Speculation- New TPE routes or extensions?

[lrbvoyager]

I can't see that happening given fewer cross-Newcastle services running from December.

Even if TPE ran 397s or 802s on that route, would there be any noticeable time savings (on Haltwhistle – Hexham – Prudhoe – MetroCentre fasts; I'd guess too frequent stops to be worth using on Hexham stoppers)? I think LNER diversions are more or less the same duration as the faster Northern services, whilst having to fit within the Northern timetable.

I think if it was entirely ran with TPE stock either 802s or 185s they are faster at accelerating then 156s and 158s.

 

[61653 HTAFC]

I think if it was entirely ran with TPE stock either 802s or 185s they are faster at accelerating then 156s and 158s.

Two things you'd need to a consider though:
(i) Does the Tyne Valley route have much in the way of differential speeds?
(ii) What would fill the gap left by those units moving northwards?

 

[stevieinselby]

(i) Does the Tyne Valley route have much in the way of differential speeds?

No differential speed limits on the Tyne Valley, just a linespeed of max 65mph.
But using 185s or 802s on that line does seem like a sledgehammer to crack a nut.

 

[lrbvoyager]

Two things you'd need to a consider though:
(i) Does the Tyne Valley route have much in the way of differential speeds?
(ii) What would fill the gap left by those units moving northwards?

ii- I was thinking more about after TPE orders new stock to replace 185s when TRU has been completed.

 

[Yorkshire09876]

I think if it was entirely ran with TPE stock either 802s or 185s they are faster at accelerating then 156s and 158s.

Why is this necessary on what is basically a secondary route, which doesn't have a high speed limit anyway? 80x in particular are intercity trains and would be overkill for the route.

 

[Anvil1984]

ii- I was thinking more about after TPE orders new stock to replace 185s when TRU has been completed.

At which point Northern will also have new units to replace the 156 / 158s. Using a 5 coach Intercity train on a line where most of the time 1 coach will suffice isn’t realistic. 185s slightly better but only if they transfer to Northern / whatever entity is running the line post TRU however they lack the amount of bike space needed for this route

 

[Bletchleyite]

At which point Northern will also have new units to replace the 156 / 158s. Using a 5 coach Intercity train on a line where most of the time 1 coach will suffice isn’t realistic. 185s slightly better but only if they transfer to Northern / whatever entity is running the line post TRU however they lack the amount of bike space needed for this route

The "ballroom" would fit in loads of bikes similar to a 156 but you'd need to do some reconfiguration to provide a proper wheelchair space (which would be beneficial anyway).

 

[Yorkshire09876]

The "ballroom" would fit in loads of bikes similar to a 156 but you'd need to do some reconfiguration to provide a proper wheelchair space (which would be beneficial anyway).

There wouldn't really be any need for first class, so that section could be converted to wheelchair space and more standard class seating.

 

[Bletchleyite]

There wouldn't really be any need for first class, so that section could be converted to wheelchair space and more standard class seating.

Alternative might be to remove the seats at the other cab end and make that a bike/luggage space, and install 4 of them (two priority airline rows) in the existing bike space to partly compensate. You would as you say gain most or all of the lost seats back by reseating the former 1st area to higher density 2+2.

 

[Anvil1984]

The "ballroom" would fit in loads of bikes similar to a 156 but you'd need to do some reconfiguration to provide a proper wheelchair space (which would be

I couldn’t see the ballroom space being used unless you move the toilet as well with first class converted to standard and bike space created somehow. Alternatively Northern could strictly impose the 2 bikes per train policy which wouldn’t be popular.

Not totally against 185s, more realistic suggestion than 802s but as I say Northern / whichever entity by post TRU will probably have different new stock

 

[Bletchleyite]

Looking at TPE's "virtual tour" the first class catering dock area could easily be modified to take a couple more bikes instead if they did want to do a cheap and nasty conversion rather than add capacity by converting first to proper standard.

 

[Yorkshire09876]

I couldn’t see the ballroom space being used unless you move the toilet as well with first class converted to standard and bike space created somehow. Alternatively Northern could strictly impose the 2 bikes per train policy which wouldn’t be popular.

Surely having the wheelchair area close to the accessible toilet is a good idea?

 

[Anvil1984]

Surely having the wheelchair area close to the accessible toilet is a good idea?

It is, the post was in response to this comment

The "ballroom" would fit in loads of bikes similar to a 156 but you'd need to do some reconfiguration to provide a proper wheelchair space (which would be beneficial anyway).

If you move the bikes into the ballroom area then you’d have to move the wheelchair spaces and then the wheelchair accessible toilet

 

[Bletchleyite]

If you move the bikes into the ballroom area then you’d have to move the wheelchair spaces and then the wheelchair accessible toilet

When I first suggested I had it in my mind that the wheelchair spaces and the toilet were the other way round. Now I've looked at a seating plan that wouldn't make much sense, it would be easier to provide 2 more bike spaces in the present first class catering store.

 

[61653 HTAFC]

Every few years there's a madcap plan on here about reconfiguring the 185s layout. It isn't going to happen anytime soon.

 

[YorksLad12]

When I first suggested I had it in my mind that the wheelchair spaces and the toilet were the other way round. Now I've looked at a seating plan that wouldn't make much sense, it would be easier to provide 2 more bike spaces in the present first class catering store.

(We're going a bit off-topic I know, but...)
Does putting potential new bikes at the current First Class end mean we'd have two separate bike storage areas? Would it be better to have just the one? Do we need the large luggage racks as well?

 

[Bletchleyite]

Every few years there's a madcap plan on here about reconfiguring the 185s layout. It isn't going to happen anytime soon.

Probably because they're one of the most bizarre and stupid layouts on the railway

 

[lrbvoyager]

Why is this necessary on what is basically a secondary route, which doesn't have a high speed limit anyway? 80x in particular are intercity trains and would be overkill for the route.

I didn’t mean 802s would run Carlisle to Newcastle

 

[Anvil1984]

Every few years there's a madcap plan on here about reconfiguring the 185s layout. It isn't going to happen anytime soon.

Agreed, however this is in response to a madcap scheme to put 802s run Carlisle to Newcastle which has less chance of happening

 

[Bletchleyite]

Agreed, however this is in response to a madcap scheme to put 802s run Carlisle to Newcastle which has less chance of happening

If there are spare 802s, it appears there might be a red dragon sniffing around the place a bit...

"Transforming Rail in Wales" Interview with TFW CEO

Green Signals interview with James Price, CEO of TFW. Some interesting points raised: CVL - Testing is under way of 398's, but no Driver training will start until they are at a suitably reliable stage. - Issues with beacons on TAM lines. - Timetable improvements still to come, with decreased...

www.railforums.co.uk

80x to replace Mk4s on TfW?

I suspect that will stay a rumour. Why would TfW order brand new 140mph capable trains when the only mileage that exceeds 100mph is Sandbach - Cheadle Hulme? Particularly given that Hitachi isn't exactly a cheap supplier to order from - weren't they pricing off orders fairly recently? I suspect...

www.railforums.co.uk

 

[61653 HTAFC]

Probably because they're one of the most bizarre and stupid layouts on the railway

In your opinion. It's certainly not perfect, but it's probably the simplest compromise to meet all the requirements of PRM rules. If it was that unpopular don't you think TPE would have reconfigured them during the refurbishment?

Agreed, however this is in response to a madcap scheme to put 802s run Carlisle to Newcastle which has less chance of happening

Indeed- but this thread is about possible routes to transfer to TPE (or whatever TPE becomes under GBR). If they were to take on Newcastle to Carlisle they probably wouldn't want to create an awkward subclass of 185s, they'd just run them as-is and introduce first class fares. They'd need that extra revenue to pay for the extra diesel being used compared to sprinters anyway!

 

[Anvil1984]

Indeed- but this thread is about possible routes to transfer to TPE (or whatever TPE becomes under GBR). If they were to take on Newcastle to Carlisle they probably wouldn't want to create an awkward subclass of 185s, they'd just run them as-is and introduce first class fares. They'd need that extra revenue to pay for the extra diesel being used compared to sprinters anyway!

No, I get that but TPE are never going to take on Newcastle to Carlisle which has been my point throughout. It’s going to be a Northern service or whichever entity is in charge when the deckchairs have been shuffled. There’s no point transferring staff / creating new mini train crew depots (TPE have no staff at Carlisle) just because a poster on here doesn’t like seats on a 158 which will probably be replaced in the North East by the time TRU is done

 

[Bletchleyite]

New thread for reconfiguring 185s: https://www.railforums.co.uk/thread...ion-of-class-185s-for-other-operators.294050/

 

[Killingworth]

Coming back to the original thread title, and remembering we are in the Speculative discussion sub forum, I would suggest that the 3rd Hope Valley express should be a TPE service from Manchester Piccadilly to Lincoln service calling at New Mills Central and Dore. The resulting services would be:

1tph Manchester Picccadilly - Lincoln (New Mills Central, Dore, Sheffield, Worksop, Retford, Gainsborough Lea Road, Saxilby, Lincoln)
1tph Sheffield - Gainsborough Central (reinstate the pre covid service)
2tph Leeds - Nottingham (the current Northern Leeds - Lincoln becomes a second Nottingham per hour)

This reinstates 2tph on the Lincoln route, gives Lincoln a service to Manchester, doubles one of Northern's busiest routes (Leeds-Nottingham) and at the loss of Leeds - Lincoln, which lets face it, is much quicker via Doncaster, so really the loss is Barnsley and Meadowhall to stations on the Lincoln line, which yes is a loss, but I would argue is significantly outweighed by the gain on the other routes.

I'm reading this thread with wry amusement. When we were to get HS2 East I noted that a regular Cross Country journey I used to make from Sheffield to Newcastle would actually take a few minutes longer. That was when there was an hourly train via Doncaster. (I suspect First may want some of those currently vacant paths for their OA Cardiff to York application. If I do travel on XC I'll look to see if I can get a discounted 1st class ticket where a congested train is expected.)

Currently there is no prospect of a third hourly Manchester - Sheffield fast service despite all the millions and decades to arrange the Hope Valley Capacity Scheme - too much congestion east from Manchester and from Dore through Sheffield towards Meadowhall. 2035-40 maybe.

More capacity is needed on the core Manchester - Sheffield section but adding a 3rd longer distance service may bring more knock on delays and hinder more than help overall performance. Making all TPE services 6 car from Liverpool to Cleethorpes is overkill for much of the day but 3 is often inadequate west of Sheffield. Where and when to split is an issue that needs facing. Currently it's too hard for multiple reasons.

However a Northern shuttle service via Marple might get round the Manchester congestion issue. Adding carriages to existing services would be the easiest solution to add capacity - if/when we have them.

We may sometimes get over hung up on intercity and express descriptions, and between first and standard class. The average passenger wants a comfortable seat from A to B on as quick a train as possible at reasonable price - preferably with no changes. I can't help noticing that passengers from Sheffield to Manchester Airport have been deterred by the loss of the direct TPE trains. On the other hand having the Northern 195s instead of Pacers, usually offering substantial cost savings on TPE or EMR, has boosted airport numbers on their trains considerably.

== Doublepost prevention - post automatically merged: 30 Oct 2025 ==

No differential speed limits on the Tyne Valley, just a line speed of max 65mph.
But using 185s or 802s on that line does seem like a sledgehammer to crack a nut.

East of Doncaster 185s trundle along at no more than 55 for most of the way. Express is a bit of a stretch. Stephenson's Rocket managed 30 in 1829!

 

[Grumpy]

Hourly service between Scarborough and Manchester Victoria (which does, indeed, run via West Yorkshire). 76 minutes or thereabouts, direct.

Indeed there now seems to be. When I looked in previous weeks they were only operating a York shuttle.

 

[revkev7]

With the controversies on the upcoming East Coast shuffle, extending the Liverpool-Newcastle to end at Edinburgh would offer better connection choices to all those impacted by reduced LNER stopping patterns in Northumberland and are a natural extension to this route in the same way as services complete to Glasgow and Edinburgh up the West Coast line. Even if only alternative services continued beyond Newcastle.

 

[A S Leib]

With the controversies on the upcoming East Coast shuffle, extending the Liverpool-Newcastle to end at Edinburgh would offer better connection choices to all those impacted by reduced LNER stopping patterns in Northumberland and are a natural extension to this route in the same way as services complete to Glasgow and Edinburgh up the West Coast line. Even if only alternative services continued beyond Newcastle.

I'd guess that that would need another large set of ECML timetable changes, given that December's (weekday) timetable has Edinburgh departures leaving around fifty minutes after Liverpool arrivals (although only with a ten minute gap southbound); that's long enough that I'd guess even most change-adverse passengers would prefer a same-platform change at Darlington or Durham if paths can't be moved.

 

[IanXC]

Currently there is no prospect of a third hourly Manchester - Sheffield fast service despite all the millions and decades to arrange the Hope Valley Capacity Scheme - too much congestion east from Manchester and from Dore through Sheffield towards Meadowhall. 2035-40 maybe.

More capacity is needed on the core Manchester - Sheffield section but adding a 3rd longer distance service may bring more knock on delays and hinder more than help overall performance. Making all TPE services 6 car from Liverpool to Cleethorpes is overkill for much of the day but 3 is often inadequate west of Sheffield. Where and when to split is an issue that needs facing. Currently it's too hard for multiple reasons.

However a Northern shuttle service via Marple might get round the Manchester congestion issue. Adding carriages to existing services would be the easiest solution to add capacity - if/when we have them.

We may sometimes get over hung up on intercity and express descriptions, and between first and standard class. The average passenger wants a comfortable seat from A to B on as quick a train as possible at reasonable price - preferably with no changes. I can't help noticing that passengers from Sheffield to Manchester Airport have been deterred by the loss of the direct TPE trains. On the other hand having the Northern 195s instead of Pacers, usually offering substantial cost savings on TPE or EMR, has boosted airport numbers on their trains considerably.

I feel like you have missed the fact we are in the speculative discussion sub forum?

Coming out of the low numbered platforms at Piccadilly, without needing any awkward reversal moves, and then heading towards Marple is significantly less congested that the other routes around Piccadilly, and I would not be surprised if there was capacity for such a departure.

North out of Sheffield what I have proposed does not involve any services above and beyond what has previously been operated in that area. There would be extra movements to the south of Sheffield, but to the North there is nothing new.

 

[Killingworth]

I feel like you have missed the fact we are in the speculative discussion sub forum?

Coming out of the low numbered platforms at Piccadilly, without needing any awkward reversal moves, and then heading towards Marple is significantly less congested that the other routes around Piccadilly, and I would not be surprised if there was capacity for such a departure.

North out of Sheffield what I have proposed does not involve any services above and beyond what has previously been operated in that area. There would be extra movements to the south of Sheffield, but to the North there is nothing new.

Informed speculation suggests the route via Marple could well be used for an extra service. North and east out of Sheffield the critical section is to Nunnery Junction for trains to Hull/Scarborough, Cleethorpes, Lincoln, Gainsborough, Adwick, Leeds, Huddersfield etc. However it all depends on having extra rolling stock to operate any extra services by any operator to anywhere.