Well it would certainly be a serious step up from the Pacers that run on the Southport - Manchester service presently.Thought the plan was for the 170s to go on the Southport-Leeds and the Harrogate line services?
Well it would certainly be a serious step up from the Pacers that run on the Southport - Manchester service presently.Thought the plan was for the 170s to go on the Southport-Leeds and the Harrogate line services?
Is it just me that thinks it would be a little odd to use 100mph 170s on the Southport - Leeds and 75mph/90mph 15x units on the Manchester - Barrow/Windermere services?
IIRC there's a franchise requirement for Southport - Hebden Bridge effectively hourly.A lot of the proposed timetable changes seem questionable. Is Southport-Leeds a franchise requirement or just formed for operational convenience?
^ Someone reported the first 170s will be used on Leeds to Chester until the 195s enter service, which will free up some 158s for the Barrow services until they also get new 195s.
That would make more sense. Thanks.^ Someone reported the first 170s will be used on Leeds to Chester until the 195s enter service, which will free up some 158s for the Barrow services until they also get new 195s.
The 158s are going to be very thinly spread from May, I'm not convinced there's going to be enough units to provide adequate capacity across the network
Some lines which don't need 158s might have to use 150s instead. There's certainly no reason why Northern need to use 158s on all stops services in the Leeds area, while longer services get stuck with Pacers.
There are still plenty of services which will continue to be DMUs and which need lengthening on this side of Manchester (peak times on the Southport and Atherton lines for a start).so hopefully once the Manchester electrification is complete the bulk of the surplus DMUs will find their way across to West Yorkshire
Very true, but if they don't need 90mph capable stock perhaps a 4-car 150 would be more appropriate than a 158? Then the 158 can be concentrated on the routes where higher speed can contribute to more robust timetables (eg. avoiding conflicts on the WCML / Chat Moss for the Barrow/Windermere trains).Whilst you're correct, it's more about maintaining (and increasing) capacity. At the December timetable change a small but significant number of Leeds services lost capacity to the point that there's now some journeys which are leaving passengers behind. Reducing these further to a 150 will only add to the problem, so hopefully once the Manchester electrification is complete the bulk of the surplus DMUs will find their way across to West Yorkshire
Copy of letter to Lisa Nandy MP
North West Electrification Announcement
Dear Lisa
Since the start of our franchise in April 16 we have set out and shared the progress of our modernisation plans with you as we work to improve rail travel for customers in the north. We have already made important steps forward delivering the first real signs of our modernisation programme for our customers.
We have more than 60 refurbished Northern trains already out on the network and improvement work has started at more than 100 stations across the region. We have also introduced 100 new ticket vending machines, automatic barriers at stations, added hundreds of additional car parking spaces and recently opened our new train depot at Blackburn.
Another significant milestone of our modernisation plans are the service enhancements scheduled for May 18. Our timetable bid for May 18 was based on the Invitation to Tender and has always been critically dependent on the successful delivery of the North-West Electrification Programme on time. Our finite train resource means that we are reliant on the completion of this programme so that we can operate electric trains on new routes and release diesel trains to operate new services elsewhere in the north.
Network Rail have recently confirmed that the North-West Electrification programme has been experiencing delays and following recent discussions it became apparent that our May 18 timetable introduction was at risk. The most significant delay and primary concern is the phase 4 electrification between Bolton and Preston. This particular part of the electrification work was scheduled for completion in December but has been severely delayed due to poor ground conditions, which have prevented the installation of the power line stanchions. Network Rail have been carrying out work on the foundations over the Christmas period and this will continue throughout January with additional weekend engineering work which we have agreed to.
Despite all this additional engineering work Network Rail have confirmed that the required infrastructure will not be available in time for the introduction of our May 18 timetable as we planned. We have discussed a number of potential options with Network Rail including an additional extensive engineering blockade on the Bolton corridor during February & March, with the aim of recovering the programme.
As a responsible operator, we have always been very clear that we need to act in the best interest of our customers. If we were to agree to this extensive blockade it would present our customers travelling on the Atherton and Bolton lines with further disruption and delay at very short notice and with an uncertain defined benefit guaranteed beyond the closure. The impact of this closure would be a significant step-up in disruption from anything previously considered on what is one of the busiest parts of our network.
This risk is increased by the fact that a significant blockade of this kind would normally be planned at least 12 months in advance and is also not contained to the school holiday periods. We are therefore presently uncertain that we can secure sufficient bus resource to replicate the estimated 8,000 morning peak capacity for rail customers across these very busy lines.
Having considered the significant impact that our customers with be faced with if we were to go ahead with this closure, we have decided not to agree to this in favour of weekend and overnight possessions throughout summer. This option protects our customers from significant disruption and we will crucially not be attempting to deliver something that is extremely high risk, but indeed adds certainty to future planning. It also provides us with the opportunity to deliver a ‘robust’ series of phased timetable improvements ensuring a seamless delivery of service improvements that will not impact negatively on our customers.
The railways across the north of England continue to be in need of additional services and capacity to cater for the growing passenger numbers. While our planned service improvements will deliver much of this requirement any service changes need to be delivered robustly, with minimal risk and minimal disruption to our customers.
This is disappointing news for our customers who will have a longer wait, with more disruption, before they can experience the service enhancements Manchester to Bolton electrification will make possible. We are committed to working with our industry partners to complete the project to its revised schedule, while doing everything we can to minimise disruption to customer journeys. We will share more detail on any changes the delayed electrification work will have on planned improvements for the May 2018 timetable change as soon as we can.
I would like to reassure you that despite this delay our modernisation plans to transform the train journey experience for our customers by 2020 remains our number one focus, however it is imperative that we act in the best interest of our customers and that is why we have taken this decision.
Yours sincerely
View attachment 41441
Liam Sumpter
Regional Director
(Arriva)
Very true, but if they don't need 90mph capable stock perhaps a 4-car 150 would be more appropriate than a 158? Then the 158 can be concentrated on the routes where higher speed can contribute to more robust timetables (eg. avoiding conflicts on the WCML / Chat Moss for the Barrow/Windermere trains).
Wouldn't surprise me to see some at least stabled overnight elsewhere. I think there's a 185 stabled at Barrow overnight currently, logic would dictate that will become a 158 (or pair of 158s).Of course this is also assuming Arriva continue with basing all the 158s at Neville Hill
Whilst you're correct, it's more about maintaining (and increasing) capacity. At the December timetable change a small but significant number of Leeds services lost capacity to the point that there's now some journeys which are leaving passengers behind. Reducing these further to a 150 will only add to the problem, so hopefully once the Manchester electrification is complete the bulk of the surplus DMUs will find their way across to West Yorkshire
150s actually have more seats than 158s
Indeed, 4 car 150s would be ideal on Calder Valley workings and may help with station dwell times. I'm assuming the 158s will be working the extended Leeds-Sheffield-Lincoln as they remain interworked with Leeds-Nottingham, and I'm also guessing the 158s will be in pairs on Barrow services so it will be interesting to see who the losers are. Of course this is also assuming Arriva continue with basing all the 158s at Neville Hill
.....I think there's a 185 stabled at Barrow overnight currently, logic would dictate that will become a 158 (or pair of 158s).
Indeed, 4 car 150s would be ideal on Calder Valley workings and may help with station dwell times. I'm assuming the 158s will be working the extended Leeds-Sheffield-Lincoln as they remain interworked with Leeds-Nottingham, and I'm also guessing the 158s will be in pairs on Barrow services so it will be interesting to see who the losers are. Of course this is also assuming Arriva continue with basing all the 158s at Neville Hill
That would really go down well in the Calder Valley. Just as we are promised through services to the west, 90mph linespeeds, forthcoming new trains, what do we get - a new timetable with appallingly bunched services, increased journey times and downgraded trains.
That would really go down well in the Calder Valley. Just as we are promised through services to the west, 90mph linespeeds, forthcoming new trains, what do we get - a new timetable with appallingly bunched services, increased journey times and downgraded trains.
I thought Calder Valley services get a mix of 142s, 144s, 150s, 155s, 158s and even a daily 180 operated service at the Leeds end of the route. If the rumour that 170s will initially be used on Calder Valley services is true than Calder Valley could be the only route on the Northern network to get more modern rolling stock before the new trains enter service.
Although the 150s are inferior to 158s the line desperately needs additional capacity. Northern shouldn't have been allowed to extend services across the Ordsall Chord as it has led to a reduction in carriages in and out of Leeds during the peaks.
Northern shouldn't have been allowed to extend services across the Ordsall Chord as it has led to a reduction in carriages in and out of Leeds during the peaks.
I thought Calder Valley services get a mix of 142s, 144s, 150s, 155s, 158s and even a daily 180 operated service at the Leeds end of the route. If the rumour that 170s will initially be used on Calder Valley services is true than Calder Valley could be the only route on the Northern network to get more modern rolling stock before the new trains enter service.
Having checked the provisional May timetable in OTT, it shows all the Blackpool-Yorks continuing as 158s. The Leeds-Brighouse-Southport services no longer interwork with the Bradford services, and are shown as 150/153/155/156, so not unexpectedly would lose their 158s. All the Leeds-Chester services are shown as 158s and the Leeds-Man Airport as 150/3/5/6. But before you celebrate, these 2 services normally interwork at Leeds, so apparently metamorphose at the platform!
The 170s on the Calder Valley extensions was just a rumour, perhaps using them on the Cumbria services makes more sense.
There was talk of Barrow crews also signing 158s, hence my confidence they're going to see use on that route."West side crews don't sign 158s"
One link at Man Vic and Blackpool North crews do.
The rest of Man Vic links are to be trained or refreshed on them for the May timetable change