Confirmation on class 379 to Great Northern???

[Goldfish62]

I’d have thought this prize would have gone to BR’s 9F fleet. 251 locos built between 1954 and 1960 with withdrawals starting in 1964 and class extinct in 1968.

While that is true I was meaning in modern times with the current post-"privatised" structure.

 

[A0]

While that is true I was meaning in modern times with the current post-"privatised" structure.

I'd have thought the 460s have pretty much achieved that haven't they from a post-privatisation standpoint.

 

[Goldfish62]

I'd have thought the 460s have pretty much achieved that haven't they from a post-privatisation standpoint.

While some coaches have been scrapped they're still very much around in service, albeit in reconfigured format.

I'll clearly have to be a bit clearer still - I mean scrapping in the post-privatisation era and by scrapping I mean just that. Whole trains sent off and scrapped.

 

[Domh245]

Specifically, it is the new entrants to the rail leasing market that have under-priced the risk. Angel, Eversholt and Porterbrook have long understood the risk, having had various fleets off lease at various times. The new entrants like Rock Rail have probably won orders by under-pricing the risk: the word was that when the 707s were in danger of having no future home that the new entrants were ****ting themselves because they thought they had a risk-free investment, even though Section 54 agreements weren't in place.

I'd be slightly surprised if that were the case, given Rock Rail are financing the fleet that displaced the 707s in the first place! Not impossible for them to have missed it of course, but I'd like to think they aren't that dim that they didn't realise it was a risky business whilst consigning a fleet of 30 new trains to an unknown fate!

That said, I would argue that their fleets are probably safer than the likes of the 707s and 379s, but even fairly safe bets can backfire (cf 350/2 - which aside from the whole "Porterbrook were charging extortionately" aspect were also supposedly part ditched to improve the business case of the 730s - only getting the stock for the additional capacity was a bit too close to microfleet, so order more and get two useably sized fleets)

 

[A0]

While some coaches have been scrapped they're still very much around in service, albeit in reconfigured format.

I'll clearly have to be a bit clearer still - I mean scrapping in the post-privatisation era and by scrapping I mean just that. Whole trains sent off and scrapped.

OK - I'd place my bets elsewhere and probably go looking at the Class 180s.

The 4 EMR ones will be leaving them when the 810s arrive next year.

That leaves the 10 with GC - and given other OARs on the ECML have moved to running hybrids, I wouldn't be surprised if GC followed them. The 180s haven't exactly been known for their reliability at any of their berths and they are pretty non-standard.

**EDIT - I might actually stick with the 460s - SWR reckon they're only going to use 28 of the 458s and there were only 30 of those originally so the 6 converted units may yet reach the end of the line and are unlikely to find a use with any other operator.

 

[ashkeba]

OK - I'd place my bets elsewhere and probably go looking at the Class 180s.

The 4 EMR ones will be leaving them when the 810s arrive next year.

That leaves the 10 with GC - and given other OARs on the ECML have moved to running hybrids, I wouldn't be surprised if GC followed them. The 180s haven't exactly been known for their reliability at any of their berths and they are pretty non-standard.

**EDIT - I might actually stick with the 460s - SWR reckon they're only going to use 28 of the 458s and there were only 30 of those originally so the 6 converted units may yet reach the end of the line and are unlikely to find a use with any other operator.

Both the 180s and ex-460s are about ten years older than the 379s and not scrapped yet.

 

[Neptune]

While some coaches have been scrapped they're still very much around in service, albeit in reconfigured format.

I'll clearly have to be a bit clearer still - I mean scrapping in the post-privatisation era and by scrapping I mean just that. Whole trains sent off and scrapped.

But for 3(?) vehicles at their factory in Goole that are sat on plinths how about the 332’s?

 

[Peter Sarf]

Regardless of the excuses or reasons for the 379s becoming surplus it is an ecological mistake to be prematurely scrapping any thing that has a carbon footprint resulting from its manufacture. Unless, of course, said item has huge costs ecologically connected with its use. A new diesel train replaced by an older electric or hybrid train might be justifiable.

At the end of the day it is ironic that, for the want of more electrification, we have relatively new electric trains going to waste.

The least worst approach ecologically would be to dispose of the older electric trains first. For example Southerns 313s and 455s.

It does not matter how cheap finance is these unwanted units still have to be paid for and the carbon footprint of manufacture does not go away.

 

[A0]

Regardless of the excuses or reasons for the 379s becoming surplus it is an ecological mistake to be prematurely scrapping any thing that has a carbon footprint resulting from its manufacture. Unless, of course, said item has huge costs ecologically connected with its use. A new diesel train replaced by an older electric or hybrid train might be justifiable.

At the end of the day it is ironic that, for the want of more electrification, we have relatively new electric trains going to waste.

The least worst approach ecologically would be to dispose of the older electric trains first. For example Southerns 313s and 455s.

It does not matter how cheap finance is these unwanted units still have to be paid for and the carbon footprint of manufacture does not go away.

Bit in bold - which is of course happening.

But it doesn't necessarily follow that it should be "first in first out" - the 365s went before the 455s or 313s, but were hamstrung by being a small class of non standard units.

I'd be very surprised if either the 379s or 350/2s were scrapped - both are relatively standard and potentially easily redeployed. TBF the 379s were probably a mistake originally as they were non standard within the Anglia fleet. More 360s would probably have been better on balance.

 

[Pete_uk]

Will all these EMUs going to the sidings, you'd think they would sling some engines under them and send them to replace the GWR HSTs or something.


What did I say?

 

[HamworthyGoods]

Will all these EMUs going to the sidings, you'd think they would sling some engines under them and send them to replace the GWR HSTs or something.


What did I say?

The electrostar is a 20 year old design, there’s no guarantee trying to fit a Diesel engine under would be anymore successful than what is going on with 769s….

 

[Pete_uk]

Oh well!

 

[JohnElliott]

Or sling batteries under them and use them to replace diesels on part-electrified routes.

 

[JonathanH]

Or sling batteries under them and use them to replace diesels on part-electrified routes.

Read two messages up that that is not guaranteed to work.

 

[anthony263]

Better yet put more wires up and use them or the 350/2’s to replace dmus

 

[Peter Sarf]

Better yet put more wires up and use them or the 350/2’s to replace dmus

Read the 196 thread to see a use for spare EMUs.

 

[JohnElliott]

Read two messages up that that is not guaranteed to work.

There's actually been a working proof of concept with batteries, though, so it's not as much of a leap as diesel engines.

 

[JonathanH]

There's actually been a working proof of concept with batteries, though, so it's not as much of a leap as diesel engines.

Indeed, 379013 was used for a month on the Harwich branch but it wasn't entirely successful. That said, battery technology will have moved on since then. However, retro fitting that sort of thing is never going to be as good as installing it in the first place.

 

[A0]

Better yet put more wires up and use them or the 350/2’s to replace dmus

You've got several billion quid lying around as spare change?

You do realise it's not as simple as buying a few thousand masts and several hundred miles of copper cabling? There are factors like existing structures such as bridges, station canopies signals all of which need to be surveyed, designs drawn up, connections to the National Grid put in place - the latter can take years because the NG aren't just going to drop everything to accomodate Network Rail.

And all of that assumes the 350s or 379s are suitable replacements for the existing DMUs - which they may not be.

 

[Agent_Squash]

And all of that assumes the 350s or 379s are suitable replacements for the existing DMUs - which they may not be.

Baring terminal platform lengths (which any decent electrification programme would resolve), there is no reason that 4x20m 350s/379s would not be a viable replacement for 2/3x20m 150s. And neither really is there for the 156s/158s apart from the lack of knitting...

 

[43074]

You've got several billion quid lying around as spare change?

You do realise it's not as simple as buying a few thousand masts and several hundred miles of copper cabling? There are factors like existing structures such as bridges, station canopies signals all of which need to be surveyed, designs drawn up, connections to the National Grid put in place - the latter can take years because the NG aren't just going to drop everything to accomodate Network Rail.

And all of that assumes the 350s or 379s are suitable replacements for the existing DMUs - which they may not be.

Don't think anyone said it was easy. It's a valid point to ask where the electrification projects are to make best use of 67 EMUs (total number of 350/2 and 379s combined) which are barely 15 years old. It's a bigger waste of taxpayers money to have 15 year old units with a 40 year lifespan sitting around in storage than it would be to use them to replace a few 15x on Northern for instance. Suitability is unlikely to be a problem, 379s would be a good fit to replace 185s on an electrified TPE as much as 350/2s would be a good fit to replace 150s on Northern.

 

[Magdalia]

It's a bigger waste of taxpayers money to have 15 year old units with a 40 year lifespan sitting around in storage than it would be to use them .

But class 379s out of use isn't a waste of taxpayers money. The units were leased, not owned, so, while the units are out of use, the taxpayer is not paying the leasing charges, and not wasting any money on them.

 

[paul1609]

Indeed, 379013 was used for a month on the Harwich branch but it wasn't entirely successful. That said, battery technology will have moved on since then. However, retro fitting that sort of thing is never going to be as good as installing it in the first place.

Indeed quite how unsuccessful it was has often been under reported. Despite only very limited running with the pan down in summer on the Harwich branch the batteries were unserviceable and life expired after 6 weeks.

 

[Goldfish62]

Indeed quite how unsuccessful it was has often been under reported. Despite only very limited running with the pan down in summer on the Harwich branch the batteries were unserviceable and life expired after 6 weeks.

On that basis it sounds like the technology used was fundamentally wrong. Compare with the latest electric buses where a 10-15 year battery can be expected.

 

[A0]

On that basis it sounds like the technology used was fundamentally wrong. Compare with the latest electric buses where a 10-15 year battery can be expected.

Your average electric bus tends to be smaller, lighter and have fewer high voltage current demands than your average train though.

 

[HamworthyGoods]

On that basis it sounds like the technology used was fundamentally wrong. Compare with the latest electric buses where a 10-15 year battery can be expected.

For a start buses don’t generally have air conditioning which is a massive drain on the batteries.

 

[Goldfish62]

For a start buses don’t generally have air conditioning which is a massive drain on the batteries.

Air conditioning can still be managed within the 10-15 year battery life. It's not that big a drain if the right low energy system is used and technology in that respect is advancing all the time.

== Doublepost prevention - post automatically merged: 29 Apr 2022 ==

Your average electric bus tends to be smaller, lighter and have fewer high voltage current demands than your average train though.

My point was that battery technology works on buses, but the solution used on the 379 was clearly lacking. I'm not trying to say that buses are the same as trains.

 

[higthomas]

But class 379s out of use isn't a waste of taxpayers money. The units were leased, not owned, so, while the units are out of use, the taxpayer is not paying the leasing charges, and not wasting any money on them.

Whilst the taxpayer might not be wasting any money on them specifically, they are likely to raise the overall cost of leasing trains, as the financing companies will adjust their expected risk and likely end up charging more for trains in future to compensate.

 

[A0]

Whilst the taxpayer might not be wasting any money on them specifically, they are likely to raise the overall cost of leasing trains, as the financing companies will adjust their expected risk and likely end up charging more for trains in future to compensate.

That doesn't necessarily follow. It's a competitive market - some of the trains which have arrived since the 350/2s and 379s are cheaper to lease because of the deals being offered.

The challenge for those leasing companies with out of lease stock is how much they can reduce their costs, because it is believed the 350/2s are costing more than the 350/1 and 350/4s, similarly the 379s are more than the very similar 387s.

 

[Pete_uk]

Better yet put more wires up and use them or the 350/2’s to replace dmus

Woah, that's a bit radical isn't it?