Could further uses have been found for the 365s?

[D365]

That was Govia's plan to use 365's on the WCML if they'd been able to keep the West Midlands franchise.

Source?

 

[A0wen]

Source?

Quite - not least because the 365s weren't cleared to work on the WCML, whereas the 319s had previously been when Connex ran the Rugby - Gatwick service and the 319s were much closer to the 321s which were operating on the WCML than the 365s.

 

[modernrail]

I have been through the threads and quite can’t piece the answer to this together and so will ask in the hope it is not repetition.

Would a more joined up railway have looked at the last northern renewal franchise and said, the Government owned 365s will become available soon and so let’s free issue them into the northern franchise and only take 321s etc that have to be paid for through leasing until the 365s are ready to transfer?

It just strikes me there may have been an opportunity to reduce overhead on northern with a like for like replacement therefore either reducing the subsidy requirement or releasing that subsidy for more productive application.

 

[JonathanH]

Would a more joined up railway have looked at the last northern renewal franchise and said, the Government owned 365s will become available soon and so let’s free issue them into the northern franchise and only take 321s etc that have to be paid for through leasing until the 365s are ready to transfer?

No. The initial plan for the spare 365s was for that half of the fleet to go to GWR for operation from Paddington but a case was made for them to lease brand new 387s. By then there was a plan for Northern to have 331s. There was no scope for Northern to run 365s as they never needed them in the right timescales.

From 2015
https://www.railforums.co.uk/threads/fgw-franchise.113684/page-4#post-2116861

From 2016
https://www.railforums.co.uk/threads/caf-rolling-stock-confirmed-for-arriva.125900/

It is only the March 2020 downturn in travelling that has freed up the other half of the 365s fleet off the Great Northern routes.

Even in a joined up railway there was nowhere for the 365s to go. Don't forget that WMR 323s are on their way to Northern to replace the 319s and it seems possible the ones Northern don't need will go in the bin (with the 319s) as well.

 

[QSK19]

Could the 365s have maybe gone to EMR instead of the 360s?

Yes, the 365s were nearly 10 years older; but seeing as railway users complained about the age of the 360s and as EMR seems to be a dumping ground for old non-IC stock anyway, the ca. 10 year age gap probably wouldn’t have made that much difference.

Furthermore, no stock shortage issues in view of 41 sets being built as opposed to 21 360s; they seemed to be in better nick than the 360s; and, given their age, could have been seen as a stop-gap to new(er) stock in a few years’ time as opposed to the 360s, with their much-discussed introduction problems, being seen as a permanent solution.

 

[43096]

Could the 365s have maybe gone to EMR instead of the 360s?

Yes, the 365s were nearly 10 years older; but seeing as railway users complained about the age of the 360s and as EMR seems to be a dumping ground for old non-IC stock anyway, the ca. 10 year age gap probably wouldn’t have made that much difference.

Furthermore, no stock shortage issues in view of 41 sets being built as opposed to 21 360s; they seemed to be in better nick than the 360s; and, given their age, could have been seen as a stop-gap to new(er) stock in a few years’ time as opposed to the 360s, with their much-discussed introduction problems, being seen as a permanent solution.

Why would the 365s be any less troublesome than the 360s? There was nothing to suggest the Desiros would be problematic: I would maintain that a large part of the issue is the split maintenance and EMR’s unfamiliarity with electric traction.

 

[JonathanH]

Could the 365s have maybe gone to EMR instead of the 360s?

Where would the 360s have gone? As noted above, GWR made a case for new 387s instead of 365s, why wouldn't EMR go with a suitably sized fleet of units newer than the 365s? While it is a shame that the 360s have not been refurbished between GA and EMR use, the fact is that 360s offer a better platform for that eventual refurbishment with good quality air conditioning already installed for example.

 

[QSK19]

Where would the 360s have gone? As noted above, GWR made a case for new 387s instead of 365s, why wouldn't EMR go with a suitably sized fleet of units newer than the 365s?

To be honest, surely that would have been the lessor’s issue - the TOC shouldn’t feel obliged to take stock solely on the basis that it has nowhere to go. There’s plenty of off-lease rolling stock sitting there that need a home to go to (and no doubt stock that will be sent off-lease in the near future - 175s for example); so the same question could be asked for those currently off-lease units.

I personally think that the Connect services should have had new build stock based on the 720 albeit with an IC level of comfort and facilities - the current stock should have served as a stop-gap. But, that’s just my opinion, though.

Why would the 365s be any less troublesome than the 360s? There was nothing to suggest the Desiros would be problematic: I would maintain that a large part of the issue is the split maintenance and EMR’s unfamiliarity with electric traction.

Agreed on the last point, though I think GA running them into the ground in the last year or so under their tenure also contributed to the issue too. But, I acknowledge that’s OT for this thread.

 

[JonathanH]

To be honest, surely that would have been the lessor’s issue - the TOC shouldn’t feel obliged to take stock solely on the basis that it has nowhere to go. There’s plenty of off-lease rolling stock sitting there that need a home to go to (and no doubt stock that will be sent off-lease in the near future - 175s for example); so the same question could be asked for those currently off-lease units.

Absolutely, I agree with the sentiment that rolling stock shouldn't be used just because it exists and the 360s could have gone off lease. However, I don't think there need to be rose tinted views of 365s either.

 

[A0wen]

Could the 365s have maybe gone to EMR instead of the 360s?

Yes, the 365s were nearly 10 years older; but seeing as railway users complained about the age of the 360s and as EMR seems to be a dumping ground for old non-IC stock anyway, the ca. 10 year age gap probably wouldn’t have made that much difference.

Furthermore, no stock shortage issues in view of 41 sets being built as opposed to 21 360s; they seemed to be in better nick than the 360s; and, given their age, could have been seen as a stop-gap to new(er) stock in a few years’ time as opposed to the 360s, with their much-discussed introduction problems, being seen as a permanent solution.

As well as being 10 years older the 365s weren't air-con'd, hadn't been 110mph cleared (yes I know the 360s hadn't, but the 350s had and they are *very* similar) as well as having the option of Siemens maintenance at Northampton looking after them, whereas the 365s didn't have any of that.

Not for the first time a suggestion for the 365s in the mould of 'solution looking for a problem.'

 

[bramling]

As well as being 10 years older the 365s weren't air-con'd, hadn't been 110mph cleared (yes I know the 360s hadn't, but the 350s had and they are *very* similar) as well as having the option of Siemens maintenance at Northampton looking after them, whereas the 365s didn't have any of that.

Not for the first time a suggestion for the 365s in the mould of 'solution looking for a problem.'

The “problem” in this case was moving the 365s in the first place. They were perfectly suited for their GN work, including the Cambridge stopping service which looks like it will never see the core let alone Maidstone.

Having said that, 365s would have been fairly suitable for Corby as well.

 

[A0wen]

The “problem” in this case was moving the 365s in the first place. They were perfectly suited for their GN work, including the Cambridge stopping service which looks like it will never see the core let alone Maidstone.

Having said that, 365s would have been fairly suitable for Corby as well.

On the former, I can see the point, but disagree because they were non-standard.

On the latter - no chance. Given that Corby / Kettering / Wellingborough were seeing a downgrade from the Meridians, air-con stock was a must. Add in the need for 110mph capability given how busy the southern section of the MML is - and I don't think any Networkers have ever been 110mph cleared ?

 

[bramling]

On the former, I can see the point, but disagree because they were non-standard.

On the latter - no chance. Given that Corby / Kettering / Wellingborough were seeing a downgrade from the Meridians, air-con stock was a must. Add in the need for 110mph capability given how busy the southern section of the MML is - and I don't think any Networkers have ever been 110mph cleared ?

I'm not advocating 365s to EMR, but I don't really see them as being unsuitable if someone wanted to deploy them there. The 110mph surely doesn't make much difference - on the GN no one has bothered getting the 387s up to 110mph - and in terms of the lack of air-con Corby is a comparable journey to Peterborough, and it's not like Luton, Bedford, Wellingborough, Kettering and Corby are the most influential places in the world, they are fairly undistinguished towns. I'm trying to find a diplomatic way of saying it isn't the Portsmouth Direct line!

I don't really buy the non-standard line, though. 40 units is by no means a microfleet, and there's a degree of commonality with the large Networker fleet south of the river. At what point does a fleet become "non standard"?

 

[cle]

Could they have done something in the North West? Add capacity to a commuter route out of Manchester for example (Stoke/Crewe)?

 

[A0wen]

I'm not advocating 365s to EMR, but I don't really see them as being unsuitable if someone wanted to deploy them there. The 110mph surely doesn't make much difference - on the GN no one has bothered getting the 387s up to 110mph - and in terms of the lack of air-con Corby is a comparable journey to Peterborough, and it's not like Luton, Bedford, Wellingborough, Kettering and Corby are the most influential places in the world, they are fairly undistinguished towns. I'm trying to find a diplomatic way of saying it isn't the Portsmouth Direct line!

I don't really buy the non-standard line, though. 40 units is by no means a microfleet, and there's a degree of commonality with the large Networker fleet south of the river. At what point does a fleet become "non standard"?

BIB - perhaps the traffic profile on the GN means it isn't needed whereas it is needed on the MML in the same way it was needed on the 350s on the WCML - I'm sure @The Planner can explain the differences.

 

[61653 HTAFC]

Could they have done something in the North West? Add capacity to a commuter route out of Manchester for example (Stoke/Crewe)?

Think at 4-cars they'd be too long for the bay at Stoke.

In my opinion they're over-rated by enthusiasts anyway- sure, they were nice on the Cambridge fasts back in the day (before the ruinous refurbishment) but don't really offer anything special compared to the early units from the privatisation era.

 

[bramling]

BIB - perhaps the traffic profile on the GN means it isn't needed whereas it is needed on the MML in the same way it was needed on the 350s on the WCML - I'm sure @The Planner can explain the differences.

The key word there seems to be perhaps.

South of Bedford the MML is essentially a 100mph railway due to the presence of Thameslink, and that’s not going to change - unless there’s any plans for uprating the 700s? The key issue is slowing down EMR trains (as evidenced by the heavy use of pathing allowance in many schedules), rather than speeding them up.

So this leaves us Bedford to Wellingborough where 110 mph is actually relevant. Potentially 15 miles. The time difference is minimal, though to be fair I can see it might be a “nice to have”.

As I say, I wouldn’t advocate 365s to Corby, but equally if they were the only stock available then they could be made to work fairly easily. From a presentational point of view they’d be recently refurbished, which is more than can be said for the 360s, for now at least! The 365s could certainly have held the fort until more of the MML is electrified, at which point who knows whether a St Pancras to Leicester EMU service might become an aspiration, at which point the 360 fleet won’t be big enough.

 

[JamesT]

The key word there seems to be perhaps.

South of Bedford the MML is essentially a 100mph railway due to the presence of Thameslink, and that’s not going to change - unless there’s any plans for uprating the 700s? The key issue is slowing down EMR trains (as evidenced by the heavy use of pathing allowance in many schedules), rather than speeding them up.

So this leaves us Bedford to Wellingborough where 110 mph is actually relevant. Potentially 15 miles. The time difference is minimal, though to be fair I can see it might be a “nice to have”.

As I say, I wouldn’t advocate 365s to Corby, but equally if they were the only stock available then they could be made to work fairly easily. From a presentational point of view they’d be recently refurbished, which is more than can be said for the 360s, for now at least! The 365s could certainly have held the fort until more of the MML is electrified, at which point who knows whether a St Pancras to Leicester EMU service might become an aspiration, at which point the 360 fleet won’t be big enough.

Are the 360s mixing it with the Thameslink trains? Isn’t the MML 4-track with the EMR services doing 110/125 on the Fasts?

 

[bramling]

Are the 360s mixing it with the Thameslink trains? Isn’t the MML 4-track with the EMR services doing 110/125 on the Fasts?

Thameslink run 4tph on the fast lines between Harpenden and West Hampstead, and in the pre-Covid timetables more during the peak hours, some of which are timetabled to use the fast lines further north than Harpenden.

If you have a look at RTTT and pick some EMR schedules, it won’t be long before pathing time is seen, especially in the up direction. All the more so with the full pre-Covid Thameslink service.

Pre-Covid there were certainly a few Thameslink services on the fasts right through from or to Bedford South, though this may change now the Corby services have eliminated the need for the most limited-stop Thameslink services.

 

[cle]

Think at 4-cars they'd be too long for the bay at Stoke.

In my opinion they're over-rated by enthusiasts anyway- sure, they were nice on the Cambridge fasts back in the day (before the ruinous refurbishment) but don't really offer anything special compared to the early units from the privatisation era.

I completely associate them with the whole Cambridge Cruiser - was a game-changer at the time.

 

[The Planner]

The 350s needed 110 to tip them over the edge of getting fast line paths.

 

[A0wen]

The 350s needed 110 to tip them over the edge of getting fast line paths.

Understood - was that the same for the EMR 360s as they have been similarly upgraded?

 

[The Planner]

Understood - was that the same for the EMR 360s as they have been similarly upgraded?

No idea, don't dabble with the MML and the dark side very often if possible.

 

[whoosh]

It’s already questionable ditching 365s for 379s given the high leasing cost of the 379s - especially given the relatively small, albeit important, amount of work the 365s were doing pre-Covid.

It would certainly be interesting to know what the leasing costs are for the various fleets.

One would have expected the 365s to be pretty cheap, especially being government owned at one point, but I’ve heard it said that this wasn’t the case.

Leasing costs were not the only consideration with 365s though. They needed Station Dispatch Staff at most of the stations called at as 12 cars, and also any stations with mirrors called at as 8 cars in the hours of darkness.

To avoid those difficulties, then retrofitting with DOO cameras and screens in cabs would need to priced up, and then also add that ETCS (in-cab signalling) is coming in on the South part of the East Cost Main Line within the next few years. This would've needed equipment retrofitting as well.
I believe a programme for the entire Electrostar fleets to be fitted to ETCS (excluding 357s though I think) is in the pipeline - so is already a 'known' in the industry (leasing costs/timescales/design work carried out).

When you can ditch 365s whilst passenger numbers are quiet, and there's a fleet of 379s about to be available if things pick up - with an ETCS fitment programme already planned, commonality of parts with 377s/387s and you can be less stringent with the staffing of stations, then getting rid of 365s has greater value than just the leasing cost.

 

[A0wen]

It does seem crazy to replace not-very-old units. We've managed with non-uniform fleets in the past, with units formerly only replaced when they reached their natural end-of-life.

But I get the impression from these threads that things have changed in the economics of how the railway is run, which makes doing this financially worthwhile. Still seems wasteful to me though.

BIB - but attracting additional costs and incurring operational limitations as a result.

And what is the "natural" end of life for an EMU ? 20 years ? 40 years ? 80 years ? - there is no "true" answer.

The point about the 365s is they are ~ 25 years old and non-standard, which limits their usefulness, particularly when factors such as adding in ETCS has to be considered and the effect of retrofitting it.

 

[73128]

BIB - but attracting additional costs and incurring operational limitations as a result.

And what is the "natural" end of life for an EMU ? 20 years ? 40 years ? 80 years ? - there is no "true" answer.

The point about the 365s is they are ~ 25 years old and non-standard, which limits their usefulness, particularly when factors such as adding in ETCS has to be considered and the effect of retrofitting it.

Couldn't the 365s have gone to South Eastern to displace some 377s back to Southern to partly replace 313s and 455s (to go when the 465s are replaced fairly soon), coupled with the 379s going to GN to displace other sets south?

 

[physics34]

Couldn't the 365s have gone to South Eastern to displace some 377s back to Southern to partly replace 313s and 455s (to go when the 465s are replaced fairly soon), coupled with the 379s going to GN to displace other sets south?

According to others on here, theyve been heavily robbed of their DC equipment

 

[hwl]

According to others on here, they've been heavily robbed of their DC equipment

And new 3rd rail equipment would have to be EMC directive compliant which is tricky given the rest of the traction equipment isn't! Which is also why there is little interest in using them on other OHLE routes as NR could easily refuse.

 

[A0wen]

According to others on here, theyve been heavily robbed of their DC equipment

For "heavily robbed" read removed when deployed onto GN as it wasn't needed there and having 3rd rail shoes unnecessarily can cause problems e.g. things getting 'snagged' by them.

At some point it sounds like the 3rd rail equipment was disposed of, presumably because it was clear that a return to 3rd rail use for the 365s was *very* unlikely.

 

[TT-ONR-NRN]

For "heavily robbed" read removed when deployed onto GN as it wasn't needed there and having 3rd rail shoes unnecessarily can cause problems e.g. things getting 'snagged' by them.

At some point it sounds like the 3rd rail equipment was disposed of, presumably because it was clear that a return to 3rd rail use for the 365s was *very* unlikely.

Pie in the sky, now that they're as good as all scrapped.

Doesn't the lease on the 379s end within a fortnight?