My suggestion for 377s up north?

[northwichcat]

Or the 323s for Northern that you have praised so many times on this forum.

323s aren't my dream EMU but they are a more cost-effective solution than 319s and there appear to be no known issues to 323s running any Northern electric service - present or future.

I'd rather have 379s to 323s (or even older 375s) but people make the argument that LM should have all the 323s for no reason other than a consistent fleet despite the problems it would cause for Northern.

 

[RichmondCommu]

Buy some diesels or bi-modes now haha !

/stuck record

In terms of bi-modes nothing wrong with your stuck record The only problem is bi-modes tend to be very heavy (or at least the SNCF Bombardier built ones are)

 

[Chris125]

However, what about the 317s that are coming available at some point? They are much more closely related to the 3-car Glasgow area 318s.. and are equipped with end-corridor connections... Is there any scope within either classes to provide Northern with a fleet of 3-car electric units..?

Northern could simply piggyback on Abellio Scotrail's plan for 3-car 321s - they already have a small fleet of 321s and 322s which could be modified, replaced in West Yorkshire with further 319s.

 

[Haydn1971]

Don't mind me, was just getting the northern gripe in before anyone else

 

[phil beard]

I quite like 377s just not their doors. When it works it's great, no "beep beep beep, doors are opening" crap like you get on 350s, decreasing dwell times considerably.

I also quite like the 319s yet hate the seating (change the record I know) but if they took out the old seats and put in some new ones, in a more suitable configuration, then passengers wouldn't feel so short changed.

Current 319s in Northern livery look like the same old crap they've used oop north for years, just they lose a diesel engine and gain a pantograph.

Whoopy frikkin doo.


hen units are cascaded, should they not be subject to the same safety checks as new trains as they are running on a new line?

You're right about the seats on the 319s. They are SO low for people like me who are quite tall and have back problems. If they were given Class 377 style seats they would be much improved.

 

[northwichcat]

Northern could simply piggyback on Abellio Scotrail's plan for 3-car 321s - they already have a small fleet of 321s and 322s which could be modified, replaced in West Yorkshire with further 319s.

Northern's current electric fleet consists of 69m class 323s and 80m class 319s on the west side, while there's 80m class 321/3s and 94m class 333s on the east side.

A fleet of 20m carriage EMUs in a mix of 3 and 4 car formation would result in capacity reduction on some services, unless they is a big platform lengthening program. However, on lines like the Glossop line is it a good idea to spend a lot of money on platform lengthening when 69m class 323s appear to be the optimum length train? Would the money not be better spent making stations more accessible, or providing CIS/help points at all unstaffed stations?

 

[47802]

Anyway getting back to the start of the thread rather than yet another thread arguing about 323 verses 319 the chances of 377 or 387's up North would seem unlikely any time soon, no more 377's are being built, no more 387's are likely to built unless perhaps somebody tags an order to continue production after the FGW 387's and that would have to be a new order as the 140 option is now used up, and any 375/377 cascades in the foreseeable future are likely to be around the GTR, Southeastern, MML or even FGW franchises, and of course there is the limitation that only some 375/377 are dual voltage.

 

[Wolfie]

People only want consistent fleets when it means their area gets decent trains (like 350/4s for LM.)

West Anglia pays a premium to operate. Northern is still an economic basket case which the Rutnum letter suggests will get a whole lot worse if Pacer replacement does go ahead. 360s, being modern, have high leasing charges. 319s are doubtless a lot cheaper. Let's see, post-election with more Govt cuts coming whoever wins, the appetite for yet more Northern subsidy shall we.

I can tell you that HMT's view is that capital investment is good and that current operating cost expenditure is bad. Sadly where does most spend in Northern lie....

 

[cjmillsnun]

The 350/4s are different to the other 350s in the LM fleet due to having a third toilet, better facilities for on board trolleys and having 2+1 seating in the First Class area.

350/4s to Northern is an option being considered. An alternative option could be to strip the 333s of their interiors and give them 'regional express' interiors to the required specification but I'm not sure that'll go down well in Leeds if 'regional express' electric services are mainly Manchester Airport to Lancashire/Cumbria.

All easily changeable to LM spec during a refurb.

 

[northwichcat]

Northern is still an economic basket case which the Rutnum letter suggests will get a whole lot worse if Pacer replacement does go ahead. 360s, being modern, have high leasing charges. 319s are doubtless a lot cheaper.

In the lead up to an election Senior MPs finally realised that Northern is a unique franchise. FGW, EMT, Anglia and SWT have low-usage rural lines balanced out by profitable Intercity services, so it should be expected that Virgin and East Coast profits subside Northern services to create a level playing field.

I never suggested 360s going to Northern, I suggested sending them to LM for a consistent fleet if that's the only consideration for rolling stock cascades, which some people seem to think is the case. Of course 319s will be cheaper than 360s but then 319s aren't cheaper to operate than 323s and may need costly re-engineering alongside costly platform lengthening to be able to take over 323 duties.

The next Northern franchise will probably require proportionally less subsidy initially. Northern will take over the Manchester Airport to Lancashire/Cumbria services from TPE (which perform well), will provide a more useful service on the Helsby-Ellesmere Port branch (rather than a poorly timed token service which no-one uses) and will off-load the low usage Barton Humber services to EMT. I can't see that having a positive effect on EMT's subsidy though!

West Anglia pays a premium to operate.

Wait a minute are you comparing the profitable part of a franchise with a whole franchise? Or do you mean Greater Anglia and you're unaware that Greater Anglia's finances have been poorer than expected and they've been in receipt of revenue support from DfT meaning DfT actually pay 1.5p for every passenger mile on Greater Anglia.

FCC, East Coast and SWT were the only truly profitable franchises in the most recent year's figures.

 

[D60]

West Anglia pays a premium to operate. Northern is still an economic basket case which the Rutnum letter suggests will get a whole lot worse if Pacer replacement does go ahead. 360s, being modern, have high leasing charges. 319s are doubtless a lot cheaper. Let's see, post-election with more Govt cuts coming whoever wins, the appetite for yet more Northern subsidy shall we.

I can tell you that HMT's view is that capital investment is good and that current operating cost expenditure is bad. Sadly where does most spend in Northern lie....

Except that HMGovt seems currently to be of the view that for its required annual economic growth to be attained, investment will have to be redirected away from the overheating and close to capacity London & Southeast, and towards the creation of a 'Northern powerhouse' complete with a transport infrastructure to match... And the Northern Hub scheme and Northern/TPE ITT all seem to support this vision of the future..

Maybe the post-election reality will lie somewhere between..

 

[Chris125]

A fleet of 20m carriage EMUs in a mix of 3 and 4 car formation would result in capacity reduction on some services, unless they is a big platform lengthening program.

I was thinking principally of services that may need more than 4-car EMUs during the peaks - 2x3 would seem a more likely answer than pairing up 319s, especially with the restricted length of Salford Crescent for example.

 

[Haydn1971]

Salford Crescent appears to be referred to a lot in these forums - are there other stations with significant issues for lengthening beyond 6 cars in the NW that could make use of 8 car units ?

 

[SpacePhoenix]

On that basis another cascade adds up perfectly:

21 x 319s to Anglia
All 21 of Anglia's 360s to LM (along with the 5 released 360s from Heathrow Connect)
All 26 of LM's 323 to Northern.

End result = more consistent fleets for Anglia, LM and Northern!

It's doubtful that either SWT or LM would want the 360s as they'd need the cabs rebuilding with compatible corridor connectors. Would the couplers also need replacing as well (not sure if the electrical block is the same side on both 350s and 360s)?

 

[RobShipway]

It's doubtful that either SWT or LM would want the 360s as they'd need the cabs rebuilding with compatible corridor connectors. Would the couplers also need replacing as well (not sure if the electrical block is the same side on both 350s and 360s)?

I would imagine that all the class 360's will go to crossrail to start their services possibly, prior to when they have their new class 345 trains starting.

 

[BantamMenace]

I would imagine that all the class 360's will go to crossrail to start their services possibly, prior to when they have their new class 345 trains starting.

I think they're starting with 315s

 

[D365]

I think they're starting with 315s

What Robbies is implying, is that the Crossrail operator will take over Heathrow Connect before the Class 345 fleet is rolled out, but I don't understand there to be any evidence that Crossrail will run any service into Paddington mainline, either before or after the lower level platforms open. Obviously it's a different matter at Liverpool Street with the Shenfield Metro.
--- old post above --- --- new post below ---

It's doubtful that either SWT or LM would want the 360s as they'd need the cabs rebuilding with compatible corridor connectors. Would the couplers also need replacing as well (not sure if the electrical block is the same side on both 350s and 360s)?

Many post-privitisation MUs are built to a modular specification. Since the HC 360/2s (most of them) were rebuilt from the Class 350/0 prototype units (with inter-cab gangways removed), I'm sure it shouldn't be a great difficulty to restore the necessary gangways.

Don't know why Siemens would have had any reason to change the coupler specification on the Class 360 build. But it seems one can come across any number of surprises in converting an EMU.

 

[Class377/5]

What Robbies is implying, is that the Crossrail operator will take over Heathrow Connect before the Class 345 fleet is rolled out, but I don't understand there to be any evidence that Crossrail will run any service into Paddington mainline, either before or after the lower level platforms open. Obviously it's a different matter at Liverpool Street with the Shenfield Metro.
--- old post above --- --- new post below ---


Many post-privitisation MUs are built to a modular specification. Since the HC 360/2s (most of them) were rebuilt from the Class 350/0 prototype units (with inter-cab gangways removed), I'm sure it shouldn't be a great difficulty to restore the necessary gangways.

Don't know why Siemens would have had any reason to change the coupler specification on the Class 360 build. But it seems one can come across any number of surprises in converting an EMU.

For atleast six months Crossrail will be running into Paddington High Level as they take over the Heathrow Connect services in May 2018. London Reconnections have a piece on it with offical slides showing this.

http://www.londonreconnections.com/2015/call-blues-look-crossrails-launch-plan/

What's not so clear is when does the service go through as the Great Eastern being connected is shown as happening in May 2019 so there is a chance that they won't run into the central section until December 2019 as the purple is only shown as going through then.

One issue of converting the 360/2s back into 350 is there is no production line building cabs for the Desiro UK so a Desiro City cab may require modifications.

 

[D365]

Thanks, I forgot about that article and the 'Stage 2' takeover plan.
And yes, it seems right to imagine that manufacturing new gangway cabs might be a problem. But a conversion programme has been completed for the ex-Gatwick Class 460 driving vehicles.

 

[northwichcat]

Salford Crescent appears to be referred to a lot in these forums - are there other stations with significant issues for lengthening beyond 6 cars in the NW that could make use of 8 car units ?

With Salford Crescent it's not a case of SDO or locking the rear unit out-of-use would solve the problem. The infrastructure was changed as part of a multi-million pound redevelopment to be able to take trains up to approx. 145m in length, while 2 x 319s would come to 160m, so the longest 319 formation it could take is 7 cars.

I don't think Network Rail have looked at trains beyond 145m in length at stations in the North West, other than at those where long distance trains stop e.g. Scottish and London services. Blackrod and Leyland couldn't take 6 car 185s/323s or equivalent currently but Network Rail have said those stations can have their platforms lengthened to be able to take 6 car if required.

It's doubtful that either SWT or LM would want the 360s as they'd need the cabs rebuilding with compatible corridor connectors. Would the couplers also need replacing as well (not sure if the electrical block is the same side on both 350s and 360s)?

LM do run 4 car services using Desiros. They also didn't have problems operating a mixed fleet of 150/1s and 150/2s and neither do Northern or FGW, so why should the Desiros be different?

 

[RobShipway]

What Robbies is implying, is that the Crossrail operator will take over Heathrow Connect before the Class 345 fleet is rolled out, but I don't understand there to be any evidence that Crossrail will run any service into Paddington mainline, either before or after the lower level platforms open. Obviously it's a different matter at Liverpool Street with the Shenfield Metro.
--- old post above --- --- new post below ---


Many post-privitisation MUs are built to a modular specification. Since the HC 360/2s (most of them) were rebuilt from the Class 350/0 prototype units (with inter-cab gangways removed), I'm sure it shouldn't be a great difficulty to restore the necessary gangways.

Don't know why Siemens would have had any reason to change the coupler specification on the Class 360 build. But it seems one can come across any number of surprises in converting an EMU.

Thanks Dab_Move that was what I was implying.

 

[thealexweb]

The 350/4s are different to the other 350s in the LM fleet due to having a third toilet, better facilities for on board trolleys and having 2+1 seating in the First Class area.

350/4s to Northern is an option being considered. An alternative option could be to strip the 333s of their interiors and give them 'regional express' interiors to the required specification but I'm not sure that'll go down well in Leeds if 'regional express' electric services are mainly Manchester Airport to Lancashire/Cumbria.

The 350s may not be the same interior wise but it would allow for a slightly more uniform fleet than if Northern Rail received the 10 350/4s.

The 333s idea is a much better one. Leeds will have to like it or lump it. Right now Transpennine North West is suffering as it has been stripped of its 185s again and again year on year to help create and now maintain Transpennine North's crazy 5tph goals. After May how many 185s will Transpennine North West still use? With its 6 x 156s factored in.

 

[61653 HTAFC]

The question of 3-car EMUs is a pertinent one for West Yorkshire services too, due to constraints at Shipley on the Leeds-Skipton arm of the triangle. Extending Platform 2 beyond 6x23m would require expensive rebuilding of the whole triangle. Currently peak services are full to capacity with the current 333s, so moving forward trains will need extending sooner or later. The initial plan for the lines was more locally built 323s before 308s were used as a cost-saving measure leading to the closure of Hunslet works. I'd be thrilled if the 323s were brought "home" but the chances of that are vanishingly small!

Perhaps as the Mk.3 units reach the end of their lives, a decision will have to be made, so perhaps there'll be a case for a large order of 3-car EMUs if that's still considered the optimum configuration...
Or more likely, the by-then-ancient 3-car Electrostars will eventually come North!

 

[BantamMenace]

The question of 3-car EMUs is a pertinent one for West Yorkshire services too, due to constraints at Shipley on the Leeds-Skipton arm of the triangle. Extending Platform 2 beyond 6x23m would require expensive rebuilding of the whole triangle. Currently peak services are full to capacity with the current 333s, so moving forward trains will need extending sooner or later. The initial plan for the lines was more locally built 323s before 308s were used as a cost-saving measure leading to the closure of Hunslet works. I'd be thrilled if the 323s were brought "home" but the chances of that are vanishingly small!

Perhaps as the Mk.3 units reach the end of their lives, a decision will have to be made, so perhaps there'll be a case for a large order of 3-car EMUs if that's still considered the optimum configuration...
Or more likely, the by-then-ancient 3-car Electrostars will eventually come North!

Money permitting, six car fixed formation new build for the Airedale and Wharfedale with the 333s going on to the Harrogate line, York line and Selby line and adding to a common pool with the 321s so they could appear on Doncaster services.

 

[Haydn1971]

With Salford Crescent it's not a case of SDO or locking the rear unit out-of-use would solve the problem. The infrastructure was changed as part of a multi-million pound redevelopment to be able to take trains up to approx. 145m in length, while 2 x 319s would come to 160m, so the longest 319 formation it could take is 7 cars.

I don't think Network Rail have looked at trains beyond 145m in length at stations in the North West, other than at those where long distance trains stop e.g. Scottish and London services. Blackrod and Leyland couldn't take 6 car 185s/323s or equivalent currently but Network Rail have said those stations can have their platforms lengthened to be able to take 6 car if required.

Thanks, I'm guessing that this could become more of an issue as the cascades of EMU's start flooding North to replace DMU's - most EMU fleets appear to be in four car units, which isn't great for the North where 5-6 car units would be better in the short term. I seem to recall that the 319's had to be kept as 4 car units, would the same go for newer EMU's like the Electrostars or perhaps the other Mk3 derived units - could these be reformed into mixed 3, 4 & 5 car units to better match demand and station lengths ?

 

[Wolfie]

Except that HMGovt seems currently to be of the view that for its required annual economic growth to be attained, investment will have to be redirected away from the overheating and close to capacity London & Southeast, and towards the creation of a 'Northern powerhouse' complete with a transport infrastructure to match... And the Northern Hub scheme and Northern/TPE ITT all seem to support this vision of the future..

Maybe the post-election reality will lie somewhere between..

I agree everything you say....

However, I've worked in Whitehall for 30 years and as such have LOTS of experience of politicians, what they say, what they actually do, and in particular the role of HMT.....

 

[northwichcat]

The question of 3-car EMUs is a pertinent one for West Yorkshire services too, due to constraints at Shipley on the Leeds-Skipton arm of the triangle. Extending Platform 2 beyond 6x23m would require expensive rebuilding of the whole triangle.

Yes.

It was also proposed quite a while back now (pre-Chat Moss electrification announcement and pre-322s going to Northern) that Northern would something like get 24 x brand new 3 car EMUs for the Manchester area and release their 323s to LM. Then it was later proposed an add-on of around 10 x 3 car EMUs for the Leeds area, with the 321/9s being released. However, that proposal never happened.

After all went quiet Govia attempted to get DfT to order around 50 x 3 car EMUs for LM, with the intention that they'll release their 323s to Northern. However, that would have given Northern more 323s than they would have needed so led to suggestions from West Yorkshire that they'll lose 333s.
--- old post above --- --- new post below ---

I seem to recall that the 319's had to be kept as 4 car units, would the same go for newer EMU's like the Electrostars or perhaps the other Mk3 derived units - could these be reformed into mixed 3, 4 & 5 car units to better match demand and station lengths ?

319s could be converted to 3 car but not cheaply. Porterbrook produced plans of how it could be done (obviously without prices) and some people have commented on it being unaffordable.

Ironically there were 2 Manchester area local lines which had provision for 8 x 20m car services, which were Manchester-Altrincham and Manchester-Crewe via Stockport and one of those was converted to Metrolink where the longest formation now is 56.8m opposed to the permitted 120m. On match days (football and cricket) 8 car EMUs operated between Manchester and Altrincham stopping at all stations and DMU services to Chester which usually only called at Sale between Manchester and Altrincham additionally called at Warwick Road (now Old Trafford) and were operated by 4 car DMUs.

 

[NorthernSpirit]

Providing that the Uckfield and Marshlink lines are juiced the 170's could come north and replace the class 150's, then when Thameslink gets its new units - the 377's that are currently used could be transfered to the North and be used on, providing that certain routes gets the juice treatment, York to Blackpool, Leeds to Nottingham, Sheffield to Scarborough via Hull which could see the 2 car class 158's being coupled up to run in four car formation on other routes thus allowing more seating to become available in the forgotton wilderness that is the North.

 

[D365]

Providing that the Uckfield and Marshlink lines are juiced the 170's could come north and replace the class 150's, then when Thameslink gets its new units - the 377's that are currently used could be transferred to the North and be used on...

Of the Thameslink [dual-voltage equipped] Electrostars, it seems all are accounted for once the Class 700 has taken over:
23x 377/5 to take over GN Cambridge fasts with 21 365s freed for FGW in the ensuing cascade.
9x 377/2 to return to Croydon-Milton Keynes via WLL service - required to form 8-car trains which will allow 8x 5-car 377/7s to double up on other metro services.
29x 387/1 to FGW - with 8 additional units to be built.

Therefore it seems unlikely that the Southern diesel lines will see Electrostars for the forseeable future, let alone on any further routes other than GW and GN as I have stated. Duly noting that Electrostar production is intended to shut down after the Class 387.

Not to mention, your entire proposals depend on providing that lines are electrified.

 

[Class377/5]

Of the Thameslink [dual-voltage equipped] Electrostars, it seems all are accounted for once the Class 700 has taken over:
23x 377/5 to take over GN Cambridge fasts with 21 365s freed for FGW in the ensuing cascade.
9x 377/2 to return to Croydon-Milton Keynes via WLL service - required to form 8-car trains which will allow 8x 5-car 377/7s to double up on other metro services.
29x 387/1 to FGW - with 8 additional units to be built.

Therefore it seems unlikely that the Southern diesel lines will see Electrostars for the forseeable future, let alone on any further routes other than GW and GN as I have stated. Duly noting that Electrostar production is intended to shut down after the Class 387.

Not to mention, your entire proposals depend on providing that lines are electrified.

Not every 377/5 is going to the GN. Think it was about 19 or so based on TSGN documents shoeing how many were to be equipped for the signalling upgrade. Also the 9x 377/2 aren't for making every service 8 cars it seems now.

As for the 387s, well the cascade speed on them may take many by surprise.