Ex LNER (and Grand Central) Mark 4 sets for TfW

[Southern Dvr]

Just remember that RTT is only showing the timing load. Doesn’t mean that is what will be running. I’d expect DMUs would easily keep to a LHCS timing load.

 

[hexagon789]

I’d expect DMUs would easily keep to a LHCS timing load.

And vice-versa with 67s and those fairly short loads

 

[Cambrian359]

Current issue of rail magazine suggests that these ex lner sets will now be formed of 5 carriages per set( instead of 4) and possibly up to 9 sets for tfw instead of 3. Page 32 bottom left.(apologies if this has already been posted but I couldn’t see it)

 

[krus_aragon]

Current issue of rail magazine suggests that these ex lner sets will now be formed of 5 carriages per set( instead of 4) and possibly up to 9 sets for tfw instead of 3. Page 32 bottom left.(apologies if this has already been posted but I couldn’t see it)

Taking that at face value, I don't think they'd be used on Manchester-Swansea, as it would muck up the plan to portion work a DMU to Carmarthen/Milford. Nine rakes (less two for the announced Cardiff-Holyhead express) wouldn't be enough for a full hourly service anyway. There's the option to operate a few diagrams instead, but that would probably involve training staff to run these five-coach trains to Carmarthen and beyond.

Holyhead-Birmingham is out (as it interworks with the Cambrian), leaving the remaining Holyhead-Cardiff services, and the North Wales-Manchesters. Both of these already see loco-hauled services, so crew training requirements would probably be lower. This interpretation would also fit with the recent press release about Mark 4 services.

One last possibility could be their use on Rhymney services, if the 769s are slower in coming than the Mark 2 coaches are in leaving. I'd be surprised if all nine potential rakes are intended for long-term use once the Civitys are built, though.

 

[Phil from Mon]

Current issue of rail magazine suggests that these ex lner sets will now be formed of 5 carriages per set( instead of 4) and possibly up to 9 sets for tfw instead of 3. Page 32 bottom left.(apologies if this has already been posted but I couldn’t see it)

Out of interest, will these have SDO or ASDO? If they are going to have this number of sets, and 5 coaches, in use then they will not fit several stations on the Marches (and maybe some to Manchester?).

 

[Cambrian359]

Out of interest, will these have SDO or ASDO? If they are going to have this number of sets, and 5 coaches, in use then they will not fit several stations on the Marches (and maybe some to Manchester?).

I’m afraid I didn’t see any comments to answer this point,it was a very small piece .

 

[hexagon789]

Current issue of rail magazine suggests that these ex lner sets will now be formed of 5 carriages per set( instead of 4) and possibly up to 9 sets for tfw instead of 3. Page 32 bottom left.(apologies if this has already been posted but I couldn’t see it)

Assuming it's all true and correct, that's quite an improvement on three rakes of 4. Though as with other comments, it'll be interesting to see which services they plan to use them all on and if with the rakes now being longer they'll have a full first now.

 

[ainsworth74]

It would tally with the idea of having a full 1st class vehicle as then you're not seriously reducing the standard class capacity if the rake is five coaches rather than four. Indeed that's a bump in standard class overall as it's three and a half vehicles of standard rather than three!

 

[krus_aragon]

It would tally with the idea of having a full 1st class vehicle as then you're not seriously reducing the standard class capacity if the rake is five coaches rather than four. Indeed that's a bump in standard class overall as it's three and a half vehicles of standard rather than three!

Though depending on where the (up to) nine rakes are deployed, they may not all have a first class coach.

As an example, introducing first class on a handful of Llandudno-Manchester services, only to withdraw the facility a few months later, could be a bit of a PR own-goal.

 

[Robert Mann]

Current issue of rail magazine suggests that these ex lner sets will now be formed of 5 carriages per set( instead of 4) and possibly up to 9 sets for tfw instead of 3. Page 32 bottom left.(apologies if this has already been posted but I couldn’t see it)

Is this the new issue of Rail that's due out on Wednesday? Because I couldn't find anything in the previous issue.

 

[Cambrian359]

Is this the new issue of Rail that's due out on Wednesday? Because I couldn't find anything in the previous issue.

Ah yes sorry I didn’t think,I read it in digital format out last Saturday so presumably Wednesday for print

 

[FrodshamJnct]

Out of interest, will these have SDO or ASDO? If they are going to have this number of sets, and 5 coaches, in use then they will not fit several stations on the Marches (and maybe some to Manchester?).

Good point. Not sure whether the likes of Helsby, Frodsham and Runcorn East are quite long enough for 5 coaches?

 

[PHILIPE]

There would be an excessive amount of traction training required if they were to work over a wider area and thecapacity to maintain the sets. Rhymney can be ruled out on the grounds of route availability.

 

[Cambrian359]

There would be an excessive amount of traction training required if they were to work over a wider area and thecapacity to maintain the sets. Rhymney can be ruled out on the grounds of route availability.

The article did claim tfw were considering Cardiff-Manchester route for their use

 

[craigybagel]

Good point. Not sure whether the likes of Helsby, Frodsham and Runcorn East are quite long enough for 5 coaches?

Helsby isn't even long enough for DVT + 4 cars. The one closest to the loco is locked out when the set is prepped at Crewe and not opened up to the public until Frodsham.

I'm not sure if the MKIVs are planned to get SDO or not but some of the stations the extra LHCS services from December are booked to call at are already problematic. They'll all take 4 cars no problem but not Loco/DVT + 4 cars. Either they'll need to put stop boards off the platforms at these stations or they'll need SDO.

The new CAF units are going to have SDO however.

The article did claim tfw were considering Cardiff-Manchester route for their use

Even that would require some degree of crew training over and above what is already taking place (either Crewe guards would need to sign LHCS or Shrewsbury guards would need to sign Crewe - Manchester) but it's certainly plausible.

 

[Phil from Mon]

Helsby isn't even long enough for DVT + 4 cars. The one closest to the loco is locked out when the set is prepped at Crewe and not opened up to the public until Frodsham.

I'm not sure if the MKIVs are planned to get SDO or not but some of the stations the extra LHCS services from December are booked to call at are already problematic. They'll all take 4 cars no problem but not Loco/DVT + 4 cars. Either they'll need to put stop boards off the platforms at these stations or they'll need SDO.

The new CAF units are going to have SDO however.



Even that would require some degree of crew training over and above what is already taking place (either Crewe guards would need to sign LHCS or Shrewsbury guards would need to sign Crewe - Manchester) but it's certainly plausible.

Thanks Craigybagel, confirms what I thought.

 

[craigybagel]

If more MKIVs do come, then Holyhead - Cardiff seems like the most appropriate route for them. As has been discussed, the through working of Manchester - South Wales services to Carmarthen/Milford Haven complicates things, and North Wales - Manchester services would mean running more end door stock through Platforms 13+14 which isn't ideal, or indeed liked by the powers that be.

 

[Rhydgaled]

Taking that at face value, I don't think they'd be used on Manchester-Swansea, as it would muck up the plan to portion work a DMU to Carmarthen/Milford. Nine rakes (less two for the announced Cardiff-Holyhead express) wouldn't be enough for a full hourly service anyway. There's the option to operate a few diagrams instead, but that would probably involve training staff to run these five-coach trains to Carmarthen and beyond.

Not having enough for a full hourly service does work against the idea, but if plans are changing there is no guarantee that they would still run through to Carmarthen/Milford. Terminating them at Swansea wouldn't be much of a problem if Milford/Carmarthen were given alternative through services to Cardiff, I'm not sure there's much demand for through services to Manchester and the marches from west of Swansea so the biggest loss would be no through trains to Newport.

Holyhead-Birmingham is out (as it interworks with the Cambrian), leaving the remaining Holyhead-Cardiff services, and the North Wales-Manchesters. Both of these already see loco-hauled services, so crew training requirements would probably be lower. This interpretation would also fit with the recent press release about Mark 4 services.

Holyhead-Birmingham may no longer interwork with the Cambrian if the open-access proposal to extend them through to Coventry is approved. However that assumes the even-hour departures from Aberystwyth will continue to terminate at Shrewsbury rather than coupling up with the Holyhead train to run through to Birmingham/Coventry.

Though depending on where the (up to) nine rakes are deployed, they may not all have a first class coach.

As an example, introducing first class on a handful of Llandudno-Manchester services, only to withdraw the facility a few months later, could be a bit of a PR own-goal.

Given the publicity already given to the plan to introduce mark 4s, the eventual switch to units would be a PR own goal in any case unless all mark 4 sets used on the route are only 4 coaches and whatever replaces them has 5 coaches in which case they could spin it as increased capacity. The mark 3 set currently used in north Wales may well appear out of date to the general public as it has slam doors, the same cannot be said of mark 4s.

The article did claim tfw were considering Cardiff-Manchester route for their use

Did it list any other possibilities for the use of the extra sets?

If more MKIVs do come, then Holyhead - Cardiff seems like the most appropriate route for them. As has been discussed, the through working of Manchester - South Wales services to Carmarthen/Milford Haven complicates things, and North Wales - Manchester services would mean running more end door stock through Platforms 13+14 which isn't ideal, or indeed liked by the powers that be.

Nine sets is probably a bit more than would be needed for just Holyhead-Cardiff though. Units with end doors will be running through platforms 13 and 14 anyway as TPE have ordered a load of them and mark 4 dwell times should be more controlable than mark 3 due to the power doors. Also, TfW's plan to switch Llandudno-Manchester for Bangor-Manchester is likely to reduce the number of stops the Manchester services west of Chester.

I still think it is a shame that the Earlestown, Runcorn East, Frodsham and Helsby stops weren't transfered to Northern's Leeds-Chester service. It would make more sense to me if the service going on into north Wales was the faster of the two between Chester and Manchester, given that Northern isn't the primary fast service between Manchester and Leeds.

 

[craigybagel]

Given the publicity already given to the plan to introduce mark 4s, the eventual switch to units would be a PR own goal in any case unless all mark 4 sets used on the route are only 4 coaches and whatever replaces them has 5 coaches in which case they could spin it as increased capacity. The mark 3 set currently used in north Wales may well appear out of date to the general public as it has slam doors, the same cannot be said of mark 4s.

Not necessarily. They only need to point out that the units are A: Brand new and B: built in Wales and they've already got two PR plus points over the MKIVs.

Nine sets is probably a bit more than would be needed for just Holyhead-Cardiff though. Units with end doors will be running through platforms 13 and 14 anyway as TPE have ordered a load of them and mark 4 dwell times should be more controlable than mark 3 due to the power doors. Also, TfW's plan to switch Llandudno-Manchester for Bangor-Manchester is likely to reduce the number of stops the Manchester services west of Chester.

Yes, it always did seem strange to me that TPE got away with that one. But I'm sure I read it somewhere in the franchise requirements specifically for the W&B franchise that end doors were not to be used for Piccadilly Platforms 13 and 14.

I still think it is a shame that the Earlestown, Runcorn East, Frodsham and Helsby stops weren't transfered to Northern's Leeds-Chester service. It would make more sense to me if the service going on into north Wales was the faster of the two between Chester and Manchester, given that Northern isn't the primary fast service between Manchester and Leeds.

For once, I entirely agree with you, it would have made a lot more sense doing things that way around. However, I suspect the impact it would have had on timings - both on tightening the turnarounds for the Northern services and either needing to repath the TfW services either side of Chester or increasing the dwell times there made it too awkward to achieve.

 

[Rhydgaled]

Not necessarily. They only need to point out that the units are A: Brand new and B: built in Wales and they've already got two PR plus points over the MKIVs

Ah, the fallacy of novelty. A.K.A. newer is not always better.

Yes, it always did seem strange to me that TPE got away with that one. But I'm sure I read it somewhere in the franchise requirements specifically for the W&B franchise that end doors were not to be used for Piccadilly Platforms 13 and 14.

I can't find that in the ITSFT documents I downloaded a while back. The nearest I've found is a condition specified by the DfT that train services must achieve a 1 minute dwell time at Oxford Road and Piccadilly from December 2021 although it doesn't seem to specifiy whether that is WTT or GBTT. If the latter then the Manchester Airport - Llandudno services already meet that criteria. The requirement is in the volume 3 (train services) ITSFT document. I wonder if TPE had a similar condition.

(ITSFT stands for Invitation To Submit Final Tender I believe).

 

[modernrail]

Ah, the fallacy of novelty. A.K.A. newer is not always better.

I can't find that in the ITSFT documents I downloaded a while back. The nearest I've found is a condition specified by the DfT that train services must achieve a 1 minute dwell time at Oxford Road and Piccadilly from December 2021 although it doesn't seem to specifiy whether that is WTT or GBTT. If the latter then the Manchester Airport - Llandudno services already meet that criteria. The requirement is in the volume 3 (train services) ITSFT document. I wonder if TPE had a similar condition.

(ITSFT stands for Invitation To Submit Final Tender I believe).

W
Does a 1 minute dwell time mean 1 minute from set down to moving off? I can't see any stock achieving that at these stations.

Mark IV's would surely suffer the same challenge as any other long distance stock at these stations, end door or not. There are a variety of routes, trains often arrive in the wrong order meaning passenger confusion on the platforms, long distance passengers often have luggage and are less familiar than regular passengers at jumping on board quickly, there will often be disabled and older passengers requiring assistance, the volume of passengers disembarking and embarking often match up (as opposed to say Thameslink core which is more one way traffic onto/off a train depending on the peak flow etc).

Any suggestion of any train meeting a 1 minute dwell time at Oxford Road/Piccadilly seems like unwise and unachievable optimism - perhaps why the situation is such a mess.

The MK IVs could be great on this service (and potentially Liverpool to North Wales) and so if it is under discussion I would hope it would be realised that longer trains may reduce dwell times with less crowding at each door and so at least be neutral over current stock.

I really think Oxford Road and Picadilly need immediate temporary solutions to try and relieve a very tricky situation. Key is a better system to tell passengers which train is arriving next, how long it will be, where the carriages will stop and help at the doors for less able passengers with luggage. I am not sure exactly what that looks like in terms of screens, staff etc but it needs some thought and implementation.

 

[Meerkat]

Bit of a trade off though - with a longer train passengers will be less willing to jump on nearest door then move along to the right coach. Which means people trundling along the platform with luggage

 

[Skip 10]

The current plan, due to unresolved clearance issues is to use a mark 4 set on the current North Wales LHCS diagram, I've not heard if there will be a second diagram.

Both mk3 sets will be used to cover the new Marches Diagrams, this will most likely be the state of play until May.

 

[hexagon789]

The current plan, due to unresolved clearance issues is to use a mark 4 set on the current North Wales LHCS diagram, I've not heard if there will be a second diagram.

Both mk3 sets will be used to cover the new Marches Diagrams, this will most likely be the state of play until May.

So derogations for the Mk3s then, slightly surprised they managed to get them considering the talk of how various other TOCs would likely have any derigations refused

 

[Skip 10]

So derogations for the Mk3s then, slightly surprised they managed to get them considering the talk of how various other TOCs would likely have any derigations refused

I think there will be a fair few, there's plenty of TOC's that have reasonable grounds for requests, be that waiting on cascades, stock that's late from providers, route clearance or having recently taken over franchises with very little time to implement a reasonable plan to upgrade current stock.

 

[squizzler]

It's good to hear that the class 67s might benefit from plenty of work in the future. Would the idea be for DB Cargo to rotate their fleet of these locomotives so each get a workout on a regular basis?

If only TfW would take all of them, then they would have quite a diesel express fleet to allow for growth on many of their routes, and have it pretty much right now. Perhaps the breathing space this allows might enable the CAF units to be reconsidered and delivered as bi-mode from the outset?

 

[squizzler]

Another thought that occurs: isn't the UK diesel freight fleet all going to be upgraded to ETCS shortly? In which case class 67 can haul trains on the Cambrian line!

 

[59CosG95]

Another thought that occurs: isn't the UK diesel freight fleet all going to be upgraded to ETCS shortly? In which case class 67 can haul trains on the Cambrian line!

That plan varies between operators; I've certainly heard very little about it in the UK. I am aware, however, that DB Cargo AG (i.e. Deutschland) is planning to equip large swathes of its fleet very soon.

 

[jimm]

Another thought that occurs: isn't the UK diesel freight fleet all going to be upgraded to ETCS shortly? In which case class 67 can haul trains on the Cambrian line!

With all that weight sitting on just four axles Class 67s would likely be subject to the same sort of restrictions on the Cambrian that applied when they worked the Fort William sleeper trains, with speed restrictions over various bridges, even if they were to be allowed.

 

[hexagon789]

I think there will be a fair few, there's plenty of TOC's that have reasonable grounds for requests, be that waiting on cascades, stock that's late from providers, route clearance or having recently taken over franchises with very little time to implement a reasonable plan to upgrade current stock.

At least they are being quite sensible in deploying the Mk3s

Another thought that occurs: isn't the UK diesel freight fleet all going to be upgraded to ETCS shortly? In which case class 67 can haul trains on the Cambrian line!

Do they have a low enough Route Availability?