TheKnightWho
Established Member
6-8 class 90 + mk 4s would be very silly to keep around for the next 20 years or so until IEPs are replaced.
-
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!
Disposal Of IC225s
- Thread starter RichmondCommu
- Start date
- Status
6-8 class 90 + mk 4s would be very silly to keep around for the next 20 years or so until IEPs are replaced.
Sponsor Post - registered members do not see these adverts; click here to register, or click here to log in
R
RailUK Forums
Eng274
Member
- Joined
- 19 Aug 2010
- Messages
- 796
Where do you get this 'backlog' claim?
The work class 91s get at Doncaster is planned scheduled overhaul, no backlog clearing of any sort.
coppercapped
Established Member
This is a variant of history which has not appeared elsewhere. Do you have any references?
Failed Unit
Established Member
News to me as well,
My understanding of the East Coast electrification was 89s and mk3s in push pull. Then BR decided to go something better and go for the 91s and mk4s.
APT was dead by then, but I think West Coast never ever had the mk4 pencilled in - It was going for IC250. (which never got off the ground at all)
The mk3s from West Coast to be cascaded to other IC routes, again I don't recall more mk4s ever planned for ICCC for example.
D365
Veteran Member
- Joined
- 29 Jun 2012
- Messages
- 11,457
British Rail had been planning an add-on order of ten IC225s for the WCML (not sure exactly what their role was going to be) but due to the limited funding of the time priority went to the Networker programme instead.
cjmillsnun
Established Member
- Joined
- 13 Feb 2011
- Messages
- 3,254
Yup this was put forward when IC250 was cancelled.
The role was to do away with the Mk2s and 86s, move Mk3s over to cover the Mk2 routes and use 225s on the flagship services to Glasgow.
Privatisation ended that as did NSE's Networker programme (which was a larger requirement as had privatisation not intervened then Networkers would've replaced most of the Mk1 stock)
transmanche
Established Member
- Joined
- 27 Feb 2011
- Messages
- 6,018
I think it's far too early to speculate on any displacement of Pendolinos/cascading to other routes.
It's going to be ten years until HS2 comes online. We don't know what the franchise map will look like then, or what the regulatory scheme will look like. It's just as likely that there will be no Pendolino displacement from the WCML, as the WCML franchisee may just use them to offer a slower but cheaper alternative to HS2, use them to grow the market in travel between intermediate destinations or serve new routes branching off the WCML. Plus the oldest units will be 25 years old by then anyway...
SpacePhoenix
Established Member
- Joined
- 18 Mar 2014
- Messages
- 5,492
Would we have seen all Networkers on the SWML Weymouth-Waterloo had privatisation never happened?
I doubt NSE would have displaced it's flagship 442's in a hurry. Might have seen longer distance networkers take over the semi-fast and stopping services from the slammers a bit earlier though.
That would be my guess. We'd have seen the Mk1 Slammers being replaced by Networkers but the 442s wouldn't have been going anywhere.
I work in a role in the civil engineering that requires me to think ahead in terms of decades... Typically our highway schemes look 20 years beyond the opening date, I was working on rail projects a few years ago that were looking at timescales 60 years from now... So forgive me if I'm looking too far ahead
HS2 could go two ways, either a standalone huge franchise of HS services... But probably more likely in my opinion are that several franchises will have access and provide competition of at least two franchises across key routes, for example
- London-Birmingham
- London-Manchester
- London-Leeds
- London-Scotland
- Birmingham-WC
- Birmingham-EC
- Manchester-Glasgow
- Yorkshire-Edinburgh
- Perhaps others
Whilst the rolling stock may be similar in specification there are likely to be at least four different flavours of stock, two captive, two classic compatible (twin fleet in 2026, another twin fleet in 2033), offering premium, middle range and value services, probably each with a mix of at least two service provisions....
This leads me to...
There is no way anyone will be able to compete in the key destination provision I've outlined above, except perhaps to the north of HS2 track. The 390 fleet will be getting old by 2026, but still able to grow currently none electrified routes, like CrossCountry, East-West rail, perhaps even as suggested by Norhern Hub, even the Hope Valley once wires are added, leading into newer EMUs a decade later once the recasts caused by HS2 have settled down. The WCML south of Manchester and probably much of the MML and the ECML south of Doncaster will become more crammed with fast accelerating EMUs that are focused on dwell times at stations than relaxed express type dwell times, I'd imagine very few 125mph slots on these lines, with a focus on 100-110mph stoppers, semi-fasts and express units to maximise capacity of ageing Victorian era infrastructure.
zn1
Member
- Joined
- 3 Sep 2011
- Messages
- 435
a press run from manchester saw a 225 set travel down the West coast in to euston early 1990's, as a prelude of what never happened, shame really as 225 sets would have suited the route well
Townsend Hook
Member
Which at the time was the maximum speed of course!
gimmea50anyday
Established Member
Not immediately, no. The kent coast routes would have been done first as these were running the oldest trains - basically the 1957 stock (CEP, EPB, HAP etc) this is why some of the 365's were initially allocated to Ramsgate but all were transferred to Great Northern routes. The 1960's CIG, VEP and remaining thumpers would eventually be replaced afterwards with more networkers. There were two other variants in development at the time, the 457 and 157 classes (although the 159 actually appeared in place of the 157 on SWML duties the 157 was still planned)
Thats how I understand things were anyway....
Oka, I'll bite...
At the moment GA have got:
75mph 153s
75mph 156s
100mph 170s (two and three coach versions)
100mph 317s (four different subfleets)
100mph 321s (two subfleets)
100mph 360s
100mph 379s
110mph 90s
(plus whatever loco hauled services are currently in operation - I'm not up to speed with them)
If they want to replace them with two types of train then surely there are a lot of operational benefits - simplicity - maintenance - driver training etc.
Are those practical reasons, or frivolous ones?
The 156s and 170s will certainly have no shortage of TOCs wanting to take them on, the 379s will go to TOCs with similar Bombardier EMUs, the 321s are capable of running in three or four coach length, so more flexible than 319s.
Funny to have moved to a world where people are complaining about too many new trains being ordered, mind you...
I'm not against new trains - its just that GA seem to have plenty that aren't life expired and are pretty well suited to their routes.
True, they currently have a lot of train types, but they doubtless have a lot of expertise and knowledge about them, so I'm not convinced that the economies of scale are going to be so great.
Perhaps it's a question of priorities. You often imply yourself that some things would be nice, but aren't there other things we would rather spend limited resources on.
I've no doubt that GA is due some new trains but I don't think we should necessarily be spending on them like Imelda Marcos in a shoe shop when there are other worthy projects that need funding.
The plan was for 471 / 171 networkers rather than 457 / 157. 457 was the test bed for Networker development and 157 was a Regional Railways build that never happened.
The allocation of 365 to Kent Coast services allowed some early CEPs to be withdrawn / reduced to 3 coaches.
Is there a definitive publication which covers stock cascades back to the 1970s? It would be an interesting read. I know there are books that list all rolling stock over a long period but I'm not aware of a comprehensive source about direct cascades, introductions and withdrawals.
RobShipway
Established Member
- Joined
- 20 Sep 2009
- Messages
- 3,337
Class 157 sprinter units where going to be for Strathclyde Passenger Transport Executive diesel services, but this later changed to being class 170 units.
Not just SPTE, but for regional use as well.
LNW-GW Joint
Veteran Member
It was the other way round really.
The government offered a fixed sum for leasing new trains, and various bids were made by the BR sectors.
It came down to 10x225 sets for InterCity for the WCML, or 40x365 for NSE.
NSE (GN and SE) won because it delivered more vehicles and enabled the withdrawal of more old stock
It also kept ABB York going (the 225s would have come from GEC-Alsthom at Washwood Heath).
These were also the first (and last) passenger trains that BR leased rather than purchased.
ac6000cw
Established Member
Not passenger trains, but originally the Class 50 loco fleet was leased from English Electric - they carried plates which said "This Locomotive is the Property of English Electric Leasings Limited". BR eventually bought them.
The 157s didn't happen partly because Regional Railways couldn't (by that time) justify taking all the 158s that were on order. NSE had some money available and wanted to get out of expensive loco haulage on Waterloo-Exeter, so the surplus 158s got transferred from the RR budget to the NSE budget.
Last edited:
D365
Veteran Member
- Joined
- 29 Jun 2012
- Messages
- 11,457
43096
On Moderation
- Joined
- 23 Nov 2015
- Messages
- 15,290
IIRC it was more than 10 IC225 sets (15 or 16) or 41 more Networkers (what became Class 365).
As for your last point, it depends if you count Class 50s as passenger trains - they were ordered to haul passenger services!
gimmea50anyday
Established Member
yes, thats right, got my numbers mixed up. Back to the class I go! ??????
--- old post above --- --- new post below ---
I remember this, yes it was 10 sets. But why 41 365's?
I can only imagine a political motive here with privatisation looming and BREL being publically owned at the time (which became ABB, AdTranz and eventually Bombardier while York itself became Thrall Europa for EWS wagon contract) no doubt wanting to keep jobs in York and a new commuter belt fleet and therefore votes in an up and coming election.
Plus as mentioned the withdrawl of more older stock than with the 225 sets. Cynical political thinking here the rolling stock cascade caused by the 225's would have led to more mk2 on XC but a rolling stock cascade doesnt have the political "wow" that a new fleet brings!
--- old post above --- --- new post below ---
Edit:- BREL may have already been sold to ABB by this point so keeping the work going that way just adds to the political weighting
Last edited:
tbtc
Veteran Member
I'd have agreed with you ten years ago.
But then the 442s moved from the route that they were "designed for" (Waterloo - Weymouth) and onto a route that they really weren't suited to (Gatwick Express).
The narrow doored 442s never suited the airport route (given luggage requirements).
Out of interest, will the TPE units actually do 125mph?
I appreciate that the track north of York is 125mph but given the stops at Thirsk/ Northallerton (and Morpeth etc in future), will there be a requirement for TPE to reach line speed?
Agreed.
Whilst I could get nostalgic about Deltics (vague memories of them being withdrawn, a small class that carried name plates that it was easy for me to learn the names of), they served their purpose then they were rightly scrapped when something better came along.
The trouble is that we've had so few trains withdrawn since privatisation (other than accident victims, slam door EMUs and a few oddities) that we enthusiasts haven't had to deal with threads like this.
But with the plethora of new trains being ordered (and the cheaper running costs etc), we are going to have to get used to such threads over the next few years!
I'm sure that the 156, 170, 360s and 379s will find new homes no problem.
But the rest are getting pretty tired, with fewer natural homes.
But it looks like the economics mean that they can have a simpler fleet of brand new trains (with options for regenerative breaking, Wifi, plugs etc) cheaper than the cost of leasing 1980s units (many of which will need upgrading to modern accessibility standards and therefore be out of service).
That's not frivolous spending, as I see it.
Very interesting posts.
It's been a while, so I've forgotten about the "politics" of BR, how they juggled resources, robbed Peter to pay Paul, tried to keep everyone sweet (and sometimes took "new" stock from an area shortly after it had been introduced).
Privatisation at least means a bit more stability.
gimmea50anyday
Established Member
TPE's LHCS will be 100mph trains as are the current 185's. The IEP and CAF units will be 125mph. It seems to be the current standard for redeployability. Although the CAF units will probably go no faster than 110 on WCML as they dont tilt, The switch from the 350s to the CAF is the 5 car and extended length providing more capacity. IEP will of course have north of church fenton all the way to edinburgh to keep up with the 225's voyagers etc...
Last edited:
I agree that the TPE Mk5 LHCS will operate at 100mph due to Class 68 haulage, but aren't the carriages designed for 125mph?
They are, but to be fair, it's a tad easier making a carriage work at 125mph than a loco.
Coming back to the use of class 91s + Mk 4s in the future, in my opinion the most obvious choice would be for them to operate fast services on the MML to Sheffield and Nottingham that only make three intermediate stops. Although I guess the question then is what to do with the stopping services.
Out of interest, which accelerates faster (from 0 to 125mph) - a 91 + Mk4 rake or Intercity 125?
Out of interest, which accelerates faster (from 0 to 125mph) - a 91 + Mk4 rake or Intercity 125?
- Status