New South Western franchise: Awarded to First/MTR

[HH]

Will the 455 AC traction conversions cease now, if the new order is to replace them?

I would imagine that it will depend on what the contracts say. DfT/TOC wouldn't want it to; the ROSCO might.

 

[HH]

And the S-stock is 18m vehicles with 3 doors... I'm thinking a bit like that.

You're talking services which are really not dissimilar to the Metropolitan Line.

More doors = even less seats. I'm not sure whether that would fit DfT's purpose; they want enough seats for the off-peak. It would presumably also add cost.

 

[3141]

More doors = even less seats. I'm not sure whether that would fit DfT's purpose; they want enough seats for the off-peak. It would presumably also add cost.

So my suggestion of Aventras similar to those going to Crossrail (in post #873) would fit better - more doors but fewer than in a train of 18m vehicles, and fewer bogies and wheelsets for the same total train length, which saves on initial costs and maintenance.

 

[3141]

Thameslink is a bit different in that it is also a longer distance service. These services are more like LO or Crossrail.

We may be able to find a consensus about what "metroised" means - much of the seating being longitudinal, and maybe all of it - which is OK for services mainly in tunnels, but unpleasant above ground. But it's harder to define what services such stock is most suitable for. LO and Crossrail are very different concepts. Or perhaps I should say that Crossrail incorporates very different types of railway, like Thameslink: a city centre section in tunnel with frequent stops, and an outer suburban and almost regional section - all the way to Reading - for which longitudinal seating is unsuitable except for the fact that the trains are likely to be busy and need to cram people in.

 

[3141]

It has been considered and the point made already. It's a valid point, but is it correct?

1. If one ROSCO simply raises its prices then no-one will buy from that ROSCO.

2. Will all ROSCOs act in concert? I hope not, because that would be illegal.

3. ROSCOs already charge more if the guaranteed rental period is shorter.

4. They are no longer the only players in the market.

I would expect some behaviour change, but I don't see an across the board large increase in rolling stock costs.

I wouldn't argue with any of that, but in my original post (#893) I did make it clear that the ideas I discussed were possibilities and not things I firmly expected; and I think the points I made in my last few sentences stand.

 

[HH]

So my suggestion of Aventras similar to those going to Crossrail (in post #873) would fit better - more doors but fewer than in a train of 18m vehicles, and fewer bogies and wheelsets for the same total train length, which saves on initial costs and maintenance.

IMO we definitely won't see 18m units. I would imagine that we're 99% likely to be looking at 5/10-car 20m units. These units will already have considerably less seats than the old ones, so I suspect that they'll chicken out with 2 doors, even though 3 doors does seem to make more sense.

 

[Bletchleyite]

an outer suburban and almost regional section - all the way to Reading - for which longitudinal seating is unsuitable except for the fact that the trains are likely to be busy and need to cram people in.

The difference with Reading is that most people won't be using Crossrail from there, they will continue to use gWr fasts and change further down the line. Running them out to Reading rather than terminating at Slough or thereabouts is just operationally easier.

Whereas people *do* use Thameslink from Bedford and Brighton to London as a primary service.

 

[Bletchleyite]

IMO we definitely won't see 18m units.

I wouldn't rule out an articulated design with 16 or 18m sections, but I do agree 20 or 23m is more likely, probably 20 due to classic clearance issues. 3 doors I wouldn't rule out, though.

 

[HH]

I wouldn't argue with any of that, but in my original post (#893) I did make it clear that the ideas I discussed were possibilities and not things I firmly expected; and I think the points I made in my last few sentences stand.

There will certainly be long-term effects. My view is that where the buyer is able to offer security then we will see good deals; this is where the devolved areas will succeed. Those franchises let directly by DfT may well be paying more for some RS (depends on how transferable it is), but this would have happened anyway, given that there were no longer any guarantees since DfT stopped issuing section 54s. Maybe it will happen a little faster and a little stronger, but it can't go too far, because buyers will find alternative ways of financing.

 

[Suraggu]

The mainstream media has started to pick up on the story about First/MTR dumping the Class 707's, dumping retractioned class 455 and dumping the class 458 as its being reported on BBC South Today.

 

[Juniper Driver]

http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-england-39445714

 

[Fuzzytop]

First MTR, which was awarded the South Western franchise on Monday, is committed to a fleet of 90 Siemens trains to increase capacity on the Reading, Windsor and London routes. It will, however, reject 150 carriages which were ordered in 2014.

I'm presuming that's a confusion - details of what exactly will come out as the standardised SW suburban units still under wraps?

(edit: lesson to search before I post, found the affirmative in 707 future thread - though it is intriguing if not ironic how Siemens keeps popping up in rumours for these new units...)

 

[physics34]

Will.the new stock have toilets

 

[TEW]

Will.the new stock have toilets

Yes, First stated that all mainland stock will have toilets.

 

[Bletchleyite]

If the 458s do go it will be interesting to see what happens to them - there isn't an obvious destination. Much as the Wessies will be popular, you could argue that they would be more sensible 2+2-seated units for Portsmouth services if reformed into 12-car sets.

I assume conversion to 25kV would not be remunerative. Conversion to DMU maybe? But then that's less flexible than DMU+25kV that the 319s can offer.

 

[nat67]

So it could now be:
Welcome to this First South Western service to Portsmouth

Odd idea not to keep the 707's why couldn't they not give the 456's to replace the southern 313's and because they are old and the 456's are pointless for inner suburban London services. Pointless farewell for the 442's, but good they are back hopefully on the pompey's again

 

[3141]

If the 458s do go it will be interesting to see what happens to them - there isn't an obvious destination. Much as the Wessies will be popular, you could argue that they would be more sensible 2+2-seated units for Portsmouth services if reformed into 12-car sets..

We could recycle the thread about what might happen to the 442s and put "458" in instead.

I assume conversion to 25kV would not be remunerative. Conversion to DMU maybe? But then that's less flexible than DMU+25kV that the 319s can offer.

Porterbrook seem to have covered all the angles by applying their Flex concept for class 319. There are more modern EMUs becoming available, like 458s, but the 319s' flexibility is a big advantage. I wonder how big a demand for such trains there will turn out to be. The scope for a bi-mode DC and diesel seems limited.

 

[Bletchleyite]

Porterbrook seem to have covered all the angles by applying their Flex concept for class 319. There are more modern EMUs becoming available, like 458s, but the 319s' flexibility is a big advantage. I wonder how big a demand for such trains there will turn out to be. The scope for a bi-mode DC and diesel seems limited.

I'd agree - there is loads of scope for bi-mode OHLE and diesel regional trains - a huge proportion of Northern's network being the majority of it. Bi-mode third rail and diesel is much smaller - basically just Uckfield and Salisbury/Exeter, I think - and those TOCs seem disinterested.

 

[Class172]

I'd agree - there is loads of scope for bi-mode OHLE and diesel regional trains - a huge proportion of Northern's network being the majority of it. Bi-mode third rail and diesel is much smaller - basically just Uckfield and Salisbury/Exeter, I think - and those TOCs seem disinterested.

The Marshlink Line is the only other route I can think of.

 

[WarrenTManager]

The Marshlink Line is the only other route I can think of.

There are big gaps in the juice rail on the Reading to Gatwick route.....

 

[BestWestern]

If the 458s do go it will be interesting to see what happens to them - there isn't an obvious destination. Much as the Wessies will be popular, you could argue that they would be more sensible 2+2-seated units for Portsmouth services if reformed into 12-car sets.

I assume conversion to 25kV would not be remunerative. Conversion to DMU maybe? But then that's less flexible than DMU+25kV that the 319s can offer.

Perhaps we'll see six car 442s? They're being retractioned, so presumably it could be possible?

How about uprated Class 150s with 455 trailer cars?!

 

[Bletchleyite]

There are big gaps in the juice rail on the Reading to Gatwick route.....

Big enough that there's barely any point using bi-mode. They fit better on routes where you combine higher-speed service on a busy mainline with a slower non-electrified branch line - Uckfield, Marshlink, Barrow/Windermere etc, plus the operational convenience of running through services across Manchester from electrified to non-electrified lines.

 

[emil]

The class 442's will need substantial overhauls to run on the Portsmouth line. They were removed by SWT due to high failure rates on this line. Maybe a radical change to the timetable to allow extra services per hour is needed. Alton could lose direct service to Waterloo via Woking. Hampton Court and Chessington could be just branches to Wimbledon only. For the extra service on the Southampton to Portsmouth line, the GWR service from Cardiff could be terminated at Southampton. West of England trains could be started/terminated at Basingstoke if the Open access from Southampton to Waterloo is agreed this reduce need for bi-mode replacements. A rebuilt Southampton station with 6 platforms with 5 through platforms needed for increased freight traffic.

 

[Suraggu]

If the 458s do go it will be interesting to see what happens to them - there isn't an obvious destination. Much as the Wessies will be popular, you could argue that they would be more sensible 2+2-seated units for Portsmouth services if reformed into 12-car sets.

I assume conversion to 25kV would not be remunerative. Conversion to DMU maybe? But then that's less flexible than DMU+25kV that the 319s can offer.

Suggesting anything like this with the numbers 458 will probably lead to technical suicide. They have always been a nightmare and always will.

 

[Bletchleyite]

Suggesting anything like this with the numbers 458 will probably lead to technical suicide. They have always been a nightmare and always will.

If they're that bad, maybe Gillette is the best next user.

 

[urpert]

If they're that bad, maybe Gillette is the best next user.

To that end, I look forward to Ian Walmsley's next column in MR...

 

[The Ham]

The class 442's will need substantial overhauls to run on the Portsmouth line. They were removed by SWT due to high failure rates on this line. Maybe a radical change to the timetable to allow extra services per hour is needed. Alton could lose direct service to Waterloo via Woking. Hampton Court and Chessington could be just branches to Wimbledon only. For the extra service on the Southampton to Portsmouth line, the GWR service from Cardiff could be terminated at Southampton. West of England trains could be started/terminated at Basingstoke if the Open access from Southampton to Waterloo is agreed this reduce need for bi-mode replacements. A rebuilt Southampton station with 6 platforms with 5 through platforms needed for increased freight traffic.

The 442's are getting new motors and so should be significantly more reliable than they were.

Given the numbers of passengers involved and logistics of reversing trains at Brookwood/Woking or Basingstoke (NR already has, for both Woking and Basingstoke, plans for improving the junction to provide more capacity).

 

[swt_passenger]

Perhaps we'll see six car 442s? They're being retractioned, so presumably it could be possible?

Two of them running together (as is usually done) would then be far too long for the infrastructure, at 276m...

 

[The Ham]

I'd agree - there is loads of scope for bi-mode OHLE and diesel regional trains - a huge proportion of Northern's network being the majority of it. Bi-mode third rail and diesel is much smaller - basically just Uckfield and Salisbury/Exeter, I think - and those TOCs seem disinterested.

Salisbury/Exeter is probably more to do with the strong desire for wires to reach Salisbury as such there's little point pushing hard for bi-modals which then don't take advantage of the wires only for wires to arrive shortly after. Alternatively, they do rely on the wires a bit (maybe to keep journey times the same) only for the wires to be 20 years away.

There is also the issue of the power supply for the third rail not being up to catering for another (potentially full length) two trains an hour, which could mess up the trains for a lot of people if it goes wrong.

 

[physics34]

Yes, First stated that all mainland stock will have toilets.

Thanks