TT-ONR-NRN
Veteran Member
Sorry that was my fault for typing in a hurry
-
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!
EMR Class 360's
- Thread starter thealm
- Start date
- Status
Sponsor Post - registered members do not see these adverts; click here to register, or click here to log in
R
RailUK Forums
3973EXL
Established Member
- Joined
- 2 Feb 2017
- Messages
- 2,741
5Q80 47727 360119
5Q81 47737 360111
Last edited:
And the first Monday as customers return after the school summer holidays, we have 50% of services short formed with 4-car units again. Brilliant. Makes it all the more acceptable that those units which turn up have been repainted though.
That's 9 out of a fleet of 21 running in service, quite abysmal performance.
That's 9 out of a fleet of 21 running in service, quite abysmal performance.
Last edited:
spotify95
Member
If there really is only 9 out of 21 working Class 360s, then (a) why the hell didn't EMR take on the 360/2's (which have now gone one way to Newport), or most importantly, (b) why the hell didn't EMR not take on a more reliable, and potentially more modern, EMU fleet?
As unfeasible as it is, even something like LNER's Class 91 and Mk 4's would have been better than the 360s; at least they have a modern interior and are long trains, so you wouldn't ever see a 4 car unit!
43096
On Moderation
- Joined
- 23 Nov 2015
- Messages
- 18,742
Because throwing more trains at the problem just leaves you with more broken trains.
Because the issue is not the trains themselves.
No, you’d just have no train at all.
QSK19
Member
A) It’s been mentioned on RF that EMR didn’t want them;
B) Probably due to the desire to take the “cheap and cheerful” option and the DfT gleefully treating East Midlands non-IC services with distain by not authorising a better option such as the 379s or new stock (eg 745s). Maybe that is a simplistic view (especially given that, admittedly, 30x 379s is overkill); but what’s undeniable is that the Connect service has been flawed from the beginning and there’s no sign that this will be sorted any time soon.
I acknowledge that the Desiros, when in a fit and proper condition, are a very solid train and that the 360s could be the perfect fit for Connect services (and that the location of maintenance facilities with respect to the MML is something that EMR can’t do anything about); but that just seems very, very far away and I fear they’ll never be fully sorted by the time EMR/its future iteration is done with them.
Bletchleyite
Veteran Member
How much older are they than the 350/2s? And why are they unreliable? Desiros are highly reliable if maintained properly - the 350s have won "golden spanners" on a number of occasions.
TT-ONR-NRN
Veteran Member
About five years or so. A similar age to the also award-winning 444 fleet.
QSK19
Member
I just wonder whether GA’s neglect of them has been to such an extent that the issues are terminal, whether the maintenance facilities being away from the MML is hampering EMR’s efforts to get them up to a reliable standard or whether it’s a mixture or both?
RailWonderer
Established Member
They were on a full Siemens maintenance contract until 2016 then once GA won the franchise again and ordered an entire fleet replacement they reduced it to a partial until 2019 then there was no maintennance contract. The last ones were withdrawn in a decaying state in Jan 21, when I last went on one. The MTIN collapsed from 84k to 18k in that time as well.
Bletchleyite
Veteran Member
Ah. So maybe the 350/2s may provide an answer as they will have been Siemens maintained for life, then scrap the 360s. Gangwayed, too, so solving the issue with the Unions about the guard being able to get to both bits of an 8-car.
Very surprised the leaseco allowed them to be neglected in that way as it reduced the value of their asset.
QSK19
Member
Whilst my post is really for another thread, it does beg the question of why the ROSCOs aren’t fining lessees for off-leasing them in a poor condition, not just because it’s unfair on the next lessee, but also because, as has been said, the value of the asset drops.
I know from fleet management that, if we took a vehicle out on, say, 3-year lease and returned it in a condition that isn’t to a fear-wear-&-tear standard, we would get chunky fines. So, shouldn’t the same apply to trains?
43096
On Moderation
- Joined
- 23 Nov 2015
- Messages
- 18,742
How many more times do you have to be reminded that there are contracts in place for the 360s and the 350/2s have a different owner?
Perhaps it did - such commercial arrangements are not generally publicised. Alternatively, the quid pro quo was that given that one Abelio franchise had stuffed them EMR/Abelio have no comeback on the ROSCO if they are unreliable.
Mikey C
Established Member
- Joined
- 11 Feb 2013
- Messages
- 8,237
Surely they've had time enough to get them in acceptable working condition now? Especially when they've been lightly used
3973EXL
Established Member
- Joined
- 2 Feb 2017
- Messages
- 2,741
STP 16/09 5Q80 0930 Cricklewood - Eastleigh Works
https://www.realtimetrains.co.uk/service/gb-nr:K05505/2022-09-16/detailed
https://www.realtimetrains.co.uk/service/gb-nr:K05505/2022-09-16/detailed
TT-ONR-NRN
Veteran Member
Is that the end of the blue ones now then?
Helvellyn
Established Member
- Joined
- 28 Aug 2009
- Messages
- 2,568
The could do with a full overhaul (ideally with the interior refurbishment) and a dedicated depot, ideally somewhere between Corby-Wellingborough because it'd be easier to split/attach units at the country end of the route, and path them to/from the depot. Whether DfT would sanction that is a whole other issue.
3973EXL
Established Member
- Joined
- 2 Feb 2017
- Messages
- 2,741
STP 16/09 5Q81 1510 Eastleigh Works - Cricklewood
https://www.realtimetrains.co.uk/service/gb-nr:K03391/2022-09-16/detailed
Both Caped.
Last edited:
sheepy1991
Member
- Joined
- 28 Feb 2009
- Messages
- 32
Where has the information regarding no maintenance contract being in place from 2019 come from? As far as I was aware that was never the case. Siemens were still responsible for maintenance right up until the end.
What has hurt the class 360 performance so much was the exodus of long term experienced staff at Ilford that worked for Siemens, with no future many left for pastures new and towards the end there were severe staff shortages.
The lack of a proper and thorough overhaul also didnt help matters but thats down to the ROSCO and not the TOC.
The corrosion in places on the underframe was horrendous having recieved absolutely no attention in 15 years of hard service.
RailWonderer
Established Member
GA staff who are forum members. 350s underwent corrosion repair and also the SWR Desiros but when GA got the long term franchise they were to be replaced so never had an overhaul.
43096
On Moderation
- Joined
- 23 Nov 2015
- Messages
- 18,742
The SWR Desiros are only now getting their first bodywork overhaul. Just as the 360s are.
sheepy1991
Member
- Joined
- 28 Feb 2009
- Messages
- 32
Thats odd as I also work for GA in the Engineering department and do not recall any GA Depot Staff being responsible for the Class 360 maintenance.
A few GA Engineering Staff were responsible for in service failures / incident recovery but that has been the case for many years and those staff members did not get involved in Maintenance tasks, that was always Siemens remit.
Regardless of the long term franchise award and full fleet replacement the ROSCO should have scheduled a C6 overhaul many moons ago. The class has looked unkept for a good few years. Using the long term award and full fleet replacement as an excuse to sweat the asset is not a reasonable argument. The class 170’s still recieved a C6 overhaul with the intention that they would be going to another operator (hence the different shade of carpet and grab handles to other stock in GA colours) and the class 360’s should not have been any different, they could have been painted in a basic base colour similar to the class 390’s until the new operator had been found and decided on a livery. After all a C6 is not just about making the train look pretty for the customer, it is also critical to keep corrosion and fatigue in check so that the vehicle can see out the designed service life.
The class 360’s only recieved scheduled bogie and major component overhauls similar to C4 overhauls which were mainly carried out at Ilford, they never received any body attention and that is plain to see.
As with almost all ROSCO’s the overhaul goalposts have been moved further and further apart and watered down excessively. The class 321’s for example should have recieved major refurbishment work 10 years before a small number of the Class were given the “Renatus” treatment. Porterbrook in all fairness were not too bad at looking after their Loco hauled assets at GA but the others left alot to be desired.
Just to note these are my personal views and opinions and not that of my employer.
They do feel a lot more tired than the equivalent SWR Desiro fleet built around the same time, and even the SE 375 fleet which predates them…
Given SE's normal levels of "care" for stock that comment is utterly damning about GA and possibly the ROSCO too.
Mikey C
Established Member
- Joined
- 11 Feb 2013
- Messages
- 8,237
The SE 375s are in decent nick, it's the Networkers and 376s which are looking "tired"
GEC465
Member
- Joined
- 10 Mar 2016
- Messages
- 413
376s have a planned refurb fairly soon. surprisingly none planned for the 465s
The 465s had a minor refresh not so long ago along with addition of PRM toilets. The “mainline” 465/9s also had a fairly extensive refurb a few years ago. The 376s are completely untouched since 2004/5 when they were first introduced and arguably more tatty inside than the Networkers these days.
Thats because Pre Covid they were destined for the scrapyard.
QSK19
Member
All these posts highlighting refurbs elsewhere, IMO, make things even more depressing for the Connect (and Regional for that matter) services and its passengers. It has been mentioned to death that Connect passengers effectively have a commuter/regional express service whilst paying IC fares. Not only that, but the 360s are part of EMR’s permanent fleet; so efforts should be going into getting those in shape - and the standard of refurb befitting of an IC service - instead of giving refurbs to stock elsewhere on the network that is/was probably in better condition pre-refurb than the 360s currently are (eg the 390s that I travelled on quite a few times over the past several years are/were much better than the 360s’ current state).
At least if the DfT are going to hand half-knackered, unwanted stock to the East Midlands, have the decency to respect the poor passengers who have to put up with them. The excuse of their being no money doesn’t cut it, especially given that they seem to magic some up for rolling stock investment elsewhere.
At least if the DfT are going to hand half-knackered, unwanted stock to the East Midlands, have the decency to respect the poor passengers who have to put up with them. The excuse of their being no money doesn’t cut it, especially given that they seem to magic some up for rolling stock investment elsewhere.
- Status