What stock "should" operate Liverpool-Norwich services?

[YorkshireBear]

The only issue with your plan is the lack of paths between Derby and Sheffield on what is a very busy stretch of railway. However if we can find some room how about having a couple of early morning stops at Belper!

I knew you would pipe up with that comment about Belper

I reckon if it is running fast like the rest of the units we can fit it in.

 

[edwin_m]

The only issue with your plan is the lack of paths between Derby and Sheffield on what is a very busy stretch of railway.

Hourly paths were found during the Nottingham blockade (both directions though southbound was empty stock) without changing the timings of anything else as far as I know.

 

[Bevan Price]

Liverpool has 3tph to Crewe already; the purpose of the EMT service isn't to serve end to end passengers (although obviously there are a few passengers aboard for the long haul); it's an inter-urban semi-fast service for journeys like Manchester to Nottingham or Peterborough to Sheffield. Knocking out the Manchester and Sheffield route would be self-defeating.

Liverpool - Crewe is mostly 2 tph, not 3. Most Virgin WC Liverpool - Euston services are non-stop between Runcorn & Stafford - only a handful of early morning & late evening services call at Crewe.

 

[Beveridges]

What stock "should" operate Liverpool-Norwich services?

Nothing wrong with a 37 and some displaced Virgin stock from the early 00's (if any of it is still lying around ?)

 

[HSTEd]

Bi-mode IEP with a reroute via Derby and Long Eaton and the Chat Moss once electrification of those lines is complete.

 

[MCR247]

IEP?!

 

[HSTEd]

IEP?!

Why not?
The higher fuel consumption compared to sprinters will be offset by not having to use diesel power at all on large sections of the route.

With the reroutes I suggest Liverpool to Hazel Grove, Sheffield to Notingham and Grantham to Peterborough could be done on electric power. Meanwhile the higher speed and faster acceleration will enable timetables to be tightened up and the attendant reduction in journey times might reduce the unit count enough to partially offset the higher leasing costs.

And you won't have to worry about overwhelming the capacity of the service for a long while after that.

 

[tbtc]

Has anyone suggested a 444 yet?

The answer is always a 444 (apparently...)

 

[YorkshireBear]

Has anyone suggested a 444 yet?

The answer is always a 444 (apparently...)

I thought the answer was a 37 and 6 mk2s?

Infact actually based on recent threads, arn't 222s the answeR?

 

[gordonthemoron]

Liverpool - Crewe is mostly 2 tph, not 3. Most Virgin WC Liverpool - Euston services are non-stop between Runcorn & Stafford - only a handful of early morning & late evening services call at Crewe.

From the December 2013 TT change, most Liverpool-Euston services will call at Crewe

 

[ryan125hst]

I've not read through the whole thread, but given that I travelled on the route last month, I thought I would give my opinion.

I travelled from Sheffield to Liverpool Lime Street and return and think that the 158's are ideal for the route- I found the seats comfortable, there were plenty of table seats, there is a toilet in every carriage and there is air conditioning (although I am aware it isn't very reliable).

In fact, I posted in another thread some time ago that I think DMU's are unsuitable for long distance runs. After my experience last month, I take that back as I found the train surprisingly smooth and quiet for a DMU. I thought the unit I was on during the outward journey was slightly quieter than the return (the engine seemed to throb ([s that the right word? It vibrate loudly, and then went quiet, and then went louder again in a cycle] when decelerating, and there was a revving sound present when stationary at lower speeds- could it be the air conditioning?), but overall, I thought they are good units. The only thing that could be improved in my opinion is the PA system as it was ridiculously quiet in both directions. Also, a small buffet counter would be nice as the advertised trolley service didn't show up during the outward journey.

 

[43074]

...there were plenty of table seats...

Which operator's 158 were you travelling on!? IIRC there is something like 4 tables per carriage (32 table seats per unit) on an East Midlands Trains 158, the rest are all airline style or tip up seats to try and increase capacity on the said route.

158s are good units generally though - just not the EMT ones. I particularly like the South West Trains and Arriva Trains Wales units myself.

EDIT: as for which stock should operate the route, I would say a ''Class 170 type'' train (e.g. 175, 185).

 

[ryan125hst]

New stock - purpose built regional express units to replace the 158s on various routes across the country - routes that are too complicated / too low priority to electrify in the next 20-30 years, like Liverpool - Norwich, Stansted - Birmingham, Nottingham - Cardiff.

Something like this:



(It's a rough idea, that I'm sure is full of gaping holes and has zero chance of becoming reality)

Not a bad idea, and in fact I was also coming up with ideas for a class 158 replacement (in general). I'll start a new thread when I get time.

However, there a few things that I don't like about it:

• Only three toilets for a five coach train. In my opinion a train operating journeys of this length should ideally have one toilet per carriage, especially given the number of stories I have heard with TPE's 185's toilets being out of use, and given that many stations along the route are unstaffed or charge 30p for the facillities!
• The trolley storage area would be best as a small buffet counter. It doesn't need to be anything too large, just enough for hot drinks, sandwiches and maybe microwaved food.
• I'm not keen on the fact that it is a cross between a train with end doors and one with 1/3 and 2/3 doors. I think it would be better with end doors.

In my opinion, a train similar to the class 175 would be ideal, but it would need a few modifications. Here's what I think would be good for the route:

• Two or three carriage sets. (Maybe 2 or 3 on the Norwich to Nottingham section, with 4,5 or 6 between Nottingham and Liverpool).
• One toilet per carriage, located in the vestibules as with 158's, 175's, Mark 3 coaches, with one of the Driving motors containing a Universal toilet.
• Small buffet counter on 3 coach train, space for a trolley on 2 coach trains.
• Around 64 to 72 seats per carriage, giving each train 128 to 216 seats.
• Luggage space at the ends of each coach.
• Inter-unit gangways
• Electronic seat reservation systems (with space for paper reservations in the seats for when the system fails!).
• Air conditioning, plug sockets and WiFi.
• First class would be good on the route, but I think standard class capacity is more useful.
• End doors giving an InterCity feel (1/3 and 2/3 doors are only really needed in the Manchester area, aren't they). The doors and vestibules should also be slightly larger than those of a 158 to reduce dwell time.
• Diesel engine under each carriage, but space for a pantograph on the roof and transformer under the floor to allow for hybrid and ultimately electric conversion- Electric transmission would be needed.
• Top speed of 100 to 110mph

How does that sound?
--- old post above --- --- new post below ---

Which operator's 158 were you travelling on!? IIRC there is something like 4 tables per carriage (32 table seats per unit) on an East Midlands Trains 158, the rest are all airline style or tip up seats to try and increase capacity on the said route.

158s are good units generally though - just not the EMT ones. I particularly like the South West Trains and Arriva Trains Wales units myself.

EDIT: as for which stock should operate the route, I would say a ''Class 170 type'' train (e.g. 175, 185).

I was travelling with EMT, and we (me, my parents and sister) got a table seat on the way there. Isn't four table seats fairly standard (or do some have 6 or 8?) It was certainly more seats then the Pacer we were on between Retford and Sheffield.
--- old post above --- --- new post below ---

as for which stock should operate the route, I would say a ''Class 170 type'' train (e.g. 175, 185).

While I have never travelled on a Class 170, I would personally prefer end doors. It probably comes from the fact that I am used to seeing and travelling on HST's and 225's and always found them to be comfortable. 1/3 and 2/3 doors feels too commuter train for journeys of over 3 hours. Even on Transpennine Express routes, while the layout is needed for Manchester-Huddersfield-Leeds-York (I don't know if it is needed in other areas), I think that the layout that I mentioned above is more suitable for the longer, more express journeys (Manchester Airport to Newcastle/Cleethorpes and Liverpool to Scarborough), and the 185's should be used on slower Manchester to Middlesbrough/Hull/Blackpool/Barrow services.

 

[43074]

In my opinion, a train similar to the class 175 would be ideal, but it would need a few modifications. Here's what I think would be good for the route:

• Two or three carriage sets. (Maybe 2 or 3 on the Norwich to Nottingham section, with 4,5 or 6 between Nottingham and Liverpool).
• One toilet per carriage, located in the vestibules as with 158's, 175's, Mark 3 coaches, with one of the Driving motors containing a Universal toilet.
• Small buffet counter on 3 coach train, space for a trolley on 2 coach trains.
• Around 64 to 72 seats per carriage, giving each train 128 to 216 seats.
• Luggage space at the ends of each coach.
• Inter-unit gangways
• Electronic seat reservation systems (with space for paper reservations in the seats for when the system fails!).
• Air conditioning, plug sockets and WiFi.
• First class would be good on the route, but I think standard class capacity is more useful.
• End doors giving an InterCity feel (1/3 and 2/3 doors are only really needed in the Manchester area, aren't they). The doors and vestibules should also be slightly larger than those of a 158 to reduce dwell time.
• Diesel engine under each carriage, but space for a pantograph on the roof and transformer under the floor to allow for hybrid and ultimately electric conversion- Electric transmission would be needed.
• Top speed of 100 to 110mph

How does that sound?

Yep, I have to agree with you there. In fact, that sounds rather like a diesel version of the 444 EMU, so you're clearly thinking along the right lines.

I would add though, the train would have to be able to operate at Sprinter speed differentials East of Peterborough, otherwise the journey time stands no chance of being competitive.

I was travelling with EMT, and we (me, my parents and sister) got a table seat on the way there. Isn't four table seats fairly standard (or do some have 6 or 8?) It was certainly more seats then the Pacer we were on between Retford and Sheffield.

Eight table seats is the standard layout, that is per vehicle according to the original technical drawings.

 

[northwichcat]

Not a bad idea, and in fact I was also coming up with ideas for a class 158 replacement (in general). I'll start a new thread when I get time.

On that - somewhere there is a Network Rail RUS about what type of rolling stock should be running which routes in the future. It actually shows some Northern Pacer services should be getting regional stock as replacement and not commuter stock.

 

[ryan125hst]

Yep, I have to agree with you there. In fact, that sounds rather like a diesel version of the 444 EMU, so you're clearly thinking along the right lines.

To be honest, I was thinking more improved 175, but I see what you mean

I would add though, the train would have to be able to operate at Sprinter speed differentials East of Peterborough, otherwise the journey time stands no chance of being competitive.

That's one thing I forgot to mention.

Eight table seats is the standard layout, that is per vehicle according to the original technical drawings.

I suppose it's not loads of tables, but some trains (such as Pacers) have no tables of 4 what so ever. Also, even the airline seats have seat back tables, so it definitely gives the trains a longer distance, more InterCity feel.

On that - somewhere there is a Network Rail RUS about what type of rolling stock should be running which routes in the future. It actually shows some Northern Pacer services should be getting regional stock as replacement and not commuter stock.

That makes sense as I asked on here a few months ago if class 156's used to operate on the Sheffield to Lincoln line back in the early 200's (see here) as I was sure they did. Sure enough, I was right. While quite as suitable for long distance journeys as the 158, they were designed with longer journeys in mind. Pacers are used on the route now (with a few 153's and the odd 150 thrown in!)

I'll have to try and find that RUS. It will be interesting to see what they have said.

 

[60008]

This is probably going to be an afterthought, but what about a 5 car Rotem DMU similar to the 22000 class is used in Ireland. But these would be made to a 5 car set with lots of seating. Just incase you don't know what they look like. They are like a cross-bred Class 460 with Class 180 bodysides (this is the closest units I can think of to pinpoint them on).

Here is a pic of one on Flickr (not mine)

Irish Rail ICR Set 40 arriving in Colbert Station. by Fred Dean Jnr, on Flickr

 

[fowler9]

If we have a dream train then I'd go back to a class 31 with 4 or 5 Mk 2 carraiges, especially if it stops by mine by South Parkway. If there aren't enough 31's then 37's would be even better but would loose the retro feel for me. If we go that far then class 50's would be even better.

At the end of the day from what I know about the service then a pair of 158's is pretty good at meeting the schedules and not over stretching the platforms anywhere. Apparently even though they don't look that flash they have more seats than some of the 5 car units and of course can be split and there is naff all reason for them to go faster apart from a few miles on the east coast.

 

[northwichcat]

That makes sense as I asked on here a few months ago if class 156's used to operate on the Sheffield to Lincoln line back in the early 200's (see here) as I was sure they did. Sure enough, I was right. While quite as suitable for long distance journeys as the 158, they were designed with longer journeys in mind. Pacers are used on the route now (with a few 153's and the odd 150 thrown in!)

I'll have to try and find that RUS. It will be interesting to see what they have said.

It's here: http://www.networkrail.co.uk/browse...ots/network rus - passenger rolling stock.pdf

I think the below is what applies for Sheffield to Lincoln, based on what colour the line is on page 78:

Type 4 – Regional and rural

Vehicles serving the regional market are often
cascaded to serve rural routes. Given the earlier
discussion on the economics of small orders, it is
unlikely that the rural sector alone could economically
be served by a bespoke vehicle. A common high
level vehicle specification which is suitable for both
the regional and rural market sectors represents an
opportunity for future cost savings.

The regional and rural sectors have a number of
common characteristics which may make it possible
to serve them with one generic type of train with the
appropriate gauge and traction power.

The key requirements for rolling stock include a
maximum operating speed up to 100mph. Some
rural services will require small formations, whilst
regional service will require medium size formations
(3 to 5-cars), and long formations (6 to 10-cars)
on busier routes. The flexibility of being able to
operate in multiple units is helpful to meet lower
levels of demand in the off-peak. The vehicles in this
fleet would be 20 metre and 23 metre to give the
flexibility to match supply and demand.

Given that many of the routes in this sector are
not recommended for future electrification in the
Network RUS: Electrification strategy, it is anticipated
that the vehicle type will have a self powered variant.
It is envisaged that as the extent of the electrified
network increases, the proportion of self powered
vehicles within this fleet will decrease.

So maybe 2 car 170s cascaded off newly electrified routes or other regional routes where passenger numbers have grown could make their way on to Sheffield-Lincoln?

On the other hand some the Manchester, Liverpool and Leeds Pacer routes fall under category 5.

Type 5 – Inner suburban

The inner suburban sector describes the market
for short distance commuting to, from and within
major employment centres, for example the
‘Great Northern Inners’ service group to and from
Moorgate. This sector accounts for 15 per cent
of the total fleet. The inner suburban market has
specific characteristics and it is envisaged that this
would have its own vehicle type distinct from those
operating in the other markets.

The key requirements of rolling stock serving this
sector include fast acceleration and braking, door
layouts that allow rapid boarding and alighting,
and the ability to operate at a variety of lengths
between two and 12-car formations. The rolling
stock’s absolute top speed may be lower for this
sector, at up to 90mph.

 

[DT611]

This is probably going to be an afterthought, but what about a 5 car Rotem DMU similar to the 22000 class is used in Ireland. But these would be made to a 5 car set with lots of seating. Just incase you don't know what they look like. They are like a cross-bred Class 460 with Class 180 bodysides (this is the closest units I can think of to pinpoint them on).

their a lovely unit and i find them rather comfortable, their quiet as well, i'd say they would be a good choice for such work your suggesting

 

[Beveridges]

I thought the answer was a 37 and 6 mk2s?

So did I

Maybe old fashioned but it will certainly do the job

 

[wtd5150]

Use service twice a week at least,and although unit is ok the problem is changing from 4 car to2 at Nottingham.Almost always overcrowded,at least to Peterborough.

 

[trainplan1]

Has anyone suggested a 444 yet?

The answer is always a 444 (apparently...)

Now now, it's an AC 444 that is constantly spouted out.
Suprised is wasn't put forward as an HST replacement. Maybe they are going to be the classic compatible trains for HS2...?

Now expecting someone to forward me a dft link with such a proposal...

 

[jopsuk]

with 170s being potentially released by TPE and Scotrail electrification- any maybe some extra 172s (pure fantasy) to displace all of LM's 170s fleet:
Unbolt some cabs. Bolt on "inner" ends in their place. Reform as 4-6 car fixed formation units. Add saloon doors to vestibules. Add a coffee bar/micro buffet.

 

[alwaystouchout]

Always found the EMT 158 units satisfactory on this route, especially since EMT started providing four car formations instead of just the two to ease overcrowding.

Northern's 158 units are a lot more comfortable.

Perhaps a five car 222 would also be suited to this route.

 

[60008]

their a lovely unit and i find them rather comfortable, their quiet as well, i'd say they would be a good choice for such work your suggesting

I rode one of those units when I was in Ireland back in 2011 and I have to agree with you on that mate. They sound very much like a Class 170/185 when powering up when I caught one back into Dublin .

I was thinking to myself, why can't East Midlands Trains use these on the Liverpool - Norwich diargram as they would be ideal. I would rather ride a Rotem 22000 unit than a Voyager/Meridian anyday. You would be lucky if you could get a seat on a Voyager out of New Street as they are mainly packed and personally I find them to be a very poorly designed DEMU for capacity . If you have been on one of those thing mate, I am sure you might agree with me .

To YorkshireBear and Beveridges. I would love to ride behind a good old Class 37 again on the MkII's and I agree that it would be better than any of these DMU's that are ten a penny these days. But sadly I serious doubt that DfT or EMT would do that or take it seriously. But nice idea anyway folks .

The best thing closest to this would be to convert some MkIII's to power doors similar to the 442's and the IE MkIII's (I dislike the design on the Chiltern ones as they look like they have been designed as an afterthought and look alienated to rest of the carriage). Traction could be to use up some spare 67's that are not used and also some spare MkIII DVT's that are still parked up somewhere in Long Marston .

Or even better still. Brush/Wabtec could build some Class 62's (a Diesel Class 92) which would have the technology to the Class 67 and the GM 201 class locomotives but would more or less look like a Class 92 with more grills on the sides and 110mph running. I did a mock up of a Class 60/3 a while ago. But all the new technology on this locomotive would grant this new locomotive a new class number and a separate HEP generator for the passenger stock.

Now, now. As for the passenger stock. EMT/DfT could learn from Ireland here and buy some rakes of brand new coaching stock from CAF in Spain. We already have MkIV's from Metro Cammell on the 225's. So these could be classed as the MkV's instead. They could be assembled into 6 cars plus DVT which would have the generator inside just like the Irish versions .

 

[DT611]

I rode one of those units when I was in Ireland back in 2011 and I have to agree with you on that mate. They sound very much like a Class 170/185 when powering up when I caught one back into Dublin .

I was thinking to myself, why can't East Midlands Trains use these on the Liverpool - Norwich diargram as they would be ideal. I would rather ride a Rotem 22000 unit than a Voyager/Meridian anyday. You would be lucky if you could get a seat on a Voyager out of New Street as they are mainly packed and personally I find them to be a very poorly designed DEMU for capacity . If you have been on one of those thing mate, I am sure you might agree with me .

no sorry never been on a voyager, went from bridgend to crew and the return via cardiff back around 2003 possibly on a class 158, and been on a class 175 which while a little loud it wasn't a bad unit but could be better IMO, so thats all my british DMU experiences, from my couple of experiences and from reading here and other places it sounds to me that many DMU classes could be better then they are at least comfort wise

I would love to ride behind a good old Class 37 again on the MkII's and I agree that it would be better than any of these DMU's that are ten a penny these days.

a bunch of mark 2s pulled by possibly a 37 out of fishguard back in 2003, never having such locos in ireland when i got off at bridgend and heard it leave i thought the engine was going to blow, fantastic machines, mind you looking at vidios of them i thought they had a higher rev?

Now, now. As for the passenger stock. EMT/DfT could learn from Ireland here and buy some rakes of brand new coaching stock from CAF in Spain. We already have MkIV's from Metro Cammell on the 225's. So these could be classed as the MkV's instead. They could be assembled into 6 cars plus DVT which would have the generator inside just like the Irish versions .

i would agree, CAF seem to make good quality rolling stock, the 29 k commuter stock is reliable and of a good build and even though they sometimes end up on long distance routes which their not designed for and in my view really shouldn't be doing they can handle the line no problem, NIR'S new trains are CAF built all though i've never been on them or know what their like but i'd imagine their of good quality and are reliable, the mark IVS are nice but prefer the 22000s to them, sadly it looks like most of the mark IVS will be going into storage but how true that is i don't know, their only 7/8 years old and will mean less work for the 201s which will mean most likely more of them going into storage

 

[Class172]

Is there a likelihood that CAF will try and bid for any of the proposed rolling stock that will come around in the next few years?

 

[edwin_m]

Is there a likelihood that CAF will try and bid for any of the proposed rolling stock that will come around in the next few years?

Maybe. They did the mechanical parts of the 332 and 333 units and all of the NI DMUs (which look very similar apart from the ends) they have a design to use as a starting point. They also supplied the trams for Midland Metro and Edinburgh so are still active in the UK market.

However there are no prospects for DMU orders in the foreseeable. To break into the EMU market they would have to develop a traction package compliant to Network Rail's stringent standards, or find a partner to do so. A long shot might be partnership with Alstom, who have a suitable traction package but no current general-purpose UK EMU bodyshell.

 

[ryan125hst]

However there are no prospects for DMU orders in the foresee able.

Really? I'm aware of the planned electrification programs, but that won't cover the various branch lines and other secondary routes. With the Pacers and Sprinters now approaching 30, and cascaded stock will surely be unsuitable for the services in most cases (cascaded Intercity stock won't be suitable for branch lines), I'm sure some DMU's will be needed within the next 10 to 15 years, won't they?