Possible AC EMU future cascade scenarios?

[XCTurbostar]

Based on ROG's conclusions for 360/2 conversion to Freight use (or more failure). Could this have implications for the 350/2 fleet conversion to battery power?

 

[43102EMR]

Based on ROG's conclusions for 360/2 conversion to Freight use (or more failure). Could this have implications for the 350/2 fleet conversion to battery power?

I think the problem with the 360/2s is that they were a microfleet of 5, so the only real place for them was EMR. There are 37 350/2s, which would be ideal for an operator such as Scotrail who are looking to bin some of their older fleet.

 

[XCTurbostar]

I think the problem with the 360/2s is that they were a microfleet of 5, so the only real place for them was EMR. There are 37 350/2s, which would be ideal for an operator such as Scotrail who are looking to bin some of their older fleet.

True but it won't be ScotRail for the 350/2s given the incoming rolling stock orders (other thread)

 

[paulravuslante]

Wasn't it also the case that the 360/2s had ATP and AWS but not TPWS, thus being an oddity which would never be mainline certified without adjustments? Or was that the case for the 332s?

Yes. This is the main cause of them going for scrap.

Incorrect as I drove them and they were TPWS fitted as well as ATP and AWS. 332s only had ATP and AWS.
I attach a picture of the desk of the 360/2 and top left you can see the TPWS panel.

 

[Towers]

I hear that, following a thorough review of their abysmal handling of rolling stock policy in recent years, the DfT have made a pledge not to make or sanction any more silly decisions.

Their review has shown that it would be quicker, easier and more efficient to just pile up a huge mountain of money and set fire to it...

 

[physics34]

Ridiculous. Nothing more to say really. Ok its a microfleet but surely some mods can make it compatible with other fleets. Crazy.

 

[D365]

Ridiculous. Nothing more to say really. Ok its a microfleet but surely some mods can make it compatible with other fleets. Crazy.

It was ROG's impetus in the end. Nothing else to be done about it.

 

[Wyrleybart]

I hear that, following a thorough review of their abysmal handling of rolling stock policy in recent years, the DfT have made a pledge not to make or sanction any more silly decisions.

Their review has shown that it would be quicker, easier and more efficient to just pile up a huge mountain of money and set fire to it...

That is the whole point. It isn't DfT's money. The new Anglia franchise which was vetted and approved by the DfT saw a complete fleet replacement, despite the practically new 379s and the investment in the 30 Renatus 321s. The fleets are owned by the Roscos so DfT effectively rubber stamped the end of lease fees for the Rosco owning the 379s. This means that the 30 strong class 379s are scattered around the GE with the rosco theoretically paying siding rental and occasional pans up to ensure "warm storage". I assume there are also occasional diesel hauled moves to keep the axleboxes circular. So the rosco goes from having a revenue stream from the fleet to actually having to pay to store them.

The class 350/2s are probably in a similar situation, although the failure of Bombardier to deliver the 730s mean 350/2 will remain on lease longer than was planned whe nthe new WMR franchise was approved by the DfT.

 

[JN114]

I think, as with the 332s it’s more an ownership problem; than technical.

Both the 332s and 360s were outright owned by Heathrow Airport - not a traditional leasing company.

With the 332s the combination of condition, equipment and ownership made them unviable for any of the ROSCOs to consider purchasing, it just wasn’t a commercial possibility buying them off Heathrow.

ROG thought there was a market for EMU spot hire, which saw them take the financial plunge to buy the smaller, better equipped and better condition 360s. But they were offered to the ROSCOs as well, none of whom were interested.

As enthusiasts and interested observers we might connect some dots on a page and suggest they work in area X or with similar fleet Y - but it’s not our money; it’s not our business. Porterbrook, Angel and so on have massive fleets of EMUs which are broadly as capable sat costing money in storage yards across the land. And even bigger fleets heading the same way.

If they can’t lease out the trains on their books already, why are they going to spend millions on 25 coaches of EMU nobody wants? They’ll never recoup the purchase cost.

 

[Energy]

That is the whole point. It isn't DfT's money. The new Anglia franchise which was vetted and approved by the DfT saw a complete fleet replacement, despite the practically new 379s and the investment in the 30 Renatus 321s. The fleets are owned by the Roscos so DfT effectively rubber stamped the end of lease fees for the Rosco owning the 379s. This means that the 30 strong class 379s are scattered around the GE with the rosco theoretically paying siding rental and occasional pans up to ensure "warm storage". I assume there are also occasional diesel hauled moves to keep the axleboxes circular. So the rosco goes from having a revenue stream from the fleet to actually having to pay to store them.

The class 350/2s are probably in a similar situation, although the failure of Bombardier to deliver the 730s mean 350/2 will remain on lease longer than was planned whe nthe new WMR franchise was approved by the DfT.

I remember it being said in the class 720 thread that new high capacity trains (like the 720s or 700s) would have been needed for the passenger numbers which had been originally modelled pre covid.

GA was well suited to a complete fleet replacement, the bare minimum 317/mk2/mk3 replacement would have still left them with sprinters and 321s 10 years later and the expected high passenger numbers. Most of the fleets got cascaded with the 379s likely having found a home by now if it wasn't for the post covid rationalising of rolling stock by the DfT.

 

[brad465]

Apologies if I've missed this, but how intensively were the 360/2s used in the end? When the 332s went for scrap there were many on here saying despite a relatively short life the intensive use they saw hastened their decline. 360/2s obviously operated the same route, albeit they are a different class and behaved differently regarding calling patterns and operating speeds.

 

[43102EMR]

Apologies if I've missed this, but how intensively were the 360/2s used in the end? When the 332s went for scrap there were many on here saying despite a relatively short life the intensive use they saw hastened their decline. 360/2s obviously operated the same route, albeit they are a different class and behaved differently regarding calling patterns and operating speeds.

The 360/2s were limited to use on Heathrow - Paddington stoppers for 15 years, then were placed into store from 2020 with both HEX and later ROG following their purchase of the fleet. I saw some photos of 360201 being used for a film shoot at the Dean Forest Railway, and it wasn’t in the best of conditions - you can see why ROG decided to sell them for scrap rather than pay more to keep them in storage!

 

[yorksrob]

Absolutely shocking.

In a couple of years time when we're suffering from overcrowding, there'll be some DfT half-wit whining "nah, there aren't enough trains" and we'll be saying yes, becausu you scrapped them all.

There ought to be a inquiry into this level of waste and lack of forethought.

 

[JonathanH]

Absolutely shocking.

In a couple of years time when we're suffering from overcrowding, there'll be some DfT half-wit whining "nah, there aren't enough trains" and we'll be saying yes, becausu you scrapped them all.

There ought to be a inquiry into this level of waste and lack of forethought.

Where do we keep the trains running in the meantime? Who pays for the storage? Five units doesn't make a difference in any case. How much would the inquiry cost? There are plenty of spare electric units even without the 360/2s.

 

[TT-ONR-NRN]

Who’s to say all five are going? The original four might stay with Rail Operations Group?

 

[DelW]

Absolutely shocking.

In a couple of years time when we're suffering from overcrowding, there'll be some DfT half-wit whining "nah, there aren't enough trains" and we'll be saying yes, becausu you scrapped them all.

There ought to be a inquiry into this level of waste and lack of forethought.

DfT hasn't scrapped anything. It's a commercial decision by a commercial company.

These were trains bought by Heathrow Airport Ltd for a particular purpose, which they served for 15 years. That purpose ended when the Elizabeth Line opened, and HAL sold the trains to ROG. ROG looked for other uses for them but couldn't find any takers. End of story.

 

[yorksrob]

Where do we keep the trains running in the meantime? Who pays for the storage? Five units doesn't make a difference in any case. How much would the inquiry cost? There are plenty of spare electric units even without the 360/2s.

The same place trains are always stored - long Marston etc.

DfT hasn't scrapped anything. It's a commercial decision by a commercial company.

These were trains bought by Heathrow Airport Ltd for a particular purpose, which they served for 15 years. That purpose ended when the Elizabeth Line opened, and HAL sold the trains to ROG. ROG looked for other uses for them but couldn't find any takers. End of story.

We're always told there's plenty of rolling stock around and not to worry about all the serviceable stuff going for scrap, then when push comes to shove and we need longer trains it turns out that there aren't enough afterall.

We've seen it on Northern, we're seeing it on Southern.

 

[DelW]

We're always told there's plenty of rolling stock around and not to worry about all the serviceable stuff going for scrap, then when push comes to shove and we need longer trains it turns out that there aren't enough afterall.

We've seen it on Northern, we're seeing it on Southern.

Keeping them available would mean using taxpayers' money to keep them in storage, since you can't force a private company to keep an asset it doesn't want. Then what if the hoped for demand doesn't appear?

What would have been wasteful would be overhauling and refurbishing them, keeping them in storage, and then finding there was still no work for them - as with the 442s.

 

[yorksrob]

Keeping them available would mean using taxpayers' money to keep them in storage, since you can't force a private company to keep an asset it doesn't want. Then what if the hoped for demand doesn't appear?

What would have been wasteful would be overhauling and refurbishing them, keeping them in storage, and then finding there was still no work for them - as with the 442s.

We'll see.

They should be storing the newer stock for when passenger numbers increase, especially as there's unlikely to be much money to build anything new.

 

[Western Sunset]

Are these the ex-Heathrow Connect units? I get a bit confused by all this (relatively) modern stuff...

 

[adc82140]

We'll see.

They should be storing the newer stock for when passenger numbers increase, especially as there's unlikely to be much money to build anything new.

Who is "they"? Storage isn't free. What any private company chooses to do with its assets is up to them.

The government I suppose could have outbid the scrap man, but then it's taxpayers money being squandered on storage charges.

 

[yorksrob]

Who is "they"? Storage isn't free. It's up to any private company what they do with their assets.

I'm not convinced that the private ownership model for rolling stock is the correct one anyway. Passengers will have subsidised this rolling stock through fares over which they have no control, therefore there ought to be some oversight of what happens to it, particularly as passengers will be on the hook for funding any new stock required when numbers increase.

 

[fgwrich]

Keeping them available would mean using taxpayers' money to keep them in storage, since you can't force a private company to keep an asset it doesn't want. Then what if the hoped for demand doesn't appear?

What would have been wasteful would be overhauling and refurbishing them, keeping them in storage, and then finding there was still no work for them - as with the 442s.

Not quite in this case - ROG being a private company (FOC) can chose to store them wherever they want to - perhaps a little ironically, they have been slightly benefitting taxpayers over the last few years being stored in MOD Bicester. I do wonder if a lack of enthusiasm + high storage charges + the fact they were largely bought to inflate the company value before the takeover has lead to their demise.

And yet, I still find it utterly crazy - the Desiro’s are some of the best built units out there.

 

[43096]

I'm not convinced that the private ownership model for rolling stock is the correct one anyway. Passengers will have subsidised this rolling stock through fares over which they have no control, therefore there ought to be some oversight of what happens to it, particularly as passengers will be on the hook for funding any new stock required when numbers increase.

These trains were originally bought by a private company (Heathrow Airport) and then sold on.

Customers “subsidise” any business asset: should there by oversight when McDonald’s sell off the deep fat fryer?!

 

[Snow1964]

Are these the ex-Heathrow Connect units? I get a bit confused by all this (relatively) modern stuff...

Yes, the 5car units.

But don’t worry many of us get get confused with the early Desiro fleet. 25 4car units ordered speculatively by Angel, only 3 built and used for testing, another 3 became later desiro order, remaining 19 became part of the SWT 450 order, the ac equipment ended up on some 360s etc. Some might even been partial conversions of the test units, so don’t know how old they are.

 

[1D54]

Are these the ex-Heathrow Connect units? I get a bit confused by all this (relatively) modern stuff...

Yes

 

[Western Sunset]

Thanks for the clarification, guys.

 

[DelW]

Yes, the 5car units.

But don’t worry many of us get get confused with the early Desiro fleet. 25 4car units ordered speculatively by Angel, only 3 built and used for testing, another 3 became later desiro order, remaining 19 became part of the SWT 450 order, the ac equipment ended up on some 360s etc. Some might even been partial conversions of the test units, so don’t know how old they are.

Most sources say that 201 - 204 were built in 2002 as 4-car units with gangways but never entered passenger service. When Heathrow ordered the Connect units around 2005, they were rebuilt without gangways, with a new fifth coach added. 205 was built new at the same time - ironically that was the one that went to Sims yesterday.

 

[43102EMR]

Who’s to say all five are going? The original four might stay with Rail Operations Group?

A reliable source of mine says they’ve all been sold for scrap - so all will make trips to Newport in the coming weeks.

 

[anthony263]

Most sources say that 201 - 204 were built in 2002 as 4-car units with gangways but never entered passenger service. When Heathrow ordered the Connect units around 2005, they were rebuilt without gangways, with a new fifth coach added. 205 was built new at the same time - ironically that was the one that went to Sims yesterday.

And the one that was refurbished a few years ago.