Class 387 Subclasses

[bcarmicle]

What's the difference between the Class 387/1, 387/2, and 387/3? Wikipedia doesn't highlight any real differences between these - only mentions the /1a which is ETCS fitted.

 

[TT-ONR-NRN]

I’m going to go with age / time ordered.

 

[NSEWonderer]

If I remember right the 387/2s were specifically at the time GatEx units so interior wise was where more of the differences would exist compared to the 387/1s. More Luggage spaces, slightly more PRM space accommodation.

 

[Failed Unit]

If I remember right the 387/2s were specifically at the time GatEx units so interior wise was where more of the differences would exist compared to the 387/1s. More Luggage spaces, slightly more PRM space accommodation.

Having travelled on all the classes on Great Northern (sometimes with some coupled to other sub-classes) as a passenger I can’t tell any difference to interior / luggage spaces etc.

To me it does seem like me as posted above it is down to when it was ordered.

On Great Northern we have 387/1 (Both original and FGW), 387/2 and 387/3s. The 387/3 don’t have the yellow stripe (which is annoying as some of these units are the wrong way around). But when the 387/3 were on C2C they didn’t operate with first class so I guess they haven’t got around to applying it yet.

 

[bcarmicle]

I thought that the purpose of subclasses was to mark different features? What benefit would there be to assigning different subclasses based on the order date?

 

[Failed Unit]

I am sure others will point this out, but I don‘t believe the the 387/2 had pantograph’s fitted as delivered and the 387/3 had 3rd rail shoes (need to look if they have any now)

The 387/1 did use their dual voltage capability as delivered.

 

[D365]

I’m going to go with age / time ordered.

Not quite - the GWR 387/1s were procured at the same time as the ex-c2c Class 387/3s.

== Doublepost prevention - post automatically merged: 25 Jun 2023 ==

I am sure others will point this out, but I don‘t believe the the 387/2 had pantograph’s fitted as delivered and the 387/3 had 3rd rail shoes (need to look if they have any now)

A number of 387/2s were used on Thameslink before the Class 700s were fully commissioned. And several have been operated on Great Northern, in both instances I seem to recall they were already fitted with overhead pickup.

 

[Failed Unit]

I if there are any differences someone will know, but at the moment I have seen most combinations working together on great northern. Just the 387/3 with the 387/2 I haven’t personally seen (but no reason it won‘t have happened, just not many of either sub-class on GN to make it a regular pairing)

 

[XAM2175]

I thought that the purpose of subclasses was to mark different features? What benefit would there be to assigning different subclasses based on the order date?

This is often the case, but not always. Subclasses - or even entirely new classes - can be assigned for any reason the administrators of R2 and the National Vehicle Register choose.

 

[43096]

This is often the case, but not always. Subclasses - or even entirely new classes - can be assigned for any reason the administrators of R2 and the National Vehicle Register choose.

Which is basically on a whim of whoever orders the stock. It is an unholy mess, which is of absolutely no surprise given the lack of structure, rules and guidance.

 

[Failed Unit]

I if there are any differences someone will know, but at the moment I have seen most combinations working together on great northern. Just the 387/3 with the 387/2 I haven’t personally seen (but no reason it won‘t have happened, just not many of either sub-class on GN to make it a regular pairing)

I have seen every combination now, I saw my first 387/2 and 387/3 yesterday on GN

 

[Sutton in Ant]

The 387/1s were originally ordered by Southern Railway for the Thameslink network.

 

[D365]

The 387/1s were originally ordered by Southern Railway for the Thameslink network.

Only 101-129. The remainder were seemingly commissioned by Porterbrook as additional new build specifically for GWR.

 

[aleggatta]

Only 101-129. The remainder were seemingly commissioned by Porterbrook as additional new build specifically for GWR.

ISTR the original plan was 29 387s ordered by SN for TL to eventually transfer to GWR with an additional 6 units to be procured and half the 365's to GWR. Upon the award of to GTR of the TSGN franchise the 387/2's were ordered and 377/5's were due to go to GN after finishing with TL. An additional order of 387s was placed by porterbrook(off their own back) upon announcement of the intention to end production of 387's, 6 were taken up for C2C services(/3), and the remaining were taken by GWR as the second half of the /1 subclass. GTR then made the decision to put 387's on GN services, and the 377/5's were able to operate on SE but maintained by GTR at Selhurst.