Class 172 Refurbishment/Snow Hill Capacity

[Old Hill Bank]

According to a memo we had ages ago regarding the 196s it said they were for Shrewsbury and Worcester work. Didn't mention Snow Hill at all.

That makes more sense, recent images show 196 interiors with a few tables.
Snow Hill would then run much as it does today with a few additional 172 vehicles and the odd Worcester jobs with 196s instead of 170s.

 

[nat67]

I saw a LO 172 at Tyesley on Thursday, not sure what number.

 

[Old Hill Bank]

I saw a LO 172 at Tyesley on Thursday, not sure what number.

Would have been 002, it moved up just before Christmas.

 

[pt_mad]

They’ve managed to keep us couped up on a dogbox for years! Never a 170/172 ran down in error.



April is the target date for being in service on the Nuneaton/Leamington branch. Whether the direct service happens in May is another matter.

2tph assumes the bay platform at Coventry station is built by then, along with the old schenker siding in Cov Yard being ripped up and replaced with a plain line through to the bay platform, to avoid having to join the mainline into Coventry.

The second bit is unlikely to be done by December.

Is April realistic? Presumably they'd have to have the disabled toilet fitted, and full train crew training? Are 172s cleared for use on the route yet? Suppose they might be if a 170 ever ran in the route with Central Trains?

Presumably the timetable for May will need to be submitted early in February. The Planner will know. As it will be made public 12 weeks before it comes into effect in May.

 

[Old Hill Bank]

Is April realistic? Presumably they'd have to have the disabled toilet fitted, and full train crew training? Are 172s cleared for use on the route yet? Suppose they might be if a 170 ever ran in the route with Central Trains?

Presumably the timetable for May will need to be submitted early in February. The Planner will know. As it will be made public 12 weeks before it comes into effect in May.

The December 2018 timetable was submitted and is now rolled over to May 2019 so the rail industry have no excuse not to implement it.

 

[pt_mad]

The December 2018 timetable was submitted and is now rolled over to May 2019 so the rail industry have no excuse not to implement it.

Does the timetable include a through service between Nuneaton and Leamington Spa? And is this service 172 dependent? (172s having improved acceleration/journey times)

 

[Class 170101]

Presumably the timetable for May will need to be submitted early in February. The Planner will know. As it will be made public 12 weeks before it comes into effect in May.

The operators have had NR's offer back for May already. March 2019 will see NR receive December 2019's timetable plans.

 

[pt_mad]

The operators have had NR's offer back for May already. March 2019 will see NR receive December 2019's timetable plans.

So we can gather that May timetable is now pretty much set in stone? So is it to be Nuneaton to Leamington Spa on a 172? (Two or three minutes earlier arriving at Coventry due to 172 gains and same time of departure in current 153 path to Leamington Spa)?

 

[The Planner]

May is pretty much done and dusted as said, just tweaking. Offer went ages ago and offer responses dealt with in the main. The 12 week bit is purely STP which needs a LTP base to work off.

 

[HLE]

Is April realistic? Presumably they'd have to have the disabled toilet fitted, and full train crew training? Are 172s cleared for use on the route yet? Suppose they might be if a 170 ever ran in the route with Central Trains?

Presumably the timetable for May will need to be submitted early in February. The Planner will know. As it will be made public 12 weeks before it comes into effect in May.

We're assuming 002 has had the toilet fitted during the 6 months it spent at Ilford. Yes, drivers and guards need to be trained on the units, drivers obviously take longer. 170's are cleared so imagine 172's are. Yes they used to operate on the branch during central trains days. Only last February did a 170 rescue the dogbox during the bad weather.

 

[fgwrich]

There was another 172 Lurking in the sheds at Ilford when I passed on Friday, I presume this is 006?

Also, do we know if ultimately the ex LO units be retaining their original cabs or as Bombardier has said the design is modular, if they'll go on to receive the same style of cabs as the /2s?

 

[D365]

Also, do we know if ultimately the ex LO units be retaining their original cabs or as Bombardier has said the design is modular, if they'll go on to receive the same style of cabs as the /2s?

Doubt there will be any change. "Modular" does not always equate to "low in cost".

 

[Old Hill Bank]

Doubt there will be any change. "Modular" does not always equate to "low in cost".

WMT have stated that the cabs will not be changed.

 

[nat67]

Would have been 002, it moved up just before Christmas.

I would assume so.

 

[superkev]

For interest TFL 172s are listed in my platform 5 pocket book as having no toilets and 75mph max rather than the standard 100. Presumably they will need a change of final drive to match WMTs other 170s or is it just a speed limiter.
K

 

[XCTurbostar]

The 172/0 fleet currently stands at:
172001 London Overground In-service with LO Toilet not fitted
172002 London Overground Unbranded At Tyseley awaiting Maintenance Toilet fitted
172003 London Overground In-service with LO Toilet not fitted
172004 London Overground In-service with LO Toilet not fitted
172005 London Overground In-service with LO Toilet not fitted
172006 London Overground Unbranded At Ilford awaiting move to Tyseley Toilet fitted
172007 London Overground In-service with LO Toilet not fitted
172008 London Overground In-service with LO Toilet not fitted

 

[XCTurbostar]

For interest TFL 172s are listed in my platform 5 pocket book as having no toilets and 75mph max rather than the standard 100. Presumably they will need a change of final drive to match WMTs other 170s.
K

Im 99% sure that the final drive was not modified in any way on LO units. The cabs still have 'Max Speed 100MPH' with a red line on the Speedometer at 100MPH. Im sure @HLE can confirm that.

 

[HLE]

Im 99% sure that the final drive was not modified in any way on LO units. The cabs still have 'Max Speed 100MPH' with a red line on the Speedometer at 100MPH. Im sure @HLE can confirm that.

He will when he's been on one! They are 100mph units from what I've been told.

 

[superkev]

He will when he's been on one! They are 100mph units from what I've been told.

Wonder why the platform 5 pocket book quotes 75mph for the TFL 170s. Must have come from somewhere.
K

 

[43096]

Wonder why the platform 5 pocket book quotes 75mph for the TFL 170s. Must have come from somewhere.
K

Platform 5 have previous for not getting things right. Colin Marsden’s website quotes 75mph for the LO and the Chiltern 172s, so maybe that is the source. Anyone who believes anything Marsden writes without corroboration is asking for trouble!

 

[craigybagel]

Platform 5 have previous for not getting things right. Colin Marsden’s website quotes 75mph for the LO and the Chiltern 172s, so maybe that is the source. Anyone who believes anything Marsden writes without corroboration is asking for trouble!

I remember there was a lot of talk in the railway magazines and on various forums when the 172s were ordered that the LO fleet would only be 75mph max - with the Chiltern fleet being 100mph.

 

[superkev]

I remember there was a lot of talk in the railway magazines and on various forums when the 172s were ordered that the LO fleet would only be 75mph max - with the Chiltern fleet being 100mph.

Whats the max line speed on the Goblin line where tfl 170s run at the moment. Prob never get out of 3rd gear.
K

 

[swt_passenger]

I remember there was a lot of talk in the railway magazines and on various forums when the 172s were ordered that the LO fleet would only be 75mph max - with the Chiltern fleet being 100mph.

Concur. It was “accepted fact” for quite a while between order and eventual delivery.

However the Angel Trains data sheet also says 75 mph. I expect many people would assume that would be legit info...
https://www.angeltrains.co.uk/Products-Services/Regional-Passenger-Trains/10

 

[HLE]

Wonder why the platform 5 pocket book quotes 75mph for the TFL 170s. Must have come from somewhere.
K

They may well be right, I've not been on one yet, they only ran the first unit up just before Christmas. It would make sense if they were only 75mph capable as the Goblin has a low line speed. Think it's around 45-50 but don't quote me on that.

Whether they are is one question, and if they are, whether WMT/Angel do try and change it is another. That may explain why one unit sat at Ilford for 6 months.

75mph would be okay for the Leamington & Nuneaton branches as things stand, but I'm not sure about the snow hill lines or which other lines the other units will end up on. It'd make sense if they were 100mph so they could work with the existing fleet up here

It does say on Angel's website that the /0's have a top speed of 75mph. They own them so I'd say that's pretty reliable

 

[superkev]

They may well be right, I've not been on one yet, they only ran the first unit up just before Christmas. It would make sense if they were only 75mph capable as the Goblin has a low line speed. Think it's around 45-50 but don't quote me on that.

Whether they are is one question, and if they are, whether WMT/Angel do try and change it is another. That may explain why one unit sat at Ilford for 6 months.

75mph would be okay for the Leamington & Nuneaton branches as things stand, but I'm not sure about the snow hill lines or which other lines the other units will end up on. It'd make sense if they were 100mph so they could work with the existing fleet up here

It does say on Angel's website that the /0's have a top speed of 75mph. They own them so I'd say that's pretty reliable

Not a good idea to have a mixed fleet of 100 and 75mph units. Only a matter of time before someone drags a 75 one at 100 presumably causing serious damage.
Riding a pacer hauled at 90 by a 158 has happened and probably quite exhilarating but unlikely to damage the transmission or engine as the voith transmission freewheels.
K

 

[Railperf]

They may well be right, I've not been on one yet, they only ran the first unit up just before Christmas. It would make sense if they were only 75mph capable as the Goblin has a low line speed. Think it's around 45-50 but don't quote me on that.

Whether they are is one question, and if they are, whether WMT/Angel do try and change it is another. That may explain why one unit sat at Ilford for 6 months.

75mph would be okay for the Leamington & Nuneaton branches as things stand, but I'm not sure about the snow hill lines or which other lines the other units will end up on. It'd make sense if they were 100mph so they could work with the existing fleet up here

It does say on Angel's website that the /0's have a top speed of 75mph. They own them so I'd say that's pretty reliable

Max on the Goblin is a very brief 50mph I believe west of Upper Holloway - but rarely exploited by drivers. Westbound train drivers are usually not in a rush as they usually end up being held outside Gospel Oak waiting for the platform to be vacated!! Between Upper Holloway and South Tottenham - it is 30mph despite being long and straight! While the rest of the way to Barking is mainly 45mph except for a 20mph restriction between South Tottenham and Blackhorse Road on a bridge that appeared to have been rebuilt to allow faster speeds!!

 

[pt_mad]

Opentraintimes now showing through trains between Leamington Spa and Nuneaton from May timetable change.

Timings for arrival at Coventry (from Nuneaton) look the same at xx36arr. Shows departing for Leamington Spa one minute later.

So presumably, if 172s can't go into service for May, 153s should be adequate for the timings anyway, as no faster acceleration required on the face of it.

Considering the chase line electrification should be finished and some electric trains in service by May, is it possible WMRailway could take a 153 off that route and make it a double 153 between Leamington Spa and Nuneaton?

 

[Old Hill Bank]

Opentraintimes now showing through trains between Leamington Spa and Nuneaton from May timetable change.

Timings for arrival at Coventry (from Nuneaton) look the same at xx36arr. Shows departing for Leamington Spa one minute later.

So presumably, if 172s can't go into service for May, 153s should be adequate for the timings anyway, as no faster acceleration required on the face of it.

Considering the chase line electrification should be finished and some electric trains in service by May, is it possible WMRailway could take a 153 off that route and make it a double 153 between Leamington Spa and Nuneaton?

Current indications are that all of the 172/0s will be in service with WMT by the May timetable change and will be used on KNUCLE and enhanced Snow Hill Line services.

 

[XCTurbostar]

Current indications are that all of the 172/0s will be in service with WMT by the May timetable change and will be used on KNUCLE and enhanced Snow Hill Line services.

The inclusion of Snow Hill Line services make sense because that could potentially release the 172/2s for refurbishment. Until the full KNUCKLE timetable and Bay platform are built and in use, not all 8 will be in use on that line. I'd also imagine that this would help push out the 150 and 153s.

 

[pt_mad]

Is there a bay platform at Leamington Spa that they will use?