Northern rolling stock changes post electrification

[Bletchleyite]

Newer stock is far more complicated - I *think* the TS of a 319 doesn't carry anything the rest of the unit needs operationally, other than maybe the bog?

Edit: Unfortunately it has the compressor and motor alternator set

 

[northwichcat]

It might also mean the 150 would be under powered unless you re-engineer the 150 as well.

 

[AM9]

The problem there is the service doesn't really need double the number of carriages - just some extra luggage space.

The 319s coped with luggage of passengers heading to/from two of the largest airports in the UK, Gatwick, nearly twice the traffic of Manchester and Luton, more traffic than every airport outside the south-east except Manchester and Edinburgh. If that wasn't enough, there is ample opportunity to replace a few fixed seats with tip-up ones as part of the upgrade when full services start.

 

[Grumpy]

ILiverpool - Preston (hourly) : 3 units, becoming 4 units when they extend to Blackpool, or 5 units if they retain the lightly used Lime Street / South Parkway extension of the Blackpool/Preston services.

Plus presumably units for the services from Blackpool/Preston-Victoria/Hazel Grove

 

[hairyhandedfool]

Newer stock is far more complicated - I *think* the TS of a 319 doesn't carry anything the rest of the unit needs operationally, other than maybe the bog?

Edit: Unfortunately it has the compressor and motor alternator set

In the 'brouchure' that Porterbrook (the owner of all eighty six class 319s) produced for the 319, they say that to turn a 319 into a three car train, twenty one items need to find new homes, two of which are the toilets and associated effluence tank. Then you have to consider what would be needed to work with a 150.

 

[Class377/5]

I wonder if the new replacement toilet location takes that into account?

 

[edwin_m]

Traditionally EMU auxiliaries ran on 110V and DMUs on 24V, so you might find the 319 trailer needed re-wiring as well before it could run with a 150.

 

[TEW]

The problem there is the service doesn't really need double the number of carriages - just some extra luggage space.

So the North desperately needs extra carriages and will get 12 extra carriages but as a result only 6 carriages are used to strengthen services which need strengthening and the rest strengthen services which don't need strengthening just because the extra carriages will be in the form of 4 car 319s.

But if the services are going to be relatively quiet as 4 car 319s luggage space is less of an issue. All those bay seats provide a space for luggage to be, especially when there are less people on board.

 

[SpacePhoenix]

In the 'brouchure' that Porterbrook (the owner of all eighty six class 319s) produced for the 319, they say that to turn a 319 into a three car train, twenty one items need to find new homes, two of which are the toilets and associated effluence tank. Then you have to consider what would be needed to work with a 150.

By the time the cost of all that is added up, would that be over half the cost of what an equivalent new build would cost?

 

[Bevan Price]

Originally Posted by Bevan Price View Post
ILiverpool - Preston (hourly) : 3 units, becoming 4 units when they extend to Blackpool, or 5 units if they retain the lightly used Lime Street / South Parkway extension of the Blackpool/Preston services.

Plus presumably units for the services from Blackpool/Preston-Victoria/Hazel Grove

Yes, in 2016/2017, but I was only thinking of the first stage of Liverpool/Manchester/Wigan electric working in 2015 (hopefully...)
--- old post above --- --- new post below ---

The problem there is the service doesn't really need double the number of carriages - just some extra luggage space.

So the North desperately needs extra carriages and will get 12 extra carriages but as a result only 6 carriages are used to strengthen services which need strengthening and the rest strengthen services which don't need strengthening just because the extra carriages will be in the form of 4 car 319s.

Some of the Airport - Lime St. services definitely need more than 2 coaches, a situation made worse on the by no means uncommon appearances of 142s or 150s on these services.

 

[Bletchleyite]

By the time the cost of all that is added up, would that be over half the cost of what an equivalent new build would cost?

I don't know, but the result of it will probably be them remaining 4-car units.

Neil

 

[Greybeard33]

I don't know, but the result of it will probably be them remaining 4-car units.

Neil

The recent "September 2014" update to Network Rail's CP5 Enhancements Delivery Plan was recently published (two months late!), but, relevant to this thread, there is no change to the section on the North West Train Lengthening project. The dates for GRIP 3 Completion and subsequent are still "To be determined". Although the "Scope of Works" identifies a list of platforms to be lengthened (mostly on unelectrified lines and to suit 23m/24m carriages), the "Key Assumptions" are:

• Cost estimates have been produced based on an initial list of platforms that have been identified as requiring extensions to facilitate train lengthening on the route.
• The additional rolling stock to support the operational plans will be provided outside of this project.
• Scope is subject to confirmation of rolling stock strategy and further development.

It seems to me that this leaves the door open for the new Northern franchisee to negotiate for additional platform lengthening on the electrified lines, to facilitate operation of 4x20m and 8x20m 319 formations.

 

[northwichcat]

Some of the Airport - Lime St. services definitely need more than 2 coaches, a situation made worse on the by no means uncommon appearances of 142s or 150s on these services.

Do you have any loading figures for those? At peak times a 156 is able to take around 200 passengers without being classed as overcrowded. Unfortunately, there's a situation where some PTE area services get 4 carriages because they get a loading of around 200 while non-PTE area services with higher loadings struggle with 2.

Of course if the rolling stock used on Airport-Lime Street services was at least as good as the refurbished 158s (internally) on Norwich-Liverpool services then more Manchester-Liverpool may chose to travel on the Northern service instead of with TPE/EMT but with the risk of a 142 filling in currently and 319s being used as replacement for 156s I think passengers will only transfer if they can't get a seat on TPE/EMT services.
--- old post above --- --- new post below ---

The recent "September 2014" update to Network Rail's CP5 Enhancements Delivery Plan was recently published (two months late!), but, relevant to this thread, there is no change to the section on the North West Train Lengthening project. The dates for GRIP 3 Completion and subsequent are still "To be determined". Although the "Scope of Works" identifies a list of platforms to be lengthened (mostly on unelectrified lines and to suit 23m/24m carriages), the "Key Assumptions" are:

It seems to me that this leaves the door open for the new Northern franchisee to negotiate for additional platform lengthening on the electrified lines, to facilitate operation of 4x20m and 8x20m 319 formations.

In the Northern RUS Network Rail did say the ideal solution would be 6 car EMUs on Bolton services as 8 cars would likely be over provision and platform lengthening work to allow 8 car would be too costly at stations like Salford Crescent. They even suggested 6 car DMUs being used post-electrification was a better solution to 8 car EMUs.

 

[LNW-GW Joint]

Do you have any loading figures for those? At peak times a 156 is able to take around 200 passengers without being classed as overcrowded. Unfortunately, there's a situation where some PTE area services get 4 carriages because they get a loading of around 200 while non-PTE area services with higher loadings struggle with 2.

From my casual observation, the Liverpool-Airport services load less than the Norwich and Scarborough services out of Liverpool, but more than the Newcastle.
But the one peak time train I use (0816 ex Lime St) is absolutely stuffed even at Lime St, with boarding problems and overtime at every intermediate stop.

Westbound, people just congregate at Piccadilly/Oxford Road and get the first train to Liverpool, so there is a more even spread between the 3 semi-fasts.
Intermediate station usage at Wavertree/St Helens Jn/Newton le Willows is fairly low compared to Parkway/Widnes/Warrington on the CLC route.

The service is pretty reliably run by 156s, unlike the Liverpool-Blackpool which has descended to shabby 150s most of the time.
Doubling up is very rare on either service.

The TP Newcastle service is lightly loaded to Huddersfield.
People heading for Yorkshire don't care which train they get at Liverpool, but those going to Manchester still evidently prefer the Piccadilly services.
The 3rd world state of Victoria (sans trams and virtually every other convenience) doesn't help, of course.

 

[northwichcat]

People heading for Yorkshire don't care which train they get at Liverpool, but those going to Manchester still evidently prefer the Piccadilly services.
The 3rd world state of Victoria (sans trams and virtually every other convenience) doesn't help, of course.

Piccadilly has a lot more connections available than Victoria, which is likely to remain the case even when more TPE services operate to Victoria, due to Victoria being a smaller station.

 

[childwallblues]

The problem there is the service doesn't really need double the number of carriages - just some extra luggage space.

So the North desperately needs extra carriages and will get 12 extra carriages but as a result only 6 carriages are used to strengthen services which need strengthening and the rest strengthen services which don't need strengthening just because the extra carriages will be in the form of 4 car 319s.

I assume that you travel on the LIV-MIA service on a regular basis to make such a statement.

 

[martynbristow]

From my casual observation, the Liverpool-Airport services load less than the Norwich and Scarborough services out of Liverpool, but more than the Newcastle.
But the one peak time train I use (0816 ex Lime St) is absolutely stuffed even at Lime St, with boarding problems and overtime at every intermediate stop.

Westbound, people just congregate at Piccadilly/Oxford Road and get the first train to Liverpool, so there is a more even spread between the 3 semi-fasts.
Intermediate station usage at Wavertree/St Helens Jn/Newton le Willows is fairly low compared to Parkway/Widnes/Warrington on the CLC route.

The service is pretty reliably run by 156s, unlike the Liverpool-Blackpool which has descended to shabby 150s most of the time.
Doubling up is very rare on either service.

The TP Newcastle service is lightly loaded to Huddersfield.
People heading for Yorkshire don't care which train they get at Liverpool, but those going to Manchester still evidently prefer the Piccadilly services.
The 3rd world state of Victoria (sans trams and virtually every other convenience) doesn't help, of course.

I've seen the Liverpool-Airport not getting the best patronage, although its slightly quicker. I'm assuming because of the poor stock condition.
The fast to Victoria doesn't do badly or well, although it offers a much better service if your in the know. Most people I know don't know about the service so don't use it

 

[childwallblues]

From my casual observation, the Liverpool-Airport services load less than the Norwich and Scarborough services out of Liverpool, but more than the Newcastle.
But the one peak time train I use (0816 ex Lime St) is absolutely stuffed even at Lime St, with boarding problems and overtime at every intermediate stop.

Westbound, people just congregate at Piccadilly/Oxford Road and get the first train to Liverpool, so there is a more even spread between the 3 semi-fasts.
Intermediate station usage at Wavertree/St Helens Jn/Newton le Willows is fairly low compared to Parkway/Widnes/Warrington on the CLC route.

The service is pretty reliably run by 156s, unlike the Liverpool-Blackpool which has descended to shabby 150s most of the time.
Doubling up is very rare on either service.

The TP Newcastle service is lightly loaded to Huddersfield.
People heading for Yorkshire don't care which train they get at Liverpool, but those going to Manchester still evidently prefer the Piccadilly services.
The 3rd world state of Victoria (sans trams and virtually every other convenience) doesn't help, of course.

In attempting to answer some of your points (from my own observations) I offer the following:-
The LIV-MIA services are indeed full and standing in the peaks. Their use outside the peaks at both Wavertree Technology Park and Newton-le-Willows is in my opinion dictated by a lack of car park facilities at both stations. Personally I have always thought that Wavertree TP would have problems with its lack of car parking (BR sold all the land around before the station was built) and its location means that car parking is on street. The situation at Newton-le-Willows is pretty much the same although their are plans to address this. St Helens Junction has car parking with room for expansion if necessary.
On the CLC line there are car parks at Liverpool South Parkway, Widnes, Warrington Central and Birchwood which are the main stations on the service. All stations on both lines have free car parking so get full pretty early.

Unfortunately there is no consistency on what trains are used on which services. Whilst they try to keep the Airport services as 156s any delays or train failures mean that 150s or even 142s will substitute. Blackpool services tend to be 150s (although these are doubled up in the summer) whilst the rest will be single units outside the peaks. Saturdays will produce double units on Wigans and CLCs when available.

The Liverpool to Newcastle service only started in May. Personally I do not think that it was well advertised and loadings at the start were light despite the attractive 32 minute non-stop timing to Manchester Victoria. Loadings are improving but as you say Victoria is currently a building site without a Metrolink connection, and until this is finished the service will not be attractive.
Reliability is also an issue at Liverpool with units arriving from Newcastle going to Scarborough and vice versa. TPE are hoping to solve this with the provision of an extra unit from December.

 

[LNW-GW Joint]

In attempting to answer some of your points (from my own observations) I offer the following:-
The LIV-MIA services are indeed full and standing in the peaks. Their use outside the peaks at both Wavertree Technology Park and Newton-le-Willows is in my opinion dictated by a lack of car park facilities at both stations. Personally I have always thought that Wavertree TP would have problems with its lack of car parking (BR sold all the land around before the station was built) and its location means that car parking is on street. The situation at Newton-le-Willows is pretty much the same although their are plans to address this. St Helens Junction has car parking with room for expansion if necessary.
On the CLC line there are car parks at Liverpool South Parkway, Widnes, Warrington Central and Birchwood which are the main stations on the service. All stations on both lines have free car parking so get full pretty early.

Unfortunately there is no consistency on what trains are used on which services. Whilst they try to keep the Airport services as 156s any delays or train failures mean that 150s or even 142s will substitute. Blackpool services tend to be 150s (although these are doubled up in the summer) whilst the rest will be single units outside the peaks. Saturdays will produce double units on Wigans and CLCs when available.

The Liverpool to Newcastle service only started in May. Personally I do not think that it was well advertised and loadings at the start were light despite the attractive 32 minute non-stop timing to Manchester Victoria. Loadings are improving but as you say Victoria is currently a building site without a Metrolink connection, and until this is finished the service will not be attractive.
Reliability is also an issue at Liverpool with units arriving from Newcastle going to Scarborough and vice versa. TPE are hoping to solve this with the provision of an extra unit from December.

Indeed.
It also doesn't help that the "fasts" are bunched together from Liverpool at xx12 (Newcastle), xx16 (Airport) and xx22 (Scarborough).
Also it stands to reason that westbound, the Norwich/Scarboroughs will have a significant load of through passengers across Manchester, while the MIA service turns up at Piccadilly fairly empty.
I find the Victoria service is usually depressingly empty east of Earlestown, with tiny numbers at Patricroft and Eccles.
1tph doesn't help, of course.

 

[Wavertreelad]

In attempting to answer some of your points (from my own observations) I offer the following:-
The LIV-MIA services are indeed full and standing in the peaks. Their use outside the peaks at both Wavertree Technology Park and Newton-le-Willows is in my opinion dictated by a lack of car park facilities at both stations. Personally I have always thought that Wavertree TP would have problems with its lack of car parking (BR sold all the land around before the station was built) and its location means that car parking is on street. The situation at Newton-le-Willows is pretty much the same although their are plans to address this. St Helens Junction has car parking with room for expansion if necessary.
On the CLC line there are car parks at Liverpool South Parkway, Widnes, Warrington Central and Birchwood which are the main stations on the service. All stations on both lines have free car parking so get full pretty early.

.

The parking or lack of it at Wavertree TP is becoming a major problem with local residents as it often impossible to park, even outside your own front door in Shanklin Road and surrounding side roads whilst the junction at Rathbone Road the road is extremely dangerous for road users and foot passengers crossing the road. It's also not helped by the fact that Rathbone Road is used by people working in the TP who don't have company parking spaces. The problem is made even worse when rail replacement busses run, because instead of inbound buses to Lime Street stopping in the bus stop on Wavertree Boulevard, they stop on the junction with Shanklin Road and Rathbone Road completely blocking the road. Outbound buses usually don't cause the same sort of problem as normally they stop a little short of the station on Rathbone Road when public parking is stopped.

The parking issue could be solved by placing by siting it on Wavertree Boulevard were sufficient space exists between the road and embankment, or alternatively cutting some of the embankment back and clearing the vegetation in the cutting and using the Network Rail access road to the cutting which joins Wavertree Boulevard near the Stephen Bridge. The car park could then be gated off the Olive Mount end still allowing NR to the cutting.

Whilst using Wavertree TP to travel daily into Liverpool a couple of years ago, I used to count an average of about 35 passengers boarding the 0716 MIA train, which even by then was half full. By this time the parking was difficult and really only cleared after 1830pm suggesting the problem is caused by commuters and thus a possible inhibitor of growth.

 

[samj]

In my experience LIV-MIA services have never been full off-peak, but can't say I have tried it during the peak hours. They carry plenty of fresh air around though between MAN and MIA.

When are these 319s due to enter service with Northern then? Hopefully by late February as that's when I am heading up there next..

 

[JonathanH]

The parking or lack of it at Wavertree TP is becoming a major problem with local residents as it often impossible to park, even outside your own front door in Shanklin Road and surrounding side roads whilst the junction at Rathbone Road the road is extremely dangerous for road users and foot passengers crossing the road. It's also not helped by the fact that Rathbone Road is used by people working in the TP who don't have company parking spaces. The problem is made even worse when rail replacement busses run, because instead of inbound buses to Lime Street stopping in the bus stop on Wavertree Boulevard, they stop on the junction with Shanklin Road and Rathbone Road completely blocking the road. Outbound buses usually don't cause the same sort of problem as normally they stop a little short of the station on Rathbone Road when public parking is stopped.

The parking issue could be solved by placing by siting it on Wavertree Boulevard were sufficient space exists between the road and embankment, or alternatively cutting some of the embankment back and clearing the vegetation in the cutting and using the Network Rail access road to the cutting which joins Wavertree Boulevard near the Stephen Bridge. The car park could then be gated off the Olive Mount end still allowing NR to the cutting.

Whilst using Wavertree TP to travel daily into Liverpool a couple of years ago, I used to count an average of about 35 passengers boarding the 0716 MIA train, which even by then was half full. By this time the parking was difficult and really only cleared after 1830pm suggesting the problem is caused by commuters and thus a possible inhibitor of growth.

Maybe the answer is to put a deck on top of the station and the cutting at Wavertree.

 

[Wavertreelad]

Maybe the answer is to put a deck on top of the station and the cutting at Wavertree.

That would be very expensive, simply clearing the vegetation off the former flyover double track track bed, tarmacking and providing a turning point would probably serve current needs. However, as the aerial shot attached shows, with some ground works it would be possible to construct a larger car park to the north of the station alongside Wavertree Boulevard. I have also attached a picture taken from a point on the Gridiron which is roughly in line with the bus stop but a little nearer the cutting showing how the area has changed in the last 50 years.

 

[martynbristow]

An obvious solution is to include Broadgreen then, that has a decent car park or lea green

 

[childwallblues]

Broad Green car park is often full by 0800 and on street parking is residents only on the north side of the station due to the proximity of Broad Green Hospital. On the south side the proximity of the M62 flyover leaves no room for expansion.

 

[WatcherZero]

Interesting in Rail the Angel chief exec saying that hes trying to get the nine 317/7 to the North sice they arent earning their keep off lease but he would only send them after a refurb which included engine replacement (presume he just means traction equipment). Glad to hear as i thought it had gone quiet on that front, but i thought 3 of them including demonstator had just been leased to anglia since the start of this year?

 

[physics34]

Interesting in Rail the Angel chief exec saying that hes trying to get the nine 317/7 to the North sice they arent earning their keep off lease but he would only send them after a refurb which included engine replacement (presume he just means traction equipment). Glad to hear as i thought it had gone quiet on that front, but i thought 3 of them including demonstator had just been leased to anglia since the start of this year?

annoys me when media people talk about engines on electric trains, lol

 

[tom1649]

annoys me when media people talk about engines on electric trains, lol

To be fair to the man from Angel, in the quote in Rail he mentions motors, not engines.

 

[physics34]

To be fair to the man from Angel, in the quote in Rail he mentions motors, not engines.

 

[childwallblues]

Drivers at Northern have informed me that a 319 in new Northern livery is to be unveiled this week. Does anybody have any further details please?