Class 442’s for ATW?

[tiptoptaff]

Plenty of non valleys routes currently using 150s that could use 175s instead. Cheltenham, Maesteg, Pembroke, Crewe-Chester shuttle, even the Heart of Wales. Possibly not the most ideal use for 175s but if it frees units for the valleys and increases capacity on the marches I don't think anyone would be complaining.

Not that I think for a second it'll actually happen.....as much as I'd love it to both for personal and professional reasons.

I think it'll see a huge reshuffle and prehaps 175s to ERTMS conversion, to release 158s on some of the routes shown above? I think it would be a waste to send 100mph units back and forth to Maesteg all day. 158s are ideal for that

 

[D1009]

According to https://www.porterbrook.co.uk/rolling-stock/lease-end-dates states the GWR 143s are going off lease on 31-07-2017? Is that now wrong then? GWR made such a fuss about being the first TOC in the UK to be getting rid of their Pacers next year!

It's mentioned in the recent National Audit Office report on the delays to GW electrification which has caused the recent news stories. There's a link to it buried in the GW electrification thread. To put it in a nutshell the 143s can't go off lease until 387s have displaced 16x trains to Bristol which in turn allow 150/2s to replace the 143s down west.

 

[jopsuk]

Given that someone's ordered new-build (day) loco hauled stock and the Class 230 seems to be a reality- not to mention the massive blindside of GA announcing total fleet replacement- I've no longer any reason to doubt this could happen.

 

[craigybagel]

I think it'll see a huge reshuffle and prehaps 175s to ERTMS conversion, to release 158s on some of the routes shown above? I think it would be a waste to send 100mph units back and forth to Maesteg all day. 158s are ideal for that

Funnily enough there was actually a rumour I heard the other day about 175 and ERTMS. Personally I don't believe it - as much as I love working on them it's hard to think of a reason they'd be better on the Cambrian than 158s, plenty of reasons to think they'd be worse and it wouldn't be a cheap mod.

 

[krus_aragon]

Plenty of non valleys routes currently using 150s that could use 175s instead. Cheltenham, Maesteg, Pembroke, Crewe-Chester shuttle, even the Heart of Wales. Possibly not the most ideal use for 175s but if it frees units for the valleys and increases capacity on the marches I don't think anyone would be complaining.

As a ballpark figure, that'd be something on the order of:

Pembroke - Swansea: 3 diagrams
Crewe - Chester: 1 diagram
Maesteg - Cardiff - Cheltenham, Ebbw Vale : up to 6 diagrams?

10 extra 150s for the Valleys could tide things over until a new franchisee got their feet under the table.

I think 175s still have clearance issues at Llandovery, but if that was shaved away that's be another two diagrams where they could release 150s. They're not currently cleared for the Borderlands or Conwy Valley (which would be worth another three units, if there was that large a 442 cascade going on).

 

[anthony263]

Certainly the use of loco hauled sets would certainly bring a boost to capacity on the atw network and allow some of the pressure to be taken off the fleet which lets face it is rather stretched at the moment.

Additional class 150's for the Cardiff Valley lines which have been released from elsewhere by the class 158/175's would be great.

ETRMS for the class 175's certainly would give atw extra flexibility for the Cambrian however there is the issue of couplings on the 175's which are different to the other est of atws fleet

 

[PHILIPE]

Certainly the use of loco hauled sets would certainly bring a boost to capacity on the atw network and allow some of the pressure to be taken off the fleet which lets face it is rather stretched at the moment.

Additional class 150's for the Cardiff Valley lines which have been released from elsewhere by the class 158/175's would be great.

ETRMS for the class 175's certainly would give atw extra flexibility for the Cambrian however there is the issue of couplings on the 175's which are different to the other est of atws fleet

If 175s were to go onto the Cambrian, it would mean training Machynlleth and Pwllheli drivers on them. Most of the trains between Shrewsbury and Machynlleth and return are doubled up with an Aberystwyth and a Pwllheli portion and 175s have no through access from one to the other unlike 158s. Leave the 158s on the route.

 

[JohnElliott]

Would the new 73/9s still be compatible and if so are there any spare?

The Bluebell intended to run one in multiple with a 4TC back in April, which suggests they're intended to be compatible with bagpipe units. On the other hand, it didn't actually happen because the necessary equipment on the loco hadn't been commissioned at that point, so the question is whether they've got round to it since.

 

[Monty]

I also hear 442's could be part of the next SWT franchise. This is getting confusing. Are they going to spread out across the network.

If that's the case god knows there we are going to put them, we have no depot space anywhere. Only Eastleigh would be a viable option and that's supposedly been earmarked for the next Alliance Rail (hair brained) scheme, even so would mean you would need to re-establish a train crew depot there.

 

[craigybagel]

If 175s were to go onto the Cambrian, it would mean training Machynlleth and Pwllheli drivers on them. Most of the trains between Shrewsbury and Machynlleth and return are doubled up with an Aberystwyth and a Pwllheli portion and 175s have no through access from one to the other unlike 158s. Leave the 158s on the route.

Exactly. 175s to the Cambrian is a silly idea, unless there was a good reason for removing the 158s.

As a ballpark figure, that'd be something on the order of:

Pembroke - Swansea: 3 diagrams
Crewe - Chester: 1 diagram
Maesteg - Cardiff - Cheltenham, Ebbw Vale : up to 6 diagrams?

10 extra 150s for the Valleys could tide things over until a new franchisee got their feet under the table.

I think 175s still have clearance issues at Llandovery, but if that was shaved away that's be another two diagrams where they could release 150s. They're not currently cleared for the Borderlands or Conwy Valley (which would be worth another three units, if there was that large a 442 cascade going on).

They've been down the Heart of Wales in service, albeit not for a long time. I wonder about Conwy Valley and Borderlands - ATW tried and failed to get 158s passed for those routes, although they are of course also still barred from the Heart of Wales (unless the airbags are deflated).

Of course, presumably there would be some changes to diagrams anyway werec this to take place. Running west of Swansea with loco + 5 would be problematic and wasteful.

 

[Bevan Price]

The Wales On Line report mentions they hope to start operation of 442s by May 2017.

And just how long would it take to do any necessary modifications to stock / locos - and to get all the routes to be cleared by NR ???

 

[LNW-GW Joint]

Of course, presumably there would be some changes to diagrams anyway werec this to take place. Running west of Swansea with loco + 5 would be problematic and wasteful.

ATW would probably remove the middle vehicle from the 442s - that contains the unwanted traction equipment and 1st class.
But they need a push-pull solution first, as top and tail would be horrendously expensive.
And the loco diagrams would be slower than 158/175.

 

[Bletchleyite]

Funnily enough there was actually a rumour I heard the other day about 175 and ERTMS. Personally I don't believe it - as much as I love working on them it's hard to think of a reason they'd be better on the Cambrian than 158s, plenty of reasons to think they'd be worse and it wouldn't be a cheap mod.

If they do, they'd best make sure they do a good quality refurb. They are in a right state, whereas the 158s are pretty spotless and very comfortable. A straight swap would be very unpopular (though some 3-car units may well be popular with Aber passengers)
--- old post above --- --- new post below ---

The Wales On Line report mentions they hope to start operation of 442s by May 2017.

And just how long would it take to do any necessary modifications to stock / locos - and to get all the routes to be cleared by NR ???

As they're physically just Mk3s, might they be cleared already?
--- old post above --- --- new post below ---

They've been down the Heart of Wales in service, albeit not for a long time. I wonder about Conwy Valley and Borderlands - ATW tried and failed to get 158s passed for those routes, although they are of course also still barred from the Heart of Wales (unless the airbags are deflated).

If it *was* possible to get 158s cleared on the Valley (what was the issue?) I imagine that would be a very popular move. The state of the 150s is disgusting - take a 158 and swap the seats round so they're all fully-aligned tables and you would have a very nice scenic-line unit worth paying a premium for - perhaps stick some First Class in to cadge some extra money out of the tourists for good measure.
--- old post above --- --- new post below ---
FWIW I'd have said the North Wales Coast long-distance services would be the classic place to put them.

 

[MatthewRead]

According to https://www.porterbrook.co.uk/rolling-stock/lease-end-dates states the GWR 143s are going off lease on 31-07-2017? Is that now wrong then? GWR made such a fuss about being the first TOC in the UK to be getting rid of their Pacers next year!

Because the 150/1's are needed up North so GWR are getting rid of them first and are keeping the 143's

 

[PHILIPE]

[/QUOTE]If it *was* possible to get 158s cleared on the Valley (what was the issue?) I imagine that would be a very popular move. The state of the 150s is disgusting - take a 158 and swap the seats round so they're all fully-aligned tables and you would have a very nice scenic-line unit worth paying a premium for - perhaps stick some First Class in to cadge some extra money out of the tourists for good measure.]
--- old post above --- --- new post below ---
FWIW I'd have said the North Wales Coast long-distance services would be the classic place to put them.[/QUOTE]

If they do, they'd best make sure they do a good quality refurb. They are in a right state, whereas the 158s are pretty spotless and very comfortable. A straight swap would be very unpopular (though some 3-car units may well be popular with Aber passengers)
--- old post above --- --- new post below ---


As they're physically just Mk3s, might they be cleared already?
--- old post above --- --- new post below ---


If it *was* possible to get 158s cleared on the Valley (what was the issue?) I imagine that would be a very popular move. The state of the 150s is disgusting - take a 158 and swap the seats round so they're all fully-aligned tables and you would have a very nice scenic-line unit worth paying a premium for - perhaps stick some First Class in to cadge some extra money out of the tourists for good measure.
--- old post above --- --- new post below ---
FWIW I'd have said the North Wales Coast long-distance services would be the classic place to put them.

158s have had diagrammed work to Rhymney, Barry Island, Radyr, Penarth and Coryton. They are not cleared north of Radyr due to platform clearances but, in any case, were not popular due to the frequency of stations, large numbers of passengers and the need to despatch trains as quickly as possible to keep time. Their slow door opening and closing process was too slow to fulfil this.

 

[Harrythecat]

What about GWR taking on the 442's using class 67 on the Cardiff to Portsmouth route but possibly develop a duel 3rd rail / push pull system. Failing that class 73 push pull. Next release 158's to run Maesteg / Cheltenham / Ebbw Vale/ Pembroke Dock services. Then redeploy 150's onto valleys, all assumes GWR would play ball

 

[Parallel]

I don't think there's much chance of GWR taking on 442s for Cardiff - Portsmouth.

GWR have mentioned that they were looking at loco hauled options or shortened HSTs for selected other routes in the west, however.

--

As far as ATW is concerned, surely their network is now at the point where any (vaguely) reliable stock would be a big help. I read that loco hauled has been used to Rhymney previously. I'm guessing that was more of a limited stop service though? I think 5 carriages would be overkill on many ATW services, but 4 would be ideal. Then some 2-car 175s could run in multiple, as well as some 158s (excluding the Cambrian, which already do.)

 

[craigybagel]

The Wales On Line report mentions they hope to start operation of 442s by May 2017.

And just how long would it take to do any necessary modifications to stock / locos - and to get all the routes to be cleared by NR ???

Crew training alone would take longer than that, even if the stock was ready to go RIGHT NOW.

ATW would probably remove the middle vehicle from the 442s - that contains the unwanted traction equipment and 1st class.
But they need a push-pull solution first, as top and tail would be horrendously expensive.
And the loco diagrams would be slower than 158/175.

Chiltern found that a 67 + 6 + DVT could keep to DMU timings. 67 + 4, or even +5 shouldn't be a problem. There is the issue of MU speed differentials in some places, but some of them are already allowed to be used by 67s and MKIIIs and none of them are huge differences anyway.

If it *was* possible to get 158s cleared on the Valley (what was the issue?) I imagine that would be a very popular move. The state of the 150s is disgusting - take a 158 and swap the seats round so they're all fully-aligned tables and you would have a very nice scenic-line unit worth paying a premium for - perhaps stick some First Class in to cadge some extra money out of the tourists for good measure.

IIRC correctly there were clearance issues at a number of stations with 158 doors. I can't imagine the traffic levels on the branch justify much expenditure on fancier stock, although I will accept that some of the 150s have seen better days and aren't a great advert for the line.

FWIW I'd have said the North Wales Coast long-distance services would be the classic place to put them.

Possible,but there are issues. Lots of request stops for one which could potentially be difficult with loco hauled stock, and you'd only be able to use them on Cardiff services since the Birminghams interwork with the Cambrian. With their narrow doors they're more suited to longer runs between stations. They'd be better off on the marches, especially if it meant introducing first class to the route. If they were kept solely between Manchester-Cardiff it would also help keep crew training costs down.

 

[anthony263]

As far as ATW is concerned, surely their network is now at the point where any (vaguely) reliable stock would be a big help. I read that loco hauled has been used to Rhymney previously. I'm guessing that was more of a limited stop service though? I think 5 carriages would be overkill on many ATW services, but 4 would be ideal. Then some 2-car 175s could run in multiple, as well as some 158s (excluding the Cambrian, which already do.)

No ATW used class 37's hauling 4 mark 2's which did the same stopping patterns as the dmu's however only ran Rhymney - Cardiff Central and didn't do the section to Penarth most likely due to lack of run round

 

[LNW-GW Joint]

Chiltern found that a 67 + 6 + DVT could keep to DMU timings. 67 + 4, or even +5 shouldn't be a problem. There is the issue of MU speed differentials in some places, but some of them are already allowed to be used by 67s and MKIIIs and none of them are huge differences anyway.

It's 70 v 90 between Nantwich and Shrewsbury, and 60 v 70 between Wrexham and Shrewsbury (and are terminally boring!).
Plus some local restrictions Shrewsbury-Onibury.
Gerald manages by having fewer stops.

There are no class 67/68 differentials on Chiltern south of Fenny Compton.
It's then generally 95 v 100 Fenny Comptom-Leamington, and 75 v 100 north of Leamington.

 

[SpacePhoenix]

If that's the case god knows there we are going to put them, we have no depot space anywhere. Only Eastleigh would be a viable option and that's supposedly been earmarked for the next Alliance Rail (hair brained) scheme, even so would mean you would need to re-establish a train crew depot there.

Back when they were used by SWT's, was Bournemouth their main maintenance base?

 

[Bletchleyite]

IIRC correctly there were clearance issues at a number of stations with 158 doors. I can't imagine the traffic levels on the branch justify much expenditure on fancier stock, although I will accept that some of the 150s have seen better days and aren't a great advert for the line.

I have no particular issue with the use of 150s in and of themselves provided they aren't in the original 150/1 layout due to very poor window alignment (and these ones aren't, they are in a modified 2+2 150/2 layout with plenty of seats with a good window view). But they are filthy and worn inside - that wouldn't cost much more than a grand or two[1] to fix with a deep clean, a set of new seat covers and a splash of paint.

Would also be good to change the seat layout to be a bit lower-density by taking a row out of each section.

[1] Though I bet on the railway it'd be ten grand knowing its ability to inflate cost.

 

[PHILIPE]

As a ballpark figure, that'd be something on the order of:

Pembroke - Swansea: 3 diagrams
Crewe - Chester: 1 diagram
Maesteg - Cardiff - Cheltenham, Ebbw Vale : up to 6 diagrams?

10 extra 150s for the Valleys could tide things over until a new franchisee got their feet under the table.

I think 175s still have clearance issues at Llandovery, but if that was shaved away that's be another two diagrams where they could release 150s. They're not currently cleared for the Borderlands or Conwy Valley (which would be worth another three units, if there was that large a 442 cascade going on).

Assuming the Maintenance arrangements stay as they are, there would still have to be services 175 worked along the Marches to get them to and from their Alstom Depot at Chester

 

[D6975]

Assuming the Maintenance arrangements stay as they are, there would still have to be services 175 worked along the Marches to get them to and from their Alstom Depot at Chester

If the 442s do go on the Manchester services, then 175s would surely replace the 158 diagrams on Cardiff - Holyheads, which are currently a mix of 158/175.
I wonder if we could see a change in the long distance West Wales services as well, with 442s only going to Swansea with 158s or 175s forward from there.

 

[BestWestern]

Back when they were used by SWT's, was Bournemouth their main maintenance base?

Bomo was indeed their depot. I'm unsure, but I believe heavy maintenance there ceased when the 442s went, with the replacement Desiro fleet being taken care of by Siemens at their own Northam facility. Wimbledon may or may not have played a part with 442s, I don't know.

 

[craigybagel]

If the 442s do go on the Manchester services, then 175s would surely replace the 158 diagrams on Cardiff - Holyheads, which are currently a mix of 158/175.
I wonder if we could see a change in the long distance West Wales services as well, with 442s only going to Swansea with 158s or 175s forward from there.

On weekdays at least, there aren't any booked 158s on Cardiff-Holyhead , although due to shortages of 175s they do frequently appear.

It's 70 v 90 between Nantwich and Shrewsbury, and 60 v 70 between Wrexham and Shrewsbury (and are terminally boring!).
Plus some local restrictions Shrewsbury-Onibury.
Gerald manages by having fewer stops.

I'm well aware of that, I sign both routes. Once you take into account the 70 through Whitchurch and how long it takes to accelerate it really doesn't make all that much of a difference on that route, and Shrewsbury - Chester is hopefully going up to 90 for everything in places (the signs are already up!) and again even at present a 10 mph difference doesn't do all that much damage, especially when it's not constant like over Cefn Mawr viaduct.
--- old post above --- --- new post below ---

I have no particular issue with the use of 150s in and of themselves provided they aren't in the original 150/1 layout due to very poor window alignment (and these ones aren't, they are in a modified 2+2 150/2 layout with plenty of seats with a good window view). But they are filthy and worn inside - that wouldn't cost much more than a grand or two[1] to fix with a deep clean, a set of new seat covers and a splash of paint.

Would also be good to change the seat layout to be a bit lower-density by taking a row out of each section.

[1] Though I bet on the railway it'd be ten grand knowing its ability to inflate cost.

The ones that got refreshed last year are much better inside. Unfortunately, not all of them got done and the whole fleet of 150s are kept together in one pool so there's no telling which one you'll get.

 

[43096]

Bomo was indeed their depot. I'm unsure, but I believe heavy maintenance there ceased when the 442s went, with the replacement Desiro fleet being taken care of by Siemens at their own Northam facility. Wimbledon may or may not have played a part with 442s, I don't know.

Bomo's role changed when the 442s left as it now does C4 and C6 overhauls on SWT's non-Desiro fleet (Desiro overhauls are Siemens' responsibility). So to say heavy maintenance ceased there is incorrect - in fact it does more heavy work than previously!

 

[The Planner]

There are no class 67/68 differentials on Chiltern south of Fenny Compton.
It's then generally 95 v 100 Fenny Comptom-Leamington, and 75 v 100 north of Leamington.

90 vs 95 Fenny to Leamington. 70 vs 90 Leamigton to Warwick Parkway, from there to Tyseley 67s and 68s can use HST differentials.

 

[Bletchleyite]

The ones that got refreshed last year are much better inside. Unfortunately, not all of them got done and the whole fleet of 150s are kept together in one pool so there's no telling which one you'll get.

Yes:

http://www.arrivatc.com/project-class-150-2-C6.php

is roughly what needs doing to them all (though it would be nice to have a separate scenic lines dedicated unit with fewer seats).

 

[Gareth Marston]

Well theirs no easy fit in terms of deploying them and shuffling the existing fleet in relation to their depots. Deploying them on Cardiff to Manchester will at least allow the Holyhead to Cardiff's to interlink with Cardiff to West Wales diagrams to get the 175's back to Chester, cutting back the Holyhead to Birmingham to Chester and extending the Crewe to Chester shuttle to Holyhead using 175s might be another option.