Future of the 350/2s

[sad1e]

Yep that appears to be the case.

Quite glad I took the time to red pen them all earlier this year then.

Is there even space to long term store them in a place such as Long Marston as I know it's quite full. Or will they be living in Wembley indefinitely.

 

[Mamorin]

Not sure how much space there is left at Long Marston, I know all but two of the ex GWR 769s are there, along with 9 323s.

I think a lot of the ex TFW 769s are there as well.

Only 1 350/2 has gone to Long Marston so far.

The rest of the fleet may have to sit at Wembley for a while.

Somebody can correct me if I'm wrong with what is at Long Marston.

 

[Rail Quest]

Latest I've heard is that the trials of the 350/2s on the Glossop line showed they could not keep up to timings so will not be suitable.

Could the 350s not replace 331s which could be cascaded onto the lines that need the highest acceleration rates? I seem to remember Northern doing something similar when replacing the pacers: 195s replaced sprinters which got cascaded to replace pacers.

Apologies if this avenue has already been explored.

 

[Mamorin]

I seem to remember Northern doing something similar when replacing the pacers: 195s replaced sprinters which got cascaded to replace pacers.

That is what happened. I don't think something like that would work with the 350/2s.

At least with the Sprinters they were newer than the pacers, replacing 331s with 350/2s on any routes would look really bad.

 

[Bletchleyite]

That is what happened. I don't think something like that would work with the 350/2s.

At least with the Sprinters they were newer than the pacers, replacing 331s with 350/2s on any routes would look really bad.

How? They're great units. With a tarting up they would look new, and they're much higher quality than 331s.

 

[Mamorin]

331s are rather new and were brand new when delivered to Northern, replacing them with cast offs would not look good politicly.

350/2s going to Northern to displace 331s will be a last resort and only to cover for delayed 382s.

I would have liked to have seen the 350/2s replace the 323s, but hopefully the 382s will be good.

382 is the TOPS number reserved for Northern's planned new EMUs for those unaware.

 

[Bertie the bus]

Could the 350s not replace 331s which could be cascaded onto the lines that need the highest acceleration rates? I seem to remember Northern doing something similar when replacing the pacers: 195s replaced sprinters which got cascaded to replace pacers.

Apologies if this avenue has already been explored.

Considering 331s have excellent acceleration, better than 323s according to some drivers, how is a 350/2 going to match a 331's schedule if it can't even keep time on a 323's?

 

[Bletchleyite]

Considering 331s have excellent acceleration, better than 323s according to some drivers, how is a 350/2 going to match a 331's schedule if it can't even keep time on a 323's?

350s are very quick off the mark, they just have a slow door cycle. So a faster service would be ideal for them.

 

[Bertie the bus]

There is no such thing as a faster 331 service. They all have many stops, e.g. Manchester Airport - Liverpool and Blackpool and the Airedale services. The only service that could possibly be described as faster or limited stop is Liverpool - Blackpool.

 

[pokemonsuper9]

If 323s can manage on Airport - Blackpool I would expect 350s to as well, especially since 350s can do 100mph (well 110).
331 door operation is pretty slow, aren't 350 doors done from the cab, that's sure to save some time.

 

[Snow1964]

Yep that appears to be the case.

Can't say how long Porterbrook will keep the 350/2s in storage though.

Only other operator that may want them is Southern but that would require shoe gear and Southern wanting to restore its full pre-covid timetable.

I don't think fitting shoe gear would be a problem if units were needed

With the relatively slow door cycles, probably better suited to semifast & fast services rather than those with lots of stops.

Although not for this thread, SWR doesn't really need 127 similar 450s if it keeps the 28 458s, so potentially Southern or South Eastern could top up any 350/2 batch to nearer 60-70 units by using spare 450s.

My gut feeling is with another 15-20 years usage likely, turning the 350s into BEMUs should work economically

 

[Mamorin]

Back in 2018 Porterbrook was considering converting the 350/2 to battery, but that plan seems to have been dropped.

Its just a matter of seeing who if anybody wants them in the near future.

I agree that fitting shoes should not be an issue if shoes are needed, I mean 350/2s are really just 350/1s without the shoe gear.

 

[43096]

Yep that appears to be the case.

Can't say how long Porterbrook will keep the 350/2s in storage though.

Only other operator that may want them is Southern but that would require shoe gear and Southern wanting to restore its full pre-covid timetable.

In a joined-up world the 350/2s would go to GWR with 387s going to Southern to get over that issue.

 

[xotGD]

How? They're great units. With a tarting up they would look new, and they're much higher quality than 331s.

3+2 is definitely not higher quality than 2+2 with tables.

 

[Nym]

3+2 is definitely not higher quality than 2+2 with tables.

That depends on how you're qualifying quality.

The fit and finish of the Desiro UK remains to be one of the best in the country, and it's by both design and implementation method.

 

[L+Y]

I've always had a soft spot for 350s and in theory would like to see them with Northern- but I think the 323 replacement plan falls down when you consider you'd be replacing 6 car 323s with a single 4 car 350 on the busy Bolton corridor. Given platforms on this route have only recently been lengthened, I can't see them being lengthened again- so you go back to either regular overhangs, or capacity downgrades. As a regular user in both directions from Leyland, these trains load well even with pairs of 323s/331s.

 

[Energy]

In a joined-up world the 350/2s would go to GWR with 387s going to Southern to get over that issue.

GWR has been clear in their battery train ambitions, particularly with the Thames Valley branches and Oxford.

“On this basis, converting the Thames Valley is a fairly simple proposition” says Mark Hopwood. “Extending the overhead wiring into the bays at Slough and Twyford, plus a short stretch around the corner at Maidenhead (as platform 5 there already has overhead wires), would probably be enough to convert the Windsor, Henley and Marlow branches to battery operation.

“Similarly, wiring from Didcot as far as Culham would likely do the trick, as you could get to Banbury and back to Culham on batteries. Although of course you might want to go all the way to Oxford with the wires for electrically-hauled freight traffic, so that electric locomotives could link up with a wired East West Rail route to access the West Coast main line.”

[source]

While I wouldn't be surprised if the class 387s stay, especially if wires reach Oxford, a single battery fleet for the Thames Valley seems more likely than the 350/2s.

 

[Snow1964]

GWR has been clear in their battery train ambitions, particularly with the Thames Valley branches and Oxford.

[source]

While I wouldn't be surprised if the class 387s stay, especially if wires reach Oxford, a single battery fleet for the Thames Valley seems more likely than the 350/2s.

The GWR procurement on DfTs spreadsheet, gives the option of also replacing the 387s in addition to the DMUs.

Logically the 350/2s wouldn't be the best fit. GWR already have 15x, 16x, 175, 387, Castle HSTs, 57s, IETs that cannot couple in service, I doubt if they would want 350/2s that cannot couple to 387s or new BEMUs

It would make operating much easier if there was a standard EMU that could couple to BEMUs, or even better one type that can be used interchangably. The struggles of correctly forming on Cardiff-Portsmouth show the problem when they need 3 types (2car 165, 3car 16x, 158) without having spares of each type where trains start or join, demonstrate how much easier it would be with standard types that can also couple up.

 

[D365]

Apologies if I've missed this - where on the Northern network will have ETCS from 2031, apart from ECML sections?

In the interview in Modern Railways, Northern's Director of New Rolling Stock Programmes mentions that the West Coast Main Line will get ETCS.

North of Preston, under the guise of ”Trilink”.

 

[warwickshire]

Could they possibly go to East Midlands Railways, and achieve 12 cars on the Corby to London St Pancras service , or be used between Market Harborough and London St Pancras on the newly electrified extension, and possibly exetended to Leicester on battery, for capacity and service improvements, as to provide extra services, so some more services can run non stop, from Leicester to London St Pancras. Especially those from Sheffield and Nottingham.

 

[Bletchleyite]

3+2 is definitely not higher quality than 2+2 with tables.

In build quality and ride terms they are light years better, and apart from the 2 side in the middle sections the legroom is excellent (and could be throughout just by removing a pair of seats from each coach, a total of just 8, and respacing that bit). As long as they aren't fully loaded to be honest I would prefer the 350/2.

I would disagree on tables on 331s on local services. Tables affect accessibility and mean you have to sit opposite someone. The 195/331 interior was mostly designed for the abortive Northern Connect project.

 

[Mamorin]

350257 and 350264 have gone to Barrow Hill LIP today, anybody know why that has happened?

 

[Class 466]

Could they possibly go to East Midlands Railways, and achieve 12 cars on the Corby to London St Pancras service , or be used between Market Harborough and London St Pancras on the newly electrified extension, and possibly exetended to Leicester on battery, for capacity and service improvements, as to provide extra services, so some more services can run non stop, from Leicester to London St Pancras. Especially those from Sheffield and Nottingham.

Don't they have enough 360s to run 12s? No way that the current service eats up that many diagrams.

 

[Gordonman]

First two for Northern in due course.

 

[InTheEastMids]

Could they possibly go to East Midlands Railways, and achieve 12 cars on the Corby to London St Pancras service , or be used between Market Harborough and London St Pancras on the newly electrified extension, and possibly extended to Leicester on battery, for capacity and service improvements, as to provide extra services, so some more services can run non stop, from Leicester to London St Pancras. Especially those from Sheffield and Nottingham.

Don't they have enough 360s to run 12s? No way that the current service eats up that many diagrams.

This was an interesting idea, however for any MML service proposals, the question is whether this would be in addition to current 4x EMR IC, 2xConnect services per hour, or instead of.

"Instead of": I think it'd be politically and commercially unacceptable to sacrifice Nottingham and/or Sheffield IC services to instead run Connect-style services to Harborough or Leicester.

"in addition to": All options fall foul of the fact that the railway is full, particularly south of Harpenden.
However, only 3 out of 18 planned EMR departures from St Pancras between 1600 and 1900 today will be >200m long; most are ~125m 222 and ~160m 360.
So the way to add capacity - if it is really needed - is not more trains, but to increase train lengths to 240m.

As Class 466 noted, 350s aren't needed to get Connect services to 240m, there ought to be enough 360s
Unless they're comprehensively refurbished with >100km battery range, they are unsuitable for IC services, and if there was a burning need to add even more IC capacity, extending the 810 order seems like the way to go.

 

[Bletchleyite]

I could see it making sense for EMR to send the 360s for scrap and bring in the 350/2s instead. They're newer and most importantly they have gangways which makes revenue protection easier (assuming EMR guards are more proactive than Bletchley ones who generally make no use of the facility). Though that decision would have to happen now before the refurb kicks off.

 

[Trainbike46]

I could see it making sense for EMR to send the 360s for scrap and bring in the 350/2s instead. They're newer and most importantly they have gangways which makes revenue protection easier (assuming EMR guards are more proactive than Bletchley ones who generally make no use of the facility). Though that decision would have to happen now before the refurb kicks off.

Would that be worth the cost it would involve for retraining etc.?

I would also add that the issues with the 360s appear completely caused by either the maintenance arrangements or the lack of a refurbishment so far or both. Bringing in the 350s instead solves none of those problems.

 

[Bletchleyite]

Would that be worth the cost it would involve for retraining etc.?

They're basically the same unit with a different snout, so retraining would hardly be extensive.

I would also add that the issues with the 360s appear completely caused by either the maintenance arrangements or the lack of a refurbishment so far or both. Bringing in the 350s instead solves none of those problems.

Gangways are rather a killer app though. Indeed weren't there disputes about working 12 car sets with an unstaffed unit? They solve that.

 

[skyhigh]

I could see it making sense for EMR to send the 360s for scrap and bring in the 350/2s instead.

Angel own the 360s. Porterbrook own the 350/2s.

Angel would want significant financial compensation to terminate the lease when it has zero benefit for them.

 

[Bletchleyite]

Angel own the 360s. Porterbrook own the 350/2s.

Angel would want significant financial compensation to terminate the lease when it has zero benefit for them.

Do we know that there are no break clauses in the lease? Does anyone here have access to its details? It wouldn't surprise me at all if there was some sort of break clause at the franchise end date.