Class 360 futures after Heathrow Connect?

[Rail.Fan]

Once crossrail take over Heathrow Connect where will the class 360s go?

 

[Domh245]

Nobody Knows

 

[swt_passenger]

A regular question to which no one really knows the answer. With the other 360 operator is the usual suggestion.

 

[SpacePhoenix]

For any TOC other then Abellio Greater Anglia to use them they'd likely have to pay however much it'd cost to have new cabs built with corridor connections

 

[SeanG]

Not necessarily, I'm sure that they could still operate with no corridor connections, as it happens across the network.

 

[northwichcat]

For any TOC other then Abellio Greater Anglia to use them they'd likely have to pay however much it'd cost to have new cabs built with corridor connections

Well FGW didn't refuse to take on LM 150/1s to go with their 150/2s or insisted that they had corridor connections fitted.

 

[swt_passenger]

For any TOC other then Abellio Greater Anglia to use them they'd likely have to pay however much it'd cost to have new cabs built with corridor connections

Preferable, as LM or SWT use fully gangwayed existing Desiro fleets, but definitely not essential.

SWT have any number of routes they could use a few single 5 car EMUs on, such as Ascot to Guildford, or Portsmouth to Southampton. Even Lymington with another short platform extension...

 

[MCR247]

SWT do also have 5 car non-gangwayed stock on order so they clearly aren't that fussed about gangyways. With a fleet of 5 (wherever they go) I imagine it will be something like 2 all day diagrams (probably join during the peaks) and 1x 10 car peak only diagram

 

[grumblingalong]

AGA would probably be prime to take them, although the 5 car formations may be an issue, of course one coach could always be removed.

 

[DasLunatic]

No, we here could use that ninth or thirteenth coach...

 

[grumblingalong]

No, we here could use that ninth or thirteenth coach...

Better get extending those platforms then

 

[Nym]

Or send them to LM to replace the 319s?

 

[cjmillsnun]

Or send them to LM to replace the 319s?

That would make sense.

 

[Nym]

That would make sense.

One might need to have the Abbey Line handed over to LOROL to operate, or LM pay LOROL to operate it in a long term agreement, so the train to operate it comes up from Willesden perhaps?

 

[Bletchleyite]

Or send them to LM to replace the 319s?

Probably make more sense that LM got the TPE ones. Perhaps they could go to Northern with the seats swapped for 2+2 for the regional services? I expect a single set would suffice for many such trains.
--- old post above --- --- new post below ---

One might need to have the Abbey Line handed over to LOROL to operate, or LM pay LOROL to operate it in a long term agreement, so the train to operate it comes up from Willesden perhaps?

What's the reason they can't use 350s on there at the moment? Is it cheap to fix?

 

[HarleyDavidson]

Preferable, as LM or SWT use fully gangwayed existing Desiro fleets, but definitely not essential.

SWT have any number of routes they could use a few single 5 car EMUs on, such as Ascot to Guildford, or Portsmouth to Southampton. Even Lymington with another short platform extension...

Can't use 5 car sets on Lymington Pier line, power constraints, can't use 5 cars on Guildford to Ascot platform lengths too short (Wanborough, Ash (Down), Frimley and they can't be extended at Camberley (Up) easily due to grade, level crossing & signals and Bagshot also suffers from grades either end & which again will require signals to be moved if they want platform extensions but then again NR very wisely put a RRV access point just off the end of the up platform, so that would probably knacker that.

 

[bluenoxid]

I know this will probably start a major argument but could the fifth carriage be used in any other formations of similar units (350/444/450/185)?

 

[Bletchleyite]

I know this will probably start a major argument but could the fifth carriage be used in any other formations of similar units (350/444/450/185)?

I suppose it probably would fit 350s or 450s, but it might be simpler just to swap the 5-car unit for a 4-car one rather than hacking around with it.

 

[Nym]

What's the reason they can't use 350s on there at the moment? Is it cheap to fix?

The dwell times would be worse than horrible...

The doors used on 378s and 700s are much quicker to cycle, and the LOROL depot at Willesden is a lot closer to get a spare on/off the line.

I'm not sure why 350s have never been cleared for the line, they'd do better with poor railhead conditions than the 319s.

 

[fgwrich]

Not necessarily, I'm sure that they could still operate with no corridor connections, as it happens across the network.

Which is somewhat ironic for these 360s as they would have originally been built with cabs as 350s, before removal/conversion to 360s for HEC.

 

[61653 HTAFC]

The dwell times would be worse than horrible...

The doors used on 378s and 700s are much quicker to cycle, and the LOROL depot at Willesden is a lot closer to get a spare on/off the line.

I'm not sure why 350s have never been cleared for the line, they'd do better with poor railhead conditions than the 319s.

Presumably the 350s cost more to lease, so there's little use in using them on a route which I assume only generates marginal revenue compared to the WCML services.

 

[Helvellyn]

Can't use 5 car sets on Lymington Pier line, power constraints, can't use 5 cars on Guildford to Ascot platform lengths too short (Wanborough, Ash (Down), Frimley and they can't be extended at Camberley (Up) easily due to grade, level crossing & signals and Bagshot also suffers from grades either end & which again will require signals to be moved if they want platform extensions but then again NR very wisely put a RRV access point just off the end of the up platform, so that would probably knacker that.

4 diagrams are needed for Guildford-Ascot, so 5 5-car 360s would free up a further 4 450s (once they return to that route) for the mainline, 4 in service and a maintenance spare.

3 diagrams are needed for Portsmouth-Southampton. Quite a few of the Netley platforms would take 5 coaches, and ASDO would be fine at those that didn't (Hamble). I wonder if with 5 units you could operate a half-hourly service on the route? I reckon you'd grow passenger numbers with a better frequency, and the number of bikes you get anyway means 360s might be a good solution. Even if you kept the hourly frequncy, you could use the other two units on some of the Basingstoke-Portsmouth/Southampton Hants local services. Again, would free up some 450s for use elsewhere.

 

[SpacePhoenix]

Which is somewhat ironic for these 360s as they would have originally been built with cabs as 350s, before removal/conversion to 360s for HEC.

If the old cabs were removed what happened to them, were they stored somewhere or scrapped?

 

[swt_passenger]

Can't use 5 car sets on Lymington Pier line, power constraints, can't use 5 cars on Guildford to Ascot platform lengths too short (Wanborough, Ash (Down), Frimley and they can't be extended at Camberley (Up) easily due to grade, level crossing & signals and Bagshot also suffers from grades either end & which again will require signals to be moved if they want platform extensions but then again NR very wisely put a RRV access point just off the end of the up platform, so that would probably knacker that.

Platform extensions or ASDO. So not actually impossible, but definitely not likely.

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

4 diagrams are needed for Guildford-Ascot, so 5 5-car 360s would free up a further 4 450s (once they return to that route) for the mainline, 4 in service and a maintenance spare.

Guildford - Ascot is actually 5 diagrams.

 

[Bletchleyite]

Presumably the 350s cost more to lease, so there's little use in using them on a route which I assume only generates marginal revenue compared to the WCML services.

When LM have multiple types of stock, yes, but it'd be easier if LM South just had 4-car 350s and nothing else, were some others to become available e.g. the TPE ones.

 

[GB]

If the old cabs were removed what happened to them, were they stored somewhere or scrapped?

I think they were originally designed with corridor connections rather than actually being built with them.

 

[cj_1985]

I think they were originally designed with corridor connections rather than actually being built with them.

360201-204 were built with corridor cabs, and were later rebuilt with the 360 cab.
36025 was built with the standard 360 cab

 

[GB]

Thanks for the info.

 

[F Great Eastern]

The original Class 360 Desiro's that First Great Eastern ordered originally were supposed to have corridor connections.

The mock-up and model even had them, there should be a photo online somewhere.

 

[RobShipway]

4 diagrams are needed for Guildford-Ascot, so 5 5-car 360s would free up a further 4 450s (once they return to that route) for the mainline, 4 in service and a maintenance spare.

3 diagrams are needed for Portsmouth-Southampton. Quite a few of the Netley platforms would take 5 coaches, and ASDO would be fine at those that didn't (Hamble). I wonder if with 5 units you could operate a half-hourly service on the route? I reckon you'd grow passenger numbers with a better frequency, and the number of bikes you get anyway means 360s might be a good solution. Even if you kept the hourly frequncy, you could use the other two units on some of the Basingstoke-Portsmouth/Southampton Hants local services. Again, would free up some 450s for use elsewhere.

Would it not be better to use the 5 5 car 360's on the London Waterloo - Portsmouth route via Basingstoke to free up class 444's to move back to the Waterloo - Portsmouth route via Guildford, that then free's up class 450's to move back to the Ascot Guildford route?