• Our booking engine at tickets.railforums.co.uk (powered by TrainSplit) helps support the running of the forum with every ticket purchase! Find out more and ask any questions/give us feedback in this thread!

East Midlands Franchise 2019-

Status
Not open for further replies.

DanTrain

Member
Joined
9 Jul 2017
Messages
753
Location
Sheffield
It's because DMUs are much cheaper than bi-modes. It was reported Arriva were the middle bid for the Northern franchise - Govia lost out because their quality scoring was low while Abellio lost out because their cost scoring was high. While people point to the Cumbria routes and say they'd be ideal for bi-modes, it's worth remembering a number of Connect services won't be able to make any real use of overheads.
Surely that’s the same as EMT? Financially, older cheaper units make more sense I imagine, and hence why I’d suggest just sticking with refurbished 156/158s for the local routes. Bi-modes for Liverpool-Norwich would be nice, but that’s more if a vague hope than any kind if real expectation.
 
Sponsor Post - registered members do not see these adverts; click here to register, or click here to log in
R

RailUK Forums

LNW-GW Joint

Veteran Member
Joined
22 Feb 2011
Messages
19,555
Location
Mold, Clwyd
What would be the point in EMT having bi/tri mode 769s? They’d only be able to switch on the juice through Manchester and on Grantham - Peterborough. Much better having 156s and 158s in my opinion than underpowered bi-modes.

And Stoke-Crewe. Not to be sniffed at operationally, replacing a 1-car 153.
 

bb21

Emeritus Moderator
Joined
4 Feb 2010
Messages
24,151
- At St Pancras, waiting for the 19.15 train, and EMT don't let you start boarding until 19.10 and it's at the far end of the platform. Regularly occurs and is very annoying

They can't be boarded much earlier than that, as the inbound isn't booked in until 1903, and they have to allow people to get off and clear the platform first, to reduce overcrowding on the narrow platforms themselves. Far better to keep everyone on the course.

So if the inbound is already a couple of minutes late due to rush hour congestion, you find yourself in this position described.
 

hooverboy

On Moderation
Joined
12 Oct 2017
Messages
1,372
In which case, (and forgive my ignorance here!) why aren't Northern's 195s bi-mode?

same reason most motor vehicles aren't bi-mode(yet)
battery technology is not yet advanced enough to give sufficient range to be viable cheaply.

if you look at road use, the purely electric car only have about a 50 mile range.sufficient for doing a "city" run to the shops, dropping the kids to school but not much else.
the other "electrics" have to be topped up en route via on board generator.

for mass adoption of pure electric vehicles,two obstacles need to be overcome.
1) range. vehicles need multi purpose roles..so the salesman can get the same car as the school run....300-400 miles per charge minimum for versatility/multi use.
2) fast charge.in the event of running low/re-fueling this needs to be done in good time.overnight is not good enough. 15-30 minutes would be acceptable as a motorway service break duration..stop,plug in,have a cup of coffee and a sandwich...then roll on.for trains this would be 10-15 minute dwell at reversal point/terminus.

same is true of trains.We'll get there in a couple of years.
hybrids do have the advantage at the moment.
 
Last edited:

Tazi Hupefi

Member
Joined
1 Apr 2018
Messages
823
Location
Nottinghamshire
Well, there's been an improved service to Matlock (clock face hourly, rather than the irregular service under BR/ Central Trains), with through services to Nottingham (rather than terminating at Derby)...

...double the frequency from Nottingham to Newark (allowing Lincoln services to be speeded up and providing through services from Derby to Newark)...

...four extra 156s which have allowed the capacity from Nottingham - Sheffield - Manchester - Liverpool to be doubled...

...a fifth London service per hour, with the opening of the Corby branch (which has allowed speeding up of services from London to Leicester/ Derby/ Nottingham)...

...four relatively young 222s acquired from Hull Trains...

...double the frequency from Sheffield to Leicester/ London...

...put InterCity trains on ex-Provincial services to deal with busy periods (222s to Liverpool on Grand National days, HSTs to Skegness on summer weekends, HSTs to Lincoln for the December Markets)...

...five HSTs have recently arrived from Grand Central...

The Matlock-Newark extensions are a complete waste of time. There are often single figures on them between Nottingham and Newark, and I believe this service only runs because of some sort of subsidy/agreement with Nottinghamshire.

Even between Derby and Nottingham, outside the peaks, people use the XC services.

222s on Grand National Day seem to have stopped. Certainly didn't run this year.

I don't really think HSTs going to Lincoln once or twice a year is anything to shout about.

4 extra 156s - "extra" - wasn't this a swap arrangement with other units?

5 x HSTs arriving? I'd be surprised if there's that many. In any event, they aren't even planning on using them that much. Outside the peaks, they'll be stabled in Derby by the looks of things.

This is the kind of thing that EMT shout about, "look what we've done" - when actually, in 10/11 years, the overall benefit is absolutely minuscule.
 

DanTrain

Member
Joined
9 Jul 2017
Messages
753
Location
Sheffield
same reason most motor vehicles aren't bi-mode(yet)
battery technology is not yet advanced enough to give sufficient range to be viable cheaply.

if you look at road use, the purely electric car only have about a 50 mile range.sufficient for doing a "city" run to the shops, dropping the kids to school but not much else.
the other "electrics" have to be topped up en route via on board generator.

for mass adoption of pure electric vehicles,two obstacles need to be overcome.
1) range. vehicles need multi purpose roles..so the salesman can get the same car as the school run....300-400 miles per charge minimum for versatility/multi use.
2) fast charge.in the event of running low/re-fueling this needs to be done in good time.overnight is not good enough. 15-30 minutes would be acceptable as a motorway service break duration..stop,plug in,have a cup of coffee and a sandwich...then roll on.for trains this would be 10-15 minute dwell at reversal point/terminus.

same is true of trains.We'll get there in a couple of years.
hybrids do have the advantage at the moment.
Very true. I still feel that EMT having bi-modes is like taking an electric car to Siberia (no chance of charging), but I do agree that they’re probably Grayling’s solution to electrification (or lack if it).
 

hooverboy

On Moderation
Joined
12 Oct 2017
Messages
1,372
Very true. I still feel that EMT having bi-modes is like taking an electric car to Siberia (no chance of charging), but I do agree that they’re probably Grayling’s solution to electrification (or lack if it).

if they get battery storage right,then there will be an electrification "lite" programme for sure.it'll just be a few metres of catenary/live rail at the back end of skeggy to sit there and charge up for 10 minutes as the train waits for a return trip,rather than energising the whole 60 miles to nottingham.

it's a cheapskate version of electrification,but with the right technology it could work.

if technology advances even further, then it just gets parked up somewhere overnight and loads up as and when needed.
I could think something like IOW line would be a prime candidate to experiment with
 

DanTrain

Member
Joined
9 Jul 2017
Messages
753
Location
Sheffield
if they get battery storage right,then there will be an electrification "lite" programme for sure.it'll just be a few metres of catenary/live rail at the back end of skeggy to sit there and charge up for 10 minutes as the train waits for a return trip,rather than energising the whole 60 miles to nottingham.

it's a cheapskate version of electrification,but with the right technology it could work.
Indeed, although I still wouldn’t fancy running up the MML like that, not till technology really moves on anyway. Anyway, we’ve drifted off topic a bit here!
 

swt_passenger

Veteran Member
Joined
7 Apr 2010
Messages
31,267
same reason most motor vehicles aren't bi-mode(yet)
battery technology is not yet advanced enough to give sufficient range to be viable cheaply.

if you look at road use, the purely electric car only have about a 50 mile range.sufficient for doing a "city" run to the shops, dropping the kids to school but not much else.
the other "electrics" have to be topped up en route via on board generator.

for mass adoption of pure electric vehicles,two obstacles need to be overcome.
1) range. vehicles need multi purpose roles..so the salesman can get the same car as the school run....300-400 miles per charge minimum for versatility/multi use.
2) fast charge.in the event of running low/re-fueling this needs to be done in good time.overnight is not good enough. 15-30 minutes would be acceptable as a motorway service break duration..stop,plug in,have a cup of coffee and a sandwich...then roll on.for trains this would be 10-15 minute dwell at reversal point/terminus.

same is true of trains.We'll get there in a couple of years.
hybrids do have the advantage at the moment.
In the context of the earlier post, it is equally correct to refer to diesel or electric (ac overhead) powered units as “bi-mode”, in which case your perfectly valid points about battery power are unnecessary. “Hybrid” doesn’t seem to have generally caught on as a description, eg with 800s...
 

swt_passenger

Veteran Member
Joined
7 Apr 2010
Messages
31,267
...5 x HSTs arriving? I'd be surprised if there's that many. In any event, they aren't even planning on using them that much. Outside the peaks, they'll be stabled in Derby by the looks of things.
You're quite right, GC only had 3 sets to make available. They were traded in for 5 x 180s, which may have caused confusion.
 

hooverboy

On Moderation
Joined
12 Oct 2017
Messages
1,372
In the context of the earlier post, it is equally correct to refer to diesel or electric (ac overhead) powered units as “bi-mode”, in which case your perfectly valid points about battery power are unnecessary. “Hybrid” doesn’t seem to have generally caught on as a description, eg with 800s...

not really.
DMU's are for the most part mechanically or hydraulically coupled.A lot of that power generated is lost in transmission.
proper Bi-mode is generally electrically driven, either directly via AC/DC source or indirectly via a generator.
 

swt_passenger

Veteran Member
Joined
7 Apr 2010
Messages
31,267
not really.
DMU's are for the most part mechanically or hydraulically coupled.A lot of that power generated is lost in transmission.
proper Bi-mode is generally electrically driven, either directly via AC/DC source or indirectly via a generator.
I was meaning diesel or electric as alternative power sources within the same unit exactly as per the 800, ie bi-mode. I was not referring to DMU at all, surely?

My main point to try and get across was that to most people bi-mode doesn’t automatically imply running long distance on battery.

Or put another way, bi-mode operations on the MML will be just like on the GWML or ECML, probably using similar trains even if from a different manufacturer.
 
Last edited:

pemma

Veteran Member
Joined
23 Jan 2009
Messages
31,474
Location
Knutsford
4 extra 156s - "extra" - wasn't this a swap arrangement with other units?

No. The ex-FNW 153s that transferred from Northern to EMT were in exchange for 158 centre cars but the 4 x 156s were additional units following London Midland releasing 150s. Northern were given 4 x of the ex-LM 150s and told to send 4 x 156s to EMT for extra capacity, which is why 4 of the EMT 156s have different seats to the rest of the 156s. Northern also got extra 150s which is probably why they didn't object to their 156s being replaced by inferior 150s.
 

tbtc

Veteran Member
Joined
16 Dec 2008
Messages
17,882
Location
Reston City Centre
In which case, (and forgive my ignorance here!) why aren't Northern's 195s bi-mode?

I like bi-modes, especially given how poor we are at electrification (both in terms of getting politicians to commit to it and in terms of sticking the flipping wires up on time/ on budget). Ideally I'd like all new "D"MUs to be bi-mode, future-proofed.

Whilst I was annoyed at Arriva going for the cheaper option, in fairness to them, the 195s are designed for the "flagship" services which generally stay away from the wires.

If they were going to order bi-modes then they'd have been better on the kind of slower routes which see significant periods under wires (but not 100%). Metro Centre - Morpeth. Manchester - Buxton. Leeds - Moorthorpe - Sheffield. But these are routes that are going to retain 75mph DMUs as they aren't the kind of flagship routes that TOCs buy new trains for. Rightly or wrongly, instead of buying direct replacements for Pacers, they ordered "top of the shop" DMUs for the flagship routes and will then cascade 158s onto 156 routes, cascade 156s onto 150 routes. Annoyingly, there seem to be a potential surplus of DMUs suitable for Northern Connect routes (with more of the TPE 158s being spare at some stage, 170s coming from Scotland and the West Midlands and East Anglia). Still, water under the bridge now.

The Matlock-Newark extensions are a complete waste of time. There are often single figures on them between Nottingham and Newark, and I believe this service only runs because of some sort of subsidy/agreement with Nottinghamshire.

Exactly - it's the kind of improvement on an ex-Provincial route that requires a local/regional government subsidy to happen.

Wales & Borders, West Midlands Rail, Scotrail and Northern have those kind of political backers. The East Midlands doesn't have a regional assembly or PTE with deep pockets, so there's nobody to pay for improvements to loss making Provincial services. Easy to blame Stagecoach (and people on here will!), but I cannot blame TOCs for not investing their money in loss making routes (without public money), unless it was part of the franchise commitment. I doubt Arriva/ First/ Abellio etc would have done much more.

I don't really think HSTs going to Lincoln once or twice a year is anything to shout about.

It's the kind of joined up railway that people believe happened all the time in the 1980s but I can't think of many TOCs who arrange that kind of thing - whether it's 222s for Liverpool or HSTs for Skegness/ Lincoln - Stagecoach have made efforts (which, in the complicated modern railway require drivers to be trained etc).

You're quite right, GC only had 3 sets to make available. They were traded in for 5 x 180s, which may have caused confusion.

:oops:

Apologies - I got my cascades confused - you are (as ever) correct.
 

Kneedown

Established Member
Joined
29 Dec 2007
Messages
1,768
Location
Nottinghamshire
Anyway, surely Greater Anglia replacing their entire fleet should solve this problem soon, some nicely refurbed 156s (in the style of Northern’s new 150s) would do the East Midlands nicely.

Whilst I don't believe bi-modes would be worthwhile on the local routes, I seriously hope the next franchise operator will commit to replacing the 30+ year old, falling to bits rubbish we already have, not adding to it.
 

ForTheLoveOf

Established Member
Joined
7 Oct 2017
Messages
6,416
I'm lucky not to have to use their services often. Some Open Access competition - or perhaps another 'LM-esque' franchise - would do them well to give a perhaps slower alternative to the trains to/from London - at the moment the walkup prices are WCML-level absurd but without the equivalent quality/speed/frequency that 'justify' it on the WCML.

It's a big shame that Abellio dropped out. Stagecoach probably won't put in a bid that's as interesting to the DfT as they might have done 4 years ago, because they've been financially and reputationally hit by the VTEC scandal and they won't want to overbid.

This leaves Arriva in prime position - they have plenty of experience of running long-distance services (XC) as well as short-distance and regional services (NT/ATW). They know how to squeeze the absolute maximum revenue possible out of the customer base - see XC's ridiculous price hikes and restriction introductions when they got hold of that franchise. Just imagine the prosecutions and other notorious Arriva conduct, too. And obviously those issues with potential collusion/market abuse in the north of the route where XC, NT and EMT all operate.

The users of the EMT franchise have my commiserations. Indeed, I'm not sure if there's any long-distance franchise out there where the users aren't getting shafted on walk-up tickets vs. quality of service.
 

SPADTrap

Established Member
Joined
15 Oct 2012
Messages
2,352
It's a big shame that Abellio dropped out. Stagecoach probably won't put in a bid that's as interesting to the DfT as they might have done 4 years ago, because they've been financially and reputationally hit by the VTEC scandal and they won't want to overbid.

Not wanting to overbid is a good thing..Abellio look to have done exactly that with the EA Franchise.
 

whhistle

On Moderation
Joined
30 Dec 2010
Messages
2,636
Those saying the rolling stock "isn't their fault" - why is it then, that Scotrail have just been able to find 5 Class 153s?

Again, these bi/tri mode trains, (769 is it?), Great Western seem to have just ordered a large batch. What stopped EMT from doing this?
As Hoover says, the problem now is that Stagecoach won't want to do anything.
The last couple of years of a franchise usually sees nothing exciting, no investment, nothing particularly great for passengers.

The parent company won't see a return so who would give away millions of pounds to (potentially) another company? It also means they have a lot more to put in their bid.

Virgin did this with the West Coast. They were given the franchise back through whatever back door clause enabled them to do so, so all the stuff they put in their bid, they carried out, knowing they would see the return. Some good, some not so good, like the rushed interim uniform, that has now been replaced yet again.



If Arriva were to run EMT in the same way that they run XC, we could see HSTs parked in the sidings whilst services are run by 4 car Merideans - with no doubled up trains at all. 2 x 5 car Merideans would be a thing of the past.
It sounds like you think XC "park up HSTs" for no reason.
Or run short formed trains leaving Voyagers just hanging around for fun?
There will be reasons for this, even if you can't see them.



I wonder if it should be split between "express" and "local" routes, sort of like on East and West Coast, although not so much on GWR.

Wild to think XC core routes and EM express routes could be merged leaving the local EM and Nots-Cardiff/Stansted-Birmingham to a local operator.

I wonder if the new franchisee would consider doing this anyway like ex-London Midland's LNW and WMR (although I am aware that was stipulated in the ITT).

Further thoughts is that if that did happen, could Arriva brand the express London - Midlands services as Grand Central?
 
Last edited:

ForTheLoveOf

Established Member
Joined
7 Oct 2017
Messages
6,416
Not wanting to overbid is a good thing..Abellio look to have done exactly that with the EA Franchise.
What I mean is that I think they will stay too much on the side of caution and offer a very 'pessimistic' bid. This will mean that Arriva, who have knowledge, experience and financial backing, will be able to win with just about any bid. So much for competition then - they'll be able to introduce few improvements and yet still win, with a probably much larger (effective) franchise subsidy than before.
 

Kneedown

Established Member
Joined
29 Dec 2007
Messages
1,768
Location
Nottinghamshire
I wonder if it should be split between "express" and "local" routes, sort of like on East and West Coast, although not so much on GWR.

Wild to think XC core routes and EM express routes could be merged leaving the local EM and Nots-Cardiff/Stansted-Birmingham to a local operator.

I wonder if the new franchisee would consider doing this anyway like ex-London Midland's LNW and WMR (although I am aware that was stipulated in the ITT).

Further thoughts is that if that did happen, could Arriva brand the express London - Midlands services as Grand Central?

That would just encourage the bidders to overbid on the "lucrative" Intercity franchise, whilst the minimum would be bid on the local ones as nobody would be that bothered about losing. We'd just see already struggling local franchises starved of further investment as the operators try to eke out every penny.
Far better to merge local franchises with Intercity one's, with a caveat that a share of the profit goes towards investment for local routes.
 

pemma

Veteran Member
Joined
23 Jan 2009
Messages
31,474
Location
Knutsford
That would just encourage the bidders to overbid on the "lucrative" Intercity franchise, whilst the minimum would be bid on the local ones as nobody would be that bothered about losing. We'd just see already struggling local franchises starved of further investment as the operators try to eke out every penny.
Far better to merge local franchises with Intercity one's, with a caveat that a share of the profit goes towards investment for local routes.

Either that approach should be done everywhere or not at all, otherwise franchises like GWR and EMT are less attractive to big companies than one likes West Coast and East Coast (hence Virgin not being interested in EMT and First/Trenitalia pulling out to focus on their West Coast bid), while you get people arguing that routes like Manchester to Liverpool should get cascaded trains as it's run by a subsided franchise and at the same time arguing that little unprofitable branch lines in Norwich can get brand new trains because they are run by a franchise which could become profitable.
 
Joined
25 Jan 2016
Messages
541
Location
Wolverhampton
Withdrawal formally confirmed, in the following statement: https://www.globalrailnews.com/2018...pulls-out-of-east-midlands-franchise-bidding/

“FirstGroup, alongside our bidding partner Trenitalia UK, has decided to withdraw from the East Midlands franchise competition in order to focus on our joint bid for the West Coast Partnership franchise. This is an exciting opportunity to be the first operator of HS2, as well as run conventional West Coast services from London to Glasgow.

“We remain committed to retaining a leading position in the UK rail market.

“We will continue to bid in a disciplined way which is good for our stakeholders, the sector as a whole and above all, passengers.”
 

Domh245

Established Member
Joined
6 Apr 2013
Messages
8,426
Location
nowhere
Thanks for confirming that. That article says that there are still 3 bidders, so Abellio remains.
 

Kneedown

Established Member
Joined
29 Dec 2007
Messages
1,768
Location
Nottinghamshire
Either that approach should be done everywhere or not at all, otherwise franchises like GWR and EMT are less attractive to big companies than one likes West Coast and East Coast (hence Virgin not being interested in EMT and First/Trenitalia pulling out to focus on their West Coast bid), while you get people arguing that routes like Manchester to Liverpool should get cascaded trains as it's run by a subsided franchise and at the same time arguing that little unprofitable branch lines in Norwich can get brand new trains because they are run by a franchise which could become profitable.

I agree, it should be across the board. I've always said so.
Completely wrong that bidders can pick and choose to bid only on the profitable Intercity franchises, without accepting some of the responsibility for the less profitable routes which feed into them.
 

47802

Established Member
Joined
8 Oct 2013
Messages
3,455
Arriva for me! They do seem to be genuinely improving Northern, new fleet etc.

I had a good laugh when I read that, good grief if you think Arriva are good I dread to think what you think a bad one would be.
 

david252

Member
Joined
8 Apr 2014
Messages
6
Perhaps a bit harsh.

I'm not sure they have done a particularly bad job with EMT - they've just not done much that stands out as being particularly innovative or good, but my experience is they've kept the existing trains running.

I can think lots of aspects of individual aspects of poor customer service and experience that they could have changed though:

- At St Pancras, waiting for the 19.15 train, and EMT don't let you start boarding until 19.10 and it's at the far end of the platform. Regularly occurs and is very annoying
- At East Midlands Parkway when the trains for London leave at xx25 and xx33. What about all the minutes in between?
- On the Crewe to Derby route when a single coach unit is full to the rafters and really needs to be doubled up
- The train times to London are so slow that passengers drive out of their way to use another line. Derby passengers to London sometimes find it quicker going via Tamworth, Sheffield passengers drive to catch a train from Doncaster, Nottingham passengers drive to Grantham and use the ECML.

Would any other operator really do much better?
Even with the new timetable in May the position at East Midlands Parkway is no better. Three trains an hou to Leicester all within ten minutes then a wait of 50 minutes.
 

pemma

Veteran Member
Joined
23 Jan 2009
Messages
31,474
Location
Knutsford
I had a good laugh when I read that, good grief if you think Arriva are good I dread to think what you think a bad one would be.

There's been plenty of bad franchises which haven't involved Arriva - First North Western, First Capital Connect, First Great Western, National Express East Coast, Connex South Central, Connex South Eastern, Southern (Govia) etc.
 

Robertj21a

On Moderation
Joined
22 Sep 2013
Messages
7,518
I had a good laugh when I read that, good grief if you think Arriva are good I dread to think what you think a bad one would be.

I think Arriva are generally ok given what they have to cope with.
 

Agent_Squash

Established Member
Joined
22 Jul 2016
Messages
1,232
There's been plenty of bad franchises which haven't involved Arriva - First North Western, First Capital Connect, First Great Western, National Express East Coast, Connex South Central, Connex South Eastern, Southern (Govia) etc.

Was Southern pre GTR that bad? As far as I've seen, it's only since it became GTR that it really went downhill. GWR eventually improved - but the rest were generally shambolic.
 
Status
Not open for further replies.

Top