Deployment of 331s: What services are likely?

[Halish Railway]

Except that they very carefully built Apperley Bridge and Kirkstall Forge (and access thereto) all over said trackbed.

Actually, on a related note, I might be wrong but aren't there single track sections also on the Leeds - Ilkley and Ilkley - Bradford sections? Means that the new trains are the only way to boost capacity, although it seems that they may just be on the Airedale run. Are their plans to cascade the 333s outside the triangle (say, Doncaster?) do we know? Or are they going to be staying to boost seat numbers on the other bits of the Aire-Wharfe lines?

Indeed, are the new 331s going anywhere east of the Pennines aside from the Skipton-Leeds run (and potential associated related workings on the Triangle?)

It was said that the Leeds to Ilkley runs would be 331's but it is not required in the franchise. Platform extensions to the stations should be quite easy as there is plenty of room to expand. To cascade enough 333's there needs to be two 331 routes east of the Pennines.

 

[DanNCL]

Would I be right in thinking that the 331s based at Neville Hill will replace the 321s/322s on Doncaster services, and supplement the 333s on services to Skipton and Ilkely, but not Bradford FS?

 

[61653 HTAFC]

Would I be right in thinking that the 331s based at Neville Hill will replace the 321s/322s on Doncaster services, and supplement the 333s on services to Skipton and Ilkely, but not Bradford FS?

Not quite. 321/322s will be replaced by 333s, with the Yorkshire 331s replacing those 333s and supplementing the remainders on Airedale and Whafedale services. 331s might find themselves on Donny services occasionally, though possibly only as singles. The main focus for the 331s is to work in pairs on Leeds to Skipton and Leeds to Ilkley (the latter possibly peak only), but I don't think they'll be barred from any other services on the "triangle" if needs must.

 

[lejog]

It was said that the Leeds to Ilkley runs would be 331's but it is not required in the franchise. Platform extensions to the stations should be quite easy as there is plenty of room to expand. To cascade enough 333's there needs to be two 331 routes east of the Pennines.

It is true that the franchise agreement does not specify which rolling stock runs on which lines (except that Northern Connect services must be 158s/195s/331s) but the contract does specify those lines which are to see train/platform lengthening (see franchise agreement p278) and this does not include the Leeds-Ilkley line. Here are the lines from Leeds that are seeing extensions,.

Apart from Ilkley, the NE Sectional Appendix shows the length of platforms on the line to be too short for 6*23m trains - most are around 100m. So if Ilkley sees 331s they won't be 6car, unless Northern's plans have changed since agreeing the contract.

 

[Roast Veg]

Is SDO not an option? I suppose 100m is very small...

 

[lejog]

Perhaps I should have been a little clearer in my post, but it is called the train lengthening programme in the agreement and it is longer trains that Northern have to deliver. And there is no mention of train lengthening for Ilkley.

Yes SDO can be used instead of/along with platform extensions if it provides a value for money solution for the DfT. But since 195s/331s lack corridor connections between the units, I doubt that even they would see having only 1 car out of 3 with doors open at most stations being satisfactory.

 

[Bantamzen]

Perhaps I should have been a little clearer in my post, but it is called the train lengthening programme in the agreement and it is longer trains that Northern have to deliver. And there is no mention of train lengthening for Ilkley.

Yes SDO can be used instead of/along with platform extensions if it provides a value for money solution for the DfT. But since 195s/331s lack corridor connections between the units, I doubt that even they would see having only 1 car out of 3 with doors open at most stations being satisfactory.

So perhaps this indicates that 333s will continue to operate at least peak services on Leeds-Ilkley, there's no way some of those could be shortened to 1x3 331s without some serious overcrowding. Its all looking very complicated all of a sudden.....

 

[Halish Railway]

So perhaps this indicates that 333s will continue to operate at least peak services on Leeds-Ilkley, there's no way some of those could be shortened to 1x3 331s without some serious overcrowding. Its all looking very complicated all of a sudden.....

And there has been a rise in demand for off peak service's as well at Ilkley and Guiseley to Leeds. I see people standing at Guiseley on those trains.

 

[lejog]

So it looks as if passengers will have more room to stand from Guiseley on refurbished 333s. I'm afraid TOC decisions on services aren't made on anecdotal evidence but on passenger numbers and revenue. AIUI there has been little below average growth in passenger numbers on the Ilkley line in recent years, with only Menston and Guiseley showing growth (and this is supported by the passenger figures since 2011 for Ilkley on wiki, which are static).

Note: Edits underlined.

 

[xotGD]

Sounds like we'll see 2×331 on Leeds - Skipton and 333 on everything else.

 

[61653 HTAFC]

So perhaps this indicates that 333s will continue to operate at least peak services on Leeds-Ilkley, there's no way some of those could be shortened to 1x3 331s without some serious overcrowding. Its all looking very complicated all of a sudden.....

That was always the plan anyway- the 331s replace the dusties and supplement the 333s. Single 331s will perhaps be used on OFF-peak services from Bradford to Ilkley and Skipton, and on Sundays. Otherwise I'd expect you'll only see them run solo in the peaks if it's that or cancel.

 

[D365]

That was always the plan anyway- the 331s replace the dusties and supplement the 333s. Single 331s will perhaps be used on OFF-peak services from Bradford to Ilkley and Skipton, and on Sundays. Otherwise I'd expect you'll only see them run solo in the peaks if it's that or cancel.

Eh? It was planned, originally at least, to use the 333s as replacements on the Doncaster run.

 

[Bevan Price]

At one time, I think that each unit used to visit Bradford, Ilkley & Skipton throughout the day. Does this still happen ?
And will they need to change the timetables if 331s & 333s have to be segregated ?

 

[61653 HTAFC]

Eh? It was planned, originally at least, to use the 333s as replacements on the Doncaster run.

It was and is, but that doesn't need all 16 of them.

 

[61653 HTAFC]

At one time, I think that each unit used to visit Bradford, Ilkley & Skipton throughout the day. Does this still happen ?
And will they need to change the timetables if 331s & 333s have to be segregated ?

Pre-electrification, the Shipley triangle units went Leeds-Ilkley-Bradford-Skipton-Leeds or variations thereof. Post wiring, the Leeds to Bradford FS services came in and the diagrams were altered- I don't know the full ins and outs but now an arrival at Ilkley for example will return to wherever it came from (Bradford or Leeds). With the 6-car services to Skipton coming in the diagrams will need to be changed around, but as I said before that won't cause the sky to fall in.
I'm not sure what you mean by segregation though. They won't be able to work in multiple but nor can the 321/322s and 333s today. The only multiple-working required will be the pairs of 331s.

 

[D365]

It was and is, but that doesn't need all 16 of them.

It seemed like you were implying that that plan had changed. I was aware that about half of the 331s will remain on WY anyway.

 

[Bantamzen]

So it looks as if passengers will have more room to stand from Guiseley on refurbished 333s. I'm afraid TOC decisions on services aren't made on anecdotal evidence but on passenger numbers and revenue. AIUI there has been little growth in passenger numbers on the Ilkley line in recent years, with only Menston and Guiseley showing growth (and this is supported by the passenger figures since 2011 for Ilkley on wiki).

Notwithstanding the fact that the figures in WY are difficult to make accurate because of the Metrocards & now MCards which see considerable use, those are some very selective figures. Go further down the line and you will see a very different story for the same period (2011/12 - 2015/16):

• Ilkley: 1.374M > 1.304M
• Ben Ryhdding: 0.182M > 0.221M
• Burley-In-Wharfedale: 0.445M > 0.48M
• Menston: 0.505M > 0.636M
• Guiseley: 0.962M > 1.259M

And whilst Ilkley has gone down, you will note from your link that this downturn happened in the year 2012/13 (down to 1.212M) only with all subsequent years once again increasing. So there is serious growth on this line, reflected not on in anecdotal evidence but in the fact that Northern added two extra Leeds peaks which themselves rapidly filled up. And with ever increasing pressure on planners to allow more new home builds in the Wharfe valley and along the rest of the route (including some confirmed for Kirkstall Forge), the demand on this line is only going to grow more.

 

[lejog]

I was quoting a Northern briefing presentation, which I obviously can't provide a link to, but your figures bear out what was said as growth has been at Menston and Guiseley. If my post was selective it was because you have taken it out of context, I was replying to a post claiming growth at both Ilkley and Guiseley.

Thanks for the complete figures, which show a 12.5% growth in passenger figures over 5years on the line, which compares to the national average of 17.5% over the same period. (Source ORR and my arithmetic). I am happy to change my original post to accurately reflect this below average growth.

But your figures possibly justify Northern's decision making. Given a line growing at 12.5% over the past 5 years, would a real world business invest in 50% longer trains and platforms to cover the next 8 years or go for the cheaper solution of increasing peak capacity by 20% by removing seats, given that the passengers standing will most likely have a journey time of 15mins?

 

[Halish Railway]

There aren't enough 333's to do all the West Yorkshire electric routes apart from the Leeds to Skipton runs so what other route would be 331 operated?

 

[Halish Railway]

Also passenger numbers are growing on most routes but at some point the growth would even out.

 

[61653 HTAFC]

There aren't enough 333's to do all the West Yorkshire electric routes apart from the Leeds to Skipton runs so what other route would be 331 operated?

I had assumed there were enough 333s, though this was based on the 2002-ish proposal to order 4 more 333s which at the time were considered adequate to replace the then 3 Dusty bins and the one remaining diesel diagram on Airedale. Since then, there are more units in use in the peaks so with hindsight it's a good thing the extra 4 weren't ordered after all. There is at least no longer a diesel diagram that stays under wires all day thanks to the 322s coming in.
If there is a further requirement for 331s besides the Leeds to Skiptons, it may well be whichever is most operationally convenient rather than whichever needs extra capacity. Skipton to Bradford doesn't need 6-cars, but these could* interwork with Leeds and would require fewer extra platforms to be extended.

An alternative would be for Leeds-Bradfords and/or Ilkley-Bradfords to be operated with single 331s, at least between the peaks.

*=before anyone chimes in with the current way everything interworks on there, we've already established that the current diagrams probably won't continue.

 

[Andyh82]

If the intention is to run the 331s doubled up, why are they ordering 3 car trains and not half as many 6 car trains?

Surely a 6 car train is much cheaper than 2 3 car trains to build as you don't need twice as many cabs, and duplicated equipment?

The possibility of running them in singles evenings doesn't seem a good enough reason, as they could just as easily use 333s at that time.

 

[scrapy]

I'm not entirely certain, but I think they will be deployed as follows:

3 car:
Leeds-Bradford/Ilkley/Skipton.
Manchester Piccadilly-Stoke-on-Trent.

4 car:
Manchester Piccadilly-Alderley Edge.
Manchester Piccadilly-Blackpool North.
Manchester Piccadilly-Crewe.
Manchester Piccadilly-Glossop/Hadfield.
Manchester Piccadilly-Macclesfield.
Manchester Piccadilly-Manchester Airport.

There will not be a Manchester Piccadilly to Manchester Airport. There will be a Liverpool to Crewe via Manchester Airport which will be 319 operated. Piccadilly to Crewe via Stockport will also be 319s as interworked.

As said Alderley Edge to Wigan NW/Southport will be 769 (and possibly 2*150 on some trips)operated. These may become 319s if/when Bolton to Wigan is electrified.

Manchester to Hadfield will all be 4 car. Blackpool to Macclesfield likely to be a mix of 3,4 and 6 cars and Manchester to Stoke 3 car.

 

[30907]

If the intention is to run the 331s doubled up, why are they ordering 3 car trains and not half as many 6 car trains?

Surely a 6 car train is much cheaper than 2 3 car trains to build as you don't need twice as many cabs, and duplicated equipment?

The possibility of running them in singles evenings doesn't seem a good enough reason, as they could just as easily use 333s at that time.

Presumably they did their sums and reckoned that was the most cost effective solution? There will be peak shoulder trains that only justify 3 cars (or 4, depending how the diagrams are done - see this thread!).

Part of the point of removing intermediate cabs is to create extra passenger space, which is more critical in London where there is simply no way of lengthening trains on the busiest routes.

 

[Jamesrob637]

The Manchester to Stoke is a big problem in morning and evening peaks with only 3-car, so aren't Northern jumping out of the frying pan into the fire?

 

[Halish Railway]

The Manchester to Stoke is a big problem in morning and evening peaks with only 3-car, so aren't Northern jumping out of the frying pan into the fire?

The people of Congleton won't be happy with the loss of 80 seats.

 

[50032]

The people of Congleton won't be happy with the loss of 80 seats.

Is this confirmed or just speculation? Perhaps Northern will run 4 car trains at peak times and 3 car trains off peak. I'm sure they're not just going to reduce capacity.

 

[northwichcat]

I'm pretty sure it was previously said that Manchester-Stoke, Manchester-Hadfield, Manchester-Stockport-Crewe would get 4 car 331s, while Blackpool-Macclesfield/Manchester Airport services will be a mix of 4 and 6 car 331s.

 

[Halish Railway]

I'm pretty sure it was previously said that Manchester-Stoke, Manchester-Hadfield, Manchester-Stockport-Crewe would get 4 car 331s, while Blackpool-Macclesfield/Manchester Airport services will be a mix of 4 and 6 car 331s.

Manchester to Stoke is going to be 3 coach due to the small bay platform at Stoke. Network Rail wants to remodel Stoke so maybe a longer bay platform will be introduced.

 

[NorthernSpirit]

I think Northern (or rather Arriva Rail North) should have ordered the class 331's as a five car high capacity unit with 3+2 seating in the three centre coaches with the end coaches being 2+2 seating, as it still doesn't make any sense having two x3 car units running in tandem.