Chiltern wanting to get hold of new stock

[Class172]

It's not really an excuse. There will almost certainly be no new DMUs built.

I suspect there will be some more DMUs eventually, but not any time soon; it'll be a small order perhaps, for a more rural design.

 

[Cherry_Picker]

Possibly, but we are talking donkeys years for that to happen. It's all about electrification and cascades for the foreseeable, isn't it?

 

[The Ham]

Possibly, but we are talking donkeys years for that to happen. It's all about electrification and cascades for the foreseeable, isn't it?

As I understand what has been said, basicly no new DMU's until CP6. There will come a point when there will need to be an order, as even with the same amount of wiring up in CP6 you'll not be able to do enough to do enough to replace all the DMU's built in the 80's and 90's.

 

[Chris125]

Poor excuse from Chiltern.

Like it or not, that's the been the reality for some years now - there aren't any spare, and there's no prospect of a sufficiently large order any time soon to make a new compliant design cost effective.

Chris

 

[aylesbury2]

Tomorrow I am going to London for leisure and for the first time, I am going from Tring. It takes less than half the time from Aylesbury (30 mins instead of 1 hour and 5), and I was suprised to find out that the tickets were £15 cheaper than Chiltern, and the parking at the station was half the price! For an extra 5 minutes drive from my house to the WCML, and the nicer station and trains, I would not hesitate to go from Tring permanently now. Thanks for stealing my money, Chiltern!

 

[Monty]

It's not stealing if you hand it over willingly. And muggins here thought it was that in the eyes of the passengers Chiltern could do no wrong.

 

[fgwrich]

Well, I gather something has been done and it's by arrangement of the DfT (This is from this months Modern Railways mag). There's a deal which has been done for Chiltern to take the 9 class 170/3s from TransPennine Express in phased stages to strengthen their fleet in time for Chilterns London to Oxford services.

So better news for the Chilterns then, and not so better for the TransPennines, which loses out on units used for strengthening (and make effective use of the SP speeds).

 

[455driver]

Tomorrow I am going to London for leisure and for the first time, I am going from Tring. It takes less than half the time from Aylesbury (30 mins instead of 1 hour and 5), and I was suprised to find out that the tickets were £15 cheaper than Chiltern, and the parking at the station was half the price! For an extra 5 minutes drive from my house to the WCML, and the nicer station and trains, I would not hesitate to go from Tring permanently now. Thanks for stealing my money, Chiltern!

If you didnt do your homework and handed over your money willingly how is it stealing?

The fault lies with you!

 

[Cherry_Picker]

Well, I gather something has been done and it's by arrangement of the DfT (This is from this months Modern Railways mag). There's a deal which has been done for Chiltern to take the 9 class 170/3s from TransPennine Express in phased stages to strengthen their fleet in time for Chilterns London to Oxford services.

So better news for the Chilterns then, and not so better for the TransPennines, which loses out on units used for strengthening (and make effective use of the SP speeds).

Yes, that's true. But TPE are only giving them up because they are getting new class 350s. Unless I have it wrong TPE are essentially getting ten four coach trains in exchange for nine two coach trains. They are up in this deal too.

 

[fgwrich]

Yes, that's true. But TPE are only giving them up because they are getting new class 350s. Unless I have it wrong TPE are essentially getting ten four coach trains in exchange for nine two coach trains. They are up in this deal too.

That's true, but I thought the initial intention was to keep the 170/3s with TPE to allow for strengthening in TPE East?

If you didnt do your homework and handed over your money willingly how is it stealing?

The fault lies with you!

Tomorrow I am going to London for leisure and for the first time, I am going from Tring. It takes less than half the time from Aylesbury (30 mins instead of 1 hour and 5), and I was suprised to find out that the tickets were £15 cheaper than Chiltern, and the parking at the station was half the price! For an extra 5 minutes drive from my house to the WCML, and the nicer station and trains, I would not hesitate to go from Tring permanently now. Thanks for stealing my money, Chiltern!

Well, the definition of Theft under Section 1 (1) of Theft act 1968 states that ''A person is guilty of theft if he dishonestly appropriates property belonging to another with the intention of permanently depriving the other of it, and theft and steal shall be construed accordingly''

Therefore I'd like to see how you get on taking Chiltern on with that if you willingly give them your money. Chiltern may be more expensive these days, but you can hardly accuse them of stealing your money.

 

[jimm]

Tomorrow I am going to London for leisure and for the first time, I am going from Tring. It takes less than half the time from Aylesbury (30 mins instead of 1 hour and 5), and I was suprised to find out that the tickets were £15 cheaper than Chiltern, and the parking at the station was half the price! For an extra 5 minutes drive from my house to the WCML, and the nicer station and trains, I would not hesitate to go from Tring permanently now. Thanks for stealing my money, Chiltern!

But if you lived in warwickshire, you would probably be moaning about the cost of a Virgin ticket from Coventry, compared with a Chiltern one from Leamington or Warwick. And your post has nothing to do with rolling stock.
--- old post above --- --- new post below ---

Well, I gather something has been done and it's by arrangement of the DfT (This is from this months Modern Railways mag). There's a deal which has been done for Chiltern to take the 9 class 170/3s from TransPennine Express in phased stages to strengthen their fleet in time for Chilterns London to Oxford services.

So better news for the Chilterns then, and not so better for the TransPennines, which loses out on units used for strengthening (and make effective use of the SP speeds).

Given the reference in another thread to wnxx in connection with this 'story', I'll believe this when I see it. As pointed out here http://www.railforums.co.uk/showthread.php?t=89934&page=28 the 170s are needed to operate extra TPE services until electrification of the route is complete.

And given that Chiltern has just got a 165 freed up by suspension of the Oxford-Bicester service and the first train to Oxford Parkway won't run until 'summer 2015', I can't see what pressing need there would be for Chiltern to have any more stock until well into next year - and that's assuming the sodden embankments between Oxford and Bicester dry out so that they can be strengthened to take two tracks again.

 

[RPM]

Tomorrow I am going to London for leisure and for the first time, I am going from Tring. It takes less than half the time from Aylesbury (30 mins instead of 1 hour and 5), and I was suprised to find out that the tickets were £15 cheaper than Chiltern, and the parking at the station was half the price! For an extra 5 minutes drive from my house to the WCML, and the nicer station and trains, I would not hesitate to go from Tring permanently now. Thanks for stealing my money, Chiltern!

Aylesbury is further out than Tring so hardly a fair comparison for journey time. Wendover would be the Chiltern equivalent of Tring. The LM equivalent of Aylesbury would be Leighton Buzzard.

The journey time AYS - MYB is 1 hour*, not 1 hour 5 mins, (that is the journey time from Aylesbury Vale Parkway).
* Actually slightly less than an hour in working timetable

LM are nonetheless faster, but not by the margin your skewed comparison suggests.

Not sure what ticket you purchased, but on the whole (comparing Tring/Wendover) LM fares tend to be slightly dearer than the Chiltern equivalents, in line with the slightly better journey time.

Historically passengers in the locale have tended to fluctuate between the two stations, both of which have pros and cons.

Tring wins on journey times, service frequency & seat availability (particularly in evening peak). Wendover is better for station ambiance, station facilities, (Tring lacks level access & toilets) and price.

 

[pemma]

Yes, that's true. But TPE are only giving them up because they are getting new class 350s. Unless I have it wrong TPE are essentially getting ten four coach trains in exchange for nine two coach trains. They are up in this deal too.

Very much not the case. Under the HLOS for CP4 TPE were due to get 40 extra carriages by December 2012 to allow 5tph on North TPE and more capacity. Only 1 extra train (10 x 350s instead of 9 x 170s) will throw the May 2014 timetables for TPE and Northern services (approved by ORR) up in the air with only weeks to completely rewrite timetables and diagrams, after years of planning the changes.

 

[RichmondCommu]

Tring wins on journey times, service frequency & seat availability (particularly in evening peak). Wendover is better for station ambiance, station facilities, (Tring lacks level access & toilets) and price.

I would be interested to know how you define ambiance and why you think it's important to a commuter.

 

[jimm]

I would be interested to know how you define ambiance and why you think it's important to a commuter.

I wouldn't, unless it's in a new thread. This one is supposed to be about extra rolling stock for Chiltern. While threads do wander, they usually retain some vague connection with where they started. What you are asking about is an entirely different subject.

 

[JamesRowden]

It's not really an excuse. There will almost certainly be no new DMUs built.

I can see EDMUs being built with 75 mph diesel and 100 mph electric performance. I think that these would be ideal for the Brighton-Ashford and London-Uckfield Southern routes and allow Southern's 171s to be cascaded.

 

[RichmondCommu]

I wouldn't, unless it's in a new thread. This one is supposed to be about extra rolling stock for Chiltern. While threads do wander, they usually retain some vague connection with where they started. What you are asking about is an entirely different subject.

In all fairness I was simply responding to a post regarding stations and their relative merits. I'm not really sure thats on topic either!

 

[222001]

Very much not the case. Under the HLOS for CP4 TPE were due to get 40 extra carriages by December 2012 to allow 5tph on North TPE and more capacity. Only 1 extra train (10 x 350s instead of 9 x 170s) will throw the May 2014 timetables for TPE and Northern services (approved by ORR) up in the air with only weeks to completely rewrite timetables and diagrams, after years of planning the changes.

TPE are now literally screwed. ALL the 185s freed up by the arrival of the 350s are going to be taken up by the brand new Liverpool to Newcastle via Manchester Victoria service. So what about the rest of their network? There aren't going to be enough trains for TPE to run the timetable they have planned from May 2014 if the 170s go. What an utter arse-up.

 

[edwin_m]

Not having received my Modern Railways yet, does the article give any dates for this transfer?

 

[LNW-GW Joint]

Not having received my Modern Railways yet, does the article give any dates for this transfer?

It seems to be a lease-back deal.
Chiltern take the fleet over but sub-lease back to TPE until the units are needed ("spring 2015" at the earliest).

In its favour, the 170s are not common in the north and this would concentrate maintenance.
But there must be a quid-pro-quo somewhere to keep TPE on track.

 

[168lover]

Chiltern do need more stock, I was on 168110 into London on saturday into London coupled up with 172102, five car train absolutely rammed!

 

[edwin_m]

It seems to be a lease-back deal.
Chiltern take the fleet over but sub-lease back to TPE until the units are needed ("spring 2015" at the earliest).

In its favour, the 170s are not common in the north and this would concentrate maintenance.
But there must be a quid-pro-quo somewhere to keep TPE on track.

Thanks for this. I presume TPE's orginal lease runs out with the original franchise expiry date. But there does still seem to be a gap between these units disappearing in 2015 and the TP electrification reducing pressure on the rest of their DMU fleet.

 

[YorkshireBear]

Thanks for this. I presume TPE's orginal lease runs out with the original franchise expiry date. But there does still seem to be a gap between these units disappearing in 2015 and the TP electrification reducing pressure on the rest of their DMU fleet.

I sense that is the case hence why this is now happening.

That gap concerns me, basically more crap for FTPE to put up with, although we do not know the full story, it could be of their own doing!

 

[M60lad]

Is it true that Chiltern Railways are planning on taking 9 170s from Trans Pennine Express this Spring, just read this on another forum and wondered how true this is

 

[43167]

I hope not. That would leave TPE very short if it did, as I think the 185's displaced by the 350's are been used for a new service.

 

[DarloRich]

Is it true that Chiltern Railways are planning on taking 9 170s from Trans Pennine Express this Spring, just read this on another forum and wondered how true this is

I would doubt it. I would assume TPE would be very keen to keep these units as they could desperately do with any 185 units displaced by the new 350/4 units to strengthen services on the core routes. I also don’t think TOC’s can just poach stock off other TOC’s!

 

[YorkshireBear]

From other thread. TPE 170s off lease in April. They are being taken on by Chiltern in preparation for the Oxford services. They will be leased back to FTPE for two years.

 

[DarloRich]

From other thread. TPE 170s off lease in April. They are being taken on by Chiltern in preparation for the Oxford services. They will be leased back to FTPE for two years.

Oh - i thought the lease was being extended for 2 years THEN to Chiltern

 

[YorkshireBear]

Oh - i thought the lease was being extended for 2 years THEN to Chiltern

Not my understanding but it is currently only in MR so i think it might be best to wait and see...

 

[pemma]

It seems to be a lease-back deal.
Chiltern take the fleet over but sub-lease back to TPE until the units are needed ("spring 2015" at the earliest).

Not sure how spring 2015 helps as the next TPE changes will be December 2016 so if Chiltern get 170s in time for the May 2015 timetable change then either TPE will run the same services with less capacity or TPE will take on an alternative form of DMU.

In its favour, the 170s are not common in the north and this would concentrate maintenance.
But there must be a quid-pro-quo somewhere to keep TPE on track.

Based on the the theory that not many new DMUs will be ordered and that the more rural lines won't be electrified I think the North will need to get either a set of 170s or 172s from another operator to replace life expired Pacers and 150s on lines that aren't electrified.

Thanks for this. I presume TPE's orginal lease runs out with the original franchise expiry date. But there does still seem to be a gap between these units disappearing in 2015 and the TP electrification reducing pressure on the rest of their DMU fleet.

The TPE franchise will end in 2015 without an extension. DfT added a clause that the franchise could end early in April 2014 but only if the Northern franchise ended on the same date and the two franchises were merged.