Cl.442 replacement?

[BestWestern]

That'll be the earlier 455s; motors recovered from 4-SUBs if I rember right. some of them, I have been told, also have jumper cables recovered from class 76 locomotives...!!

Apparently Southern even have some trains with parts recovered from ancient Class 313s!

 

[Manchester77]

That'll be the earlier 455s; motors recovered from 4-SUBs if I rember right. some of them, I have been told, also have jumper cables recovered from class 76 locomotives...!!

Wow that's going back dayum!

Wonder if in 50/60 years time there'll be EMUs with motors from 450s and bits from 377s knocking about? Doubt it

 

[yorksrob]

The trouble with the 442's is that they are only really suited to one line - the one they were built for, Waterloo to Weymouth. They didn't need replacement, only they were. Now we are stuck with the fact they are put on routes they are not suitable for and it seems inconceivable they will ever work again on the route they were specifically designed for.

I suspect they'll die an early death, which will be a shame. They were a victim of 'shiney new train' syndrome. A shame that the money spent on the 444's couldn't be spent either supplementing the 442's or buying new stock for a line that didn't already have high quality IC style long distance EMU's operating on it.

The 442 is a long distance EMU. This is why it's a nuisance on the Gatex services, which did not require such a train.

Absolutely spot on !

 

[Peter Mugridge]

Apparently Southern even have some trains with parts recovered from ancient Class 313s!

Extreme like!

 

[BananaRepublic]

....A shame that the money spent on the 444's couldn't be spent either supplementing the 442's or buying new stock for a line that didn't already have high quality IC style long distance EMU's operating on it....

Except that "no money" was spent on the 444's. They are leased from Siemens by the incumbent TOC (SWT), therefore the idea of using that money for trains on another line is invalid.

 

[JamesRowden]

Except that "no money" was spent on the 444's. They are leased from Siemens by the incumbent TOC (SWT), therefore the idea of using that money for trains on another line is invalid.

Money was spent on them by SWT on leasing costs.

 

[tbtc]

Excuse my "northern" ignorance, but what currently works the "fast" Victoria - Brighton services? 377s?

 

[The Ham]

Money was spent on them by SWT on leasing costs.

OK SWT's spent money on leasing the 444's, however it is often forgotten by those who still want to see the 442's on SWT's service that there were only 24 sets compared with the 45 sets of the 444's.

Which would have likely resulted in more 450's running services which currently have 444's running them.

 

[JamesRowden]

OK SWT's spent money on leasing the 444's, however it is often forgotten by those who still want to see the 442's on SWT's service that there were only 24 sets compared with the 45 sets of the 444's.

Which would have likely resulted in more 450's running services which currently have 444's running them.

What would have been so bad about ordering a bigger fleet of 450s?

 

[Manchester77]

Excuse my "northern" ignorance, but what currently works the "fast" Victoria - Brighton services? 377s?

Yeah and I think some 442s are extended from Gatwick in the peak

 

[Peter Mugridge]

Excuse my "northern" ignorance, but what currently works the "fast" Victoria - Brighton services? 377s?

Yes, usually. Some diagrams do have 442s instead, but most are 377s.

 

[The Ham]

What would have been so bad about ordering a bigger fleet of 450s?

Personally I wouldn't mind, but then some may comment about 3+2 seating and the lack of catering.

 

[D365]

Personally I wouldn't mind, but then some may comment about 3+2 seating and the lack of catering.

Bigger fleet of 444s instead? Shame the design is no longer available.

 

[cjmillsnun]

What would have been so bad about ordering a bigger fleet of 450s?

They did. Then DaFT told them they couldn't have them all, put pans on them and sent them over to the WCML sharing them between Silverlink and CT (both now LM) where they are known as 350/1s

 

[swt_passenger]

They did. Then DaFT told them they couldn't have them all, put pans on them and sent them over to the WCML sharing them between Silverlink and CT (both now LM) where they are known as 350/1s

They also put out a far more recent tender, in 2009, for 120-180 vehicles compatible with their existing stock, that most commentators expected to be either complete 450 based units, and/or additional '5th cars', based on this:

120 to 180 vehicles (20 metre) to operate in 5 car formation. (or approx. 100 m length equivalent).

The result of that tender turned out to be the 458/460 merger, and the 456 transfer; given that provides only 108 vehicles we can see why according to the rail press they still want more units...

--- old post above --- --- new post below ---

Bigger fleet of 444s instead? Shame the design is no longer available.

A similar 23m end doored unit to a 444, probably based on the 380 bodyshell, would be available if they were needed. Siemens would build whatever they were asked for.

Please don't repeat the rubbish that a reputable manufacturer doesn't keep the drawings for an existing product, and can't make compatible add on quantities of stock only ten years on, even if they have to conform to revised crash worthiness standards...

 

[Eagle]

Bigger fleet of 444s instead? Shame the design is no longer available.

Well there's nothing stopping them from making a similar but new design from a 380 bodyshell, for instance (you just need to put the doors in different places and add some vestibules and so on). If anyone commissioned such a design from them.

EDIT: Beaten to it.

 

[D365]

Well there's nothing stopping them from making a similar but new design from a 380 bodyshell, for instance (you just need to put the doors in different places and add some vestibules and so on). If anyone commissioned such a design from them.

EDIT: Beaten to it.

That's how it'd be done, I suppose., though I'm wondering whether crashworthiness standards might become even stricter in the near future. I'm not going to regurgitate 'rubbish' about jigs etc. having been destroyed!

 

[David Goddard]

The 444 is very much like the 442. Both are excellent trains for what they were built for but with two main problems:
*Not enough of them were built
*The product was not developed further to offer AC variants.
Had this have happened, we could have seen 442s to Weymouth, Portsmouth, Brighton and Dover with AC variants (342) running to Northampton and Norwich by 1989.
History repeated itself ten years ago and the opportunity was missed again when the 444s came along.

 

[D365]

The 444 is very much like the 442. Both are excellent trains for what they were built for but with two main problems:
*Not enough of them were built
*The product was not developed further to offer AC variants.
Had this have happened, we could have seen 442s to Weymouth, Portsmouth, Brighton and Dover with AC variants (342) running to Northampton and Norwich by 1989.
History repeated itself ten years ago and the opportunity was missed again when the 444s came along.

A 444 can easily be converted to AC like most modern EMUs, as will likely be required when Basingstoke-Bournemouth electrification conversion takes place. If the demand is there I'm sure Siemens would be more than willing to provide an updated version - though I do not really see what such a train would do that IEP shouldn't, aside from dual-voltage pickup and gangways (and slight commonality with existing Siemens fleets).

 

[tbtc]

A 444 can easily be converted to AC like most modern EMUs, as will likely be required when Basingstoke-Bournemouth electrification conversion takes place. If the demand is there I'm sure Siemens would be more than willing to provide an updated version - though I do not really see what such a train would do that IEP shouldn't, aside from dual-voltage pickup and gangways (and slight commonality with existing Siemens fleets).

I think that IEP will be good for the UK, but I think it'd be overspecced for the SWT routes we are talking about here (125mph so requiring crumple zones etc).

(and that's assuming that the line is converted to AC all the way to Waterloo)

Yeah and I think some 442s are extended from Gatwick in the peak

Yes, usually. Some diagrams do have 442s instead, but most are 377s.

Would 442s not be better suited to the Brighton "fasts"? (given the lack of stops, and the fact that the 376 doors would be better suited to the Gatwick luggage etc)

 

[Peter Mugridge]

Would 442s not be better suited to the Brighton "fasts"? (given the lack of stops, and the fact that the 376 doors would be better suited to the Gatwick luggage etc)

Yes, which is probably why the DfT did the opposite...:roll:

 

[D365]

I think that IEP will be good for the UK, but I think it'd be overspecced for the SWT routes we are talking about here (125mph so requiring crumple zones etc).

(and that's assuming that the line is converted to AC all the way to Waterloo)

Fair enough I suppose; a suburban/IEP intermediary? Although more towards the intercity category - to an extent it does feel somewhat like further, unnecessary fragmentation of rolling stock and categories.

Would 442s not be better suited to the Brighton "fasts"? (given the lack of stops, and the fact that the 377 doors would be better suited to the Gatwick luggage etc)

In short, this arrangement is a compromise, combining the desire for Gatwick Airport to keep the service and allow better use of paths by extending services. But not the best solution by any stretch of the imagination

 

[Minstral25]

Would 442s not be better suited to the Brighton "fasts"? (given the lack of stops, and the fact that the 376 doors would be better suited to the Gatwick luggage etc)

Simple answer is no they wouldn't. The Brighton expresses stop at Clapham Jnct and East Croydon so the 442's would cause significant delays at these overcrowded stations

In terms of BML services they are used for the best services on the GATEX as they only stop in terminal platforms. The extension services and Brighton/Eastbourne trains they are also used can cause delays. Also other than the extended services to Brighton, they are normally run as 5 car units as the Gatwick empty trains they run don't need 10 car units.

If they are to go then the Gatwick trains should take on a Heathrow Connect style service calling at East Croydon and Clapham to relieve the suburban overcrowding. Their is not enough Airport traffic to demand an exclusive service.

 

[RobShipway]

Simple answer is no they wouldn't. The Brighton expresses stop at Clapham Jnct and East Croydon so the 442's would cause significant delays at these overcrowded stations

In terms of BML services they are used for the best services on the GATEX as they only stop in terminal platforms. The extension services and Brighton/Eastbourne trains they are also used can cause delays. Also other than the extended services to Brighton, they are normally run as 5 car units as the Gatwick empty trains they run don't need 10 car units.

If they are to go then the Gatwick trains should take on a Heathrow Connect style service calling at East Croydon and Clapham to relieve the suburban overcrowding. Their is not enough Airport traffic to demand an exclusive service.

But to do a Gatwick Connect rain, you need Class 377 type trains and not the class 442's with the doors at the end of the carriages.

As much as I like the class 442's, I don't believe as things stand today and possibly in the future that there is route that the class 442's could be used on operate a service.

For the Gatwick Connect service you really need a 5 car 377/6 or 377/7 train to do this route.

The only way that you really would be able to continue to be using the Class 442's is if they where used as hauled units by a locomotive like a class 92 or Traxx loco on a route.

 

[Fincra5]

Simple answer is no they wouldn't. The Brighton expresses stop at Clapham Jnct and East Croydon so the 442's would cause significant delays at these overcrowded stations

In terms of BML services they are used for the best services on the GATEX as they only stop in terminal platforms. The extension services and Brighton/Eastbourne trains they are also used can cause delays. Also other than the extended services to Brighton, they are normally run as 5 car units as the Gatwick empty trains they run don't need 10 car units.

If they are to go then the Gatwick trains should take on a Heathrow Connect style service calling at East Croydon and Clapham to relieve the suburban overcrowding. Their is not enough Airport traffic to demand an exclusive service.

I believe around half the Brighton express diagrams are Class 442s outside of Peak... I agree they are best suited to express workings.. the door layout is impractical for GateX but hey ho. 442s Should be dedicated to Express workings to Brighton but a 377s adds flexibility, more so for the disabled passengers and bikes... 442s are great in that respect, the bike area is in the guards van, and this is only used when one of us Guards is on the train, in peak hours, and only folded cycles are accommodated in peak! Now if there was a guard on every train...

 

[Minstral25]

But to do a Gatwick Connect rain, you need Class 377 type trains and not the class 442's with the doors at the end of the carriages.

For the Gatwick Connect service you really need a 5 car 377/6 or 377/7 train to do this route.

The only way that you really would be able to continue to be using the Class 442's is if they where used as hauled units by a locomotive like a class 92 or Traxx loco on a route.

That would be the point of a Gatwick Connect Service, it would create extra trains between Victoria and East Croydon - currently significantly overcrowded both Peak and Off-peak as is much of SE commuter routes whilst the Gatwick Express carries air mostly. So you would need a 12 coach train to cover the loads between East Croydon and Victoria and a 442 would be unsuitable.
--- old post above --- --- new post below ---

I believe around half the Brighton express diagrams are Class 442s outside of Peak... I agree they are best suited to express workings.. the door layout is impractical for GateX but hey ho. 442s Should be dedicated to Express workings to Brighton but a 377s adds flexibility, more so for the disabled passengers and bikes... 442s are great in that respect, the bike area is in the guards van, and this is only used when one of us Guards is on the train, in peak hours, and only folded cycles are accommodated in peak! Now if there was a guard on every train...

The 442's are not suited to the Brighton Expresses as these trains call at Clapham Junction and East Croydon and the delays caused at these stations as commuters get on and off the "Express" trains are significant. They are non-stop from East Croydon to Brighton only - where the 442 would cause no delays.

 

[tbtc]

That would be the point of a Gatwick Connect Service, it would create extra trains between Victoria and East Croydon - currently significantly overcrowded both Peak and Off-peak as is much of SE commuter routes whilst the Gatwick Express carries air mostly. So you would need a 12 coach train to cover the loads between East Croydon and Victoria and a 442 would be unsuitable

Gatwick Connect sounds a lot better than Gatwick Express to me - must be annoying to stand at East Croydon watching emptyish trains pass through

The 442's are not suited to the Brighton Expresses as these trains call at Clapham Junction and East Croydon and the delays caused at these stations as commuters get on and off the "Express" trains are significant. They are non-stop from East Croydon to Brighton only - where the 442 would cause no delays.

Looking at it further, I don't know whether the Hastings SE services are "fast" enough - have services ever been recast to accommodate the limitations of stock before?

 

[Mikey C]

The 444 is very much like the 442. Both are excellent trains for what they were built for but with two main problems:
*Not enough of them were built
*The product was not developed further to offer AC variants.
Had this have happened, we could have seen 442s to Weymouth, Portsmouth, Brighton and Dover with AC variants (342) running to Northampton and Norwich by 1989.
History repeated itself ten years ago and the opportunity was missed again when the 444s came along.

The Class 442 are oddballs really, with their late 1980s Mk3 bodyshells and late 1960s traction equipment, any further build would have required new traction motors, but I agree would be perfect for something like Norwich

 

[yorksrob]

Looking at it further, I don't know whether the Hastings SE services are "fast" enough - have services ever been recast to accommodate the limitations of stock before?

To be fair, the 142's used to do a fair amount of stopping west of Southampton even in their flagship days, so I doubt stopping on the Hastings route would be too much of a problem.

 

[Muzer]

To be fair, the 142's used to do a fair amount of stopping west of Southampton even in their flagship days, so I doubt stopping on the Hastings route would be too much of a problem.

Didn't know we had Pacers west of Southampton