Future of the 350/2s

[Energy]

I have done a little research and I have found this. Northern railway and Porterbrook has put in a tender for the 323s to have a light refurbishment. Why would Nothern do a refurbishment on the 323s if they were wanting to get rid of them and replace them with 350/2s.

My conclusion is that 323s are still going to be in service with Northern and the 350/2s will not be going to Nortern.

A tender doesn't have to have an award.

To be fair, it hasn't been stated if northern would be taking the full fleet of 37. Id imagine that information would become clear if they decide to do so.

Oh yeah, they wouldn't necessarily be taking all of them.

They have 34 x 323s, so I'd imagine Porterbrook would want them to take the whole lot or do a Northern/WMT split.

 

[Mikey C]

The 323's have IGBT traction converters in a retrofit done a few years back so have plenty of life left in them but are clearly older than the 350's so might be sensible in the round. Mind you would have thought Scotland would take 323's as a 3/6 car railway if they are being released and let the 318's go being the oldest 25kV units now even if its only for 5-10 yrs before a wider replacement is undertaken.

GA declared they had 20 more 720's than they needed but i get the 745 fleet is tight but still probably 15 surplus units. SWR also have more units than they need post full commissioning of 701's so that will throw off more surplus units. Then with electrification all but stalled for years now there is no logically home for many of these units other than the scrapper. So its still possible some of SE demands could be fulfilled by transfers in of surplus units many of which need not much more than a shoebeam being added to run on DC.

The 720s are 24m units, when Southeastern's fleets is entirely 20m units.

 

[tfw756rider]

According to who?

More than one person who's closely related, even if there isn't yet official confirmation. See the latest posts in the thread "Future of the 350/2s" in Speculative Discussion and it will be obvious that they're at least interested in them / considering taking them on.

 

[TT-ONR-NRN]

More than one person who's closely related, even if there isn't yet official confirmation. See the latest posts in the thread "Future of the 350/2s" in Speculative Discussion and it will be obvious that they're at least interested in them / considering taking them on.

I’ve read the posts. They’re testing for some reason on the Glossop line yes, but the OP jumped the gun and went straight to “they’re apparently going to Northern.” We absolutely don’t know that yet.

 

[The Ham]

Someone asked how suitable the 350's might be for stopping services, well given that the 450's (and for that matter it's not been uncommon in the past for 444's to also run some peak services) are used on services like those to Alton, those between Portsmouth and the Southampton area and the Basingstoke Stoppers all of which have fairly closely spaced station stops I would hope that they aren't too bad.

Given those are on 3rd rail where they are more likely to have power limitations than the 350's on OHLE they should (at least in theory) be reasonable.

 

[JonathanH]

Someone asked how suitable the 350's might be for stopping services, well given that the 450's (and for that matter it's not been uncommon in the past for 444's to also run some peak services) are used on services like those to Alton, those between Portsmouth and the Southampton area and the Basingstoke Stoppers all of which have fairly closely spaced station stops I would hope that they aren't too bad.

The door cycles are quite slow, which isn't great for stopping services, unless the dwell times allow for slow running.

 

[Peter0124]

Someone asked how suitable the 350's might be for stopping services, well given that the 450's (and for that matter it's not been uncommon in the past for 444's to also run some peak services) are used on services like those to Alton, those between Portsmouth and the Southampton area and the Basingstoke Stoppers all of which have fairly closely spaced station stops I would hope that they aren't too bad.

Given those are on 3rd rail where they are more likely to have power limitations than the 350's on OHLE they should (at least in theory) be reasonable.

Or 380s being used on the Cathcart Circle?

 

[tfw756rider]

Well no, because considering you'd have to train an entire crew up on them, plus lose compatibility with 320s (and multiple 318/320 pairs are out daily), for a train merely six years older - that won't offer an enhanced passenger experience (in fact the TrainFX 323 PIS is cheaper and much poorer quality than the Whiteleys 318 PIS), it's not really worth it.

Or six years newer?

 

[tfw756rider]

I’ve read the posts. They’re testing for some reason on the Glossop line yes, but the OP jumped the gun and went straight to “they’re apparently going to Northern.” We absolutely don’t know that yet.

True. They might be going to Northern, we'll go with that

 

[Bletchleyite]

True. They might be going to Northern, we'll go with that

Northern are trialling them (not in service) on one route. The outcome of the trial is not yet known publicly.

 

[tfw756rider]

Northern are trialling them (not in service) on one route. The outcome of the trial is not yet known publicly.

Exactly.

 

[TT-ONR-NRN]

That is indeed what I meant thanks. Edited.

 

[Merle Haggard]

just an observation; if Northern wanted more e.m.u., why didn't they just take more of the ex WMT 323's - which are still available?

When the 350/2 leasing company were ruthless in their negotiations with the new TOC, they would surely have had an alternative plan for if their bluff was called - wouldn't they? Perhaps that is now swinging onto action. I'm sure they're all top negotiators, it's all going to plan.

 

[Bletchleyite]

just an observation; if Northern wanted more e.m.u., why didn't they just take more of the ex WMT 323's - which are still available?

Because 350/2s are considerably higher quality and more modern than the now quite dated, non-aircon 323s?

 

[diligentdave]

True. They might be going to Northern, we'll go with that

I'm not saying nothing.

 

[Tazi Hupefi]

With regards to this "project" (in the loosest possible term) - a certain pair of Northern Mayors are attempting to drive this forwards, moreso than GBR/DfT.

Good political opportunity to spin here - "new" and fairly nice trains laid up in sidings with no prospects, whilst telling the story that Merseyside and Greater Manchester otherwise continue to get ancient and well worn castoffs from BR days.

Levelling up etc. If that coincides with a ROSCO offering a good financial incentive, moreso the better, especially as the ultimate asset owners of the 323s will not want to sink huge amounts of money in increasingly difficult to maintain rolling stock, particularly the ability to obtain parts.

Bringing "new" trains to Northern may well solve a few issues both politically and mechanically - so long as the timetable isn't (too adversely) affected. No doubt an introduction could even coincide with the run up to an opportune election or bad news day.

 

[Bletchleyite]

Good political opportunity to spin here - "new" and fairly nice trains laid up in sidings with no prospects, whilst telling the story that Merseyside and Greater Manchester otherwise continue to get ancient and well worn castoffs from BR days.

Also an opportunity to spin on capacity - 4 coaches rather than 3 - despite them being shorter ones that same spin has been used on Merseyside.

They do need a decent refurb but they are good solid units which would have been happily soldiering on down South were it not for the standoff over their lease costs.

 

[pokemonsuper9]

What electrified routes could regular Northern services use the 110mph on, is there enough space between stations on the Crewe-Manchestrer services to get up to speed?

Also an opportunity to spin on capacity - 4 coaches rather than 3 - despite them being shorter ones that same spin has been used on Merseyside.

At least compared to Merseyside it's be a 11.5m length gain (323 Vs 350) rather than their 5.5m (777 Vs 508)!

 

[tfw756rider]

I'm not saying nothing.

Then you're saying something I know what you mean though

== Doublepost prevention - post automatically merged: 28 Jul 2025 ==

Because 350/2s are considerably higher quality and more modern than the now quite dated, non-aircon 323s?

Exactly, I really don't get the "I hope that in 2026 they'll get 1992 units rather than 2008 ones" stuff (nothing personal against anyone).

== Doublepost prevention - post automatically merged: 28 Jul 2025 ==

With regards to this "project" (in the loosest possible term) - a certain pair of Northern Mayors are attempting to drive this forwards, moreso than GBR/DfT.

Good political opportunity to spin here - "new" and fairly nice trains laid up in sidings with no prospects, whilst telling the story that Merseyside and Greater Manchester otherwise continue to get ancient and well worn castoffs from BR days.

Levelling up etc. If that coincides with a ROSCO offering a good financial incentive, moreso the better, especially as the ultimate asset owners of the 323s will not want to sink huge amounts of money in increasingly difficult to maintain rolling stock, particularly the ability to obtain parts.

Bringing "new" trains to Northern may well solve a few issues both politically and mechanically - so long as the timetable isn't (too adversely) affected. No doubt an introduction could even coincide with the run up to an opportune election or bad news day.

Also an opportunity to spin on capacity - 4 coaches rather than 3 - despite them being shorter ones that same spin has been used on Merseyside.

They do need a decent refurb but they are good solid units which would have been happily soldiering on down South were it not for the standoff over their lease costs.

Here's hoping.

Also acknowledging @pokemonsuper9

 

[778]

Because 350/2s are considerably higher quality and more modern than the now quite dated, non-aircon 323s?

When Northern decided to take the WMR 323s was it known that the 350/2s were going off lease?

Someone asked how suitable the 350's might be for stopping services, well given that the 450's (and for that matter it's not been uncommon in the past for 444's to also run some peak services) are used on services like those to Alton, those between Portsmouth and the Southampton area and the Basingstoke Stoppers all of which have fairly closely spaced station stops I would hope that they aren't too bad.

Given those are on 3rd rail where they are more likely to have power limitations than the 350's on OHLE they should (at least in theory) be reasonable.

Yes with 3+2 seating the 350/2s are suitable for stopping services. They are less suitable for long distance services. 350/2s are essentially 450s with pantographs.

 

[pokemonsuper9]

When Northern decided to take the WMR 323s was it known that the 350/2s were going off lease?

I bet if it was the other way round it would be said that "why do we have to wait for the 350/2s when the 323s are (going for scrap/just sitting spare)", the WMT 323s have been with northern quite a few months now, and the first 350/2 only just came for a clearance/test run yesterday.

 

[GRALISTAIR]

Good political opportunity to spin here - "new" and fairly nice trains laid up in sidings with no prospects, whilst telling the story that Merseyside and Greater Manchester otherwise continue to get ancient and well worn castoffs from BR days.

Also an opportunity to spin on capacity - 4 coaches rather than 3 - despite them being shorter ones that same spin has been used on Merseyside.

Excellent points - here is hoping.

 

[Bletchleyite]

Yes with 3+2 seating the 350/2s are suitable for stopping services. They are less suitable for long distance services. 350/2s are essentially 450s with pantographs.

There aren't any long distance Northern EMU services and won't be unless Windermere gets the wires. Blackpool stoppers are not long distance services, and 350/2s are perfectly suited to them, particularly to families who will like the well-spaced facing bays of 6, which are the closest you can get on the railway to a family car. They really are decent units (maybe not as decent as a /1, /3 or /4, but you can't have everything, and I suspect families might even prefer the /2 due to more facing bays).

If I were Northern I'd consider taking a couple of rows out on the 2 side and putting in a luggage rack, but aside from that they'd be perfect for those services. If ASDO could be fitted or Unit Deselect used, in 8 car formations too.

 

[pokemonsuper9]

If ASDO could be fitted or Unit Deselect used, in 8 car formations too.

I think you'd start running into terminal /junction station issues.
Salford Crescent can't fit 8*20m without sticking out onto points at one or both ends.

 

[Bletchleyite]

I think you'd start running into terminal /junction station issues.
Salford Crescent can't fit 8*20m without sticking out onto points at one or both ends.

Whether that's an issue depends on what movements need to occur over those junctions while the train is in the station. Blocking points is not *in and of itself* an issue - every time a 12-car starts at Bletchley it blocks a set of points unless it came from the depot rather than the carriage sidings.

As for termini, both Blackpool North and Manchester Airport platforms are longer than 160m, as are all platforms (except 12?) at Manchester Piccadilly, and I don't think there are now any short platforms at Liverpool Lime St? At Preston only the disused "7" is short bar the bays which aren't used for EMUs.

You might not be able to run doubles to Hadfield, but do doubles ever run there anyway? I don't think they do.

 

[pokemonsuper9]

Whether that's an issue depends on what movements need to occur over those junctions while the train is in the station. Blocking points is not *in and of itself* an issue - every time a 12-car starts at Bletchley it blocks a set of points unless it came from the depot rather than the carriage sidings.

Ok that's a good sign then, I thought train in platform over points wasn't allowed, although I don't know if a train would be able to overtake (or use the future new platform) if an 8 car was in Platform 1.

You might not be able to run doubles to Hadfield, but do doubles ever run there anyway? I don't think they do.

You definitely couldn't fit 8 cars at Hadfield, but it's almost exclusively a route for 3 car trains at the moment so I doubt it's an issue.

 

[Tazi Hupefi]

I believe the mayors are primarily interested in Crewe to Manchester, Liverpool-St Helens Junction/Manchester, Liverpool-Warrington Bank Quay and Liverpool-Wigan/Preston/Blackpool etc.

Hadfield etc just helps to eliminate 323s improving the business case.

 

[Merle Haggard]

Because 350/2s are considerably higher quality and more modern than the now quite dated, non-aircon 323s?

Might that, together with the history of lease price negotiation with WMT, suggest that the lease price might be higher than that for 323s? If the 323s go off lease to be replaced by 350s the lease company is only receiving an increase in income (the driver for their business) if that is the case.
Of course, the extra costs might well be justifiable. It would be interesting to know how the proposed lease charges for Northern compare to those offered to WMT and declined, but I guess we'll never know.

 

[Bletchleyite]

Might that, together with the history of lease price negotiation, suggest that the lease price might be higher than that for 323s?

I'd expect so yes. But they are of course higher value to the customer and business too. They are more comfortable, capacious and modern. 323s do to be fair look newer than their years as one of the earliest examples of a "third generation" EMU, but they are getting old and aren't air conditioned.

 

[Wolfie]

I'm not saying nothing.

Hmmm.... Double negative have any significance???