Invitation to tender for the next Northern franchise

[tbtc]

185's are fuel-hungry beasts with 100 mph capability. I see little prospect of any TOC wanting to deploy them on local or semi-fast services to places like Buxton or Southport. Indeed, in my opinion, their capabilities are somewhat wasted by using them on Blackpool services. (At least, not until they get much older, when it might make sense to de-rate their engines, and possibly convert the centre coaches to unpowered trailers.)

They may be fuel hungry, but they are very quick from a standing start, and hills don't really bother them. Add in the 1/3 and 2/3 doors, then they are almost perfect for hilly routes like the Buxton branch as well as TPE routes.

Agreed, they'd be okay on the Buxton route or the Calderdale one, but would be wasted on many other services (like Southport/ Blackpool).

 

[Nym]

You mean them routes that are of a smilar length and stopping pattern (for blackpool semi fasts)

 

[IanXC]

Excepting that no-one describing them as such has ever come up with a link to any form of official statement about the 350s being an 'interim solution'.

If it was intended that the trains were on temporary loan from LM, they'd have surely just been sub-leased, like the SN trains currently with Thameslink.

Thinking about that you're absolutely right, isnt the "source" a suggestion in a RUS document that predates 110mph running with 350s?

 

[WatcherZero]

They are suggested to be interim because the RUS says four car would only be enough capacity for a few years and six car length trains would be required in the medium term. Also with electrification a more uniform and expanded electric fleet would be required by TPE.

 

[pemma]

They may be fuel hungry, but they are very quick from a standing start, and hills don't really bother them. Add in the 1/3 and 2/3 doors, then they are almost perfect for hilly routes like the Buxton branch

Assuming they have a refurbishment at least like the EMT 158s to increase seating capacity. A 3 car unit with under 160 seats isn't really what the Buxton line needs even though the train itself is suitable.

 

[swt_passenger]

They are suggested to be interim because the RUS says four car would only be enough capacity for a few years and six car length trains would be required in the medium term. Also with electrification a more uniform and expanded electric fleet would be required by TPE.

That could still be done with train lengthening though. Additional coaches in a 110mph 350/4 would do the job, and they'd be allowed to use an existing design with grandfather rights.

Which RUS is this in?

 

[WatcherZero]

Northern, says six car trains would be required at the end of the week (thu-sat)

 

[tbtc]

You mean them routes that are of a smilar length and stopping pattern (for blackpool semi fasts)

The Blackpool route seems okay in terms of distance and stopping pattern, for a 185, but its heavy/ hungry build means its a waste on a ride to the seaside.

The Buxton line (and the Calderdale one etc) are meatier routes for DMUs designed for a hill climbing purpose.

 

[Railman01]

I agree to a point. I think that there is something to be said about competition (after all, that was the point of selling off the railways!)

Er, no you cant have competition when more then one TOC is sharing the same stretch of track, it just doesn't work. Fanatastic for air travel they're not constrained by running rails. Rail's main competition is the car.

, and TPE seem to have made a pretty good name for themselves along the Scottish services.

No they haven't, i work at one of the main stations along the route and i get more complaints than compliments

. It does 'fit' them to a degree - not exactly, but it seems to be working and without serious delays or reputation damage.

Merging TPE with Northern seems to be one of the worst kept conclusions to a story since the first film version of "Titanic".

--- old post above --- --- new post below ---

I agree to a point. I think that there is something to be said about competition (after all, that was the point of selling off the railways!), and TPE seem to have made a pretty good name for themselves along the Scottish services. It does 'fit' them to a degree - not exactly, but it seems to be working and without serious delays or reputation damage.

Merging TPE with Northern seems to be one of the worst kept conclusions to a story since the first film version of "Titanic".

The railways were sold off (and i quote the Adam Smith institute here) "to maximise profit" (to benefit a fatcat few). So don't give us all that competition claptrap it just does not wash. TPE have made a name for themselves in that they run an inter city timetable with inter urban units. Class 185s are not fit for this type of run. They would be more suited to, say, a Man Vic, Rochdale, Halifax, Bradford to Leeds run, you know an actual "Trans Pennine" service. However First Group are not entirely to blame. The buck stops with the DfT, who, when all is said and done specify the type of service and trains that we are entitled to. So if this run involved starting in the South East we would have eleven or twelve coached air conditioned inter city quality trains capable of up to 125mph. But in the railway backwater of the North West, you can forget it.

 

[Xenophon PCDGS]

They are suggested to be interim because the RUS says four car would only be enough capacity for a few years and six car length trains would be required in the medium term.

How many of the railway stations concerned would be in need of platform lengthening to allow for the six-car length trains ?

 

[WatcherZero]

On Chat Scotland services? none probably. The bigger hassle would be getting 8 car trains on the Bolton line, while most platforms could accomadate 6 cars theres a few notable stations that would have trouble with 8 (Salford).

 

[pemma]

On Chat Scotland services? none probably. The bigger hassle would be getting 8 car trains on the Bolton line, while most platforms could accomadate 6 cars theres a few notable stations that would have trouble with 8 (Salford).

Is not the intention long term (subject to growth) for 8 car trains to operate on the Scotland-Preston section, formed of two units with one unit breaking off and going to Liverpool?

 

[PR1Berske]

I agree to a point. I think that there is something to be said about competition (after all, that was the point of selling off the railways!)

Er, no you cant have competition when more then one TOC is sharing the same stretch of track, it just doesn't work. Fanatastic for air travel they're not constrained by running rails. Rail's main competition is the car.

, and TPE seem to have made a pretty good name for themselves along the Scottish services.

No they haven't, i work at one of the main stations along the route and i get more complaints than compliments
--- old post above --- --- new post below ---


The railways were sold off (and i quote the Adam Smith institute here) "to maximise profit" (to benefit a fatcat few). So don't give us all that competition claptrap it just does not wash. TPE have made a name for themselves in that they run an inter city timetable with inter urban units. Class 185s are not fit for this type of run. They would be more suited to, say, a Man Vic, Rochdale, Halifax, Bradford to Leeds run, you know an actual "Trans Pennine" service. However First Group are not entirely to blame. The buck stops with the DfT, who, when all is said and done specify the type of service and trains that we are entitled to. So if this run involved starting in the South East we would have eleven or twelve coached air conditioned inter city quality trains capable of up to 125mph. But in the railway backwater of the North West, you can forget it.

I would subscribe to you newsletter (I agree with you about describing the North West as a railway backwater) but the 'competition claptrap' comment gives you away

Socialist are we? Union man? Fully paid member of the awkward squad?

 

[tbtc]

I agree with you about describing the North West as a railway backwater

In what sense?

 

[Xenophon PCDGS]

First Group are not entirely to blame. The buck stops with the DfT, who, when all is said and done specify the type of service and trains that we are entitled to. So if this run involved starting in the South East we would have eleven or twelve coached air conditioned inter city quality trains capable of up to 125mph. But in the railway backwater of the North West, you can forget it.

Trains comprised of eight or more carriages do seem the norm on many routes "South of the Thames". The class 185 units should always have been four-car sets and we all know the historical reasons why a three-car set was supplied, so I will not insult our readership by repeating these. The Caldervale line, the Buxton line and the Settle and Carlisle line are my three submissions to the "general competition" that exists on this forum for "hypothetical" future uses of the Class 185 units.

 

[MidnightFlyer]

Hmm, the Northern Hub, mass OHLE-ing, Todmorden Curve, newest stationm in the country. Yep, we're a backwater alright :roll:

Further, a lot of 8-12 car operation on the Southern is down to splitting on-route or the need for it, it can get very overcrowded even off-peak.

 

[34D]

Manchester-Scotland to either XC or Scotrail? South TransPennine possibly to EM? North TP to Northern or XC?

Can I point out that both non-standard stock within a TOC and diesel under the wires won't be a concern of the DfT.

When Manc-Scotland is wired, some 185s or 170s will be surplus. Potentially EMT could take some 185s for Norwich-Liverpool, or even Southern (allowing 171s to be converted back to 170s and sent north).

When NTP is wired, then finding a role for 25ish desiro DMUs which are fuel hungry as already said may not be that easy. Birmingham-West wales perhaps?

 

[pemma]

Hmm, the Northern Hub, mass OHLE-ing, Todmorden Curve, newest stationm in the country. Yep, we're a backwater alright :roll:

Northern Hub £500m - some of that going to refurbish 25-30 year old trains cascaded away from the Greater London Area as part of Thameslink and only funding for part of the scheme confirmed.

Thameslink £6bn - funding pretty much guaranteed in full.

So the whole of the North of England gets a fraction of what one part of Greater London gets.

 

[MidnightFlyer]

Because I suspect the cost:benefit down there is way better than compared to up here.

 

[pemma]

When Manc-Scotland is wired, some 185s or 170s will be surplus. Potentially EMT could take some 185s for Norwich-Liverpool, or even Southern (allowing 171s to be converted back to 170s and sent north).

Not this again. ALL DMUs released off Scottish services will be redeployed on North TPE services*. ALL DMUs released off Chat Moss will be needed to run additional local services through Bolton, following the diversion of some TPE services via Wigan.

* The proposed May 2014 timetable includes diverting/extending the Newcastle service to Liverpool and an additional Manchester Airport to York service every hour. It also should allow all daytime services on South TPE to have at least 3 carriages.

 

[daniel3982]

My only fear of TPE being subsumed into Northern is a return to the dreaded days of Northern Spirit. I'm still recovering from being shunted off a 158 to a Pacer at York on a run from Manchester to Newcastle. Say what you like about 185s but they are spacious compared to some trains on the network and have good luggage capacity and windows and TPE have been great for the route with good cheap advanced booking etc (something Northern completely ignore altogether!). Infact I use TPE 9 x out of 10 between York and Newcastle as it's such a good value advanced route compared to the very high walk on fares or fares on XC or EC.

 

[PR1Berske]

Hmm, the Northern Hub, mass OHLE-ing, Todmorden Curve, newest stationm in the country. Yep, we're a backwater alright :roll:

Further, a lot of 8-12 car operation on the Southern is down to splitting on-route or the need for it, it can get very overcrowded even off-peak.

Matt, you are one of the people on this forum I like hearing from, but on this you are off the mark. The North has been largely ignored for decades and continues to be. The focus will always be on Manchester rather than the north as a whole (Westminster seems to think both are synonymous).

 

[Xenophon PCDGS]

Hmm, the Northern Hub, mass OHLE-ing, Todmorden Curve, newest stationm in the country. Yep, we're a backwater alright :roll:

The Northern Hub is only a set of proposals....not a hard and fast funded agreement to all sections contained within that submission.

The Todmorden Curve was only PART of the £8.8 million grant from the Regional Growth Fund and that funding also must be considered to include projects in Burnley, such as the Weavers Triangle area regeneration. Do not confuse this with funding for standard railway infrastructure projects.

Incidentally, birthday greetings for today...

 

[Railman01]

I agree to a point. I think that there is something to be said about competition (after all, that was the point of selling off the railways!)

Er, no you cant have competition when more then one TOC is sharing the same stretch of track, it just doesn't work. Fanatastic for air travel they're not constrained by running rails. Rail's main competition is the car.

, and TPE seem to have made a pretty good name for themselves along the Scottish services.


I would subscribe to you newsletter (I agree with you about describing the North West as a railway backwater) but the 'competition claptrap' comment gives you away

Socialist are we? Union man? Fully paid member of the awkward squad?

Socialist, me, mmm i voted Tory at the last election (and even Maggie Thatcher thought privatising British Rail was a privatisation too far). And just where does the competition come from ? What is the train competing against ? I work for Northern but have to be completely impartial when selling tickets. So, i ask you where is the competition in that ? Oh, and yes i am a fully paid up member of the RMT. I am awkward, yes, but only because i believe that the railways should be run as a public service. The Socialist, Union man, awkward comment gives you away. Shareholder are we ? Bank exec are we ? The Apprentice fan are we?

 

[WatcherZero]

Is not the intention long term (subject to growth) for 8 car trains to operate on the Scotland-Preston section, formed of two units with one unit breaking off and going to Liverpool?

Yes, but that wouldnt require platform extension on the Bolton line. What NR said was required for Manchester-Scotland services was 1x4 car units for the majority of service and 2x3 car units to strengthen at weekends when the weekend getaway mob increase demand, these wouldnt be required straightaway but towards the end of the decade. Coupling of Liverpool services at Wigan or Preston was also suggested not to meet passenger capacity requirements but to increase the choice of services for Liverpool allowing a direct rather than a change of trains and sharing a WCML path.

The problem is TPE cant strengthen some weekend services to 2x3 using the 185's (and swallow the bullet of running diesel under the wires) as they will be redeployed serving the east-west corridor, they also wont order enough 350's for this as they would be reduced to providing extra capacity or allowing extra maintenence rotation mon-thu and at any rate wouldnt be needed straight away. This then comes back around to the 350's being a temporary stopgap when what TPE really need is a large fleet of 3 and 4 car electrics that would allow a variety of capacity options. This then plays into their situation towards the end of the decade when they find half their network now electrified just as they need the extra capacity so a new fleet can be ordered taking advantage of the longer distance passengers are more profitable so can justify new stock.

We then of course comeback to Northern and the Bolton line. The RUS predated the expanded Lancashire Triangle electrification, at the time only Liverpool-Manchester was expected to be electrified and the stock evisaged for the Bolton line would be 3x2 Sprinter formations using freed up stock (or possibly even the 185's taken off Scotland services and now operating Cumbria/Blackburn services). So as planned they wouldnt have required platforms longer than 6x23m that were already being used for the 2x185 formations. Electrification throws a spanner in the works as the majority of the fleet is now envisaged to be the four car 319 with 20m carriages. Now the shorter length means on a coupled formation it would be equivalent to 7 Sprinter/185 cars rather than 8 but thats still a problem of 20m longer than planned to resolve if they operate in 2x4 formations. What I suppose they could do is use class 323's for the six car formations and use 319's on the 323 services.

Sorry that was kind of rambling as I was thinking through the problem as I wrote.

 

[YorkshireBear]

The Apprentice fan are we?

Ill be having none of that!
Nothing i love better than watching posh people argue

I dont think the north is ignored, with the various projects in in the pipeline i think we just arn'fairly treated.

I mean what could we achieve in north of england with crossrail budget? infinite electrification with huge capcity increases everywhere. over a much wider area affecting much more people but thats not how it works.

 

[34D]

Yes, but that wouldnt require platform extension on the Bolton line. What NR said was required for Manchester-Scotland services was 1x4 car units for the majority of service and 2x3 car units to strengthen at weekends when the weekend getaway mob increase demand, these wouldnt be required straightaway but towards the end of the decade. Coupling of Liverpool services at Wigan or Preston was also suggested not to meet passenger capacity requirements but to increase the choice of services for Liverpool allowing a direct rather than a change of trains and sharing a WCML path.

The problem is TPE cant strengthen some weekend services to 2x3 using the 185's (and swallow the bullet of running diesel under the wires) as they will be redeployed serving the east-west corridor, they also wont order enough 350's for this as they would be reduced to providing extra capacity or allowing extra maintenence rotation mon-thu and at any rate wouldnt be needed straight away. This then comes back around to the 350's being a temporary stopgap when what TPE really need is a large fleet of 3 and 4 car electrics that would allow a variety of capacity options.

Except that further south, there are a number of 350s that will be parked up from 8pm friday that aren't needed (for work or for maintenance) until 5am Monday.

 

[Bellwater]

Say what you like about 185s but they are spacious compared to some trains on the network and have good luggage capacity and windows and TPE have been great for the route with good cheap advanced booking etc.

Burst out laughing when I read "Good Luggage Capacity"
--- old post above --- --- new post below ---

Are the mods on here going to remove this derogatory comment? Is this how people in a union are viewed.

No they won't.

 

[Bellwater]

Anything critical of Firstgroup gets removed, just so you know.

 

[Stats]

I dont think the north is ignored, with the various projects in in the pipeline i think we just arn'fairly treated.

As long as you take the Whitehall view that the North stops at Leeds.