This DMU cascade - what is actually going on?

[NXEA!]

Hello all, now I realise the basics of what's happening; London Midland and London Overground have ordered new 172's from Bombardier which are running severely behind schedule in LM's case. Now this has the potential to release 6 150's from LO - which have moved to the South-West; and 33 2 car and 2 3 car 150's from LM. Now from the LM batch 9 2-cars are shown as transferring to FGW, as well as 8 sets to Northern. The 15 150's FGW are receiving are displacing the 7 pacers back to Northern to replace the 180's as well as displacing the two LHCS rakes and releasing a couple of 158's to be made up to 3 cars. The Northern bound 150's are releasing 4 156's to EMT and they're adding capacity. Now this leaves 16 2 car and 3 2 car LM 150's uncascaded. Nothing has been announced as to where the others are headed - and it seems that they're going to keep a few sets back and displacing the 153's. Now that's 8 (?) 153's and around 10 150's to cascade. What do you think will happen or should happen? Personally I think the 153's should go to EMT and 7 of the 10ish 150's go to Northern to release a further 3/4 156's to EMT, with the last 150's going to FGW. Basically what do you think will happen and should happen with these left over sets? Discuss.

 

[387star]

I forget Northern are taking 150s from LM as well!

That is a lot left over... didn't realise.

IF 153s are replaced by those remaining I'd love FGW to take them all because they make ideal trains to strengthen branch line services in the summer months which can then be run independently in the winter months or to strengthen Bristol commuter services. They could even couple on to Portsmouth trains.

I don't think in the long run LM should keep any 150s. It would be a shame for Northern to lose more 156s but at least EMT would have a standardised fleet... I say give more to FGW who currently gain little from the cascades let desperately need the stock.

PS your figures presume LM hybrid 3-car trains will revert back to 2-car? Were 150001 and 150002 built as 3-car? (prototype units)
--- old post above --- --- new post below ---
or hand a few 153s to SWT for the lymington and Chandlers Fords figure of 8? 1 carriage should suffice if a high enough frequency is maintained then hand the 158s to EMT

 

[Anvil1984]

Yep 001 and 002 both have proper centre cars not makeshift ones

 

[TEW]

FGW are meant to be getting some LM 153s at some time.

 

[NXEA!]

I forget Northern are taking 150s from LM as well!

That is a lot left over... didn't realise.

IF 153s are replaced by those remaining I'd love FGW to take them all because they make ideal trains to strengthen branch line services in the summer months which can then be run independently in the winter months or to strengthen Bristol commuter services. They could even couple on to Portsmouth trains.

I don't think in the long run LM should keep any 150s. It would be a shame for Northern to lose more 156s but at least EMT would have a standardised fleet... I say give more to FGW who currently gain little from the cascades let desperately need the stock.

PS your figures presume LM hybrid 3-car trains will revert back to 2-car? Were 150001 and 150002 built as 3-car? (prototype units)
--- old post above --- --- new post below ---
or hand a few 153s to SWT for the lymington and Chandlers Fords figure of 8? 1 carriage should suffice if a high enough frequency is maintained then hand the 158s to EMT

Yeah but the DfT ordered 69 172 carriages to replace 72 150 carriages and the 172's seat less anyway and they didn't anticipate growth, so if they don't add on an extra order of 7 or so units, the 150's will be staying with LM. Yeah, the 16 2-car sets are once the hybrids have been disbanded, the prototypes are 3 coaches. Yeah I suppose the 153's could go to FGW... But they'd be better adding capacity on Derby-Crewe and other East Midlands locals that need more capacity but don't warrant an extra 2 cars. I think if you wanted to cascade a couple of 158's from SWT the way to do it would be order a fleet of 5 450's to eliminate the couple of diagrams that work over the third rail completely and allow for growth. There are currently 7 diagrams for the 158 units. However, this would only release around 3/4 sets as there's only two diagrams which involve running over the third rail, and this would bring the number of diagrams down to 5 or there abouts so allowing 2 for maintenance and exams, 3/4 could be released, so SWT would still have 7 158's.

I wasn't aware of the LM 153's moving to FGW, how did you find that out?

 

[sprite]

the prototypes and 2 other 3 cars are stayins as 3 car. This is as 2 of the "butchered" ones have 52's in them, and the 52's haven't got a 57 to pair with as they were written off. If the 2 52's were coupled, they wouldn't have a loo (52 is DMS and 57 is DMSL iirc)

 

[NXEA!]

the prototypes and 2 other 3 cars are stayins as 3 car. This is as 2 of the "butchered" ones have 52's in them, and the 52's haven't got a 57 to pair with as they were written off. If the 2 52's were coupled, they wouldn't have a loo (52 is DMS and 57 is DMSL iirc)

Thanks for that. So in effect that is 3 2 cars, and the prototypes... That means there's at least 13 150's to go. Anybody agree with me that 10 of them should be sent to NXEA, refurbished with 2+2 seating to displace the 9 156's to EMT/Northern? I know that means that 156s have been replaced by 150's which were replaced by 156's which would be replaced by 150's, but it could help the two operators gain a bit more 'comfortable' capacity. Or you could send the 10 150's to Northern displacing 5 156's to EMT and 1 156 to NXEA? (NXEA could do with an extra unit, their fleet is stretched enough as it is, 12 Sprinter diagrams out of 14 sets).

 

[daikilo]

Thanks for that. So in effect that is 3 2 cars, and the prototypes... That means there's at least 13 150's to go. Anybody agree with me that 10 of them should be sent to NXEA, refurbished with 2+2 seating to displace the 9 156's to EMT/Northern? I know that means that 156s have been replaced by 150's which were replaced by 156's which would be replaced by 150's, but it could help the two operators gain a bit more 'comfortable' capacity. Or you could send the 10 150's to Northern displacing 5 156's to EMT and 1 156 to NXEA? (NXEA could do with an extra unit, their fleet is stretched enough as it is, 12 Sprinter diagrams out of 14 sets).

Well, we seem to have a privatised railway who cannot actually choose what they can operate nor what it will cost them. Further, evolutions seem to be at the whim of that someone or others. Is this a unique business model? Is it viable long term?

 

[YorkshireBear]

i think the amound of 153's we have now is more than we need... i regularly see two operating together....

is their many places where 1 car are needed or are they best as add ons now.... i dont know much of the rural lines outside yorkshire if anyone could shed some light for me

i think we should try to standardise it as much as possible.... i wish all 150's had gangway connections

 

[WatcherZero]

Devon/Cornwall? Though they will complain of ride quality, a place where theirs not high usage but extra services could alleviate some overcrowding.
Then North Scotland I guess is the last place where single cars could be in demand. The single car branch lines north of London seem to be being gradually phased out.
I guess those in Leigh would like a couple set aside for them :P

I imagine most will be destined to form two car services.

 

[Ivo]

Devon/Cornwall? Though they will complain of ride quality, a place where theirs not high usage but extra services could alleviate some overcrowding.
Then North Scotland I guess is the last place where single cars could be in demand. The single car branch lines north of London seem to be being gradually phased out.
I guess those in Leigh would like a couple set aside for them :P

I imagine most will be destined to form two car services.

The best example is probably the Looe Valley Line, and also to St Ives but only during the winter. Otherwise, all I can suggest is the odd line in the East of England, such as to Felixstowe and the long-winded route from Newark to Peterborough; unless of course myself and others can persuade FGW that they could be used through Melksham (providing they don't obstruct HSTs between Swindon and Chippenham of course ).

 

[Matt Taylor]

They could even couple on to Portsmouth trains.

153s are not cleared east of Southampton, but the Southampton to Bristol corridor is the core of the route so there is scope to attatch/detatch a 153 at Southampton if required. Either that or make the Southampton-Bristol stopping service hourly.

Elsewhere surely the Liverpool-Norwich route is in desperate need of additional capacity.

 

[anthony263]

Maybe when crossrail free's up some class 166's if they can be cleared to work the Cardiff - Portsmouth service could some class 158's be re-formed back into 2 carriage sets and sent to east midlands trains?

 

[Zoe]

Maybe when crossrail free's up some class 166's if they can be cleared to work the Cardiff - Portsmouth service could some class 158's be re-formed back into 2 carriage sets and sent to east midlands trains?

I would expect 158s to be sent back to the Westcountry so 150s can be sent north so that pacers can finally be withdrawn.

 

[anthony263]

That is what i meant also, displace some class 158's down to the west country to use on the Exeter - Plymouth - Penzance services to allow the class 150's to work on some of the local services to enable the pacers to be sent for scrap.

Another idea would be to see if some of the class 165's could be used on Bristol - Servern beach & Great Malvern - Cheltenham - Bristol - Westbury - Yeovil/Weymouth services

 

[sprinterguy]

It has been reported unofficially that London Midland will be retaining 150001/002/016/017 as three carriage units, and 150202/4/6/10/20/26 as two carriage units. 150016 and 150017 are the two hybrid trains that each contain a 572XX 150/2 vehicle with no 522XX partner.

I’d like to see the ten LM 153s go to EMT, to allow Northern to retain the four 156s earmarked to go to EMT, which would mean EMT gains two additional carriages over the original plan and Northern get to keep their 156s!

IMO Northern should receive 5 or 6 of the “left over” 150s, with the remainder (There’s a total of 9 “left over” 150s by my calculations) going to FGW.

 

[tbtc]

I would expect 158s to be sent back to the Westcountry so 150s can be sent north so that pacers can finally be withdrawn.

I don't think there are enough Sprinters going to be spare to replace all 136 Pacers.

We are probably talking a couple of dozen spare Sprinters - even the electrification in the Thames Valley (freeing up 165s) and around Preston (freeing up 156s/ 185s etc) won't be enough to rid us of Pacers.

Plus we need more units for capacity on existing services - we don't have the luxury of being able to withdraw anything yet :-/
--- old post above --- --- new post below ---

i think the amound of 153's we have now is more than we need... i regularly see two operating together....

is their many places where 1 car are needed or are they best as add ons now.... i dont know much of the rural lines outside yorkshire if anyone could shed some light for me

i think we should try to standardise it as much as possible.... i wish all 150's had gangway connections

I was thinking of starting a thread about "Do any routes only require single 153s", but you've beaten me to it!

I think one sensible policy would be to replace single 153s with Pacers, replace some of these Pacers with 150s, stick the 153s into other Sprinters for capacity... and build longer units like that.

One handy thing with 153s is they can easily be used for portion working - like the idea of one working as far as Southampton on the Cardiff - Portsmouth service (that kind of thing)

 

[sprinterguy]

I don't think there are enough Sprinters going to be spare to replace all 136 Pacers.

We are probably talking a couple of dozen spare Sprinters - even the electrification in the Thames Valley (freeing up 165s) and around Preston (freeing up 156s/ 185s etc) won't be enough to rid us of Pacers.

Plus we need more units for capacity on existing services - we don't have the luxury of being able to withdraw anything yet :-/
--- old post above --- --- new post below ---


I was thinking of starting a thread about "Do any routes only require single 153s", but you've beaten me to it!

I think one sensible policy would be to replace single 153s with Pacers, replace some of these Pacers with 150s, stick the 153s into other Sprinters for capacity... and build longer units like that.

One handy thing with 153s is they can easily be used for portion working - like the idea of one working as far as Southampton on the Cardiff - Portsmouth service (that kind of thing)

Rather conveniently, there is a total of 135 class 150s (Minus the odd missing bit due to accidents): In an ideal world, I’d like to see all the Pacers (136 units) replaced by 150s (Which would be an increase in the total number of seats available, given that a two carriage 150 is only a slight decrease in seating from a THREE carriage 144) eventually. Unfortunately, I think the chances of all the 150s ever being in the appropriate areas of the country for total Pacer replacement is unlikely and it’ll be many years at any rate until there are enough new trains around to allow that sort of level of cascade.

I like your idea for substituting Pacers for 153s, although this would only really be relevant for Northern services and Wales, as other areas where 153s operate are devoid of Pacers. It’s a good idea for those areas I’ve named though, allowing 153s to be added to 155 and 156 units to form three carriage trains.

 

[route:oxford]

North Scotland I guess is the last place where single cars could be in demand.

Can't think of anywhere suitable in the North of Scotland...

Unless the Scottish Parliament (Transport Scotland) fancied one to run as a shuttle between Wick & Thurso.

Or Leuchars and St Andrews.

 

[tbtc]

Rather conveniently, there is a total of 135 class 150s (Minus the odd missing bit due to accidents): In an ideal world, I’d like to see all the Pacers (136 units) replaced by 150s (Which would be an increase in the total number of seats available, given that a two carriage 150 is only a slight decrease in seating from a THREE carriage 144) eventually. Unfortunately, I think the chances of all the 150s ever being in the appropriate areas of the country for total Pacer replacement is unlikely and it’ll be many years at any rate until there are enough new trains around to allow that sort of level of cascade.

I like your idea for substituting Pacers for 153s, although this would only really be relevant for Northern services and Wales, as other areas where 153s operate are devoid of Pacers. It’s a good idea for those areas I’ve named though, allowing 153s to be added to 155 and 156 units to form three carriage trains.

Replacing 142/143/144s with 150s on a "one for one" basis would be a great idea. I like the maths working out like that - it was meant to happen!

The "Pacers for 153s" idea would work on FGW branch lines too (but are these generally Pacer operated already?)

I think we need to grasp the thorny issue of Pacer/ Sprinter replacement some time though. Even the Thames Valley/ Lancashire electrifications aren't going to free up *that* many units to allow significant cascades, and if we need approx 650 units to replace the existing Pacer/Sprinters (maybe 550/600 by the time you include the electrifications committed to) then we need a long term plan - concentrate on two unit designs and build *hundreds* of them.
--- old post above --- --- new post below ---

Can't think of anywhere suitable in the North of Scotland...

Unless the Scottish Parliament (Transport Scotland) fancied one to run as a shuttle between Wick & Thurso.

Or Leuchars and St Andrews.

153s would be suitable on the Cumbernauld - Motherwell route, or the Anniesland DMU service though

In fact, on the Cumbernauld - Motherwell service you could have a 153 with a buffet car and a guard's van and you'd still have spare seats for the passengers

 

[route:oxford]

153s would be suitable on the Cumbernauld - Motherwell route, or the Anniesland DMU service though

In fact, on the Cumbernauld - Motherwell service you could have a 153 with a buffet car and a guard's van and you'd still have spare seats for the passengers

It's a real shame that the Cumbernauld - Motherwell services aren't extended to Larbert, Stirling, Alloa or even Dunfermline - it would offer a connection to so many parts of Scotland.

 

[jopsuk]

If going with Bombardier, a Turbostar with the 376/378 doors would be best for 150/Pacer replacement in most areas- though perhaps all with the LM 172 front end*. Also, a Turbostar with cariage end doors (as a 156/158 replacement)- could even include a single-car version.

In fact, I'd also look at putting those 172 cabs onto the entire 170 fleet (which would be expanded as part of the replacement)

 

[tbtc]

could even include a single-car version

I can't see any more single car units being built - not with the space needed for disabled toilets etc - there wouldn't be many seats

In fact, I'd also look at putting those 172 cabs onto the entire 170 fleet (which would be expanded as part of the replacement)

Agreed. A lot of 170s (Scotrail/ London Midland) are coupled to other units for much of the day (153/158/170), and corridor connections would make that a lot easier. If only the first ones had been built with them...
--- old post above --- --- new post below ---

It's a real shame that the Cumbernauld - Motherwell services aren't extended to Larbert, Stirling, Alloa or even Dunfermline - it would offer a connection to so many parts of Scotland.

Even if there are no spare units and no spare paths, I can't understand why the Motherwell - Cumbernauld doesn't extend to Falkirk Grahamston (in place of the extended Glasgow - Cumbernauld services which run to Falkirk each hour).

Glasgow to Falkirk is already well served, whereas a direct train from Motherwell to Falkirk would open up WCML connections and encourage more people to avoid travelling into/out of central Glasgow.

I did Glasgow Queen Street - Falkirk Grahamston in November at rush hour, and I don't think anyone else did the "end to end" trip. I was only doing it to get a different stretch of line (albiet in the dark, so less fun)...

 

[sprinterguy]

The "Pacers for 153s" idea would work on FGW branch lines too (but are these generally Pacer operated already?)

Not on the Devon and Cornish branch lines radiating from Plymouth and the Cornish main line, which are currently operated by 150s or 153s: There’s a good reason the Cornish “Skippers” were rapidly rejected and sent up north in the eighties! The FGW 142s are used on “Devon Metro” services radiating from Exeter.

I don’t fancy having to face the response from West Country travellers if they were to have Pacers set upon them again in a few years time, not that long after FGW get to offload their seven 142s back onto Northern in the current cascade!
--- old post above --- --- new post below ---

Replacing 142/143/144s with 150s on a "one for one" basis would be a great idea. I like the maths working out like that - it was meant to happen!

I think we need to grasp the thorny issue of Pacer/ Sprinter replacement some time though. Even the Thames Valley/ Lancashire electrifications aren't going to free up *that* many units to allow significant cascades, and if we need approx 650 units to replace the existing Pacer/Sprinters (maybe 550/600 by the time you include the electrifications committed to) then we need a long term plan - concentrate on two unit designs and build *hundreds* of them.

The first and most pressing hurdle to overcome is complete Pacer replacement. This could hypothetically be achieved completely through cascades of Sprinters (as I mentioned above, the number of 150s fits very neatly against the number of Pacers), and even then that is already going to require a lot of new trains to be built to allow this. Eventual replacement of the Sprinter family is going to require a monumentally large (compared to current trends in the size of train builds outside of the South East) build of new trains.

I can't see any more single car units being built - not with the space needed for disabled toilets etc - there wouldn't be many seats

Agreed, there would be precious little saloon space left for seating in a modern single carriage unit.

If going with Bombardier, a Turbostar with the 376/378 doors would be best for 150/Pacer replacement in most areas- though perhaps all with the LM 172 front end*.

In fact, I'd also look at putting those 172 cabs onto the entire 170 fleet (which would be expanded as part of the replacement)

I too have thought that a 376/378 style two carriage (maybe a few three carriage units as well) unit would be a perfect replacement for Pacers and 150s. Corridor connections, now that the feature has finally been affixed to the diesel Turbostars, would be a welcome feature.

 

[YorkshireBear]

In a Dream world, we would build corridor connected 172's for TPE all 3 car im not sure how many to help a) aleviate crowding b) replace all 170's

send 170s to LM so they can get rid of rest of 150s. Would 4 car 172's be a good option for EMT express service liverpool norwich? cos that is quite a few 158's freed up and capacity along line much improved... ???

 

[sprinterguy]

In a Dream world, we would build corridor connected 172's for TPE all 3 car im not sure how many to help a) aleviate crowding b) replace all 170's

send 170s to LM so they can get rid of rest of 150s. Would 4 car 172's be a good option for EMT express service liverpool norwich? cos that is quite a few 158's freed up and capacity along line much improved... ???

Ideally the DfT would have granted TPE permission to order it’s originally planned larger fleet of 185s in the first place, the buggers.

Once EMT gets the stock (from this cascade) to allow all the Liverpool-Norwich services to be doubled up 158s between Liverpool and Nottingham, then introducing four carriage 172s in place of pairs of 158s would be a drop in seating by about 20 seats per train from the 158 operation.

 

[NXEA!]

It has been reported unofficially that London Midland will be retaining 150001/002/016/017 as three carriage units, and 150202/4/6/10/20/26 as two carriage units. 150016 and 150017 are the two hybrid trains that each contain a 572XX 150/2 vehicle with no 522XX partner.

I’d like to see the ten LM 153s go to EMT, to allow Northern to retain the four 156s earmarked to go to EMT, which would mean EMT gains two additional carriages over the original plan and Northern get to keep their 156s!

IMO Northern should receive 5 or 6 of the “left over” 150s, with the remainder (There’s a total of 9 “left over” 150s by my calculations) going to FGW.

So they're effectively going to keep 11 sets if this source is to be trusted. So with 17 out of 35 already earmaked to be cascaded, that leaves 7 sets to move. I don't know about you guys, but I'd say send 5 to Northern to release 3 156's to EMT, send 2 sets to FGW, and send 4 of the LM 153's to FGW, and the other 4 to EMT. This will provide some extra capacity for FGW, and an extra 2 sets for Northern, plus EMT gain a further 8 carriages; we could actually see some capacity increases on EMT then! And is it definate that the 5 180's are going to FGW? If not, they might as well move the other 2 sets to Northern, and let them have them to run services - Maybe Leeds-Blackpool(?) Which will free up the 3 car 158's.

 

[northwichcat]

Once EMT gets the stock (from this cascade) to allow all the Liverpool-Norwich services to be doubled up 158s between Liverpool and Nottingham, then introducing four carriage 172s in place of pairs of 158s would be a drop in seating by about 20 seats per train from the 158 operation.

5 car 170s (3 car + 2 car) used to run Liverpool-Norwich so why not 5 car 172s?

 

[158722]

It has been reported unofficially that London Midland will be retaining 150001/002/016/017 as three carriage units, and 150202/4/6/10/20/26 as two carriage units. 150016 and 150017 are the two hybrid trains that each contain a 572XX 150/2 vehicle with no 522XX partner.

I’d like to see the ten LM 153s go to EMT, to allow Northern to retain the four 156s earmarked to go to EMT, which would mean EMT gains two additional carriages over the original plan and Northern get to keep their 156s!

IMO Northern should receive 5 or 6 of the “left over” 150s, with the remainder (There’s a total of 9 “left over” 150s by my calculations) going to FGW.

Interesting that its suggested that LM keep the 150/2s and not the 150/1s. Does this suggest that they will operate 150/2+153 combos vice the 153+170 combos along with the 4 3-car 150/0 sets.

From my impression, FGW are to get 15 150s, NOR 9 with LM retaining 10, with LM loosing some but not all 153s and NOR passing 4 156s to EMT.

 

[YorkshireBear]

5 car 170s (3 car + 2 car) used to run Liverpool-Norwich so why not 5 car 172s?

well that would be more capacity than XC ! but yeah id say realistically yes, problem is 5 cars would be wayy to much alot of the day