Short formations on EMR Liverpool services

I've been using EMT's Manchester - Sheffield services for several years now. The only occasion I've had to endure a 2 carriage was when the line towards Liverpool was closed.

Now as soon as this new outfit take over, but what should greet me in Manchester but (Surprise Surprise it's Cilla here) a 2 carriage short form. Is this the shape of things to come ?

I shall be keeping a close eye on the new lot.

It may have been a train fault out of their control, but yes not a good start. I can imagine how busy the train is as the line is always busy!

Well indeed. However in my previous experience, if the full 4-carriage 158 was unavailable, they'd substitute a 156, or even shove a 153 on.

Guess we've been spoiled these past few years.

yorksrob said:

Well indeed. However in my previous experience, if the full 4-carriage 158 was unavailable, they'd substitute a 156, or even shove a 153 on.

Guess we've been spoiled these past few years.

Click to expand...

True, I remember being on a 158, 153, 153 combo from Liverpool to Nottingham a few years ago.

Fingers crossed it's only a short term issue!

londonteacher said:

True, I remember being on a 158, 153, 153 combo from Liverpool to Nottingham a few years ago.

Fingers crossed it's only a short term issue!

Click to expand...

Let's hope indeed !

Unfortunately, they've already committed to replacing HST's with 180's that are so clapped out, their current operator can't even get by with them for a few months, so they're skating on thin ice as far as I'm concerned.

I've had quite a few times over the past couple of years with only 2 carriages on the EMT Sheffield to Manchester service. Always liked it though when EMT had mixed carriage classes to form a 3 or 4 carriage train as mentioned earlier in the thread. To me, it shows at least they've tried to make things better by adding 153s to 158s to give 4 carriages total rather than just 2 carriages.

Two coach EMT DMUs were never a "rare" sight through Sheffield, from my observations - they were mainly four coach (sometimes supplemented by a 156 rather than a second 158) but not unusual to see a single unit. There was a period where they even advertised which services would be regularly run by single units IIRC(?).

On a warm summer Saturday they shouldn't dare cut capacity on Nottingham to Skegness (or the less frequent Cleethorpes service)... Derby County and Stoke City were both at home (which presumably means you can't get away with single 153s on all services on that line)... EMT were never blessed with surplus DMU fleets in the first place (though Stagecoach seemed to do their best with the limited resources available - blame the Government for the bad way that the Central Trains fleet was "shared" between EMT and LM).

However, in the way that people obsessed about every 319 cancellation (when they replaced Pacers/Sprinters around Manchester, ignoring all of the times that Pacers/Sprinters were cancelled over the years), I fear that the first few months of a new franchise will see people worry unduly about every short formed train (or cancellation).

Don't get me wrong, I'd like *at least* four coaches on the service through Sheffield - I'm not happy when I see a single unit struggling with passenger numbers - I know a few local people who commute to/from Manchester/Nottingham and hear their moans - but it feels like a relatively minor thing to start a new thread about. That said, it's given people an excuse to complain about the HSTs being chopped up in a year or two and suggest running St Pancras - Settle - Glasgow, so at least we've given those an airing.

tbtc said:

Two coach EMT DMUs were never a "rare" sight through Sheffield, from my observations - they were mainly four coach (sometimes supplemented by a 156 rather than a second 158) but not unusual to see a single unit. There was a period where they even advertised which services would be regularly run by single units IIRC(?).

On a warm summer Saturday they shouldn't dare cut capacity on Nottingham to Skegness (or the less frequent Cleethorpes service)... Derby County and Stoke City were both at home (which presumably means you can't get away with single 153s on all services on that line)... EMT were never blessed with surplus DMU fleets in the first place (though Stagecoach seemed to do their best with the limited resources available - blame the Government for the bad way that the Central Trains fleet was "shared" between EMT and LM).

However, in the way that people obsessed about every 319 cancellation (when they replaced Pacers/Sprinters around Manchester, ignoring all of the times that Pacers/Sprinters were cancelled over the years), I fear that the first few months of a new franchise will see people worry unduly about every short formed train (or cancellation).

Don't get me wrong, I'd like *at least* four coaches on the service through Sheffield - I'm not happy when I see a single unit struggling with passenger numbers - I know a few local people who commute to/from Manchester/Nottingham and hear their moans - but it feels like a relatively minor thing to start a new thread about. That said, it's given people an excuse to complain about the HSTs being chopped up in a year or two and suggest running St Pancras - Settle - Glasgow, so at least we've given those an airing.

Click to expand...

Well, for me the issue is that I'm just not used to it.

The route from Liverpool to Sheffield has often seen units substituted rather than short formed, and I've often held the route up as an exemplar on here because of it, particularly during the Northern strike.

Do you feel that we should only comment on the railway when it is doing well ? That seems like the sort of position an enthusiast could be forgiven for taking, but not someone who uses the railway every day as their prime mode of transport.

I think there's been a shortage of 158's for a couple of weeks now. I was leaving Sheffield a few weeks back & noted a 156 + a 153 combi on a Liverpool bound service.

Polarbear said:

I think there's been a shortage of 158's for a couple of weeks now. I was leaving Sheffield a few weeks back & noted a 156 + a 153 combi on a Liverpool bound service.

Click to expand...

Thanks, that could explain things.

@tbtc would you be content to have Hull trains' 180's take over your route ?

tbtc said:

Two coach EMT DMUs were never a "rare" sight through Sheffield, from my observations - they were mainly four coach (sometimes supplemented by a 156 rather than a second 158) but not unusual to see a single unit. There was a period where they even advertised which services would be regularly run by single units IIRC(?).

On a warm summer Saturday they shouldn't dare cut capacity on Nottingham to Skegness (or the less frequent Cleethorpes service)... Derby County and Stoke City were both at home (which presumably means you can't get away with single 153s on all services on that line)... EMT were never blessed with surplus DMU fleets in the first place (though Stagecoach seemed to do their best with the limited resources available - blame the Government for the bad way that the Central Trains fleet was "shared" between EMT and LM).

However, in the way that people obsessed about every 319 cancellation (when they replaced Pacers/Sprinters around Manchester, ignoring all of the times that Pacers/Sprinters were cancelled over the years), I fear that the first few months of a new franchise will see people worry unduly about every short formed train (or cancellation).

Don't get me wrong, I'd like *at least* four coaches on the service through Sheffield - I'm not happy when I see a single unit struggling with passenger numbers - I know a few local people who commute to/from Manchester/Nottingham and hear their moans - but it feels like a relatively minor thing to start a new thread about. That said, it's given people an excuse to complain about the HSTs being chopped up in a year or two and suggest running St Pancras - Settle - Glasgow, so at least we've given those an airing.

Click to expand...

10 years ago, 2 cars was the norm, for at least the last 5 years, 4 car seems to be the norm. Hopefully the service will be split at Nottingham and it will be 6 car 185s soon.

yorksrob said:

Thanks, that could explain things.

@tbtc would you be content to have Hull trains' 180's take over your route ?

Click to expand...

I can only imagine one of those failing on the Castlefield corridor and how funny it would be.

yorksrob said:

Well, for me the issue is that I'm just not used to it.

The route from Liverpool to Sheffield has often seen units substituted rather than short formed, and I've often held the route up as an exemplar on here because of it, particularly during the Northern strike.

Do you feel that we should only comment on the railway when it is doing well ? That seems like the sort of position an enthusiast could be forgiven for taking, but not someone who uses the railway every day as their prime mode of transport.

Click to expand...

I'm just explaining that it's far from a rare occurrence on the route - but it seems typical for it to be picked up upon right now because we are in the first few days of a new franchise - if you want to go looking for reasons to complain about a new franchise (say, one that is going to get rid of your favourite old trains?) then you'll find one - confirmation bias - but nothing particularly unusual on the route - I'm not saying I'm happy with short formations but a cursory glance at any EMT thread would show people complaining about short formations on one "Provincial" service or another - and on a day when you can't cut the seaside services and shouldn't be getting away with single carriages on the Uttoxeter service (due to big football matches) then I'm not surprised that the tight fleet wasn't;t able to double up your service.

When there were no Northern services (on the Liverpool - Nottingham bits of the route) then EMT made the effort to run doubled up trains - when it's a Summer Saturday in Skeggy (and there's football at both Derby and Stoke on the same afternoon) then EMR didn't have the spare stock.

yorksrob said:

Thanks, that could explain things.

@tbtc would you be content to have Hull trains' 180's take over your route ?

Click to expand...

If you're suggesting ten carriage trains on Sheffield - London services then, yeah, they are decent enough internally (from when I was last on one - although I was on a GC example more recently) - I don't think that Hull Trains should have been squeezing as much out of its tiny fleet as it was trying to - but you seem to be changing the topic of conversation away from the fact that you were mildly unlucky in having a short formed DMU (on a route where DMUs do run in two carriage formation regularly enough for it to be fairly common).

You want to keep your old HSTs, fine, but you seem to be looking for reasons to complain about the TOC that have taken the decision to do so, any reasons.

Class83 said:

10 years ago, 2 cars was the norm, for at least the last 5 years, 4 car seems to be the norm. Hopefully the service will be split at Nottingham and it will be 6 car 185s soon.

Click to expand...

Agreed - maybe we'll get the five coach loco hauled formations (if TPE order additional 802s to simplify their fleet on the Manchester - York axis) - four coaches is the "norm" at the moment but sadly EMT/EMR haven't had sufficient stock to meet that requirement all of the time.

Are you referring to the 15:52 Liverpool to Norwich? That was a single 2-car 158.

Interestingly I don’t think it was updated in the system, as it still announced it as dividing at Nottingham.

The other week I had a 158+153 combo from Nottingham to Liverpool. The extra unit certainly makes a difference.

NoMorePacers said:

I can only imagine one of those failing on the Castlefield corridor and how funny it would be.

Click to expand...

Fortunately, I don't think they're planning to send them around the Castlefield curve, although it would represent an increase in capacity in the event that they actually moved.

tbtc said:

I'm just explaining that it's far from a rare occurrence on the route - but it seems typical for it to be picked up upon right now because we are in the first few days of a new franchise - if you want to go looking for reasons to complain about a new franchise (say, one that is going to get rid of your favourite old trains?) then you'll find one - confirmation bias - but nothing particularly unusual on the route - I'm not saying I'm happy with short formations but a cursory glance at any EMT thread would show people complaining about short formations on one "Provincial" service or another - and on a day when you can't cut the seaside services and shouldn't be getting away with single carriages on the Uttoxeter service (due to big football matches) then I'm not surprised that the tight fleet wasn't;t able to double up your service.

When there were no Northern services (on the Liverpool - Nottingham bits of the route) then EMT made the effort to run doubled up trains - when it's a Summer Saturday in Skeggy (and there's football at both Derby and Stoke on the same afternoon) then EMR didn't have the spare stock.



If you're suggesting ten carriage trains on Sheffield - London services then, yeah, they are decent enough internally (from when I was last on one - although I was on a GC example more recently) - I don't think that Hull Trains should have been squeezing as much out of its tiny fleet as it was trying to - but you seem to be changing the topic of conversation away from the fact that you were mildly unlucky in having a short formed DMU (on a route where DMUs do run in two carriage formation regularly enough for it to be fairly common).

You want to keep your old HSTs, fine, but you seem to be looking for reasons to complain about the TOC that have taken the decision to do so, any reasons.



Agreed - maybe we'll get the five coach loco hauled formations (if TPE order additional 802s to simplify their fleet on the Manchester - York axis) - four coaches is the "norm" at the moment but sadly EMT/EMR haven't had sufficient stock to meet that requirement all of the time.

Click to expand...

EMT HST's aren't my favourite old trains, although they're fairly close. However, this is an irrelevance as new trains are coming on line in 2022 which will replace them. That is the way of the world. That is progress.

My concern, as a regular user of the MML is what will be in place between when the HST's go and the new trains come on line in 2022. Several sources on here have cited the takeover by 180's which are surely not suited, eeven though you sidestepped the issue of their appalling lack of reliability.

Its amazing how many people get on a 158 dmu, stood at Nottingham the other week during the cross country strike and saw the number of people waiting to get on the train, thought this was going to busy for the Nottingham to Peterborough section but actually it wasn't that busy at all. Missing 2 cars certainly wouldn't have been pleasant on the Nottingham liverpool section but you cannot magic DMUs up and better to run short forms than cancelling services

londonmidland said:

Are you referring to the 15:52 Liverpool to Norwich? That was a single 2-car 158.

Interestingly I don’t think it was updated in the system, as it still announced it as dividing at Nottingham.

The other week I had a 158+153 combo from Nottingham to Liverpool. The extra unit certainly makes a difference.

Click to expand...

I can vouch for that 15:52 - 158857, to be precise. And to complete the experience, the aircon had failed.

Very busy indeed, but unlike past short forms, all the passengers appeared to actually fit onboard at Piccadilly...

A couple more observations on Saturday:
• The 1727 arrival at Lime Street was announced as cancelled, but a single 158 seemed to be operating. Presumably the Nottingham unit was sent on its own, the Norwich portion having suffered a fault.
• 1R66 earlier in the day was 2x156 - had it not been, there would have been double or even triple digits left behind at Sheffield...

tbtc said:

Agreed - maybe we'll get the five coach loco hauled formations (if TPE order additional 802s to simplify their fleet on the Manchester - York axis) - four coaches is the "norm" at the moment but sadly EMT/EMR haven't had sufficient stock to meet that requirement all of the time.

Click to expand...

I'd rather see the 185s used as I don't believe there is any other use for them planned and it's a waste of perfectly good trains with 15-20 years life left in them. Also, mid carriage doors will help speed up loading at Oxford Road and Piccadilly, and they have good performance for the Peak District. Ripping out the First Class and putting in more standard seats would be fine by me as well.

If more trains are to be ordered, 195s for Northern to supplement or replace 150s and 156s would seem a higher priority.

yorksrob said:

Let's hope indeed !

Unfortunately, they've already committed to replacing HST's with 180's that are so clapped out, their current operator can't even get by with them for a few months, so they're skating on thin ice as far as I'm concerned.

Click to expand...

Let's be fair, they've been rubbish since day one. They aren't clapped out, they're just an awful design.

This is perhaps true, although they definitely seem to have taken a turn for the worse of late.

I think some posters are forgetting that any 156s or 153s being used on Liverpool to Norwich services are nicked from other routes. With the Liverpool to Nottingham service meant to be transferring to another operator in the next few years it makes a lot more sense for EMR to annoy the customers who will not be using their services in the future rather than customers on other routes who will be using EMR services for the full franchise duration. Unfortunately during EMT years the Liverpool to Norwich was too protected from stock shortages and all too often units being taken from other services to keep it at 4 coaches meant those other services were leaving people behind whereas many Liverpool to Nottingham services could transport all passengers with 2 coaches.

Qwerty133 said:

I think some posters are forgetting that any 156s or 153s being used on Liverpool to Norwich services are nicked from other routes. With the Liverpool to Nottingham service meant to be transferring to another operator in the next few years it makes a lot more sense for EMR to annoy the customers who will not be using their services in the future rather than customers on other routes who will be using EMR services for the full franchise duration.

Click to expand...

It does worry me that there will be an element of EMR losing interest in the route now that it doesn't have a future with them.

I always thought that splitting Liverpool - Norwich was a bad idea, and it will be interesting to see if I'm proved right.

yorksrob said:

EMT HST's aren't my favourite old trains, although they're fairly close. However, this is an irrelevance as new trains are coming on line in 2022 which will replace them. That is the way of the world. That is progress.

My concern, as a regular user of the MML is what will be in place between when the HST's go and the new trains come on line in 2022. Several sources on here have cited the takeover by 180's which are surely not suited, eeven though you sidestepped the issue of their appalling lack of reliability.

Click to expand...

Wait, what is this thread complaining about now?

You started it to complain about EMR running a two coach DMU on the Nottingham - Liverpool service, but then you moved onto the HST replacement and now it's the reliability of the 180s... I'm not sure where the goalposts are any more!

As for "sidestepping" the issue of reliability - scroll up the thread - I mentioned that IMHO Hull Trains have tried to squeeze too much out of the 180s (perhaps understandable for an OAO as they want as big a share of that sweet sweet ORCATS pie as they can get) - GC seem to be able to use 180s without the same level of cancellations - Northern sensibly diagrammed them when they had them on the Manchester - Preston corridor a few years ago (three trains for two diagrams IIRC) - but HT seem to have preferred to stretch their resources further - if GC had the same level of cancellations then, fair enough, I'd agree. But GC took on more 180s (to replace HSTs), so they must be happy enough with them?

However, at this moment in time, we don't know what the 180s are going to be used for on EMR. If it's to replace the barely-used "short" ex-GC sets then that'd be fine... if it's to run a doubled up 180 on a peak southbound morning service and evening return (to replace one of the HSTs that sit at Cricklewood for most of the day) then that'd be fine... it it's to replace a single four/five car 222 diagram with a single 180 then that'd be fine (given the appalling number of Standard Class seats on a 222)... it it's to run a single 180 on an all day diagram that is currently run by a full length HST/222 then that'd be a backwards step - but I suspect that you don't know the answer to this yet either?

Adrian1980uk said:

Missing 2 cars certainly wouldn't have been pleasant on the Nottingham liverpool section but you cannot magic DMUs up and better to run short forms than cancelling services

Click to expand...

Qwerty133 said:

I think some posters are forgetting that any 156s or 153s being used on Liverpool to Norwich services are nicked from other routes

Click to expand...

Agree with the above two posts - something I've tried to mention - and there'd have been huge complaints if EMR had run short formations to Skeggy on a sunny Bank Holiday weekend - there'd have been complaints if they'd run single 153s on the Uttoxoter line on an afternoon when Derby County and Stoke City were both playing - running single units through to Liverpool at least ensures that other services aren't cancelled.

Nymanic said:

Very busy indeed, but unlike past short forms, all the passengers appeared to actually fit onboard at Piccadilly...

Click to expand...

Interesting!

Nymanic said:

• 1R66 earlier in the day was 2x156 - had it not been, there would have been double or even triple digits left behind at Sheffield...

Click to expand...

Sounds a good move then, proactive in the circumstances - I don't recall seeing a service through Sheffield that didn't have at least one 158 on it for some time

Class83 said:

I'd rather see the 185s used as I don't believe there is any other use for them planned and it's a waste of perfectly good trains with 15-20 years life left in them. Also, mid carriage doors will help speed up loading at Oxford Road and Piccadilly, and they have good performance for the Peak District. Ripping out the First Class and putting in more standard seats would be fine by me as well.

If more trains are to be ordered, 195s for Northern to supplement or replace 150s and 156s would seem a higher priority.

Click to expand...

There's benefits to both - I'm just thinking that additional 802s may be more use on the Manchester - Leeds corridor and (if that happens) the Liverpool - Norwich seems a logical place for the loco hauled rakes.

tbtc said:

Wait, what is this thread complaining about now?

You started it to complain about EMR running a two coach DMU on the Nottingham - Liverpool service, but then you moved onto the HST replacement and now it's the reliability of the 180s... I'm not sure where the goalposts are any more!

As for "sidestepping" the issue of reliability - scroll up the thread - I mentioned that IMHO Hull Trains have tried to squeeze too much out of the 180s (perhaps understandable for an OAO as they want as big a share of that sweet sweet ORCATS pie as they can get) - GC seem to be able to use 180s without the same level of cancellations - Northern sensibly diagrammed them when they had them on the Manchester - Preston corridor a few years ago (three trains for two diagrams IIRC) - but HT seem to have preferred to stretch their resources further - if GC had the same level of cancellations then, fair enough, I'd agree. But GC took on more 180s (to replace HSTs), so they must be happy enough with them?

However, at this moment in time, we don't know what the 180s are going to be used for on EMR. If it's to replace the barely-used "short" ex-GC sets then that'd be fine... if it's to run a doubled up 180 on a peak southbound morning service and evening return (to replace one of the HSTs that sit at Cricklewood for most of the day) then that'd be fine... it it's to replace a single four/five car 222 diagram with a single 180 then that'd be fine (given the appalling number of Standard Class seats on a 222)... it it's to run a single 180 on an all day diagram that is currently run by a full length HST/222 then that'd be a backwards step - but I suspect that you don't know the answer to this yet either?





Agree with the above two posts - something I've tried to mention - and there'd have been huge complaints if EMR had run short formations to Skeggy on a sunny Bank Holiday weekend - there'd have been complaints if they'd run single 153s on the Uttoxoter line on an afternoon when Derby County and Stoke City were both playing - running single units through to Liverpool at least ensures that other services aren't cancelled.



Interesting!



Sounds a good move then, proactive in the circumstances - I don't recall seeing a service through Sheffield that didn't have at least one 158 on it for some time



There's benefits to both - I'm just thinking that additional 802s may be more use on the Manchester - Leeds corridor and (if that happens) the Liverpool - Norwich seems a logical place for the loco hauled rakes.

Click to expand...

You used the phrase "you want to keep your old HST's fine". Was I not supposed to respond to this part of your post ?

Mentioning something in your own post, then implying that someone is going off the subject for responding to your post, is bizarre behaviour for an internet forum.

I agree with your point, that if EMR obtain the 180's then barely use them, they might get away with it. Yet, as you say, we don't know how EMR will use them which is what worries me.

I note that you agree with @Querty133's post, which implies that Liverpool services might be de-prioritised within the EMR franchise. If this is the case, then I am justified in my concerns.

yorksrob said:

You used the phrase "you want to keep your old HST's fine". Was I not supposed to respond to this part of your post ?

Mentioning something in your own post, then implying that someone is going off the subject for responding to your post, is bizarre behaviour for an internet forum.

I agree with your point, that if EMR obtain the 180's then barely use them, they might get away with it. Yet, as you say, we don't know how EMR will use them which is what worries me.

I note that you agree with @Querty133's post, which implies that Liverpool services might be de-prioritised within the EMR franchise. If this is the case, then I am justified in my concerns.

Click to expand...

still stikes me as EMR would probably be better off swapping the 180's with SWR 159's.
ie 4*5 car units for 6 or 8 * cl159 or 10*158

maximum linespeed on swr is only 100mph so it's not as if the 180's will get thrashed.159's can't quite make that but 180's can with a decent acceleration to boot.
MPTF should improve in this case.

a 2*5 car set still gives splitting capability and 1 extra carriage per set(seeing as swr 159's run as 3*3car)..out of waterloo that's sorely needed in rush hour.


The benefit for EMR is better coverage of regional routes which they need

hooverboy said:

still stikes me as EMR would probably be better off swapping the 180's with SWR 159's.
ie 4*5 car units for 6 or 8 * cl159 or 10*158

maximum linespeed on swr is only 100mph so it's not as if the 180's will get thrashed.159's can't quite make that but 180's can with a decent acceleration to boot.
MPTF should improve in this case.

a 2*5 car set still gives splitting capability and 1 extra carriage per set(seeing as swr 159's run as 3*3car)..out of waterloo that's sorely needed in rush hour.


The benefit for EMR is better coverage of regional routes which they need

Click to expand...

There’s absolutely no upside here for SWR. They just lose standardisation.
But haven’t we already got a 60 page thread running about EMR rolling stock?

The best people to complain to about these trains being serially run in breach of franchise commitments would be the politicians in the Liverpool and Manchester city regions.

If EMR have lost enthusiasm for what they know is being taken from them, the politicians can still cause trouble for them.

The route does need 4 carriages, and given the size of the population centres it currently links it should be a priority.

Camden said:

The best people to complain to about these trains being serially run in breach of franchise commitments would be the politicians in the Liverpool and Manchester city regions.

If EMR have lost enthusiasm for what they know is being taken from them, the politicians can still cause trouble for them.

The route does need 4 carriages, and given the size of the population centres it currently links it should be a priority.

Click to expand...

If stock was just sitting on depots and serviceable but EMR were choosing not to use it you may have a point. Unfortunately the truth of the situation is that EMR have to shortform or cancel some services and that the (in my opinion mistaken) belief held by EMT that Liverpool services should be protected at all costs is not held in the same manner by EMR. Whether passengers on the route like it or not all that is happening is that the route is finally taking its fair share of EMR shortforms rather than shortforms being focused on other routes. Personally I would go further and place a complete ban on 1v2 shortforms unless all Liverpool to Nottingham services had been shortformed to 2 or 3 coaches. The only potential argument is that EMR should be making better use of 153s on the route so that 2 diagrams can run at 75% capacity rather than one at 100% and one at 50%.

tbtc said:

Wait, what is this thread complaining about now?

Click to expand...

Agreed. No idea what this thread is supposed to be discussing now as it has just evolved into a rant about EMR with nothing not already covered in numerous previous threads.

Locked.