Northern rolling stock plan once new DMU's introduced?

[Sparks807Evo]

The word on the ROSCO tracks is that a deal has been done to take some of the GW 150/2 units at the end of their current lease with an option on the remainder.

GW are reported to be less than amused.

If that is true then I'm not surprised they wouldn't be happy - considering the current plans in place seem to offer an increase in capacity in the south west. Still rather annoying the LM 150s are off considering they're the only things that can actually operate in a two car formation on the Bedford branch.

 

[northwichcat]

If that is true then I'm not surprised they wouldn't be happy - considering the current plans in place seem to offer an increase in capacity in the south west. Still rather annoying the LM 150s are off considering they're the only things that can actually operate in a two car formation on the Bedford branch.

If GWR lose the 150/2s I imagine they'll get something released as a result of TPE 185s being released.

 

[61653 HTAFC]

If GWR lose the 150/2s I imagine they'll get something released as a result of TPE 185s being released.

GWR Portsmouth services would be a suitable home for the 185s, as they could possibly be maintained by Siemens at Northam. In that case though there'd have to be a rethink over where the Turbos go. Doesnt solve the Marston Vale issue for LM or their successor though.

 

[158722]

Article states 46 extra 150 vehicles from GWR, so presumably 23 units. This seems to contradict the GWR fleet plan as part of their direct award, which saw them retain all their 150/2s, releasing the 150/1s. They have 17 150/1s. That leaves 6 extra 150s. I suspect it's the 3 LM 150/1s, and the 3 GWR 150/2s which are owned by Angel Trains rather than Porterbrook (202, 216 and the currently 2 toiletless carriages, which are apparently getting fitted with a toilet between them).

Totally agree with this, all adds up nicely and a change to what has been mentioned before.

17x 150/1s ex-GWR, 34 vehicles
3x 150/1s ex-LM, 6 vehicles
3x 150/2s ex-GWR, 6 vehicles with '150209' reformed from 57209/57212.

 

[northwichcat]

GWR Portsmouth services would be a suitable home for the 185s, as they could possibly be maintained by Siemens at Northam. In that case though there'd have to be a rethink over where the Turbos go. Doesnt solve the Marston Vale issue for LM or their successor though.

An option could be 153s reformed in to 2 car trains for either LM or GWR especially if EMT get the released 185s and release their 153s.

 

[Haydn1971]

Going off at a tangent I realise, but does EMT require all 25 158s to cover the Liverpool-Nottingham-Norwich/Ely service ? Could the 22 185s cover the same service pattern or would the Nottingham-Norwich/Ely better splait and retained as 158s ?

 

[Bletchleyite]

The reduction in capacity caused by changing from 4x158 to 3x185 would not be appreciated.


Sent from my iPad using Tapatalk

 

[Haydn1971]

The reduction in capacity caused by changing from 4x158 to 3x185 would not be appreciated.

I wasn't thinking a single 185

 

[158722]

Going off at a tangent I realise, but does EMT require all 25 158s to cover the Liverpool-Nottingham-Norwich/Ely service ? Could the 22 185s cover the same service pattern or would the Nottingham-Norwich/Ely better splait and retained as 158s ?

Running Liverpool-Nottingham hourly requires 7 diagrams, so 14 units if you want pairs of 185s.

Nottingham-Norwich hourly requires 6 diagrams (with a little tweaking of times as the current Nottingham arrivals are xx35, departures at xx34!) or 7 if nothing can be found in the timetable to give more time at Nottingham (noting that the Norwich turnaround times are 45mins).

So, in answer to the original question, I'd say 20 or 21 of their 158s are probably required to cover the current services.

Even if all Nottingham-Norwich services became pairs of 158s, that potentially leaves 13 sets - probably enough to see off EMT's 17 (soon to be 18) 153s, given most seem to run in pairs most of the day.

Wasn't there some intention of increasing the frequency of Hope Valley services? Those other 8 from 22 185s would seem fine for those if I am correct.

 

[northwichcat]

Wasn't there some intention of increasing the frequency of Hope Valley services? Those other 8 from 22 185s would seem fine for those if I am correct.

The TPE consultation suggested an additional Liverpool-Sheffield service every hour or a new Chester-Sheffield service but both those ideas were dropped, just like giving Liverpool-Nottingham to TPE. It now seems the plan is to run 6 carriages on all TPE Manchester-Sheffield services.

 

[PHILIPE]

Have had another assessment of GWR 150s and this should be figure (46 vehicles has been quoted as a number and would be all the Angels:-

This figure must also include the 2x150/0s (6 vehicles)

Current situation is:=
150/0 x 2 (6 Carriages)
150/1 x 15 (30 Carriages)
150/9 x 2 (6 Carriages)
150/2 x 2 (202+216 Angels) (4 Carriages)

This totals 40, so the 150/0s. Note that the 150/9s are to be split into 150/1s (2 Car) and with the Centre Cars to be removed (toilet fitted into one of them) and formed together making more 2x150/1s and another 150/2

 

[notlob.divad]

Have had another assessment of GWR 150s and this should be figure (46 vehicles has been quoted as a number and would be all the Angels:-

This figure must also include the 2x150/0s (6 vehicles)

Current situation is:=
150/0 x 2 (6 Carriages)
150/1 x 15 (30 Carriages)
150/9 x 2 (6 Carriages)
150/2 x 2 (202+216 Angels) (4 Carriages)

This totals 40, so the 150/0s. Note that the 150/9s are to be split into 150/1s (2 Car) and with the Centre Cars to be removed (toilet fitted into one of them) and formed together making more 2x150/1s and another 150/2

I thought someone had said that the opposite was happening, rather than splitting down 3 car units into 2 car units. They where planning to split 24 2 car formations and create 16, 3 car formations. Requiring a total of 48 carriages. Or am I getting confused with the 158s?

 

[swt_passenger]

I thought someone had said that the opposite was happening, rather than splitting down 3 car units into 2 car units. They where planning to split 24 2 car formations and create 16, 3 car formations. Requiring a total of 48 carriages. Or am I getting confused with the 158s?

GWR's pair of temporary 3 car units being switched back to two 2 cars, with the orphaned vehicles fitted with a toilet to make them more standard, is described in the footnotes of the GW franchise agreement's rolling stock tables.

Whether or not they only last a short time like that is presumably for a future user to determine; but I guess GWR will 'obey the last order', as they say...

 

[northwichcat]

I thought someone had said that the opposite was happening, rather than splitting down 3 car units into 2 car units. They where planning to split 24 2 car formations and create 16, 3 car formations. Requiring a total of 48 carriages. Or am I getting confused with the 158s?

GWR will create a hybrid 2 car 150/2 from the orphaned vehicles which will be fitted with a new toilet.

Northern will create 16 x 3 car 150s (likely from a pool of their existing 150s and some of the GWR 150/1s.) I wouldn't be surprised if that means 8 x 150/2s get fitted with accessible retention toilets in both carriages and 16 x 150/1s have their toilets removed so they get reformed in to a 3 car train with an accessible toilet in the centre vehicle.

 

[TEW]

Have had another assessment of GWR 150s and this should be figure (46 vehicles has been quoted as a number and would be all the Angels:-

This figure must also include the 2x150/0s (6 vehicles)

Current situation is:=
150/0 x 2 (6 Carriages)
150/1 x 15 (30 Carriages)
150/9 x 2 (6 Carriages)
150/2 x 2 (202+216 Angels) (4 Carriages)

This totals 40, so the 150/0s. Note that the 150/9s are to be split into 150/1s (2 Car) and with the Centre Cars to be removed (toilet fitted into one of them) and formed together making more 2x150/1s and another 150/2

That also works. I think the 6 carriages could either be the 2 GWR 150/0s as you state or the 3 LM 150/1s. 150001 is currently being overhauled and painted GWR Green, which was meant to only be happening to units staying long term.

 

[northwichcat]

That also works. I think the 6 carriages could either be the 2 GWR 150/0s as you state or the 3 LM 150/1s. 150001 is currently being overhauled and painted GWR Green, which was meant to only be happening to units staying long term.

Apart from the 143s, 150/1s and 153s all the GWR DMUs are set to remain with GWR until the end of the franchise in April 2019. However, that doesn't automatically mean Northern's train plan for December 2019 or December 2022* won't include trains that are currently secured by GWR until the end of the franchise.

* There was a reference to additional vehicles being added to the franchise in 2022.

 

[61653 HTAFC]

An option could be 153s reformed in to 2 car trains for either LM or GWR especially if EMT get the released 185s and release their 153s.

2x23m is too long for several platforms on Marston Vale, so no good for that part of LM. Wires are supposedly coming with East West Rail but that's a long way off... 230s perhaps? It's been a while since they were suggested for anything!

 

[northwichcat]

2x23m is too long for several platforms on Marston Vale, so no good for that part of LM. Wires are supposedly coming with East West Rail but that's a long way off... 230s perhaps? It's been a while since they were suggested for anything!

Currently from what people say Marston Vale can only take 2 car Pacers, 2 car 150s and single car 153s. All those are fairly old trains so there needs to be some long term plan. A new 40m EMU is probably unlikely to happen even if the line is wired. Maybe Vossloh can produce a high floor version of the tram-train (class 399) they are producing for Sheffield-Rotherham if platform extensions are impossible?

 

[Bletchleyite]

Platform extensions are possible, and would be cheaper than a load of brand new stock. D78s would also work.


Sent from my iPad using Tapatalk

 

[YorkshireLad]

As a frequent commuter from Kiveton Bridge to Sheffield on the Sheffield to Lincoln line is it more likely the stopper service that's currently served by Pacers will be replaced by Sprinters?

 

[Haydn1971]

The northern franchise is creating a "connect" service between Lincoln-Sheffield-Wakefield-Leeds - the documentation in Dec 2015 talked of "new" trains for Sheffield-Lincoln, but brand new trains elsewhere - I'd expect a mix of new 195 DMUs and cascaded 170 DMUs on the connect service, but again, it's not entirely clear at this stage which stations will be on the connect service

 

[43074]

That also works. I think the 6 carriages could either be the 2 GWR 150/0s as you state or the 3 LM 150/1s. 150001 is currently being overhauled and painted GWR Green, which was meant to only be happening to units staying long term.

This makes sense: in the table showing the rolling stock plan in Modern Railways, it suggested there would be 18 3-car 150s; 16 is the number which I quoted on here previously, so the extra 2 could well be the 150/0s.

 

[edwin_m]

The northern franchise is creating a "connect" service between Lincoln-Sheffield-Wakefield-Leeds - the documentation in Dec 2015 talked of "new" trains for Sheffield-Lincoln, but brand new trains elsewhere - I'd expect a mix of new 195 DMUs and cascaded 170 DMUs on the connect service, but again, it's not entirely clear at this stage which stations will be on the connect service

The 170s won't be "Connect" units - only 158s on the route through Newcastle and 195s on all the other diesel Connect routes.

However the Connect is going to be an additional semi-fast service on this route so probably won't be stopping at the likes of Kiveton Bridge. All Pacers are being eliminated, the 170s are going to Southport-Manchester-Leeds so the most likely on the stopping service is probably a 150 and possibly a 156.

 

[Haydn1971]

The 170s won't be "Connect" units - only 158s on the route through Newcastle and 195s on all the other diesel Connect routes.

Are there enough 195s for that ? The franchise interactive map does state new on some routes and brand new on others - I really don't think it's as simple as 195s do the diesel connect services.

However the Connect is going to be an additional semi-fast service on this route so probably won't be stopping at the likes of Kiveton Bridge. All Pacers are being eliminated, the 170s are going to Southport-Manchester-Leeds so the most likely on the stopping service is probably a 150 and possibly a 156.

I'd hope the connect services play a more semi fast service than point to point, places like Kiveton, Worksop, Gainsborough etc aren't shown on the connect maps, but are unlikely to be missed out... Similarly on the Sheffield-Leeds services, would we expect Meadowhall, Rotherham and Swinton to be missed out ? There has to be a balance.

 

[61653 HTAFC]

Are there enough 195s for that ? The franchise interactive map does state new on some routes and brand new on others - I really don't think it's as simple as 195s do the diesel connect services.

I'd hope the connect services play a more semi fast service than point to point, places like Kiveton, Worksop, Gainsborough etc aren't shown on the connect maps, but are unlikely to be missed out... Similarly on the Sheffield-Leeds services, would we expect Meadowhall, Rotherham and Swinton to be missed out ? There has to be a balance.

The plan as announced by Arriva Rail North was 195s on all diesel connect services except those in the North East. I share your scepticism about whether there'll be enough 195s to cover all the services, but whether using 170s would be acceptable to the powers that be is another matter altogether.

I'd be massively surprised if the Nottingham and Lincoln services don't call at Meadowhall. Rotherham on the other hand might be a problem due to the tram-train services and the single-track Holmes Chord. Also with Swinton, the Nottingham service is moving to that route as it is quicker, so stopping at too many of the smaller places will erode those gains.

 

[43074]

Are there enough 195s for that ? The franchise interactive map does state new on some routes and brand new on others - I really don't think it's as simple as 195s do the diesel connect services.

That is the plan... It's the 195s & 158s (for Middlesbrough - Carlisle) which will almost exclusively work the diesel connect services; that's not to say they won't appear elsewhere but that will be their staple work. Any Connect services not worked by 195s or 158s will be operated by the electric 331s.

I'd hope the connect services play a more semi fast service than point to point, places like Kiveton, Worksop, Gainsborough etc aren't shown on the connect maps, but are unlikely to be missed out... Similarly on the Sheffield-Leeds services, would we expect Meadowhall, Rotherham and Swinton to be missed out ? There has to be a balance.

I think that's the purpose of the Connect services, i.e. to be faster point to point; the normal Northern services (in many cases at an enhanced frequency anyway) will continue to serve places like Rotherham, Swinton, Kiveton etc so the Connect services can skip stops. For instance, the Connect between Leeds and Lincoln will run non-stop between Sheffield & Worksop, and take the paths of the current semi-fast services between Leeds & Sheffield; the Leeds to Nottingham service will run non-stop between Meadowhall and Wakefield Westgate etc etc

 

[lejog]

As a frequent commuter from Kiveton Bridge to Sheffield on the Sheffield to Lincoln line is it more likely the stopper service that's currently served by Pacers will be replaced by Sprinters?

The new franchise Train Service Requirements suggest an hourly stopper running all stations from Sheffield to Retford and a Northern Connect service running fast from Sheffield to Worksop, then stations to Lincoln.

So yes Kiverton Bridge will most likely be served by an hourly refurbished Sprinter, I'd hazard a guess at a 150.

 

[edwin_m]

I'd hope the connect services play a more semi fast service than point to point, places like Kiveton, Worksop, Gainsborough etc aren't shown on the connect maps, but are unlikely to be missed out... Similarly on the Sheffield-Leeds services, would we expect Meadowhall, Rotherham and Swinton to be missed out ? There has to be a balance.

I don't think the Connect map (a particularly nasty example of bad graphic design) is intended to show all stations called at. It may be attempting to show the Connect stations that are going to be enhanced, but the exact calling pattern isn't known. I'd hazard a guess as non-stop Sheffield to Worksop because none of the stations in between seems very major and as mentioned there will be a replacement service for them. Then all of them would call at Retford and Gainsborough.

It's a bit more tricky where Connect is replacing rather than supplementing the existing stopping service so will have to provide local calls. The only two I can think of are the Nottingham (Dronfield, Langley Mill, Ilkeston - two of the three outside Rail North area so they probably aren't bothered) and the minor stops east of Carlisle (some perhaps only every two hours?).

On Sheffield-Leeds I think the Connect will be flighted with the XC service to minimise capacity issues, ideally a few minutes before it in each direction so as also to remove local journeys from the XC as much as possible. For this to work it needs to have the minimum of stops and I'd guess just Meadowhall and Westgate.

 

[Haydn1971]

A Meadowhall-Wakefield-Leeds service would be superb ! Although I'd expect the car park would need extending very quickly

 

[Roose]

It already does unless you travel at the crack of dawn!