My thoughts on the future of the class 222 fleet

[MidlandMainlie]

Now that FGW has decides to replace its WoE services with new build class 800's and Scotrail is to take on refurbished HST's I was wondering what future options there are the 222's.

One obvious area is to transfer the fleet to XC to increase capacity. However most of the fleet won't be freed up by MML electrification till 2020/21 and if electrification progresses as plans then some services run by XC could switch over to EMU operation (e.g. Southampton to Manchester) in the early 2020's, the other problem is the lack of compatibility with 220/1's, so the demand for 222's could be limited.

Another option that occurred to me was the fleet could be transferred to the new Wales and Borders franchise to operate Cardiff - Manchester/Holyhead service. The current services are operated by 27 Class 175's, made up of:-

• 11x 2 car with 134 standard class seats
• 16x 3 car with 206 standard class seats

The 222 fleet consist 27 sets in formations of:-

• 4x 4 car with 132 standard and 33 first class seats
• 17x 5 car with 192 standard and 50 first class seats
• 6x 7 car with 236 standard and 106 first class seats.

The formations below show which coaches are standard and which are first.

Seven cars

• Coach A - Standard Class with driving cab and reservable space for two bikes
• Coach B - Standard Class
• Coach C - Standard Class
• Coach D - Standard Class with Shop/Buffet counter
• Coach F - First Class
• Coach G - First Class
• Coach H - First Class and driving cab

Five cars

• Coach A - Standard Class with driving cab and reservable space for two bikes
• Coach B - Standard Class
• Coach C - Standard Class with Shop/Buffet counter
• Coach D - Standard Class / First Class
• Coach G - First Class and driving cab

Four cars

• Coach A - Standard Class with driving cab and reservable space for two bikes
• Coach B - Standard Class with Shop/Buffet counter
• Coach D - Standard Class / First Class
• Coach G - First Class and driving cab

To create a more uniform fleet and increase standard capacity I would remove coach F from 4 of the 6 car sets, convert it to standard class and insert it into the four car set to become a new coach B (coach B then becoming coach C) to make a more uniform fleet of 21x 5 car and 4x 6 car sets and 2x 7 car sets. Similarly in the 5 car sets Coach D could become standard class only (with first class confined to leading coach G) which would increase standard class seating across the fleet.

(All information taken from Wikipedia so I hope it is accurate)

 

[D365]

To create a more uniform fleet and increase standard capacity I would remove coach F from 4 of the 6 car sets, convert it to standard class and insert it into the four car set to become a new coach B (coach B then becoming coach C) to make a more uniform fleet of 21x 5 car and 4x 6 car sets and 2x 7 car sets. Similarly in the 5 car sets Coach D could become standard class only (with first class confined to leading coach G) which would increase standard class seating across the fleet.

At present there are no 6-car sets, so it appears you made a typo initially when thinking about the 6 7-car units (of which you propose to be removing a coach from each of 4 units).

 

[BantamMenace]

All very good on paper and I'd support your idea for the change of formation but not sure the Welsh would be able to afford them although if the 222s do find themselves without an operator a good deal may be struck.

The fact they might become cheap to lease could also tempt an incumbent or a new open access operator to have a dabble with them. Cumbria-London, North Scotland - London, MML - Carlisle etc. I'm certainly not saying that they're feasible or will ever happen but the cheaper the stock the closer to reality they'll become.

 

[Haydn1971]

I can imagine them going on to either replace 158/159 sets on longer distance routes that partly use mainline routes, or a resurrection of the eVoyager idea may resurface possibly also in a bi-mode type configuration.

 

[jopsuk]

If you wanted uniformity, you'd take two coaches from each of two of the 7 car units, making it 23x5 + 4x7

Or if a potential operator could make use of two much longer single units, you could have 25x5 car + 2x9 car

it's awkward. Essentially you've got 54 driving cars (which would be hard/expensive if you wanted to make them into intermediates, so that can probably be ruled out) and 89 intermediates to work with.

 

[RobShipway]

If you wanted uniformity, you'd take two coaches from each of two of the 7 car units, making it 23x5 + 4x7

Or if a potential operator could make use of two much longer single units, you could have 25x5 car + 2x9 car

it's awkward. Essentially you've got 54 driving cars (which would be hard/expensive if you wanted to make them into intermediates, so that can probably be ruled out) and 89 intermediates to work with.

I think the first option would be the correct approach, as i cannot see any operator using 2x9.

You would not need though all 23x5 for the Wales and Borders Franchise routes of Cardiff - Manchester or Holyhead - Manchester and I don't think that all stations would along the North Wales coast such as Prestatyn would be able to take 5 coach trains?

 

[LNW-GW Joint]

XC hasn't figured in any of the direct awards to date, though it is due to get one to last till 2019.
DfT has not indicated what the future for the franchise is either.
However it is still the prime candidate for 222s when they are cascaded from EMT.
They could take over the Stansted-Birmingham and Nottingham-Cardiff services, as well as adding to the existing Voyager capacity.
They will still need to be based at either Central Rivers or Derby, so other options are limited.
The future of VT's Voyagers also needs to be considered, after the next WC franchise starting in 2017.

Forgetting the maintenance base, the options seem to be:
W&B (ATW) might be able to use 4/5-car trains but nothing more.
Most of its services run by 175s are too slow and local to merit 125mph-capable stock (and what would you do with the 175s?).
175s also work Llandudno/Holyhead-Crewe/Manchester/Birmingham.
TPE might be interested for South TP, but still not a good fit.
EMT's Norwich-Liverpool run maybe (4-car).
SWT Waterloo-Exeter replacing 159s? 5-car units doubling up at Salisbury? Stagecoach will know all about them from EMT.
Shouldn't think FGW would be interested when they have 80x.
Scotrail, if the HST plan doesn't work out?

There might well be a crunch moment around 2017 after the next HLOS is published.
That will determine how much (if any) of the XC network will be wired in CP6.
That will drive the rolling stock plan going forward.
With the 222 fleet coming free the DfT may well take the view that reusing them on XC is more cost effective than wiring + new stock for another franchise cycle, despite the many miles run under the wires.

 

[Haydn1971]

I'd hope that a four car 222 doesn't replace the four car 158 on the core of this route - not unless it doubles the frequency !

 

[ac6000cw]

Given the way the electrification projects are falling behind schedule and costing more, I think it's likely the MML wiring is going to be later than projected.

I still think the eVoyager idea is a good one - even if it's done by removing the engine+fuel tank from one car to replace it with transformer+rectifier (to avoid the cost of building a whole new car, provided it's possible to modify the structure to create the pantograph well at sensible cost). When some 222's become available from MML as electrification progresses you would have a 'float' of vehicles to do the conversions on (and to refurbish the interiors).

 

[RobShipway]

Given the way the electrification projects are falling behind schedule and costing more, I think it's likely the MML wiring is going to be later than projected.

I still think the eVoyager idea is a good one - even if it's done by removing the engine+fuel tank from one car to replace it with transformer+rectifier (to avoid the cost of building a whole new car, provided it's possible to modify the structure to create the pantograph well at sensible cost). When some 222's become available from MML as electrification progresses you would have a 'float' of vehicles to do the conversions on (and to refurbish the interiors).

I think that even converting existing carriages to be able to take a pantograph would cost more to change the fleet of class 222's than it would to buy a small fleet of 5 or 6 car class 800 hybrids. But I could be proved wrong.

 

[IanXC]

SWT Waterloo-Exeter replacing 159s? 5-car units doubling up at Salisbury? Stagecoach will know all about them from EMT.

This is the stand out option to me; so long as moving from a 158/159 fleet at 90mph max to a 222 fleet at 100mph (on these routes) would create extra paths then I think the capacity issue can be overcome by operating extra services in the newly created paths.

Other than that ATW could be a good option, but probably relies on the ROSCO offering a good deal.

The issue not mentioned thus far is that EMT will have little in the way of electrified diversionary routes under current plans, so may choose to retain a mixed fleet (as per the current East Coast) to maintain diversionary options. This could be coupled with their use on Liverpool-Norwich if some of the differential speed issues can be overcome. This would clearly free up a number of 158s either for use within EMT (to retire/cascade their 153s?) or for use with other operators.

 

[cjmillsnun]

This is the stand out option to me; so long as moving from a 158/159 fleet at 90mph max to a 222 fleet at 100mph (on these routes) would create extra paths then I think the capacity issue can be overcome by operating extra services in the newly created paths.

Other than that ATW could be a good option, but probably relies on the ROSCO offering a good deal.

The issue not mentioned thus far is that EMT will have little in the way of electrified diversionary routes under current plans, so may choose to retain a mixed fleet (as per the current East Coast) to maintain diversionary options. This could be coupled with their use on Liverpool-Norwich if some of the differential speed issues can be overcome. This would clearly free up a number of 158s either for use within EMT (to retire/cascade their 153s?) or for use with other operators.

I don't think you'll be creating additional paths by going to 100MPH (maybe 1 per day), and these units use far more fuel than 158/9s I doubt SWT will take them unless they are forced on them.

Knowing DAfT that's exactly what will happen then :/

 

[hulabaloo]

I guess Chiltern are committed to Mk3s for the foreseeable future?

 

[cjmillsnun]

I guess Chiltern are committed to Mk3s for the foreseeable future?

I didn't think of that one. It would fit Chiltern quite well and they could get rid of their LHCS.

 

[Class 170101]

Extra capacity is needed on Cross Country Routes.

I would suggest that the remaining 221s would leave XC to join their counterparts on West Coast to provide capacity and a complete fleet class there.

222s would form extra capacity as individual units for seven car trains or pairs of 4 and 5 cars attached replacing the 221s departing (as above)
It would also allow more of the existing 220s to run in pairs.

I would suggest HSTs will have a future post 2020 between Plymouth and Scotland on diagrams based at Edinburgh, Leeds, Plymouth and maybe Penzance, Bristol, Derby and Aberdeen.

A Third path per hour is definitely needed between Birmingham and York via Derby, Sheffield and Leeds. Probably extending to either Bristol or Reading to the south and Newcastle to the north. Extending the remaining Reading terminators to Southampton is likely to be an aspiration.

The other aspirations appear to be a service to at least Gatwick Airport via the North Downs, services to Heathrow via Western Access should this be built and finally a service using the East West Rail Link between Oxford and Milton Keynes and thence to Manchester.

Perhaps on these aspirations something like
1tph Southampton to Newcastle
1tph Bournemouth to Manchester
1tph Bristol to Manchester (perhaps extend to Plymouth)
1tp2h Gatwick to Manchester
1tp2h Heathow to Manchester
(Would be nice to see one of the previous three extend to Scotland via WCML he says dreaming )
1tph Plymouth to Scotland via ECML
1tph Bristol to York (Sunderland / Middlesbrough?)

As far electrification goes if Bristol to Derby is wired maybe or maybe not alongside Sheffield to Leeds / Doncaster / York there are likely to be changes to services to make use of wires constructed. Additionally I would not rule out use of 3rd Rail if it means services can use electric trains for the entire journey.

 

[IanXC]

A Third path per hour is definitely needed between Birmingham and York via Derby, Sheffield and Leeds. Probably extending to either Bristol or Reading to the south and Newcastle to the north. Extending the remaining Reading terminators to Southampton is likely to be an aspiration.

I can't pass up the opportunity to bang the drum for my idea here - CrossCountry seemingly are incredibly keen to have a second service per hour via Leeds across the whole day. I'd propose the Scotland and Newcastle serve Leeds, and the third service is to Hull via Doncaster. This wouldn't break any linakeges so long as the East Coast franchise holder operated an hourly service between Doncaster and York.

 

[RobShipway]

Perhaps on these aspirations something like
1tph Southampton to Newcastle
1tph Bournemouth to Manchester
1tph Bristol to Manchester (perhaps extend to Plymouth)
1tp2h Gatwick to Manchester
1tp2h Heathow to Manchester
(Would be nice to see one of the previous three extend to Scotland via WCML he says dreaming )
1tph Plymouth to Scotland via ECML
1tph Bristol to York (Sunderland / Middlesbrough?)

As far electrification goes if Bristol to Derby is wired maybe or maybe not alongside Sheffield to Leeds / Doncaster / York there are likely to be changes to services to make use of wires constructed. Additionally I would not rule out use of 3rd Rail if it means services can use electric trains for the entire journey.

I would suggest the following to replace those above:

1tp3h Weymouth to Edingburgh via Westbury/Cheltenham
1tph Bournemouth to Manchester
1tp3h Plymouth to Aberdeen
1tp4h Brighton to Glasgow
1tp4h Heathrow to Glasgow via Preston

 

[route:oxford]

Don't forget the planned XC path on the E-W route.

Say, for example:-

07:15 Bristol Temple Meads
07:26 Bath Spa
07:39 Chippenham
07:55 Swindon
08:10 Grove & Wantage Interchange
08:28 Oxford Central
08:33 Oxford Parkway
08:55 Bletchley
09:00 Milton Keynes Central
09:05 Wolverton
09:21 Northampton

Which would probably take 6 units to operate the diagram on an hourly frequency.

 

[edwin_m]

Don't forget the planned XC path on the E-W route.

Say, for example:-

07:15 Bristol Temple Meads
07:26 Bath Spa
07:39 Chippenham
07:55 Swindon
08:10 Grove & Wantage Interchange
08:28 Oxford Central
08:33 Oxford Parkway
08:55 Bletchley
09:00 Milton Keynes Central
09:05 Wolverton
09:21 Northampton

Which would probably take 6 units to operate the diagram on an hourly frequency.

This will be electric all the way, as would alternatives via the MML which would probably create more journey opportunities. So not a sensible use for 222s!

 

[The Ham]

Given the dramatic reduction in peak hour capacity if SWT's used pairs of 222's over 9 coach trains formed of 159's I don't think that would (even with DfT's record) be likely. It could be possible to form 222's as 10 coach sets and get close to the capacity of a 9 coach train formed by 159's although that would require quite a few of end coaches to be stored/scrapped.

ICWC are unlikely to take them due to the lack of tilt, although if either of the last two franchise bidders packages are anything to go by then their 221's may also be spare.

XC could be a possible option for 222's to go to, however if ICWC release a number of 221's (which would be preferable) there could be enough to provide many routes with more capacity. As for each new 221, which can be used to replace a 220 (increase from 200 seats to 250 seats), this 220 can then be paired up with another 220 which are then switched with a 221 so that the route which was run the existing 220 is then run with a 221 (250 seats rather than 200) whilst the route previously run with the 221 would then be run by the pair of 220's (400 seats rather than 250).

Therefore for each extra 221 released from ICWC, which are not used to run new services (which increase capacity in different ways), would see 3 services see capacity enhancements. However, given that individual trains can be used several times a day a relatively small number of trains can make a significant difference to XC.

For instance just 6 units would see 25% of the 221's running as a pair of 220's and 33% of 220's replaced with 221's. Based on the same principal by getting all the 222's (27 units) it would see a very large increase in capacity (even if the 7 coach sets are used to replace the HST's).

 

[Iskra]

TPE could use them on their more intercity diagrams; especially Manchester-Scotland (allowing 350's to go to shorter routes and subsequently 156's back to Northern) or Liverpool-Newcastle.

 

[43074]

I don't think there's really a ''logical'' place for them to go because they're a heavy, fuel hungry 125mph DMU which offer poor space economy and a relatively low seating capacity for what they are.

A cascade plan such as this might be a reasonable solution:
16 5 car 222s displace 16 3-car 175s from Manchester - South Wales, which in turn go to Northern for York/Leeds - Blackpool North/Manchester Victoria, which in turn displace a similar number of 158s to replace the 156s operating out of Heaton, which hence go onto replace 150s in Yorkshire, which in turn then replace Pacers on Kirby/Southport - Manchester Victoria or something like that. Having said that, by then the Pacers might have been replaced anyway.

CrossCountry is the other obvious one, but with electrification happening they will have enough resources to run everything they need to and probably replace the HSTs in the bargain. There's no logic using them on TPE especially since most of that will be electrified in a few years.

Alternatively and more radically, what about a Meridian/Voyager conversion similar to the 458/460 project? You have 30 intermediate vehicles on the 7-cars, insert 4 of these into the 222/1s, release 8 intermediate vehicles by shortening the remaining 7-cars to 5-cars (which can augment 220001 - 220008 to 5-cars and give a marginal increase in capacity on XC). That gives you a uniform fleet of 27 5-car trains to go elsewhere.

 

[edwin_m]

TPE could use them on their more intercity diagrams; especially Manchester-Scotland (allowing 350's to go to shorter routes and subsequently 156's back to Northern) or Liverpool-Newcastle.

Why would they want to do that, as one route is electrified now and the other will be only a couple of years after the 222s are released? An EMU, even a 125mph one, is likely to be much cheaper to lease and operate, and if an appropriate interior is specified also more comfortable.

 

[NotATrainspott]

TPE could use them on their more intercity diagrams; especially Manchester-Scotland (allowing 350's to go to shorter routes and subsequently 156's back to Northern) or Liverpool-Newcastle.

The 222s would be released around the same time as Manchester-York would be electrified, and as Manchester-Scotland is already electrified it makes no sense to put them there either. If new long-distance trains are needed for those routes, some form of EMU would be ordered.

 

[sprinterguy]

I would suggest that the remaining 221s would leave XC to join their counterparts on West Coast to provide capacity and a complete fleet class there.

Where do you envisage that West Coast would require 44 diesel units as opposed to their current fleet of 20 x 5-car trains? hock: Even if West Coast were to, hypothetically, take on the Manchester to Scotland route that is far more of a fleet increase than would be required.

A Third path per hour is definitely needed between Birmingham and York via Derby, Sheffield and Leeds. Probably extending to either Bristol or Reading to the south and Newcastle to the north.

I can't see why: The current twice hourly Intercity service over the Birmingham to Derby, Sheffield and York route seems to manage fine.

I personally could see the appeal of an additional Nottingham to Glasgow (via York) service, but perhaps as an extension of a future of an East-West rail service, rather than duplicating existing journeys.

 

[43074]

There might be a need for a small micro-fleet with the MML franchise, for services North of Corby & between London & Sheffield via the Erewash Valley & Nottingham I would imagine. The 4 4-cars would appear to fit if one unit worked Derby - Corby, the other pair worked a peak return service from Sheffield - London via Nottingham (laying over at Cricklewood during the day) and the other unit on maintenance.

 

[sprinterguy]

Another option that occurred to me was the fleet could be transferred to the new Wales and Borders franchise to operate Cardiff - Manchester/Holyhead service. The current services are operated by 27 Class 175's, made up of:-

• 11x 2 car with 134 standard class seats
• 16x 3 car with 206 standard class seats

The 222 fleet consist 27 sets in formations of:-

• 4x 4 car with 132 standard and 33 first class seats
• 17x 5 car with 192 standard and 50 first class seats
• 6x 7 car with 236 standard and 106 first class seats.

To create a more uniform fleet and increase standard capacity I would remove coach F from 4 of the 6 car sets, convert it to standard class and insert it into the four car set to become a new coach B (coach B then becoming coach C) to make a more uniform fleet of 21x 5 car and 4x 6 car sets and 2x 7 car sets. Similarly in the 5 car sets Coach D could become standard class only (with first class confined to leading coach G) which would increase standard class seating across the fleet.

(All information taken from Wikipedia so I hope it is accurate)

Personally, I think the idea of forming up 17 x 6-car and 10 x 4-car class 222s to replace the 175s on Welsh services quite appeals (presumably by swapping around the Coach B from 5 and 7-car sets as appropriate, and probably some reduction in first class seating as well - leaving one intermediate vehicle as a spare). Though, as has been said, it would be up to the Welsh franchise as to whether it could afford to do so. The timing of the next Welsh franchise doesn't correspond so badly to the proposed electrification schedule for the MML.

I suppose you could form the 6-car sets as DMF - MC - MS - MS - MRSB - DMS, and the 4-car sets as DMF - MS - MRSB - DMS.

I've looked across to the "hot spare" 220 stabled on the centre road at New Street a few times and thought how reasonable a regional train it would make up to the North Wales coast compared to the 2-car 158 that arrives for that traffic: Of course, the Cambrian line would have to retain 158s or other suitably fitted ERTMS units, and longer (6 carriage) trains would be welcome on the busier Welsh regional services.

 

[Haydn1971]

I can't see why: The current twice hourly Intercity service over the Birmingham to Derby, Sheffield and York route seems to manage fine.

In the day they are fine, in the high peak, they are packed to the brim, so either longer or more frequent would be good.

 

[sprinterguy]

In the day they are fine, in the high peak, they are packed to the brim, so either longer or more frequent would be good.

I think that longer would be the best way to go for the foreseeable future: The 7-car HSTs that head north from Birmingham generally have a decent amount of space even in the middle of the high peak.

 

[Haydn1971]

I think that longer would be the best way to go for the foreseeable future: The 7-car HSTs that head north from Birmingham generally have a decent amount of space even in the middle of the high peak.

Really ? Every XC train I've ever caught between Leeds-Sheffield-Birmingham has been rammed full of commuters - the early HST from Sheffield to Birmingham is nice, but still has standing room only past Derby.