12 car 350/1 to be tested at 110mph

[Peter Sarf]

So are LM getting extra Desiros to go on the Cross city. Well, personally, they should support the home market and order some Class 378s. Keep Bombardier going for a little while longer

I hope you mean 377s or 379s. The 378s are AWFUL, I have used them. They have no loos. They only have seats facing inwards so all seated passengers have their backs to the windows and standing passengers can only look down at the track/embankment. Could save money by not having windows as you cannot see the station signs anyway. The 378s are probably all that can be justified on short journeys but for busy commuter routes where people are used to 323s there would be a revolt. Granted they are very open and easy to feel secure in but they are barren in terms of comfort. At least pacers have forward/backward facing seats (cannot believe I am saying this).

 

[jon0844]

I don't think the 378s are that bad, but admit I've not been on one that is really crowded.

I love the walk-through design, but there's no reason why you can't have that along with some proper seats too. If the 378 design was used for services from WGC and Hertford North to Moorgate, giving a potential 45 minute journey, I'd hope they'd put in 2+2 seating or a mix of 2+2 and London Overground seating, or lots of tip-down seats.

The fact is, the trains need room for standing in the peak and a more even mix off-peak. The 378s seem like a good compromise.

 

[MCR247]

I hope you mean 377s or 379s. The 378s are AWFUL, I have used them. They have no loos. They only have seats facing inwards so all seated passengers have their backs to the windows and standing passengers can only look down at the track/embankment. Could save money by not having windows as you cannot see the station signs anyway. The 378s are probably all that can be justified on short journeys but for busy commuter routes where people are used to 323s there would be a revolt. Granted they are very open and easy to feel secure in but they are barren in terms of comfort. At least pacers have forward/backward facing seats (cannot believe I am saying this).

Because a train is obviously classified by its seating layout :roll:

The interior could be 3+2 on a 378, the fact that it is a 378 doesn't restrict it to the LO seating plan :roll:

172/0s don't have loos, but 172/3s do?! hock:

Surely that can't be?!

 

[Peter Sarf]

Because a train is obviously classified by its seating layout :roll:

The interior could be 3+2 on a 378, the fact that it is a 378 doesn't restrict it to the LO seating plan :roll:

172/0s don't have loos, but 172/3s do?! hock:

Surely that can't be?!

Fair enough, but I assumed the original poster was referring to the seating layout. As I said, I dont mind the openess of the "Capitalstar" 378s carriages and the inter-unit gangways. But the seating layout is one step short of none. If its going to be 2+2 or 3+2 seating then fine. They might look an awfull lot more like a 379 though, that is why I mentined the 379s. Though granted the 379s don't have the large inter-unit gangway connection (do they ?), or the more reliable sliding doors.

But its just occured to me that the 378s body might not be designed to take seats arranged at right angles to the windows. I imagine the internal pockets for the sliding doors mean no seats near the doors (which is an advantage for circulation) anyway. Lets face it we are evolving towards 60 minute journeys where people stand so I can see there being no seats eventually anyway !.

I dont commute much now (well I walk), but sometimes have to do peak time travel to various parts of London. The advantage is I don't have to stand for 20 minutes or more and pay to do it. But if I had to go back to working in London I would not want to spend 30 minutes on a 378 style of seating going on one leg of a journey to Docklands.

 

[Class172]

378s have Dellner couplers, as do 350s


Get it right

Nothing to stop them fitting a BSI coupler (or whatever the 170/172s have). Just because the first lot had dellners, doesn't mean the rest can havea different coupler — Southern had different couplers on their 170s (which then became 171s).

 

[150001]

When I said get some 378s I did mean change the seating scheme to 2+2 or 3+2 with a toilet. I don't think it would go down well having LO's layout. Would it be possible to fit BSI to 378s so it can be rescued? I would like to see a 378 in LM livery. As the 323s aren't gangwayed what is the point in getting gangwayed units. 378s are the perfect option. Derby needs the work.

 

[jopsuk]

But its just occured to me that the 378s body might not be designed to take seats arranged at right angles to the windows. I imagine the internal pockets for the sliding doors mean no seats near the doors (which is an advantage for circulation) anyway. Lets face it we are evolving towards 60 minute journeys where people stand so I can see there being no seats eventually anyway !.

The body design is based upon the earlier Class 376, in service with Southeastern. They've got 2+2 with "perch" type seats at the doors- here's an interior shot.

 

[northwichcat]

Doesn't mean posts in the past were correct. This quote is from the finalised WM RUS:

"On the Cross City South corridor, there is planned
service improvement with the Cross City line operating
three trains per hour to each of Bromsgrove and
Redditch (in each direction) by extending the existing
Longbridge services. Additional vehicles are planned
in order to operate this service enhancement and to
meet demand on the rest of the corridor."

That last bit isn't specific, but it is more than zero...

Was that written before or after the subsidy ran out for the Chase Line meaning DMUs have been freed up there as a result of a service cut?

 

[Class172]

When I said get some 378s I did mean change the seating scheme to 2+2 or 3+2 with a toilet. I don't think it would go down well having LO's layout. Would it be possible to fit BSI to 378s so it can be rescued? I would like to see a 378 in LM livery. As the 323s aren't gangwayed what is the point in getting gangwayed units. 378s are the perfect option. Derby needs the work.

I'm with you there; that's what I was trying to get across: fitting different couplers so they can be rescued by LM's existing DMUs. Quite a few diagrams involve multiple working so gangways would help.

 

[Old Hill Bank]

Was that written before or after the subsidy ran out for the Chase Line meaning DMUs have been freed up there as a result of a service cut?

All that saved was some operating costs, the units are still needed in the morning and evening peaks.

 

[Chris125]

I hope you mean 377s or 379s. The 378s are AWFUL, I have used them. They have no loos. They only have seats facing inwards so all seated passengers have their backs to the windows and standing passengers can only look down at the track/embankment. Could save money by not having windows as you cannot see the station signs anyway.

378's are the mainline equivalent of tube stock and offer a similar level of comfort - for short metro style operation they are ideal. They are not suited however for Cross-City services, but i see no reason why a different seating layout could be used.

Chris

 

[swt_passenger]

Cant have more than 2tph each way I think due to single track between Barnt Green and Redditch

The whole point of the project is to change that though. It's precisely why it is a HLOS enhancement with infrastructure costs, and not just a timetable tweak...

 

[The Planner]

Cant have more than 2tph each way I think due to single track between Barnt Green and Redditch

The plan is to add a long loop and have two platforms at Alvechurch where they would cross.

 

[150001]

The 378s are like electric equivalents to Class 150s.

 

[MCR247]

Nothing to stop them fitting a BSI coupler (or whatever the 170/172s have). Just because the first lot had dellners, doesn't mean the rest can havea different coupler — Southern had different couplers on their 170s (which then became 171s).

Nothing to stop them fitting BSI to 350, therefore your point is irrelevant re by having 378s you could couple to LMs diesels.

 

[Class172]

Nothing to stop them fitting BSI to 350, therefore your point is irrelevant re by having 378s you could couple to LMs diesels.

But I didn't think a Bombardier Turbostar would be compatible with a Siemens Desiro. :roll:

 

[MCR247]

170 would be able to drag a 350 in theory (although I doubt a 170 has enough power ) as would it would a 37x, but it would only be in emergency.

 

[IanXC]

I'd imagine it might end up more like 350s going to replace 323s on the Walsall - Birmingham - Wolverhampton and Birmingham New Street - Birmingham International lines and concentrating all the 323s on the Cross City line so there's a uniform fleet (for doubling up and the like).

This sounds like a plausible plan to me. Is there a need to move from 3 to 4 car on these routes?

Even a small number of 323s going to the Manchester area would be very useful, to make use of existing electrification and allow DMU stock to be used for strengthening elsewhere. Very much the same as the 322s coming to the Leeds area.

 

[ChrisCooper]

Couplings are irrelevant. If a 323 fails it can't be rescued by a Sprinter or Turbostar as 323s have Tightlocks wheras Sprinters and Turbostars have BSIs. LM could specify BSI couplers on any unit they order, but regardless of the type it could only be used in an emergency to haul or propell a dead unit. 171s cannot run in multiple with Electrostars, but they can couple in an emergency. I don't even know if the brakes would work on both units, but for low speed movement in an emergency it doesn't matter.

As for the 378s, altering the seating layout would not be straightforward as the equipment which would have been either side of the full width gangways is under the seats. It could be done but it would practically be a new design of train.

 

[9K43]

http://www.publictenders.net/tender/116735

A train is a collection of vehicles complete with a tail lamp.

An international screw coupling is tightened up so that there is equal number of threads showing through the nut.

 

[150001]

Nothing to stop them fitting BSI to 350, therefore your point is irrelevant re by having 378s you could couple to LMs diesels.

Yes. But Bombardier have produced the 170, which is compatible with the 15x series and therefore the 378 would also be able to. New Bombardier products wit h BSI couplers like the 172s can connect to the 15x. So the 378 can be as well and work.

 

[MCR247]

A 350 with BSI would be as capable as a 378 with BSI, especially if it is in the specification.

 

[150001]

A 350 with BSI would be as capable as a 378 with BSI, especially if it is in the specification.

Good point. But surely Bombardier with a bombardier is better than a siemens and a bombardier.

 

[MCR247]

If its only for emergency, I wouldn't say so, no

 

[ChrisCooper]

The only DMUs and EMUs that are fully compatable are the 220s and 221s with 390s. No other types ever have been. Even the SR DEMUs were not fully compatable with SR EMUs. It's pretty pointless and I don't even know why Virgin bothered, especially as it meant the Voyagers have to use Alstom TMS rarther than Bombardier to be compatable (and is the reason Voyagers are not compatable with Meridiens/Pioneers). Compatability for rescue is another matter, but even then has been rare, the only coupling compatability is between Dellner fitted DMUs and EMUs, and between 1st generation DMUs and Buckeye EMUs (Slammers and 442s). Anything else would need an adaptor. Units with Westinghouse Automatic Air Brakes would be able to have a continous brake, anything else the assisted unit would be unbraked. It's important to remember that Turbostars use the same 7 notch, 5 wire (3 power, 2 direction) throttle control system as the Sprinters to be compatable. Modern EMUs use databuses for control.

 

[Geezertronic]

The only DMUs and EMUs that are fully compatable are the 220s and 221s with 390s....

To be picky, the 220s & 221s are DEMUs

 

[ChiefPlanner]

Redditch branch up for partial redoubling - soon.

Bromsgrove needs one extra 323 working diagram.
--- old post above --- --- new post below ---

Weedon is super-busy. Are there any available paths? Maybe one an hour in each direction?

At least one - maybe 2 with 110 mph running.

 

[The Planner]

Redditch branch up for partial redoubling - soon.

Bromsgrove needs one extra 323 working diagram.

Not sure how that can be proved when the layout isn't finalised and it is dependant on what happens with the Redditch trains.

 

[northwichcat]

Bromsgrove needs one extra 323 working diagram.

Northern have needed two extra 323s since the Macclesfield service was extended to Stoke and the Airport shuttle was enhanced in 2008 but they didn't get any and are using Pacers under the wires at peak times. (The 322s have been allocated to Northern for West Yorkshire enhancements.)

 

[Class172]

Redditch branch up for partial redoubling - soon.

Bromsgrove needs one extra 323 working diagram.

Public consultations are will shortly be taking place regarding the Redditch line proposals.