Class 379 updates (all are OFF LEASE)

[Shunter_69]

026 and 029 moved to Parkestone this afternoon.

 

[Railperf]

I know, and GA have confirmed they’re withdrawn, but until an article is published the stubborn “regulars” on Wikipedia won’t let the Wiki page be changed to show them as withdrawn. They’d rather the page be wrong than accept a tweet as a source.

ah ok. That explains why Wikipedia is so inaccurate.

 

[XAM2175]

I know, and GA have confirmed they’re withdrawn, but until an article is published the stubborn “regulars” on Wikipedia won’t let the Wiki page be changed to show them as withdrawn. They’d rather the page be wrong than accept a tweet as a source.

I’ll never forget the time I used a photo of a train in a new livery, in service that I’d taken and put it on the actual wiki page for that unit and they still refused to accept that as evidence of it transferring. “A photo or video isn’t a reliable source”

ah ok. That explains why Wikipedia is so inaccurate.

As a counterpoint - it would also likely be inaccurate if people were able to add information simply on the strength of their own observations, or, indeed, tweets from a TOC's social media team that would be treated with considerable suspicion in any other discussion on this very forum.

Restricting information to that which has come from sources deemed to be consistently reliable is the least-bad way of ensuring that the overall project can be trusted, even if it does frustrate well-meaning attempts to keep on top of recent changes. The policy is described thus:

Wikipedia does not publish original research. Its content is determined by previously published information rather than the beliefs or experiences of editors. Even if you are sure something is true, it must be verifiable before you can add it. If reliable sources disagree, then maintain a neutral point of view and present what the various sources say, giving each side its due weight.

On the specific question of using a TOC's own tweet, however, some of the "regulars" may be a bit behind on policy:

Self-published or questionable sources as sources on themselves​

Self-published and questionable sources may be used as sources of information about themselves, usually in articles about themselves or their activities, without the self-published source requirement that they are published experts in the field, so long as:

1. the material is neither unduly self-serving nor an exceptional claim;
2. it does not involve claims about third parties;
3. it does not involve claims about events not directly related to the source;
4. there is no reasonable doubt as to its authenticity; and
5. the article is not based primarily on such sources.

This policy also applies to material published by the subject on social networking websites such as Twitter, Tumblr, LinkedIn, Reddit, and Facebook.

I personally would be inclined to accept GA's tweet about the 379 on these grounds, although I'd be hoping that the established railway press caught up quickly.

 

[CDM]

ah ok. That explains why Wikipedia is so inaccurate.

There's also a difference between 'withdrawn' and 'off lease'. Withdrawn *can* be returned to traffic with an operator.
Only when the latter happens can they definitely not be.

 

[Bikeman78]

There's also a difference between 'withdrawn' and 'off lease'. Withdrawn *can* be returned to traffic with an operator.
Only when the latter happens can they definitely not be.

Unless anyone knows better, 379012 and 379030 are still at Cambridge. 379029 worked 5V81 up yesterday.

 

[Railperf]

There are a pair of 379's at Orient Way too - but are they sitting awaiting a move into warm or cold storage?
As mentioned earlier, looks like GA canned one Southend service per hour and one of the Stratford to/from Bishops Stortford & Meridian Water diagrams to ensure all diagrams can be filled with the available 317's and 720's.
That might signal that there are not enough serviceable Class 317's - and that 379's are not available for use.

 

[43102EMR]

There are a pair of 379's at Orient Way too - but are they sitting awaiting a move into warm or cold storage?
As mentioned earlier, looks like GA canned one Southend service per hour and one of the Stratford to/from Bishops Stortford & Meridian Water diagrams to ensure all diagrams can be filled with the available 317's and 720's.
That might signal that there are not enough serviceable Class 317's - and that 379's are not available for use.

Considering they’re the most expensive to lease out of GA’s NXEA-inherited fleet, this wouldn’t surprise me - almost half of the fleet is at Harwich, although I can imagine a few have been kept for spare use in case a 720 or 317 fails…

 

[Bikeman78]

There are a pair of 379's at Orient Way too - but are they sitting awaiting a move into warm or cold storage?
As mentioned earlier, looks like GA canned one Southend service per hour and one of the Stratford to/from Bishops Stortford & Meridian Water diagrams to ensure all diagrams can be filled with the available 317's and 720's.
That might signal that there are not enough serviceable Class 317's - and that 379's are not available for use.

To clarify, the cancelled Stratford to Bishop's Stortford turns gains nothing in terms of units. They simply have a pair sitting in Bishop's Stortford sidings from 0925-1547.

I think it's fairly clear that the 379s are not intended to be used any more. Whether they are still on lease and available to use to avoid a cancellation I have no idea.

 

[Astro_Orbiter]

There was a pair of 379's on the 1643 (I think) London to Cambridge just now, 030 and 012 I think, passed them at hackney

 

[43102EMR]

To clarify, the cancelled Stratford to Bishop's Stortford turns gains nothing in terms of units. They simply have a pair sitting in Bishop's Stortford sidings from 0925-1547.

I think it's fairly clear that the 379s are not intended to be used any more. Whether they are still on lease and available to use to avoid a cancellation I have no idea.

This aged well… yes 379030 and 012 on Cambridge - Liv Street workings today. My guess is limited ones will be used on peak workings considering it isn’t going to Cambridge North.

 

[Bikeman78]

This aged well… yes 379030 and 012 on Cambridge - Liv Street workings today. My guess is limited ones will be used on peak workings considering it isn’t going to Cambridge North.

Indeed! They must have run up on 5H44 and should finish back in Cambridge on 2H72. Worth keeping an eye out tomorrow.

 

[Meglodon 5]

what i don't understand is why GA is scrapping its newer models before it scraps its older ones. That makes zero sense.

 

[43102EMR]

what i don't understand is why GA is scrapping its newer models before it scraps its older ones. That makes zero sense.

Lease costs - the 379s are some of the highest EMUs out there to lease. Cheaper to keep the 317s on until the 720 introduction is complete…

 

[Meglodon 5]

Lease costs - the 379s are some of the highest EMUs out there to lease. Cheaper to keep the 317s on until the 720 introduction is complete…

ah yes, keep the cheap trains that are falling apart and don't work, but scrap the fairly new trains that are a bit more expensive, to replace them with even newer trains, which are truly terrible. 720s are literally 317s in a new shell. Except the seats are in the ironing board style, not the comfy style of the 317s. Also, on a side note, ever noticed how the 720s don't seem to fit the height of the platforms? Yet another screwup from GA

 

[TT-ONR-NRN]

720s are literally 317s in a new shell. Except the seats are in the ironing board style, not the comfy style of the 317s.

Well that’s ideal then, as Class 317 is the original stock on the routes the West 720s are running. Class 379 was dedicated to the Stansted Express for the entirety of its life prior to the introduction of new trains on GA, plus a handful of trains to Cambridge, and the Stansted has had 745s introduced, not 720s.

 

[DanNCL]

Also, on a side note, ever noticed how the 720s don't seem to fit the height of the platforms? Yet another screwup from GA

That’s not a GA specific issue but rather an issue with the UK rail network more generally. The standard floor height of UK trains is higher than standard platform height. The few examples in the UK where train floor height matches platform height are either where the floor height is lower than the standard spec (Stadler units, Tyne & Wear Metro and DLR), or where the platforms are higher than the standard spec (Heathrow Express and Crossrail).

 

[dk1]

ah yes, keep the cheap trains that are falling apart and don't work, but scrap the fairly new trains that are a bit more expensive, to replace them with even newer trains, which are truly terrible. 720s are literally 317s in a new shell. Except the seats are in the ironing board style, not the comfy style of the 317s. Also, on a side note, ever noticed how the 720s don't seem to fit the height of the platforms? Yet another screwup from GA

Take it you’re not a fan then lol

 

[Meglodon 5]

Take it you’re not a fan then lol

thats an understatment

 

[bramling]

Take it you’re not a fan then lol

Well, I can see why people wouldn’t like them. They do feel rather like a 1990s 2+3 school coach rather than a train. It’s quite stark compared to the 379s, or for that matter the 317/6.

 

[swt_passenger]

what i don't understand is why GA is scrapping its newer models before it scraps its older ones. That makes zero sense.

There’s no evidence whatsoever of “scrapping”, you’re being melodramatic I think. They are being returned to the owner and there’s numerous suggestions earlier in this thread about what might happen next.

 

[CDM]

ah yes, keep the cheap trains that are falling apart and don't work, but scrap the fairly new trains that are a bit more expensive, to replace them with even newer trains, which are truly terrible. 720s are literally 317s in a new shell. Except the seats are in the ironing board style, not the comfy style of the 317s. Also, on a side note, ever noticed how the 720s don't seem to fit the height of the platforms? Yet another screwup from GA

You're forgetting who's in control of costs in the rail industry at the moment. Under the new rail operating contracts, costs are covered by DfT and changes to the operating budgets are determined by them. Treasury is very keen to limit costs. So don't assume GA are in the lead on all such decisions

This aged well… yes 379030 and 012 on Cambridge - Liv Street workings today. My guess is limited ones will be used on peak workings considering it isn’t going to Cambridge North.

To cover a Class 720 fault, rather than a Class 317 fault

 

[Mollman]

ah yes, keep the cheap trains that are falling apart and don't work, but scrap the fairly new trains that are a bit more expensive, to replace them with even newer trains, which are truly terrible. 720s are literally 317s in a new shell. Except the seats are in the ironing board style, not the comfy style of the 317s. Also, on a side note, ever noticed how the 720s don't seem to fit the height of the platforms? Yet another screwup from GA

Not unique to GA. Same has happened at SWR where the brand new 707s have mostly gone off lease (though now to SET) before the 'old' stuff. WMT/LNWR are getting rid of the 350/2s which are newer than the 350/1s but cost more to lease.

 

[43102EMR]

Not unique to GA. Same has happened at SWR where the brand new 707s have mostly gone off lease (though now to SET) before the 'old' stuff. WMT/LNWR are getting rid of the 350/2s which are newer than the 350/1s but cost more to lease.

This is different though in the sense the 350/1s aren’t planned to be replaced imminently and the 707s had a new home to go to straight away… the 379s don’t - they’re simply just too expensive to lease, so they’re being put into storage…

 

[Bikeman78]

379024+379025 have done 5A32 Ilford to Harwich. Meanwhile 379011 has gone the other way on 5V13.

 

[swt_passenger]

[…]
..and the 707s had a new home to go to straight away… the 379s don’t - they’re simply just too expensive to lease, so they’re being put into storage…

This is correct with hindsight, but the decision to return the 707s was taken long before they had a future use lined up.

 

[43096]

ah yes, keep the cheap trains that are falling apart and don't work, but scrap the fairly new trains that are a bit more expensive, to replace them with even newer trains, which are truly terrible. 720s are literally 317s in a new shell. Except the seats are in the ironing board style, not the comfy style of the 317s. Also, on a side note, ever noticed how the 720s don't seem to fit the height of the platforms? Yet another screwup from GA

Keeping the trains that are cheaper to lease (and off leasing the expensive ones) when revenue is massively down seems like a good idea to me, particularly as taxpayers are picking up the tab for the railway to a much larger degree than before.

 

[LNW-GW Joint]

Not unique to GA. Same has happened at SWR where the brand new 707s have mostly gone off lease (though now to SET) before the 'old' stuff. WMT/LNWR are getting rid of the 350/2s which are newer than the 350/1s but cost more to lease.

It's not just cost.
350/1 (and SWR's 444/450s) are on Section 54 leases which means the DfT agreed to lease them until a fixed date, in their case 23 April 2025.
The later 350/2/3/4 were not subject to such an agreement and can go off-lease when the TOC decides.
There are similar guaranteed long leases for some other classes too: eg Classes 800/1, 700 and 395.
The class 379 leases probably expire on 31 March 2022 (the original end date for GA's franchise).

 

[43102EMR]

This is correct with hindsight, but the decision to return the 707s was taken long before they had a future use lined up.

And the fleet was taken up long before the 701s are ready to enter service, whilst the 379s have almost been fully replaced by the 745s/720s…

 

[Sutton in Ant]

Here who owns the rolling stock in the UK. https://www.railmagazine.com/news/fleet/off-lease-fleets

 

[Bald Rick]

Here who owns the rolling stock in the UK. https://www.railmagazine.com/news/fleet/off-lease-fleets

that list is almost helpful.

it would be better if it differentiated between those off lease, and those ‘at risk’ with a corresponding end of lease date.