Speculation on West Midlands Fleet Plans

[DarloRich]

we have been led to assume 3 x 2/3 car former underground trains are heading for the Vale.

Happy to see the back of the 153 units but sad to see the 150's leave.

 

[TheDavibob]

I'm not sure but it does have a caveat that the 26 x 4 car EMUs to replace 26 x 3 car 323s is an educated guess based on the number of carriages quoted.

I'm not claiming any expertise, but it seems like an utterly awful guess. 4-car EMUs would be deeply insufficient for Cross City running at peak times, given the requirement for more space, and doubled up won't fit into any platforms (unless we're talking short articulated cars, as per S8 stock).

And the wording surrounding everything seems to imply (again, making assumptions) that the new stock is *only* destined for the Cross City (at least primarily). The Chase Line and the Stoke/Crewe extension would presumably be served by cascaded EMUs from the WCML.

 

[northwichcat]

If 230s are the only type of train allowed on Marston Vale (due to platform lengths) could only having 3 of them cause an issue e.g. one if one fails while another is already having some work done on it, that would only leave one unit available for the line. Haven't current LM used 153s on Stourbridge on occasions because both 139s have been out-of-service?

 

[northwichcat]

I'm not claiming any expertise, but it seems like an utterly awful guess. 4-car EMUs would be deeply insufficient for Cross City running at peak times, given the requirement for more space, and doubled up won't fit into any platforms (unless we're talking short articulated cars, as per S8 stock).

We heard the same argument with Merseyrail - the new trains will have to be 3/6 car because of the infrastructure. Yet they are getting 4 car Stadler Metro trains which will have short carriages allowing them to be used without expensive infrastructure modifications. Maybe LM will get the same?

And the wording surrounding everything seems to imply (again, making assumptions) that the new stock is *only* destined for the Cross City (at least primarily). The Chase Line and the Stoke/Crewe extension would presumably be served by cascaded EMUs from the WCML.

And there's 225 new carriages arriving for the WCML. Like I said already if Old Hill Bank is correct LM will get the equivalent of over 60 extra 350s for non-cross city services (except the new sets will likely be in 5 car formations.)

 

[Old Hill Bank]

If 230s are the only type of train allowed on Marston Vale (due to platform lengths) could only having 3 of them cause an issue e.g. one if one fails while another is already having some work done on it, that would only leave one unit available for the line. Haven't current LM used 153s on Stourbridge on occasions because both 139s have been out-of-service?

The Stourbridge Town service is run by Pre-Metro Operations as a sub contract with its own staff so a 153 could never do the job on the grounds of route and traction knowledge.

 

[TheDavibob]

We heard the same argument with Merseyrail - the new trains will have to be 3/6 car because of the infrastructure. Yet they are getting 4 car Stadler Metro trains which will have short carriages allowing them to be used without expensive infrastructure modifications. Maybe LM will get the same?

That would make an awful lot of sense, I'll admit. It's the sort of line ideally suited to such trains. Maybe I'm just more surprised nobody has really mentioned it as a possibility to date

 

[Bletchleyite]

If 230s are the only type of train allowed on Marston Vale (due to platform lengths) could only having 3 of them cause an issue e.g. one if one fails while another is already having some work done on it, that would only leave one unit available for the line. Haven't current LM used 153s on Stourbridge on occasions because both 139s have been out-of-service?

Overall reliability would be better, as the usual situation in case of failure of one of the Marston Vale units is that the buses come out until the end of the day when the unit can be either fixed or swapped. Whereas with 3 units there would be a spare at Bletchley.

If one was under maintenance, they would know about the issue and perhaps could pre-warn passengers of likely issues. And as the 230s are effectively new they *should* be more reliable.

As for 153s on the Stourbridge, I've not heard of that happening. I have heard of the odd bustitution, though.

 

[Bletchleyite]

We heard the same argument with Merseyrail - the new trains will have to be 3/6 car because of the infrastructure. Yet they are getting 4 car Stadler Metro trains which will have short carriages allowing them to be used without expensive infrastructure modifications. Maybe LM will get the same?

Possible. I personally think 5-car sets (707s, anyone?) with no doubling up are most likely for the Cross City. 4-car would be too short unless they were 4x26m, and I don't think anyone makes 26m UK loading gauge trains except IEPs.

 

[TheDavibob]

Possible. I personally think 5-car sets (707s, anyone?) with no doubling up are most likely for the Cross City. 4-car would be too short unless they were 4x26m, and I don't think anyone makes 26m UK loading gauge trains except IEPs.

5x20m (i.e. the 707s) is a considerable loss of length to 6x23m, which Cross City essentially needs in the peaks (though of course the 707s have a better layout for standing). As was suggested above, if 4-cars were chosen we would probably be looking at 4x~17m (as per S8 stock and the Merseyrail FLIRTs), which is broadly the same as a single 323 set.

On the 707 topic, part of me would think adding a pair of extra powered cars would both sort their problems (to some extent) and allow for Cross City usage. But that's just the crayons coming out, really.

 

[northwichcat]

With 153s on Stourbridge I was thinking around the time the 139s were first introduced before the services were subcontracted but was unaware of what's happened more recently.

 

[Qwerty133]

The Stourbridge Town service is run by Pre-Metro Operations as a sub contract with its own staff so a 153 could never do the job on the grounds of route and traction knowledge.

As long as there was a LM and a shuttle driver and guard (4 members of staff in total) on board it would be possible, if a particularly poor use of 'spare' drivers and guards.

 

[DarloRich]

Overall reliability would be better, as the usual situation in case of failure of one of the Marston Vale units is that the buses come out until the end of the day when the unit can be either fixed or swapped. Whereas with 3 units there would be a spare at Bletchley.

If one was under maintenance, they would know about the issue and perhaps could pre-warn passengers of likely issues. And as the 230s are effectively new they *should* be more reliable.

As for 153s on the Stourbridge, I've not heard of that happening. I have heard of the odd bustitution, though.

although we do seem to have been allocated a spare 150 in recent weeks. It comes out fairly often to cover the 153.

 

[Bletchleyite]

although we do seem to have been allocated a spare 150 in recent weeks. It comes out fairly often to cover the 153.

Ah, I did see a 150 in the sidings last week and wondered where it had come from. Good to hear that.

 

[gg1]

5x20m (i.e. the 707s) is a considerable loss of length to 6x23m, which Cross City essentially needs in the peaks (though of course the 707s have a better layout for standing).

It is but when you bear in mind no more than 1/3 of peak time services currently operated doubled up, a fleet 5x20m units would still represent a notable improvement in capacity.

 

[HLE]

The rumour is the 230 will be running on the Coventry branch come the December timetable change - not the Vale.

The 153 released then goes to Bletchley to increase the Marston Vale service to 1 every 40 mins.
Purely rumours at the minute though, nothing much official.

 

[Bletchleyite]

It is but when you bear in mind no more than 1/3 of peak time services currently operated doubled up, a fleet 5x20m units would still represent a notable improvement in capacity.

And there is a plan to increase frequency, isn't there?

While things haven't gone that way, I did suggest in the past that Merseyrail going to fixed formation 4x20m but upping frequency to a 10 rather than 15 minute base would be a good move.

 

[HLE]

we have been led to assume 3 x 2/3 car former underground trains are heading for the Vale.

Happy to see the back of the 153 units but sad to see the 150's leave.

Prefer the 153's to be honest.

 

[Bletchleyite]

Prefer the 153's to be honest.

Same. 150s either have no decent window view at any seat (150/1) or have no legroom (150/2), and are 3+2 seated. They're basic and reliable but no niceties at all.

153s at least have a decent window view at all seats (due to the narrow pillars) and 2+2 seating with some tables.

 

[gg1]

And there is a plan to increase frequency, isn't there?

I'd be very surprised if they did, I can't see how they'd find the additional paths between Barnt Green and New Street to do so.

 

[Class172]

And there is a plan to increase frequency, isn't there?

I'd be very surprised if they did, I can't see how they'd find the additional paths between Barnt Green and New Street to do so.

Perhaps Bletchelyite is thinking of the requirement to offer an improvement for the current 'Leaf Fall' timetable, to bring it up to a consistent frequency (6tph) with the normal timetable.

 

[MCR247]

Does this require more units? Or just units that can cope better with poor adhesion?

 

[43074]

Cross City will be staying at 6tph, additional capacity will come from the metro style layout of the new trains and before that the cascade of extra stock to the franchise (Northern's 323s??). The requirement was that the timetable didn't need altering for leaf fall as Class172 mentioned above.

 

[northwichcat]

Cross City will be staying at 6tph, additional capacity will come from the metro style layout of the new trains and before that the cascade of extra stock to the franchise (Northern's 323s??). The requirement was that the timetable didn't need altering for leaf fall as Class172 mentioned above.

The franchise announcement has made it clear the cross city route will get brand new trains. The Northern 323s won't form part of the long term fleet plan but that doesn't rule out some joining as a short term measure.

 

[the sniper]

If the speculation here is correct about Cross City getting something less than equivalent to 6x23m, along with what we know will be 'London Overground style seating', I can see this being a PR nightmare for the TOC/Regional authority (WMT).

Throw in the possibility of taking passengers down the rough road to DCO and you've got yourself into quite a mess...

 

[iainbhx]

350/2 still only 100 mph, and far too many of them on the Liverpool / Birmingham services (around 75%) with their 2+3 seating.

As a Birmingham-Crewe commuter, it's unusual not to get a 350/2, the 07:01 is sometimes a 350/1, but not always whilst the 07:36 and the 08:01 are nearly always 350/2's. We had a 350/3 the other day, only the second one this year.

 

[northwichcat]

If the speculation here is correct about Cross City getting something less than equivalent to 6x23m, along with what we know will be 'London Overground style seating', I can see this being a PR nightmare for the TOC/Regional authority (WMT).

Throw in the possibility of taking passengers down the rough road to DCO and you've got yourself into quite a mess...

But we do know the order for cross city will be for over 100 carriages, while there are 26x3 car 323s which indicates around 4 new carriages for each 3 leaving. We have no idea on the carriage length though.