New trains for East Midlands Franchise

InTheEastMids · 30 Jul 2019

According to the 125 group there are 9 HST diagrams on EMT (7 2+8, 2 2+6) and a post on here from 5 years ago says 23 Meridian, giving 32 in total. Remember that this 2+6 HST diagrams only came about because of the Thameslink timetable

The informed sources on this forum say that 3-4 meridian diagrams get released by Corby 360s, which means EMR will have 33 trains for 28-29 diagrams in BAU. However, it's been said here that EMT HST utilisation is quite low, so with tighter turnarounds and fleet commonality, maybe the same number of services will only need about 26-27 units. Assuming 30-31/33 availability, this allows a bit of doubling up?

Might have to get a bit clever with the timetabling too. Maybe some services need less capacity. Eg the 1904 from STP (2+8 HST) is usually full and standing on departure but pretty empty by Leicester as everyone gets off at Bedford and Wellingborough, so that could end up a 5-car of a Corby electric has taken all the passengers For Kettering and points South

RailUK Forums

RealTrains07 · 30 Jul 2019

So are the hitachi units being built just so EMR can bin the HSTs or are the 222 being replaced alongside as originally previously stated?

Passengers don’t care about bland modern interiors they just want good service

Roast Veg · 30 Jul 2019

That really isn't enough units, even if the four 180s are retained.

hwl · 30 Jul 2019

RealTrains07 said:
None. The HST and 222 run services dont split

Splitting a Sheffield service at Derby or Leicester would produce a 64/110 minute saving on a unit on at round trip from St Pancras which would allow much more doubling up where the passenger numbers are highest.

InTheEastMids · 30 Jul 2019

sprinterguy said:
According to the sectional appendix, each of the platforms at St Pancras is 260 metres long. The Hitachi AT-300 vehicles are actually a little shorter than 26 metres, so a 10-car formation will fit.

Yes however the MML Key Outputs only specify 240m trains. Although tbf the only station in scope of platform extensions that has been extended and might need another 20m adding is Market Harborough as most of the rest haven't been done or won't be done (North of Leicester was descoped)

samuelmorris · 30 Jul 2019

I have to say, at the moment this looks like it may go the way of a certain other Abellio franchise, where full fleet replacement was touted but insufficient units were ordered to do the job and some uncertainties started creeping in.

InTheEastMids · 30 Jul 2019

samuelmorris said:
I have to say, at the moment this looks like it may go the way of a certain other Abellio franchise, where full fleet replacement was touted but insufficient units were ordered to do the job and some uncertainties started creeping in.

I agree, it feels tight and seems to depend on (probably) reducing the length of some services because they're currently filled up by Bedford-Corby demand that these trains won't have to meet. And that effect should be obvious from the end of 2020

Out in the real world, a similar operation like an airline would have options in case they'd under ordered, and so would be able to exercise these options in 2021 if demand was different. I guess I'm right to think that this is unlikely to happen in today's railway?

samuelmorris · 30 Jul 2019

InTheEastMids said:
I agree, it feels tight and seems to depend on (probably) reducing the length of some services because they're currently filled up by Bedford-Corby demand that these trains won't have to meet. And that effect should be obvious from the end of 2020

Out in the real world, a similar operation like an airline would have options in case they'd under ordered, and so would be able to exercise these options in 2021 if demand was different. I guess I'm right to think that this is unlikely to happen in today's railway?

Options are relatively common with rail fleet orders too. There are options on the 710s at LO, as there were with the 387s (which were taken up).

Roast Veg · 30 Jul 2019

Although I'm sure the concept art is worth very little, it is interesting that there appear to be six windows down the side of the driving car despite it probably being 2 meters shorter.

Qwerty133 · 30 Jul 2019

InTheEastMids said:
I agree, it feels tight and seems to depend on (probably) reducing the length of some services because they're currently filled up by Bedford-Corby demand that these trains won't have to meet. And that effect should be obvious from the end of 2020

Out in the real world, a similar operation like an airline would have options in case they'd under ordered, and so would be able to exercise these options in 2021 if demand was different. I guess I'm right to think that this is unlikely to happen in today's railway?

The non removal of the (virtually) non existent Bedford-Corby passengers will have little effect. The only possible way that this order would make any sense is by all EMR non-Corby services not stopping south of Kettering and even then I doubt that it is enough. I can only assume that the plan is for all Nottingham services to be operated by a singular unit with the limited scope for double units being used on the busier Sheffield services. I also assume that all peak services will be stopping at Loughborough to allow capacity for the significant commuter flow from Loughborough to Leicester.

InTheEastMids · 30 Jul 2019

Qwerty133 said:
The non removal of the (virtually) non existent Bedford-Corby passengers will have little effect.

To be clear, I meant passengers (mostly commuters) from those stations, mostly to London. They are a significant contribution to crowding on EMT peak services (Bedford was too, prior to the May 18 timetable fiasco which meant EMT dropped stops at Bedford and elsewhere to instead spend the time trundling along the fast lines behind slower GTR services)

Siemens Staines · 30 Jul 2019

It does seem like there are not enough sets ordered to run the Sheffield trains as 10-cars. Perhaps the idea is that all Sheffield trains are 5-cars that attach/detach to another portion at either Nottingham or Derby (possibly alternating). Given that the long term plan was for Sheffield to be served by HS2, then the requirement for London - Sheffield to be served by MML would reduced although that particular goalpost seems to have been moving in the last few days and since Abellio and Hitachi would have been in discussions over this particular contract.

ohgoditsjames · 30 Jul 2019

Siemens Staines said:
It does seem like there are not enough sets ordered to run the Sheffield trains as 10-cars. Perhaps the idea is that all Sheffield trains are 5-cars that attach/detach to another portion at either Nottingham or Derby (possibly alternating). Given that the long term plan was for Sheffield to be served by HS2, then the requirement for London - Sheffield to be served by MML would reduced although that particular goalpost seems to have been moving in the last few days and since Abellio and Hitachi would have been in discussions over this particular contract.

That would be outrageous if that’s the case as 5 car sets won’t be an increase in capacity for Sheffield. If anything it will be a decrease as currently there are 10 car 222’s and 8 car HST’s that operate early morning from Sheffield.

LNW-GW Joint · 30 Jul 2019

A bit more technical detail in this Railway Gazette piece:
https://www.railwaygazette.com/news...io-orders-east-midlands-inter-city-fleet.html

According to Hitachi, the EMR units will be an ‘evolution’ of the AT300 design supplied to other UK operators, with 24 m long vehicles rather than 26 m, and a slightly modified nose profile. Each five-car set will have four underfloor diesel generator modules rather than the three used in the Class 800 and 802s

The trains will apparently also be maintained by Hitachi at Etches Park.
I had thought Doncaster might have figured in the maintenance regime, as for LNER and TPE.

sprinterguy · 30 Jul 2019

LNW-GW Joint said:
A bit more technical detail in this Railway Gazette piece:
https://www.railwaygazette.com/news...io-orders-east-midlands-inter-city-fleet.html

That's helpful to know, thanks for sharing this. I did wonder whether the driving vehicle in the CGI artwork looked a bit "compressed" compared to a typical 26 metre IET vehicle. The windows also seem to look taller to my eye when compared to other mock-ups for GWR or Hull Trains sets, though that could be an optical illusion. Four powerpacks per unit and perhaps a slight weight saving with shorter vehicles should hopefully give these sets the necessary "oomph" to meet 222 timings.

Antman · 30 Jul 2019

LNW-GW Joint said:
A bit more technical detail in this Railway Gazette piece:
https://www.railwaygazette.com/news...io-orders-east-midlands-inter-city-fleet.html

The trains will apparently also be maintained by Hitachi at Etches Park.
I had thought Doncaster might have figured in the maintenance regime, as for LNER and TPE.

Let’s hope that’s good for Newton Aycliffe jobs. Given that hitachi claimed they may have to scale back investment in the UK on the event of Brexit. You’d hope that the DFT considered that before permitting them to enter the race for the contract. And an evolution of the IET will hopefully be better for passengers and staff. Boring for enthusiasts though !

TT-ONR-NRN · 30 Jul 2019

https://www.mynewsdesk.com/uk/hitac...achi-trains-for-east-midlands-railway-2902003

According to this press release from Hitachi, 33x new trains have been ordered. Is this enough? There are 42x Intercity trains with East Midlands Trains (15x HST, 27x 222) and 21 of those have 6-8 carriages whereas these new ones will only have five.

With only thirty-three new trains ordered, I fail to see how this is going to be enough. Not only are the trains shorter, there are less of them, so I fail to see how enough of them can be coupled up! Corby is being transferred to EMUs I know, but that won’t reduce a huge amount of how many IC trains are needed.

Nymanic · 30 Jul 2019

24m vehicles won't do much to increase capacity...and the render suggests that space-inefficient pocket doors will live on.

Will we perhaps see a change of window sizing and spacing to accommodate better alignment? Probably not, but some of us can hope.

I'm keen to see if Abellio will try as hard as they did with Greater Anglia to avoid - ahem - certain designs of seat...

samuelmorris · 30 Jul 2019

Nymanic said:
24m vehicles won't do much to increase capacity...and the render suggests that space-inefficient pocket doors will live on.

Will we perhaps see a change of window sizing and spacing to accommodate better alignment? Probably not, but some of us can hope.

I'm keen to see if Abellio will try as hard as they did with Greater Anglia to avoid - ahem - certain designs of seat...

I wouldn't hold your breath, I don't know if either the seats being fitted to 720s/730s or 755s are suitable for 125mph operation in the UK.

ohgoditsjames · 30 Jul 2019

Nymanic said:
24m vehicles won't do much to increase capacity...and the render suggests that space-inefficient pocket doors will live on.

Will we perhaps see a change of window sizing and spacing to accommodate better alignment? Probably not, but some of us can hope.

I'm keen to see if Abellio will try as hard as they did with Greater Anglia to avoid - ahem - certain designs of seat...

Considering they’ll mostly be 10car instead of the current 4,5,7 or 10 car that the 222’s operate at and the fact that the 222’s have inefficient seating configuration per car it will be a significant improvement in terms of number of seats. The issue is they don’t seem to have ordered enough to replace HST’s that have 8 MK3’s

JonathanH · 30 Jul 2019

LNW-GW Joint said:
The trains will apparently also be maintained by Hitachi at Etches Park.

More fleet maintenance staff suffering a reduction in terms and conditions.

RealTrains07 · 30 Jul 2019

Qwerty133 said:
I can only assume that the plan is for all Nottingham services to be operated by a singular unit with the limited scope for double units being used on the busier Sheffield services. I also assume that all peak services will be stopping at Loughborough to allow capacity for the significant commuter flow from Loughborough to Leicester.

Except the Nottingham- crewe service which will also run 2 car untill the newer 170 units arrive

ainsworth74 · 30 Jul 2019

ohgoditsjames said:
Considering they’ll mostly be 10car instead of the current 4,5,7 or 10 car that the 222’s operate at and the fact that the 222’s have inefficient seating configuration per car it will be a significant improvement in terms of number of seats.

They will? That's certainly not the impression I got from the press release!

eastwestdivide · 30 Jul 2019

On the back of a virtual envelope...

33 new trains to provide:
• 2x Sheffields an hour, 2-hour+ journey time, ?5 hours for a round trip, let's say 6 hours to be safe = 6 x 2 services = 12 trains running
• 2x Nottinghams an hour, under 2 hour journey time, say 5 hours for a round trip = 5 x 2 services = 10 trains running

so 22 services from 33 trainsets just for the basic timetable.

swt_passenger · 30 Jul 2019

Just a thought, there’s now the possibility of 10 car trains leaving St Pancras with only the front 5 running to the end of the route. And vice versa.

Splitting and joining doesn’t necessarily need two separate destinations or origins, the Waterloo/Bournemouth/Weymouth type of service comes to mind. Perhaps St Pancras/Nottingham/Lincoln?

Siemens Staines · 30 Jul 2019

But if they are all 10-car sets that is 44 units. That is a very similar calculation to the one I made although I assumed the advertised reduced journey times meant 11 and 9 sets respectively, which is what led me to speculate that the Sheffield trains couldn't be 10-car if, as seems to be the case in the press release, the "core" service to St Pancras is 10-car.

43055 · 30 Jul 2019

eastwestdivide said:
On the back of a virtual envelope...

33 new trains to provide:
• 2x Sheffields an hour, 2-hour+ journey time, ?5 hours for a round trip, let's say 6 hours to be safe = 6 x 2 services = 12 trains running
• 2x Nottinghams an hour, under 2 hour journey time, say 5 hours for a round trip = 5 x 2 services = 10 trains running

so 22 services from 33 trainsets just for the basic timetable.

I got something simular:
Sheffield fast can be done in 5 hours (5 units)
Sheffield slow can be done in 5-6 hours (5 to 6 units)
Nottinghams combined to remove hour layover at London gives 9 units.
This gives 19 to 20 units. After deducting a hot spare (currently a 4 car 222) and two or three sets for maintenance you could have 9 to 10 units extra to allow for 10 car working which is around half of services.

Mikey C · 30 Jul 2019

swt_passenger said:
Just a thought, there’s now the possibility of 10 car trains leaving St Pancras with only the front 5 running to the end of the route. And vice versa.

Splitting and joining doesn’t necessarily need two separate destinations or origins, the Waterloo/Bournemouth/Weymouth type of service comes to mind. Perhaps St Pancras/Nottingham/Lincoln?

Which is where the lack of through gangways (unlike with the 442s, 444s, 377s or indeed the Sprinters etc) counts against such operations. Any latecomers at STP will be stuck in the rear unit, and have to get out and change to the front unit at a later station

krus_aragon · 30 Jul 2019

ohgoditsjames said:
Considering they’ll mostly be 10car instead of the current 4,5,7 or 10 car that the 222’s operate at and the fact that the 222’s have inefficient seating configuration per car it will be a significant improvement in terms of number of seats. The issue is they don’t seem to have ordered enough to replace HST’s that have 8 MK3’s

The trouble with the press release saying these units will be "regularly" operated in 10-carriage formations is that full moons also happen regularly (just not that frequently).

swt_passenger · 30 Jul 2019

Mikey C said:
Which is where the lack of through gangways (unlike with the 442s, 444s, 377s or indeed the Sprinters etc) counts against such operations. Any latecomers at STP will be stuck in the rear unit, and have to get out and change to the front unit at a later station

I can’t disagree with that. Seems quite a daft way of running such a service, I’m just putting it up as a possibility.

New trains for East Midlands Franchise

Member

RailUK Forums

Established Member

Established Member

Established Member

Member

Established Member

Member

Established Member

Established Member

Established Member

Member

Member

Member

Veteran Member

Established Member

Established Member

Established Member

Member

Established Member

Member

Veteran Member

Established Member

Forum Staff

Established Member

Veteran Member

Member

Established Member

Established Member

Established Member

Veteran Member