• Our booking engine at tickets.railforums.co.uk (powered by TrainSplit) helps support the running of the forum with every ticket purchase! Find out more and ask any questions/give us feedback in this thread!

Should Northern replace their 170s with more 195s to avoid issues with cascades elsewhere?

Status
Not open for further replies.

py_megapixel

Established Member
Joined
5 Nov 2018
Messages
6,681
Location
Northern England
If East Midlands Railway took on Northern's current fleet of 170s then they wouldn't need Southern's 171s. That would avoid problems such as stock shortages on the Uckfield branch and would also negate the need to install BSI couplers on the 171s.

Of course, this would leave a gap in Northern's fleet, which would probably be most logically filled with a few more 195s.

That way, Southern isn't left with a gap in their fleet, and Northern doesn't have to deal with the comparatively small Turbostar fleet.
 
Sponsor Post - registered members do not see these adverts; click here to register, or click here to log in
R

RailUK Forums

Bletchleyite

Veteran Member
Joined
20 Oct 2014
Messages
98,337
Location
"Marston Vale mafia"
Given that Northern are using 170s on utterly unsuitable services, burning lots of diesel to heat up transmission oil in units that never go into direct drive, then yes, they'd be better off with more 195s which have transmissions designed for stopping services.

However, that's only sending them to EMR to use them on...stopping services, for which they are unsuitable.

So my conclusion would actually have to be to get EMR some units actually suitable for local stopping services (195s or whatever), then Northern could perhaps take the 170s instead, to be used on their regional express services that presently use 195s, to allow 195s to cascade to replace 150s and 156s on local stopping services, which is what they are, mechanically, designed to do.
 

Energy

Established Member
Joined
29 Dec 2018
Messages
4,540
So my conclusion would actually have to be to get EMR some units actually suitable for local stopping services (195s or whatever)
Electrification. Either of EMRs routes or of somebody else's, WMR is a good candidate with loads of mechanical 196s and 172, plus it shares some of it with Chiltern so if you electrify the remaining bit of Chiltern you get a load of 168s for Northern.

We should be avoiding buying new diesel trains where possible
 

Bletchleyite

Veteran Member
Joined
20 Oct 2014
Messages
98,337
Location
"Marston Vale mafia"
Electrification. Either of EMRs routes or of somebody else's, WMR is a good candidate with loads of mechanical 196s and 172, plus it shares some of it with Chiltern so if you electrify the remaining bit of Chiltern you get a load of 168s for Northern.

We should be avoiding buying new diesel trains where possible

168s are no use for local stopping services either, they are the same as 170s. You could get the 165s (being geared for 75mph they are) but they are getting on a bit.

Wiring the Snow Hill lines to release the 172s to cascade for 150/156 replacement wouldn't be a bad bet. (172s have a mechanical transmission similar to 195s so have good acceleration and are fuel-efficient on stopping services).
 

Energy

Established Member
Joined
29 Dec 2018
Messages
4,540
168s are no use for local stopping services either, they are the same as 170s. You could get the 165s (being geared for 75mph they are) but they are getting on a bit.
I meant for Northern's regional expresses, where they and 170s are better placed
 

Bletchleyite

Veteran Member
Joined
20 Oct 2014
Messages
98,337
Location
"Marston Vale mafia"
I meant for Northern's regional expresses, where they and 170s are better placed

Ah OK. Yeah, that could allow all the 195s to go onto urban stopping services where they belong. They need to go on things like the CLC stopper, the Marples (and already do on some), Atherton, 'Arrigut etc. That could allow for some considerable timing (or punctuality) improvements.
 
Status
Not open for further replies.

Top