TfL to order new units for WAML

[Nym]

How would one mark the route numbers on the map without using two tone lines or dashed lines to indicate what's what though? I can't see numbers next to each of the lines at regular intivals working well within the constaints of the design as it sits.

 

[Eagle]

All of the Greater Anglia operated routes shown on that map are set to come under the control of TfL then in some shape or form!

WA services via Tottenham Hale aren't.

And as for Romford to Upminster, there are conflicting reports as to whether or not the DfT have asked TfL to take it on (along with West Ealing to Greenford, running both as some sort of "Crossrail Connect" type thing).

 

[TEW]

West Ealing to Greenford really is a no-brainer IMO. It really doesn't fit in with FGW once the other Thames Valley branches are electrified. If not TfL it would make sense for Chiltern to run it.

 

[edwin_m]

Presumably this displaces the rest of the 315s that aren't affected by Crossrail.

The extension to Barking Riverside is interesting. It would make sense for this service to continue to Grays, which is a bit of an orphan route since the main Tilbury services were diverted via Chafford Hundred. This might then allow the release of some 357s to cope with growth on the Tilbury/Southend routes without introducing some more trains, which would no doubt be to a different and incompatible design.

 

[jopsuk]

To really sort out the West Anglia, what's needed is four-track all the way to at least Broxbourne- with the section through Clapton, in tunnels and deep cuttings, the most expensive part of that to solve. Rearrange Harlow to have terminating platforms.
Use the extra capacity between Stratford and Bethnal Green- maybe add a station at Mile End?

Possible Services then:
West Anglia Metro:
All from Liverpool Street
Chingford via Clapton or Stratford
Enfield
Hetford or Harlow via: Seven Sisters or Tottenham Hale (Clapton or Stratford)

Turn the Stortford-Stratford into a service that's semi-fast south of Harlow and doesn't go to Stratford, part of the Cambridge service group.

 

[306024]

I'm not sure how great the demand for the 315s will be. They're already over 30 years old and really in need of a thorough refurbishment. I suppose they will be a cheap option for someone though, but it's certainly a case of cheap and nasty, they don't even have toilets.

Oi !! Not so much of the cheap and nasty. These are fine workhorses

They will be over 35 years old by the time this comes around so perhaps it is time to retire them. Keep one for Romford - Upminster.

 

[TEW]

I'm not complaining about mechanically, but if you're a passenger I'm sure you can see you wouldn't be thrilled at the prospect of a fleet of 315s moving to your area.

 

[Eagle]

Even if (as in the case of ATW) they're replacing Pacers?

 

[306024]

I've been using them all their life and for short journeys of up to 30 minutes they are fine. Yes the seats are not up to class 306 standards, but then nothing is

 

[TEW]

Even if (as in the case of ATW) they're replacing Pacers?

I wouldn't say they're any better than ATW pacers. The main benefit would of course be the capacity increase. No reason they can't be refurbished to a better standard of course.

 

[SF-02]

Presumably this displaces the rest of the 315s that aren't affected by Crossrail.

The extension to Barking Riverside is interesting. It would make sense for this service to continue to Grays, which is a bit of an orphan route since the main Tilbury services were diverted via Chafford Hundred. This might then allow the release of some 357s to cope with growth on the Tilbury/Southend routes without introducing some more trains, which would no doubt be to a different and incompatible design.

Ideally the Barking Riverside link would go over/under the Thames to Abbey Wood Crossrail with a stop in Thamesmead. How feasible I'm not sure but the benefits would be immense. Thamesmead would finally get a rail link (50 years late) and be minutes from crossrail and the tube and rail just over the Thames in Barking. It would help sort out the desperate need for river crossings in that area. A rail bridge with tolled roads alongside would probably even cover it's construction cost in a number of years.
--- old post above --- --- new post below ---

I'm not complaining about mechanically, but if you're a passenger I'm sure you can see you wouldn't be thrilled at the prospect of a fleet of 315s moving to your area.

Why not? In all lieklihood they would go to places with diesel trains that rattle and are loud. South Wales or North West perhaps. If mechanically ok could get 10 years out of them. With yet more cuts to the DfT budget coming tomorrow cost effectiveness is key.

 

[Mikey C]

I wouldn't say they're any better than ATW pacers. The main benefit would of course be the capacity increase. No reason they can't be refurbished to a better standard of course.

Far smoother electric traction, proper bogies and suspension, they're far better (apart from perhaps the poor window alignment)!

 

[HSTEd]

I don't imagine fitting them with toilets would be impossible, especially if they stay in four car formations and thus have a trailer that contains nothing traction related below the solebar.

 

[anthony263]

I don't imagine fitting them with toilets would be impossible, especially if they stay in four car formations and thus have a trailer that contains nothing traction related below the solebar.

Problem fitting them with toilets as Network rail have fitted one to their class 313 test unit

 

[TheGrew]

I'm surprised nobody has yet mentioned what stock they might procure. My money in on 379/1s fitted for a more metro style layout. But able to work in multiple with the 379/0 is times of disruption. What do other people think?

 

[anthony263]

For the Goblin I think TFL will order additional class 378's as for the WAML servies I think either a class 379 style unit or perhaps a 378 with a different interior perhaps with a seating layout similar to the S8 stock

 

[sprinterguy]

It is striking that the order is for 4-car trains. The WA lines currently run 8 - 9 car trains for most of the day. If they shrank them to 4 car this would be a recipe for overcrowding.

Hopefully they'll be paired up to 8-car trains S-bahn style.

The West Anglia services currently use 4-car trains coupled in pairs to form 8-car trains (I don't think that WA services use any 3 or 5-car units to be able to operate 9-car trains?), which would be perpetuated following the new rolling stock order. 4-car units have, until recently, been something of an industry standard for London area suburban EMUs (Yes pedants, I know there are historical exceptions ).

 

[G_A_C_C_C]

I can see them all being 378s.

How many units will they actually need for GOBLIN? Derby don't like small orders - they put a huge price tag on adding centre cars to the 172/0s so they never happened (good job really with the electrification), so I can't see them building just 6 or 8 units without a premium..... a joint order however is likely to be far more favourably priced. It also gives TfL 1 common fleet EMU

The 172/0 can then be used on WEA-GFD and RMF-UPM services - no one else is going to won't a toiletless mini fleet.....

I also thought there was talk of putting back Hall Farm curve to allow LST-SRA-CHI services...which would alter their map

 

[jopsuk]

if Bombardier, they'll be pushing the Aventra platform hard- a four car metro-layout version. If Siemens, Desiro City.

I doubt anything other than mechanical coupling to 379s will be required

 

[anthony263]

The Romford - Upminster branch is electrified so I cannot see the London Overground class 172's being used on it although that said SWT do use a 158 on the electrified lymington branch on weekdays.

LO's class 172's are most likely going to make their way over to Chiltern who I am sure would be greatful for the extra capacity. The faster acceleration of the 172's and top speed of 100mph will make them easier to path on the chiltern mainline perhaps working the local services to Gerrards cross like Chiltern originally intended to do.

This could free up chiltern 165's to perhaps provide extra capacity elsewhere such as on the service to Aylesbury via Amersham and perhaps allowing some of teh class 165's to move elsewheres such as perhaps on the GW local's around Bristol since they only need units capable of 75mph and it doesnt hurt that I find the chiltern 165's nicer to travel on than FGW's

 

[bnsf734]

I presume the West Anglia services will need a new depot to operate from? I assume they are run from Ilford at present and operate as part of a combined fleet with the Great Eastern 315's.

I can' t see any of the existing LO depots having capacity for the new fleet, or easy access to the West Anglia lines. and all I can find on Google are stabling sidings at Chingford for about 10 sets.

Perhaps there is room at Stratford to build a new depot?

 

[davetheguard]

West Ealing to Greenford really is a no-brainer IMO. It really doesn't fit in with FGW once the other Thames Valley branches are electrified. If not TfL it would make sense for Chiltern to run it.

Yes, either of these suggestions would make a lot of sense.

Presumably, if TfL had control it would be electrified; but remain diesel worked if Chiltern inherited it. Having said that, with Chiltern's services now so frequent, we must reach a point soon where the whole lot should be electrified - I can't think of anywhere else in Western Europe that would have this intensity of suburban service operated by diesels.

Anyway, whoever ends up with it, it will free up another FGW Turbo for use in Devon or Cornwall.

 

[anthony263]

Yes, either of these suggestions would make a lot of sense.

Presumably, if TfL had control it would be electrified; but remain diesel worked if Chiltern inherited it. Having said that, with Chiltern's services now so frequent, we must reach a point soon where the whole lot should be electrified - I can't think of anywhere else in Western Europe that would have this intensity of suburban service operated by diesels.

Anyway, whoever ends up with it, it will free up another FGW Turbo for use in Devon or Cornwall.

Or two if the Greenford service is increased to run every 15 minutes to reduce the complaints about the loss of through services to Paddington.

 

[Wolfie]

For the Goblin I think TFL will order additional class 378's as for the WAML servies I think either a class 379 style unit or perhaps a 378 with a different interior perhaps with a seating layout similar to the S8 stock

My money is on 378s full stop. As far as I am aware the WA routes transferring are not greatly different in distance or duration of travel or time between stations to the Watford to Euston DC line. If 378s are used on the latter why do you believe anything else will be used on the former? TfL will doubtless be attracted by the simplified logistics resulting from such a move.

 

[bicbasher]

TfL are not an operator, they are a specifier. There is nothing to stop DfT specifying the same. And perhaps they will on the Vic-Dartford line.

Indeed, the DfT have recognised the need to open the Northern City Line during evenings and weekends after recognising the increased demand for services, especially as Highbury and Islington is now a hub for increased LO services under the new TSGN franchise.

 

[swt_passenger]

I presume the West Anglia services will need a new depot to operate from?

I don't think that automatically follows, as there are a number of existing examples of stabling and maintenance of more than one TOC's fleet at the same place. But in any case, by the time this happens the other 315 fleet will also be up for replacement by Crossrail's 345s, and their trains will be maintained differently anyway.

 

[alwaystouchout]

What happened to plans for new stations at Barking Riverside and Beam Reach? Could they be incorporated into a LO extension from Barking to Rainham or somewhere?

 

[LNW-GW Joint]

Why would they not go for more 345s?
It would be simpler to expand that order rather than go for something new.
The service requirements must be very similar, except possibly train length.

 

[Chris125]

For the Goblin I think TFL will order additional class 378's as for the WAML servies I think either a class 379 style unit or perhaps a 378 with a different interior perhaps with a seating layout similar to the S8 stock

The draft business plan specifically says that the WAML and Gospel Oak-Barking orders will likely be combined "to ensure best value for money", so it's safe to presume a common design of train.

My money is on 378s full stop. As far as I am aware the WA routes transferring are not greatly different in distance or duration of travel or time between stations to the Watford to Euston DC line. If 378s are used on the latter why do you believe anything else will be used on the former? TfL will doubtless be attracted by the simplified logistics resulting from such a move.

As they don't need to be compatible with the 378 fleet, and are unlikely to be either maintained or operated alongside each other, I should think a new design is much more likely.

A 4-car equivalent of the Crossrail design could well prove attractive, especially if these new services are operated by the Crossrail concession holder - they would also benefit from having a similar interior, longitudinal seating would not go down well without any promise of longer trains to compensate.

Chris

 

[anthony263]

For the WAML units similar to the Crossrail units would be a good idea however since the Goblin has no connection with the WAML and is currently part of the London Overground Network I would have thought ordering further examples of the class 378 would be better.

That said I think there may be a good point to ordering shorter crossrail style units for the GOBLIN/WAML.