Options for TPE rolling stock in the future

Discussion in 'Traction & Rolling Stock' started by 47802, 8 Aug 2015.

Thread Status:
Not open for further replies.
  1. 47802

    47802 On Moderation

    Messages:
    3,455
    Joined:
    8 Oct 2013
    Mod Note: This thread has been split out from here.

    A lot of people seem to be assuming that the 442's will ends up going north, yet word seems to be that all the TPX bidders have proposed some form of Bi-mode solution.
     
  2. Registered users do not see these banners - join or log in today!

    Rail Forums

     
  3. aformeruser

    aformeruser Veteran Member

    Messages:
    30,637
    Joined:
    23 Jan 2009
    Yes. However, loco-hauled 442s could be on TPE services next year, a bi-mode solution would take longer to get in to service.
     
  4. D365

    D365 Established Member

    Messages:
    6,735
    Joined:
    29 Jun 2012
    Assuming the 18 Class 442s will be rewired for the purpose originally suggested, presumably to AAR specification for either Class 67 or 68 haulage - locomotives which are available immediately - surely the existing driving vehicles will suffice for control cabs.
     
  5. aformeruser

    aformeruser Veteran Member

    Messages:
    30,637
    Joined:
    23 Jan 2009
    Would that result in a situation similar to dragged Pendolinos where a second driver has to sit in the cab of the Pendolino, despite a driver being in the locomotive hauling the Pendolino?
     
  6. D365

    D365 Established Member

    Messages:
    6,735
    Joined:
    29 Jun 2012
    The key difference is probably that the Class 442 rakes will not run under their own power again and will be semi-permanently coupled to a loco - I also don't know if the existing motor cars will have to be scrapped. It would seem a bit of a waste to scrap half of the driving vehicles.
     
  7. Haydn1971

    Haydn1971 Established Member

    Messages:
    2,088
    Joined:
    11 Dec 2012
    Location:
    Sheffield

    I'm not - TPE provides the premium balancing services to the Northern value services - of course, it's much more complex than that. Ageing 442's with a loco at one end isn't going to meet that expectation in the franchise.

    Another order of the currently popular but unproven AT300's is possible for the Scotland/Newcastle services, but does Hitachi have the capacity and more importantly would the end doors work on the busy sections after the mid-door successes ? It's clear diesel power is needed, so there's the question of looking at 125-140mph options to work better on EC/WC or to look at where the core issues on the M62 corridor. I'm still not convinced that a diesel under the floor cannot be done, order enough and someone will do it. It's wide open as far as I see it, with Aventra, ATx00, Desiro City, Civity, leading the way vs numerous unknowns
     
  8. AM9

    AM9 Established Member

    Messages:
    7,623
    Joined:
    13 May 2014
    Location:
    St Albans
    Maybe there will be a diesel equivalent of the Verve. That would be a worthy successor to the 185s, a bit faster, 1/3, 2/3 double doors, 23m length coaches, possibly a new replacement for the Desiro worldwide.
     
  9. edwin_m

    edwin_m Veteran Member

    Messages:
    17,327
    Joined:
    21 Apr 2013
    Location:
    Nottingham
    Why would new express diesels be ordered when the lines they use are still likely to be electrified within the next decade and by then there will be a surplus of existing express diesels? If this happens it would be a sign that the "pause" is permanent.

    Taking the "pause" at face value I'd expect either TPE to carry on with 185s with a few more Turbostars from somewhere, or a small fleet of bi-modes just for the Scotland and Newcastle routes where there is significant running under the wires. When the TP electrification is eventually completed these could move to South Transpennine or other routes that remain unelectrified.
     
  10. D365

    D365 Established Member

    Messages:
    6,735
    Joined:
    29 Jun 2012
    The TPE ITT explicitly forbids bidders from taking on Class 17x units as these are 'supposed' to go to the Northern franchise, as an option for fulfilment of the 'Regional Express' criteria. The options for TPE bidders are new-build or Class 442 loco-hauled as we have discussed.
     
  11. Emblematic

    Emblematic Member

    Messages:
    659
    Joined:
    14 Aug 2013
    Any loco-hauled stock could be offered, subject to the conditions set out (which boil down to either confirmation of availability, or a fallback plan.) So, for example, a Scotrail-style HST derivative could be offered, or 68 + Mk3. The 442 option was promoted as a pre-qualified option, a broad hint from DfT which all the bidders seem to have ignored.
     
    Last edited: 8 Aug 2015
  12. aformeruser

    aformeruser Veteran Member

    Messages:
    30,637
    Joined:
    23 Jan 2009
    While TPE bidders weren`t allowed to propose taking on released 15xs and 17xs, there is a reference in the ITT about bidders to presume they will receive temporary replacements for the 4 remaining 170s. Maybe a loan of 170s from another operator?
     
  13. Rick1984

    Rick1984 Member

    Messages:
    691
    Joined:
    23 Aug 2012
    Would it not make sense to use the rebuilt class 73's as these are compatible with 442's, as far as Im aware. All obsolete equipment could be stripped to remove dead weight.
     
  14. Emblematic

    Emblematic Member

    Messages:
    659
    Joined:
    14 Aug 2013
    What it actually says, is that that there will be something put in place with (present) TPE to substitute for the 4 Chiltern 170s going in Feb 16, and the new incumbent can continue to use whatever that is (even if 17x, 15x or even 14x.) Bidder is to work on the basis that the replacement is equivalent to 4 x 2 car 170. Not necessarily temporary either.
    --- old post above --- --- new post below ---
    But are they available? The Network Rail ones clearly aren't, there are only 5 GBRF conversions and these are going to Scotland. Doesn't make sense to build - or rebuild - locos just to suit one batch of old stock.
    There wouldn't be much needed to adapt the 442s to work with available locos like 67s or 68s, and that allows either loco or stock to be replaced in future without issue.
     
  15. edwin_m

    edwin_m Veteran Member

    Messages:
    17,327
    Joined:
    21 Apr 2013
    Location:
    Nottingham
    The performance would be far below that of a DMU. In fact you'd probably be better leaving the dead weight in the 73 as it would increase the tractive effort.
     
  16. SpacePhoenix

    SpacePhoenix Established Member

    Messages:
    5,492
    Joined:
    18 Mar 2014
    Is there anything wrong structurally with the motor cars? If there isn't could they just remove the traction package and disconnect the traction motors from where the power comes in and from the motor to the wheels (probably cheaper then getting new bogies designed and made).

    Could the driving vehicles have their cabs modified to server the same function that the PCVs served on the old Royal Mail trains?
     
  17. AM9

    AM9 Established Member

    Messages:
    7,623
    Joined:
    13 May 2014
    Location:
    St Albans
    ISTR there have been reports that they are sagging. Even if they don't, it would be more than simply removing bits. The weight of the traction switchgear/rheo banks etc., together with the motors means that the suspension is much stiffer. The suspension including damping would need replacing at least.
     
  18. aformeruser

    aformeruser Veteran Member

    Messages:
    30,637
    Joined:
    23 Jan 2009
    I was thinking the replacement units wouldn't be used by the existing TPE franchise but I was forgetting about the short extension from Feb 2016 to April 2016 to cover for the delay in getting the ITT published.

    Did it not make some reference to being similar in capacity and performance to a 170? If so I would hope that at least excludes 75mph DMUs, given they aren't able to run to class 170 timings.
     
  19. Haydn1971

    Haydn1971 Established Member

    Messages:
    2,088
    Joined:
    11 Dec 2012
    Location:
    Sheffield
    That horse has well and truly bolted - although the pause will review the current situation, it's pretty certain "just" electrifying TPE North through Huddersfield isn't a long term solution. It has to be a new line full stop.




    On the basis of "a new line", struggling on with the 185 fleet isn't enough. A new line would struggle to be built in time for HS2 completion, so we're are realistically looking another 20 years of DMU's in the North and across the regions of England and Wales. There's also going to be demand for new services linking to HS2 stations that haven't even hit the public radar yet, Sheffield Crossrail, Derby-Nottingham Crossrail, Leicester-Coventry-Birmingham-Wolverhampton improvements, servicing the demands of wiring the Valleys, Bristol Metro, plus dozens of small schemes - We have a staffing crunch and building short bits of railway chords to link up existing lines is a relative walk in the park compared to track, bridge, signals and wiring complexities of moving from diesel to electric lines.

    TPE needs 6-8 carriage units across its fleet to manage growth through that period, it also needs some cheap fix solutions for getting more trains per hour down the line. CrossCountry desperately needs extra units, Northern will be culling it's 14x fleet in a few years, the 150-156 fleet perhaps even the 158 fleet will need to be culled before the next franchise in 2025 ish. As I've been saying ever since joining this forum, we need to accept that wires across the network aren't going to happen quickly and start a rolling program of new DMU's, preferably DEMU's that are easy to convert or Bi-Mode lower speed units for the regions and non ML franchises.
     
  20. aformeruser

    aformeruser Veteran Member

    Messages:
    30,637
    Joined:
    23 Jan 2009
    What exactly do you mean by 'express diesels'? Apart from the 180s and 22xs the other diesels are all versatile enough to use on shorter routes. Indeed the rolling stock RUS referred to rural routes having a poor business case for new stock but stock currently used on regional routes like the 170s being suitable to cascade down.

    Also worth remembering is even if North TPE services cease to serve destinations which aren't electrified, TPE will likely need to continue using either diesels or bi-mode on some services so that they are able to divert via Wakefield, Calder Vale and Warrington Central. Remember Virgin saying they had to use Voyagers on Birmingham to Scotland services because the diversionary route via Manchester wasn't electrified?

    TPE bidders were told in the ITT to make plans for Manchester-York electrification not occurring during the next franchise. If they can't find suitable/sufficient additional stock without a new order then a new order is the only option.
     
  21. Haydn1971

    Haydn1971 Established Member

    Messages:
    2,088
    Joined:
    11 Dec 2012
    Location:
    Sheffield

    I seem to recall some discussion in the last few weeks about a TPE route via Calder a Valley too
     
  22. thealexweb

    thealexweb Member

    Messages:
    905
    Joined:
    5 Jan 2014
    Class 225s anyone? They will need a new home in the coming years. I think I am right in saying a Class 225 would offer a similar capacity to an eight car Class 350.
     
  23. D365

    D365 Established Member

    Messages:
    6,735
    Joined:
    29 Jun 2012
    If you are referring to an InterCity 225, the '225' does not refer to a TOPS classification. Most significant shortcoming is the comparative lack of acceleration even with carriages removed, and the 110mph limit due to lack of tilt.
     
  24. Haydn1971

    Haydn1971 Established Member

    Messages:
    2,088
    Joined:
    11 Dec 2012
    Location:
    Sheffield

    Also, a Class 91 loco hauled set fixes little through the York-Manchester core
     
  25. edwin_m

    edwin_m Veteran Member

    Messages:
    17,327
    Joined:
    21 Apr 2013
    Location:
    Nottingham
    If there is to be a new line then the stock to operate it will have to be suitable. We have absolutely no idea what this should be, as it could range from a pretty conventional EMU through to a short-formation classic compatible with a top speed of anything from 160km/h to 300km/h or even more. So it is pointless ordering more units just as a stopgap, unless there is a good chance of them being useable elsewhere once whatever happens on HS3/TransNorth actually happens. With the West of England replacements now ordered, the long-term uses for another fleet of long-distance DMUs or bi-modes are strictly limited - perhaps replacing some Voyagers but that's about it.

    There's also a strong possibility of electrification of the existing line going ahead some time before the new line appears, once decisions are made on which if any parts of the existing route will form parts of the new line and even if the answer is either "none of them" or "all of them"! But this won't be known in time for the franchise currently in bidding (in fact the bids are in already) so if that franchise orders diesels they could still be redundant within a decade or so.
    --- old post above --- --- new post below ---
    I agree the likes of 170s are able to be used on other routes, whether commuter, regional or rural. But the main point of issue here is the 185s, which are physically capable of working certain other routes but are so heavy and expensive that any non-TPE franchise considering using them (with the possible exception of Chiltern) would probably go for 170s or some new build instead. And if TPE orders something new then I would expect it to be something that can readily find a home elsewhere in ten years or so.
     
    Last edited: 9 Aug 2015
  26. Aictos

    Aictos Established Member

    Messages:
    9,059
    Joined:
    28 Apr 2009
    However don't forget that didn't the Deltics when replaced by HSTs for example instead of being cut up actually went on selected TPE services?

    So a TPE bidder could propose to use 91s on the Anglo Scottish services as they don't need tilt on the WCML, case in point the existing 350s and 185s don't have tilt so could be a option.

    As to York/Doncaster to Manchester, I be very surprised if they did go with loco haul as for operational reasons, a multiple unit is probably more effective for example you wouldn't need to run the loco around and you save money on not needing remote driving cabling as fitted to DVTs at the moment.

    Only thing is you need to make sure the MU is designed to be future proof, no use ordering a fleet of 3 car MUs when growth has shown they need to be between 5 and 6 coaches long per MU.
     
  27. Haydn1971

    Haydn1971 Established Member

    Messages:
    2,088
    Joined:
    11 Dec 2012
    Location:
    Sheffield

    20 years is hardly a stop gap - that's how long it would take to build a new line across the Pennines
    --- old post above --- --- new post below ---

    That's not looking likely now - Electrification of TPE North is dead in the water - why spend £100m's on something that brings so small a benefit of an extra train per hour with the restrictions on train length we have now - the HS2 argument will win out
    --- old post above --- --- new post below ---


    My point exactly, 91's could only service Manchester Airport to Scotkand - freeing up 350's that are useless on the rest of the TPE network


    Never a truer word said, I nearly choked when a two car 170 pulled into Sheffield the other afternoon to a huge sigh from dozens of waiting passengers - it chugged out with people standing
     
  28. Tom Quayle

    Tom Quayle Member

    Messages:
    67
    Joined:
    6 Aug 2015
    Location:
    Edinburgh
    It has been suggested that the situation has links with the DRS order for more 68s. As for where the stock is coming from that's another matter entirely. There's about 2 rakes of mk3s that could theoretically be reinstated if refreshed/overhauled or it could be a case of Rivera are going to be running out of mk2 air cons quickly with more going on long term hire to DRS. The 442s is an option but the refresh costs of hauled stock would be lower.
     
  29. Haydn1971

    Haydn1971 Established Member

    Messages:
    2,088
    Joined:
    11 Dec 2012
    Location:
    Sheffield
    As much as it pains me to say it, sadly 68's hauling Mk4's could be the future - I'm just not convinced end doors or dwell times will work on TPE North though.

    Anyone know when the news of what we will get is actually broken ?
     
  30. ainsworth74

    ainsworth74 Forum Staff Staff Member Global Moderator

    Messages:
    21,332
    Joined:
    16 Nov 2009
    Location:
    Redcar
    Surely if anything is going to be hauling Mk4s around on TPE it'll be 88s? Can run on electrics where available and has a diesel for the bits where there aren't yet wires.

    That being said I do share your concerns with end doors on TPE North!
     
  31. jimm

    jimm Established Member

    Messages:
    5,007
    Joined:
    6 Apr 2012
    Sorry but it really is stretching a point to claim that Deltics were used on "selected" TransPennine services. There was nothing very systematic about their appearances on the route, beyond a round trip from York to Liverpool and back often being booked on a Thursday in the last few months of operations to make sure all was well with whichever loco was due to be on railtour duty on the Saturday. Otherwise their appearances usually had more to do with the non-availability of a booked Class 47/4 coinciding with the availability of a spare Class 55 and a York-based driver who signed both 55s and the route via Standedge.
     
Thread Status:
Not open for further replies.

Share This Page