Potential stock for future Nottingham to Liverpool services?

[JonathanH]

I'd suggest some Class 800 series unless anyone here could think of any potential suitability issues?

That would be ridiculous. A pointy nose simply isn't needed for the route. A 800 series unit with a class 385 style upright front might be appropriate but arguably a unit with better distributed doors is needed so a class 385 with 'generating units' might be better. I think the other point to note is that the electric part of the route via Warrington Central would be limited to a very small part of the route miles:

Liverpool Lime Street to Liverpool South Parkway
Deansgate to Hazel Grove

and perhaps one day
Sheffield to Chesterfield
Nottingham Station.

Surely if we are talking brand new, a FLIRT would be better.

Not exclusively though. There is no reason a class 800 style unit with a flat front couldn't be designed to maximise passenger space.

 

[swt_passenger]

I'd suggest some Class 800 series unless anyone here could think of any potential suitability issues?

Hammers to crack a nut on a low speed route, just like 220/221/222.

 

[Bletchleyite]

Class 170s are basically perfect for the route, ideally in 5 or 6 car formations. Just have to find some.

 

[JonathanH]

Class 170s are basically perfect for the route, ideally in 5 or 6 car formations. Just have to find some.

Class 172s probably even better with some interior changes and electric units acquired for the Snow Hill lines.

Clearly neither 170s or 172s are going to be available in the near future so continuation of the use of 158s seems likely.

 

[MattRat]

Class 170s are basically perfect for the route, ideally in 5 or 6 car formations. Just have to find some.

Swap with Northern?

 

[JonathanH]

Swap with Northern?

They aren't available as noted below (and many times previously from people who actually work them).

I really wish people would leave Northern’s 170’s alone. And no we don’t want EMR’s junk 158’s in return before anyone suggests it.

 

[MattRat]

They aren't available as noted below (and many times previously from people who actually work them).

I'm just working through the idea, and also any other ideas, to see the logical conclusions. In this case, a bust.

Personally I'd like a solution that replaces both EMRs 158s and 170s, so that the units can all go to Northern and replace their most elderly units. The 158s might be considered 'junk' but they are better than 150s and 153s.

 

[Failed Unit]

Class 170s are basically perfect for the route, ideally in 5 or 6 car formations. Just have to find some.

The lack of corridor connections for me makes them worse than the 158s. considering the industrial relations issue of running multiple units together (360s) without corridor connections says industrial action as well.


However, I know the 158 won’t go on forever, but surely keeping them is the perfect solution. Couple that with the 170s then EMR are sorted. I did hear they were looking to reform some to 3 car to give the option of 5 cars on the route. Another positive about that is mode 3 cars could help other routes in peak demand such as Skegness- Nottingham. (again 5 cars with the corridor connection in use)

Apart from age I see no reason to replace the 158s.

 

[Philip]

I think a potentially better option might be to send all of the 175s to EMR and for these to replace the 158s on the Liverpool to Nottingham service; if all of the services were doubled up then it would utilize 12-14 units of the 16 three coach 175 fleet, the two coach units could then go to more local routes like the Robin Hood and Brigg lines, or replace the 170s which in turn could go to Northern.
The displaced 158s could then also go to Northern to fulfill their additional stock requirements; if Northern are keen not to add another fleet type to their network then this makes more sense than 175s going to Northern.

 

[MattRat]

The lack of corridor connections for me makes them worse than the 158s. considering the industrial relations issue of running multiple units together (360s) without corridor connections says industrial action as well.


However, I know the 158 won’t go on forever, but surely keeping them is the perfect solution. Couple that with the 170s then EMR are sorted. I did hear they were looking to reform some to 3 car to give the option of 5 cars on the route. Another positive about that is mode 3 cars could help other routes in peak demand such as Skegness- Nottingham. (again 5 cars with the corridor connection in use)

Apart from age I see no reason to replace the 158s.

Cascading. If the 158s are old, what does that make the classes older than them?

 

[Failed Unit]

Cascading. If the 158s are old, what does that make the classes older than them?

sadly for another thread. But the 150 - 156s should be cascaded to the scrap yard by EMUs. (Even if that means releasing 17x). Lots of EMUs rusting away but as we know, no plans to electrify much. 158s are not much good on suburban routes where the 150s generally operate.

 

[WideRanger]

Has the speculation about 68+Mk5 gone away?

 

[JonathanH]

Has the speculation about 68+Mk5 gone away?

Yes, because the speculation about TPE running the service has gone away.

 

[RailWonderer]

People speak as if 158s are the normal traction for Nottingham Liverpool, when in fact 156s have been doing it regularly as of late.

 

[MattRat]

People speak as if 158s are the normal traction for Nottingham Liverpool, when in fact 156s have been doing it regularly as of late.

Maybe it's a sign they are fixing up the 158s at long last.

 

[The Ham]

sadly for another thread. But the 150 - 156s should be cascaded to the scrap yard by EMUs. (Even if that means releasing 17x). Lots of EMUs rusting away but as we know, no plans to electrify much. 158s are not much good on suburban routes where the 150s generally operate.

What ever option we end up with it's likely that more electrification would be required to make it viable, otherwise we'll be looking at sub optimal options.

 

[Wilts Wanderer]

Given that EMR are soon to obtain a replacement fleet for its St Pancras routes, one would hope that a proportion of the 222 fleet is retained for the Nottingham-Liverpool axis and this would in turn release 158s that are needed elsewhere?

 

[JonathanH]

Given that EMR are soon to obtain a replacement fleet for its St Pancras routes, one would hope that a proportion of the 222 fleet is retained for the Nottingham-Liverpool axis and this would in turn release 158s that are needed elsewhere?

There are many many threads which have debunked any idea that 222s could be an appropriate fleet for that route. They are totally inappropriate for Nottingham to Liverpool, no matter what could be done with the 158s as a result. As their home at Derby becomes a Hitachi depot with the coming of the 810s, they are also without suitable servicing facilities on the EMR network.

 

[Kneedown]

There are many many threads which have debunked any idea that 222s could be an appropriate fleet for that route. They are totally inappropriate for Nottingham to Liverpool, no matter what could be done with the 158s as a result. As their home at Derby becomes a Hitachi depot with the coming of the 810s, they are also without suitable servicing facilities on the EMR network.

You make a good point regarding the future servicing of 222's, but the other two main debunks are themselves open to debunking.
222's indeed are restricted to 70mph over the Hope Valley and unable to utilise the SP speed differentials. However, many of those differentials are just paper excercises and not attainable by a 158. The much greater acceleration of the 222 means they can match 158 timings, as has been demonstrated when utilised on Aintree race days.
The other issue is seating. A lot is made of the fact that a 5 car 222 has less seats than a pair of 158s. When the 158s were refurbished though, it was done on flawed data on passenger numbers, and it was decided that if the absolute maximum number of seats was crammed in a 2 car 158, it would be sufficient. It was soon found out that seating was still insufficient and so the service was increased to 4 cars, all with seats crammed in at the expense of space for luggage, which ended up dumped in aisles, vestibules, and on surplus seats. I'm sure a 5 car 222 would strike a healthy balance between seat availability, and luggage room. I haven't signed Liverpool for nearly three years now so that may or may not still be the case.
I do accept that a 222 has an insane appetite for fuel when compared to a 158. I think it's an exaggeration to say they are wholly inappropriate though.

 

[STINT47]

If a 222 was made into STD only I would expect the same if not higher number of seats plus space for luggage etc. Although personally I think the TfW 175s are the answer for this route. Combination of 2 and 3 car sets would be ideal.

 

[tbtc]

There are many many threads which have debunked any idea that 222s could be an appropriate fleet for that route. They are totally inappropriate for Nottingham to Liverpool, no matter what could be done with the 158s as a result

Agreed - it's the same as the regular suggestions that XC's 220/221s are cascaded onto the ex Central Citylink services

We've seen the problems with trying to cascade 158/170s onto slow stoppers that were better suited to an unglamorous unit like a 150

Some people seem to fixated on sexy top speeds/ swanky First Class and don't pay attention to mundane things like door configurations (trying to load/unload a couple of hundred passengers at Manchester Piccadilly's island platforms with a 222 doesn't sound much fun) or Sprinter differentials or acceleration or fuel economy or...

 

[Philip]

If the battery bi-mode 195s prove to be a success then perhaps these will be a candidate for replacing 158s in the next few years, with an additional order from EMR?

Perhaps the GWR HST sets might be a short term option if EMR want 158s replaced quickly?

 

[Bevan Price]

If the battery bi-mode 195s prove to be a success then perhaps these will be a candidate for replacing 158s in the next few years, with an additional order from EMR?

Perhaps the GWR HST sets might be a short term option if EMR want 158s replaced quickly?

They are about 15 years older than Class 158.

 

[Killingworth]

Against 185s and Nova 3s by TPE and 195s from Northern EMR's 158s are looking in need of another refurb but still seem good trains. Just not enough of them.

HSTs would make an interesting contrast and might bring in good numbers of enthusiasts. Much as I like them I realise it's now 45 years since I first took one to Cardiff. Best left to be lovingly cared for to run high value luxury excursions.

 

[Grumpy Git]

What are the differences in seat numbers between a 158 and a 175?

 

[JonathanH]

Perhaps the GWR HST sets might be a short term option if EMR want 158s replaced quickly?

The DfT wants the GWR HST sets replaced quickly. They aren't going anywhere else on the network once the DfT has found a way for GWR to dispense with them. Introducing 769s and cascading Turbos to Bristol to displace 158s further west is the fastest way.

They wouldn't make a very good short term option for EMR as the training requirement would be substantial and there is nowhere to service them.

EMR will need to retain its 158s until there is something viable to replace them, which of course is awkward because they are the ideal fleet to see off the GWR HSTs, but there isn't going to be a swap.

 

[Philip]

The DfT wants the GWR HST sets replaced quickly. They aren't going anywhere else on the network once the DfT has found a way for GWR to dispense with them. Introducing 769s and cascading Turbos to Bristol to displace 158s further west is the fastest way.

They wouldn't make a very good short term option for EMR as the training requirement would be substantial and there is nowhere to service them.

EMR will need to retain its 158s until there is something viable to replace them, which of course is awkward because they are the ideal fleet to see off the GWR HSTs, but there isn't going to be a swap.

All of the potential stock to replace EMR 158s would need a lot of training, as EMR traincrew don't sign 170s, 175s, 185s and 195s; HSTs would be no different in this sense. The 175s would be a better option overall, but I don't believe these can run at the SP speeds east of Cowburn tunnel, so the journey time may have to increase by a few minutes if EMR go with 175s. Class 185s definitely can't use the higher speeds and won't be available for a while yet and any new-build Civity stock will be a few years away yet. If HSTs aren't an option then it looks like it'll be either 170s or 175s to replace the 158s.

 

[JonathanH]

All of the potential stock to replace EMR 158s would need a lot of training, as EMR traincrew don't sign 170s, 175s, 185s and 195s; HSTs would be no different in this sense.

Yes, but a stop gap means training twice and the conversion from 158 to 175 / 185 / 195 might be easier in any case. That is why keeping the 158s on is an attractive option although it has to be balanced against whether they would be more useful elsewhere.

 

[wobman]

That suggestion is made repeatedly on this forum with a frequent rebuttal to the effect that the 170s are well employed on Sheffield to Hull / Scarborough services. (I thought the other option sometimes explored is trying to get 170s from Wales.)

I still think getting Greater Anglia to run Nottingham to Norwich with their spare 755s is a better option for displacing EMR's need for 170s.

Finding stock to displace the continued use of 158s on the Liverpool to Nottingham route does seem to be complicated (but of course 158s are quite good at the job they are doing.)

There's always the option of getting the tfw 158s once the 197s come into service

 

[liamf656]

Class 172s probably even better with some interior changes and electric units acquired for the Snow Hill lines.

Clearly neither 170s or 172s are going to be available in the near future so continuation of the use of 158s seems likely.

If we bring 172s into this crayonista idea, I think putting those on the likes of Matlock and Worksop services for the 170s to work Liverpool to Nottingham would be a better idea. The 172s work perfectly on stop-start services with lower top speeds whereas the 170s can make the most of the higher speeds

Yesterday EMR ran their first multiple 170 in service on the Crewe route for football, I think it proves that it can happen without issues (apart from one passcom being pulled), so hopefully if 170s in multiple become more common we will see them in Liverpool too!