Pacer and Sprinter replacement

[YorkshireBear]

Depends what is happening - if there are just cascades then the 158s could go elsewhere, but if we're beginning to replace 14xs then the 158s would be useful on quite a few routes - such as Carlisle - Newcastle, Newcastle - Middlesbrough etc (and that is just up here). In any case, 158s are already on some services where they probably shouldn't (Grand Tour being one of them).

yes and 3 car versions too it sickens me!

I think the 158s are alright at local services but i think they should be put on long distance local services, like the ones you suggested. Among many others around the country. For example they are wasted on sheffield doncaster not neccesarily due to distance between stations but because the route is short its much more at home with a 150. But leeds carlisle (already in use i know) leeds morcambe and... Maybe sheffield manchester.

Could they be regeared?

I think the 172s would be at home on local services so they havent only built interegional.

 

[WillPS]

A 158 would be wasted on Sheffield-Manchester stoppers (I'm assuming you mean that), the frequency of stops and low journey times (nobody does it end-end, and even if they did it'd only be 90 mins). A 150 is the most appropriate unit for this service.

 

[YorkshireBear]

A 158 would be wasted on Sheffield-Manchester stoppers (I'm assuming you mean that), the frequency of stops and low journey times (nobody does it end-end, and even if they did it'd only be 90 mins). A 150 is the most appropriate unit for this service.

It was maybe and now you said that definitely not. I cant think of any others right now although i am certain they exist. probably mostly in rural areas.

 

[sprinterguy]

(nobody does it end-end, and even if they did it'd only be 90 mins).

*Waves hand in the air*. I have, and so have a couple of other people I know. Purely because it was the next train heading that way at the time. So while there are perhaps few people who use the Hope Valley stoppers from end to end, it isn't "nobody".

 

[northwichcat]

I think the 158s are alright at local services

I think 158s are more suited to some local services than to express services.

If you look at Liverpool to Norwich almost every stop between Liverpool and Nottingham has a large number of people boarding and alighting. This hardly makes the narrow doors ideal. Although I do accept the lack of interior doors between the saloons and exterior doors on other units like the 185s isn't ideal either.

If you look at Chester-Altrincham-Manchester (which incidentally FNW did use 158s on alongside other units) you have the origin/destination station of Chester then a few lightly used stops, then Greenbank which gets OK patronage, Northwich which gets good patronage, a couple more lightly used stops, then Knutsford which gets good patronage, a couple more lightly used stops, Hale with OK patronage, Altrincham with good patronage, Navigation Rd with OK patronage then Stockport and Manchester Piccadilly. If you're going to put a train with narrow doors on a route in my opinion this is the type of service you put them on. There's quite a few stops where the width of door has no bearing and then not everyone stays on to the final destination so there isn't any attempt at a mass exodus with narrow doors.

 

[tbtc]

*Waves hand in the air*. I have, and so have a couple of other people I know. Purely because it was the next train heading that way at the time. So while there are perhaps few people who use the Hope Valley stoppers from end to end, it isn't "nobody".

I've done it a few times, when disruption to longer distance services (or narrowly missing one!) means its marginally quicker to board the Pacer than to wait half an hour at Sheffield Midland.

Far from ideal, of course...
--- old post above --- --- new post below ---

Somehow over the last 10-15 years we seem to have managed to order a lot of long distance or inter-regional DMU rolling stock that is not really appropriate for local services (175s, 180s and 170-172s for instance) without ordering any rolling stock that could be used on 14x or 150-156 services. TPE is in fact a good case in point, here we had brand new order of 185s to replace fairly young 158s that were perfectly suited to the TPE route rather than doing something about the rolling stock that Northern had/have. Instead of ordering new DMUs for local services we seem to have a thing for ordering new DMUs for long distance services (that don't always need replacing anyway).

Agreed - middle distance services have had some great improvements since privatisation (meaning, as you say, 158s replaced from routes like Edinburgh-Glasgow, TPE North...), whilst "local" ones are stuck with the same old tat.

4) Will the 2tph that opperate beyond York to Scarborough and Middlesborough still be opperated by 185's, or will passengers have to change for DMU services at York?

I think the plan was for Blackpool - York services to be extended to Scarborough, to maintain a direct Leeds service (albeit one which is a bit slower through Garforth etc)

 

[Lampshade]

185s could be a decent choice for replacing 158s that work on the York - Blackpool North route, where most stations are capable of handling 2x 2 car 158s. The 158s could then be used on routes currently served by 14xs and other 15xs.

They'd be restricted to 25mph over Copy Pit (Burnley - Hall Royd Jn), it's slow enough on a 158 hock:

Besides, I prefer a nice comfy seat on an ex-TPE carriage than an ironing board on a current one.

 

[northwichcat]

1) Will 350's be the new rollingstock used?

Unlikely. 350s are not the latest product anymore. They are only being ordered for Manchester Airport to Scotland because the order is too small so it needs to be combined with another order and LM don't want 380s.

Long term we can probably expect to see the Manchester Airport to Scotland 350s being cascaded to the LM area and a new order for the proposed Manchester Airport/Liverpool to Scotland portion working that may be introduced in the next Network Rail CP.

There is no guarantee Siemens will get any TPE EMU order.

2) Are the 185's that will be displaced suitable for operating local trains, rather than inter-regional services.

They are powerful 100mph trains designed for hill climbing. When they are displaced from North TPE they will probably be due a mid life refurbishment so refurbing with all standard class higher density seating will make them ideal for lines like Buxton-Manchester and Calder Vale while keeping a similar interior will make them more suitable for Blackpool to Scarborough.

3) What exactly are NR's proposed stopping patterns for the 6thp Leeds to Manchester service and where will these services start/terminate at?

Basically the current TPE services will all go in to Victoria. The Stalybridge and Dewsbury stops will be removed. The Newcastle and Middlesbrough services will continue to the Airport via the Ordsall Chord and Piccadilly station, while at least one of the other two will continue to Liverpool via Newton-le-Willows. The other may terminate at Victoria or it could also continue to Liverpool.

There will be two semi-fasts between Piccadilly and Leeds every hour. They will call at Stalybridge and Dewsbury plus two out of Mossley, Greenfield, Marsden and Slaithwaite.

The Victoria-Huddersfield service will no longer run.

4) Will the 2tph that opperate beyond York to Scarborough and Middlesborough still be opperated by 185's, or will passengers have to change for DMU services at York?

It's looking like Middlesbrough is part of their electrification proposal now. Maybe the long term view is with there being a lot of Pacers in the North East and no local services run by EMUs they are looking to change that.

 

[Xenophon PCDGS]

There will be two semi-fasts between Piccadilly and Leeds every hour. They will call at Stalybridge and Dewsbury plus two out of Mossley, Greenfield, Marsden and Slaithwaite. The Victoria-Huddersfield service will no longer run.

Does this effectively mean that there will be no all-stations service to Huddersfield from ANY Manchester station, when the Ordsall Chord project comes to fruition?

Has there also been any forward planning on the route from Ashton Moss North Junction - Denton Junction - Heaton Norris Junction for trains from Manchester Victoria to stations past Stockport?

 

[northwichcat]

Does this effectively mean that there will be no all-stations service to Huddersfield from ANY Manchester station, when the Ordsall Chord project comes to fruition?

Yes if the preferred plans are implemented.

Has there also been any forward planning on the route from Ashton Moss North Junction - Denton Junction - Heaton Norris Junction for trains from Manchester Victoria to stations past Stockport?

There are proposals for a Stockport-Victoria service calling at Reddish South, Denton, Guide Bridge and Ashton. There is another proposal for an additional Greenbank to Stockport service and the suggestion is that the two services would be merged to be a through service.

However, the Manchester Hub excludes any tram-train proposals as that is dependant on the success of the tram-train trial. If the tram-train trial is a success I can see Greenbank to Stockport becoming Greenbank to Manchester via Sale.

 

[Nym]

That being one of the few times you will ever see me support tram/train being the Mid Cheshire Line, (that or converting it to Heavy and re-opening Central)

 

[WillPS]

Going back to the topic title - I think 15x replacement is unlikely in the next 30 years. I expect they'll be refitted to accommodate a disabled toilet, and probably re-engined too towards the end of this decade.

Do 158 doors comply with DDA regs?

 

[DjU]

I expect they'll be refitted to accommodate a disabled toilet, and probably re-engined too towards the end of this decade.

There's already plans being looked into to re-engine 15x units.

 

[Nym]

Posted this in another thread, thought it might be relevant in here...

Personally (to save training, and time) I'd have the turbo fleet used to get rid of pacers on the GW route, move some stuff round, send some sprinters to ATW, use the turbos round Bristol etc.

Then the Northern Pacer fleet is going to need say,
the Valley Lines (all valley line stock sent to Northern, don't know how many that is)
TP North would also release a few NT units (and mean some NT routes could be handed over to TPE)
It would knock free all but 16 units from the TPE fleet, (Airport - Lakes, Airport - Cleethorpes). That would leave enough to cover some InterReigonal routes around the North...

35 units to play with...
Take your pick...
Liverpool - Norwich: 13 diagrams (so I've been told), 15 units. Cascade to NT to replace pacers.
Calder Valley Fasts: 7 diagrams, 10 units (but can be interworked with other diagrams, so proberbly closer to 8 units)
Blackpool North - Scarbrough: 10 diagrams, 12 units
Leeds - Carlisle?
Portion Working through the Hope Valley to make
Liverpool - CLC Semi Fast - Manchester - Stockport - Sheffeild -
-- Doncaster - Goole - Hull Paragon
-- Doncaster - Thorne - Cleethorpes

Basically, keep the 185s as a seperate fleet covering the 'expressey' jobs round the north, under a seperate brand name if it can be maintained, that covers 35 - 40 pacers

Then the direct replacement stock...

Leeds - Selby 2dia?
Leeds - Hudds 2dia?
Hudds - Vic 2dia?

If via Castleford is done too, knock that onto the list with another 3 or 4 diagrams

So lets say thats another 10 or so units, (pacers)

So, optimistically TPE N Electrification can cover 50 pacers

If the valley lines can cover another 31 (all their 150s)

Leaves about 20 or so to find...

Some more wires around Greater Manchester could cover that, or a load of smaller schemes...

Mid Cheshire Line Tram Train 4 units
East Manchester Lines ?10 units
Lostock - Wigan 4 units
Eaglescliffe - Darlo...
Donny - Goole - Hull

Then of course add in the HT Units freed up that could go, somwhere... (From TPE N Electrification)

Anyway, if the valley lines includes enough to get rid of 50 units (I think it proberbly might... don't know the valley lines)

TPE N Should manage 50 units directly and indirectly by other routes becoming 185 operated, or swapping 185s out with another TOC wholesale for 158s or 159s (I'm looking at YOU SWT!)

Thats Northern covered, all pacers potentially gone with two major schemes.

Then it's just the matter of the IEP Bi Mode to scrap with MML Electrification and we're all happy... and don't need any new diesel trains for a very long time, provided we keep up electrification with stock expiry rates...
__________________

 

[northwichcat]

Using 185s on Liverpool-Norwich and Manchester Airport to Cleethorpes, doubled up where required would keep the 185s together. However, if that was done I would recommend refurbishment to make the 185s more acceptable to spend a few hours on.

I really don't know where 4 units for the Mid-Cheshire line comes from. A minimum of 5 are required for off-peak services otherwise turnaround times are very tight. There's also a 6th unit used for strengthening the 15:07 Chester-Manchester. Also introducing a tram-train would likely compliment the existing rail service not replace it. If tram-trains replace the service they will certainly need toilets, luggage racks and bicycle space which would be difficult to implement all of an a light rail service.

There's a chance the peak time extras would go if a tram-train was introduced but that's only 2 units released. If those 2 units are released I can see MCRUA and Cheshire East and Cheshire West councils pushing hard for them to be used on a Crewe-Northwich shuttle.

 

[Rhydgaled]

Personally (to save training, and time) I'd have the turbo fleet used to get rid of pacers on the GW route, move some stuff round, send some sprinters to ATW, use the turbos round Bristol etc.

Good point, but would guage clearance be more or less time consuming/expensive than training? Anyway, if the 165s are staying with GW then I would agree that around Bristol is probably the best place for them, ie. the Severn Beach Line and Bristol to Taunton/Weston-Super-Mare services.

With TPE, I was wondering whether Hull Trains would buy some EMUs, lease some mark3s with a 90, 86 or 87, or continue running 180s under the wires. If they get rid of their 180s then I was wondering if they could take over a few of TPE's remaining non-electrified routes. Another thing I'm wondering, could you take 24 of the 51 185s, reclasify them into a different subclass, take a coach out of each and add the spare coaches to 24 other units. So far, this is what somebody else suggested but could you knock a hole in one cab of each of these 25 units that were reduced to 2-car and fit a gangway instead, creating 12 more 4-car units. That would result in 36 4-car and 2 3-car 185s in total I think.

the Valley Lines (all valley line stock sent to Northern, don't know how many that is)

I'm sure all ATW's Pacers could go if the Valleys, plus Cardiff-Swansea/Cheltenham, were all wired. The way I worked out the number of 150s Valleys electrification was to work out how many 150s might be needed elsewhere in Wales. I might be wrong but I made it:

Wrexham - Bidston - 3 units
Llandudno - Blaenau Ffestiniog - 1 unit, potentially up to 3 units with service improvments
New Llandudno - Holyhead stopper - 2 or 3 units
Pembroke Dock - Swansea - 3 units
Chester - Crewe - Shrewsbury - 2 units

Total: 14 units, meaning 30 Pacers and 15 to 17 150s could be released by ValleyLines wiring. However, if Swansea - Cardiff and Cardiff - Cheltenham remain diesel you'd need another 150 or two for Swanline, and some more for Cardiff - Cheltenham. 8 of the released 150s would take care of FGW's 8 143s. I suggest the remaining 7 150s and 4 155s (formed from ATW's 8 153s) be exchanged for 11 156s. I suppose Wales might not need all 11 of them (though HOWL, an hourly service to Milford Haven and a 2-hourly service to Fishguard (if we can't get 158s) could use them) so perhaps 2 of them could go to allow another four 153s to become two 155s.

Anyway, if the valley lines includes enough to get rid of 50 units (I think it proberbly might... don't know the valley lines)

About 40 Pacers replaced is the limit (30 directly, 8 from FGW and maybe a couple from Northern if you take a few more 150s off Wales) for Valleys electrification I reckon.

Then it's just the matter of the IEP Bi Mode to scrap with MML Electrification and we're all happy... and don't need any new diesel trains for a very long time, provided we keep up electrification with stock expiry rates...

Sounds good. Getting enough wires up by the end of Dec 2019 to scrap all Pacers and half the 153s (due to them needing to become 155s again) is not going to be easy though, compared to that getting rid of bi-mode IEP looks very, very easy.

You don't even need MML wiring to scrap bi-mode IEP, just need Crewe - Chester, Swansea - Cardiff, Swindon - Cheltenham, a shed load of extra Pendolinios, IEP electrics that can multi with a 67 to avoid run-round and a few TDM push-pull capable class 57s. Once we've got rid of Pacers and IEP bi-mode, then MML is next on the list.

 

[anthony263]

Good point, but would guage clearance be more or less time consuming/expensive than training? Anyway, if the 165s are staying with GW then I would agree that around Bristol is probably the best place for them, ie. the Severn Beach Line and Bristol to Taunton/Weston-Super-Mare services.

With TPE, I was wondering whether Hull Trains would buy some EMUs, lease some mark3s with a 90, 86 or 87, or continue running 180s under the wires. If they get rid of their 180s then I was wondering if they could take over a few of TPE's remaining non-electrified routes. Another thing I'm wondering, could you take 24 of the 51 185s, reclasify them into a different subclass, take a coach out of each and add the spare coaches to 24 other units. So far, this is what somebody else suggested but could you knock a hole in one cab of each of these 25 units that were reduced to 2-car and fit a gangway instead, creating 12 more 4-car units. That would result in 36 4-car and 2 3-car 185s in total I think.

I'm sure all ATW's Pacers could go if the Valleys, plus Cardiff-Swansea/Cheltenham, were all wired. The way I worked out the number of 150s Valleys electrification was to work out how many 150s might be needed elsewhere in Wales. I might be wrong but I made it:

Wrexham - Bidston - 3 units
Llandudno - Blaenau Ffestiniog - 1 unit, potentially up to 3 units with service improvments
New Llandudno - Holyhead stopper - 2 or 3 units
Pembroke Dock - Swansea - 3 units
Chester - Crewe - Shrewsbury - 2 units

Total: 14 units, meaning 30 Pacers and 15 to 17 150s could be released by ValleyLines wiring. However, if Swansea - Cardiff and Cardiff - Cheltenham remain diesel you'd need another 150 or two for Swanline, and some more for Cardiff - Cheltenham. 8 of the released 150s would take care of FGW's 8 143s. I suggest the remaining 7 150s and 4 155s (formed from ATW's 8 153s) be exchanged for 11 156s. I suppose Wales might not need all 11 of them (though HOWL, an hourly service to Milford Haven and a 2-hourly service to Fishguard (if we can't get 158s) could use them) so perhaps 2 of them could go to allow another four 153s to become two 155s.

About 40 Pacers replaced is the limit (30 directly, 8 from FGW and maybe a couple from Northern if you take a few more 150s off Wales) for Valleys electrification I reckon.

Sounds good. Getting enough wires up by the end of Dec 2019 to scrap all Pacers and half the 153s (due to them needing to become 155s again) is not going to be easy though, compared to that getting rid of bi-mode IEP looks very, very easy.

You don't even need MML wiring to scrap bi-mode IEP, just need Crewe - Chester, Swansea - Cardiff, Swindon - Cheltenham, a shed load of extra Pendolinios, IEP electrics that can multi with a 67 to avoid run-round and a few TDM push-pull capable class 57s. Once we've got rid of Pacers and IEP bi-mode, then MML is next on the list.

Or perhaps one of those new locmotives DRS are supposed to be interested in which look similar to a class 67

 

[Xenophon PCDGS]

There will be two semi-fasts between Piccadilly and Leeds every hour. They will call at Stalybridge and Dewsbury plus two out of Mossley, Greenfield, Marsden and Slaithwaite. The Victoria-Huddersfield service will no longer run.

Sorry to return to this point again, but the matter of Ashton under Lyne seems not to be mentioned in the above quote. The Ordsall Chord will see services passing through there en route to Stalybridge and there are existing services from stations west of Manchester that do call at this station. Will any TPE-type services call at Ashton under Lyne and will the new plans for stopping services see Ashton under Lyne see a different pattern of service calls. Have you any news as to which service routes will be stopping at Ashton under Lyne ?

The current East Manchester line of the currently progressing Manchester Metrolink system is supposed to terminate at Ashton under Lyne and one of the main interchange submission proposals was for a co-ordinated interchange for train, tram and bus service provision to be constructed near to the railway station, but whether this was just an agenda item at discussion stages, I cannot say with any certainty. Again, if anyone knows of news of such an interchange, I would be pleased to hear of any current proposals.

 

[northwichcat]

Sorry to return to this point again, but the matter of Ashton under Lyne seems not to be mentioned in the above quote. The Ordsall Chord will see services passing through there en route to Stalybridge and there are existing services from stations west of Manchester that do call at this station. Will any TPE-type services call at Ashton under Lyne and will the new plans for stopping services see Ashton under Lyne see a different pattern of service calls. Have you any news as to which service routes will be stopping at Ashton under Lyne ?

TPE services calling at Ashton is something that they have looked at but the preferred option (subject to electrification being extended to Stalybridge) is for 2tph between Liverpool and Stalybridge via Newton-le-Willows doing all stops.

 

[ainsworth74]

With TPE, I was wondering whether Hull Trains would buy some EMUs, lease some mark3s with a 90, 86 or 87, or continue running 180s under the wires.

I imagine if they were to procure new stock it would be an EMU. I doubt they will go for an existing electric locomotive for the simple reason that there services will be timed for 125mph and the acceleration of a MU something that none of those locomotives can manage. I could be wrong of course but I think HT would see it as a backwards step to go back to LHCS.

 

[Nym]

What would they order though? IEP? Pendos? only two things in or in line for production that can meet 125 at the moment...

 

[Rhydgaled]

I imagine if they were to procure new stock it would be an EMU. I doubt they will go for an existing electric locomotive for the simple reason that there services will be timed for 125mph and the acceleration of a MU something that none of those locomotives can manage. I could be wrong of course but I think HT would see it as a backwards step to go back to LHCS.

Well the main question was whether they would keep 180s under the wires or buy new stock, as any spare LHCS is 110mph limted (although I think it's been desided on debates on this fourm before that NXEA's 90s match the acceleration of most MUs). I just allowed for a third option which avoided the capital cost of new trains while permiting HT to make use of the electrification.

 

[tbtc]

Well the main question was whether they would keep 180s under the wires or buy new stock

Going wildly off topic, I know (in a thread that has gone all round the houses), but would sticking a pantograph coach into 180s and converting them into EMUs stop the reliability problems?

You'd have a fleet of fourteen 6-coach EMUs, capable of 125mph, which could be used elsewhere (e.g. instead of non-tilting 110mph 350s on the WCML), and some *decent* diesel stock could be ordered to replace them?

 

[ainsworth74]

but would sticking a pantograph coach into 180s and converting them into EMUs stop the reliability problems?

It would require a total rebuild as they are diesel hydraulic units. So you would need to strip out all the diesel engines and the existing transmissions and replace them with electric traction motors and the other bits and pieces. I think it would probably be quite an expensive and complex conversion.

 

[Buttsy]

It would require a total rebuild as they are diesel hydraulic units. So you would need to strip out all the diesel engines and the existing transmissions and replace them with electric traction motors and the other bits and pieces. I think it would probably be quite an expensive and complex conversion.

I'd guess a 22x with a pantograph car would be a better option...

 

[ainsworth74]

I'd guess a 22x with a pantograph car would be a better option...

Certainly easier to do than a 180 and it seems the plans are already at an advanced stage seeing as Bombardier keeping saying that they are more than capable of doing it should the DfT place the orders.

 

[HSTEd]

If a publically funded design team was to start now, from scratch, or using only designs for parts found in the public domain or that are easily available (Onix traction converters or whatever), how long would it take to design an Electrostar/Turbostar/Cl350 style design from scratch?

Just wondering if it would be possible to have a "Standard" design family that would could be contracted out to factories or built at a nationalised derby works, never happen but its nice to imagine.

 

[BR Blue]

The problem: Pacers need replacing

More carriages are needed for capacity and much of the current rolling stock is 25 years old or more. We have a factory in Derby that can build trains and has just produced the class 172 dmu. Whether you like bombardier or not, they have a product that works.

Pacers ain`t gonna get past 2019 with the PRM TSI rules coming in to force.

The solution: Order more class 172`s

I`m not so sure on the numbers needed, but I do know that you can`t replace 100 odd pacers(with Northern) with a share of 86 class 319`s.

 

[150001]

Thank you for common sense. Get more 172s or a 378 diesel version and then with a mass bombardier stock, parts would be in good supply and cheaper. Plus Bombardier will get more work and there'd be more jobs.

 

[HSTEd]

Thank you for common sense. Get more 172s or a 378 diesel version and then with a mass bombardier stock, parts would be in good supply and cheaper. Plus Bombardier will get more work and there'd be more jobs.

Unfortunately its not that simple, Bombardier nappear to be looking for an excuse to close the plant and move production on future British orders to europe.