Future of Class 379

[Trainbike46]

Passenger numbers isn’t the relevant metric when DfT and the Treasury look at it. Revenue is king, and that’s still well below pre-pandemic levels. I wouldn’t be surprised to see fares tweaked to extract more revenue from off-peak passengers.

Clearly revenue is really important

But for capacity needed, what matters is how many passenger kms are being travelled.

And as I pointed out, specifically where the 379s would be useful (london commuter land), passenger numbers lag behind

 

[Bald Rick]

The railways are almost at 100% of pre-pandemic usage - the only thing slowing this down is the ongoing union disputes which the government refuse to resolve.

Passenger numbers are reported of the total usage, so we're almost back to the same overall usage.

The railways are not at 100% of Pre pandemic usage, currently it is in the 80-90% range.

What is at 100% of Pre pandemic (indeed potentially above it) is on train capacity. Whilst there are fewer services being operated (about 90% of Pre pandemic), the trains that run them are in many cases longer (eg Cross County doubling up many services) or have higher capacity (Class 720s vs what they replaced), or in some cases both (Azumas). Many more examples out there too.

 

[43102EMR]

The railways are not at 100% of Pre pandemic usage, currently it is in the 80-90% range.

What is at 100% of Pre pandemic (indeed potentially above it) is on train capacity. Whilst there are fewer services being operated (about 90% of Pre pandemic), the trains that run them are in many cases longer (eg Cross County doubling up many services) or have higher capacity (Class 720s vs what they replaced), or in some cases both (Azumas). Many more examples out there too.

I never said they were AT 100% - I said they’re NEAR 100%… usage the past few months has been around 90-95%.

CrossCountry have recently began the act of using single Voyagers again on a lot of their routes, although some are still doubled.

Most Class 720s (particularly on the West Anglia route), are used in 5 carriage formations, which is equivalent to a 6 carriage 379/317.

LNER is an example of an operator that has seen it return to full traffic pre-covid, however I can imagine this will decrease following the recent announcement by the unions of overtime working restrictions.

 

[ashkeba]

I really do not think there is any money. Rather more there is debt. Can you allude to this money you speak of ?.

All money is debt, but I think this is not the thread for detailed discussion of money theory.

Clearly revenue is really important

But for capacity needed, what matters is how many passenger kms are being travelled.

And as I pointed out, specifically where the 379s would be useful (london commuter land), passenger numbers lag behind

Why is not the DfT set targets about capacity and encouraging moving out of cars? Providing extra capacity seems like a good way to get people to switch. Look how fast the 345s have filled.

 

[HamworthyGoods]

All money is debt, but I think this is not the thread for detailed discussion of money theory.


Why is not the DfT set targets about capacity and encouraging moving out of cars? Providing extra capacity seems like a good way to get people to switch. Look how fast the 345s have filled.

Govt had set all sorts of targets for reducing carbon emissions and getting people out their cars was part of this, however the govt is also starting to realise this is becoming unaffordable in the current climbs, there are already tax increases on the way and I suspect to deliver much of the carbon reduction would require further increases. People driving in cars also brings a lot of revenue for the treasury in terms of fuel duty paid etc.

 

[A0wen]

Why is not the DfT set targets about capacity and encouraging moving out of cars? Providing extra capacity seems like a good way to get people to switch. Look how fast the 345s have filled.

For two reasons - firstly getting any serious modal shift unless the ticket prices are covering the costs just increases the amount of subsidy needed.

And secondly, because motorists, unlike rail users, are net contributors to the Exchequer.

In 2019 Motorists paid over £ 40bn a year in taxes (source IFS) - a mix of VED, fuel duties, VAT etc. The DFT's budget is £ 2.9bn.

You stop people using cars and you need another revenue stream.

A road map for motoring taxation | Institute for Fiscal Studies

Taxes on motoring raise around £40 billion a year for the exchequer (around 5% of government revenue), equivalent to about £750 per adult in the UK. Most of this comes from fuel duties, which in 2019–20 are expected to raise £28 billion in their own right plus an additional £5.7 billion from the...

ifs.org.uk

 

[Wyrleybart]

Clearly revenue is really important

But for capacity needed, what matters is how many passenger kms are being travelled.

And as I pointed out, specifically where the 379s would be useful (london commuter land), passenger numbers lag behind

But if there is no money in the DfT purse there simply wont be any extra capacity provided. End of.

There is some PRM rolling stock sat idle but DfT still need to find the funding for the extra drivers needed for the additional services. There are still plenty of trains pruned from pre covid WTTs but i suspect they will never return.
Just how great is Castlefield Jn performing these days.

The best thing to do is look for the gap between the precovid WTTs and how much it would cost to reinstate it without RDW for train drivers, before hiring and training even more train drivers to help out with capacity

 

[43102EMR]

Govt had set all sorts of targets for reducing carbon emissions and getting people out their cars was part of this, however the govt is also starting to realise this is becoming unaffordable in the current climbs, there are already tax increases on the way and I suspect to deliver much of the carbon reduction would require further increases. People driving in cars also brings a lot of revenue for the treasury in terms of fuel duty paid etc.

It is affordable, as long as austerity isn’t involved…

 

[WizCastro197]

What I'm trying to argue is that the electrostar designs differ very little in each other and just like DC electrostars have provision for AC conversion, AC electrostars have the same for dc. From a logistical standpoint it makes sense for them to be built to a standardised design where TOCs can cherry pick the specifications. looking at a cab of a 379 it's virtually identical to a 377/375 even down to there being space left for a DC control system underneath the AC control system. Non AC 377/375s have only a DC control system fitted with dual voltage electrostars having both. If you look at the images of the cabs you will see what I mean.

No money for conversions.

The transfer of 379s to Southern won’t ever happen.

I am not sure how many times I have said it but your ideal full electrostar fleet is rather unlikely. Since all électrisants are different and can’t work with each other, they have to be treated as completely different families, defeats the whole purpose.

The coastway again isn’t Southern’s main routes so therefore 167 units definitely won’t move to the coast leaving a handful to operate metro and all mainline services. You have a shortage of stock there which you said 379s would fix allowing longer trains which it won’t.

When 701s are given to SouthWestern, 707s will be released subsequently allowing 377/5s to be given to Southern. Already in DC form it wouldn’t cost a lot to give them over.

 

[Bald Rick]

I never said they were AT 100% - I said they’re NEAR 100%… usage the past few months has been around 90-95%.

I’m afraid those numbers are wrong, or calculated in a way that is not comparable to Pre Covid; as I said we are in the low 80s and have been for a while.

CrossCountry have recently began the act of using single Voyagers again on a lot of their routes, although some are still doubled.

But their whole fleet is deployed, hence they are running at 100% Pre Covid capacity (Or nearly so for the purposes of this discussion).

Most Class 720s (particularly on the West Anglia route), are used in 5 carriage formations, which is equivalent to a 6 carriage 379/317.

Temporarily, yes. Albeit a 5 coach 720 seats 122 more passengers than an 8 car 379, so capacity is almost 30% higher on that comparison. And there’s more and more 10 car 720s being used now (capacity is 158% more than an 8 car 379).

 

[Trainbike46]

Temporarily, yes. Albeit a 5 coach 720 seats 122 more passengers than an 8 car 379, so capacity is almost 30% higher on that comparison. And there’s more and more 10 car 720s being used now (capacity is 158% more than an 8 car 379).

But how do the running costs compare? say for a 5-car 720 v a 8 car 379 or a 10-car 720 v a 12-car 379? I was under the believe the 720s were supposed to be cheaper than the 379s, but I guess they may be more expensive than the other GA fleets they replaced

Obviously only if you happen to know!

 

[Bletchleyite]

Temporarily, yes. Albeit a 5 coach 720 seats 122 more passengers than an 8 car 379

Theoretically. If they are schoolchildren.

 

[43102EMR]

I’m afraid those numbers are wrong, or calculated in a way that is not comparable to Pre Covid; as I said we are in the low 80s and have been for a while.

Those numbers are from the DfT themselves, so if you want to tell them that what they’re reporting is wrong then be my guest.

But their whole fleet is deployed, hence they are running at 100% Pre Covid capacity (Or nearly so for the purposes of this discussion).

Not from what I’ve been seeing recently, especially as they’ve started reintroducing certain services on their timetable such as Bristol to Manchester; I would imagine a lot of people on here have been experiencing a number of short formations with CrossCountry as well.

Temporarily, yes. Albeit a 5 coach 720 seats 122 more passengers than an 8 car 379, so capacity is almost 30% higher on that comparison. And there’s more and more 10 car 720s being used now (capacity is 158% more than an 8 car 379).

That’s only because of the 2+3 seating layout on the 720s vice the 2+2 layout on the 379s; as a frequent commuter on the 720s, I can tell you that only 2-3 people use the 3 layout seats, whilst the 2 layout seats are the ones which are frequently fully occupied. Especially owing to the rather cramped nature of the 720s.

 

[Bikeman78]

But then it's not as if new train procurement has stopped entirely, with Southeastern after a replacement for the Networkers.

The 379s obviously couldn't be a direct replacement for them, but I'm sure someone at the DfT will be thinking that some sort of swap and rejig might mean 30 fewer new trains being needed.

With a bit of juggling, the 379s could bin off 30 Networkers. It's unfortunate that the GN needs slightly more than 30 units.

 

[Wyrleybart]

Not from what I’ve been seeing recently, especially as they’ve started reintroducing certain services on their timetable such as Bristol to Manchester; I would imagine a lot of people on here have been experiencing a number of short formations with CrossCountry as well.

Best not mention NCL-RDG/SOU and the MAN/BHM-PGN services as they were precovid. What we armchairers dont know is whether DfT/GBR intend for them to be restored. Or was 2019 the pinnacle GBTT ?

 

[43102EMR]

Best not mention NCL-RDG/SOU and the MAN/BHM-PGN services as they were precovid. What we armchairers dont know is whether DfT/GBR intend for them to be restored. Or was 2019 the pinnacle GBTT ?

Not with the revised WMT timetables

With a bit of juggling, the 379s could bin off 30 Networkers. It's unfortunate that the GN needs slightly more than 30 units.

I’m pretty sure the original plan was for GN’s fleet to comprise the 30 379s and 6 ex-c2c 387/3s, with the 29 387/1s going to Southern and the 387/2s returning to Gatwick Express, compared to GN’s fleet now which is the 29 /1s, 1 /2 and 6 /3s.

 

[HamworthyGoods]

Best not mention NCL-RDG/SOU and the MAN/BHM-PGN services as they were precovid. What we armchairers dont know is whether DfT/GBR intend for them to be restored. Or was 2019 the pinnacle GBTT ?

Pre-covid is exactly that pre-covid. The service specifications that existed at the time died with all the franchises.

The New NRCs have a service specification which is generally based around the current service. Any enhancements are built on that specification. In most cases the enhancements are looking at bringing back services which previously existed but not exclusively.

 

[Peter Sarf]

The railways are almost at 100% of pre-pandemic usage - the only thing slowing this down is the ongoing union disputes which the government refuse to resolve.

No way. Worse still there is a problem in that the financials are worse because people have switched from peak fares to off peak fares. There is a BIG hole in the income from season tickets. So even if the figures for carrying reach 100% these carrying are on cheaper tickets.

Therefore there is less income and no foreseeable return to the income levels of the past. So nobody really wants to commit to increasing capacity. ncome

There’s many at DfT equally as fed up, they are acting under instruction from the treasury.



Correct, in London and South East (which was the cash cow that funded the railways) ridership in the peak is still way down, in some cases still nearly 50% down.



Indeed, revenue which funds the entire railway is still drastically down on pre-covid due to the loss of the railways bread and butter. The only solution to the funding model if people wish to run more trains is either fares rises or higher taxes.

My bold and underline. YES - Remember the big money is no longer coming in.

But then it's not as if new train procurement has stopped entirely, with Southeastern after a replacement for the Networkers.

The 379s obviously couldn't be a direct replacement for them, but I'm sure someone at the DfT will be thinking that some sort of swap and rejig might mean 30 fewer new trains being needed.

This is the only chance. But will Southeastern actually follow through on orders ?. Austerity is coming.

However manufactures tend to go for minimum numbers or discount for bulk so there may actually be no saving buying slightly less new but having to spend money adapting and bringing back into traffic a decommissioned fleet. It’s a difficult one to evaluate.

Yes the order for new trains has to be an attractive size. I reckon it will boil down to nothing.

Passenger numbers isn’t the relevant metric when DfT and the Treasury look at it. Revenue is king, and that’s still well below pre-pandemic levels. I wouldn’t be surprised to see fares tweaked to extract more revenue from off-peak passengers.

Yes.

The railways are not at 100% of Pre pandemic usage, currently it is in the 80-90% range.

What is at 100% of Pre pandemic (indeed potentially above it) is on train capacity. Whilst there are fewer services being operated (about 90% of Pre pandemic), the trains that run them are in many cases longer (eg Cross County doubling up many services) or have higher capacity (Class 720s vs what they replaced), or in some cases both (Azumas). Many more examples out there too.

I see there being fewer trains but almost all at maximum length on all TOCs. To save costs - drivers etc.

The only realistic chance for the 379s is use as they are so NO CONVERSION and before they decay too much. This would hopefully cause a cascade of ALREADY DC capable unit to 3rd rail land. This seems most likely to be GN 387s. Too many IFs and not enough NO money.

 

[Wyrleybart]

Please may you write out the stations? Sorry

It is forum rules

Newcastle - Reading / Southampton Central.
Manchester Piccadilly - Birmingham New St / Bristol Temple Meads / Paignton

No way. Worse still there is a problem in that the financials are worse because people have switched from peak fares to off peak fares. There is a BIG hole in the income from season tickets. So even if the figures for carrying reach 100% these carrying are on cheaper tickets.

Therefore there is less income and no foreseeable return to the income levels of the past. So nobody really wants to commit to increasing capacity. ncome

My bold and underline. YES - Remember the big money is no longer coming in.

I dont dispute any of that at all. But....... we have moved on from gravy train first class season tickets.

That however could have been predicted and perhaps even was in the publication of the Williams report (before the Shapps moniker). How was revenue in 2017 2018 and 2019 ? Sure i have read that the pinnacle of rail ridership was in 2015/2016 but maybe wrong. How was the premium loaded revenue stream back then ? What percentage of revenue was extracted from the "orange seats" rather than the "blue ones". You need to be a certain age to recognise the seat colour reference !!!!

 

[WizCastro197]

No way. Worse still there is a problem in that the financials are worse because people have switched from peak fares to off peak fares. There is a BIG hole in the income from season tickets. So even if the figures for carrying reach 100% these carrying are on cheaper tickets.

Therefore there is less income and no foreseeable return to the income levels of the past. So nobody really wants to commit to increasing capacity. ncome

My bold and underline. YES - Remember the big money is no longer coming in.

This is the only chance. But will Southeastern actually follow through on orders ?. Austerity is coming.

Yes the order for new trains has to be an attractive size. I reckon it will boil down to nothing.

Yes.

I see there being fewer trains but almost all at maximum length on all TOCs. To save costs - drivers etc.

The only realistic chance for the 379s is use as they are so NO CONVERSION and before they decay too much. This would hopefully cause a cascade of ALREADY DC capable unit to 3rd rail land. This seems most likely to be GN 387s. Too many IFs and not enough NO money.

Absolutely, on the last point
I am not sure what is going through some members heads when they say the 379s can be converted ‘Easily’ when they really can’t.

Honestly the best scenario was that 379s could go to GN but they are no longer needed.

Others also speculating a move to Southeastern with their second hand tender. Southeasternland is a complète 3rd Rail land so again without a suitable cash injection, nothing can be done.

 

[Peter Sarf]

Newcastle - Reading / Southampton Central.
Manchester Piccadilly - Birmingham New St / Bristol Temple Meads / Paignton


I dont dispute any of that at all. But....... we have moved on from gravy train first class season tickets.

That however could have been predicted and perhaps even was in the publication of the Williams report (before the Shapps moniker). How was revenue in 2017 2018 and 2019 ? Sure i have read that the pinnacle of rail ridership was in 2015/2016 but maybe wrong. How was the premium loaded revenue stream back then ? What percentage of revenue was extracted from the "orange seats" rather than the "blue ones". You need to be a certain age to recognise the seat colour reference !!!!

I think the gravy train of First Class was a long time ago, if indeed it was much of a gravy train. It is the mountain of 2nd class season tickets that has been eroded since Covid that is damaging. This fall in season ticket revenue is particularly bad in the Southeast of England where most of the season ticket revenue originally was - 90% iirc ?.

Here is a thought :-

Also if off-peak carryings (i.e cheap tickets) have risen so much then it follows off-peak fares are going to have to rise if we need so many trains. Ironically the age old desire to smooth out the difference between peak and off peak carrying my be in danger of being achieved. That would undermine obviate the original reason for off peak fares. Bye bye cheap day returns !.

 

[WizCastro197]

Actually, can 379s work with 377s? Wikipedia suggests they can but based on here with the different basements of operating systems I thought not.

British Rail Class 379 - Wikipedia

en.wikipedia.org

 

[43102EMR]

Actually, can 379s work with 377s? Wikipedia suggests they can but based on here with the different basements of operating systems I thought not.

British Rail Class 379 - Wikipedia

en.wikipedia.org

Probably just for ECS movements/emergencies, might be different in a passenger service scenario.

 

[ashkeba]

For two reasons - firstly getting any serious modal shift unless the ticket prices are covering the costs just increases the amount of subsidy needed.

And secondly, because motorists, unlike rail users, are net contributors to the Exchequer.

In 2019 Motorists paid over £ 40bn a year in taxes (source IFS) - a mix of VED, fuel duties, VAT etc. The DFT's budget is £ 2.9bn.

You stop people using cars and you need another revenue stream.

A road map for motoring taxation | Institute for Fiscal Studies

Taxes on motoring raise around £40 billion a year for the exchequer (around 5% of government revenue), equivalent to about £750 per adult in the UK. Most of this comes from fuel duties, which in 2019–20 are expected to raise £28 billion in their own right plus an additional £5.7 billion from the...

ifs.org.uk

The second is wrong on both sides: rail users are on average net contributors to the exchequer, many having well paid jobs paying much income tax; and lots of money is spent on motoring not by the DfT.

I agree partly on the first point. While some subsidy is OK to avoid the harm done by motoring, the 379 leasing cost is probably so high it would require too much extra.

 

[Bald Rick]

But how do the running costs compare? say for a 5-car 720 v a 8 car 379 or a 10-car 720 v a 12-car 379? I was under the believe the 720s were supposed to be cheaper than the 379s, but I guess they may be more expensive than the other GA fleets they replaced

Obviously only if you happen to know!

That I don’t know. At a guess a 5 car 720 will be cheaper to run than an 8 car 379 or 317.

Those numbers are from the DfT themselves, so if you want to tell them that what they’re reporting is wrong then be my guest.

I have done, don’t worry.

Not from what I’ve been seeing recently, especially as they’ve started reintroducing certain services on their timetable such as Bristol to Manchester; I would imagine a lot of people on here have been experiencing a number of short formations with CrossCountry as well.

I don’t know what you’ve been seeing. But Pre Covid most XC trains on the Voyager routes were single units. When the services were reduced to hourly, most went to double units. Now that some (but not all) are back to half hourly, some (but not all) are back to single units. This isn’t ‘short forming’.

 

[Brubulus]

What stops the 379s being used to replace 323s in the North? They will be approaching 30 years old and they are a pretty much a microfleet. I know they've been recently refurbished for PRM but they are among the oldest OHL EMUs which are not in the process of being scrapped, except the 318s, which are mk3 based and too small a fleet to be really replaced by 379s. However scotland's rolling electrification means there may be more demand for new EMUs so these might actually be quite useful in Scotland. (I'm aware of the fact that these are 3 coach trains instead of 4 coach)

 

[Mamorin]

Northern are getting 17 more 323s from WMT in 2024 to replace their 319s. That would be a total of 34 323s and there are only 30 379s so the 379s can’t replace Northern’s 323 fleet.

There is also the issue that the 379s are not mulitable working compatible with any of Northern’s fleet.

Add to that 379s needing an interior refurb for work with Northern and all the training required for Train crew etc and the 379s are not worth Northern even thinking of leasing.

 

[Mikey C]

Absolutely, on the last point
I am not sure what is going through some members heads when they say the 379s can be converted ‘Easily’ when they really can’t.

Honestly the best scenario was that 379s could go to GN but they are no longer needed.

Others also speculating a move to Southeastern with their second hand tender. Southeasternland is a complète 3rd Rail land so again without a suitable cash injection, nothing can be done.

The suggestion wasn't for the 379s to go to Southeastern, but rather for the 379s to displace other trains (e.g. 387s) which could go to Southeastern.

After all if the DfT is in total charge now, presumably they would be able to make such a decision.

 

[Southern Dvr]

After all if the DfT is in total charge now, presumably they would be able to make such a decision.

Yes they would. And they have made a different decision.

379s are for scrap in due course.

That appears to be the DfT decision. Nothing seems to be changing.

The fact units are off to Worksop should tell y’all that the writing is on the wall.

 

[Wyrleybart]

Yes they would. And they have made a different decision.

379s are for scrap in due course.

That appears to be the DfT decision. Nothing seems to be changing.

The fact units are off to Worksop should tell y’all that the writing is on the wall.

If that is true (and i have no reason other than incredulity) then it proves that DfT should not be in total charge of rail.

The most obvious result would be for DfT to "bankroll" by some means the fitting of ETCS to the 379s then diagram them to GN work, releasing 387s for cascade. Obviously DfT wont do this directly so perhaps there is brinkmanship at play. Will the Rosco really send 12 year old EMUs for scrap ? If nowhere else they should equipped for EWR which should be electrified - with maybe electrification of part of the Chiltern network.
Another option would be trans Pennine operations such as Northern between York - Leeds - Huddersfield and Manchester once OLE is completed

So many uses for nearly new PRM 25kV EMUs