• Our new ticketing site is now live! Using either this or the original site (both powered by TrainSplit) helps support the running of the forum with every ticket purchase! Find out more and ask any questions/give us feedback in this thread!

Southern add 40 vehicles to order

Status
Not open for further replies.

D365

Veteran Member
Joined
29 Jun 2012
Messages
13,195
In the same way the 507s and 508s were practically new after the Merseyrail refurbishments and now they're really struggling to try and get 40 years out of them?

That didn't involve anything 'under the bonnet' did it? Strange because the 313s at least are doing alright... I'm not sure that AC traction alone will get 317s to last 20 more years; other work has to be done, surely?


That's not entirely correct. Press releases have confirmed that the TPE units will be spec'ed to include a more long distance style interior and that the TPE units will be leased directly by TPE and maintained by Siemens at Ardwick, not subleased from LM as some older reports suggested.

Isn't TP supposed to receive a shiny new batch of 100mph+ EMUs as and when further electrification comes online? The 350/4s are (or were) supposed to be used for some years and sent down to Midland to join their siblings.
 
Sponsor Post - registered members do not see these adverts; click here to register, or click here to log in
R

RailUK Forums

ainsworth74

Forum Staff
Staff Member
Global Moderator
Joined
16 Nov 2009
Messages
31,126
Location
Redcar
Isn't TP supposed to receive a shiny new batch of 100mph+ EMUs as and when further electrification comes online? The 350/4s are (or were) supposed to be used for some years and sent down to Midland to join their siblings.

That was the plan and personally I still think it's logical (TPE get a uniform fleet and LM get some extra capacity and a unformish fleet) but heavens alone know what the plan is now (if there even is one).
 

northwichcat

Veteran Member
Joined
23 Jan 2009
Messages
32,692
Location
Northwich
That didn't involve anything 'under the bonnet' did it? Strange because the 313s at least are doing alright... I'm not sure that AC traction alone will get 317s to last 20 more years; other work has to be done, surely?

Originally no but since then the wheels have been replaced by a newer long lasting type and the third rail shoes have also been replaced.


Isn't TP supposed to receive a shiny new batch of 100mph+ EMUs as and when further electrification comes online? The 350/4s are (or were) supposed to be used for some years and sent down to Midland to join their siblings.

There is nothing for certain on this. Some media reports said North TPE would get refurbished 365s if commuter IEP goes ahead and replaces the 365s. It could also replace the 350s on Northampton-London meaning LM need less 350s not more 350s.

There have been suggestions that the Manchester Airport to Scotland route will go to either LM or the future ICWC franchise.

The Manchester Airport services may get Liverpool portions added in the future, but again that's not for certain.
 

D365

Veteran Member
Joined
29 Jun 2012
Messages
13,195
No, I don't want to lose my darling 365s!

Should Manchester Airport longer-distance and similar receive Pendos? If the ICWC fiasco is sorted out... London Midland to Scotland?
 

swt_passenger

Veteran Member
Joined
7 Apr 2010
Messages
34,308
That's not entirely correct. Press releases have confirmed that the TPE units will be spec'ed to include a more long distance style interior and that the TPE units will be leased directly by TPE and maintained by Siemens at Ardwick, not subleased from LM as some older reports suggested.

I agree - and the word used in the ITT for the units was that LM would order the stock as an add on to their own but the contract would be 'novated' to TPE.

'Novated' means a contract is completely transferred - so a 'sublease' was never intended.
 

D365

Veteran Member
Joined
29 Jun 2012
Messages
13,195
There are proposals for LM to run slow Birmingham-Preston and Manchester-Stone-Birmingham services so if they get the green light Manchester Airport-Scotland doesn't look so out-of-place with LM.

Ah, OK. Not very London-y though up there!

In case anyone is interested, I have updated the Class 377 Wikipedia page with the 40 extra vehicles, as well as the Class 350 page for the 350/1 110mph upgrade.
 

John55

Member
Joined
24 Jun 2011
Messages
800
Location
South East
Do you recall the renewed underground track in Liverpool city centre a few years ago? The 507s and 508s needed wheel modifications to be able to run on it, which led to many cancelled and short formed services after the works were supposed to have been completed.

The problems on the sharply curved loop are more fundamental than wheel modifications. The track and rolling stock is actually incompatible as described in the RAIB report into the derailment at Central Station 6 years ago. This is unfortunately a result of BR poor engineering of the time which has cost the Merseyrail passengers dear over the last 40 years.

The wheel modifications which If I remember correctly is a modified wheel profile is an attempt to ameliorate the problems not solve them. From the report into one of the problems I remember one proposed solution involved putting grease into the flange lubricators. Not impressive from the track maintainers.

The issues with OHLE and pantographs is trivial in comparision.

In the same way the 507s and 508s were practically new after the Merseyrail refurbishments and now they're really struggling to try and get 40 years out of them?

The refurbishment was above floor only with the traction equipment left untouched during the refurbishment. Changes have been made at other times to improve the reliability of the doors and traction motors in common with other emus from the same family.

The last time I saw any figures (from the article in Modern Railways) The 507s & 508s are more reliable now than 5 years ago. The services I use on Merseyrail don't seem to be affected by rolling stock issues but by the usual issues with signalling & track faults as well as the less usual forgetting to turn the pumps on after engineering works!

If the reliability of rolling stock was reported as breakdowns per station stop (a perfectly reasonable approach) the results would be completely different to those normally reported.

One should be cautious about taking statements from those trying to justify replacing the trains and trying to get lots of money out of the Government to do so at face value.
 

tbtc

Veteran Member
Joined
16 Dec 2008
Messages
18,061
Location
Reston City Centre
I really feel sorry for the people who have to use the trains in the NW, even after electrification they dont get nice new trains but knackered things with no aircon from the south!

I wouldn't - there's a long tradition of newly electrified lines getting cascaded stock from elsewhere for the first few years.

The North Berwick branch got 1960s class 305s after electrification, eventually replaced by 322s from 1990 - only getting brand new EMUs (380s) after almost twenty years of electrification.

The Airedale/ Wharfdale lines in West Yorkshire got 308s (first built in 1959) with a coach taken out - only five years later did they get three coach 333s (later extended to four coaches).

The Valley Lines electrification is widely expected to see cascaded 315s (made redundant from Crossrail).

The 86s were at least fifteen years old when they were put on the newly electrified London - Norwich line - later replaced by Class 90s that were a similar age when they moved to East Anglia.

I'm not sure why those in the North West would have had any expectation of getting brand new trains (especially as the redundant 319s were one of the main justifications for the initial plan to electrify).
 

IanXC

Emeritus Moderator
Joined
18 Dec 2009
Messages
6,615
I suppose the question which does arise is how many EMUs will be surplus when the Thameslink stock is delivered, and the 319s are available for cascade.

If further stock is being ordered to "fill the gap" then surely the logical conclusion is that further routes will now be electrified to use this stock?
 

HSTEd

Veteran Member
Joined
14 Jul 2011
Messages
20,361
Has the Thameslink order actually gone through yet?

This is not the build up to the whole thing being scrapped and replaced with lots of Class 377 orders or something right?
 

IanXC

Emeritus Moderator
Joined
18 Dec 2009
Messages
6,615
Has the Thameslink order actually gone through yet?

This is not the build up to the whole thing being scrapped and replaced with lots of Class 377 orders or something right?

I thought the Thameslink outcomes could not be delivered without ATO?
 

tbtc

Veteran Member
Joined
16 Dec 2008
Messages
18,061
Location
Reston City Centre
I suppose the question which does arise is how many EMUs will be surplus when the Thameslink stock is delivered, and the 319s are available for cascade.

If further stock is being ordered to "fill the gap" then surely the logical conclusion is that further routes will now be electrified to use this stock?

Thameslink 2000 (!) should free up

  • 86x 319
  • 12x 317
  • 13x 321

Not sure whether anything "south of the river" will be freed up (by more services being moved over to "Thameslink") - and assuming that the FCC 377s are going to be needed on "Southern" services (inc the Wimbledon loop which 700s won't run)
 

Wath Yard

Member
Joined
31 Dec 2011
Messages
864
Has the Thameslink order actually gone through yet?

This is not the build up to the whole thing being scrapped and replaced with lots of Class 377 orders or something right?

It hasn't gone through. The DfT's current 'guesstimate' is 'in the new year', but we've heard these a few months in the future estimates for the past 18 months.

I doubt the Thameslink order is going to be scrapped, although we'll have to see whether it proceeds in its current form and to its current timetable. These orders will be the contingency plans they spoke about and my guess is the new units will find their way onto what is now the Southern network once the Thameslink trains do arrive.
 

D365

Veteran Member
Joined
29 Jun 2012
Messages
13,195
Thameslink 2000 (!) should free up

  • 86x 319
  • 12x 317
  • 13x 321

Not sure whether anything "south of the river" will be freed up (by more services being moved over to "Thameslink") - and assuming that the FCC 377s are going to be needed on "Southern" services (inc the Wimbledon loop which 700s won't run)

23+3 377 back to South - and 40 365s, but they may or may not be retained (for north and south of the Thames? Just an idea :3).
 

tbtc

Veteran Member
Joined
16 Dec 2008
Messages
18,061
Location
Reston City Centre
If there's to be no Thameslink order (i.e. a bespoke EMU with ATO capable of running high frequency trains automatically through the Blackfriars "core) then we might as well rip everything up and start again, because so many things hinge on this.

No bespoke EMUs (i.e. just ordering more 377 compatible units) means significantly fewer trains through the core, means all the infrastructure works at London Bridge etc are overblown, means no automatic cascade of EMUs for elsewhere in the UK...

...it all hinges on getting this next bit done.
--- old post above --- --- new post below ---
23+3 377 back to South - and 40 365s, but they may or may not be retained (for north and south of the Thames? Just an idea :3).

I was of the understanding that the 377s were moving "back" to Southern services and the 365s were going to be required for Kings Cross services (inc the Cambridge fasts, peak extras)?
 

Chris125

Established Member
Joined
12 Nov 2009
Messages
3,272
Location
Isle of Wight
The 365's aren't being cascaded by Thameslink but replacement commuter-spec IEP's has been suggested to allow 125mph operation. That said it wouldn't surprise me if 110mph Desiro's (or equivalent) would be just as suitable.

Chris
 

Class377/5

Established Member
Joined
19 Jun 2010
Messages
5,594
Do the new 'Star trains not have ribbon glazing because the company who did them went bust? Thats what I remember reading somewhere.

I really feel sorry for the people who have to use the trains in the NW, even after electrification they dont get nice new trains but knackered things with no aircon from the south!

Oh and they definitely are just a 379 judging by the CGI image! http://www.rail.co/2012/11/16/southern-plans-to-extend-electrostar-order/ The drivers seat even has the NX moquette from the 379's! Haha

Remember that the 379 are not true Electrostars but Electrostar 1.5 with some of the Adventra features such as window detail.


There is nothing for certain on this. Some media reports said North TPE would get refurbished 365s if commuter IEP goes ahead and replaces the 365s. It could also replace the 350s on Northampton-London meaning LM need less 350s not more 350s.

Seriously? IEP will only replace one service that the 365 do which off peak is only four cars and peak four cars north of Cambridge. IEP if it had happened to King's Lynn would release about 6-8 units at best. Not enough for TPE.

Has the Thameslink order actually gone through yet?

This is not the build up to the whole thing being scrapped and replaced with lots of Class 377 orders or something right?

I thought the Thameslink outcomes could not be delivered without ATO?

No, 377s won't be quick enough to deal with requirements. Remember the 700 fleet is able to do 30tph in disruption to allow recovery of service. Even Bombardier knows the 377s are suitable, hence the Adventra design.

Thameslink 2000 (!) should free up

  • 86x 319
  • 12x 317
  • 13x 321

Not sure whether anything "south of the river" will be freed up (by more services being moved over to "Thameslink") - and assuming that the FCC 377s are going to be needed on "Southern" services (inc the Wimbledon loop which 700s won't run)

700 are going around the loop. Everything into Blackfriars will be a 700.

It hasn't gone through. The DfT's current 'guesstimate' is 'in the new year', but we've heard these a few months in the future estimates for the past 18 months.

I doubt the Thameslink order is going to be scrapped, although we'll have to see whether it proceeds in its current form and to its current timetable. These orders will be the contingency plans they spoke about and my guess is the new units will find their way onto what is now the Southern network once the Thameslink trains do arrive.

These orders are not contingency plans got Thameslink but for other schemes requiring the current fleet to be released.

23+3 377 back to South - and 40 365s, but they may or may not be retained (for north and south of the Thames? Just an idea :3).

All 365 are being kept on GN, none are displaced. That's been stated before. All the 377/5 are planned to allow the Milton Keynes- Croydon service to go to eight car 2tph. They aren't 'spare'.

If there's to be no Thameslink order (i.e. a bespoke EMU with ATO capable of running high frequency trains automatically through the Blackfriars "core) then we might as well rip everything up and start again, because so many things hinge on this.

No bespoke EMUs (i.e. just ordering more 377 compatible units) means significantly fewer trains through the core, means all the infrastructure works at London Bridge etc are overblown, means no automatic cascade of EMUs for elsewhere in the UK...

...it all hinges on getting this next bit done.

I was of the understanding that the 377s were moving "back" to Southern services and the 365s were going to be required for Kings Cross services (inc the Cambridge fasts, peak extras)?

Would be stupid to get the fleet after everything else being done. Don't forget that the final Phase has started and will really kick into action in May when platform closures at London Bridge start.

365 are doing extra Kings Cross services.

The 700 deal is not in trouble, its just rumours because of a lack of information stirred by the needs of some to try and illegally form the Government to hand the contract to Bombardier. Without saying much the deal is progressing but has been hit by events outside of its control. Siemens are busy working through the problems with the DfT but neither have caused a significant part of the delay. And Bombardier would have had the same problem and likely had it worse.

However its finally come to the DfT that the whole cascade timetable is out the window. So they are looking at ways to move stock over but also get Derby building killing two birds with one stone.
 

Wath Yard

Member
Joined
31 Dec 2011
Messages
864
These orders are not contingency plans got Thameslink but for other schemes requiring the current fleet to be released.

No they're not. They are contingency plans being enacted because the Thameslink order is seriously behind schedule and the trains that should be released aren't going to be.

The 700 deal is not in trouble, its just rumours because of a lack of information stirred by the needs of some to try and illegally form the Government to hand the contract to Bombardier. Without saying much the deal is progressing but has been hit by events outside of its control. Siemens are busy working through the problems with the DfT but neither have caused a significant part of the delay. And Bombardier would have had the same problem and likely had it worse.

You don't seriously expect anybody to believe that do you? It is in deep trouble and has been for many months. It has been reported in many, many different publications of varying political persuasion and the DfT themselves have finally admitted it. Even Roger Ford admits it and his current estimate for the contract to be signed is Feb/Mar, even later than the DfT's current estimate.
 

43074

Established Member
Joined
10 Oct 2012
Messages
2,253
The potential competition for 116 electric (dual voltage) new rolling stock vehicles, with an option for a further 100 vehicles, would be openly tendered via the rail Link-Up system. The new rolling stock will be of dual voltage configuration and is required to operate up to 110 mph. Any rolling stock manufacturer registered on the rail Link-Up system would be able to compete for this opportunity.
(The above is taken from a Southern press release found here: http://www.southernrailway.com/southern/news/procurement-of-new-rolling-stock/ )

It seems odd why 110 mph running has been specified. AFAIK, there are no sections of 110mph on the 3rd rail network served by Southern. Do forum users think this higher speed capability to take advantage of fast lines on the Midland Main Line (on Thameslink services (should this be where the trains end up)), or for the 'future proofing' of the trains should further AC (re)electrification occur South of the Thames, with associated linespeed improvements to take advantage of higher attainable speeds possible with AC electrification?
 

IanXC

Emeritus Moderator
Joined
18 Dec 2009
Messages
6,615
It seems odd why 110 mph running has been specified. AFAIK, there are no sections of 110mph on the 3rd rail network served by Southern. Do forum users think this higher speed capability to take advantage of fast lines on the Midland Main Line (on Thameslink services (should this be where the trains end up)), or for the 'future proofing' of the trains should further AC (re)electrification occur South of the Thames, with associated linespeed improvements to take advantage of higher attainable speeds possible with AC electrification?

Would this be for use on services to Milton Keynes Central?
 

43074

Established Member
Joined
10 Oct 2012
Messages
2,253
Would this be for use on services to Milton Keynes Central?

Possibly, although Southern's 377s do not exceed 90mph on the West Coast Main Line, as they run on the slow lines ((unless Southern have plans to utilise the fast lines at a later date)).
 

Chris125

Established Member
Joined
12 Nov 2009
Messages
3,272
Location
Isle of Wight
Would this be for use on services to Milton Keynes Central?

MK service's need neither 110mph capability nor 116-216 vehicles, and are likely being catered for by the 40 extra vehicles also announced.

It wouldn't surprise me if this new fleet doesn't even have a definite use at the moment given the ongoing uncertainty around the Thameslink cascades - the 110mph Dual Voltage capability and the opportunity to almost double its size if necessary gives them various options in what will presumably be the combined FCC/Southern franchise by the time they arrive.

Chris
 
Last edited:

jopsuk

Veteran Member
Joined
13 May 2008
Messages
12,774
It seems odd why 110 mph running has been specified. AFAIK, there are no sections of 110mph on the 3rd rail network served by Southern.

As I understand it, whilst greater than 100mph has been achieved on the 3rd rail network, it is discouraged as the limiting factor is the "ramps" of the third rail. For low speed, these are steep to limit the length of the gap. As line speed rises, the ramps become shallower- but the risk therefore of a train becoming gapped if it has to stop somewhere unexpected increases. So the fastest ramps currently used top out at at about 100mph- regular running any faster than that will result in damage to the shoes and conductor rails.

In theory, you could keep going faster with third rail. It's essentially an operational limit. And one that's absent on OHLE!
 

IanXC

Emeritus Moderator
Joined
18 Dec 2009
Messages
6,615
Possibly, although Southern's 377s do not exceed 90mph on the West Coast Main Line, as they run on the slow lines ((unless Southern have plans to utilise the fast lines at a later date)).

MK service's need neither 110mph capability nor 116-216 vehicles, and are likely being catered for by the 40 extra vehicles also announced.

It wouldn't surprise me if this new fleet doesn't even have a definite use at the moment given the ongoing uncertainty around the Thameslink cascades - the 110mph Dual Voltage capability and the opportunity to almost double its size if necessary gives them various options in what will presumably be the combined FCC/Southern franchise by the time they arrive.

Chris

Thats very true. Hmm. I think you're probably right that a purpose isn't confirmed - thinking about it such an announcement would be "good news for users of xyz services" if it was!
 

The Ham

Veteran Member
Joined
6 Jul 2012
Messages
12,036
It seems odd why 110 mph running has been specified. AFAIK, there are no sections of 110mph on the 3rd rail network served by Southern. Do forum users think this higher speed capability to take advantage of fast lines on the Midland Main Line (on Thameslink services (should this be where the trains end up)), or for the 'future proofing' of the trains should further AC (re)electrification occur South of the Thames, with associated linespeed improvements to take advantage of higher attainable speeds possible with AC electrification?

It also comes back to the question:

If you only have 100mph speed limits do you only ever buy 100mph trains yet never look again at if you could, with little or no cost, run faster?

However basicly it is down to future proofing as 3rd rail gets replaced.
 

Class377/5

Established Member
Joined
19 Jun 2010
Messages
5,594
No they're not. They are contingency plans being enacted because the Thameslink order is seriously behind schedule and the trains that should be released aren't going to be.

You don't seriously expect anybody to believe that do you? It is in deep trouble and has been for many months. It has been reported in many, many different publications of varying political persuasion and the DfT themselves have finally admitted it. Even Roger Ford admits it and his current estimate for the contract to be signed is Feb/Mar, even later than the DfT's current estimate.

They've only just come up this this idea and are doing in Part because of Derbygate. Remember as well that its been made impossible to deliver the trains to plan due to the late award of the contract. We're already some nine months late from getting the first train and we don't even have a signed deal yet.

But all these people quote from outside looking at delays not knowing why. The structure the DfT forced for this is the sole cause of the delay. DfT have stated next year and Roger's estimate is bit generous it seems.
 

northwichcat

Veteran Member
Joined
23 Jan 2009
Messages
32,692
Location
Northwich
Seriously? IEP will only replace one service that the 365 do which off peak is only four cars and peak four cars north of Cambridge. IEP if it had happened to King's Lynn would release about 6-8 units at best. Not enough for TPE.

Based on the current and proposed services they'll be 3 or 4 types of service to require EMUs after North TPE electrification.

Intercity e.g. Liverpool-Newcastle only calling at Manchester Victoria and Huddersfield between Liverpool and Leeds.

Local commuter e.g. Huddersfield-Leeds stopping services.

Regional express e.g. Manchester Airport to York

Regional e.g. Manchester to Leeds/Selby with more local stops than the Regional express

So one type of EMU with a standard spec won't suit all services. With the possibility of some routes going to East Coast or Cross Country I think that would make it even more likely to have 4 different classes of electric units on TPE routes.
--- old post above --- --- new post below ---
The last time I saw any figures (from the article in Modern Railways) The 507s & 508s are more reliable now than 5 years ago. The services I use on Merseyrail don't seem to be affected by rolling stock issues but by the usual issues with signalling & track faults as well as the less usual forgetting to turn the pumps on after engineering works!

If the reliability of rolling stock was reported as breakdowns per station stop (a perfectly reasonable approach) the results would be completely different to those normally reported.

One should be cautious about taking statements from those trying to justify replacing the trains and trying to get lots of money out of the Government to do so at face value.

What I was meaning is the plans for new rolling stock on Merseyrail had been to replace the units when they were around 35 years old. However, due to budget problems they are now trying to get 40 years out of them. From what I've heard reported the lease on the 507s and 508s now ends in 2016. They have the option to end that to 2018 and that may even be extended to 2019 but concerns were expressed about how viable it would be to keep the units in regular operation post-2016 due to maintenance costs rising year on year.
--- old post above --- --- new post below ---
Ah, OK. Not very London-y though up there!

I think the legal name of London & Birmingham better suits the LM franchise anyway. All the current routes seem to serve one of the two cities, while the name London Midland sounds a bit like they are an operator providing services between London and the Midlands.
 

387star

On Moderation
Joined
16 Nov 2009
Messages
6,665
Did I hear somewhere Great Western were going to get new trains instead of class 319s or did I imagine it?

Also bit off topic but what will happen to trains going to Banbury from Oxford (stopping services) if electrification ends at Oxford? Likewise with Newbury as I thought Newbury was on the main line not a terminus? I'm not great with the geography of that area though
 
Status
Not open for further replies.

Top