Future of the 350/2s

[Tremzinho]

Never never say never. There will be a time where a rail operator will take a chance on the 350/2s. The reason why? To save money.

WMT might be persuaded to keep some of them if they were taking over Birmingham - Manchester services. Dito XC if they were going to split the Manchester service. After that it's a big stretch to see any operator taking them on for OHL services.

They would've been ideal for GWR, but they now have the 387s. So unless another Electrostar operator was desperate to get hold of GWRs 387s, it is not going to happen.

At a pinch, and for a suitably low price, perhaps ScotRail would be interested. Siemens could maintain them alongside the 380s and, as different generations of the Desiro, I imagine there is a fair degree of similarity between them. They'd probably end up being reduced to 3 cars so that they could replace 318s and the worst of the 320s. Unlikely, as I'm sure ScotRail would prefer a single fleet to replace the 318, 320 and possibly even the 334. Depends how desperate Porterbrook is.

 

[172007]

There is no operator with overhead wiring who has a use for them, as many of those operators have just taken on new trains, and the rest aren't at the point where they need to replace their fleet.

Have Scotrail gor plans to replace their Class 318 and Class 320's?

 

[Nicholas Lewis]

WMT might be persuaded to keep some of them if they were taking over Birmingham - Manchester services. Dito XC if they were going to split the Manchester service. After that it's a big stretch to see any operator taking them on for OHL services.

They would've been ideal for GWR, but they now have the 387s. So unless another Electrostar operator was desperate to get hold of GWRs 387s, it is not going to happen.

At a pinch, and for a suitably low price, perhaps ScotRail would be interested. Siemens could maintain them alongside the 380s and, as different generations of the Desiro, I imagine there is a fair degree of similarity between them. They'd probably end up being reduced to 3 cars so that they could replace 318s and the worst of the 320s. Unlikely, as I'm sure ScotRail would prefer a single fleet to replace the 318, 320 and possibly even the 334. Depends how desperate Porterbrook is.

Scotrail may prefer a single fleet but cash is tight in Scotland now so would present an economical option to get newer trains

 

[JonathanH]

Can the 350s be easily reduced to 3 coaches, and is the removal of 37 coaches from the fleet the best option for the owner of the vehicles. Do 37 class 350 units represent a sensible replacement for 55 units of classes 318 and 320? Is the door cycle reasonable for use on Strathclyde? Can they easily be used for Strathclyde style DOO operation? I don't think it is going to happen.

 

[Sutton in Ant]

WMT might be persuaded to keep some of them if they were taking over Birmingham - Manchester services. Dito XC if they were going to split the Manchester service. After that it's a big stretch to see any operator taking them on for OHL services.

They would've been ideal for GWR, but they now have the 387s. So unless another Electrostar operator was desperate to get hold of GWRs 387s, it is not going to happen.

At a pinch, and for a suitably low price, perhaps ScotRail would be interested. Siemens could maintain them alongside the 380s and, as different generations of the Desiro, I imagine there is a fair degree of similarity between them. They'd probably end up being reduced to 3 cars so that they could replace 318s and the worst of the 320s. Unlikely, as I'm sure ScotRail would prefer a single fleet to replace the 318, 320 and possibly even the 334. Depends how desperate Porterbrook is.

It depends if GWR is happy with their 387s. If they are. Then the GWR 387s will stay with GWR and they will not pursue the 350/2s.

 

[JonathanH]

They would've been ideal for GWR, but they now have the 387s. So unless another Electrostar operator was desperate to get hold of GWRs 387s, it is not going to happen.

Ideal is going a bit far. They aren't (yet) equipped for DOO, which is how the Thames Valley services operate, and aren't available yet.

 

[Russel]

WMT might be persuaded to keep some of them if they were taking over Birmingham - Manchester services. Dito XC if they were going to split the Manchester service. After that it's a big stretch to see any operator taking them on for OHL services.

This isn't a bad idea, give them to XC and run the Birmingham to Manchester as a stand alone service.

Rip out the 3+2 seating and replace it with 2+2 with First Class and they would be ideal.

 

[Nym]

May perhaps be a slight over-provision of stock for Birmingham - Manchester and does raise the question of where to terminate the existing XC services, they'd ideally need to run through Birmingham to somwhere as terminating space in there is somewhat at a premium.

Then out of the fleet of 37 that doesn't really make sense to partially lease or split up, even running 12 car formation permanently you'd only need between 15 and 18 units to run the service.
One could perhaps inter-work the units on both Birmingham - Manchester and Birmingham to Liverpool to make use of the whole fleet, but then this continues to raise the question of what to do with the XC services that now need somewhere to terminate.
Somewhere to run through from Birmingham will not really free up any voyagers at this point, just providing much better capacity on the Manchester / Liverpool - Birmingham axis.

It's almost like a stalling electrification programme combined with the lack of proper rolling stock procurement strategies as a country has landed us with high quality assets that no-one wants / needs to use. Not only being the 321s and 319s but now the 2000s gen units as well fighting for a home.

 

[43074]

From purely a numbers point of view they are actually a better fit for Great Northern than the mix of 387s and 379s they will end up with, there are 33 diagrams for 37 units...

Really they could do with being fitted with batteries or third rail shoes (as per the 350/1s) which would open up more options where there is genuinely a need for more modern trains, either replacing Networkers or Sprinters/Turbos.

 

[The_Train]

Have Scotrail gor plans to replace their Class 318 and Class 320's?

Problem there is that there are 55 units across the 318 and 320 fleet and only 37 in the 350/2 sub fleet. Replacing the 34x 320's with 37x 350/2s would work but then they'd still need to find something to replace the 21x 318s with. I imagine when it happens, they will want to replace the 318 and 320 fleets with a single class.

I don't know if there are other options for the 350/2's in Scotland now they have extra wired routes to manage or whether their current EMU fleet is able to manage that workload?

 

[D365]

Not only being the 321s and 319s but now the 2000s gen units as well fighting for a home.

In fairness, the 319s are knackered, but you’re absolutely right about the 321s which would have come into their own on new electric stopping services. The Midland Main Line, or the routes through Meadowhall, perhaps.

 

[LUYMun]

Perhaps a potential conversion to 3rd rail/battery and used to cascade the 158s from SWR?

That was what I was thinking too. 350s on WoE routes, 158s/159s to Southern on Uckfields, remaining 171s elsewhere.

 

[JonathanH]

That was what I was thinking too. 350s on WoE routes, 158s/159s to Southern on Uckfields, remaining 171s elsewhere.

158s and 159s would be totally inappropriate for use on the Uckfield line, at least if the trains are still going to run north of Oxted. The dwell time at East Croydon would be unacceptable.

 

[AlastairFraser]

That was what I was thinking too. 350s on WoE routes, 158s/159s to Southern on Uckfields, remaining 171s elsewhere.

I'm not sure battery performance would permit the 159s to be cascaded, but the 158s could easily be cascaded from the Romsey rounders + Waterloo-Salisbury shorts.
Worting Jcn (where the WoE line deviates from the South Western Main Line west of Basingstoke) to Salisbury is roughly 33.5 miles, Romsey to Eastleigh is roughly 7.5 miles, and Redbridge to Salisbury is roughly 22 miles.

158s and 159s would be totally inappropriate for use on the Uckfield line, at least if the trains are still going to run north of Oxted. The dwell time at East Croydon would be unacceptable.

Agreed, they'd be better used with GWR to retire some 150s.

 

[Sutton in Ant]

That was what I was thinking too. 350s on WoE routes, 158s/159s to Southern on Uckfields, remaining 171s elsewhere.

I would very doubt this idea will leave ground zero. I would doubt that porterbrook would want to pay out for doing something that would be a total waste of money.

I would very doubt this idea will leave ground zero. I would doubt that porterbrook would want to pay out for doing something that would be a total waste of money.

Plus. I remember what happened with the 769 project that was a total disaster.

 

[AlastairFraser]

I would very doubt this idea will leave ground zero. I would doubt that porterbrook would want to pay out for doing something that would be a total waste of money.


Plus. I remember what happened with the 769 project that was a total disaster.

Getting rid of the last diesel units on SWR is strongly incentivised. And the issue with the 769s was mainly the diesel engine parts. The 350s were designed from the outset for 3rd rail (and some have even been successfully used on third rail networks before), so the only new parts needed are batteries.

 

[daodao]

I know this is a speculative thread, but some of the suggestions on this thread for redeploying the class 350s that are supposedly "surplus to requirements" are frankly implausible. There appears to be an excess of mid-life emus that are not yet worn out and a shortage of dmus. Therefore the obvious answer is to use the 350s to replace diesel services "running under the wires" for a long distance.

It seems to me that the Manchester-Birmingham sector of XC is the best option, as I have previously mentioned on this thread. These trains (with second class only) are deemed fit for use on the equivalent service from Liverpool to Birmingham. I accept that they may need a refurbishment, and there would need to be some reconfiguration of services to/through New Street, but neither is a "red line". It would also help XC by freeing up a handful of Voyager dmus for use elsewhere on their network. What's not to like?

 

[Halifaxlad]

The best thing to do is to electrify more lines!

 

[LUYMun]

The best thing to do is to electrify more lines!

Cough cough, ORR, cough cough, third rail.

 

[JonathanH]

Cough cough, ORR, cough cough, third rail.

What has that got to do with 350/2s? If routes are being electrified specifically to use the 350/2s, it would be an odd decision to install third rail.

 

[brad465]

Getting rid of the last diesel units on SWR is strongly incentivised. And the issue with the 769s was mainly the diesel engine parts. The 350s were designed from the outset for 3rd rail (and some have even been successfully used on third rail networks before), so the only new parts needed are batteries.

Isn't there also a limited power supply on the SWML that 159s help alleviate by not utilising? If so power supply enhancements will be needed through to Worting Jct from Waterloo first. Then battery range, while improving, will be risky for trying to get all the way to and from Exeter. To/from Salisbury might be enough, but after that you'd either need further electrification or very effective recharge points at principle stations.

 

[AlastairFraser]

Isn't there also a limited power supply on the SWML that 159s help alleviate by not utilising? If so power supply enhancements will be needed through to Worting Jct from Waterloo first. Then battery range, while improving, will be risky for trying to get all the way to and from Exeter. To/from Salisbury might be enough, but after that you'd either need further electrification or very effective recharge points at principle stations.

My plan was to look at initially replacing the 8 158s (which are used for the Romsey rounders and the London to Salisbury shorts) with the 3rd rail/battery 350/2s. That would only need up to 35 miles of battery capacity.

The power supply could perhaps do with upgrading should the full service convert, but initially replacing the 158s will have less of an impact.

 

[43096]

My plan was to look at initially replacing the 8 158s (which are used for the Romsey rounders and the London to Salisbury shorts) with the 3rd rail/battery 350/2s. That would only need up to 35 miles of battery capacity.

The power supply could perhaps do with upgrading should the full service convert, but initially replacing the 158s will have less of an impact.

You don't need to bother with converting 350/2s for that. Once (if?) the 701s are in - and even more so if the 458/4s are put into use - SWR will have surplus 450s. Easier to convert some of the 450s.

 

[AlastairFraser]

You don't need to bother with converting 350/2s for that. Once (if?) the 701s are in - and even more so if the 458/4s are put into use - SWR will have surplus 450s. Easier to convert some of the 450s.

Perhaps, but how many 450s will be free? Enough to cascade all 8 158s? You'd probably want at least 6 bi mode units to replace them to provide a degree of redundancy and reliability (given the significant distance units will be running on battery for the first time, although the proximity of Northam depot makes the Romsey rounders ideal for a trial, because of the ease of unit swaps).

 

[43096]

Perhaps, but how many 450s will be free? Enough to cascade all 8 158s? You'd probably want at least 6 bi mode units to replace them to provide a degree of redundancy and reliability (given the significant distance units will be running on battery for the first time, although the proximity of Northam depot makes the Romsey rounders ideal for a trial, because of the ease of unit swaps).

There will be plenty of 450s free - far more than eight - if SWR do not increase service levels back to what was planned pre-Covid.

 

[Jturner98]

Although this might sound ridiculous but how feasible would it be to give them to Grand Central? Obviously with a successful battery being fitted and a full interior abs exterior refurbishment. That way you’ve taken the last diesel train out of Kings Cross. They could perhaps run as 8 carriage sets. (With 2+2 seats after a decent refurbishment)

 

[Neptune]

Although this might sound ridiculous but how feasible would it be to give them to Grand Central? Obviously with a successful battery being fitted and a full interior abs exterior refurbishment. That way you’ve taken the last diesel train out of Kings Cross. They could perhaps run as 8 carriage sets. (With 2+2 seats after a decent refurbishment)

They’re not 125mph capable so wouldn’t get the paths.

 

[JonathanH]

give them

Who is doing the giving?

If Grand Central feel they could make a viable case to the vehicle owners to rebuild them to 125mph and fit batteries, I'm sure they would be in negotiations as we speak.

 

[Nym]

When ATL have an essentially unleasable asset that GC are manage to make work… the costs just won’t stack up unless it’s replacement with 221s or 222s of a similar age with a suitable fleet down size for the higher availability

 

[London Trains]

There will be plenty of 450s free - far more than eight - if SWR do not increase service levels back to what was planned pre-Covid.

As I suggested in another thread, an idea to use up some of the surplus 450s could be for SWR to take over the Southampton to Brighton services from Southern when all of the 701s enter service (if that ever happens!). That would also reduce the shortage of rolling stock Southern are having.