Philip Phlopp
Established Member
- Joined
- 31 May 2015
- Messages
- 3,003
665 units built or on firm order, 2749 vehicles in total. The Mark 3 family doesn't come anywhere close to that.
-
Our new ticketing site is now live! Using either this or the original site (both powered by TrainSplit) helps support the running of the forum with every ticket purchase! Find out more and ask any questions/give us feedback in this thread!
Class 387
- Thread starter Class377/5
- Start date
- Status
665 units built or on firm order, 2749 vehicles in total. The Mark 3 family doesn't come anywhere close to that.
Sponsor Post - registered members do not see these adverts; click here to register, or click here to log in
R
RailUK Forums
Deepgreen
Established Member
I knew I must have missed at least one!
Islineclear3_1
Established Member
What about the BR Standard design for EMU and coaching stock built under the 1955 Modernisation Plan that was just about ubiquitous all over the UK for many years?
A tricky one to total up:
for a start, the 4 EPB and 2 EPB classes were only partly built to the Mark 1 body design (the first batches were an older Southern design) and used older underframes.
Then there's the 4 BEP and 4 CEP which were all new-build; 2 HAP of which batches 2 & 3 were Mark 1; 4 CIG and 4 BIG were all new build; 4 VEP new build; 4 REP a combination of new build motor cars and converted hauled stock as trailer cars; 4TC were entirely converted from hauled stock. There's various other EMU classes on the Southern that were Mark 1 stock but they were all formed from these nine classes (as far as I can tell)
Away from the Southern, AM2 and AM9 (i think) were Mark 1 based.
AM3 and AM11 were an in-house Cravens design; AM4, AM5 and AM8 plus Class 504 were a separate design family; AM1 was protoypes based on older stock, AM6 was built pre-1951 to an even older design; AM7 to the same design as batch 1 4 EPB, AM10 and Class 312 were Mark 2!
As far as DMUs go- Class 204, 205 and 207? No Class 1xx I'm pretty sure.
Counting is difficult unless you can find the actual works records. So much in the way of reforming went on!
greaterwest
Established Member
- Joined
- 23 Nov 2014
- Messages
- 1,507
Probably closely followed by the 450/350 Desiro design for modern EMUs.
Let's also not forget that the 172 is the diesel equivalent of the Electrostar in design.
greaterwest
Established Member
- Joined
- 23 Nov 2014
- Messages
- 1,507
Yeah, although I don't think they count because they don't have the gangway; the front doesn't really look the same without it.
D365
Veteran Member
- Joined
- 29 Jun 2012
- Messages
- 12,132
That's only about 200 units though.
greaterwest
Established Member
- Joined
- 23 Nov 2014
- Messages
- 1,507
Indeed, though for three TOCs to be using the same type/design of train, it must've done something right.
It also seems like a lot more than it actually is!
The GE EMUs were all MKI based designs up to the late '60s except for the LNER designed AM6s (306). The AM7s were originally BR 1500VDC designs but they were built into the standard MKI suburban design, as were classes AM2, 5, 7 & 8. The LMR Western Lines AM4s were also very similar to the AM5s. The AM9s were built in MKI corridor bodies.
There were also the class 501 units on the LMR Euston/Broad St services.
--- old post above --- --- new post below ---
And the class 168s.
--- old post above --- --- new post below ---
The class 123 (Swindon inter-city), class 124 (Trans-Pennine) and class 126 (Glasgow-Edinburgh inter-city) DMUs were all based on standard MKI express corridor bodies/underframes.
samuelmorris
Established Member
I really noticed this on my travels yesterday - using a 377/6 on a metro service, a 377/1 on a fast service, observing the 377/2, /3 and /4s passing on other services and the GX 387/2s, using a TL 387/1 on the return and passing the 377/5s on Three Bridges services, then upon the approach to Blackfriars seeing SE 375s passing nearby, Electrostars everywhere. It may only be two or three franchises but I suspect the complexity of the network and the diversity of subclasses and liveries emphasises just how populous the units are.
I wonder how much of their ubiquity is down to the inertia that was BREL supplying almost everything.
Harbornite
Established Member
- Joined
- 7 May 2016
- Messages
- 3,627
You've also got the pretty-similar 360s and the 380s, the final evolution of the desiro Uk.
Then neither does the 357 which is every bit an Electrostar.
I was thinking more on Cost and Quantity than parts and quality.
(see door buttons falling off saga for a start)
The Siemens offerings also seem to me to be more customisable to the TOC Spec required, whereas Bombardier seem to offer Electrostars whos seats appear to be customiseable, but not the interior fittings (Lights over luggage racks / not over seats etc as per the 387s). I Also know as I've mentioned on a few of the Irish threads, that Bombardier did offer a version of the Turbostar to Northern Ireland / Translink and of course the GuaTrain Electrostars - same Electrostar with a different cab.
Last edited:
Class315
Member
- Joined
- 9 Feb 2008
- Messages
- 328
387104+114 are out testing on the GN at present. It's running as 00:13 Hornsey EMUD - Royston 3Z84, returning as 3Z85 02:09 from Royston.
Last edited:
+ The 357 body is the exact same as the 168/1 / 168/2 / 170 / 171 / 172 w/o gangway so...conclusions to be taken.
Turbostar: 168/1, 168/2, 170, 171, 172
Electrostar: 357, 375, 376, 377, 378, 379, 387.
With or without gangway.
Not quite I'm afraid. In appearance maybe, but the Electrostars are 20M while the Turbostars are 23M in car length.
*Almost* the same. The Turbostar bodies are all nominally 23m long (and narrower?) whilst the Electrostars are all nominally 20m long.
Well to say that they are not customisable to some degree isn't really true is it, the 378's have sliding doors, a totally different interior to a normal Electrostar, and Wide Corridor Connections. Yes there will be some things which might be difficult or more expensive to change, and as far as Lights not over seats goes Bombardier probably have a standard layout, possibly they could be changed for an additional cost but maybe the customer wasnt particularly bothered about changing them.
I belive Bombardiers philosophy is like Airbus to offer a standard design and keep changes to a minimum.
I any case while Electrostars although the latest versions are more of a Electrostar/Aventra Hybrid are still being so are the new Aventra units for Crossrail which may be a bit more flexible in some aspects of the design.
Last edited:
Does this change things SO MUCH it has to be considered a TOTALLY different body ? ............ ... ... ... *sigh*
It's not a totally different body, but it isn't the same
It certainly is part of the same family in terms of fittings, bogies, cab design, etc.
Class377/5
Established Member
- Joined
- 19 Jun 2010
- Messages
- 5,594
Yes. You tried to state they are the same. They are similar not the same, especially when it affects things like gauging (which the change from 20m to 23m affects) meaning NR sees them very different . Errors like that will be picked up on here.
The 378 walk through corridor was a design feature the customer wanted IIRC to cope with large passenger numbers and keep . Sidings oops are similar to the 377s (which is the original class given to the Capitialstar's during the design phase).
Last edited:
It's not a totally different body, but it isn't the same
It certainly is part of the same family in terms of fittings, bogies, cab design, etc.
Actually there are two main types of bogies, the conventional outside frame design derived from the BR MKIII types (can't remember the bogie designation), and the much newer lightweight flexx bogies originall put on the non-tilt Voyagers. They have been successful on the class 172 Turbostars and a development will be used on the Aventras starting with the class 345s.
It seems that Bombardier and Siemens are both following similar trends here, as witnessed with their class 7NN designs.
Peter Mugridge
Veteran Member
TRAX said:
It's not a totally different body, but it isn't the same
It certainly is part of the same family in terms of fittings, bogies, cab design, etc.
I agree with both of you.
It's not really any more different than the Hastings units were compared to rest of the Mk1s is it? Same basic design, dimensions tweaked a little...
As you allude to though, the internal framed bogies are rather a rarity with the -star fleets at the moment though, they are only fitted to the 172s, whilst everything else uses the standard outboard bogie. I make that 183 instances of the Flexx eco bogie vs several thousand of the traditional bogie.
As an aside, the flexx eco bogie fitted to the 172s is officially a different type to the B5000 bogie fitted to the 220s and 222s. They look the same, and I wouldn't be surprised if the differences were minimal, but they are different.
It's still the same family. Surely there are other things more important to consider wrong on there ?
A full size Enviro300 bus doesn't have the same dimensions as a midi Enviro200 (which itself comes in different lengths) yet these are considered part of the same range (Enviro), no ? Yes. Thanks.
Last edited:
No one is disputing the family relation, they are disputing your statement that they have the same body
leomartin125
Member
Just noticed that some barrier waggons left Crewe Basford Hall for Derby Litchurch Lane yesterday, followed by a move from Derby to Bletchley TMD which arrived late last night. Is this 387130? Can anyone confirm this? If it is, GWR 387 testing could start as early as next week!
- Status