Now that the post-172 DMU cascade is almost over... (who were the winners and losers)

[MCR247]

Yes it can

 

[tbtc]

From where I'm sitting, it's definitely the North.

From where you are sitting, C2C are a "northern" franchise

I think comparing the number of carriages gained by everyone is a bit arbitrary and not necessarily an indication of how "well" franchises have done out of the cascade. It's a bit arbitrary, and doesn't really show up how well they will be used.

Nonetheless I would agree FGW have done quite well. Although everyone has in their own way.

This is why I find it an interesting argument.

It's not just about carriages, its not just about length of carriages (e.g. a 15.5m 142 vs a 20m 150 vs a 23m 156)...

...its also about the benefits of having similar units (e.g. the fifteen 180 carriages sound like a lot, but they only used ten a day, which was equivalent of eight Sprinter coaches - but Northern could get eight Sprinter coaches in daily use from five 150s, so 15x 180 coaches are broadly equivalent to 10x 150 coaches in terms of daily use).

Plus, its all relative. EMT have gained coaches (with no loss), but not that much (still using single 153s on a few duties each day), so not big "winners"...

Interesting how many people think "other" franchises have done better
--- old post above --- --- new post below ---

P.S.: "This poll will close on 18th August 2014 at 13:27" - what?!

I reckoned it might take us a while to sort out the arguments

 

[I like Class 153]

As you've already surmised in another thread, a mix of 153s and 156s; just like it is now but with less sporadic 158 activity. EMT don't have anything else that could run the Matlock branch.

They are still using the 2x158 units on the Matlock at the moment while the refurbishment on the 153/156 is taking place

 

[pemma]

...but you dismiss the additional standing space on the ex-FNW 150s (e.g. the wheelchair space) when making comparisons about capacity (vs a 156).

We need to be consistent on whether standing space can be used to determine capacity.

156s also have a wheelchair space. Like I said at the time the aisles are wider on 156s compared to 150s with 3+2 seating and the carriages on 156s are longer, so the 'extra standing space around the doors' on 150s is really cancelled out in my opinion.
--- old post above --- --- new post below ---

...its also about the benefits of having similar units (e.g. the fifteen 180 carriages sound like a lot, but they only used ten a day, which was equivalent of eight Sprinter coaches - but Northern could get eight Sprinter coaches in daily use from five 150s, so 15x 180 coaches are broadly equivalent to 10x 150 coaches in terms of daily use).

Had the LO 150s been available Northern would have taken them on in Dec 08 instead of the 180s, which is where DfT get the idea that the 180s are equivalent to 12 x 150 carriages. At one point DfT got the idea of the LO 150s going to FGW and the 7x142s going back to replace the 180s, which GMPTE and Northern complained about because of difficulties matching capacity using 142s to replace much longer carriages.

 

[NXEA!]

Personally I think that FGW got the best deal out of the cascades. Originally they received 17 150's as part of the cascade: 8 ex-LO ones, and 9 ex-LM ones. These replaced the 2 loco-hauled rakes (equivalent to 4 150's), 7 142's, and the 4 long-term hire-in ATW 150's. Indications on WNXX are that the SWT 158 hire-in will continue after the December timetable change. So carriage for carriage, FGW received a total of 4 extra carriages out of the cascade, but the 3+2 seating of the 150's and longer carriage lengths means that there was a slight capacity increase when displacing the 142's, and there was a capacity increase over the loco-hauled rakes and the ATW 150's because of the high density seating. Since then, FGW have received 150202/216, 153325/333, and 150209 in addition, so that's an extra 8 carriages received, making 12 extra carriages of capacity. 150001/002 will displace two 2-car 165's to Thames Valley duties, and the 180's will help in this respect as well. So 150001/002 have brought an extra 6 cars of capacity, making 18. The impact of the 180's is hard to gauge as there has been a suggestion on WNXX that one HST set may be disbanded to help with the extra coaches needed, so that means only 2 180's will be out and about displacing 165/166's accounting for one spare, so discounting the 2 needed to plug the gap of the missing HST, an extra 15 carriages will be available, making 33 extra carriages.

On the other hand Northern gained 18 150's and 7 142's, making 50 carriages, with 3 180's moving to FGW and 4 156's going to EMT, so that means Northern get a net gain of 27 carriages. Not much less than FGW, but it seems that FGW got the best deal out of it.

 

[swt_passenger]

Useful reminder there that FGW actually got all 8 units from London Overground.

I can't remember, did the first two become available when Silverlink was broken up and the incoming LOROL people thought they only needed 6 for the Goblin timetable at that time?

Over the last couple of years there have been a few references to the "FGW 30" inward cascade, that I always assumed meant the remaining 6 units (12 vehicles) from LO, and the initial 9 units (18 vehicles) from LM.

So did the first two LO 150s sort of 'slip under the radar' a bit - because they were already sorted out well before the full LM cascade was planned?

 

[tbtc]

Useful reminder there that FGW actually got all 8 units from London Overground.

I can't remember, did the first two become available when Silverlink was broken up and the incoming LOROL people thought they only needed 6 for the Goblin timetable at that time?

Over the last couple of years there have been a few references to the "FGW 30" inward cascade, that I always assumed meant the remaining 6 units (12 vehicles) from LO, and the initial 9 units (18 vehicles) from LM.

So did the first two LO 150s sort of 'slip under the radar' a bit - because they were already sorted out well before the full LM cascade was planned?

Good question - I don't honestly know.

But you got me thinking - I'm sure that at one stage XC were meant to get half a dozen 170 centre cars from LM (essentially turning 170/5s into 170/6s, is I think how it was worded) - what happened there?

 

[fgwrich]

Useful reminder there that FGW actually got all 8 units from London Overground.

I can't remember, did the first two become available when Silverlink was broken up and the incoming LOROL people thought they only needed 6 for the Goblin timetable at that time?

Over the last couple of years there have been a few references to the "FGW 30" inward cascade, that I always assumed meant the remaining 6 units (12 vehicles) from LO, and the initial 9 units (18 vehicles) from LM.

So did the first two LO 150s sort of 'slip under the radar' a bit - because they were already sorted out well before the full LM cascade was planned?

Regarding the ex London Overground 150s - Pretty much a Yes, as it was either the December 2007 or May 2008 timetable changes when they arrived into First Great Westerns fleet - Certainly some time around 2008 as shown by these pictures here:

http://railwayherald.co.uk/imaging.centre/showimage.php?image=114739

 

[Xenophon PCDGS]

Northern: A mixed bag. The loss of the fifteen 180 carriages means they have no more post-privatisation DMUs. However the poor availability of these units meant that they only rostered for two in use at any one time, and two 180s are broadly equivalent to four 150/156s. They also lost four 156s to EMT. Whilst the return of the 142s worsens the average age, the overall capacity at Northern (including the cascaded 150s) did increase. However there is arguably the greatest need here for further capacity, which was not really addressed.

I have only just seen this thread and must say that I totally agree with everything that you have said above. (Ignoring the matter of services to Manchester Airport, we seem to agree on most things now). I would venture to ask if the quality of the seating capacity referred to should also be brought into consideration into this discussion.

 

[TEW]

Useful reminder there that FGW actually got all 8 units from London Overground.

I can't remember, did the first two become available when Silverlink was broken up and the incoming LOROL people thought they only needed 6 for the Goblin timetable at that time?

Over the last couple of years there have been a few references to the "FGW 30" inward cascade, that I always assumed meant the remaining 6 units (12 vehicles) from LO, and the initial 9 units (18 vehicles) from LM.

So did the first two LO 150s sort of 'slip under the radar' a bit - because they were already sorted out well before the full LM cascade was planned?

150121 and 150127 had been with FGW since around early 2008, they weren't really considered a part of the latest cascade. They had become available because LO really didn't need 8 150s to run the service on the GOBLIN line at the time.

 

[swt_passenger]

Another re-allocation of rolling stock that Modern Railways have just reminded me of were the 5 x Pacers from the Oldham Loop closure.

Modern Railways have included them as part of their totalling up of additional stock for Northern, and I reckon they are right, as they would have gone off lease if DfT hadn't allowed a new deal to be made eventually...

 

[pemma]

Another re-allocation of rolling stock that Modern Railways have just reminded me of were the 5 x Pacers from the Oldham Loop closure.

Modern Railways have included them as part of their totalling up of additional stock for Northern, and I reckon they are right, as they would have gone off lease if DfT hadn't allowed a new deal to be made eventually...

There were issues with them.

Originally when the Oldham Loop closed the passengers transferred to Rochdale services meaning a lot of people couldn't board as the trains were so packed. The Pacers weren't diagrammed to be in use so there was a lot of criticism of Northern who refused to put them in to service. GMPTE stepped in and funded the units, so Northern put them back in to service. GMPTE had previously thought they weren't required because the passengers would use buses instead.

 

[sprinterguy]

But you got me thinking - I'm sure that at one stage XC were meant to get half a dozen 170 centre cars from LM (essentially turning 170/5s into 170/6s, is I think how it was worded) - what happened there?

It would have made even more sense if LM had simply been allocated all the 170/5s and XC all the 170/6s (each operator has six of the other) in the first place. I can't work out why the DfT seemingly set out to allocate six 170/5s to Crosscountry, and then take the six centre cars from the six 170/6s allocated to London Midland and insert them into six XC units.

But as it is, the deal seems to have fallen through anyway. Presumably it's better for capacity if both operators can make 3 and 4 car formations, instead of XC being primarily 3-car trains and LM being a mix of 2-car and 4-car trains, with a greater number of 2-car formations.

 

[Class172]

Somehow I don't see that no 3/5 car formations would go down very well, especially as Chase Line services are already being shortened. :?

 

[Philip Elliott]

But you got me thinking - I'm sure that at one stage XC were meant to get half a dozen 170 centre cars from LM (essentially turning 170/5s into 170/6s, is I think how it was worded) - what happened there?

XC are definitely the losers of the cascade. 18 months and counting now for a 2-car on the 16.52 Birmingham - Cambridge, the busiest service out of Brum

It was never confirmed that the 6 vehicles would have centre cars - it didn't make sense as there was nothing to replace that capacity on the Shrewsbury services. I suspect it would have been 3x 170/5 replaced by 150s kept (probably Chase line services).

 

[pemma]

XC are definitely the losers of the cascade. 18 months and counting now for a 2-car on the 16.52 Birmingham - Cambridge, the busiest service out of Brum

Which cascade are you referring to?

If it's the current one then TPE didn't benefit either and most of their services are rammed, even a number of their off-peak services.

If you're referring to how the CT fleet was split up then EMT got a very poor deal as well and a few extra carriages doesn't solve all their problems.

 

[tbtc]

Which cascade are you referring to?

If it's the current one then TPE didn't benefit either and most of their services are rammed, even a number of their off-peak services.

If you're referring to how the CT fleet was split up then EMT got a very poor deal as well and a few extra carriages doesn't solve all their problems.

XC were meant to be getting six 170 coaches from LM which never happened (with no prospect of anything on the horizon either).

TPE had no expectations of getting anything out of this cascade (but will be getting its west-side routes electrified in a few years).

 

[pemma]

XC were meant to be getting six 170 coaches from LM which never happened (with no prospect of anything on the horizon either).

TPE had no expectations of getting anything out of this cascade (but will be getting its west-side routes electrified in a few years).

Doesn't that relates to an order of additional DMU vehicles for LM releasing 6 170 carriages for XC, giving LM a 26 vehicle gain? LM haven't got those additional DMU vehicles, any more than Northern, TPE and FGW got their new train orders but the add-on LM 172 order is 100 times more likely to go through.

http://www2.dft.gov.uk/pgr/rail/pi/rollingstock/rollingstockplan_pge_6-.html?page=6#a1017

 

[swt_passenger]

XC were meant to be getting six 170 coaches from LM which never happened (with no prospect of anything on the horizon either).

Wasn't the wording in the rolling stock plan that only one of XC or EMT would get a few carriages, but not both?

East Midlands Trains would introduce additional DMU vehicles, cascaded from the Northern franchise, for use on services into Leicester and Nottingham. Alternatively, the Cross Country franchise would provide additional vehicles on services into Leicester...

So it looks like EMT got that decision - the 4 x 156s - which strongly suggests the XC 6 vehicles were no longer to be expected...

 

[tbtc]

Doesn't that relates to an order of additional DMU vehicles for LM releasing 6 170 carriages for XC, giving LM a 26 vehicle gain? LM haven't got those additional DMU vehicles, any more than Northern, TPE and FGW got their new train orders but the add-on LM 172 order is 100 times more likely to go through.

http://www2.dft.gov.uk/pgr/rail/pi/rollingstock/rollingstockplan_pge_6-.html?page=6#a1017

Cheers.

Interesting that your link talks of "ten class 317 units from the One franchise" (now NXEA, obv), so maybe people can stop blaming Abellio for the (now) nine 317s planned to leave the GEML?

Wasn't the wording in the rolling stock plan that only one of XC or EMT would get a few carriages, but not both?



So it looks like EMT got that decision - the 4 x 156s - which strongly suggests the XC 6 vehicles were no longer to be expected...

Fair enough, thanks. Although the EMT coaches aren't benefitting Leicester (as planned) - I'm not sure what their plan to benefit Leicester was (presumably doubling up some Ivanhoe DMUs?)

 

[pemma]

Fair enough, thanks. Although the EMT coaches aren't benefitting Leicester (as planned) - I'm not sure what their plan to benefit Leicester was (presumably doubling up some Ivanhoe DMUs?)

Notice that it's dated July 2007 and there was a cascade involving EMT in late 2007 as well.

You'll probably recall that as a result of Liverpool-Norwich passenger counts being inaccurate DfT decided EMT should not retain the 8 x 158 centre cars. However, they gained a pair of Wessex Trains 158s, two 153s from Northern and two 153s from ATW. The extra 153s were intended to provide extra capacity on route 4, even though there was no net gain of carriages for EMT.

The 4 additional 156s were allocated to EMT after the Rolling Stock Strategy was published.

 

[tbtc]

Notice that it's dated July 2007 and there was a cascade involving EMT in late 2007 as well.

You'll probably recall that as a result of Liverpool-Norwich passenger counts being inaccurate DfT decided EMT should not retain the 8 x 158 centre cars. However, they gained a pair of Wessex Trains 158s, two 153s from Northern and two 153s from ATW. The extra 153s were intended to provide extra capacity on route 4, even though there was no net gain of carriages for EMT.

The 4 additional 156s were allocated to EMT after the Rolling Stock Strategy was published.

Thanks for reminding me - it'd make things easier if there were a flowchart showing exactly what went where and when (like I was trying to remember whether FGW loaned a 158 to SWT or whether SWT loaned a 158 to FGW a few days ago), there's such a merry-go-round...

 

[WillPS]

The 3x Additional units were ex-FNW/Northern 153s and moved over in December 2008. I remember getting on an ex-FNW 142 from Sheffield - Worksop with its FGW labelscar still clear, then changing on to an ex-FNW 153 with its Northern labelscar still clear.

The 156s were not even up for discussion at this point as the DfT were satisfied that Liverpool - Norwich would be adequately served when the franchise was split.

 

[pemma]

The 3x Additional units were ex-FNW/Northern 153s and moved over in December 2008.

And I forgot about those. However, combining the two cascades adds up. EMT gains a total of 7 Class 153s even though they only gained 3 additional carriages overall, so that then means at least 6 extra carriages were available for Leicester and Nottingham services.

 

[I like Class 153]

And I forgot about those. However, combining the two cascades adds up. EMT gains a total of 7 Class 153s even though they only gained 3 additional carriages overall, so that then means at least 6 extra carriages were available for Leicester and Nottingham services.

Did they?, I thought that there are 17 153 units?

 

[sprinterguy]

Did they?, I thought that there are 17 153 units?

Yes, most of which have been East Midlands area units for years. But there's been a few 153s swapped around between operators over the years. I can't keep track of all of the units have moved around (It looks like there have been a number of exchanges between Wales & West/ATW, East Anglia and Central Trains/EMT over the last decade or so as the franchise boundaries have been continually redrawn), but I know for sure that EMT have gained former Regional Railways North East units 153319 and 153357, and I think that 153310 and 153313 are the former North West Trains ones.

 

[DjU]

Cheers.
Interesting that your link talks of "ten class 317 units from the One franchise" (now NXEA, obv), so maybe people can stop blaming Abellio for the (now) nine 317s planned to leave the GEML?

Not Really. Because you've jumped to an incorrect conclusion.

Had C2C recieved ten 317 units off ONE/NXEA (instead of potentially getting the ten 321), then ONE/NXEA would have likely either taken the ten 321s in addition to the other 17 it ended up getting or would have had to order a slightly larger fleet of 379s.

The HLOS had ONE down for 188 Additional EMU vehicles, take away 40x 317 vehicles and they'd only have 148 extra.


The current nine 317s under discussion are a completly different kettle of fish.