New trains for East Midlands Franchise

43074 · 25 Jun 2019

samuelmorris said:
Or they might just not bother? I haven't actually seen 180s officially announced yet?

180s are definitely in the plan, they were confirmed in the staff presentation that has been widely referenced here and elsewhere. Whether or not it happens is another question, though.

RailUK Forums

43074 · 25 Jun 2019

700007 said:
The only way EMR could try and cushion the blow of inheriting the class 180s thanks to the actions of their questionable bidding team, is by trying to diagram them on light duties where they're only working two peak journeys a day or something like that and spend the rest of it sitting in the depot doing nothing. Even if they fail, it will only impact very few journeys a day.

Which is exactly what the 6 car HST sets are diagrammed to do at the moment, funnily enough. I suspect the 180s will be used more intensively from Dec 2020 though, when they and the 222s will have to cover all Nottingham/Sheffield services.

Mitchell Hurd · 25 Jun 2019

43074 said:
Which is exactly what the 6 car HST sets are diagrammed to do at the moment, funnily enough. I suspect they'll be used more intensively from Dec 2020 though, when they and the 222s will have to cover all Nottingham/Sheffield services.

I wouldn't get your hopes up - EMT tweeted to someone or 2 people that the buffered HST's will be replaced by stock displaced from Hull Trains.

The DfT is bonkers to let unreliable trains replace reliable trains. At one time, I'd be happy at 180's replacing HST's but considering the major issues with Hull Trains, the HST's should be kept going til new trains arrive!

hwl · 25 Jun 2019

43074 said:
Which is exactly what the 6 car HST sets are diagrammed to do at the moment, funnily enough. I suspect they'll be used more intensively from Dec 2020 though, when they and the 222s will have to cover all Nottingham/Sheffield services.

The IC diagramming isn't that tight is some places at the moment (especially stock rotating through a Corby turn) so some room to squeeze in addition to not having to use non EMUs for Corby might get close to elininating HST overall. Getting as many southern end EMT users on to the EMUs will be key.

hwl · 25 Jun 2019

Mitchell Hurd said:
I wouldn't get your hopes up - EMT tweeted to someone or 2 people that the buffered HST's will be replaced by stock displaced from Hull Trains.

The DfT is bonkers to let unreliable trains replace reliable trains. At one time, I'd be happy at 180's replacing HST's but considering the major issues with Hull Trains, the HST's should be kept going til new trains arrive!

I read the comment as 180s replacing existing 6 car diagrams which are very relaxed at the moment but everything will get squeezed in December 2020 so they have a short period of time to get reliability sorted.

43074 · 25 Jun 2019

Mitchell Hurd said:
I wouldn't get your hopes up - EMT tweeted to someone or 2 people that the buffered HST's will be replaced by stock displaced from Hull Trains.

The DfT is bonkers to let unreliable trains replace reliable trains. At one time, I'd be happy at 180's replacing HST's but considering the major issues with Hull Trains, the HST's should be kept going til new trains arrive!

Yes the 2+6 sets are the buffered ones, I was implying that initially the 180s will drop onto those diagrams and be used more intensively from Dec 2020. Plus the ex Grand Central sets are the least reliable in the fleet.

talltim · 25 Jun 2019

43074 said:
Yes the 2+6 sets are the buffered ones, I was implying that initially the 180s will drop onto those diagrams and be used more intensively from Dec 2020. Plus the ex Grand Central sets are the least reliable in the fleet.

Anyone spot a pattern?

700007 · 25 Jun 2019

43096 said:
So you know what Porterbrook are going to charge for future leases, do you?

I have never said that anywhere in any of my posts. It's a known fact that the leases Porterbrook have charged, particularly with the class 350/2 and 379 fleet are quite high hence they are being replaced by cheaper, new trains.

hexagon789 · 25 Jun 2019

talltim said:
Anyone spot a pattern?

EMT get Grand Central's rejects?

43074 · 25 Jun 2019

hwl said:
The IC diagramming isn't that tight is some places at the moment (especially stock rotating through a Corby turn) so some room to squeeze in addition to not having to use non EMUs for Corby might get close to elininating HST overall. Getting as many southern end EMT users on to the EMUs will be key.

Indeed, I reckon the standard hourly service on the MML post Corby electrification could be covered with, say, 18 circuits - 10 on Sheffield services with 2 hr journey times, and 8 on Nottingham services with 1 hr 35 journey times and 25 min turnarounds. They will have 31 units in the Intercity fleet, so seven or eight circuits could still operate as pairs and leave a maintenence buffer. The timetable will be more similar in the peak to the off peak than it is now, leading to the logical conclusion that replacing HSTs is dependent on the Dec 2020 recast, but completely achievable with the mixed 222 and 180 fleet.

hwl · 25 Jun 2019

700007 said:
I have never said that anywhere in any of my posts. It's a known fact that the leases Porterbrook have charged, particularly with the class 350/2 and 379 fleet are quite high hence they are being replaced by cheaper, new trains.

379s are Macquarie (ex Lloyds TSB) not Porterbrook.

cactustwirly · 25 Jun 2019

43074 said:
Which is exactly what the 6 car HST sets are diagrammed to do at the moment, funnily enough. I suspect they'll be used more intensively from Dec 2020 though, when they and the 222s will have to cover all Nottingham/Sheffield services.

No they won't, they're being binned next May once the 180s are in service.

700007 · 25 Jun 2019

hwl said:
379s are Macquarie (ex Lloyds TSB) not Porterbrook.

Oooooh, my bad! :oops:

Thank you for that.

43074 · 25 Jun 2019

cactustwirly said:
No they won't, they're being binned next May once the 180s are in service.

That's exactly what I said, if you'd bothered to read what I'd written :rolleyes:

I implied the 180s will replace them like for like.

Railperf · 25 Jun 2019

Unlesa reliability can be improved, nobody in their right mind would take a 180 over an HST at the moment. It would be absoloutely madness. Order some bi-modes NOW!!

hwl · 25 Jun 2019

43074 said:
Indeed, I reckon the standard hourly service on the MML post Corby electrification could be covered with, say, 18 circuits - 10 on Sheffield services with 2 hr journey times, and 8 on Nottingham services with 1 hr 35 journey times and 25 min turnarounds. They will have 31 units in the Intercity fleet, so seven or eight circuits could still operate as pairs and leave a maintenence buffer. The timetable will be more similar in the peak to the off peak than it is now, leading to the logical conclusion that replacing HSTs is dependent on the Dec 2020 recast, but completely achievable with the mixed 222 and 180 fleet.

Do-able but also dependant on getting the Kettering and further south users on to the EMUs and being able to time single units on to counter peak journeys in both peaks.

hwl · 25 Jun 2019

Railperf said:
... Order some bi-modes NOW!!

the 180s are to cover the gap till they arrive.

samuelmorris · 25 Jun 2019

4-SUB 4732 said:
One thing will stop them taking 379s:

There’s 30 of them. We’ve worked out independently they need no more than 18 units a day with all 6 cycles on the Corby route being 12 car. Why would you have 12 maintenance spares instead of 3?

Moreover, it’s been confirmed they’re having 360s. Will they be able to update the incumbent cabs for 110mph? Of course they will.

No reason for them to take all 30 - 30 would be too many to bolster any of the other AC Electrostar fleets, but an extra 9 could probably slot into GN, GWR or even c2c quite easily.

whhistle · 25 Jun 2019

Railperf said:
Order some bi-modes NOW!!

Yes, rush into making a decision when there are other pressing matters to deal with first.
Good idea!

43074 · 25 Jun 2019

hwl said:
Do-able but also dependant on getting the Kettering and further south users on to the EMUs and being able to time single units on to counter peak journeys in both peaks.

Easier said than done though given heavy flows from Nottingham/Derby to Leicester in the PM peak though, I suspect crowding will remain as bad if not worse than it is now until the new stock arrives.

Railperf said:
Unlesa reliability can be improved, nobody in their right mind would take a 180 over an HST at the moment. It would be absoloutely madness. Order some bi-modes NOW!!

Doesn't really help at this stage, ought to have been done two years ago to avoid this very situation in the first place.

LowLevel · 25 Jun 2019

The 6 car HSTs are far from reliable themselves I should point out.

hwl · 25 Jun 2019

samuelmorris said:
No reason for them to take all 30 - 30 would be too many to bolster any of the other AC Electrostar fleets, but an extra 9 could probably slot into GN, GWR or even c2c quite easily.

Easiest to slot 9 into would be GatEx. (DC conversion is simple).
The Vampire Kangaroo are by far the least experienced ROSCO and bit detached from reality.

Howvever Anglia are expected to be short of stock so reasonable to expect some to stay from 379/321.

ForTheLoveOf · 25 Jun 2019

hwl said:
The Vampire Kangaroo

Where's this name come from?

samuelmorris · 25 Jun 2019

ForTheLoveOf said:
Where's this name come from?

From this I guess - I certainly had to google it.
https://www.afr.com/street-talk/why...acquarie-the-vampire-kangaroo-20160914-grfobp

samuelmorris · 25 Jun 2019

hwl said:
Easiest to slot 9 into would be GatEx. (DC conversion is simple).
The Vampire Kangaroo are by far the least experienced ROSCO and bit detached from reality.

Howvever Anglia are expected to be short of stock so reasonable to expect some to stay from 379/321.

Not as simple as retaining them on AC routes for which they are already equipped. GX would also have no use for that many units, surely. As hinted, it's also possible some 379s may stick around on GA. In any case, that's speculation for another thread. If the 360/1 cab issue really is a genuine problem, I can just see them running at 100mph temporarily until something else is worked out.

hwl · 25 Jun 2019

samuelmorris said:
Not as simple as retaining them on AC routes for which they are already equipped. GX would also have no use for that many units, surely. As hinted, it's also possible some 379s may stick around on GA. In any case, that's speculation for another thread. If the 360/1 cab issue really is a genuine problem, I can just see them running at 100mph temporarily until something else is worked out.

They would as only ~50% of GatEx services are 12 car with the rest 8 car. 8-9 units needed to run all as 12 car. (Half the GatEx services are Victoria Brighton)

I don't think the cab problem is a real issues just a paperwork one.

samuelmorris · 25 Jun 2019

hwl said:
They would as only ~50% of GatEx services are 12 car with the rest 8 car. 8-9 units needed to run all as 12 car. (Half the GatEx services are Victoria Brighton)

I don't think the cab problem is a real issues just a paperwork one.

8-9 extra units sure, but not 30, was what I was getting at. I don't see what they'd do with them all. It'd be the same problem as trying to use them all for Corby, but probably worse.

hwl · 25 Jun 2019

samuelmorris said:
8-9 extra units sure, but not 30, was what I was getting at. I don't see what they'd do with them all. It'd be the same problem as trying to use them all for Corby, but probably worse.

Hence 21 to EMR and 9 to GX but that woul need to much joined up thinking.
Coastway as the SN 313 need replacing in the next few years... 20+ units needed
SN 455 replacement too.

4-SUB 4732 · 25 Jun 2019

samuelmorris said:
No reason for them to take all 30 - 30 would be too many to bolster any of the other AC Electrostar fleets, but an extra 9 could probably slot into GN, GWR or even c2c quite easily.

And this is why I'm glad Rail UK isn't where the ideas come from at Westminster. Why split a fleet of 30 units, which can have battery tech added, into a 21 and a 9? Terrible!

samuelmorris · 25 Jun 2019

4-SUB 4732 said:
And this is why I'm glad Rail UK isn't where the ideas come from at Westminster. Why split a fleet of 30 units, which can have battery tech added, into a 21 and a 9? Terrible!

Plenty of ideas that came from Westminster or the TOCs themselves have involved splitting or joining fleets before - look at basically all the Sprinter classes, 170s, 321s, 317s, 377s and so on. A split fleet is better than one sitting in storage gathering dust.

New trains for East Midlands Franchise

Established Member

RailUK Forums

Established Member

On Moderation

Established Member

Established Member

Established Member

Established Member

Established Member

Veteran Member

Established Member

Established Member

Established Member

Established Member

Established Member

Established Member

Established Member

Established Member

Established Member

On Moderation

Established Member

Established Member

Established Member

Established Member

Established Member

Established Member

Established Member

Established Member

Established Member

Established Member

Established Member