TfN propose Northern Sprinter replacement

[LOL The Irony]

**Mods please move if in wrong area**

In the meeting due to happen today to discuss the Manchester Recovery Timetable, the agenda includes a roadmap which has the procurement of new rolling stock to replace the Sprinters from 2023.

 

[Metrolink]

Do you know what stock will replace them if this happens?

 

[Mollman]

Do you know what stock will replace them if this happens?

One would hope that a rolling electrification plan would have been finalised by then allowing direct replacement by new EMUs and bi-modes plus cascaded newer DMUs from other routes.

 

[scrapy]

One would hope that a rolling electrification plan would have been finalised by then allowing direct replacement by new EMUs and bi-modes plus cascaded newer DMUs from other routes.

I doubt new EMUs would be ordered. There will probably be surplus EMUs with the extra 323s (plus extra ones available as I think WMT will be releasing more than the 17 Northern will be getting).

I very much doubt Network Rail will deliver any new meaningful electrification before these units enter service that will allow more routes to go totally EMU (possibly Windermere?). My guess is bi-modes, initially enough to go on Barrow, Windermere to Man Airport and Southport to Stalybridge/Oxford Rd. This would allow scrapping/ moving to TFW of 769s, and cascade of 195s to other routes.

 

[HST43257]

I doubt new EMUs would be ordered. There will probably be surplus EMUs with the extra 323s (plus extra ones available as I think WMT will be releasing more than the 17 Northern will be getting).

I very much doubt Network Rail will deliver any new meaningful electrification before these units enter service that will allow more routes to go totally EMU (possibly Windermere?). My guess is bi-modes, initially enough to go on Barrow, Windermere to Man Airport and Southport to Stalybridge/Oxford Rd. This would allow scrapping/ moving to TFW of 769s, and cascade of 195s to other routes.

TFW’s 769s are only temporary I believe, don’t give them any more

 

[Purple Orange]

If the sprinters are to be replaced, please let them be new build bi-modes.

6-car 323s is an appealing prospect too. I’d stick 6-car 331s on the routes where SDO is required.

 

[Anonymous10]

I doubt new EMUs would be ordered. There will probably be surplus EMUs with the extra 323s (plus extra ones available as I think WMT will be releasing more than the 17 Northern will be getting).

I very much doubt Network Rail will deliver any new meaningful electrification before these units enter service that will allow more routes to go totally EMU (possibly Windermere?). My guess is bi-modes, initially enough to go on Barrow, Windermere to Man Airport and Southport to Stalybridge/Oxford Rd. This would allow scrapping/ moving to TFW of 769s, and cascade of 195s to other routes.

tfw 769s are a temporary measure so please dont send them down be pointless in my opinion also for new dmus i think it would be likely a caf product again likely another 195 or similar variation

 

[Bletchleyite]

tfw 769s are a temporary measure so please dont send them down be pointless in my opinion also for new dmus i think it would be likely a caf product again likely another 195 or similar variation

More straight DMUs would be nuts.

 

[Purple Orange]

Could it be that 195s are cascaded to routes that have a significantly high proportion of track not under wires, should bi-modes be ordered?

 

[Bletchleyite]

Could it be that 195s are cascaded to routes that have a significantly high proportion of track not under wires, should bi-modes be ordered?

This would be very sensible. A 195 is a very competent 150 replacement.

 

[DB]

More straight DMUs would be nuts.

It would also be very surprising if the DfT would authorise it!

 

[Bigman]

What about some 170's from Cross Country? Lots of drivers already sign them.

 

[Anonymous10]

More straight DMUs would be nuts.

please note the word variant i wouldn't be surprised to see one altered into a bi mode as they said when built they could be if i remember correctly

 

[Domh245]

It would also be very surprising if the DfT would authorise it!

Indeed, especially in light of the "greenprint" which aims to remove diesel only trains from 2040 (note, remove as opposed to 'stop introduction from')

it'd be a brave ROSCO who financed new build diesel only in light of that, though I suppose it does also imply that some form of bi-mode conversion (even if just to battery hybrid) for the CAF fleets is likely

 

[squizzler]

Upon hearing that TfW was going with prm class 153 rather than the formerly planned class 170s, I wondered if the class 230 - a previous contender - was an idea worth revisiting.

We know more about the 230 series than when they were originally mooted. Whilst the initial ones on the Marston Vale have suffered teething problems, the interior quality has apparently exceeded expectations. So are there any lines in Northernland for which its worth revisiting the Vivarail class 230 to replace the remaining sprinters and pacers?

 

[LOL The Irony]

Do you know what stock will replace them if this happens?

Probably CAF. Although it's only going out to tender in 2023.

One would hope that a rolling electrification plan would have been finalised by then allowing direct replacement by new EMUs and bi-modes plus cascaded newer DMUs from other routes.

With a 2023 procurement date, that's very wishful thinking. Despite that, I do actually see bi-modes playing a large role in this new fleet.

If the sprinters are to be replaced, please let them be new build bi-modes.

Their replacement is inevitable, just this is speeding their ordering up.

6-car 323s is an appealing prospect too. I’d stick 6-car 331s on the routes where SDO is required.

I think all routes would require SDO or platform extensions to take 6 car 323s. At least south of Manchester and towards Bolton.

What about some 170's from Cross Country? Lots of drivers already sign them.

1. Why not new build bi-modes that can have their diesel engines removed at a later date?
2. Lots of east side drivers. I don't think any west side crews sign 170s.

 

[61653 HTAFC]

Upon hearing that TfW was going with prm class 153 rather than the formerly planned class 170s, I wondered if the class 230 - a previous contender - was an idea worth revisiting.

We know more about the 230 series than when they were originally mooted. Whilst the initial ones on the Marston Vale have suffered teething problems, the interior quality has apparently exceeded expectations. So are there any lines in Northernland for which its worth revisiting the Vivarail class 230 to replace the remaining sprinters and pacers?

When the Vivarail 230 was first proposed, the Huddersfield to Sheffield line was suggested as a possible use for them. IIRC Vivarail themselves used that route as a basis for computer modelling. Then of course Arriva went with 150s, which were originally intended to be 3-car but will almost certainly now stay as 2.

 

[Bletchleyite]

Upon hearing that TfW was going with prm class 153 rather than the formerly planned class 170s, I wondered if the class 230 - a previous contender - was an idea worth revisiting.

We know more about the 230 series than when they were originally mooted. Whilst the initial ones on the Marston Vale have suffered teething problems, the interior quality has apparently exceeded expectations. So are there any lines in Northernland for which its worth revisiting the Vivarail class 230 to replace the remaining sprinters and pacers?

The problem is that there are very few lines in Northernland where the 60mph top speed wouldn't cause things to get in the way. You might get away with some of the Manchester suburbans e.g. the Rose Hills, but really those need the wires, not cheapo DMUs.

 

[Journeyman]

The problem is that there are very few lines in Northernland where the 60mph top speed wouldn't cause things to get in the way. You might get away with some of the Manchester suburbans e.g. the Rose Hills, but really those need the wires, not cheapo DMUs.

Rose Hill immediately sprang to mind, given the nature of the route with its frequent stops, but I agree, it should be wired instead, and operation integrated with the Hadfield services.

 

[Bletchleyite]

Rose Hill immediately sprang to mind, given the nature of the route with its frequent stops, but I agree, it should be wired instead, and operation integrated with the Hadfield services.

Atherton line might also work, but again, the fizzy string is the correct solution.

 

[adrock1976]

The only places in Northernland I can think of that may be suitable for 230s is the Middlesbrough - Whitby, Lancaster - Morecambe/Heysham Harbour, and Oxenholme - Windermere as they are all low speed lines.

 

[Journeyman]

The only places in Northernland I can think of that may be suitable for 230s is the Middlesbrough - Whitby, Lancaster - Morecambe/Heysham Harbour, and Oxenholme - Windermere as they are all low speed lines.

Would the S&C work? Before I get flamed here, you can do interesting things with a D Train interior, there's even CGI mockups of buffet counters.

 

[Bletchleyite]

The only places in Northernland I can think of that may be suitable for 230s is the Middlesbrough - Whitby, Lancaster - Morecambe/Heysham Harbour, and Oxenholme - Windermere as they are all low speed lines.

The problem with Oxenholme-Windermere is that the thing would need to clog up the WCML to get to/from the branch.

Leeds-Lancaster-Morecambe might work? I have wondered about the idea of the Morecambe branch being a self contained service with a branded-up ("The Bay Metro"?) three-car unit dedicated to it.

One thing that might work is to wire Windermere and give that an hourly clockface Manchester Airport service, then run Lancaster-Barrow-Carlisle as an hourly clockface connection again using 3-car 230s and the units maintained at Barrow (though only starting/terminating there at the extremes of the day). Most traffic on the Barrows appears not to cross Lancaster in my experience. Though there is still the short WCML section, and if that's OK perhaps the likes of Ormskirk to Preston (with a similarly short WCML section) might be too.

 

[Journeyman]

The problem with Oxenholme-Windermere is that the thing would need to clog up the WCML to get to/from the branch.

I'm sure you could squeeze the ECS in somewhere, there's plenty of freight on that route.

 

[DB]

Would the S&C work? Before I get flamed here, you can do interesting things with a D Train interior, there's even CGI mockups of buffet counters.

No, Apart from anything else the southern end of that route is the busy Aire Valley line into Leeds.

 

[Ben Anslow]

I doubt 195s are going to be removed from barrow to the airport for at least 10 years unless they electrify the Furness line but those plans were scrapped and no indication has been given when they will reconsider

 

[HSTEd]

Buy a fleet of 755s.

Job done.

 

[Purple Orange]

Nah not with that middle section. I’d like to see a bi-mode train of course, at about 120m in length. That could be the equivalent of a 5-car 323 (115m) or a 6-car 319 (120m).

 

[Neptune]

Nah not with that middle section. I’d like to see a bi-mode train of course, at about 120m in length. That could be the equivalent of a 5-car 323 (115m) or a 6-car 319 (120m).

Better to go for a 4 car unit at a max of 100m. That would mean more of a go anywhere unit across most of the network. ASDO should be minimised as much as possible to stations where platform extensions are prohibitive.

A 4 car bi-mode Civity (which CAF have previously said is possible) would be fine as it would minimise staff/fitter training. That would put the unit at c96m.

6 car trains are required only on certain routes and where they are needed they are either currently running as such or are in the pipeline (Leeds NW triangle) although I would personally like to see platform extensions in that case where possible with ASDO where it isn’t (Shipley platform 2 for instance).

 

[HSTEd]

Nah not with that middle section. I’d like to see a bi-mode train of course, at about 120m in length. That could be the equivalent of a 5-car 323 (115m) or a 6-car 319 (120m).

Is the middle section actually a serious problem?