Well they won't all be going to Chiltern, I think that is nailed on considering 165s and 168s won't be leaving. So it'll either be two micro fleets or they all go to a different operator (probably Northern).
Exactly, pretty much the only fault with the 175 design was no gangways and a different coupler to everything else they ended up working with. The magic of the new post privatisation railway with no standards. Elsewhere, couplers were changed to get around that. That 175s were incompatible with sprinters was madness.
Currently Chiltern 168s are a mixture of 2 3 and four car sets as you can imagine this is difficult to diagram. They want to move to three car sets but that would leave one spare centre car.
That would seem sensible albeit Southern's fun and frolics with the former Scots 170s suggests possibly non-trivial. I'm sure that a 170 operator (e.g. Cross Country) would happily grab a spare centre car.
Chiltern were hoping to gain some sets rather than lose the centre car but if they were compensated with extra 175s.
That would represent a significant capacity cut.
Four loco-hauled sets not used particularly intensively.
Six would be waste of time and would attract all the disadvantages associated with small micro fleet. I would suggest all the 175s go to Chiltern. The 3-cars in six car sets on the Long distance Birmingham\Oxford- Marylebone and the 2-cars for East West Rail services. You could base them at Bletchley. Any resulting overcapacity can be dealt with by 165s going to GWR in the South-west.
Usually a couple units a couple with some services being 7 cars long... well they were meant to be but were often shortened due to Chiltern not having enough units.
Well, based on that and that alone, probably EMR for Nottingham-Liverpool seeing as we get the rubbish that other TOCs are done with
They absolutely fly between Wilmslow and Crewe. In my experience they will get to 100 mph faster than a 158 will reach 90.
Well, based on that and that alone, probably EMR for Nottingham-Liverpool seeing as we get the rubbish that other TOCs are done with
Comment made in jest in light of cascades of the CT 15x, ex-LNER HSTs, 360s, 156/9s, etc. It’s as if EMR are used to cascaded stuff in poor condition; so the comment was more EMR-related with the Notts-Liverpool as an example of an EMR service as opposed to being aimed at the route specifically
I quite agree that the Mk3 isn't all it's hyped to be, although I can't remember any stinking of p*ss. Some stink of damp though!
Someone's going to have to pay for crew training wherever they go, even if it's the North West. Too long a period of time has passed since the entire fleet was allocated to the Wales and Borders franchise.
You're not making any sense. There's a clear indication in the Chiltern business plan document about 175s going to Chiltern. As for getting rid of 165s or 168s, all it says is "the Operator shall introduce a HyDrive fleet fitment programme in respect of all the Class 165 units comprised in the Train Fleet": there is no indication of what the size of each fleet will be. You cannot assume the fleets are as now; the DfT has the right under the current contracts to move stock around as it sees fit by directing operators to do so.
I’d argue GWR could utilise them well, to add to the recurring Cardiff-Penzance suggestion. The fleet replace the 2+4 HSTs on all the routes they operate, as well as the interregional services of Cardiff-Portsmouth, Great Malvern-Southampton, and Worcester to Westbury. The inadequate 165/166s could then be cascaded to the South West to replace the ageing 150s. This would mean that two elderly and unpopular (be it with the public or ASLEF) fleets are withdrawn, whilst upgrading or maintaining passenger comfort, all without requiring new trains.
I don’t think depot fitters/crew training is really much of a factor- they’re quite unusual trains so it’s more or less a level playing field- and their North West operation was so long ago it might as well be forgotten. That said, areas that have had 180s might have an edge (I suppose including the North West slightly), and GWR seems like the only likely candidate in this regard (though they were stabled at Worcester weren’t they?).
On the contrary, wouldn't almost all trains on the main line have such couplers if the 175s came over?
They cannot, 158s are useful for tagging 150s to when moving them on and off branches or dropping down a spare and towing back a failed unit.