Southern add 40 vehicles to order

[Lrd]

quick question the 442s all run as DOO don't they? Gatwick Express staff don't work as conventional conductors? is this because all stations they stop at have train dispatch or RA/CDs ? must be tough dispatching those units on time with their tiny doors

The Gatwick Express runs non-stop and has layovers at both Gatwick and Victoria. There are platform staff at both stations.

 

[387star]

The Gatwick Express runs non-stop and has layovers at both Gatwick and Victoria. There are platform staff at both stations.

what about when they run to Brighton? do they stop at too few stops to need a conductor? what about the Eastbourne runs?

At Brighton they are announced as a Southern service are they not? does this lead to confusion with people expecting a green train?

 

[Lrd]

what about when they run to Brighton? do they stop at too few stops to need a conductor? what about the Eastbourne runs?

At Brighton they are announced as a Southern service are they not? does this lead to confusion with people expecting a green train?

I have no idea, I was just thinking about the Gatwick Express as being just the Gatwick-Victoria express runs.

Do they not have guard's on the extended runs?

 

[RAGNARØKR]

Personally, I don't have a problem with Thameslink being longer-distance per se, but it needs to match distance-wise on both sides. Brighton to Bedford does match at about 60 minutes to St Pancras/Blackfriars from each direction.

There are two problems with long routes running through London. The first is the potential for propagation of disruption between networks that are otherwise separate. Cross country trains encounter the same thing. The second is that the trains get hit by crowds travelling short distances in central London and have to be designed for that, otherwise station dwell times become excessive - in other words they have to have wide doors and plenty of circulation space. Which means a shortage of comfortable seats for long journeys. This has been the problem with Thameslink ever since it opened.

 

[RobShipway]

There are two problems with long routes running through London. The first is the potential for propagation of disruption between networks that are otherwise separate. Cross country trains encounter the same thing. The second is that the trains get hit by crowds travelling short distances in central London and have to be designed for that, otherwise station dwell times become excessive - in other words they have to have wide doors and plenty of circulation space. Which means a shortage of comfortable seats for long journeys. This has been the problem with Thameslink ever since it opened.

Having travelled from Brighton to Clapham Junction a class 319 a few times, it is I found very uncomfortable even at that distance and I think the seats in the Class 700's need to be more like the seats in the 450's, but with some being longitude as they are in teh class 378's or have the seating based on the seating in the Class 458's, which are good for travelling for an hour but also work well in suburban circumstances.

 

[tbtc]

There are two problems with long routes running through London. The first is the potential for propagation of disruption between networks that are otherwise separate. Cross country trains encounter the same thing. The second is that the trains get hit by crowds travelling short distances in central London and have to be designed for that, otherwise station dwell times become excessive - in other words they have to have wide doors and plenty of circulation space. Which means a shortage of comfortable seats for long journeys. This has been the problem with Thameslink ever since it opened.

I agree here (to an extent), the problem is that we seem to have a lot of people on here who want Crossrail to become a long distance route (Exeter/ Bristol to Norwich/ Stansted) which would be even worse.

 

[jopsuk]

Aye, for cross-London running long distance what ideally would be needed is a further pair of tracks (on both CrossRail and Thameslink) with just a single station within London (at their interhcnage), with potentially four or even six platforms for each route, to allow longish dwell times- and then "first stop" eg Reading. Don't mix Metro with ANYTHING- this is the mistake of Thameslink. This is the problem with the south London rail network that stops it being as good as the (mainly) north london Underground network.

 

[HSTEd]

If you are using the correct kind of rolling stock..... Bristol to London could likely be made similar journey time terms to what Bedford-STP is now.

We really need to stop thinking about "Long Distance" and "Metro" services being entirely different things.

There is no reason we could not have "Long Distance" "Metro" services.

 

[ushawk]

what about when they run to Brighton? do they stop at too few stops to need a conductor? what about the Eastbourne runs?

At Brighton they are announced as a Southern service are they not? does this lead to confusion with people expecting a green train?

I believe that the majority of the Brighton Express services are DOO and the runs to Eastbourne ARE covered by a conductor as DOO is not permitted on Coastway East.

They are announced as a Southern service at Brighton, although underneath the list of calling points, it states "The SOUTHERN service is operated by Gatwick Express type coaches. Tickets marked SOUTHERN ONLY are allowed on this service" - PIS also says "Southern service".

 

[RAGNARØKR]

If you are using the correct kind of rolling stock..... Bristol to London could likely be made similar journey time terms to what Bedford-STP is now.

We really need to stop thinking about "Long Distance" and "Metro" services being entirely different things.

There is no reason we could not have "Long Distance" "Metro" services.

If only you were right. A good long distance train would have seats like the end cars of the class 377 - a mixture of table bays and airlines not too close together, though with a bit more luggage space. A good Metro train has wide doorways and plenty of standing and circulation space - something like the class 378 or S-type. Use one type of train on a long distance metro service and you will either end up with insufficient seats or glacially slow loading and unloading at busy stations where throughput of trains is critical. Or possibly both, as in the case of the 313 stock as built.

 

[RobShipway]

If only you were right. A good long distance train would have seats like the end cars of the class 377 - a mixture of table bays and airlines not too close together, though with a bit more luggage space. A good Metro train has wide doorways and plenty of standing and circulation space - something like the class 378 or S-type. Use one type of train on a long distance metro service and you will either end up with insufficient seats or glacially slow loading and unloading at busy stations where throughput of trains is critical. Or possibly both, as in the case of the 313 stock as built.

But that is where you order two different types or more of the same train as was done with the class 377's.

 

[HSTEd]

If only you were right. A good long distance train would have seats like the end cars of the class 377 - a mixture of table bays and airlines not too close together, though with a bit more luggage space. A good Metro train has wide doorways and plenty of standing and circulation space - something like the class 378 or S-type. Use one type of train on a long distance metro service and you will either end up with insufficient seats or glacially slow loading and unloading at busy stations where throughput of trains is critical. Or possibly both, as in the case of the 313 stock as built.

Long Distance does not equate to Long Journey times neccesarily.

The Class 395 manages 57km (~35 miles) stop to stop in 19 minutes.

And Class 378s are unneccesarily extreme for most "metro" services.

I am talking about average journey times less than an hour, not the ten minutes of the Class 378s/S-Stock.

 

[43074]

Back on topic...

If the rumours circulating that the Class 319s may not be 'suitable' for the NW Triangle Electrification scheme are true, why not send some of the new trains up North, subleasing them in a similar way to the 377/5 units? (25 or so should be enough for the entire project). Nothing has been revealed on how these trains are to be used yet.

 

[anthony263]

Back on topic...

If the rumours circulating that the Class 319s may not be 'suitable' for the NW Triangle Electrification scheme are true, why not send some of the new trains up North, subleasing them in a similar way to the 377/5 units? (25 or so should be enough for the entire project). Nothing has been revealed on how these trains are to be used yet.

A good idea in theory and also what about the 4 class 360s that are currently with Heathrow Connect perhaps a home could be found for these once Crossrail is up and running between London and Heathrow

 

[tbtc]

If the rumours circulating that the Class 319s may not be 'suitable' for the NW Triangle Electrification scheme are true, why not send some of the new trains up North, subleasing them in a similar way to the 377/5 units? (25 or so should be enough for the entire project)

I still think that this is a big "if" - Manchester and Liverpool already see EMUs (323, 350, 390) so I'm surprised by the claim that 319s can't cope with the new bits of electrification.

Anyhow, the order discussed on this thread is only for eight EMUs (shows how desperate things are when such a tiny order gets so many comments) whereas the "Lancashire Triangle" will need a lot more than that.
--- old post above --- --- new post below ---

A good idea in theory and also what about the 4 class 360s that are currently with Heathrow Connect perhaps a home could be found for these once Crossrail is up and running between London and Heathrow

That's still five years away. It'd make more sense to give these to GA, who already operate 360s, and swap other EMUs around to avoid having tiny fleets

 

[bronzeonion]

Class 378's are ideal but could be made better with an extra doorway and more strap hangers for Metro services.

 

[northwichcat]

I still think that this is a big "if" - Manchester and Liverpool already see EMUs (323, 350, 390) so I'm surprised by the claim that 319s can't cope with the new bits of electrification.

The question mark seems to be over the existing pantograph being compatible with the wires meeting the standards that new electrification work has to conform to. So I would assume the 319s would need new pantographs fitting if they are to run on any line that is to be electrified opposed to already electrified.

I always thought given clearance issues come up from time to time that we can't just assume the 319s will work on any route without possibly requiring modifications.

 

[tbtc]

The question mark seems to be over the existing pantograph being compatible with the wires meeting the standards that new electrification work has to conform to. So I would assume the 319s would need new pantographs fitting if they are to run on any line that is to be electrified opposed to already electrified.

I always thought given clearance issues come up from time to time that we can't just assume the 319s will work on any route without possibly requiring modifications.

This hasn't been an issue with any other electrification (including Paisley Canal which opened a few days ago), so is this specific to the 319s?

Would 321s be better for newly electrified lines (i.e. give the entire 319 fleet to GA to free up an equivalent number of 321s - given the advantage that Northern already have some 321/322s)?

 

[northwichcat]

This hasn't been an issue with any other electrification (including Paisley Canal which opened a few days ago), so is this specific to the 319s?

Would 321s be better for newly electrified lines (i.e. give the entire 319 fleet to GA to free up an equivalent number of 321s - given the advantage that Northern already have some 321/322s)?

The previous Labour government did make clear it would be 319s that would be refurbished and go to the North West. However, at that stage there were no confirmed plans to electrify Manchester-Leeds so a North West EMU fleet would have remained separate to a Yorkshire EMU fleet.

The current government made a slight alteration to the wording to say something along the lines of "as a result of EMUs being returned to the leasing companies following a new order for Thameslink there will be EMUs available for newly electrified North West routes" which does leave the option for another operator to take on the 319s and to cascade their existing EMUs to Northern. However, I've not heard about any other operators being interested in the 319s so everyone's assumed it will still be the 319s in the long term.

At the moment we don't know what the North West will get initially (other than the 350/4s for Scottish services) or whether the initial cascade will be a permanent or temporary transfer. I think the extra EMUs for Southern does effectively rule out a new order being placed.

 

[Class377/5]

The 319s will be fine. All that's been said us the new design of OHLE is I compatible with BR OHLE. This had lead to BR pans aren't suitable which in turn has lead those no informed to go 319s arent compatable.

Let's get this straight, they are compatable, all they need is a pan change. Something that's simple and easy to do. Remember the 319s worked through the channel tunnel with modified pans so it's not an issue to do this or the NW move.

As has been stated on other forums by those working on the NW triangle, all design work is based on 319s.

 

[Manchester77]

Sorry to go off topic but, the 350/4s for TPE will the operate Blackpool services as well or are they just for Scottish services?

 

[northwichcat]

Sorry to go off topic but, the 350/4s for TPE will the operate Blackpool services as well or are they just for Scottish services?

There are only 10 x 350/4s being ordered currently so that will only just cover Manchester Airport-Wigan-Scotland every hour with a single 350 operating each service by the time maintenance is allowed for. Someone previously said that TPE are looking at the option of using 185s on the quietest Scottish services on Saturdays to allow some 8 car operations on the busiest services.

 

[thelem]

I always thought given clearance issues come up from time to time that we can't just assume the 319s will work on any route without possibly requiring modifications.

Except they have been designed for Thameslink which has quite tight clearances IIRC, and will be being moved to newly electrified routes, where clearance work can be combined with the electrification work.

 

[43074]

A good idea in theory and also what about the 4 class 360s that are currently with Heathrow Connect perhaps a home could be found for these once Crossrail is up and running between London and Heathrow

As has been said before, the 360/2s will probably go to the Anglia franchisee in 2017 to avoid having a small fleet elsewhere.
--- old post above --- --- new post below ---

I think the extra EMUs for Southern does effectively rule out a new order being placed.

Yes definitely, especially as the 216 extra vehicles will be dual voltage (IF they are ever built).

Yet another cascade possibility arises with the 216 extra vehicles. They aren't needed on the Southern yet, but what about on Great Northern lines from Kings' Cross. There are 40 365s and 13 321s on Great Northern, so 53 units all together. 216 new vehicles formed into 4- car trains would a total of 54- 4 car trains. The 321s and 365s could be cascaded elsewhere - 321s to Anglia and 365s to Great Western perhaps?
--- old post above --- --- new post below ---

I still think that this is a big "if" - Manchester and Liverpool already see EMUs (323, 350, 390) so I'm surprised by the claim that 319s can't cope with the new bits of electrification.

Don't forget that much of the electrification around these cities was completed as part of West Coast Main Line electrification in 1966. The technology has moved on from the sturdy 1960s electrification schemes to the flimsy 'on the cheap' 1990s East Coast electrification, that seems to fall down/get tangled in a pantograph or get blown down by the wind every other week!

 

[Class377/5]

There are only 10 x 350/4s being ordered currently so that will only just cover Manchester Airport-Wigan-Scotland every hour with a single 350 operating each service by the time maintenance is allowed for. Someone previously said that TPE are looking at the option of using 185s on the quietest Scottish services on Saturdays to allow some 8 car operations on the busiest services.

TPE have said in MR that the Scottish services will be able to be formed of 4, 6, or 8 carriages depending in demand.

Adding in faster acceralation and faster top speed means they will be able to perform much better and maybe tweak standing time around to generate extra available units?

 

[Minstral25]

Lots of interesting points being raised.

I wonder though if this potential order is because they have realised there isn't enough units to provide a service once the Thameslink trains get diverted from London Bridge in December 2014 as the increase in journey times will require additional stock to maintain the timetable - especially with providing a Brighton Service from London Bridge.

It is noted the announcement clearly states that the extra units requires "agreeing consequential amendments to Southern’s franchise agreement" so I would suggest that means the units are for Southern itself.

 

[Class377/5]

Lots of interesting points being raised.

I wonder though if this potential order is because they have realised there isn't enough units to provide a service once the Thameslink trains get diverted from London Bridge in December 2014 as the increase in journey times will require additional stock to maintain the timetable - especially with providing a Brighton Service from London Bridge.

It is noted the announcement clearly states that the extra units requires "agreeing consequential amendments to Southern’s franchise agreement" so I would suggest that means the units are for Southern itself.

Remember that the consultation stated joint services with Thameslink and Southern from Dec 2014. With the likely timetable (partly discussed on here) means they are likely to share stock and services. Note the London Bridge - Brighton is off peak, more units will be spare then.

Also important here is after Dec 2014, London Bridge low level will be completed allowing Southern to run as normal but some services will have to leave until displaced onto the Thameslink Core. With a new timetable being written things will change.

However it's the following making me thing the eight 5 cars are for cascading and helping release 319s for the North West.

Southern Managing Director Chris Burchell said "I am pleased that Southern is able to assist the Department in introducing additional capacity. The potential new order for 116 carriages will be exciting news for train manufacturers and for passengers".**

"Agreeing consequential amendments to Southern's franchise agreement" could mean They expect the franchise to last longer due to the problems in new franchises and expect Southern to still be around to introduce the 116+100 units. Remember under the pre WCML timetable Southern's franchise ended in July 2015 (barely 7 months after the additional eight 377s) and then are supposed to merge into Thameslink. So if Southern are doing this, they would likely need an agreement to hand over all work o the next franchisee which would mean amended franchise agreement.

 

[northwichcat]

TPE have said in MR that the Scottish services will be able to be formed of 4, 6, or 8 carriages depending in demand.

Adding in faster acceralation and faster top speed means they will be able to perform much better and maybe tweak standing time around to generate extra available units?

The proposed May 2014 timetables that TPE have submitted to ORR includes numerous changes to make use of the 185s released. It also seems to assume Northern will be operating an additional Manchester-Bolton service every hour, which is proposed to take the form of an additional Manchester-Bolton-Blackburn service but I have no idea where the additional rolling stock will come from for that at the moment.

 

[swt_passenger]

However it's the following making me thing the eight 5 cars are for cascading and helping release 319s for the North West.

Southern Managing Director Chris Burchell said "I am pleased that Southern is able to assist the Department in introducing additional capacity. The potential new order for 116 carriages will be exciting news for train manufacturers and for passengers".

However it's the two sentences immediately before the one you quote that are even more specific about the potential order being intended to sort out national issues:

The procurement of 40 new carriages will enable additional capacity on the Southern network as well as a cascade of rolling stock around the wider network.

The new procurement competition will assist the Department's ability to address the wider rolling stock needs of the country.

 

[Class377/5]

However it's the two sentences immediately before the one you quote that are even more specific about the potential order being intended to sort out national issues:

True but first issue is to get the first batch of 319s released. To do this use the eight new five car DV 377 to displace some 377/2 to Thameslink to release the 319s for refurishment. Additional newer units can release further 319s for refurishment and further electric work.

Remember the original TLP was for 20-25 additional units, part current generation (377/450), part next gen (700). So this possible order of 116 units is simply repeating past plans to fill in temporarly.