• Our new ticketing site is now live! Using either this or the original site (both powered by TrainSplit) helps support the running of the forum with every ticket purchase! Find out more and ask any questions/give us feedback in this thread!

Class 387

Status
Not open for further replies.

RobShipway

Established Member
Joined
20 Sep 2009
Messages
3,337
My mistake, it must be GWR they are off to then.
--- old post above --- --- new post below ---


yeh i think its GWR.... southern dont have any ;)

Just because the majority of the ex - Thameslink are going to GN, does not mean that Southern will not end up with some too, plus later on the class 387 trains that are going to C2C.
 
Sponsor Post - registered members do not see these adverts; click here to register, or click here to log in
R

RailUK Forums

swt_passenger

Veteran Member
Joined
7 Apr 2010
Messages
34,229
Just because the majority of the ex - Thameslink are going to GN, does not mean that Southern will not end up with some too, plus later on the class 387 trains that are going to C2C.

All of the 29 'Thameslink' 387s are going to GN aren't they? I thought this had been established earlier, so not just a majority...
 

Class377/5

Established Member
Joined
19 Jun 2010
Messages
5,594
All the TL 377 387 are going to GN. Southern does not run any 387s and only a small handful of its drivers sign the stock. GatEx is the other user of 387s other than GWR.

GN is getting an additional 40 coach with the 29x 387/1 transferring.

Why anyone thinks the 6 387 which cannot be used with 377s would go to Southern is beyond me as it's stupid idea.
 

Brian Aylott

Member
Joined
11 Oct 2012
Messages
262
All the TL 377 387 are going to GN. Southern does not run any 387s and only a small handful of its drivers sign the stock. GatEx is the other user of 387s other than GWR.
GN is getting an additional 40 coach with the 29x 387/1 transferring.
Why anyone thinks the 6 387 which cannot be used with 377s would go to Southern is beyond me as it's stupid idea.

Sorry, I'm confused
Please help!
I understand that, by getting 40 additional coaches (10 units) that would replace more of the 365s, instead of the originally 21 units planned
Are you saying that with getting all TL's 377s (32 units?) they will replace all the 365s and this will result in GN getting an extra 10 units overall?
Thank you for the interesting news we get from you on this forum
Brian
 

D365

Veteran Member
Joined
29 Jun 2012
Messages
13,157
Situation with Great Northern is:

IN: 29x 387/1 (from Thameslink, instead of 19x 377/5)
IN: 25x 717
OUT: 44x 313
OUT: 12x 317 (to Greater Anglia)
OUT: 13x 321 (six units to Greater Anglia)
OUT: 19x 365
 

Class 466

Established Member
Joined
5 Mar 2010
Messages
2,129
Location
Atherton, UK
To add to the above, The situation with Southern will be:

IN: 23x 377/5
IN: 9x 377/2
OUT: 36x 377/1 (To Southeastern)
--- old post above --- --- new post below ---
Southern green astro turf spreads to the gwr region I see; )

GWR 387/1s have a different interior to those on TL/GN.
 

43096

On Moderation
Joined
23 Nov 2015
Messages
18,734
Situation with Great Northern is:

IN: 29x 387/1 (from Thameslink, instead of 19x 377/5)
IN: 25x 717
OUT: 44x 313
OUT: 12x 317 (to Greater Anglia)
OUT: 13x 321 (six units to Greater Anglia)
OUT: 19x 365

I thought it was 21 x 365 that were leaving (those that were to go to GWR)?

The plan was odd numbered units to GWR, even numbered remain.
 

D365

Veteran Member
Joined
29 Jun 2012
Messages
13,157
I thought it was 21 x 365 that were leaving (those that were to go to GWR)?

The plan was odd numbered units to GWR, even numbered remain.

You're right, apologies. Not sure if the odd/even split is still planned.
 

387star

On Moderation
Joined
16 Nov 2009
Messages
6,665
To add to the above, The situation with Southern will be:

IN: 23x 377/5
IN: 9x 377/2
OUT: 36x 377/1 (To Southeastern)
--- old post above --- --- new post below ---


GWR 387/1s have a different interior to those on TL/GN.

Drivers seat ;)
 

Class377/5

Established Member
Joined
19 Jun 2010
Messages
5,594
Sorry, I'm confused
Please help!
I understand that, by getting 40 additional coaches (10 units) that would replace more of the 365s, instead of the originally 21 units planned
Are you saying that with getting all TL's 377s (32 units?) they will replace all the 365s and this will result in GN getting an extra 10 units overall?
Thank you for the interesting news we get from you on this forum
Brian

All that has changes is instead of getting 19x 377, GN is getting 29x 387. 365 cascade has not changed. Hence the extra 40carriages.
 

swt_passenger

Veteran Member
Joined
7 Apr 2010
Messages
34,229
All that has changes is instead of getting 19x 377, GN is getting 29x 387. 365 cascade has not changed. Hence the extra 40carriages.

I think there may have been some confusion earlier because you wrote "All the TL 377 387 are going to GN", in the earlier description of what is happening.
 

Mikey C

Established Member
Joined
11 Feb 2013
Messages
8,234
The 365s aren't going to GWR, so where will they go (which is another thread of course!)
 

Class377/5

Established Member
Joined
19 Jun 2010
Messages
5,594
I think there may have been some confusion earlier because you wrote "All the TL 377 387 are going to GN", in the earlier description of what is happening.

Auto correct when using a keypad is really annoying. Sorry for the confusion folks.
 

D365

Veteran Member
Joined
29 Jun 2012
Messages
13,157
The 365s aren't going to GWR, so where will they go (which is another thread of course!)

Plenty of those about I believe ;)

Don't forget that there is a dedicated discussions topic for the Class 387 Great Northern transfer, in case you're after any further information.
 

swt_passenger

Veteran Member
Joined
7 Apr 2010
Messages
34,229
A track access application on NR's site shows the next phases of 387 introduction on the GW.

Now moved to completed consultations here:
http://www.networkrail.co.uk/browse...16 3rd sa final for external consultation.pdf

Jan 2017

As we had already discussed January sees the all day 2 tph service as far as Hayes & Harlington, there will however be a through DMU at start and end of service to get the unit on and off the branch.

However it does still include the caveat: ‘These rights start at 0200hrs on 3rd January 2017 or when the crossover at Hayes & Harlington is commissioned, whichever is later.’

May 2017

3. Table 2.1 – Train Service Group EF06 – Train Service Code: 25516005 London Paddington – Bourne End / Bourne End – London Paddington
GWR proposes running their existing 3 London Paddington to Bourne End evening Peak services as EMUs between London Paddington and Maidenhead then offer passengers a connection to a Bourne End DMU service. This necessitates switching 3 quantum rights in EF06 London Paddington - Bourne End to London Paddington – Maidenhead and adding 3 quantum rights in EF08 Maidenhead – Bourne End.
Similar to the above, GWR propose running their existing 2 Bourne End to London Paddington morning Peak services as DMUs between Bourne End and Maidenhead then allowing passengers to connect to an EMU service between Maidenhead and London Paddington

4. Table 2.1 – Train Service Group EF06 – Train Service Code: 25516005 Slough – London Paddington and Maidenhead – London Paddington
GWR proposes running 2 morning trains as EMUs. There are currently 2 morning Peak rights in Table 2.1 and 1 Off Peak contingent right in Table 2.2 of the Track Access Contract. We propose that the rights become 1 morning Peak, 1 Off Peak and zero Slough – London Paddington rights in Table 2.2 (see below).
The Maidenhead –London Paddington service is an extension of the current morning Peak 09:15 Slough to London Paddington. GWR propose to run the service as an EMU and retime the service to start at 09:08 at Maidenhead. To accommodate this service we propose to remove the current morning Peak Slough – London Paddington passenger slot in Table 2.1 and create a new Maidenhead to London Paddington firm right.

So, in the light of recent discussions about services being taken over gradually, it seems as though all the relief line DMU services that come through Reading, or from Reading, remain unchanged, there is no general replacement of the standard 4 tph along the route, it is just the various peak extras that are converted. A key change is that an existing Slough to Paddington train becomes a Maidenhead to Paddington train.

Presumably if these Maidenhead starters run as 8 car they will have a reasonable capacity impact?
 
Last edited:

reddragon

Established Member
Joined
24 Mar 2016
Messages
3,271
Location
Churn (closed)
Interesting in the fact that there is no mention of a plan to extend the Hayes services to Maidenhead or to change the Reading services to stop at less stations.

Maybe this is part of a phased approach, to allow driver training etc and that another service change is planned for July when the IEPs are introduced?
 

ScotGG

Established Member
Joined
3 Apr 2013
Messages
1,585
When will services start calling at all stations between Paddington and Hayes on a Sunday? I was amazed they don't given the growth along the line. Stations with 1.4m annual users not getting a Sunday service or anything after 10pm seems mad. The trains still run - they just skip some stations.
 

swt_passenger

Veteran Member
Joined
7 Apr 2010
Messages
34,229
Interesting in the fact that there is no mention of a plan to extend the Hayes services to Maidenhead or to change the Reading services to stop at less stations.

Maybe this is part of a phased approach, to allow driver training etc and that another service change is planned for July when the IEPs are introduced?

That fits with the point I raised a few days ago, where I noted that the Paddington to Hayes service had a withdrawal date, (i.e. May 2018) and I wondered what that meant in the context of extensions to Maidenhead.

I now believe, having read the TAA, that Paddington to Hayes will not actually be extended as such, but separate EMU services will be added over and above it, as in the above quotes. So when Crossrail takes over, the Paddington to Hayes can easily be removed without an impact on stations west of Hayes and Harlington.

I was led up a blind alley by the units having route maps on board that show an extension to Maidenhead, but they probably should not be read that way...
 

SWT_USER

Member
Joined
29 Aug 2010
Messages
1,176
Location
Ashford Middx
When will services start calling at all stations between Paddington and Hayes on a Sunday? I was amazed they don't given the growth along the line. Stations with 1.4m annual users not getting a Sunday service or anything after 10pm seems mad. The trains still run - they just skip some stations.

When they are told to by the DFT. GWR will only do the bare minimum if forced to. I agree it is a ridiculous state of affairs that stations on one of the main lines in to London don't have a Sunday service.

387 introduction is good overall as capacity is needed but as GWR are unable to run their trains on time I've missed the Greenford connection at West Ealing on the 4 times I've attempted it as they don't hold the connection - so it leaves empty. :roll:
 
Last edited:

adc82140

Established Member
Joined
10 May 2008
Messages
3,396
Similar to the above, GWR propose running their existing 2 Bourne End to London Paddington morning Peak services as DMUs between Bourne End and Maidenhead then allowing passengers to connect to an EMU service between Maidenhead and London Paddington

I presume they'll run as 2 car DMU direct from Marlow to Maidenhead, and cease the Bourne End shuffle. Can't see the people of Marlow being that impressed about having two interchanges to get in to Paddington otherwise.
 

jimm

Established Member
Joined
6 Apr 2012
Messages
5,276
When will services start calling at all stations between Paddington and Hayes on a Sunday? I was amazed they don't given the growth along the line. Stations with 1.4m annual users not getting a Sunday service or anything after 10pm seems mad. The trains still run - they just skip some stations.

When they are told to by the DFT. GWR will only do the bare minimum if forced to. I agree it is a ridiculous state of affairs that stations on one of the main lines in to London don't have a Sunday service.

Have you heard of engineering work, which often happens overnight from 10pm-ish or all day on Sundays?

If the GWML relief lines are closed for engineering work on a Sunday, how exactly do you propose GWR should stop trains at Hanwell or Acton Main Line, given the lack of a westbound platform on the fast lines* at either station? Or the alignment of the eastbound fast line at Hanwell, which isn't actually alongside the adjacent platform.

And if the fast lines are closed, GWR doesn't want stopping services getting in the way of expresses that are having to share the relief lines with Thames Valley locals.

Once all the current Crossrail and GWML modernisation work is completed, the amount of engineering work required will be reduced and I'm sure Crossrail will - subject to future engineering requirements - offer late-night and Sunday services at the West London stations.

So, in the light of recent discussions about services being taken over gradually, it seems as though all the relief line DMU services that come through Reading, or from Reading, remain unchanged, there is no general replacement of the standard 4 tph along the route, it is just the various peak extras that are converted. A key change is that an existing Slough to Paddington train becomes a Maidenhead to Paddington train.

How could the electrics gradually replace dmu services without there being 25kv wires to and through Reading? You're hardly going to recast the timetable once wires get to Maidenhead, when you have to do it all over again a few months later anyway once you can get 387s to Reading and Didcot - and actually replace a substantial number of Turbos with 387s at one fell swoop.

Nor do I understand why you are making a fuss about what the maps in the 387s may, or may not mean. They are simply a diagrammatic representation of the intention to provide some electric trains to and from Maidenhead at the earliest opportunity, not that such trains would be specifically linked to the initial Hayes shuttles.

*Pedants please note, well aware they are called the main lines in GWR terminology, just trying to make sure people understand which pair of tracks I mean.
 
Last edited:

swt_passenger

Veteran Member
Joined
7 Apr 2010
Messages
34,229
How could the electrics gradually replace dmu services without there being 25kv wires to and through Reading? You're hardly going to recast the timetable once wires get to Maidenhead, when you have to do it all over again a few

I only mentioned this because earlier in the thread (about the 20th Sept) someone was posing the question as to whether the extended EMU services would take over the DMU stopping services between Paddington and Reading once the wires reached Reading.

Regarding earlier discussions about the Hayes shuttles, the GWR page about Greenford alterations is written this way:

2017

From January, all Greenford trains will terminate at West Ealing; as we increase our electric service between Hayes & Harlington and London Paddington to every 30 minutes.

From Summer, these trains will start running to and from Maidenhead, as we replace our existing diesel fleet.

As can be seen it implies that 'these trains' (the Hayes shuttles) will start running to and from Maidenhead, whereas the TAA describes separate trains. Is that not worth pointing out?
 
Last edited:

JN114

Established Member
Joined
28 Jun 2005
Messages
3,522
Or how about "additional units will also start running to and from etc..."

Minor tweaks to some of these PR statements make all the difference to how they are interpreted.

For the rail enthusiast, trying to second guess GWR's plans for their introduction, yes it makes a difference. For average joe public? No, it makes no difference.
 

GodAtum

On Moderation
Joined
11 Dec 2009
Messages
2,684
I presume they'll run as 2 car DMU direct from Marlow to Maidenhead, and cease the Bourne End shuffle. Can't see the people of Marlow being that impressed about having two interchanges to get in to Paddington otherwise.

I never knew who popular marlow was until i started to commute there!
 

jopsuk

Veteran Member
Joined
13 May 2008
Messages
12,774
I presume they'll run as 2 car DMU direct from Marlow to Maidenhead, and cease the Bourne End shuffle. Can't see the people of Marlow being that impressed about having two interchanges to get in to Paddington otherwise.

OTOH for many journeys (eg to the City) once Crossrail service starts they'll potentially have one less change at Paddington
 
Status
Not open for further replies.

Top