Class 379 updates (all are OFF LEASE)

[Malaxa]

The pair at Orient Way have now been debranded

They have now been removed, possibly to Ilford

 

[DanNCL]

They're using DMUs on Thames Valley services entirely under the wires, aren't they? That says to me they need more EMUs, not fewer.

I’ve not seen DMUs on TV electrified services since the handover of Reading stoppers to TfL - only ones the 387s are used on now are Paddington - Didcot/Newbury and limited services to Swindon, Bristol P and Cardiff.

Only on an early morning and a late evening trip, both in order to get the Greenford unit to/from Reading for maintenance.

 

[43102EMR]

Only on an early morning and a late evening trip, both in order to get the Greenford unit to/from Reading for maintenance.

Exactly - but not used in day-to-day service on Newbury/GWML surburban runs.

 

[Cowley]

Just to say that there is a thread set up for the GWR EMU tender which you can now find here.

 

[SolomonSouth]

To be honest, I don't think 379s going to GN is likely for the following reasons:

1. The 379s have been stored since February 2022. I spoke to someone on the East Kent railway who tried to drive a 365 to the railway - they preserved it. Guess what? It wouldn't move by itself. They had to tow it to preservation. The couple of months it had in storage crippled it badly. The 379 may not be a Networker, but the same principles apply. Months in storage will mean that most of them have now lost the capability to move, and even those that can will have extremely poor performance.
2. The 387s are 110mph. 379s are 100mph. Keeping 387 timings would be extremely difficult if not impossible at the best of times, even with a good 379's slightly superior acceleration. But then, when you remember how crippled the 379s are from months of storage, you know how slow their acceleration would be. At best, it would be 80% of what it was. It would not be anywhere near a 387 in acceleration or speed and so would only cause hold-ups and disruption.
3. The 379s have 200 seats per 4-car unit due to lots of 1st class. 387s have around 230. Adds up over longer formations. What would be a moderately loaded 387 would feel crush loaded.
4. The 379s and 387s cannot even work in multiple - 379s and 377s can, but 387 couplings are wired slightly differently, or so the user said, so they would only be able to drag each other like a dead weight, and not operate with each other. So, why would GN want a micro-fleet of crippled EMUs, with too much 1st class, lower top speed, less seats and no compatibility with the other fleets they have (387 and 700)?

 

[SolomonSouth]

I think the scrapyard beckons for 379s. Unfortunately.

 

[43102EMR]

I think the scrapyard beckons for 379s. Unfortunately.

Highly doubt it - you’d be more likely to see the 350/2s head for scrap than the 379s.

According to several posts upthread, their plans will be announced in several months time, so best to wait until then.

 

[DanNCL]

To be honest, I don't think 379s going to GN is likely for the following reasons:

1. The 379s have been stored since February 2022. I spoke to someone on the East Kent railway who tried to drive a 365 to the railway - they preserved it. Guess what? It wouldn't move by itself. They had to tow it to preservation. The couple of months it had in storage crippled it badly. The 379 may not be a Networker, but the same principles apply. Months in storage will mean that most of them have now lost the capability to move, and even those that can will have extremely poor performance.

The 365 couldn’t move to the East Kent Railway under its own power for two reasons neither of which were related to the period of storage. One is that the pantograph vehicle had been scrapped, without it the unit was going nowhere. Second was that 365s haven’t had third rail shoegear for many years so in any case even if it did still have a pantograph vehicle it wouldn’t have got further than London under its own power.

Stock can be reactivated from warm storage quickly. Several 91s were reactivated from warm storage in a matter of days last May when the 80x units had issues. Eurostar also reactivated 373s from warm storage earlier this year.

2. The 387s are 110mph. 379s are 100mph. Keeping 387 timings would be extremely difficult if not impossible at the best of times, even with a good 379's slightly superior acceleration. But then, when you remember how crippled the 379s are from months of storage, you know how slow their acceleration would be. At best, it would be 80% of what it was. It would not be anywhere near a 387 in acceleration or speed and so would only cause hold-ups and disruption.

The process to modify any electrostar to 110 mph is as simple as a software update and a new pantograph. Can be done in a couple of days.

4. The 379s and 387s cannot even work in multiple - 379s and 377s can, but 387 couplings are wired slightly differently, or so the user said, so they would only be able to drag each other like a dead weight, and not operate with each other.

That can also be fixed. Should only require a software update, worst case scenario they’d have to change the couplers.

 

[jamieP]

To be honest, I don't think 379s going to GN is likely for the following reasons:

1. The 379s have been stored since February 2022. I spoke to someone on the East Kent railway who tried to drive a 365 to the railway - they preserved it. Guess what? It wouldn't move by itself. They had to tow it to preservation. The couple of months it had in storage crippled it badly. The 379 may not be a Networker, but the same principles apply. Months in storage will mean that most of them have now lost the capability to move, and even those that can will have extremely poor performance.
2. The 387s are 110mph. 379s are 100mph. Keeping 387 timings would be extremely difficult if not impossible at the best of times, even with a good 379's slightly superior acceleration. But then, when you remember how crippled the 379s are from months of storage, you know how slow their acceleration would be. At best, it would be 80% of what it was. It would not be anywhere near a 387 in acceleration or speed and so would only cause hold-ups and disruption.
3. The 379s have 200 seats per 4-car unit due to lots of 1st class. 387s have around 230. Adds up over longer formations. What would be a moderately loaded 387 would feel crush loaded.
4. The 379s and 387s cannot even work in multiple - 379s and 377s can, but 387 couplings are wired slightly differently, or so the user said, so they would only be able to drag each other like a dead weight, and not operate with each other. So, why would GN want a micro-fleet of crippled EMUs, with too much 1st class, lower top speed, less seats and no compatibility with the other fleets they have (387 and 700)?

I think the scrapyard beckons for 379s. Unfortunately.

As much as I cant see 379s coming to the GN if they did they would keep to 387 timings. 387s are MAX 100mph on the GN as mentioned before. Also last time I checked the East Kent railway isn't fitted with OHL and neither is the NR lines connecting to it so would be extremely difficult to drive a 365 there.

I wouldn't be surprised if the 379s ended up green.

 

[D365]

To be honest, I don't think 379s going to GN is likely for the following reasons:
1. The 379s have been stored since February 2022. I spoke to someone on the East Kent railway who tried to drive a 365 to the railway - they preserved it. Guess what? It wouldn't move by itself. They had to tow it to preservation. The couple of months it had in storage crippled it badly.

I suspect you didn’t get the full story. To ”drive” a 365 by rail would have required third rail capability, which 524/540 was never fitted for.

Also it’s worth pointing out that electric and diesel multiple units/carriages can be stored for months at a time. The 317/7s are a perfect example - they’ve been stored and reactivated several times since the 379s were introduced.

 

[swt_passenger]

The process to modify any electrostar to 110 mph is as simple as a software update and a new pantograph. Can be done in a couple of days.

And reported already successfully trialled on a 379 nearly 10 years ago, before the 387s were modified. Hence my post # 566 last Wednesday…

 

[Fincra5]

To be honest, I don't think 379s going to GN is likely for the following reasons:

1. The 379s have been stored since February 2022. I spoke to someone on the East Kent railway who tried to drive a 365 to the railway - they preserved it. Guess what? It wouldn't move by itself. They had to tow it to preservation. The couple of months it had in storage crippled it badly. The 379 may not be a Networker, but the same principles apply. Months in storage will mean that most of them have now lost the capability to move, and even those that can will have extremely poor performance.
2. The 387s are 110mph. 379s are 100mph. Keeping 387 timings would be extremely difficult if not impossible at the best of times, even with a good 379's slightly superior acceleration. But then, when you remember how crippled the 379s are from months of storage, you know how slow their acceleration would be. At best, it would be 80% of what it was. It would not be anywhere near a 387 in acceleration or speed and so would only cause hold-ups and disruption.
3. The 379s have 200 seats per 4-car unit due to lots of 1st class. 387s have around 230. Adds up over longer formations. What would be a moderately loaded 387 would feel crush loaded.
4. The 379s and 387s cannot even work in multiple - 379s and 377s can, but 387 couplings are wired slightly differently, or so the user said, so they would only be able to drag each other like a dead weight, and not operate with each other. So, why would GN want a micro-fleet of crippled EMUs, with too much 1st class, lower top speed, less seats and no compatibility with the other fleets they have (387 and 700)?

Several things there... Modifications can be made to make the fleet compatible. 387s would be pushed South from GN by 379s ... perhaps only a few 387/3s would remain. No real difference to GN from having a Micro Fleet of 387s to a Micro Fleet of 379s...

Also, GN 387s aren't allowed above 100mph... so the Top Speed "Issue" isn't one.

 

[swt_passenger]

Several things there... Modifications can be made to make the fleet compatible. 387s would be pushed South from GN by 379s ... perhaps only a few 387/3s would remain. No real difference to GN from having a Micro Fleet of 387s to a Micro Fleet of 379s...

Also, GN 387s aren't allowed above 100mph... so the Top Speed "Issue" isn't one.

But the 379s need to be modded for 110 if they go to GWR as per the other current possibility…

 

[317 forever]

With the potential final withdrawal of 379s, this seems to be like the 1983 tube stock story writ large.

Who paid for them to be built in the first place? And will passengers or taxpayers end up paying for the waste?

 

[43102EMR]

With the potential final withdrawal of 379s, this seems to be like the 1983 tube stock story writ large.

Who paid for them to be built in the first place? And will passengers or taxpayers end up paying for the waste?

The 379s were part of an NXEA improvement plan for West Anglia services drawn up by the DfT circa 2008/9.

 

[hwl]

With the potential final withdrawal of 379s, this seems to be like the 1983 tube stock story writ large.

Who paid for them to be built in the first place? And will passengers or taxpayers end up paying for the waste?

The original ROSCO was Lloyds Bank, who then sold to Macquarie (Australian investment bank) when they needed the cash due to hidden issues with Halifax purchase. Macquarie then sold them as well as other rolling stock assets they bought to Akiem (new private equity etc. owned ROSCO), after their departure from Anglia was known.
The financing was arranged just before the financial crash at high interest rates so leasing costs were high compared to new leases.

There is a current Mexican stand off while the current ROSCO comes to terms with the need to invest in the stock for future use (e.g. ETCS, 110mph, interior refurb/refresh) and a lower future income stream and DfT can make them sweat for a long time to clarify.

The GWR tender will help clarify the current potential competitive leasing costs for a mk2 Electrostar and give DfT more ammo.

Porterbrook could also have some fun by offering the 350/2s at a rate very slightly higher than the current GWR (Porterbrook) 387s which would really help DfT out with 379 discussions.

 

[43096]

The original ROSCO was Lloyds Bank, who then sold to Macquarie (Australian investment bank) when they needed the cash due to hidden issues with Halifax purchase. Macquarie then sold them as well as other rolling stock assets they bought to Akiem (new private equity etc. owned ROSCO), after their departure from Anglia was known.

Akiem was originally an SNCF creation, as a way to try to find a use for various Frêt SNCF locomotives, so Akiem was created as a leasing business. The Akiem website suggests current ownership is split 50:50 between Eurotraction (investment fund managed by DWS) and TLP (which is an SNCF subsidiary).

 

[Fincra5]

But the 379s need to be modded for 110 if they go to GWR as per the other current possibility…

I can't see them going to GWR.

 

[bramling]

With the potential final withdrawal of 379s, this seems to be like the 1983 tube stock story writ large.

Who paid for them to be built in the first place? And will passengers or taxpayers end up paying for the waste?

There are some difference to the 83 stock, not least that the 83 stock had a number of design issues (or flaws), and weren’t particularly reliable. None of this applies to the 379s.

== Doublepost prevention - post automatically merged: 5 Jun 2022 ==

Several things there... Modifications can be made to make the fleet compatible. 387s would be pushed South from GN by 379s ... perhaps only a few 387/3s would remain. No real difference to GN from having a Micro Fleet of 387s to a Micro Fleet of 379s...

Also, GN 387s aren't allowed above 100mph... so the Top Speed "Issue" isn't one.

And is in practice unlikely to be an issue going forward, for as long as there are 100 mph 700s going up and down the GN. Indeed the GN 387s are still timed as 365s.

 

[A0]

I think the scrapyard beckons for 379s. Unfortunately.

I think that's highly unlikely.

The ROSCo are unlikely to have covered their costs so would be facing a huge financial write off.

I can think of no modern rolling stock which was withdrawn and scrapped at 10 years old.

 

[DanNCL]

I think that's highly unlikely.

The ROSCo are unlikely to have covered their costs so would be facing a huge financial write off.

I can think of no modern rolling stock which was withdrawn and scrapped at 10 years old.

Indeed. Even the various Shinkansen fleets which are known for short service lives have all lasted longer than 10 years.

 

[JonathanH]

The ROSCo are unlikely to have covered their costs so would be facing a huge financial write off.

I can think of no modern rolling stock which was withdrawn and scrapped at 10 years old.

It might still depend on what the scrap value is. If they can get a good price for scrap and the costs of putting them back in service are too high, it could make sufficient sense. At 10 years you might expect there to be some sort of overhaul coming up.

The fact that no other 10 year old stock has been scrapped is irrelevant as these are circumstances not seen before.

 

[Agent_Squash]

To be honest, I don't think 379s going to GN is likely for the following reasons:

1. The 379s have been stored since February 2022. I spoke to someone on the East Kent railway who tried to drive a 365 to the railway - they preserved it. Guess what? It wouldn't move by itself. They had to tow it to preservation. The couple of months it had in storage crippled it badly. The 379 may not be a Networker, but the same principles apply. Months in storage will mean that most of them have now lost the capability to move, and even those that can will have extremely poor performance.
2. The 387s are 110mph. 379s are 100mph. Keeping 387 timings would be extremely difficult if not impossible at the best of times, even with a good 379's slightly superior acceleration. But then, when you remember how crippled the 379s are from months of storage, you know how slow their acceleration would be. At best, it would be 80% of what it was. It would not be anywhere near a 387 in acceleration or speed and so would only cause hold-ups and disruption.
3. The 379s have 200 seats per 4-car unit due to lots of 1st class. 387s have around 230. Adds up over longer formations. What would be a moderately loaded 387 would feel crush loaded.
4. The 379s and 387s cannot even work in multiple - 379s and 377s can, but 387 couplings are wired slightly differently, or so the user said, so they would only be able to drag each other like a dead weight, and not operate with each other. So, why would GN want a micro-fleet of crippled EMUs, with too much 1st class, lower top speed, less seats and no compatibility with the other fleets they have (387 and 700)?

1. the 379s are in warm storage, so they are actively been maintained. Electrics only run into problems when they’re just left drained for months - as happened with the 365s
2. You can change the gearing of the unit - Siemens have done this with the 350s and 360s, and a 379 has been reheated for 110mph before
3. Refurbishments exist.
4. A 379 will get on better with a 387 than a 377. It’s a second gen Electrostar, and has the up to date MITRAC.

 

[swt_passenger]

2. You can change the gearing of the unit - Siemens have done this with the 350s and 360s, and a 379 has been reheated for 110mph before

The 350s and 360s were not actually regeared, only part of the motors (the rotors) were strengthened. From what I’ve read here the Electrostars only needed software changes and pantograph mods to run at 110 mph.

 

[778]

Highly doubt it - you’d be more likely to see the 350/2s head for scrap than the 379s.

According to several posts upthread, their plans will be announced in several months time, so best to wait until then.

If the 350/2s get scrapped, then that would be just as bad as scrapping the 379s, if not worse.

 

[warwickshire]

As much as I cant see 379s coming to the GN if they did they would keep to 387 timings. 387s are MAX 100mph on the GN as mentioned before. Also last time I checked the East Kent railway isn't fitted with OHL and neither is the NR lines connecting to it so would be extremely difficult to drive a 365 there.

I wouldn't be surprised if the 379s ended up green.

Exactly what I am thinking. Myself.
387 gwr to gtr. 387 gtr to southern elsewhere on network due to shoe gear fitted. Plus 379 ideal for Didcot Parkway local services to London Paddington.
Use slow lines anyway. Most of the time due to stopping patterns and stations and caught behind crossrail services unlikely to achieve 100 mph anyway.

 

[jamieP]

1. the 379s are in warm storage, so they are actively been maintained. Electrics only run into problems when they’re just left drained for months - as happened with the 365s
2. You can change the gearing of the unit - Siemens have done this with the 350s and 360s, and a 379 has been reheated for 110mph before
3. Refurbishments exist.
4. A 379 will get on better with a 387 than a 377. It’s a second gen Electrostar, and has the up to date MITRAC.

Curious to what you mean by drained?

 

[yorkie]

Just a gentle reminder this is an updates thread.

For any discussion of a speculative nature,. please post in the speculative discussion section.

Thanks.

 

[Bletchleyite]

Curious to what you mean by drained?

Sometimes when storing road vehicles they are stored drained of all fluids (i.e. the oil and water is taken out). Don't know if this is literal in this case, though.

 

[jamieP]

Sometimes when storing road vehicles they are stored drained of all fluids (i.e. the oil and water is taken out). Don't know if this is literal in this case, though.

The 365s left for storage in full working order and even had there pans raised now and then whilst at Doncaster so certainly had all there oil. Anyway straying off topic now.

Hopefully soon we will know what is happening with the 379s.