New Midland Mainline Stock?

[David10]

Put simply InterCity stock is capable of 125mph, ie HSTs, 91/Mk4s, 180s, 220s, 221s, 222s & 390s. Whether diesel, electric, bi-mode, head end powered or under floor powered is irrelevant.

MML's 170s were never intended to be InterCity stock, they just took over the running of some all stops services in much the same way LM's 350s took over the Trent Valley services from Virgin.

 

[jopsuk]

Put simply InterCity stock is capable of 125mph,

so the 90s+Mark 3s on the Great Eastern (and one set on the West Coast) aren't "InterCity"?

 

[Kneedown]

I've done a Norwich - Sheffield run on a 4 car 156 before. And a particularily rotten smelly one at that.

I can beat that.... Nottingham - Norwich and back on a 153 some years ago!
That was a long, long trip!
--- old post above --- --- new post below ---

so the 90s+Mark 3s on the Great Eastern (and one set on the West Coast) aren't "InterCity"?

Goodness knows what the mk1 and mk2 coaches, hauled by 45's, 47's, 50's and 55's, 86's, 87's and 90's were then.

 

[Oswyntail]

I know this is not the main point of this thread, but...
There is general confusion between:

• "Inter City" - long distance routes between two major cities, with limited intermediate stops, where the main traffic flows are centered on the end cities (eg London-Edinburgh, London-Liverpool, London-Bristol). Stock will tend to be higher speed, lower density
• Intra-City - long distance routes, not necessarily between major cities, but embracing them en route, several intermediate stops, where the main traffic flows are centered on journeys between the settlements (eg London - Penzance, Bristol - Edinburgh). Stock will tend to be higher acceleration and medium density

Part of the confusion arises because HSTs are ideal for both types of service, and were used as such. Voyagers and Meridians are more Intra-City. IMHO, 170s and 158s are more a "Regional" type, for medium length services - the problem here is that they are used on longer services such as Norwich-Liverpool, which have the feel of Intra-City but are in fact a number of regional services glued together.

 

[Waverley125]

A new batch of Pendolinos to take over MML services to Sheffield, with a couple of HSTs retained for through services to Leeds.

The rest of the HSTs to be sent of & given Chiltern-style re-engineerings, then packed off to XC along with the Meridians, with all sets to be reformed to a standard length of 9 coaches.

The remaining Meridians& voyagers to cascade to replace 170s & 158s on long distance services e.g. Nottingham-Cardiff (hopefully to become Cleethorpes-Swansea), Birmingham-Stansted & Liverpool-Norwich. Those 170s & 158s to go to getting pacers & 150s off the railway & into the scrapyard.

 

[sprinterguy]

A new batch of Pendolinos to take over MML services to Sheffield, with a couple of HSTs retained for through services to Leeds.

The rest of the HSTs to be sent of & given Chiltern-style re-engineerings, then packed off to XC along with the Meridians, with all sets to be reformed to a standard length of 9 coaches.

The remaining Meridians& voyagers to cascade to replace 170s & 158s on long distance services e.g. Nottingham-Cardiff (hopefully to become Cleethorpes-Swansea), Birmingham-Stansted & Liverpool-Norwich. Those 170s & 158s to go to getting pacers & 150s off the railway & into the scrapyard.

Having done a bit of maths around this plan, even if EMT weren’t to retain any 222s or HSTs the numbers would only barely cover the unit requirement for Liverpool – Norwich, Cardiff – Nottingham and Birmingham – Stansted once you’ve completed all the processes in this complex little cascade.

Also, how long do you intend to keep the HSTs in service for? It’ll be 2020 by the time they are displaced by MML electrification at best, they’ll be at least forty years old! And if you propose to fit them with power doors at that point in their lives, then realistically we’ve got to assume that they’ve got another decade or so of useful life in them to warrant the expenditure, bringing them up to fifty years of age by the time they are withdrawn! I would think that MML electrification will be used as a strong argument to avoid the cost of fitting power doors to the Midland Mainline HST fleet.

Plus, the number of trains released (EMTs’ 25 x 158s and Crosscountrys’ 29 x 170s) would be hard pushed to cover the withdrawal of all the Pacers, let alone the withdrawal of the 150s as well. Plus, if you withdraw the 150s then that leaves a woeful under provision of commuter spec diesel stock, and a large number of rural/regional trains in the form of the 153s, 156s, 158s and 170s, without ordering any new DMUs.

 

[dosxuk]

I can beat that.... Nottingham - Norwich and back on a 153 some years ago!
That was a long, long trip!

Good God, I can imagine! hock:

 

[MCR247]

I can beat that.... Nottingham - Norwich and back on a 153 some years ago!
That was a long, long trip!

Ouch. Suppose it could have been worse: 2x153 with large cabs at the centre

 

[Waverley125]

Having done a bit of maths around this plan, even if EMT weren’t to retain any 222s or HSTs the numbers would only barely cover the unit requirement for Liverpool – Norwich, Cardiff – Nottingham and Birmingham – Stansted once you’ve completed all the processes in this complex little cascade.

Also, how long do you intend to keep the HSTs in service for? It’ll be 2020 by the time they are displaced by MML electrification at best, they’ll be at least forty years old! And if you propose to fit them with power doors at that point in their lives, then realistically we’ve got to assume that they’ve got another decade or so of useful life in them to warrant the expenditure, bringing them up to fifty years of age by the time they are withdrawn! I would think that MML electrification will be used as a strong argument to avoid the cost of fitting power doors to the Midland Mainline HST fleet.

Plus, the number of trains released (EMTs’ 25 x 158s and Crosscountrys’ 29 x 170s) would be hard pushed to cover the withdrawal of all the Pacers, let alone the withdrawal of the 150s as well. Plus, if you withdraw the 150s then that leaves a woeful under provision of commuter spec diesel stock, and a large number of rural/regional trains in the form of the 153s, 156s, 158s and 170s, without ordering any new DMUs.

Remember, a lot of Pacers & 150s are being replaced by electrification around Leeds, Manchester and Cardiff. Once those units are displaced (good signs the Caldervale & Hallam lines will be wired in CP6), the sole 'pacer island' left is the southwest. Also don't forget that EGIP will release a lot of 170s & 158s from services in the central belt & replace them with EMUs.

And yes, the HST's will be 50 years old. I don't see that as being a problem. They're fantastic trains, and if kept well maintained should make 50 years without a problem.

 

[tbtc]

Remember, a lot of Pacers & 150s are being replaced by electrification around Leeds, Manchester and Cardiff. Once those units are displaced (good signs the Caldervale & Hallam lines will be wired in CP6), the sole 'pacer island' left is the southwest

Sadly not many Pacers/ 150/153s will be freed up in/around Manchester or Leeds - the routes being electrified are longer distance ones. For example, Pacer involvement on the line from York - Leeds - Huddersfield - Manchester is pretty minimal, and most of the Pacers you'd see on it are going to end up away from the wires (e.g. there may be 144s on the Leeds - Dewsbury line but these are going off to unwired places - Brighouse - Rochdale etc).

If they were serious about getting rid of Pacers then they'd tackle things like the Warrington Central line, the Wigan Wallgate line, the Harrogate line...

The Pacers in the South West will be replaced by cascaded 165/166s (in turn cascading 150/153s onto Pacer duties), though they may end up at Northern/ ATW and not be withdrawn straight away.

 

[HSTEd]

Where's that "Like" Button?

Sounds good to me, space at Grantham to do this I assume?

Would any else on here be happy with two 3 car 158 or 159 units being used for this? Although they don't have SDO or UDS fitted so it could be intresting at some Hope Valley stations...

Well platform four is apparently cleared for 91 hauled Mark 4s because I have boarded them there before. (And for some reason the train was able to move without door interlock as al the doors were still open and people were still boarding, our luggage was on the train and we weren't, but that was years ago).

 

[Philip Elliott]

"Inter City" - long distance routes between two major cities, with limited intermediate stops, where the main traffic flows are centered on the end cities (eg London-Edinburgh, London-Liverpool, London-Bristol). Stock will tend to be higher speed, lower density
Intra-City - long distance routes, not necessarily between major cities, but embracing them en route, several intermediate stops, where the main traffic flows are centered on journeys between the settlements (eg London - Penzance, Bristol - Edinburgh). Stock will tend to be higher acceleration and medium density

You need to learn your latin:

Inter = between

Intra = within

London Overground is an intra-city operator...

 

[sprinterguy]

Remember, a lot of Pacers & 150s are being replaced by electrification around Leeds, Manchester and Cardiff. Once those units are displaced (good signs the Caldervale & Hallam lines will be wired in CP6), the sole 'pacer island' left is the southwest. Also don't forget that EGIP will release a lot of 170s & 158s from services in the central belt & replace them with EMUs.

And yes, the HST's will be 50 years old. I don't see that as being a problem. They're fantastic trains, and if kept well maintained should make 50 years without a problem.

I did factor Valley Lines electrification and an assumed cascade of 165s to the West Country due to GWML electrification into my assumptions. As tbtc says, the North West electrification is not going to lead to the withdrawal of any Northern DMUs. They are to be used strengthening other services. TPE North electrification will not displace many Northern units directly, although admittedly I did not consider the displaced 185s in my calculations which are likely to be significant. The EGIP has been dramatically pruned back from it's original scope, so is likely to release far fewer DMUs than was originally expected.

 

[Waverley125]

I still think pendos would suit the MML best. Even if pacer removal wasn't complete, it'd allow a large number of high-acceleration long-form DMUs to be cascaded to routes they're better suited to. So more HSTs to XC, meridians to ScotRail for Aberdeen/Inverness-Glasgow/Edinburgh runs, and to SWT to replace 158s on Waterloo-Exeter.

Also worth noting that it'd be worth have a rolling 390 production line so that, when the wiring is surely put up from Marylebone to Banbury, and Leamington Spa to Moor Steet, the 390s can go to the GEML where their tilt will hugely cut journey times Norwich-London, and the mk3s & class 90s can move to the Chiltern.

 

[HSTEd]

The GEML won't benefit significantly from tilt.

The main problem there is the huge number of non-fully gated level crossings that impose 100mph speed limits as I understand it.

 

[ainsworth74]

And further to that there's also pathing/capacity constraints due to the slower commuter/freight traffic. If you were to quad track significant parts of it (perhaps out to Ipswich) then you'd be able to get higher linespeeds.

 

[Waverley125]

I think we can all agree that the GEML is in dire need of an upgrade. That it takes as long to get to Norwich as it does to York is nothing short of a joke.

 

[RichmondCommu]

The GEML won't benefit significantly from tilt.

The main problem there is the huge number of non-fully gated level crossings that impose 100mph speed limits as I understand it.

Then get rid of the crossings?

 

[Waverley125]

probably. Also four lines to Ipswich, signal & clear for tilt, upgrade stock on the branches to 110mph capable on the mains & segregate crossrail south of Shenfield.

 

[HSTEd]

Then get rid of the crossings?

For the price of eliminating every single crossing without significant loss of utility to the locals you could probably build a HSL half way to Norwich. Especially if you want to start extending four tracking any further than it already is.

I know which I would prefer.

 

[tbtc]

That it takes as long to get to Norwich as it does to York is nothing short of a joke

Not really - Norwich is a much smaller market and almost the end of the line. York is on the main line to Newcastle/ Edinburgh, so of course it's going to get more money spent on it, in terms of speed upgrades/ eliminating bottlenecks etc.

You can do the three hundred miles from Glasgow to Birmingham in the four hours it takes you to do Glasgow to Fort William (only a hundred miles) - that's just how things are.

To try to bring this subject back to the initial topic, you can do London to York faster than you can do London to Leeds, and you can do London to Leeds faster than you can do London to Sheffield. But the MML doesn't really go further north, so it's always playing second fiddle in terms of line speeds etc.