TransPennine class 397

[800001]

397003 is currently working 3E99 0938 Longsight T.M.D. (D) to Doncaster Works Wagon Shops, lead to believe that this is for overhaul.

Also believe this is the first 397 to work south of Edinburgh and into ECML?

 

[DanNCL]

Also believe this is the first 397 to work south of Edinburgh and into ECML?

It is.

Assuming this run goes without issue, one would guess it may open the door to 397s covering Edinburgh - Berwick/Newcastle stoppers during disruption or if there’s ever a shortage of 802s, some crews already sign both the route and the stock.

 

[LNW-GW Joint]

397003 is currently working 3E99 0938 Longsight T.M.D. (D) to Doncaster Works Wagon Shops, lead to believe that this is for overhaul.
Also believe this is the first 397 to work south of Edinburgh and into ECML?

That's a 500 mile grand tour (initially via Crewe) to cover the 60 mile TPE South route.
Going via the North London line is about 350 miles.
No doubt the present route avoids clearance and route knowledge issues, benefitting from the established movements to/from Hitachi sites.
It's hard to put a date when a fully-wired route cross-Pennine would be available for such moves, presumably after 2030 when TRU delivers.
Even then it will be necessary to reverse at Leeds or York.

Realtime Trains | 3E99 0938 Longsight T.M.D. (D) to Doncaster Works Wagn Shops | 25/09/2024

Real-time train running information for 3E99 0938 departure from Longsight T.M.D. (D) to Doncaster Works Wagn Shops on 25/09/2024. From Realtime Trains, an independent source of train running info for Great Britain.

www.realtimetrains.co.uk

The RTT entry says "planned for 125mph max".
Is this an opportunity to test a 397 at that speed on the ECML?
Both CAF and LNER have an interest in how this stock performs at that speed.

 

[driver9000]

It is.

Assuming this run goes without issue, one would guess it may open the door to 397s covering Edinburgh - Berwick/Newcastle stoppers during disruption or if there’s ever a shortage of 802s, some crews already sign both the route and the stock.

Never say never but given the tight availability for 397 west coast diagrams (9-10 set daily requirement) this would be very unlikely.

 

[Blindtraveler]

I keep reading about this job of work being done to these units, do we know exactly what the scope is that Doncaster are supposedly carrying out

 

[driver9000]

The RTT entry says "planned for 125mph max".
Is this an opportunity to test a 397 at that speed on the ECML?
Both CAF and LNER have an interest in how this stock performs at that speed.

397s are always timed at 125mph on RTT. From Edinburgh it's pathed as a 22x.

 

[DanNCL]

The RTT entry says "planned for 125mph max".
Is this an opportunity to test a 397 at that speed on the ECML?
Both CAF and LNER have an interest in how this stock performs at that speed.

They’ve already been tested at 125mph. They’re 125mph units, only reason they don’t run at 125mph in service is because there aren’t any non-EPS 125mph limits where the 397s operate.

Never say never but given the tight availability for 397 west coast diagrams (9-10 set daily requirement) this would be very unlikely.

Oh I’m well aware it’s unlikely to ever be booked work for them. But during disruption possibly, for example if the WCML were blocked north of Carlisle and there were a few units ‘trapped’ north of the border.

== Doublepost prevention - post automatically merged: 25 Sep 2024 ==

Noticed that this working appears to be stopping at Chathill, Acklington, Widdrington, Pegswood, Cramlington, Manors and Chester-le-Street. These stations all have one thing in common - none of them have platforms long enough for a 397. Are they testing SDO on this move? Or are the stops at those stations for another reason?

Update 19:05
Just seen it at Chester-le-Street. Staff got out and measured the step between the train and the platform. Any idea why this is being done, considering the chances of a 397 ever stopping at Chester-le-Street in passenger service are practically nil?

 

[800001]

They’ve already been tested at 125mph. They’re 125mph units, only reason they don’t run at 125mph in service is because there aren’t any non-EPS 125mph limits where the 397s operate.


Oh I’m well aware it’s unlikely to ever be booked work for them. But during disruption possibly, for example if the WCML were blocked north of Carlisle and there were a few units ‘trapped’ north of the border.

== Doublepost prevention - post automatically merged: 25 Sep 2024 ==

Noticed that this working appears to be stopping at Chathill, Acklington, Widdrington, Pegswood, Cramlington, Manors and Chester-le-Street. These stations all have one thing in common - none of them have platforms long enough for a 397. Are they testing SDO on this move? Or are the stops at those stations for another reason?

Update 19:05
Just seen it at Chester-le-Street. Staff got out and measured the step between the train and the platform. Any idea why this is being done, considering the chances of a 397 ever stopping at Chester-le-Street in passenger service are practically nil?

From a Facebook post ‘platform height and gauging measurements’ were taken.

 

[DanNCL]

From a Facebook post ‘platform height and gauging measurements’ were taken.

I saw them take the measurements at Chester-le-Street. Can’t for the life of me think of why they’d want the measurements for these stations specifically though, and not stations like Durham.

 

[danbarjon]

I saw them take the measurements at Chester-le-Street. Can’t for the life of me think of why they’d want the measurements for these stations specifically though, and not stations like Durham.

Maybe they are looking at feasibility for more 397s (bi-mode obviously) as part of the tender they've got...

 

[Peter Mugridge]

Maybe they are looking at feasibility for more 397s (bi-mode obviously) as part of the tender they've got...

Haven't LNER got ten virtual clones of the 397s on order...?

 

[D6975]

Haven't LNER got ten virtual clones of the 397s on order...?

beat me to it! Checking for class 897s.

 

[danbarjon]

Haven't LNER got ten virtual clones of the 397s on order...?

Yep, they could always add onto the order

 

[DanNCL]

Haven't LNER got ten virtual clones of the 397s on order...?

beat me to it! Checking for class 897s.

Yep, they could always add onto the order

If the measurements were for LNER then why were they only taken at stations that LNER don’t call at? Just doesn’t make sense, there surely has to be another reason for it that’s unrelated to the 897 order.

 

[danbarjon]

If the measurements were for LNER then why were they only taken at stations that LNER don’t call at? Just doesn’t make sense, there surely has to be another reason for it that’s unrelated to the 897 order.

There is an Edinburgh to York train now and again so maybe they were testing for that

 

[chazi898]

Yep, they could always add onto the order

I was hoping they would order more middle cars to make the 397s 7 cars or something, or 6 at least
5 cars are surely gonna burst on the north WCML at some point...

 

[LNW-GW Joint]

I was hoping they would order more middle cars to make the 397s 7 cars or something, or 6 at least
5 cars are surely gonna burst on the north WCML at some point...

The original contract with CAF did include options for more/longer 397s, but those will have expired.
That was before the various pauses in the TRU electrification schedule.

 

[SamCam]

I was hoping they would order more middle cars to make the 397s 7 cars or something, or 6 at least
5 cars are surely gonna burst on the north WCML at some point...

I agree - travelling between Scotland and the likes of Lancaster/Carlisle, the difference in overcrowding between a 5-car 397 and an 11-car Pendolino makes the latter a much more attractive option...

 

[Bletchleyite]

I agree - travelling between Scotland and the likes of Lancaster/Carlisle, the difference in overcrowding between a 5-car 397 and an 11-car Pendolino makes the latter a much more attractive option...

They apply fake compulsory reservations to these - but "sold out" is very commonly shown, whereas it's rare on Pendolinos. I think the success of Manchester-Scotland was rather underestimated when specifying capacity - this route is easily as busy as a Euston one.

 

[Peter Mugridge]

The original contract with CAF did include options for more/longer 397s, but those will have expired.

Would there be an opportunity for them to revisit this while the production line is open for the 897s?

 

[800001]

Wouldn’t the issue then become, how are these platformed at Manchester Airport if they are made longer?
How does the platforming of these currently work at Airport? Do they share with other services? Or use platform on their own?

 

[driver9000]

Wouldn’t the issue then become, how are these platformed at Manchester Airport if they are made longer?
How does the platforming of these currently work at Airport? Do they share with other services? Or use platform on their own?

As originally built the 397 had an option to be extended up to 8 coaches in length.

Manchester Airport platforms can hold 8 coaches but if a train longer than 4 vehicles is in the platform permissive working can't be used. Essentially a 397 (or 802) must use an empty platform and can't have another short unit put on top.

 

[Lg_]

As originally built the 397 had an option to be extended up to 8 coaches in length.

Manchester Airport platforms can hold 8 coaches but if a train longer than 4 vehicles is in the platform permissive working can't be used. Essentially a 397 (or 802) must use an empty platform and can't have another short unit put on top.

Generally speaking 397's and 802's don't share platforms at the airport anyway, you could fit a 7 car 802 or an 8 car 397 in the airport.

The only other place I'd anticipate an issue on the WCML would be Haymarket which only fits 7 carriages of a Pendo in.

 

[SamCam]

The only other place I'd anticipate an issue on the WCML would be Haymarket which only fits 7 carriages of a Pendo in.

Haymarket fits 8 carriages of a 385 or 9 carriages of an Azuma in no problem, so one or two extra vehicles added to a 397 shouldn't be a problem?

 

[Scotrail314209]

I think it would be nice having them as a 7 car. One thing they’d need for sure is some more First Class, even if it’s just half a carriage worth (like Coach K on the Azuma fleet which is Half standard, half first). Pair that with an extra Standard class coach and it’d be perfect.

First Class on the Manchester to Scotland services (particularly from Edinburgh) has been going out pretty full recently, which I’m pretty sure has been spurred on by the launch of West Coast Kitchen.

 

[Bungle965]

First Class on the Manchester to Scotland services (particularly from Edinburgh) has been going out pretty full recently, which I’m pretty sure has been spurred on by the launch of West Coast Kitchen.

Which then actually surely devalues the First Class proposition! No one wants to be in 1st class and have about as much room as in Standard.

 

[Bevan Price]

As originally built the 397 had an option to be extended up to 8 coaches in length.

Manchester Airport platforms can hold 8 coaches but if a train longer than 4 vehicles is in the platform permissive working can't be used. Essentially a 397 (or 802) must use an empty platform and can't have another short unit put on top.

As many of the Manchester / Edinburgh services used to be pairs of 350s, I don't see 6 or 7 coach 397s being much of a problem.

 

[InOban]

Indeed. I would say it's pretty good to be able to get to this stage in just six weeks.

Generally speaking 397's and 802's don't share platforms at the airport anyway, you could fit a 7 car 802 or an 8 car 397 in the airport.

The only other place I'd anticipate an issue on the WCML would be Haymarket which only fits 7 carriages of a Pendo in.

The relevant platforms at Haymarket are 230m which should accommodate 9 vehicles of a Pendo. Platform 1 is shorter which affects the southbound Azumas.

 

[ZakCreaser2003]

According to Railcam, 397003 has gone to Wabtec for ETCS fitment.

 

[DanNCL]

According to Railcam, 397003 has gone to Wabtec for ETCS fitment.

I would take that with a pinch of salt.