Class 319's Staying On The Thameslink!

[jon0844]

Tbh rather than NXEMU they should just build more 377s, i assume most drivers on FCC are trained for them anyway, plus Bombardier already has the body shell setup

If we could build trains that were more generic, and perhaps easily modified (e.g. a modular interior design that could allow some changes from one route to another, even down to mounting points in the floor that would allow seats to move etc) then you could build trains to temporarily work on one route with another one in mind later on - and no compromises for either.

Then, you could build new fleets in much larger numbers, knowing they'll move around and be shared on different routes and different TOCs. From a driver point of view, they'll be the same for training purposes, which is another big plus. Build more 377s now for TL, with 2+2 seating but maybe in a few years, they move and 3+2 is easily installed (the only replacement being new carpet).

Is that an impossible idea? Could you have mounting points on the train floor to allow easy changing of seat configurations, installing/removing luggage racks on the floor etc?

 

[MCR247]

Tbh rather than NXEMU they should just build more 377s, i assume most drivers on FCC are trained for them anyway, plus Bombardier already has the body shell setup

Well I suppose that would mean that if 1 377 failed in the core, it wouldn't hold up other trains behind because they'd be 377s so they would have failed anyway. If we want a Thameslink that is unreliable then we'll ring Bombardier then

 

[Geezertronic]

Is that an impossible idea?

Don't be so DaFt, that smacks of common sense. Go boil your head immediately

 

[Kingfisher200262]

If we could build trains that were more generic, and perhaps easily modified (e.g. a modular interior design that could allow some changes from one route to another, even down to mounting points in the floor that would allow seats to move etc) then you could build trains to temporarily work on one route with another one in mind later on - and no compromises for either.

Then, you could build new fleets in much larger numbers, knowing they'll move around and be shared on different routes and different TOCs. From a driver point of view, they'll be the same for training purposes, which is another big plus. Build more 377s now for TL, with 2+2 seating but maybe in a few years, they move and 3+2 is easily installed (the only replacement being new carpet).

Is that an impossible idea? Could you have mounting points on the train floor to allow easy changing of seat configurations, installing/removing luggage racks on the floor etc?

All that exists on most trains, at least as far back as Mk IIIs in the 1970s. It's just that the TOC, the TOC's consultant, the ROSCO, the ROSCO's consultant, the DfT, the DfT's consultant, the safety authority, the safety authority's consultant, ATOC, Passenger Focus et al, make it so difficult and cumbersome to do.

 

[asylumxl]

I think CSRE should employ me to design trains for Thameslink. I've been crammed on crowded trains on Thameslink since its creation who could be better for designing the NXEMU?

 

[Fincra5]

Well I suppose that would mean that if 1 377 failed in the core, it wouldn't hold up other trains behind because they'd be 377s so they would have failed anyway. If we want a Thameslink that is unreliable then we'll ring Bombardier then

I can think of far more unreliable trains than those built by bombardier.

 

[asylumxl]

I can think of far more unreliable trains than those built by bombardier.

*coughalstomcough*

Having said that though, for an existing class of train, the 377/5s had a very high failure rate at first.

 

[oliverj8]

*coughalstomcough*

Having said that though, for an existing class of train, the 377/5s had a very high failure rate at first.

Pendolinos are reliable aren't they?

 

[asylumxl]

Pendolinos are reliable though aren't they?

Yes. Really it's just their 3rd rail and DMU trains

 

[MCR247]

I can think of far more unreliable trains than those built by bombardier.

Yes, but have we seen further orders of Junipers, coradias or adelentés? Ordering more 377/5s would be stupid. They should order desiros if you want a reliable EMU. The desiro city was it?

 

[Fincra5]

Because what we need in the south is more trains that arent compatible with each other...

 

[MCR247]

Well would they NXEMU be compatible?

 

[Fincra5]

If it were built by another company probably not.

Also, yes we havent seen anymore orders for Junipers, coradias or adelentés but there have been massive orders for Electrostars, so they can't all be that bad.

 

[87015]

Yes, but have we seen further orders of Junipers, coradias or adelentés? Ordering more 377/5s would be stupid. They should order desiros if you want a reliable EMU. The desiro city was it?

You mean "reliable" like the 350/2s are way down the pecking order of post-privatisation EMUs? You build anything on the cheap and it'll have teething problems, especially a class new to the route, the 377/5s have settled down now into a far better pattern than the 350/2s are doing for LM. The Siemens stuff is far more expensive to purchase and run to boot.

 

[Minstral25]

And Thameslink is just as crowded, and has no 12 car trains. Getting left behind on the platform is no fun, and it's a regular occurence.

Yes, but - Thameslink routes have 4 or more trains per hour in the rush hour but most Southern Routes only have 2 per hour - so minimum 30 minutes wait if you get bounced (which happens quite a lot as well).

Have a lot of sympathy with Northern colleagues - I believe DFT needs to urgently ensure that all trains have sufficient coaches before wasting Billions on new HS lines. Get the existing lines right first!

 

[MCR247]

You mean "reliable" like the 350/2s are way down the pecking order of post-privatisation EMUs? You build anything on the cheap and it'll have teething problems, especially a class new to the route, the 377/5s have settled down now into a far better pattern than the 350/2s are doing for LM. The Siemens stuff is far more expensive to purchase and run to boot.

I remember a while ago reading in today's railways magazine that the 350/2s had the highest (or one of the?) MPC in the UK for EMUs

 

[Class377/5]

You mean "reliable" like the 350/2s are way down the pecking order of post-privatisation EMUs? You build anything on the cheap and it'll have teething problems, especially a class new to the route, the 377/5s have settled down now into a far better pattern than the 350/2s are doing for LM. The Siemens stuff is far more expensive to purchase and run to boot.

They may have settled down compared to what they used to be but they are still off what they are supposed to be. Bombardier have put alot of resources into getting the 377/5 up to better figures but even so one major failure a day was expected only a few months ago. In the core a failure like that can affect trains all over the place over the space of a few hours.

 

[Fincra5]

Perhaps the 377/5s do have problems, but the other 377s seem to be settled nicely.

 

[MCR247]

Yes, but the other 377s are about 8 years old

 

[Pumbaa]

I remember a while ago reading in today's railways magazine that the 350/2s had the highest (or one of the?) MPC in the UK for EMUs

They did when they arrived into the UK. Since then Siemens have suffered LM - Siemens didnt design their trains to deal with LM incompetence. Result? 350/2s now one of the lowest reliabilities, being outshone by 458s and 334s for christ sake. Bemusingly, 350/1 still very high mileages attained. Personally I just don't think the /2s like the South. They always seem much happier up here!

 

[87015]

They did when they arrived into the UK. Since then Siemens have suffered LM - Siemens didnt design their trains to deal with LM incompetence. Result? 350/2s now one of the lowest reliabilities, being outshone by 458s and 334s for christ sake. Bemusingly, 350/1 still very high mileages attained. Personally I just don't think the /2s like the South. They always seem much happier up here!

Now if it was LM to blame I'd have been happy to put the boot in very quickly but in this case they are only partly to blame unfortunately, remember its largely Siemens staff that maintain the units anyway not LM. 350/2s are just rubbish, which adds some balance as at least there are fewer 377/5s to go wrong.

Still no Siemens stuff getting close to 357s and its not as though the 350/1s were very good at doing voltage changeovers when they worked the Claphams, perhaps using both modes is a lot more stressful for any class of units.

 

[Aictos]

I remember a while ago reading in today's railways magazine that the 350/2s had the highest (or one of the?) MPC in the UK for EMUs

Ha, the older 321s have well outdone them!

2009

Category: Ex BR EMU
Award: Gold
Class: 321
MPC*: 36,033
Operator: First Capital Connect
Depot: Hornsey
Maker: Bombardier (BREL)
Owner: HSBC Rail

* Miles per casualty for Golden Spanner, percentage improvement for Silver Spanner.

Not forgetting of course the same 321s picked up the same award not only in 2005 but also in 2006 with Silverlink which is pretty good going for a older EMU.

I quite like the 377/5s although I rather they use 2+2 though out like the 365s on the GN.

Even if FCC did have to hand back the leased 377/5s after FCC has done all the bedding in of the units for Southern (In all fairness, Southern should get the flak for them having the problems as they originally ordered them and FCC are only borrowing them), I prefer FCC to look at a fleet of their own 377/5s numbering about 41.

This way, the majority of them and the 319s will be 12 cars meaning seats for all

 

[Class377/5]

Even if FCC did have to hand back the leased 377/5s after FCC has done all the bedding in of the units for Southern (In all fairness, Southern should get the flak for them having the problems as they originally ordered them and FCC are only borrowing them), I prefer FCC to look at a fleet of their own 377/5s numbering about 41.

This way, the majority of them and the 319s will be 12 cars meaning seats for all

In all fairness Southern didn't have a choice. DfT told Southern FCC were getting them.

And the 319 will never run 12 cars (in passenger service, empties they can run in multple and have done upto 16 cars). They aren't permitted due as the middle car doesn't have an escape route through the end of the units. One of the reason why FCC got Southern's new Electrostars in the first place.

 

[MCR247]

Anyway could someone please tell me why a company that runs an 8 car 377 on an off peak Bognor run needs 23 new trains?!

 

[Ivo]

In all fairness Southern didn't have a choice. DfT told Southern FCC were getting them.

And the 319 will never run 12 cars (in passenger service, empties they can run in multple and have done upto 16 cars). They aren't permitted due as the middle car doesn't have an escape route through the end of the units. One of the reason why FCC got Southern's new Electrostars in the first place.

If this is the case why are trains in Essex often 12 long in peaks, when neither c2c or NXEA units have end gangways?

 

[Fincra5]

Anyway could someone please tell me why a company that runs an 8 car 377 on an off peak Bognor run needs 23 new trains?!

I'd guess it is because during Peak hours most trains are still only 8 car which leads to overcrowding.

 

[thelem]

Does this mean that if an 8-car train gets stuck in a tunnel then half the train exit through the front door, and half through the rear? Who opens the rear door (given the trains are DOO)? What happens if a fire prevents one door from being used?

If this is the case why are trains in Essex often 12 long in peaks, when neither c2c or NXEA units have end gangways?

The end doors are only needed for narrow tunnels where there might not be enough space to exit through the side doors. Do these routes have any narrow tunnels?

 

[Class377/5]

If this is the case why are trains in Essex often 12 long in peaks, when neither c2c or NXEA units have end gangways?

The end doors are only needed for narrow tunnels where there might not be enough space to exit through the side doors. Do these routes have any narrow tunnels?

Correct. Do the the nature of Smithfield tunnel (between City and Farringdon) there is a risk that people in the middle car would become trapped as there isn't enough room to escape from the side doors of the unit. I forgot to add that in my original reply.

Anyway could someone please tell me why a company that runs an 8 car 377 on an off peak Bognor run needs 23 new trains?!

Well untill a few weeks ago Southern actually owned 11 of the trains. So they paid for these new trains then had they removed from themselves.

The original plan was for the 377/5 to return to Southern and allow for more units to be used on Metro routes in London along with the platform lengthing and the use of 377/3 to produce 10 car metro trains in London.

Even if Southern still do this plan the lengthing of trains in the original timeline is also now out as the 377/5 won't be released in time. The delay to NXEMU affects more than just FGW and the northern regions.

Anyway could someone please tell me why a company that runs an 8 car 377 on an off peak Bognor run needs 23 new trains?!

I take it by this you mean that you feel an 8 car train at this time is overkill? Without knowing the loadings (and I dont know the area) you might be missing the bigger picture. There may not be time or spare path later on to add an extra 4 cars if it was only 4 cars to begin with. So instead of not running a service, off peak its kept at 8 cars so its at the right place in the peak.

 

[westcoaster]

Do the the nature of Smithfield tunnel (between City and Farringdon) there is a risk that people in the middle car would become trapped as there isn't enough room to escape from the side doors of the unit. I forgot to add that in my original reply
.

Not true, ill go into detail about the centre door in a moment.
Read your above paragraph again, so how is it possible to access the end gangway door from in a carriage during a fire? the answer impossible.

Now the endgangway door was put in place as you say due to the nature of smithfield tunnel (single boar both directions) between farringdon and barbican(no longer in use), and the lack off space between the carriage side and the tunnel walls, so if there was a failure / emergancy the driver would put the ladder over the coupling and up to the front door. A little bit of trivia for you did you know there are ladders placed at some signals through the core route, now im not 100% sure of the reason why, but i think it was to save time, so if there was a fire, it would save time rather then having to go to the rear of the train to the emergency cupboard.

The tunnel between city and farringdon is snow hill tunnel.
--- old post above --- --- new post below ---

Ha, the older 321s have well outdone them!

2009

Category: Ex BR EMU
Award: Gold
Class: 321
MPC*: 36,033
Operator: First Capital Connect
Depot: Hornsey
Maker: Bombardier (BREL)
Owner: HSBC Rail

* Miles per casualty for Golden Spanner, percentage improvement for Silver Spanner.

Not forgetting of course the same 321s picked up the same award not only in 2005 but also in 2006 with Silverlink which is pretty good going for a older EMU.

I quite like the 377/5s although I rather they use 2+2 though out like the 365s on the GN.

Even if FCC did have to hand back the leased 377/5s after FCC has done all the bedding in of the units for Southern (In all fairness, Southern should get the flak for them having the problems as they originally ordered them and FCC are only borrowing them), I prefer FCC to look at a fleet of their own 377/5s numbering about 41.

This way, the majority of them and the 319s will be 12 cars meaning seats for all

dont forget Ajax103 there are different catagories for modern stock and old stock.
--- old post above --- --- new post below ---

And the 319 will never run 12 cars (in passenger service, empties they can run in multple and have done upto 16 cars). They aren't permitted due as the middle car doesn't have an escape route through the end of the units. One of the reason why FCC got Southern's new Electrostars in the first place.

again not true, fcc run 12 car 365's out off the cross . back in the days of silverlink they would run 12 car 321's all day long again no problems they were the same as a 319 all exept not bieng dual voltage and no emergency gangway doors..

 

[Pumbaa]

Anyway could someone please tell me why a company that runs an 8 car 377 on an off peak Bognor run needs 23 new trains?!

We've been through this time and time again - the Bognor service splits at Horsham, 4 to Bognor and 4 to Southampton/Portsmouth; get stock in the right place for the Peak home.

Southern need extra capacity as much as the next operator.