Sprinter Extinction

[Neptune]

Well if you transferred the TfW 158s to GWR they would have 44 x 158s
Plus 57 x 165/166s with the remaining 165s at Chiltern.

So that’s 24 x Perkins 158’s to GWR joining 20 x Cummins 158’s. Now I’m confused. I thought you wanted 1 engine type at each company.

 

[tbtc]

I do seem to recall the DfT springing for a ruinously expensive intercity fleet of a thousand carriages or more very recently!

Or the the 1140 carriage Class 700 fleet slightly less recently

The big differences being that:

1. The Intercity and suburban SWR services were both relatively profitable (based on a pre Covid world), rather than requiring subsidies per passenger mile so high it’d be cheaper to send them by taxi (which is the case on some Provincial lines). It’s a lot easier to justify investment on busy lines that are paying something back

2. The Intercity and suburban SWR services have trains that should work on those lines for life. Whereas who knows what the future holds for a thousand carriages worth of Provincial lines? How many will be electrified over the expected “forty” year lifespan? Or converted to light rail (Marple, Atherton etc)? Or face significant cut backs because the DfT click their fingers and order immediate savings, or even mothballed/ closed? Given that every carriage will cost over a million pounds, but also the uncertainties over future needs, how many million do you spend?

 

[Snow1964]

6 x 150/0 vehicles
100 x 150/1 vehicles
168 x 150/2 vehicles
26 x 153 vehicles
14 x 155 vehicles
228 x 156 vehicles (although some EMR 156s are out of use)
442 x 158 / 159 vehicles (allowing for deletion of 158763 and 159102)

984 in total,
then add on 240 165 / 166 vehicles.

Which is why further up the thread realistically need about 600 vehicles to be replaced within about 3-8 years, then another 600 vehicles in 8-13 years time.

My gut feeling is that if GBR (or whoever orders stock under latest DfT plan) starts with about 70-100 sets for the big secondary services (Cardiff-Portsmouth, XC Cardiff-East Midlands, South Trans Pennine etc) Perhaps even others like GWR Castles, then can cascade lots of the less old DMUs

For clarity talking 5 car trains, doors able to cope with churn, seating suitable for 3-4 hour journeys. Bi-mode (diesel and electric, both 25kv and third rail), 100 or even 110mph on electric (perhaps 95-100mph on diesel) then could probably get away with not needing to order any other DMU replacements for at least 7 years (as some lines are getting electric units, or existing orders)

 

[Trainbike46]

6 x 150/0 vehicles
100 x 150/1 vehicles
168 x 150/2 vehicles
26 x 153 vehicles
14 x 155 vehicles
228 x 156 vehicles (although some EMR 156s are out of use)
442 x 158 / 159 vehicles (allowing for deletion of 158763 and 159102)

984 in total, then add on 240 165 / 166 vehicles.


Too much, although the more pertinent question is how much higher would the lease cost be, offset by possibly higher revenue and lower maintenance costs.

Building a thousand or more carriages sounds great, but I’m guessing the people making these suggestions haven’t noticed the dozen years of austerity/ the fact that the DfT aren’t exactly in “expansionist” mode?

Plus there’s the problem that building a thousand carriages in one order “now” would presumably mean that we’d need to consider one enormous to swallow bill for a replacement thousand carriages in thirtysomething years?

(If you’re going to tell me that “ah, no, because we’ll have electrified so much over those decades that we can replace a lot of them with pure EMUs then that begs the question of how many new self powered trains we really need to order today if a lot of them will be usurped by electrification in the medium term?)

Also, the talk of DMU engines just reminds me what a mess BR made of what looks to outsiders like one big/common fleet, yet with a lot of differences under the surface

I do seem to recall the DfT springing for a ruinously expensive intercity fleet of a thousand carriages or more very recently!

Or the the 1140 carriage Class 700 fleet slightly less recently.

A thousand carriage-equivalents of homogeneous electrodiesel stock would allow dramatic simplifications in maintenance and driver training services, and all the trains would come fitted for ETCS and almost certainly with all the equipment for train based DOO - which would allow the Government to take up that fight at will.

Maintaining all this rusting out scrap metal is not cheap in the slightest, and there are numerous places on the network where stock modernisation would enable dramatic operational savings - for example with high performance units the semi-fast services on the CLC could likely be dispensed with because they would be little faster than the stopper.



Well a cynic would suggest "almost none" - but the real answer is you follow SNCF's example and order electro-diesels.

The GA whole fleet replacement was very large too
133 x 5 = 665 cl720
20 x 12 = 240 cl745
24 x 4 = 96 cl755/4
14 x 3 = 42 cl755/3
so 1043 carriages in total - I don't see why a total order of around a 1000 bimode sprinter replacements carriages would be out of the question - specifically if it is split over a few different types (regional express and local stopper for example) and included options to allow units to be lengthened and extra units to be ordered if demand on the railway grew

The big differences being that:

1. The Intercity and suburban SWR services were both relatively profitable (based on a pre Covid world), rather than requiring subsidies per passenger mile so high it’d be cheaper to send them by taxi (which is the case on some Provincial lines). It’s a lot easier to justify investment on busy lines that are paying something back

2. The Intercity and suburban SWR services have trains that should work on those lines for life. Whereas who knows what the future holds for a thousand carriages worth of Provincial lines? How many will be electrified over the expected “forty” year lifespan? Or converted to light rail (Marple, Atherton etc)? Or face significant cut backs because the DfT click their fingers and order immediate savings, or even mothballed/ closed? Given that every carriage will cost over a million pounds, but also the uncertainties over future needs, how many million do you spend?

Point two should be considered for sprinter replacement trains no matter what - I think the obvious solution would be to order something that is a bimode (immediate savings on some routes as less fuel needed) that can easily be transformed into a full electric train. That way, you can keep the same trains if electrification comes along, and if lines close they can be redistributed onto existing electric lines

 

[JonathanH]

The GA whole fleet replacement was very large too
133 x 5 = 665 cl720
20 x 12 = 240 cl745
24 x 4 = 96 cl755/4
14 x 3 = 42 cl755/3
so 1043 carriages in total - I don't see why a total order of around a 1000 bimode sprinter replacements carriages would be out of the question - specifically if it is split over a few different types (regional express and local stopper for example) and included options to allow units to be lengthened and extra units to be ordered if demand on the railway grew

Greater Anglia had a huge London commuting base over which to spread the costs of its fleet replacement. There were reports of the franchise having financial issues prior to March 2020 which may have become worse with the new fleet.

The point comes back to whether wholesale replacement is really affordable and the desirability of doing it all at once, rather than piecemeal for reasons already expressed in this thread.

 

[MattRat]

Greater Anglia had a huge London commuting base over which to spread the costs of its fleet replacement. There were reports of the franchise having financial issues prior to March 2020 which may have become worse with the new fleet.

The point comes back to whether wholesale replacement is really affordable and the desirability of doing it all at once, rather than piecemeal for reasons already expressed in this thread.

The problem is the current approach involves a lot of dragging of feet, by which time another fleet also need replacing. I understand the problems, but I also understand we should probably order more trains to account for latency, then we don't end up back at square one.

 

[Anonymous10]

Greater Anglia had a huge London commuting base over which to spread the costs of its fleet replacement. There were reports of the franchise having financial issues prior to March 2020 which may have become worse with the new fleet.

The point comes back to whether wholesale replacement is really affordable and the desirability of doing it all at once, rather than piecemeal for reasons already expressed in this thread.

issue is is alot of 15x stock is same sort of age and taking build and in service at 3 years best case its going to be a whole fleet replacement or face diminishing reliability

 

[Dspatula]

Simplest would be for TPE to order more 802s to replace the 185s at least in carriage numbers it's enough to take out every northern 2 car 150, 153 carriages in 144 out. The north still gets new trains so politically acceptable.

 

[Bletchleyite]

Simplest would be for TPE to order more 802s to replace the 185s at least in carriage numbers it's enough to take out every northern 2 car 150, 153 carriages in 144 out. The north still gets new trains so politically acceptable.

185s aren't ideal for Northern, though - too heavy and thirsty.

 

[61653 HTAFC]

185s aren't ideal for Northern, though - too heavy and thirsty.

Not to mention that an 802 would be a massive overprovision on the Huddersfield stoppers, and would increase dwell-times significantly.
You'd also struggle to platform it at Huddersfield until after the rebuild, as only P4 would be suitable without having to go for miles to Marsden or Wakefield Kirkgate to reverse.

 

[MattRat]

185s aren't ideal for Northern, though - too heavy and thirsty.

It seems like people want to shove 185s everywhere. What's so special about them that people want them everywhere?

 

[Neptune]

185s aren't ideal for Northern, though - too heavy and thirsty.

It seems like people want to shove 185s everywhere. What's so special about them that people want them everywhere?

185’s are seen by some as ideal suburban units due to their door layout and rapid acceleration. However their heavy weight and thirst for fuel (slightly negated by the eco-mode) are massive barriers to use elsewhere from what they operate now.

There would be some areas of Northern they could work but only in areas where they are either cleared or can be cleared.

Calder Valley services are a definite possibility and which they are already used over during diversions. So with a refurbishment to replace the first class area with standard class seating that could be:-

9 units for the 1Dxx, 1Exx and 1Jxx Leeds - Man Vic/Chester circuit
5 units for the 2Ixx/2Rxx Leeds - Wigan circuit
4 units for the 2Kxx Hull - Halifax circuit
6 units for the 1Bxx York - Blackpool circuits if they are suitable

Then factoring in maybe 1 spare and 2 for maintenance that’s 27 units releasing several 195’s for suburban work and some 158’s (Leeds - Wigan is going over to all 3/4 car 158’s from December).

Not much under the wire work there and plenty of hill climbing. The Hull section they are already cleared for and would be much better than the 158’s on the stopping section between Selby & Leeds.

Elsewhere on the Northern network you’re probably talking the Hope Valley stoppers (say 6 units to allow for doubling up) and possibly CLC stoppers (6 units) and finally Windermere/Barrow maybe for now just to free up 195’s to replace 150’s. The latter really need a bi-mode solution.

That will probably account for all 51 including spares/maintenance.

They are still excellent solid units and far more suitable for inter regional work with a bit of stopper work thrown in than the flimsy end door 175’s that constantly get banded about for Northern.

 

[Philip]

They are still excellent solid units and far more suitable for inter regional work with a bit of stopper work thrown in than the flimsy end door 175’s that constantly get banded about for Northern.

175s would be ideal for Manchester-Barrow/Windermere as they have worked the route before and it is limited stop, meaning the door layout they have would be adequate. If used in pairs the Castlefield issue wouldn't be much of a problem with the end doors - it is only a problem on overcrowded services and 158s/397s seem to cope ok on their EMR/TPE duties.

They would also be good for replacing Sprinters in the North East - so much so that there are rumours about them moving to Heaton depot after TfW have finished using then.

Class 185s are intercity units and would be wasted on Northern stopping services. They'd be more suitable as Voyager replacements, used in pairs, on Cross Country services; or replacing 158s/159s on SWR intercity services.

 

[D365]

Indeed, but the end cars of 16 465s aren't. There were also suggestions that 30 321s could get Vivarail batteries.

Converting more 466s would be a serious money sink…

 

[Dspatula]

185s aren't ideal for Northern, though - too heavy and thirsty.

When when most of you're other options have one wheel in the scrapyard there's not whole lot of other reasonable choices.

Not to mention that an 802 would be a massive overprovision on the Huddersfield stoppers, and would increase dwell-times significantly.
You'd also struggle to platform it at Huddersfield until after the rebuild, as only P4 would be suitable without having to go for miles to Marsden or Wakefield Kirkgate to reverse.

The Leeds Huddersfield stopper can just go back to Northern and the Manchester to Huddersfield could be done with daily hire also back to Northern in the longer term. It's probably Cleethorpes that's more of an issue 802s would be completely wasted on the route but I don't think there are enough mark5s to cover it, so TPE would probably need to keep some 185s for that maybe?

It seems like people want to shove 185s everywhere. What's so special about them that people want them everywhere?

To be honest I don't really like 185s all that much, at least I think they're poor fit for the Manchester airport route which is where I mainly experience them (to be fair I don't think any of the trains that go to Manchester airport are a good fit for the route), just makes sense to me to keep them near the existing depot and they'd mainly cover routes they're already cleared for.

185’s are seen by some as ideal suburban units due to their door layout and rapid acceleration. However their heavy weight and thirst for fuel (slightly negated by the eco-mode) are massive barriers to use elsewhere from what they operate now.

There would be some areas of Northern they could work but only in areas where they are either cleared or can be cleared.

Calder Valley services are a definite possibility and which they are already used over during diversions. So with a refurbishment to replace the first class area with standard class seating that could be:-

9 units for the 1Dxx, 1Exx and 1Jxx Leeds - Man Vic/Chester circuit
5 units for the 2Ixx/2Rxx Leeds - Wigan circuit
4 units for the 2Kxx Hull - Halifax circuit
6 units for the 1Bxx York - Blackpool circuits if they are suitable

Then factoring in maybe 1 spare and 2 for maintenance that’s 27 units releasing several 195’s for suburban work and some 158’s (Leeds - Wigan is going over to all 3/4 car 158’s from December).

Not much under the wire work there and plenty of hill climbing. The Hull section they are already cleared for and would be much better than the 158’s on the stopping section between Selby & Leeds.

Elsewhere on the Northern network you’re probably talking the Hope Valley stoppers (say 6 units to allow for doubling up) and possibly CLC stoppers (6 units) and finally Windermere/Barrow maybe for now just to free up 195’s to replace 150’s. The latter really need a bi-mode solution.

That will probably account for all 51 including spares/maintenance.

They are still excellent solid units and far more suitable for inter regional work with a bit of stopper work thrown in than the flimsy end door 175’s that constantly get banded about for Northern.

These were the route that came to mind for me. Barrow/Windermere would need 7 units plus another 3 to strengthen the peak time runs, the 185s would at least have the advantage that they don't throw a fit every time couple and uncouple the units.

 

[Bevan Price]

How many Scottish 156s will be displaced when East Kilbride & related electrification is completed?

 

[Neptune]

175s would be ideal for Manchester-Barrow/Windermere as they have worked the route before

So have 185’s much more recently.

and it is limited stop, meaning the door layout they have would be adequate. If used in pairs the Castlefield issue wouldn't be much of a problem with the end doors - it is only a problem on overcrowded services and 158s/397s seem to cope ok on their EMR/TPE duties.

Why would we create more end door stock on Castlefield? It doesn’t matter how many coaches there are, they won’t beat a 185 for loading/unloading times. 185’s have the added advantage of Ardwick depot on the doorstep.

They would also be good for replacing Sprinters in the North East - so much so that there are rumours about them moving to Heaton depot after TfW have finished using then.

Unsubstantiated rumours, you seem to take too much stock in them. I prefer facts.

Class 185s are intercity units and would be wasted on Northern stopping services.

They are inter regional units, not intercity. As I said strip out the first class for standard and they are ideal for use on the services I suggest. The only stopping services I suggested would be Hope Valley and CLC where their acceleration would be ideal.

By the way if the Huddersfield - Leeds and Huddersfield - Manchester services they currently work very happily aren’t stoppers then what are they?

They'd be more suitable as Voyager replacements, used in pairs, on Cross Country services; or replacing 158s/159s on SWR intercity services.

They don’t have the 125mph top speed of a voyager so not suitable. Read through the many threads why they aren’t suitable for SWR’s WoE mainline services.

I’m looking at uses for them to replace ageing sprinters either directly or indirectly on routes they can easily be cleared for if they aren’t already. The maintenance bases at Ardwick and York can also continue to be used with what I suggest.

These were the route that came to mind for me. Barrow/Windermere would need 7 units plus another 3 to strengthen the peak time runs, the 185s would at least have the advantage that they don't throw a fit every time couple and uncouple the units.

So by my reckoning from what I’ve suggested that’s 49 out of 51 required for daily use. You could probably knock that down by using 195’s alongside them on something like the CLC or Hope Valley.

 

[RobShipway]

So have 185’s much more recently.

Why would we create more end door stock on Castlefield? It doesn’t matter how many coaches there are, they won’t beat a 185 for loading/unloading times. 185’s have the added advantage of Ardwick depot on the doorstep.

Unsubstantiated rumours, you seem to take too much stock in them. I prefer facts.

They are inter regional units, not intercity. As I said strip out the first class for standard and they are ideal for use on the services I suggest. The only stopping services I suggested would be Hope Valley and CLC where their acceleration would be ideal.

By the way if the Huddersfield - Leeds and Huddersfield - Manchester services they currently work very happily aren’t stoppers then what are they?

They don’t have the 125mph top speed of a voyager so not suitable. Read through the many threads why they aren’t suitable for SWR’s WoE mainline services.

I’m looking at uses for them to replace ageing sprinters either directly or indirectly on routes they can easily be cleared for if they aren’t already. The maintenance bases at Ardwick and York can also continue to be used with what I suggest.

I agree with your comments. However, on many routes that the Voyagers run they are not using their 125mph capability and are limited to 100mph. The 125mph capability is only used on sections such as Didcot Parkway to Reading on the GWML, sections of the West Coast main Line and East Coast Mainline. Where I believe a 110mph train would cope just as well as the Voyagers. The question then remains, if like the class 350's, could the top speed of the class 185 units be changed to be 110mph?

 

[Philip]

So have 185’s much more recently.

Why would we create more end door stock on Castlefield? It doesn’t matter how many coaches there are, they won’t beat a 185 for loading/unloading times. 185’s have the added advantage of Ardwick depot on the doorstep.

175s have Longsight. Commuter-door stock at Castlefield is not the criticial issue some people say it is. With long enough trains (ie. 4-6 coaches) end door stock can manage adequately - as the 397s and 802s do.

Unsubstantiated rumours, you seem to take too much stock in them. I prefer facts.

They are inter regional units, not intercity. As I said strip out the first class for standard and they are ideal for use on the services I suggest. The only stopping services I suggested would be Hope Valley and CLC where their acceleration would be ideal.

By the way if the Huddersfield - Leeds and Huddersfield - Manchester services they currently work very happily aren’t stoppers then what are they?

They were used for many years on Manchester-Scotland services which is an intercity route, they have had an impressive intercity-spec refurbishment recently, first class... They are only used on Huddersfield stoppers because TPE have nothing that is more suitable to use (like 195s). People mention that they are thirsty units - this issue won't be resolved by using them on frequent stop services as the stop-start-accelerate nature uses more fuel than running at 90-100mph for long periods with one of the engines off and the others cruising.

They don’t have the 125mph top speed of a voyager so not suitable. Read through the many threads why they aren’t suitable for SWR’s WoE mainline services.

I’m looking at uses for them to replace ageing sprinters either directly or indirectly on routes they can easily be cleared for if they aren’t already. The maintenance bases at Ardwick and York can also continue to be used with what I suggest.

They have better acceleration than Voyagers and they managed Manchester-Scotland at a similar journey time to the Voyagers because of the superior acceleration. Alternatively if they are still too slow for Cross Country then you could put smaller engines in them, possibly with a bi-mode option, to reduce the weight and use them om the Chiltern mainline or SWR as mentioned or even to replace the GWR HSTs.

Class 195s are commuter-suburban spec trains suitable for the frequent-stop Northern services you suggest. Class 175s are inter-regional express units hence why they'd be ideal for Barrow/Windermere and likewise in the North East. Class 185s are intercity units with doors at 1/3-2/3 down the train - they are no less 'intercity standard' than the top-spec 350s which are used on intercity WCML services (like Crewe-London).

 

[Neptune]

175s have Longsight.

Ardwick was built for the 185’s. Longsight just happens to be run by Alstom.

Commuter-door stock at Castlefield is not the criticial issue some people say it is. With long enough trains (ie. 4-6 coaches) end door stock can manage adequately - as the 397s and 802s do.

Really? Can you not see that 185’s would still be superior to 175’s on this corridor? What happens when a 2 car 175 inevitably turns up at peak time?

They were used for many years on Manchester-Scotland services which is an intercity route, they have had an impressive intercity-spec refurbishment recently, first class...

They have an inter regional interior. The Manchester - Scotland service was taken over from Virgin XC in 2007 and they were the stock available. Notice how it is now run by 397’s which have a far greater ambience and capacity? First Class does not immediately mean Intercity and you seem to be wilfully ignoring my suggestion that the FC compartment is converted to SC just to ‘prove’ your point.

They are only used on Huddersfield stoppers because TPE have nothing that is more suitable to use (like 195s). People mention that they are thirsty units - this issue won't be resolved by using them on frequent stop services as the stop-start-accelerate nature uses more fuel than running at 90-100mph for long periods with one of the engines off and the others cruising.

Once again, just to ‘prove your point’ you are more than happily ignoring the fact that most of my suggestions put them on mainly semi fasts across hills which they are more than suited to. Eco-mode downhill/on the flat.

They have better acceleration than Voyagers and they managed Manchester-Scotland at a similar journey time to the Voyagers because of the superior acceleration.

You’ve obviously never experienced a Voyager’s acceleration.

Alternatively if they are still too slow for Cross Country then you could put smaller engines in them, possibly with a bi-mode option, to reduce the weight and use them om the Chiltern mainline or SWR as mentioned or even to replace the GWR HSTs.

Another obsession. Is it even technically possible? You seem to think everything is possible and cheap too.

Class 195s are commuter-suburban spec trains suitable for the frequent-stop Northern services you suggest. Class 175s are inter-regional express units hence why they'd be ideal for Barrow/Windermere and likewise in the North East.

170, 175 and 185 are all inter regional units or do you think the 170’s with FC are Intercity too?

Class 185s are intercity units with doors at 1/3-2/3 down the train - they are no less 'intercity standard' than the top-spec 350s which are used on intercity WCML services (like Crewe-London).

I’m sorry but that last part is simply laughable if you think LNWR Crewe - London 350 services are Intercity.

Your arguments are based around an obsession with 175’s and what you want to do with them rather than any form of thought and realism at times.

All I’m trying to do is find a solution combining what to do with 185’s with getting rid of 15x units and surprise surprise all I can hear is ‘ah but 175’. If I hadn’t mentioned Windermere/Barrow I bet you wouldn’t have commented.

 

[Philip]

Ardwick was built for the 185’s. Longsight just happens to be run by Alstom.

Really? Can you not see that 185’s would still be superior to 175’s on this corridor? What happens when a 2 car 175 inevitably turns up at peak time?

They have an inter regional interior. The Manchester - Scotland service was taken over from Virgin XC in 2007 and they were the stock available. Notice how it is now run by 397’s which have a far greater ambience and capacity? First Class does not immediately mean Intercity and you seem to be wilfully ignoring my suggestion that the FC compartment is converted to SC just to ‘prove’ your point.

Once again, just to ‘prove your point’ you are more than happily ignoring the fact that most of my suggestions put them on mainly semi fasts across hills which they are more than suited to. Eco-mode downhill/on the flat.

You’ve obviously never experienced a Voyager’s acceleration.

Another obsession. Is it even technically possible? You seem to think everything is possible and cheap too.

170, 175 and 185 are all inter regional units or do you think the 170’s with FC are Intercity too?


I’m sorry but that last part is simply laughable if you think LNWR Crewe - London 350 services are Intercity.

Your arguments are based around an obsession with 175’s and what you want to do with them rather than any form of thought and realism at times.

All I’m trying to do is find a solution combining what to do with 185’s with getting rid of 15x units and surprise surprise all I can hear is ‘ah but 175’. If I hadn’t mentioned Windermere/Barrow I bet you wouldn’t have commented.

I've explained which routes are best for each of the trains in question. I don't think it is unreasonable to suggest 185s are an intercity train, if used in multiple, hence my suggestion of routes. Likewise 175s are a good replacement for 156s, which Northern are looking towards. My suggestion of using them on Barrow services instead of 195s is because they are express routes and the Cumbria service is an express route, not a stopping service which the 195 is most suited towards.

 

[150249]

Isn't the logical move to scrap the 150/1s and transfer TFW's 150/2s up to Northern along with (potentially) the 158s? I can see the 150/2s on GWR's network being around for at least another 5-10 years since they are in a considerably better condition than the Nothern's and TFW's

So having sat down and mapped this out, this is my opinion on where things could end up -

SHORT TERM (0-5 years)
ScotRail
As has been reported in Modern Railways, there is currently a cascade plan in line with electrification in Scotland. Therefore, if this is followed, I do not anticipate much if anything coming south of the border unless absolutely required and all Sprinters will go to scrap once taken out of service.

TfW
Out:
36 x 150/2s > Northern
24 x 158s > GWR
11 x 175/0s > EMR
16 x 175/1s > EMR

It would make sense for the 158s to go to GWR to replace the 12 Castle Sets given they already run on part of the route. The 27 x 175s would directly replace the 26 x 158s at EMR for the LIV-NRW route and give not only a capacity increase as trains could run as 5-cars but also a train which has recently be refurbished (something EMR desperately need). 150/2s to Northern to displace the 150/0s & 150/1s to GWR and create a homogenous fleet. 170s have already been accounted for going to EMR and 153s will hang on until someone decides to put their hand in their pockets for West Wales/HoW.

EMR
Out:
26 x 158s > Northern
20 x 156s > Northern

In:
TfW > 11 x 175/0s
TfW > 16 x 175/1s

158s to Northern to displace 150/0s & 158/7s to GWR and provide additional units, 156s to Northern to replace 155s and provide additional units. 170s from WMT/TfW/Southern already accounted for. The 27 x 175s would directly replace the 26 x 158s at EMR for the LIV-NRW route.

GWR
Out:
12 x HST Castle Sets > scrap
20 x 150/2s > Northern

In:
Northern > 6 x 150/0s
Northern > 46 x 150/1s (not all of them, rest sent for scrap/spares)
Northern > 8 x 158/7s
TfW > 24 x 158s

158s from TfW to displace 12 Castle Sets. 150/2s to Northern to create a homogeneous fleet. All 150/0s and some 150/1s from Northern in return to run Devon & Cornwall branch services & provide capacity increase. 158/7s from Northern to provide additional capacity for GWR regional services.

Northern
Out:
6 x 150/0s > GWR
46 x 150/1s > GWR (not all of them, rest sent for scrap/spares)
7 x 155s > scrap
8 x 158/7s > GWR

In:
TfW > 36 x 150/2s
GWR > 20 x 150/2s
EMR > 20 x 156s
EMR > 26 x 158s

All 150/0s and some 150/1s from Northern to run Devon & Cornwall branch services & provide capacity increase. 155s to scrap when they are displaced by 156s from EMR. 158/7s to GWR to provide capacity boost, replaced by 26 x 158s from EMR. All 150/2s end up at Northern to create a homogeneous fleet, 156s and 158s from EMR to replace 150/0s, 155s & 158/7s plus provide additional rolling stock.

So realistically the only Sprinters that could potentially go are the 150s (by my prediction the 150/1s) and 155s plus the Castle Sets.

MEDIUM TERM (5-15 YEARS)
The most pressing things to replace will be the 150s. GWR ones are likely to be replaced with something similar to Class 230 battery power if successful on the Greenford branch. That leaves about 82 150/2s at Northern to be replaced. Depending on further electrification schemes it will likely be battery/AC metro trains with some internal cascading. Latest 150s will go will be 2030.

The 71 x 156s, 129 x 158s and 30 159s will likely be replaced with bi or tri mode trains dependent on electrification and advancement of alternative fuels. 156s likely to be around until 2030 and 158s & 159s likely to be around until 2035.

And I don't see the point of giving Northern the better 150/2s from GWR and giving GWR the 150/1s in return

 

[Neptune]

I've explained which routes are best for each of the trains in question. I don't think it is unreasonable to suggest 185s are an intercity train, if used in multiple, hence my suggestion of routes.

They are not Intercity trains. They are no different to a 170 with first class which incidentally FTPE had 9 of. The higher power is due to the routes they were bought for. If they’d been bought for flat routes then they’d have had a lower powered engine specced.

Likewise 175s are a good replacement for 156s, which Northern are looking towards.

Can you provide any actual shred of evidence that Northern are looking at 175’s.

My suggestion of using them on Barrow services instead of 195s is because they are express routes and the Cumbria service is an express route, not a stopping service which the 195 is most suited towards.

Again, for which 185’s are perfectly suited to.

I mean come on, aren’t 175’s Intercity units in your mind? They share much with the 180’s other than first class and top speed.

 

[Philip]

They are not Intercity trains. They are no different to a 170 with first class which incidentally FTPE had 9 of. The higher power is due to the routes they were bought for. If they’d been bought for flat routes then they’d have had a lower powered engine specced.

Can you provide any actual shred of evidence that Northern are looking at 175’s.

The refurbishment they had was to intercity standard, just because they have doors part-way down the carriage doesn't mean they're not intercity trains. If they weren't intercity trains then TPE would have ordered 180s for the Scotland services rather than using the 185s which they did do.

Someone mentioned the other week about word on the Chester depot grapevine being that 175s were heading for Heaton - if this turns out to be true then it'd be logical to keep a few at Longsight to replace 195s on the Cumbria services, which in turn can replace some Sprinters on more local routes.

Again, for which 185’s are perfectly suited to.

I mean come on, aren’t 175’s Intercity units in your mind? They share much with the 180’s other than first class and top speed.

The 175s don't have first class, they have slower acceleration than 185s and the same top speed. You could remove first class from the 185s but there are currently no plans for this, hence a 185 is more suited to intercity work.

 

[JonathanH]

If they weren't intercity trains then TPE would have ordered 180s for the Scotland services rather than using the 185s which they did do.

180s weren't on offer when TPE started using 185s on the Scotland services. The DfT required them to use their existing fleet, backfilling with 170s.

 

[Philip]

180s weren't on offer when TPE started using 185s on the Scotland services. The DfT required them to use their existing fleet, backfilling with 170s.

I seem to remember TPE had the option to take them on as there were quite a few spare after FGW gave most of them back, but they declined and opted for the 185s.

 

[D365]

Aside from cab-end corridors. What is the reason for scrapping 150/1s?

 

[tbtc]

180s weren't on offer when TPE started using 185s on the Scotland services. The DfT required them to use their existing fleet, backfilling with 170s.

Agreed

The hierarchy of demand was basically:

1. Chester needed stock for an hourly London service (coincidently when Osbourne was a local MP/ Chancellor)
2. That meant taking the 125mph Voyagers from the Manchester - Edinburgh/ Glasgow routes
3. TPE were awarded the Scottish route at relatively short notice and therefore needed to stretch their 185 fleet further
4. They did this by downgrading the Hull and Cleethorpes to Manchester services to just a two coach 170 (and pretty much abandoning doubled up 185s on other routes)
5. This was before Chiltern got their hands on the 170s (converting them to 168s)

The idea of TPE getting additional stock to cover the additional duties that the Scottish services required was never ask option, if additional stock was an option then the Scottish services would probably have stayed with Virgin

(AFAICS they only have the services to TPE because they were expected to cope by stretching their Inadequate fleet further - remember that TPE were meant to have 60x4 car 185s but the Government cut the size of the fleet by giving TPE two coach 185s instead and then didn’t let them take up the option of the fourth coaches - the Government have their grubby fingers all over this bleak period)

As for the other things in this thread, the idea that the mid-door 185s are more “intercity” than the end-door 175s is an unusual one…

…as is the idea that 175s should run Windermere/ Barrow services because they did so twenty years ago… similarly the 150s used to run Hull - Manchester services, so should we bring them back to that route?

 

[Neptune]

The refurbishment they had was to intercity standard, just because they have doors part-way down the carriage doesn't mean they're not intercity trains. If they weren't intercity trains then TPE would have ordered 180s for the Scotland services rather than using the 185s which they did do.

No, the refurbishment was to TPE standards. It was simply new seat covers, carpets, wall coverings and better screens. Have you noticed for instance that GWR’s intercity and local fleet have the same style decor. It is possible.

Someone mentioned the other week about word on the Chester depot grapevine being that 175s were heading for Heaton - if this turns out to be true then it'd be logical to keep a few at Longsight to replace 195s on the Cumbria services, which in turn can replace some Sprinters on more local routes.

Bit in bold. This does not make it true. Also ‘keep a few at Longsight’ would probably require 11 or so units with 16 to Heaton. Because that would make sense.

The 175s don't have first class, they have slower acceleration than 185s and the same top speed. You could remove first class from the 185s but there are currently no plans for this, hence a 185 is more suited to intercity work.

Right so by your reckoning any unit with first class is Intercity and it can’t ever be removed from 185’s whether there were plans to do so or not.

 

[61653 HTAFC]

Aside from cab-end corridors. What is the reason for scrapping 150/1s?

The Pacers are gone so 150/1s are the natural "next on the chopping block".

I personally think 156s will be the first Sprinters (153/155s notwithstanding) to see mass withdrawals, simply because they fall between two stools: being lower density but not having the higher top speed of 158s. 150s for all their faults are more useful due to the wider doors and 20m carriages.