Eureka moment - 319 cascades.

[tbtc]

I can't see why the branches arn't being electrified, leaving islands that would be cheaper to electrfy surely than just leaving the odd DMU half way down the GWML.

Its a real false economy, not doing things properly first time, because it may be a generation (or two) before we go back and fill in the gaps - look at Uckfield...

I am sure i read somwhere that the management at FGW have said they would pay for the thames valley branches to be wired if they won the next GW franchise.

I hope so - otherwise they'll be stuck with a small DMU fleet at Reading, with the complication of trying to interwork services (and potentially fewer "through" trains from London to Henley etc.

I'd like to think that the branches have been saved for a subsequent announcement, so that they can get another "good news" story into the press (same with extension to Swansea etc)

I think you're right given the current electrification plans. However add in North TPE and/or MML electrification and I recon the entire 319 fleet would be perfect for Northern

Fingers crossed.

If they do the MML properly (filling in the triangle between Sheffield/ Doncaster/ Barnsley/ Wakefield/ Leeds) then that would free up a number of DMUs.

Same with doing TPE properly (plus the Harrogate loop etc) - I just wish these were commitments (and not just "ideas")

Thats working at current service levels though...

If you increase service levels drastically on the electrified routes I got it up to 45 units required with current electrification.

ie.
Bolton slows over to EMU, extended to Chorley or Horwich.
Wigan via Paitcroft 2tph slow
etc etc. Got me up to 45 units

Add in Lostock electrification, Chinley Electrification and possibly Rochdale / Stalybridge and then you can easilly use all 86 units.

You'd have to increase things very dramatically (e.g. Bolton already has eight/ hour to Manchester, few spare paths at flat junctions), or commit to further electrification.

Bear in mind that if Northern gets the 319s (and not a cascade of 323s from LM) then you are talking about four coach EMUs mainly replacing two/three coach DMUs (there are a handful of 180 duties through Chorley, there are some doubled 156s, but just maintaining the existing frequencies with four coach EMUs will be a significant capacity increase.
--- old post above --- --- new post below ---

4. At present there is no guarantee that the existing 350s will be allowed to run at 110mph. It's subject to the outcome of tests.

There's no guarantee of many things, but if the 350s can't do 110 on London - Birmingham and Manchester Airport - Glasgow/Edinburgh services then there's going to be a lot of going back to the drawing board.

I still don't see why you'd want corridor connected 350s at Northern (which won't need to use doubled up EMUs) and non corridor connected 319s at LM (which needs a lot of doubled up services at the southern end of the WCML).

 

[pemma]

I still don't see why you'd want corridor connected 350s at Northern (which won't need to use doubled up EMUs) and non corridor connected 319s at LM (which needs a lot of doubled up services at the southern end of the WCML).

Huh? I specifically said the 350 cascaded north would be used on existing TPE routes as they are electrified. In addition the proposed Liverpool-Scotland service (which would portion work with the Manchester service) and the additional semi-fasts between Manchester and Leeds. I imagine some TPE services will still need to be doubled up even with an increase in frequency and 4 carriage trains.
--- old post above --- --- new post below ---

You'd have to increase things very dramatically (e.g. Bolton already has eight/ hour to Manchester, few spare paths at flat junctions), or commit to further electrification.

Bear in mind that if Northern gets the 319s (and not a cascade of 323s from LM) then you are talking about four coach EMUs mainly replacing two/three coach DMUs (there are a handful of 180 duties through Chorley, there are some doubled 156s, but just maintaining the existing frequencies with four coach EMUs will be a significant capacity increase.

Yes the Bolton corridor will be very busy. The Manchester Hub document mentions enhancing the Scottish service and diverting via Wigan with a replacement train through Bolton. The only suggestion for additional services through Bolton is through an enhancement of Victoria-Blackburn service which obviously wouldn't be EMU operated.

The point you make about capacity is where an issue arises with 4 car EMUs without SDO being used. Most peak time services are currently 4, 5 or 6 car. (The 5 car are the 180 services which have similar capacity to 2x156s so we can pretend they are actually 4 car.)

Arrival times in Manchester from Preston in the morning peak are: 08:18 (4 car), 08:27 (6 car), 08:48 (4 car) and 08:56 (6 car.)

Given most platforms take up to 6 car on this line (Salford Crescent doesn't currently but will before EMUs start running through it) I can't see how the same capacity can be maintained using 319s, never mind providing more seats.

 

[tbtc]

Given most platforms take up to 6 car on this line (Salford Crescent doesn't currently but will before EMUs start running through it) I can't see how the same capacity can be maintained using 319s, never mind providing more seats.

...in which case you'd get more capacity with doubled up (three coach) 323s cascaded from London Midland than you would from single 319/350s (and there isn't space for doubled up four coach EMUs).

 

[Nym]

The main problem with sending the 319s to Northern is the're just too long for a hell of a lot of the platforms, most of the network around Greater Manchester is geared for 3/6 or 2/4 car operation, and the newly electrified route are 3/6 car formation routes (Salford Crescent can already accept 6x23m car in both directions.

But theres two major issues stopping 8x20m formations that will be needed in Northernland before too long, especially if we have more parking provided where it's needed at Horwich.

1) Salford Crescent, it's boxed inside the junction and can't get any bigger
2) Oxford Road, the main Westbound Platform Pt2 is boxed in too, and it would need a major re-build of lines and platforms switching the main platforms over to 1 and 4, extending both, and shortening 2 and 3 to 4 car to allow non conflicting movments at both ends before we can have 8x20m or 8x23m platforms. You'd also be cutting off Platform 5 (No major issue as you could terminate on 2/3 or at Piccadilly)

The only way round this would be to either extend platforms...

Keep 323s for doubled up services on the 3/6 routes

Or order new EMUs at 3x23m length (The limit for most platforms) or 3x20m

Now since 319s will be a lot cheaper to lease than anything new, and Salford Crescent and Oxford Road are in desprate need of a re-build (platform wise) in the next 10 years anyway, I'd suggest going for the long term solution and extending platforms on the network to 4/8/12 car operational lengths. Especially Oxford Road, since this is to become a major station on TPE North, and one hopes they will have much longer formations running, and 8x20m or 8x23m is the theoretical limit for most other platforms. And salford crescent needs a major re-build anyway, Further North after the junction with 6 platforms please...

 

[pemma]

...in which case you'd get more capacity with doubled up (three coach) 323s cascaded from London Midland than you would from single 319/350s (and there isn't space for doubled up four coach EMUs).

And how would that work exactly? There wouldn't be enough 323s if Northern didn't take on another type of EMU as well and what would LM use to replace their 323s? People from the Midlands have said on a few occasions that 4 carriage trains could not replace the 323s at LM for infrastructure reasons. If you're proposing ordering new 3 car EMUs why not send them directly to Northern?

 

[swt_passenger]

Does anyone wish Bombardier would stop and let the thameslink under get underway so that it doesn't mess up the plans for EMU cascades?

What exactly are Bombardier doing to prevent it?

All the objections seemed to be from third parties, and the two most likely avenues for help, the Audit Commission and the Transport Select Committee have both reported back no further action...

The plans have already been messed up by DfT/Goverenment - that's why SN are putting in another short notice 377 order, and Siemens aren't delivering any Thameslink units until 2015...

 

[YorkshireBear]

Thats working at current service levels though...

If you increase service levels drastically on the electrified routes I got it up to 45 units required with current electrification.

ie.
Bolton slows over to EMU, extended to Chorley or Horwich.
Wigan via Paitcroft 2tph slow
etc etc. Got me up to 45 units

Add in Lostock electrification, Chinley Electrification and possibly Rochdale / Stalybridge and then you can easilly use all 86 units.

Add in manchester warrington liverpool, and im sure with sufficent platforms extensions lancashire would have a nice little electryfied network.
With probably most of the 319s based there if we can get doubling up to work. If North TPE too then youve got services to huddersfield too.
I agree about platform extensions but its probably going to be very expensive and difficult at some locations (ones youve already mentioned) and i cant see it happening soon.

Unless ive missed it as been announced as future plans.

What exactly are Bombardier doing to prevent it?

All the objections seemed to be from third parties, and the two most likely avenues for help, the Audit Commission and the Transport Select Committee have both reported back no further action...

The plans have already been messed up by DfT/Goverenment - that's why SN are putting in another short notice 377 order, and Siemens aren't delivering any Thameslink units until 2015...

Alright then i wish all third parties would stop the objections... its stopping progress...

Yes the had messed it up but this is extending it by another year which is severly delaying thr 319 introdution to other routes.

 

[pemma]

If North TPE too then youve got services to huddersfield too.

Huddersfield-Victoria services are set to go completely with stations being served by TPE services as Network Rail have found it too difficult to go above 4tph on North TPE, speed up services and keep the stopper in.

Their plan is for an hourly pattern of:
* Liverpool to York via Victoria
* Victoria to Hull
* Airport to Newcastle via Piccadilly
* Airport to Middlesbrough via Piccadilly

None of the above would call at Dewsbury or Stalybridge

There would also be two Piccadilly-Leeds services services every half hour. These would call at Stalybridge and Dewsbury and two stations out of Mossley, Greenfield, Marsden and Slaithwaite.

There would also likely be two Stalybridge-Victoria-Lime Street stopping services per hour.

 

[tbtc]

Huddersfield-Victoria services are set to go completely with stations being served by TPE services as Network Rail have found it too difficult to go above 4tph on North TPE, speed up services and keep the stopper in.

Their plan is for an hourly pattern of:
* Liverpool to York via Victoria
* Victoria to Hull
* Airport to Newcastle via Piccadilly
* Airport to Middlesbrough via Piccadilly

None of the above would call at Dewsbury or Stalybridge

There would also be two Piccadilly-Leeds services services every half hour. These would call at Stalybridge and Dewsbury and two stations out of Mossley, Greenfield, Marsden and Slaithwaite.

There would also likely be two Stalybridge-Victoria-Lime Street stopping services per hour.

IF it gets electrified.

 

[YorkshireBear]

Huddersfield-Victoria services are set to go completely with stations being served by TPE services as Network Rail have found it too difficult to go above 4tph on North TPE, speed up services and keep the stopper in.

Their plan is for an hourly pattern of:
* Liverpool to York via Victoria
* Victoria to Hull
* Airport to Newcastle via Piccadilly
* Airport to Middlesbrough via Piccadilly

None of the above would call at Dewsbury or Stalybridge

There would also be two Piccadilly-Leeds services services every half hour. These would call at Stalybridge and Dewsbury and two stations out of Mossley, Greenfield, Marsden and Slaithwaite.

There would also likely be two Stalybridge-Victoria-Lime Street stopping services per hour.

Oh thanks very much for that.
Hmm im not neccesarily sure i agree with that (them doing it not what you said) i think for example if it called slaightwaite marsden and the other one called marsden mossley then what happens to people travelling between say slaithwaite and marsen? very wierd to have two station next to each other that are never served they would surely have to sponsor a bus service?

Looking at google maps... could they not use marsden as an overtaking palce and keep the hourly stopper?
--- old post above --- --- new post below ---

IF it gets electrified.

Is the plan to increase frequency definitely just for electrification and not a diesel aspiration too.

 

[pemma]

IF it gets electrified.

Is the plan to increase frequency definitely just for electrification and not a diesel aspiration too.

No 6tph is the preferred proposal anyway as part of the Northern/Manchester Hub which doesn't include electrification being extended east of Stalybridge.

The only difference if no electrification takes place is Scarborough-Liverpool would remain instead of becoming York-Liverpool.

Hmm im not neccesarily sure i agree with that (them doing it not what you said) i think for example if it called slaightwaite marsden and the other one called marsden mossley then what happens to people travelling between say slaithwaite and marsen? very wierd to have two station next to each other that are never served they would surely have to sponsor a bus service?

I don't know how many people travel between the adjacent stations. Marsden and Slaithwaite have buses to Huddersfield every few minutes so I can only assume the hourly train is so popular because it's cheaper than the bus.

Looking at google maps... could they not use marsden as an overtaking palce and keep the hourly stopper?

I think the middle platform can only be used for turn backs from Huddersfield and it has been closed off but it's a while since I've been there so I'm not 100% sure on that.

 

[Nym]

They could of course re-introduce a lot of 4 track on the route so slows could be overtaken by fasts...

 

[YorkshireBear]

No 6tph is the preferred proposal anyway as part of the Northern/Manchester Hub which doesn't include electrification being extended east of Stalybridge.

The only difference if no electrification takes place is Scarborough-Liverpool would remain instead of becoming York-Liverpool.



I don't know how many people travel between the adjacent stations. Marsden and Slaithwaite have buses to Huddersfield every few minutes so I can only assume the hourly train is so popular because it's cheaper than the bus.



I think the middle platform can only be used for turn backs from Huddersfield and it has been closed off but it's a while since I've been there so I'm not 100% sure on that.

Fair enough thanks again for that.

I could see that now marsden couldnt be used but... it looks like there is room should they want to 4 track through that station.

 

[tbtc]

They could of course re-introduce a lot of 4 track on the route so slows could be overtaken by fasts...

They could (with the issue that the main line would have to slow down a little as the current alignment is two tracks across a four track space, so are marginally faster than the old alignment - not a major difference over a Newcastle - Manchester journey, granted).

However the whole argument here is based on a Network Rail wishlist, and not on any Government agreement.

 

[Nym]

Also, Network Rail is a private company that can change inferstructure how they see fit... At least I see it as this being the case.

 

[pemma]

However the whole argument here is based on a Network Rail wishlist, and not on any Government agreement.

Funding for the Ordsall Chord has been approved. You don't approve a project of that size for just linking Victoria station to the Airport. It needs quite a few extra trains every hour to go in to Manchester to prove to be a good use of public money.

 

[tbtc]

Funding for the Ordsall Chord has been approved. You don't approve a project of that size for just linking Victoria station to the Airport. It needs quite a few extra trains every hour to go in to Manchester to prove to be a good use of public money.

Funding for Ordsall Curve, yes (which will divert the TPE North services via Victoria which will free up a number of paths into Piccadilly each hour).

But we can't assume that TPE North will be electrified until its announced, just because Network Rail have it on a wish list. After all, RailTrack wanted to rebuild the Matlock - Buxton line, but that came to nothing.

If we assumed that ever aspiration in a RUS would actually happen then there'd be no problems...

 

[pemma]

But we can't assume that TPE North will be electrified until its announced, just because Network Rail have it on a wish list. After all, RailTrack wanted to rebuild the Matlock - Buxton line, but that came to nothing.

I agree we don't know for certain that North TPE will be electrified but proposals for extra services on North TPE have existed for longer than electrification proposals. The problem has been getting around the issue of the Victoria-Huddersfield stopper. However, they've now come up with a proposal that gets around that issue and had public consultations on it. I don't know if anyone reading this thread attended one of those consultations to be able to provide more information on it.

If we assumed that ever aspiration in a RUS would actually happen then there'd be no problems...

Sometimes proposals are changed but the high priority ones usually get some sort of solution. For instance, the Yorkshire RUS recommended adding on to the new order of EMUs that the North West were getting as 323 replacement and extra capacity. However, the new order never went ahead but instead the 322s are going to be in service in Yorkshire from December.

The new EMU order was a DfT proposal not a Network Rail one.

 

[tbtc]

I agree we don't know for certain that North TPE will be electrified but proposals for extra services on North TPE have existed for longer than electrification proposals

True, I just took the view that no electrification meant that there would be no need for quite so many EMUs in northern England, hence mentioning it in this thread

 

[Xenophon PCDGS]

Their plan is for an hourly pattern of Victoria to Hull

There would also be two Piccadilly-Leeds services services every half hour. These would call at Stalybridge and Dewsbury and two stations out of Mossley, Greenfield, Marsden and Slaithwaite.

I remember those days when British Railways ran services using the Class 124 units to Hull that used to call at Manchester. Would the route taken by those DMU be reflected in these proposed services, which at least were run by trains with the correct number of coaching stock. Are there lessons to be learnt from the car-numbers of those former units, as a journey from either Liverpool or Manchester to Hull is quite a good distance, with prospective sectional loadings that form part of an established passenger loading pattern.

With regard to the "either/or" situation in the second part of your quote, Mossley has more numerical users than Greenfield on the west side of the Pennines and Slaithwaite has more numerical users than Marsden on the east side of the Pennines. It is noticeable that the current stations nearest to the Standedge tunnels on both sides of the Pennines have lower figures then their neighbouring stations.