Over 400,000 journeys are made to/from Altrincham a year by heavy rail for connections with Metrolink or journeys where Metrolink can't be used. For instance, most of the school/college traffic from Altrincham is to Hale and Knutsford, while Metrolink doesn't run to Stockport and Chester.
The oldest M5000s are now 7 years old. Don't forget the brand new tram-trains which are being delivered for Rotherham-Sheffield and if the trial is successful it might lead to more being ordered.
However, if we're going to count light rail should we also consider how modern vehicles used on bus services are?
Okay, so the average age of the vast majority of rail departures from Altrincham (ten out of twelve per hour, based on current timetables) are roughly four years old...
...and the average age of light rail vehicles in South Yorkshire will still be around twenty years old, even when the seven new vehicles are introduced alongside the existing twenty five that date back to 1994.
I wont mind 150's on the DCL as long as they're refurbished to a good standard with 2+2 seating. It's just still a bit annoying that the North East seems to be the dumping ground for the worst stock combined with a historically poor service when we actually have some large and densely populated conurbations within a short distance of each other.
If we do lose the 156's though that will be a sad day for me! A big part of my childhood being taken on one to Newcastle most Saturday's in the early 90's.
Good points
While I'm not against 150s being used within the North East as I have mentioned on the previous page, if suitably refurbished as stated by others, I view it as unlikely in reality that 150s would be moved to Heaton: While there's not a great deal of difference mechanically and operationally between a 150 and a 156, Heaton depot and North East area drivers and guards have many years of experience on 156s (admittedly as I say there's a lot of common components between the two) and the units are already there.
Plus, there are still a large number of 142s that need replacing on routes radiating out of Sheffield and Manchester which won't be covered by new class 195s and are commuter based, so better suited to 150s, and I'm not sure what other routes you would consider better covered by 156s (Off the top of my head, 153 diagrams on the Cumbrian Coast could usefully be covered by156s).
I largely agree with that although perhaps for slightly different reasons. Most of the runs that will be or might be resourced from Heaton are more rural with relatively long journeys for which a reasonable standard of interior comfort is important. I'd say only the Saltburn line is a possible exception and even that is arguable. On the other hand nearly every Northern diagram further south that isn't a Connect will be relatively short-distance or having to deal with commuter peaks or both, where the layout of the 150 offers a real benefit in shorter dwell times and more standing space. I think, donning tin hat, that this makes it more likely Heaton will stick with 156s alongside its 158s, and the 150s will cluster around Manchester and Leeds.
I can see the logic in keeping 156s to go with the 158s; as someone with family in County Durham Id like that area to have a decent fleet (and I wouldnt want to have to schlep all the way to Saltburn on a 150 I dislike 150s about as much as I love summer jaunts to Saltburn).
I just cant see the Heaton fleet justifying
three different DMU types (not big enough to warrant it) and Id be surprised if they got the best of both worlds (essentially swapping 142s for refurbished 158s, with nothing downgraded). Good if it happens, dont get me wrong, but usually these cascades tend to come at a price, if history is anything to go by itd be nice to be wrong though!
156s on the Saltburn stoppers would seem a relative luxury, given the middle distance services that will be 150 operated under the new franchise (which will presumably include routes like Liverpool to Manchester, Manchester to Sheffield, Sheffield to Leeds...).
Theres going to be a lot of 150s arriving, but not a lot of short distance services for them to be confined to. With Manchester Wigan being electrified (and Manchester Oldham replaced by trams a few years ago), the new franchise wont have many short distance services. Dump 150s on shorter routes like the Ormskirk shuttle, the Kirby shuttle, the New Mills services (albeit some of which run through to Sheffield) but thats a still drop in the ocean compared to the increased number of these DMUs). I cant believe that 150s wont end up on the Saltburn Darlington Bishop Auckland line (if that makes sense).
After electrification, would there be enough work for 47 Class 156 west of the Pennines?
Good question.
Id expect therell be enough to keep a large fleet of 156s busy whilst well see some Pacers/153s replaced by 150s, there are certainly a few middle distance routes west of the Pennines that currently see 142/153s on at least some duties Cumbrian Coast, Southport, Mid-Cheshire, Hope Valley (which is a west route, even if Hope is east of the Pennine Way). Some of these will also see frequency increases (compared to todays timetable), as will existing 156-dominated routes like the Buxton corridor. Then there are the routes that may not see timetable changes, but need doubled up units.
I personally think that 156s would be better suited to the Blackpool South route a lot of money along the coast the route needs upgrading beyond just a 150 but its let down by the Colne side of the route (which a 150 would be fine on).
The electrification and the new DMUs will certainly make an impact, but (given the large number of 142s and 153s to replace), I think the full 156 fleet could be accommodated west of the Pennines. That said, there are a number of middle distance services east of the Pennines that currently see Pacers where I dont think a 150 would be enough of an upgrade (Sheffield to Leeds via Dearne Valley, Sheffield to Leeds via Castleford, Sheffield to Huddersfield, Sheffield to Scunthorpe), so I think weve a long way to go until we can afford to put 156s on all Saltburn diagrams. No disrespect to the good people of Cleveland, of course, I just think that the service to Darlington is more of a 150 route (whilst theres no shortage of routes elsewhere in Northernland for 156s).
That said, the whole What Will Northern Use Where debate is a messy one. For example, they could have three different types of very similar DMUs (100mph with commuter doors and no corridor connections) with the 170s/ 185/ 195s, but the need to spread the 195s thinly on premium services means theyll presumably have multiple versions of similar DMUs at the same depot which seems wasteful.
The more I think about it, the less I like the way that the new stock is going to be spread around to tick a box so that each city* gets one "new" train an hour, rather than the operational efficiency of having a big stock of new trains at one depot.
(* - with the obvious exceptions of the cities of Sunderland and Newcastle
)
Of course they might leave Class 158 maintenance at Neville Hill, exchanging units at Carlisle with some S&C services. Also, it makes sense to retain some Class 156 at Heaton if the Scotrail Glasgow - Carlisle - Newcastle services are being retained (& still operated by 156s), since Heaton crews will need to retain traction knowledge for class 156.
I wonder how the Glasgow trains will fit into the service pattern. Logically as longer-distance trains they should be the in the faster path, but 156s don't meet the spec for Connect. Will they not advertise those ones as Connect, or run them as slows, or try to persuade the Scots to use a 158 instead?
Good points re the GSW duties - I *think* that 158s can't work that route through Kilmarnock, though can't remember if there's a genuine clearance issue somewhere (with the doors?) of if this is one of these "never applied for clearance as it was never needed" paperwork issues.
