Future of Class 458s

[dorsetdesiro]

What does anyone reckon the Class 458's future will be post-SWR?

Southern may be "Bombardier exclusive", perhaps for the Coastway services, just put down carpets?

 

[4REP]

South eastern should take on these as well as the 707s and replace 466s. Your gaining more carriages so 5 car replaces 2 cars = more capacity.

 

[Energy]

South eastern should take on these as well as the 707s and replace 466s. Your gaining more carriages so 5 car replaces 2 cars = more capacity.

I wouldn't give SE another fleet, the 458s aren't known to be that reliable although they are meant to be quite reliable right now. SE aren't required to take them either and with neither the 376s, 465s or 466s being owned by Porterbrook, who own the 458s, it wouldn't be easy to swap them. For the next franchise I expect more 707s to be ordered to take over the metro routes.

 

[4-SUB 4732]

I wouldn't give SE another fleet, the 458s aren't known to be that reliable although they are meant to be quite reliable right now. SE aren't required to take them either and with neither the 376s, 465s or 466s being owned by Porterbrook, who own the 458s, it wouldn't be easy to swap them. For the next franchise I expect more 707s to be ordered to take over the metro routes.

Weigh then in.

 

[hwl]

I wouldn't give SE another fleet, the 458s aren't known to be that reliable although they are meant to be quite reliable right now. SE aren't required to take them either and with neither the 376s, 465s or 466s being owned by Porterbrook, who own the 458s, it wouldn't be easy to swap them. For the next franchise I expect more 707s to be ordered to take over the metro routes.

I'd expect they tender would tender for a complete new metro fleet rather than just buy more 707s. The 707 move is about Angel getting some more for them rather than anything deeply strategic.

 

[43096]

Perhaps an area for their re-use would be in Scotland, subject to conversion to AC.

With a lack of much else to do, I had a quick look at the fleet composition in terms of general vehicle types, and there are enough 458 vehicles to replace the 55 Class 318/320 fleet (165 vehicles) in its entirety. The starting point is the 30 original 458 sets where the current middle car (helpfully complete with disabled access toilet) has a pantograph well. That gives 30 x 4-car sets. Now the Glasgow suburban network is based around 3 or 6 car 20m length vehicles, so to make this work needs the former 460 fleet. The ex-460 fleet includes 48 intermediate vehicles, of which half are motors (those in 458501-530 no longer provide traction power, but do still have inverters etc) and half are trailers.

So, to replace the entire 318/320 fleet you would form up 24 x 6-car sets, with the original 4-car having a motor and a trailer added to maintain power:weight ratio. That leaves 6 sets, that you can either leave as 4-car or cut to 3-car and make compatible with the 334 fleet. That gives either 162 or 168 vehicles.

So a 6-car set would be formed DM - M - T - T - M - DM and a 3/4-car set as DM - T (- M) - DM.

The obvious issues are: it's yet another mix-around of the 458s and conversion to AC with all the issues of that. It also assumes that the traction motors are still available from the 460 motor cars currently running in 458501-530.

The benefits are: allows replacement of the 318/320 fleets with upgrade in terms of air-conditioning and passenger environment for Glasgow suburban work, brings the entire Juniper fleet together in one location and gives Shields depot only 2 types to maintain: Junipers and 380s.

 

[Clansman]

Perhaps an area for their re-use would be in Scotland, subject to conversion to AC.

With a lack of much else to do, I had a quick look at the fleet composition in terms of general vehicle types, and there are enough 458 vehicles to replace the 55 Class 318/320 fleet (165 vehicles) in its entirety. The starting point is the 30 original 458 sets where the current middle car (helpfully complete with disabled access toilet) has a pantograph well. That gives 30 x 4-car sets. Now the Glasgow suburban network is based around 3 or 6 car 20m length vehicles, so to make this work needs the former 460 fleet. The ex-460 fleet includes 48 intermediate vehicles, of which half are motors (those in 458501-530 no longer provide traction power, but do still have inverters etc) and half are trailers.

So, to replace the entire 318/320 fleet you would form up 24 x 6-car sets, with the original 4-car having a motor and a trailer added to maintain power:weight ratio. That leaves 6 sets, that you can either leave as 4-car or cut to 3-car and make compatible with the 334 fleet. That gives either 162 or 168 vehicles.

So a 6-car set would be formed DM - M - T - T - M - DM and a 3/4-car set as DM - T (- M) - DM.

The obvious issues are: it's yet another mix-around of the 458s and conversion to AC with all the issues of that. It also assumes that the traction motors are still available from the 460 motor cars currently running in 458501-530.

The benefits are: allows replacement of the 318/320 fleets with upgrade in terms of air-conditioning and passenger environment for Glasgow suburban work, brings the entire Juniper fleet together in one location and gives Shields depot only 2 types to maintain: Junipers and 380s.

I mind working out the numbers on a thread years ago because someone was hell bent on the idea. Numbers wise it worked out well, similar to your numbers, but the practicalities suggest otherwise.

The cost of such a conversion would render it unfeasable even at drawing board level, if memory of previous discussion serves me correct. Additionally, 334s have less capacity than 320s/318s both seating and standing wise, so unless any 334 hybrid could include interior specs (ie 3 + 2 throughout and removal of interior partitions), then there isn't any benefit to passengers - let alone ScotRail for investing in a major refurbishment and retractioning program of a fleet that's only 10 years younger than the 320s. More pleasant to travel on, granted, but in the grand scheme of things there's not really any upside as far as ScotRail are concerned.

Edit: Funnily enough, it was in response to your own misgivings about another user's idea for this very thing!

 

[CM]

I mind working out the numbers on a thread years ago because someone was hell bent on the idea. Numbers wise it worked out well, similar to your numbers, but the practicalities suggest otherwise.

The cost of such a conversion would render it unfeasable even at drawing board level, if memory of previous discussion serves me correct. Additionally, 334s have less capacity than 320s/318s both seating and standing wise, so unless any 334 hybrid could include interior specs (ie 3 + 2 throughout and removal of interior partitions), then there isn't any benefit to passengers - let alone ScotRail for investing in a major refurbishment and retractioning program of a fleet that's only 10 years younger than the 334s. More pleasant to travel on, granted, but in the grand scheme of things there's not really any upside as far as ScotRail are concerned.

Edit: Funnily enough, it was in response to your own misgivings about another user's idea for this very thing!

Just to point out that the 458s are roughly the same age as the 334s and not 10 years younger.

 

[Speed43125]

Just to point out that the 458s are roughly the same age as the 334s and not 10 years younger.

I suspect that was a typo and was intended to say 10 years younger than the class 320

 

[Clansman]

I suspect that was a typo and was intended to say 10 years younger than the class 320

Indeed, thank you for highlighting this.