Future of 321's

[Dave1987]

Hi I am a driver for GA and was wondering if anyone new what the future of the 321's is? I have heard rumour a plenty but does anyone know for sure if they are having a major upgrade or what?

Thanks in advance

David

 

[D365]

I would expect a refurbishment similar to that which is being trialled on 317722, with the GA fleet probably being done soon after their 317s. Hopefully the project will extend to all Mk3 EMUs, and possibly the PEPs (or even Networkers?).

 

[David Goddard]

That could certainly be a natural step to take. The 321s must have plenty of life in them still, and I believe that the entire fleet should move to Great Eastern, to provide a uniform fleet and ensure that they all get treated.

 

[DjU]

Nothing planned yet aside from the 317722 trial which will take place soon. Watch this space.

That's wrong for a start. 321448 is a Doncaster having a complete overhaul to be a test bed in a similar vein to 317722.

 

[D365]

That's wrong for a start. 321448 is a Doncaster having a complete overhaul to be a test bed in a similar vein to 317722.

I haven't heard anything about a 321 prototype; all the better if that is true.

 

[Tottenham Flyer]

That's wrong for a start. 321448 is a Doncaster having a complete overhaul to be a test bed in a similar vein to 317722.

I've heard on the grapevine that 321448 isn't having the complete overhaul anymore. It's just having the same work all the other bins have had. I maybe wrong....

 

[Pumbaa]

Methinks you are hearing correctly. Funds froze up after they couldn't get confirmation from the powers that be that the 32x will have a revenue earning future.

 

[Dave1987]

I've heard on the grapevine that 321448 isn't having the complete overhaul anymore. It's just having the same work all the other bins have had. I maybe wrong....

I drove 321448 the other day, that one has just had an internal refresh

 

[F1Ken]

The 321's are my favorites! There sweet looking, modern enough but still quirky with opening windows!

What are they like to drive? Id say they have another 20 years in them but I'm not a driver.

Ken

 

[A-driver]

321s are not too bad to drive-ok very under powered like a 317 (a 365 will reach 100 on the down fast by new barnet, a 321 or 317 will only just reach 100 by Hatfield-they struggle to get above 85 until potters bar-they actually loose speed in full power from wood green to Hadley wood). The brakes arnt bad but different to 317s etc and you find step 1 isn't nearly enough and step 2 is too much so you have to constantly fan them. But they have nice comfy cabs, quite smooth, and nice for lower speed work where you arnt getting much above 75. Just a nightmare in the slippy season.

 

[Dave1987]

The 321's brakes I find are better (except in left fall season when they seem to lock up very easily) as you have far more feel to the brakes. As regards to power it all depends if you have got a good set of motors or not, they are DC motors on 321 still.

 

[DjU]

Methinks you are hearing correctly. Funds froze up after they couldn't get confirmation from the powers that be that the 32x will have a revenue earning future.

Ah. Thanks for the clarification. Hadn't seen that 321448 had come back still thought it was up there following the original plan.

RE your other point about whether the ROSCOS deeming if it is worthwhile re-engineering them if they have no cast iron future, Tony Miles seem to drop a very similar hint a few weeks ago with regards to the 319's.


In the end it wouldn't be a spectacular surprise if 317722 ending up being a one off!

 

[F1Ken]

321s are not too bad to drive-ok very under powered like a 317 (a 365 will reach 100 on the down fast by new barnet, a 321 or 317 will only just reach 100 by Hatfield-they struggle to get above 85 until potters bar-they actually loose speed in full power from wood green to Hadley wood). The brakes arnt bad but different to 317s etc and you find step 1 isn't nearly enough and step 2 is too much so you have to constantly fan them. But they have nice comfy cabs, quite smooth, and nice for lower speed work where you arnt getting much above 75. Just a nightmare in the slippy season.

The 321's brakes I find are better (except in left fall season when they seem to lock up very easily) as you have far more feel to the brakes. As regards to power it all depends if you have got a good set of motors or not, they are DC motors on 321 still.

Interesting. Thanks.

Ken

 

[colchesterken]

Why are all the top people so obsessed with a new train set the politicans talk about the new trains since privatisation what about the fares
I would rather have trains that go are well maintained and safe rather than new shiny toys no one can afford to travel in
The 321 s need better seats possibly new bigger motors for a bit more power sort out disabled access and good for another 20 yrs
Anyone know why when they replaced the track from Colchester to Walton and Clacton they did not put it 6" lower and allow step free access

 

[D365]

Why are all the top people so obsessed with a new train set the politicans talk about the new trains since privatisation what about the fares
I would rather have trains that go are well maintained and safe rather than new shiny toys no one can afford to travel in
The 321 s need better seats possibly new bigger motors for a bit more power sort out disabled access and good for another 20 yrs

They may be obsessed but the Thameslink order is barely off the ground... And the long gaps we have between orders? The 317 project aims to achieve what you desire; new interiors and seats, DDA rebuild, Bombardier traction and other modifications which should keep rebuilt sets going 20 more years, as opposed to buying these "shiny toys".

 

[anthony263]

I suppose the class 321's could be used on an swanline stopping service from Swansea to Cardiff/Bristol and perhaps on the Maesteg services since I think they would be much more suitable than a class 315.

That said The last time I was on a class 321 it did seem a bit sluggish

 

[D365]

All Mk3 EMUs after the 317 have more power, including 319s and 321s. I think it will be 319s on GWML suburban unless a 110mph EMU is demanded. The 116+100 tender started by Southern may prove handy, at least in the short term.

 

[anthony263]

I am expecting new emu's for the GWML suburban services although perhaps we could see some class 319's (the last few that would still be operated by thameslink) heading down to Bristol to work some local electric services to Cardiff, Bath for example when the wires are erected to those destinations.

Still I would not be too surprised to see a class 319 or 321 making an appearance down in Swansea in about 6-7 years time.

Hopefully we will see soon the work that is being done to the class 315's since it does now seem very likely that these along with a few class 313's are set to make their way to the Cardiff Valleys

 

[Class377/5]

They may be obsessed but the Thameslink order is barely off the ground... And the long gaps we have between orders? The 317 project aims to achieve what you desire; new interiors and seats, DDA rebuild, Bombardier traction and other modifications which should keep rebuilt sets going 20 more years, as opposed to buying these "shiny toys".

However these 'shiney toys' are sometimes very needed. Thameslink is the case in question where nothing currently running is suitable.

I'd suggest people aren't obsessed but actually like to see better travelling environments. Thameslink naturally gets the attention due to it being a leap forward. However things like the electrifications currently under way require 'shiny toys' or they'd get lumbered with crappy pacers instead of a decent service they deserve.

Remember not everyone gets new units but the more we have and the better the passenger (the very people expected to be paying 75% of the railways costs soon) has a chance of a seat. And at the end of the day that's what matters, the passenger.

 

[D365]

I understand that; a uniform, high-acceleration fleet is needed to enable a high frequency service, of which we have none in Britain. However, we should seek to continue using our existing assets as efficiently as possible, and only buy new where we can justify it.

For example, is the extra cost of buying new 110mph rolling stock for GWML suburban worthwhile as opposed to refurbished 319s? Ditto replacing Greater Anglia 317s/321s (and 360s, with 379s?) instead of refurbishing the former two. Although when buying new stock, displaced stock can be reused elsewhere.

 

[Tottenham Flyer]

Why are all the top people so obsessed with a new train set the politicans talk about the new trains since privatisation what about the fares
I would rather have trains that go are well maintained and safe rather than new shiny toys no one can afford to travel in
The 321 s need better seats possibly new bigger motors for a bit more power sort out disabled access and good for another 20 yrs
Anyone know why when they replaced the track from Colchester to Walton and Clacton they did not put it 6" lower and allow step free access

Because 6" may not be of any benefit to a class 360, which also use that section of line. What about the OHLE? I'm no expert in that field, but lowering the track bed by 6", will the pans on the 360's and 321's reach another 6" to maintain contact? (I don't know how high they already have to go up there)

Then there's the extra engineering work time, and lets face it, there's enough of that already without putting more work into it all!

 

[SprinterMan]

I've heard on the grapevine that 321448 isn't having the complete overhaul anymore. It's just having the same work all the other bins have had. I maybe wrong....

I drove 321448 the other day, that one has just had an internal refresh

Thank god they aren't doing 321448 anymore, GA need all the units they can get. TBH only one Mark 3 EMU needs the test refurbishment, and anything other than 317722 seems like overkill, especially as it is only a test. 317/7s are the most sluggish of all the Mark 3 EMUs due to them being very underpowered like all 317s, but are heavier and have pseudo-aircon so are quite slow away. Hopfeully the AC traction package fixes this.

Is it coincidence that we have 2 different fleets of purpose built express EMUs (317/7s and 460s) out of use right now, and both are being rebuilt into other things (something more commuter-ish)?

Adam

 

[Class377/5]

I understand that; a uniform, high-acceleration fleet is needed to enable a high frequency service, of which we have none in Britain. However, we should seek to continue using our existing assets as efficiently as possible, and only buy new where we can justify it.

For example, is the extra cost of buying new 110mph rolling stock for GWML suburban worthwhile as opposed to refurbished 319s? Ditto replacing Greater Anglia 317s/321s (and 360s, with 379s?) instead of refurbishing the former two. Although when buying new stock, displaced stock can be reused elsewhere.

But the refurishished 319s weren't built for 110mph so unless you rebuild the body you might as well buy new and use the 319s elsewhere. Plenty of places where you could use more electric stock, especially now.

However you missed my point as I said neither new build or refurishished units alone is the soluation but both. In fact I mentioned displacement in my post as well.

However calling those who are asking for new stock obsessed is wrong as it referring to new units as 'shiney toys'. You forget there's a need for additional electric trains that means simply we need new to meet all the requirements. Transpennie is a good example of this. Thameslink order just doesn't affect Thameslink but has wide ranging effects that could affect today's Southern, FGW and Northern. People are worried, rightly, what they are going to get after finally getting the wires up. To use remarks like that over looks that and you seem to be suggesting we can only refurish units and everything will be ok. It not.

 

[jopsuk]

Anyone know why when they replaced the track from Colchester to Walton and Clacton they did not put it 6" lower and allow step free access

For the same reason that there's a surprisingly big step from Cambridge Platforms 7 and 8 (brand new, arrow straight, level and on low speed lines) to all the stock that uses it?

(I don't know what that reason is, but it confuses me)

 

[D365]

But the refurishished 319s weren't built for 110mph so unless you rebuild the body you might as well buy new and use the 319s elsewhere. Plenty of places where you could use more electric stock, especially now.

However you missed my point as I said neither new build or refurishished units alone is the soluation but both. In fact I mentioned displacement in my post as well.

However calling those who are asking for new stock obsessed is wrong as it referring to new units as 'shiney toys'. You forget there's a need for additional electric trains that means simply we need new to meet all the requirements. Transpennie is a good example of this. Thameslink order just doesn't affect Thameslink but has wide ranging effects that could affect today's Southern, FGW and Northern. People are worried, rightly, what they are going to get after finally getting the wires up. To use remarks like that over looks that and you seem to be suggesting we can only refurish units and everything will be ok. It not.

I know the 319s aren't 110mph and won't ever be. Only post-privatisation EMUs (Desiros -350- and Electrostars) have a chance of being upgraded.

But then again, new 110mph EMUs on GWML would be ideal if displaced Thameslink/GN stock can be used fully elsewhere. I'm sure we do not want to see more useful assets being left to rot. It depends partially on who will be prepared to "splash out" on new stock (where entry to service is more under customer's control) as opposed to being satisfied with [refurbished] EMUs which may not fit requirements exactly.

There's a lot of factors and decisions involved, most of which I've forgotten about! Please excuse me if I don't make myself clear :roll:

 

[Tottenham Flyer]

I've heard on the grapevine that 321448 isn't having the complete overhaul anymore. It's just having the same work all the other bins have had. I maybe wrong....

Ignore me. I have it on good authority 321448 is still at Doncaster, and is not due back at Ilford until January.

 

[Dave1987]

Hi one of my collegues has said one of the rail magazines states 321448 is going to be used for this test.

 

[SprinterMan]

Hi one of my collegues has said one of the rail magazines states 321448 is going to be used for this test.

This was what originally was going to happen, but its not now (or maybe it is). I thought you drove it the other day? :P

Ignore me. I have it on good authority 321448 is still at Doncaster, and is not due back at Ilford until January.

But this fella drove it the other day (!) :P

I drove 321448 the other day, that one has just had an internal refresh

Very confused now. Abrail list it as being in Red & White colours, implying it has come back.

Adam

 

[Tottenham Flyer]

This was what originally was going to happen, but its not now (or maybe it is). I thought you drove it the other day? :P

But this fella drove it the other day (!) :P

Very confused now. Abrail list it as being in Red & White colours, implying it has come back.

Adam

It is happening although some things are happening and some things aren't. I'm not allowed to say too much. I've been corrected by someone in the know tonight.

Maybe it wasn't 448?? 438 maybe? I'm told that 448 is very much still at Donny, will be until at least January, and that's all I can say.

It will be red and white when it comes back

 

[Dave1987]

Hi I maybe wrong then it might have been 438! If it's at Doncaster then I can't have driven it! Lol