New fleet for Southeastern Metro in future franchise / concession

[hkstudent]

There is some shortage of rolling stock for Southeastern metro routes during morning peak hours while class 465/466 are starting to be aged.

Are there any stocks that Southeastern can get at the start of the new franchise/concession, to solve the capacity problem in the short term? Class 707 may be a good one for some routes, but are there any more options for routes requiring 12 cars?

 

[klass43]

Your thread title reads like news, not a question.

Greater Anglia are completely renewing their rolling stock, so there may be some suitable EMUs that can be cascaded.

379s

321 Renatus

 

[hkstudent]

Your thread title reads like news, not a question.

Greater Anglia are completely renewing their rolling stock, so there may be some suitable EMUs that can be cascaded.

379s

321 Renatus

Thanks. I should have add a question mark in the title or just change the wording slightly...

Class 321 is even older than Class 465.
Not sure whether class 379 can be fitted with third-rail shoe (and I doubt that's suitable for services within London. It could be suitable for Tunbridge Wells / Tonbridge service.

 

[swt_passenger]

Ex-SWR 707s is the usual suggestion that has been made, in what has been a fairly regular recent subject of discussion...

 

[hkstudent]

Ex-SWR 707s is the usual suggestion that has been made, in what has been a fairly regular recent subject of discussion...

I think this is likely the consensus of this forum for class 707.
Sadly it can't be made to 12 cars.

 

[JonathanH]

I think this is likely the consensus of this forum for class 707.
Sadly it can't be made to 12 cars.

Why not? Reform the units to 15 six and 15 four car units and you can make up 12-car trains (with some maintenance cover).

 

[Snow1964]

I think this is likely the consensus of this forum for class 707.
Sadly it can't be made to 12 cars.

Even if they aren't reformed, it should still free up a decent number of the 465s and 466s which would allow other services to be 12-car

Must be plenty of fringe peak services where 10-car high capacity units is more than enough

 

[4-SUB 4732]

Understand the ROSCO that owns the 707s has had discussions with James Brokenshire MP about funding the 6th coach for 707 units as well as building a follow-on order of reasonable comparison. Toilets would also be fitted.

 

[brad465]

Replacing and expanding the current fleet is not as simple as bringing in more stock: there are many issues related both to the amount of depot, siding and maintenance facilities that don't permit any expansion of the fleet beyond its current size, which are necessary if capacity is to be created. When it comes to 12 cars not everywhere can utilise them either, including Slade Green depot and half of Charing X.

In terms of 707s they are not numerous enough to outright replace Networkers, and the first point prevents them coming here on top of the current fleet. If 376s left the franchise for battery operations, as has been speculated elsewhere, they'd be more of a like for like replacement there, albeit the franchise would be down 6 sets (30 carriages) in that scenario.

 

[hkstudent]

Replacing and expanding the current fleet is not as simple as bringing in more stock: there are many issues related both to the amount of depot, siding and maintenance facilities that don't permit any expansion of the fleet beyond its current size, which are necessary if capacity is to be created. When it comes to 12 cars not everywhere can utilise them either, including Slade Green depot and half of Charing X.

In terms of 707s they are not numerous enough to outright replace Networkers, and the first point prevents them coming here on top of the current fleet. If 376s left the franchise for battery operations, as has been speculated elsewhere, they'd be more of a like for like replacement there, albeit the franchise would be down 6 sets (30 carriages) in that scenario.

yes indeed. Slade Green was identified by the Kent Route Study for a need to expand its capacity.
If not, I would imagine that new trains may need to stock as far as to Ramsgate / Dover

Understand the ROSCO that owns the 707s has had discussions with James Brokenshire MP about funding the 6th coach for 707 units as well as building a follow-on order of reasonable comparison. Toilets would also be fitted.

Yes, that's the essential bit for Southeastern metro service, a toilet onboard.
Many stations can't open the station toilet for whole day due to short in staff / vandalism.

 

[4-SUB 4732]

yes indeed. Slade Green was identified by the Kent Route Study for a need to expand its capacity.
If not, I would imagine that new trains may need to stock as far as to Ramsgate / Dover


Yes, that's the essential bit for Southeastern metro service, a toilet onboard.
Many stations can't open the station toilet for whole day due to short in staff / vandalism.

Only good to have the toilet if they are cleaned at each destination, effectively serviced and tanked at stabling points and kept in working order...

 

[hkstudent]

Only good to have the toilet if they are cleaned at each destination, effectively serviced and tanked at stabling points and kept in working order...

Yes, you are right.
But given to the limited cleaning staffing, toilet clean for suburban route would be the last thing to think of...

 

[ScottGallagher]

Having travelled on South Eastern metro numerous times and I get the toilet situation for people and DDA regs but on these lines with virtually no staff to be seen arent on train toilets just asking to be continually wrecked by some of the local natives which vandalise other bits of the trains as it is. Same goes for SWR and their 701 fleet.

 

[ComUtoR]

If/When any new fleet is introduced for Southeastern, it should be for an entire fleet replacement. There is an opportunity here that shouldn't be wasted.

707s are the most likely but can't replace Networkers for many reasons. 707s as an additional fleet poses various problems and a replacement for 376s feels like a solution looking for a problem.

I would like to see an entire fleet replacement for Southeastern in a similar way that 700s replaced the GTR fleet. Sadly, the franchise change will dictate what happens.

 

[Doomotron]

I doubt that an entire fleet replacement is worth it. The Class 375s have just had an extensive refurbishment, the 376s have no reason to go and the 395s are only 10 years old. I do believe, however, the Networkers need replacing. 707s probably won't be the answer, though, as they were built for Class 455 timings, and Networkers are a lot quicker than that. I think that an entirely new fleet is required for the Metro - AT100s anyone? After all, they will go like the clappers (the 395s do) and certainly be more reliable than either the Desiros or the Aventras. Also, if a Hitachi-only order is made, new high speed trains (or maybe just extensions of 395s) and maybe some AT200s to replace Networkers on Dover services could be bought (possibly!) at the same time, saving time and money.

 

[brad465]

I doubt that an entire fleet replacement is worth it. The Class 375s have just had an extensive refurbishment, the 376s have no reason to go and the 395s are only 10 years old. I do believe, however, the Networkers need replacing. 707s probably won't be the answer, though, as they were built for Class 455 timings, and Networkers are a lot quicker than that. I think that an entirely new fleet is required for the Metro - AT100s anyone? After all, they will go like the clappers (the 395s do) and certainly be more reliable than either the Desiros or the Aventras. Also, if a Hitachi-only order is made, new high speed trains (or maybe just extensions of 395s) and maybe some AT200s to replace Networkers on Dover services could be bought (possibly!) at the same time, saving time and money.

Going by the bio about AT100s on Hitachi Rail EU's website they would be very suitable for replacing Networkers, especially the phrase "Targeted at short distance, intensive commuter journeys, the 100mph top speed means it is also suitable for longer, inner suburban journeys.", which is Networker operation on Metro, Tun Wells and Dover services in a nutshell. Ultimately though it depends on where the franchise goes in future and what company the new operator wants to provide them with a new fleet.

 

[tbtc]

If there is a major/complete fleet replacement then will that mean that something (375s?) will replace the 365s as the Forum's current obsession to find a new home for (I remember when it was 442s that had that role!)

I do enjoy the combination of "how can we find future uses for these unwanted 1970/1980s trains" and "let's replace these trains that are under ten years old" that we are currently having at the moment, mind

 

[ComUtoR]

I doubt that an entire fleet replacement is worth it.

The is an advantage for the long term. With a single fleet it unifies maintenance and fault management. It will allow for greater operational flexibility, reduce staff training, reduce infrastructure demands and potentially introduce network wide DOO.

The Class 375s have just had an extensive refurbishment, the 376s have no reason to go and the 395s are only 10 years old. I do believe, however, the Networkers need replacing.

395s are uniquely placed and will always remain as independent and Networkers need to go without a doubt. If your going to split Metro/Mainline Then you should bundle 376s in with a fleet change for Networkers. This is an opportunity to bring an entire fleet up to modern standards. Toilets, Aircon, WiFi, plugs etc etc. If you fast forward another 10yrs we could end up in the same situation again, where part of the Metro fleet needs replacing (the 376s) and because of whatever franchise system exists new fleet replacement gets constantly kicked into touch.

Also consider a future where ERTMS is being introduced, CSDE, SDO, ASDO, FASDO, ABDO, ABC, 123 etc. are becoming the norm and a new fleet would speed up the rollout of balise introduction and push new signalling forward. Again, if this is all happening, then we should take the opportunity whilst its available.

I'm sure there is a financial benefit of ordering an entire new fleet. With the 707s, isn't there an issue with the costs involved ? Where is was cheaper to order a new fleet with lower leasing costs. Dumping 707s onto a franchise purely because they are sitting about doing nothing feels counter productive and a penalty to whoever is forced to take them.

 

[Doomotron]

The is an advantage for the long term. With a single fleet it unifies maintenance and fault management. It will allow for greater operational flexibility, reduce staff training, reduce infrastructure demands and potentially introduce network wide DOO.

395s are uniquely placed and will always remain as independent and Networkers need to go without a doubt. If your going to split Metro/Mainline Then you should bundle 376s in with a fleet change for Networkers. This is an opportunity to bring an entire fleet up to modern standards. Toilets, Aircon, WiFi, plugs etc etc. If you fast forward another 10yrs we could end up in the same situation again, where part of the Metro fleet needs replacing (the 376s) and because of whatever franchise system exists new fleet replacement gets constantly kicked into touch.

Also consider a future where ERTMS is being introduced, CSDE, SDO, ASDO, FASDO, ABDO, ABC, 123 etc. are becoming the norm and a new fleet would speed up the rollout of balise introduction and push new signalling forward. Again, if this is all happening, then we should take the opportunity whilst its available.

I'm sure there is a financial benefit of ordering an entire new fleet. With the 707s, isn't there an issue with the costs involved ? Where is was cheaper to order a new fleet with lower leasing costs. Dumping 707s onto a franchise purely because they are sitting about doing nothing feels counter productive and a penalty to whoever is forced to take them.

An entire fleet replacement was a good idea (mostly) for Greater Anglia as it is mostly older fleets of trains or microfleets of trains. The 321s, 317s, 156s, 153s and Mark 3s had to go, and unfortunately the more modern 360s, 379s and 170s were included in it. However, Southeastern already has a modern, unified fleet (well, Networkers are at least one of them). Class 375s and 377s are basically the same, the 395s are a fleet that is very focused on one purpose, and the Networkers are pretty much the same in general, but the mechanical bits being different is annoying. Out of the fleet, only the 376s seem out of place, but only because they're a smaller Metro fleet in a larger Metro fleet of different trains.

We'd be replacing a unified fleet with another unified fleet, where more than half the fleet have no reason to go - at all. We'd also have to deal with the interior: the longer-distance services would get uncomfortable Metro trains, or the Metro operations would get trains with nowhere enough capacity for their services. We already have a unified fleet, just the Networkers aren't suitable anymore - that's why they're the only ones that need replacing. A complete fleet replacement would achieve nothing; maybe even cause more problems than in the first place!

 

[brad465]

There are 190 Networker sets in total (147x 465 and 43x 466): has there been a larger whole fleet replacement undertaken for a single TOC post-privatisation that this one will be? It took 3-4 years to fully introduce the Networker fleet, it will take at least as long to replace them, and unless all the problems that some TOCs have recently been having introducing new fleets are resolved come the time of the Networker replacement, it will be a very long job, so I think the less that needs replacing at once the better (i.e. I don't think completely replacing everything SE uses is a good idea, as nice as it may be).

 

[Meerkat]

Greater Anglia was also profitable, so could be seen as more worthy and financially viable to go all new.
Southeastern is a bit of a basket case isn’t it?

 

[ComUtoR]

We need to push forward. Introduce a new, modern fleet. Up to date onboard systems, incident reduction (reducing delays) through improved safety systems, traffic management (reducing delays). New trains tend to come with an increase in seating; especially if its a walk through unit.

376s don't specifically need to go but if they were replaced it would increase the number of available toilets and could also help increase capacity.

Class 375s and 377s are basically the same

But Southeastern treat them differently. Granted from a passenger perspective but operationally there is an impact. A new franchise holder may want to introduce a new fleet because operationally they can achieve so much more.

 

[Doomotron]

Greater Anglia was also profitable, so could be seen as more worthy and financially viable to go all new.
Southeastern is a bit of a basket case isn’t it?

Other way around. Greater Anglia (at least was) under threat, Southeastern is still profitable/not going bankrupt (there's not much difference in the railway industry now).

We need to push forward. Introduce a new, modern fleet. Up to date onboard systems, incident reduction (reducing delays) through improved safety systems, traffic management (reducing delays). New trains tend to come with an increase in seating; especially if its a walk through unit.

My point still applies; we'd be replacing a modern, up-to-date fleet with a modern, up-to-date fleet. Incident reduction is not a thing on most of the network, as the Electrostars are already reliable fleet and Southeastern's long-distance operations are very punctual. New safety systems won't achieve anything if the infrastructure is the same, which it will be for a very long time. Even if we could get an infrastructure improvement, it would only improve the Metro operations, which is the fleet we're getting rid of anyway! There's no reason to 'push forward', especially if the reasoning behind it is based on ideology.

376s don't specifically need to go but if they were replaced it would increase the number of available toilets and could also help increase capacity.

What's to stop adding a toilet and redoing the interior so there's more standing space? It would be a hell of a lot cheaper! An increase in capacity with walk-through gangways is minimal and is only an improvement on extremely busy routes. A new operator could just keep the 376s on less busy metro services and be done with it.

But Southeastern treat them differently. Granted from a passenger perspective but operationally there is an impact. A new franchise holder may want to introduce a new fleet because operationally they can achieve so much more.

Or, instead of buying new trains, why can't they just interoperate them? They can probably work together, or if not can be easily modified. Then, if needed, transfer them to Ramsgate so they are properly integrated.

 

[Meerkat]

Other way around. Greater Anglia (at least was) under threat, Southeastern is still profitable/not going bankrupt (there's not much difference in the railway industry now).

Profitability for the TOC is not the same as profitable overall.

 

[ComUtoR]

My point still applies; we'd be replacing a modern, up-to-date fleet with a modern, up-to-date fleet.

375s are not modern by any means and are pushing 20yrs old. Compare them to a 700.

Incident reduction is not a thing on most of the network,

It really is. Safety is very much a concern when changing a fleet. Standards have improved a fair bit over the years and ensuring a new fleet conforms to up to date standards is a high priority. CSDE (correct side door enable) is one example. Improved SDO is another. Remember Stonegate ? It is very difficult to slide a 700, not impossible, but difficult.

New safety systems won't achieve anything if the infrastructure is the same, which it will be for a very long time.

It's a little bit of a chicken/egg situation. Continually sticking barriers in the way or refusing to move the network forward is part of what is destroying the railway. Traffic Management is coming, ERTMS is coming, Automation is coming. 5G is coming. To introduce those you need a new fleet. We are also at a point where shaving a single second off dwell times is considered to be critical. The speed in which a set of doors open and close, how wide they are, and even how many sets of doors per coach are all critical for improving the timetable and increasing network capacity. All that only comes with new trains.

Even if we could get an infrastructure improvement, it would only improve the Metro operations, which is the fleet we're getting rid of anyway! There's no reason to 'push forward', especially if the reasoning behind it is based on ideology.

Holding back is just the same. There is no real reason to hold on to something that isn't needed or will be changed in a few years anyway. As I say, there is an opportunity here that shouldn't go to waste.

What's to stop adding a toilet and redoing the interior so there's more standing space? It would be a hell of a lot cheaper! An increase in capacity with walk-through gangways is minimal and is only an improvement on extremely busy routes. A new operator could just keep the 376s on less busy metro services and be done with it.

I suspect that there is a lot of politics involved. Toilets aren't required on journeys less than an hour. You could remove all the toilets from Metro but I doubt that would be acceptable to passengers. 376s have been around for 15(ish) years and they have never attempted to add an extra coach or add a toilet. I'm not knowledgeable enough about how ROSCOs operate to comment on costs or feasibility. The fact it hasn't happened already leads me to suspect that it never will and 376s will simply life expire.

A big elephant in the room is DOO. Replacing 375s could introduce DOO across all of Southeastern with the stroke of a pen. Again, part of the requirements for new units is that they can be operated as DOO.

It will come down to cost, convenience, and politics.

 

[Doomotron]

375s are not modern by any means and are pushing 20yrs old. Compare them to a 700.

It really is. Safety is very much a concern when changing a fleet. Standards have improved a fair bit over the years and ensuring a new fleet conforms to up to date standards is a high priority. CSDE (correct side door enable) is one example. Improved SDO is another. Remember Stonegate ? It is very difficult to slide a 700, not impossible, but difficult.

It's a little bit of a chicken/egg situation. Continually sticking barriers in the way or refusing to move the network forward is part of what is destroying the railway. Traffic Management is coming, ERTMS is coming, Automation is coming. 5G is coming. To introduce those you need a new fleet. We are also at a point where shaving a single second off dwell times is considered to be critical. The speed in which a set of doors open and close, how wide they are, and even how many sets of doors per coach are all critical for improving the timetable and increasing network capacity. All that only comes with new trains.

Holding back is just the same. There is no real reason to hold on to something that isn't needed or will be changed in a few years anyway. As I say, there is an opportunity here that shouldn't go to waste.

I suspect that there is a lot of politics involved. Toilets aren't required on journeys less than an hour. You could remove all the toilets from Metro but I doubt that would be acceptable to passengers. 376s have been around for 15(ish) years and they have never attempted to add an extra coach or add a toilet. I'm not knowledgeable enough about how ROSCOs operate to comment on costs or feasibility. The fact it hasn't happened already leads me to suspect that it never will and 376s will simply life expire.

A big elephant in the room is DOO. Replacing 375s could introduce DOO across all of Southeastern with the stroke of a pen. Again, part of the requirements for new units is that they can be operated as DOO.

It will come down to cost, convenience, and politics.

I'm not going to bother replying to individual bits anymore. I'll repeat what I've said previously. This is a solution that is looking for a problem, and this solution is pretty much entirely based on ideology. Not one TOC would go anywhere near this idea, because it's ridiculous. As the old saying goes, "If it ain't broke, don't fix it" - it perfectly describes this.

If we were to spend £2 billion Pounds every time a new advancement comes along to replace the fleet, the country would be bankrupted. Imagine every franchise, replacing their entire fleet every two years. It would be mental, and a complete waste of money.

There's nothing wrong with almost all of the fleet, even if they're 'old' (since when was 20 years old?) - so replacing it because of new safety systems is pointless, and even if we were to put in new safety systems, there's no reason whatsoever not to put them in the existing fleet.

 

[Meerkat]

It would be a brave person who ordered a whole new fleet before Covid settles down, we find out whether WFH has really caught on, and what the economic effect on London employment is.

 

[4-SUB 4732]

Other way around. Greater Anglia (at least was) under threat, Southeastern is still profitable/not going bankrupt (there's not much difference in the railway industry now).

My point still applies; we'd be replacing a modern, up-to-date fleet with a modern, up-to-date fleet. Incident reduction is not a thing on most of the network, as the Electrostars are already reliable fleet and Southeastern's long-distance operations are very punctual. New safety systems won't achieve anything if the infrastructure is the same, which it will be for a very long time. Even if we could get an infrastructure improvement, it would only improve the Metro operations, which is the fleet we're getting rid of anyway! There's no reason to 'push forward', especially if the reasoning behind it is based on ideology.

What's to stop adding a toilet and redoing the interior so there's more standing space? It would be a hell of a lot cheaper! An increase in capacity with walk-through gangways is minimal and is only an improvement on extremely busy routes. A new operator could just keep the 376s on less busy metro services and be done with it.
Or, instead of buying new trains, why can't they just interoperate them? They can probably work together, or if not can be easily modified. Then, if needed, transfer them to Ramsgate so they are properly integrated.

Give the 376s to Southern as then it’s a 10-car Electrostar railway; and bring some 455s over from SWR to work the Victoria - Orpington, Blackfriars - Beckenham and Victoria - Dartford/Hayes routes. Maintain them all out of Stewarts Lane and crewed basically by Victoria, Orpington and Dartford alone.

That would allow the entirety then of the wider Metro fleet (CHX and CST oriented) to make them 12 car with SDO where needed. Easy...

 

[brad465]

Give the 376s to Southern as then it’s a 10-car Electrostar railway; and bring some 455s over from SWR to work the Victoria - Orpington, Blackfriars - Beckenham and Victoria - Dartford/Hayes routes. Maintain them all out of Stewarts Lane and crewed basically by Victoria, Orpington and Dartford alone.

That would allow the entirety then of the wider Metro fleet (CHX and CST oriented) to make them 12 car with SDO where needed. Easy...

If SE need to get rid of Networkers in future due to age, then bringing even older 455s in isn't exactly good PR for a new operator.

 

[Mikey C]

Charing Cross station needs rebuilding as well, so that all trains can run as 12 cars into modern, full size platforms. That would be very expensive