Possible future 158 cascade

[MCR247]

TPE or EMT? :?

 

[Failed Unit]

TPE or EMT? :?

I think he is refering to the bad of days of Central trains, we had 170's but very rarely through trains to Norwich (they were turned back at Ely) or Liverpool (they were turned back at either Warrington or Manchester).

Some people debated that Manchester Airport - Cleethorpes should have been Central rather than Northern / TPE. That had merits considering Central already operated Sheffield - Manchester & Barnetby - Cleethorpes. Central had services to Doncaster. But that is a different debate.

 

[WillPS]

TPE or EMT? :?

If TPE were to run the Liverpool - Norwich service, they'd need to get the Turbostars which formerly ran the service back.

 

[MCR247]

If TPE were to run the Liverpool - Norwich service, they'd need to get the Turbostars which formerly ran the service back.

Oh right. Didnt get what you meant

 

[Bellwater]

Secondly, the Leeds to Nottingham service is an extension of a Leeds to Sheffield service again ordered by DfT. Northern running a service between Sheffield and Nottingham means less chance of overcrowding on EMT trains between Sheffield and Nottingham.

Because most people travel between Nottingham and Sheffield don't they :roll:

What do you suggest, Make them all get on the Northern Service and make an unneccesary change at Sheffield?

 

[WillPS]

Oh right. Didnt get what you meant

No problems man, I realised the way I wrote it was confusing.

Because most people travel between Nottingham and Sheffield don't they :roll:

What do you suggest, Make them all get on the Northern Service and make an unneccesary change at Sheffield?

Nottingham - Sheffield was an underserved commuter corridor, and there was plenty of demand for a frequent, direct Nottingham - Leeds service. Double whammy.

 

[Kneedown]

extend the existing 2 and 3 car 170s to 4 cars by inserting unpowered trailer cars.

Would never work, a 170 with all engines going is underpowered without adding even more weight!
--- old post above --- --- new post below ---

The original post was suggesting EMT get 3 car Turbostars to replace 2 car Sprinters.

But possibly the best thing to do is to put Liverpool-Norwich in the TPE franchise and routes like Birmingham-Stansted Airport with LM. Then if unit swaps are needed the operator has other appropriate units for the service.

What makes you think TPE would do a better job than EMT, and Lon Mid a better job than XC?
It matters not one iota who is running the service and what colour the trains are painted, as long as there are enough trains for the job.
Besides, three cars isn't enough on Liv-Nor. Four is the minimum required.

 

[northwichcat]

What makes you think TPE would do a better job than EMT, and Lon Mid a better job than XC?
It matters not one iota who is running the service and what colour the trains are painted, as long as there are enough trains for the job.
Besides, three cars isn't enough on Liv-Nor. Four is the minimum required.

I was meaning when EMT are short of 158s then 156s and 153s appear on Liverpool-Norwich. If TPE had the route they wouldn't have an unsuitable unit as a subsitute.
--- old post above --- --- new post below ---

Because most people travel between Nottingham and Sheffield don't they :roll:

What do you suggest, Make them all get on the Northern Service and make an unneccesary change at Sheffield?

I don't understand where you've got that idea from. I wasn't suggesting that at all!

 

[tbtc]

What makes you think TPE would do a better job than EMT, and Lon Mid a better job than XC?
It matters not one iota who is running the service and what colour the trains are painted, as long as there are enough trains for the job

I'd say it does matter, given that there are three TOCs running from Sheffield to Manchester. One operator for the Liverpool - Norwich and Manchester Airport - Cleethorpes would mean a better chance of rectifying problems when things go wrong, would make it easier to swap staff etc.

The fewer TOCs on any route the better; it gives them better chance to co-ordinate services, may make certain services more commercially viable (given that one company gets all the ORCATS money they have more incentive to make improvements) and would stop the current situation of the current operator having nothing spare west of the Pennines when things go wrong.

 

[WillPS]

4 cars on Liverpool - Norwich seems like a dream too good to be true!

 

[Bellwater]

I'd say it does matter, given that there are three TOCs running from Sheffield to Manchester. One operator for the Liverpool - Norwich and Manchester Airport - Cleethorpes would mean a better chance of rectifying problems when things go wrong, would make it easier to swap staff etc.

That might happen in the next run of franchise changes, it won't be TPE though i'd think... They're more interested in their Western operations.

If TPE had the route they wouldn't have an unsuitable unit as a subsitute.

Erm... 2 Car 170s on peak Man Airport-Cleethorpes anyone? particularly the 1628 off Cleethorpes...

0718 CLE-SHF has been a 153 a few times as well before!

 

[royaloak]

I was meaning when EMT are short of 158s then 156s and 153s appear on Liverpool-Norwich. If TPE had the route they wouldn't have an unsuitable unit as a subsitute.

No they would just cancel it instead, that would be much better wouldnt it!

 

[Aictos]

Would never work, a 170 with all engines going is underpowered without adding even more weight!

Sorry, I'm not a regular on the 170s although I can easily get one to and from work part of the way.

Just reconsider my idea with with powered trailers.

 

[northwichcat]

No they would just cancel it instead, that would be much better wouldnt it!

They'd actually probably terminate it at Nottingham.

 

[Bellwater]

They'd put a Rail Replacement bus on it and make up some press release about "Essential Train Maintenance"...

 

[transportphoto]

4 cars on Liverpool - Norwich seems like a dream too good to be true!

Yes, the 158's EMT we have now are only two cars!
Correct me if I am wrong - the 170's central trains operated on the route were 3 car DMUs.

 

[MCR247]

Yes, the 158's EMT we have now are only two cars!
Correct me if I am wrong - the 170's central trains operated on the route were 3 car DMUs.

3 car: 101-110, 397 & 398, 630-639
2 car: 111-117, 399, 501-523

 

[WillPS]

It was supposed to be operated by 3-car Turbostars but occasionally saw 2-cars and also sprinters.

They would only ever reserve for two coaches though, which sometimes meant a very quiet centre car.

 

[Kneedown]

It was supposed to be operated by 3-car Turbostars but occasionally saw 2-cars and also sprinters.

They would only ever reserve for two coaches though, which sometimes meant a very quiet centre car.

There were also a good few 4car trains made up of 2x2car 170's or a 2car 170 and a 158. If you were really lucky the paint schemes would match too!
I remember one trip when i had 397 and a two car. 5 whole coaches!

 

[thefab444]

SWT only had turbostars whilst the 158 and 159s were being refurbished (etc).

Rubbish. The 170s were ordered in 2000-1 as a growth order, and to allow new routes to commence. During their time at SWT they were mainly used on the Reading - Brighton and Romsey - Totton services. They were also used to strengthen some Waterloo - Salisbury/Exeter services, although they were not booked west of Yeovil they did occasionally reach Exeter. I don't believe they ever worked to Bristol or west of Exeter.

They were swapped for some of TPE's two car 158s in 2006-7. TPE gained 8 170s from SWT (the other SWT 170 was sent to Southern), and SWT gained 11 158s from TPE. I think we know who got the better end of that deal. We, of course, also gained an additional 8 three car 158s from TPE, but these were displaced by the Class 185s rather than as a swap.

 

[me123]

I am aware why 158's and 170's are used on the Glasgow - Anniesland services. But this diagram could quite easily be self contained and operated by a 153! There are many examples in the UK where unsuitable stock is diagrammed, I could have picked on Northern with Wakefield - Knottingley. I do know that putting a pacer or a 153 would be totally pointless however as you would only need 3 units to cover the service and having staff trained to use / maintain such a small subfleet would be wrong. To balance this out however many routes in Scotland where the 158 is used really should be running with 3 coach units, Dunblane - Edinburgh & Fife lines spring to mind which are often very full all day (and overcrowded on Saturday) - just in case you feel I am picking on Scotland.

Fair enough. I've had this argument too many times, and it's all too often a case of people presuming that there's two Turbostars running back and forth all day; something that could not be further from the truth.

But your suggestion of having a 153 on a self-contained diagram... We'd still need the 158s for their other jobs. For example, the 158 which does spend the day going between GLQ and ANL comes down from Aberdeen in the morning and goes back up in the evening. The train is still going to be needed for this service, regardless of whether or not we have the 153s, and would instead be spending the day sitting in the sidings.

So you'd merely be giving us an extra carriage that we don't need while a perfectly good train is sitting doing nothing. I know what you're trying to do here, but it's just not really feasible.

 

[northwichcat]

They were swapped for some of TPE's two car 158s in 2006-7. TPE gained 8 170s from SWT (the other SWT 170 was sent to Southern), and SWT gained 11 158s from TPE. I think we know who got the better end of that deal. We, of course, also gained an additional 8 three car 158s from TPE, but these were displaced by the Class 185s rather than as a swap.

Didn't SWT axe a route that 170s were used on (Brighton to London?) so the some 170s were surplus to requirements? (Or at least more surplus to requirements than the 16 508s that Merseyrail had to hand over to Connex because DfT said they were surplus to requirements when they were being well used, even if in this case SWT could have had another use for 170s.)

 

[Failed Unit]

Fair enough. I've had this argument too many times, and it's all too often a case of people presuming that there's two Turbostars running back and forth all day; something that could not be further from the truth.

But your suggestion of having a 153 on a self-contained diagram... We'd still need the 158s for their other jobs. For example, the 158 which does spend the day going between GLQ and ANL comes down from Aberdeen in the morning and goes back up in the evening. The train is still going to be needed for this service, regardless of whether or not we have the 153s, and would instead be spending the day sitting in the sidings.

So you'd merely be giving us an extra carriage that we don't need while a perfectly good train is sitting doing nothing. I know what you're trying to do here, but it's just not really feasible.

Doesn't the 158 on that train attach at Perth (and likewise detach at Perth on the 1741?). The joys of MU's however I am sure that Scotrail would in an ideal world like a few 4 car Turbo's for the Aberdeen and Inverness route.

The Anniesland route is very odd the way it is daigramed, as there are 2 units on it all day. So when the 158 takes over from the 156 which was on the route is stood down. I know it is probably for a bit of TLC but the Annieland route has 2 units on it all day. (In the summer the 156 goes off to Fort William, in the winter this doesn't happen as the Oban & Malliag train work separately. But in the summer they are both 4 car units). I guess in reality they keep the 158 daigram the same all year.

 

[AlexS]

Although people say take the units back from LM - people seem to forget that the capacity is equally needed there.

While 170s might be overspecced for it, the Birmingham to Shrewsbury stopper is either a 3 or 4 car unit - and it's busy whatever time of day, and generally full and standing in the peaks (particularly out of Birmingham in the evening and into it in the morning). Since the 3rd train in the hour was withdrawn you can't really afford to reduce capacity on the route, when a 2 car 170 turns up it's rather less than pleasant.

The same goes for the Hereford route.

 

[starrymarkb]

Didn't SWT axe a route that 170s were used on (Brighton to London?) so the some 170s were surplus to requirements? (Or at least more surplus to requirements than the 16 508s that Merseyrail had to hand over to Connex because DfT said they were surplus to requirements when they were being well used, even if in this case SWT could have had another use for 170s.)

Reading to Brighton was axed (DfT orders), but SWT had gained the Bristol Route as well as the hourly services to Exeter. SWT were not impressed by the reliability of the Turbostars compared to the 159s (how many Golden Spanners now?) so took the opportunity to Swap the 170s for what became the 159/1s, and grabbed some of the 2 car 158s as well.