171s leaving Southern

[py_megapixel]

Not much point converting 376s to battery as they are suburban trains and everywhere they would work is electrified.

Uckfield? (That's what this entire thread is about, after all)

 

[mmh]

Uckfield? (That's what this entire thread is about, after all)

It's a route with predominantly commuter traffic to London, but it's hardly suburban. The well-heeled outcry over downgrading it to something like 376s would drown out the complaints over 450s on the Portsmouth line.

 

[JonathanH]

It's a route with predominantly commuter traffic to London, but it's hardly suburban. The well-heeled outcry over downgrading it to something like 376s would drown out the complaints over 450s on the Portsmouth line.

I think the idea is that they would get a substantial upgrade, not just be put in service in their current suburban form. (Clearly there have been examples in the past where the refurbishment has been delayed - eg 360s for East Midlands).

 

[RobShipway]

I think the idea is that they would get a substantial upgrade, not just be put in service in their current suburban form. (Clearly there have been examples in the past where the refurbishment has been delayed - eg 360s for East Midlands).

The 376 units though, would need upgrade to 2+2 seating from 3+2 that exist within them currently.

 

[mmh]

The 376 units though, would need upgrade to 2+2 seating from 3+2 that exist within them currently.

376s have 2+2 seating, albeit very, very upright and spartan. Massively spaced though, acres of legroom on all of the (few!) seats they have. They're very much a intra-city suburban train though. The door areas are collossal, they have no toilets, nor air conditioning, nor first class. I'd rate the chances of one ever reaching Uckfield as close to zero!

 

[paul1609]

Official source. The OP of your linked thread acknowledges that it isn't officially confirmed.

Are 376s fitted with cctv for DOO operation and Adso? I cant really think of any Southern service they could operate without either?

 

[JonathanH]

Are 376s fitted with cctv for DOO operation and Adso? I cant really think of any Southern service they could operate without either?

They would be fitted with it if necessary. The whole point is that they can be repurposed for use with Sutton with a new interior, DOO cameras etc, ASDO etc. Victoria to Epsom, Victoria to London Bridge, Victoria to Sutton, Victoria to West Croydon would all be perfectly fine for 376 operation once upgraded, even Dorking and Caterham / Tattenham Corner wouldn't be that inappropriate. The interior wouldn't actually need to change much for use on those routes.

Ultimately they are just Electrostars with no cab end gangway and a slightly different door arrangement.

 

[Wolfie]

376's are now confirmed to be heading to Southern could they be converted to battery power as has been suggested in the past?

Really? Where?

== Doublepost prevention - post automatically merged: 19 Jun 2021 ==

Official source. The OP of your linked thread acknowledges that it isn't officially confirmed.

Absolutely. Rumour-reinforced rumour is not confirmation.

 

[mmh]

They would be fitted with it if necessary. The whole point is that they can be repurposed for use with Sutton with a new interior, DOO cameras etc, ASDO etc. Victoria to Epsom, Victoria to London Bridge, Victoria to Sutton, Victoria to West Croydon would all be perfectly fine for 376 operation once upgraded, even Dorking and Caterham / Tattenham Corner wouldn't be that inappropriate. The interior wouldn't actually need to change much for use on those routes.

Ultimately they are just Electrostars with no cab end gangway and a slightly different door arrangement.

Yes, I think it's fair to say that if they end up moving anywhere, 376s would just replace 455s on their existing Southern routes. There's nowhere else they're really suited to.

 

[Stephen Lee]

Can I suggest those saying about electrifying the Marshlink line read the High Speed rail Report from East Sussex county council dated 2015 (https://www.eastsussex.gov.uk/media/5343/high-speed-rail-report.pdf).

Within this report it states the following:

"Mott MacDonald was appointed by East Sussex County Council in conjunction with Rother District Council and Hastings Borough Council to develop a strategic economic case for running high speed rail services from London St Pancras via Ashford along the Marshlink line to Hastings and Bexhill. The study has been undertaken by Mott MacDonald’s Economic & Social Development Team with specialist input from Mott MacDonald’s transport modellers using the Wider Impact of Transport Appraisal (WITA) model. The team has also been supported by Dr James Laird, a specialist in the wider economic benefits assessment of transport schemes."

It then goes on to state:

"Currently, there are three rail services between Hastings and London; the East Coastway line, Hastings – Tonbridge line and the Marshlink line. Network Rail undertook a rail connectivity study4 for Hastings to investigate how rail services could be improved, focusing on journey times to London, Ashford and Brighton (feeding into the Kent Route Strategy currently being developed). The work identified that improvement options on the Tonbridge line had too high a cost for minimal benefit therefore the focus has been on the Marshlink line. The study found that a combined enhancement package, of sending HS1 services (the Javelin trains) from Ashford along a faster Marshlink to Hastings and Bexhill with electrification has a strong business case given substantial journey time savings (see Table 1.1 below) and the improved appeal to passengers and commuters. The total journey time from Hastings to London would
fall from over 90 minutes currently to 68 minutes if the Javelin trains were to travel to Hastings and Bexhill."

Table 1.1: Journey time savings from using HS1 services from London St Pancras via Ashford to Hastings /Bexhill
Journey Journey time savings
London St Pancras-Rye 72-85 minutes to 55 minutes
London St Pancras-Hastings 91-100 minutes to 68 minutes
London St Pancras-Bexhill 101-112 minutes to 78 minutes

Is it possible to use Hitachi AT300 for using HS1 services from London St Pancras via Ashford to Hastings /Bexhil

 

[JonathanH]

Is it possible to use Hitachi AT300 for using HS1 services from London St Pancras via Ashford to Hastings /Bexhil

The track layout at Ashford is reportedly not set up for that.

See https://www.railforums.co.uk/thread...er-marshlink-electrified.217681/#post-5147180

 

[RobShipway]

Yes, I think it's fair to say that if they end up moving anywhere, 376s would just replace 455s on their existing Southern routes. There's nowhere else they're really suited to.

Could they not be used to replace the class 313's on coastway services, if the 376's are coming to Southern?

The track layout at Ashford is reportedly not set up for that.

See https://www.railforums.co.uk/thread...er-marshlink-electrified.217681/#post-5147180

Is that working on the basis of the class 8xx AT300's or the class 395/810 AT300's?

 

[JonathanH]

Could they not be used to replace the class 313's on coastway services, if the 376's are coming to Southern?

Isn't the point that the 376s release 3-car 377s from the metro area to go to the coast and 4-car 377s to start removal of 455s?

 

[mmh]

Isn't the point that the 376s release 3-car 377s from the metro area to go to the coast and 4-car 377s to start removal of 455s?

Quite. The 313s were a fudge because there weren't enough 377s and are widely considered not ideal. I can't see that there'd be any desire to replace them with another inner suburban unit, but rather have all Southern services outside of the "Metro" area 377s.

 

[D365]

Is that working on the basis of the class 8xx AT300's or the class 395/810 AT300's?

That's working on the basis that trains to/from the Hastings branch cannot physically access HS1 without reversing at least twice.

Not sure why you're grouping random Hitachi classes together.

 

[RobShipway]

That's working on the basis that trains to/from the Hastings branch cannot physically access HS1 without reversing at least twice.

Not sure why you're grouping random Hitachi classes together.

I was not sure if the issue was with the length of the carriages, with class 8xx being 26M and class 395/810 being 20 - 24M going over the points at Ashford International to be joining the route to Rye and Hastings.

I know that wiki is not always correct, but the wiki page (https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Ashford_International_railway_station) for Ashford International states "Because Ashford International connects High Speed 1 to the Marshlink line, it creates potential for a fast service from St Pancras to Hastings and Eastbourne. In November 2017, the Secretary of State for Transport, Chris Grayling, proposed a modification of the track layout at Ashford International to accommodate such a service. The scheme was supported by Amber Rudd, a former Hastings MP.

To connect the two lines, the junction at the west end of the station would need to be rebuilt, with 25 kV 50 Hz AC overhead wires being installed along platform 2. This would relieve pressure from platforms 5 and 6, which currently handle all High Speed 1 domestic services. In 2018, a spokesman for Network Rail said remodelling the station could be complete by 2022"

Is the rebuilding of Ashford International taking place as per the above details?

 

[Bald Rick]

I know that wiki is not always correct, but the wiki page (https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Ashford_International_railway_station) for Ashford International states "Because Ashford International connects High Speed 1 to the Marshlink line, it creates potential for a fast service from St Pancras to Hastings and Eastbourne. In November 2017, the Secretary of State for Transport, Chris Grayling, proposed a modification of the track layout at Ashford International to accommodate such a service. The scheme was supported by Amber Rudd, a former Hastings MP.

there are no existing connections from the HS1 lines to the Rye line at Ashford.

Nice to see the former Secretary of State proposing projects. To my certain knowledge this was looked at in 2015, if not earlier. Amber Rudd was very keen, and I need those days, very important. Political pressure has waned somewhat since the 2019 General Election...

It is very difficult. It needs the whole of Ashford west to be rebuilt, and potentially needs certain types of non standard switches and crossings that would make the track engineers sweat profusely, and bring in potential single point failures that could stop the whole job. As I mentioned in the other thread, it also means amending the signalling on HS1, albeit at the fringe, but still not an easy task due to the interfaces.

Is the rebuilding of Ashford International taking place as per the above details?

Not currently. It’s a lot of money, a lot of risk, for relatively little benefit. And there’s no trains that could use it.

 

[JamesRowden]

It is very difficult. It needs the whole of Ashford west to be rebuilt,

The Kent Route Study included the alternative option of making platform 3 a domestic platform and providing a connection from it to the Marshlink.

 

[wobman]

Is it true that the 171's aren't being released to EMR now ? Apparently TFW are having to give their 170's to EMR and TFW gain 8 153's to go with the extra mk4's they have gained recently.
It's all part of the rolling stock merry go round !

 

[David Goddard]

Bit of a legacy of the way that Ashford was rebuilt for international services in the 1990s, which has now created new problems.
Knowing that HS1 would come along eventually, and the most likely route, they should have left the old station pretty much alone and built 5/6 for international trains, so the 3/4 and 5/6 islands would have been the opposite uses to what they are.
This would have then been easier to integrate 3-6 into HS1 and have left a more flexible layout for the classic lines.

Appreciate we are getting a little off topic but it is still part of how to displace 171s.

 

[Class 466]

Isn't the point that the 376s release 3-car 377s from the metro area to go to the coast and 4-car 377s to start removal of 455s?

The whole 376 to Southern thing seems a hot topic on here. Until Southeastern order and receive a replacement metro fleet for the rest of their 465s - 376s won’t be going anywhere.

 

[Bald Rick]

The Kent Route Study included the alternative option of making platform 3 a domestic platform and providing a connection from it to the Marshlink.

Equally troublesome.

 

[ABB125]

Ultimately they are just Electrostars with no cab end gangway and a slightly different door arrangement.

How are the doors different? I've not noticed anything myself, but admittedly I don't frequent electrostars of any variety; indeed, I think I've only ever had two trips on a class 376!

 

[JonathanH]

How are the doors different? I've not noticed anything myself, but admittedly I don't frequent electrostars of any variety; indeed, I think I've only ever had two trips on a class 376!

376s have sliding doors which go into a pocket like a 378 instead of the plug doors fitted to 375s, 377s, 379s and 387s. This means that where the door pocket and set back area, the cross section of the interior is more narrow.

 

[ABB125]

376s have sliding doors which go into a pocket like a 378 instead of the plug doors fitted to 375s, 377s, 379s and 387s. This means that where the door pocket and set back area, the cross section of the interior is more narrow.

Ah right, thanks

 

[RobShipway]

Getting the thread back on topic, in an ideal world you would have the routes that the class 171 units serve currently to be electrified. But like some routes where bi-mode trains are being used, possibly pre - electrification of those routes would any of the following ideas for trains be of any use on the class 171 routes:

1) Use Stadler flirt trains similar to class 755/756, but with gangways at the front of the end units.
2) If the class 171's are to stay, then adapt them to be full DEMU units such that they can either be operated in diesel mode or from getting supply from third rail.
3) Use a version of Bombardier(Alstom) Aventra that can operate on either 3rd rail, OHLE and with battery power or similar train from other manufacturers.
4) Replace with loco hauled coaches that also has a driving car similar to Nova 3..... Loco? Traxx or class 93? Possibly too wide for the Uckfield line?
5) Have trains similar to the class 230's, but based on S Stock.

 

[mmh]

Getting the thread back on topic, in an ideal world you would have the routes that the class 171 units serve currently to be electrified. But like some routes where bi-mode trains are being used, possibly pre - electrification of those routes would any of the following ideas for trains be of any use on the class 171 routes:

1) Use Stadler flirt trains similar to class 755/756, but with gangways at the front of the end units.
2) If the class 171's are to stay, then adapt them to be full DEMU units such that they can either be operated in diesel mode or from getting supply from third rail.
3) Use a version of Bombardier(Alstom) Aventra that can operate on either 3rd rail, OHLE and with battery power or similar train from other manufacturers.
4) Replace with loco hauled coaches that also has a driving car similar to Nova 3..... Loco? Traxx or class 93? Possibly too wide for the Uckfield line?
5) Have trains similar to the class 230's, but based on S Stock.

1) Yup, it is very unfortunate 171s weren't built with gangways.
2) Sounds ambitious. Has that ever been done before? And very slow, you'd have to do one at a time. Better just to do a new build then release the 171s for use somewhere else - loads of places could do with them.
3) Realistically I can't see Uckfield ever being electrified, however perhaps more OHLE equipped dual voltage EMUs would be useful - e.g. a post-HS2 WCML with more cross-London services.
4) You could make them narrower if it was a problem, but length is an issue. I can't see anyone going for locos and reducing passenger compartment size.
5) Not really sure what this means to be honest, sorry!

 

[RobShipway]

1) Yup, it is very unfortunate 171s weren't built with gangways.
2) Sounds ambitious. Has that ever been done before? And very slow, you'd have to do one at a time. Better just to do a new build then release the 171s for use somewhere else - loads of places could do with them.
3) Realistically I can't see Uckfield ever being electrified, however perhaps more OHLE equipped dual voltage EMUs would be useful - e.g. a post-HS2 WCML with more cross-London services.
4) You could make them narrower if it was a problem, but length is an issue. I can't see anyone going for locos and reducing passenger compartment size.
5) Not really sure what this means to be honest, sorry!

Point 5 is class 230 battery/Diesel train, but rather than using ex - underground D Stock, use any available S Stock instead.

 

[Wolfie]

Point 5 is class 230 battery/Diesel train, but rather than using ex - underground D Stock, use any available S Stock instead.

What makes you believe that there are any available S stock? LU is hardly about to release it's current rolling stock without replacement.

 

[Journeyman]

Point 5 is class 230 battery/Diesel train, but rather than using ex - underground D Stock, use any available S Stock instead.

What available S Stock?