Proportion of EMU Services through Manchester, Leeds & Birmingham.

Status
Not open for further replies.

Purple Orange

Member
Joined
26 Dec 2019
Messages
831
Location
Wilmslow
I’m a very big advocate for reducing diesel running as much as possible and with the various electrification programs that have been completed in the north west and GWML, does anyone know what proportion of services running in to Manchester Piccadilly, Leeds and Birmingham New Street are EMUs? It was not that long ago that the only electric traction through Manchester was the pendolinos and the northern 323 units.
 
Sponsor Post - registered members do not see these adverts; click here to register, or click here to log in
R

RailUK Forums

YorksLad12

Member
Joined
5 Feb 2020
Messages
311
Location
Leeds
For Leeds, roughly 9 out of 30 (back of an envelope calculation) per hour based on the "normal" timetable - so less than one-third. I've not counted the Settle or Lancaster services nor the LNER extension to Harrogate (all diesel), but think I've counted everything else.

With TRU from Huddersfield to York that would rise to 16 out of 30.
 

LMS 4F

Member
Joined
11 Aug 2019
Messages
242
A large number of the services into Leeds will be on the end of the queue for electrification I’m thinking of Kottingley, Sheffield both routes, Selby, Harrogate and Calder valley as well. Maybe battery or Hydrogen but the economic case for wires is a non starter.
 

Wyrleybart

Member
Joined
29 Mar 2020
Messages
156
Location
South Staffordshire
In the case of Birmingham New St it firstly depends on the timetable.
Assuming
Everything to Coventry, Northampton and Euston will 350 or 390
Everything to Walsall and Rugeley will be 350
Everything to Four Oaks / Shenstone / Lichfield will be 323
Everything to Longbridge / Redditch / Bromsgrove will be 323
Everything to Wolverhampton except Shrewsbury / Cambrian / Wrexham / Chester will be EMU
Everything to Crewe and Liverpool will be 350
Not sure about Avanti to Glasgow and Edinburgh

Everything else is diesel.
 

YorksLad12

Member
Joined
5 Feb 2020
Messages
311
Location
Leeds
A large number of the services into Leeds will be on the end of the queue for electrification I’m thinking of Kottingley, Sheffield both routes, Selby, Harrogate and Calder valley as well. Maybe battery or Hydrogen but the economic case for wires is a non starter.
As much as I would like to see the Harrogate route electrified, with Northern and LNER running that way, Micklefield-Selby-Hull would be better and would benefit Hull Trains (and LNER) as well as Northern and TPE.
It goes to show the importance of the TRU if Leeds EMU services can increase from circa 30% to over 50%.
I might have miscounted. My envelope doesn't include the TPE services towards York & Hull, just the Northern stoppers. So that would 9 out of 35 currently, and 19 out of 35 after TRU (with the uncounted services as noted previously). That's 25% now and going on 60% afterwards, and not including any additional services added after TRU. Busier than Calder Valley even.
 

Class 170101

Established Member
Joined
1 Mar 2014
Messages
6,171
In the case of Birmingham New St it firstly depends on the timetable.
Assuming
Everything to Coventry, Northampton and Euston will 350 or 390
Everything to Walsall and Rugeley will be 350
Everything to Four Oaks / Shenstone / Lichfield will be 323
Everything to Longbridge / Redditch / Bromsgrove will be 323
Everything to Wolverhampton except Shrewsbury / Cambrian / Wrexham / Chester will be EMU
Everything to Crewe and Liverpool will be 350
Not sure about Avanti to Glasgow and Edinburgh

Everything else is diesel.
Not all trains to Coventry or Euston will be EMU operated. Some could be Class 221 operated and further to that Class 220 / 221 operated if an XC service to Coventry.

Some Avanti services to Glasgow / Edinburgh may be Class 221 operated.
 

supervc-10

Member
Joined
4 Mar 2012
Messages
401
Thanks! And yes, it would make a big difference if TPE's services on the Manchester-Leeds corridor were electric. Totally insane that it wasn't done years ago.
 

norbitonflyer

Member
Joined
24 Mar 2020
Messages
225
Location
SW London
Not Woodhead again! As much as I love the route, it's rather impractical and had some very strange DC overhead lines. Converting it to standard would probably cost close to electrifying a new route!
What was strange about it? At the time 1500V dc was quite common. The NER/LNER had been using it as far back as WW1 (and it is still used on the Tyne & Wear Metro). It's still in use in France, the Netherlands, Ireland, Japan, New Zealand and many other countries.
 

mspljd1990

Member
Joined
8 Jul 2016
Messages
43
The vast majority of EMU services out of Leeds are the 333s and the occasional 331 that serve the Wharfedale and Airedale lines, to Bradford, Ilkley and Skipton. There's also the Leeds to Doncaster line, which uses 331s. Aside from that it's all diesels. 150s, 158s, 170s, 186s, 195s, Azumas, Novas and the very occasional pacer.
 
Last edited:

seagull

Member
Joined
28 Feb 2011
Messages
135
In the case of Birmingham New Street, I would be surprised if EMU traction was more than about half of that used: what with diesel comprising XC (everything), TfW (everything), WMT Hereford/Shrewsbury and Avanti (Shrewsbury/Holyhead/various Euston and the north services).
 

Bald Rick

Veteran Member
Joined
28 Sep 2010
Messages
14,100
In the case of Birmingham New Street, I would be surprised if EMU traction was more than about half of that used: what with diesel comprising XC (everything), TfW (everything), WMT Hereford/Shrewsbury and Avanti (Shrewsbury/Holyhead/various Euston and the north services).
Be prepared to be surprised.

In the current TT, the standard hour has 48 services of which 34 (71%) are electric. Occasionally this will drop to 32 if 2 Avanti services come through with a 221.

Of course for carbon reduction and pollutants, the issue is not number of trains, but number of vehicles. Avanti services are 9/11 cars (except when formed of a 221) and most Cross City services are 6 cars, whereas most diesel services are 3-5 cars, except for the double up Cross Country services. I guess the %of vehicles that are electric will be around 75%; perhaps someone else could do the maths.
 
Last edited:

Purple Orange

Member
Joined
26 Dec 2019
Messages
831
Location
Wilmslow
After looking at the Piccadilly services, I believe that there are 42 tph either terminating or passing through towards Oxford Rd. Of those 42 there are 19 long distance services, where 7 are EMUs or Bi-modes (3 Avanti London, 4 TPE: 1 Newcastle, 1 Scotland, 2 Airport). The 12 DMUs being 2 TfW (terminating), 2 EMR (Liverpool & Norwich), 6 TPE (Middlesbrough, Sheffield, Hull, Huddersfield, 2 Airport), 2 XC (terminating). Then we have 23 Northern, of which 10 are EMUs. Meaning that 40% of services are electric.

Trans Pennine electrification and the Windermere branch will help, it is all about bi-modes really. There must be a push for these units.
 

supervc-10

Member
Joined
4 Mar 2012
Messages
401
Air quality in central Manchester is rubbish- we definitely need bimodes, and electrification. So frustrating seeing tatty Northern 15x screech through Oxford Road! Pretty disgusting that 40% of services through one of the countries biggest and most important stations are diesel, when the entire station is electrified.
 

supervc-10

Member
Joined
4 Mar 2012
Messages
401
Insane isn't it. A little bit of connected thinking would have a program of rolling electrification.... But I know I'm preaching to the choir saying that!
 

rebmcr

Established Member
Joined
15 Nov 2011
Messages
3,246
Location
Cambridge
It’s even worse at Victoria, where only 6 out of 26 tph are EMUs.
Victoria at least has the pee-poor excuse that its electrification was relatively recent. Piccadilly/Oxford Road has seen several rounds of fleet replacement since their wires went up, it's mental.
 

WAO

Member
Joined
10 Mar 2019
Messages
120
Mental is probably the appropriate word. Electrification was sidelined in the 1990's because John Major's weak Tory Government thought (advised by mandarins) that a more complicated railway would be cheaper and that central leadership didn't matter. Blair's Government (really old Labour's Gordon Brown), was guided by tabloid-reading focus groups who said that rail investment wasn't a priority and so produced a dysfunctional NR.

Finally Manchester, chose light rail over heavy rail (and still does), diverting the investment that would have stretched out the wires.

No marks all round.

WAO
 

Purple Orange

Member
Joined
26 Dec 2019
Messages
831
Location
Wilmslow
Victoria at least has the pee-poor excuse that its electrification was relatively recent. Piccadilly/Oxford Road has seen several rounds of fleet replacement since their wires went up, it's mental.
Is that not the fault of the DfT & government policy?

Mental is probably the appropriate word. Electrification was sidelined in the 1990's because John Major's weak Tory Government thought (advised by mandarins) that a more complicated railway would be cheaper and that central leadership didn't matter. Blair's Government (really old Labour's Gordon Brown), was guided by tabloid-reading focus groups who said that rail investment wasn't a priority and so produced a dysfunctional NR.

Finally Manchester, chose light rail over heavy rail (and still does), diverting the investment that would have stretched out the wires.

No marks all round.

WAO
Oh I would say metrolink is a million times better than anything the same cash could have produced, had it been invested in Manchester’s heavy rail network.
 

WAO

Member
Joined
10 Mar 2019
Messages
120
Millions is again about right, as Metrolink has recently cost between £45M and £90M per route mile, between 7 and 15 times the current cost of heavy rail electrification. Merseyrail is much more cost effective, even with its limitations.

We can only spend our money once.

WAO
 

Efini92

Member
Joined
14 Dec 2016
Messages
199
Mental is probably the appropriate word. Electrification was sidelined in the 1990's because John Major's weak Tory Government thought (advised by mandarins) that a more complicated railway would be cheaper and that central leadership didn't matter. Blair's Government (really old Labour's Gordon Brown), was guided by tabloid-reading focus groups who said that rail investment wasn't a priority and so produced a dysfunctional NR.

Finally Manchester, chose light rail over heavy rail (and still does), diverting the investment that would have stretched out the wires.

No marks all round.

WAO
The reason Manchester chose metrolink was because they have both hands firmly on the fare box.
Had GMPTE not deliberately underfunded the railways for 30 years, we could well have had electrification Everywhere now.
 
Status
Not open for further replies.

Top