Possible new 377 order

[northwichcat]

I've seen a rumour saying that 3 car 377s could be heading to the North West after electrification to be used on Blackpool and Scotland services. There would then be an order of new 4 car 377s which would both compliment the 3 car 377s used on Blackpool/Scotland services and also replace the cascaded 3 car 377s.

Although this is a rumour there does seem a lot of sense to it. Most North West platforms can't take 8 cars but the bigger stations can mainly take 6. It would allow extra carriages on Thameslink but not to the same extent as was proposed with the 319 cascade and likewise gives more carriages to the North but not as many as if the 319s came up here.

 

[sprinterguy]

hock: New. Electric. Trains? In the north? *Jaw hits floor*

Seeing as Thameslink has had no mention in the spending review, this doesn’t seem unfeasible: In terms of saving costs due to not furnishing Thameslink with a vast fleet of new trains to allow the 319s to head north, it’s a very sensible proposition. And the Manchester to Scotland corridor gets the mix of three and four car trains it’s after. 100mph EMUs, and with corridor connections between units too, excellent stuff.

And there’s the flexibility on the local services to match train length to demand, by running six car trains during the peaks and three cars during the quieter periods of the day. Though tbh, either a four car 319 or a six carriage pair of 377s would be like a dream compared to the current situation on the Manchester to Liverpool corridor.

 

[YorkshireBear]

see what you mean, we cant cdouble up 319's on alot fo routes and it does state that in RUS, we could do with loads fo 323's!

 

[Aictos]

If the 319s are good enough to be cascaded elsewhere after a refurbishment ie air conditioning being added, then why not just cancel the NXEMU and just stick with them on the Thameslink, bolstered by a fleet of FCC's own 377s meaning the vast majority of peak services would be 12 cars.

Or just cascade the 319s to Lancashire and to the West Country, cancel NXEMU and order enough 377s to cascade the 317s, 321s to NXEA and to use the 377s to run though services from Cambridge to Haywards Heath for example or Hertford North to Wimbledon for example.

In fact, I think ordering a tried and tested design like the 377/5 despite it's quirks is got to be more cost effective then going for a untried design like the NXEMU.

 

[tbtc]

In fact, I think ordering a tried and tested design like the 377/5 despite it's quirks is got to be more cost effective then going for a untried design like the NXEMU.

Yeah, I'd rather we concentrated on existing EMU types, otherwise we'll have fifty seven different EMU classes

 

[Pumbaa]

In fact, I think ordering a tried and tested design like the 377/5 despite it's quirks is got to be more cost effective then going for a untried design like the NXEMU.

What, you mean a design that still doesn't like working on the third Friday of every month, or when the wind speed ends in x7mph?!

Frankly, don't see it happening yet. Anyway, the plan was for the TPE services to be Desiro, with the order placed at the same time as for LM extra units. I think that one been trashed but still, sounds a tad far fetched to me!

 

[northwichcat]

Anyway, the plan was for the TPE services to be Desiro, with the order placed at the same time as for LM extra units.

The electrification report stated that electric units currently used on London Euston services would move to Manchester to Scotland services. It was later revealed that Northampton-Euston would get 5 car IEP units.

LM aren't due to get any new electric units unless their 323s are moved to Northern.

 

[Pumbaa]

The electrification report stated that electric units currently used on London Euston services would move to Manchester to Scotland services. It was later revealed that Northampton-Euston would get 5 car IEP units.

LM aren't due to get any new electric units unless their 323s are moved to Northern.

That is the same report that also contradicted itself, and as far as I know, we never got the bottom line. At one point it said cascaded stock from 350s released by IEP, then it said new build 350s, then it said new build tagged on from new order when the order tranches were decided and Northampton weren't getting the IEPs. Then it changed again when they decided Northampton might get IEPs.

To be honest, both routes plus an enhanced half-hourly Trent Valley service (1 as is, the second running straight from Stafford to Crewe then on to Liverpool) should get 444 style replacements. But back in the real world, not gonna happen.

 

[Scousefandan]

And some of the 377s are dual voltage, so could be used on the WCML using overhead wires...possibly via Newton as well (the Chat Moss). How good would it be to have Electrostars on these routes? And if the line speeds are increased, it would be a logical progression that these could be used for Lime Street-Manchester Airport services and possibly Blackpool-Wigan-Lime Street semi-fasts?

 

[Aictos]

Yeah, I'd rather we concentrated on existing EMU types, otherwise we'll have fifty seven different EMU classes

Which is why I feel we need to avoid the situation of such small batches of trains like the 180s for example, when Virgin placed a order for the Voyagers, what could have happened was a bid could have been placed for 222s and Virgin, Midland Mainline, Hull Trains and Great Western could have all gone with the design but with their own interiors which would meant instead of having 180s, 220s, 221s and 222s, they would have gone with the 222 design.

Far better then a few 180s and no one knows just what to do with them.

 

[sprinterguy]

Which is why I feel we need to avoid the situation of such small batches of trains like the 180s for example, when Virgin placed a order for the Voyagers, what could have happened was a bid could have been placed for 222s and Virgin, Midland Mainline, Hull Trains and Great Western could have all gone with the design but with their own interiors which would meant instead of having 180s, 220s, 221s and 222s, they would have gone with the 222 design.

Far better then a few 180s and no one knows just what to do with them.

Hindsight is a wonderful thing.

Problem is, at the time, no-one knew what would happen next. Plus Meridians didn't exist when Virgin ordered its 220s and 221s, the Meridians were a development from the Voyagers based on the experiences raised by a couple of years of Voyager operation: Hence the 222s being a much better product.

And at the time Virgin were ordering Voyagers, Midland Mainline had no idea that they would in future gain approval to run a St. Pancras to Leeds service (which was then withdrawn), which is why the nine carriage Meridians were ordered in the first place and the opportunity was taken to purchase a number of four carriage 222s as well.

Hull Trains hadn't had a chance to prove they had a steady, successful market and have the financial security to order new trains, that is, if Hull Trains were even running in 2000?

The 180s were definitely a mistake, but what would have been an even bigger mistake would have been if FGW had gone ahead and bought a big fleet of nine carriage 180s, withdrawn all of their HSTs, and THEN had all the problems they had with the Adelantes.

So the main problem is a lack of joined up thinking in a fragmented network, where a large number of different train designs are available to order by different TOCs based on what design suits them at that particular time. I agree that it would be much more convenient if there was just one standard design of 125mph Intercity train in 5 or 9 carriage formations available.

 

[northwichcat]

Far better then a few 180s and no one knows just what to do with them.

Remember the 180s were originally proposed for the open access London services run by North Western Trains which would have been in a fleet alongside 175s, which are of course of the same family.

Why 175s were ordered to replace the North West 101s and loco hauled over 170s is another question. Was it perhaps quicker delivery was promised with 175s?

 

[tbtc]

Which is why I feel we need to avoid the situation of such small batches of trains like the 180s for example, when Virgin placed a order for the Voyagers, what could have happened was a bid could have been placed for 222s and Virgin, Midland Mainline, Hull Trains and Great Western could have all gone with the design but with their own interiors which would meant instead of having 180s, 220s, 221s and 222s, they would have gone with the 222 design.

Far better then a few 180s and no one knows just what to do with them.

I agree 100%

Since privatisation we have 168/ 170/ 171/ 172/ 175/ 180/ 185/ 220/ 221/ 222s. Ten DMU classes. Realistically these could have been boiled down to two classes - 170 and 220 (possibly with a lower-speed 170 for local routes with a "corridor connection", and a "tilting" version of the 220).

It's even worse with EMUs, with lots of small classes (332 and 333 anyone?)

Whilst some of these small classes are okay in the short term, we are going to struggle to find suitable routes for them longer term (would you want a micro-class at your TOC?)
--- old post above --- --- new post below ---

Why 175s were ordered to replace the North West 101s and loco hauled over 170s is another question. Was it perhaps quicker delivery was promised with 175s?

Beats me. What can a 175 do that a 170 can't? What are we going to do with classes of about two dozen?

 

[asylumxl]

hock: New. Electric. Trains? In the north? *Jaw hits floor*

OMG!

Wait, when were the 333s made?!

 

[tbtc]

OMG!

Wait, when were the 333s made?!

True.

Mind you, a class of sixteen means they must be about the smallest class on the railways apart from the 139s!

 

[Neilandrewhall]

OMG!

Wait, when were the 333s made?!

the class 333 were built in 2000 mate

 

[jopsuk]

I agree 100%

Since privatisation we have 168/ 170/ 171/ 172/ 175/ 180/ 185/ 220/ 221/ 222s. Ten DMU classes. Realistically these could have been boiled down to two classes - 170 and 220 (possibly with a lower-speed 170 for local routes with a "corridor connection", and a "tilting" version of the 220).

The 170 was a technical improvement on the 168- which basically a pre-privatisation design. The 171 merely differs in coupler- the 170s have a coupler compatible with Sprinters, whilst the 171s are compatible with 377s. 172s are technical development further of the 170- lower speed, and one batch will have a corridor connector.

The 221 IS the tilting version of the 220.

Some of the class numbering as to whether different versions of trains count as sub-classes or "full" classes can be somewhat arbitrary.

 

[90019]

True.

Mind you, a class of sixteen means they must be about the smallest class on the railways apart from the 139s!

322s, class of 5

 

[jopsuk]

True.

Mind you, a class of sixteen means they must be about the smallest class on the railways apart from the 139s!

there's 5 class 322- though they're basically the same thing as a 321. But then the 333 and 332 are the same- the difference in numbering is, if anything, just a "vanity" thing (much as it was with the 322s, ordered for the start of the Stansted airport service).

And, of course, there's 14 180s. 16 171s.

 

[Helvellyn]

There could easily have been more 175s/180s ordered by other TOCs if they hadn't had such a troubled introduction to service. It was a similar case with the Class 458 EMUs on SWT. They were so troublesome that it helped give Siemens an opportunity to enter the UK market and win the Mark 1 replacement order on SWT with the Class 444 and 450 units. Alstom were effectively knocked out of the new UK train market by the problems with the 175/180/334/458/460 units.

 

[tbtc]

322s, class of 5

Okay, so you win!

If we carry on like this then the 139s (or even the "master and slave" class 13s from British Rail days) won't be the smallest class!

 

[Crossforth]

Okay, so you win!

If we carry on like this then the 139s (or even the "master and slave" class 13s from British Rail days) won't be the smallest class!

Carrying on even further, you could say the class 89... only 1

I assume the only major difference between the 332s and 333s is the amount of luggage space and first class on 332s?

 

[tbtc]

Carrying on even further, you could say the class 89... only 1

I assume the only major difference between the 332s and 333s is the amount of luggage space and first class on 332s?

True about the 89

I think the 332/333s are basically two flavours of the same thing, from what people have said they are mechanically the same (but one is five coaches with First Class etc and the other is shorter with standard only)

 

[asylumxl]

the class 333 were built in 2000 mate

Which is 12 years newer than a 319 still .

 

[ainsworth74]

Which is 12 years newer than a 319 still.

Shush, if we keep on with talk like that then the whole argument about Northern's rolling stock being ancient and clapped out will fall apart!

 

[YorkshireBear]

16 units built within last 10 years, still hardly big is it :P

 

[b0b]

Do we really want to keep 377's on the Thameslink route, isn't the dwell time at Farringdon to switch power systems a real pain?

 

[sprinterguy]

True.

Mind you, a class of sixteen means they must be about the smallest class on the railways apart from the 139s!

I'm slightly bemused as to why Northern Spirit and Metro didn't order a nice round 20 333s, and use them to replace the three 321s on Doncaster to Leeds: Instead, Neville Hill looks after two diminutive EMU fleets.

If new 377s are ordered for the north west, it'll be continuing a trend that sees the north getting new EMUs (roughly) every ten years:
1980: Merseyrail 507/508s
1990(ish, actually between 1990 and 1993): 321/9 and 323
2000: 333
2010: 377?

 

[northwichcat]

OMG!

Wait, when were the 333s made?!

Remember the Northern area covers most local services in three parliamentary regions: North West, Yorkshire, North East and the 333s were built for Yorkshire meaning the newest EMUs the North West has are the 323s built in the early 1990s which were only possible with GMPTE funding.
--- old post above --- --- new post below ---

I'm slightly bemused as to why Northern Spirit and Metro didn't order a nice round 20 333s, and use them to replace the three 321s on Doncaster to Leeds: Instead, Neville Hill looks after two diminutive EMU fleets.

The option was there. The money wasn't.

1980: Merseyrail 507/508s
1990(ish, actually between 1990 and 1993): 321/9 and 323
2000: 333
2010: 377?

507s were 1978 leaving around 15 years between them and the 323s.

 

[sprinterguy]

The option was there. The money wasn't..

Aha, the usual enemy; lack of funding!

507s were 1978 leaving around 15 years between them and the 323s.

Well, I wasn't being dead accurate with that analogy, it was more a generalised rule of thumb.

As you say though, with the northern belt split into four PTE areas and the wider northern area split into three parliamentary regions, then investment in electric trains in one area has no effect on adjoining areas (unless DMUs are released and cascaded their way). The promise of investment in ANY area of the north is good news though.