I highly doubt the Liverpool to Manchester Airport via Warrington service will be served by 2 coach 195s. At the moment it's doubled 156s of 4 carriages.
Not to mention, I doubt Network Rail will be very happy with an existing 4 carriage service becoming a 2 carriage given the current dwell problems at Piccadilly platforms 13/14 and passengers with luggage from the Airport. 3 carriage 195s seem best suited.
No; typical narrow corridor connection.No doors between cars? Presumably that means a 700-style open walkthrough area?
This used to be served by 6 carriage 185's at peak times under TPE. The morning rush hour service was always very busy even with 6.
No, typical narrow corridor connection.
I agree on all counts. From what has been seen the 195s don't seem appropriate for Northern's premier services.When I first saw that I thought it had "Pacer" written all over it. Cheap and nasty.
These things, given their comfort level and superior acceleration, should really be going on Manchester and Leeds area locals directly replacing 142s and 150s. Northern Connect needs better, more InterCity like trains such as 170s and 158s, ideally with an ATW or EMT style interior with decent seats rather than ironing boards (or just the originals with new cushions - the GWR 158s are like that and are decent) and a less stark colour scheme.
Agreed. Just because they're modern air-conditioned 2+2 units they're far higher-spec than a lot of the other Sprinters, but they are really commuter-spec, not long-distance. What was the expected average journey time on Connect services?When I first saw that I thought it had "Pacer" written all over it. Cheap and nasty.
These things, given their comfort level and superior acceleration, should really be going on Manchester and Leeds area locals directly replacing 142s and 150s. Northern Connect needs better, more InterCity like trains such as 170s and 158s, ideally with an ATW or EMT style interior with decent seats rather than ironing boards (or just the originals with new cushions - the GWR 158s are like that and are decent) and a less stark colour scheme.
Standard seating:
6-car 185: 338 seats (30 of which 1st)
4-car 156: 304 seats (no 1st)
That's surprisingly little difference. The Class 185 layout is second only to the Voyager for its gross inefficiency of space usage.
Not enough 170s coming over to do that are there?I hadn't noticed the lack of end doors before. That is a bit naff on long distance services. I also hadn't noticed the mis-matching seats and carpet before. Can somebody please lend Northern a bloody colour wheel.
Is it looking increasingly sensible for Northern to deploy the 170's on the Connect routes and the 195's on routes like Leeds to Harrogate and Manchester to Southport? The 170's are better geared for longer routes and the interiors better suited. The 195's are better geared for routes with lower line speeds and more regular stops (I understand).
Putting my passeger hat on I would be more than happy with:
- 195's on Leeds to Harrogate, Manchester to Southport, Liverpool to Manchester via Warrington and the like;
- 185's, if they can be negotiated into the franchise, on all Transpennine via Calder Valley services;
- 170's on the remainder of Connect services such as Leeds to Nottingham (with the exception of 158s which are fine for Carlisle to Newcastle)
The final piece of the non-electrified puzzle for me would be to replace all sprinters with converted 321's. Hydrogen where this works and bi-mode where it doesn't.
That would, in my view, take Northern from basket case to logical and actually pretty comfortable. As they need to move all the deck chairs anyway they might as well apply some logic.
I am not sure on the number of 170's. I know a line from London Bridge with some suitable stock though if a bi-mode replacement can be found that fits through Oxted tunnel!Not enough 170s coming over to do that are there?
I agree in principle with all that, though I'm not sure how many 321s are likely to be converted. Presumably there are several areas on Northern where 4x20m units aren't practical.
Doors between vehicles cost money, as do cab-end gangways. These units really are CAF - cheap as ...
Sat over the border, where TfW have ordered similar Civity stock from CAF, we're expecting stock with inter-unit gangways (which naturally must have doors!) so I'd expected some doors between carriages as well for us.Just because they're modern air-conditioned 2+2 units they're far higher-spec than a lot of the other Sprinters, but they are really commuter-spec, not long-distance. What was the expected average journey time on Connect services?
I do believe that in time the 321 hydrogens & 769 bi-modes could be a panacea for the Norrhern franchise.
The 150s/156s are life expired and do nothing to encourage more people to use the train.
However no TOC or ROSCO is going to make another large diesel order given the possibility such trains could be banned / require modifications to hybrid in the next 10 to 20 years. The fact the 195 was only increased by 3 says it all.
A cheap and cheerful solution is the only way and the 321s and 769s could offer that. (assuming they'll work as reverse engineered bi-modes)
I agree there is a question to be answered here. If I was sitting in the DfT or a TOC I would be asking the following very simple questions of the ROSCOS:The 319/769s are already 30 years old, how can they be anything but a short term stop gap? I’ll believe they are a success when they actually appear in service.
You weren't paying much attention then. Ordering new stock has nothing to do with Arriva and nor does Pacer withdrawal. Both were specified by the DfT. The bidders had no choice.
The choice of new stock was down to Arriva and from various comments it isn't anything to boast about.
Doing that would have required considerably more units - in excess of 100. As things stand, using 195s to cascade Sprinters to replace Pacers manages expectations to some degree. Not great for the people that have endured Pacers for the last 30 years to step up to only having 150s for another decade, but better than nothing. Given the considerable subsidy that goes up there, I don't think the DfT would be too keen to see expensive new assets used on routes that weren't bringing in a good return. The 150s, 155s and 156s are long overdue for replacement too, once they are replaced with something better then some growth might be stimulated. Personally though, I don't see that coming unless service frequencies / journey times are improved.The 195s should be being used to directly replace the Pacers, the seem most suited to that role.
The regular pax aren’t stupid, mostly..., and will quickly work out that Northern’s “new trains to replace pacers” is actually a smokescreen and start complaining.
The pax seeing 170s and 185s daily aren’t going to be impressed with the 195s particularly. Punters traveling on 4x 142s however will be impressed with 4x 195s... Seems so simple
Doing that would have required considerably more units - in excess of 100. As things stand, using 195s to cascade Sprinters to replace Pacers manages expectations to some degree. Not great for the people that have endured Pacers for the last 30 years to step up to only having 150s for another decade, but better than nothing. Given the considerable subsidy that goes up there, I don't think the DfT would be too keen to see expensive new assets used on routes that weren't bringing in a good return. The 150s, 155s and 156s are long overdue for replacement too, once they are replaced with something better then some growth might be stimulated. Personally though, I don't see that coming unless service frequencies / journey times are improved.
There's quite a few stations that can't even cope with 4-car 156s.It seems the major problem is most of the infrastructure can’t support longer trains than a 4 car 156 and there’s no spare rail capacity for increased frequencies.
Surely in the short term longer trains are the answer, but without the platform space that can’t happen.
A couple of questions. When did Northern Connect become an 'Inter-City' brand as opposed to a Regional one? I was always under the impression that Connect was just a slight upgrade to commuter services, covering longer distances with fewer stops. A bit like the York / Leeds - Preston / Blackpool, or Leeds - Nottingham?
It was design to avoid Manchester - Barrow & Windermere being downgraded in quality with the transfer from TPE (designated as an Intercity franchise) and Northern. The loss of first class and a trolley has already downgraded them to an extent.