Future of the 350/2s

[Energy]

All goes down to the original deal done, the price in the 172 contact was probably far better value than the legacy 350 one originally done 15 years ago. It's a pretty fair guess that the operator TUK (was abellio) tried over the years to renegotiate the price and reached the point of frustration with Porterbrook.

Not quite, Abellio called their bluff by signing a contract for new class 730s just after the franchise award. I’m doubtful they negotiated the 350/2s after that as they were already committed to the 730s.

 

[bengley]

Moderator note: Split from

London NorthWestern Railway Class 350/2 withdrawal

Exactly! So many sweeping assertions such as "families prefer the 350/2s" ... I'd love to know which families were actually asked or heard saying this? Whenever me, my partner and young child travel on a 350/2, we head to the declassified first class aera and bag a table! That said, I try to...

www.railforums.co.uk

I've heard rumours of 350s heading to a new home up North - these moves to Ardwick would definitely not now appear to be a coincidence.

 

[JonathanH]

I've heard rumours of 350s heading to a new home up North - these moves to Ardwick would definitely not now appear to be a coincidence.

I'll respond here as it is no more than speculation, but it would be odd for the 350 fleet to 'jump the queue' for re-use over other fleets, particularly given there is no publicly quoted 'gap' to be filled in any of the train fleets operating in the Manchester area.

Northern are already working on bringing in the West Midlands 323s that they are taking. The 350s aren't really any use for anyone else.

 

[bengley]

I'll respond here as it is no more than speculation, but it would be odd for the 350 fleet to 'jump the queue' for re-use over other fleets, particularly given there is no publicly quoted 'gap' to be filled in any of the train fleets operating in the Manchester area.

Northern are already working on bringing in the West Midlands 323s that they are taking. The 350s aren't really any use for anyone else.

I didn't say anything about Northern

 

[TT-ONR-NRN]

I've heard rumours of 350s heading to a new home up North - these moves to Ardwick would definitely not now appear to be a coincidence.

What are those rumours then?

 

[Snow1964]

What would they be for, or is crowding on some routes and is it simply to add capacity by taking over some routes, and allowing some existing units to run in multiple on other services.

Logically as more electrified sections (Staylbridge, Huddersfield etc) get wired they need electric trains and could be 5-10 years before new generation fleets arrive.

 

[43096]

What would they be for, or is crowding on some routes and is it simply to add capacity by taking over some routes, and allowing some existing units to run in multiple on other services.

Logically as more electrified sections (Staylbridge, Huddersfield etc) get wired they need electric trains and could be 5-10 years before new generation fleets arrive.

There’s nine off lease 323s that are not spoken for which would be far more logical for Northern to take than 350s.

 

[Snow1964]

There’s nine off lease 323s that are not spoken for which would be far more logical for Northern to take than 350s.

Yes, if there is sufficient quantity for their needs

must have been some calculation in past that these 9 wouldn't be needed, even if that is now superseded.

Although if taking on 30 year old units is better bet than 20 year old units, rather depends on expected replacement plans in next 5-15 years.

 

[D365]

What are those rumours then?

That Porterbrook is interested in re-leasing the 350/2s.

I wonder if they’d be any ’easier’ than the 323s if an ETCS retrofit is required.

 

[JonathanH]

That Porterbrook is interested in re-leasing the 350/2s.

Surely it goes without question that Porterbrook would like to re-lease the 350/2s. The question is whether anyone wants to take up that lease, and what Porterbrook need to do with the units to make them attractive to lease.

 

[Nym]

That Porterbrook is interested in re-leasing the 350/2s.

I wonder if they’d be any ’easier’ than the 323s if an ETCS retrofit is required.

I very much doubt there will be much more simplicity on either of the units.
350/2s have modular cabs but would still need new through wiring, more cabinet space etc, and I suspect the “newer cab” will be far outweighed by the much easier job of interfacing with traction and braking and getting wires through a 323. Full width cab also very much helps the in fitting the displays.

 

[Northerngirl]

Would they make sense for any of the open access opperator plans, or are all the routes uneletrified

 

[JonathanH]

Would they make sense for any of the open access opperator plans, or are all the routes uneletrified

None of the open access operators have indicated a desire to use class 350s in their plans. 110mph outer suburban units don't really tally with what they are generally looking for.

 

[daodao]

Could these trains be used to reduce diesel running under the wires, e.g.

• replacing (in whole or part) the XC segment from Birmingham to Manchester,
• partial replacement (2 hourly) for TfW's dmu segment from Crewe to Manchester
• replacing the Northern dmu service from Newcastle to Morpeth (and Chathill)
• replacing the TPE semi-fast services from Newcastle to Edinburgh so that the bimodes currently used can be re-deployed to other partly electrified lines
• some Northern services such as Manchester to Hazel Grove that are partly run by dmus

 

[The Planner]

Could these trains be used to reduce diesel running under the wires, e.g.

• replacing (in whole or part) the XC segment from Birmingham to Manchester,

350/2 on that route would be appalling.

 

[Bletchleyite]

350/2 on that route would be appalling.

Double 350/2s with the seats replaced to 2+1 First, 2+2 Standard would be better than Voyagers in every conceivable way.

 

[The Planner]

Double 350/2s with the seats replaced to 2+1 First, 2+1 Standard would be better than Voyagers in every conceivable way.

That isn't a 350/2 then.

 

[Bletchleyite]

That isn't a 350/2 then.

If the number on the front is 3502xx it's a 350/2, unless the refurb involved changing the subclass. It's not just about the seating (as I'm sure you're well aware) - there are other differences from the other subfleets. The /3s and /4s now have near-identical interiors and have not been moved into different subclasses.

 

[Nym]

That isn't a 350/2 then.

It’s whatever R2 says it is.
If you’re not changing the route capability it’s not a different subclass.
If the CoG (Centre of Gravity) changes outside of the kinomatic envelope, or the seating capacity changes the Route Availability then it would need a new sub class, but if it doesn’t then it doesn’t

 

[Meerkat]

If various projects are downgraded and pennies are being cut is there any chance of TPE Manchester-Scotland going back to 350s (Unless speed limits are being worked on are the 397s appreciably faster than 110 capable 350s?) and the 397s going elsewhere?

 

[stevieinselby]

If various projects are downgraded and pennies are being cut is there any chance of TPE Manchester-Scotland going back to 350s (Unless speed limits are being worked on are the 397s appreciably faster than 110 capable 350s?) and the 397s going elsewhere?

Why would they? The class 397s have been running on the route for 5 years, there are no problems with them, and there's no other call for them. Who else is looking for 5-car electric 125mph units? Why would TPX want to downgrade an existing service?

 

[Wolfie]

Why would they? The class 397s have been running on the route for 5 years, there are no problems with them, and there's no other call for them. Who else is looking for 5-car electric 125mph units? Why would TPX want to downgrade an existing service?

The only conceivable reason would be cost. I think it highly unlikely.

 

[Russel]

Double 350/2s with the seats replaced to 2+1 First, 2+2 Standard would be better than Voyagers in every conceivable way.

Honestly, this sounds like an ideal solution...

It would remove diesels from under the wires and release Voyagers to strengthen the rest of the XC routes, it's a win/win situation.

Yes, it would require some passengers to change trains at New Street but that would be a small sacrifice overall.

 

[AlastairFraser]

Honestly, this sounds like an ideal solution...

It would remove diesels from under the wires and release Voyagers to strengthen the rest of the XC routes, it's a win/win situation.

Yes, it would require some passengers to change trains at New Street but that would be a small sacrifice overall.

Issue is New St capacity. You may have to move the change point somewhere else e.g Coventry for the Bournemouth to Man Picc, or Wolverhampton for the Bristol TM - Man Picc.

 

[Southsider]

I'll respond here as it is no more than speculation, but it would be odd for the 350 fleet to 'jump the queue' for re-use over other fleets, particularly given there is no publicly quoted 'gap' to be filled in any of the train fleets operating in the Manchester area.

As discussed on another thread, there may well be a gap in the Glasgow area once East Kilbride is electrified.

 

[TT-ONR-NRN]

Double 350/2s with the seats replaced to 2+1 First, 2+2 Standard would be better than Voyagers in every conceivable way.

If we’re talking objectively, then in terms of capacity and environmental footprint yes, but as far as on-board ambience goes, well, I actually much prefer a Voyager to a 350/1 to be honest. But it’d be ideal to have an eight carriage EMU on the route definitely, and I think 2+2 seating fitted to 350s and a decent first class would be a good option.

 

[Sprinter107]

Honestly, this sounds like an ideal solution...

It would remove diesels from under the wires and release Voyagers to strengthen the rest of the XC routes, it's a win/win situation.

Yes, it would require some passengers to change trains at New Street but that would be a small sacrifice overall.

I agree with this. It's a much more pleasant journey on a 350, than one of those awful Voyagers. How they can be classed as Inter City travel I don't know. The 350s at least are quiet, and give a smooth ride, the Voyagers are claustrophobic, and the ride with the diesel engines underneath and the vibrations from them is like sitting on a washing machine performing a fast spin. 350s definately for me !

 

[Russel]

If we’re talking objectively, then in terms of capacity and environmental footprint yes, but as far as on-board ambience goes, well, I actually much prefer a Voyager to a 350/1 to be honest. But it’d be ideal to have an eight carriage EMU on the route definitely, and I think 2+2 seating fitted to 350s and a decent first class would be a good option.

I agree with you here...

An inter-urban EMU would be a downgrade on an Intercity DMU, however, given the choice of standing in the vestibule with my face buried in a strangers armpit, or a seat on a 350, I know which one I'd pick.

 

[A0]

It would remove diesels from under the wires and release Voyagers to strengthen the rest of the XC routes, it's a win/win situation.

Yes, it would require some passengers to change trains at New Street but that would be a small sacrifice overall.

Ah that old 'it would only affect some passengers'. The factvit would sever southbound connection for the UK's 3rd largest city to anywhere in the south apart from London is conveniently ignored.

And this is the same forum which routinely peddles the supposed need to *extend* the XC network back to marginal destinations, whilst in the same breath suggests splitting XC's busiest routes......

 

[Jamesrob637]

Could these trains be used to reduce diesel running under the wires, e.g.

• replacing (in whole or part) the XC segment from Birmingham to Manchester,
• partial replacement (2 hourly) for TfW's dmu segment from Crewe to Manchester
• replacing the Northern dmu service from Newcastle to Morpeth (and Chathill)
• replacing the TPE semi-fast services from Newcastle to Edinburgh so that the bimodes currently used can be re-deployed to other partly electrified lines
• some Northern services such as Manchester to Hazel Grove that are partly run by dmus

Manchester to Birmingham needs to be no more than £40 open return on 350s, with occasional £5-7 one-way tickets. Certainly lots of £10 one-way tickets; still only roughly a pound for 8-9 miles. Maybe knock a pound off for Stockport and/or Wolverhampton.