Future of Class 379

[Trainbike46]

I do think the decision to park some up near the sea is odd: If they expected to find a new TOC to take them on, then wouldn't it have been safer to park them elsewhere? And if they didn't expect to get a new lease, why didn't they just send them to be turned into razorblades right away?

For the first case there would have been less risk of corrosion, and in the second case less costs for storing them

 

[dk1]

I do think the decision to park some up near the sea is odd: If they expected to find a new TOC to take them on, then wouldn't it have been safer to park them elsewhere? And if they didn't expect to get a new lease, why didn't they just send them to be turned into razorblades right away?

For the first case there would have been less risk of corrosion, and in the second case less costs for storing them

I think there’s space round the back at Potters, Ely but that place was always rather expensive.

 

[JonathanH]

I do think the decision to park some up near the sea is odd: If they expected to find a new TOC to take them on, then wouldn't it have been safer to park them elsewhere? And if they didn't expect to get a new lease, why didn't they just send them to be turned into razorblades right away?

I think the convenience of Harwich was the space available near to where the units operated. If they had gone to Great Northern in line with the suggested plans they would have been there for two or three months at worst. I doubt it was expected that the Great Northern move would fall through. Clearly it now costs money to move them somewhere else.

Putting them in a field isn't much better. The 365s at Crewe similarly deteriorated nowhere near the sea and I can imagine that stuff at Ely isn't getting better thanks to its storage either.

 

[Jturner98]

I think there’s space round the back at Potters, Ely but that place was always rather expensive.

Don’t know about space as there is quite a few 317s still there but it might be the fact that potters is being used by angel trains.

 

[bramling]

I think the convenience of Harwich was the space available near to where the units operated. If they had gone to Great Northern in line with the suggested plans they would have been there for two or three months at worst. I doubt it was expected that the Great Northern move would fall through. Clearly it now costs money to move them somewhere else.

Putting them in a field isn't much better. The 365s at Crewe similarly deteriorated nowhere near the sea and I can imagine that stuff at Ely isn't getting better thanks to its storage either.

It should be relatively well known that stored stock deteriorates, not sure why this should be a surprise to anyone. The industry shouldn’t be planning to have stock redundant in this way, but unfortunately the leasing setup encourages it, not helped by the DFT’s more recent rolling stock policy which is to encourage new stock without giving thought to what happens to the displaced stock.

 

[Mamorin]

The DFT needs to drop this idea that new trains are always better, while new trains are nice there is nothing wrong with allowing good rolling stock in storage from being reused.

I wonder if the DFT’s view will change given the high interest rates.

Also if Northern can’t get a good price on 20 hybrid 195s then what chance does any other TOC stand at getting a good price on some new trains, we need to reuse useable non life expired trains that are in storage where possible.

 

[dk1]

Don’t know about space as there is quite a few 317s still there but it might be the fact that potters is being used by angel trains.

Possibly. Looks room round the back.

 

[skyhigh]

Also if Northern can’t get a good price on 20 hybrid 195s then what chance does any other TOC stand at getting a good price on some new trains

Partly that an order of either 40 or 60 vehicles is not particularly large.
Partly that by specifying the manufacturer and unit type you lose the competitive element that can bring down prices
Partly that there is other aspects at play and it wasn't just price that caused the stoppage with 195s.

Just because one order didn't go ahead for various reasons it doesn't mean that nobody is going to get new trains at a fair price.

== Doublepost prevention - post automatically merged: 16 Oct 2022 ==

we need to reuse useable non life expired trains that are in storage where possible.

Don't really see what that has to do with new hybrid orders. Is there a suitable fleet of hybrid 195-compatible units sitting around spare somewhere?

 

[Mamorin]

Don't really see what that has to do with new hybrid orders. Is there a suitable fleet of hybrid 195-compatible units sitting around spare somewhere?

I should have been more clear when I said what I said as I ment reusing any rolling stock in storage, I was not referring to Northern’s hybrid order when I said that.

 

[Jturner98]

The DFT needs to drop this idea that new trains are always better, while new trains are nice there is nothing wrong with allowing good rolling stock in storage from being reused.

I wonder if the DFT’s view will change given the high interest rates.

Also if Northern can’t get a good price on 20 hybrid 195s then what chance does any other TOC stand at getting a good price on some new trains, we need to reuse useable non life expired trains that are in storage where possible.

With all the problems with the new trains it would make sense to use a proven design like the Electrostar

 

[Mamorin]

Sadly Electrostars are not built anymore, however sending the 379s to replace some ageing and life expired BR era rolling stock would be a great idea. But the DFT won’t allow it due to the high leasing cost.

 

[JonathanH]

Sadly Electrostars are not built anymore

Are rolling stock manufacturers really expected to keep making the same trains indefinitely? The electrostar production run was over 15 years.

 

[RailWonderer]

No they couldn't, even in an 'ideal world'. It has been explained many times that neither the 379s or 350/2s are appropriate to replace the 323s, and neither is there an indirect possibility. It has equally been noted that there is already a plan to replace the 313s, that is just stalling on movements of other stock.


The other 19 are stored in the open as well of course and aren't exactly being kept 'warm'. No doubt they also need an overhaul.

For Northern it was about platform lengths, where 6 cars is the maximum, so only a single 4 car 350/379 could run. That said, they could easily run 8 cars and use SDO/ASDO but then it's a matter of associated costs of putting that in place that the DfT/Northern won't want to do.

 

[Mamorin]

Northern won’t get the 379s nor the 350/2s even if the 323s needed replacing as 323s have a higher capacity than both the 379s and 350/2s. Northern would not install SDO/ASDO due to cost though.

Speaking of SDO/ASDO do the 379s really not have that? I would have thought they may have had that.

 

[py_megapixel]

Northern won’t get the 379s nor the 350/2s even if the 323s needed replacing as 323s have a higher capacity than both the 379s and 350/2s. Northern would not install SDO/ASDO due to cost though.

They may have less seating capacity but that obviously comes with more standing room, plus more of the seats will be used as there aren't any middle seats. 331s do occasionally substitute for 323s without causing any capacity issues. (184 seats on a 3-car 331, or about 220 if you were to replace the first class with standard on a 4-car 379, vice 275 on a 3-car 323)

 

[Mamorin]

The DFT only cares about the current seating capacity and does not care that with standing and a refurb a 379 might be better than a 323 capacity wise.

Hence another reason why, along with Northern getting more 323s the 379s won’t go to Northern.

 

[Shwam3]

Northern won’t get the 379s nor the 350/2s even if the 323s needed replacing as 323s have a higher capacity than both the 379s and 350/2s. Northern would not install SDO/ASDO due to cost though.

Speaking of SDO/ASDO do the 379s really not have that? I would have thought they may have had that.

379s do have ASDO, the cost would be in updating the database on the train but this is necessary regardless of where they go as you otherwise wouldn't be able to release the doors anywhere.

 

[Mamorin]

Thanks for answering my question on wether the 379s have SDO/ASDO.

 

[dk1]

Two of the Norwich based 379s have been removed from the Wensum Sdgs and are now on the depot. Somewhat different to the others spoken about on here as these look spotless and well kept in storage.

 

[Southern Dvr]

Two of the Norwich based 379s have been removed from the Wensum Sdgs and are now on the depot. Somewhat different to the others spoken about on here as these look spotless and well kept in storage.

These presumably being the ‘showroom’ units for any prospective leaser to see!

 

[Mamorin]

With the high leasing costs who is going to want them?

 

[Trainbike46]

With the high leasing costs who is going to want them?

The ROSCO clearly must believe they can find someone, because why else would they spend money keeping them spotless? In addition, it would be cheaper to send them off to metal recycling if the ROSCO believes they have no future.

Maybe they're hoping for better than expected passenger returns on GTR, leading on to another chance of them going to Great Northern?

Though with the 350s becoming available as well, there might be more competition between ROSCOs for any operator looking for more EMUs

 

[dk1]

These presumably being the ‘showroom’ units for any prospective leaser to see!

No doubt. They look immaculate.

== Doublepost prevention - post automatically merged: 18 Oct 2022 ==

018 and 023 now on 3rd at Norwich Crown Point.

 

[43102EMR]

No doubt. They look immaculate.

== Doublepost prevention - post automatically merged: 18 Oct 2022 ==

018 and 023 now on 3rd at Norwich Crown Point.

Any word re their future?

 

[Mamorin]

So far no news regarding the future of the 379s @43102EMR.

== Doublepost prevention - post automatically merged: 18 Oct 2022 ==

Nice photograph @dk1. Those 379s do look really clean, I hope somebody leases the 379s before the leasing company possibly scraps them.

 

[dk1]

So far no news regarding the future of the 379s @43102EMR.

== Doublepost prevention - post automatically merged: 18 Oct 2022 ==

Nice photograph @dk1. Those 379s do look really clean, I hope somebody leases the 379s before the leasing company possibly scraps them.

Thank you. Yes me too mate.

 

[Techniquest]

Gorgeous photo that fair game, that brought back some nice memories from when they were still new Hopefully a home will be found for them, but I don't see it happening any time soon.

 

[Ayman Ilham]

What about converting them to bi-mode a la 319 to 769? That way they would have much more possible homes if they gain diesel capabilities; call them the Class 779.

== Doublepost prevention - post automatically merged: 18 Oct 2022 ==

The ROSCO clearly must believe they can find someone, because why else would they spend money keeping them spotless? In addition, it would be cheaper to send them off to metal recycling if the ROSCO believes they have no future.

Maybe they're hoping for better than expected passenger returns on GTR, leading on to another chance of them going to Great Northern?

Though with the 350s becoming available as well, there might be more competition between ROSCOs for any operator looking for more EMUs

Why are the lease costs so expensive in the first place? Any possibility of an open access operator using them for a new service?

 

[Mamorin]

What about converting them to bi-mode a la 319 to 769? That way they would have much more possible homes if they gain diesel capabilities; call them the Class 779.

That would be a huge mistake. The 769 conversion program was full of issues, so much so that Portorbrook feel that the Class 769 should have been a one off prototype.

 

[AlexNL]

Why are the lease costs so expensive in the first place?

My guess would be that the trains were procured in roughly 2007/2008, and that Macquarie funded them by lending money on the commercial market. At the time the interest rates on loans were very high (the BofE lists the April 2008 Bank Rate at 5.00%) and I would expect the interest rate agreed to by Macquarie to be pretty high as well. This has a direct effect on the lease rate.

Whether the loans can be restructured will probably depend on the terms of the original loan, contractual stipulations, and whether Macquarie/Akiem are even willing to go through the hassle.

Interest rates plummeted a few years later (among others due to years of quantitative easing policies) which made buying new, like Greater Anglia have done, much more interesting than continuing the lease of the 379s. Interest rates are rising again, so perhaps eventually the fleet will be of interest again to an operator looking for AC trains.

I wonder how much longer they're willing to keep the 379s around before they decide to have the units scrapped. After all, now they only cost money in upkeep in storage and they have no income from them.