Southeastern are aiming to reduce microfleets so the 458 isn't something they'd be looking into especially as it would need work reintroducing doo controls on the cab.
There were some rumours a few months ago about them going to Southern. It was in Modern Railways so there was likely, at some point, a prospect of them going over.
The 458s are in way better condition than the Networkers.
You can add the Class 318, one of the mainstays of the North Clyde lines, to that list!
The term may be meaningless, but the concept isn't. Maintaining stores and knowledge for a range of small fleets is more expensive than for the same number of vehicles of a consistent fleet.You can add the Class 318, one of the mainstays of the North Clyde lines, to that list!
Yes, it's absurd. The only place I ever see the term "microfleet" is on these forums and it's getting a bit of a joke now.
"Non-standard fleet" is surely more accurate.
The 442s were designed to be locomotives hauled, and had standard ETH jumper sockets (at the time of introduction were used on diversions via Laverstock, Salisbury. The electrification of Solent lines via Fareham was only authorised after first ones were delivered).
What has been unfortunate, is that certain operators were allowed to completely replace their fleet (Greater Anglia) or replace far more than they had to (SWR with the 701s replacing the 707s and 458s on "Metro" duties), leaving the problem of what to do with unwanted relatively modern stock to other operators.
Indeed nothing is impossible. But the engineering and project management is what drives the costs - especially when software comes into the equation.
Indeed, DfT's treatment of some of the procurements justifies the nickname of "DafT". That doesn't alter the realities for operators who have to manage multiple fleets with little commonality between them
If the 458s were very reliable still Southeastern might bite the bullet and take them, however, being at best on a par with Networkers makes the move unjustifiable, as only a slight gain in reliability would be more than offset by the need to add further training and alter depots and supply chains for maintenance/parts. While the 707s were kind of forced on Southeastern, at least they are relatively new and could be easily marketed as a positive for the franchise. Neither of these are possible with 458s.
I think you are looking at this the wrong way round. It's good that large standardised fleets have been ordered.
The replacement of the 707s and 458/5s was down to DfT capacity requirements in the 2017 franchise. I gather than floor level heating ducts stopped the 707s meeting those requirements and that is partly why the 701s had a redesigned cab to squeeze a little extra passenger space in the driving coaches. The 458/5s were obviously a way Stagecoach could offer extra capacity as part of the mid-2010s HLOS scheme (10-car suburban railway that also saw the 456s move to SWT and various platform lengthening schemes).
A big difference is that the EMR is just large enough, and no more, whereas the 701s and 720s were ordered for growth, so not only did they displace relatively young fleets like the 379s, 360s, 707s and 458s (from metro work) we've ended up with surplus 701s and 720s.
Other fleets have had side mounted cameras added. The question is more likely to be space in the driving cab for the monitors.
I'd definately not say way better condition, the 458s from first revenue service were notoriously unreliable, chop changed formations to 5 and then 4 etc. The last year several had started accumulating multiple traction package faults.
Were the 701s really ‘ordered for growth’?
Statement from the time of introduction: https://www.railjournal.com/fleet/s...eives-first-class-701-bombardier-aventra-emu/
Although the number of vehicles is much the same, losing redundant cabs and having the open gangways means you can fit more people on.
That makes sense, I was thinking they wouldn‘t increase the number of services that could be run. Of course a huge proportion of ‘fitting more people onboard’ is that most of them end up standing.
I’ll take it! The standing is so much more comfortable than the 455s even in near crush load conditions.
I think they'd be good on Gatwick Express. If that displaced 387s I would argue Southern should keep them.
