Glenn1969
Established Member
Think that shortage is only on NW. Yorkshire depots have different terms and conditions apparently
A 2 car 195 will also have many fewer seats than a 2 car 150/155/158 does on the Calder Valley lineOn the Calder Valley it would be grand if on a Sunday they could send out a longer train then just the 2 car units that they currently do on most services. If they are going to have only 1 train an hour on sundays then so be it, but it needs to be at least 4 cars long.
2 car 195s and PRM refurbished 150s both (I think?) have 124 seats. 158s have more, of course, but 195s have far more standing room, so it's a trade off.A 2 car 195 will also have many fewer seats than a 2 car 150/155/158 does on the Calder Valley line
What do you think would be the time saving between Salford Crescent and Bolton if the stopper were a 319 EMU (to Preston) versus a 769 bi-mode (to Wigan)? Under the wires they will have essentially the same performance, except the 769 will have a bit of extra weight to carry.
The line speed is 95 from Agecroft North Jn to about half way between Clifton station and the M60 motorway bridge, then 100mph to the site of the former Moses Gate Jn. There is no 100mph in the up direction (Bolton to Salford), maximum is 95 between Moses Gate and a distance before Agecroft North Jn.
Signalling and infrastructure will be the reasons the permissible speeds aren't higher.
This thread is about the May 2019 timetable. It seems highly unlikely that all Victoria - Preston services will be worked by 323s from May. Especially since Northern's 323s will need to sent away for PRM mods before the end of the year, if they are going to remain in service next year.What about when 323s appear? They are pretty nippy in acceleration.
Bradford and Calderdale combined are a bigger population than Kirklees so why should we not have at least the same level of service as Huddersfield and Dewsbury do?
The Nottingham - Bradford is meant to turn into the Bradford - Manchester Airport service
That's hardly worth the trade.... people much prefer a seat to standing and the reason people have to stand is that there aren't enough seats2 car 195s and PRM refurbished 150s both (I think?) have 124 seats. 158s have more, of course, but 195s have far more standing room, so it's a trade off.
2 car 195s and PRM refurbished 150s both (I think?) have 124 seats. 158s have more, of course, but 195s have far more standing room, so it's a trade off.
That's hardly worth the trade.... people much prefer a seat to standing and the reason people have to stand is that there aren't enough seats
Which is all well and good; but who do you propose pays for the extra carriages which will, for most of the day, most of the year, cart around nothing but fresh air?It’s the same old story! It’s great news that Northern are getting all these new trains but why are so many of the 195’s only 2 carriages providing less seats than the current, often seriously overcrowded old 150 and 158 trains. Even 3 carriage trains after a few years will not provide enough capacity on many busy inter urban routes.
Haven’t we learnt anything from the mistakes of the past. The Voyagers were built with far too few carriages and so were the 185’s. Why is the north getting yet more 2 carriage trains for busy routes. How many 2 carriage trains have been ordered for routes in the south during recent years?
Which is all well and good; but who do you propose pays for the extra carriages which will, for most of the day, most of the year, cart around nothing but fresh air?
Longer trains, and more seats, would be lovely, but I seriously doubt there is a business case.
Just because the trains are crowded in rush hour does not mean that there would be enough money made from making them longer to justify the extra cost of said longer trains.No business case for longer trains up north but there is a business case for long trains in the south east that throughout most of the day during off peak hours carry around a lot of fresh air?
If you’ve ever traveled on a northern 2 car dmu at rush hour out of Manchester or Leeds then you’d know there most certainly is a very strong case.
One Leeds to Chester service now showing on RTT for May 20th. 1D70 departing 0539.
Where are these future Northern Connect services where off peak services don’t have enough passengers to fill up 2 cars?Which is all well and good; but who do you propose pays for the extra carriages which will, for most of the day, most of the year, cart around nothing but fresh air?
Longer trains, and more seats, would be lovely, but I seriously doubt there is a business case.
Few of the Connect services have timetables available as yet; however, I would venture to suggest that, on many routes, services will be slower (e.g. Manchester - Leeds via the Calder Valley), and with a lower standard of passenger service than on other operators (Virgin, TPE, Cross Country, et al all offer catering, and first class, for example). Unless the fares on Northern Connect are frankly astonishing, I would be amazed if they attract a significant number of regional journeys except where they allow a direct journey which isn't otherwise possible.Where are these future Northern Connect services where off peak services don’t have enough passengers to fill up 2 cars?
Just because the trains are crowded in rush hour does not mean that there would be enough money made from making them longer to justify the extra cost of said longer trains.
Like it or not, the railway is a business and if adding carriages does not make money it is not going to happen.
Paid for how? The money just isn't there without either a) a massive increase in taxpayer funding, which is about as likely as my 14 stone form willing the London Marathon this year; or b) an even more massive increase in fares, which would decimate passenger numbers and render the new trains pointless anyway.You mean like the 12 coach London/SE trains that are sat idle in sidings outside peak hours or which are running around carrying fresh air most of the day?
No business case for longer trains up north but there is a business case for long trains in the south east that throughout most of the day during off peak hours carry around a lot of fresh air?
If you’ve ever traveled on a northern 2 car dmu at rush hour out of Manchester or Leeds then you’d know there most certainly is a very strong case.
If there is no way in a million years Northern could justify anything more than 2 cars, how come Greater Anglia rural branch lines are going to be getting at least 3 cars?
Greater Anglia is pretty radial though. The Northern routes are not.
I don't disagree with your point about everywhere to everywhere, and everywhere to Manchester Airport - but Shenfield to Harwich would require a reversal (yes Bradford Interchange) - etc - generally it all stems from Liverpool St by design.
Northern's network would need to be carved up into specific metros/termini - rather than these random regional pairings. The issue is that through-running is needed at Manchesters Victoria and Piccadilly... and electrification limits some of the pairs. A western Rochdale/Stalybridge type location is needed to terminate Calder trains at volume - no spare platforms anywhere really. Bolton perhaps now?
Surely the issue at Manchester is more the lack of west-facing terminal platforms? If the TSR is fully implemented, the Victoria through platforms will have to terminate two DMUs per hour, from Kirkby and Wigan Wallgate, and one EMU per hour, from Preston. The Calder Valley services will all run through Victoria, leaving the hourly Stalybridge shuttle as the only service using the east-facing bays.Northern's network would need to be carved up into specific metros/termini - rather than these random regional pairings. The issue is that through-running is needed at Manchesters Victoria and Piccadilly... and electrification limits some of the pairs. A western Rochdale/Stalybridge type location is needed to terminate Calder trains at volume - no spare platforms anywhere really. Bolton perhaps now?
Adding an extra unit to the Kirkby diagrams would allow that service to extend to Rochdale and terminate in the bay there (easier said than done, I know). As for the shuttles, logically it should be possible to combine the Wallgate - Victoria and Victoria - Stalybridge shuttles. That would, theoretically at least, remove the need for any trains to terminate at Victoria at all.Surely the issue at Manchester is more the lack of west-facing terminal platforms? If the TSR is fully implemented, the Victoria through platforms will have to terminate two DMUs per hour, from Kirkby and Wigan Wallgate, and one EMU per hour, from Preston. The Calder Valley services will all run through Victoria, leaving the hourly Stalybridge shuttle as the only service using the east-facing bays.
I suppose there might be merit to an hourly Bolton - Rochdale shuttle via Victoria as an extra 'commuter' service. Good luck to anyone trying to find a path for it though.The bay at Bolton is useable, but what service would run from there?
I believe that was the original intention, before Victoria to Stalybridge electrification was curtailed.Given current planned electrification boundaries could the Preston EMU and the Stalybridge EMU shuttle end up combined as well?