Government set to go ahead with Labour Thameslink and NW plans

[northwichcat]

The wires do normally have to be ready first, with most electrification schemes...

I guess you meant they may be ready for a long time before the trains arrive!

Crew training on 319s could actually start to occur on the existing electrified routes out of Manchester before the electrification program is completed and I would assume that the operator will want to be able to use a 319 to be able to fill in for a 323 and vice versa.

 

[starrymarkb]

The wires do normally have to be ready first, with most electrification schemes...

I guess you meant they may be ready for a long time before the trains arrive!

They were on the GWML prior to HEX IIRC... wires were up around 1996 and HEX started in 98

 

[Oswyntail]

They were on the GWML prior to HEX IIRC... wires were up around 1996 and HEX started in 98

And I seem to remember the Bedpan and Ilkley schemes were similar - for different reasons.

 

[sprinterguy]

Looks like the Manchester to Scotland operation will be getting new EMUs follow electrification: Contained in the DfT statement on new rolling stock to be introduced between now and 2019 is an entry for:

Services between Manchester and Scotland New electric multiple units – subject to negotiation

With a figure of "circa 36 carriages": So, what do we reckon: 9 four carriage trains or 12 three carriage trains? I have a feeling nine trains would be insufficient to operate the service.

 

[Nym]

Christ knows, but why the're not just ordering short formed pendilinos before the prodiction line closes down again, 6 carrage pendos would seem sensible, then it would be a total homogonisation of all passenger stock north of Oxenhome, that has to help timetableing, or actually, order anything that can run to the EPS speeds, just short 390s would be easyest, as everything is already cleared for the routes wanted.
To be honest, 9 car pendos wouldn't be that lost on the route, and the only platfoms you'd need to extend would be Chorley; They don't stop at Salford Crecent, Bolton I've seen 67 + 12 Mk2 + 67, so plenty of space for a pendo, Preston already has them etc etc.

Then again, I'd set everything on the WCML that was express services to VT or the IC WC Franchise, so then you'd have one TOC with all the tilting stock, running all services from Euston, and those from Birmingham and Manchester to Glasgow and Edinbrugh

 

[WatcherZero]

Looks like the Manchester to Scotland operation will be getting new EMUs follow electrification: Contained in the DfT statement on new rolling stock to be introduced between now and 2019 is an entry for:

With a figure of "circa 36 carriages": So, what do we reckon: 9 four carriage trains or 12 three carriage trains? I have a feeling nine trains would be insufficient to operate the service.

6x6 would be my suspicion, especielly with the limit of 6 car on Bolton line without platform lengthening. Small order but may be complemented with other existing (possibly diesel) trains. Heck they may even be planning to tack it on to the IEP order.

 

[YorkshireBear]

On the NW electrification thread theres a link to DFT website and it says there discussions have not yet concluded on whether extra stock on LM (new stock) should be put in franchise? would this release the rest of the 150's for further usE?

 

[lm321412]

Christ knows, but why the're not just ordering short formed pendilinos before the prodiction line closes down again, 6 carrage pendos would seem sensible, then it would be a total homogonisation of all passenger stock north of Oxenhome, that has to help timetableing, or actually, order anything that can run to the EPS speeds, just short 390s would be easyest, as everything is already cleared for the routes wanted.
To be honest, 9 car pendos wouldn't be that lost on the route, and the only platfoms you'd need to extend would be Chorley; They don't stop at Salford Crecent, Bolton I've seen 67 + 12 Mk2 + 67, so plenty of space for a pendo, Preston already has them etc etc.

I would like to see some sort of unit thats a cross between a 444 and a 185 for this service made by Siemens. 185 styled fronts to complement the 185s but with a 444 styled bodyshell; But this is just a dream and probably would never happen...

 

[mwmbwls]

The Midland viaduct, between Piccadilly and the Philips Park No2 - Ashburys line.
Some of the bridges have been removed since closure in 1964.

Railtrack apparently rejected re-instating this route in its Manchester Hub RUS report. Why I know not.

Would anyone like to comment on
a) why it was rejected
b) how much this option would have cost ?
c) would it provide real benefits, as a pose to letting such trains terminate at Victoria ?

It does converge at the Piccadilly end where the eastern lines approach is at its busiest. However if the link was used to join the Metrolink in the undercroft to run through Ancoats to join the Rochdale,Oldham and Bury Metrolink lines it could provide a robust back up link for the system or an alternative route if ever Piccadilly Gardens and Market Stree get too busy, again another return loop to minimise dwell time.



On another note, have Railtrack costed the re-instatement of Glazebrook to Northenden, thus enabling Liverpool to Manchester trains bypass the 13/14 PIccadilly bottleneck and serve Stockport as well ?

IIRC BRB residuary were selling the bridge over the MSC at Glazebrook - it would make more sense to divert freight trains from Liverpool to the East Coast via Warrington Glazebrook Partington Skelton Junction Northenden Junction Edgeley Heaton Norris Guide Bridge and Stalybridge to avoid using city centre train paths and avoid the bank at Miles Platting. Such joined up thinking is now evident in today's announcement,

 

[swt_passenger]

On the NW electrification thread theres a link to DFT website and it says there discussions have not yet concluded on whether extra stock on LM (new stock) should be put in franchise? would this release the rest of the 150's for further usE?

Before the election, LM had a tender out for more four car EMUs, not DMUs. DfT then tacked an additional order for 9 units onto it for the Manchester - Scotlands, the 36 carriages shown as 'under negotiation' in the DfTpress release, and mentioned a few posts ago.

I reckon these were the orders announced as being put on hold after the election, looks like they are being resurrected...

 

[mwmbwls]

So the Manchester -> Preston -> Blackpool electrification to go ahead.

What about through Pendolinos from Euston to Blackpool ?

Virgin have been quoted in local paper that they are up for it - but they might not be the franchisee by the time the wires are up.

 

[northwichcat]

Virgin have been quoted in local paper that they are up for it - but they might not be the franchisee by the time the wires are up.

Virgin have not appiled to do that. DfT have put in an ORR application for the new West Coast franchise to have a Blackpool service.

 

[Nym]

Yet they won't allow the franchise to order more tilting electric stock to run the service, hmmm.........

 

[WatcherZero]

I fear after this spending round the Dft wont allow any order for extra rolling stock/services that require revenue support.

 

[tbtc]

I fear after this spending round the Dft wont allow any order for extra rolling stock/services that require revenue support.

...which covers a lot of routes that Pacers run on. So, what would happen to these?

 

[WatcherZero]

Cascaded replacements, no new stock or routes without local subsidy.
Hammond also seems to be talking up the lower running costs of light rail as the answer to the norths lower fares and higher subsidy requirements. Government policy is to take the total government subsidies of rail down from 50% to 25% through above inflation fare hikes and private revenue e.g. from stations.

Personally I think Franchise reform, freeing the industry to invest and reap the rewards themselves rather than it going back to government can offset some though not all of the damage.

Another thing to consider is that by the time these cascades actually occur the classes may have 10 years or less life left, but we dont need to worry, we will just get another set of southern castoffs (Networkers perhaps?) when their renewed. In a way I admit its partially our fault, we get what we pay for, we pay less for rail travel so we dont get the factory fresh shinies.

 

[tbtc]

Cascaded replacements

Trouble is there are too many Pacers for them all to be replaced by cascaded DMUs (plus a 158 isn't suitable to an All Stops service).

So, at some stage they'll either have to

A. Electrify these "unprofitable" lines for cascaded EMUs to take over
B. Build a new Pacer equivalent
C. Scrap the lines/ stations/ services

 

[northwichcat]

the norths lower fares and higher subsidy requirements. Government policy is to take the total government subsidies of rail down from 50% to 25% through above inflation fare hikes and private revenue e.g. from stations.

The government has been refunded much of the Northern susbsidy due to passenger numbers being more than 25% higher than expected.

From the fares that get posted on forums. On the day fares to and through London are higher than average where ever you start from. However, non-PTE subsided fares aren't that inconsistent between operators and from what I've seen Northern actually charge higher on average than most operators in the off-peak period by not offering off-peak singles.
--- old post above --- --- new post below ---

Trouble is there are too many Pacers for them all to be replaced by cascaded DMUs (plus a 158 isn't suitable to an All Stops service).

158s with four narrow doors and a single step aren't slower to load and unload than Pacers with three wider doors and double steps.

The suitability of different door formation depends on the line. For TPE a lot of people board and alight regional services at intermediate stations such as Huddersfield, Bolton, Leeds and Preston so they opted for wider doors on the 185s. While on a rural stopping service some stations may have less than 4 people boarding at some stations - so that's a door each on a 158.

 

[WatcherZero]

The government has been refunded much of the Northern susbsidy due to passenger numbers being more than 25% higher than expected.

Which I addressed under franchise reform, Northern is not incentivised to invest when they dont keep the revenue above the government targets.
At the moment the moneys cyclical, franchise payments and revenue above breakeven point on services is being used to subsidise services elsewhere. Looking at Northerns 2009 results, 25% of their revenue was from subsidy and they made an operating profit of 3%, hence they couldnt break even without that subsidy.

 

[sprinterguy]

158s with four narrow doors and a single step aren't slower to load and unload than Pacers with three wider doors and double steps.

The suitability of different door formation depends on the line. For TPE a lot of people board and alight regional services at intermediate stations such as Huddersfield, Bolton, Leeds and Preston so they opted for wider doors on the 185s. While on a rural stopping service some stations may have less than 4 people boarding at some stations - so that's a door each on a 158.

Yes but there's a lot more to suitability of a train type for a particular type of service than just the door layout (Which is nonetheless an important point to consider).

 

[tbtc]

Yes but there's a lot more to suitability of a train type for a particular type of service than just the door layout (Which is nonetheless an important point to consider).

Yes, I was meaning acceleration/ weight/ economy etc

158s are great at what they do, but would struggle with "local" routes

 

[northwichcat]

Yes, I was meaning acceleration/ weight/ economy etc

158s are great at what they do, but would struggle with "local" routes

Door layout seems to have been the most common complaint relating to 156s and 158s being used on local services.

142s struggle on Stockport-Manchester with their 75mph top speed and their slower acceleration compared to 323s, which makes 142s a poor stand-in for 323s. When they filled on a couple of diagrams on the Crewe services they took were timetabled to take around 3 minutes longer and even held up following services by doing Heaton Chapel and Levenshulme stops, so a 90mph unit with faster acceleration than a Pacer has advantages on local services and especially when being used on congested sections of rail.

 

[ST PADDY]

Listening to the transport minister speech yesterday on the eight billion pound investment of the railways I got the distinct impression that he had no idea of how the railways operate today.
His ideas seamed to come from the 70/80 with plans for locomotive changes from deisal to electric locomotives so passengers wouldn't have to change trains. At the time he was on about the Paddington to Oxford electification via Didcot and was seaming to suggest that a change of traction at Didcot would bring down the time from Cardiff to under two hours.
I fail to see how as the fastest time at present is two hours, so unless he intendes to raise the line limit above 125 a loco change would actualy add time, (mind you i guess we would all welcome back loco hauld trains).
The only place that speeds could be improved would be from Bristol Parkway to Newport/Cardiff, or go back to the 1976 timetable when serives ran non stop to Newport taking I belive around 75 minutes and 90 minutes to Cardiff.

He also announced that the first part of the Manchester - Liverpool electrification would be to Newton. Le. Willows to allow services faster access to the west coast main line, I presume he meant Parkside junction as a revesal would be needed at Newton. Le. Willows.
This is again a throw back to the 70/80s when inter city trains ran this way. However I can't see any company wanting to swap a stop at Bolton for Wigan and the subsaqant loss of time this would incure.
By the time a train gets to Parkside junction its counter part would have left Bolton and by the time it got to Wigan its conunter part would be approaching Preston a loss of 15/20 minutes.
I think the minister should stop listening to his advisors and get the job done him self or at least consult the railway magazines like Chris Walmer he would get a much better out look on the present day operation.

 

[WatcherZero]

Hammond was responding to the inquiry into the value for money of the IEP program which offered as a possible alternative (Along with life extend 125's) the changing of locomotives. Hammond was saying despite the reports findings it was impractical so no need to worry there.

Yep, if you listened to the debate Hammond wasnt too hot on his northern geography. The diversion of Manchester-Scotland services away from Bolton is mainly to relieve the capacity constraints on the Bolton line where additional paths are wanted for faster, longer and more frequent commuter/regional services, including the single line section which hampers flows considerably. Despite this route being less compass direct it would be faster passing through less stations and with higher line speeds. Moving the service back to the Bolton line when its electrified a couple of years later has been considered but is currently not favoured.

 

[ukrob]

And it was also the original plan of the previous Government - which was nothing to do with Hammond.

 

[philjo]

Modern Railways which arrived today suggests that a study is being done on the costs/feasability of electrifying Crewe-Chester & Oxenholme-Windermere as an add-on.

It mentioned that Crewe-Chester would allow Pendos to operate that route to Euston, freeing up 221s to operate with a pantograph car added on electric services from Manchester Airport to Scotland.
--- old post above --- --- new post below ---

L At the time he was on about the Paddington to Oxford electification via Didcot and was seaming to suggest that a change of traction at Didcot would bring down the time from Cardiff to under two hours.
I fail to see how as the fastest time at present is two hours, so unless he intendes to raise the line limit above 125 a loco change would actualy add time, (mind you i guess we would all welcome back loco hauld trains).

The Swansea trains don;t stop at Didcot so these would be slowed down.
Also I can't see how a loco could easily be added at Didcot without disrupting other services ?
It would be more logical to do this at Swindon if the Bristol route via Bath is wired, as most trains call there anyway.

 

[LE Greys]

Modern Railways which arrived today suggests that a study is being done on the costs/feasability of electrifying Crewe-Chester & Oxenholme-Windermere as an add-on.

It mentioned that Crewe-Chester would allow Pendos to operate that route to Euston, freeing up 221s to operate with a pantograph car added on electric services from Manchester Airport to Scotland.
--- old post above --- --- new post below ---


The Swansea trains don;t stop at Didcot so these would be slowed down.
Also I can't see how a loco could easily be added at Didcot without disrupting other services ?
It would be more logical to do this at Swindon if the Bristol route via Bath is wired, as most trains call there anyway.

Down my way, Deltics, and later HSTs, operated under the wires from King's Cross to Hitchin for years, and then later Huntingdon and Peterborough. Of course, some still do, all the way to Edinburgh. Why change?

 

[northwichcat]

Modern Railways which arrived today suggests that a study is being done on the costs/feasability of electrifying Crewe-Chester & Oxenholme-Windermere as an add-on.

It mentioned that Crewe-Chester would allow Pendos to operate that route to Euston, freeing up 221s to operate with a pantograph car added on electric services from Manchester Airport to Scotland.

Bombardier have certainly proposed building extra panto cars for the 22xs. However, their proposal would have made them able to operate on overhead wires and be able to switch to diesel traction, making them ideal for XC and Holyhead-London use.

However, I don't see that how that would work considering the proposed WCML 2013 timetable, which involves unchanged North Wales/Chester to London services i.e. some services would still require splitting at Chester. Also 11 car Pendolinos would appear on Glasgow to London allowing some 9 car Pendolinos to be cascaded on to Birmingham-Scotland services, in turn freeing up Voyagers for additional Blackpool/Lancaster to London services.

 

[MCR247]

How would the 11 car 390s make it possible for 9 cars to be cascaded? Only 4 are being built! And they are making Glasgow hourly

 

[northwichcat]

How would the 11 car 390s make it possible for 9 cars to be cascaded? Only 4 are being built! And they are making Glasgow hourly

I think there are actually enough 9 car Pendolinos used on Glasgow-London currently to allow an hourly service with revised diagramming and the proposed reduced stopping pattern.

The current departures from Glasgow for London is: 0428, 0540, 0630, 0737, 0840, 0940, 1040, 1140, 1240, 1340, 1440, 1640, 1740, 1840.