Again, we keep going round in complete circles, the money for conversions isn't there? This has been stated so many times, in addition, what benefit appears when you replace 350s (older than 387s) with 387s (slightly newer stock) ?
I hate to be negative, but why would GWR want older trains? Having to retrain staff and completely upgrade their facilities to get worse units makes minimal sense in any economic climate, let alone the current one.
I wouldn't go that far. The 350/2s don't have 3rd rail shoes, so will need extensive work to make them DC compatible. Again, there is no money to convert them.
Well, SE need new trains. It can be fulfilled with existing stock. SE need trains that can use third rail. SE want (doesnt matter too much) trains without a real first class. 387s are dual voltage and would not need too much modification. However the 387s that move to SE (from gwr, TL would use 379s) would need a replacement. The 350/2 are avaliable 110mph EMUs.
GWR have no reason to want older trains, it's that their current stock would be better used elsewhere.
For Metro operation, not the longer distance work.
SE want trains that already have DC capability, and I assume from that, don’t want to pay for conversions which will ultimately come out of the Government’s pocket.
www.railforums.co.uk
350/1s aren’t leaving LNWR? How would 387s be better used elsewhere and how would 350s aid GWR anymore than what 387s are doing?
The 350/2s would be best for metro ops but the 387s aren't half bad for that sort of operation given their history on TL. The 379s would not be suitable without an expensive interior refurbishment for definite...
Door cycles are too slow. They aren't yet fitted with DOO cameras.
Apologies if I have understood this wrong, but how does your proposal tie into the 379s at all? It only seems to include 350s and 387s?
380s are used on Scottish metro routes with two minutes between stops. 450s on the Reading, Windsor and Hounslow loop lines as well.
The 379s go to GN, who have always been the obvious choice for these trains. GN 387s go to SE. 350/2s go to GWR to so their 387s go to SE. The eventual idea being that the vast majority of 387s are operated by SE.
There aren't enough 379s to replace GN's 387s and GN don't need to replace 387s with an older fleet as well. Won't SE have a surplus stock anyway with your proposal or are you attempting to replace all networkers?
It would be to replace around half of the networker fleet, GN have surplus stock, their core service only needs 16 units(at peak with half hourly to KL) plus the peterbrough peak extras need 6(3 departures daily) so it's fine. SE can replace about half their networkers, including all the more troublesome ones.
This. The 379s are a solution looking for a problem if truth be told. Yes they are new and comfortable, but none of that will offset the fact that the railways are not in a good state financially and nobody can afford to lease the 379s right now. If they were affordable enough (and if they were wanted), then they would be in service right now - but they aren't, and that alone should be enough to prove that there is no demand for them right now.
I agree mostly, but it’s not about affordability. The issue is that DfT will not let the TOCs do what they think is best or to grow their businesses. I have had made clear to me (from a very reliable source) that most TOCS want to give (or at least make sensible offers of) pay rises, but they are suffocated by the government. What would be interesting would be if a TOC had the guts to stand up to DfT and just do it.
Yes, it does seem the DfT are behind a lot of this. I think that if given the chance someone like GTR would have taken on the 379s months ago; it's not a case of them not being wanted as such; but the DfT will likely not let them.
And they struggle to meet the timings.
The dft (through SE) have said that Southeastern needs new trains. The most "affordable" option will be existing trains(387s) cascaded from other operators(GN and GWR) who can use 379s and 350/2s to cover what they have.
I refer you to this thread again, as there is a dedicated discussion for this topic:
www.railforums.co.uk
Especially when the 387s would need various modifications like having batteries fitted to meet the tender.
The tender is pretty overambitious in terms of what it wants from the trains. The dft is going to have to compromise of it wants existing trains. The lease cost of the trains should significantly reduce if Akiem realistically believe that they could re-enter service. However it might be that the tender is deliberately designed to ensure that a new train order takes place.
This is incorrect, I think you may have misunderstood the tenders put in place: There is one that asks for NEW rolling stock, and the other asks for existing rolling stock, although, the latter's demands are hard to meet. Both closed on the 9th of December.
www.railforums.co.uk
www.railforums.co.uk
But the Southeastern suggestions aren't about growth, they're about replacing knackered Networkers (especially the Metro-Cammell ones) with existing 379s, whether directly or indirectly.
But the 379s don't have 3rd rail equipment, and conversion is unlikely to be economic. So who is currently operating dual-voltage EMUs (or AC EMUs that can be economically adapted) that could accept the 379 fleet to release trains to replace the networkers?
Which is why I also said "indirectly", as some of the other suggestions involve using the 379s to displace 387s
The 387s are a hated downgrade from the 365s on the Cambridge cruiser services. The 379s might be more suitable, from what I remember from their occasional trips north of Cambridge.
