Surely not - DfT orders 8 more carriages than proposed.

[swt_passenger]

At one point, the extension of bedford-bletchley to MK was planned (as a stand-alone scheme, nothing to do with E-W) and I do understand that this was partly behind the alterations at MK. Plans were then deferred.

It was definitely a live proposal by the local authorities, as it was referred to in the DfT's WCRM progress report of 2006 like this:

"...local sponsorship of a platform capable of handling future services to and from Bedford or possibly later, in conjunction with the possible line
restoration, from Oxford or Aylesbury."

Use by some SN services seems to be a bit of a bonus.

 

[Eagle]

Hum, take your point but sort of depends on how you look at it - 3 cars should cost 75% the cost of 4 cars......

And four cars should cost 133% the cost of three...

Percentages are unintuitive like that.

 

[WatcherZero]

Since its the only active rolling stock thread I will dump this here rather than starting a new thread. Despite Bombardiers threatening of massive job losses if it lost Thameslink im told there was a staff announcement in Derby yesterday that all the jobs are safe for the forseeable future, no massive layoffs.

Yep, promise to staff no layoffs before 2014

 

[Xenophon PCDGS]

Since its the only active rolling stock thread I will dump this here rather than starting a new thread. Despite Bombardiers threatening of massive job losses if it lost Thameslink im told there was a staff announcement in Derby yesterday that all the jobs are safe for the forseeable future, no massive layoffs.

Yep, promise to staff no layoffs before 2014

That must give some consolation to the Bombadier staff with two more years of employment promised. Who is to say what may occur with regard to new orders in the period leading up to 2014.

 

[Chris125]

Since its the only active rolling stock thread I will dump this here rather than starting a new thread. Despite Bombardiers threatening of massive job losses if it lost Thameslink im told there was a staff announcement in Derby yesterday that all the jobs are safe for the forseeable future, no massive layoffs.

Yep, promise to staff no layoffs before 2014

Dont forget that even if they had no other work, they still have several years of building S Stock - its their commitment beyond that which was, and remains, questionable.

Chris

 

[Yew]

That must give some consolation to the Bombadier staff with two more years of employment promised. Who is to say what may occur with regard to new orders in the period leading up to 2014.

Dont bombardier own the designs for MK3/4's maybe we could order some new ones, and some lightweight (and hence High RA) and powerful locomotives to run top and tail.

 

[the sniper]

Dont bombardier own the designs for MK3/4's maybe we could order some new ones, and some lightweight (and hence High RA) and powerful locomotives to run top and tail.

Maybe they can build some more Derby Lightweights too? Stick a Turbostar body on them and it'll be as good as new.

No really though, I'm sure Bombardier will be alright. There'll be another order along/gifted in 2014 to keep them going. It would be nice if they put the 'Stars' to bed though and came up with new concepts, not that I think they will.

 

[ChristopherJ]

It would be nice if they put the 'Stars' to bed though and came up with new concepts, not that I think they will.

Bombardier already have - the Aventra.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Aventra

 

[Eagle]

It would be nice if they put the 'Stars' to bed though and came up with new concepts, not that I think they will.

Why? The Turbostars and Electrostars are still useful and modern, 20-odd years after their parents the Networkers were born.

 

[Yew]

Bombardier already have - the Aventra.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Aventra

Is this based on the Turbostar? That was based on the Networker, That was based on the Class 210, that was based on the class 317, that was based on MK3 Coaching stock?


Sorry, I was quite interested I had managed to trace the lineage back so far... albeit the Networker => 210 link is a bit tenuous

 

[the sniper]

Bombardier already have - the Aventra.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Aventra

But will it be pursued now they haven't got Thameslink or presumably Crossrail?

Why? The Turbostars and Electrostars are still useful and modern, 20-odd years after their parents the Networkers were born.

How long do you think they should run with the same outer design? Surely everything has a lifespan?

 

[tbtc]

Is this based on the Turbostar? That was based on the Networker, That was based on the Class 210, that was based on the class 317, that was based on MK3 Coaching stock?


Sorry, I was quite interested I had managed to trace the lineage back so far... albeit the Networker => 210 link is a bit tenuous

In the same way that the size of the rockets that went to the moon were influenced by the size of a horse's backside in Roman times?

 

[Eagle]

How long do you think they should run with the same outer design?

As long as it works, indefinitely.

 

[ChristopherJ]

Why? The Turbostars and Electrostars are still useful and modern, 20-odd years after their parents the Networkers were born.

It's important to remember that the origins of Electrostar/Turbostar model essentially make the fleet the "Networker Mark 2".

The class 168 Clubman evolved from the class 165 Networker Turbo, the class 168 evolved in to the class 170 Turbostar, which subsequently evolved in to the electrically propelled class 357 Electrostar, then modified with a HÜBNER gangway to create the 375/377, and so on...

When you look at both models in detail, the shared similarities are evident. Adtranz had basically taken the BREL/ABB Networker blueprints and and amalgamated it with the latest in computer and traction technology. They took a decent design of train and made it even better according to the latest standards.

Despite that there was many potential projects for the Networker programme that never occurred - such as the Universal Networker - under privatisation they was still born under the Electrostar model - the class 375/6 and 377/2/5 are dual voltage, go anywhere, outer suburban models - ironically used on the same routes that the Universal Networker was intended: the SE division, SC division, Thameslink...

 

[transmanche]

Why an inappropriate stock?

People doing long journeys on the 185s don't find them well suited to the long journeys. A 350 is an electric version of a 185. The Manchester-Scotland service will be speeded up and that should mean less commuter traffic on it, meaning it will be even harder to justify any commuter compromised layout on the new stock.

Personally I would have preferred an AC version of a 444 for the TPE services, rather than a 350. The layout's better suited for long-distance travel.

 

[swt_passenger]

But will it be pursued now they haven't got Thameslink or presumably Crossrail?

You cannot presume they won't get Crossrail just because they didn't get Thameslink.

The two rolling stock order processes are being run completely separately. There are clearly some similarities between the requirements, and a follow on order would probably be considered a good idea by various commentators, but as it stands today Crossrail will be an entirely new competition.

 

[northwichcat]

Personally I would have preferred an AC version of a 444 for the TPE services, rather than a 350. The layout's better suited for long-distance travel.

I think a lot of agree that 350s are not the best option for Manchester-Scotland. The problem is that LM want new trains that are compatible with their existing trains and TPE want new trains and the orders are not big enough to issue separate tenders and orders, so LM will get what they want and TPE will get the same type of train, whether they want it or not, but can request a different internal layout.

 

[Chris125]

Personally I would have preferred an AC version of a 444 for the TPE services, rather than a 350. The layout's better suited for long-distance travel.

They arent for TPE, they are for LM via TPE - a long-distance desiro variant should be considered, but as part of a much larger order specifically for TransPennine services.

You cannot presume they won't get Crossrail just because they didn't get Thameslink.

No, but with such similarities (especially signalling) the winner of one has always been seen as favourite for the other - if Bombardier had lost Thameslink just on financial grounds perhaps they'd still be in with a healthy chance, but it seems common knowledge the Siemens design was technically superior too.

Chris

 

[WatcherZero]

The 350's wont be permanently at TPE, they are to operate the initial electrified Scotland service from December 2013, when TPE (successor) puts in a full tender for a uniform electric fleet to operate their long distance services the 350's will go back to London Midland. The 350's will operate an hourly alternating Manchester Airport-Wigan-Glasgow/Edinburgh service. The freed up 185's will operate an addional hourly Liverpool-Manchester-Leeds-Newcastle service and the remaining units will be used for strengthening existing services according to TPE. When further electrification is completed you would likely see a large order of long distance electrics for Scotland/Liverpool/Blackpool/Cumbria (im sure that final mile will be electrified on the cheap) 185's will probably become the sole diesel unit in the fleet and the 170's released to the other operators of the class (unless Northern and TPE are merged where im sure they would find a good use for all TPE's diesel stock).

The main problem I see will be the gap after Chat Moss but before Bolton is electrified where theres going to be less services on that route and no stock to make up the difference with additional Blackburn services as planned until 319's release some diesels at Northern.

 

[Class377/5]

The 350's wont be permanently at TPE, they are to operate the initial electrified Scotland service from December 2013, when TPE (successor) puts in a full tender for a uniform electric fleet to operate their long distance services the 350's will go back to London Midland. The 350's will operate an hourly alternating Manchester Airport-Wigan-Glasgow/Edinburgh service. The freed up 185's will operate an addional hourly Liverpool-Manchester-Leeds-Newcastle service and the remaining units will be used for strengthening existing services according to TPE. When further electrification is completed you would likely see a large order of long distance electrics for Scotland/Liverpool/Blackpool/Cumbria (im sure that final mile will be electrified on the cheap) 185's will probably become the sole diesel unit in the fleet and the 170's released to the other operators of the class (unless Northern and TPE are merged where im sure they would find a good use for all TPE's diesel stock).

The main problem I see will be the gap after Chat Moss but before Bolton is electrified where theres going to be less services on that route and no stock to make up the difference with additional Blackburn services as planned until 319's release some diesels at Northern.

Just been looking at some stuff online from NR stating the new services will be run by 333 units. Not completely familiar with the stock situation, where would these units come from?

EDIT- here's the link http://www.networkrail.co.uk/docume...trification20and20Plant2020Future20Growth.pdf

Hopefully the next TPE will be allowd to get some decent, purpose built units as adding all this OHLE means the fleet needs to be ordered. The North needs investment.

 

[MK Tom]

I've mentioned this earlier but nobody responded - I heard somewhere that the 350/3s would have a ''more intercity interior spec'' than older 350s - not sure if that meant /2s or all older ones. Either way what would that mean? Wouldn't that make them a little more suitable for the FTPE services?

 

[Nym]

Theifrow express post crossrail...

And tpe does need dedicated special stock. unless oxford road is being remoddeled soon they need 6 car EMUs...

 

[Blindtraveler]

I've mentioned this earlier but nobody responded - I heard somewhere that the 350/3s would have a ''more intercity interior spec'' than older 350s - not sure if that meant /2s or all older ones. Either way what would that mean? Wouldn't that make them a little more suitable for the FTPE services?

when the 185s launched they claimed to have IC Qualitty seating. Well iv never yet till then met an intercity seat like it.
Proppdr seats, unlike any other diziro, plugs at aj seats, wifi and luggage space make my idea of an IC interior. I would like to think this wil happen cut cant see it. Its shocking.

 

[ainsworth74]

Either way what would that mean? Wouldn't that make them a little more suitable for the FTPE services?

I would guess that it will mean they will get 185 style interiors so 2+2 in standard with lots of table seats and legroom and 2+1 in first with those really comfy seats as found in the 185s.

 

[northwichcat]

when the 185s launched they claimed to have IC Qualitty seating. Well iv never yet till then met an intercity seat like it.
Proppdr seats, unlike any other diziro, plugs at aj seats, wifi and luggage space make my idea of an IC interior. I would like to think this wil happen cut cant see it. Its shocking.

After translating your post in to English I agree with your statement. Vernon Barker in his introduction printed in the timetables referred to the trains as new state of the art Intercity trains, even when he was referring to the Scottish service where 185s replaced Voyagers.

I know someone who contacted TPE customer relations soon after the Desiros were introduced on Manchester-Scotland asking when the new state of the art Intercity trains they were promised were going to take over on that route. They didn't get a response.
--- old post above --- --- new post below ---

I would guess that it will mean they will get 185 style interiors so 2+2 in standard with lots of table seats and legroom and 2+1 in first with those really comfy seats as found in the 185s.

So basically a 350/1 built without the third rail equipment that the 350/1s originally had.

 

[swt_passenger]

I would guess that it will mean they will get 185 style interiors so 2+2 in standard with lots of table seats and legroom and 2+1 in first with those really comfy seats as found in the 185s.

That's basically a 350/1 then, +/- a few tables, and 2+1 in first?

 

[Blindtraveler]

i 2 asked TPE that same question knowing full well what the answer would be should I get one.
I didnt.
if your suffering from cramp and akes n pains by CAR, having borded at EDB then thats not an IC qualitty seat!
Cupple of years back they did some flexible TPE only Scotland to Blackpool tikets which me and mates used. We did an unplanned BoJ at Carlisle, had cramp again by Preston and were actually delighted when the Blackpool came in standing!
On our return we stood all the way with another (primarrily medicinal) pub move at CAR. They are fine for MAN - LDS, and similar but they are not for Scotland and I worry the 350s will be as bad.

 

[northwichcat]

That's basically a 350/1 then, +/- a few tables, and 2+1 in first?

I though a 350/1 does have 2+1 seating in first.
--- old post above --- --- new post below ---

On our return we stood all the way with another (primarrily medicinal) pub move at CAR. They are fine for MAN - LDS, and similar but they are not for Scotland and I worry the 350s will be as bad.

I think the seating on a 350/1 is slightly firmer than on a 185. I've never been on a 185 and a 350/1 on the same day so it's difficult to confirm but I seem to notice the firmest of the seating quicker on a 350 compared to a 185.

 

[swt_passenger]

I though a 350/1 does have 2+1 seating in first.

No it is 2+2 in the same 24 seat layout as a normal 450. From my own travels I believe the same seats are used in 350/1 standard, 350/1 first, 350/2 first, 450 first and 444 standard.

I haven't been in a 185 - but isn't their 2+1 first seat the same as the 444 first?

(For completeness 350/2 and 450 standard have the same narrow 2+3 seating.)

 

[Pumbaa]

No it is 2+2 in the same 24 seat layout as a normal 450. From my own travels I believe the same seats are used in 350/1 standard, 350/1 first, 350/2 first, 450 first and 444 standard.

I haven't been in a 185 - but isn't their 2+1 first seat the same as the 444 first?

(For completeness 350/2 and 450 standard have the same narrow 2+3 seating.)

Almost not quite.

Standard Desiro Grammer seats E3000 - 350/1 (std), 444 (std), 185 (std).

Standard narrow Desiro Grammer seats F3000 - 350/2 (std), 450 (std), 360 (std).

Completely different style of Richmond seating - 350 (all models, first class), 450 (1st).

Even more completely different Richmond seat - 444 (1st)

Related but newer version of aforementioned even more completely different Richmond seat - 185 (1st).

For completeness, Grammer supply the UKF MSG90.3 drivers seat to all UK Desiro classes mentioned above. Richmond supply the tip-down bench seats found scattered throughout all of the above.