samuelmorris
Established Member
Fair enough. I imagine it isn't top of the list of priorities right now but given the units had been in service for many months before the pandemic I wondered what the hold-up was.
They really need to find somewhere else to use them to displace other rolling stock. I suggested Norwich to Nottingham a few months back instead of 170s - https://www.railforums.co.uk/thread...are-755s-to-run-norwich-to-nottingham.212253/As there are now 38 755s there are 12 more units to play with.
They really need to find somewhere else to use them to displace other rolling stock. I suggested Norwich to Nottingham a few months back instead of 170s - https://www.railforums.co.uk/thread...are-755s-to-run-norwich-to-nottingham.212253/
Leasing a fleet with so many units in excess of the number needed for the near future is pure folly and a waste of taxpayers money.
It is so good to have some slack. Been many decades since that’s happened. Will allow for reliability, extra fuelling, future enhancements & of course all the testing currently required along with those in bits on Crown Point depot. Still seems surreal to have such a luxury within the fleet but I’m not complaining.As someone else has calculated 12 more units exist than diagrams covered by the legacy fleet. I believe one extra is needed for the Norwich Stansted services than was needed for Norwich Cambridge. Then there is a thunderbird unit at Ipswich. Then tends to be a standby at Norwich and Ipswich. So that's 4 accounted for. Then there the standard slack for exams and works, another 3 or 4 units.
That leaves effectively 4/5 totally surplus. Ok f we learnt anything from the legacy fleet it's trying to run diagrams with little to no slack is a nightmare. So trying to squeeze a Nottingham circuit out of 4 or 5 units, while still leaving the operational slack needed to cover faults and failures is absolutely asking for trouble
It is absolutely ridiculous given the parlous economic situation of the railway. While it may be good for the operation of the railway, it is a shocking waste of money to be leasing more units than are needed.It is so good to have some slack. Been many decades since that’s happened. Will allow for reliability, extra fuelling, future enhancements & of course all the testing currently required along with those in bits on Crown Point depot. Still seems surreal to have such a luxury within the fleet but I’m not complaining.
It is absolutely ridiculous given the parlous economic situation of the railway. While it may be good for the operation of the railway, it is a shocking waste of money to be leasing more units than are needed.
To have four units totally spare and four on standby isn't exactly a good use of funding and is just adding to the costs of the railway. An expensive luxury.
Few will say that once 755 can run in multiple on electric. Should be fast?Might have been advisable to have 2-3 less 755s and an extra 745/0?
Few will say that once 755 can run in multiple on electric. Should be fast?
It is absolutely ridiculous given the parlous economic situation of the railway. While it may be good for the operation of the railway, it is a shocking waste of money to be leasing more units than are needed.
To have four units totally spare and four on standby isn't exactly a good use of funding and is just adding to the costs of the railway. An expensive luxury.
Why not just sell standard tickets but charge a supplement to sit in first class should a 745/0 be diagrammed?Personally if I was taking the Norwich to London route on a regular basis I would have rather that they had ordered enough 745/0s to provide a consistent experience ra Instead because they haven't we're probably going to see a mix of 745/0s, 745/1s minus tables, first class and buffet and a 6/7/8 car 755 combo without first class and a buffet.
It's frustrating when a 745/1 turns up without any tables when you've wanted to get some work done and the situation is not going to help them sell First Class tickets. A friend of mine whose company normally purchases First Class tickets to London has stopped buying them now because more often than not its not there.
GA boast about a lot of things. Remember the adverts plastered all over the inside of the trains bragging about having fitted replacement seat covers?I wish we were willing to tolerate just a little bit of slack in infrastructure in this country! GA is boasting about record reliability that isn't really actually that wonderful. Lets not find ways of making it any worse!!!
As far as the step change, absolutely. The 720s are a big step up from 321s, but less so from the more modern units of course. The experience moving from Mk3s to 745s isn't hugely different, but going from a Sprinter to a 755 the difference, not just in terms of quality of product but capacity as well, is enormous.You have to remember the fleet ordered was to resource a timetable aspiration that was, to be charitable, ambitious. Like so many bids, reality then dawns too late in the process and in this case you are left with what you ordered.
The 755s are arguably the best of all the new breed. A total game changer on journeys like Colchester to Peterborough, Norwich to Stansted or Ipswich to Lowestoft.
I quite agree which is why it is galling to have so many parked up spare when they could be used on other services, particularly if that is going to be the position for the forseeable future.The 755s are arguably the best of all the new breed. A total game changer on journeys like Colchester to Peterborough, Norwich to Stansted or Ipswich to Lowestoft.
How many of the spares will be used when Peterborough Ipswich goes hourly? And if a few are extended to Harwich if people prefer ferry cabins to open plane seating post-covid?I quite agree which is why it is galling to have so many parked up spare when they could be used on other services, particularly if that is going to be the position for the forseeable future.
How many of the spares will be used when Peterborough Ipswich goes hourly?
How many of the spares will be used when Peterborough Ipswich goes hourly? And if a few are extended to Harwich if people prefer ferry cabins to open plane seating post-covid?
Is there really a Peterborough-Harwich train again now?Colchester is a much better destination than Harwich. In fact the original bid did refer to a Colchester - Peterborough service. There is already a train to Harwich for the Stena ferries, and there now aren’t any other passenger sailings.
Is there really a Peterborough-Harwich train again now?
Is there really a Peterborough-Harwich train again now?
Running on to Colchester would be useful. Or even Manningtree but I suspect there may be no easy reversal there.
Not forgetting the Lowestoft-Harwich & Harwich-Lowestoft positioning move before & after.No, it's Cambridge-Harwich. Westbound in the morning/eastbound in the evening to connect to the overnight ferry.
In the early days of emus first started serving Ipswich it did just that. Hourly Ipswich-Harwich Town via Manningtree. Used to leave Ipswich at XX:50 following the up Norwich. Even now (in normal times) there is quite a flow between Ipswich & Harwich.Sorry no, it was switched to Cambridge some time ago as the commercial department at the time felt it gave more opportunity for short breaks from Holland.
Reversing in the up main at Manningtree is a signalled move, but wouldn’t be sensible. Linking with a large population at Colchester, and with one change Clacton, has more potential.
Yes a rough guess of the Harwich patronage is roughly 60/40 in favour of Colchester, so the Ipswich contingent mustn’t be overlooked. That timetable would never be accepted today, as it effectively blocks the up main for about 10 minutes while the reversing move takes place and all the timetable junction margins are applied.In the early days of emus first started serving Ipswich it did just that. Hourly Ipswich-Harwich Town via Manningtree. Used to leave Ipswich at XX:50 following the up Norwich. Even now (in normal times) there is quite a flow between Ipswich & Harwich.
Far less trains in those days. I quite like doing it when engineering work blocks the route South of Manningtree. 90/DVTs where a pain though as no matter how far I drew up the darn TPWS was flashing upon changing ends. Used to get clear of the neutral section, stop & reopen the desk again.Yes a rough guess of the Harwich patronage is roughly 60/40 in favour of Colchester, so the Ipswich contingent mustn’t be overlooked. That timetable would never be accepted today, as it effectively blocks the up main for about 10 minutes while the reversing move takes place and all the timetable junction margins are applied.
Well if the units are reliable enough then you do not need spares. But reality shows that a lot of time more spare units and drivers are needed. It is not a luxury when passengers perceive the service to be too unreliable to be worth using - that costs money.It is absolutely ridiculous given the parlous economic situation of the railway. While it may be good for the operation of the railway, it is a shocking waste of money to be leasing more units than are needed.
To have four units totally spare and four on standby isn't exactly a good use of funding and is just adding to the costs of the railway. An expensive luxury.
755403 is the long-term broken one, currently at NC undergoing repairs/'rebuild'. Reportedly had been used as a Christmas tree! This unit was the last FLIRT to be delivered on 23/4/20 and entered service on 3/7/20. Precisely four months later it was dragged by 37608 to Cambridge for temporary storage pending repairs. In other words, it has spent less than four months in service since delivery!755401 was in service Sunday, saw 418 last week. Haven’t seen 403 for a while.
May I ask what the issue that took 403 out of service was?755403 is the long-term broken one, currently at NC undergoing repairs/'rebuild'. Reportedly had been used as a Christmas tree! This unit was the last FLIRT to be delivered on 23/4/20 and entered service on 3/7/20. Precisely four months later it was dragged by 37608 to Cambridge for temporary storage pending repairs. In other words, it has spent less than four months in service since delivery!
Is the list of when each unit entered service publicly available anywhere? I appreciate the 755s have been in service for a while now but modern fleets are introduced in such an arbitrary order it'd be nice to know which units were among the first to be introduced and which were the last (same goes for the 745s and 720s for that matter).755403 is the long-term broken one, currently at NC undergoing repairs/'rebuild'. Reportedly had been used as a Christmas tree! This unit was the last FLIRT to be delivered on 23/4/20 and entered service on 3/7/20. Precisely four months later it was dragged by 37608 to Cambridge for temporary storage pending repairs. In other words, it has spent less than four months in service since delivery!
That would be nice to know, in the past I have just gone by seing them under testing or starting in service , the past year or so has made this pretty hard to doIs the list of when each unit entered service publicly available anywhere? I appreciate the 755s have been in service for a while now but modern fleets are introduced in such an arbitrary order it'd be nice to know which units were among the first to be introduced and which were the last (same goes for the 745s and 720s for that matter).
Crikey! What happened to it to break it so comprehensively?755403 is the long-term broken one, currently at NC undergoing repairs/'rebuild'. Reportedly had been used as a Christmas tree! This unit was the last FLIRT to be delivered on 23/4/20 and entered service on 3/7/20. Precisely four months later it was dragged by 37608 to Cambridge for temporary storage pending repairs. In other words, it has spent less than four months in service since delivery!