Future for 9 East Anglia Class 317s

[swt_passenger]

So why does the earlier correspondence from NXEA to NR refer specifically to their proposal to use the class from Ipswich to Norwich from Dec 2010?

It seems to me from the set of three letters on NR's site that NXEA applied, and NR agreed - there's no other explanation of the wording used...

 

[tbtc]

One of the proposals from the Manchester Hub project would see the Liverpool - Manchester Airport diverted via Warrington Central, and some TPE sevices to Liverpool running via the Chat Moss. So, the first phase of electrification would need only 2 EMU's for Liverpool - Manchester Victoria, plus 2 more for Liverpool to Warrington Bank Quay (or Manchester) . Say 6 EMUs including spares.

Liverpool to Wigan / Blackpool will be completed later, and with present service levels would need about another 7 EMUs plus another spare or two. More EMU's would be needed when Manchester - Blackpool electrification is completed.

You may well be right - the slow build of the Lancashire routes means only a handful of EMUs will be needed in the short term

 

[87015]

So why does the earlier correspondence from NXEA to NR refer specifically to their proposal to use the class from Ipswich to Norwich from Dec 2010?

There are enough restrictions on 360s north of Ipswich, well Stowmarket, to make their use not worthwhile. The 1702/1930 has always been planned to be 321s then 317s since Plan A.

 

[Bald Rick]

Vehicle Change is a contractual process that alters the 'specified equipment' that an operator wants to use on a given route. Other operators can object.

But just because the operator wants to run a certain type of train, and everyone agrees they can, doesn't mean it is comaptible with the infrastrcture. So the operator then has to make it fit, either through proving it does through various studies, or by paying Network Rail to make the infrastructure compatible.

The route was certainly not clear to Norwich for Class 360s at the start of the Dec 2010 TT. There were some gauging issues, and under certain electrical feeding scenarios having 2 x 12 car 360s in section would cause the lights to go out in deepest Norfolk. So back then the signallers at Colchester were under direct instructions not to clear signals for them to go north of Stowmarket.

 

[SprinterMan]

It seems someone knows what is going on.....

http://railwayeye.blogspot.com/

Of course an initial fleet of 9 x 4-car Class 317/7 sets is due to become available in February 2012, released by Abellio Greater Anglia. Once these have been put through a heavy overhaul to make them PRM-TSI compliant they will be ready to start work in 2014 for Northern Rail.

 

[jopsuk]

There were some gauging issues, and under certain electrical feeding scenarios having 2 x 12 car 360s in section would cause the lights to go out in deepest Norfolk.

Wht would a train drawing power affect oil lamps and tallow candles?

 

[northwichcat]

One of the proposals from the Manchester Hub project would see the Liverpool - Manchester Airport diverted via Warrington Central, and some TPE sevices to Liverpool running via the Chat Moss. So, the first phase of electrification would need only 2 EMU's for Liverpool - Manchester Victoria, plus 2 more for Liverpool to Warrington Bank Quay (or Manchester) . Say 6 EMUs including spares.

Those changes aren't simultaneous ones though.

From 2014 the following can be EMU operated:
* Victoria - Lime Street 2tph (the Bank Quay service is being diverted/extended to Victoria)
* Airport - Lime Street 1tph
* Wigan - Lime Street 2tph

From 2016 when other routes are electrified and the Ordsall Chord is opened the Airport service will be diverted via Warrington and TPE services will go in to Victoria, freeing up the EMUs on Airport services. However, the freed up ones can be redeployed on the Liverpool/Manchester to Preston/Blackpool services.

 

[tbtc]

It seems someone knows what is going on.....

http://railwayeye.blogspot.com/

Very interesting, but will it really take two years to refurbish these EMUs? Surely you could either build new EMUs in that time (allowing the 317s to remain in revenue earning service) or reserrect a 508 in that timescale!

 

[hairyhandedfool]

Very interesting, but will it really take two years to refurbish these EMUs? Surely you could either build new EMUs in that time (allowing the 317s to remain in revenue earning service) or reserrect a 508 in that timescale!

Well, if they are completed inside six months they'll be surplus to requirements for around 18 months!

 

[swt_passenger]

Very interesting, but will it really take two years to refurbish these EMUs? Surely you could either build new EMUs in that time (allowing the 317s to remain in revenue earning service) or reserrect a 508 in that timescale!

18 months to write a spec, issue an ITT, select a bidder, then a short pause while someone organises a massive protest because Bombardier don't win (even though they don't bother bidding.)

Yeah, 2 yrs is probably just about enough... :roll:

 

[WatcherZero]

Rumour going round does seem to be these will be going to Northern as an interim due to delays in the 319's.

 

[jopsuk]

and if the rumour's repeated enough in one thread, it might even become "fact"

 

[WatcherZero]

Modern Rail are reporting it too I see.

 

[tbtc]

Well, if they are completed inside six months they'll be surplus to requirements for around 18 months!

...in which case it makes more sense to keep them on the GEML for at least another year, surely?

This is a serious point, because there are quite a few units that will need a fair bit of work done on them to comply with regulations post 31 December 2019.It'll be bad enough for the overall network to be without a dozen 150s at a time whilst they are converted, but if it's going to take eighteen months... we might as well give up now

18 months to write a spec, issue an ITT, select a bidder, then a short pause while someone organises a massive protest because Bombardier don't win (even though they don't bother bidding.)

Yeah, 2 yrs is probably just about enough... :roll:

Its funny because its true...

 

[northwichcat]

...in which case it makes more sense to keep them on the GEML for at least another year, surely?

The problem is a lack of funds. When Northern got the extra 158s they took 12x142s out of service and put them in to warm storage, which FGW later took on. I think it would have been very easy to find 12 peak time Northern services that needed extra capacity but there weren't the funds to keep them in use so the passengers continued to suffer.

 

[tbtc]

The problem is a lack of funds. When Northern got the extra 158s they took 12x142s out of service and put them in to warm storage, which FGW later took on. I think it would have been very easy to find 12 peak time Northern services that needed extra capacity but there weren't the funds to keep them in use so the passengers continued to suffer.

I don't know the maths, I don't think anyone on here does (or can divulge this kind of commercially sensitive information), but if the GEML is as busy as is being said by many on here then it seems strange that they don't want to get use out of them for another year or so (since they won't be needed in Lancashire for a couple of years and surely only need a couple of months work to modify them).

 

[mappman1000]

This is mentioned every few weeks, so once again I'm going to post a link to the NR paperwork reporting that they were cleared through to Norwich in May 2010:

http://www.networkrail.co.uk/browse... 360 nxea ipswich-norwich/g establishment.pdf

Yes Boss

 

[Norwich317]

Theresa Villiers explains all!http://www.theyworkforyou.com/wrans/?id=2011-11-24a.82167.h

 

[YorkshireBear]

Theresa Villiers explains all!http://www.theyworkforyou.com/wrans/?id=2011-11-24a.82167.h

That doesnt make it sound as bad, but who knows.... :/