LNER Class 91/Mk4 service status/withdrawals/2021 refurbishment

[DanNCL]

Ok a cut in real terms but the end result is LNER will have to find around 10% savings.

@Goldfish62 has pointed out there’s more detail on the is Modern Railways

The end result is the DFT will have to find around 10% savings. It's up to the DFT where those savings come from, it doesn't have to be the same percentage from each TOC and indeed if they can fill the shortfall they could allow some TOCs, the more sustainable ones financially such as LNER, not to make any savings if it's offset by larger savings from other TOCs. The South East commuter TOCs must surely be in the firing line, especially SWR who are currently set to have a much larger fleet in a couple of years time than what they have now.

== Doublepost prevention - post automatically merged: 8 Dec 2022 ==

That is the same at any TOC which has cut fleet size - it’s made a fragile service difficult to deliver on a day to day base. However it appears this time the DfT budget is finite

Which is why they should be helping LNER to return to profitability again rather than forcing it to axe a chunk of it's fleet that both provides vital capacity (and in turn more revenue) and is popular with customers.

 

[HamworthyGoods]

The end result is the DFT will have to find around 10% savings. It's up to the DFT where those savings come from, it doesn't have to be the same percentage from each TOC and indeed if they can fill the shortfall they could allow some TOCs, the more sustainable ones financially such as LNER, not to make any savings if it's offset by larger savings from other TOCs. The South East commuter TOCs must surely be in the firing line, especially SWR who are currently set to have a much larger fleet in a couple of years time than what they have now.

== Doublepost prevention - post automatically merged: 8 Dec 2022 ==


Which is why they should be helping LNER to return to profitability again rather than forcing it to axe a chunk of it's fleet that both provides vital capacity (and in turn more revenue) and is popular with customers.

Unfortunately cost and revenue are not currently linked at DfT so the focus is on costs much to the frustration of many.

 

[Halish Railway]

Won't LNER be short of stock without a reduction of the timetable? or are we consigned to 5-car Leeds-Londons..

Do you think the DfT care as long as people get on the train? Less supply for seats means that you can charge more for advance purchase tickets a la CrossCountry.

What a shame it is that the third Newcastle train won’t run. The DfT/LNER must have made the calculation that adding an additional train won’t create any more demand and revenue so it is shelved for the foreseeable future.

 

[DanNCL]

Do you think the DfT care as long as people get on the train? Less supply for seats means that you can charge more for advance purchase tickets a la CrossCountry.

Except that's just it. Even 9 car trains leave people behind at times. Every one of those reduced to a 5 car diagram would effectively be 4 cars worth of passengers no longer travelling.

This isn't the same as some of the South East TOCs where 12 carriage trains are carrying fresh air.

 

[XCTurbostar]

Except that's just it. Even 9 car trains leave people behind at times. Every one of those reduced to a 5 car diagram would effectively be 4 cars worth of passengers no longer travelling.

This isn't the same as some of the South East TOCs where 12 carriage trains are carrying fresh air.

Exactly, the DfT has this completely wrong and they should be improving the passenger experience (through stock improvement) since this short attitude hurts the railway far more than any of these strikes.

 

[Halish Railway]

Except that's just it. Even 9 car trains leave people behind at times. Every one of those reduced to a 5 car diagram would effectively be 4 cars worth of passengers no longer travelling.

This isn't the same as some of the South East TOCs where 12 carriage trains are carrying fresh air.

Exactly, LNER services to Edinburgh are constantly busy with the longest possible train length, so the only way that overcrowding can be eased is by operating more services. But a train that is 100% loaded is the DfT and HMTs’ dream.

 

[HamworthyGoods]

Except that's just it. Even 9 car trains leave people behind at times. Every one of those reduced to a 5 car diagram would effectively be 4 cars worth of passengers no longer travelling.

This isn't the same as some of the South East TOCs where 12 carriage trains are carrying fresh air.

There’s very few 12 car trains in the South East carrying fresh hair. Most of those have been culled. @TT-ONR-NRN has made the valid point they’ve been cut that far if a train is 8v12 we’re now leaving people behind especially on Tues to Thurs.

LNER is back to a full pre covid timetable. On London and Southeast most routes have lost 25-50% of former capacity.

Bluntly the industry has already made itself quite lean, and now is being asked to cut further.

 

[yorksrob]

The squatter "government"s perfidy becomes clearer with every passing day.

== Doublepost prevention - post automatically merged: 8 Dec 2022 ==

LNER is back to a full pre covid timetable.

Not for long, when they start slashing the fleet.

 

[HamworthyGoods]

The squatter "government"s perfidy becomes clearer with every passing day.

Realistically no government regardless of colour is going to give the railway a money tree. Less than 10% of the country use the railways, it’s not a vote winner.

 

[yorksrob]

Realistically no government regardless of colour is going to give the railway a money tree. Less than 10% of the country use the railways, it’s not a vote winner.

Where does this 10% figure keep cropping up from ? I don't trust it.

 

[43096]

Bluntly the industry has already made itself quite lean, and now is being asked to cut further.

The industry has spent the last ten years growing its cost base at least as fast as its revenue. That is unsustainable - normal businesses grow revenue faster than costs. It points to an industry that is incapable of managing its cost base and the chickens are now coming home to roost.

 

[HamworthyGoods]

Where does this 10% figure keep cropping up from ? I don't trust it.

The inflation figures are there for all to see. The budget not being expanded to cover this gap is in the autumn financial statement.

 

[yorksrob]

The inflation figures are there for all to see. The budget not being expanded to cover this gap is in the autumn financial statement.

I was referring to the "10% of people using the railway" figure, not inflation.

 

[gabrielhj07]

Not a very good decision if true. ECML is one of the few few routes in any danger of making money, and this would drive passengers away. Where cuts are needed, they should be made to obvious money-wasters.

 

[HamworthyGoods]

I was referring to the "10% of people using the railway" figure, not inflation.

That’s very much an industry figure that is used as a senior level including at RDG.

However when you think of the car journeys made across the UK and the many locations that don’t have access to nearby stations it’s not actually that surprising. As railway folk we can all be a bit skewed how important the railway is when there really are vast swathes who never use it.

 

[yorksrob]

That’s very much an industry figure that is used as a senior level including at RDG.

However when you think of the car journeys made across the UK and the many locations that don’t have access to nearby stations it’s not actually that surprising. As railway folk we can all be a bit skewed how important the railway is when there really are vast swathes who never use it.

I don't know whether thery're talking about more regular use, however I'm sure a much larger proportion use it, albeit less regularly.

 

[HamworthyGoods]

I don't know whether thery're talking about more regular use, however I'm sure a much larger proportion use it, albeit less regularly.

Trust me you’d be amazed what proportion of the uk population never goes near to the railway, it’s alien to people like ourselves but it really is a large figure.

 

[Fuzzytop]

I've long been a fan of the 225s, so I acknowledge my bias in saying I would be very sad to see them binned off.

I would add that the timing seems ludicrous, considering the money that has so recently been spent on the comprehensive repaint and overhaul of the Wi-Fi (both of which are still ongoing).

 

[Rhydgaled]

Did they need modifying for that or were the mark 4 rakes built with internal couplings to the exact same specification as those EMU couplers (so TSOEs could be also used as barrier vehicles for EMU moves)?

They’ve had Tightlock couplers within the Mark 4 sets from new. It’s only really coupler height that would be key - this is only for low speed moves within the Worksop site.

Thanks for trying to answer my question. Do I take it that one Tightlock is fully compatable with another Tightlock then (unlike Scharfenberg which appears to be more of a design principle than a standard given that Wikipedia lists a number of UK units as being equiped with Scharfenbergs, including the 175s, but if I recall correctly the 175s can multiple only with other 175s) and the only modification these DVTs needed to be used as barrier vehicles for EMUs was to change the coupler height?

Where has this 10% cut come from? Not seen anything announced?

The 'Railtalk' item (pages 6&7) in the December 2022 Modern Railways says this (it's a general piece, not specific to LNER):

Meanwhile, operators are putting together their annual business plans for the next financial year. There are widespread suggestions that swingeing cuts are being sought by DfT, with a figure of 10% commonly quoted.

I've long been a fan of the 225s, so I acknowledge my bias in saying I would be very sad to see them binned off.

I would add that the timing seems ludicrous, considering the money that has so recently been spent on the comprehensive repaint and overhaul of the Wi-Fi (both of which are still ongoing).

They are spending money on the repaint yes but the 225 group newsletter 'Livewire' (Issue 3) dated August 2022 says that LNER are "trying to minimise the need for more major exams" on the class 91s (the most recent G exam having been completed in March 2022 with 91119 and 91124 not having had a G exam since 2019). I'd much rather LNER kept them running until the percieved need to replace them with bi-modes had been eliminated by further electrification, but even without having to make the rumoured 10% cuts the fact is that LNER were planning on getting rid of them fairly soon anyway sadly.

After my experience on Sunday, I would echo the words of those who are raising concerns about capacity. Without having been able to commit to the trip in advance for various reasons, my mother and I attempted to book tickets for the Leeds-London leg of our trip while on-route to Leeds that morning. At first we requested standard class tickets but it did not seem to offer seat reservations, suggesting that all reservable seats in standard had already been booked. Rather than risk finding out, we booked first class instead meaning we had to pay an unexpectedly high fare for that leg of the trip. LNER clearly need more standard class capacity, not less. I often wonder why GNER converted the buffet from first to standard rather than one of the Pullman Open vehicles (which I assume would have made them 2.5 first and 6 standard coaches rather than the 3 first and 5.5 standard it is now) but I guess that wouldn't make all that big a difference.

 

[43096]

Thanks for trying to answer my question. Do I take it that one Tightlock is fully compatable with another Tightlock then (unlike Scharfenberg which appears to be more of a design principle than a standard given that Wikipedia lists a number of UK units as being equiped with Scharfenbergs, including the 175s, but if I recall correctly the 175s can multiple only with other 175s) and the only modification these DVTs needed to be used as barrier vehicles for EMUs was to change the coupler height?

There's a key difference between what we're talking here and the 175s. For the Worksop vehicles it is mechanical coupling only, whereas for the 175s you're referring to full multi-working. The electrical and air connections are just as important for multiple working as the physical coupler connection. For moving units around Worksop they only need the physical connection: it may well not even need an air connection. I've no definitive knowledge on the coupler height question, but would think they are very similar.

 

[DanNCL]

They are spending money on the repaint yes but the 225 group newsletter 'Livewire' (Issue 3) dated August 2022 says that LNER are "trying to minimise the need for more major exams" on the class 91s (the most recent G exam having been completed in March 2022 with 91119 and 91124 not having had a G exam since 2019). I'd much rather LNER kept them running until the percieved need to replace them with bi-modes had been eliminated by further electrification, but even without having to make the rumoured 10% cuts the fact is that LNER were planning on getting rid of them fairly soon anyway sadly.

After my experience on Sunday, I would echo the words of those who are raising concerns about capacity. Without having been able to commit to the trip in advance for various reasons, my mother and I attempted to book tickets for the Leeds-London leg of our trip while on-route to Leeds that morning. At first we requested standard class tickets but it did not seem to offer seat reservations, suggesting that all reservable seats in standard had already been booked. Rather than risk finding out, we booked first class instead meaning we had to pay an unexpectedly high fare for that leg of the trip. LNER clearly need more standard class capacity, not less. I often wonder why GNER converted the buffet from first to standard rather than one of the Pullman Open vehicles (which I assume would have made them 2.5 first and 6 standard coaches rather than the 3 first and 5.5 standard it is now) but I guess that wouldn't make all that big a difference.

Unless a business case can be made for extending the lease, it’ll be ‘Summer 2023’ they go off lease, most likely meaning a May withdrawal from service.

Given the busyness of LNER I’m sure if enough time and resources were put into it that the business case for a lease extension could be made. Whether the time, resources or willpower to make such a business case are available is another matter entirely.

Of course the DFT and LNER have already tried getting rid of the retained Mark 4 sets once, in early 2021, and we saw how that ended!

 

[800001]

Unless a business case can be made for extending the lease, it’ll be ‘Summer 2023’ they go off lease, most likely meaning a May withdrawal from service.

Given the busyness of LNER I’m sure if enough time and resources were put into it that the business case for a lease extension could be made. Whether the time, resources or willpower to make such a business case are available is another matter entirely.

Of course the DFT and LNER have already tried getting rid of the retained Mark 4 sets once, in early 2021, and we saw how that ended!

And at the moment the reliability of the Mk4s has massively improved are extremely reliable, thanks to a lot of hard work by the team at NL.
Be daft to get rid of them, but it all comes down to £s.

 

[yorksrob]

Unless a business case can be made for extending the lease, it’ll be ‘Summer 2023’ they go off lease, most likely meaning a May withdrawal from service.

Given the busyness of LNER I’m sure if enough time and resources were put into it that the business case for a lease extension could be made. Whether the time, resources or willpower to make such a business case are available is another matter entirely.

Of course the DFT and LNER have already tried getting rid of the retained Mark 4 sets once, in early 2021, and we saw how that ended!

I'm sure the DfT have a plan to do away with them, regardless of the effect on passenger services. They serve only their masters in the treasury.

 

[DanNCL]

And at the moment the reliability of the Mk4s has massively improved are extremely reliable, thanks to a lot of hard work by the team at NL.
Be daft to get rid of them, but it all comes down to £s.

Indeed. Usually stock reliability goes down with a move to a new depot, it’s been exactly the opposite with the Mark 4s. The 91s seem to be a little less temperamental than I remember them being too!

I'm sure the DfT have a plan to do away with them, regardless of the effect on passenger services. They serve only their masters in the treasury.

The DFT tried getting rid of them in 2021, the idea was to convince LNER they didn’t need the sets on the basis that they managed during the Kings Cross blockade without them. But of course that one ended with the 80xs being grounded en masse and the 91s making an almost immediate comeback!

It wouldn’t surprise me if Downing Street had intervened to save them last time. It turned out the then PM was a personal fan of loco hauled trains - he was spotted on many occasions during his time in office alighting from a Mark 4 set at Leeds from Kings Cross only to promptly board a Mark 5 set to Manchester!

 

[yorksrob]

Indeed. Usually stock reliability goes down with a move to a new depot, it’s been exactly the opposite with the Mark 4s. The 91s seem to be a little less temperamental than I remember them being too!


The DFT tried getting rid of them in 2021, the idea was to convince LNER they didn’t need the sets on the basis that they managed during the Kings Cross blockade without them. But of course that one ended with the 80xs being grounded en masse and the 91s making an almost immediate comeback!

It wouldn’t surprise me if Downing Street had intervened to save them last time. It turned out the then PM was a personal fan of loco hauled trains - he was spotted on many occasions during his time in office alighting from a Mark 4 set at Leeds from Kings Cross only to promptly board a Mark 5 set to Manchester!

Yes, some people view that PM as the Devil incarnate, but he has his plus points !

 

[E27007]

Except that's just it. Even 9 car trains leave people behind at times. Every one of those reduced to a 5 car diagram would effectively be 4 cars worth of passengers no longer travelling.

This isn't the same as some of the South East TOCs where 12 carriage trains are carrying fresh air.

I make regular early morning trips trips London KX to Leeds Monday to Friday.
I aim to travel for the 0703 or 0733, regret to advise the passenger loadings are minimal, not empty, but not far off. the benefit for me "Peace and Quiet"
How many other LNER express long-distance services are operating well below economic ridership levels?,
If LNER are seeking financial savings, then surely there is scope to trim back those early morning timetables, eg from two services per hour to one.
By the same action, cull the 91 microi fleet and rely upon the Azumas for the reduced mileage and trains in service daily requirement

 

[DanNCL]

I make regular early morning trips trips London KX to Leeds Monday to Friday.
I aim to travel for the 0703 or 0733, regret to advise the passenger loadings are minimal, not empty, but not far off. the benefit for me "Peace and Quiet"
How many other LNER express long-distance services are operating well below economic ridership levels?,
If LNER are seeking financial savings, then surely there is scope to trim back those early morning timetables, eg from two services per hour to one.
By the same action, cull the 91 microi fleet and rely upon the Azumas for the reduced mileage and trains in service daily requirement

Very few services run with loadings like that, and most of those that do only do so for part of the journey. Taking the 06:22 Newcastle - Edinburgh as an example, it starts off virtually as a fresh air carrier, but gets busier at each stop, particularly at Berwick, Dunbar and to some extent even Reston, and by the time it leaves Dunbar most seats are occupied.

Indeed those two services you mention wouldn’t run like that if it wasn’t for LNER’s apparent incapability of offering anything remotely resembling an affordable advance far on services considered to be ‘Peak’ in or out of London.

In the specific case of the 07:03 and 07:33, they’re running in the opposite direction to the peak flow anyway. People mainly want to be travelling into London at that time of day not out of it.

Depot requirements also have to be considered. Of the depots that LNER use, Heaton is the only one that isn’t heavily limited by space. So the correct number of trains have to start and end the day in certain locations. Quiet services at the start and end of the day aren’t always the financial burden they may seem to be when the wider operational picture is looked at.

In any case axing some of the early and late services wouldn’t save any diagrams, the set would just have to come off depot into service later in the day when it’s busier. Cutting the timetable or even just shortening individual services to 5 car for much of the day from Kings Cross would see people left behind at stations like Peterborough.

 

[Bald Rick]

Many years ago I was a regular on the 0735 or 0800 from York to London. They were routinely full in both first and standard, often leading to standing on the 0735 after the Peterboro call. For a variety of reasons I have been able to catch the modern equivalents of these in recent weeks (0737 and 0802) and they have been less than half full.

Allowing for the different capacity a 9 car Azuma provides vs the MkIVs (about 60 fewer first class, 140 more in standard) I’d have a rough guess that each of these trains is missing about 100 first class and 150 standard passengers paying something close to full fare. Very roughly, that means each of these two trains is down around £35k per day in revenue, which allowing for historically lower travel on Fridays and in holiday periods will be a revenue reduction of around £5m-£6m pa for each train.

It doesn’t take many of these to start making a very big hole in revenue, as we have found. And it takes an awful lot of advance fares for the leisure market at £30-£40 to fill it back up.

 

[gabrielhj07]

There’s no point cutting stock to remove quiet peak services if that would subtract from diagrams to run LNER’s significant off-peak demand.

 

[43096]

There’s no point cutting stock to remove quiet peak services if that would subtract from diagrams to run LNER’s significant off-peak demand.

That rather depends if the costs saved from stock cuts are more than revenue lost as a result. There is going to have to be a look at off-peak and advance fares: I wouldn’t be surprised if the 2024 fares change is rather “interesting”.