5 x 180s up for grabs

[northwichcat]

A Class 180 seats 226 in standard and 42 in first, so a total of 268 seats presuming first is declassified. Not entirely sure on the seating capacity of the refurbished EMT 158s, but presuming it is approximately 70 seats per coach that means a total of 280 seats in a four car formation, more than the 268 of a five car Class 180!

I'm aware that if Northern subsitute a 180 with 2x156s (I did say if) then it results in a slight increase in seating.

However, if EMT get the 180s it would mean that they could end 2 car formations on Liverpool-Norwich. I think the issue though could be 180s may be too heavy to use the higher speeds on Nottingham-Norwich.

 

[Failed Unit]

However, if EMT get the 180s it would mean that they could end 2 car formations on Liverpool-Norwich. I think the issue though could be 180s may be too heavy to use the higher speeds on Nottingham-Norwich.

Correct, they would be stuck at 40mph betwen Ely and Norwich. I don't know if they could even keep up with 158 timings between Stockport and Sheffield. The 185's only can because of thier good accel / decel. But they are powerful 100mph units, I don't know if the 180 could do it without regearing. The 222's are using all the recovery time to keep up. Hopefully once the already planned cascade takes place the issues on Norwich - Liverpool will go.

 

[northwichcat]

Northern already have drivers who are trained on the units.

The 180's would suit the Newcastle-Manchester and Scotland-Manchester services for TPE, but whether they will or not is another question.

The issue Northern have is the only routes they are permitted to use them on are Manchester Victoria to Blackpool, Hazel Grove to Preston and Manchester to Chester via Stockport. The latter isn't a sensible use of the units as there are a few stations that only have platforms long enough for 4 cars and under normal circumstances a 3 car 158 or 156+153 would be long enough (not that the line ever gets 158s or 153s.)

I imagine they could easily get clearance for routes which Voyagers use such as Manchester-Stoke and Manchester-Crewe but then these are electric routes and Northern have 323s.

Northern also don't have that many drivers and guards who sign 180s so any more units would need more training.

 

[TheWalrus]

For someone who doesn't pay very much, compared to us down the line, please belt up! We already have to suffer slower journeys because of the blasted riff raff of minor stations between Pewsey & Reading demanding this that & the other! They want the extra trains they buy them.

Anyway the 180's were abysmal pieces of rubbish with a propensity to erupt into flames & generally go kaput. We don't want that non standard rubbish down here. We like our HSTs.

Hold on a minute! I don't pay very much? Well go on the journey planner and type in Bedwyn to Taunton, then do Pewsey to Taunton and see the difference! Also try it for Bedwyn - London and Pewsey-London.

The reason you have to "suffer" slower journey times is because FGW don't have suitable stock to operate a London-Taunton semi-fast. These additional 180s could cater for this and therefore speed up all of your IC services, with the majority of trains between Taunton and London only calling at Reading.

So what are you complaining about? I also don't see how running 180s to Taunton is going to affect you, because judging by your attitude, you clearly don't want to visit us "riff-raff" along the B&H.
--- old post above --- --- new post below ---

!!!!!

That's a first!

Can I just add that I have never used a 180 before? (That's a good thing, right?)

Yes lol!

Naa you should use one, they are good to ride in btw my comment wasn't aimed at you, I was stating the fact that everyone wants them for their home route(s)! (including myself!)
--- old post above --- --- new post below ---

No they wont, 168s only for Oxford.
--- old post above --- --- new post below ---

Sorry, yes you are right. 67s are going on the Birmingham-Marylebone route I believe.
--- old post above --- --- new post below ---

If 5 180s were used on just a few Cardiff-Pompey services then 5 158s could be cascaded to strengthen Cardiff-Taunton and Bristol-Weymouth trains.

Or they could send a few 150s down to Exeter or the 143s off the severn beach line and replace those with 150/1s.

Personally I would love to see them on Cardiff-Pompeys, but I think if we upgraded 166s to make them more suitable for long distance travel and singular door operation fitted, these would be well suited to Pompeys - better accel./decel. and doors in the middle help reduce dwell times at stations. These 2 factors assist in order to reduce journey times on this route.

 

[Drsatan]

How about TPE using them for the Manchester-Scotland services. As they are 125mph units, they can then run at full line speed on the WCML.
This would release a few 185s for strengthening the core transpennine services between Manchester & Leeds. (or releasing 170s for use elsewhere.


Another thought : maybe Northern could swap a pacer with SWT which can use it to Lymington & Northern gain the 158 instead.

Since Manchester Airport - Glasgow is entirely under the wires, why not order a batch of 350s (ideally an AC version of the 444s but reopening the production line would be expensive because the jigs used in construction were destroyed) and transfer the 185s used on that line to trans-pennine services? Until the Windermere branch is electrified one 185 would have to be used for an Oxenholme - Windermere shuttle though

SWT would not want just one 142 since it would be too expensive to maintain just 142
--- old post above --- --- new post below ---

Personally I would love to see them on Cardiff-Pompeys, but I think if we upgraded 166s to make them more suitable for long distance travel and singular door operation fitted, these would be well suited to Pompeys - better accel./decel. and doors in the middle help reduce dwell times at stations. These 2 factors assist in order to reduce journey times on this route.

I think the SRA recommended that 165/166s be used on Bristol area services once. This would only be possible when Crossrail's completed since that would free up 165/166s. It might be cost-prohibitive to convert them to single door operation - because they have wide doorways the doors would have to be very wide!

Because they were designed as outer surburban units I suggest at first they should be used on a new Westbury - Bristol Parkway stopper and a Gloucester - Western Super Mare stopper.

Journey times on Cardiff-Portsmouth would only be increased if the line speed was increased from 75 to 90 or more mph from Southampton to Bath Spa and some of the intermediate stops were cut out. A Westbury - Bristol Parkway stopper would handle station calls at Bradford upon Avon, Avoncliff Freshford, and so on, all the way to Bristol TM.

 

[jon0844]

Elaine Holt told me, face to face, that FCC (in 2006) would get 180s over her dead body (and I think she was right to ensure FCC didn't get diesel trains working under the wires, especially a train that - at the time - was incredibly unreliable). I wonder if she still felt the same way in her new job and had a say in matters?

 

[ukrob]

How about TPE using them for the Manchester-Scotland services. As they are 125mph units, they can then run at full line speed on the WCML.

They could not run at 125 on the WCML.

Since Manchester Airport - Glasgow is entirely under the wires, why not order a batch of 350s (ideally an AC version of the 444s but reopening the production line would be expensive because the jigs used in construction were destroyed) and transfer the 185s used on that line to trans-pennine services?

Because ordering trains is out of the window. This is about where the 180s would be best deployed

 

[Failed Unit]

Since Manchester Airport - Glasgow is entirely under the wires, why not order a batch of 350s (ideally an AC version of the 444s but reopening the production line would be expensive because the jigs used in construction were destroyed) and transfer the 185s used on that line to trans-pennine services? Until the Windermere branch is electrified one 185 would have to be used for an Oxenholme - Windermere shuttle though

Manchester Airport - Glasgow is not wired yet, the current route has a 25mile gap between Deansgate and Leyland. The plan is of course to electrify but we don't know if the axe is swinging here. 350's would be used if the wires ever come along but the route would also miss out Bolton. I guess if you turn Windermere into a shuttle then the 170's would be the perfect unit. I don't know if it has a significant amount of traffic to Lancaster, Preston and Manchester however.

 

[northwichcat]

Manchester Airport - Glasgow is not wired yet, the current route has a 25mile gap between Deansgate and Leyland. The plan is of course to electrify but we don't know if the axe is swinging here. 350's would be used if the wires ever come along but the route would also miss out Bolton. I guess if you turn Windermere into a shuttle then the 170's would be the perfect unit. I don't know if it has a significant amount of traffic to Lancaster, Preston and Manchester however.

The previous DfT plan was to electrify a shorter distance between Deansgate and Newton-le-Willows, to route Manchester Airport to Scotland via Wigan and to run another service between Manchester and Preston via Bolton, most likely extending Windermere's back to Manchester again.

I think Drsatan may be confusing Manchester to Scotland with Birmingham to Scotland or may not realise that when Virgin's Scottish services are diverted via Bolton they are dragged using a Thunderbird between Crewe and Preston.

 

[jamesontheroad]

Throw some Irish guage bogies under them (yes, I appreciate that is a gross simplification of the matter) and send them to NIR and IE. Hourly service on the Enterprise between Dublin and Belfast has been an aspiration for donkeys years, and until additional stock is found there aren't enough De Deitrich's. There was talk at one point of them acquiring and re-guaging some Meridians, so it's not completely beyond the realm of possibility.

 

[fgwrich]

Throw some Irish guage bogies under them (yes, I appreciate that is a gross simplification of the matter) and send them to NIR and IE. Hourly service on the Enterprise between Dublin and Belfast has been an aspiration for donkeys years, and until additional stock is found there aren't enough De Deitrich's. There was talk at one point of them acquiring and re-guaging some Meridians, so it's not completely beyond the realm of possibility.

I know i've come back into this thread fairly late, but

Well, That id almost agree with...Except IE & Alstom Don't seem to mix...Remember the ever so reliable 2700 Class?

Id say the best places for the 180s to end up, after the rolling stock casecade, is:

Hull Trains
GC
First Great Western - oxford services
Or TPE - Because, They could be maintained in a deal simular to the 175's a couple of years back...Say 5X180 Could make a tempory make up for the new units promised 2 years or so ago...

anyway, in college so this post will be a quick one...

 

[jamesontheroad]

Well, That id almost agree with...Except IE & Alstom Don't seem to mix...Remember the ever so reliable 2700 Class?

True, but then the GM + De Deitrich Enterprise hasn't exactly set the bar very high.

At the moment the L'Derry line is not cleared for locomotives (presumably due to axle weights). I seem to remember the politically attractive possibility raised at the time the Meridian idea was floated was that with an all or part DMU Enterprise fleet, some services could provide through service Dublin - Belfast - Derry. Certainly not as direct as the crow flies, but the current Bus Eireann Expressway service takes four hours. If the headline peak time services that take two hours between Dublin and Belfast could be combined with the Derry line improvements that should bring that journey to less than two hours, I'd see a very attractive schedule with hourly service between the capitals and at least one daily round trip between Dublin and Derry.

 

[asylumxl]

Send them back to Alstom and ask for a refund?

 

[RAPC]

From a purely selfish point of view, I'd love the 180s to stay with Northern a bit longer. It makes the commute in to Manchester from Leyland / Preston quite a pleasure, to the point where I'll actively stick around work a bit later to get the 19:28 from Victoria home.

Obviously though, it isn't the best use for the units and my comfort isn't much of a priority here! I had the chance to go on the new GC service from KX to Halifax last week and it was nice to actually be on a 180 that was travelling at a speed they were designed for rather than having a pleasant click clack down to Manchester.

I'll be interested to see how it all plays out though.

 

[tbtc]

I guess if you turn Windermere into a shuttle then the 170's would be the perfect unit

Windermere is normally a self contained shuttle service (now the Manchester Airport services run to Glasgow/ Edinburgh).

A simple idea: Subcontract the daytime branch to Northern using a Pacer.

Use the displaced TPE 185 to replace a TPE 170.

Use the displaced TPE 170 to replace a ScotRail 158.

Use the 158 in Northern territory to replace the Pacer.

Everyone's a winner

 

[Multiple Unit]

There is a good chance the Grand Central will take them on or even DB Wales & Borders Trains aka ARRIVA Trains Wales for which if ATW took them on there is a possibility for 158s or 153s to go to EMT & FGW.

3x 153s to EMT

2x 153S to FGW

 

[northwichcat]

Windermere is normally a self contained shuttle service (now the Manchester Airport services run to Glasgow/ Edinburgh).

A simple idea: Subcontract the daytime branch to Northern using a Pacer.

Use the displaced TPE 185 to replace a TPE 170.

Use the displaced TPE 170 to replace a ScotRail 158.

Use the 158 in Northern territory to replace the Pacer.

Everyone's a winner

While I agree a 185 is not a good use on a Windermere-Oxenholme service. What would happen in the peak periods when the Windermere service joins up to or detaches from a Glasgow/Edinburgh service at Preston to run a double 185 between Preston and Manchester Airport?

 

[TheWalrus]

I think the SRA recommended that 165/166s be used on Bristol area services once. This would only be possible when Crossrail's completed since that would free up 165/166s. It might be cost-prohibitive to convert them to single door operation - because they have wide doorways the doors would have to be very wide!

Because they were designed as outer surburban units I suggest at first they should be used on a new Westbury - Bristol Parkway stopper and a Gloucester - Western Super Mare stopper.

Journey times on Cardiff-Portsmouth would only be increased if the line speed was increased from 75 to 90 or more mph from Southampton to Bath Spa and some of the intermediate stops were cut out. A Westbury - Bristol Parkway stopper would handle station calls at Bradford upon Avon, Avoncliff Freshford, and so on, all the way to Bristol TM.

Yes they did after electrification, which is when they would be introduced. When I said single door operation I meant only unlocking one door at a time, not replacing the doors! This would be needed to call at stations like Avoncliff and Dilton Marsh.

I've looked at the possibility of running a Westbury - Bristol PW stopper, but I think an additional service decreases viability of the line. Although it is something I would like to think about.

Raising speed restrictions from 75 to 90 between Bath and Southampton would be beneficial to improve these important services. What are speed restrictions like between Bath and Cardiff; and Southampton and Portsmouth?

 

[Ivo]

Must we have 165s and 166s? At least the Chiltern ones are quite nice, but the FGW ones are bleedin' awful. Still, if they displace 143s I won't complain. Assuming they fix the stupid internal display unit things which never work probably and stream the same information year after year... (yawn)

I shall have a look at a revised timetable for the area. But what would become of Dilton Marsh? I assume some services would have to be extended to Warminster (because you can't reasonably stop a 180 at a tiny one-door halt! )?

 

[ashworth]

I have never seen a York - Blackpool service full at the Preston end, even with 3 cars.

I have never seen them full at the Preston end either, well certainly not on regular daily basis. That was what was so annoying when EMT lost their centre carriages from their 158's, which were ideal for the Norwich-Liverpool route, so that they could go to Northern for York to Blackpool.

I agree that these trains are very full for a few hours each day at peak times between Leeds-Bradford and Halifax but they are not busy at all times of day throughout the length of the whole route as with the Norwich-Liverpool service. These trains should not have been removed from where they were desperately needed on a long distance almost inter-city route just for the sake of a few hours a day for short commuter journeys.
I've done quite a bit of travelling between Leeds and Blackpool during the last 2 summers, albeit off peak between 10am and 3pm but I have found these services quite lightly used for large parts of the journey. This would never be the case at any time of the day on a Norwich -Liverpool train.
I don't doubt that more capacity was needed at peak times in West Yorkshire but removing carriages from EMT was not the answer.

Slightly changing the subject but back to the 180's. Why don't Northern use these on busy summer Saturdays between Manchester and Blackpool? It seems such a waste of resources to leave them stabled at Blackpool North every weekend by just using them Monday to Friday. A few Saturday's ago I travelled to and from Blackpool on very overcrowded TPE 185's that were so full that the 1st Class was declassified in both directions, yet there are 5 car trains standing unused in Blackpool. It seems such a waste to leave them standing idle when other services are so overcrowded.

 

[northwichcat]

Slightly changing the subject but back to the 180's. Why don't Northern use these on busy summer Saturdays between Manchester and Blackpool? It seems such a waste of resources to leave them stabled at Blackpool North every weekend by just using them Monday to Friday. A few Saturday's ago I travelled to and from Blackpool on very overcrowded TPE 185's that were so full that the 1st Class was declassified in both directions, yet there are 5 car trains standing unused in Blackpool. It seems such a waste to leave them standing idle when other services are so overcrowded.

That's just typical Northern. Every diesel operated service is 2 cars unless they get funding to strengthen the service and they don't get any GMPTE funding for strengthening weekend services, who sponsor the 180s for weekday operation.

 

[ukrob]

Slightly changing the subject but back to the 180's. Why don't Northern use these on busy summer Saturdays between Manchester and Blackpool? It seems such a waste of resources to leave them stabled at Blackpool North every weekend by just using them Monday to Friday. A few Saturday's ago I travelled to and from Blackpool on very overcrowded TPE 185's that were so full that the 1st Class was declassified in both directions, yet there are 5 car trains standing unused in Blackpool. It seems such a waste to leave them standing idle when other services are so overcrowded.

Not an answer I want to give, but why should they? Northern don't operate Manchester - Blackpool services. They don't pick and choose what routes to operate.

 

[TDK]

Read this thread with interest, to get the full potential from the 180's they need to be on 125mph routes as that's what they were designed for. However in my opinion they would be best off with Cross Country so they can move the HST's on!

 

[Drsatan]

I've looked at the possibility of running a Westbury - Bristol PW stopper, but I think an additional service decreases viability of the line. Although it is something I would like to think about.

Raising speed restrictions from 75 to 90 between Bath and Southampton would be beneficial to improve these important services. What are speed restrictions like between Bath and Cardiff; and Southampton and Portsmouth?

To run a Westbury - Bristol PW stopper it might be necessary to reopen platform 4 at Westbury otherwise there would be too many trains for two few platforms. Bath-Bristol's very congested so to run that service hourly (at minimum), it might be necessary to wait for Bath-Bristol to be resignalled.

To the best of my knowledge Redbridge Junction - Salisbury is cleared for 80mph operation; not sure about other stretches of track though.

 

[tbtc]

While I agree a 185 is not a good use on a Windermere-Oxenholme service. What would happen in the peak periods when the Windermere service joins up to or detaches from a Glasgow/Edinburgh service at Preston to run a double 185 between Preston and Manchester Airport?

Its not a foolproof plan, I grant you, but how about if the 185s run morning peak trips from the branch, joining up with a Scotland service at Oxenholme, or a Barrow service at Lancaster/ Preston, with a 142 (Stabled at Lancaster overnight? Is that where Northern stable some?) running a morning Lancaster - Oxenholme - Windermere service...

...keep the 142 shuttling up and down the branch during the day (whilst the 185 is put to better use elsewhere), then in the evening the 185 runs a Manchester Airport - Windermere direct service.

That way you keep a direct from Windermere to Manchester, whilst the 100 mph 185 gets put to better use during the day.

I'm sure it won't be popular in the Lake District, but the three coach 100mph unit with First Class is wasted on a wee branchline like this (since there aren't the same number of through trains to Manchester etc). Not idea, I realise, but maybe a pragmatic alternative in the meantime

 

[northwichcat]

Not an answer I want to give, but why should they? Northern don't operate Manchester - Blackpool services. They don't pick and choose what routes to operate.

Northern do operate Manchester-Blackpool. Until Dec 2008 it was part of a Buxton-Manchester Piccadilly-Blackpool service and since Dec 2008 it's been a Manchester Victoria-Blackpool service.

Northern say in their passengers charter that they aim to have no more standing than 35% of the seating capacity in the peak weekday morning and evening periods and no standing at other times. If they do have standing at other times and have units sitting about doing nothing - not even in maintenance then they aren't fulfilling promises they've committed to.
--- old post above --- --- new post below ---

Read this thread with interest, to get the full potential from the 180's they need to be on 125mph routes as that's what they were designed for. However in my opinion they would be best off with Cross Country so they can move the HST's on!

Move them on where? The fact with the 5x180s is that there's 25 carriages which are desperately needed on the network and the only question to ask is where to deploy them. If they replace existing units then the question to ask is where to deploy the units the 180s have replaced. Unless a very large number of new vehicles are ordered we simply can't afford to scrap a single carriage.

 

[philjo]

You still need some through trains off the branch, and most should go to Lancaster. Maybe run a few Windermere-Barrow services via Lancaster?

I was on a service arriving in Windermere on Friday Lunchtime just before abank holiday a few weeks ago & it was stuffed full in all 3 coaches (wasn't much room to get on at Oxenholme) & half the train was full of suitcases - the racks were full & had overflowed into the doorways.

you often get better connections with London trains by changing at Lancaster or Preston than Oxenholme - depends on the hour as the London ones call alternatiley Oxenholme/Penrith & you get 2 Pendolinos which start/terminate at Lancaster which are better are they are nicely times to connect & have much more room on them than the ones from Glasgow.

Problem is that the Windermere services are not clockface, so it is hard to reliably connect at either end e.g. connections at Lancaster to/from Windermere with Skipton/Leeds and the Barrow/coastal services are rubbish (sometimes you have a 70 minute wait at Lancaster!). Pity that the Windermere services are not able to call at Carnforth which would partly solve this. Also the connections with the buses at Windermere are very hit & miss.
The line on the branch & especially speed near Burneside is low - there is one ungated "level" crossing (on a steep slope) which has a 5mph limit I think.
In the long term, perhaps upgrading the branch & wiring it would work. reinstating the 2nd platform at Winderemere could allow the London services that terminate at Lancaster to go to Windermere & provide 2/3 through London services per day.

 

[ukrob]

Northern do operate Manchester-Blackpool. Until Dec 2008 it was part of a Buxton-Manchester Piccadilly-Blackpool service and since Dec 2008 it's been a Manchester Victoria-Blackpool service.

Northern say in their passengers charter that they aim to have no more standing than 35% of the seating capacity in the peak weekday morning and evening periods and no standing at other times. If they do have standing at other times and have units sitting about doing nothing - not even in maintenance then they aren't fulfilling promises they've committed to.

I forgot about the Victoria service, I just went into Piccadilly mode because the service mentioned was a TPE one

 

[tbtc]

You still need some through trains off the branch, and most should go to Lancaster. Maybe run a few Windermere-Barrow services via Lancaster?

I was on a service arriving in Windermere on Friday Lunchtime just before abank holiday a few weeks ago & it was stuffed full in all 3 coaches (wasn't much room to get on at Oxenholme) & half the train was full of suitcases - the racks were full & had overflowed into the doorways.

you often get better connections with London trains by changing at Lancaster or Preston than Oxenholme - depends on the hour as the London ones call alternatiley Oxenholme/Penrith & you get 2 Pendolinos which start/terminate at Lancaster which are better are they are nicely times to connect & have much more room on them than the ones from Glasgow.

Problem is that the Windermere services are not clockface, so it is hard to reliably connect at either end e.g. connections at Lancaster to/from Windermere with Skipton/Leeds and the Barrow/coastal services are rubbish (sometimes you have a 70 minute wait at Lancaster!). Pity that the Windermere services are not able to call at Carnforth which would partly solve this. Also the connections with the buses at Windermere are very hit & miss.
The line on the branch & especially speed near Burneside is low - there is one ungated "level" crossing (on a steep slope) which has a 5mph limit I think.
In the long term, perhaps upgrading the branch & wiring it would work. reinstating the 2nd platform at Winderemere could allow the London services that terminate at Lancaster to go to Windermere & provide 2/3 through London services per day.

Some good points there.

Maybe a Pacer running hourly shuttles (approx 21 minutes travel, nine minutes layover, so hourly clockface is realistic) then through train every hour or two to Lancaster (maybe joining to the Leeds services?).

I've nothing against the area, and I appreciate that summer weekends are ultra-busy, but the 185s are wasted on most trips there.

 

[route:oxford]

If all East Coast services operated non-stop between Edinburgh & Newcastle, would 5x180s be sufficient to operate an hourly stopping diagram between Newcastle & Edinburgh?

The 180s have pretty good acceleration compared to the HST stock and it would be a perfect opportunity for Transport Scotland/NE England to jointly sponsor a service for the benefit of people on both sides of the border...

Not that it would ever happen...