fTPE Rant

[rosscbrown]

Why does fTPE have three car sets if it wants to run six car trains to Edinburgh? It wouldn't be a problem if I could walk the entire length of the train but there is no door between carriages three and four.

I usually get the 8.15 (ish) three car service to Edinburgh from Lockerbie, so at 9.55 am when I went to get the later service I assumed it was again a three car train.

There was no announcement at the station which was particularity disappointing seeing that I chased the train up the platform to sit in section A.

Thirty minutes later I still hadn't bee served some refreshments and I noticed that the trolley was missing from where it usually rests.

It was only when I reached Edinburgh, and the driver stopped almost outside the eastern end of the station, that I found out that it was a six car train and the catering trolley was in the other half of the train.

So, here is a simple little request: Either buy new trains, have two trolleys or at least tell people when they board the train!

I'm honestly starting to believe that First Class is not worth the trouble on these services to Lockerbie. On the early train it is too busy and on the 9.55 train i seems one only have a 50% chance of service. Bring back the Virgin services to Lockerbie.

 

[pemma]

Apparently Siemens asked TPE if they wanted corridor linkers and TPE said no as they didn't think they'd be used in multiple on a regular basis.

 

[F Great Eastern]

fTPE have become a victim of their own success - the growth on a lot of there services has been very high since they got the franchise, now they are suffering with this problem.

 

[bengolding]

Is First Class also full by the time it reaches Lockerbie on the 8:15? You should be grateful that you are travelling First (Class) as the chances of a seat in Standard are probably slim at that point. VT have laid on Pendolinos on the Birmingham-Edinburgh route to cater for growing demand during the festival. I hate to think what your train will be like over the next few weeks.

On the Lockerbie-Edinburgh route I know that the old daily VT to Euston stopped there, but VT now only have a few services from Glasgow that stop at Lockerbie, such as the 17:40 to Birmingham. So, unless you want to go via Glasgow, you'll have to stick with TPE.

 

[tbtc]

fTPE have become a victim of their own success - the growth on a lot of there services has been very high since they got the franchise, now they are suffering with this problem.

It's not an accident that there's been growth - surely they looked at medium/ long term forecasts when investing in new trains?

 

[MCR247]

Anyway, they're getting new trains so consider yourself lucky

 

[bluenoxid]

It's not an accident that there's been growth - surely they looked at medium/ long term forecasts when investing in new trains?

FTPE wanted a larger fleet and longer trains. They have been wanting extra carriages for years.

Were the Scottish services foreseen when the 185's were ordered.

To rant about fTPE and complain that they are at fault is wrong. They are a victim of circumstance

 

[A60K]

Yep - TPE were pretty much told by the DfT they had to operate these services, with the rolling stock they had. Ideally an order for another eight or so Voyager/Meridian units for these services would have been underwritten by the DfT so that there was enough and appropriate stock to go around (or, even better, they could have electrified the few missing miles and ordered some 444 type stock or mini-Pendos).

 

[me123]

On the plus side, the upcoming electrification will allow electric trains to run between Glasgow/Edinburgh and Manchester. Hopefully, this will be more suitable rolling stock than the 185s, which would allow more services to run as 6 carriages when needed.

Perhaps the order will even see Virgin replacing part of their Voyager fleet (for Birmingham-Scotland), which would be a welcome addition over at Cross Country... It's a nice dream that probably won't happen, though.

 

[pemma]

On the plus side, the upcoming electrification will allow electric trains to run between Glasgow/Edinburgh and Manchester. Hopefully, this will be more suitable rolling stock than the 185s, which would allow more services to run as 6 carriages when needed.

Cascaded 350s will run Manchester Airport to Scotland services, so they will get an extra carriage. If it's 350/1s then they will be almost identical to the 185s, but with an extra carriage. If it's 350/2s then it will be a downgrade.

The cascaded 350s will be instead of new diesel units. Whether TPE will get any new diesels is to be confirmed later in the year.

 

[tbtc]

FTPE wanted a larger fleet and longer trains. They have been wanting extra carriages for years.

Were the Scottish services foreseen when the 185's were ordered.

To rant about fTPE and complain that they are at fault is wrong. They are a victim of circumstance

I was replying to F Great Eastern's comment that "fTPE have become a victim of their own success - the growth on a lot of there services has been very high since they got the franchise, now they are suffering with this problem".

Whilst the Scottish routes are probably an exception (had it been decided that TPE would get them at the time the 185s were ordered - can't remember), the notion of running three car DMUs on the other routes certainly isn't a step forward.

Worryingly, First's "solution" to the busy Leeds services isn't longer trains on the core section, but to try to cram a fifth train each hour onto congested tracks.

I thought that the order for 185s was cut down at the last minute? (plus all the rigmarole about a "fourth" carriage)
--- old post above --- --- new post below ---

Cascaded 350s will run Manchester Airport to Scotland services, so they will get an extra carriage. If it's 350/1s then they will be almost identical to the 185s, but with an extra carriage. If it's 350/2s then it will be a downgrade.

The cascaded 350s will be instead of new diesel units. Whether TPE will get any new diesels is to be confirmed later in the year.

In an ideal world, we'd have a new fleet of EMUs ordered for the Birmingham/ Manchester to Edinburgh/ Glasgow services, to be shared between the two TOCs.

However, the "solution" currently seems to be taking some of LM's EMUs (to be replaced by what?), with the Birmingham service staying diesel (at a time when we could do with cascaded Voyagers elsewhere)

 

[pemma]

However, the "solution" currently seems to be taking some of LM's EMUs (to be replaced by what?), with the Birmingham service staying diesel (at a time when we could do with cascaded Voyagers elsewhere)

London Midlands 350s will be replaced by brand new EMUs:

CSR Nanjing Submits Train Bid

Source: Transport Briefing

The Chinese company CSR Nanjing has submitted a bid to build between 40 and 120 carriages for London Midland. The other bidders who have submitted documents are Bombardier, Rotem and CAF. The value of the work is between 44 and 160 million depending on the amount of carriages supplied. The specification for the trains was that they could run in either 3 or 4 car sets and had a top speed of 100 mph.

These are believed to be replacing the 350s currently running London Euston services. Why? I have no idea.

 

[MCR247]

London Midlands 350s will be replaced by brand new EMUs:

CSR Nanjing Submits Train Bid

Source: Transport Briefing

The Chinese company CSR Nanjing has submitted a bid to build between 40 and 120 carriages for London Midland. The other bidders who have submitted documents are Bombardier, Rotem and CAF. The value of the work is between 44 and 160 million depending on the amount of carriages supplied. The specification for the trains was that they could run in either 3 or 4 car sets and had a top speed of 100 mph.

These are believed to be replacing the 350s currently running London Euston services. Why? I have no idea.

3 car ones replace 323s. I dont think they are replacing the 350/1s

 

[F Great Eastern]

No Siemens bid? Seem not to be involved lately with orders?

 

[pemma]

3 car ones replace 323s. I dont think they are replacing the 350/1s

Where will the London Midland 323s go then? If Northern are to get the 319 and keep their 323s then they certainly won't be able to use all the London Midland 323s.

 

[MCR247]

Where will the London Midland 323s go then? If Northern are to get the 319 and keep their 323s then they certainly won't be able to use all the London Midland 323s.

Sorry about that, I should have said that is a rumour. Is it comfirmed that Northern will get 319s?

 

[pemma]

Sorry about that, I should have said that is a rumour. Is it comfirmed that Northern will get 319s?

DfT have said the following:

Completion of the second phase between Newton-le-Willows and Liverpool
will provide a fully electrified route between Liverpool and Manchester.
Like the Thames Valley suburban services on the Great Western Main Line,
regional services will be operated from 2013 by four-carriage electric trains
transferred from the cross-London Thameslink route. These trains will be
completely modernised before they are transferred, including the installation
of air conditioning.

That suggests 319s, without specifically saying it.

 

[MCR247]

I hadnt seen that. Cheers

 

[tbtc]

Where will the London Midland 323s go then? If Northern are to get the 319 and keep their 323s then they certainly won't be able to use all the London Midland 323s.

I've never understood the logic of Northern getting the other 323s (there's not a lot of scope for more EMUs until there's more wires).

Doubled up 323s could replace the three 321s at Leeds (if the platforms on the Donny line are long enough), maybe a couple of Manchester area EMUs could be doubled up, but apart from that there's not much scope. Shame, when there's tatty Pacers running around to get electric carriages they can't use!

 

[D841]

Apparently Siemens asked TPE if they wanted corridor linkers and TPE said no as they didn't think they'd be used in multiple on a regular basis.

When the 185 prototype was on display at the NRM, I asked one of the staff why the units were not being fitted with connecting doors like the electric Desiros have. He told me they were not allowed on lines where trains run at over 100 mph (ECML, and, since then, WCML too).

I still don't know if there's any truth in this.

 

[pemma]

When the 185 prototype was on display at the NRM, I asked one of the staff why the units were not being fitted with connecting doors like the electric Desiros have. He told me they were not allowed on lines where trains run at over 100 mph (ECML, and, since then, WCML too).

I still don't know if there's any truth in this.

185s and 350s both have a top speed of 100mph and are both used on lines where the line speed exceeds 100mph, so there doesn't seem to be any logic to that.

 

[Bayum]

185s and 350s both have a top speed of 100mph and are both used on lines where the line speed exceeds 100mph, so there doesn't seem to be any logic to that.

The rumour was that HSE wanted this to apply to new stock.

Dating suggests that the 185's were introduced AFTER the 350's, so it could well be that they did have a say in the 185's having no Corridor Connection.

 

[pemma]

The rumour was that HSE wanted this to apply to new stock.

Dating suggests that the 185's were introduced AFTER the 350's, so it could well be that they did have a say in the 185's having no Corridor Connection.

So why didn't they stop the 350/2s from having corridor connectors?

 

[Bayum]

Because, the ruling/idea might have come into fruition, AFTER the 350's were made.

The 350's have been in service since about 2004, which suggests that 2002/2003 for production...

However, the 185's have been in service since 2006... Theres ample time there, for HSE to rule for no corridor connections between trains moving above 75mph

 

[Traineeconductor]

Because, the ruling/idea might have come into fruition, AFTER the 350's were made.

The 350's have been in service since about 2004, which suggests that 2002/2003 for production...

However, the 185's have been in service since 2006... Theres ample time there, for HSE to rule for no corridor connections between trains moving above 75mph

Well I am sure i read that coaches from the 3 cars can be made up into 6 cars formations anyway thats what i read when they was been made.

 

[Bayum]

Well, you can couple them together!!

Theres just no corridor connection between the 2 sets!!

A bit like 2 voyagers running in Multiple

 

[rww100]

Because, the ruling/idea might have come into fruition, AFTER the 350's were made.

The 350's have been in service since about 2004, which suggests that 2002/2003 for production...

However, the 185's have been in service since 2006... Theres ample time there, for HSE to rule for no corridor connections between trains moving above 75mph

London Midland's Class 172s, due to be delivered next year, were ordered in 2007 and are due to have gangway connectors. They also have a top speed of 100mph so I don't think there were any new rules put in place before the 185s were ordered. It's probably just that FTPE didn't anticipate the trains being used in multiple.

Info from The Railway Centre.

 

[pemma]

The rumour was that HSE wanted this to apply to new stock.

Dating suggests that the 185's were introduced AFTER the 350's, so it could well be that they did have a say in the 185's having no Corridor Connection.

350/2s, which had a modified specification over the 350/1s, including a lack of DC operation, weren't even in the planning stages when the 185s were all built and in service. Only one type of 150/1s and 150/2s have corridor linkers, so I don't buy that reason at all.

 

[Bayum]

350/2s, which had a modified specification over the 350/1s, including a lack of DC operation, weren't even in the planning stages when the 185s were all built and in service. Only one type of 150/1s and 150/2s have corridor linkers, so I don't buy that reason at all.

I didn't say that was the answer... I just said it was possible... So bleurgh...

 

[MCR247]

I know FGE wanted the 360s to have corridor connections like 350s, but because of visibillity or something they couldnt...