Shortage of trains to cause severe disruption to Penistone Line and Ormskirk-Preston

[AndrewE]

The above may be an exception, but I've heard it said that the rough riding of the older units gave an extra scrubbing action to the wheel and the rail too. All designs from about class 313 and 150 onwards took advantage of advances in vehicle dynamics which allowed the wheels to run much more smoothly.

I'm surprised at that.
I would think that the 304s were very like all their sister designs: in my experience they weren't at all rough-riding (bouncy maybe) and felt quite safe. I don't remember anything that gave me cause for concern (unlike a Mk 1 coach with its bogies hunting at 90 mph on the NE-SW Bristol - Birminghams.)
I can't even see a hunting bogie cleaning the track much either, as that was caused by the flanges hammering against the rail. I guess the conicity of the treads had been lost due to inadequate wheel-turning (or the dampers had failed.)
The fact that 150s are to be updated says something about the expected future life of the UK's aged rail fleet...

 

[Taunton]

All so obvious, but Dr Beeching did identify an immense number of carriages doing nothing for 350 days or more each year. As always the solution has gone too far the other way. The average carriage must be in service nearly every day, leaving too little slack for maintenance, refurbishment and train strengthening.

Of course all those units stored or discarded long before they're life expired is another story.

The analysis of "surplus" vehicles in Beeching's time was considerably misrepresented. Because of archaic costing systems, vehicle costs were just averaged across the fleet, so all were just charged at (say) £1,000 per month, without any regard for usage or actual cost incurred. Maintenance costs are quite obviously heavily influenced by the mileage done. Older (they were all pre-nationalization then) types were pretty cheap to have available. Then they didn't just get used on August Saturdays, they were only spare if the more mainstream fleet was in use every day of the year, which was of course not the case.

Just look at all the stuff above about wheel flats on multiple units putting them out of service. What do you think covered for them when they were out of use in Beeching's time and kept things going in November?

 

[Killingworth]

The analysis of "surplus" vehicles in Beeching's time was considerably misrepresented. Because of archaic costing systems, vehicle costs were just averaged across the fleet, so all were just charged at (say) £1,000 per month, without any regard for usage or actual cost incurred. Maintenance costs are quite obviously heavily influenced by the mileage done. Older (they were all pre-nationalization then) types were pretty cheap to have available. Then they didn't just get used on August Saturdays, they were only spare if the more mainstream fleet was in use every day of the year, which was of course not the case.

Just look at all the stuff above about wheel flats on multiple units putting them out of service. What do you think covered for them when they were out of use in Beeching's time and kept things going in November?

Clearly I can't remember all the details, but when we went from Newcastle to Scarborough on an August Saturday in the late 1950s I know the old carriages had a very musty smell to them! Between Dore & Totley and Beauchief stations were about 4 sidings where old coaches were kept for similar services from the old West Riding.

Beeching had this to say, page 15;

"The extent to which reserve stock has been held to cover peak demands in the past, and its gross under-utilisation, is shown by the following table, which relates to 1959:-

Total number of gangwayed coaches allocated to fast and semi-fast services, 18,500

Number in year-round service, 5,500

Additional vehicles for regular summer service, 2,000

Available for high peak service, 8,900

Under repair, 2,100

A large number of the coaches available for high peak traffic were only required on a limited number of occasions as the following table, relating to the last 6,000 vehicles in the
fleet, shows:-

Number of Coaches Required on not more than:
2,000 10 occasions
2,000 14 occasions
2,000 18 occasions

The annual cost of providing the 6,000 coaches was £3.4m.
Against this it was estimated that they only earned £0.5m after allowing for all other costs of the movements concerned.

Since the beginning of 1959 the number of passenger-carrying gangway coaches has been
reduced by 5,584 and by the end of 1965 stock will not be available for use at high peak
periods. Efforts will be made to control these peaks by seat reservation schemes and by
fares policy, as is the custom with airline service"

 

[Mathew S]

Hats off to them. I have been very impressed with the evident skill exercised on these and other services over the past couple of weeks of extensive travel.

Seconded. The level of care, skill, and finesse I've seen over the last few weeks from drivers on the Atherton line, especially through Ince/Hindley and Moorside/Swinton/Pendlebury, has been most impressive.

 

[sprinterguy]

Are any other compabies suffering the same problems ?

Transport for Wales very publicly, with a quarter of their fleet out of action for wheel lathe attention at present. Lots of short formations going on, exacerbated by a number of units being away for disability modifications as per Northern, as they have a comparable fleet portfolio of ageing Pacer and Sprinter units.

West Midlands Trains, and London Midland before them, put in place a leaf fall timetable on Birmingham's Cross City line every autumn to contend with the sensitivities of class 323 units in low adhesion conditions and the disruption this would otherwise cause.

 

[Mathew S]

One thing I have noticed is that, in previous years, Northern have issued more autumn/leaf fall timetables than they have this year. For example, we've had longer journeys timetabled on Wigan-Kirkby and Wigan-Manchester via Atherton/Bolton. These timetables don't seem to have happened this year.

Not making any comment as to why, or the effects; just an observation.

 

[pemma]

One thing I have noticed is that, in previous years, Northern have issued more autumn/leaf fall timetables than they have this year. For example, we've had longer journeys timetabled on Wigan-Kirkby and Wigan-Manchester via Atherton/Bolton. These timetables don't seem to have happened this year.

Not making any comment as to why, or the effects; just an observation.

Northern have increased standard journey times on some routes which used to have leaf fall timetables, so they are unable to add further times in without exceeding franchise requirements for end to end journey times.

 

[al78]

But no, lets blame EVERYTHING on Northern as its only they who can be at fault for everything on the railway - including trees.

It is hardly surprising that people complain about the leaves on the line excuse. Autumn and associated leaf fall has happened in the UK long before the railways were invented. The railways were built in the 19th century, and deciduous trees existed back then and presumably leaf fall was an issue. It is therefore not completely unreasonable to ask why, given they have had 200 years, the railway has been incapable of solving the problem, or at least significantly reducing it. Two reasons come to mind: 1) it is impossible, 2) No-one can be bothered because it is too much effort, too expensive, so everyone just has to deal with it.

 

[Clip]

Well they make a total Horlicks out of everything else, so an educated guess is that they could have avoided this had they exercised reasonable competence as well. This is after all the company which allows a computer to allocate crews, changes them round on one of the busiest and least reliable stretches of line in the country, and wonders why things go even further to pot.

Well your 'educated guess' was quite clearly wrong wasnt it and surely anyone who bemoans the railway for all its faults such as yourself would at least have a basic grasp of how these things work but it turns out you didnt and just flapped your gums anyway.

It is hardly surprising that people complain about the leaves on the line excuse. Autumn and associated leaf fall has happened in the UK long before the railways were invented. The railways were built in the 19th century, and deciduous trees existed back then and presumably leaf fall was an issue. It is therefore not completely unreasonable to ask why, given they have had 200 years, the railway has been incapable of solving the problem, or at least significantly reducing it. Two reasons come to mind: 1) it is impossible, 2) No-one can be bothered because it is too much effort, too expensive, so everyone just has to deal with it.

I never mentioned anything about people complaining about leaves on the line merley commented that people were blaming northern even though they 1) dont run the RHTT 2) Cant foresee wheel flats occurring due to the lack of action of them not doing 1).

 

[AndrewE]

It is hardly surprising that people complain about the leaves on the line excuse. Autumn and associated leaf fall has happened in the UK long before the railways were invented. The railways were built in the 19th century, and deciduous trees existed back then and presumably leaf fall was an issue. It is therefore not completely unreasonable to ask why, given they have had 200 years, the railway has been incapable of solving the problem, or at least significantly reducing it. Two reasons come to mind: 1) it is impossible, 2) No-one can be bothered because it is too much effort, too expensive, so everyone just has to deal with it.

Try reading posts 135 and 142. There has always been a problem, but it was probably at its lowest in the 1960s. Since then trains have got lighter, the braking has changed and the people keeping the lineside clear of vegetation have been "let go."

 

[Llanigraham]

Try reading posts 135 and 142. There has always been a problem, but it was probably at its lowest in the 1960s. Since then trains have got lighter, the braking has changed and the people keeping the lineside clear of vegetation have been "let go."

And when NR did start the wholesale felling of problem trees in problem areas the "greens" stopped them!
You can't win.

 

[Ken H]

Try reading posts 135 and 142. There has always been a problem, but it was probably at its lowest in the 1960s. Since then trains have got lighter, the braking has changed and the people keeping the lineside clear of vegetation have been "let go."

and steam trains have gone. they regularly set fire to the lineside thus keeping vegetation under control.

 

[AndrewE]

and steam trains have gone. they regularly set fire to the lineside thus keeping vegetation under control.

I think it's more that the vegetation was kept under control to prevent fires starting (and spreading to neighbouring property.) End of steam = no need to reduce fire risk, as the cause had gone.

 

[njamescouk]

But no, lets blame EVERYTHING on Northern as its only they who can be at fault for everything on the railway - including trees.

I can't remember northern actually taking responsibility for anything, I just hear just constant whining about circumstances beyond their control. They've undertaken to run trains in northern england but 1. didn't get enough trains to do the job 2. didn't get enough staff to do the job 3. decided to have a war with such staff as they have on an issue of no real consequence to their customers 4. hired plenty of people to shovel money into the directors wheelbarrows.

Tellingly the trains now running over part of the Penistone line are a vast improvement on the garbage they've been inflicting on us over the last few years. This is because the, cough, "new", trains have more than one wheel at each corner and are heavy enough to actually stick to the rails. But they chose to run with the same rubbish that had been used for the last 30 years.

Cue a load of replies about the RMT, DfT, Network Rail and Uncle Tom Cobleigh and all: the fact remains that it is Northern's responsibility to run a train service and they've failed. If I did my job the way Northern are doing theirs I'd be sacked. Why haven't they been?

 

[Tomnick]

Cue a load of replies about the RMT, DfT, Network Rail and Uncle Tom Cobleigh and all: the fact remains that it is Northern's responsibility to run a train service and they've failed. If I did my job the way Northern are doing theirs I'd be sacked. Why haven't they been?

I don’t think they’ve done a good job at all, and they knew what they were signing up for - but the trains that they have are the trains that the DfT decided they should have (and they’ve ordered new trains as part of their franchise agreement, which don’t just appear within a week or two like when you buy a new car) and the war with the staff is over an issue that the DfT won’t let them back down over - which probably explains why the DfT won’t sack them whilst they’re shielding them from the public’s anger.

 

[Eccles1983]

Heavy enough to stick to the rails?

It's this level of stupidity that makes people who understand what's actually happening angry at the "leaves on the line is a myth" mob.

The facts are that any traction would of struggled over that line last week. It really was a freak set of circumstances that the simple of mind won't listen to.

 

[Robertj21a]

I can't remember northern actually taking responsibility for anything, I just hear just constant whining about circumstances beyond their control. They've undertaken to run trains in northern england but 1. didn't get enough trains to do the job 2. didn't get enough staff to do the job 3. decided to have a war with such staff as they have on an issue of no real consequence to their customers 4. hired plenty of people to shovel money into the directors wheelbarrows.

Tellingly the trains now running over part of the Penistone line are a vast improvement on the garbage they've been inflicting on us over the last few years. This is because the, cough, "new", trains have more than one wheel at each corner and are heavy enough to actually stick to the rails. But they chose to run with the same rubbish that had been used for the last 30 years.

Cue a load of replies about the RMT, DfT, Network Rail and Uncle Tom Cobleigh and all: the fact remains that it is Northern's responsibility to run a train service and they've failed. If I did my job the way Northern are doing theirs I'd be sacked. Why haven't they been?

It's a shame that you have so little understanding of the facts that any discussion is quite useless.

 

[Killingworth]

It's often overlooked that railway rolling stock is a lot more expensive to build and maintain than a car or bus. The need for safety requires a lot more engineering. The average car is most intensively used for less than 5 years, a bus maybe for 15 before front line service and high mileages taper off. A train is expected to continue working at maximum intensity for 30 years or more.

The TOCs can't magic up new trains from thin air. Where I have concerns is that we're ordering a lot of different new trains for specific franchises which may be difficult to reassign in the future.

We have ample older cars and buses available that can and will be brought onto the roads at short notice to cover peak periods. That isn't the case with trains, as we are acutely aware!

 

[rg177]

Stock shortages starting to bite in the North West on electric services, as 150204 is running around on a Wigan-Liverpool diagram.

All seats taken by St Helens, full and standing up the aisles from Huyton...

 

[Mathew S]

Stock shortages starting to bite in the North West on electric services, as 150204 is running around on a Wigan-Liverpool diagram.

All seats taken by St Helens, full and standing up the aisles from Huyton...

I saw a 142 on the Wigan-Liverpool stopping diagram yesterday afternoon. Just shows how much Northern are struggling.

 

[Dr Hoo]

There was a Class 156 DMU on a Liverpool-Wigan EMU diagram on Tuesday when I was visiting Garswood.

 

[AndrewE]

I saw a 142 on the Wigan-Liverpool stopping diagram yesterday afternoon. Just shows how much Northern are struggling.

Perhaps we should be grateful that the 142s have survived after all. They not only saved some branch lines but their longevity means some people have trains just now who would otherwise be going without!

 

[Bletchleyite]

I saw a 142 on the Wigan-Liverpool stopping diagram yesterday afternoon. Just shows how much Northern are struggling.

Used to be the normal stock for that service!

 

[AndrewE]

Used to be the normal stock for that service!

Maybe, but since the arrival of the 319s we have come to expect something fit for the late 20th century rather than the 1930s! Lovely well-lit, roomy etc etc...(add your own compliment) trains!

 

[Llanigraham]

Maybe, but since the arrival of the 319s we have come to expect something fit for the late 20th century rather than the 1930s! Lovely well-lit, roomy etc etc...(add your own compliment) trains!

Which would you prefer, something slightly old trains OR no trains at all?

 

[Mathew S]

Used to be the normal stock for that service!

Indeed. Not seen one on a Wigan-Liverpool for at least a year, probably longer, though.

 

[Mathew S]

Which would you prefer, something slightly old trains OR no trains at all?

Honestly? If the alternative is no service and a refund/compensation, or travel on a pacer, I'd be tempted to take the refund personally.

 

[AndrewE]

Which would you prefer, something slightly old trains OR no trains at all?

which is exactly what was saying over my last few posts, even regarding the pacers. I was also hinting at how good our new London hand-me-downs are - compared against what they are replacing (actually in practice just strengthening) both in relation to the number of vehicles coming our way and their quality in almost all respects.

 

[Llanigraham]

Honestly? If the alternative is no service and a refund/compensation, or travel on a pacer, I'd be tempted to take the refund personally.

Then I suggest that you are in a very, very small minority!

 

[B&I]

Indeed. Not seen one on a Wigan-Liverpool for at least a year, probably longer, though.

There was one on the 18.13 from Lime Street tonight, wodged onto a 150