London Midland Class 172s

[adrock1976]

While having a look on the Abrail website for something else, I have noticed that regarding the Class 172 fleet that London Midland have, I have noticed that 172338 has been split in half with one of the coaches being attached to 172333.

Could somebody explain if that is the case or so, if this is a temporary measure, and if both 333 and 338 would be put back the way they were?

On a side note, it is ironic that both 333 and 338 are my last 2 required LM Class 172s for haulage.

 

[6Gman]

While having a look on the Abrail website for something else, I have noticed that regarding the Class 172 fleet that London Midland have, I have noticed that 172338 has been split in half with one of the coaches being attached to 172333.

Could somebody explain if that is the case or so, if this is a temporary measure, and if both 333 and 338 would be put back the way they were?

On a side note, it is ironic that both 333 and 338 are my last 2 required LM Class 172s for haulage.

How do you split a 3-car in half?

Wasn't the rearrangement following accident (fire?) damage?

 

[PHILIPE]

This thread may help on the background

http://www.railforums.co.uk/showthread.php?t=120446

 

[Kite159]

While having a look on the Abrail website for something else, I have noticed that regarding the Class 172 fleet that London Midland have, I have noticed that 172338 has been split in half with one of the coaches being attached to 172333.

Could somebody explain if that is the case or so, if this is a temporary measure, and if both 333 and 338 would be put back the way they were?

On a side note, it is ironic that both 333 and 338 are my last 2 required LM Class 172s for haulage.

172333 was still formed of one driving coach from 338 last Saturday (ironically attached to 222)

 

[XCTurbostar]

172338 was involved in both of the fires at some point. They'll have to renumber it 172346!
Thanks,
Ross

 

[SpacePhoenix]

They'll have to renumber it 172346!

Don't you mean 172666?

Did the fire damaged coaches return to service in the end or have they not yet been repaired?

 

[Sparks807Evo]

Would be good to have 172338's middle car and 172333's driving end back one day to get the extra unit back for the peaks, or for a bit of slack in the diagrams. Hard working units right now and minor attention needed on some. Few interior lights needing replacement, some wheelflats and couple of interior fittings needing tightening up.

 

[bnsf734]

I presume the fire damaged cars of 172 333 and 172 338 are sitting on Tyseley depot somewhere. Will they need to be fixed before the end of the franchise next year?

 

[Sparks807Evo]

I presume the fire damaged cars of 172 333 and 172 338 are sitting on Tyseley depot somewhere. Will they need to be fixed before the end of the franchise next year?

Probably is in the depot - or Derby?

It'd be great to have them fixed by October 2017, which is when the new franchise is meant to start, but heard no news on their progress.

I think it's a shame that the original option for an additional 26 Class 172 vehicles was never taken up (I believe that was the case). Would've provided extra peak capacity not just on the Snow Hill line, but on the Hereford services.

 

[43096]

I presume the fire damaged cars of 172 333 and 172 338 are sitting on Tyseley depot somewhere. Will they need to be fixed before the end of the franchise next year?

Believe they went to Wolverton for repair.

 

[Sparks807Evo]

Believe they went to Wolverton for repair.

Thanks for the info - hadn't realised they'd gone up to there.

 

[XCTurbostar]

Believe they went to Wolverton for repair.

Both must have gone by road then?

Thanks,
Ross

 

[43096]

Both must have gone by road then?

Thanks,
Ross

Correct!

 

[sk688]

How is it that the LM 172s keep setting on fire ?

Chiltern and LO 172s haven't , so why do LMs

 

[sprinterguy]

How is it that the LM 172s keep setting on fire ?

Chiltern and LO 172s haven't , so why do LMs

Two units caught fire within a short period during late 2015, they don't keep doing it. The issue that caused the fires was identified and appropriate remedial action put in place by London Midland. I don't know whether Chiltern or London Overground made any changes to their maintenance regime at the time, but the findings were communicated throughout the rail industry so the opportunity was there.

Why it was two London Midland units that caught fire could be down to simple probability due to them operating by far the largest fleet, or more intensive diagramming and higher periodic mileage (I don't know whether this is the case), or the maintenance regime.

 

[Old Hill Bank]

I understand that both of the fire damaged vehicles are due back with LM this month.

 

[Sparks807Evo]

I understand that both of the fire damaged vehicles are due back with LM this month.

Excellent news to hear - will be good to have 172338 back in action to aid the diagramming.

 

[172212]

I understand that both of the fire damaged vehicles are due back with LM this month.

They are both back in service, which is great to see. Although 172333 still has 50338, and 172338 has 50333, so they're both mismatched