What stock "should" operate Liverpool-Norwich services?

[dosxuk]

Nice idea, but I think you would want stock that could run at 125mph maximum speed between Grantham and Peterborough, but has the same acceleration capacity as a Class 158 at lower speeds.

The chances of building a train which is 125MPH capable, but also light enough to run under the sprinter differentials is practically zero. Being able to run at the sprinter speeds is a must have. Getting the extra 25MPH on the Peterborough / Grantham run is a nicety - which is why we can safely rule out the use of 180s/22xs.

 

[Class172]

Nice idea, but I think you would want stock that could run at 125mph maximum speed between Grantham and Peterborough, but has the same acceleration capacity as a Class 158 at lower speeds.

If you can't achieve both top speed and acceleration easily, how about a compromise with a top speed of 110mph, allowing for better acceleration.

 

[MCR247]

At the end of the day, 125mph isn't that important because you'd probably end up with worse acceleration which is more important

 

[Class172]

Which is why I suggested the lower speed of 110, similar to the situation with LM's 350s.

 

[D365]

As I was reading through this thread, I kept thinking Class 180 to do the Liverpool - Norwich Services once they have been replaced by IEP bi-mode trains, however I think their acceleration maybe a bit too much for these services?

Then I thought, what if the 180's replaced the Class 170s in the Cross Country fleet and the Class 170s then got moved to do the Liverpool - Norwich service?

Bonkers! There's hardly enough units, and GC may well end up taking a number more on board. Definitely too long for Stansted (due to being diesel, can only use on outdoor P2 where they would foul the pointwork.) Not even sure if all platforms en-route are capable of 4x23m, let alone 5. In any case it seems like Birmingham-Felixstowe could be within a good shout of full electrification in the future. Even Cardiff to Birmingham, I might recall. 180 acceleration will, at most, only be as good as a 170, which is pretty poor as it stands.

I understand this is way off-topic, apologies for the late reply, but I couldn't bear to leave without having this fully answered.

 

[HSTEd]

IEPs would probably be better than Class 180s on the route.

Since a significant portion of it is electrified, and this portion could be expanded if the train is rerouted via the Chat Moss route between Liverpool and Manchester.

That would allow it to run on electric power between Liverpool and Hazel Grove, and if the train was then routed via Derby instead of Erewash Valley line it could run between Dore and Nottingham on electric power, and then again between Grantham and Peterborough on electric power.

I imagine that would go a long way towards defraying the additioanl costs of running a 5-car IEP instead of a 4/2-car Class 158 lashup.

 

[RobShipway]

IEPs would probably be better than Class 180s on the route.

Since a significant portion of it is electrified, and this portion could be expanded if the train is rerouted via the Chat Moss route between Liverpool and Manchester.

That would allow it to run on electric power between Liverpool and Hazel Grove, and if the train was then routed via Derby instead of Erewash Valley line it could run between Dore and Nottingham on electric power, and then again between Grantham and Peterborough on electric power.

I imagine that would go a long way towards defraying the additioanl costs of running a 5-car IEP instead of a 4/2-car Class 158 lashup.

If you read earlier posts, you would see that anything with a top speed of 125mph would have too higher an acceleration for the route.

 

[HSTEd]

If you read earlier posts, you would see that anything with a top speed of 125mph would have too higher an acceleration for the route.

Well at least between Grantham and Nottingham there is so much slack in the timetable that it is not even funny.
It used to take 28 minutes and now it takes ~40.

And I think you mean too low an acceleration.
But remember that a Class 158 has a relatively primitive hydraulic transmission, an electric transmission vehicle like an IEP could concievably beat it.
A Class 395 will leave a Class 158 in the dust for instance.

And I don't think it would take too much to upgrade the Breckland line SP differentials into HST differentials, I think it is a track maintenance cost reduction thing than anything.

 

[O L Leigh]

Some facts:

1) Hydraulic transmission is not primitive, nor does it preclude rapid acceleration. Voyager drivers have reported that they cannot out-drag TPE's Cl185s in spite of having electric transmission. It would appear that the main factors are final-drive gearing and vehicle weight.

2) A number of station platforms on many of the routes mentioned are short. SDO can help, but there are still limitations. On a number of the routes mentioned, the main maximum appears to be 4 x 23 metres but many are shorter still.

3) 100mph maximum speed really is more than adequate. There really isn't anywhere much you can go any faster on these routes anyway, just Grantham to Peterborough and Birmingham to Derby (as far as I am aware).

There may be some mileage in suggesting that a 3 car DMU is a better option than a 2 car, but not if this precludes doubling-up. It may have a benefit east of Nottingham, but if you can't double-up west of that point then it is not a forward step but a backwards one.

There may be some aspects of EMT's Cl158 fleet that are not popular, but I have to agree that they are still the best option for the route. In some respects they are interchangeable with Cl170s, but that really isn't much of a difference. Under Central Trains I am given to understand that the two fleets were, in any case, interchangeable and could turn up on any of the Central Citylink services.

O L Leigh

 

[Kneedown]

I think 222s would be unsuitable, as they would not be able to keep to the 158 timings IIRC

222's are more than capable of keeping to 158 timings as we demonstrate when they stand in on Grand National day.

The problem with 158's, even doubled up, is the poor acceleration and low power that can affect running on even mild gradients let alone the heavy one's over the Hope Valley.
The acceleration of a 170 is even worse than that of a 158.

In an IDEAL, ideal world, the Cheshire lines and Hope Valley would be wired. I'm sure the Erewash will also be done in CP6, enabling the service to go over to EMU operation, the service splitting at Nottingham.
In an only ideal world, displaced 222's or 180's displaced by GW and future Hull electrification would operate the service.

What will happen? Who knows, but 158's of 1990/91 vintage probably only have another 10-15 years life left in them. Maybe less when you consider that they are thrashed to 100% every day, so the time for decision is approaching.

 

[tom1649]

Personally I like it when a 156 (rarely) turns up, at least you can open the windows and get the air circulating. The conditions on the EMT 158 I travelled on Monday were oppressive and there was no sign of the guard to open the lockable windows.

 

[Kneedown]

390s.

I like you!

Via Crewe WCML NLL GEML and Ipswich.

Far quicker than tottering across country.

--
Nick

I don't like you anymore!

 

[anti-pacer]

TPE do call at Liverpool South Parkway and people from Yorkshire do use Liverpool Airport so the call isn't just for passengers to/from Liverpool and Warrington. LM also stop all Birmingham-Liverpool trains there so the only services to go through South Parkway without stopping is the hourly London-Liverpool train, which is too long to stop there anyway.

TPE call at Birchwood while EMT call at Widnes, the standard pattern is for fast Liverpool-Manchester trains on the CLC to call at Birchwood or Widnes, not neither or both. All Northern services between Oxford Rd and Lime St stop at both.

Sorry, should of made my post clearer. I'm aware TPE stop at LSP as I alighted a train from Leeds at that station last week.

What I should have said was "maybe EMT services could skip it as TPE stops there anyway".

With TPE services moving to the Chat Moss line after electrification, would that not free up the line for another service between Manchester-Liverpool, running from, say, Manchester Airport - Piccadilly - Oxford Road - Urmston - Birchwood - Warrington Central - Widnes - LSP - Lime Street?

 

[43074]

What I should have said was "maybe EMT services could skip it as TPE stops there anyway".

Liverpool South Parkway is an important call on the route for South Merseyside and John Lennon Airport. Seems well used from what I gather. Also well used for connections to/from the Runcorn line and the Merseyrail route that serves it.

What about more variety in terms of origin or destination points? For example splitting and joining at Ely or Peterborough to serve more East Anglian destinations like Cambridge or Ipswich. You would need ~ 5 more 15x units to do that though. (3 EMT 158s per day are used on local services, so you would need to replace these and then aquire 2 more 158s for maintenance/spares.)

 

[northwichcat]

With TPE services moving to the Chat Moss line after electrification, would that not free up the line for another service between Manchester-Liverpool, running from, say, Manchester Airport - Piccadilly - Oxford Road - Urmston - Birchwood - Warrington Central - Widnes - LSP - Lime Street?

See my earlier post. The DfT illustrative example for HLOS assumes Liverpool-Sheffield being every half-hour instead of every hour. I understand the options of extending the stoppers on the CLC beyond Oxford Road to Buxton and Manchester Airport are being considered once platforms 15 & 16 at Piccadilly are operational.
--- old post above --- --- new post below ---

Personally I like it when a 156 (rarely) turns up, at least you can open the windows and get the air circulating. The conditions on the EMT 158 I travelled on Monday were oppressive and there was no sign of the guard to open the lockable windows.

Sometimes on busy trains you get an announcement from the guard saying they are unable to get through and could any passengers who have left bags on seats remove them so some standing passengers can sit down.

 

[tom1649]

Sometimes on busy trains you get an announcement from the guard saying they are unable to get through and could any passengers who have left bags on seats remove them so some standing passengers can sit down.

To be honest it wasn't that busy, certainly not so busy that the guard couldn't get through. We were delayed for 15 minutes outside Nottingham though and there were no announcements at all until we arrived at the station, even then there was no explanation for the delay.

 

[harry42]

OK...The majority of the time the trains aren't even 4 cars. AND...4 times last week we travelled and we reserved seats every time and not once were reservations put on NOT ONCE!!!

My house backs onto this line in Nottingham so I would prefer 222's!

 

[oliMw]

What about more variety in terms of origin or destination points? For example splitting and joining at Ely or Peterborough to serve more East Anglian destinations like Cambridge or Ipswich. You would need ~ 5 more 15x units to do that though. (3 EMT 158s per day are used on local services, so you would need to replace these and then aquire 2 more 158s for maintenance/spares.)

Splitting the train at Ely would give an hourly service from Ipswich to Peterborough and then the North, again with Cambridge but providing a half hourly service to peterborough, although that sounds to much like common sense

 

[northwichcat]

My house backs onto this line in Nottingham so I would prefer 222's!

On the same basis I'm sure anyone who lives near a curvy bit of track would prefer to not see Pacers from their house.

 

[D365]

On the same basis I'm sure anyone who lives near a curvy bit of track would prefer to not see Pacers from their house.

They'd rather have Pendolinos; the small windows mean nobody will see much of their properties

 

[northwichcat]

They'd rather have Pendolinos; the small windows mean nobody will see much of their properties

And if the train is tilting at the time they might see the embankment opposed to the house.

 

[chubs]

2 car 158 Norwich-Manchester last week was horribly overcrowded.

Also the industrial action on Sundays doesn't help, at least they were running services as 6 cars.

Air con worked fine both ways, but 4.5 hours on those units isn't fun. There were a lot of people going quite far too, Norwich - Manchester was popular with others and some stayed on to Liverpool.

I've done it in Central days on a 170 and it was no better tbh.

 

[CockneySparrow]

I think the 158s are fine as it is.
Perhaps 3x 158 might be better as I hear the services are still overcrowded, but obviously this is unlikely to happen, and I wonder if platform lengths will be an issue to.

I think 222s would be unsuitable, as they would not be able to keep to the 158 timings IIRC

6 carriages shouldn't be an issue down south, Grantham, Peterborough, Ely, Thetford and Norwich all ok, March, Brandon and Wyndham there might be issues
--- old post above --- --- new post below ---

Splitting the train at Ely would give an hourly service from Ipswich to Peterborough and then the North, again with Cambridge but providing a half hourly service to peterborough, although that sounds to much like common sense

Splitting at Ely with one going to Ipswich can't be done, there are no paths available due to the single line between Ely and Soham, then at Chippenham although now double track the Cambridge service joins the line, not to mention the Felixstowe containers

Suppose when they double the line between Ely and Soham the could put the curve back in at Chippenham and run a service to Cambridge calling at Newmarket and Dullingham but the chances of that curve going back in are very remote

Would be better splitting at March in one of the disused platforms with a service to Wisbech, that unit can nip to Wisbech and back in time to double up with the next service back north

 

[YorkshireBear]

They'd rather have Pendolinos; the small windows mean nobody will see much of their properties

And nobody can see into their rooms Unlike some uni students in Manchester who have been surprised by overnight trains. Going about their amorous activities in full view of me and about 20 other people.

 

[jopsuk]

If there was a bit more sense in the timetable then east of Peterborough the EMT service (and the XC Stansted service) would only serve "principal" stations- March, Ely, Thetford. Really the local operator, Greater Anglia, should be providing the local service.

 

[edwin_m]

If there was a bit more sense in the timetable then east of Peterborough the EMT service (and the XC Stansted service) would only serve "principal" stations- March, Ely, Thetford. Really the local operator, Greater Anglia, should be providing the local service.

This is probably because the EMT service has been running for years and the Anglia service was relatively recent. Having said that, might the principal flow on that section actually be Norwich-Cambridge rather than Norwich-Peterborough?

 

[jopsuk]

how much longer would the Cambridge-Norwich service take if it stopped at (most) stations on every service?

Alternatively, what about a serious recast, so that there was an hourly Liverpool - Norwich stopping only at Thetford, the current Cambridge-Norwich stopping at a couple more stations, and a third service, Cambridge-Norwich stopping at every station?

This would mirror the Peterborough-Ely section somewhat, which I'd alter to having the Birmingham-Stansted and Liverpool-Norwich services both stopping March only, with the Peterborough-Ipswich being all-stations (as it is Ely-Ipswich).

This would mean that at least east of Peterborough, where there are other services, there would be less barriers to using "intercity" stock (Stansted would remain an issue for the XC service).

 

[CockneySparrow]

If there was a bit more sense in the timetable then east of Peterborough the EMT service (and the XC Stansted service) would only serve "principal" stations- March, Ely, Thetford. Really the local operator, Greater Anglia, should be providing the local service.

That's what does happen, only rush does EMT stop at other stations

 

[Whistler40145]

IMHO, I would re-route the Liverpool-Norwich via Toton or Derby, Loughborough, Melton Mowbray & Peterborough using 2x4 Car 158s or maybe cascade 170s and reform several as 4 Cars (using centre carriages) with others reformed as 2 Cars, 180s or even Non-Tilting Voyagers onto the service

If Nottingham-Grantham-Peterborough is well loaded, maybe extend other services to infill the void.

 

[Beveridges]

I think 222s would be unsuitable, as they would not be able to keep to the 158 timings IIRC

How would the much, much higher powered 222's be unable to keep to 158 timings ?