Why did TPE go for three different Nova fleets?

[DB]

65 Mk 5 vehicles in 13 sets plus the spare driving car.

Sorry, I should have checked! That makes it an even bigger difference, anyway!

Just because they would be "least worst" doesn't mean they're going to take them up, either - if the fleet ends up sitting about unwanted and out of use then so be it. No TOC has an obligation to pick up the lease.

Indeed!

 

[Energy]

An alternative answer to the question: Due to the lack of suitable bimode locomotives they had to settle for bimode multiple units instead of more sets of Mark 5as.

It isn't the correct answer though. TPE needed bimode intercity trains and the obvious choice was 802s, the mk5s only came up because not enough 802s could have come in time.

 

[LNW-GW Joint]

65 Mk 5 vehicles in 13 sets plus the spare driving car.

A similar size fleet to the TfW 175s (and several other smallish fleets, inc the 180s).

I wonder how long it will take for the promised "single guiding mind" to sort all these odd-ball fleets out?

 

[DunfordBridge]

The more I think about it, the less it makes sense, to have invested in a separate fleet of Mk 5A stock, given the necessity to build a new depot in Scarborough, to the tune of several millions, and also to alter the track layout of the depot at York Leeman Road.

 

[Class 170101]

The more I think about it, the less it makes sense, to have invested in a separate fleet of Mk 5A stock, given the necessity to build a new depot in Scarborough, to the tune of several millions, and also to alter the track layout of the depot at York Leeman Road.

But presumably without said depot the only other places to maintain the Mk 5As would be with the Mark 5 Sleeper Stock either in Scotland or London.

 

[JonathanH]

But presumably without said depot the only other places to maintain the Mk 5As would be with the Mark 5 Sleeper Stock either in Scotland or London.

The primary depot is Longsight International - Scarborough is a lower level of depot - the point being made is that if only 802s had been procured, a separate depot at Scarborough would not have been needed because they could have been accommodated at Doncaster. No depot was needed at Scarborough for 185s.

 

[Class 170101]

The primary depot is Longsight International - Scarborough is a lower level of depot - the point being made is that if only 802s had been procured, a separate depot at Scarborough would not have been needed because they could have been accommodated at Doncaster. No depot was needed at Scarborough for 185s.

Depends upon how full Doncaster Carr is. IEPs for TPE, Hull Trains and LNER that sounds like a lot.

 

[JonathanH]

Hull Trains

Hull Trains have their units serviced at Bounds Green, not Doncaster. I guess it is up to Hitachi as to how to best balance their servicing schedules against capacity of their depots. In the all 802 situation, I don't think they would need a depot at Scarborough.

I note, however, that TPE having a Scarborough depot is good for the workforce they have recruited there.

 

[DunfordBridge]

But presumably without said depot the only other places to maintain the Mk 5As would be with the Mark 5 Sleeper Stock either in Scotland or London.

Scarborough is the lightest of maintenance - just refuelling and toliet discharge.

The primary depot is Longsight International - Scarborough is a lower level of depot - the point being made is that if only 802s had been procured, a separate depot at Scarborough would not have been needed because they could have been accommodated at Doncaster. No depot was needed at Scarborough for 185s.

It is a strange question, there has been a refuelling point for class 185s for years at the other TPE coastal terminus in Cleethorpes. I am not quite sure how far a class 185 can go before it needs refuelling, but the extra length and weight of the 68 and 5 x Mk5a carriages might have deemed the new Scarborough depot a necessity.

Hull Trains have their units serviced at Bounds Green, not Doncaster. I guess it is up to Hitachi as to how to best balance their servicing schedules against capacity of their depots. In the all 802 situation, I don't think they would need a depot at Scarborough.

I note, however, that TPE having a Scarborough depot is good for the workforce they have recruited there.

I would imagine that a class 802 unit is considerably more frugal on fuel than the the Mk5a combo, both of which contain 5 carriages. The depot seems more like a vanity project and a very costly one too, not only for the construction of the depot, but also the expense of demolishing half of the Washbeck excursion platform and relaying the adjacent track between the station and the depot, in order to provide safe clearance between the excursion lines and the running line.

Besides the work force employed in the creation of the depot, how many people actually work there now? I would have thought a security guard was essential to deter the local graffiti 'artists'.

 

[irish_rail]

The lack of inter operability of the gwr 800 and 802s causes lots of problems , especially when a unit is required for the wofe line and only 800s are available. Lost count of the delayed starts from Paddington due to awaiting an 802 to be sourced.

You'd think First had learned its lesson and to me 3 separate fleets that can only be worked by specific depots is short sighted in the extreme.

 

[DB]

The lack of inter operability of the gwr 800 and 802s causes lots of problems , especially when a unit is required for the wofe line and only 800s are available. Lost count of the delayed starts from Paddington due to awaiting an 802 to be sourced.

You'd think First had learned its lesson and to me 3 separate fleets that can only be worked by specific depots is short sighted in the extreme.

Wonder how difficult it would be to make 800s and 802s able to work together? Presumably it's a software issue?

 

[Cheshire Scot]

It is a strange question, there has been a refuelling point for class 185s for years at the other TPE coastal terminus in Cleethorpes. I am not quite sure how far a class 185 can go before it needs refuelling, but the extra length and weight of the 68 and 5 x Mk5a carriages might have deemed the new Scarborough depot a necessity.

My understanding was the main driver of the need for facilities at Scarborough was the limited fuel range of the class 68s - 185s can comfortably do two days in traffic before needing fuel but the 68s don't come anywhere near that.

The need for fuel at Cleethorpes is probably driven by a lot of Cleethorpes route diagrams being captive and 185s not taking fuel at Sheffield e.g. some sets start their day at Cleethorpes and end up back there that night, or a set starts Ardwick or Cleethorpes on day1, ends day 1 at Sheffield then ends day2 at Cleethorpes or Ardwick, by no means empty but needing a decent top up.

 

[43096]

Wonder how difficult it would be to make 800s and 802s able to work together? Presumably it's a software issue?

Contractual issues are rather more restrictive. The DfT fleets are highly restricted in terms of what depots they can land back at each night. If you’re short of a set for the down Hind you can’t just put an 800 out on it as it can’t overnight at Penzance.

 

[irish_rail]

Contractual issues are rather more restrictive. The DfT fleets are highly restricted in terms of what depots they can land back at each night. If you’re short of a set for the down Hind you can’t just put an 800 out on it as it can’t overnight at Penzance.

Exactly. The issue is the precious 800s not allowed to overnight at Laira or Long Rock. Quite why one digit in a running number should affect where a train can stable is anyone's guess. I wonder how happy passengers waiting for a delayed evening departure to the south west would be to know their train is delayed due to the wrong type of unit running number!

 

[Bald Rick]

Quite why one digit in a running number should effect where a train can stable is anyones guess.

It’s nothing to do with the number, and everything to do with the service provisions contact Hitachi have for the trains. There are some very, very specific maintenance arrangements. Same for LNER.

 

[Tynwald]

Hull Trains have their units serviced at Bounds Green, not Doncaster. I guess it is up to Hitachi as to how to best balance their servicing schedules against capacity of their depots. In the all 802 situation, I don't think they would need a depot at Scarborough.

I note, however, that TPE having a Scarborough depot is good for the workforce they have recruited there.

Scarborough is an Arriva Traincare Depot. A sub depot of Crewe.

 

[DunfordBridge]

My understanding was the main driver of the need for facilities at Scarborough was the limited fuel range of the class 68s - 185s can comfortably do two days in traffic before needing fuel but the 68s don't come anywhere near that.

The need for fuel at Cleethorpes is probably driven by a lot of Cleethorpes route diagrams being captive and 185s not taking fuel at Sheffield e.g. some sets start their day at Cleethorpes and end up back there that night, or a set starts Ardwick or Cleethorpes on day1, ends day 1 at Sheffield then ends day2 at Cleethorpes or Ardwick, by no means empty but needing a decent top up.

So basically the noisy class 68s are like the old Jaguars of the UK train world. I never realised that diagramming on the South Pennine route could be so complicated although I am now wondering distinguishes the South Pennine route from the North Pennine route where there are several more possible destinations for a unit, not all of which will have refuelling facilities.

I seem to remember reading that the class 68 and Mk5A stock were being proposed as a possibility for running between Nottingham and Liverpool following the splitting of the East Midlands Railway route from East Anglia to Liverpool, also through the South Pennine route. Transpennine were in the running along with Northern as the successor for the western part of that route.

 

[irish_rail]

It’s nothing to do with the number, and everything to do with the service provisions contact Hitachi have for the trains. There are some very, very specific maintenance arrangements. Same for LNER.

I'm aware of that I was being sarcastic. The service agreement needs tearing up and re writing although I suspect the lawyers won't allow it unfortunately.

 

[Clarence Yard]

That’s how Agility guarantee their money - over tight contract specification.

Getting back to the OP’s question, it was meeting the bid timescales that forced the split fleet decision on TPE. No one builder could deliver the fleet in the required time.

 

[Cheshire Scot]

Scarborough is an Arriva Traincare Depot. A sub depot of Crewe.

Under contract to TPE who built the depot - or paid a contractor to build it - to enable their trains to be serviced.

 

[MML]

At some point following further electrification, there will be a need to increase bi-mode services on the Northern TPE route. Fleet commonality would suggest more 802s.
In Germany, you have premium IC or ICE services and then cheaper Regional Express services. Chiltern could use displaced 68s and extended rakes of Mk5s to operate regional express limited stop services from Marylebone to Birmingham and Oxford. Competing effectively with GWR, LNWR and Avanti WC services to both destinations. With the displaced Turbostars enhancing the commuter stopping services and providing stock for the East West rail services which are likely to remain diesel powered for some time.
Of course, this would require some DfT planning in consultation with TOCs but could be a minimum cost cascade process as a means of delivering new stock and removing complexity.

 

[ScottGallagher]

Is it a non starter to think that the coaching stock as it's modern could be converted to being 1 or 2 car units like D stock or 155/153 conversion. As to who would want them is another conversation!!

 

[a_c_skinner]

The DfT fleets are highly restricted in terms of what depots they can land back at each night.

This is a random quote (apologies) of many in this thread that boil down to a lack of ability to apply common sense to the rolling stock under discussion. The TPE mess (and that is the word) stems from someone not being able to decide it was worth waiting for the right solution of a uniform bi-mode fleet from whatever company. If I could wish for a Christmas present for the railway it would be common sense to cut through (what I think is the root cause) red tape. My wife is about to tell me to do something more festive.

 

[LNW-GW Joint]

Chiltern could use displaced 68s and extended rakes of Mk5s to operate regional express limited stop services from Marylebone to Birmingham and Oxford. Competing effectively with GWR, LNWR and Avanti WC services to both destinations. With the displaced Turbostars enhancing the commuter stopping services and providing stock for the East West rail services which are likely to remain diesel powered for some time.
Of course, this would require some DfT planning in consultation with TOCs but could be a minimum cost cascade process as a means of delivering new stock and removing complexity.

Almost anything is possible, but like all TOCs Chiltern is heading for a concession status where the DfT specs the service, sets the fares and takes the revenue, and competition of the sort you describe is eliminated.
Some solution for East West will be required (and is being sought) but it will be the DfT's choice.
We'll soon know what kind of future TPE has with First Group in the concession model.

 

[Watershed]

I am not quite sure how far a class 185 can go before it needs refuelling

Approx 1800 miles (though of course the kind of services run, i.e. Huddersfield stoppers vs Redcars cruising along the ECML, will also make a difference).

That's enough to last 2 days on almost any combination of diagrams. The issue is more with the toilets, as with typical use the water will run out and the "other" tank will be full well before that point.

Also if one engine happens to be isolated then the other two carriages' engines will have to work harder to compensate, and thus as there is no cross-carriage fuel transfer those carriages will run out of fuel sooner than the normal range.

the extra length and weight of the 68 and 5 x Mk5a carriages might have deemed the new Scarborough depot a necessity.

It's not so much the length and weight - more the fact that the total fuel capacity is understandably lower with a class 68 than with a 185 or other distributed traction unit where you can have fuel tanks underneath each carriage.

This is a random quote (apologies) of many in this thread that boil down to a lack of ability to apply common sense to the rolling stock under discussion. The TPE mess (and that is the word) stems from someone not being able to decide it was worth waiting for the right solution of a uniform bi-mode fleet from whatever company. If I could wish for a Christmas present for the railway it would be common sense to cut through (what I think is the root cause) red tape. My wife is about to tell me to do something more festive.

Like with the pensions liability issue, this responsibility for this one can be squarely placed with a certain department.

 

[Bletchleyite]

This is a random quote (apologies) of many in this thread that boil down to a lack of ability to apply common sense to the rolling stock under discussion. The TPE mess (and that is the word) stems from someone not being able to decide it was worth waiting for the right solution of a uniform bi-mode fleet from whatever company. If I could wish for a Christmas present for the railway it would be common sense to cut through (what I think is the root cause) red tape. My wife is about to tell me to do something more festive.

It wasn't right to wait without doing anything - the TPE situation had got really dire, and only COVID gave it a respite by reducing passenger numbers. But hiring something in in the meantime (such as the Mk3s they failed to operate properly) would have done, so the new kit was more sensible.

 

[DB]

Is it a non starter to think that the coaching stock as it's modern could be converted to being 1 or 2 car units like D stock or 155/153 conversion. As to who would want them is another conversation!!

It's unpowered coaching stock - trying to rebuild that as a DMU would probably cost as much as building a DMU from scratch!

It wasn't right to wait without doing anything - the TPE situation had got really dire, and only COVID gave it a respite by reducing passenger numbers. But hiring something in in the meantime (such as the Mk3s they failed to operate properly) would have done, so the new kit was more sensible.

Indeed - and the situation really was down to the DfT and their inflexible franchising system (XC has the same issue) - there's no reason they couldn't expand the fleet part way through a franchise and put an obligation on the next operator to use it until X date (as I believe was done with the Pendolinos), but the flawed concept of 'competition' means that they don't want to do that, and therefore overcrowding is just allowed to get worse and worse until a franchise ends, and there's a rush to do something about it at that point - leading in this case to a situation which is far from ideal. When a franchise gets a seemingly endless series of extensions (as XC has) the situation becomes even worse.

 

[Bletchleyite]

It's unpowered coaching stock - trying to rebuild that as a DMU would probably cost as much as building a DMU from scratch!

In any case, if you accept the Stadler solution as a DMU, it's also a DMU if you bang a locomotive on the end permanently.

That there aren't autocouplers isn't really relevant because they never operate in multiple anyway.

 

[adamedwards]

If the Mk5s can be made reliable, how about a move to Ireland to be the stock for the new hourly Enterprise from Dublin to Belfast? Replaced by 802s cascaded from other routes given post covid shrinkage in services.

 

[DB]

If the Mk5s can be made reliable, how about a move to Ireland to be the stock for the new hourly Enterprise from Dublin to Belfast? Replaced by 802s cascaded from other routes given post covid shrinkage in services.

Wrong gauge, and nothing in Ireland loco-wise with the same multiple working system.

i.e. expensive modifications would be required.