Northern possibly close to taking on extra EMUs

[HSTEd]

LM has 317s now?

Oops..

I thought they did have some for peak extras on London trains......

Apparently they got 321s instead...

 

[Whistler40145]

If LM had sufficient units to release 321s, could they not go to Northern?


Sent from my iPad using Tapatalk HD

 

[Old Hill Bank]

To various posters:
LM have no 317s.
LM have more 323s than Northern and require more 23 metre units for the reasons I have stated.
Why spend lost of money training loads of Northern train and maintainence staff on 323s when they are clearly needing to be trained 319s and on other stuff in the medium to long term, best just keep with the uniform fleet idea.
Why do people think that LM have units to release?

 

[Nym]

Oops..

I thought they did have some for peak extras on London trains......

Apparently they got 321s instead...

Yes, used all day on Trings and peak Milton Keynes / Bletchleys

317s make sense for northern as the 319s they'll soon be getting have very similar underpinnings that are nothing like the 323s (DC Traction Westcode rather than AC Traction GTO)

 

[tbtc]

Aren't 323s needed to keep ahead of Pendolinos on some of the south Manchester services? Even if reduced to three-car the 319s would not match this.

• 319s are 100mph
• 323s are 90mph

Unless the 323s accelerate a lot better than 319s (?), I think 319s should be okay on the Stoke service?

LM will need more units for Bromsgrove, Redditch and Rugeley. Lets put all the 323s with LM and all the (hopefuly) refurbished 319s with Northern as and when required, this will save the industry a lot of money and deliver the capacity needed.

323s to LM makes sense to me - LM need more 23m units for the expanded Cross City service - makes sense to have "more of the same" for the Chase line electrification too.

That way Northern can get all of the 319s (even if it means giving up the 321/322s to someone else to balance the numbers up, to have the same type on both sides of the Pennines).

 

[Class172]

To various posters:
LM have no 317s.
LM have more 323s than Northern and require more 23 metre units for the reasons I have stated.
Why spend lost of money training loads of Northern train and maintainence staff on 323s when they are clearly needing to be trained 319s and on other stuff in the medium to long term, best just keep with the uniform fleet idea.
Why do people think that LM have units to release?

I agree, some people have been suggesting moving 323s to Northern in place for more 350s, but this would cause 8 car trains on services; some stations cannot be extended and SDO is not ideal on a high load route such as Cross-city. In stead I think all the 323s should be consolidated with LM, which would allow a uniform fleet for their commuter services and also for when the Chase Line is electrified.

 

[ainsworth74]

• 319s are 100mph
• 323s are 90mph

Unless the 323s accelerate a lot better than 319s (?), I think 319s should be okay on the Stoke service?

I wouldn't be surprised if they did to be honest. 323s have two powered vehicles (so 2/3s of the vehicles are powered) whilst 319s only have the one motor vehicle (1/4 of the vehicles powered).

 

[Whistler40145]

Northern could take on sufficient 319s to eliminate 323s in the North West & 321/9s in Yorkshire.

I am sure this would be the best move.

If it was ever required for some services to use 2x319, this is easier having unit end gangway doors, therefore only one set of crew is required.

Sent from my iPad using Tapatalk HD

 

[WatcherZero]

Northern would be unlikely to use them in 8 car formations except for semi-fasts where tha platforms could take it anyway. What Northern really need is a mix of 4 car and 3 car so they can better match demand by having single four car units and coupled three cars, lone three cars wouldnt meet Northerns passenger demand forcing them to be used nearly always in pairs and resulting in an overprovision of capacity on some lower demand services.

 

[Nym]

• 319s are 100mph
• 323s are 90mph

Unless the 323s accelerate a lot better than 319s (?), I think 319s should be okay on the Stoke service?

They accelarate significantly better than 319s.

 

[158722]

Oops..

I thought they did have some for peak extras on London trains......

Apparently they got 321s instead...

They kept 7, one on the St Albans flyer and five (I think) diagrammed on Euston peak services, as you say.

 

[Old Hill Bank]

Northern would be unlikely to use them in 8 car formations except for semi-fasts where tha platforms could take it anyway. What Northern really need is a mix of 4 car and 3 car so they can better match demand by having single four car units and coupled three cars, lone three cars wouldnt meet Northerns passenger demand forcing them to be used nearly always in pairs and resulting in an overprovision of capacity on some lower demand services.

Confused! if you were refering to "Class 172s" post it was about the Lichfield-Redditch/Bromsgrove service, not anything in the North West.

 

[Nym]

They kept 7, one on the St Albans flyer and five (I think) diagrammed on Euston peak services, as you say.

Theres a two unit set that operates an early morning service from the Milton Keynes area, then ECS to Watford Junction to operate the 0755 to Euston, then is stuck on a Tring diagram.

Another, three unit set operates in the AM peak in one direction, then goes into Euston Carriage Sidings, coming out in the PM peak for one diagram, but then splitting out into four / eight car sets for the late evening services heading back up to Northampton.

 

[tbtc]

I wouldn't be surprised if they did to be honest. 323s have two powered vehicles (so 2/3s of the vehicles are powered) whilst 319s only have the one motor vehicle (1/4 of the vehicles powered).

Makes sense - my excuse is that my use of 323s is generally on lines like Glossop where I don't think they have to break much sweat to keep up with the timetable.

 

[swt_passenger]

Erm... Hate to break it to you, but there's hardly any left.

Well spotted. I fully expect people to be still theoretically cascading them all over the country even when they've all gone...

 

[Buttsy]

Seems a shame now that the 303s, 306s and 311s were all scrapped. Sliding door stock which would have helped out while the DfT decided what the TOCs needed...

(tongue firmly in cheek)

 

[Class377/5]

They accelarate significantly better than 319s.

But a refurbished re-motored (as proposed) 319 may accelerate better than a 323.

 

[WatcherZero]

Confused! if you were refering to "Class 172s" post it was about the Lichfield-Redditch/Bromsgrove service, not anything in the North West.

The 321/9 at Northern are three 20m car unlike the rest of the class which is four car.
The 323's are three car 23m.

LM most wants a fleet of four car trains whereas Northern would find a mix of 3 and 4 very useful for load balancing.

No, the 321/9s (and 322s) are formed of 4 cars per unit just like the rest of the class. It's the Scottish 320 (and 318) which is formed of 3 cars.

Sorry, I thought they were three.

 

[edwin_m]

But a refurbished re-motored (as proposed) 319 may accelerate better than a 323.

Unlikely, unless motors were added on other cars of the 319 to make it two thirds motored like the 323.

 

[D365]

The 321/9 at Northern are three 20m car unlike the rest of the class which is four car.
The 323s are three car 23m.

No, the 321/9s (and 322s) are formed of 4 cars per unit just like the rest of the class. It's the Scottish 320 (and 318) which is formed of 3 cars.

Unlikely, unless motors were added on other cars of the 319 to make it two thirds motored like the 323.

Or specific units were reduced by one carriage along with the retraction, as has been suggested by Porterbrook.

 

[WatcherZero]

The proposal from Porterbrook includes adding traction control to reduce wheelslip but I agree, its already got nearly a MW of tractive power through just one driving car, unless they added motors to the TSO the only real significant increase in power is from dropping the 7.75 tonnes of the TSO carriage which would increase its power to weight ratio by almost a third.

 

[34D]

Erm... Hate to break it to you, but there's hardly any left.

Well spotted. I fully expect people to be still theoretically cascading them all over the country even when they've all gone...

Appreciate the correction both. I've started a separate thread about stored units.

 

[Old Hill Bank]

The 321/9 at Northern are three 20m car unlike the rest of the class which is four car.
The 323's are three car 23m.

LM most wants a fleet of four car trains whereas Northern would find a mix of 3 and 4 very useful for load balancing.



Sorry, I thought they were three.

Who told you that LM want four car units for Birmingham x-city when the platforms are built for 6 x 23m and the current stock is 3-car 23m units!!!!

 

[61653 HTAFC]

It certainly does look like Birmingham has the better case for getting all of the 323s- a shame as I remember seeing the brand new ones outside Hunslet's works in the early 1990s, it would be nice if they came 'home'!

Of course in the longer-term there may be issues on the Airedale EMU services due to the fact that platform 2 at Shipley (Leeds-Skipton-bound) cannot be realistically extended to more than 6-cars (though I'm not sure if this would be 20m or 23m stock) due to the junctions at either end. Currently all the West Yorkshire EMUs are 4-car sets (321/322 being 20m cars, 333s being 23m) which means the longest formation available on Leeds-Skipton services is a single 333. Replacing the current sets with 3-car units would allow 6-car formations but would also mean that most services would see a drop in capacity.

 

[WatcherZero]

Who told you that LM want four car units for Birmingham x-city when the platforms are built for 6 x 23m and the current stock is 3-car 23m units!!!!

If you read the last RUS crowding issues across the LM franchise are acute and I understand its only got worse since then, they concluded that even doubling up 3x23m trains there still wouldnt be enough capacity to meet passenger demand on the Lichfield-Birmingham services by 2020 (But still as a BCR 1 scheme it wont generate enough extra revenue to justify procuring extra units for lengthening, likely as they arent needed outside the peaks), most of the stations could already accomodate 8x23m theres only a couple that are currently 6x23m max.

Lengthening platforms and moving towards a baseline four car electric fleet however would give LM that flexibility to put on extra capacity in the peak and still reduce it offpeak to match lower demand without the 3x23 units being unusable anywhere else on the network because 4/8/12 was required.

 

[edwin_m]

Or specific units were reduced by one carriage along with the retraction, as has been suggested by Porterbrook.

Even then the acceleration wouldn't match the 323. Acceleration depends a lot on the number of motored axles, a 3-car 319 would still only have one third and a 323 has two thirds. A 319 also has less power and DC motors are probably less effective at using this power at high speeds. A re-tractioning might address these two issues but would be unlikely to add another power car in each unit.

 

[northwichcat]

Northern could take on sufficient 319s to eliminate 323s in the North West & 321/9s in Yorkshire.

I am sure this would be the best move.

We don't yet know for certain the franchise boundaries of future franchises.

WY Metro were assured by DfT a few years ago that the long term future of the 333s will be in West Yorkshire. When TfGM asked about assurances of the long term 323 future they were not given that. However, given that they were willing to fund CCTV for the 323s DfT guaranteed that if the 323s were taken away that the replacement units would have CCTV fitted before entering service in the Manchester area.

Aren't 323s needed to keep ahead of Pendolinos on some of the south Manchester services? Even if reduced to three-car the 319s would not match this.

3 car 319s would be a reduction in capacity over a 323. A 323 is the only type of train in the Midlands and North of England which has both a carriage length length of at least 23m and a wide enough carriage with to allow 3+2 seating. The 319s have approx 20m carriages, like the 350s.

They are off lease and so available at short notice and Northern isnt thinking of using them for additional services so the timetable change dates become pretty irrelevent.

I don't think Northern would put extra carriages in to service at the present time without getting extra funding off either a PTE or DfT. However, they could usefully use extra carriages.

 

[WatcherZero]

Would reduce the fines and missed payments for failing to fulfill contractual strengthening requirements elsewhere.

 

[Nym]

But a refurbished re-motored (as proposed) 319 may accelerate better than a 323.

I highly dowbt it...

 

[158722]

If you read the last RUS crowding issues across the LM franchise are acute and I understand its only got worse since then, they concluded that even doubling up 3x23m trains there still wouldnt be enough capacity to meet passenger demand on the Lichfield-Birmingham services by 2020 (But still as a BCR 1 scheme it wont generate enough extra revenue to justify procuring extra units for lengthening, likely as they arent needed outside the peaks), most of the stations could already accomodate 8x23m theres only a couple that are currently 6x23m max.

Lengthening platforms and moving towards a baseline four car electric fleet however would give LM that flexibility to put on extra capacity in the peak and still reduce it offpeak to match lower demand without the 3x23 units being unusable anywhere else on the network because 4/8/12 was required.

Indeed, but a quick scan of current LM services and diagrams suggests that they need 26 units to cover the Cross city line (14 all day diagrams, 5 peak time turns to create 6-car sets plus 2 odd-ball extras) and 5 for Walsall-Wolves turns). LM only have 26 323s at present, hence the use of a 350 on a Walsall-Wolves turn and I suspect there may be at least one another non-323 turn, meaning they require 24 of the 26 323s in service.

What would they use an influx of ex-Northern 323s on?
2 to free up the 350s for starters, which then replace a pair of 321s
4 will be required for BNS/Walsall to Rugeley when that goes live
2 (?) will be required for when the wires are extended to Bromsgrove (is that happening still?)
Reinstating the Walsall-Wolves direct service has been a wish of TWM for many years (1 set?)
Coventry-Nuneaton line is also to be wired, 1 set required based on current frequency, although 2 if service doubled as planned.
Another 6 peak-hour Cross City turns look good for using 6-car sets on, so whatever units are left over are used on these services.

I can easily see how LM could diagram 40 from 43 323 sets in the next few years, but as WatcherZero says, will even these be enough given projections in the RUS?