Rolling stock announcement regarding TPE (updated)

[Haydn1971]

A timetable change twice a year might not seem very often, but, equally, loadings on a particular journey are not inclined to vary from minute to minute anyway. If a particular journey gets to the point where it needs attention, whether that by by way of adjustment to the timetable or capacity enhancement, then the likelihood is that the situation has been developing for a year or two.

Clearly you aren't familiar with school holidays, the mad September return to work and the concept of university holiday break ups - all have a huge impact on journeys fro regulars. Loading on a peak hour train in October is very different to that of the same timed train in peak hour July.

 

[childwallblues]

In high summer, particularly weekends and bank holidays, and whenever the sun shines, a 3-car 185 is barely enough for the Windermere traffic.

Unfortunately this is a situation that passengers must bear until the line is electrified and 319s can get up there.

 

[northwichcat]

Unfortunately this is a situation that passengers must bear until the line is electrified and 319s can get up there.

The loan of 185s to Northern ends next year. Northern will then have to use Sprinters until the new CAF trains arrive (they will be getting additional 150s from GWR and LM next year.)

 

[Greybeard33]

The loan of 185s to Northern ends next year. Northern will then have to use Sprinters until the new CAF trains arrive (they will be getting additional 150s from GWR and LM next year.)

The sublease of 185s to Northern will presumably end in December 2017, per the ITT. Is there a possibility Northern could obtain some cascaded 170s by then, to get 75mph stock off the WCML between Carnforth and Oxenholme?

 

[keith1879]

Hull is retaining 185's as they will be used on the 'semi fasts' to picc along with the cleethorpes and middlesbrough routes. Leaving the mk5 and AT300's to cover LIV-EDB/SCA and MIA-NCL while the CAF EMUs LIV/MIA-EDB/GLC

The full confirmation of what and how will be allocated where is still to be revealed,

Apologies - I hadn't spotted that the Hull services would be the same as the semi-fasts. In that case a single 185 is the most likely I agree.

 

[northwichcat]

The sublease of 185s to Northern will presumably end in December 2017, per the ITT. Is there a possibility Northern could obtain some cascaded 170s by then, to get 75mph stock off the WCML between Carnforth and Oxenholme?

Scotrail 170s aren't being released until 2018 and it sounds like only 150s and 319s will be joining the fleet before the end of 2017.

Maybe Northern will need to do a fleet reorganisation to put more 150s on Yorkshire routes so that 158s are used on what will become the Northern Connect routes until the new CAF DMUs are ready. I certainly hope the Chester-Leeds route doesn't get 142s or 150s initially!

 

[Bletchleyite]

Unfortunately this is a situation that passengers must bear until the line is electrified and 319s can get up there.

A 319 is only 11m longer. Unless there are platform lengthenings planned to allow 8-car running, which might actually solve the problem?

 

[northwichcat]

A 319 is only 11m longer. Unless there are platform lengthenings planned to allow 8-car running, which might actually solve the problem?

I forget to add before I doubt 319s will normally go to Windermere. The Northern Connect service will be 331s* and I imagine the shuttles will be part of the same diagrams as the Connect services, opposed to basing a 319 around 90 miles from it's depot with no easy way of diagramming 319s so the unit based there gets switched.

* The franchise requirement sets out the standard of trains for Northern Connect services so unless the 319s get features like air conditioning it'll have to the 331s on the electric Connect services.

 

[Starmill]

A single 156 has rather less passenger capacity and much limited standing and luggage space. It will definitely be an issue on some days, unless it can run as a double. Reason after reason why the 170s should never have left. It was madness then and it still is now.

 

[DunfordBridge]

Does anyone have any information on the forthcoming mk 5 rolling stock? Not a photo to be found anywhere. I was also wondering if this would herald the return of the buffet car.

 

[WatcherZero]

Nope, nothing, Caf dont even have an entry on their website for them and no technical details on the Caledonians either. Its one thing Bombardier and Siemens do much better.

Is a entry for the northern diesel stock though which lists the 2 car carriages as 24.026m length and the centre car in a three car as 23.35m.

3 car electrics 71.4m and 4 car 94.752 which looks like identical driving car trailer lengths.

 

[Bletchleyite]

Does anyone have any information on the forthcoming mk 5 rolling stock? Not a photo to be found anywhere. I was also wondering if this would herald the return of the buffet car.

I very much doubt it.
--- old post above --- --- new post below ---

3 car electrics 71.4m and 4 car 94.752 which looks like identical driving car trailer lengths.

I'd expect them to be identical other than what's slung underneath to make it go. Wouldn't be surprised if the TPE LHCS was an end-doored, uprated version of the same thing.

 

[Greybeard33]

A single 156 has rather less passenger capacity and much limited standing and luggage space. It will definitely be an issue on some days, unless it can run as a double. Reason after reason why the 170s should never have left. It was madness then and it still is now.

And the DfT's "too little, too late" attempts to mediate an "industry solution" between TPE, Northern and Network Rail are spreading the collateral damage from the 170 fiasco far and wide.

I fear there is a risk that the PPM of VTWC Scottish services may be adversely affected after 11 July, when 75mph Northern 156s start occupying WCML train slots between Lancaster and Oxenholme that are currently allocated to 100mph 185s. Delays to VTWC services can ripple south down the WCML, so conceivably LM services out of Euston might suffer too.

Surely there is a case for regulation of the "free market" in rolling stock leases, to ensure that end-of-lease stock can never again be reallocated by a ROSCO to another TOC without regard to the wider national interest?

 

[Clansman]

Does anyone have any information on the forthcoming mk 5 rolling stock? Not a photo to be found anywhere. I was also wondering if this would herald the return of the buffet car.

CAF are tight on their UK orders. I contacted Caledonian Sleeper about the mock-ups which were due last year and they stated that there's some sort of confidential agreement until 2017, and I can only imagine TPE has a similar agreement.

The only thing close to a photo of the Mk5 we have to go on is the coach layouts the Scottish Government included in their franchise agreement contract for the Caledonian Sleeper. The photo below shows the Pod Beds Sleeper which looks like your typical carriage so I can imagine TPE will have the body shell design at the least. The interior side of things will be different of course.

The rest of the sleeper coach plans can be found on this thread, created by NotATrainspott

 

[Bletchleyite]

That's the pod flatbeds, the seating is still 2+1 but not quite so generously spaced!

 

[NotATrainspott]

Nope, nothing, Caf dont even have an entry on their website for them and no technical details on the Caledonians either. Its one thing Bombardier and Siemens do much better.

Is a entry for the northern diesel stock though which lists the 2 car carriages as 24.026m length and the centre car in a three car as 23.35m.

3 car electrics 71.4m and 4 car 94.752 which looks like identical driving car trailer lengths.

CALEDONIAN SLEEPER PASSENGER COACHES

No photos or details beyond what we already know.

The sleeper carriages are 22m long, so that 16 of them plus two locomotives can fit in the platforms at Euston.

 

[AndrewE]

Delays to VTWC services can ripple south down the WCML, so conceivably LM services out of Euston might suffer too.

Surely there is a case for regulation of the "free market" in rolling stock leases, to ensure that end-of-lease stock can never again be reallocated by a ROSCO to another TOC without regard to the wider national interest?

No, the free market and the "case for regulation" has run out of all the excuses that can be made for it. Just accept that we have learnt the hard way that a regulator is always a step (or three) behind the money men busily milking all of our infrastructure for their own benefit (and please don't try to excuse it by telling me that my pension fund might have a vested interest in this charade continuing.)

Just give us a publically-accountable management chain - up to a Secretary of State - so that we can throw out the politicians who ignore the transport and other needs of their constituents if they starve our infrastructure of investment.
A
--- old post above --- --- new post below ---

And the DfT's "too little, too late" attempts to mediate an "industry solution" between TPE, Northern and Network Rail are spreading the collateral damage from the 170 fiasco far and wide.

...and compare this shambles with the rolling stock cascade during BR days. Why are DfT allowed to continue making the doctrinaire "privatised rail industry" even worse?

 

[Roose]

I forget to add before I doubt 319s will normally go to Windermere. The Northern Connect service will be 331s* and I imagine the shuttles will be part of the same diagrams as the Connect services, opposed to basing a 319 around 90 miles from it's depot with no easy way of diagramming 319s so the unit based there gets switched.

* The franchise requirement sets out the standard of trains for Northern Connect services so unless the 319s get features like air conditioning it'll have to the 331s on the electric Connect services.

The specification is ultimately for four airport services to/from Windermere; presumably these will be operated as Connect services by new stock, when that becomes available.

Remaining services are likely to be mainly branch shuttles with some running through to/from Preston which would enable rotation of 319 units among the wider fleet, if these, as seems likely, are to be the preferred option for Windermere.

 

[northwichcat]

The specification is for two airport services to/from Windermere from 12/2017; presumably these will be operated as Connect services by new stock, when that becomes available.

Remaining services are likely to be mainly branch shuttles with some running through to/from Preston which would enable rotation of 319 units among the wider fleet, if these, as seems likely, are to be the preferred option for Windermere.

Using a 156 on the shuttles and a 195 on the Connect services would seem viable given other 156s are used in Cumbria, but post-electrification a 319 on shuttles and 331 on Connect services would be a lot less viable.

 

[Greybeard33]

Using a 156 on the shuttles and a 195 on the Connect services would seem viable given other 156s are used in Cumbria, but post-electrification a 319 on shuttles and 331 on Connect services would be a lot less viable.

The Windermere branch is an unsignalled single line without sidings, so can only be occupied by one train at a time. If a 156 was used just for the shuttles, it would have to run to and from Lancaster on the WCML to clear the branch for the Airport services. Therefore this option would still require 75mph paths on the WCML. Better for the Airport services to interwork with the shuttles using 195s, as currently with the 185s, then switch to 331s after electrification.

Staveley platform is only 55m, so would need drastic lengthening before 319s (without SDO) could be used.

Edit: 55m is the figure in the Electronic Sectional Appendix, but see Post #331 below.

 

[Bungle965]

The Windermere branch is an unsignalled single line without sidings, so can only be occupied by one train at a time. If a 156 was used just for the shuttles, it would have to run to and from Lancaster on the WCML to clear the branch for the Airport services. Therefore this option would still require 75mph paths on the WCML. Better for the Airport services to interwork with the shuttles using 195s, as currently with the 185s, then switch to 331s after electrification.

Staveley platform is only 55m, so would need drastic lengthening before 319s (without SDO) could be used.

I did think that one of the stations had short platforms and I could not think which one it actually was.
Thanks for that.
Sam

 

[Bletchleyite]

Staveley platform is only 55m, so would need drastic lengthening before 319s (without SDO) could be used.

How's it done with 185s? Single door? I guess 319s can't do that as they don't have staff door controls in the saloon? How easy to fit a set?

 

[edwin_m]

The Windermere branch is an unsignalled single line without sidings, so can only be occupied by one train at a time. If a 156 was used just for the shuttles, it would have to run to and from Lancaster on the WCML to clear the branch for the Airport services. Therefore this option would still require 75mph paths on the WCML. Better for the Airport services to interwork with the shuttles using 195s, as currently with the 185s, then switch to 331s after electrification.

With the layout changes currently being made, I think a Windermere branch train could wait in what is now the Down Goods Loop at Oxenholme while another train went to Windermere and back. However I agree it would be very wasteful to have a train and crew doing nothing for an hour or so, and also blocking the loop to other trains.

 

[Wolfie]

Surely there is a case for regulation of the "free market" in rolling stock leases, to ensure that end-of-lease stock can never again be reallocated by a ROSCO to another TOC without regard to the wider national interest?

I would agree. Of course in the event that such regulation results in a less profitable leasing agreement the ROSCO will wish to be compensated.

There is also a question, which the Courts might then get into, of natural justice - namely how much in advance, so they can seek alternative users, will ROSCOs be advised that a TOC will no longer require the extant stock? As a general principle the Courts are likely to take askance of regulation of privately owned assets in a oneway game of the heads I win, tails you lose variety.

 

[coppercapped]

SNIP

Surely there is a case for regulation of the "free market" in rolling stock leases, to ensure that end-of-lease stock can never again be reallocated by a ROSCO to another TOC without regard to the wider national interest?

Already exists.

The DfT can designate items of rolling stock as a 'franchise asset'. The designation is intended to ensure that at the end of a franchise the rolling stock is transferred to the new franchisee.

 

[edwin_m]

It was said at the time (probably in Modern Railways) that the DfT had agreed the transfer of units to Chiltern.

I think at the moment the pendulum is swinging towards the DfT leaving rolling stock provision to the market, which could give rise to more of this sort of thing in the future.

 

[D365]

It was said at the time (probably in Modern Railways) that the DfT had agreed the transfer of units to Chiltern.

I think at the moment the pendulum is swinging towards the DfT leaving rolling stock provision to the market, which could give rise to more of this sort of thing in the future.

Wasn't it down to the delays in refranchising that TPE could not offer Porterbrook a long-term deal on the 170s, one which Chiltern was able to do?

 

[Jona26]

Already exists.

The DfT can designate items of rolling stock as a 'franchise asset'. The designation is intended to ensure that at the end of a franchise the rolling stock is transferred to the new franchisee.

Section 54, Railways Act 1993?

 

[Bevan Price]

The specification is ultimately for four airport services to/from Windermere; presumably these will be operated as Connect services by new stock, when that becomes available.

Remaining services are likely to be mainly branch shuttles with some running through to/from Preston which would enable rotation of 319 units among the wider fleet, if these, as seems likely, are to be the preferred option for Windermere.

Until new trains arrive, if/when the 185s go, I suspect that all Windernere services (shuttles & Airport trains) might be operated by 156s. Four (per day) paths each way operated by 75mph stock is not a major problem - don't forget that many WCML freights are also limited to 75 mph.

 

[childwallblues]

It would be a waste to have 195/331 on branch shuttles when they could be better used elsewhere.