• Our booking engine at tickets.railforums.co.uk (powered by TrainSplit) helps support the running of the forum with every ticket purchase! Find out more and ask any questions/give us feedback in this thread!

Northern timetable plan for May 2018

Status
Not open for further replies.
Sponsor Post - registered members do not see these adverts; click here to register, or click here to log in
R

RailUK Forums

mic505

Member
Joined
26 Nov 2016
Messages
185
That plan is still on. 16 x 170/4s cascaded to Northern from Scotrail by December 2018, with the first four released from Scotrail next month (two months early).
 

Mathew S

Established Member
Joined
7 Aug 2017
Messages
2,167
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?
 

pemma

Veteran Member
Joined
23 Jan 2009
Messages
31,474
Location
Knutsford
^ 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.
 

northernchris

Established Member
Joined
24 Jul 2011
Messages
1,509
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?

A lot of the proposed timetable changes seem questionable. Is Southport-Leeds a franchise requirement or just formed for operational convenience?
 

Mathew S

Established Member
Joined
7 Aug 2017
Messages
2,167
A lot of the proposed timetable changes seem questionable. Is Southport-Leeds a franchise requirement or just formed for operational convenience?
IIRC there's a franchise requirement for Southport - Hebden Bridge effectively hourly.
 

northernchris

Established Member
Joined
24 Jul 2011
Messages
1,509
^ 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
 

Mathew S

Established Member
Joined
7 Aug 2017
Messages
2,167
^ 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.
 

pemma

Veteran Member
Joined
23 Jan 2009
Messages
31,474
Location
Knutsford
Northernchris - Not a requirement set by DfT/Rail North but one that Arriva included in their bid so they'll need a very good reason if they want to change it now, same with Bradford to Nottingham or Bradford to Liverpool or Leeds to Lincoln.
 

pemma

Veteran Member
Joined
23 Jan 2009
Messages
31,474
Location
Knutsford
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.
 

northernchris

Established Member
Joined
24 Jul 2011
Messages
1,509
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.

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
 

Mathew S

Established Member
Joined
7 Aug 2017
Messages
2,167
so hopefully once the Manchester electrification is complete the bulk of the surplus DMUs will find their way across to West Yorkshire
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).

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
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).
 

47802

Established Member
Joined
8 Oct 2013
Messages
3,455
I expect the random unit generator will be on overtime:lol: until Manchester- Preston finally gets done and the 195's start to come into service.
 

Mathew S

Established Member
Joined
7 Aug 2017
Messages
2,167
Posting this from the Blackpool-Manchester electrification thread. The key part timetabling-wise seems to be Para 8 where Northern say they have agreed with Network Rail, "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."

That, to me, says that they're looking to implement as much of the planned May 2018 changes as they reasonably can, perhaps operating some sort of temporary timetable on the Bolton line, then introduce later the rest of the changes/enhancements when the infrastructure is in place to make it work.

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)
 

northernchris

Established Member
Joined
24 Jul 2011
Messages
1,509
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).

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
 

Mathew S

Established Member
Joined
7 Aug 2017
Messages
2,167
Of course this is also assuming Arriva continue with basing all the 158s at Neville Hill
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).
 

pemma

Veteran Member
Joined
23 Jan 2009
Messages
31,474
Location
Knutsford
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. OK they are in 3+2 formation but if short services are overcrowded they might be an improvement. The wider doors on 150s also help reduce delays at stations when trains are overcrowded.
 

47802

Established Member
Joined
8 Oct 2013
Messages
3,455
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'm not sure I would put money on most of the Barrow services being double units, I would have Leeds-Sheffield-Lincoln as temp downgrade candidate, well the Leeds Sheffield bit given Lincoln is already as downgraded as you can get:lol:, but if they are still interworked with Nottingham's that's going to be difficult, although I guess they could end up with a temp mix of 158's and 150's, otherwise they have to find more 158's for that service.
 
Last edited:

WatcherZero

Established Member
Joined
25 Feb 2010
Messages
10,272
The highback chairs on 158's take up more room too so theres loads more standing/wheelchair space on the 150's with their bench seats even with 3+2, you can effectively fit 4 150 seat rows in the same space 3 158 rows occupy.
 

fulmar

Member
Joined
12 Feb 2016
Messages
82
.....I think there's a 185 stabled at Barrow overnight currently, logic would dictate that will become a 158 (or pair of 158s).

Currently two 185s stabled overnight at Barrow. Used to be four before TPE cut the Barrow/Windermere - Manchester Airports services so will probably require a similar number of whatever units are used to replace the 185s.
 

lejog

Established Member
Joined
27 Feb 2015
Messages
1,321
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.
 

pemma

Veteran Member
Joined
23 Jan 2009
Messages
31,474
Location
Knutsford
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.
 

northernchris

Established Member
Joined
24 Jul 2011
Messages
1,509
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.

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.

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.

144s aren't allocated to Calder Valley routes anymore, but anything else can show up. The 180 is to boost capacity as the 2 services either side of it were reduced from 4 to 2 carriages.
 

pemma

Veteran Member
Joined
23 Jan 2009
Messages
31,474
Location
Knutsford
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.

The first train extended beyond Victoria is the 08:50 arrival at Victoria from Leeds and the last one is the 15:38 arrival at Victoria, so they should have no effect on the total peak time capacity on Calder Valley services. The only change that could possibly be a direct result of that is that units have switched place e.g. a 3 car 158 is on what was previously a 2 car 158 diagram and vice versa.
 

Bovverboy

Established Member
Joined
1 Dec 2013
Messages
1,930
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 can't imagine why the extension of a few off-peak journeys over the chord would result in a reduction of carriages in and out of Leeds during the peaks, since the Chord journeys haven't increased Northern's PVR at all.
There appears to be general agreement that capacity into/out of Leeds has been reduced, but has Northern suggested any link with the Ordsall Chord?
 

lejog

Established Member
Joined
27 Feb 2015
Messages
1,321
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.

It depends what you mean by Calder Valley services, but all the Blackpool-York services are 158s (as specified in the track access contract) and approx 50% of the Leeds-Victoria, the rest being 155s/150s. No 144s since they were removed from the Brighouse - Victoria services some years ago, and while 142s and even 2/3 car 153s have been turning up occasionally since the refurbishments started, I understand they are only diagrammed as strengthening units.

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.
 

pemma

Veteran Member
Joined
23 Jan 2009
Messages
31,474
Location
Knutsford
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!

Like has been said on numerous times what services are timed for and don't indicate what will actually be used. All it does is gives a clue as to what is the slowest stock which can be used without causing a problem. There's no reason why Northern couldn't time services to be 75mph 15xs and use 158s.

The 170s on the Calder Valley extensions was just a rumour, perhaps using them on the Cumbria services makes more sense.

100mph units on the Cumbria services makes sense. However, it needs to be remembered that:
1. There are only 4 x 170s expected to join by May. Given not every train can be in service every day that would mean something else would have to be used alongside them.
2. West side crews don't sign 158s or 170s but 158s are more similar to what they already sign.
3. The crews who work Leeds-Chester will probably also work at least part of Leeds-Southport.
 

175001

Established Member
Joined
3 Feb 2007
Messages
1,301
Location
Between Heaven and Hell
"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
 

Mathew S

Established Member
Joined
7 Aug 2017
Messages
2,167
"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
There was talk of Barrow crews also signing 158s, hence my confidence they're going to see use on that route.
 
Status
Not open for further replies.

Top