VT Class 221s

[northwichcat]

While I've just posted something similar in the North TPE electrification thread it's also relevant to this post so I'll repeat myself here.

What about this idea:
Once Manchester-Bolton-Preston is electrified they'll be less excuse for Virgin to say they need diesels on Birmingham-Scotland in case they are diverted. Therefore, order a new set of 6 car EMUs to replace Voyagers on Birmingham-Scotland, cascade the Voyagers to TPE with a pantograph vehicle added, then use a mixture of the cascaded Voyagers plus new 6 car EMUs (part of the same order as for Birmingham-Scotland) on North TPE.

Whether all 4 North TPE routes will be completely electrified is something that's still under consideration, while TPE services operate through the night and can get diverted over routes that won't be electrified for the forseeable future, so a small fleet of dual powered DEMUs could certainly be used effectively on North TPE.

 

[Nym]

jcollins, while I agree that could be a good way to go, and wouldn't object to 5 and 6 car units on TPE (and 125 capable...)

I don't however agree that the best place would be TPE, if the likes of the Bi Mode Hitachi SET could be removed from the cards by using the 221 fleet in lieu of this, if that definitely won't be happening, then I'd welcome the 221 fleet to TPE, provided that the're not used in lieu of new EMUs for the core routes, AND that the 185 fleet stays up north to run diesel routes with Northern (political backlash if they go to SWT for example, although that would be a good home for them in the Thames Valley Branches are electrified, then there wouldn't need to be any diesel with ICGW at OOC Depot, Reading to Bournmouth and Redhill & Gatwick would move to SWT and be operated by their extra 185s over what they had with the 158/9 fleet, that would come North...)

 

[tbtc]

Chester doesn't have any Virgin crews based there and considering crews are based at Liverpool, Manchester and Crewe it's unlikely that it will become a base for them.

It also has an earlier finish for London services, so the chances of finding a path for an ECS move would be more difficult.

There may also be platform issues at Chester with having more terminating services from London and replacement services to Holyhead. There's only 3 platforms that could take a Pendolino and one of them has a Merseyrail service departing from it every 15 minutes. If a Pendolino takes up one of the three then it only leaves one through platform for other services.

When BR did electrification they knew that during weekend engineering works they could swap an electric loco usually used on WCML passenger services with a diesel loco usually used on weekday freight services to send the train an alternative route e.g. via Bolton.

You seem to be suggesting a 100% electric fleet for the next WC franchise with a few diesel locos. A 100% electric fleet works for a local operator like c2c but won't work for regional and intercity franchises unless we have much more electrification.

Its chicken and egg though. Virgin don't run late services to/from Chester, so Virgin don't have a base at Chester. Because Virgin don't have a base at Chester they don't run late services there...

Maybe, as they have staff based at Crewe anyway, it'd make more sense to have some trains based there too (handy for Manchester/Liverpool too).

Once the (planned) Lancashire routes are electrified (allowing Liverpool/Manchester - London service to run via Warrington, allowing Glasgow - London services to run via Bolton etc), I'm not sure what other electrification you are demanding? The S&C is obviously unrealistic, are you talking about the G&SW?
--- old post above --- --- new post below ---

While I've just posted something similar in the North TPE electrification thread it's also relevant to this post so I'll repeat myself here.

What about this idea:
Once Manchester-Bolton-Preston is electrified they'll be less excuse for Virgin to say they need diesels on Birmingham-Scotland in case they are diverted. Therefore, order a new set of 6 car EMUs to replace Voyagers on Birmingham-Scotland, cascade the Voyagers to TPE with a pantograph vehicle added, then use a mixture of the cascaded Voyagers plus new 6 car EMUs (part of the same order as for Birmingham-Scotland) on North TPE.

Whether all 4 North TPE routes will be completely electrified is something that's still under consideration, while TPE services operate through the night and can get diverted over routes that won't be electrified for the forseeable future, so a small fleet of dual powered DEMUs could certainly be used effectively on North TPE.

They'd need to be 125mph units capable of tilting to do Birmingham - Scotland, which sounds like the "additional Pendolino" comments I've been making.

125mph tilting EMUs would be overkill for TPE though

 

[northwichcat]

Once the (planned) Lancashire routes are electrified (allowing Liverpool/Manchester - London service to run via Warrington, allowing Glasgow - London services to run via Bolton etc), I'm not sure what other electrification you are demanding? The S&C is obviously unrealistic, are you talking about the G&SW?

Liverpool, Manchester, Glasgow and Edinburgh EMU services should be fine. However, Chester/North Wales causes an issue if the WC franchise has a 100% electric fleet with a few diesel locos and the line between Chester and Crewe is closed.

Currently when that happens Holyhead-London services are all Voyager operated (even the booked Saturday drag) and run Crewe-Sandbach-Greenbank-Chester-Holyhead. Considering the condition of the freight only Middlewich branch I'm not sure it can take a dragged Pendolino.

If it can't the alternative dragged route would involve reversals so require a diesel loco on both ends of the Pendolino. That's not really realistic so what are other options?

Well, option 1 would be a replacement bus all the way between Holyhead and Crewe just for a short section of track being closed or option 2 would involve running all the way round Manchester or option 3 would be using a dragged EMU between Holyhead and Chester using no overhead wires and requiring 2 drivers.

They'd need to be 125mph units capable of tilting to do Birmingham - Scotland, which sounds like the "additional Pendolino" comments I've been making.

125mph tilting EMUs would be overkill for TPE though

As Liverpool-Birmingham is operated by 350s as Manchester Airport-Scotland will be, which won't be able to go over 110mph, is it really a requirement for 125mph tilting stock on Birmingham-Scotland any more than 125mph is required on Manchester Airport-Newcastle?

 

[Lampshade]

Yes. I find it very odd that they didn't remove the shop and replace it with seats. It's never going to revert back, after all!

As with XC's Voyagers, they can't replace it with seats as it's essentially in the vestibule, outside the passenger saloon.

 

[Nym]

TBH, I'm of the opinion that TPE should be contracted into northern as a sub-brand like Central Citylink was, have a small first class, reservable seats etc. like TPE do now, but would run more routes.

Manchester - Scotland I would put into the hands of ICWC and they can run it as a through service from London if reliable enough, if not, with some additional pendos at 8 car length to run into MIA (or make the extra platform 260m long).

And the 'Northern Citylink' would take over the expressey routes around all of Northern, assuming that TPE N gets wired to Midds and Hull, them routes would be run by 350/380 style units, as would be current MIA- BPN service, displaces 185s would run the likes of Calder Valley Semi Fasts, Scarbrough - Blackpool N, Buxton - Manchester and MIA - Lakes. (Just enough fleet to do them routes).

Because TPE runs as extensions of a core, (For TPE N) the core is the dominant factor, and a class 380 unit specified up to 110mph would be the ideal IMO, the door layout of the 185s works for TPE. They just need to be longer, and if Manchester OR is to be the dominant station, unless there is a garuentee of platform extensions in the next 6 years to 8x20m or 8x23m for Pt 1/4 (Would mean 2/3 cut back to 4x23m, and loosing 5 but it would fit) then it should be a fixed 6 car formation (the maximum that MCO can take) since 3 car clearly isn't enough off peak, and 4 car wouldn't be enough on peak, and SDO wouldn't work for clearances at MCO, it needs to run to the max.

(If MCO is getting platform extensions to 8 car, buy 4 car gangwayed units, if it isn't buy 6 car non-gangwayed units, for the TPE routes, and move the 185s onto the routes discribed above, i recon all of them have a demand for 1st class, a small one anyway, Toddy, Hebden Br etc.)

 

[150222]

I'd go first from 'Toddy'. Especcially on a 185.

 

[Nym]

I'd go first from 'Toddy'. Especcially on a 185.

Would you like it to remain branded sperately from Northern as a Northern Citylink style affair?

 

[Lampshade]

If MCO is getting platform extensions to 8 car, buy 4 car gangwayed units, if it isn't buy 6 car non-gangwayed units...

SDO?*

*Asterisk to get round the character limit - and yes I'm fully aware this does as well.

 

[Nym]

Selected Door Opening, running two four car units together into for example platform 2 at Manchester OR and only opening the doors on the 1st 6 carriages, wouldn't work because you're blocking junctions with the overhang, and MCO is getting rather busy nowerdays.

 

[150222]

Well i certainly wouldn't mind. Would stop 142's appearing on the semi-fasts (in theory). I certainly think the line deserves more than 2 car pacers at rushour. I believe as a key route it deserves more than what it does. Then again I'm biased and you may be correct about the first class. I don't think it woukd work as well as centrals system though.

 

[RobShipway]

TBH, I'm of the opinion that TPE should be contracted into northern as a sub-brand like Central Citylink was, have a small first class, reservable seats etc. like TPE do now, but would run more routes.

Manchester - Scotland I would put into the hands of ICWC and they can run it as a through service from London if reliable enough, if not, with some additional pendos at 8 car length to run into MIA (or make the extra platform 260m long).

And the 'Northern Citylink' would take over the expressey routes around all of Northern, assuming that TPE N gets wired to Midds and Hull, them routes would be run by 350/380 style units, as would be current MIA- BPN service, displaces 185s would run the likes of Calder Valley Semi Fasts, Scarbrough - Blackpool N, Buxton - Manchester and MIA - Lakes. (Just enough fleet to do them routes).



Because TPE runs as extensions of a core, (For TPE N) the core is the dominant factor, and a class 380 unit specified up to 110mph would be the ideal IMO, the door layout of the 185s works for TPE. They just need to be longer, and if Manchester OR is to be the dominant station, unless there is a garuentee of platform extensions in the next 6 years to 8x20m or 8x23m for Pt 1/4 (Would mean 2/3 cut back to 4x23m, and loosing 5 but it would fit) then it should be a fixed 6 car formation (the maximum that MCO can take) since 3 car clearly isn't enough off peak, and 4 car wouldn't be enough on peak, and SDO wouldn't work for clearances at MCO, it needs to run to the max.

(If MCO is getting platform extensions to 8 car, buy 4 car gangwayed units, if it isn't buy 6 car non-gangwayed units, for the TPE routes, and move the 185s onto the routes discribed above, i recon all of them have a demand for 1st class, a small one anyway, Toddy, Hebden Br etc.)

I was under the impression that the new Pendolino's ordered where to do the some of the fill in work on the Manchester - Scotland route with ordered Class 350's rated for 110mph taking over the duties of Class 185 TPE's on this route which would be doubled up with existing Class 185's on other TPE services.

 

[Nym]

I was only mentioning the 185s that would be displaced from TPE N and TPE NW if all of TPE N is electrified, that would leave 185s also running Airport / Victoria - Lakes and TPE South, in addition to the aforementioned additional services.

Theres a full list on ere somewhere when I worked out what services could be run.

 

[RobShipway]

There is I believe an article in one of the recent Rail Magazines where it states that Services like Airport/Victoria - Lakes would be given 2 Class 185's per service, so that there is a six car train whne TPE gets Class 350's from May 2013.

 

[Nym]

But to be honest, a lot of the time rail magazines run speculation no more educated than some of the posters in this forum...

 

[LNW-GW Joint]

I was under the impression that the new Pendolino's ordered where to do the some of the fill in work on the Manchester - Scotland route with ordered Class 350's rated for 110mph taking over the duties of Class 185 TPE's on this route which would be doubled up with existing Class 185's on other TPE services.

No. The 4 new Pendolinos are for increasing frequency to Glasgow/Preston/Liverpool.

There are no plans for the West Coast franchise to operate between Manchester and Preston (unless they do a U-turn in the new WC franchise spec due out any day). They will use it as a diversionary route of course.

 

[Geezertronic]

No. The 4 new Pendolinos are for increasing frequency to Glasgow/Preston/Liverpool.

There are no plans for the West Coast franchise to operate between Manchester and Preston (unless they do a U-turn in the new WC franchise spec due out any day). They will use it as a diversionary route of course.

Wasn't it three to increase frequency and one to replace the 390 written off in the Grayrigg accident?

 

[LNW-GW Joint]

Wasn't it three to increase frequency and one to replace the 390 written off in the Grayrigg accident?

Yes, but it amounts to the same thing.
Just gets rid of the Pretendolino (probably!).

 

[tbtc]

Liverpool, Manchester, Glasgow and Edinburgh EMU services should be fine. However, Chester/North Wales causes an issue if the WC franchise has a 100% electric fleet with a few diesel locos and the line between Chester and Crewe is closed.

Currently when that happens Holyhead-London services are all Voyager operated (even the booked Saturday drag) and run Crewe-Sandbach-Greenbank-Chester-Holyhead. Considering the condition of the freight only Middlewich branch I'm not sure it can take a dragged Pendolino.

If it can't the alternative dragged route would involve reversals so require a diesel loco on both ends of the Pendolino. That's not really realistic so what are other options?

Well, option 1 would be a replacement bus all the way between Holyhead and Crewe just for a short section of track being closed or option 2 would involve running all the way round Manchester or option 3 would be using a dragged EMU between Holyhead and Chester using no overhead wires and requiring 2 drivers.

My idea was to electrify Crewe - Chester, replace the West Coast Voyagers with additional Pendolino and run one (dragged) Holyhead service a day (ATW to provide replacement daytime capacity west of Chester).

You are suggesting that, if this were to happen, you'd keep running Voyagers (for the handful of times each year that the line from Crewe to Chester was closed?

As Liverpool-Birmingham is operated by 350s as Manchester Airport-Scotland will be, which won't be able to go over 110mph, is it really a requirement for 125mph tilting stock on Birmingham-Scotland any more than 125mph is required on Manchester Airport-Newcastle?

AIUI the Birmingham - Scotland services are timed for 125mph tilting stock (hence the reason the Pretendolino doesn't work it). To slow the service down by using 100mph EMUs (which may be allowed to do 110 if tests allow it) would mean recasting the timetable.

Plus there's the obvious benefit that having an all-390 franchise would make things a lot easier for the West Coast franchise.

Saying that the Liverpool - Birmingham service is run by 350s is true, but these are slower services (stopping at Winsford/ Hartford etc).

 

[Jdrowlands]

Yes, but it amounts to the same thing.
Just gets rid of the Pretendolino (probably!).

It's probably going to end up sticking around, they already have the allowed 53 390s in operation yet the mk3 rake is still in regular service both covering for pendolinos and running charters.

 

[IanXC]

It's probably going to end up sticking around, they already have the allowed 53 390s in operation yet the mk3 rake is still in regular service both covering for pendolinos and running charters.

I agree. If it were to go out of service imminently I don't think First Great Western would be converting loco hauled buffets for use in HST sets if more suitable stock were due to become available.

Having said that if it were to become surplus to ICWC I'd like to see it go to Greater Anglia and a further number of EMUs be displaced from the Liverpool Street-Norwich route.

 

[150222]

These mk3's aren't hst compatable.

 

[Lampshade]

These mk3's aren't hst compatable.

Neither were Grand Central's...

 

[MCR247]

FGWs buffet covertions are HST buffets taken from their own sets a while ago aren't they? They are LHCS

 

[IanXC]

FGWs buffet covertions are HST buffets taken from their own sets a while ago aren't they? They are LHCS

Haven't got the figures to hand but I seem to remember them being a combination of former HST buffets, LHCS buffets and TSOs.

 

[northwichcat]

You are suggesting that, if this were to happen, you'd keep running Voyagers (for the handful of times each year that the line from Crewe to Chester was closed?

No I'm suggesting Virgin would use Voyagers but probably with a pantograph vehicle to allow flexibility during engineering works and to allow a few North Wales services per day to continue (something you seem to have strong objections to.)

Remember if through North Wales-London services were cut back then ATW would need a few additional DMUs to run a replacement service between North Wales and Chester.

Saying that the Liverpool - Birmingham service is run by 350s is true, but these are slower services (stopping at Winsford/ Hartford etc).

Only half of them stop between Crewe and Runcorn. The other half run Crewe to Runcorn non-stop.