Harrogate line cancellations

[Shaw S Hunter]

I remember someone making the observation that a 170 (being designed for 100mph) spending the day on the Harrogate line will never exceed 65mph and therefore never get out of hydraulic transmission into direct drive. Prolonged use like this doesn’t do the transmission any good. Given the maintenance facility is at Hull Botanic they must be cycled through other duties but then this doesn’t support good timetable performance at Leeds if one route can import delay to another, etc.

For comparison a 158 will ‘change gear’ at between 53-60mph depending on the power notch, so they don’t have the same problem.

For anyone in the know - is there a limit to how much time a 170 can be diagrammed to remain on sub-70mph duties?

No, and there are very little issues with the transmissions. It is largely a problem that has been 'invented' from the characteristics of the unit.

I have mentioned this before but I believe it bears repeating. When 170s were first used on the Harrogate line they quickly gained a reputation for unreliability due to overheating. Seemingly the issue was (is) exacerbated by an unfortunate aerodynamic "incompatiblity" between 170s and the interior of Bramhope Tunnel, ie the airflow around these units at this location does not provide the expected amount of air-cooling. Remember that Leeds-bound trains face an adverse gradient of 1 in 94 through the tunnel and then turn round in Leeds before having a chance to cool down.

The short-term solution was to ensure that daily diagramming of the class kept the units from more than a couple of days at a time on the route. Longer term greater attention to detail during maintenance has largely dealt with the problem ie keeping underfloor areas free from debris and ensuring radiator circuits are in good order and properly topped-up with coolant. Sadly this sort of problem is not new, the HST Valentas had major cooling issues for a while and the Coradia family units have shown a propensity to self-combust due to lack of engine bay cleaning. It seems it's easy (for some) to forget the importance of good quality maintenance.

 

[Bevan Price]

The trains seem to be good at just picking up delay as they go, especially in the peak.

For example today 2C98 (14:12 York to Leeds) picked up 2 minutes of delay between York and Poppleton (seems to be common), 3 by Knaresborough, 4 at Starbeck, 5 at Harrogate, 6 at Hornbeam Park and Pannal, 7 at Weeton and Horsforth, 9 at Headingley, 10 at Burkey park and 11 minutes at Leeds

There just seems to be a recurring inability to stick to time even without taking the single line into account. I can’t really tell the differences between these trains and ones that stick rigorously to schedule (I’ve been on both)

So which Northern routes might be a better location for 170s (ignoring the initial issues about crew training ?)
Leeds - Chester ?, York- Blackpool ? Or what ??

 

[driverd]

I remember someone making the observation that a 170 (being designed for 100mph) spending the day on the Harrogate line will never exceed 65mph and therefore never get out of hydraulic transmission into direct drive. Prolonged use like this doesn’t do the transmission any good. Given the maintenance facility is at Hull Botanic they must be cycled through other duties but then this doesn’t support good timetable performance at Leeds if one route can import delay to another, etc.

For comparison a 158 will ‘change gear’ at between 53-60mph depending on the power notch, so they don’t have the same problem.

For anyone in the know - is there a limit to how much time a 170 can be diagrammed to remain on sub-70mph duties?

This is not true. The gearbox doesn't need to be fluid coupled for any particular performance reason.

The reason for the issues was actually down to cooling airflow (this is all from an exceptionally good source - namely the fleet engineer who was responsible). The units weren't getting enough speed up to provide the requisite cooling over the mechanical components resulting in an excessive oil burn and overheating. The solution was to remove some of the shielding panels on the underframe to allow air to circulate more readily.

As others will likely point out, 170s serve without issue on Anniesland shuttles and other Glasgow suburban services (infact, where the northern units were ordered for), where they rarely exceed 65 mph for prolonged periods.

 

[bluenoxid]

The trains seem to be good at just picking up delay as they go, especially in the peak.

For example today 2C98 (14:12 York to Leeds) picked up 2 minutes of delay between York and Poppleton (seems to be common), 3 by Knaresborough, 4 at Starbeck, 5 at Harrogate, 6 at Hornbeam Park and Pannal, 7 at Weeton and Horsforth, 9 at Headingley, 10 at Burkey park and 11 minutes at Leeds

There just seems to be a recurring inability to stick to time even without taking the single line into account. I can’t really tell the differences between these trains and ones that stick rigorously to schedule (I’ve been on both)

There does appear to be quite some variation in running times. The current extremes are likely to be being influenced by leaf fall. The tree on my street has just dumped all of its leaves on the road in the last few days.

 

[ChrisC]

Whilst many parts of the EMR regional network has some faster running, there's also a lot of stopping, and the reliability of the 170s has been very very good so far with EMR!

I agree that the reliability of the 170s at EMR has been very good so far. However, there were issues with them not being able keep time on the Robin Hood Line between Nottingham-Mansfield -Worksop. The timetable which had been successfully operated for almost 30 years using 156s and previously 150s has been adjusted with both increased journey times and skipping stations. The Robin Hood Line has long stretches of uphill gradient and many stations quite close together. This could be a similar problem on the Harrogate Line of timekeeping rather than unreliability of the units.

 

[Adam0984]

So which Northern routes might be a better location for 170s (ignoring the initial issues about crew training ?)
Leeds - Chester ?, York- Blackpool ? Or what ??

I'd put them on the Leeds to Lincoln and Notts, the only crew who would need training would be Huddersfield and some Leeds drivers

 

[anothertyke]

I agree that the reliability of the 170s at EMR has been very good so far. However, there were issues with them not being able keep time on the Robin Hood Line between Nottingham-Mansfield -Worksop. The timetable which had been successfully operated for almost 30 years using 156s and previously 150s has been adjusted with both increased journey times and skipping stations. The Robin Hood Line has long stretches of uphill gradient and many stations quite close together. This could be a similar problem on the Harrogate Line of timekeeping rather than unreliability of the units.

Six mins dwell time for Burley Park, Headingley, Horsforth, Harrogate and Knaresborough added together is tight given the traffic volumes.

I'd put them on the Leeds to Lincoln and Notts, the only crew who would need training would be Huddersfield and some Leeds drivers

Ideally yes, but as long as p17 at Leeds requires double occupancy I don't think they fit.

 

[Adam0984]

Ideally yes, but as long as p17 at Leeds requires double occupancy I don't think they fit

They don't but seems a convenient excuse for not putting 3 car 195s on, every 3rd hour the Knottingley is put on a different platform Because its a 4 car so could be done every hour

 

[jayah]

Does the single line section deserve retention ? York to Leeds via the mainline is sufficient surely, the few wayside stations on the single line have relatively light footfall.

York to Harrogate is very popular.

 

[leedslad82]

York to Harrogate is very popular.

I think for me the question is does it need to be a leeds to york via harrogate line?

Would it be more reliable and bring in more passengers and revenue if you went back to how it used to be and having one unit turn round at knaresborough , or even having the train from York only going as far as harrogate ?

 

[Northern158170]

I think for me the question is does it need to be a leeds to york via harrogate line?

Would it be more reliable and bring in more passengers and revenue if you went back to how it used to be and having one unit turn round at knaresborough , or even having the train from York only going as far as harrogate ?

The latter would certainly adversely affect my journey personally, as well as several others judging by what I see on the trains I use. It also effectively removes Leeds as a convenient option to travel to from the small stations on the line. The former would also take away a crucial turn up and go aspect of the journey for the Knaresborough to York section of the line which is the only form of public transport between these areas (excluding the Cattal/Hammerton to York bus which is every 2 hours, slow and often delayed, and Poppleton to York).

Admittedly some trains are quiet in the off-peak and wouldn't make financial sense to operate, but the social benefits to the half-hourly frequency of the trains can't be ignored

 

[Adam0984]

Harrogate to York is an important link with a lot of people travelling both to York and onward to ECML destinations north and south. And it might as well stop inbetween Knaresborough and York

 

[skyhigh]

or even having the train from York only going as far as harrogate ?

So halving the Leeds-Harrogate frequency? Bonkers if that's what you're suggesting.

 

[leedslad82]

So halving the Leeds-Harrogate frequency? Bonkers if that's what you're suggesting

No if anything I'd suggest increasing the frequency between leeds and harrogate. Ideally to every 20 mins but I think you would still need some form of cross harrogate service.

 

[800001]

So halving the Leeds-Harrogate frequency? Bonkers if that's what you're suggesting.

No, you would have same frequency, but York to Knaresborough only.
So still every roughly 30 minutes.

 

[IanXC]

So which Northern routes might be a better location for 170s (ignoring the initial issues about crew training ?)
Leeds - Chester ?, York- Blackpool ? Or what ??

I'd suggest that as there are 8 170s currently used for the Harrogate line services, that since that was increased back up from 7 the fleet seems a bit stretched, and that 7 units are required for the York - Bridlington service group which struggles for capacity at times, and that 170s home depot is in Hull, that when new stock starts to arrive with Northern displacing 170s to withdraw the 155s would be the logical way forward. No crew training requirements either as York - Bridlington is entirely York and Hull who already have 170 work.

 

[jayah]

I think for me the question is does it need to be a leeds to york via harrogate line?

Would it be more reliable and bring in more passengers and revenue if you went back to how it used to be and having one unit turn round at knaresborough , or even having the train from York only going as far as harrogate ?

I am not sure halving the service between Leeds and Knaresborough or Harrogate and York will achieve that.

All over the UK and Europe operators run reliable stopping services over 40 miles, including over single line sections.

They need to get back to basics and tackle the cause of poor performance instead of the symptoms.

 

[anothertyke]

I am not sure halving the service between Leeds and Knaresborough or Harrogate and York will achieve that.

All over the UK and Europe operators run reliable stopping services over 40 miles, including over single line sections.

They need to get back to basics and tackle the cause of poor performance instead of the symptoms.

Which to me is the single track sections. The cycle requires 2h 25 moving time in a 3 hr cycle. If you dedicate P3 at Leeds and p8 at York to these trains, you really ought to be able to have 15 mins turnaround time at each end. That ought to work. Probably not cheap though......

 

[IanXC]

They need to get back to basics and tackle the cause of poor performance instead of the symptoms.

Which brings us back to the York 3rd Line Works, which are rumoured to be paused....

 

[tgregson]

They need to get back to basics and tackle the cause of poor performance instead of the symptoms.

The poor performance seems to be due to sweating the assests during the day at a level that Ryanair would be proud of and the timings can't be changed due to the single line which has 2 8 minute sections. But the solution might be already there, 3 sets are only used for the morning and evening peak service but which spend the rest of the day sat in Leeds if these were used all day they could be used to give extra time to turn around in Leeds to give more resilience to the timetable.

 

[jayah]

The poor performance seems to be due to sweating the assests during the day at a level that Ryanair would be proud of and the timings can't be changed due to the single line which has 2 8 minute sections. But the solution might be already there, 3 sets are only used for the morning and evening peak service but which spend the rest of the day sat in Leeds if these were used all day they could be used to give extra time to turn around in Leeds to give more resilience to the timetable.

Looking right now, the 1613 at York has arrived 2 late from Leeds and gone back as the 1642, departing 9 late at 1651.

This appears to be related to the 1529 Leeds York being 13 late, having been 7 late from Leeds, in turn caused by 1412 York Leeds running 10 late, for which there seems to be no reason other than its regulation between late running express trains between York and Skelton Jn.

While the Leeds turnarounds look tight, there is a lot of padding on the last leg from Burley Park, in reality they are 9 minutes not 6.

While the Leeds turnarounds are not ideal, the assets really aren't sweating like Ryanair here.

But they do need running times that can be delivered and a plan to recover the service when there are delays, instead of having them escalate through the day as seems to be happening here.

 

[Adam0984]

The 30 mins in York is there to reset any delays but of course that's dependent on them getting an on time path out of York, if a train is late at the Leeds end there is a contingency plan (as well as if its really late from York) for express running either Horsforth and Harrogate or straight to Harrogate for longer delays where the next one will be close behind, they can also terminate at Harrogate to save the single line passing being messed up

 

[johntea]

I travel on this line quite frequently and at least in the morning peak the departures from Leeds seem to generally depart on time...but there have been more than several occassions where the 170 decides to have a random fault and they have to get an engineer out to quickly try and resolve it before giving up and telling passengers to catch the next service!

It is awful trying to alight at Leeds from a service during the evening peak though...hundreds of passengers already waiting on the platform many of whom try to board the second the doors open vs the hundreds of passengers trying to get off the train!

Can't say I'm too bothered about the minor delays arriving into Leeds at the moment as I have a connection that would meet the minimum connection time if the service arrived on time so I end up claiming a lot of free tickets through delay repay

 

[Northern158170]

Severe delays seem to be being picked up this morning between Burley Park and Weeton. Trains are losing around 8 minutes to their schedule. Apparently slippy rails are to blame

 

[ElijahsTrains]

The route to York has been so useful to me so many times. It would be a massive loss if we got rid of it. I feel it’d be more beneficial to just re-double track it, which would also leave potential for other routes such as up to ripon. But that’s just me getting excited.

Yes Ripon really needs a rail link!

Severe delays seem to be being picked up this morning between Burley Park and Weeton. Trains are losing around 8 minutes to their schedule. Apparently slippy rails are to blame

Ah

 

[Plethora]

So which Northern routes might be a better location for 170s (ignoring the initial issues about crew training ?)
Leeds - Chester ?, York- Blackpool ? Or what ??

York to Blackpool sounds like a good shout.

Northern reliability has been poor West of the Pennines as well these past weeks. Usually staff shortages.

 

[anothertyke]

Bad day at the office today with thirteen cancellations including three evening peak trains out of Leeds and one class 155 subbed in.

 

[Northern158170]

Seemed to get quite bad in the evening. First half of the day was running 1 unit down, up to 2-3 at the evening. Something happened to the class 155, it picked up an hours delay operating 2C68 Leeds-York

 

[HaxbyTraveller]

From what people are saying above, it sounds like the problem is not with any of the individual train types; but the lack of any spare capacity which means that one defect has knock on effects across the whole network that Northern run? If they had 'spare' trains, could that not solve the problem (same issue on airlines now - sweating the assets to 100% utilisation means that if there is a glitch then the route after the one after the one after ... is cancelled to catch up again)

 

[david737]

Quite a lot of cancellations again today ending up with a gap in the service of around 2 hours this afternoon between Harrogate & York not helped by a signaling problem as well, also the railhead treatment train ended up 2hrs late this morning and disrupted the morning peak service.