TPEX Class 68 & Mk5 Nova 3 fleet to be withdrawnDec 2023

[4630]

3 minutes ago, Ian Hargrave said:

The fleet. ?   

 I quoted as the comment appeared in the magazine.

[newbryford]

17 minutes ago, Ian Hargrave said:

The fleet. ?   All 27…..to replace and for which services ?   XC operate 170 and 220/221 which in terms of age are surely newer. And it ( so a member has recently posted ) is to receive 7X Avanti’s 221 as replacement for its recently withdrawn 125 ‘s. 

 

13 minutes ago, 4630 said:

 I quoted as the comment appeared in the magazine.

 

Was "the fleet" reference to the 68/Mk5 or the 27x175s?

Edited October 25, 2023 by newbryford
27x added for clarity

[4630]

This thread is about 68s and Mark5.

[Ian Hargrave]

6 minutes ago, 4630 said:

 I quoted as the comment appeared in the magazine.

 

Yes I realise that thanks but that’s a large lump of hardware when you consider XC runs on two types of unit with dedicated servicing locations Twin Rivers for the Voyagers and Tyseley for the 170.

[4630]

5 minutes ago, Ian Hargrave said:

 

Yes I realise that thanks but that’s a large lump of hardware when you consider XC runs on two types of unit with dedicated servicing locations Twin Rivers for the Voyagers and Tyseley for the 170.

 

Yes for sure.  Although it could be argued that until a couple of weeks ago CrossCountry were already running three types of unit in the form of HSTs based at a third depot - Plymouth Laira.  Four if you count Leeds Neville Hill, where HSTs routinely received some overnight maintenance. 

 

The piece in Modern Railways goes into detail about full fleet refurbishment of both the Voyagers and class 170s, plus additional services that CrossCountry would like to introduce.   The comment about the 68s and Mark 5s is in the last couple of sentences and references "...could be deployed on Nottingham to Cardiff services...".

[woodenhead]

1 minute ago, 4630 said:

The piece in Modern Railways goes into detail about full fleet refurbishment of both the Voyagers and class 170s, plus additional services that CrossCountry would like to introduce.   The comment about the 68s and Mark 5s is in the last couple of sentences and references "...could be deployed on Nottingham to Cardiff services...".

Seems a bit overkill for that service, I would have thought a very long distance service like the Liverpool - Norwich one would suit them better.  A 68 is going to shake Birmingham NS to bits. 😁

[Reorte]

1 minute ago, woodenhead said:

Seems a bit overkill for that service, I would have thought a very long distance service like the Liverpool - Norwich one would suit them better.  A 68 is going to shake Birmingham NS to bits. 😁

Liverpool - Norwich? Suits me, I'd like to see them passing by near me!

 

[The Meerkat]

13 minutes ago, Reorte said:

Liverpool - Norwich? Suits me, I'd like to see them passing by near me!

 

thats TPE route??  they giving up mk5

[Ian Hargrave]

3 minutes ago, 4630 said:

 

Yes for sure.  Although it could be argued that until a couple of weeks ago CrossCountry were already running three types of unit in the form of HSTs based at a third depot - Plymouth Laira.  Four if you count Leeds Neville Hill, where HSTs routinely received some overnight maintenance. 

 

The piece in Modern Railways goes into detail about full fleet refurbishment of both the Voyagers and class 170s, plus additional services that CrossCountry would like to introduce.   The comment about the 68s and Mark 5s is in the last couple of sentences and references "...could be deployed on Nottingham to Cardiff services...".

Thanks.The comment about refurbishment is interesting.The 170 wears its years well and is good to travel on but could do with a cabin and seating upgrade.EMR have received 2 car versions which have been nicely upgraded and now use them on Newark-Crewe services in place of 153’s. 
   Using the TPEX Nova 3 +68 on Nottingham-Cardiff trains will create platform occupancy difficulties at some stations. The service normally runs as 2x2 car 170 but can be only a 2 car at times whereas the Nova +68 is quite long  in comparison and I wonder if it would be cost effective for this particular service,though commuter traffic at New Street might benefit from extra capacity.Also bear in mind that the intermediate service from Nottingham to Birmingham has to fit into this cycle 

[woodenhead]

3 minutes ago, The Meerkat said:

thats TPE route??  they giving up mk5

No it's East Midlands or whatever name it goes by currently - TPE uses the same route between Liverpool and Shefffield (via Warrington Central), with Norwich services reversing at Sheffield and going via Chesterfield to Nottingham and onwards to Norwich.

[4630]

6 minutes ago, woodenhead said:

Seems a bit overkill for that service, 

 

I completely agree.

 

7 minutes ago, woodenhead said:

I would have thought a very long distance service like the Liverpool - Norwich one would suit them better. 

 

I agree too, although as I appreciate you know, Liverpool-Norwich isn't a CrossCountry route.

 

8 minutes ago, woodenhead said:

 A 68 is going to shake Birmingham NS to bits. 😁

 

Seems a bit unfair on Birmingham NS really.

 

I suspect one of two things is happening here;

 

1.  Beacon Rail, who own the Mark 5A is keen to find work for them quickly, otherwise their expensive asset becomes a liability.  I Imagine they're knocking on the door of any operator that might just be able to make use of them.  The same, but to a slightly lesser extent and with less urgency for DRS and the class 68s.

 

2.  CrossCountry Voyagers and class 170s are, as I understand it, pretty rigorously diagrammed.  Although CrossCountry are supposedly getting more Voyagers from Avanti West Coast, they may not get all that they want/need.  Especially with Grand Central having already taken a couple of units on a short term lease and by all accounts impressed with them (not a surprise when compared to their unreliable and incendiary class 180s).

 

CrossCountry might need additional rolling stock, under keen leasing terms, to cover for their Voyagers when they're being refurbished.

 

 

Just my thoughts to add to the pot. 

 

 

[Ian Hargrave]

25 minutes ago, woodenhead said:

Seems a bit overkill for that service, I would have thought a very long distance service like the Liverpool - Norwich one would suit them better.  A 68 is going to shake Birmingham NS to bits. 😁

That service is 2x158 as far as Nottingham and continues as a single unit btw

[Ian Hargrave]

6 minutes ago, 4630 said:

 

I completely agree.

 

 

I agree too, although as I appreciate you know, Liverpool-Norwich isn't a CrossCountry route.

 

 

Seems a bit unfair on Birmingham NS really.

 

I suspect one of two things is happening here;

 

1.  Beacon Rail, who own the Mark 5A is keen to find work for them quickly, otherwise their expensive asset becomes a liability.  I Imagine they're knocking on the door of any operator that might just be able to make use of them.  The same, but to a slightly lesser extent and with less urgency for DRS and the class 68s.

 

2.  CrossCountry Voyagers and class 170s are, as I understand it, pretty rigorously diagrammed.  Although CrossCountry are supposedly getting more Voyagers from Avanti West Coast, they may not get all that they want/need.  Especially with Grand Central having already taken a couple of units on a short term lease and by all accounts impressed with them (not a surprise when compared to their unreliable and incendiary class 180s).

 

CrossCountry might need additional rolling stock, under keen leasing terms, to cover for their Voyagers when they're being refurbished.

 

 

Just my thoughts to add to the pot. 

 

 

The TPEX +68 is a rail enthusiasts dream…a locomotive hauled train once more in daily use.But sadly not to be it seems. Do we have a white elephant here ?  The Avanti 221’s are in good condition and ride well so hardly surprising Grand Central are impressed. 

[The Meerkat]

1 hour ago, woodenhead said:

No it's East Midlands or whatever name it goes by currently - TPE uses the same route between Liverpool and Shefffield (via Warrington Central), with Norwich services reversing at Sheffield and going via Chesterfield to Nottingham and onwards to Norwich.

 

yes just realised,  all xc chat confused me a little bit

[russ p]

Trouble with Liverpool Norwich is there are lots of SP speeds. Which 68s and mk5s can't do. From Lakenheath to Ely is 45 for locos against 75 for units

[CWJ]

Re. Differential speed restrictions, I believe the same problem affects the Hope Valley.

 

Re. Gloriously indulgent and uninformed speculation about the future, in my opinion these sets would be best paired with an electric or bi-mode loco on routes without frequent stops. That way they could efficiently spend most of their time at 100+mph and their single-leaf doors wouldn't delay too many station dwells. Both the coaches and the loco would need modifying for compatibility, but then that would be true for any loco that isn't a TPE-hired 68.

 

Cheers,

 

Will

[woodenhead]

The problem is the coaches were procurred due to a flawed process - TPE wanted quick results so ordered three types of 'Nova' trains when all they actually needed was one fleet of IEP derivatives.

 

So we have a a series of coach rakes with a DVT designed around the interior driving position of a class 68 that had no purpose other than being something they could order and get delivered rather quickly.

 

In other words they are an answer looking for a question and here we are looking for that question and coming up with blanks because there is no case for a locomotive/coach combo any longer for daytime express passenger service in the UK.  What we do have are special cases like the Sleepers or re-allocation of existing loco/coach combos - TFW or LNE Mk4s.

[Mike_Walker]

9 hours ago, woodenhead said:

The problem is the coaches were procurred due to a flawed process - TPE wanted quick results so ordered three types of 'Nova' trains when all they actually needed was one fleet of IEP derivatives.

 

So we have a a series of coach rakes with a DVT designed around the interior driving position of a class 68 that had no purpose other than being something they could order and get delivered rather quickly.

 

In other words they are an answer looking for a question and here we are looking for that question and coming up with blanks because there is no case for a locomotive/coach combo any longer for daytime express passenger service in the UK.  What we do have are special cases like the Sleepers or re-allocation of existing loco/coach combos - TFW or LNE Mk4s.

No, it was the DfT that required a loco-hauled fleet in the ITT for the franchise.  They saw it as an opportunity to redeploy the 442s as hauled stock but First, having had won the contract, were understandably wary of those and proposed new build instead.  CAF Mk5s having been created for the sleepers were the only viable option.  If it had been left to First the there would only have been 397s and (more) 802s for TPE which, ironically, we've ended up with under DOR (DfT) control backed up by the 185s which will be retained when originally they were to be given up by TPE.

[woodenhead]

@Mike_Walker still a flawed idea - DFT asked for one thing, TPE did another and both ended up with a solution that would not have otherwise been chosen and the 442s, where are they now?

[frobisher]

3 minutes ago, woodenhead said:

@Mike_Walker still a flawed idea - DFT asked for one thing, TPE did another and both ended up with a solution that would not have otherwise been chosen and the 442s, where are they now?

 

Getting stripped and scraped at the moment.

[phil-b259]

4 minutes ago, woodenhead said:

@Mike_Walker still a flawed idea - DFT asked for one thing, TPE did another and both ended up with a solution that would not have otherwise been chosen and the 442s, where are they now?

The 442 idea was bonkers anyway - those within the industry knew the amount of work required (a complete strip down to bare metal, full re-wire and replacement of things like the door mechanisms + air con system) would not have come cheap and most likely costed more than new stock.

[31A]

The net result as far as TPE was concerned would likely have been similar, in that they would have bitten off too big a training commitment regardless whether the coaches were ex 442s or the CAF Mk 5s.

 

[Hesperus]

The logical thing to do with the fleet of mk5s would be what the 4TCs used to do.  A long run behind something electric powered that needs to continue far enough away from the wires that batteries won't cut it.

 

Can't see that happening though with bi-modes available.

[Reorte]

20 hours ago, CWJ said:

Re. Differential speed restrictions, I believe the same problem affects the Hope Valley.

I don't think they're as severe as that 45 vs 75  but there are certainly a few of them. Although I've got a vague impression that the 185s that use that route can't use the SP speeds anyway. Waiting for a correction from someone who actually knows what they're talking about!

[Mike_Walker]

42 minutes ago, Reorte said:

I don't think they're as severe as that 45 vs 75  but there are certainly a few of them. Although I've got a vague impression that the 185s that use that route can't use the SP speeds anyway. Waiting for a correction from someone who actually knows what they're talking about!

Correct.  The SP applies to classes 15x, 16x and 17x but not to class 185.  This is because of their additional weight and braking performance.