What a waste of a high speed train!

[CosherB]

I travelled on a Northern 180 on Tuesday evening, Manchester Piccadilly to Deansgate! What a complete waste of superb high speed train; using it on an all-stations stopper to Preston!

And I travelled in what was obviously a de-classified 1st. Very comfy, almost silent.... but oh what a waste!

Why are these very capable trains be used on a 'nodding donkey' turn?

 

[David]

Because there isn't enough pacers and sprinters to go around ....

 

[generalvegitable]

simple answer, stock shortage

 

[tbtc]

What a complete waste of superb high speed train; using it on an all-stations stopper to Preston!

Their capacity is more important than their top speed, in the current environment. Simple

 

[brad465]

Unfortunate situation I'm afraid :cry:

 

[ukrob]

I travelled on a Northern 180 on Tuesday evening, Manchester Piccadilly to Deansgate! What a complete waste of superb high speed train; using it on an all-stations stopper to Preston!

And I travelled in what was obviously a de-classified 1st. Very comfy, almost silent.... but oh what a waste!

Why are these very capable trains be used on a 'nodding donkey' turn?

What stock do you suggest they use instead? Maybe just sending everyone by taxi instead.

 

[387star]

East Coast no longer showing interest in their allocation of 5 180s (including Northerns 3) so will be interesting to see what happens to the 5 that didn't make it to Grand Central or Hull Trains. Perhaps another open access operator is eyeing them up? could mean Northern keeping the 180s for a bit longer, I'm sure they have recently extended the lease
--- old post above --- --- new post below ---
Wiki implies all but 180110 with Hull Trains carry the new First livery is this correct? Is there any informaiton as to which units have seen the full refurbishment or will this not happen to later this year?

And yes according to wiki Northern might RETAIN the 180s Past November!!!

 

[route:oxford]

I travelled on a Northern 180 on Tuesday evening, Manchester Piccadilly to Deansgate! What a complete waste of superb high speed train; using it on an all-stations stopper to Preston!

And I travelled in what was obviously a de-classified 1st. Very comfy, almost silent.... but oh what a waste!

Why are these very capable trains be used on a 'nodding donkey' turn?

It is a bit of a waste.

If someone were to have a few £m to spare to build a fleet of 4 car 172s, they wouldn't have any problems find someone wanting to lease them.

 

[43021HST]

Why are you complaining, you get a comfortable(ish) train instead of a pacer. You can never please some people.

 

[Z12XE]

Perhaps another open access operator is eyeing them up?

If they are, they shouldn't get them until stock shortages with Franchise Operators elsewhere have been sorted.

A solution now would be let Northern have at least 1 more so that they could release a 156 to NXEA to cover their loss as they need 8x156 per day, and now only have 8 units.

 

[AeroSpace]

Why can they not be swapped with 165s between Paddington and Oxford?

 

[Crossforth]

180102 is with Hull Trains as I saw it in London King's Cross on Sunday

 

[route:oxford]

Why can they not be swapped with 165s between Paddington and Oxford?

Aren't the 16X range built to take advantage of the more generous loading gauge of GW route?

 

[anthony263]

Aren't the 16X range built to take advantage of the more generous loading gauge of GW route?

I think some routes might!!! be able to be cleared for them.

as for the spare class 180's maybe FGW should use them again on London - Hereford services instead of the class 165/166 DMU's Which if possible be used on Cardiff - Portsmouth Harbour and realease at least 2 class 158's which could be reformed back into 2 carriage sets and at least 2 being sent to Northern or something. What has happened with the idea of Northern using loco hauled stock?

 

[222666]

Tricky, Turbos are needed on the Berks locals, Cotswolds already has HST (though I was sad to see 180s go from there). Perhaps they should swap them for a few TPE 185s?

 

[tbtc]

If they are, they shouldn't get them until stock shortages with Franchise Operators elsewhere have been sorted.

Spot on; no point wasting units on "start up" routes when we have serious capacity problems elsewhere.

Lets wait ten years to ensure we have built sufficient trains to take away all the capacity problems (lengthening existing services as a priority, not new services on existing lines), *then* we can worry about some Open Access application to run some fanciful new route.

The fact that people can't get a seat on many OFF-peak services, yet Open Access takes units away seems bonkers

 

[LE Greys]

Why can they not be swapped with 165s between Paddington and Oxford?

I always thought that FGW were daft to let them go anyway. They had a capable train that fitted very neatly between the HSTs and the Turbos, and suited the Oxford Flyer right down to the ground. If they had redeployed any remaining Turbos to reinforce Thames Valley services in the peaks, while retaining 1 HST diagram for the Cathedrals, then we would have had 125mph stock on all Cotswold diagrams, perhaps along with an extension of the hourly Bedwyn service to Exeter (thus having something call at Bedwyn and Pewsey and linking Frome to London). However, we're stuck with what we've got, and someone will sort it out sooner or later.

 

[Crossforth]

Tricky, Turbos are needed on the Berks locals, Cotswolds already has HST (though I was sad to see 180s go from there). Perhaps they should swap them for a few TPE 185s?

I don't think there is any point shifting TPEs fleet of uniform 185s for, what are to TPE, non standard 180s

 

[Bastiaan]

I'm not very known with the details of the situation, but here's an idea. Could Northern operate the Manchester - Scotland service for TPE? The Blackpool services could then be added to the TPE network. This way TPE can keep their uniform fleet of 185s and Northern can operate the 180s on a service for which they are better suited. However, I don't know if five 180s is enough to cover the whole service.

 

[CosherB]

Some good points there - cheers all. And mostly sensible answers. Except these two total plonkers.

What stock do you suggest they use instead? Maybe just sending everyone by taxi instead.

Wow, you're a far sighted thinker, aren't you. :roll: How about swapping the stock with a TOC that can use their capability? Did that possibility, or any of several others the thread has raised, whizz over your head at about 35,000 feet so you never saw it?

Why are you complaining, you get a comfortable(ish) train instead of a pacer. You can never please some people.

Crikey, what a blinkered view. Doesn't the wider picture of innappropriate allocation of stock occur to you? In fact, with a comment like that, one wonders if anything much at all occurs to you.

The bottom line is that this stock is innappropriate for a local stopper, and other TOCs could make better use of it. Perhaps there is no mechanism on the modern railway to implement that sort of swap; if not, it's an interesting point to ponder how such a mechanism could be brought about (some kind of top-down view of stock allocation to TOCs).

 

[ukrob]

Some good points there - cheers all. And mostly sensible answers. Except these two total plonkers.

Wow, you're a far sighted thinker, aren't you. :roll: How about swapping the stock with a TOC that can use their capability? Did that possibility, or any of several others the thread has raised, whizz over your head at about 35,000 feet so you never saw it?

Come on then. Give us a simple solution that doesn't involve too much cascading and training crew on stock new to them. Do you know how stock allocation works and who controls it?

Show me one of the easy to do suggestions in this thread that apparently whizzed above my head please. And then you can start throwing insults around.

 

[MCR247]

Wow, you're a far sighted thinker, aren't you. :roll: How about swapping the stock with a TOC that can use their capability? Did that possibility, or any of several others the thread has raised, whizz over your head at about 35,000 feet so you never saw it?

So what ideas do you have then?

The bottom line is that this stock is innappropriate for a local stopper, and other TOCs could make better use of it. Perhaps there is no mechanism on the modern railway to implement that sort of swap; if not, it's an interesting point to ponder how such a mechanism could be brought about (some kind of top-down view of stock allocation to TOCs).

So what should they use?

 

[tbtc]

The bottom line is that this stock is innappropriate for a local stopper, and other TOCs could make better use of it.

As I've said, their strength is their capacity, not their top speed (plenty other trains never get to top speed, as you'll see from the other thread)

I've tried alternatives for using 180s, but there aren't enough of them to use elsewhere (e.g. three units aren't going to be able to cope with a route like Manchester Airport - Glasgow, or Cardiff - Portsmouth or Liverpool - Norwich)

Of course, in an ideal world we'd not build daft little classes like the 175/ 180s (maybe not even the 185s), and just have more 170s/ 222s, but in the real world we're stuck with some units that are unreliable, built in a low number, are split between three TOCs (four if you include the East Coast two) and are better used on a busy route like the Blackpools than on another Open Access route

(I must declare an interest here - I stood all the way from Preston to Manchester Pic last night on a three-car 185 - the route through Bolton needs longer trains, and I wish I'd times it for a 180 instead!)

 

[LE Greys]

So what ideas do you have then?



So what should they use?

Trade them with Scotrail for a bunch of 158s. The Dellas could work the Waverley-Queen Street shuttle, allowing Scotrail to redeploy a few Turbostars, meaning that there would no longer be any need for 170-158 combinations in the peaks.

 

[MCR247]

But in the peaks they are all diagrammed for 2x170 and then off peak 1x170. So why have a 5 car train on a route that needs 3 coaches off peak? And then SR would have to run 170s on 158 runs which would mean slower timings and then Haymarket would have to be trained on 180s. Pointless

 

[LE Greys]

But in the peaks they are all diagrammed for 2x170 and then off peak 1x170. So why have a 5 car train on a route that needs 3 coaches off peak? And then SR would have to run 170s on 158 runs which would mean slower timings and then Haymarket would have to be trained on 180s. Pointless

I suppose that two Dellas would be too long for the Queen Street platforms, so running them in pairs would be impossible. However, the route is growing. I haven't been on it for a while, but the last off-peak 3-car was pretty full. The question I was really trying to address was the 158/170 combinations I have often seen on the Fife Circle, and occasionally working all the way out to Aberdeen. Really, Scotrail need more 170s, 4-car 170s, but there aren't any of those going spare. The Dellas would be a stopgap measure until electrification, so I suppose it is a bit pointless. Maybe that's why it was rejected in 2007, when it was under consideration as a serious solution.

 

[MCR247]

Wiring via falkirk is due to start soon I heard?

 

[TheWalrus]

Do all the small electrification projects up there and give them a load of 350s or 332s!

 

[LE Greys]

Do all the small electrification projects up there and give them a load of 350s or 332s!

Isn't that where the 380s are going?

 

[tbtc]

Isn't that where the 380s are going?

Paisley lines, as far as I understood (cascading stock onto the Bathgate line)