Future of the 350/2s

[Peter749]

323s, as with all the ex-British Rail units, which need getting rid of, are obviously old. They look out-of-place in the 2020s. They lack air conditioning. They're so old that all the accessibility equipment had to be retrofitted, including the totally clear-sounding TrainFX (Levenshulme = "Mumblemum").

The 323s are a lot better than the 331s that "replaced them" - Modern CAF units are rough riding even on good track as the suspension is too stiff.

When the train stops because of lack of power you can Open The Windows unlike the modern coffins where you are stuck without any fresh air

The Accessibility Equipment - disabled Loos(?) - had to refitted to all trains because of a law that came out well after they were built.

 

[Class15]

323s, as with all the ex-British Rail units, which need getting rid of, are obviously old. They look out-of-place in the 2020s. They lack air conditioning. They're so old that all the accessibility equipment had to be retrofitted, including the totally clear-sounding TrainFX (Levenshulme = "Mumblemum").

EMUs typically have a lifespan of 40 years. In other countries, trains are normally kept until they become life expired. I refer you to a brilliant sarcastic post by @Transilien:

But they were built in THE NINETIES and ordered PRE PRIVATISATION . Only third world countries would still have trains running from that long ago!

Also I don’t see why a poor PIS has anything to do with the actual quality of a train and why it is life-expired.

 

[skyhigh]

They're so old that all the accessibility equipment had to be retrofitted, including the totally clear-sounding TrainFX (Levenshulme = "Mumblemum").

And what do you think will happen if they go to Northern?

(Hint - class 170 and 333)...

 

[61653 HTAFC]

(Not disregarding any of your points but just replying to the basic question)

350s, as with all the "post-privatisation" units, which should stay, are relatively modern. They still look "in place" in the 2020s. They have air conditioning. All the accessibility equipment is part of the train design itself, and the announcement intelligability in particular is relatively good.

323s, as with all the ex-British Rail units, which need getting rid of, are obviously old. They look out-of-place in the 2020s. They lack air conditioning. They're so old that all the accessibility equipment had to be retrofitted, including the totally clear-sounding TrainFX (Levenshulme = "Mumblemum").

None of that makes it "awful" if the 350/2s end up scrapped though. Slightly disappointing, maybe even annoying... but not awful. They're just machines at the end of the day. If nobody takes them on it'll be Porterbrook who are left licking their wounds, and I'm not convinced they won't deserve it.

 

[185]

Slightly disappointing, maybe even annoying... but not awful.

Tis awful, when you see some of the other junk floating around. Speaking to most Northern guards, they'd rather have one of these anyday than a 331. For doing tickets, they are better than a 323.

 

[FrontSideBus]

I'd personally take a 350 over a 331 with their bone shaking ride quality. I'd also take one over a 323 too tbh, even though I like 323's, I mean they ride well and have comfortable seats but they are just too dated IMO.

 

[sad1e]

relatively new units aren't getting cut up any time soon.

Wasn't the case for 321's after they had a major internal refurb that basically made them like new , But let's hope that 350's don't go the same way as the 321's.

 

[childwallblues]

They would be adequate replacements for the 333s and would provide electric units for the forthcoming York-Leeds-Huddersfield electrification until Northerns much vaunted new units appear.

 

[amahy]

None of that makes it "awful" if the 350/2s end up scrapped though. Slightly disappointing, maybe even annoying... but not awful. They're just machines at the end of the day. If nobody takes them on it'll be Porterbrook who are left licking their wounds, and I'm not convinced they won't deserve it.

When you consider that Northern are running short formed 2 car trains into major cities at peak time on a daily basis (and have been doing so for decades), it is pretty awful.

 

[FrontSideBus]

Northern have always had to put up with knackered old cast off stock from elsewhere! The 331/195 order should have been large enough to replace all of the legacy rolling stock tbh.

 

[LNW-GW Joint]

Northern have always had to put up with knackered old cast off stock from elsewhere! The 331/195 order should have been large enough to replace all of the legacy rolling stock tbh.

Maybe you don't remember that the Northern CAF order was forced through by DfT SoS Patrick McLoughlin, overruling his civil servants, to ensure the removal of the hated Pacers - a political decision.
There was still a limit on how many new trains were affordable (and there still is).

 

[FrontSideBus]

I also remember the completely worn out and knackered 319's that we had to put up with for several years. Just like the worn out and knackered 323's that have been sent up.

 

[skyhigh]

When you consider that Northern are running short formed 2 car trains into major cities at peak time on a daily basis (and have been doing so for decades), it is pretty awful.

They are running short formed trains because of a lack of diesel stock. Hence why they are continuing with 769s.

 

[daodao]

They are running short formed trains because of a lack of diesel stock. Hence why they are continuing with 769s.

Acquiring the class 350/2s would help Northern if diesel "running under the wires" was reduced. For example:

• The Windermere branch could be run as a self-contained dmu shuttle service.
• Barrow trains could be curtailed at Lancaster.
• The Piccadilly-Hazel Grove service could be run using emus.
• All Southport trains could be run using dmus via Atherton to Manchester Victoria (and beyond), with a dmu operating a shuttle service between Wigan Wallgate and Headbolt Lane.
• The Wigan-Bolton-Manchester service could be run exclusively with emus, starting at Wigan North-Western.
• Emus could be used on services from Newcastle to Morpeth/Chathill.

 

[Bletchleyite]

The Windermere branch could be run as a self-contained dmu shuttle service.
Barrow trains could be curtailed at Lancaster.

Realistically you'd want to add an EMU service of some sort to that for decent connections. The TPE and Avanti services are just too bitty and don't always connect well with the branch, and with the TPE services often "sold out" they aren't practical for that purpose.

Trouble with Oxenholme is it only has one bay so an EMU to Oxenholme would not work very well. Perhaps that would suggest the 350/2s should be tarted up with new 2+2 seating and sent to TPE to increase capacity on the Manchester Airport service (including adding a later last train) thus increasing capacity on those services from the present inadequate 5 car services? 8.350 was definitely a better match to demand than 5.397 is.

Not wiring to Windermere when the WCML was done was just nuts. It would have cost next to nothing and would have no doubt established a two hourly Manchester-Windermere service with a shuttle in between (connecting at Lancaster to Carlisle with most or all trains running through), which would have better dealt with demand than the present mess.

The Piccadilly-Hazel Grove service could be run using emus.

Certainly agree with this. Using DMUs on that service is utterly nonsensical. Indeed, why are DMUs used on the shuttles? Just to keep it simple? It seems rather a waste.

• All Southport trains could be run using dmus via Atherton to Manchester Victoria (and beyond), with a dmu operating a shuttle service between Wigan Wallgate and Headbolt Lane.
• The Wigan-Bolton-Manchester service could be run exclusively with emus, starting at Wigan North-Western.

I think this is a fairly likely situation despite Sandgrounders' disdain for it, even better if you extend Merseyrail to Wigan Wallgate instead of running a shuttle.

 

[amahy]

There was still a limit on how many new trains were affordable (and there still is).

Yet WMT can afford to replace relatively new and reliable trains. Absolute madness.

They are running short formed trains because of a lack of diesel stock. Hence why they are continuing with 769s.

Which is why Northern should have had more new DMUs ordered ages ago. The fact that the DfT can afford to buy new EMUs, casting aside perfectly capable mid life EMUs, such as 350/2s, 365s, and to an extent, the Renatus 321s, is as above, stupidity.

 

[Bletchleyite]

Which is why Northern should have had more new DMUs ordered ages ago. The fact that the DfT can afford to buy new EMUs, casting aside perfectly capable mid life EMUs, such as 350/2s, 365s, and to an extent, the Renatus 321s, is as above, stupidity.

The reason why the new units were purchased was that their lease costs were lower than the old ones, which was a result of the very low interest rates of the period. In the specific case of the 350/2s, Porterbrook's offering was extremely unattractive, their bluff was called and they lost.

Having something newer that costs less than the older thing you had is not stupidity, it's common sense.

The cause of all this is of course privatisation and the way trains, particularly existing BR-owned ones, were financed.

== Doublepost prevention - post automatically merged: 15 Sep 2025 ==

Which is why Northern should have had more new DMUs ordered ages ago.

New DMUs are not a good thing. We should be electrifying - both battery and OHLE. Then there'd be a home for these!

 

[61653 HTAFC]

When you consider that Northern are running short formed 2 car trains into major cities at peak time on a daily basis (and have been doing so for decades), it is pretty awful.

350s won't help a jot with that though, will they?

 

[Trainbike46]

Northern is one of the operators planning to order BEMUs, the way to resolve the DMU shortage is to move on with that.

Isn't there also some electrification east of the penines that has recently or is about to come online? getting EMUs for that area should also free up some DMUs.

 

[amahy]

The reason why the new units were purchased was that their lease costs were lower than the old ones, which was a result of the very low interest rates of the period. In the specific case of the 350/2s, Porterbrook's offering was extremely unattractive, their bluff was called and they lost.

Having something newer that costs less than the older thing you had is not stupidity, it's common sense.

The cause of all this is of course privatisation and the way trains, particularly existing BR-owned ones, were financed.

But when it’s costing Northern a small fortune to keep an ageing, clapped out fleet running, the argument of the new EMUs being cheaper to lease kind of cancels out. Additionally, the number of short forms and cancellations simply not having enough trains causes. Commuters don’t want to hear the “more trains that usual needing repairs at the same time” excuse over and over, an excuse that has been used for several years already, and looks like is here to stay for many years to come.

New DMUs are not a good thing. We should be electrifying - both battery and OHLE. Then there'd be a home for these!

I’d agree with you there, but unfortunately this is yet another long term solution - what Northern desperately needs is a short term one, similar to the suggestion in post #1,154.

350s won't help a jot with that though, will they?

Again, see @daodao’s suggestion.

 

[43096]

In the specific case of the 350/2s, Porterbrook's offering was extremely unattractive, their bluff was called and they lost.

How do you know what the offer was? Unless you were involved either with WMR or Porterbrook, you have no idea how unattractive the offer was, or whether it was tied up with making the 730/0 order more attractive through economies of scale.

 

[Trainbike46]

But when it’s costing Northern a small fortune to keep an ageing, clapped out fleet running, the argument of the new EMUs being cheaper to lease kind of cancels out. Additionally, the number of short forms and cancellations simply not having enough trains causes. Commuters don’t want to hear the “more trains that usual needing repairs at the same time” excuse over and over, an excuse that has been used for several years already, and looks like is here to stay for many years to come.

I agree that shortforms and cancellations are bad. However, that doesn't support your opposition to the 331s. The 331s came in because they were cheaper, and that decision is entirely separate from whatever happens with the DMUs.

I’d agree with you there, but unfortunately this is yet another long term solution - what Northern desperately needs is a short term one, similar to the suggestion in post #1,154.

Again, see @daodao’s suggestion.

What DMUs would be available sooner than new BEMUs?

The 350/2s are available now though, so where those could be used, they are the fastest solution.

 

[amahy]

I agree that shortforms and cancellations are bad. However, that doesn't support your opposition to the 331s. The 331s came in because they were cheaper, and that decision is entirely separate from whatever happens with the DMUs.

What DMUs would be available sooner than new BEMUs?

The 350/2s are available now though, so where those could be used, they are the fastest solution.

1. I never mentioned 331s.

2. By DMUs, I mean stock that can run away from the wires to replace the sprinters. Whether that be BMUs, BEMUs, DMUs, or anything else.

3. I would agree with you about the 350/2s, however you would need major timetable changes to make them useful.

 

[pokemonsuper9]

Indeed, why are DMUs used on the shuttles? Just to keep it simple? It seems rather a waste.

Yes, the diagrams interwork with Buxton services.

 

[LNW-GW Joint]

Yet WMT can afford to replace relatively new and reliable trains. Absolute madness.
Which is why Northern should have had more new DMUs ordered ages ago. The fact that the DfT can afford to buy new EMUs, casting aside perfectly capable mid life EMUs, such as 350/2s, 365s, and to an extent, the Renatus 321s, is as above, stupidity.

It's about business case, and WMT will have a better case for new trains than Northern.
Their timing for the 730s order was handily just before Covid and recent massive inflation kicked in, which makes all business cases harder.
DfT doesn't buy trains, they approve leasing deals with Roscos, whose money actually pays for the new trains.
All that could possibly change under GBR/DFTO, who will control all procurement going forward.

 

[Trainbike46]

1. I never mentioned 331s.

What other, new EMUs that are cheaper to lease were you referring to in the context of Northern, if not the 331s?

 

[amahy]

What other, new EMUs that are cheaper to lease were you referring to in the context of Northern, if not the 331s?

I was referring to other, non Northern EMUs. The facts are that the sprinters and 769s are unsuitable for the routes which they run on. Much less suitable than the 365s on Great Northern, 350/2s on WMT, or Renatus 321s on Greater Anglia.

 

[Peter749]

Tis awful, when you see some of the other junk floating around. Speaking to most Northern guards, they'd rather have one of these anyday than a 331. For doing tickets, they are better than a 323.

Most Northern Guards would never have seen the interior of a 350
A 350/1 or 350/3 are ok but the 350/2 is quite cramped walking thru and not much different to a 323 with 2+3 seating

 

[Russel]

Most Northern Guards would never have seen the interior of a 350
A 350/1 or 350/3 are ok but the 350/2 is quite cramped walking thru and not much different to a 323 with 2+3 seating

The 350/2 interior is dreadful, in every way, but it's nothing that a refurb wouldn't solve.

 

[Peter749]

Trouble with Oxenholme is it only has one bay so an EMU to Oxenholme would not work very well.

Oxenholme has 3 platforms - none of which are bays.

Not wiring to Windermere when the WCML was done was just nuts. It would have cost next to nothing and would have no doubt established a two hourly Manchester-Windermere service with a shuttle in between (connecting at Lancaster to Carlisle with most or all trains running through), which would have better dealt with demand than the present mess.

Except in 1974 when the WCML was electrified the only sets running in the area were 304s which were all working out of Manchester and Liverpool
Even if other Emus were available the line from Manchester to Preston was not electrified so an Emu off the branch would only work to Lancaster or Preston and could not do anything else.

You are looking at current traffic patterns and wondering why something was not done 60 years ago