730/0 on Northampton fast?!

[Bletchleyite]

Yesterday (Sunday) a pair of 730/0s worked the 1922 Euston-Northampton fast. This is quite notable for a few reasons - one, that it would have been fairly easy to set-swap it with the pair of 350s on the 1921 Milton Keynes Central slow (which I half recall is usually 730 worked), another, that it meant a 90mph unit on the fasts which lost time, and another that I don't think I've ever known these go north of MKC in service before.

Does anyone know why this happened?

It was, notably, very smooth on the fasts at 90 particularly around Cheddington, and far less lurch-y than 350s over Ledburn - bodes well for the /2s.

 

[RailWonderer]

Seeing as it only lost two minutes of time by Bletchley, WMR might choose to not bother avoiding to run 90mph units on the fasts south of MK. They could just pad future timetables more though I'd rather they stuck 350s to semi-fasts. For MK - Rugby though on the fast Crewe, they probably won't want 90mph units holding up 390s.

 

[Bletchleyite]

Seeing as it only lost two minutes of time by Bletchley, WMR might choose to not bother avoiding to run 90mph units on the fasts south of MK. They could just pad future timetables more though I'd rather they stuck 350s to semi-fasts. For MK - Rugby though on the fast Crewe, they probably won't want 90mph units holding up 390s.

I did half wonder if it was a test run to see how they performed, which was probably lower consequence yesterday due to the thinned Avanti service. If it was on the wrong diagram it would have been easy to do a set swap between that and the 1921 to get it back on a slow diagram - indeed I didn't go down to the platform until it was called because I was almost certain that would happen - but it didn't!

I can't see them ending up on Crewes, the seated capacity would be too low.

 

[sjoh]

Anyone know when we might start seeing the 730/2s out on the LNR route from Euston?

 

[Merle Haggard]

Seeing as it only lost two minutes of time by Bletchley, WMR might choose to not bother avoiding to run 90mph units on the fasts south of MK. They could just pad future timetables more though I'd rather they stuck 350s to semi-fasts. For MK - Rugby though on the fast Crewe, they probably won't want 90mph units holding up 390s.

If 90 mph units can (almost) keep time then the cost of upgrading the 350s from 100 mph to 110 mph seems to have been wasted...

 

[Bletchleyite]

If 90 mph units can (almost) keep time then the cost of upgrading the 350s from 100 mph to 110 mph seems to have been wasted...

"Almost" matters when the fasts are as crammed in as they are, though. A 100mph 350 took two paths, I seem to recall 110 improved that.

Of a Sunday evening with an Avanti strike-level service on that's a bit less important.

 

[Merle Haggard]

"Almost" matters when the fasts are as crammed in as they are, though. A 100mph 350 took two paths, I seem to recall 110 improved that.

Of a Sunday evening with an Avanti strike-level service on that's a bit less important.

But doesn't that mean that a 90 mph train would take at least two paths? - and, if it's an arithmetic series, 3?

 

[Wilts Wanderer]

But doesn't that mean that a 90 mph train would take at least two paths? - and, if it's an arithmetic series, 3?

If the timetable graph is full, even taking 1.005 paths ends up equating to taking 2 paths in practice, to avoid disrupting a very fixed clockface pattern.

 

[Merle Haggard]

So does not the foregoing discussion suggest that running 90 mph stock on the WCML fast line is a bad idea?

 

[800001]

Yesterday (Sunday) a pair of 730/0s worked the 1922 Euston-Northampton fast. This is quite notable for a few reasons - one, that it would have been fairly easy to set-swap it with the pair of 350s on the 1921 Milton Keynes Central slow (which I half recall is usually 730 worked), another, that it meant a 90mph unit on the fasts which lost time, and another that I don't think I've ever known these go north of MKC in service before.

Does anyone know why this happened?

It was, notably, very smooth on the fasts at 90 particularly around Cheddington, and far less lurch-y than 350s over Ledburn - bodes well for the /2s.

Apparently they were actually diagrammed for it.
There are some ‘special Sunday diagrams’ according to a LNWR conductor I know.
But they don’t know how long they are operating that diagram.

 

[Kite159]

The 730s have worked north of Milton Keynes before, I've had a 730 on one of the Northampton 'fasts' in the evening peak in December (something with some 350s getting a tad wet at Northampton). Although that one was put onto the slow lines after Hemel Hempstead and was due to be overtaken by the following London - Birmingham service (hence it was pretty much empty, other than passengers from Watford Junction).

 

[800001]

The 730s have worked north of Milton Keynes before, I've had a 730 on one of the Northampton 'fasts' in the evening peak in December (something with some 350s getting a tad wet at Northampton). Although that one was put onto the slow lines after Hemel Hempstead and was due to be overtaken by the following London - Birmingham service (hence it was pretty much empty, other than passengers from Watford Junction).

September I can find picture on Facebook when they worked Euston to Northampton I think for the first time.

Edit - 26th August 730s worked a Euston to Northampton service.

Picture below from Facebook.

 

[DJH1971]

Anyone know when we might start seeing the 730/2s out on the LNR route from Euston?

Wonder what the issues regarding the 730/2's are?

 

[800001]

Wonder what the issues regarding the 730/2's are?

Apparently ride quality above 90mph, and also the noise from the gangways at high speed.

 

[DJH1971]

Apparently ride quality above 90mph, and also the noise from the gangways at high speed.

Could these end up being the next 701's?

 

[Bletchleyite]

If the timetable graph is full, even taking 1.005 paths ends up equating to taking 2 paths in practice, to avoid disrupting a very fixed clockface pattern.

I seem to recall that the issue of a 100mph 350 taking 1.5 paths was solved by the other 1.5 being taken by the Crewe, and so just taking 3 between them rather than 4.

 

[800301]

Apparently ride quality above 90mph, and also the noise from the gangways at high speed.

So no change from a 387 then…

 

[RailWonderer]

September I can find picture on Facebook when they worked Euston to Northampton I think for the first time.

Edit - 26th August 730s worked a Euston to Northampton service.

Picture below from Facebook.

Those 3 car 730s were meant to replace the 323s like for like and be just for West Midlands Metro area services with the LNR 5 car units for WCML work, but as I suspected when they were first ordered, they'll be mixed up in service. At least the lack of WCML driver training on 323s (and possibly clearance as well) kept them up in Birmingham which was better. If WMR had ordered two types of rolling stock, one for each service type you wouldn't have this situation. If the 730s are anything like the 720s the seats are far harder than the Desiro Grammar seat even in 3+2 so I would want to avoid the Aventra services. The legroom is also poorer as well if the 730 has the same density as the 720.

 

[800001]

Those 3 car 730s were meant to replace the 323s like for like and be just for West Midlands Metro area services with the LNR 5 car units for WCML work, but as I suspected when they were first ordered, they'll be mixed up in service. At least the lack of WCML driver training on 323s (and possibly clearance as well) kept them up in Birmingham which was better. If WMR had ordered two types of rolling stock, one for each service type you wouldn't have this situation. If the 730s are anything like the 720s the seats are far harder than the Desiro Grammar seat even in 3+2 so I would want to avoid the Aventra services. The legroom is also poorer as well if the 730 has the same density as the 720.

Seating is perfectly comfortable and legroom is fine, I’m 6ft 4”, it’s always good to ride a train before judging seating.

Also, never had an issue with a 720 seat, but then again, seating will never please everyone.

 

[AJDesiro]

Those 3 car 730s were meant to replace the 323s like for like and be just for West Midlands Metro area services with the LNR 5 car units for WCML work, but as I suspected when they were first ordered, they'll be mixed up in service. At least the lack of WCML driver training on 323s (and possibly clearance as well) kept them up in Birmingham which was better. If WMR had ordered two types of rolling stock, one for each service type you wouldn't have this situation. If the 730s are anything like the 720s the seats are far harder than the Desiro Grammar seat even in 3+2 so I would want to avoid the Aventra services. The legroom is also poorer as well if the 730 has the same density as the 720.

It's more a short-term solution than anything, they're still waiting for the 730/2s, so at the moment they are being used down south. It's highly unlikely that they'll end up with the random unit generator that the 350s had, however - mainly down to the fact that in the end state they won't be based at the same depot as the 730/2s (other than for work that can't be accommodated at Soho, that Bletchley can accommodate).

I seem to recall hearing rumblings about the 730/0s being used down south long-term, but that would only be on the Tring/MK stoppers (and maybe the odd Northampton terminator in the peaks), where they're fully adequate units. But I may be misremembering.

Seating density-wise, they're fine, legroom is akin to what we're used to with 350s in the centre sections in all honesty, not great, but nowhere near as bad as something like a 150. I'd say they're more pleasant to travel on than a 720.

 

[Bletchleyite]

Seating density-wise, they're fine, legroom is akin to what we're used to with 350s in the centre sections in all honesty, not great, but nowhere near as bad as something like a 150. I'd say they're more pleasant to travel on than a 720.

I quite like them to be honest. The interior ambiance is pleasant, the seats are indeed hard but quite well-shaped (for me anyway), there are seat back tables unlike 350/2s and there are the single seats if you get on quickly enough to get one. They also handle crowds very well indeed - I've been on one short formed to 3 coaches and it was far less unpleasant than a 4-car 350 would have been with that level of loading. It'd be inappropriate to use them on the Crewes, but to be honest for most WMT services they're perfectly suitable, no worse than a 350/2. Legroom isn't amazing but it isn't on the 350s either unless you get a priority seat.

 

[Ibex]

Yesterday (Sunday) a pair of 730/0s worked the 1922 Euston-Northampton fast. This is quite notable for a few reasons - one, that it would have been fairly easy to set-swap it with the pair of 350s on the 1921 Milton Keynes Central slow (which I half recall is usually 730 worked), another, that it meant a 90mph unit on the fasts which lost time, and another that I don't think I've ever known these go north of MKC in service before.

Does anyone know why this happened?

It was, notably, very smooth on the fasts at 90 particularly around Cheddington, and far less lurch-y than 350s over Ledburn - bodes well for the /2s.

There's 730s on Northampton services when the six-weekly Sunday block of Northampton takes place.

These blocks trap 20+ 350s in Northampton so the spare 730s come out to play from Bletchley instead.

 

[nn7man]

I had 730002 on the 10.26 MK to Euston stopper on Sunday. It was a good ride. Apart from leaving late as they couldn't get the doors to open!

 

[Bletchleyite]

There's 730s on Northampton services when the six-weekly Sunday block of Northampton takes place.

These blocks trap 20+ 350s in Northampton so the spare 730s come out to play from Bletchley instead.

Thanks, that explains it!

 

[Silverlinky]

Ref the original post, 730039 and 002 worked 1N51 1922 Euston to Northampton on Sunday, this train was 3' late at Ledburn before routing onto the slows. Diagram is timed for 110mph running.

Also 1N55 2020 Euston to Northampton was worked by a 730 too, shortformed of 3 coaches 730009. This one lost only two minutes Euston to Ledburn on the Fast.

 

[Deepgreen]

If 90 mph units can (almost) keep time then the cost of upgrading the 350s from 100 mph to 110 mph seems to have been wasted...

The extra 20mph from 90-110mph must surely be significant if weaving in with 125mph stock, though?

 

[GW43125]

The extra 20mph from 90-110mph must surely be significant if weaving in with 125mph stock, though?

As someone who has, on multiple occasions, followed a 350 most of the way from Rugby to Euston, it very much is!

 

[Deepgreen]

Apparently ride quality above 90mph, and also the noise from the gangways at high speed.

Which makes me wonder what was found during any high-speed testing before delivery. Perhaps test tracks need rough sections provided (if they don't already)!

 

[800301]

Which makes me wonder what was found during any high-speed testing before delivery. Perhaps test tracks need rough sections provided (if they don't already)!

It should be mandatory to test them between Paddington and Newbury, certainly get thrown about on a 387 doing those runs

 

[Bletchleyite]

Which makes me wonder what was found during any high-speed testing before delivery. Perhaps test tracks need rough sections provided (if they don't already)!

It's slightly ironic that the WCML isn't that rough. Some parts of the fasts particularly around Cheddington are Germanically smooth, in a 350 you can only tell you're moving if you look out of the window. The 730/0 at 90 was pretty good too, in particular far less of a lurch over Ledburn than a 350.