Transpennine Express decide not to use MK3's on limited services

[Shaw S Hunter]

So for the short term run the trains with locos that are compatible then. As I said, don't gild the lily, just increase capacity NOW. If the franchises have mismanaged their rolling stock procurement then that is their problem. I would say hire in locos and drivers if needed (or train up their own) and take the extra cost on the chin, but then I live in a delusional world where I expect organisations that sign contracts to honour them, and if they cock things up it's their loss rather than them taking the full price but not delivering.

So you don't think the DfT had any role in all this? Whose decision was it to send away the Class 170s thereby exacerbating the capacity issue? Because it certainly wasn't TPE's!! As for using alternative traction, all that would do is generate an avoidable training cost and would still require the rolling stock to come out of service for the required modifications at a later date. Class 68 haulage is pretty much "the only show in town" for anything other than a very short-term solution.

 

[47802]

So for the short term run the trains with locos that are compatible then. As I said, don't gild the lily, just increase capacity NOW. If the franchises have mismanaged their rolling stock procurement then that is their problem. I would say hire in locos and drivers if needed (or train up their own) and take the extra cost on the chin, but then I live in a delusional world where I expect organisations that sign contracts to honour them, and if they cock things up it's their loss rather than them taking the full price but not delivering.

So what would the alternate motive power be? certainly don' want clapped out 1st gen diesels clogging up the busy TPE route thats for sure.

 

[Tetchytyke]

Hardly a pantomime. The lack of capacity is purely down to "build it and they will come" (new trains, oh nice lets drop the car), etc.

Is it heck. The 185s haven't been big enough since the day they were bought, with fewer seats than a 3-car 158 (that also couldn't cope with demand). Capacity hasn't been right on TPE since the 47s left the scene.

I don't blame First for this- the SRA/DafT have an awful lot to answer for- but overcrowding is not new.

 

[Solent&Wessex]

New trains will be in service from December 2018 when a massive timetable change happens - that is when you will see major changes to stock and carriage numbers. Can't and won't happen any quicker than that.

Forgive me from going off topic, but wasn't the massive timetable change meant to take place in May 2018, having already been deferred from December 2017??

Are you saying it has been deferred again?

 

[jayah]

Splitting up 185s into 2 and 4 car sets will never happen, for reasons posted on here many times before.

Why anybody would want to create even more PRM compatible 2 car units is beyond me. There are already too many mini-me uneconomical trains clogging up the railway.

Make them longer, and if you can fill them up, run fewer of them. 110 seats loses money even if it is full. Spending £bn increasing capacity to run even more tiny trains is a disease in this industry.

 

[Shaw S Hunter]

Is it heck. The 185s haven't been big enough since the day they were bought, with fewer seats than a 3-car 158 (that also couldn't cope with demand). Capacity hasn't been right on TPE since the 47s left the scene.

I don't blame First for this- the SRA/DafT have an awful lot to answer for- but overcrowding is not new.

The 47s ran once an hour, the 185s 4 times an hour. If that's not an increase in capacity then you and I live in different mathematical universes! In short your statement is overly simplistic.

 

[TC60054]

The 47s ran once an hour, the 185s 4 times an hour. If that's not an increase in capacity then you and I live in different mathematical universes! In short your statement is overly simplistic.

What happened to the fifth train an hour introduced when the 350s entered service?

 

[BMIFlyer]

Forgive me from going off topic, but wasn't the massive timetable change meant to take place in May 2018, having already been deferred from December 2017??

Are you saying it has been deferred again?

What happened to the fifth train an hour introduced when the 350s entered service?

There are 5 TPE trains an hour from Leeds to Manchester in each direction:

Hull to Man Picc
Scarborough to Liverpool via Picc
Middlesbrough to Man Airport via Picc
Newcastle or York to Man Airport via Picc

Newcastle to Liverpool via Man Vic


The Northwest electric wiring plan is currently behind schedule and if nothing changes the new timetable changes will be as below.

May 2018:

Hull to Man Picc
Middlesbrough to Man Airport via Man Picc
Newcastle to Man Airport via Man Picc

Scarborough to Liverpool via Man Vic
Newcastle to Liverpool via Man Vic



December 2018 should be 6tph:

Leeds to Man Picc skip stop
Hull to Man Picc
Middlesbrough to Man Airport via Man Vic and Man Picc
Newcastle to Man Airport via Man Vic and Man Picc

Scarborough to Liverpool via Man Vic
Newcastle to Liverpool via Man Vic


Otherwise, bring all the changes forward to MAY 2018.


http://moderngov.merseytravel.uk.ne... NORTHERN MAY 2018 TIMETABLE CONSULTATION.pdf

 

[yorksrob]

The 47s ran once an hour, the 185s 4 times an hour. If that's not an increase in capacity then you and I live in different mathematical universes! In short your statement is overly simplistic.

Wasn't there also an hourly Hull to Manchester service formed of a unit, making core TPE services half hourly when the 47's were running ?

Not as much capacity as now, but better than one an hour.

 

[jayah]

Wasn't there also an hourly Hull to Manchester service formed of a unit, making core TPE services half hourly when the 47's were running ?

Not as much capacity as now, but better than one an hour.

Nobody thinks there is actually less capacity than 20 years ago. The population is far more mobile. But there are far too many tiny trains. It doesn't need more than 4tph but they need to be far longer.

 

[Chester1]

When are the 185s on loan to Northern returning? I thought that they would be increasing capacity from May. Apart from rerouting services via Ordsall and extending a service from York to Newcastle very little seem to be happening for nearly a year!

 

[yorksrob]

Nobody thinks there is actually less capacity than 20 years ago. The population is far more mobile. But there are far too many tiny trains. It doesn't need more than 4tph but they need to be far longer.

Yes, I was saying that comparing just the 47 hauled rake, rather than the core TPE service at the time wasn't really accurate.

From my point of view, having four much longer TPE services an hour over the core would provide a big capacity improvement and retain the "walk up and go" nature of the service.

 

[Shaw S Hunter]

Wasn't there also an hourly Hull to Manchester service formed of a unit, making core TPE services half hourly when the 47's were running ?

Not as much capacity as now, but better than one an hour.

For many years the core service was always just the hourly loco-hauled service. And towards the end of that era the loco-hauled formations were themselves reduced in length (the cynics said it was to prepare us for what was to come!) so the net gain in capacity when the first Sprinter services were added to the timetable was negated somewhat. Though I do remember once being startled by a 6-car 150/2 formation at Victoria on a Scarborough service.

 

[yorksrob]

For many years the core service was always just the hourly loco-hauled service. And towards the end of that era the loco-hauled formations were themselves reduced in length (the cynics said it was to prepare us for what was to come!) so the net gain in capacity when the first Sprinter services were added to the timetable was negated somewhat. Though I do remember once being startled by a 6-car 150/2 formation at Victoria on a Scarborough service.

Thanks for the clarification. I remember reading that the additional unit was often a 155 or 150.

 

[47802]

Wasn't there also an hourly Hull to Manchester service formed of a unit, making core TPE services half hourly when the 47's were running ?

Not as much capacity as now, but better than one an hour.

There was a limited number of Manchester Hull trains at one point after the hourly Loco Hauled was introduced but it wasn't hourly 3 or 4 trains per day, I think they were withdrawn when the 124's were withdrawn until the 87 timetable change when an hourly Hull Manchester was introduced, while the other service to make a half hourly service over the core was 2 hourly Loco Hauled to Newcastle, 2 hourly Sprinter to Scarborough meant to 2x2 but was frequently 1x2. Capacity has certainly increased but I suspect not nearly enough given that was 30 years ago.

 

[yorksrob]

There was a limited number of Manchester Hull trains at one point after the hourly Loco Hauled was introduced but it wasn't hourly 3 or 4 trains per day, I think they were withdrawn when the 124's were withdrawn until the 87 timetable change when an hourly Hull Manchester was introduced, while the other service to make a half hourly service over the core was 2 hourly Loco Hauled to Newcastle, 2 hourly Sprinter to Scarborough meant to 2x2 but was frequently 1x2. Capacity has certainly increased but I suspect not nearly enough given that was 30 years ago.

Thanks for the further information.

It would certainly be interesting to go back in time and travel the route in those days as its hard to think of one whose services have changed more in nature !

 

[Bevan Price]

Let me advise you of this....

If the coaches are not altered so that the class 68s can power the ETH, then the Mk3 stock will have no PA system, lights or heating as the batteries will die after a couple of hours of no charging (the ETH charges the battery system).

So the train will then be out of service.

A question. The Pretendolino set operated with Class 90s. Do the Class 68 have some non-standard ETH system that makes them incompatible with Mark 3 stock?

I thought the main problem was incompatibilty with unmodified Mark 3 era DVTs, and 68s would need to run in top/tail mode with Mark 3 stock (due to absence of run-round facilities on many TP routes) - and with new stock due in a year or so, it was not worth the cost of modifying any more Mark 3 era DVTs to operate with 68s
.

 

[BMIFlyer]

A question. The Pretendolino set operated with Class 90s. Do the Class 68 have some non-standard ETH system that makes them incompatible with Mark 3 stock?

I thought the main problem was incompatibilty with unmodified Mark 3 era DVTs, and 68s would need to run in top/tail mode with Mark 3 stock (due to absence of run-round facilities on many TP routes) - and with new stock due in a year or so, it was not worth the cost of modifying any more Mark 3 era DVTs to operate with 68s
.

The Mk3 DVT'S aren't route cleared for the main Transpennine route.
The top and tail is purely to give drivers as much time in a class 68 cab as possible.
The jumper cables on the pretendolino MK3's need changing for use with the 68.

 

[Bevan Price]

The Mk3 DVT'S aren't route cleared for the main Transpennine route.
The top and tail is purely to give drivers as much time in a class 68 cab as possible.
The jumper cables on the pretendolino MK3's need changing for use with the 68.

Thanks. Presumably changing jumper cables should be a relatively easy process?

 

[Tetchytyke]

The 47s ran once an hour, the 185s 4 times an hour. If that's not an increase in capacity then you and I live in different mathematical universes! In short your statement is overly simplistic.

The 150s that came in were overcrowded, the 156s and 158s after them were overcrowded, the 185s are overcrowded. The route has been a history in how small fixed-formation trains can't cope with peak demands.

An hourly 47 was replaced with more frequent 150s, sure. But the peak travelling times haven't changed and can't change. The 185s weren't big enough when they were bought, and then they were spread too thinly thanks to the incompetence of DfT and the SRA.

 

[Chester1]

Are the 185s on loan to Northern returning in May? The two Mark III sets must only just be enough to extend the York service to Newcastle with very few additional seats between Manchester and Leeds.

 

[BMIFlyer]

Are the 185s on loan to Northern returning in May? The two Mark III sets must only just be enough to extend the York service to Newcastle with very few additional seats between Manchester and Leeds.

Hopefully.

Don't forget the Liverpool services all route via Chat Moss from May which being quicker also frees up an additional 185 unit over the course of a day.

 

[BMIFlyer]

The 150s that came in were overcrowded, the 156s and 158s after them were overcrowded, the 185s are overcrowded. The route has been a history in how small fixed-formation trains can't cope with peak demands.

An hourly 47 was replaced with more frequent 150s, sure. But the peak travelling times haven't changed and can't change. The 185s weren't big enough when they were bought, and then they were spread too thinly thanks to the incompetence of DfT and the SRA.

The majority of capacity problems are on such flows as Huddersfield to Leeds in the morning and return in the evening. Myself I have no issue standing for 18 minutes to get home. If you want a train service where no one stands up to travel to or from work then carry on dreaming.

Going back through history, when the class 158s were about we had 3 trains per hour from Leeds to Manchester, then it was changed to 4 per hour, the additional one being usually from platform 17 at Leeds (or any west facing bay) and called at Huddersfield and Manchester Picc only.

The 185s arrived and replaced some 2 car trains with 3 cars, as well as some 3 car trains with 3 cars. Demand rose and some trains became 4 cars with class 170's or 6 cars with 185's. Class 350's arrived and TPE were able to run a 5th train per hour but to Man Vic. The 6th train per hour comes this year but with skip stops.

Trains on the route are faster than those operated when the 158s were about, that is a certainty. The main dramas on the route are TPE trains being held up by slow moving Northern units. All this changes over the next few years when Huddersfield to Mirfield is 4 tracked, plus other enhancements to the route between Leeds and Manchester happen.

People enjoy travelling on the current 5th train per hour to Man Vic - it is very well used and popular with the customers.

The primary issues are in the peaks mostly, where nearly everyone wants to travel on the same train at times, for example the 1709 from Leeds, the 1725 from Leeds and the 1740 from Leeds, all heading towards Huddersfield. No matter how many carriages you supply, the train will be full.

Try travelling down south in the peak and then complain about overcrowding on TPE.

 

[leedslad82]

Just seen this on Facebook from someone I know who drives for tpe.

 

[Jamesrob637]

I'll be there, and likely in t'pub immediately after!

 

[Foxcover]

“People enjoy travelling on the current 5th train per hour to Man Vic - it is very well used and popular with the customers.”

Yes it’s deservedly popular and the first real fast intercity service on this route for a long time - 32 minutes non-stop from Lime St to Manchester Victoria does seem to have registered very positively with people in both the leisure and commuter markets. It needs the extra capacity that’s coming and hopefully the new Chat Moss timetables will keep the balance of ‘true’ fast and semi fast which this service provides.

 

[BMIFlyer]

“People enjoy travelling on the current 5th train per hour to Man Vic - it is very well used and popular with the customers.”

Yes it’s deservedly popular and the first real fast intercity service on this route for a long time - 32 minutes non-stop from Lime St to Manchester Victoria does seem to have registered very positively with people in both the leisure and commuter markets. It needs the extra capacity that’s coming and hopefully the new Chat Moss timetables will keep the balance of ‘true’ fast and semi fast which this service provides.

When the timetable changes, the Liverpool to Scarborough will call at Newton LW. The Newcastle will be either St Helens J or Lea Green.

This way the relevant train will avoid catching up the train in front too soon which sometimes does happen.

 

[Tetchytyke]

Try travelling down south in the peak and then complain about overcrowding on TPE.

I did, for several years. Where 8-12 car trains are the norm. And TPE is worse...much worse. It isn't just the commuter peaks either, Sundays are particularly bad on TPE and have been for donkey's years. I've stood from Manchester to York on 158s and on 185s. It's not a new thing. My Sunday afternoon travel from Yorkshire back to uni in Durham was always horrific...And that was nearly 20 years ago.

It isn't the shiny trains that has generated custom, the custom has always been there. The simple fact is that the 185s are too small and insufficient in number, and they always have been. I don't blame First for this, really.

I do blame them for the constant delays in getting the additional trains up and running. Chiltern have been using 68s and Mk3s for ages now, it's not a new combination.

 

[Halish Railway]

When the timetable changes, the Liverpool to Scarborough will call at Newton LW. The Newcastle will be either St Helens J or Lea Green.

This way the relevant train will avoid catching up the train in front too soon which sometimes does happen.

Lea Green? Where did you get this information from?

Also, I thought that the TPE via Chat Moss would have the same stopping pattern as the current Liverpool to the Airport 319, instead going into Victoria.

 

[BMIFlyer]

Lea Green? Where did you get this information from?

Also, I thought that the TPE via Chat Moss would have the same stopping pattern as the current Liverpool to the Airport 319, instead going into Victoria.

Forgive me for I've written it the wrong way round....

The Liverpool to Newcastle will stop at Newton LW, the Scarborough will stop at St Helens J or Lea Green.

It's in the document I posted above earlier in the thread. Here it is again.

http://moderngov.merseytravel.uk.net/documents/s20571/TRANSPENNINE EXPRESS AND NORTHERN MAY 2018 TIMETABLE CONSULTATION.pdf

Regarding the TPE stopping pattern being the same as the current 319 service, no it won't.