• 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!

New trains for East Midlands Franchise

Status
Not open for further replies.

43096

On Moderation
Joined
23 Nov 2015
Messages
15,164
Because at the moment, stations north of Market Harborough are served by well over 200 of those vehicles/coaches.

From December next year, this will shrink to 247-84 which is 163 vehicles
From 2023, this will be 165 vehicles

and some of these services between Leicester and Derby, Nottingham and Sheffield are already very busy
That’s way too simplistic as an analysis. It’s a total timetable re-write.
 
Sponsor Post - registered members do not see these adverts; click here to register, or click here to log in
R

RailUK Forums

Murray J

Member
Joined
10 Aug 2019
Messages
709
Location
East Grinstead
The fleet goes from 233 vehicles currently to 247 next year and then 249 when the new Hitachi sets arrive.

Currently it's:
HST 9 x 8-car = 72
HST 3 x 6-car = 18
222 6 x 7-car = 42
222 17 x 5-car = 85
222 4 x 4-car = 16
Total = 233

From December next year it is:
180 4 x 5-car = 20
222 6 x 7-car = 42
222 17 x 5-car = 85
222 4 x 4-car = 16
360 21 x 4-car = 84
Total = 247

From 2023 it is:
360 21 x 4-car = 84
804 33 x 5-car = 165
Total = 249

I'm not understanding what all the flapping is about.
I'd say it's because those 21/84 360s can only be used as far as Corby while the HSTs go up to Nottingham and Leicester, meaning the HST sets are only being replaced properly by the 4 180s.
 

OTRail

Member
Joined
14 Jul 2019
Messages
529
I'd say it's because those 21/84 360s can only be used as far as Corby while the HSTs go up to Nottingham and Leicester, meaning the HST sets are only being replaced properly by the 4 180s.

Not just 180s - also through internal cascades of 222s freed up by the 360s...
 

MML

Member
Joined
25 Oct 2015
Messages
587
Once again, there appears to be little focus on growth. And as we all know unless sufficient stock is procured from day 1, there is usually little or no hope of a follow on order during the life of the existing or future franchise.
In 5 years from now, we'll be complaining about not getting a seat from Leicester to London as all these 5 coach sets are whizzing up and down on a railway where track access becomes ever more congested.
 

Merle Haggard

Established Member
Joined
20 Oct 2019
Messages
1,979
Location
Northampton
Just a gentle question...
The ex Grand HST were requisitioned, I understood, because the new TL TT made the MML TT inefficient (e. g. fewer paths, RRB Wellingboro' to Bedford) and (because DfT instructed these TL timetable changes) their lease charges were paid for by DfT.
The proposed recast TT seems to have overcome any problems caused by conflicts with TL, so one might reasonably think these extra sets would no longer be required; but they are being retained - although the sets themselves will be replaced by Cl 180s.
So two questions; Why are they being kept; and will the DfT still be paying for them (i.e., the 180s)?.
(the initiallisms I've used are TT - Timetable; TL - Thameslink; MML - Midland main line)
 

Haydn1971

Established Member
Joined
11 Dec 2012
Messages
2,099
Location
Sheffield
No focus on growth ? The 360 and 804 both offer significantly more seats than the trains they replace carriage for carriage the five car 804s could have between 285-300 seats based on GWR/TPE densities on the 802, that’s at least 43 extra seats per five car unit... similarly, the 360 in 2+2 configuration will give at least 220 seats, that’s at least 60 more seats per four car unit over the 222 - yes of course the HSTs give more seats, but the HSTs run a small fraction of services, and won’t compensate for the boost in capacity the new units will give.
 

43096

On Moderation
Joined
23 Nov 2015
Messages
15,164
Just looking at the Leicester and beyond services, the current service requires 21 basic diagrams to operate 2tph to Nottingham and Sheffield. There will probably be some efficiencies from a common train fleet and the Nottingham fast not sitting at St Pancras for 70mins, so 20 diagrams required. With 33 804s on order, you would expect 90% availability, so 29 or 30 units in service. That means half of all services north of Leicester could run as 10-car; which is a sizeable increase from now. Add in that the Nottingham slow will no longer have to carry intermediate passengers from London to Wellingborough, and the improvement is even greater.

I'm still not understanding the argument about lack of capacity.
 

Scott1

Member
Joined
29 Apr 2015
Messages
377
Just looking at the Leicester and beyond services, the current service requires 21 basic diagrams to operate 2tph to Nottingham and Sheffield. There will probably be some efficiencies from a common train fleet and the Nottingham fast not sitting at St Pancras for 70mins, so 20 diagrams required. With 33 804s on order, you would expect 90% availability, so 29 or 30 units in service. That means half of all services north of Leicester could run as 10-car; which is a sizeable increase from now. Add in that the Nottingham slow will no longer have to carry intermediate passengers from London to Wellingborough, and the improvement is even greater.

I'm still not understanding the argument about lack of capacity.
Personally I've no concerns about the intercity and electric services, but the regional fleet seems very tight. Hopefully the 170s will need less maintance time than the 15x fleet.
 

Failed Unit

Established Member
Joined
26 Jan 2009
Messages
8,857
Location
Central Belt
The regional is interesting. Many routes have had serious capacity increases. I guess we won’t see issues for a couple of years. At that point i would expect surplus DMUs as no home exists for the 158s going off lease. Who knows if dft will agree. But if the regional routes are a problem keep the 15x.
 

hooverboy

On Moderation
Joined
12 Oct 2017
Messages
1,372
The regional is interesting. Many routes have had serious capacity increases. I guess we won’t see issues for a couple of years. At that point i would expect surplus DMUs as no home exists for the 158s going off lease. Who knows if dft will agree. But if the regional routes are a problem keep the 15x.
well they are supposed to be getting 9* 156's as well.

supposedly to cover the 153's going out of proper mainline service-in all likelihood they will run the lincoln-peterborough/derby-crewe diagrams and the matlock service.
the 153's themselves will be pretty cheap to lease now there's very little demand for them,and for add-ons/capacity busters they'll do alright.

It would certainly be a possibility of making them a permanent fixture if things get really tight.
I'd prefer 158's if we had to go down that route, but it will ultimately boil down to lease and running costs.

it's still a bit tight though. 47 operational regional sets versus 53sets currently.
I think they could do with a couple more.
 
Last edited:

edwin_m

Veteran Member
Joined
21 Apr 2013
Messages
24,793
Location
Nottingham
So they hope that using the electric units on stopping services will mean diesel units with less stops won't need much capacity?
I think that's a bit risky.
I tend to agree. In the off-peak the Sheffield trains and the faster Nottingham don't stop south of Kettering anyway, and the slower Nottingham is generally a five-car. So I think most of the peak extras will go, some of the 10-car peak services will go down to five, as will the faster Nottingham off-peak.
 

swt_passenger

Veteran Member
Joined
7 Apr 2010
Messages
31,267
Just a gentle question...
The ex Grand HST were requisitioned, I understood, because the new TL TT made the MML TT inefficient (e. g. fewer paths, RRB Wellingboro' to Bedford) and (because DfT instructed these TL timetable changes) their lease charges were paid for by DfT.
The proposed recast TT seems to have overcome any problems caused by conflicts with TL, so one might reasonably think these extra sets would no longer be required; but they are being retained - although the sets themselves will be replaced by Cl 180s.
So two questions; Why are they being kept; and will the DfT still be paying for them (i.e., the 180s)?.
(the initiallisms I've used are TT - Timetable; TL - Thameslink; MML - Midland main line)
The original announcement suggested strongly that the 180s together with the few 222s released from Corby, with revised diagramming, were intended to allow the HSTs to go offlease before the new 804s started being delivered. As far as I can tell the ex LNER HSTs that replace existing HSTs will still have to go before the 804s arrive, so it follows the 180s role in the transition is still required?
 

tbtc

Veteran Member
Joined
16 Dec 2008
Messages
17,882
Location
Reston City Centre
Just looking at the Leicester and beyond services, the current service requires 21 basic diagrams to operate 2tph to Nottingham and Sheffield. There will probably be some efficiencies from a common train fleet and the Nottingham fast not sitting at St Pancras for 70mins, so 20 diagrams required. With 33 804s on order, you would expect 90% availability, so 29 or 30 units in service. That means half of all services north of Leicester could run as 10-car; which is a sizeable increase from now. Add in that the Nottingham slow will no longer have to carry intermediate passengers from London to Wellingborough, and the improvement is even greater.

I'm still not understanding the argument about lack of capacity.

Agreed - I'm okay about the future capacity - with just one type of long distance high speed stock, you can have much more efficient use of platforms at St Pancras/ Nottingham/ Sheffield (rather than the situation where a southbound service has to wait around at St Pancras to run the next equivalent northbound service and the same situation at Nottingham/ Sheffield where the northbound "fast" has to sit around to run the next southbound "fast" - thus ending the nonsense of a northbound "slow" waiting at Sheffield for over an hour, so having to run empty to Nunnery Square to sit around).

Add that to the Thameslink pathing (which was the reason for the GC 180s) and the Corby service going EMU (which frees up at least three 222s) and the future looks okay. Not amazingly fantastically wonderful, but okay, good enough - we can have half of the LDHS services run with ten coaches.

You know the way that a lot of enthusiasts work though - in a few years time they'll complain that the capacity increase wasn't that great, by ignoring the fact that most of the longest trains in the fleet sat around at Cricklewood during the daytime and were mainly used just for peak capacity - or similarly by comparing the total number of trains in the "regional" fleet which ignores the fact that a 170 has a lot more seats than a 153. It'll get spun to make it look like it's a capacity cut, but I think it's a good enough increase - we should be okay.
 

hooverboy

On Moderation
Joined
12 Oct 2017
Messages
1,372
You know the way that a lot of enthusiasts work though - in a few years time they'll complain that the capacity increase wasn't that great, by ignoring the fact that most of the longest trains in the fleet sat around at Cricklewood during the daytime and were mainly used just for peak capacity - or similarly by comparing the total number of trains in the "regional" fleet which ignores the fact that a 170 has a lot more seats than a 153. It'll get spun to make it look like it's a capacity cut, but I think it's a good enough increase - we should be okay.

the 170's should be considered replacements for the 156/158's
a 2 car turbostar has about 10 seats less.
 

Snow1964

Established Member
Joined
7 Oct 2019
Messages
6,025
Location
West Wiltshire
So we’re potentially going to get stuck with shorter trains? I don’t understand how that’s acceptable?

Although the total number of vehicles goes up a bit over 3 years, effectively goes down to 2 types, whilst can work in multiple there is effectively less ability to run a 6 or 7 or 8 coach train, so some will have to run with excess capacity and others with insufficient capacity.

Therefore assumption is some services will effectively be short formed vs potential passenger numbers
 

LowLevel

Established Member
Joined
26 Oct 2013
Messages
7,543
The regional is interesting. Many routes have had serious capacity increases. I guess we won’t see issues for a couple of years. At that point i would expect surplus DMUs as no home exists for the 158s going off lease. Who knows if dft will agree. But if the regional routes are a problem keep the 15x.

I think there is significant pent up demand that running 2 car trains will release and on some routes that won't be sufficient. If you take Lincolnshire the roads are awful and Doncaster to Peterborough via Lincoln suddenly becomes a mostly 75 mph railway with reasonably high quality trains. The 2 car peak time trains are already full - the 0743 off Sleaford becomes a 4 car from December.

Derby to Crewe is another that yoyos significantly and goes from some trains being quite quiet with a 153 to suddenly requiring 4 carriages.

Same for Skegness where in winter a 153 can manage some trains but in summer many need to be 4 or 5 cars and on summer Saturdays 8 car HST sets can have standees.

I think there is some concern including from Abellio that the proposed fleet will be able to handle the peaks and troughs.
 

edwin_m

Veteran Member
Joined
21 Apr 2013
Messages
24,793
Location
Nottingham
Just looking at the Leicester and beyond services, the current service requires 21 basic diagrams to operate 2tph to Nottingham and Sheffield. There will probably be some efficiencies from a common train fleet and the Nottingham fast not sitting at St Pancras for 70mins, so 20 diagrams required. With 33 804s on order, you would expect 90% availability, so 29 or 30 units in service. That means half of all services north of Leicester could run as 10-car; which is a sizeable increase from now. Add in that the Nottingham slow will no longer have to carry intermediate passengers from London to Wellingborough, and the improvement is even greater.

I'm still not understanding the argument about lack of capacity.

Agreed - I'm okay about the future capacity - with just one type of long distance high speed stock, you can have much more efficient use of platforms at St Pancras/ Nottingham/ Sheffield (rather than the situation where a southbound service has to wait around at St Pancras to run the next equivalent northbound service and the same situation at Nottingham/ Sheffield where the northbound "fast" has to sit around to run the next southbound "fast" - thus ending the nonsense of a northbound "slow" waiting at Sheffield for over an hour, so having to run empty to Nunnery Square to sit around).

Add that to the Thameslink pathing (which was the reason for the GC 180s) and the Corby service going EMU (which frees up at least three 222s) and the future looks okay. Not amazingly fantastically wonderful, but okay, good enough - we can have half of the LDHS services run with ten coaches.

You know the way that a lot of enthusiasts work though - in a few years time they'll complain that the capacity increase wasn't that great, by ignoring the fact that most of the longest trains in the fleet sat around at Cricklewood during the daytime and were mainly used just for peak capacity - or similarly by comparing the total number of trains in the "regional" fleet which ignores the fact that a 170 has a lot more seats than a 153. It'll get spun to make it look like it's a capacity cut, but I think it's a good enough increase - we should be okay.
I think the concern is more about the period between the HSTs going and the 802s arriving. The 7-car 222s work most of the Sheffield fasts so these probably won't change, the off-peak slower Nottingham and the slower Sheffield are 5-car 222s already so can't get any shorter (assuming the 4-car 222s are only used for strengthening). The HSTs operate the peak extra workings, which I am assuming will cease, plus the Nottingham fasts which should require four or five in service if diagrammed efficiently. Assuming the other services need what they need now, what's left over is the three or so 222s released from Corby plus the 180s. This suggests to me that at least one Nottingham diagram currently a HST drop from eight to five cars - which will either be a 180 with a question mark over reliability or a 222 which seats fewer than a 2+5 HST let alone the 2+8 that operates today.

There is some relief for the Nottinghams when the 802s arrive, because they ought to have more seats than a 180 or 222. But some of the Sheffields may go from a 7-car 222 to a 5-car 802.
 

hooverboy

On Moderation
Joined
12 Oct 2017
Messages
1,372
I think there is significant pent up demand that running 2 car trains will release and on some routes that won't be sufficient. If you take Lincolnshire the roads are awful and Doncaster to Peterborough via Lincoln suddenly becomes a mostly 75 mph railway with reasonably high quality trains. The 2 car peak time trains are already full - the 0743 off Sleaford becomes a 4 car from December.

Derby to Crewe is another that yoyos significantly and goes from some trains being quite quiet with a 153 to suddenly requiring 4 carriages.

Same for Skegness where in winter a 153 can manage some trains but in summer many need to be 4 or 5 cars and on summer Saturdays 8 car HST sets can have standees.

I think there is some concern including from Abellio that the proposed fleet will be able to handle the peaks and troughs.

skegness is a good example.You would have thought that trainsets could be rotated during summer/winter timetables to adjust for seasonal loads.
As you say,in winter a 156 is about right,if you consider peak hours,so a 2 car 170 would suffice.In summer it would typically be 156+153 and still full and standing, and could use the extra carriage ,either 2*156, 156+2*153,4 car 170 or some permutation of that sort.

I think the intercity/electrics diagrams will be adequate enough, but the local/regional fleet is a bit thin.
 

bunnahabhain

Established Member
Joined
8 Jun 2005
Messages
2,070
skegness is a good example.You would have thought that trainsets could be rotated during summer/winter timetables to adjust for seasonal loads.
As you say,in winter a 156 is about right,if you consider peak hours,so a 2 car 170 would suffice.In summer it would typically be 156+153 and still full and standing, and could use the extra carriage ,either 2*156, 156+2*153,4 car 170 or some permutation of that sort.

I think the intercity/electrics diagrams will be adequate enough, but the local/regional fleet is a bit thin.
Some Skegness diagrams used to be 5 cars, and in the winter the first out and back from Nottingham is usually booked for 6 cars for the Butlins chuck out. The major issue with Skegness isn't just bums on seats however, luggage is a major problem, on a pair of 156s you can stack both sides of the parcels van, overhead racks, and still not fit it all in!
 

Failed Unit

Established Member
Joined
26 Jan 2009
Messages
8,857
Location
Central Belt
The 2 car peak time trains are already full - the 0743 off Sleaford becomes a 4 car from December.
I wonder why? That does not split but will be interesting how that works considering Methringham and Ruskington can only take 2 cars. The 0803 Lincoln - Peterborough needs to be 4 as it splits at Sleaford now.

But you are right. A lot of demand is held back. I used to commute to Lincoln in the late 1980s and early 1990s from Market Rasen. Along came the 153s. How did BR deal with this? They started killing demand. Missing connections at Newark (6 minutes waiting time instead of 7 so not valid). Changing times making it unattractive for commuters. Introducing large gaps in the service. Just to justify the 153s.

Now we have what we have today.
No arrivals from Lincoln between 0800 and 1000 - prime commuting time. 1 peak departure 1722. That is it. Go early it is 1435. Leave later 2002. The route is impossible to commute / shop on. I gave up and started driving as did many other. Not because I wanted to - I had no choice as BR had made the service unusable.

So bring back an hourly service it could soon be full. It takes 15 minutes from Market Rasen to Lincoln. In 15 minutes your are lucky to even be at the Lincoln bypass. We could see some mega growth. But at least the 153s may still be around and cheap to lease to help soak it up. (Attached to another train of course.)

I am sure many of the routes you mention could see a growth explosion. Crewe - Nottingham returning coupled with the fact you can physically board will help growth.
 

tbtc

Veteran Member
Joined
16 Dec 2008
Messages
17,882
Location
Reston City Centre
I think the concern is more about the period between the HSTs going and the 802s arriving. The 7-car 222s work most of the Sheffield fasts so these probably won't change, the off-peak slower Nottingham and the slower Sheffield are 5-car 222s already so can't get any shorter (assuming the 4-car 222s are only used for strengthening). The HSTs operate the peak extra workings, which I am assuming will cease, plus the Nottingham fasts which should require four or five in service if diagrammed efficiently. Assuming the other services need what they need now, what's left over is the three or so 222s released from Corby plus the 180s. This suggests to me that at least one Nottingham diagram currently a HST drop from eight to five cars - which will either be a 180 with a question mark over reliability or a 222 which seats fewer than a 2+5 HST let alone the 2+8 that operates today.

There is some relief for the Nottinghams when the 802s arrive, because they ought to have more seats than a 180 or 222. But some of the Sheffields may go from a 7-car 222 to a 5-car 802.

Are all of the HSTs going before the 804s arrive though?

I thought that it'd be the ex-GC ones leaving in the next year but not *all* HSTs? Or am I getting confused, given that there are various people claiming to be in the know talking about ex-LNER sets coming across etc? Could it be that all of the ex-EMT HSTs go (i.e. all of the ex-GC and all of the current full length ones) but some ex-LNER ones will be running up to the introduction of the 804s (given that the LNER ones are more complaint? Or have things changed again?
 

InTheEastMids

Member
Joined
31 Jan 2016
Messages
718
Are all of the HSTs going before the 804s arrive though?

I thought that it'd be the ex-GC ones leaving in the next year but not *all* HSTs? Or am I getting confused, given that there are various people claiming to be in the know talking about ex-LNER sets coming across etc? Could it be that all of the ex-EMT HSTs go (i.e. all of the ex-GC and all of the current full length ones) but some ex-LNER ones will be running up to the introduction of the 804s (given that the LNER ones are more complaint? Or have things changed again?

I thought it might be helpful to summarize what (I think) the consensus is, and the key talking points.
1. Now: current EMR HST fleet quickly dumped in favour of ex-LNER
2. May 2020: ex-HT 180s arrive, and a presumably few ex-LNER HSTs are withdrawn (or fleet utilisation falls further)
3. Dec 2020: Timetable recast, 360s on Corby, all ex LNER HSTs stopped, the EMR IC timetable is delivered solely 27*222 and 4*180
4. Dec 2022: 804s introduced. EMR fleet is solely 33*5-car 804s.
(222s sent elsewhere eg XC, 180s sold to Whirlpool and recycled as tumble dryers).

The first main concern is about service reliability & resilience from Dec-2020 until 804s arrive, given the 180s not known for reliability. Will there be chronic cancellations and short-forming?

Secondly there are concerns about whether there will be enough capacity after Dec 2020 particularly where 2+8 HSTs might be replaced by 5 coach trains (whether 222 or the 804s) Will there be enough units to run in multiple where demand is there, and if demand grows.

The reasons why this isn't a simple calculation are
1- electrification will reduce demand on IC services on South MML, so less IC capacity is needed
2- EMR fleet utilisation is currently low, due to having multiple (sub)fleets of different length 222 and HST, and these fleet changes will enable more effective and intensive use of a smaller fleet.
 

yorksrob

Veteran Member
Joined
6 Aug 2009
Messages
38,818
Location
Yorks
Certainly.

According to MR:

"The arrival of the '180s' and the start of electric services between Corby and London operated by 360's from December 2020 is set to allow EMR to withdraw HST's by that point, with it's Inter-city services solely in the hands of the 180's and its class 222 Meridians."

Good luck Midlands passengers.

Are all of the HSTs going before the 804s arrive though?

I thought that it'd be the ex-GC ones leaving in the next year but not *all* HSTs? Or am I getting confused, given that there are various people claiming to be in the know talking about ex-LNER sets coming across etc? Could it be that all of the ex-EMT HSTs go (i.e. all of the ex-GC and all of the current full length ones) but some ex-LNER ones will be running up to the introduction of the 804s (given that the LNER ones are more complaint? Or have things changed again?

Modern Railways seem to think that all HST's are to be withdrawn from December 2020 (see my earlier post).
 

Helvellyn

Established Member
Joined
28 Aug 2009
Messages
1,995
So reviewing the EMR HST diagrams (NL081-NL088) on the 125 group website you can see these sets are hardly overworked. Add in the tightening up of diagrams and I think things will be okay with a mix of 5-car/10-car sets. Heck, even some of the current peak workings (both a.m. and p.m.) that use HSTs and call at Wellingborough have plenty of seats left (e.g. 08:05 off Wellingborough a.m. or 18:35 off St Pancras in an evening).
  • NL081 - one return STP-NOT trip a.m. and one single STP-NOT trip p.m.
  • NL082 - one single SHF-STP trip a.m. and one single STP-DBY (via NOT) trip p.m.
  • NL083 - one single LDS-STP trip plus one return STP-NOT trip a.m. and one return STP-NOT trip plus one single STP-LDS trip p.m.
  • NL084 - one single NOT-STP trip plus one return STP-NOT trip a.m. and one return STP-NOT trip plus one single STP-LDS trip p.m.
  • NL085 - one single NOT-STP trip a.m. and one return STP-NOT trip, one return STP-SHF trip and plus one single STP-DBY trip p.m.
  • NL086 - one single SHF-STP trip a.m. and one single STP-DBY trip p.m.
  • NL087 - one single LDS-STP trip plus one return STP-NOT trip a.m. and one return STP-NOT trip plus one single STP-LDS trip p.m.
  • NL088 - one single SHF-STP trip a.m. and two return STP-NOT trips p.m.
So eight sets currently make 36 single trips up and down the MML in a day. Given some of the those peak ones will run as 2x804 units a number will then split and run as 1x804 unit in the off peak, or head to Cricklewood in the off-peak for servicing. Plus some services will only need a 1x804 unit, e.g. the first trip of NL081 is 1D07 07:04 STP-NOT. Having used that one weekday you could count the number of people in First Class on one hand and Standard was not even half full.

What I would hope is that if EMR sees more growth than expected in the next couple of years they have some options to add to their 804 order as an add-on build that could be delivered in 2023/24. But I think sufficient peak services will run as 10-car units, and off-peak will be a mix of 5-car and 10-car, with yield management being used to put people on the 10-car services as required (or the electric services for passengers travelling from Kettering to London on Advance fares).

I know people look at the West Coast and see 9-car/11-car Pendolinos everywhere, but it's unrealistic to expect four trains an hour between London and Nottingham/Sheffield to be 10-car all day every day - many will be carrying fresh air. Some have said just sell super cheap Advance Fares to fill the seats, but as airlines will tell you bums on seats to give a full plane does not equate to profit if you have trashed your yield to do so.
 
Last edited:

hooverboy

On Moderation
Joined
12 Oct 2017
Messages
1,372
Some Skegness diagrams used to be 5 cars, and in the winter the first out and back from Nottingham is usually booked for 6 cars for the Butlins chuck out. The major issue with Skegness isn't just bums on seats however, luggage is a major problem, on a pair of 156s you can stack both sides of the parcels van, overhead racks, and still not fit it all in!
back in the 70's/80's summertimes it was typically a 6 car dmu formation,with some loco hauled summer specials.
the good thing about the old fashioned dmu's is they had a guard/brake section which was useful for storing luggage,bikes,parcels etc etc.

maybe EMR should consider doing a sort of scotrail hybrid with their 153's and converting a section of them back to "brake" status.
It would come in handy on the holiday routes.Especially with PRM, that could be quite beneficial for those with mobility scooters etc.
 

222001

Member
Joined
1 Sep 2006
Messages
716
Location
Chesterfield
So a minimum of 35 units required without any strengthening, peak hour extras, or summer Skegness services. Assuming 9 diagrams from 11 for the 3 car sets and 29 from 33 for the 2 car sets there doesn't seem to be a lot of slack in the fleet.

Happy to be corrected on matters though.

All sounds about right to me. There should be enough for around 3 double sets if that's the case, which is pretty naff.
 

DDB

Member
Joined
11 Sep 2011
Messages
473
It will depend when you measure it from. Some services are only a single 153 at the moment. They will have a massive increase in capacity when they go to 156 or 158 operation. There may be a very slight drop again depending on seating layout when they go over to 170 but still a massive increase from now.
I think we may all be trying to read too much into the limited published information as they are announcing/consulting on the London services at the moment. However speculation is why we are here so I have a number of questions.
How many regional services currently operate as more than two cars? I'm not counting Liverpool to Nottingham as that is being segregated off.
What peak extras are there? I know there is a ~5:55pm Derby to Nottingham but that route is getting double the number of services so the peak extra will effectively be part of the standard service.
Given that HSTs are currently used to boost capacity on the weekends to Skegness I would guess that the new intercity trains will be pressed into simular service?
 

Helvellyn

Established Member
Joined
28 Aug 2009
Messages
1,995
Given that HSTs are currently used to boost capacity on the weekends to Skegness I would guess that the new intercity trains will be pressed into simular service?
But at least they have the two power cars and the TGS they can pile a load of luggage in, plus three decent luggage stacks per coach. With LNER announcing last week that they are going to remove some of the windowless seats on their Azumas to fit more luggage racks it will be interesting to see how much luggage space the 804s have. Plus, a 10-car 804 to Skegness might have to be non-stop to Skegness. Dealing with SDO at Boston and Sleaford could be interesting given it would be a seasonal Saturday service and getting people used to being in the right part will be interesting.
 

cactustwirly

Established Member
Joined
10 Apr 2013
Messages
7,447
Location
UK
But at least they have the two power cars and the TGS they can pile a load of luggage in, plus three decent luggage stacks per coach. With LNER announcing last week that they are going to remove some of the windowless seats on their Azumas to fit more luggage racks it will be interesting to see how much luggage space the 804s have. Plus, a 10-car 804 to Skegness might have to be non-stop to Skegness. Dealing with SDO at Boston and Sleaford could be interesting given it would be a seasonal Saturday service and getting people used to being in the right part will be interesting.

Who said anything about 804s to Skegness.
The trains will be designed for the London services, because that's where they will be operating for the vast majority of the time, even of they do make it to Skegness. I suspect they'll have a similar seating layout to the GWR 800s actually, but with a much smaller kitchen area.
 
Status
Not open for further replies.

Top