Northern Tender for up to 450 units

[py_megapixel]

I find the 331s cope far better than their 3+2-seated predecessors with busy services. 331s seem to manage the loads quite well whereas an older unit feels claustrophobic with any significant number of standing passengers thanks to the very narrow aisles and lack of space to stand around the doors.

 

[JonathanH]

Short fat carriages with 3+2 seating was introduced when the average passenger was shorter, slimer and before there were requirements for accessible toilets.

I find the 331s cope far better than their 3+2-seated predecessors with busy services. 331s seem to manage the loads quite well whereas an older unit feels claustrophobic with any significant number of standing passengers thanks to the very narrow aisles and lack of space to stand around the doors.

The upshot is that some people have to stand, which is the point I was initially noting. The trains are generally set up to make that easier than it was historically.

 

[Speed43125]

While I get new electric only units will be easier to build. If they go for an existing model, wouldn't it be better to deliver multi-mode first? After all the oldest electric train is Northern's fleet is around ten years newer than the oldest diesel train.

Possibly this is/was designed to coincide with TRU being delivered?

 

[Xenophon PCDGS]

Is there a minimum space decreed between 3+2 unit coach seat gangways and if so, what year would this have been introduced?

Of course, times change and I am most certainly old enough to remember travelling in non-compartment coaches with long seats either side.

 

[td97]

I'd like to question why they are willing to order replacements for perfectly good mid life rolling stock that probably have another 15 years of their Operating life still left in them?

Fleet commonality hugely reduces expensive training and maintenance for multiple fleets. Someone else will likely take the surplus existing stock, and it's not Northern's problem who that is.

While I get new electric only units will be easier to build. If they go for an existing model, wouldn't it be better to deliver multi-mode first? After all the oldest electric train is Northern's fleet is around ten years newer than the oldest diesel train.

Possibly this is/was designed to coincide with TRU being delivered?

Correct, TRU is a factor. Northern are desperately aware that the Sprinters are life expired.

 

[Snow1964]

Is there a minimum space decreed between 3+2 unit coach seats and if so, what year would this have been introduced?

Of course, times change and I am most certainly old enough to remember travelling in non-compartment coaches with long seats either side.

Government Guidance is seats centres should be minimum 500mm width (section 9.3)

section 9.4 suggests gangways should ideally be 1300mm between tables tops, although where space is restricted 900mm is absolute minimum

Guidance was originally issued in March 2000, so is nearly 24 years old. Some parts such as ramps and stairs date back into 1980s

https://assets.publishing.service.gov.uk/media/5a79554040f0b63d72fc4e31/inclusive-mobility.pdf

 

[Trainbike46]

While I get new electric only units will be easier to build. If they go for an existing model, wouldn't it be better to deliver multi-mode first? After all the oldest electric train is Northern's fleet is around ten years newer than the oldest diesel train.

The first electric only units may well be replacing diesel trains, given the electrification currently happening up north

 

[northwichcat]

The first electric only units may well be replacing diesel trains, given the electrification currently happening up north

Aren't the additional 323s catering for that? And, if not, they'll be plenty spare.

 

[JonathanH]

Aren't the additional 323s catering for that? And, if not, they'll be plenty spare.

I suspect that the previous poster is thinking of TransPennine electrification, rather than Wigan to Bolton.

 

[northwichcat]

I suspect that the previous poster is thinking of TransPennine electrification, rather than Wigan to Bolton.

Either way there's spare electric trains available and no guarantee either train procurement or electrification will arrive on time.

 

[HSTEd]

The upshot is that some people have to stand, which is the point I was initially noting. The trains are generally set up to make that easier than it was historically.

The wonders of an ancient railway infrastructure with a tiny loading gauge!
I wish we could have 3380mm-wide trains

 

[swt_passenger]

Government Guidance is seats centres should be minimum 500mm width (section 9.3)

section 9.4 suggests gangways should ideally be 1300mm between tables tops, although where space is restricted 900mm is absolute minimum

Guidance was originally issued in March 2000, so is nearly 24 years old. Some parts such as ramps and stairs date back into 1980s

https://assets.publishing.service.gov.uk/media/5a79554040f0b63d72fc4e31/inclusive-mobility.pdf

Section 9‘s title says it concerns “transport buildings”. The preamble suggest railway vehicles are dealt with somewhere else.

 

[bluelagoon8951]

a northern employee i've spoken to has said that even the 195s/331s will be replaced by this order (it's a full 100% fleet replacement). this leads me to believe that it will likely not be CAF that builds these trains.

 

[Mamorin]

If that ends up being the case, que what "a waste" when the 195s and 331s get replaced. As the 195s and 331s were built with a planned service life of 35 years and they will have only been with Northern for under half that of that time years by the time they would be replaced.

 

[bluelagoon8951]

i'm sure another operator will find a use for them.

 

[Mamorin]

Another operator would find a use for the 195s 100%, GWR comes to mind, perhaps as a Sprinter or Networker Turbo replacement. Can't see any operator who would want the 331s without more wires going up.

A full fleet replacement would make sence imo as at this point Northern could do with all of its fleet having end gangways. 195s and 331s no longer fit for Northern since those are being run in multiple more that was planed when they were ordered and built.

 

[jonesy3001]

Thought the new fleet was going to be compatible with the CAF units, can't see northern getting rid of the 195s and 331s until they've replaced the older fleet.

 

[Bletchleyite]

If that ends up being the case, que what "a waste" when the 195s and 331s get replaced. As the 195s and 331s were built with a planned service life of 35 years and they will have only been with Northern for under half that of that time years by the time they would be replaced.

Someone will take them if that's true. There are plenty of operators of 1980s DMUs (and 170s which will be getting on a bit by the time these are in service!) and only three of them, Northern, GWR and Chiltern, appear to be progressing tenders for replacement.

I think it's a bit early for a "where will the 195s go next" thread though

Section 9‘s title says it concerns “transport buildings”. The preamble suggest railway vehicles are dealt with somewhere else.

500mm is definitely not a requirement for train seat width, or the 435mm wide seats on the 720s and 730s would never have happened (they are ridiculous! )

 

[Meerkat]

a northern employee i've spoken to has said that even the 195s/331s will be replaced by this order (it's a full 100% fleet replacement). this leads me to believe that it will likely not be CAF that builds these trains.

Maybe its just a clue to how long introduction and delivery is going to take - they think the 195s will be time expired by the time they get to them!

 

[InkyScrolls]

There's not been any suggestion that the CAF units will be leaving - any rumour to the contrary is exactly that, messroom gossip!

 

[td97]

It seems that Northern want a single, common fleet

Fleet commonality hugely reduces expensive training and maintenance for multiple fleets. Someone else will likely take the surplus existing stock, and it's not Northern's problem who that is.

This implied that all existing fleet is to be replaced. Northern don't care what happens to the existing fleet - it's all leased (barring a single 156).

There's not been any suggestion that the CAF units will be leaving

Not publicly.

 

[Xenophon PCDGS]

This implied that all existing fleet is to be replaced. Northern don't care what happens to the existing fleet - it's all leased (barring a single 156).

Not publicly.

It seems strange to discuss Northern in respect of the reasonably short time that they have had the Class 195 units, when you consider the length of time that the transport powers-that-be were content to let the Class 142 Pacers run,

 

[Trainbike46]

This implied that all existing fleet is to be replaced. Northern don't care what happens to the existing fleet - it's all leased (barring a single 156).

Not necessarily, it just implies that Northern is planning to reduce the number of different fleets they have, and that will happen even if the 195s and the 331s stay, given they would be replacing 5 classes of DMUs, 2 classes of EMUs and the 769s with a single class (or possibly 2 variants) if the 195s and 331s stay. Going from 10 to 3/4 classes of trains is a massive simplification.

 

[td97]

Not necessarily, it just implies that Northern is planning to reduce the number of different fleets they have, and that will happen even if the 195s and the 331s stay, given they would be replacing 5 classes of DMUs, 2 classes of EMUs and the 769s with a single class (or possibly 2 variants) if the 195s and 331s stay. Going from 10 to 3/4 classes of trains is a massive simplification.

The keyword was 'single'.
A dictionary search defines it as "only one; not one of several". Hopefully that's cleared up now.

 

[Xenophon PCDGS]

Does this tender allow for extra middle coaches, a matter that was denied TPE when the Class 185 were introduced.

 

[skyhigh]

Does this tender allow for extra middle coaches, a matter that was denied TPE when the Class 185 were introduced.

Middle coaches for what? The proposed units or existing ones?

 

[Xenophon PCDGS]

Middle coaches for what? The proposed units or existing ones?

I was referring to those in the Northern tender documentation. I did take the trouble to show the word "tender" in the posting that I made.

 

[Mamorin]

Does this tender allow for extra middle coaches, a matter that was denied TPE when the Class 185 were introduced.

Yes the tender does all for extra middle coaches.

"The manufacturing requirements are for multi-mode multiple units, including options to order further units and/or additional centre-vehicles and/or a mix of multi-mode and electric multiple units."

 

[Snow1964]

Yes the tender does all for extra middle coaches.

"The manufacturing requirements are for multi-mode multiple units, including options to order further units and/or additional centre-vehicles and/or a mix of multi-mode and electric multiple units."

Although if have number of variations, eg mix of 2 car, 3 car, 4car and some multi mode and others pure EMU then simplification of the fleet doesn't happen much.

You only have to look at the mess GWR services around Bristol got in (and are still in), with schedules requiring a 2car and 3car coupled and vast numbers of workings where single 3 car units get swapped to a 2car (which can't cope).

Also got to be wary of transition period, which might easily be 6-7 years from 2026 -2033 for introduction, with possibly another transition later where some diesel electric are converted to battery electric. Again using GWR as example and Cardiff-Portsmouth where mix of 158 and 16x run which can't couple, can get real problems at outstations like Fratton when unit fails and they can't form up next 3 or 4 trains correctly because of wrong length units or different generation that can't couple together. Basically if your outstations are 2-3 hours away unless have lots of spare units get stuck when late substitutions needed (and Northern has some quite geographically scattered bits too).

 

[bluelagoon8951]

i'd expect 2 classes of train (one bi-mode, one electric) with potential subclasses that are different lengths (some 3 cars, some 4, perhaps some 6 if we're lucky). i'd also expect them all to be able to be coupled together. if power source and number of carriages are the only differences between classes, training for them can be treated as training for one type of train.