Electrification & Rolling Stock Cascade Impact Review

Rhydgaled · 21 Feb 2014

Chrisgr31 said:
Surely we need a position where the country has more units than demand? Because until we get the the train leasing companies can charge almost what they like? If they have more trains than were required then they would be required to offer competitive terms to lease them?

That's almost exactly what I say about the ROSCOs (rolling stock companies). There cannot be really effective competition between them for existing stock, unless there were far more units than demand. However, the latter suituation would be quite mad and almost certainly will not happen.

The only sensible solution, as I see it, is for all new rolling stock to be state-owned. The ROSCOs can then competitively bid for maintainance contracts etc.

RailUK Forums

Qwerty133 · 22 Feb 2014

158722 said:
Reading my notes again, I can only see I've suggested that 8 156s ex-SCR replace 17 EMT 153s, so not sure where you picked those numbers from, but either way, the exercise I was trying to run through was to see if there was sufficient like for like replacements available. That appears to be possible. I'm sure we are all agreed that almost all operators will be looking to increase their fleets, given ever increasing demand. Suggestions have been made that the 153s may well live on beyond the 2020 PRM deadline, providing a very useful way of meeting that demand into CP6.

must have misread the numbers somehow, but 8*2 is 16 which would see a reduction of 1 coach and 9 units in the fleet. 153s often run in single coach form, and never in fixed pairs so in real terms it would be a bigger decrease in stock levels and there are not enough local EMT currently run with 2 units, for 9 units to be saved while keeping the same timetable. I should probably also add that
they already seem to struggle to keep diagrammed lengths on a regular basis.

158722 · 22 Feb 2014

Qwerty133 said:
must have misread the numbers somehow, but 8*2 is 16 which would see a reduction of 1 coach and 9 units in the fleet. 153s often run in single coach form, and never in fixed pairs so in real terms it would be a bigger decrease in stock levels and there are not enough local EMT currently run with 2 units, for 9 units to be saved while keeping the same timetable. I should probably also add that
they already seem to struggle to keep diagrammed lengths on a regular basis.

I agree with your point, but if we are now expecting the 153s to live a bit longer, surely the case for them being made PRM compliant, especially in the case of EMT, will only stack up if they are reformed as 155 2-car units. This will reduce the number of trains available, compensated by the cascaded 156s from elsewhere.

Out of interest, is anyone able to assist in saying how many 153 diagrams still exist as single units around the various operators?
--- old post above --- --- new post below ---
Also interesting regarding comments about possible deployment of displaced class 387s from TSGN being used on Midland services to Corby. This seems to have been confirmed by DfT documents.

My original notes seem to suggest that the 387s will start being freed up from dec 2016, with Corby expected to be wired by dec 2017. A small fleet of 10 387s for Midland then, perhaps to be joined by extra units once displaced from TSGN and the wires go up to Nottingham and Sheffield. 387s for the semi-fast/stopping services with mk4 sets/91s on the fasts?

43074 · 22 Feb 2014

158722 said:
Out of interest, is anyone able to assist in saying how many 153 diagrams still exist as single units around the various operators?

IIRC EMT have 14 diagrams for 17 153s, of which 10 are single and 2 are ''hot spare'' at Nottingham Eastcroft.

GA have 4 diagrams for 5 trains, all booked single units.

Don't know about FGW or Northern.
--- old post above --- --- new post below ---
And London Midland don't use any of their units in pairs, but they do work with 170/5s and /6s.

IanXC · 22 Feb 2014

The only booked work I know of for a single Northern 153 is the Barton branch.

Rich McLean · 22 Feb 2014

IanXC said:
The only booked work I know of for a single Northern 153 is the Barton branch.

There was a Saturday Morning Doncaster - Lincoln run via Sheffield which is booked a Single 153. Not sure if that has changed in the last few years

158722 · 22 Feb 2014

43074 said:
IIRC EMT have 14 diagrams for 17 153s, of which 10 are single and 2 are ''hot spare'' at Nottingham Eastcroft.

GA have 4 diagrams for 5 trains, all booked single units.

Don't know about FGW or Northern.
--- old post above --- --- new post below ---
And London Midland don't use any of their units in pairs, but they do work with 170/5s and /6s.

Whilst I'll admit my knowledge of EMT is not huge, I'm surprised so many single units still - mostly out towards Lincoln? I was under the impression Matlock sees pairs of 153s and 156s.

I would suggest GA use single 153s out of necessity and would be better off with pairs or more 156s, plus a couple of extra units, given their well documented capacity issues.

As for LM, again the 153s are out of necessity with 3-car 170s being a much better solution. Again, it's all which is available, so got to live with it for now! Wiring out to Rugeley TV will surely see off the LM 150s and 153s, as mentioned in my original text, so 8 LM 153s to Northern, along with the 5 EA ones would allow 6 156s to move to EA, giving them extra capacity and units. This would assume the 153s get paired back up as PRM compliant 155s with Northern or indeed swap could be with EMT.

Qwerty133 · 22 Feb 2014

158722 said:
Also interesting regarding comments about possible deployment of displaced class 387s from TSGN being used on Midland services to Corby. This seems to have been confirmed by DfT documents.

My original notes seem to suggest that the 387s will start being freed up from dec 2016, with Corby expected to be wired by dec 2017. A small fleet of 10 387s for Midland then, perhaps to be joined by extra units once displaced from TSGN and the wires go up to Nottingham and Sheffield. 387s for the semi-fast/stopping services with mk4 sets/91s on the fasts?

I would hope not as the line is currently being increased to 125mph in a number of places so 387s would be a waste and 91s are actually slower than the meridians they are replacing. Just imagine the headlines in the press- 'millions wasted on line upgrade to 125mph' and 'years of disruption for older, slower trains'.
--- old post above --- --- new post below ---

158722 said:
Whilst I'll admit my knowledge of EMT is not huge, I'm surprised so many single units still - mostly out towards Lincoln? I was under the impression Matlock sees pairs of 153s and 156s.

I would suggest GA use single 153s out of necessity and would be better off with pairs or more 156s, plus a couple of extra units, given their well documented capacity issues.

As for LM, again the 153s are out of necessity with 3-car 170s being a much better solution. Again, it's all which is available, so got to live with it for now! Wiring out to Rugeley TV will surely see off the LM 150s and 153s, as mentioned in my original text, so 8 LM 153s to Northern, along with the 5 EA ones would allow 6 156s to move to EA, giving them extra capacity and units. This would assume the 153s get paired back up as PRM compliant 155s with Northern or indeed swap could be with EMT.

Matlock is supposed to be all 2 coaches, and is booked to have 2 156 diagrams and 1 2x153 diagram, however it is common for single 153s to be found on any of the diagrams and semi common for a 158 to be seen.

Rhydgaled · 22 Feb 2014

Qwerty133 said:
158722 said:

My original notes seem to suggest that the 387s will start being freed up from dec 2016, with Corby expected to be wired by dec 2017. A small fleet of 10 387s for Midland then, perhaps to be joined by extra units once displaced from TSGN and the wires go up to Nottingham and Sheffield. 387s for the semi-fast/stopping services with mk4 sets/91s on the fasts?

Click to expand...

I would hope not as the line is currently being increased to 125mph in a number of places so 387s would be a waste and 91s are actually slower than the meridians they are replacing. Just imagine the headlines in the press- 'millions wasted on line upgrade to 125mph' and 'years of disruption for older, slower trains'.

Where are the 125mph stretches of the MML though? Could it be that 387s to Corby would not actually pass over the 125mph sections?

As for class 91s, Meridians being faster is just what I've been fearing. Class 91s can do 125mph, quite possibly even 140mph, but I fear their acceleration won't be good enough for use on the MML. As I've said on other topics, but nobody else seems to care, it makes much more sense to leave the IC225s with East Coast and use IEPs on the MML than send the IC225s to the MML with more IEPs for East Coast.

MidlandMainlie · 22 Feb 2014

Rhydgaled said:
Where are the 125mph stretches of the MML though? Could it be that 387s to Corby would not actually pass over the 125mph sections?

As for class 91s, Meridians being faster is just what I've been fearing. Class 91s can do 125mph, quite possibly even 140mph, but I fear their acceleration won't be good enough for use on the MML. As I've said on other topics, but nobody else seems to care, it makes much more sense to leave the IC225s with East Coast and use IEPs on the MML than send the IC225s to the MML with more IEPs for East Coast.

Are 225 definitely going to the MML though? I was under the impression that new build electric multiple units was the preferred option for an electrified MML (possibly IEP or class 395 derivative or an "electric" Meridian type unit).

PHILIPE · 22 Feb 2014

43074 said:
IIRC EMT have 14 diagrams for 17 153s, of which 10 are single and 2 are ''hot spare'' at Nottingham Eastcroft.

GA have 4 diagrams for 5 trains, all booked single units.

Don't know about FGW or Northern.
--- old post above --- --- new post below ---
And London Midland don't use any of their units in pairs, but they do work with 170/5s and /6s.

FGW, I think, is 14 for 12 Diagrams. Mixture of working singly, strengthening or as a pair.
LM have a single working, i.e. Coventry to Nuneatn.

Edvid · 22 Feb 2014

Rhydgaled said:
Where are the 125mph stretches of the MML though? Could it be that 387s to Corby would not actually pass over the 125mph sections?

More than half of the stretch between Borehamwood and Sharnbrook (both locations are south of Kettering) is nominally signed for 120 or 125mph.

North of Kettering, there are also patches between Leicester and East Midlands Parkway.

Qwerty133 · 22 Feb 2014

Rhydgaled said:
Where are the 125mph stretches of the MML though? Could it be that 387s to Corby would not actually pass over the 125mph sections?

As for class 91s, Meridians being faster is just what I've been fearing. Class 91s can do 125mph, quite possibly even 140mph, but I fear their acceleration won't be good enough for use on the MML. As I've said on other topics, but nobody else seems to care, it makes much more sense to leave the IC225s with East Coast and use IEPs on the MML than send the IC225s to the MML with more IEPs for East Coast.

No idea where the 125mph stretches are, EMT didn't say in the press release and I haven't really been reading that thread. With the 91s a member of train staff said they weren't as fast to acelarate either on here or on twitter. From what I've read Mr Horne wants new 125mph intercity EMUs, and as a passenger this is one of few things I actually trust him with.

TEW · 23 Feb 2014

PHILIPE said:
FGW, I think, is 14 for 12 Diagrams. Mixture of working singly, strengthening or as a pair.
LM have a single working, i.e. Coventry to Nuneatn.

2 FGW diagrams that I can think of that are single units all day. The unit working Swindon-Melksham-Westbury services and the unit providing the extra Paignton-Newton Abbot shuttles.

Kettledrum · 23 Feb 2014

158722 said:
--- old post above --- --- new post below ---
Also interesting regarding comments about possible deployment of displaced class 387s from TSGN being used on Midland services to Corby. This seems to have been confirmed by DfT documents.

My original notes seem to suggest that the 387s will start being freed up from dec 2016, with Corby expected to be wired by dec 2017. A small fleet of 10 387s for Midland then, perhaps to be joined by extra units once displaced from TSGN and the wires go up to Nottingham and Sheffield. 387s for the semi-fast/stopping services with mk4 sets/91s on the fasts?

I see the logic for 387s for Corby as long as it doesn't slow down other services that do use the higher line speeds on the MML.

For what you describe as the "semi fasts", on the main MML, the idea would be seen a retrograde step. (OK they are newer trains but they're designed for regular stopping patterns with passengers making shorter journeys).

How are you going to sell the idea to all the inter city business travellers and all those MPs in marginal seats too! You'd be replacing fast and comfortable HSTs and Merideans with something slower and arguably less comfortable. Passengers from Leicester and further afield in particular would expect inter-city style.

One way it could work is if you did it "Chiltern style" with refurbishments to "clubman" spec (comfortable seats with lots of tables) or the silver trains or similar.

This might also be necessary for the MML to compete with HS2, in the same way that Chiltern trains have to compete with the faster virgin route.

HSTEd · 23 Feb 2014

But we don't really want things to 'compete' with the MML.
The public purse is not well served by such things.

Rich McLean · 23 Feb 2014

TEW said:
2 FGW diagrams that I can think of that are single units all day. The unit working Swindon-Melksham-Westbury services and the unit providing the extra Paignton-Newton Abbot shuttles.

Plus the Looe and Newquay diagrams off season

PHILIPE · 23 Feb 2014

Plus 16 05 Exeter StD. to Plymouth and 17 45 return.

158722 · 23 Feb 2014

Kettledrum said:
I see the logic for 387s for Corby as long as it doesn't slow down other services that do use the higher line speeds on the MML.

For what you describe as the "semi fasts", on the main MML, the idea would be seen a retrograde step. (OK they are newer trains but they're designed for regular stopping patterns with passengers making shorter journeys).

How are you going to sell the idea to all the inter city business travellers and all those MPs in marginal seats too! You'd be replacing fast and comfortable HSTs and Merideans with something slower and arguably less comfortable. Passengers from Leicester and further afield in particular would expect inter-city style.

One way it could work is if you did it "Chiltern style" with refurbishments to "clubman" spec (comfortable seats with lots of tables) or the silver trains or similar.

This might also be necessary for the MML to compete with HS2, in the same way that Chiltern trains have to compete with the faster virgin route.

I agree with your observations, but there has been a general 'dumbing down' for lack of a better phrase of nominally InterCity services all over the country, so why expect the MML to be any different. Take the 185/350s on the Manchester- Scotland services, for example, which were generally loco hauled Mk2 stock a decade or so ago. The aspiration has been quoted for extra trains, Derby getting 5 TPH for example, so why not 3 TPH fast with IC stock (mk4s for example) serving Nottingham, Sheffield with 2 TPH semi fasts in between using the 350s?

Rich McLean · 23 Feb 2014

PHILIPE said:
Plus 16 05 Exeter StD. to Plymouth and 17 45 return.

That is not a single unit all day though, as it detaches from a service at Exeter to form the 1605

TEW · 23 Feb 2014

Rich McLean said:
Plus the Looe and Newquay diagrams off season

Ah yes of course. In the Summer those two units are in effect reallocated to strengthen Cornish main line services to 3 carriages.

Rhydgaled · 23 Feb 2014

MidlandMainlie said:
Are 225 definitely going to the MML though? I was under the impression that new build electric multiple units was the preferred option for an electrified MML (possibly IEP or class 395 derivative or an "electric" Meridian type unit).

IC225s to MML is just what others on this fourm have suggested, there's nothing official. If class 91s aren't able to keep to Meridian timings, I think that would makes pretty certain that they won't be going to the MML. That opens the question of what will happen to the class 91s.

Edvid said:
More than half of the stretch between Borehamwood and Sharnbrook (both locations are south of Kettering) is nominally signed for 120 or 125mph.

Ah, ok.

Qwerty133 said:
From what I've read Mr Horne wants new 125mph intercity EMUs, and as a passenger this is one of few things I actually trust him with.

I'm guessing 'Mr Horne' is somebody at EMT? New 125mph EMUs for the MML sounds sensible, but in my view scrapping the class 91s does not. The obvious solution, as I see it, is to give the MML the IEPs ordered to replace IC225s, and leave the IC225s with East Coast.

PHILIPE · 26 Feb 2014

Rich McLean said:
That is not a single unit all day though, as it detaches from a service at Exeter to form the 1605

I didn't say it was a single unit all day..

43074 · 27 Feb 2014

Rhydgaled said:
I'm guessing 'Mr Horne' is somebody at EMT? New 125mph EMUs for the MML sounds sensible, but in my view scrapping the class 91s does not. The obvious solution, as I see it, is to give the MML the IEPs ordered to replace IC225s, and leave the IC225s with East Coast.

David Horne is EMT's MD.

The general view at EMT is that 125mph EMUs are the preferred option, not only of their MD, but also a few other senior people: 91s would slow down stopping services because of their acceleration.

158722 · 27 Feb 2014

Comments on wnxx reporting an article in Modern Railways that the nine TPE 170s are to move to Chiltern from this spring. Seems to be a large increase in capacity for Chiltern and their forthcoming oxford services, perhaps at the expense of extra loco hauled sets. I did wonder if this would see Chiltern loose their 172s to LOROL, who seem to be desperately short of stock for GOBLIN services. TPE seem to be losers though, the 350/4s not bringing the hoped for increase in capacity, although they are getting a net gain of 22 vehicles.

YorkshireBear · 27 Feb 2014

158722 said:
Comments on wnxx reporting an article in Modern Railways that the nine TPE 170s are to move to Chiltern from this spring. Seems to be a large increase in capacity for Chiltern and their forthcoming oxford services, perhaps at the expense of extra loco hauled sets. I did wonder if this would see Chiltern loose their 172s to LOROL, who seem to be desperately short of stock for GOBLIN services. TPE seem to be losers though, the 350/4s not bringing the hoped for increase in capacity, although they are getting a net gain of 22 vehicles.

Very Very surprised by that. I sense that maybe industry rumor rather than any actual truth... A TPE staff member has previously been on here stating that the planned diagrams for the 170s are already in the timetables... It would also stop FTPE introducing their 5th service over the Pennines which has been planned for ages....

The Ham · 27 Feb 2014

YorkshireBear said:
Very Very surprised by that. I sense that maybe industry rumor rather than any actual truth... A TPE staff member has previously been on here stating that the planned diagrams for the 170s are already in the timetables... It would also stop FTPE introducing their 5th service over the Pennines which has been planned for ages....

I have a Question, would TPE be able to release more DMU's if they were able to have more EMU's (either because there are current services which run totally run under the wires or from new electrification in the next 3 to 18 months - assuming that they don't all go to Chiltern all at once as Evergreen 3 doesn't allow the Oxford services to start running until 2015)?

As if they could, then it maybe possible for the DfT to give them some more EMU's (thinking of the extra units which Southern has ordered and they should start be getting in 2015), which could solve the problem.

YorkshireBear · 27 Feb 2014

The Ham said:
I have a Question, would TPE be able to release more DMU's if they were able to have more EMU's (either because there are current services which run totally run under the wires or from new electrification in the next 3 to 18 months - assuming that they don't all go to Chiltern all at once as Evergreen 3 doesn't allow the Oxford services to start running until 2015)?

As if they could, then it maybe possible for the DfT to give them some more EMU's (thinking of the extra units which Southern has ordered and they should start be getting in 2015), which could solve the problem.

I think there is still the odd Manchester-Scotland diesel diagram. Therefore 2-3 more 350s would release 2 185s. Nothing significant though. Outside that there is nothing they could run until completion of the NW and TPE N electrification projects in 2016 and 2018/9 respectively. NW electrification is completed Dec 2016 i believe that is when they could release the Blackpool DMUs, and 2017 the Windemere DMUs then 2018 the TPE norther DMUs (excluding Hull for now). I see it likely that the 170s will leave TPE for the south at some point but not yet. Not for at least 3 years.

pemma · 27 Feb 2014

The Ham said:
I have a Question, would TPE be able to release more DMU's if they were able to have more EMU's (either because there are current services which run totally run under the wires or from new electrification in the next 3 to 18 months - assuming that they don't all go to Chiltern all at once as Evergreen 3 doesn't allow the Oxford services to start running until 2015)?

As if they could, then it maybe possible for the DfT to give them some more EMU's (thinking of the extra units which Southern has ordered and they should start be getting in 2015), which could solve the problem.

TPE will need all their DMUs (170s and 185s) until Manchester-York is fully electrified in 2018. December 2016 should see more DMUs released off Manchester-Preston services (when Deansgate to Leyland and Preston to Blackpool are electrified) but those will be needed to allow 6tph on North TPE for around 2 years, with the Ordsall Chord opening in 2016 2 years ahead of North TPE electrification.

LNW-GW Joint · 27 Feb 2014

The Ham said:
I have a Question, would TPE be able to release more DMU's if they were able to have more EMU's (either because there are current services which run totally run under the wires or from new electrification in the next 3 to 18 months - assuming that they don't all go to Chiltern all at once as Evergreen 3 doesn't allow the Oxford services to start running until 2015)?
As if they could, then it maybe possible for the DfT to give them some more EMU's (thinking of the extra units which Southern has ordered and they should start be getting in 2015), which could solve the problem.

The next TPE service to go electric will be Manchester Airport-Blackpool in Dec 2016.
They could run an electric service via Parkside from May 2016 if DfT/Rail North wanted them to (to the further fury of Boltonians).
NT will also be able to run Liverpool-Blackpool from then.
Not really enough scope to lose the 170s by May 2016.
The main culprits for running under the wires are VT/XC Voyagers.

Electrification & Rolling Stock Cascade Impact Review

Established Member

RailUK Forums

Established Member

Member

Established Member

Emeritus Moderator

Established Member

Member

Established Member

Established Member

Member

Veteran Member

Established Member

Established Member

Established Member

Member

Veteran Member

Established Member

Veteran Member

Member

Established Member

Established Member

Established Member

Veteran Member

Established Member

Member

Established Member

Established Member

Established Member

Veteran Member

Veteran Member