Northern possibly close to taking on extra EMUs

[D365]

Funnily enough, I'm trying to put together some notes on all of the electrification projects announced and their potential impacts in services and lfeet changes. Becoming a bit of a mammoth task, given everything that has been announced!

Worth posting it once I get it to a sufficient level?

Did a uni project on it last year.... mammoth task doesn't quite cover it.

I'd love to read at least a summary of your respective works. DfT certainly haven't made it easy for anyone with this 'Big Bang of electrification'

There's no guarantee of brand new stock on "London based" electrification projects:

The Thames Valley lines were going to get the same Class 319s that "Lancashire" was going to get some of (rumours abound about 110mph stock, but still just rumours).

Could be some of the '377/8' fleet which has been ordered as a short-term replacement for some of the 319s. Also potentially for MML 'CorPan' post-electrification.

The "GOBLIN" may get cascaded stock from elsewhere (certainly no guarantee of 378s).[/QUOTE]

With the 57 additional carriages soon to be under construction for LO, it should be easy to add another few extra units to the batch, at a minimum 3 cars each but ideally 5 for commonality.

Meanwhile one forthcoming electrification guaranteed to get brand new EMUs is the Manchester - Preston - Glasgow/ Edinburgh TPE service.

The 10 350/4s, at least in the interim.

I don't know why there's the assumption that electrification always means brand new trains - it rarely has.

I wouldn't say rarely, but I do catch your drift. In that sense GWML is similar to ECML, where the LDHS fleet is new-build but the London-emanating suburbans are served by cascaded EMUs (GWML 319 or 377/8 likely, ECML 317 with additional new-build). Both receiving IEP up to the end of the decade.

 

[Xenophon PCDGS]

I don't know why there's the assumption that electrification always means brand new trains - it rarely has.

But with sizeable new EMU fleets in mind, someone, somewhere, has got to be the very first recipient of brand new stock before they become the second-hand cascaded stock that are handed down to other TOC/operators.

Or are "custom-made-second-hand-style" specifications given to the manufactuerers of these new EMU fleets..

 

[anti-pacer]

But with sizeable new EMU fleets in mind, someone, somewhere, has got to be the very first recipient of brand new stock before they become the second-hand cascaded stock that are handed down to other TOC/operators.

Or are "custom-made-second-hand-style" specifications given to the manufactuerers of these new EMU fleets..

Well you can bet your bottom dollar it won't be Northern!

 

[HSTEd]

Well the problem is the continual escalation in train performance requirements in the South East makes retaining the existing fleets.... problematic.

So do you propose we buy everyone new trains and scrap the old ones?
Who pays for this?

 

[158722]

I'd love to read at least a summary of your respective works. DfT certainly haven't made it easy for anyone with this 'Big Bang of electrification'

I've started a new thread with my notes on the subject of electrification projects and resultant stock cascades. Feel free to correct all the inevitable errors or doubts!

 

[Xenophon PCDGS]

Well the problem is the continual escalation in train performance requirements in the South East makes retaining the existing fleets.... problematic. So do you propose we buy everyone new trains and scrap the old ones? Who pays for this?

May I respond by asking which area gets the new trains first (as some TOC will obviously be in line for these) and who gets the "second-hand" ones that form the wonderful term "cascaded". See my earlier posting.

 

[Wolfie]

Well you can bet your bottom dollar it won't be Northern!

Given that Northern already receives the highest subsidy per passenger journey of any TOC how exactly do you believe that any business case involving brand new rolling stock (and the associated additional costs thereof) would ever make sense?

Be grateful that electrication is proceeding, trojan hporse-like, and that new (or at least newer, as there may be a further cascade) stock will follow once the case is clearer.....

 

[jon0844]

Well you can bet your bottom dollar it won't be Northern!

If Northern gets cascaded stock that is given a refresh, I presume there's still going to become a point where they'll need to be scrapped. By then, would it be possible that they'll get new stock, or would there then be other old stock to cascade?

My point being - these cascades solve a problem today, but doesn't mean Northern is destined never to get new rolling stock at any point in the future.

Not everyone has brand new stock 'down here' either, as I more often than not will be going into London on a train made in the 70s or 80s with no air conditioning.

 

[northwichcat]

Given that Northern already receives the highest subsidy per passenger journey of any TOC how exactly do you believe that any business case involving brand new rolling stock (and the associated additional costs thereof) would ever make sense?

Incorrect. Scotrail and Arriva Trains Wales receive higher subsides. Northern is the highest subsided English TOC. However, Northern, TPE and C2C are the only English operators with negative revenue support i.e. the government are getting a better deal out of them then the terms the franchises were let on. The worse performing franchise compared to the financial terms it was let on is East Midlands Trains.

What you also have to remember is Northern is one of the few franchises to not include long distances services, which are generally better performing from a financial point of view than local stoppers, even though the longer distance services would struggle to attract passengers if they couldn't use local services to connect on to the long distance services, meaning the Great Western franchise makes a lot of sense.

 

[Starmill]

Be grateful that electrication is proceeding, trojan hporse-like, and that new (or at least newer, as there may be a further cascade) stock will follow once the case is clearer.....

Yes, that's right. We should all be so grateful that somebody has decided that the somewhere other than London could do with some public transport :roll:

 

[WatcherZero]

Northern also seems to be bearing a disproportinately high apportionment of the Network Rail Grant through access charges which is reduced substantially in the next control period compared to other tocs according to the draft access fees. A third issue is fixed vs variable running costs, it not being that much more expensive to put on longer trains as the largest cost is that for the first unit with the associated staffing costs and administration costs. There seems to be this pervasive myth that rolling stock makes up the bulk of TOC costs when in reality its only around a quarter. Northern operate the largest timetabled train kms of any toc at 44.6m but the capacity of those trains is far lower with Northern carrying a below average 87m people across 2bn passenger km with an average occupancy of 46 (joint smallest with ATW) and an average capacity utilisation of 26% the same as Southeastern and within the same general 26%-40% range of most tocs which is pretty good considering how rural some services are. Only stand out exceptions being Lodon Overground 65% (fewer seats per train, designed for standing passengers), TPE 52% (overcrowding) (whose network pretty much overlaps Northerns anyway and builds the argument of them being combined).

Breakdown of toc costs according to ORR:

20% Rolling stock leasing and maintenence.
28% staff costs.
25% Access charges, fixed and variable to NR and franchise payments to the Government but excluding franchise premiums.
27% Other charges, mainly fuel (newer electric stock rather than old diesel would reduce this substantially), EC4T, train cleaning, policing, station maintenence, catering, admin, IT and finance.

Broken down further into train related expenses, staff related expenses, etc..

Category, 2001/2002, 2011/12
Real Rolling Stock Costs 27%, 27%
Real Staff Costs 30%, 37%
Real Other Costs 43%, 36%

http://www.rail-reg.gov.uk/upload/pdf/toc-benchmarking-report-2012.pdf

 

[tbtc]

Could be some of the '377/8' fleet which has been ordered as a short-term replacement for some of the 319s. Also potentially for MML 'CorPan' post-electrification.

The "GOBLIN" may get cascaded stock from elsewhere (certainly no guarantee of 378s)

With the 57 additional carriages soon to be under construction for LO, it should be easy to add another few extra units to the batch, at a minimum 3 cars each but ideally 5 for commonality.

378s may arrived on the "GOBLIN", I wouldn't be surprised, but its certainly not guaranteed - could even be some 313s!

But with sizeable new EMU fleets in mind, someone, somewhere, has got to be the very first recipient of brand new stock before they become the second-hand cascaded stock that are handed down to other TOC/operators.

Or are "custom-made-second-hand-style" specifications given to the manufactuerers of these new EMU fleets..

Its like buses - some profitable areas have a much better business case for brand new vehicles - look at how new buses tend to go straight to Manchester/ Leeds etc which cascades older vehicles to places like Barnsley where routes aren't profitable enough to always justify new vehicles.

Same deal with trains - busy routes around London have a much better business case for new stock.

Worth pointing out that if there weren't sizeable numbers of EMUs being surplus to requirements around London (due to the need for brand new stock for Thameslink/ Crossrail) then we probably wouldn't see the electrification planned for the rest of the country, certainly not in such large numbers.

Well you can bet your bottom dollar it won't be Northern!

The "southern bias" stuff gets a bit boring after a while

 

[HSTEd]

May I respond by asking which area gets the new trains first (as some TOC will obviously be in line for these) and who gets the "second-hand" ones that form the wonderful term "cascaded". See my earlier posting.

The one that needs them.

You can't run the programme envisaged for Thameslink with the Class 319s, or run Crossrail with the existing 315 fleet.

So they have to get new trains.

You can however run a drastically superior ro the current service on Northern routes using the cascaded trains?

Or are you suggesting that Crossrail and Thameslink should be cancelled to buy Northern new rolling stock?

 

[Xenophon PCDGS]

You can't run the programme envisaged for Thameslink with the Class 319s, or run Crossrail with the existing 315 fleet.

Why not ? Why not also supplement these stocks with "cascaded" stocks from other areas once these other areas have received their new stock.

Perhaps you will now understand the animosity to certain "favoured" areas by those deemed to be "second-class" areas...

The words "goose" and "gander" seem to ring extremely loud bells in these "second-class" areas.

 

[jon0844]

Because of automatic train operation on Thameslink for one. Northern doesn't require a service of over 20 trains per hour does it?

 

[HSTEd]

Why not ? Why not also supplement these stocks with "cascaded" stocks from other areas once these other areas have received their new stock.

Because running Crosraill with about 2-3 trains per hour would not really be worthwhile? (And that is about all the current Shenfield Metro electric stock would stretch to).

And are you proposing to cascade Sprinters to Crossrail and run them in a tunnel all the time?

Perhaps you will now understand the animosity to certain "favoured" areas by those deemed to be "second-class" areas...

The words "goose" and "gander" seem to ring extremely loud bells in these "second-class" areas.

Because people don't seem to think about what they are saying?

 

[Buttsy]

Never forget that the North got the majority of new diesel stock first in the 80s and new electric units in the 60s...

(tongue in cheek comment)

 

[Manchester77]

To be fair if we go back 10/15 years the south had 60s and 70s vintage mark I derived slammers! Now you can't really accuse me of a southern bias considering I use northerns trains pretty much daily!

Sure it'd be nice to have a brand new fleet however other operators have shown that 80s BR stock can really shine! I'd be happy if porterbrook carry out their refurbishment of the 319s and we get them. TPE are likely to get new stock for the electrified northern TPE routes so if its not brand new it'll be one of the recently ordered batch of 377s!

And I do agree, it'd be pretty pointless running a brand new commuter line through the capital with the existing stock or trying to retrofit ATO to the 319s

 

[northwichcat]

Its like buses - some profitable areas have a much better business case for brand new vehicles - look at how new buses tend to go straight to Manchester/ Leeds etc which cascades older vehicles to places like Barnsley where routes aren't profitable enough to always justify new vehicles.

Some of the new buses in Manchester are Hybrid buses which are under a government funding scheme and have purposely been sent to the largest cities because they'll benefit more from reduced emissions. Stagecoach Manchester, First Manchester and Bullocks all have some of these government funded hybrid buses. Although First Manchester do retain some elderly Volvo Olympians.

If you look at what must be one the largest independent operators - GHA Coaches - they use their fairly new Optare Versas (2008/2009 reg) on subsided routes e.g. 88 Knutsford-Wilmslow-Altrincham, the 200 Macclesfield-Manchester Sunday service and Flintshire Shuttle +. On the other hand the 82 Northwich-Chester service which is doing well enough for the service frequency to have been enhanced recently gets older similar capacity 10.7m Dennis DARTs (the oldest being P reg.) So it isn't always the case that the more profitable services get the newer buses.

Also don't TfL specify that buses used on their contracts must be under 10 years old which is why there's a lot of ex-London double deckers scattered around the country?
--- old post above --- --- new post below ---

Why not ? Why not also supplement these stocks with "cascaded" stocks from other areas once these other areas have received their new stock.

Because of automatic train operation on Thameslink for one. Northern doesn't require a service of over 20 trains per hour does it?

The North West electrification program was really an after thought as at the time DfT realised:
1. They had an invitation to tender out for additional new carriages for Northern Rail, TPE and FGW.
2. They wanted to buy new Thameslink trains for the reason stated by jonmorris but the old trains wouldn't be life expired and they hadn't got any electric lines to cascade them to.

I think everyone can see some logic there even if they don't want the cascaded trains.

However, things have changed since then. The 319s aren't unlikely to be released on time and the planned 319 cascade was already much later than the delivery of the proposed DMU order. It appears to solve this problem DfT have allowed Southern Railway to over order new class 377s on condition that some are subleased out to fill the void but subleased to FCC so they can release 319s opposed to subleased to Northern.

Now this seems overcomplicated considering there are many other electrification projects planned that could utilise cascaded EMUs at a later date, so why the government seems to be going all out to ensure Northern do get cascaded 319s isn't that logical.

 

[Starmill]

Or are you suggesting that Crossrail and Thameslink should be cancelled to buy Northern new rolling stock?

Walked right into that one. For starters, scrap and replace every pacer countrywide - then maybe think about some new stock for London.
--- old post above --- --- new post below ---

Because of automatic train operation on Thameslink for one. Northern doesn't require a service of over 20 trains per hour does it?

If it had 20tph, in some areas, I am certain the market to support that would develop in time.

 

[Manchester77]

People's views of the railway are always going to be biased to their region, northerns would obviously rather cancel crossrail and thameslink 2000 just as southerner's would probably be happy to see some of the money being spent on other electrification schemes spent on things like new trains and longer trains.

 

[WatcherZero]

I dont think any Northern person wants Crossrail or Thameslink cancelled, they just want a matching per capita level of investment, you do however get lots of people arguing that HS2 should be cancelled because its not in London and the money spent on Crossrail 2 instead.

 

[CC 72100]

In what of the other large European countries are elderly refurbished units thought acceptable for proposed "new" stock replacement between the MAJOR cities of those countries rather than the provision of new units.

Whilst not quite the same but in a similar vein, I commute on what can only be described as elderly units, built in 1967.

I mention this because around 2007/2008, it was decided that instead of buying double deck stock, that these units were to be refurbished and life-extended to 2017, when the line will finally become a fully double-deck railway. This was the option on the cheap - the figure of funding for this refurbishment was fixed, and it was either a case of refurbish all of these trains or with the same figure you can buy a paltry 9 trains. The refurbishment was chosen, and as a result these trains valiantly continue on in service into a major European capital.

Some new trains have been delivered to replace stock that was built in the early 80s (so 30 years old), but these have simply been refurbished and put to use on another line, once again on the Parisian suburban network.

So if you think that the grass is greener elsewhere, that we all commute in trains smelling of new paint and the 'cheap' option is never chosen, think again.

 

[tbtc]

Some of the new buses in Manchester are Hybrid buses which are under a government funding scheme and have purposely been sent to the largest cities because they'll benefit more from reduced emissions. Stagecoach Manchester, First Manchester and Bullocks all have some of these government funded hybrid buses. Although First Manchester do retain some elderly Volvo Olympians.

If you look at what must be one the largest independent operators - GHA Coaches - they use their fairly new Optare Versas (2008/2009 reg) on subsided routes e.g. 88 Knutsford-Wilmslow-Altrincham, the 200 Macclesfield-Manchester Sunday service and Flintshire Shuttle +. On the other hand the 82 Northwich-Chester service which is doing well enough for the service frequency to have been enhanced recently gets older similar capacity 10.7m Dennis DARTs (the oldest being P reg.) So it isn't always the case that the more profitable services get the newer buses.

Also don't TfL specify that buses used on their contracts must be under 10 years old which is why there's a lot of ex-London double deckers scattered around the country?

There are always exceptions, just like the 313s in London, but generally the most "profitable" services get the newest stock (other than tendered services where the sponsoring organisation are paying a premium to specify that the service is run by young buses). Manchester seems to be full of Stagecoach E400s (and E400Hs) whenever I visit. Leeds is wall-to-wall First Group Geminis.

I don't know why some are so surprised that the railways are working in a similar manner - with the busier services around London justifying new stock.

 

[LNW-GW Joint]

For Northern (note not "The North") to get new trains I suggest fares there are put up by 50% to make the business case viable. :-x

Parts of the north have had some very modern trains recently (390, 221, 350, 185, 175, 333), with IEP to come.

 

[Darren R]

For Northern (note not "The North") to get new trains I suggest fares there are put up by 50% to make the business case viable. :-x

Parts of the north have had some very modern trains recently (390, 221, 350, 185, 175, 333), with IEP to come.

It often amuses me that half of the comments about Northern's rolling stock consist of 'why is it so rubbish' and the remaining half are along the lines of 'why should Northern get new stock when they've got so much new stuff already?' Often the latter come from those who do not have to savour the delights of Newton Heath's finest.

The backbone of Northern's fleet consists of Pacers and Sprinters. I defy anyone to make a well-reasoned argument that they do not need replacing - let alone that fares should rise by 50% to pay for it.

And, incidentally, it's been a while since my 0803 from Blackburn was a Pendo!

 

[jon0844]

I agree that the Pacers need to go, but we've argued many times that without them many lines might not even still exist.. so it's swings and roundabouts.

Anyway, fares have always gone up loads in the south east (as a percentage on a higher fare, the increase is higher) and the argument has always been that it's to fund new stations, trains etc. HS1 was another situation where people had to pay a surcharge to help fund it.

So, people are being made to pay for the new things 'we' get and so it's not totally ridiculous to suggest that fares might have to go up to get a nice shiny new fleet.

And you know what? When that shiny new fleet of plastic trains arrive - they'll probably be expected to last 30, 40 or 50 years so it won't be long (5 or 10 years?) before people start to moan that they're old.

When I left school, we got brand new trains on the West Anglia line. 317s they were! Wow. Replacing slammers.. and looking well futuristic. Well, roll on to today and they're still here! Sure, some have been replaced, but by no means all.

 

[RobShipway]

Well, up to 2004 we did have in the South the class 205 units which where from the last 1950s still running trains on the Marshlink and Uckfield lines and other slam door stock was as has been mentioned from the early 1960s with the Class 421/423 type trains.

 

[Xenophon PCDGS]

I realise that by playing Devils Advocate, as I did in the phraseology of my postings yesterday, was what I considered to be the best method of evaluating forum members views on matters both now in 2013 and forward to Control Periods 5 and 6. I have been most interested in the response of the many postings that subsequently ensued.

 

[northwichcat]

There are always exceptions, just like the 313s in London, but generally the most "profitable" services get the newest stock (other than tendered services where the sponsoring organisation are paying a premium to specify that the service is run by young buses). Manchester seems to be full of Stagecoach E400s (and E400Hs) whenever I visit. Leeds is wall-to-wall First Group Geminis.

In the case of the older DC only stock - there's only two areas it can be used Merseyrail and London/South East and Merseyrail do have old stock which is 3 car.

I do see the point of ordering new bigger buses and trains to go on to the busiest routes and cascading non-life expired buses and trains that have been replaced to give routes in another area more capacity as well. However, in the case of some recent new stock orders the replacement stock has been delivered with similar capacity to the stock it replaced e.g. the LM and LO 172s.

One other thing to consider with trains is some lines with a frequent service have 100% fully accessible trains while other areas with a less frequent service get some trains which are partially accessible. Ideally the lines with the less frequent service should get the 100% fully accessible service as it causes less issues if a disabled passenger is made to wait an extra 10 minutes for the next accessible service over having to arrange a taxi from an unstaffed Hope Valley station because there isn't an accessible service due to turn up in the near future.

Also, don't forgot where some of the older Stagecoach buses finish up - in major cities repainted in a Magic Bus livery.