My thoughts on the future of the class 222 fleet

[Bevan Price]

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 use diesels on electrified routes ? Liverpool - Newcastle should be fully electrified at about the same time as the MML. Surely even our DfT is not silly enough to spend money on TP electrification and then suggest not using electric trains.

And if Southampton - Reading - Birmingham does ever get electrified, we could see through electric trains to Manchester. Some Voyager stock may have a very limited future (in UK) after about 2020/2025.

 

[sprinterguy]

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.

The morning peak southbound could well be different as I have no personal experience there: I was thinking of the northbound evening peak departures I travel on, where they have seats available whether they hit Birmingham or Sheffield at peak time.

 

[tbtc]

(wait, nobody has suggested an Open Access service up the Settle & Carlisle? maybe reports of Bank Holiday drinking are exaggerated?)

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.

Agreed.

I can see why the 222s are an appealing problem to "Crayonistas" - they are potentially going to be freed up (by electrification), they could potentially be formed into various different lengths, on paper there are a lot of routes that these diesels could be used on.

Problem is that most of the suggestions you tend to get either involve scrapping lots of end carriages (people get upset about Virgin wasting a couple of cabs, but I've seen enthusiast suggestions that would waste significantly more 222 cabs!)...

...or a capacity reduction (given that a five coach 222 will probably have fewer seats than a four coach 158)...

...or trains that are far too long for intermediate platforms...

...or trains that are never going to get anywhere near 125mph (I think that longer distance Welsh services still see 75mph 150s from time to time, so presumably aren't seeing much running at 100mph?). Given the subsidies required for the Wales & Borders franchise, I really can't see them finding the money for "flagship" units like the 222s anyway.

I think we can forget the "eVoyager" / "Project Thor" ideas now - the units are already over ten years old (knocking on half way through their life before any "panto coach" is inserted - if it wasn't feasible to do it on 78(?) Voyagers a few years ago then I can't see the economics adding up for the sake of twentysomething 222s.

Five years ago I could have seen a future for 222s, but the options are narrowing - Scotland going for old HSTs, Cornwall getting new AT300s, Cardiff - Portsmouth getting high capacity five coach 165/166s mash ups, Transpennine getting electrified...

...so that the only three options I can see are:

1. Boring idea: Leave them where they are on the MML - it's not getting electrified any time soon, it's so far behind that it may even be an easy one for a new Government to cancel (compared to the "shovels on the ground" on other schemes).

2. Sensible idea: Give them to XC (for additional capacity and/or HST replacement). They aren't operational compatible with Voyagers, but then neither are HSTs/ Turbostars and XC seem to cope with three different classes. You could even try to restrict them to one corridor if you are that worried about units that can't work with each other, but I think that this is something that gets blown out of proportion as an argument against them.

3. Dafter idea: Give them to the next West Coast franchise as 110mph units for the remaining unelectrified services (Holyhead, Shrewbury, Wrexham?) to free up twenty (?) Voyagers for XC. Obvious drawbacks - West Coast won't need as many DMUs once they have more tilting EMUs to operate the remaining London - Birmingham - Scotland services, West Coast won't want non-tilting trains, West Coast will be able to run EMUs to Bolton/ Blackpool etc in a few years time...

I'm not saying that West Coast would be a great idea, but I really don't know what alternative there is (beyond the initial two suggestions above), and am partly suggesting it just to show how few other alternatives there really are.

A four coach 222 wouldn't be a capacity increase against a three coach 170 on routes like Birmingham - Stansted/ Nottingham - Cardiff, a five coach 222 wouldn't be a capacity increase against a four coach 158 on a route like Nottingham - Liverpool, a ten coach 222 wouldn't be a capacity increase against a nine coach 158/159 on Waterloo - Salisbury (plus the obvious drawbacks that these services see splitting at Nottingham and Salisbury).

We'll have a few space 170s from Scotland (plus a handful from the West Midlands) and 185s from Transpennine in the next five years... we'll be drowning in spare old HSTs (from East Coast, Great Western, East Midlands, Grand Central), the need for additional 125mph DMUs isn't a going to be a major problem.

I think that there's a good chance that there will still be 156s in daily service on the day that we start cutting up the first of the 222s - "bog standard go anywhere" units like 156s will always be in demand, but a small fleet of low capacity 125mph DMUs are harder to find a long term "home" for.

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?)

Agreed - the idea of replacing twenty seven oddball trains with twenty seven (longer faster) oddball trains makes sense on some levels, but it just pushes a problem further down the line.

The only possible way the numbers would "add up" would be if the twenty seven 175s moved to Greater Anglia to replace a similar number of DMUs there (since the GA 153/156/170s are "standard" at other TOCs, so could be easier absorbed into their fleets, unlike non-standard 175s), but that'd mean two coach 100mph DMUs on Sudbury - Marks Tey, so has a few drawbacks!

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.

Replacing the current hourly Sheffield - Hull service with a Cross Country one has a lot of merit. Sure, Sheffield would lose it's direct service to the coast (the extensions to Bridlington/ Scarborough, but it'd give Hull a direct service to the East Midlands/ West Midlands which seems to be lacking (for all that I read on another thread about how much Hull "wants"/ "deserves" a direct service to Manchester Airport, I think that a link to places like Birmingham would be a bigger deal).

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

Agreed

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'd disagree - Cross Country are struggling on Birmingham to Yorkshire, with no light at the end of the tunnel until HS2 is built - we really need some capacity increase (whether that's a third path per hour or just longer trains on existing services).

I know most people on here beat the drum about how "overcrowded" their local route is, and I try not to fall into that trap on Sheffield services, but I think I need to make an exception for the XC trips!

 

[IanXC]

Replacing the current hourly Sheffield - Hull service with a Cross Country one has a lot of merit. Sure, Sheffield would lose it's direct service to the coast (the extensions to Bridlington/ Scarborough, but it'd give Hull a direct service to the East Midlands/ West Midlands which seems to be lacking (for all that I read on another thread about how much Hull "wants"/ "deserves" a direct service to Manchester Airport, I think that a link to places like Birmingham would be a bigger deal).

I couldn't agree more that there are bigger fish to fry than Manchester Airport - principally I think this is a case of 'if we go after this, Manchester will help, and they always get their way'!

I agree that Birmingham is a bigger issue, however for me the lack of any direct service to anywhere north of York is even bigger. Given the likely correlation between the Offshore Wind and Offshore Oil industries I would have expected a direct service to at least Darlington and Newcastle to be top of the agenda.

(My concept for the XC to Hull is in addition to the current NT Sheffield-Bridlington/Scarborough - giving a half hourly express service - with the XC calling Sheffield, Doncaster, Goole or Selby, Brough and Hull only).

 

[RobShipway]

I couldn't agree more that there are bigger fish to fry than Manchester Airport - principally I think this is a case of 'if we go after this, Manchester will help, and they always get their way'!

I agree that Birmingham is a bigger issue, however for me the lack of any direct service to anywhere north of York is even bigger. Given the likely correlation between the Offshore Wind and Offshore Oil industries I would have expected a direct service to at least Darlington and Newcastle to be top of the agenda.

(My concept for the XC to Hull is in addition to the current NT Sheffield-Bridlington/Scarborough - giving a half hourly express service - with the XC calling Sheffield, Doncaster, Goole or Selby, Brough and Hull only).

I have to agree that the 222's should go to XC as per my previous post, however they should be used not only on existing XC routes, but to paths allowing create new routes that go say Brighton - Glasgow or Weymouth - Edingburgh to not only give the Birmingham area better services, but also to provide a better North - South service all round.

Yes, you will be having 125mph diesel trains running a pretty long way under wires, but you have that at the moment with the 221's doing services to Holyhead, Chester etc... from London Euston.

 

[Class 170101]

3. Dafter idea: Give them to the next West Coast franchise as 110mph units for the remaining unelectrified services (Holyhead, Shrewbury, Wrexham?) to free up twenty (?) Voyagers for XC. Obvious drawbacks - West Coast won't need as many DMUs once they have more tilting EMUs to operate the remaining London - Birmingham - Scotland services, West Coast won't want non-tilting trains, West Coast will be able to run EMUs to Bolton/ Blackpool etc in a few years time...

I'm not saying that West Coast would be a great idea, but I really don't know what alternative there is (beyond the initial two suggestions above), and am partly suggesting it just to show how few other alternatives there really are.

221s could go to West Coast from XC with 222s moving to XC so tilting issue goes away if I have understood the above correctly.

A four coach 222 wouldn't be a capacity increase against a three coach 170 on routes like Birmingham - Stansted/ Nottingham - Cardiff, a five coach 222 wouldn't be a capacity increase against a four coach 158 on a route like Nottingham - Liverpool, a ten coach 222 wouldn't be a capacity increase against a nine coach 158/159 on Waterloo - Salisbury (plus the obvious drawbacks that these services see splitting at Nottingham and Salisbury).

Almost certianly could work on Nottingham to Cardiff route as Voyagers have covered this route but I wouldn't suggest anything east of Leicester / Nottingham as 222s have been tested there - they lose time due to Sprinter Differentials being used by 158s / 170s not available to 222s. Some 15 minutes I heard.

Replacing the current hourly Sheffield - Hull service with a Cross Country one has a lot of merit. Sure, Sheffield would lose it's direct service to the coast (the extensions to Bridlington/ Scarborough, but it'd give Hull a direct service to the East Midlands/ West Midlands which seems to be lacking (for all that I read on another thread about how much Hull "wants"/ "deserves" a direct service to Manchester Airport, I think that a link to places like Birmingham would be a bigger deal).

I like this idea, you may be able to get to Beverley though as Hull Trains Class 222s go there now. As far as Hull to Manchester Airport I would expect that to have a stronger case as an electrified destination via the North Pennines particularly if Hull Trains wire Hull to ECML via Selby on the back of North TPE wiring.

 

[TheNewNo2]

Almost certianly could work on Nottingham to Cardiff route as Voyagers have covered this route but I wouldn't suggest anything east of Leicester / Nottingham as 222s have been tested there - they lose time due to Sprinter Differentials being used by 158s / 170s not available to 222s. Some 15 minutes I heard.

Do you mean they have longer gears than the 158s/170s, and so can't accelerate so quickly?


I do like the 222s, my suggestion out of those made would be either Chiltern, or CrossCountry after sending 221s to VWC.

It does seem somewhat ironic that after all the fuss about there being insufficient DMUs in the country, here we have a lot of DMUs and can't work out what to do with them.

 

[IanXC]

I like this idea, you may be able to get to Beverley though as Hull Trains Class 222s go there now. As far as Hull to Manchester Airport I would expect that to have a stronger case as an electrified destination via the North Pennines particularly if Hull Trains wire Hull to ECML via Selby on the back of North TPE wiring.

Hull Trains haven't had 222s since 2009

I suspect any extension to Beverley might have to be at the cost of an existing Northern service. Much as it would be a nice to have, I'm not sure Beverley would make a food enough case.

 

[RichmondCommu]

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.

I'm sorry for going off topic here but what time does the first HST from Sheffield to Birmingham depart? On a roundabout route from London to Kidderminster for the SVR Spring Gala the other week (having spent the night at my mum's) we caught a HST from Derby to New Street. Although a fair few people got on at Derby it certainly wasn't standing room only.

However I certainly think there is a case for strengthening four car units that operate Cross Country services. Is it not possible to run Meridians with Voyagers?

 

[D365]

Is it not possible to run Meridians with Voyagers?

We've discussed it before; no. Different TMS/coupler electrical specifications.

 

[RichmondCommu]

1. Boring idea: Leave them where they are on the MML - it's not getting electrified any time soon, it's so far behind that it may even be an easy one for a new Government to cancel (compared to the "shovels on the ground" on other schemes).

Just a quick question but what evidence do you have to suggest that the MML electrification project is "so far behind"?. Given all the work that has been done to raise the height of bridges between Bedford and Kettering not to mention all the surveys that have been carried out further north gives me the impression that work is proceeding according to the schedule.

Yes there have been cost over runs due to the need to upgrade the existing wires between Bedford and St Pancras to allow 125 mph running but in no way does that suggest that the project had been delayed.

 

[Haydn1971]

To be fair, delaying the MML electrification is a genius idea, that would allow resources to be moved onto more local electrification in particular around Manchester and Leeds that could be fast tracked for cascaded EMU's from London.
--- old post above --- --- new post below ---

I'm sorry for going off topic here but what time does the first HST from Sheffield to Birmingham depart? On a roundabout route from London to Kidderminster for the SVR Spring Gala the other week (having spent the night at my mum's) we caught a HST from Derby to New Street. Although a fair few people got on at Derby it certainly wasn't standing room only.

I suspect it's the 6am from Leeds - Hits Derby at 07:27 - to be fair this HST isn't so bad, the Voyagers are the real culprits of the squeeze - never had a HST home from Birmingham, must check out the times they run for next time.

 

[sprinterguy]

I suspect it's the 6am from Leeds - Hits Derby at 07:27 - to be fair this HST isn't so bad, the Voyagers are the real culprits of the squeeze - never had a HST home from Birmingham, must check out the times they run for next time.

Yes you are indeed correct, the earliest Crosscountry HST is the 06:00 Leeds to Plymouth.

Northbound from Birmingham, it varies by day of the week, but there are Crosscountry HSTs departing New Street at 16:03 (all days), 17:03 (Monday, Tuesday and Thursday), 19:03 (all days) and 21:03 (Monday, Wednesday and Friday) .

 

[43074]

With regards to London - Exeter via Salisbury, I would suggest that by the end of CP6 - certainly CP7 - we will almost certainly have electrification between London & Salisbury, if nothing else as a GWML diversionary route. Therefore you will have a regional route perhaps with demand for a few peak hour Exeter - Waterloo services but aside from that Salisbury - Exeter services connecting with London electrics at Salisbury would seem the likely option. Therefore the route will probably not be able to sustain a fleet of 222s financially, and lets be honest, it is all about making a profit in the privatised railway. That would be very hard to achieve with a train with similar qualities to the 222s.

Nottingham - Cardiff seems a good fit, but equally a 3-car 170 has the same number of seats than a 222, and costs half as much to operate.

The First & Virgin WCML bids in 2012 included ''baby Pendolinos'' or a similar fleet of short tilting electrics in First's case which would be hauled along the North Wales Coast - the only real ''off-wire'' route. In addition, there has been talk of Virgin replacing their Voyagers altogether, so I'm not convinced there's a future for them on the West Coast either.

I think that there's a good chance that there will still be 156s in daily service on the day that we start cutting up the first of the 222s - "bog standard go anywhere" units like 156s will always be in demand, but a small fleet of low capacity 125mph DMUs are harder to find a long term "home" for.

Agreed.

I think with the 222s it's a trade off: do we really have anywhere for them to go where they can use their full capability and still be economical to run, or do we let them run below their capabilities of 125mph with high acceleration and poor space economy costing an arm and a leg for a TOC to run? For the MML, they are ideal for the frequent station stops and sprints between, but it is a high earning InterCity route. XC are loss-making, would the 222s exacerbate that issue by having an additional fleet on their books for drivers/crew to learn and the need for spares?

Alternatively, will we be scrapping 16 year old trains in 2020 simply because they have nowhere that needs them and no-one who wants to run them?

To be fair, delaying the MML electrification is a genius idea, that would allow resources to be moved onto more local electrification in particular around Manchester and Leeds that could be fast tracked for cascaded EMU's from London.

By my reckoning, a 222 could get from Nottingham to London in 1 hr 25 minutes with a stop at Leicester only; Nottingham is where the big savings are because there isn't as much scope to cut journey times of services to Sheffield. Therefore there is no reason to assume the MML must wait until electrification to realise this sort of potential, and with improvements to make at Market Harborough, Leicester & Derby journey times can only come down further.

If resources are stretched (I've seen nothing to suggest this - work is certainly ongoing South of Kettering raising bridges etc) delaying electrification could make sense as I've suggested above improvements are possible in the short/medium term. But delaying electrification schemes becomes political which wouldn't go down well.

 

[sprinterguy]

I'd disagree - Cross Country are struggling on Birmingham to Yorkshire, with no light at the end of the tunnel until HS2 is built - we really need some capacity increase (whether that's a third path per hour or just longer trains on existing services).

I know most people on here beat the drum about how "overcrowded" their local route is, and I try not to fall into that trap on Sheffield services, but I think I need to make an exception for the XC trips!

As I've mentioned above, with longer trains I certainly agree, but I don't think that the demand over this corridor warrants squeezing an extra hourly train path through New Street.

I remain of the opinion that Crosscountry would cope adequately with passenger loadings 95% of the time if all the trains were a mix of 5 and 7 cars, rather than (mainly) 4s and 5s. Though I also wouldn't be surprised if such an increase in capacity led to further increases in demand.

 

[47802]

Frankly who gives a monkey's at this stage its 6 years away assuming Electrification is completed on time, and the new Government which is about to be elected wont even be running the country by then

 

[northwichcat]

TPE might be interested for South TP, but still not a good fit.

Not sure how on schedule MML electrification will be. Wikipedia says Corby-London will be electric by 2017 with the whole mainline by 2020.

Given Manchester-York electrification is expected 'no earlier than December 2020' with Roger Ford suggesting it'll be December 2021, maybe the 222s could provide a pre-electrification capacity boost to TPE?

 

[jopsuk]

wibbling crayonista bit:

143 carriages, divided by 11, gives 13 sets. 11 carriages would fit on the GEML (which currently uses mainly loco+9+DVT). Rebuild some of the driving cars as intermediate cars- some of them with pantographs and transformers (two per train) and remove the diesel engines, repurposing them as 125mph EMUs



Ahem. Sometimes I have bad thoughts.

 

[D365]

wibbling crayonista bit:

Oh no, we don't need none of your 442-fuelled crazies round here

 

[61653 HTAFC]

A fair bit has been said about how Meridians can't work with Voyagers due to software and coupler differences, but given that the only reason the Voyagers had the Alstom software was to rescue or be rescued by Pendolinos is there any reason why this couldn't be changed? The Scottish 170s are having couplers changed after all when they go South...

If any solution to the apparent 222 problem involves the Cross-country 221s going to ICWC, how easy will it be to reactivate their tilt capability? Shedding the constraints of reality for a moment, the Meridians do have a tilt profile, so theoretically could be fitted with tilt equipment...

 

[JamesRowden]

I thought I'd add my related recent post from another thread:

The proposed Basingstoke to Manchester via East West Rail service which the Western Route Study draft anticipates in 2019 has the following stock options as I see it:

1. New or cascaded 110mph EMUs
2. New tilting 125mph EMUs
3. New tilting 125mph EDMUs
4. New non-tiliting 125mph EMUs (e.g. Class 801)
5. New non-tilting 125mph EDMUs (e.g. Class 800s)
6. Cascaded electric intercity stock (e.g. Class 90/91s)
7. Use 221s with tilt enabled
8. Use 220/221/222s with no tilt

(Cross Country would require new/cascaded diesel stock for options 7 or 8)

Once HS2 opens (2025), some pendolinos may become available. If class 800s were chosen, they could subsequently be cascaded to other Cross Country routes in 2025. Class 800s would not be able to run at 125mph along the WCML unlike options 2, 3 and 7.

I guess that this decision will need to be made for the franchise extension(s) from April 2016 to November 2019.

It was discussed in the other thread that Intercity West Coast or London Midland could run this service instead of Cross Country.

 

[Class 170101]

Hull Trains haven't had 222s since 2009

I suspect any extension to Beverley might have to be at the cost of an existing Northern service. Much as it would be a nice to have, I'm not sure Beverley would make a food enough case.

--- old post above --- --- new post below ---

Do you mean they have longer gears than the 158s/170s, and so can't accelerate so quickly?

The Class 222s are not classed as Sprinters as where as 158s and 170s are. Therefore they have to stick to lower non-sprinter speed limits. These speed limits are quite a bit lower than the Sprinter speed limits, between Ely and Brandon for example Sprinters can do upto 75mph other trains its upto 40mph.

 

[Haydn1971]

Northbound from Birmingham, it varies by day of the week, but there are Crosscountry HSTs departing New Street at 16:03 (all days), 17:03 (Monday, Tuesday and Thursday), 19:03 (all days) and 21:03 (Monday, Wednesday and Friday) .

Cheers, I must just miss them every time, but then thankfully, I'm not a Birmingham regular.

 

[RobShipway]

I thought I'd add my related recent post from another thread:



It was discussed in the other thread that Intercity West Coast or London Midland could run this service instead of Cross Country.

Would it not be better for the Service to Manchester to start either I Bournemouth, Southampton or Salisbury rather than Basingstoke?

 

[RichmondCommu]

To be fair, delaying the MML electrification is a genius idea, that would allow resources to be moved onto more local electrification in particular around Manchester and Leeds that could be fast tracked for cascaded EMU's from London.

In all honesty not even the DfT would be silly enough to shelve a electrification project once work had got under way. Given the progress that has been made with bridge clearance I can't imagine that it will be very long until work begins to install the support structures.

 

[bunnahabhain]

222s are likely to stay in the East Midlands and operate the Liverpool to Norwich service should it stay with the EMT franchise. The aspiration is for the service to become a more "Intercity" style operation with six car sets operating throughout and full catering/first offering available. You'd need a minimum fleet size of 12 x 6 car sets for that, which could be done by reforming the current 7 car sets into 6 cars each. To add maintenance spares in you could probably reform some of the five car sets to create an additional 2 x 6 car sets, giving you 14 x 6, 15 x 5 and 6 x 4 cars. Depending on what happens in the future you'd potentially see the 5 car sets going onto an additional 3rd service over the Hope Valley, and the current ManAir-Cleethorpes; the four car sets would fit in on the Nottingham to Leeds service if transferred in from the Northern franchise to give a standard level of service on the regional express routes through the East Midlands.

 

[The Ham]

222s are likely to stay in the East Midlands and operate the Liverpool to Norwich service should it stay with the EMT franchise. The aspiration is for the service to become a more "Intercity" style operation with six car sets operating throughout and full catering/first offering available. You'd need a minimum fleet size of 12 x 6 car sets for that, which could be done by reforming the current 7 car sets into 6 cars each. To add maintenance spares in you could probably reform some of the five car sets to create an additional 2 x 6 car sets, giving you 14 x 6, 15 x 5 and 6 x 4 cars. Depending on what happens in the future you'd potentially see the 5 car sets going onto an additional 3rd service over the Hope Valley, and the current ManAir-Cleethorpes; the four car sets would fit in on the Nottingham to Leeds service if transferred in from the Northern franchise to give a standard level of service on the regional express routes through the East Midlands.

That's probably the least square peg to fit in a round hole use for the 222's.
--- old post above --- --- new post below ---

Would it not be better for the Service to Manchester to start either I Bournemouth, Southampton or Salisbury rather than Basingstoke?

It would depend on available paths and to a lesser extent where was electrified. However, by terminating at Basingstoke the service can use the lesser used platform 4 which saves it having to cross the other tracks.

One other point about XC is that about the same time as the 222's become free (hopefully) the electric spine works will enable the use of dual voltage EMU's to run the existing Manchester to South Coast XC services, freeing up about 10 Voyagers to strengthen existing services. Even at the very least that would allow 9 services run by 221's to be run with pairs of 220's and 9 services run by 220's to be run by 221's. However, if it frees up 221's it would benefit 30 services.

Then with some fairly small sections of electrification further XC routes could also pass over to being run by EMU's. Which would effectively mean that the 222's could be looking for a new home mid 2020's (or only a few years after moving to XC).

 

[SpacePhoenix]

Would there be anything to stop XC from ordering class 800s to use on the Manchester-Bournemouth route (and if paths are available maybe extend to Poole all year round and possibly every 2 hours to Weymouth in the summer) - as the route currently stands

 

[cjmillsnun]

222s are likely to stay in the East Midlands and operate the Liverpool to Norwich service should it stay with the EMT franchise. The aspiration is for the service to become a more "Intercity" style operation with six car sets operating throughout and full catering/first offering available. You'd need a minimum fleet size of 12 x 6 car sets for that, which could be done by reforming the current 7 car sets into 6 cars each. To add maintenance spares in you could probably reform some of the five car sets to create an additional 2 x 6 car sets, giving you 14 x 6, 15 x 5 and 6 x 4 cars. Depending on what happens in the future you'd potentially see the 5 car sets going onto an additional 3rd service over the Hope Valley, and the current ManAir-Cleethorpes; the four car sets would fit in on the Nottingham to Leeds service if transferred in from the Northern franchise to give a standard level of service on the regional express routes through the East Midlands.

I'm sure passengers will love their slower service. Parts of the Liverpool - Norwich route have large sprinter differentials in speed. Unless a lot of money was spent there would be parts that would be limited to 40MPH on a 222 that currently operate at 75MPH with sprinters.

 

[northwichcat]

I'm sure passengers will love their slower service. Parts of the Liverpool - Norwich route have large sprinter differentials in speed. Unless a lot of money was spent there would be parts that would be limited to 40MPH on a 222 that currently operate at 75MPH with sprinters.

I'm sure the DfT thinking was that 185s would be released from North TPE could be used to run Liverpool-Nottingham in 6 car formation under TPE, leaving 4 car 158s to run Nottingham-Norwich under EMT. However, people objected to the route being split up and North TPE electrification got delayed so DfT have at least put those plans on hold.