Class 345 progress

[D365]

Since I have made my comments on the class 345's, can I ask where are your thoughts and comments please or do you just like putting down other people's comments?

I explained my thoughts in post #180 of this thread.

I can't see how that makes any difference. If floorspace is used for toilets or anything else that isn't optimising passenger capacity, it will limit capacity throughout the line. Unless you are planning some revolutionary 'pop-up' toilets.

Funnily enough, that's the first thought that came into my head.

 

[coppercapped]

I can't see how that makes any difference. If floorspace is used for toilets or anything else that isn't optimising passenger capacity, it will limit capacity throughout the line. Unless you are planning some revolutionary 'pop-up' toilets.
Even if there is a perception of lighter commuter loadings on the GWML, I would imagine that in the next 10-15 years, the sparks effect of both Crossrail and much improved outer-suburban services will ensure that they become fully loaded.[/QUOTE

Then don't terminate half the service at Paddington.

 

[RobShipway]

I can't see how that makes any difference. If floorspace is used for toilets or anything else that isn't optimising passenger capacity, it will limit capacity throughout the line. Unless you are planning some revolutionary 'pop-up' toilets.
Even if there is a perception of lighter commuter loadings on the GWML, I would imagine that in the next 10-15 years, the sparks effect of both Crossrail and much improved outer-suburban services will ensure that they become fully loaded.

The Crossrail service will be run on the basis that the people getting on from stations Reading onwards into London, will get off either at Paddington or stations within the centre of London. The passengers getting on the trains from Paddington omwards, will be those travelling to the East of London and then onto Shenfield.

On this basis, I can see that the trains into the centre of London will be fully loaded as it will mean that passengers either do not need to change to the underground or spend less time on it.

Where I see there being light loads is the trains travelling East to Shenfield, however those trains travelling west from Shenfield I expect to be heavily loaded and not just in the rush hour peaks.

 

[valentaman]

345001 did static tsts today at asfordby test centre https://www.flickr.com/photos/ukbuses/28563236464/

 

[J-2739]

345001 did static tsts today at asfordby test centre https://www.flickr.com/photos/ukbuses/28563236464/

Lovely pics, thanks for sharing

 

[dubscottie]

Just looking at this tread now. Did they sub contract the front end design to a preschool nursery?

 

[J-2739]

Just looking at this tread now. Did they sub contract the front end design to a preschool nursery?

Now, now, don't offend those kids; they know how to play crayons better than that other designer!

 

[D365]

I thought you were all getting sick of seeing that Electrostar cab...

 

[AM9]

The Crossrail service will be run on the basis that the people getting on from stations Reading onwards into London, will get off either at Paddington or stations within the centre of London. The passengers getting on the trains from Paddington omwards, will be those travelling to the East of London and then onto Shenfield.

Assuming that you mean the majority of the passengers will fall into these patterns then yes, that's how a double-ended commuter railway works.

On this basis, I can see that the trains into the centre of London will be fully loaded as it will mean that passengers either do not need to change to the underground or spend less time on it.

As above, that is the plan (assuming that the frequency and start-point of eastbound trains matches the expected passenger levels).

Where I see there being light loads is the trains travelling East to Shenfield, however those trains travelling west from Shenfield I expect to be heavily loaded and not just in the rush hour peaks.

What are you trying to say? The trains from Shenfield inwards to central London will be as loaded if not more than the current GEML metro services are. Those trains will gradually empty out as they approach their western termini, e.g. Paddington, Heathrow, Maidenhead or Reading. All of that is just normal contra-peak loading patterns. The only difference is that Crossrail will have healthy loads between Liverpool St and Paddington throughout the day, hopefully relieving some of the Central, and sub-surface lines' east-west pinch-points. The equivalent also applies with eastbound trains with them emptying out as they head towards Chadwell Heath, Gidea Park, Shenfield and Abbey Wood.
--- old post above --- --- new post below ---

I can't see how that makes any difference. If floorspace is used for toilets or anything else that isn't optimising passenger capacity, it will limit capacity throughout the line. Unless you are planning some revolutionary 'pop-up' toilets.
Even if there is a perception of lighter commuter loadings on the GWML, I would imagine that in the next 10-15 years, the sparks effect of both Crossrail and much improved outer-suburban services will ensure that they become fully loaded.[/QUOTE

Then don't terminate half the service at Paddington.

If the plan is to constrain capacity on the GWML until the demand is there then that can only be a wise move. Why waste resources carrying lots of empty seats out to Reading?
I think that the increase in services would be seen as a development in years to come. Doesn't that seem like good planning?
It would be daft to clutter the passenger space up with equipment that would limit such expansion in maximum capacity well within the service life of the trains.

 

[phoenixcronin]

Just looking at this tread now. Did they sub contract the front end design to a preschool nursery?

Indeed, what a shame that the front end looks so hideous. The rest of the train looks good

 

[jopsuk]

Is the unit on test in 9- car or 7-car formation?

 

[swt_passenger]

Is the unit on test in 9- car or 7-car formation?

7 car. Its vehicle numbers were provided in another forum:

340101/340201/340301/340501/340701/340801 & 340901

the 401 and 601 cars will be added later.

 

[plcd1]

I fear to even comment about the "great Crossrail toilet debate" but suffice to say this issue is raised every single time that the Crossrail senior management sit down in front of the London Assembly Transport Cttee. There is usually an annual slot for them to update the Cttee on progress.

Every time the Crossrail people (usually T Morgan and A Wolstenholme) politely try not to roll their eyes and say the Sponsors (DfT and TfL) did not specify on board toilets. However the Crossrail people have repeatedly said that all of the new build stations will have public toilet facilities.

I believe it is also the case that a reasonable number, but not all, existing FGW / TfL Rail stations also have toilets available. Given the full staffing promise that TfL make for their rail operations then I expect that toilets will be kept open during the hours that Crossrail trains run. Clearly we are 2 and a bit years away from seeing if that promise is kept about station toilets but I expect all hell will break loose if, for some reason, it is not kept.

And much as I might like to comment further I won't for fear of being shot down in the never ending crossfire.

 

[phoenixcronin]

What is the configuration of the cars? I.e. DMOS/MOS/PTOS/TOS etc. I haven't been able to find it anywhere?

 

[47802]

Indeed, what a shame that the front end looks so hideous. The rest of the train looks good

I don't think it looks hideous a little quirky perhaps I would change the black bottom fairing so that the black paint runs level with the rest of the train. On the original drawings the fairing was the same colour as the rest of the train which I think looked better but probably less practical.

TFL have supposedly had input to the design so presumably its along the lines that they want, it will be interesting to see if there are any changes to the styling at the front for the Anglia units.

 

[Uzair]

what is the configuration of the cars? I.e. Dmos/mos/ptos/tos etc. I haven't been able to find it anywhere?

dmso + pmso + mso + mso + tso + mso + mso + pmso + dmso

 

[phoenixcronin]

dmso + pmso + mso + mso + tso + mso + mso + pmso + dmso

Cheers. Interesting that there's only one trailer. Also do you know how the axels are configured? Do the motor cars have one powered and one unpowered axel, or is it like the Class 378s with one powered and one semipowered?

 

[SF-02]

I fear to even comment about the "great Crossrail toilet debate" but suffice to say this issue is raised every single time that the Crossrail senior management sit down in front of the London Assembly Transport Cttee. There is usually an annual slot for them to update the Cttee on progress.

Every time the Crossrail people (usually T Morgan and A Wolstenholme) politely try not to roll their eyes and say the Sponsors (DfT and TfL) did not specify on board toilets. However the Crossrail people have repeatedly said that all of the new build stations will have public toilet facilities.

I believe it is also the case that a reasonable number, but not all, existing FGW / TfL Rail stations also have toilets available. Given the full staffing promise that TfL make for their rail operations then I expect that toilets will be kept open during the hours that Crossrail trains run. Clearly we are 2 and a bit years away from seeing if that promise is kept about station toilets but I expect all hell will break loose if, for some reason, it is not kept.

And much as I might like to comment further I won't for fear of being shot down in the never ending crossfire.

That's true but Southeastern passengers might remember what was said when 376s came in 10 years ago without toilets. They'd be at stations. Now most are permanently closed or open sporadically at best.

 

[swt_passenger]

What is the configuration of the cars? I.e. DMOS/MOS/PTOS/TOS etc. I haven't been able to find it anywhere?

DMSO(A)
PMSO(A)
MSO(A)
MSO(B)
TSO
MSO( C )
MSO(D)
PMSO(B)
DMSO(B)

P5 Locomotives & Coaching Stock combined volume 2016 edition. Any contributions to its purchase gratefully accepted...

...and already answered while I was looking for the book! Grrrr.

 

[phoenixcronin]

DMSO(A)
PMSO(A)
MSO(A)
MSO(B)
TSO
MSO( C )
MSO(D)
PMSO(B)
DMSO(B)

P5 Locomotives & Coaching Stock combined volume 2016 edition. Any contributions to its purchase gratefully accepted...

...and already answered while I was looking for the book! Grrrr.

cheers

 

[J-2739]

I fear to even comment about the "great Crossrail toilet debate" but suffice to say this issue is raised every single time that the Crossrail senior management sit down in front of the London Assembly Transport Cttee. There is usually an annual slot for them to update the Cttee on progress.

Every time the Crossrail people (usually T Morgan and A Wolstenholme) politely try not to roll their eyes and say the Sponsors (DfT and TfL) did not specify on board toilets. However the Crossrail people have repeatedly said that all of the new build stations will have public toilet facilities.

I believe it is also the case that a reasonable number, but not all, existing FGW / TfL Rail stations also have toilets available. Given the full staffing promise that TfL make for their rail operations then I expect that toilets will be kept open during the hours that Crossrail trains run. Clearly we are 2 and a bit years away from seeing if that promise is kept about station toilets but I expect all hell will break loose if, for some reason, it is not kept.

And much as I might like to comment further I won't for fear of being shot down in the never ending crossfire.

I agree with all that. People need to remember that the number one priority for Crossrail is capacity and a toilet will just eat that away. I suspect toilets will be installed in the new stations also.

 

[Class377/5]

Interesting point made in new Modern Railway this month

There is the possibility that ... trains lengthened to 11 cars in future

Platforms in Central London have been built with passive provision for lengthening

Bombardier says the the while 345 is not designed for extension to 11 carriages it could develop a solution to make this possible

So the new stations were built with 11 car trains in mind but no-one thought to make sure the new fleet was ready to do that. Develop certainly sounds give us a lot of money to figure something out.

 

[SpacePhoenix]

Did the article state what the "sticking" point would be with extending them to 11 cars?

 

[306024]

Lengthening platforms 16 and 17 (and removing platform 18 to create the space) can only start once the Shenfield service goes down the tunnel in May 2019. Until then platforms 15 to 18 are all required to run the current peak service into Liverpool St.

 

[J-2739]

Interesting point made in new Modern Railway this month







So the new stations were built with 11 car trains in mind but no-one thought to make sure the new fleet was ready to do that. Develop certainly sounds give us a lot of money to figure something out.

Are the 345s actually not made ready for extra 2 cars in mind? If not that, they are going to be 9-car now, then Tfl would probably do this the 'Jubilee line way' where the new trains are to be shorter than their potential, but increasing demand could justify adding extra cars in the future.

 

[jopsuk]

Whilst the core section platforms are being built to 250m train length some of the non-core stations will be using SDO at 9 car (200m) as far as I understand- so any (presumably software and control systems) train based issues are probably secondary to the infrastructure issues.

Anyway, any news on testing rather than constantly rehashing the "toilets on long range metro services" argument?

 

[plcd1]

Interesting point made in new Modern Railway this month

So the new stations were built with 11 car trains in mind but no-one thought to make sure the new fleet was ready to do that. Develop certainly sounds give us a lot of money to figure something out.

The idea of extension to 11 cars has been around for a long while. I haven't seen the article and am not disputing what's being said but I find it astounding that the ability to extend a design to 11 cars isn't assured. That sounds like a contract dispute in the making to me given extension to 11 cars is likely to be TfL's first step up in capacity rather than moving to more tph in the peak. I suspect signalling enhancements are harder than buying some more carriages. I'm assuming there is provision in sidings and depots to handle 11 car trains being built in now. Still, as you suggest, it's no shock that a supplier is hinting that it will need wheelbarrows full of money to possibly, perhaps, maybe extend the customer's nice new trains.

 

[D365]

Anyway, any news on testing rather than constantly rehashing the "toilets on long range metro services" argument?

There's a 360° video of 345001 here, if that's your cup of tea.

Should I be surprised about Bombardier's tone? How much work have TfL given them over the past ten years? It's probably just the money-grabbing opportunity they sense.

 

[hwl]

The idea of extension to 11 cars has been around for a long while. I haven't seen the article and am not disputing what's being said but I find it astounding that the ability to extend a design to 11 cars isn't assured. That sounds like a contract dispute in the making to me given extension to 11 cars is likely to be TfL's first step up in capacity rather than moving to more tph in the peak. I suspect signalling enhancements are harder than buying some more carriages. I'm assuming there is provision in sidings and depots to handle 11 car trains being built in now. Still, as you suggest, it's no shock that a supplier is hinting that it will need wheelbarrows full of money to possibly, perhaps, maybe extend the customer's nice new trains.

[Bombardier said this while sucking air through teeth]

But TfL have indicated that they would like to improve frequency despite it being far harder to achieve due to physical infrastructure not just signalling.

Lets hope they have sized the traction power cables and transformers to be large enough to take more motor cars. (Shades of 378 and electrostars not being more than 5 cars?
Logic would suggest that additional motor cars would go between the driving and panto cars (as new 2nd cars) to sort traction power cabling issues.
With the pantograph cars also being motor cars it might be hard to fit a bigger transformer with out it becoming trailer and having to motor up the trailer in the middle instead.

They might be right in suggesting a bit of work is required...

Power wise a 345 looks rather like the 4 motor cars from a 377/6 or /7s at either end of the unit with trailer inbetween....

 

[Wivenswold]

Noting that they could be extended to 11 cars, that reversing siding at Chadwell Heath doesn't even look long enough for 8 x 315 cars.