Train GraphicClick on the map to explore geographics
 
I need help
FAQ
Emergency
About .
Travel & transport from BBC stories as at 14:35 09 Jan 2025
 
* Fresh weather warnings for ice across UK
Read about the forum [here].
Register [here] - it's free.
What do I gain from registering? [here]
 today - Bath Railway Society
24/01/25 - Westbury Station reopens
24/01/25 - LTP4 Wilts / Consultation end
24/01/25 - Bristol Rail Campaign AGM 2025

On this day
9th Jan (2004)
Incorporation of Railway Development Society Ltd (now Railfuture) (link)

Train RunningShort Run
13:30 London Paddington to Bristol Temple Meads
Delayed
11:52 London Paddington to Hereford
13:15 London Paddington to Cardiff Central
14:50 Trowbridge to Bristol Temple Meads
Abbreviation pageAcronymns and abbreviations
Stn ComparatorStation Comparator
Rail newsNews Now - live rail news feed
Site Style 1 2 3 4
Next departures • Bristol Temple MeadsBath SpaChippenhamSwindonDidcot ParkwayReadingLondon PaddingtonMelksham
Exeter St DavidsTauntonWestburyTrowbridgeBristol ParkwayCardiff CentralOxfordCheltenham SpaBirmingham New Street
January 09, 2025, 14:53:31 *
Welcome, Guest. Please login or register.

Login with username, password and session length
Forgotten your username or password? - get a reminder
Most recently liked subjects
[167] 'Railway 200' events and commemorations 2025
[114] Thumpers for Dummies
[96] Railcard Prices going up
[57] Outstanding server / web site issues
[33] Oxford station - facilities, improvements, parking, incidents ...
[21] Views sought : how train companies give assistance to disabled...
 
News: A forum for passengers ... with input from rail professionals welcomed too
 
   Home   Help Search Calendar Login Register  
Pages: [1] 2 3 4
  Print  
Author Topic: Northern don't want 142s back  (Read 20850 times)
northwesterntrains
Hero Member
*****
Posts: 324


View Profile
« on: April 18, 2010, 13:54:58 »

At a stakeholder meeting Northern admitted that they weren't happy using 180s on services between Blackpool/Preston and Manchester/Hazel Grove.  However, they also stated that they will be unhappy at getting the 7 142s back from FGW (First Great Western) to fill the gap when the 180s are returned to East Coast.  They said that due to exponential increases in passenger numbers Pacers that were struggling a few years ago on the busier lines are totally unsuitable for them now.

They didn't say what they wanted instead but it sounds like it's a hint to the DfT» (Department for Transport - about) that they either want the 158s back from ScotRail or that they want more 150s or the 150s that they have been promised quicker.
Logged
Super Guard
Hero Member
*****
Posts: 1308


View Profile
« Reply #1 on: April 18, 2010, 14:16:31 »

Did I miss the press release announcing Northern in charge of rolling stock for the DfT» (Department for Transport - about)?
Logged

Any opinions made on this forum are purely personal and my own.  I am in no way speaking for, or offering the views of First Great Western or First Group.

If my employer feels I have broken any aspect of the Social Media Policy, please PM me immediately, so I can rectify without delay.
northwesterntrains
Hero Member
*****
Posts: 324


View Profile
« Reply #2 on: April 18, 2010, 14:30:16 »

Did I miss the press release announcing Northern in charge of rolling stock for the DfT» (Department for Transport - about)?

You mean you didn't hear?  It's going to be one of the biggest changes to the rail industry ever.  Mainline London trains are going to be comprised of 6x142s and 4x143/4s (The 143/4s being First Class.)  Expect delays of up to 60 minutes for each service as the conductor struggles with the doors jamming at every station.

I'd love to see the faces of the London business people if that actually happened.
Logged
brompton rail
Sr. Member
****
Posts: 262



View Profile
« Reply #3 on: April 18, 2010, 15:35:15 »

I believe the DafT are involved and this is part of larger plan to provide relief for those people unable to fly owing to Icelandic Ash. The 142s are to be retained by FGW (First Great Western) and operated on regular Penzance - Plymouth - Paddington services (where the top speed of 75 mph is less of a problem) on condition that FGW run their HSTs (High Speed Train) as boat rains to Fishguard and Weymouth to assist stranded airline passengers. If it is found that heavily loaded 142s struggle on Devon banks the DafT have employed consultants to investigate and install a type of atmospheric railway propulsion system.
Logged
devon_metro
Hero Member
*****
Posts: 5175



View Profile
« Reply #4 on: April 18, 2010, 19:26:08 »

In reply to the original thread title: Shame!
Logged
6 OF 2 redundant adjunct of unimatrix 01
Hero Member
*****
Posts: 2754



View Profile Email
« Reply #5 on: April 18, 2010, 19:28:08 »

good news... i found somewhere for them to go

http://drupal.thedonkeysanctuary.org.uk/
Logged
The SprinterMeister
Hero Member
*****
Posts: 665


Trundling round the SW

Chris64ex4@hotmail.com
View Profile Email
« Reply #6 on: April 19, 2010, 10:04:14 »

At a stakeholder meeting Northern admitted that they weren't happy using 180s on services between Blackpool/Preston and Manchester/Hazel Grove.  However, they also stated that they will be unhappy at getting the 7 142s back from FGW (First Great Western) to fill the gap when the 180s are returned to East Coast.  They said that due to exponential increases in passenger numbers Pacers that were struggling a few years ago on the busier lines are totally unsuitable for them now.

They didn't say what they wanted instead but it sounds like it's a hint to the DfT» (Department for Transport - about) that they either want the 158s back from ScotRail or that they want more 150s or the 150s that they have been promised quicker.

Tough Titty Cool

Unfortunately for Northern (and fortunately for us down here) it isn't a matter for Northern to decide who gets what units. FGW could have made use of the 14 x Angel Trains 158's that were sent away but they were not on the franchise plan so away they went as  DfT merely told FGW to follow the game plan. Arguably FGW could have made better use of the three car 158's that went to SWT (South West Trains) and sent 158863 - 872 there instead to give SWT a single engine type to deal with.

Northen can moan all they like, I still say their best option is to press for some rapid fire fill in electrification and some cascaded EMU (Electric Multiple Unit)'s to release their DMU (Diesel Multiple Unit)'s for other routes. We have capacity problems here too you know, you must have noticed all these loco hauled trains with hired in drivers (all paid for by DfT) rolling round the area to cover for a unit shortage. I seem to remember this forum got started as a general voice for aggieved commuters rammed into short formed DMU's round the Bristol area due to lousy decision making in the past.
Logged

Trundling gently round the SW
6 OF 2 redundant adjunct of unimatrix 01
Hero Member
*****
Posts: 2754



View Profile Email
« Reply #7 on: April 19, 2010, 11:10:13 »

It's also worth noting that northen has a couple more units due to the oldham loop conversion to metrolink they probably get the most investment outside of London and Scotland
Logged
caliwag
Hero Member
*****
Posts: 342


View Profile
« Reply #8 on: April 19, 2010, 11:21:17 »

Seems that Northern have no plans to sub the 180 loss with any loco hauled trains MCV to BPN...must be the obvious solution, and the passengers would love it. Roll Eyes
Logged
northwesterntrains
Hero Member
*****
Posts: 324


View Profile
« Reply #9 on: April 19, 2010, 11:28:31 »


Tough Titty Cool

Unfortunately for Northern (and fortunately for us down here) it isn't a matter for Northern to decide who gets what units. FGW (First Great Western) could have made use of the 14 x Angel Trains 158's that were sent away but they were not on the franchise plan so away they went as  DfT» (Department for Transport - about) merely told FGW to follow the game plan. Arguably FGW could have made better use of the three car 158's that went to SWT (South West Trains) and sent 158863 - 872 there instead to give SWT a single engine type to deal with.


One decision makes a lot of different things happens.

One key decision in rolling stock has been what's happened with TPE (Trans Pennine Express).  TPE were supposed to be getting new 3 car trains for all routes, with later on 4th cars to be added.

The first thing that happened was TPE told the order would be cut and they would be getting smaller cascaded Turbostars but should be getting enough to run the busier journeys in multiple.  As a result of this SWT forfeited their 170s and got first digs on cascaded 158s and overall got an increase in their capacity.

Following this doubt was cast over whether TPE would get the 4th carriages and apparently Siemens would now have difficulty in building 4th carriages due to new green legislation, not to mention hugely inflated costs over a few years ago.

The next thing that happened is TPE were told to run the Manchester-Scottish services without getting any extra stock.  Virgin and CrossCountry would benefit from this.  This resulted in less Turbostars operating in multiple and a cutback in capacity between Manchester and Preston, a gap which Northern have since had to fill.

Quote
Northen can moan all they like, I still say their best option is to press for some rapid fire fill in electrification and some cascaded EMU (Electric Multiple Unit)'s to release their DMU (Diesel Multiple Unit)'s for other routes.

Really?  We're being told that Manchester-Liverpool electrification could be completed in two years yet it could be 2015 before any cascaded EMUs are available.
« Last Edit: April 19, 2010, 11:50:22 by northwesterntrains » Logged
northwesterntrains
Hero Member
*****
Posts: 324


View Profile
« Reply #10 on: April 19, 2010, 11:37:50 »

It's also worth noting that northen has a couple more units due to the oldham loop conversion to metrolink they probably get the most investment outside of London and Scotland

The Oldham Loop is closed completly at present.  Most of the Oldham Loop passengers are travelling on Calder Vale services so the units released are used to strengthen services on that line.

The conversion consists of overhead DC (Direct Current) electrics (on the cheap), cheap replacement of track where it needs it i.e. not done to a high enough level for heavy rail to run on it (parts of the Altrincham and Bury lines are on old BR (British Rail(ways)) wooden sleepers), new trams (much cheaper than new trains) and a repaint of stations in to Metrolink colours.  Trams will be built to run at rail platform heights.  Overall a lot cheaper than what happening in London Midland land.

« Last Edit: April 19, 2010, 11:56:39 by northwesterntrains » Logged
6 OF 2 redundant adjunct of unimatrix 01
Hero Member
*****
Posts: 2754



View Profile Email
« Reply #11 on: April 19, 2010, 11:54:52 »

Exactly proving you don't have to spend big!
Logged
northwesterntrains
Hero Member
*****
Posts: 324


View Profile
« Reply #12 on: April 19, 2010, 12:02:08 »

We have capacity problems here too you know

The ex-Wessex Pacers and 150s do have low capacity seating compared to Northern's and London Midland's units though.
Logged
devon_metro
Hero Member
*****
Posts: 5175



View Profile
« Reply #13 on: April 19, 2010, 16:16:41 »

We have capacity problems here too you know

The ex-Wessex Pacers and 150s do have low capacity seating compared to Northern's and London Midland's units though.

You seem to be under the illusion that the South West is making these capacity issues up. You try boarding any peak time service and expect a seat out of Bristol/Cardiff/Exeter/Southampton etc. Heaven forbid if you get a 2 car 142 bouncing into Exeter Central at half 5...

There is of course also the fact that the newest unit that First Great Western (west) operates is 1992 (ish), meanwhile in the North you have the 332 (?) EMUs (Electric Multiple Unit) in Leeds, 185s, 170s. But alas, the South always gets the new stock!!  Cool
Logged
inspector_blakey
Hero Member
*****
Posts: 3574



View Profile
« Reply #14 on: April 19, 2010, 16:25:41 »

I'm trying to think of a more scandalous waste of 125 mph intercity-standard rolling stock than having 5-car 180s pottering around between Manchester and Blackpool but having trouble.

Anyone think of any other contenders?
Logged
Do you have something you would like to add to this thread, or would you like to raise a new question at the Coffee Shop? Please [register] (it is free) if you have not done so before, or login (at the top of this page) if you already have an account - we would love to read what you have to say!

You can find out more about how this forum works [here] - that will link you to a copy of the forum agreement that you can read before you join, and tell you very much more about how we operate. We are an independent forum, provided and run by customers of Great Western Railway, for customers of Great Western Railway and we welcome railway professionals as members too, in either a personal or official capacity. Views expressed in posts are not necessarily the views of the operators of the forum.

As well as posting messages onto existing threads, and starting new subjects, members can communicate with each other through personal messages if they wish. And once members have made a certain number of posts, they will automatically be admitted to the "frequent posters club", where subjects not-for-public-domain are discussed; anything from the occasional rant to meetups we may be having ...

 
Pages: [1] 2 3 4
  Print  
 
Jump to:  

Powered by MySQL Powered by PHP Powered by SMF 1.1.2 | SMF © 2006-2007, Simple Machines LLC Valid XHTML 1.0! Valid CSS!
This forum is provided by customers of Great Western Railway (formerly First Great Western), and the views expressed are those of the individual posters concerned. Visit www.gwr.com for the official Great Western Railway website. Please contact the administrators of this site if you feel that the content provided by one of our posters contravenes our posting rules (email link to report). Forum hosted by Well House Consultants

Jump to top of pageJump to Forum Home Page