-
Our new ticketing site is now live! Using either this or the original site (both powered by TrainSplit) helps support the running of the forum with every ticket purchase! Find out more and ask any questions/give us feedback in this thread!
Where could class 350/2s units go?
- Thread starter Bletchleyite
- Start date
- Status
Sponsor Post - registered members do not see these adverts; click here to register, or click here to log in
R
RailUK Forums
Bletchleyite
Veteran Member
I'd think most likely to replace older EMUs, e.g. ScotRail's 320s or Northern's 323s.
I suggest that the 350 could replace the Northern's 323 which in turn would replace the ScotRail's 320.
Scotrail314209
Established Member
Wouldn’t work at all. The 323s are 23m I believe, which means significant lengthening of platforms would need to be happen in order to run them as 6 car. Said lengthening is too expensive to do. (Subject for another thread though)
I know it’s been shot down time and time again, but seeing as it’s speculative I’ll throw it out there.
350/2S to be converted to 2+2 and fitted with 3rd rail collection equipment, cab redesign and bought up to the same standard as 450s/444s including fitting and testing of ASDO. This way they can operate in the same pool as the rest of the Desiro stock, but would primarily be used on Portsmouth services. I know Northam are full with limited diagrams arriving and departing, but the fitters that worked on 442s, and would work on the 458s would just be converted to 450/2 fitters, based out of Bournemouth. This would enable the 458s to be scrapped, or transferred to SE to see off stock that was no longer wanted. I would imagine the refurbishment for the 450/2s would be around the same sort of cost involved in the 458 work and training that’s about to be undertaken.
350/2S to be converted to 2+2 and fitted with 3rd rail collection equipment, cab redesign and bought up to the same standard as 450s/444s including fitting and testing of ASDO. This way they can operate in the same pool as the rest of the Desiro stock, but would primarily be used on Portsmouth services. I know Northam are full with limited diagrams arriving and departing, but the fitters that worked on 442s, and would work on the 458s would just be converted to 450/2 fitters, based out of Bournemouth. This would enable the 458s to be scrapped, or transferred to SE to see off stock that was no longer wanted. I would imagine the refurbishment for the 450/2s would be around the same sort of cost involved in the 458 work and training that’s about to be undertaken.
Whilst I don't disagree with the idea of converting them to 3rd rail - why do you think South Eastern would want the 458s ? They are a 'one off' and only SWR has any experience of operating them.
Not sure South Eastern should become the dumping ground of any odd-ball 3rd rail stock which might become surplus.
Bletchleyite
Veteran Member
350/2s converted to third rail and reseated to a Class 350/1 style 2+2 interior would be perfect for the Pompey Direct, I agree. 458s should just go in the bin, they're old, not particularly good and there's a glut of EMUs.
The 458s already have a 2+2 interior and are about to be refurbished for use on the PDL, so it seems like a waste of money and effort to bin them and start over on the 350s. I can't imagine that Porterbrook are being particularly precious about the 458 lease charges either, so surely they'd be better off trying to keep both the 350/2s and 458s in use rather than swapping one for the other.
The current interior on the 458s would not be suitable for the 2 hour journey, of many passengers travel end to end, and so they’ll need a major interior re-work, re-gearing and having an intermediate coach removed. you’ve also got the training costs involved which will be more substantial than on Desiro based. In regards to the leasing costs, you’re probably correct.
The reason I suggested potentially SE wasn’t to suggest it’s the 3rd rail dumping ground, but because they’re still newer and possibly better than many of the networkers, although they’d need to be returned to 4 car units.
43096
On Moderation
- Joined
- 23 Nov 2015
- Messages
- 18,831
Ah the usual forum fantasy trains that ignores the realities of the world like commercial contracts. It further ignores that the 350/2s and 458s have the same owner, so there’s no real benefit for them.
317 forever
Established Member
They could even be reduced to (or reformed as) 3-car 350s and replace 318s as well as 320s with ScotRail.
Kite159
Veteran Member
You will also need to do something with the doors being slower to open compared to the 318/320s.
--------
Had Northern not gone for the 323s then they might have made a reasonable replacement for the 323s & 319s (although the doors are slow). Breaking out my crayons
Not enough - there are only 37 x 350/2, whereas GWR has 42 x 387.
== Doublepost prevention - post automatically merged: ==
Possibly on the 319s, but the 323s are 23m (350s are 20m), so there may be signal / platform issues which allow for 2 x 323 but not 2 x 350.
GWR has 48 387s (387130-387174/301/302/306) with 12 allocated to HEX (387130-387141) - ie 36 operational units.
Kite159
Veteran Member
Other than the odd Manchester - Stoke service on busy weekends, is there any routine pairs of 323s in Northern?
Fair enough - I took the numbers from Wikipedia.
== Doublepost prevention - post automatically merged: ==
The Stoke - Manchester usually uses the bay at Stoke, and that can only take 1 unit........ So 2 x 323 on that is going to be rare, because otherwise it means blocking a platform at Stoke.
On the other part, no idea.
D365
Veteran Member
- Joined
- 29 Jun 2012
- Messages
- 13,186
Bingo. Porterbrook has to spend the money if they want to keep the 458s in revenue service.
It's a shame there isn't spare capacity on the WCML. Otherwise you could get an Open Access Operator to refurbish them and run a cheap service from London to Glasgow/Edinburgh with maybe one stop in Manchester. Sort of like the WCMLs version of Lumo.
Bletchleyite
Veteran Member
That almost did happen with Mk4s then COVID killed it.
Even with the paths it would be a deeply unattractive journey, not comparable to Lumo.
Euston - Manchester (current timings, so 125mph stock) is ~2h 15m, Manchester - Glasgow is ~3h 20m, so a combination of those would be over 5h 30m - and 110mph Desiros on an OAR with random stopping patterns would be slower than that, compared to Euston - Glasgow ~4h 30m.
Not comparable to Lumo who's timings are comparable to LNER's (quicker than some, slower than others depending on LNER stopping patterns).
That's before HS2 shaves another chunk off Euston - Glasgow times.
== Doublepost prevention - post automatically merged: ==
No - Grand Central only applied for Euston - Blackpool so not Glasgow / Edinburgh and not via Manchester.
They are an OAR, but that's about the only similarity with Lumo....
Does Lumo have random stopping patterns? I thought it was London - Newcastle - Edinburgh. What I was talking about was similar, London - Manchester - Glasgow/Edinburgh. Again, no randomn stopping patterns as far as I can tell. Yes, it's 110, but factor in Lumo plus travel between Edinburgh and Glasgow, and Glasgow at least starts to look attractive, IMO.
Oh, and HS2 isn't here yet, not for another 15 - 20 years.
Why is it going to be cheap? An understanding really must get reached that you can't just put an open access operator on to run a 'cheap' service.
That would create massive pathing issues.
If Lumo can do cheap, why can't someone else?
I pointed that out in my first post. "It's a shame there isn't spare capacity on the WCML...."
Lumo doesn't, but an OAR on the WCML with 110mph stock, even if paths were there, would not get a London, Manchester Glasgow service with just those stops.
The existing WCML operators have never been able / allowed to run London - Manchester or Manchester - Glasgow non stop.
And why would London - Manchester - Glasgow which would be over an hour slower end to end be attractive? The current London Glasgow's biggest competitor is Easyjet - a slower service on suburban stock isn't going to be attractive.
Ok add beuraucracy to the list of it's a shame that exists so we can't do this.
If the stars aligned and the preferred route was possible though, the lack of stops would be how it gets there quicker. Just like Lumo. Maybe I need to charter a Deltic with some 110 capable coaches to prove my point (and here comes the argument of whether or not a Deltic can do a sustained 110).....
Lumo got its access rights by putting a case that it was competing with airlines on time and adding passengers to the railway. To some extent, that is a little dubious as it will be taking market from LNER as well. It is looking to use its trains intensively and concentrate traincrew at a single Newcastle base.
Running London to Glasgow via Manchester in six, maybe seven hours is neither intensive or good competition against other flows. The demand from London to Glasgow is less than Edinburgh in any case.
Or, perhaps a class 90 that can actually do 110mph. Going via Manchester adds time to the journey even if paths were available.
What journey time could sensibly be achieved with a 350 in your view?
Last edited:
Tinfoil hat nonsense.
The simple facts are via Manchester is longer, slower (because the linespeeds are slower) and you're suggesting the use of 110mph stock compared to 125mph which is used which is also slower.
You'll be adding over an hour to the current journey time and limited stopping which in turn will limit its usefuleness.
This feels more like a crayonista desire to cover certain routes on certain stock than a sensible proposal.
- Status