Class 387

[swt_passenger]

then SWT should presumably have just ordered lots more 450s instead of those frivolous 444s with their fancy end doors, GWR should be using 387s to Bristol and Cardiff....:roll:

Network Rail's Wessex route study consultation did recommend exactly that, more 2+3 seating at 12 car length for increased capacity. They accept the idea would not be popular with passengers.

 

[387star]

What we know so far....

29 x 387/1 in service with GTR. Were to go to GWR, but not now.
27 x 387/2 in delivery to GTR for GatEx.
8 x 387 (were to be 387130-137) for GWR in build at Derby.
20 x 387/3 Porterbrook "speculative" about to start build. 6 to go to c2c, then transfer to GWR. 14 go new to GWR.
9 x 387 to be ordered for GWR to give 37 sets total for GWR.

So, the big question is, what happens to 387101-129 once the 700s replace them on Thameslink?

presumably this allows for complete 313 replacement on the southern whether by 377s or 387s

unless the new greater anglia franchise fancy them

unless the remaining 365s on GN can be replaced with the 365s that were due to remain with GN going to Southeastern? not sure if they still have shoe gear though presumably not

 

[43096]

presumably this allows for complete 313 replacement on the southern whether by 377s or 387s

unless the new greater anglia franchise fancy them

unless the remaining 365s on GN can be replaced with the 365s that were due to remain with GN going to Southeastern? not sure if they still have shoe gear though presumably not

There is some logic in putting 387s on the Cambridge/Kings Lynn fasts out of Kings Cross, and the numbers sort of stack up as 19x377s were meant to be going to these services. So perhaps something like:
- 6x387/1 to c2c
- 23x387/1 to Great Northern
- 19x377/5 to Southern (instead of GN)
- 19x313 from South Coast go off-lease

This allows for a slight capacity increase on GN and also allows the 387s to use their 110mph capability from KX to Hitchin, which eases pathing a bit, and also allows the entire 313 fleet to be taken out of service.

Whatever is planned, I cannot believe Porterbrook have agreed to this deal (with the extra 387s being built) and not have a home signed up for the 387/1 fleet.

 

[387star]

There is some logic in putting 387s on the Cambridge/Kings Lynn fasts out of Kings Cross, and the numbers sort of stack up as 19x377s were meant to be going to these services. So perhaps something like:
- 6x387/1 to c2c
- 23x387/1 to Great Northern
- 19x377/5 to Southern (instead of GN)
- 19x313 from South Coast go off-lease

This allows for a slight capacity increase on GN and also allows the 387s to use their 110mph capability from KX to Hitchin, which eases pathing a bit, and also allows the entire 313 fleet to be taken out of service.

Whatever is planned, I cannot believe Porterbrook have agreed to this deal (with the extra 387s being built) and not have a home signed up for the 387/1 fleet.

very interesting

there was mention by a poster on here GN 313s might be refurbished to southern spec for more capacity but with 387s 377/5s (and 377/3s) available the 313s could be strengthened easily

the fact 19 377/5s matches 19 313s seems no mistake...

also weren't SOUTHERN 313s due a C6?

 

[bengley]

very interesting

there was mention by a poster on here GN 313s might be refurbished to southern spec for more capacity but with 387s 377/5s (and 377/3s) available the 313s could be strengthened easily

the fact 19 377/5s matches 19 313s seems no mistake...

also weren't SOUTHERN 313s due a C6?

In addition to this I believe GN 377 driver training has been delayed for the time being (although willing to be corrected by someone closer to the programme than me)

 

[387star]

If 377/5s replace 313s maybe a 375/9 interior will be installed by swapping seating about from.other 377s to replace the long distance style seating in the outer driving cab coaches

It was mentioned major work was due on the 377/5s

 

[bengley]

If 377/5s replace 313s maybe a 375/9 interior will be installed by swapping seating about from.other 377s to replace the long distance style seating in the outer driving cab coaches

It was mentioned major work was due on the 377/5s

Not necessary. The 313s only have 2x2 seating and are 3 coaches long - 377/5s have half 3x2 and half 2x2 (spread over 4 coaches) so have more capacity without any mods.

 

[Class377/5]

As we're having a day of speculation, I'll throw-in my conspiracy theory:

The order will trigger a cascade sufficient to rid Southern of the nineteen 313s on Coastway duties, along with the Guards still required to work them after (if?) GTR get their way on DOO elsewhere. Potentially 377/3s back to Brighton, assuming they have cameras?

I was out and about yesterday, but didn't see any 387s on GatEx. Do they not have any weekend diagrams yet?

GatEx are one 8 car diagram at present if they run. Still early days.

Btw while it's amusing watching everyone trying to add 2 + 2 and getting wacky numbers, the 313/455 on Southern aren't in any cascade plan at present. All will be revealed soon (and not mine by me before you lot ask).

very interesting

there was mention by a poster on here GN 313s might be refurbished to southern spec for more capacity but with 387s 377/5s (and 377/3s) available the 313s could be strengthened easily

the fact 19 377/5s matches 19 313s seems no mistake...

also weren't SOUTHERN 313s due a C6?

Southern 313 C6 started last week with 210 IIRC going up to Selhurst tail end of last week.

 

[whoosh]

In addition to this I believe GN 377 driver training has been delayed for the time being (although willing to be corrected by someone closer to the programme than me)

Yes it has been delayed, but starts today (Monday).

 

[AM9]

Network Rail's Wessex route study consultation did recommend exactly that, more 2+3 seating at 12 car length for increased capacity. They accept the idea would not be popular with passengers.

That is my point about the GEML, i.e. just because trains that are currently used on Liverpool St to Norwich services are ex '80s inter-city trains doesn't mean that they won't be retired and replaced with modern trains that are accepted for use on journeys of greater distances and longer durations elsewhere in the UK, however much the passengers may expect better. It's the way of the modern railway and like it or not, the existence of a large commuter flow overlaid on a trunk or regional route creates compromises in passenger accommodation styles.
The concept of an 'inter-city' type of train for a relatively short run like Norwich is not only based on GEML services in the past when passenger volume was far lower than today, but even if both London and Norwich are regarded as true cities, the service makes 4-7 other stops so the XX:00 'fast service' stops every 22 minutes and the XX:30 'stopper' every 15 minutes! That is why I said that ther XX:30 service could be run with 387s (or similar).
There are examples of this elsewhere, e.g. on the SWML (intentionally, not because of the lack of 444s) and the WCML where 110 mph is achieved by 350s for much of the journey to Birmingham or Crewe. So unless the 650 'ish seats on an IEP is enough to cover both the XX:00 AND the XX:30 services, if everbody wants to travel on an 'inter-city' train, many of them will stand whilst those who want a seat will have the luxury of a sparsely filled 387 type of train.

 

[jimm]

Not what I'm trying to say at all. The 450s and 387s have different style interiors. I'm saying that the 387s would be more suited to longer journeys as they have an intercity style layout.

So what are you saying? It seems to me to be something along the lines of every journey up to two hours might as well be operated by a pretty bog-standard emu - which is not something that I think most passengers would agree with. Never mind the impact on journey times that being limited to running at 110mph would have to the likes of Bristol.

The 387 seats are the same type of seats used on the class 800s. They have a different shape, but they are the same.

Eh? They have a different shape but are the same? Some slight contradiction there, surely? Never mind that the seat pitch and legroom is also different. Or are you yet another of the people who knows what the seats in an IEP will be like to sit in, despite never having sat in one?

Would it not be possible to install doors to separate the vestibules from the seating areas?

Which might have some slight effect but most would be open while people get on and off the train.

Network Rail's Wessex route study consultation did recommend exactly that, more 2+3 seating at 12 car length for increased capacity. They accept the idea would not be popular with passengers.

I doubt you will find a single word about GWML services in a Wessex route study. The Western one perhaps? I seem to recall discussion of lengthening 5-car IEPs to 6-car to create 12-car formations to meet demand from Swindon, but for reference purposes might you care to point out the relevant section of a document that runs to almost 300 pages?

That is my point about the GEML, i.e. just because trains that are currently used on Liverpool St to Norwich services are ex '80s inter-city trains doesn't mean that they won't be retired and replaced with modern trains that are accepted for use on journeys of greater distances and longer durations elsewhere in the UK, however much the passengers may expect better. It's the way of the modern railway and like it or not, the existence of a large commuter flow overlaid on a trunk or regional route creates compromises in passenger accommodation styles.

In which case, would you care to explain the choice of new rolling stock for TransPennine, where many passengers are making journeys a lot shorter than London-Norwich?

The concept of an 'inter-city' type of train for a relatively short run like Norwich is not only based on GEML services in the past when passenger volume was far lower than today, but even if both London and Norwich are regarded as true cities, the service makes 4-7 other stops so the XX:00 'fast service' stops every 22 minutes and the XX:30 'stopper' every 15 minutes! That is why I said that ther XX:30 service could be run with 387s (or similar).
There are examples of this elsewhere, e.g. on the SWML (intentionally, not because of the lack of 444s) and the WCML where 110 mph is achieved by 350s for much of the journey to Birmingham or Crewe. So unless the 650 'ish seats on an IEP is enough to cover both the XX:00 AND the XX:30 services, if everbody wants to travel on an 'inter-city' train, many of them will stand whilst those who want a seat will have the luxury of a sparsely filled 387 type of train.

You make it sound as though there are no other services running between Liverpool Street and intermediate stations towards Norwich. What do you think the semi-fast emus that leave Liverpool Street for Ipswich at xx.02 are doing or the xx.18s to Clacton via Colchester, the xx.38s to Colchester Town and the xx.48s to Braintree? They are performing exactly the same job as the 350s do on the WCML.

Are you now going to advocate use of 387s on Virgin services between London and Birmingham? They seem to be about to become the new 'do every job going' train of choice for some on this forum. What about the poor old Class 444...?

If faced with the choice of a emu - and I doubt any TOC would fancy running a 'sparsely-filled' 12-car formation all the way to Norwich from London, given what it would cost them - or an intercity-configured train vaguely resembling those currently provided between Norwich and London, a lot of passengers will quickly work out which one they prefer - and it won't be a 387.

 

[Warbo44]

Saw a GWR 387 on my local news report about Bombardier in Derby the other day so they must be ready for release soon. Obviously the drivers will need training up so it'll be a while before they will be seen on the network working timetabled services.

 

[Class377/5]

Yes it has been delayed, but starts today (Monday).

377 training started a while back, was paused.

Saw a GWR 387 on my local news report about Bombardier in Derby the other day so they must be ready for release soon. Obviously the drivers will need training up so it'll be a while before they will be seen on the network working timetabled services.

8x GWR new build will be complete by the end of the month so 8 units to test soon.

Back to the subject matter, the GatEx 387/2 are working the following this week...

5T16 05+00 Stewarts Lane to Victoria
1D16 05:45 Victoria to Gatwick
1U21 06:35 Gatwick to Victoria
1D30 07:30 Victoria to Gatwick
5D30 08+16 Gatwick to Gatwick Sidings
5U43 09+16 Gatwick Sidings to Gatwick
1U43 09:20 Gatwick to Victoria
5T43 10+11 Victoria to Stewarts Lane
5U77 12+07 Stewarts Lane to Gatwick
1U77 13:30 Gatwick to Victoria
1D84 14:15 Victoria to Gatwick
5U84 15:+05 Gatwick to Stewarts Lane
5T20 17+47 Stewarts Lane to Victoria
1D20 18:26 Victoria to Gatwick
1U25 19:30 Gatwick to Victoria
1D34 20:15 Victoria to Gatwick
1U39 21:00 Gatwick to Victoria
1D46 21:45 Victoria to Gatwick
1U51 22:25 Gatwick to Victoria
1D60 23:30 Victoria to Gatwick
1U03 00:20 Gatwick to Victoria
5T03 01+07 Victoria to Stewarts Lane

5T12 04+48 Stewarts Lane to Victoria
1D12 05:15 Victoria to Gatwick
1U17 06+05 Gatwick to Victoria
1D24 06+45 Victoria to Gatwick
1U29 07:34 Gatwick to Victoria
1A16 08:30 Victoria to Brighton
1A29 09:48 Brighton to Victoria
1A36 11:00 Victoria to Brighton
1A53 12:18 Brighton to Victoria
1A56 13:30 Victoria to Brighton
1A75 14:48 Brighton to Victoria
1A76 16:00 Victoria to Brighton
1A03 17:20 Brighton to Victoria
1A08 18:44 Victoria to Brighton
1A17 20:20 Brighton to Victoria
1A20 21:30 Victoria to Brighton
1A27 22:55 Brighton to Victoria
5T57 00+07 Victoria to Stewarts Lane

 

[387star]

Okay so if 313s and 455s are not being released perhaps all 377/5s to southeastern?
They are due a refresh so stick them.on to the end of their refurbishment scheme presuming they are compatible

 

[43074]

Okay so if 313s and 455s are not being released perhaps all 377/5s to southeastern?

I thought the 377/5s were being split between Great Northern (19) and Southern (the other 4)?

 

[swt_passenger]

I doubt you will find a single word about GWML services in a Wessex route study. The Western one perhaps? I seem to recall discussion of lengthening 5-car IEPs to 6-car to create 12-car formations to meet demand from Swindon, but for reference purposes might you care to point out the relevant section of a document that runs to almost 300 pages?

You seemed to suggest it would be unlikely for SWT to be required to use more 2+3 layout 12 car 450s, and for a counter example I simply replied that the Wessex route study consultation says the opposite. It is the Wessex route study that covers SWT, as you well know, this from the draft, page 87:

Most Main Line long distance services are currently formed of Class 450 rolling stock configured with three plus two seating in standard
accommodation. During peak hours this rolling stock typically works shorter distance services within the service group (for example, services
starting from Woking, West Byfleet or Alton). Class 450 rolling stock is also used on some longer distance services within the service group (including
some high peak services starting from Portsmouth Harbour and Southampton Central).
A number of Main Line long distance services are currently formed of Class 158, 159 and 444 rolling stock, configured with2 + 2 seating in standard
accommodation. This rolling stock typically works longer distance services within the service group (for example, from Bournemouth and the West
of England Line).
In a ‘making best use’ scenario, further deployment of 3 + 2 seating in standard accommodation on Main Line long distance services could provide
an additional 750 seats into London Waterloo during the high peak hour, a capacity increase of approximately four per cent. This is equivalent to
providing roundly 11 extra passenger vehicle arrivals into London Waterloo in the high peak hour (out of a total requirement for 72 by the end of
CP6).

 

[Class377/5]

I thought the 377/5s were being split between Great Northern (19) and Southern (the other 4)?

That's the old cascade plan.

 

[swt_passenger]

I see that it has again been fairly categorically stated in wnxx (by a GWR insider) that they are no longer getting any 365s. That has to imply more 387s, even if they are also getting nine more AT300s...

 

[387star]

I see that it has again been fairly categorically stated in wnxx (by a GWR insider) that they are no longer getting any 365s. That has to imply more 387s, even if they are also getting nine more AT300s...

Or gwr get the 377/5s vice 365 s

 

[158722]

I see that it has again been fairly categorically stated in wnxx (by a GWR insider) that they are no longer getting any 365s. That has to imply more 387s, even if they are also getting nine more AT300s...

If I'm reading correctly, it has also been stated that the 29 extra GWR ones are on top of the speculative Porterbrook order.

 

[swt_passenger]

Or gwr get the 377/5s vice 365 s

Another option that would work, agreed. But we don't like micro fleets...

 

[D365]

If I'm reading correctly, it has also been stated that the 29 extra GWR ones are on top of the speculative Porterbrook order.

That's interesting, because when the first speculative order was announced (20 units to be built this year), I heard that Porterbrook had an option with Bombardier for another batch, but only up to 80 carriages (20 units again).

Another option that would work, agreed. But we don't like micro fleets...

No different to the mixed 365/377 fleet announced initially by GTR/Great Nothern.

 

[43074]

That's the old cascade plan.

That raises more questions than answers, what prompted the change, out of interest?
Are GN still getting 377/5s then?

Trying to make sense of this is a complete minefield, so trying to clarify:
1) GWR are no longer getting 365s
2) 387101 - 129 are no longer going to GWR, instead they are having 37 new build units (8 already ordered plus 29 extra)
3) 14 of the Porterbrook 20 haven't been ordered yet, however there are suggestions these could also end up on GWR, which in addition to the 9 extra AT300s enables 1)

Also how do the initial GWR electric services to Hayes fit with all this, or are a few 387/1s going to GWR on a short term basis?

 

[swt_passenger]

Also how do the initial GWR electric services to Hayes fit with all this, or are a few 387/1s going to GWR on a short term basis?

Is there any good reason why the first batch of 8 GW units, which are also 387/1s, should not go straight to GWR?

 

[Class377/5]

That raises more questions than answers, what prompted the change, out of interest?
Are GN still getting 377/5s then?

No real idea why.

Trying to make sense of this is a complete minefield, so trying to clarify:
1) GWR are no longer getting 365s
2) 387101 - 129 are no longer going to GWR, instead they are having 37 new build units (8 already ordered plus 29 extra)
3) 14 of the Porterbrook 20 haven't been ordered yet, however there are suggestions these could also end up on GWR, which in addition to the 9 extra AT300s enables 1)

Also how do the initial GWR electric services to Hayes fit with all this, or are a few 387/1s going to GWR on a short term basis?

The Hayes shuttle will be 387 run soon enough. The GWR 8 order is almost complete and the first units are to be with GWR by July.

No 387/1 are going to GWR.

 

[swt_passenger]

No 387/1 are going to GWR.

Do you mean the GW batch are to be assumed renumbered again? I remember people originally suggested they would be 387/3 (with no real justification, just that they would come after the 387/2), and then it was later assumed they would be 387130-136?

I'm fairly sure there's no requirement for different operators to have unique sub classes of an otherwise identical unit.

I see the current wiki page on the 387s suggests c2c will be getting 387/3s, but again, I don't see how this assumption can be made yet?

 

[Class 466]

Do you mean the GW batch are to be assumed renumbered again? I remember people originally suggested they would be 387/3 (with no real justification, just that they would come after the 387/2), and then it was later assumed they would be 387130-136?

I'd say that was referring to the 29 TL 387/1s. An awful lot of guessing and stabbing in the dark on here, Whatever happened to waiting until something is announced? :roll:

 

[Bishopstone]

I'd say that was referring to the 29 TL 387/1s. An awful lot of guessing and stabbing in the dark on here, Whatever happened to waiting until something is announced? :roll:

Speculation is a direct consequence of people associated with the rail industry dropping jigsaw pieces into the public domain. Surely the reason they do that is to stimulate further discussion?

It's not the fault of enthusiasts and other outsiders that the industry is as leaky as a sieve.

If discussion on here was embargoed until TOCs/DFT/Network Rail/unions (etc) issued official press releases on all matters, it wouldn't be a very active forum.

 

[physics34]

I'd say that was referring to the 29 TL 387/1s. An awful lot of guessing and stabbing in the dark on here, Whatever happened to waiting until something is announced? :roll:

Because this is a FORUM.. .for people to DISCUSS things.

 

[Class377/5]

Do you mean the GW batch are to be assumed renumbered again? I remember people originally suggested they would be 387/3 (with no real justification, just that they would come after the 387/2), and then it was later assumed they would be 387130-136?

I'm fairly sure there's no requirement for different operators to have unique sub classes of an otherwise identical unit.

I see the current wiki page on the 387s suggests c2c will be getting 387/3s, but again, I don't see how this assumption can be made yet?

Right now we don't know what the GWR numbering would be. They could be /1 or /3. Originally it would have made sense for GWR 8 to be /1 (130-138 btw) as they are follow on from the 101-129 that GWR was getting. Now that no longer applies the numbers could be anything. 387130-167 or 387301-338 are both equally as valid.

Your correct there is no need for a different operator to have different from sub classes. Doesn't mean it has to be either way. You could argue either point.

Right now it's all guesswork on many front on here. All that has been confirmed is GWR is getting 37 new build 387 meaning another 9 more than currently ordered are to be ordered. That's all.