WAG Express discussion

[The Planner]

Bit pointless taking Manchester Cardiff off ATW, they would suck up considerably more subsidy if you did that as it is their most profitable route.

 

[LNW-GW Joint]

I am sure Charlie is correct, I only recall the three HSTs when VT took over,perhaps he means the six loco hauled prior to the HSTs which replaced them in BR Days, ready for privatisation.
At least the silly idea by BR of running the HSTs to St Pancras was dropped,
any thoughts from our Mold area correspondent.

The 3 HST Euston-Holyhead workings were quite regularly substituted by a Mk3+DVT loco hauled set, right up to Voyager/Pendolino days.
Often a Friday evening down and a Saturday moring up were 47-hauled from Crewe.
By the end the HSTs were in poor condition and bounced terribly at speed, whereas the Mk3 loco sets were nice and smooth.
I don't think the DVTs were in driving mode (ie the 47 ran round at Holyhead).

On Manchester Airport, the City of Manchester expanded south of the Mersey only in 1931, to develop Wythenshawe as an overspill town.
This extended to the Bollin and included the initial site for the Ringway airfield.
This had to be extended by a short rectangular area slightly into Cheshire to accommodate the 2nd runway which projects further to the SW.
But basically Cheshire forms the southern and eastern perimeter of the airport, while the terminals are in the City of Manchester.
The airport is owned by a consortium of the 10 metropolitan counties that make up Great Manchester, which includes Trafford but not Cheshire.

 

[a good off]

Bit pointless taking Manchester Cardiff off ATW, they would suck up considerably more subsidy if you did that as it is their most profitable route.

I agree. They do however need to address the problem of overcrowding on the route. In my opionion, two and thee car 175 sets aren't suitable for the majority of services. I travel this line frequently and I have had to stand in the vestibules every time recently.

 

[anthony263]

The paths used for the WAG express would be better off being used to provide additional services between Cardiff & Manchester using the 2 loco hauled sets

 

[jones_bangor]

The paths used for the WAG express would be better off being used to provide additional services between Cardiff & Manchester using the 2 loco hauled sets

There's plenty of the components required to assemble a number of sets with 67s, mk2/3s and DVTs to be able to do both!
--- old post above --- --- new post below ---

I agree. They do however need to address the problem of overcrowding on the route. In my opionion, two and thee car 175 sets aren't suitable for the majority of services. I travel this line frequently and I have had to stand in the vestibules every time recently.

Agree that it shouldn't be taken off, but ATW could easily justify LHCS with a 67 and DVT on this route.

 

[merlodlliw]

The 3 HST Euston-Holyhead workings were quite regularly substituted by a Mk3+DVT loco hauled set, right up to Voyager/Pendolino days.
Often a Friday evening down and a Saturday moring up were 47-hauled from Crewe.
By the end the HSTs were in poor condition and bounced terribly at speed, whereas the Mk3 loco sets were nice and smooth.
I don't think the DVTs were in driving mode (ie the 47 ran round at Holyhead).

On Manchester Airport, the City of Manchester expanded south of the Mersey only in 1931, to develop Wythenshawe as an overspill town.
This extended to the Bollin and included the initial site for the Ringway airfield.
This had to be extended by a short rectangular area slightly into Cheshire to accommodate the 2nd runway which projects further to the SW.
But basically Cheshire forms the southern and eastern perimeter of the airport, while the terminals are in the City of Manchester.
The airport is owned by a consortium of the 10 metropolitan counties that make up Great Manchester, which includes Trafford but not Cheshire.

Thanks for the comments,Suppose I had left the coast to notice the VT DVTs
agree the HSTs became rough, I will always say a loco hauled coach is much much better for comfort.#

As for the UKs largest regional airport, how its changed over the years, I recall the initial site of Ringway, circa late 1950s, a couple of large Nissan huts & Dakotas. You are correct about Wythenshaw a vast Council house estate,here in Wrexham we have Queens Park, what was & may well be the
largest Council house estate in Wales, thousands of homes built, with out a pub & just a couple of shops. The Estate is still owned by WCBC, who would love to loose it to a housing Assoc.

 

[HSTEd]

Bit pointless taking Manchester Cardiff off ATW, they would suck up considerably more subsidy if you did that as it is their most profitable route.

Presumably the increase in the subsidy to ATW would be offset by the increase in the premium payments paid by XC.

 

[Rhydgaled]

The paths used for the WAG express would be better off being used to provide additional services between Cardiff & Manchester using the 2 loco hauled sets

I dissagree. What is needed in my opinion is LHCS rakes running the current franchised ATW Manchester services (ideally with some extra stoppers put in on the marches line to allow some more Craven Arms and Church Stretton stops to be cut from Manchesters), not more Manchester services.

There's plenty of the components required to assemble a number of sets with 67s, mk2/3s and DVTs to be able to do both!

Agree that it shouldn't be taken off, but ATW could easily justify LHCS with a 67 and DVT on this route.

Maybe 67s, mark 3s and DVTs should run Manchesters (I think you'd have to stop them short at Swansea or Carmarthen to be viable though, and provide replacment direct trains from Pembrokeshire & Carmarthen to Cardiff) with TDM equiped 57s running with a mark3 buffet and ATW's fleet of stored mark 2s, plus DBSOs, on Holyhead - Cardiff expresses and either Manchester - Llandudno trains or whichever stretch of line needs extra capacity due to some special event.

 

[IanXC]

Bit pointless taking Manchester Cardiff off ATW, they would suck up considerably more subsidy if you did that as it is their most profitable route.

Considerably more *Welsh Government* subsidy.

Presumably the increase in the subsidy to ATW would be offset by the increase in the premium payments paid by XC.

Exactly. If the governance problems with the Welsh franchise are to be resolved I cannot see a way of achieving this without removing this service group from the franchise. If WG wants control a la ScotRail then they have to accept the subsidy position IMHO.

 

[tbtc]

Exactly. If the governance problems with the Welsh franchise are to be resolved

I don't think they can be, satisfactorily.

Wales isn't Scotland, its railways aren't as self contained (daytime Scotrail services only enter England on the short section from Gretna to Carlisle - Scotrail don't run any services wholly in England).

The WAG need to either restrict their ambitions to controlling the Valley Lines (which are wholly Welsh), or give up trying to "play trains".

 

[IanXC]

If the governance problems with the Welsh franchise are to be resolved

I don't think they can be, satisfactorily.

Don't know why I put resolved when I was thinking improved.

 

[ChiefPlanner]

Bit pointless taking Manchester Cardiff off ATW, they would suck up considerably more subsidy if you did that as it is their most profitable route.

Exactly .....(and always has been) - even back in Wales and West Days .

 

[TDK]

I dissagree. What is needed in my opinion is LHCS rakes running the current franchised ATW Manchester services (ideally with some extra stoppers put in on the marches line to allow some more Craven Arms and Church Stretton stops to be cut from Manchesters), not more Manchester services.

Maybe 67s, mark 3s and DVTs should run Manchesters (I think you'd have to stop them short at Swansea or Carmarthen to be viable though, and provide replacment direct trains from Pembrokeshire & Carmarthen to Cardiff) with TDM equiped 57s running with a mark3 buffet and ATW's fleet of stored mark 2s, plus DBSOs, on Holyhead - Cardiff expresses and either Manchester - Llandudno trains or whichever stretch of line needs extra capacity due to some special event.

This is all a good idea but this will cost ATW money and aparently they don't have any
--- old post above --- --- new post below ---

The paths used for the WAG express would be better off being used to provide additional services between Cardiff & Manchester using the 2 loco hauled sets

see above

 

[jones_bangor]

This is all a good idea but this will cost ATW money and aparently they don't have any

I would suggest they would attract passengers to the route if they improved the travelling environment - if I had a choice, I'd certainly drive rather than spend several hours standing outside a train toilet.

 

[ainsworth74]

I would suggest they would attract passengers to the route if they improved the travelling environment

That still doesn't give ATW the money to start up and run the services and I doubt the increase in passenger numbers would be enough to cover the running costs of such services. Therefore we still have the problem of ATW having no money.

 

[Rhydgaled]

That still doesn't give ATW the money to start up and run the services and I doubt the increase in passenger numbers would be enough to cover the running costs of such services. Therefore we still have the problem of ATW having no money.

The cost of replacing current franchise services (if you let the released units go off-lease rather than paying to use them elsewhere) with longer, LHCS, trains is mostly the capital of refurbishing said LHCS (and perhaps getting track improved to allow LHCS to run at DMU differential linespeeds) I expect. There will be a slight increase in running costs, but based on the subsidy figures for the WAG expresses (£1.7m annually for WAG 1, £3.5 for WAG 2 with 67 and DVT for 3? years and £625k for 6 months WAG 2 175):

£1.7m per year = 1x class 57 + 1x mrk3 buffet (with chef!) + 2x mrk2 TSO + 1x mrk2 BSO
£1.25m per year = 1x 2-car 175
£1.87m per year = 1x 3-car 175
£1.6m per year = 1x class 67 + unknown number of mrk3 coaches + mrk3 DVT

If those figures are correct, and the contract length has little effect, a push-pull LHCS rake is cheaper than a 3-car 175.

 

[jones_bangor]

The cost of replacing current franchise services (if you let the released units go off-lease rather than paying to use them elsewhere) with longer, LHCS, trains is mostly the capital of refurbishing said LHCS (and perhaps getting track improved to allow LHCS to run at DMU differential linespeeds) I expect. There will be a slight increase in running costs, but based on the subsidy figures for the WAG expresses (£1.7m annually for WAG 1, £3.5 for WAG 2 with 67 and DVT for 3? years and £625k for 6 months WAG 2 175):

£1.7m per year = 1x class 57 + 1x mrk3 buffet (with chef!) + 2x mrk2 TSO + 1x mrk2 BSO
£1.25m per year = 1x 2-car 175
£1.87m per year = 1x 3-car 175
£1.6m per year = 1x class 67 + unknown number of mrk3 coaches + mrk3 DVT

If those figures are correct, and the contract length has little effect, a push-pull LHCS rake is cheaper than a 3-car 175.

ATW need some Ministerial pressure to inspire creative solutions aka pulling their finger out!

 

[merlodlliw]

The cost of replacing current franchise services (if you let the released units go off-lease rather than paying to use them elsewhere) with longer, LHCS, trains is mostly the capital of refurbishing said LHCS (and perhaps getting track improved to allow LHCS to run at DMU differential linespeeds) I expect. There will be a slight increase in running costs, but based on the subsidy figures for the WAG expresses (£1.7m annually for WAG 1, £3.5 for WAG 2 with 67 and DVT for 3? years and £625k for 6 months WAG 2 175):

£1.7m per year = 1x class 57 + 1x mrk3 buffet (with chef!) + 2x mrk2 TSO + 1x mrk2 BSO
£1.25m per year = 1x 2-car 175
£1.87m per year = 1x 3-car 175
£1.6m per year = 1x class 67 + unknown number of mrk3 coaches + mrk3 DVT

If those figures are correct, and the contract length has little effect, a push-pull LHCS rake is cheaper than a 3-car 175.

Last year WAG1 Gerald received over £2millions according to a contact,and ATW keep all the fare revenue on both O/A services.
The £3.5 millions was for ATW to hire in stock for a longer period than a year,I think it was 4 years,but a year has been lost due to uncertainty, I have a feeling ATW will also be getting a grant for WAG2 as well(running costs) unless Gerald is killed off.
If the 67/DVT is modelled on W/S(where the idea came from by IWJ) it wont have a Chef, in my opinion a buffet is all that is required, if it did have a Chef plus 2 staff as now on Gerald , ATW will have the begging bowl out, due to a rota of 2 Chefs & 4 buffet staff each week on Gerald WAG1.


Bob

 

[TDK]

I would suggest they would attract passengers to the route if they improved the travelling environment - if I had a choice, I'd certainly drive rather than spend several hours standing outside a train toilet.

Amd that is what most people do - so, therefore a couple of extra trains a day will not make a difference and ATW will not find a sturdy business case to run extras based on profit and cost
--- old post above --- --- new post below ---

If the 67/DVT is modelled on W/S(where the idea came from by IWJ)
Bob

Really Bob, you think IWJ thought of running a 67/DVT combo when the only thing he knows about trains is to provide them for AM's and watch a Hornby go round the room? Come on, the 67/DVT combo was around a long time before WSMR with the EWS company train and this is where the combo idea came from.

I may have mis-understood your post here Bob, maybe you mean IWJ travelled on WSMR and thought we want some of this for our AM/WAG members to travel to Cardiff and then approached WSMR to run the service for them, this was refused due to logistics of the staff and then ATW were approached!

 

[anthony263]

Amd that is what most people do - so, therefore a couple of extra trains a day will not make a difference and ATW will not find a sturdy business case to run extras based on profit and cost
--- old post above --- --- new post below ---


Really Bob, you think IWJ thought of running a 67/DVT combo when the only thing he knows about trains is to provide them for AM's and watch a Hornby go round the room? Come on, the 67/DVT combo was around a long time before WSMR with the EWS company train and this is where the combo idea came from.

I may have mis-understood your post here Bob, maybe you mean IWJ travelled on WSMR and thought we want some of this for our AM/WAG members to travel to Cardiff and then approached WSMR to run the service for them, this was refused due to logistics of the staff and then ATW were approached!

Weren't grand central also approached to run it as well.?

I remember someone mentioning Grand centrals idea of a saturday only loco hauled service via the heart of wales line on this forum a few years ago.

 

[TDK]

The cost of replacing current franchise services (if you let the released units go off-lease rather than paying to use them elsewhere) with longer, LHCS, trains is mostly the capital of refurbishing said LHCS (and perhaps getting track improved to allow LHCS to run at DMU differential linespeeds) I expect. There will be a slight increase in running costs, but based on the subsidy figures for the WAG expresses (£1.7m annually for WAG 1, £3.5 for WAG 2 with 67 and DVT for 3? years and £625k for 6 months WAG 2 175):

£1.7m per year = 1x class 57 + 1x mrk3 buffet (with chef!) + 2x mrk2 TSO + 1x mrk2 BSO
£1.25m per year = 1x 2-car 175
£1.87m per year = 1x 3-car 175
£1.6m per year = 1x class 67 + unknown number of mrk3 coaches + mrk3 DVT

If those figures are correct, and the contract length has little effect, a push-pull LHCS rake is cheaper than a 3-car 175.

This 1.6m per year does not include maintenance/staff training/extra track access/extra fuel/stand out times etc. The only way that ATW could merit running the 67/DVT/Coaches was to buy the coaches and DVT for ATW and then there are no hire costs however they are hiring the coaches/67/DVT combos. You will also not get the same mileage from a 67 combo as you do from a 175 and where are ATW going to maintain their loco hauled services? Canton? If so this means the staff there need training as well.

 

[jones_bangor]

This 1.6m per year does not include maintenance/staff training/extra track access/extra fuel/stand out times etc. The only way that ATW could merit running the 67/DVT/Coaches was to buy the coaches and DVT for ATW and then there are no hire costs however they are hiring the coaches/67/DVT combos. You will also not get the same mileage from a 67 combo as you do from a 175 and where are ATW going to maintain their loco hauled services? Canton? If so this means the staff there need training as well.

ATW could expand their LHCS operations, the use of Mk 2 / 3 s, 67 and DVT would be an "unit" more or less, and this could be centred at Canton.
--- old post above --- --- new post below ---

I may have mis-understood your post here Bob, maybe you mean IWJ travelled on WSMR and thought we want some of this for our AM/WAG members to travel to Cardiff and then approached WSMR to run the service for them, this was refused due to logistics of the staff and then ATW were approached!

I understood there had been a "tender" process to run these?
--- old post above --- --- new post below ---

If the 67/DVT is modelled on W/S(where the idea came from by IWJ) it wont have a Chef, in my opinion a buffet is all that is required, if it did have a Chef plus 2 staff as now on Gerald , ATW will have the begging bowl out, due to a rota of 2 Chefs & 4 buffet staff each week on Gerald WAG1.

A buffet, microwave/oven and frozen pre-prepared food (which is what you get in many expensive restaurants anyway) would be more than adequate!

 

[tbtc]

ATW could expand their LHCS operations, the use of Mk 2 / 3 s, 67 and DVT would be an "unit" more or less, and this could be centred at Canton

Which services do you think this expanded "unit" should be used on?

 

[jones_bangor]

Which services do you think this expanded "unit" should be used on?

Milford Haven - Manchester
Holyhead - Cardiff

 

[Tracky]

Dont forget that loco hauled trains require more time between stations and slam door stock requires more time at stations...

On a Manchester - Milf train it could easily add 15-20 mins...

 

[TGVDUDE]

deleted

 

[TDK]

ATW could expand their LHCS operations, the use of Mk 2 / 3 s, 67 and DVT would be an "unit" more or less, and this could be centred at Canton.

I am not certain but I do not think mk2 coaching stock is compatible to 67/DVT combinations and there are also restrictions with Mk2's due to the braking curve of the coaches

 

[anthony263]

I am not certain but I do not think mk2 coaching stock is compatible to 67/DVT combinations and there are also restrictions with Mk2's due to the braking curve of the coaches

I thinks that true which is the reason why the WAG express is going over to MK3 carriages.

 

[jones_bangor]

I thinks that true which is the reason why the WAG express is going over to MK3 carriages.

I hope it will be Mk 3 stock!

I wonder what will become of the Mk 2 stock afterwards.....

 

[ainsworth74]

I wonder what will become of the Mk 2 stock afterwards.....

I suspect it will rejoin the rest of ATWs Mk2s in storage at Canton and occasionally be wheeled out for Ruggexs.