Should "new Northern" scrap 15x as a sweetener?

[Bletchleyite]

My view no - Northern have such a capacity issue that no 15x should be scrapped until they manage to sort that out, which won't be for a while yet.

Additional stock is needed, not replacements. Really the Pacers should have stayed with the toilets removed and other PRM work done, to be used coupled to other stock with toilets, but that became a stupid political pawn.

 

[yorksrob]

They should collect every 153 they can lay their hands on in order to strengthen the far too many 2 carriage services still on the network.

 

[Mogster]

Keep them, Northern needs more stock not less. A decent interior re-ferb and they’ll be fine.

Same goes for the 156s. Actually where are all the 156s now? They seem to have disappeared from Southport - Manchester completely.

 

[Bletchleyite]

They now seem the norm on the Cumbrian Coast, if that's any help? S&C seems to have a lot of 158s.

 

[Meerkat]

The 150s need to be electrified out of business (via cascade).
The other 15xs aren’t too bad are they?

 

[Kite159]

Keep them, Northern needs more stock not less. A decent interior re-ferb and they’ll be fine.

Same goes for the 156s. Actually where are all the 156s now? They seem to have disappeared from Southport - Manchester completely.

Probably in the North East running the Darlington - Saltburn services and other services alongside 158s

 

[Greybeard33]

They should collect every 153 they can lay their hands on in order to strengthen the far too many 2 carriage services still on the network.

Might it make sense for Northern to "part PRM" a number of 153s? Do the PIS and grab rail mods etc but not the toilet, in order to get an indefinite dispensation for them to be used coupled to a unit with an accessible toilet.

Maybe two or three could have the accessible toilet fitted too, like the TfW 153s, so that they could be used solo or coupled to a part compliant 153.

 

[Caaardiff]

They should collect every 153 they can lay their hands on in order to strengthen the far too many 2 carriage services still on the network.

TfW got there first on that one!

 

[Andyh82]

It’s basically just the 150s. Plans should be in place now to replace them in a few years time, as well as extra units for growth.

It’s notable how Northern had the vast majority of pacers, and now they are going, Northern have collected up the vast majority of the next worse trains, the 150s. So give it a few years and they are hardly any better off, still operating the worst oldest trains in the regions.

Remember on top of this, the other regional franchises like TfW, Merseyrail and Greater Anglia haven’t just moved one generation of stock along, but will be making major strides ahead. Scotrail and West Midlands are already way ahead.

 

[Gareth]

I wouldn't put 150s in the same category as Pacers. They're proper trains, even if somewhat tired.

I agree that, ideally, they should be made redundant via electrification. The CLC should be a prime candidate.

 

[js1000]

The 150s as well as the similar 319s are on their last legs. Once all Pacers are gone and the 195/331s are in service they will stick out like a sore thumb. But demand for diesel carriages in the north is so high I do not see it likely the 150s will be replaced until 2030 and the intention appeared to be that the new franchise in 2025/26 would provide a proposal to phase the Northern's ~80 150s out. Depending on if there is a dearth of DMUs and surplus of EMUs it may make more economic sense to electrify a couple of routes as the govt did with the Chat Moss line and the 319s.

 

[bramling]

It’s basically just the 150s. Plans should be in place now to replace them in a few years time, as well as extra units for growth.

It’s notable how Northern had the vast majority of pacers, and now they are going, Northern have collected up the vast majority of the next worse trains, the 150s. So give it a few years and they are hardly any better off, still operating the worst oldest trains in the regions.

Remember on top of this, the other regional franchises like TfW, Merseyrail and Greater Anglia haven’t just moved one generation of stock along, but will be making major strides ahead. Scotrail and West Midlands are already way ahead.

Simple answer, no.

Northern needs as many trains as it can get, and like it or not the 150s are part of that. With a decent refurbishment they’re perfectly fit for purpose in my view.

 

[cosmo]

There's not really anything wrong with them ("them" being 156/158, I can't speak for 150/153/155) that warrants their scrappage though, and like others have said, Northern kind of need all they can get right now.

 

[Bantamzen]

My view no - Northern have such a capacity issue that no 15x should be scrapped until they manage to sort that out, which won't be for a while yet.

Additional stock is needed, not replacements. Really the Pacers should have stayed with the toilets removed and other PRM work done, to be used coupled to other stock with toilets, but that became a stupid political pawn.

I agree, the 15x classes need to stay until they can be replaced by cascades of newer DMUs or replaced by brand new stock from the 195/6 production line. This of course does not mean that the network doesn't need even more units / carriages, because it really does. As a standard no diesel formation should be less than 3 car, with the median being at least 4.

 

[Neptune]

They now seem the norm on the Cumbrian Coast, if that's any help? S&C seems to have a lot of 158s.

The S&C has been 158 operated for over 10 years, probably nearer 15. There's still the odd diagram with a 153 attached to them. All I can say is thank goodness the 195's aren't planned for this route. They've ruined the Nottingham's already with 2 car 195's replacing perfectly able 158's. The passengers don't like the massive reduction in seating capacity and lack of decent luggage space for large items.

 

[yorksrob]

Might it make sense for Northern to "part PRM" a number of 153s? Do the PIS and grab rail mods etc but not the toilet, in order to get an indefinite dispensation for them to be used coupled to a unit with an accessible toilet.

Maybe two or three could have the accessible toilet fitted too, like the TfW 153s, so that they could be used solo or coupled to a part compliant 153.

I for one, think that would be a very good idea.

TfW got there first on that one!

The benefit of having more local control perhaps !

 

[yorksrob]

Simple answer, no.

Northern needs as many trains as it can get, and like it or not the 150s are part of that. With a decent refurbishment they’re perfectly fit for purpose in my view.

They can be. A major travesty of the current franchise is that they seem to have been left behind without one in favour of ripping the seating out of units that didn't need it.

The S&C has been 158 operated for over 10 years, probably nearer 15. There's still the odd diagram with a 153 attached to them. All I can say is thank goodness the 195's aren't planned for this route. They've ruined the Nottingham's already with 2 car 195's replacing perfectly able 158's. The passengers don't like the massive reduction in seating capacity and lack of decent luggage space for large items.

Indeed. Whoever thought replacing 158's with 2 carriage 195's on this route was sorely mistaken.

The lines in the West seem to have received 3-carriage 195's but for some reason the Hallam line gets a capacity reduction.

 

[Bletchleyite]

Might it make sense for Northern to "part PRM" a number of 153s? Do the PIS and grab rail mods etc but not the toilet, in order to get an indefinite dispensation for them to be used coupled to a unit with an accessible toilet.

Maybe two or three could have the accessible toilet fitted too, like the TfW 153s, so that they could be used solo or coupled to a part compliant 153.

Just remove the bog and replace it with more bike/luggage space and do the other stuff which would be cheaper. Compliant even on its own then, though I'd hope that would be avoided.

 

[Bletchleyite]

lack of decent luggage space for large items.

...for lazy people (and most of them are lazy, though some genuinely can't). The overheads are huge, even the largest trolley case will fit. Then you've got the standbacks which can be used. 150s have less space, and 158s aren't much better as the overheads are quite small.

2-car 195s aren't suitable for replacing anything other than 2-car 150s, though[1]. Ordering them was foolish.

[1] Maybe do that, and run 4 car 150/2 formations, which are more use than 4-car 195 formations due to being gangwayed.

 

[Greybeard33]

...for lazy people (and most of them are lazy, though some genuinely can't). The overheads are huge, even the largest trolley case will fit. Then you've got the standbacks which can be used. 150s have less space, and 158s aren't much better as the overheads are quite small.

2-car 195s aren't suitable for replacing anything other than 2-car 150s, though[1]. Ordering them was foolish.

[1] Maybe do that, and run 4 car 150/2 formations, which are more use than 4-car 195 formations due to being gangwayed.

Following the Pacer withdrawals, there are now plenty of 2-car 156s and 158s operating on routes where a 2-car 195 would provide adequate seating capacity. Examples: Cumbrian Coast, Carlisle to Newcastle, Settle & Carlisle.

If the 195/0s were swapped on to these routes, the 15x could be redeployed in 3- and 4-car formations, with inter-unit gangways, instead of using paired-up 195/0s on routes that need the extra capacity.

If there are too many 150/1s to operate them all on 2-car diagrams, some could be reformed into 3-car units, as per the Arriva franchise agreement, with some of the 150/2s split up to provide the centre cars.

IMO the aim should be to minimise the operation of the DMUs lacking end gangways (150/1s and 195s) in multiple formations.

 

[Bletchleyite]

Slow rural routes like those are a very poor use of 100mph 195s, other than that I could be convinced that if they could be cleared for the Cumbrian Coast, double sets could operate Manchester Airport to Barrow then 2 cars go forward to Carlisle.

They are best used on either premier expresses due to the high comfort interior, or on urban stopping services due to the high acceleration.

 

[mwmbwls]

They should collect every 153 they can lay their hands on in order to strengthen the far too many 2 carriage services still on the network.

The 153 would foul the platform at Wigan Wallgate and therefore could not be used on rosters that include Southport or Kirkby services.

 

[Bletchleyite]

I wouldn't put 150s in the same category as Pacers. They're proper trains, even if somewhat tired.

I agree that, ideally, they should be made redundant via electrification. The CLC should be a prime candidate.

Given Northern's capacity issues (and I do agree with wiring the CLC and using Class 323s on it due to their acceleration) I would suggest it is going to need a lot of electrification to achieve that. An end to 2-car working other than on the most rural lines should be a first priority before anything more is scrapped.

A double 150/2 is basically the same thing (but diesel) as a 319. I don't see why people seem to have them in such different brackets in terms of "tiredness" that a refurb can't fix.

 

[matacaster]

On a 153 at present. Legroom terrible. I am surprised these seats passed an h&s check at this pitch. If the seat back tables are in down position and there is an accident, unlucky passenger would be evicerated, break ribs or both.

Any h&s type care to comment?

 

[Greybeard33]

Slow rural routes like those are a very poor use of 100mph 195s, other than that I could be convinced that if they could be cleared for the Cumbrian Coast, double sets could operate Manchester Airport to Barrow then 2 cars go forward to Carlisle.

They are best used on either premier expresses due to the high comfort interior, or on urban stopping services due to the high acceleration.

Many 158s are currently used on slow routes that are a "poor use" of their 90mph capability.

The "high comfort interior" of a 195 is advantageous on a long, slow rural route as well as on a "premier express". And the high acceleration/quick hill climbing could cut journey times substantially on twisty, hilly rural stopping services as well as on urban stoppers.

A double 150/2 is basically the same thing (but diesel) as a 319. I don't see why people seem to have them in such different brackets in terms of "tiredness" that a refurb can't fix.

Excepting the 769 conversions, Northern's 319s should all be gone by next year once the WMT 323s arrive. The 319 refurbs may have refreshed the interior but have done nothing to improve the sluggish performance and dismal reliability of these 30 year old units.

 

[skyhigh]

150s should not be replaced until there is sufficient (reliable!) rolling stock available to replace them.

I've heard rumours that a proportion of Northern's 153s are to be retained and given a full PRM refurb - a sensible move in my opinion.

 

[yorksrob]

The 153 would foul the platform at Wigan Wallgate and therefore could not be used on rosters that include Southport or Kirkby services.

There are plenty of others !

 

[Neptune]

...for lazy people (and most of them are lazy, though some genuinely can't). The overheads are huge, even the largest trolley case will fit. Then you've got the standbacks which can be used. 150s have less space, and 158s aren't much better as the overheads are quite small.

I beg to differ. Many cases these days are huge and for safety reasons should not be put on overhead racks. Whilst some may fit, lifting a heavy weight above the seats either onto or off the rack is extremely dangerous.

Leeds - Nottingham is well used by Uni students (Leeds, Sheffield & Nottingham are all major student centres) with their associated large amounts of luggage they need each term.

I worked a Leeds to Nottingham service after Leeds fest last August and there were around 50 people going home from it on this service (most all the way to Nottingham) with all their associated luggage. The 2 car 158 with its end luggage racks coped marvellously with the largest cases and smaller bags and cases fitted perfectly overhead or between seat backs. Come next August this same service will be a 2 car 195, where do all these large cases go? No doubt in the doorways or disabled area or in the aisle as some people like to do. The stand backs on a 195 could only take one or two large cases safely as anymore in the area would need to be stacked precariously on top.

There also just aren’t enough seats on a 2 car. Leeds - Nottingham is a very well used service and now 2 car 195’s are filtering onto them there are now standing passengers for parts of the journey where previously there were not with the exception of short sections on the main peak services. I’ve worked the 1017 off Nottingham recently with dozens of standees between Chesterfield and Meadowhall. With a 158 this situation didn’t occur. There just aren’t enough seats, nobody should have to stand on an off peak Northern service.

Why would any company replace a train with less seats and luggage capacity than previously. The fact the train is new doesn’t cut it with those now standing where previously they sat.

Remember, these trains are essentially commuter trains fitted with tables to make them look like an express train.

 

[hexagon789]

My view no - Northern have such a capacity issue that no 15x should be scrapped until they manage to sort that out, which won't be for a while yet.

Additional stock is needed, not replacements. Really the Pacers should have stayed with the toilets removed and other PRM work done, to be used coupled to other stock with toilets, but that became a stupid political pawn.

Not until they've got a replacement in service, tried, tested and settled in and even then I wouldn't get rid of the 158s. The 150s, 153s and possibly even the 156s but I'd keep the 158s.

 

[Gareth]

A double 150/2 is basically the same thing (but diesel) as a 319. I don't see why people seem to have them in such different brackets in terms of "tiredness" that a refurb can't fix.

319s are pretty tired too. That said, being EMUs does help their case a little, at least.