Just for context, 458/5s were cleared for passenger service to Haslemere. There was for a time a mid-evening service from Waterloo to Haslemere which used a 458/5 that then went ECS to Farnham. It caused me a double-take once or twice when I encountered it by chance.
Although given it ran through fine without the world stopping spinning on its axis, they would now seem to have been cleared, at least on the down fast.
The inclusion of the main lines for passenger service were removed from the vehicle change proposal at the insistence of Network Rail, to avoid any possibility of the units being inadvertently routed via the slow lines at Clapham during perturbation.
Now the MD of SWR is also responsible for Network Rail on his patch maybe he's overruled this. But probably not!
We were all surprised.
I suspect they will be treating todays 458/4 as a 'new' type for the purposes of clearances, irrespective of how closely aligned they may be to their original incarnation as 458/0.
Indeed and the gauging standards have changed since they were 458/0’s too.
Are they worried about their own control swapping a 444 for a 458?
The risk is that the signaller could inadvertently route them via the slow lines at Clapham in times of disruption, where they have gauging restrictions. It was agreed with NR that they wouldn’t be used in passenger service on the main line to remove that risk.
I don’t understand why there is a passenger/non-passenger distinction as the airbags adjust for loadings. They get back to Wimbledon depot without issue…
Would appear to be another reason why they'll never appear on Portsmouth services, or any other mainline service for that matter.
It should have been dealt with long since. It’s a common (both planned and unplanned) diversion for Reading services. A failure to clear them is not acceptable from a customer service perspective.
Indeed, 2145 Waterloo - Haslemere in the December 2022 timetable.
That is so, but in the mire of things that need attending to, it may well be lower down the priority list. There are only so many people to deal with these matters, not helped by a change of overall control, which will detract some of those people from their day job initially - believe me! As one small example, when the 456's were re introduced to the SW i/c/w the original 10 car plan, one diagram involving same was required to return to Wimbledon depot via East Putney after the am peak, as part of 3Y81, 08+21 ex Waterloo. For me this was a must, as it provided the depot with the only 456 (for maintenance reasons) on the day shift, but those involved with matters as above were overworked at the time, so the clearance of 456s via the East Putney got pushed back and back. It was done, just in time, but only after some pressing - and that was for a move that formed part of the base plan, not (what some - not me btw) might see as a 'nice to have just in case', sort of thing.
They all kept their original carriage numbers.
In principle, the individual vehicle number is with a vehicle from cradle to grave, and although they will usually be in some sort of logical sequence when first assembled into a class of units, even if they are later inserted into something else, or the parent unit number is changed, then the vehicle number stays the same.
Interesting, I assumed they always changed if the unit number changed.
I’d think of them as being like a car’s VIN, which is stamped into the chassis, whereas a unit number is just a convenient way of referring to the whole consist. Unit numbers can be changed (within reason), examples such as SWT renumbering 10 x 3 car 158s as 159s, and also renumbering 11 x 158s as 158880-890 for little more than ‘neatness’. What those 2 changes achieved was a straightforward way of organising allocations as 159 = 3 car, and 158 = 2 car.
Vehicle numbers can be changed, too. For example the DB Cargo and GBRf Class 66s that are being re-geared. It is easier to change set formations, however.
Yes, I was really thinking of units only. It seems to be done on a different basis for locos for some reason.
Locos I presume are more like how you described multiple units earlier?
The numbering is normally amended to reflect changes on the fourth digit of the unit numbers, rather than the carriages.
I should flag up that this doesn't apply on the London Underground; if two vehicles are swapped between two units, they will nearly always each get renumbered to keep the units in the apparent correct formation - this was a particular headache for keeping track of A Stock carriages and a n umber of 1959 / 1962 Stock carriages got swapped and renumbered as well, in some cases more than once!
Nearly always, except for all the times that this didn't happen - notably with the S7+1 units and the replacement MS cars built as part of that shuffle around.
That's only one car left out of sequence, though... 25386?
