Class 387 to GN

[bspahh]

I live in Ely, and work near the Cambridge North station. These are the train times I can see. I checked a few weeks ago, and then the 08.00 didn't stop at Cambridge North.

Ely CambNth Code Route
06.38 06.53 2T09 Ely - Cambridge
07.15 07.27 2T11 Ely - Cambridge
07.30 07.42 2H13 Ely - Liverpool St
07.33 07.46 1K59 Norwich - Cambridge
08:00 08:14 2H15 Ely - Liverpool St
08.38 08.50 1K61 Norwich - Cambridge
09.38 09.50 1K65 Norwich - Cambridge
10.04 10.18 1T57 Kings Lynn - Kings Cross

CambNth Ely Code Route
15.11 15.24 1T30 Kings Cross - Ely
15.14 15.28 1K76 Cambridge - Norwich
15.32 15.47 2T18 Kings Cross - Ely
15.52 16.11 2H96 Cambridge - Ely
16.10 16.23 1T34 Kings Cross - Kings Lynn
16.14 16.27 1K78 Cambridge - Norwich
17.08 17.23 1T38 Kings Cross - Ely
17.14 17.27 1K80 Cambridge - Norwich
17.25 17.42 2H42 Liverpool St - Ely
18.10 18.23 1T02 Kings Cross - Ely
18.15 18.28 1K82 Cambridge - Norwich
18.26 18.41 2H20 Cambridge - Ely
19.26 19.39 1K84 Cambridge - Norwich
19.31 19.44 2T06 Royston - Ely
20.12 20.25 1T10 Kings Cross - Ely

Its a shame that from 18.10, there are three trains within 16 minutes, followed by a gap of an hour

 

[AS43]

so, on the standard pattern the current Kings Lynn service will call at Waterbeach but not Cambridge North, and the current Cambridge-Kings Cross service will start at Ely and call at Cambridge North but not Waterbeach

This could mean that the Elys will all be 8-cars, maybe? It isn't ideal, especially as the 387s could technically use their SDO, but fouling Waterbeach crossing is the problem.

 

[TheDavibob]

so, on the standard pattern the current Kings Lynn service will call at Waterbeach but not Cambridge North, and the current Cambridge-Kings Cross service will start at Ely and call at Cambridge North but not Waterbeach?

They do realise that lots of people that live in Waterbeach and nearby work at the Science Park/Business Park yes? I mean this should be easy stuff. As should the XC services stopping to provide connections for all the businesses straight to and from the airport. I despair.

To be fair, there are two competing factors here. I assume the reason for either stopping at Waterbeach or Cambridge North is that a heftier timetable rewrite would be required and given there's only a year until a completely revamped Thameslink timetable, there isn't much point moving stuff around now. Certainly the plan is to try and move to two fasts an hour to Ely, both stopping at Cambridge North, with presumably the current Kings Lynn one still stopping at Waterbeach.

Secondly, dare I say it, it isn't the point or job of XC to stop at regional stations - if there was any choice I'd say it shouldn't be stopping at Stamford, Oakham or Melton Mowbray either (or even March). Commuters using it is already a problem -- I've nearly failed to board when Cam-Ely commuters wanted to use it (due to earlier cancellations) which, as I was travelling to either Nuneaton or New Street (I forget) would have been infuriating. I completely understand there being no XC stop at Cambridge North, though the inconsistent frequency to Ely makes this annoying (for northbound passengers). Southbound it's not the biggest problem in the world, given the eventual number of trains (we're looking at 4tph TL/GN + at least one GA ph) from Cambridge North to Cambridge itself (Central? Vaguely South-East?).

 

[notverydeep]

A blast from the recent past on platforms 10 and 11! 317340 + 317347 on 2R30 1752 King's Cross - Roysfon and 321401 + 321404 on 2V90 1758 King's Cross - Welwyn Garden City. A seat for all at Finsbury Park!

2R30 has been 387s normally for a few weeks now, presume a few drivers still to be trained?

 

[jopsuk]

This could mean that the Elys will all be 8-cars, maybe? It isn't ideal, especially as the 387s could technically use their SDO, but fouling Waterbeach crossing is the problem.

This would make sense. Current peak time Waterbeach services have been at "almost leaving people on the platform" levels for years, but withouth the promised station rebuild (which won;t happen until the barracks redevelopment is finally approved) nothing more than a 4-car service can call there, whilst all three platforms at Cambridge North are 250m (and straight & level)

 

[EMU Driver]

A blast from the recent past on platforms 10 and 11! 317340 + 317347 on 2R30 1752 King's Cross - Roysfon and 321401 + 321404 on 2V90 1758 King's Cross - Welwyn Garden City. A seat for all at Finsbury Park!

2R30 has been 387s normally for a few weeks now, presume a few drivers still to be trained?

Quite a few still tbh!

 

[387star]

Last ever tl 387 run any day now then?

 

[OFFDN]

Quite a few still tbh!

I'm pretty certain that not a single King's Cross driver is trained on them yet.

Last ever tl 387 run any day now then?

Not long to go, less than a month left if I remember right.

 

[Class377/5]

Last ever tl 387 run any day now then?

Sunday. Remaining 6 units will all be at Hornsey early next week.

Will post diagrams in general 387 thread for those interested.

 

[notverydeep]

The WNXX site (which needs a subscription) has a photo of Car 77047 from GN unit 317348 (Richard A Jenner) at Ilford Depot where it is clearly undergoing a C6 overhaul. It has been repainted into the same colour scheme as 317337 - 343 (all of which I have seen recently, still running on GN).

I assume this is more of a 'non-operator specific' livery rather than a GN livery. I also presume that with more 387s imminent (so just about on topic for the thread), 317348 will not return to GN after overhaul, but will enter service with Greater Anglia, perhaps losing the nameplates.

Incidentally, does anybody know who Richard A Jenner was? Clearly Driver John Webb (317345) was, well a driver, but does anyone know why he has a 317 named for him? Both units have carried these names since WAGN days, but a Google search didn't bring up the back story for either. It will be sad to see the two trains with 'proper' nameplates leave GN.

 

[whoosh]

I'm pretty certain that not a single King's Cross driver is trained on them yet.

At least one is. Kings Cross and Kings Lynn have started training on them from last month.

 

[387star]

Sunday. Remaining 6 units will all be at Hornsey early next week.

Will post diagrams in general 387 thread for those interested.

Thanks my last ever tl 387 ride quite possibly yesterday's 2033 off Brighton

 

[jopsuk]

The WNXX site (which needs a subscription) has a photo of Car 77047 from GN unit 317348 (Richard A Jenner) at Ilford Depot where it is clearly undergoing a C6 overhaul. It has been repainted into the same colour scheme as 317337 - 343 (all of which I have seen recently, still running on GN).

I assume this is more of a 'non-operator specific' livery rather than a GN livery. I also presume that with more 387s imminent (so just about on topic for the thread), 317348 will not return to GN after overhaul, but will enter service with Greater Anglia, perhaps losing the nameplates.

What colour doors is it getting? The only difference between the "final" Greater Anglia 317 livery and the GN 317 livery has been GA red doors, GN white doors

 

[notverydeep]

What colour doors is it getting? The only difference between the "final" Greater Anglia 317 livery and the GN 317 livery has been GA red doors, GN white doors

The photo shows blue passenger doors, which is consistent with how 317s 337 - 343 have been painted. The drivers doors are white though. It had not had GN logos applied. If you have a WNXX subscription it is photo 5/9 at the following link: http://www.wnxx.com/17/1701/310117/ilford270117.htm

 

[Hadders]

Caught the 1650 from Kings Cross to Stevenage yesterday. 2x387s - standing throughout.

On approaching Finsbury Park the PIS said that you could 'change for 'one' services'. As we approached both Welwyn North and Stevenage the PIS said we were approaching Huntingdon (and still said we should change for 'one' services).

If they can't fix this why don't they just switch the PIS off and make manual announcements?

 

[jon0844]

What's odd is how such announcements can be made when one services never called there, so it's not just a case of it being set to an older setting.

Likewise how they've got it saying TOC names for coach numbers (apparently now fixed and being rolled out), it can't say Great Northern, and apparently doesn't have recording for one of the stations - can't remember which (Arlesey or Ashwell & Modern maybe).

Doesn't the PIS software run on an emulator somewhere so it can be managed and tested before rolling out? So when an error is spotted by a member of the public, or another driver, or any TOC staff, it can be investigated and spotted in minutes, not months.

 

[Ianno87]

What's odd is how such announcements can be made when one services never called there, so it's not just a case of it being set to an older setting.

Likewise how they've got it saying TOC names for coach numbers (apparently now fixed and being rolled out), it can't say Great Northern, and apparently doesn't have recording for one of the stations - can't remember which (Arlesey or Ashwell & Modern maybe).

Doesn't the PIS software run on an emulator somewhere so it can be managed and tested before rolling out? So when an error is spotted by a member of the public, or another driver, or any TOC staff, it can be investigated and spotted in minutes, not months.

It's a case of the voice software substituting "one" (as in a coach number) in place of a TOC name/London Underground. The same error applies the orher way around, with passengers being advised to travel in "coaches Cross Country to Grand Central" for stations beyond Royston.

 

[D365]

Could somebody let me know please if the 07:22 KGX-PBO is a 387 please?

 

[Skimble19]

What's odd is how such announcements can be made when one services never called there, so it's not just a case of it being set to an older setting.

Likewise how they've got it saying TOC names for coach numbers (apparently now fixed and being rolled out), it can't say Great Northern, and apparently doesn't have recording for one of the stations - can't remember which (Arlesey or Ashwell & Modern maybe).

Doesn't the PIS software run on an emulator somewhere so it can be managed and tested before rolling out? So when an error is spotted by a member of the public, or another driver, or any TOC staff, it can be investigated and spotted in minutes, not months.

Somewhat off topic but continuing along the PIS discussion.. I notice there's a picture of a 365 on the site linked to on the previous page that has "Great Northern" on it's PIS. This is odd as I've never seen this before and didn't think they could display this - has the new PIS that was meant to come in the refurbishment finally been installed on a unit?

It would be nice if the 387s could be properly sorted out. Some of them now seem to be getting stuck saying they're approaching Finsbury Park and to change for the Underground, even when they're way out in to Hertfordshire and Bedfordshire.. Unfortunately I suspect there simply isn't enough slack in the fleet at the moment to allow it, hopefully once the final units come over this may change.

 

[Via Bank]

It's a case of the voice software substituting "one" (as in a coach number) in place of a TOC name/London Underground. The same error applies the orher way around, with passengers being advised to travel in "coaches Cross Country to Grand Central" for stations beyond Royston.

First rule of any embedded/enterprise software: never assume anyone bothers to test anything.

 

[bramling]

Could somebody let me know please if the 07:22 KGX-PBO is a 387 please?

Negative. It's 2x365. From memory it's one of the diagrams which turns up 321s, normally every other day.

 

[D365]

Negative. It's 2x365. From memory it's one of the diagrams which turns up 321s, normally every other day.

Pity. I was due to catch the 19:22 tonight, however owing to an (almost) 15 minute delay I would not have made my onward connection at Peterborough.

 

[bramling]

Pity. I was due to catch the 19:22 tonight, however owing to an (almost) 15 minute delay I would not have made my onward connection at Peterborough.

Pity for you, but most GN users would be glad!

Last night I let two services go at KX so I could take 2x317 home instead of the dreaded 387s. Even then, whilst waiting on the platform, a 387 still managed to get my nerves, being constantly subjected to the sound of door sounders and doors opening/closing whilst an adjacent 387 service waited to depart. Gone are the days of peace and quiet whilst waiting for a train to leave! They need to modify the 387s so the self-close delay is a little longer.

 

[D365]

Seems like the 07:22 has been substituted with 2x321. Currently sitting aboard 321401 on top of a noisy compressor. The reason I said it was a pity is because I've not ever bashed a 387 yet.

Admittedly, the 321s are nicer than the 317s, but that's about as far as my opinion stretches on them.

 

[bramling]

Seems like the 07:22 has been substituted with 2x321. Currently sitting aboard 321401 on top of a noisy compressor. The reason I said it was a pity is because I've not ever bashed a 387 yet.

Admittedly, the 321s are nicer than the 317s, but that's about as far as my opinion stretches on them.

I can't put my finger on why, however for some reason I actually prefer 317s.

Returning to the subject of 387s, I noticed on one unit yesterday that the different seat covering found in first class extends into a few rows of the standard class area on the same car. Is this common across the whole fleet? I'm still of the opinion that the whole first-class thing stems from the trains being designed that first-class occupies the *outer* end of the driving cars, based on the 5-car Electrostars, with the change being made because this is too much first for a 4-car.

 

[Failed Unit]

I can't put my finger on why, however for some reason I actually prefer 317s.

Returning to the subject of 387s, I noticed on one unit yesterday that the different seat covering found in first class extends into a few rows of the standard class area on the same car. Is this common across the whole fleet? I'm still of the opinion that the whole first-class thing stems from the trains being designed that first-class occupies the *outer* end of the driving cars, based on the 5-car Electrostars, with the change being made because this is too much first for a 4-car.

It does on all have travelled on. So they can extend first class if they want.

Managed to go on one the other day that actually said "coaches 1-4 will continue to cambridge" but if they have fixed the bug, it isn't fleet wide yet.

 

[Failed Unit]

Couple of interesting things today. This morning we were late into kings cross because we were signalled into a platform 387s are not cleared for. My guess is it was platform 10 as I can't say I have seen one on it. But what is the problem with it?

Today's auto announcer was "Emergency brakes are on service to Royston and Cambridge". Not good considering the service in question the 1722 ex kings cross was delayed on departure because of a train fault. Surely it shouldn't be broadcasting safety critical stuff?

 

[bramling]

Couple of interesting things today. This morning we were late into kings cross because we were signalled into a platform 387s are not cleared for. My guess is it was platform 10 as I can't say I have seen one on it. But what is the problem with it?

Hmm. Unlikely to be 10, as I saw 1P80 (2x387) depart from Plat 10 last night (viewed from the comfortable relative luxury of 2x317 on Plat 9!).

Definitely seen 387s depart from all of platforms 9 to 11.

 

[jon0844]

Couple of interesting things today. This morning we were late into kings cross because we were signalled into a platform 387s are not cleared for. My guess is it was platform 10 as I can't say I have seen one on it. But what is the problem with it?

Today's auto announcer was "Emergency brakes are on service to Royston and Cambridge". Not good considering the service in question the 1722 ex kings cross was delayed on departure because of a train fault. Surely it shouldn't be broadcasting safety critical stuff?

I was on a tube train that announced a fault on the PIS! It then started giving some odd information before resetting itself.

While I am sure it was an error of the system itself, it does show there are recordings for such things.

Of course with a 387, 'emergency breaks' could be a recording for 'we are approaching' or, well, anything!

 

[Hadders]

Why the hell can't they just switch off the PIS altogether until they get it sorted out. It's embarrassing.

Surely someone relatively high up in GTR reads this thread, or can be directed to it.