Class 717 speed up-rating (85 to 100mph)

[D365]

In the context that main line paths are a rare and valuable resource - then it could have been worth specifiying the 700s to run at 110mph for reliability and capacity improvements.

How much is a single minute worth?

 

[supervc-10]

The flipside, is how much would it cost to rate the 700s for 110 mph? Probably not worth it now, but might have been when they were being built.

 

[Bald Rick]

then it could have been worth specifiying the 700s to run at 110mph for reliability and capacity improvements.

It wasn’t.

 

[Aictos]

It wasn’t.

Rather then uprating the speed on those units, could not the line speed be increased if the signalling permits?

As surely that should be the first priority over uprating a EMU's maximum speed especially as they're already capable of 85mph.

 

[AM9]

It wasn’t.

I suppose if the MML south of Bedford had it's speed uplifts already in place, the cost difference at the point of manufacture might have been a slightly better case, - they are run on tight fast line paths a lot more on the MML than the ECML.

== Doublepost prevention - post automatically merged: 26 Jan 2021 ==

The flipside, is how much would it cost to rate the 700s for 110 mph? Probably not worth it now, but might have been when they were being built.

Has the SF7000 bogie design been cleared for 110mph anywhere else? It has a shorter wheelbase and a smaller wheel size, so I presume that it isn't the same in performance as the SF5000 used on Desiro GB stock.

 

[Energy]

Has the SF7000 bogie design been cleared for 110mph anywhere else? It has a shorter wheelbase and a smaller wheel size, so I presume that it isn't the same in performance as the SF5000 used on Desiro GB stock.

No, its only in use on Desiro Cities, Siemens say it was designed for up to 100mph. I would imagine it could got to 110 but there isn't much point specifying it for the extra cost when it will only save a minute, acceleration is far more important for these units.

 

[AM9]

No, its only in use on Desiro Cities, Siemens say it was designed for up to 100mph. I would imagine it could got to 110 but there isn't much point specifying it for the extra cost when it will only save a minute, acceleration is far more important for these units.

Yes I know that a lot of work went into creating a bogie that was significantly lighter than the then current SF5000. They alone saved nearly 70 tonnes on the tare of a 12-car unit, which despite having 5MW of drive, certainly helped their ability to slot in between the EML fasts.

 

[Energy]

Yes I know that a lot of work went into creating a bogie that was significantly lighter than the then current SF5000. They alone saved nearly 70 tonnes on the tare of a 12-car unit, which despite having 5MW of drive, certainly helped their ability to slot in between the EML fasts.

Siemens must have learnt from the Desiro UKs, especially the 185s.

 

[Halish Railway]

Unless they could just retime the LDHS services that go over 100 mph so that between Kings Cross and Woolmer Green so that they are timed to go at 100 mph to mirror the GTR services even though they will still be able to reach 115 mph along that route.

Its worth noting that there is already some pathing allowances built into the timetables for the LDHS trains to account for the slower running of the GTR services, although the amount of slack does depend on what service it is.

 

[whoosh]

Do the 717s have two motor cars? If so my thinking was it could be the figure for ONE motor car.

That would make more sense and give them a much more sprightly power-to-weight ratio more in keeping with the ratios of modern trains.

Three motor cars:

DMOS Driving Motor Open Standard (A-end) [Country end]
TOS Trailer Open Standard
TOSW Trailer Open Standard Wheelchair (provision for Lavatory to be retrofitted)
MOS Motor Open Standard
PTOSB Pantograph Trailer Open Standard Bicycle
DMOS Driving Motor Open Standard (B-end) [London end]

 

[Nogoohwell]

I would have thought the speed increase would have been related to potential diversions during the ECML upgrades. I always thought the lower speed specification was a major oversight/cost saving.

 

[hexagon789]

Three motor cars:

DMOS Driving Motor Open Standard (A-end) [Country end]
TOS Trailer Open Standard
TOSW Trailer Open Standard Wheelchair (provision for Lavatory to be retrofitted)
MOS Motor Open Standard
PTOSB Pantograph Trailer Open Standard Bicycle
DMOS Driving Motor Open Standard (B-end) [London end]

In which case the quoted figure must surely be per motor car and not for a full set

 

[Kieran1990]

Just a note- could the 717s be uprated to 100mph be linked to Class 365’s leaving GN and thus allowing the 717s to cover any gaps on the GN in the future?

 

[bramling]

Just a note- could the 717s be uprated to 100mph be linked to Class 365’s leaving GN and thus allowing the 717s to cover any gaps on the GN in the future?

In theory, yes, it’s *feasible* as the December 2020 timetable leaves a handful of 717s spare compared to usual, I forget the exact number.

With the Welwyn/KX peak extras missing as well this leaves a few 700/0 and 717 spare each day.

Whether this is actually the case in practice, who knows. However sticking 717s on 365 diagrams introduces some issues like no toilets and no first class. Also the Baldocks are 8-car, so 6-car would be a capacity reduction and 12-car doesn’t fit the current stabling arrangements nor the reversing berth at Baldock. Were, for example, the Welwyns to return then these could be 717, releasing two or there 700/0 to replace 365s.

However I think this is all rather speculative, as it’s more likely they will simply reshuffle the 387s and squeeze a few extra trips out of these, combined with the mooted 12 extra units. They’ve already managed to squeeze in over half the Baldocks as 387s in the December 2020 timetable, so that combined with continuing them at 50% of normal (hourly vice half-hourly) and perhaps doing the same to the Peterboroughs would likely mean all could be just about be covered with 387s.

 

[Railperf]

Just a note- could the 717s be uprated to 100mph be linked to Class 365’s leaving GN and thus allowing the 717s to cover any gaps on the GN in the future?

It seems to make sense in the current climate. If any 'spare' 717's and 700's can fulfill diagrams that were previously formed by 365's it does reduce TOC leasing costs, as well as create a more uniform fleet.
Going forward the 365's or any other suitable stock could be re-leased as and when passenger numbers demand more services.

 

[bramling]

It seems to make sense in the current climate. If any 'spare' 717's and 700's can fulfill diagrams that were previously formed by 365's it does reduce TOC leasing costs, as well as create a more uniform fleet.
Going forward the 365's or any other suitable stock could be re-leased as and when passenger numbers demand more services.

The trouble with re-leasing the 365s would be that driver knowledge will run out, and that’s a lot of hassle (time and expense) to get back.

This is the problem with a knee-jerk move to cut capacity - getting it back can be costly. Though in GN’s case this might not apply if they can simply shuffle/lease more of the stock they already have, for example the Gatwick 387s or the similar 379s. None of this helps oust the 313s or 455s though!

 

[Railperf]

The trouble with re-leasing the 365s would be that driver knowledge will run out, and that’s a lot of hassle (time and expense) to get back.

This is the problem with a knee-jerk move to cut capacity - getting it back can be costly. Though in GN’s case this might not apply if they can simply shuffle/lease more of the stock they already have, for example the Gatwick 387s or the similar 379s. None of this helps oust the 313s or 455s though!

I would imagine any off-lease 379's and any available 377's/387's would fit the bill better than 365's.

 

[bramling]

I would imagine any off-lease 379's and any available 377's/387's would fit the bill better than 365's.

Not necessarily; the 365s have a higher seating (and overall) capacity, and 387s have other places they could gainfully be used - for example south of the river replacing ageing 313s or 455s.

On the debit side it’s a third type of traction on GN, and they require DOO equipment to be maintained (albeit at a very small number of stations); I forget if they still need dispatch staff at certain stations during darkness too.

I suppose one could also make a case to say that newer Electrostar stock might also be more gainfully deployed on applications where a high proportion of the fleet would be at work all day and thus more passengers reap the benefits - as would be the case if they replaced the 313s. The 365s are not heavily utilised, some diagrams only doing an out and back peak trip, so are perhaps more suited to older stock, which one would expect (!) to have lower lease costs.

 

[OFFDN]

Up-rating the 717s maximum speed has nothing to do with 717s covering long distance services - it was being investigated prior to the COVID-19 pandemic.

There are no intentions to replace 387s/365s with 717s.

 

[southern442]

I wouldn’t bank on the 365s going anywhere just yet.

There may be a reduction in the overall GTR fleet size that may require a bit of a reshuffle, but I’d say the fact the 365s are about to be fitted with ETCS suggests you should be looking elsewhere.. I’m not privy to the conversations happening at a very high level, but if I had to guess, I’d go with the far older stock somewhere a little more Southern!

However, as said, I’m not privy to those conversations so could be completely wrong, but it would be very odd for the 365s to be scrapped whilst the far older 313s continue to linger on..

Rumblings elsewhere in the forums suggest that GN are at the very least planning to remove the 365s from their current operations in exchange for spare 387s, but there are an equal number of rumblings that say that they are about to have some attention done to them.

I'd probably put money on the 455's going first, before the 313's, bizarrely they still seem to be fine, from a passenger perspective at least.

 

[Skimble19]

Rumblings elsewhere in the forums suggest that GN are at the very least planning to remove the 365s from their current operations in exchange for spare 387s, but there are an equal number of rumblings that say that they are about to have some attention done to them.

I'd probably put money on the 455's going first, before the 313's, bizarrely they still seem to be fine, from a passenger perspective at least.

Indeed, the situation is certainly fluid. Nothing has been formally announced, but sadly it does seem the 365s will be in storage by the end of May. Hopefully they have a future elsewhere, they're good units.

Slightly back on topic, whilst I don't know the reason for the speed up-rating on the 717s, I can't see them covering duties currently operated by 365s, but they could in theory allow a cascade of other units to cover those services.

 

[bramling]

Indeed, the situation is certainly fluid. Nothing has been formally announced, but sadly it does seem the 365s will be in storage by the end of May. Hopefully they have a future elsewhere, they're good units.

Slightly back on topic, whilst I don't know the reason for the speed up-rating on the 717s, I can't see them covering duties currently operated by 365s, but they could in theory allow a cascade of other units to cover those services.

The obvious ready cascade is 717s on the Welwyn to KX, in turn releasing about three 700/0 to take on 6x365 work. However, this kind of falls apart on a number of levels - firstly there’s no need for 100mph on these services, secondly it assumes the Welwyns reappear at all, thirdly it assumes Welwyn to Sevenoaks doesn’t happen, and fourthly it assumes the 717s aren’t needed on Moorgate services.

I suspect if the 365s are going then it’s certainly possible the 700/0s currently not doing the Welwyns could form part of the backfill, but only in the short term.

 

[southern442]

The obvious ready cascade is 717s on the Welwyn to Londons, in turn releasing about three 700/0 to take on 365 work. However, this kind of falls apart on a number of levels - firstly there’s no need for 100mph on these services, secondly it assumes the Welwyns reappear at all, thirdly it assumes Welwyn to Sevenoaks doesn’t happen, and fourthly it assumes the 717s aren’t needed on Moorgate services.

I suspect if the 365s are going then it’s certainly possible the 700/0s currently not doing the Welwyns could form part of the backfill, but only in the short term.

It seems as though the Maidstone-Cambridge through services have been cancelled for the time being, so I can't see Welwyn-Sevenoaks happening anytime soon.

 

[bramling]

It seems as though the Maidstone-Cambridge through services have been cancelled for the time being, so I can't see Welwyn-Sevenoaks happening anytime soon.

Presumably the required route knowledge isn’t in place at the current time, in any event?

I suppose it could happen at short notice with Finsbury Park crew changes.

 

[73128]

Indeed, the situation is certainly fluid. Nothing has been formally announced, but sadly it does seem the 365s will be in storage by the end of May. Hopefully they have a future elsewhere, they're good units.

Slightly back on topic, whilst I don't know the reason for the speed up-rating on the 717s, I can't see them covering duties currently operated by 365s, but they could in theory allow a cascade of other units to cover those services.

Might the 365s be heading (back) to South Eastern at some point? Compatible (?) with other networkers and allows the non standard 377/5s to go back to Southern to indirectly displace 171s, 313s or 455s or something else?

 

[Energy]

Might the 365s be heading (back) to South Eastern at some point? Compatible (?) with other networkers and allows the non standard 377/5s to go back to Southern to indirectly displace 171s, 313s or 455s or something else?

The third rail gear is long gone.

 

[southern442]

Might the 365s be heading (back) to South Eastern at some point? Compatible (?) with other networkers and allows the non standard 377/5s to go back to Southern to indirectly displace 171s, 313s or 455s or something else?

I haven't heard anyone definietly say that this will never happen, but questions have been raised about how easy it would be to get them back to being able to run on DC.

 

[hwl]

The third rail gear is long gone.

I haven't heard anyone definietly say that this will never happen, but questions have been raised about how easy it would be to get them back to being able to run on DC.

Extremely unlikely as the traction electrics aren't fully EMC compliant so another 442 type saga to be had before any potential return to 3rd rail (most also never had 3rd rail gear in the first place)

 

[Hadders]

I haven't heard anyone definietly say that this will never happen, but questions have been raised about how easy it would be to get them back to being able to run on DC.

All but impossible. We had a discussion on here not that long back and I believe there are all sorts of electrical compliance issues.