• 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!

TPE Mark 5A coaching stock progress

Status
Not open for further replies.

sjpowermac

Established Member
Joined
26 May 2018
Messages
1,989
The physical infrastructure work at York depot is complete and the stop boards have been removed. Whether the associated paperwork to allow full use of the new facilities has been completed is another matter. To summarise the changes, in addition to the fuel roads (1 & 2) being made longer with additional fuel/C.E.T. points for the longer trains, the two roads are now operated differently. There was access to the stabling sidings from both fuel roads previously, however those sidings can now only be accessed from no.2 road (furthest from the 'main line'), no.1 road (next to the main line) is 'in and out' - there is no access to the sidings. Exactly how things will pan out when the new trains start using it, I am not aware yet.

Scarborough depot is a "work in progress" I think is the best way of putting it.
Many thanks indeed for that. Interesting in particular to hear how the two roads at York are now operated differently.

Thank you too for the update about the Scarborough Depot.

I think I’m right in saying that in the current timetable the last train into Scarborough is one that starts at York, presumably to avoid the need for overnight servicing at Scarborough. I guess too that with the initial diagrams likely to be booked off Longsight, Scarborough probably isn’t a priority at this stage.
 
Last edited:
Sponsor Post - registered members do not see these adverts; click here to register, or click here to log in
R

RailUK Forums

keith1879

Member
Joined
1 Jun 2015
Messages
393
On 23 May 2016, three days after TPE announced the CAF order, Railway Gazette published a story that gave more detail on the planned date of introduction than TPE's own press release:


https://www.railwaygazette.com/news...ine-express-orders-emus-and-hauled-stock.html (my bolding)

It looks as though this information came from an official source within TPE.

Depending on which definition of the seasons you choose (solar, meteorological or astronomical), the end of spring 2018 was 1st May, 1st June or 21st June. But even using the latest, entry into service should have been no more than 13 months from the order date. If it now happens in September 2019, that will be more than 26 months from the order!

There is no attribution to a source in this article if you read it. It is entirely reasonable to judge TP by their failure to meet their own declared targets ....which they have done (ie failed). But to quote more aggressive targets which were published just three days later in a piece which appears to be a worked up report based on TP's own press release and then to attribute it to an official TP source (with nothing to back that up) smacks of desperation to over-egg the pudding. Anyway that's my four pennorth and I shall wait and see when the trains finally arrive (and if the wait was worth it).
 

J-P_L

Member
Joined
7 Sep 2017
Messages
203
Location
UK
Many thanks indeed for that. Interesting in particular to hear how the two roads at York are now operated differently.

Thank you too for the update about the Scarborough Depot.

I think I’m right in saying that in the current timetable the last train into Scarborough is one that starts at York, presumably to avoid the need for overnight servicing at Scarborough. I guess too that with the initial diagrams likely to be booked off Longsight, Scarborough probably isn’t a priority at this stage.

The two units that stable at Scarborough overnight during week come in on a 1T headcode... 1T51 and 1T53.

The diagram for 1T51 starts at Heaton and runs NCL/MBR services and forms 1P39 1917 MIA-YRK. While not advertised as a through train, it then forms 1T51 (2105) straight away and runs to SCA.

The unit for 1T53 starts at York and forms 1P06 0242 YRK-MIA, again runs NCL/MBR and then forms 1P41 (2019) MIA-YRK, it then shunts down Scarborough Bridge JCT and into P2 to form 1T53 (2245) YRK to SCA.
 

sjpowermac

Established Member
Joined
26 May 2018
Messages
1,989
The two units that stable at Scarborough overnight during week come in on a 1T headcode... 1T51 and 1T53.

The diagram for 1T51 starts at Heaton and runs NCL/MBR services and forms 1P39 1917 MIA-YRK. While not advertised as a through train, it then forms 1T51 (2105) straight away and runs to SCA.

The unit for 1T53 starts at York and forms 1P06 0242 YRK-MIA, again runs NCL/MBR and then forms 1P41 (2019) MIA-YRK, it then shunts down Scarborough Bridge JCT and into P2 to form 1T53 (2245) YRK to SCA.
Many thanks indeed for the correction. I knew about 1T51 but not that 1T53 was formed from 1P41 after a ‘rest’!

The 1P06 through 1T53 diagram certainly looks like an intensive one. I’ve heard that some of the Nova 3 diagrams will be over 900 miles a day, with annual mileages for the Class 68s of the order of 250,000 miles.

Many thanks again for the reply, greatly appreciated.
 

D6700

Member
Joined
13 Mar 2010
Messages
649
I’ve heard that some of the Nova 3 diagrams will be over 900 miles a day, with annual mileages for the Class 68s of the order of 250,000 miles.

Once everything is in place, I suspect Nova 3 diagram lengths will be a little shorter than originally envisaged, due to the cessation of stupidly short turnarounds - which was one of the reasons for the May 2018 catastrophe. I reckon the average diagram will be around 750 miles per day.

I foresee some very long 397 diagrams on the WCML, whilst I can imagine some 802 diagrams will cover huge mileages - especially if they end up on any of the overnights and remain in traffic through the day on ECML Edinburgh circuits!
 

nicolaboo

Member
Joined
19 Jun 2018
Messages
285
There doesn't appear to have been any training for almost any part of the route that the 68s will be diagrammed for when in service. Barring the York - Scar section.

Now this might be putting the cart before the horse a bit, but when the route training is done and they are creeping into service, won't they also be having to be trained on the mainly non-TPE routes that will be used during the TRU blockades that supposedly will commence early next year? Given that full Liv-Scar Loco-hauled service isn't expected until November at the very earliest and Man Air to Midd hasn't even been looked at (seemingly).

Calder Valley, Bradford Interchange, Normanton are all likely candidates for diversions and not normally used by TransPennine.
Does anyone think that this is being looked at yet so as to be ready for the expected possessions, or will TPE be concentrating solely on the (busy and backlogged) job in hand and awaiting the potential results of the TRU and the disruption thus likely to be caused.
 

_toommm_

Established Member
Joined
8 Jul 2017
Messages
5,843
Location
Yorkshire
There doesn't appear to have been any training for almost any part of the route that the 68s will be diagrammed for when in service. Barring the York - Scar section.

Now this might be putting the cart before the horse a bit, but when the route training is done and they are creeping into service, won't they also be having to be trained on the mainly non-TPE routes that will be used during the TRU blockades that supposedly will commence early next year? Given that full Liv-Scar Loco-hauled service isn't expected until November at the very earliest and Man Air to Midd hasn't even been looked at (seemingly).

Calder Valley, Bradford Interchange, Normanton are all likely candidates for diversions and not normally used by TransPennine.
Does anyone think that this is being looked at yet so as to be ready for the expected possessions, or will TPE be concentrating solely on the (busy and backlogged) job in hand and awaiting the potential results of the TRU and the disruption thus likely to be caused.

Calder Valley is used nightly for the very purpose of route retention, Normanton was used a few weekends ago when the route through Dewsbury was shut (although this came to an end rapidly when a GC 180 decided to set on fire). I'm sure Normanton is used at night aswell for the very same purpose as the Calder Valley
 

superkev

Established Member
Joined
1 Mar 2015
Messages
2,682
Location
west yorkshire
With only a handful of sets accepted after almost a year I wonder if a time will come when TP will reject them as not fit for purpose and order more 800s.
K
 

The_Train

Established Member
Joined
2 Jun 2018
Messages
4,313
With only a handful of sets accepted after almost a year I wonder if a time will come when TP will reject them as not fit for purpose and order more 800s.
K

How does a delay of the sets being handed over make them unfit for purpose? And more importantly how long would it take to get extra 800s if they placed an order today?
 

superkev

Established Member
Joined
1 Mar 2015
Messages
2,682
Location
west yorkshire
How does a delay of the sets being handed over make them unfit for purpose? And more importantly how long would it take to get extra 800s if they placed an order today?
If they repeatedly fail there running fault free mileage test there must come a point when it's no point on continuing. Perhaps they could struggle on with the 800s and 185s which no one seems to want or even some surplus MK4s.
How many have TP actually accepted. I was told a couple of weeks ago just one as well as they would hae preferred an all 800 fleet but went to CAF for a promised quick delivery.
K
 

J-P_L

Member
Joined
7 Sep 2017
Messages
203
Location
UK
Calder Valley is used nightly for the very purpose of route retention, Normanton was used a few weekends ago when the route through Dewsbury was shut (although this came to an end rapidly when a GC 180 decided to set on fire). I'm sure Normanton is used at night aswell for the very same purpose as the Calder Valley

Calder Valley, Normanton and Methley are all booked routes on early morning/late night trains for route retention purposes.
 

CosherB

Established Member
Joined
23 Feb 2007
Messages
3,041
Location
Northwich
If they repeatedly fail there running fault free mileage test there must come a point when it's no point on continuing. Perhaps they could struggle on with the 800s and 185s which no one seems to want or even some surplus MK4s.
How many have TP actually accepted. I was told a couple of weeks ago just one as well as they would hae preferred an all 800 fleet but went to CAF for a promised quick delivery.
K
I'm sure TPE would have preferred one IET fleet as part of their modernisation programme. However, contracts have been signed and TPE can't just walk away from any of the CAF stock - and Beacon Rail would have something to say about that!
 

Ben Bow

Member
Joined
20 Sep 2018
Messages
342
I'm sure TPE would have preferred one IET fleet as part of their modernisation programme. However, contracts have been signed and TPE can't just walk away from any of the CAF stock - and Beacon Rail would have something to say about that!

Of course they can - if CAF fail to deliver within the contracted timescale. And with the worrying problems being encountered on the Caledonian Sleeper I expect that TPE are being extremely cautious about accepting more sets, and I don't blame them in the slightest.
 

dgl

Established Member
Joined
5 Oct 2014
Messages
2,390
It's looking like it's more Ansaldocaf than just CAF at the moment
 

CosherB

Established Member
Joined
23 Feb 2007
Messages
3,041
Location
Northwich
Of course they can - if CAF fail to deliver within the contracted timescale. And with the worrying problems being encountered on the Caledonian Sleeper I expect that TPE are being extremely cautious about accepting more sets, and I don't blame them in the slightest.

Both Beacon & TPE can walk away from this and may well do if CAF continue to fail to deliver.

Can you both confirm this contractually possible?
 

hooverboy

On Moderation
Joined
12 Oct 2017
Messages
1,372
What do you mean "contractually"? CAF have delivered faulty goods that can't even reach the benchmark of acceptance and if it winds up in court, the outcome will most likely not be in their favour.
depends on the legalities of the contract and what was specified in the acceptance test process.

if there is a clause in the order/test procedure that specifies how parts have a maximum wear specification under emergency conditions, then CAF are obliged to repair/replace at their expense,with parts that do meet the conditions.

as the units are only just in service they should be covered under a warranty period already.

As far as liability for lost hours in service is concerned, that's a bit of a grey area.
The ToC in question is certainly within their rights to start legal proceedings to recover costs.
whether the liability falls on the ROSCO or the manufacturer will be the subject of some quite fruity discussions between lawyers.

I would suspect a deal would be done out of court,whereby CAF will remedy the faults and throw in a few extra units to the ROSCO as compensation(type to be determined by ROSCO as the best revenue generating option), and the TOC gets a kickback from the ROSCO.

as an aside, I know a while back we were looking for nicknames for the 19x stock.
lets hope CAF do not get the reputation of:

Cheap
As
F***
 
Last edited:

CosherB

Established Member
Joined
23 Feb 2007
Messages
3,041
Location
Northwich
What do you mean "contractually"? CAF have delivered faulty goods that can't even reach the benchmark of acceptance and if it winds up in court, the outcome will most likely not be in their favour.
I'm not privy to the contractual arrangements between CAF, Beacon Rail and First Group so I can't comment. I think we are a long way from 'unfit for purpose' and a legal bun fight - and in any case, what is the alternative to the Mk5s for TPE anyway?
 

superkev

Established Member
Joined
1 Mar 2015
Messages
2,682
Location
west yorkshire
Anyone know how many (if any) of TPs 3 classes of new trains have actually been accepted. Not really for this thread but I hear WM want the 350/2 in Sept so the 397s need to work soon.
K
 

superkev

Established Member
Joined
1 Mar 2015
Messages
2,682
Location
west yorkshire
I'm not privy to the contractual arrangements between CAF, Beacon Rail and First Group so I can't comment. I think we are a long way from 'unfit for purpose' and a legal bun fight - and in any case, what is the alternative to the Mk5s for TPE anyway?
As I said above once the 800s are working they may make do with the 185s which no one seems to want or how about the Mk4s.
K
 

EE Andy b1

Established Member
Joined
12 Dec 2013
Messages
1,212
Location
CLC
as the units are only just in service they should be covered under a warranty period already.

There not in service, i think that's the point!

2 sets accepted by TPE i believe or might be 3 now but not much TPE training going on. July not a chance.

The name given to CAF "Cheap As F***" seems to be about right in all the rolling stock that they are building for the UK market. Is that down to them or the TOCs?
 

CosherB

Established Member
Joined
23 Feb 2007
Messages
3,041
Location
Northwich
Anyone know how many (if any) of TPs 3 classes of new trains have actually been accepted. Not really for this thread but I hear WM want the 350/2 in Sept so the 397s need to work soon.
K
LNWR already have the 350/2s and will be keeping them for some time to come, which they will eventually release and replace with TPE 350/4s and the new 730 Aventras.
 

Bletchleyite

Veteran Member
Joined
20 Oct 2014
Messages
97,532
Location
"Marston Vale mafia"
It's looking like it's more Ansaldocaf than just CAF at the moment

It is, isn't it? Ironically some of the 80x are built there and they seem to be doing reasonably well.

If Hitachi will supply a few more 80x sets, I wouldn't blame TPE if they did walk away. The benefits of having only two types of stock (80x and 185) would be significant.
 
Status
Not open for further replies.

Top