Class 365 scrap movements + preservation discussion

[43096]

I would have thought that 365s could go anywhere that post office Networkers being that apart from carrying passengers they are very similar.

Post office Networkers? If you mean the 325s, they are basically 319s with a Networker cab on. They are very, very different to a 365.

 

[hwl]

I would have thought that 365s could go anywhere that post office Networkers being that apart from carrying passengers they are very similar.

The royal mail 325s are effectively very similar to 319s but with networker cabs...

 

[cnjb8]

Could they not go bi-mode? Sort of an evolution on the 769s. Could be used by Northern to replace Sprinters.

 

[py_megapixel]

Could they not go bi-mode? Sort of an evolution on the 769s. Could be used by Northern to replace Sprinters.

There are nowhere near enough of them and the 769s so far have not been a success - the least reliable units in the country despite being years late.

 

[CBlue]

Convert them into sealed baked bean containers. You can then own a small slice of a 365 simply by visiting your local supermarket.

 

[cnjb8]

There are nowhere near enough of them and the 769s so far have not been a success - the least reliable units in the country despite being years late.

That’s what I mean, learn from the 769 situation to create a bi-mode train that works!
It’s very unlikely, with Northern wanting to standardise and the leasing situation

 

[skyhigh]

I would have thought that 365s could go anywhere that post office Networkers being that apart from carrying passengers they are very similar.

They look like 325s, but mechanically/electrically they're pretty much 319s.

Could they not go bi-mode? Sort of an evolution on the 769s. Could be used by Northern to replace Sprinters.

I don't think any more conversions of old unwanted trains should be encouraged (and then forced upon Northern to replace trains that actually work).

 

[supervc-10]

As much as I like the 365s... they're going to get scrapped. I'd rather electrify a few more routes to ditch some Sprinters and use 365s but that's simply not going to happen in the timeframe it needs to. Add in the fact that the superior 350/2s are going to be available soon too in similar numbers, and the outlook for the 365s is not good.

 

[Journeyman]

I would have thought that 365s could go anywhere that post office Networkers being that apart from carrying passengers they are very similar.

Yup, as others have said, they're 319s under the skin, and therefore technically nothing like the 365s. They perform completely differently and have totally different electronic interference issues. The bodywork isn't the same either. Roughly the same dimensions, but completely differently constructed.

Only the cabs are vaguely similar. Nothing else is even remotely the same.

 

[fgwrich]

Convert them into sealed baked bean containers. You can then own a small slice of a 365 simply by visiting your local supermarket.

Might be a small issue with turning them into bean cans, although Coke cans are more widespread and appropriate

 

[D365]

Speculative thread here.

 

[driverd]

365s are very limited as to where they can run under their own power as there is electrical interference between them and the signalling systems (800s/801s/802s had a very similar issue a while back), therefore the only places they can run under their own power are places that have been specifically cleared for them - that is Kings Cross to Peterborough/Kings Lynn, the Hertford loop and a few routes in Scotland.

Not to doubt you for a second but I'm curious about the basis of this information - they seemed to be quite readily deployed in Scotland and didn't have any issues with OHLE/signalling compatibility. What's the basis for thinking there are major issues with the electronics, as opposed to simple clearance issues?

 

[DanNCL]

Not to doubt you for a second but I'm curious about the basis of this information - they seemed to be quite readily deployed in Scotland and didn't have any issues with OHLE/signalling compatibility. What's the basis for thinking there are major issues with the electronics, as opposed to simple clearance issues (ie: broadly speaking EMUs are 20m, so 23m vehicles could be the constraint in various areas)?

It’s likely in the main historical issues, with route clearance for other routes not having been done simply as there’s been no need.

 

[Journeyman]

Not to doubt you for a second but I'm curious about the basis of this information - they seemed to be quite readily deployed in Scotland and didn't have any issues with OHLE/signalling compatibility. What's the basis for thinking there are major issues with the electronics, as opposed to simple clearance issues?

They still had to be tested to make sure they could operate in Scotland. They may not have been able to, but presumably we got lucky here.

The Networker family is know to be electronically and magnetically "dirty" in a way that earlier DC-motored trains, and later AC-motored trains aren't. They were an early use of a particular technology, and the frequency of various on-board systems is potentially problematic in a lot of areas.

 

[Tynwald]

1st generation AC drive units, with obselete GTO inverters. There day is done.

 

[Journeyman]

1st generation AC drive units, with obselete GTO inverters. There day is done.

Yeah, that. Reliability is only going to get worse as these units age.

 

[driverd]

It’s likely in the main historical issues, with route clearance for other routes not having been done simply as there’s been no need.

So in most cases its unlikely to be much of an issue. Generally route clearance is just a paper exercise.

 

[Journeyman]

So in most cases its unlikely to be much of an issue. Generally route clearance is just a paper exercise.

No, it's definitely an issue with 365s.

 

[D365]

So in most cases its unlikely to be much of an issue. Generally route clearance is just a paper exercise.

Key word emphasised. As per @Journeyman’s comments, the Networkers are a rather special case from a time where three-phase inverter technology was developing at a rate of knots.

 

[Journeyman]

Key word emphasised. As per @Journeyman’s comments, the Networkers are a rather special case from a time where three-phase inverter technology was developing at a rate of knots.

Yeah. An absolutely vast amount of work had to be done to immunise signalling systems before the Networkers entered traffic, and it's possible that similar work will be needed for any future redeployment of 365s. That work will not be needed for 350/2s.

 

[Hadders]

Despite their similar looks the class 325 ‘post office’ units have more in common with the 319s rather than the 365s.

 

[D365]

Despite their similar looks the class 325 ‘post office’ units have more in common with the 318s rather than the 365s.

I’ll assume that was a typo for ”319”

Cl325 is a slightly modified 319.

 

[Hadders]

I’ll assume that was a typo for ”319”

Cl325 is a slightly modified 319.

Sorry, yes. Bloody keyboard on my phone! Now corrected.

 

[driverd]

They still had to be tested to make sure they could operate in Scotland. They may not have been able to, but presumably we got lucky here.

The Networker family is know to be electronically and magnetically "dirty" in a way that earlier DC-motored trains, and later AC-motored trains aren't. They were an early use of a particular technology, and the frequency of various on-board systems is potentially problematic in a lot of areas.

Sorry, I missed this message before posting my reply.

Key word emphasised. As per @Journeyman’s comments, the Networkers are a rather special case from a time where three-phase inverter technology was developing at a rate of knots.

Interesting to know! Would more modern signalling generally be less vulnerable to this? Just curious as to why there was no issue on E to G?

 

[Journeyman]

Interesting to know! Would more modern signalling generally be less vulnerable to this? Just curious as to why there was no issue on E to G?

I think it was more luck than judgement! The 365s really dug ScotRail out of a hole. Because it was Hitachi's fault that they were needed due to problems with the 385s, I believe they funded the whole project. The suspension was jacked up slightly, but I don't think any further action was required.

 

[fgwrich]

I think it was more luck than judgement! The 365s really dug ScotRail out of a hole. Because it was Hitachi's fault that they were needed due to problems with the 385s, I believe they funded the whole project. The suspension was jacked up slightly, but I don't think any further action was required.

I believe the side steps were replaced for narrower ones as well. I have to say though, they rather suited their work with ScotRail rather nicely - a shame the Fife Circle wasn't electrified sooner as I feel they'd be ideal (with refurbishment and modernisation!) for that. But yes, they rather did dig ScotRail out of the hole at the time.

 

[Journeyman]

I believe the side steps were replaced for narrower ones as well.

Yeah, I think you're right there.

I have to say though, they rather suited their work with ScotRail rather nicely - a shame the Fife Circle wasn't electrified sooner as I feel they'd be ideal (with refurbishment and modernisation!) for that. But yes, they rather did dig ScotRail out of the hole at the time.

Yeah, I was rather sad to see them go. I was commuting from Linlithgow to Glasgow on them for a while, and they were nice to travel on. I don't think there's any shortage of EMUs in Scotland now, though.

 

[Wolvercoter]

Hi all,
Just trying to piece together storage locations of the 365s. Can anyone confirm whether this is correct?

All odd-numbered units at Crewe South and all even-numbered units at Doncaster Belmont, except:
512 at Ely
525 at Bicester
526 at Crewe Works
528 at Ely
539 at Doncaster Belmont

 

[bramling]

Hi all,
Just trying to piece together storage locations of the 365s. Can anyone confirm whether this is correct?

All odd-numbered units at Crewe South and all even-numbered units at Doncaster Belmont, except:
512 at Ely
525 at Bicester
526 at Crewe Works
528 at Ely
539 at Doncaster Belmont

365526 is essentially disposed of. Two cars went to Spadeadam and are presumed long destroyed, and a third car was scrapped at Booths a couple of years ago. This leaves one driving car, which was last reported at Wolverton.

 

[The_Train]

Hi all,
Just trying to piece together storage locations of the 365s. Can anyone confirm whether this is correct?

All odd-numbered units at Crewe South and all even-numbered units at Doncaster Belmont, except:
512 at Ely
525 at Bicester
526 at Crewe Works
528 at Ely
539 at Doncaster Belmont

This ties up with the 365 records at https://www.ukraillog.co.uk/360-379 apart from the 2 you have at Ely, which are now at Belmont and 526 which @bramling has explained about above