Northern rolling stock changes post electrification

[The Ham]

Without the cheaper LM only tickets more people would likely use Virgin. LM don't need to share revenue on LM only tickets.

Both Northern and TPE have managed to decrease their subsides at the same time as getting extra carriages so it seems up here there's a general trend of more seats = more revenue.

Sorry I wasn't clear, I was talking about the large numbers of LM advanced tickets, not the any time or off peak LM tickets (which the "full priced" tickets I was comparing them against).

 

[deltic08]

Where do southeastern fit into this? Crying out for new stock, serving areas of the country with highest population growth and planned housing and no new trains for 10 years, HS1 excluded, which serves a fraction of new development areas anyway, and even that is full to bursting now.

Somewhere in the Southeast I would suggest!

I hope this post was in jest? If not, I suggest you visit the York-Leeds-Manchester-Liverpool corridor anytime between 7am and 7pm to see another part of the country full to bursting and crying out for new stock. Apart from 10 350/4 units, the North has not had any new stock for 10 years either.
--- old post above --- --- new post below ---

It's understood the acceleration on 319s is too poor to run either the Glossop or Stoke services. The 323s would either have to be replaced by something newer or something re-engineered.

My mistake. I thought Manchester-Glossop was non conflicting being a branch line and I confused Manchester-Crewe with Manchester-Stoke..

 

[superkev]

To improve performance on 323 routes they could take a coach out as scotrail have done with there 321s.
K
p.s. similarly powered to 319s NR 4 car 321s keep time on on the aire valley triangle.

 

[BurtonM]

they could take a coach out

Aside from the fact I'm not sure that's even possible within reason, no no a thousand times no, reducing capacity is never an option, especially where Northern are concerned.

 

[Domh245]

And especially when (as discussed in length) removing a car is going to land you with a hefty bill to relocate all the equipment that you've decided to deprive of an underframe to hang from. The 321s are comparatively simple beasts compared to the 319s

 

[Xenophon PCDGS]

My mistake. I confused Manchester-Crewe with Manchester-Stoke..

There are times, such as this, when the Monopoly adage springs to mind to punish such a heretical statement....
Go directly to jail.
Do not pass "GO"
Do not collect £200

I can just imagine the words of a song from even before my time...
"Oh Mr Porter, whatever shall I do,
I wanted to go to Prestbury and they've taken me on to Crewe"...

Again, my local station appears in print on this website.

 

[D365]

Somewhere in the Southeast I would suggest!

I hope this post was in jest? If not, I suggest you visit the York-Leeds-Manchester-Liverpool corridor anytime between 7am and 7pm to see another part of the country full to bursting and crying out for new stock. Apart from 10 350/4 units, the North has not had any 'new' stock for 10 years either.

Why would a posting about overcrowding be 'in jest'? Is it only Northern which is allowed to suffer from congestion? Does it mean only one or the other is allowed to receive new rolling stock?

 

[northwichcat]

I thought Manchester-Glossop was non conflicting being a branch line

The problem with any 'branch' line out of Manchester is the trains have to use the same lines as the long distance services for the first stretch so the local trains need a suitable top speed and suitable acceleration to run alongside such services.

and I confused Manchester-Crewe with Manchester-Stoke.

Well for Stoke services we know even a short extension to the total journey time could cause problems fitting them around the Virgin and XC services. While from December 2017 they'll be additional Macclesfield only services that will mean the off-peak services can be speeded up (by calling at less stations) but at peak times stations like Prestbury are required to have 2tph.

For Stockport-Manchester services calling at Heaton Chapel and Levenshulme replacing 323s with slower accelerating EMUs might also cause issues at peak times. Although with some services calling at Heaton Chapel and Levenshulme being DMUs at present it might be switching those to EMUs might help prevent pathing issues if the 323s are replaced on other services.

 

[deltic08]

There are times, such as this, when the Monopoly adage springs to mind to punish such a heretical statement....
Go directly to jail.
Do not pass "GO"
Do not collect £200

I can just imagine the words of a song from even before my time...
"Oh Mr Porter, whatever shall I do,
I wanted to go to Prestbury and they've taken me on to Crewe"...

Again, my local station appears in print on this website.

I knew it was a route out of Piccadilly with stopping services mixing with Pendolino's. With odds of 50/50 I chose the wrong one. Good job I am not a betting man.

 

[ed1971]

Earlier this morning a train broke down outside Liverpool LS. I overheard someone say that it was the 10:32am Liverpool LS to Wigan NW. Can anyone confirm this and which unit was involved?

Later today, the 17:45 Liverpool LS - Wigan NW was formed with a Class 156 instead of a 319.

 

[deltic08]

The problem with any 'branch' line out of Manchester is the trains have to use the same lines as the long distance services for the first stretch so the local trains need a suitable top speed and suitable acceleration to run alongside such services.

Surely when the Ordsall Curve is completed, Piccadilly to Guide Bridge will be much quieter so 319s could be used on this route to Glossop?

 

[ScotGG]

Why would a posting about overcrowding be 'in jest'? Is it only Northern which is allowed to suffer from congestion? Does it mean only one or the other is allowed to receive new rolling stock?

Exactly. Some people bizarrely think overcrowding only happens in their area, and that the limited budget to alleviate it can only go to the north or the south. God forbid the overall budget should be increased to improve matters in various areas.

Yes, much of the north is in desperate need, but so are certain areas in the south. The solution is to increase money to the north but not at the expense of those areas in the south with huge levels of overcrowding and poor stock.

 

[childwallblues]

Aside from the fact I'm not sure that's even possible within reason, no no a thousand times no, reducing capacity is never an option, especially where Northern are concerned.

Totally agree. Since this thread started we have had quite a number of posters advocating reduction of the 319s from four to three cars. Yet once the 319s were put in service the need for four cars has been proved especially in the Merseytravel area.

 

[mwmbwls]

Totally agree. Since this thread started we have had quite a number of posters advocating reduction of the 319s from four to three cars. Yet once the 319s were put in service the need for four cars has been proved especially in the Merseytravel area.

The suggestion by Porterbrook that 319 could be reduced to three cars was kited on page 8 of this brochure.
http://www.porterbrook.com/downloads/brochures/319 Brochure.pdf
Portertbrook's approach to this was characterised by two factors (1) a positive mental attitude to re-engineering and (2) other peoples' money financing the project.

Upon detailed examination the costs of reallocating the underfloor equipment from the non driving trailer to be removed was deemed not to be cost effective and would have delayed the cascade. These factors in addition to the capacity headroom issues raised above resonated with the DfT whose ears were ringing about the consequences of the disastrous assumption of zero growth on the Northern franchise meant that this idea was despatched to the long grass fairly early on. Let us let it stay there.

 

[furnessvale]

Totally agree. Since this thread started we have had quite a number of posters advocating reduction of the 319s from four to three cars. Yet once the 319s were put in service the need for four cars has been proved especially in the Merseytravel area.

They reduced from 4 to 3 years ago when the north west got secondhand 304s (I think that is the correct number).

God forbid that northerners get a seat when London commuters have had to stand on the same units.

Just because it may be impossible to cure overcrowding down south is no reason to ensure that the north suffers equally.

 

[AM9]

The suggestion by Porterbrook that 319 could be reduced to three cars was kited on page 8 of this brochure.
http://www.porterbrook.com/downloads/brochures/319 Brochure.pdf
Portertbrook's approach to this was characterised by two factors (1) a positive mental attitude to re-engineering and (2) other peoples' money financing the project.

Which translated into everyday understanding means more profit (from other's cash of course).

Upon detailed examination the costs of reallocating the underfloor equipment from the non driving trailer to be removed was deemed not to be cost effective and would have delayed the cascade. These factors in addition to the capacity headroom issues raised above resonated with the DfT whose ears were ringing about the consequences of the disastrous assumption of zero growth on the Northern franchise meant that this idea was despatched to the long grass fairly early on. Let us let it stay there.

I'm sure if asked, the majority of paying passengers on the lines that 319s are or will be deployed would not trade a few percent of the journey time for 33% less capacity, even if it was cost and time effective for their modification to 3-cars.

 

[northwichcat]

Surely when the Ordsall Curve is completed, Piccadilly to Guide Bridge will be much quieter so 319s could be used on this route to Glossop?

The introduction of a Piccadilly-Huddersfield stopper has been looked in to, as has an enhanced service to Rose Hill Marple using tram-trains. The former won't happen pre-electrification as it won't fit around four express and two 'semi-fasts' between Manchester and Leeds without faster accelerating EMUs being used. The latter won't happen until the Sheffield tram-train trial has been undertaken.

 

[73001]

I'm sure if asked, the majority of paying passengers on the lines that 319s are or will be deployed would not trade a few percent of the journey time for 33% less capacity, even if it was cost and time effective for their modification to 3-cars.

I don't use the Liverpool - Manchesters a lot but the peak hour 319 I got last week was full but the vast majority got a seat... And if people had wanted to budge up, nearly all would have. The guard was able to walk up and down and collect fares and it was a pleasant journey. Removing one carriage would have a detrimental effect and, as others have said, let's hope it stays on the drawing board.
They've made a pleasant change from 150s / 156s and worse!

 

[northwichcat]

I don't use the Liverpool - Manchesters a lot but the peak hour 319 I got last week was full but the vast majority got a seat... And if people had wanted to budge up, nearly all would have. The guard was able to walk up and down and collect fares and it was a pleasant journey. Removing one carriage would have a detrimental effect and, as others have said, let's hope it stays on the drawing board.

A 3 car option has been looked at for 2 reasons:
1. 319s are slower to accelerate than other EMUs so they are unsuitable to replace other EMUs in 4 car formation.
2. Some services will need more than 4 cars but providing provision for 8 car would be very expensive and not necessarily needed, so an alternative solution is 2 x 3 car formations.

These problems relate to lines other than Chat Moss so there's no reason at present why 3 car versions would go on to Chat Moss.

 

[JaJaWa]

I'm sure if asked, the majority of paying passengers on the lines that 319s are or will be deployed would not trade a few percent of the journey time for 33% less capacity, even if it was cost and time effective for their modification to 3-cars.

There would be 25% less capacity when running as a three car set, not 33% less. But the suggestion was made so that they can run in six car formation rather than four car (eight carriages would not be possible). Six cars would be a 50% capacity increase over four cars.

 

[Bletchleyite]

Provisioning 8 car will be necessary in the near future, so might as well do it now with a long term view to 12.

 

[nw-sparks]

Earlier this morning a train broke down outside Liverpool LS. I overheard someone say that it was the 10:32am Liverpool LS to Wigan NW. Can anyone confirm this and which unit was involved?

Later today, the 17:45 Liverpool LS - Wigan NW was formed with a Class 156 instead of a 319.

As far as I can see, the 1032 Liverpool - Wigan ran as normal throughout.

On the other hand, the 1031 Wigan - Liverpool took 77 minutes from Edge Hill to Lime Street, so I think that might be the culprit. If my approximate weekday diagrams also apply on Saturday then this would later form the 1745.

Sorry, don't know which unit.

 

[ed1971]

Thanks for that. It was fortuitous that I set off later than usual yesterday, as the 10:31 Wigan NW to Liverpool LS is the train that I normally catch.

 

[Greybeard33]

Surely when the Ordsall Curve is completed, Piccadilly to Guide Bridge will be much quieter so 319s could be used on this route to Glossop?

I believe the issue on the Glossop/Hadfield line is not only paths between Piccadilly and Guide Bridge, but also the minimal recovery time in the current off-peak diagrams. The single lines between Dinting, Glossop and Hadfield mean there is no time for a layover at Hadfield. I think slower-accelerating 4-car 319s would need one or more of the following changes:

• use of the leaf-fall circular timetable all year round. This means Manchester-Glossop journeys have to go via Hadfield in one direction or the other, adding about 10 minutes
• skip-stopping some of the closely spaced stations in the Hyde area
• infrastructure improvements to increase linespeed - currently the timetable allows 6 minutes for the 1.8 miles from Glossop to Hadfield - an average speed of 18mph!
• redoubling of Dinting to Hadfield to provide a dynamic loop, together with a fourth off-peak diagram to allow layover time at Hadfield.

3-car 319s would be 14% shorter than the 70m-long 323s, which are already chronically overcrowded in the high peak.

 

[hassaanhc]

Totally agree. Since this thread started we have had quite a number of posters advocating reduction of the 319s from four to three cars. Yet once the 319s were put in service the need for four cars has been proved especially in the Merseytravel area.

Because, God-forbid, the platforms may need extending, or the services may need re-timing... :roll:

 

[northwichcat]

or the services may need re-timing... :roll:

And I'm sure Mr Branson will happily oblige with changing the intervals between Manchester to London services to be 20/25/15 instead of 20/20/20 so Northern can use slower 319s. :roll:

 

[Bevan Price]

12:16 Lime St - Airport & 13:40 return were cancelled yesterday (28 Nov.) -- "due to a problem with the doors" according to RTT.
--- old post above --- --- new post below ---

A 3 car option has been looked at for 2 reasons:
1. 319s are slower to accelerate than other EMUs so they are unsuitable to replace other EMUs in 4 car formation.
2. Some services will need more than 4 cars but providing provision for 8 car would be very expensive and not necessarily needed, so an alternative solution is 2 x 3 car formations.

These problems relate to lines other than Chat Moss so there's no reason at present why 3 car versions would go on to Chat Moss.

One reason why 319s have lower acceleration is that they are prone to slipping, especially in wet weather. Apply power too quickly, and they are liable to slip. Some drivers seem to increase power less quickly, and manage to avoid slipping. I suspect that reducing the load by removing one coach will not cure the slipping problem - it could even make it worse due to the higher power to weight ratio.

The problem with having 3 and 4 coach versions would be reduced flexibility in allocation of units to services - I think that most operators would prefer the least possible number of varieties of stock, so that any emu could cover any train booked to be an emu. **

And 6 car 319 formations would be no use for any of the services into Liverpool Lime St - most of the platforms at intermediate stations are only long enough for 4 coach trains.


** - Yes I know they currently have 319s & 323s in the area being discussed - but had the option been available, I suspect that the TOC would have possibly preferred a uniform fleet of 323s for the Lancashire / Cheshire area services.

 

[AM9]

Northern Rail is a loss-making TOC that despite supposedly rising passenger numbers ('exponential rises' have been claimed here), continues to plan for 2 & 3-car trains that are supposedly loaded well in excess of capacity, (cue anecdotal reports of single Pacers with 250 on board), yet seems to have no enthusiasm to make their services fit this demand by having platforms capable of the 4 and 8-car trains that would be available to them. Surely the 'Northern Powerhouse' could justify a proper railway rather than hundreds of branch-line length trains, each with driver and guard/TM working them.
Unless there are specific geographical impossibilities, any station that is expected to handle large numbers of commuters of day passengers should be planned for 8-car or longer trains. I'm sure that if the DfT said that they could have enough new 4-car Electrostar EMUs on all these routes, something would happen fairly quick.
319s, like 321s and 455s are run in large numbers in the south-east. They do have problems with poor railhead conditions down here, especially in the leafy suburbs where local resistance to tree lopping often results in more leaf problems than should be the case. Most of the year they just get on with running the services.
As far as acceleration goes, it's true that the MKIII EMUs are not the fastest around but they regularly run in and out of 100-125mph stock on really tight headways and all the 8 and 12 car trains are really full! If the NW trains were longer, some of them could be dropped maintaining the same service capacity thereby releasing more paths and/or increasing headways - especially if the 'Northern Powerhouse' isn't all that the politicians have promised it to be.

 

[edwin_m]

I believe the issue on the Glossop/Hadfield line is not only paths between Piccadilly and Guide Bridge, but also the minimal recovery time in the current off-peak diagrams. The single lines between Dinting, Glossop and Hadfield mean there is no time for a layover at Hadfield. I think slower-accelerating 4-car 319s would need one or more of the following changes:

• use of the leaf-fall circular timetable all year round. This means Manchester-Glossop journeys have to go via Hadfield in one direction or the other, adding about 10 minutes
• skip-stopping some of the closely spaced stations in the Hyde area
• infrastructure improvements to increase linespeed - currently the timetable allows 6 minutes for the 1.8 miles from Glossop to Hadfield - an average speed of 18mph!
• redoubling of Dinting to Hadfield to provide a dynamic loop, together with a fourth off-peak diagram to allow layover time at Hadfield.

3-car 319s would be 14% shorter than the 70m-long 323s, which are already chronically overcrowded in the high peak.

I believe there is also an issue with how long the trains take to do Dinting-Glossop-Hadfield-Glossop-Dinting. By the time the previous train leaves Dinting Junction towards Manchester the next one from Manchester is not far away. This is all single line so unless the direct Hadfield route is used there can only be one train east of Dinting Junction at a time. Hence an alternative infrastructure improvement might be to extend double track from Dinting Junction towards Glossop.

 

[childwallblues]

They reduced from 4 to 3 years ago when the north west got secondhand 304s (I think that is the correct number).

God forbid that northerners get a seat when London commuters have had to stand on the same units.

Just because it may be impossible to cure overcrowding down south is no reason to ensure that the north suffers equally.

The 304s operated in the North West from new.