387/319 for South Wales? (Rugby matches only)

[rf_ioliver]

This popped up today on WalesOnLine:

"Rail bosses are planning to bring crowd-busting commuter trains into South Wales on future rugby international days – but not until the railway has been electrified.

Each of the trains will have 12 coaches, compared with eight in today’s Swansea-London trains.

On weekdays they will ferry commuters into London Paddington from Berkshire and Oxfordshire."

http://www.walesonline.co.uk/news/wales-news/train-bosses-introducing-much-larger-10796507

 

[pemma]

Great Western aren't getting 319s anymore, they're getting 365s in lieu.

Northern are expected to get 32 x 319s in total alongside their new EMUs and 333s, which leaves 54 x 319s available for other operators (LM currently have a few of those.)

 

[Hadders]

GWR are getting 365s so I suspect these could be used.

 

[pemma]

GWR are getting 365s so I suspect these could be used.

Question is perhaps will they want to use 387s which can run at 110mph on a match day special from London to Cardiff or 365s which can only do 100mph.

 

[Philip Phlopp]

This popped up today on WalesOnLine:

"Rail bosses are planning to bring crowd-busting commuter trains into South Wales on future rugby international days – but not until the railway has been electrified.

Each of the trains will have 12 coaches, compared with eight in today’s Swansea-London trains.

Ah, the pre-emptive strike to save Series 1 OLE in South Wales.

 

[MatthewRead]

GWR are getting 365s so I suspect these could be used.

What about the plan to use Class 319s on services around Bristol GWR have since gone very tight lipped about this I wish they would because there's going to be a heavier surplus of these wonderful units.

 

[pemma]

What about the plan to use Class 319s on services around Bristol GWR have since gone very tight lipped about this I wish they would because there's going to be a heavier surplus of these wonderful units.

The GWR franchise agreement (which ends in 2019) doesn't include taking on any 319s. DfT decided to over-order Electrostars to allow for the 700s being delayed and that's meant Great Northern will have redundant 365s which GWR will use for the services which won't be able to make use of a 110mph top speed. 319s to FGW was Lord Adonis' plan when he was Labour Transport Secretary - a lot has changed since.

Arriva (Northern) apparently will take on 12 additional 319s in 2017, so they'll have 32 in total. There's been suggestions Southeastern will either directly or indirectly benefit from some of the rest, I don't know how many though.

 

[Mintona]

What about the plan to use Class 319s on services around Bristol GWR have since gone very tight lipped about this I wish they would because there's going to be a heavier surplus of these wonderful units.

I don't think that's a plan anymore. There aren't any local services around Bristol that can go over to EMUs as a result of electrification.

 

[MatthewRead]

The GWR franchise agreement (which ends in 2019) doesn't include taking on any 319s. DfT decided to over-order Electrostars to allow for the 700s being delayed and that's meant Great Northern will have redundant 365s which GWR will use for the services which won't be able to make use of a 110mph top speed. 319s to FGW was Lord Adonis' plan when he was Labour Transport Secretary - a lot has changed since.

Arriva (Northern) apparently will take on 12 additional 319s in 2017, so they'll have 32 in total. There's been suggestions Southeastern will either directly or indirectly benefit from some of the rest, I don't know how many though.

But I read quite recently that the 319s would work services around Bristol and services out of Paddington would all be 387s if not what will operate the local electric services in Bristol.

 

[pemma]

But I read quite recently that the 319s would work services around Bristol and services out of Paddington would all be 387s if not what will operate the local electric services in Bristol.

How recently? Until the Direct Award was agreed it was presumed 110mph capable Electrostars would work services out of Paddington and 319s on other services but the Direct Award was granted on the basis of 365s being used instead of 319s.

 

[ChiefPlanner]

In any case - 319's not allowed in passenger service above 8 cars ...ECS yes

 

[Fincra5]

In any case - 319's not allowed in passenger service above 8 cars ...ECS yes

Used to be 12 Car (Non-DOO).. I've not seen anything over an 8 car DOO 319.. but that could also be due to infrastructure being set up for 8 car DOO (Mirrors)

 

[physics34]

Used to be 12 Car (Non-DOO).. I've not seen anything over an 8 car DOO 319.. but that could also be due to infrastructure being set up for 8 car DOO (Mirrors)

yep, peak time connex expresses were 12 car.. (8 car /2 and 4 car /0, if i remember correctly!)

 

[pemma]

Or could the rules have changed since? Pacers aren't allowed in more than 8 car formation, even for ECS currently but I think there have been longer formations when they've been relocated to new depots in the past.

 

[61653 HTAFC]

Are there any services from Bristol to Cardiff that don't run beyond to either Portsmouth or Taunton? These could go electric but I assume they currently interwork with other services if indeed they exist at all. I could perhaps see Portishead and Severn Beach being a sensible add-on for CP6 to use up some of the surplus Mk3 based EMUs...

 

[hairyhandedfool]

Used to be 12 Car (Non-DOO).. I've not seen anything over an 8 car DOO 319.. but that could also be due to infrastructure being set up for 8 car DOO (Mirrors)

yep, peak time connex expresses were 12 car.. (8 car /2 and 4 car /0, if i remember correctly!)

Or could the rules have changed since? Pacers aren't allowed in more than 8 car formation, even for ECS currently but I think there have been longer formations when they've been relocated to new depots in the past.

There were a number of potential issues with 12 car trains, but most were on the Thameslink route I think. Not sure if all of them apply now.

1) Maximum speed in some areas (Snow Hill Tunnel-Farringdon was 10mph IIRC, think there was one at Crystal Palace too)
2) Maximum speed on AC power using more than two pantographs (75mph).
3) Emergency access to centre unit(s) in single bore tunnels.
4) Platform lengths and DOO equipment.

 

[Domh245]

There were a number of potential issues with 12 car trains, but most were on the Thameslink route I think. Not sure if all of them apply now.
...
2) Maximum speed on AC power using more than two pantographs (75mph).
...

I wonder if the multiple pantograph issue is something that wouldn't be a problem on series 1 OHLE with it's higher tension. As Phillip Phlopp often says, it has been designed for 110mph operation with 3 BR/BW pantographs, so for the BR/BW fitted 319s, that shouldn't be an issue, and I wonder what the effect would be with the Stone Faively pantographs?

 

[221129]

But I read quite recently that the 319s would work services around Bristol and services out of Paddington would all be 387s if not what will operate the local electric services in Bristol.

What local electric services will they be?

 

[MatthewRead]

What local electric services will they be?

I suppose the services between Bristol and Cardiff.

 

[Mintona]

As they all continue beyond Bristol to non-electrified destinations, I don't see how that would work.

 

[Envoy]

As they all continue beyond Bristol to non-electrified destinations, I don't see how that would work.

I can't see the wisdom of running DMU's on the Taunton to Cardiff route once the electrification is complete. So, it would surely make sense to operate EMU's - possibly as Bath to Cardiff stoppers. Once the wires are up between Cardiff & Swansea, such a service could be extended to Swansea in order to get the greatest 'value' out of the electrification project. (This would just leave the Cardiff > Portsmouth services as the only passenger diesels going through the Severn Tunnel. Always wise to remove fumes from long tunnels).

However, I would expect something better than the old 319's. Scotrail have ordered Hitachi AT200's for their services serving major cities in the Central Belt. Surely, these or something similar should link the cities of Bristol, Newport , Cardiff & Swansea?

http://www.hitachirail-eu.com/at200-for-scotland_141.html

 

[Mintona]

I can't see the wisdom of running DMU's on the Taunton to Cardiff route once the electrification is complete. So, it would surely make sense to operate EMU's - possibly as Bath to Cardiff stoppers. Once the wires are up between Cardiff & Swansea, such a service could be extended to Swansea in order to get the greatest 'value' out of the electrification project. (This would just leave the Cardiff > Portsmouth services as the only passenger diesels going through the Severn Tunnel. Always wise to remove fumes from long tunnels).

However, I would expect something better than the old 319's. Scotrail have ordered Hitachi AT200's for their services serving major cities in the Central Belt. Surely, these or something similar should link the cities of Bristol, Newport , Cardiff & Swansea?

http://www.hitachirail-eu.com/at200-for-scotland_141.html

I imagine a Bath to Swansea service would require about 8 EMUs, not enough for a new build order, and there would be nowhere to stable them overnight, apart from maybe Hitachi's shiny new IEP depot. The plans are (were?) for the Cardiff - Taunton service to extend to Penzance using class 158 stock, although other traction types may be available.

I can't see a point in bringing in a whole new traction type, and all the associated traction training, route learning to Swansea for just one service. I can only see west services around Bristol going to EMUs/bi-mode when Cheltenham (if not Worcester/Great Malvern), Taunton (maybe Exeter), Westbury (at least), Severn Beach, Henbury and Portishead all have wires too.

 

[Philip Phlopp]

I wonder if the multiple pantograph issue is something that wouldn't be a problem on series 1 OHLE with it's higher tension. As Phillip Phlopp often says, it has been designed for 110mph operation with 3 BR/BW pantographs, so for the BR/BW fitted 319s, that shouldn't be an issue, and I wonder what the effect would be with the Stone Faively pantographs?

The Stone Faiveley pantograph was fine in the days of slow, ponderous, single pantograph trains, the BR/BW was developed for a good reason, with the aerofoils to reduce pantograph bounce and thus to maintain good contact as speed increases.

Me, I'd skip all the Stone Faiveley pantographs and standardise on the BR/BW, bound to help availability and maintenance too, anything that saves 15 minutes for an engineer here or there allows either an extra cup of tea or another 15 minutes fettling something else, maybe dealing with a door which is slow to open.
--- old post above --- --- new post below ---

I can't see the wisdom of running DMU's on the Taunton to Cardiff route once the electrification is complete. So, it would surely make sense to operate EMU's - possibly as Bath to Cardiff stoppers. Once the wires are up between Cardiff & Swansea, such a service could be extended to Swansea in order to get the greatest 'value' out of the electrification project. (This would just leave the Cardiff > Portsmouth services as the only passenger diesels going through the Severn Tunnel. Always wise to remove fumes from long tunnels).

However, I would expect something better than the old 319's. Scotrail have ordered Hitachi AT200's for their services serving major cities in the Central Belt. Surely, these or something similar should link the cities of Bristol, Newport , Cardiff & Swansea?

http://www.hitachirail-eu.com/at200-for-scotland_141.html

What's wrong with using Class 387s for such a service ? Why do we need yet another type of traction on the route ?

I still don't entirely understand the rationale behind GWR taking 20 Class 365 units, and from a route reliability viewpoint, hope they take the 20 Class 387 units Porterbrook has on speculative order instead, creating a uniform fleet.

I'd also like, in the medium term, and following a bit more wiring to Weston-Super-Mare and Taunton, the Gatwick Express Class 387s to transfer to Great Western for those services, with GatEx being backfilled by Siemens Class 700 compatible units to standardise stock on both the GWML and BML, as much as is possible.

 

[Stow]

The Stone Faiveley pantograph was fine in the days of slow, ponderous, single pantograph trains, the BR/BW was developed for a good reason, with the aerofoils to reduce pantograph bounce and thus to maintain good contact as speed increases.

Me, I'd skip all the Stone Faiveley pantographs and standardise on the BR/BW, bound to help availability and maintenance too, anything that saves 15 minutes for an engineer here or there allows either an extra cup of tea or another 15 minutes fettling something else, maybe dealing with a door which is slow to open.
--- old post above --- --- new post below ---


What's wrong with using Class 387s for such a service ? Why do we need yet another type of traction on the route ?

I still don't entirely understand the rationale behind GWR taking 20 Class 365 units, and from a route reliability viewpoint, hope they take the 20 Class 387 units Porterbrook has on speculative order instead, creating a uniform fleet.

I'd also like, in the medium term, and following a bit more wiring to Weston-Super-Mare and Taunton, the Gatwick Express Class 387s to transfer to Great Western for those services, with GatEx being backfilled by Siemens Class 700 compatible units to standardise stock on both the GWML and BML, as much as is possible.

GWR aren't going to really need any EMU's for a while going by the latest Enhancements Delivery plan, so why would they get more 387's they can't use?

365's are ideal for the suburban trips that GWR will use them on, indeed 387 110mph capability will be wasted on many routes, so 365's available in the short term provides a good solution in my view.

From a reliability perspective, these units are replacing Networker turbos so a 365 is a big step up in reliability already, with 387 performance a nice to have in my opinion for the short direct award period.

Beyond the direct award the new franchisee can develop a revised operational and rolling stock plan and the market will decide what stock gets deployed.

 

[Class 170101]

What's wrong with using Class 387s for such a service ? Why do we need yet another type of traction on the route ?

I still don't entirely understand the rationale behind GWR taking 20 Class 365 units, and from a route reliability viewpoint, hope they take the 20 Class 387 units Porterbrook has on speculative order instead, creating a uniform fleet.

I'd also like, in the medium term, and following a bit more wiring to Weston-Super-Mare and Taunton, the Gatwick Express Class 387s to transfer to Great Western for those services, with GatEx being backfilled by Siemens Class 700 compatible units to standardise stock on both the GWML and BML, as much as is possible.

I could see the 20x 387s being used instead 365s with these instead moving to South Eastern to help with their capacity issues there - being discussed elsewhere on this board.

I can't see the 8 car 700s through the Thameslink core lasting long - possibly moving onto Gatwick Express with the balance being used to maintain services via the Sutton Loop starting / terminating at Blackfriars. Consequently more 12 car Class 700s built.
--- old post above --- --- new post below ---

2) Maximum speed on AC power using more than two pantographs (75mph).

Really? Are the pantographs of 319s any different from 317s / 321s / 322s all built around the same time and capable of 100mph in 12 carriage formations.

 

[Domh245]

Really? Are the pantographs of 319s any different from 317s / 321s / 322s all built around the same time and capable of 100mph in 12 carriage formations.

Some of them are different. The 321s and 322s were fitted with BR/BW high speed pantographs, which is a single arm style pantograph with winglets to help generate lift and maintain contact with the contact wire. The 317s and 319s were fitted upon construction with Stone Faiveley AMBR pantographs, which don't have the winglets. Over the course of those train's lives, a lot of Stone Faiveley pantographs have been swapped out for the BR/BW design. The BR/BW pantograph with it's better contact means that the oscillations set up by the first pantograph at higher speeds don't prevent later pantographs from intermittently loosing contact.

Additionally, it must be remembered that the Infrastructure will play a role as well, Mk1 having a higher working tension than Mk3 (I think?) means that the contact wire oscillates less and so wouldn't pose as much of a problem. Admittedly, not applicable here, but I'm sure that the 319s could now run as 12 cars on Mk3, but the other problems with them running as 12 cars on Thameslink prevents there being a reason to test it/do the paperwork.

 

[AM9]

Some of them are different. The 321s and 322s were fitted with BR/BW high speed pantographs, which is a single arm style pantograph with winglets to help generate lift and maintain contact with the contact wire. The 317s and 319s were fitted upon construction with Stone Faiveley AMBR pantographs, which don't have the winglets. Over the course of those train's lives, a lot of Stone Faiveley pantographs have been swapped out for the BR/BW design. The BR/BW pantograph with it's better contact means that the oscillations set up by the first pantograph at higher speeds don't prevent later pantographs from intermittently loosing contact.

Additionally, it must be remembered that the Infrastructure will play a role as well, Mk1 having a higher working tension than Mk3 (I think?) means that the contact wire oscillates less and so wouldn't pose as much of a problem. Admittedly, not applicable here, but I'm sure that the 319s could now run as 12 cars on Mk3, but the other problems with them running as 12 cars on Thameslink prevents there being a reason to test it/do the paperwork.

The 319s can run as 3x4-car as ECS but not in DOO . So pantograph operation can be fully tested on the MML at 100mph.
The AMBR pantographs are relatively few and far between now, mostly confined to the Sutton loop services running as single units, so they are rarely expected to do the 'St Albans dash' on the fast lines. I would imagine that the AMBRs are more prone to cause OLE damage, especially on MKIII headspan wiring as they seem to be less well damped.