TPE Mark 5A coaching stock progress

[Kieran1990]

I'm sure I read somewhere that the plan was to introduce mk5+68s onto the Newcastle services initially, before cascading them to Middlesbrough/Scarborough/Hull(?) services when the 802s arrive. Is that still the case?

Think I saw in a post somewhere in this thread that it would be LIV-SCA first (2 diagrams) plus it would involve Newcastle crew having to sign them on top of there intended route crews LIV-SCA & MAI-Middlesbrough which would probs the priority once they are accepted. I personally can’t wait for them to start in PAX service!

 

[D6975]

Scarborough needs 5 sets. There should be one spare set per day as a minimum.

Check the journey times.
Liverpool-Scarborough needs 6 sets, as does Airport-Middlesbrough. That means 12/13 sets in regular service if all diagrams are Mk5s, just one set spare/maintenance.

 

[Kieran1990]

Check the journey times.
Liverpool-Scarborough needs 6 sets, as does Airport-Middlesbrough. That means 12/13 sets in regular service if all diagrams are Mk5s, just one set spare/maintenance.

I had a feeling it was 12/13 sets. Could we see a double Class 185 diagram in use all day on one diagram on either of the routes to give MK5’a some slack?

 

[joshy.fre_2003]

Do we know for certain whether the tests tomorrow will run?

 

[TBSchenker]

Only way to check for yourself is look at Real time Trains for departures from Longsight Down Goods Loop.

 

[joshy.fre_2003]

Suppose not then

 

[BMIFlyer]

Check the journey times.
Liverpool-Scarborough needs 6 sets, as does Airport-Middlesbrough. That means 12/13 sets in regular service if all diagrams are Mk5s, just one set spare/maintenance.

Yep sorry, bit hasty with my reply.

I had a feeling it was 12/13 sets. Could we see a double Class 185 diagram in use all day on one diagram on either of the routes to give MK5’a some slack?

There will be a double 185 on a Middlesbrough diagram yes, not sure which one yet.

 

[LNW-GW Joint]

Only way to check for yourself is look at Real time Trains for departures from Longsight Down Goods Loop.

The test runs appear from RTT to be Longsight-Ordsall Lane-Parkside and then either way on the WCML to Carlisle or Bletchley and back.
Nothing visible outside Longsight today (1300), and the paths were not activated.

 

[Mollman]

I'm sure I read somewhere that the plan was to introduce mk5+68s onto the Newcastle services initially, before cascading them to Middlesbrough/Scarborough/Hull(?) services when the 802s arrive. Is that still the case?

Original plan was indeed to put Mk5s on Newcastle services, however it was dropped as it would have involved training Newcastle staff for a typed they would use for all of 6 months or so. Hull won't be seeing the Mk5s in general, when Selby - Hull electrification was dropped it was promised that new EMUs would arrive for Newcastle trains following TP electrification with the 802s cascaded onto other workings including Hull services. However now that 100% electrification is likely not to happen that will be another broken promise from the DfT!

 

[TBSchenker]

The doors to the shed on one road were open at 1220, plus a 68 ran from Crewe to Carlisle training a TPE driver.

We are not far off the first trip!

 

[EE Andy b1]

It will be Crewe based Freightliner Heavyhaul drivers that do the testing of 68s with Mk5s from Longsight.

 

[Oxfordblues]

From tonight's NWRail notice board:

Mk5a coaches at Holyhead

Following our earlier report, a rake of Mk5a coaches intended for use by TransPennine Express have arrived by road for temporary storage at the Anglesey Aluminium sidings, having arrived by ship at Immingham. Several coaches, built by CAF in Spain, have been in Britain since May, having been transported by rail from Portbury dock to Manchester Longsight depot, so why these had to go by road we are not sure.

 

[LNW-GW Joint]

It will be Crewe based Freightliner Heavyhaul drivers that do the testing of 68s with Mk5s from Longsight.

Sounds like still quite a way from TPE themselves doing crew training runs then.
Presumably FHH run the trains until the sets get NR approval.

 

[EE Andy b1]

From tonight's NWRail notice board:

Mk5a coaches at Holyhead

Following our earlier report, a rake of Mk5a coaches intended for use by TransPennine Express have arrived by road for temporary storage at the Anglesey Aluminium sidings, having arrived by ship at Immingham. Several coaches, built by CAF in Spain, have been in Britain since May, having been transported by rail from Portbury dock to Manchester Longsight depot, so why these had to go by road we are not sure.

Maybe the movement by road was because of pathing or gauging problems across the Pennines or maybe the cost for a one off move was prohibitive. This was the test set from Velim Czech Rep as the other have been arriving through Portbury. Seems strange though as ROG (Rail Operations Group) dragged the two 68s from Immingham back to Crewe, although easier LE than with a Mk5 set and barriers.

Sounds like still quite a way from TPE themselves doing crew training runs then.
Presumably FHH run the trains until the sets get NR approval.

I should imagine it will be a while before TPE do start training with Mk5s.
Once FHH have trained two or three drivers on 68s perhaps a week or two training, static & handling, i would imagine they would get on with testing the Mk5 sets pretty quickly. The paths are in the system now and i presume CAF will have technicians on these test trains and that accumulation mileage will need to be completed, although not self powered like a DMU there will be plenty systems to test.

I don't know (does anybody else know?) if there are any gauging issues to be addressed before they can run over the Pennines.

 

[palmersears]

For those interested 68026 will be the loco doing these runs once they commence.

 

[TBSchenker]

There should be sufficient FL HH drivers trained on the 68s now, the 68+Mark 3 runs from Crewe to Carlisle over the last month were for FL drivers being trained.

Strangeley it was TPE training FL drivers on the 68s, not DRS.

 

[EE Andy b1]

There should be sufficient FL HH drivers trained on the 68s now, the 68+Mark 3 runs from Crewe to Carlisle over the last month were for FL drivers being trained.

Strangely it was TPE training FL drivers on the 68s, not DRS.

Ah well that's good and hopefully the first of the Mk5 sets will be out for testing sooner rather than later.

I suppose TPE would have had to pay DRS for training of Freightliner Heavy Haul drivers so once TPE had there own instructors trained up, it made sense to train FLHH drivers themselves.

 

[61653 HTAFC]

Does seem odd that Freightliner and their drivers need to be involved at all, given that they don't have any 68s and DRS drivers should already be trained on them. Is it a route knowledge thing, or just one of the wonders of the privatised railway?

EDIT: or, more likely, that FLHH had spare drivers and DRS didn't. Which I suppose is no different to a hypothetical BR situation where a particular depot has more slack in their driving staff, so they take on the job.

 

[BMIFlyer]

Does seem odd that Freightliner and their drivers need to be involved at all, given that they don't have any 68s and DRS drivers should already be trained on them. Is it a route knowledge thing, or just one of the wonders of the privatised railway?

EDIT: or, more likely, that FLHH had spare drivers and DRS didn't. Which I suppose is no different to a hypothetical BR situation where a particular depot has more slack in their driving staff, so they take on the job.

As I understand it, CAF put the contract for U.K. test runs out to tender and FLHH won it.

 

[gimmea50anyday]

Newcastle crews will not be signing Mk5. This will be Liverpool, scarborough And part York crews. Newcastle will retain 185 and gain 802 traction knowledge and will lose Middlesbrough and Scarborough route knowledge as a result.there is also talk on gaining Edinburgh, Newcastle will not work beyond Leeds

My arguement is this will cause problems. Different crews signing different routes and traction will mean no cross cover, and unable to step up during disruption.

 

[Bertie the bus]

Maybe the movement by road was because of pathing or gauging problems across the Pennines or maybe the cost for a one off move was prohibitive. This was the test set from Velim Czech Rep as the other have been arriving through Portbury. Seems strange though as ROG (Rail Operations Group) dragged the two 68s from Immingham back to Crewe, although easier LE than with a Mk5 set and barriers.

I'm sure there was a reason and I'm just a sure that 99.9% of the population would roll their eyes when hearing it, but it is the railway so what else can one expect?

 

[twpsaesneg]

Regarding road transport outrage - pretty sure that Crewe to Holyhead has not been gauge cleared for Mk5 / Mk5A as it is neither a normal service route nor a delivery route.

It may come in time if the storage site is to be used regularly and if someone is willing to pay!

 

[edwin_m]

Regarding road transport outrage - pretty sure that Crewe to Holyhead has not been gauge cleared for Mk5 / Mk5A as it is neither a normal service route nor a delivery route.

It may come in time if the storage site is to be used regularly and if someone is willing to pay!

If the storage location is never going to be accessed by rail then why bother with a rail-connected site? They could just hire some random flat area a bit closer to their oprational base and buy a few bits of old track.

 

[Bletchleyite]

My arguement is this will cause problems. Different crews signing different routes and traction will mean no cross cover, and unable to step up during disruption.

Much as I do think the CAF stock all looks great, it would have been a lot easier for them if they just had a single fleet of 802s, or at most 802s and 185s.

 

[twpsaesneg]

If the storage location is never going to be accessed by rail then why bother with a rail-connected site? They could just hire some random flat area a bit closer to their oprational base and buy a few bits of old track.

1. TPE would need to buy in expertise to lay track on a rented site, buy the track, and then remove and dispose of it later.
2. It may well be that the route clearance to Holyhead is in the pipeline and subsequent deliveries / extraction can be done by road.

Unfortunately there are only a finite amount of people in the UK with the expertise to assess route clearance for rolling stock, plus it still needs a signoff from Network Rail, even to run as an "X" headcode (exceptional load). Since I understand the Holyhead storage wasn't in the original plans for introduction, any route clearance will be somewhere in the backlog. NR are quite risk averse, understandably, so these things take time.

 

[BMIFlyer]

Newcastle crews will not be signing Mk5. This will be Liverpool, scarborough And part York crews. Newcastle will retain 185 and gain 802 traction knowledge and will lose Middlesbrough and Scarborough route knowledge as a result.there is also talk on gaining Edinburgh, Newcastle will not work beyond Leeds

My arguement is this will cause problems. Different crews signing different routes and traction will mean no cross cover, and unable to step up during disruption.

Mk5A: Liverpool, Manchester, Man Airport, York, Scarborough.

397: Liverpool, Preston, Man Airport, Glasgow

802: Man Airport, Manchester, York, Newcastle

185: Sheffield, Hull, Cleethorpes, Manchester.

 

[LNW-GW Joint]

1. TPE would need to buy in expertise to lay track on a rented site, buy the track, and then remove and dispose of it later.
2. It may well be that the route clearance to Holyhead is in the pipeline and subsequent deliveries / extraction can be done by road.

Unfortunately there are only a finite amount of people in the UK with the expertise to assess route clearance for rolling stock, plus it still needs a signoff from Network Rail, even to run as an "X" headcode (exceptional load). Since I understand the Holyhead storage wasn't in the original plans for introduction, any route clearance will be somewhere in the backlog. NR are quite risk averse, understandably, so these things take time.

After all, the route only has 150+ years of intercity traffic, carries 67+Mk3 daily and is in line for 68+Mk4 next year.
And it was cleared for 57+390 operation for VT.
If it's going to be CAF's buffer storage for UK deliveries, maybe we will see use with class 397 and 331 in due course.

 

[Bertie the bus]

We know how long route clearance really takes from the Flying Scotsman on the Borders Railway fiasco and it isn’t very long at all. How long a process the railway makes it is quite a different matter.

 

[158820]

A light locomotive from Rail operations group has visited holyhead so some proving has been done on the site.

 

[twpsaesneg]

We know how long route clearance really takes from the Flying Scotsman on the Borders Railway fiasco and it isn’t very long at all. How long a process the railway makes it is quite a different matter.

I never said it took a long time. What I said was there are a finite number of people that can do it.

It might only take 10 minutes for a bloke to fill a pothole in, but if there are a thousand potholes to do, and a single man, it won't get done quickly.

There is a massive skills shortage within the rail engineering industry, and especially within Network Rail. It's not all a conspiracy to stop trains running which some people seem to think.