SouthEastern fleet replacement updates

[Samzino]

What on earth is meant by that?

Just let it go its clearly flown over your head, deary me

 

[TT-ONR-NRN]

CAF the rolling stock manufacturer - has a reputation among some...

I know, but I wondered what that had to do with Southeastern. I guess it’s also a dig that SE are a rubbish TOC. Not wrong tbf.

 

[Samzino]

I know, but I wondered what that had to do with Southeastern. I guess it’s also a dig that SE are a rubbish TOC. Not wrong tbf.

Apologies I assumed you were getting defensive on it hence why I decided to not try further explain it outside of those who got it. In a nutshell yeh it was more of a dig on not just the service over the years and state of their current rolling stock(especially the fact the 376s they choose never to even do a basic relivery from connex colours) it just wouldn't surprise me if they ended up doing a deal with CAF.

CAF would be imo the only manufacturer that would allow them to cheap out on the numerous things they would on their new rolling stock if they went for one. As far as im aware Siemens, Stadler, Hitachi most cases will try to work with the demands/ budget but will only do so to a reasonable degree. Noticeably CAF will when trying to accommodate a barebones order cheap out on the bogies for example which is why quite a few of their rolling stock have terrible ride quality which would be far fine at home with SE metro routes anyway. (pre 707 city beam)

CAF when given an order tho definitely have made great trains the 332s were solid(albeit yes being part with Siemens)

 

[TT-ONR-NRN]

Apologies I assumed you were getting defensive on it hence why I decided to not try further explain it outside of those who got it. In a nutshell yeh it was more of a dig on not just the service over the years and state of their current rolling stock(especially the fact the 376s they choose never to even do a basic relivery from connex colours) it just wouldn't surprise me if they ended up doing a deal with CAF.

CAF would be imo the only manufacturer that would allow them to cheap out on the numerous things they would on their new rolling stock if they went for one. As far as im aware Siemens, Stadler, Hitachi most cases will try to work with the demands/ budget but will only do so to a reasonable degree. Noticeably CAF will when trying to accommodate a barebones order cheap out on the bogies for example which is why quite a few of their rolling stock have terrible ride quality which would be far fine at home with SE metro routes anyway. (pre 707 city beam)

CAF when given an order tho definitely have made great trains the 332s were solid(albeit yes being part with Siemens)

Makes sense Definitely wasn’t getting defensive; I can’t stand Southeastern either hahaha!

 

[43066]

CAF would be imo the only manufacturer that would allow them to cheap out on the numerous things they would on their new rolling stock if they went for one. As far as im aware Siemens, Stadler, Hitachi most cases will try to work with the demands/ budget but will only do so to a reasonable degree. Noticeably CAF will when trying to accommodate a barebones order cheap out on the bogies for example which is why quite a few of their rolling stock have terrible ride quality which would be far fine at home with SE metro routes anyway. (pre 707 city beam)

Is there any evidence that CAF trains a. have terrible ride quality, and b. that this is due to a decision to “cheap out” on the bogies?

Surely, like all manufacturers, they will just produce what is required by the spec within the budget allocated. AIUI these decisions are primarily taken by the DfT, so if trains end up of low quality/unfit for purpose that is where the blame lies.

 

[Samzino]

Is there any evidence that CAF trains a. have terrible ride quality, and b. that this is due to a decision to “cheap out” on the bogies?

Surely, like all manufacturers, they will just produce what is required by the spec within the budget allocated. AIUI these decisions are primarily taken by the DfT, so if trains end up of low quality/unfit for purpose that is where the blame lies.

Many a thread on CAF. This is one

195s truly awful, not a step forward

I can’t believe northern rail, ever evaluated these properly before ordering a large fleet...the caf designs are really bad. The list of flaws is endless Ride quality is appalling, it’s difficult to find a seat that aligns with windows, seats are typical of modern designs rock hard and too...

www.railforums.co.uk

There is also many on the MK5 CAF coaches and in these yes the bogies and frame seem to be a reoccurring area. The 332s which are CAF built had Siemens traction kit for example and I never once heard much about those.

Here is another on CAF: https://www.railforums.co.uk/threads/caf-rolling-stock-any-issues-with-quality.200505/

Makes sense Definitely wasn’t getting defensive; I can’t stand Southeastern either hahaha!

Haha fairs

 

[TT-ONR-NRN]

Personally though I’d rather take a 331 than a 465 anyday. I’ll take anything over the Networkers.

Have Southeastern actually indicated any signs of progressing with this?

 

[3RDGEN]

Personally though I’d rather take a 331 than a 465 anyday. I’ll take anything over the Networkers.

Have Southeastern actually indicated any signs of progressing with this?

Given the amount of surplus EMU's that will be available in the next couple of years, 350, 379, 701 & 720, its hard to see new build been given the go ahead. Problem is the surplus units are all different and not compatible so Southeastern would end up with numerous fleets replacing the 465's which isn't desirable. Wait and see I guess.

 

[Samzino]

Personally though I’d rather take a 331 than a 465 anyday. I’ll take anything over the Networkers.

Have Southeastern actually indicated any signs of progressing with this?

Haha the ole networkers were great as long as you never rode them in the baking summer.

 

[Roast Veg]

Given the amount of surplus EMU's that will be available in the next couple of years, 350, 379, 701 & 720, its hard to see new build been given the go ahead. Problem is the surplus units are all different and not compatible so Southeastern would end up with numerous fleets replacing the 465's which isn't desirable. Wait and see I guess.

There are, to put it simply, not enough vehicles out there to replace the 465/0s, 465/1s, and 466s. Those alone are a total of 406 vehicles currently, and even a 15% reduction in fleet size is still a total of 345 vehicles, all of which require high capacity interiors and 3rd rail compatibility. Replacement of the /9s is much more straightforward, at a mere 124 outer suburban vehicles.

There really isn't any other option than new build for the metro stock, and it will be expensive, which is why it hasn't happened.

 

[Cowley]

We’ve (as mentioned above) had plenty of threads about CAF build quality but it’s not at the moment relevant to this thread, so I think we can leave it at that now probably.

Thanks

 

[43066]

Haha the ole networkers were great as long as you never rode them in the baking summer.

You know they’re still in use, right?

 

[3RDGEN]

There are, to put it simply, not enough vehicles out there to replace the 465/0s, 465/1s, and 466s. Those alone are a total of 406 vehicles currently, and even a 15% reduction in fleet size is still a total of 345 vehicles, all of which require high capacity interiors and 3rd rail compatibility. Replacement of the /9s is much more straightforward, at a mere 124 outer suburban vehicles.

There really isn't any other option than new build for the metro stock, and it will be expensive, which is why it hasn't happened.

SE replacement has got messy and been pending now for years but keeps getting kicked into the long grass. A single new build suburban fleet is the right answer as it was for 465 in the first place. 379's for the 465/9's is a possible option at the right price for conversion to 3rd rail running.

Given Thameslink never reached it's planned service level are there spare 700's that SE can have to complement the 707's perhaps?

 

[Milo T.K]

You know they’re still in use, right?

No they are not(365s anyway). Generally networkers are ok apart from summer when it smells like 5 day old yellow liquid that is everywhere not in the toilets especially in the /9s

 

[43066]

No they are not

Oh yes they are, in fact, I’m riding on one now (we are, per the thread title, discussing the current Southeastern Networker fleet - the 365s left SE land many years ago now).

I find them more pleasant than the 376s in the summer, because they at least have decent hopper windows. I can’t disagree with the comment about the aroma, though!

 

[brad465]

Given Thameslink never reached it's planned service level are there spare 700's that SE can have to complement the 707's perhaps?

Well SE don't have all the 707s yet because of 701 delays with SWR, so I'd have thought when the remaining 12 are able to operate that would complement the existing 18. I don't see there being many 700s spare, although you could argue Thameslink having the Rainham service means 700s are de facto supporting SE capacity; they also do this on the Sevenoaks' services, which used to be SE operated many years ago, Thameslink took them over even while 319s were still in use.

 

[Roast Veg]

There could be scope to reduce the SE metro fleet by using 700s, but it'd be best to keep them under TL ownership. That's pretty much what the plan was anyway.

379's for the 465/9's is a possible option at the right price for conversion to 3rd rail running.

I don't think "the right price" is out there, since there are enough non-3rd rail TOCs that would take them without having to pay for mods. If that unlocked some 387s along the way (which we all thought would happen but didn't), then those could be used. Otherwise I hear there are some outer suburban 458s going spare.

 

[cactustwirly]

Personally though I’d rather take a 331 than a 465 anyday. I’ll take anything over the Networkers.

Have Southeastern actually indicated any signs of progressing with this?

The Networkers are very good metro units.
All they need is some tlc. I'd rather take a 465 over a 376 or an Aventra tbh.

The unrefurbished BR 481s on the Berlin S Bahn aren't hugely different tbh

 

[brad465]

There could be scope to reduce the SE metro fleet by using 700s, but it'd be best to keep them under TL ownership. That's pretty much what the plan was anyway.

I don't think "the right price" is out there, since there are enough non-3rd rail TOCs that would take them without having to pay for mods. If that unlocked some 387s along the way (which we all thought would happen but didn't), then those could be used. Otherwise I hear there are some outer suburban 458s going spare.

The other thing to consider is that SE already have too many micro fleets; I would not be surprised if in an ideal world they'd like to replace everything they've got in their Metro fleet, not just Networkers, which would explain the large range in the advertised tender.

 

[Roast Veg]

The other thing to consider is that SE already have too many micro fleets; I would not be surprised if in an ideal world they'd like to replace everything they've got in their Metro fleet, not just Networkers, which would explain the large range in the advertised tender.

That's exactly why the large range in the tender is there I'm sure. I don't share your optimism that the upper bound of that order will be taken up, however.

 

[PGAT]

It's a slowly ticking timebomb that will eventually strangle the SouthEastern network if it isn't handled with soon.

The Networkers are very good metro units.
All they need is some tlc. I'd rather take a 465 over a 376 or an Aventra tbh.

The Networkers aren't going to last forever and maintenance is only going to get more expensive. If you don't get ordering now, then massive problems emerge

 

[Samzino]

Pretty sure SE want to replace both the 376s and 465s. I mean SE doesn't seem to have a refurbishment plan for the 376s which is only more clearly shown by the fact they are still in connex colours and haven't had an upgrade since arriving in 2004.

The networkers are pretty much near end of life especially the 465/2s 466s which unlike the 1s and 0s have yet to get any proper bogie upgrades and hence had the distinctive worn springy sounds when running.

SE I'm sure want to reduce all their microfleets with the tender from 3 to 1 which will make maintaince much simpler plus many others things simplified. They just don't want an SWR level issue with the 701s

 

[43066]

The networkers are pretty much near end of life especially the 465/2s 466s which unlike the 1s and 0s have yet to get any proper bogie upgrades and hence had the distinctive worn springy sounds when running.

If you mean the distinctive high pitched, metallic, chiming sound you can sometimes hear from the bogies, they’ve always done that!

 

[Doomotron]

Pretty sure SE want to replace both the 376s and 465s. I mean SE doesn't seem to have a refurbishment plan for the 376s which is only more clearly shown by the fact they are still in connex colours and haven't had an upgrade since arriving in 2004.

But a refurbishment for the 376s has already been confirmed...

The other thing to consider is that SE already have too many micro fleets;

How? Southeastern have two large fleets, the 375s and Networkers. The Class 376 is often described as a microfleet despite having more units than the 395s, which I have yet to see anyone describe as a microfleet. Plus, the 376s and 377s share many parts with the large 375 fleet (and the main 377 fleet since the 377s are maintained at Selhurst). The Class 707s are currently a microfleet but once all of them are transferred will be a larger fleet than the 395s. If we're planning on cutting down SE's fleet based on fleet sizes and differences from the rest of the fleet, the Class 395s would be the ones to go, proving how ridiculous the SE microfleet argument is.

 

[Geogregor]

But a refurbishment for the 376s has already been confirmed...

How? Southeastern have two large fleets, the 375s and Networkers. The Class 376 is often described as a microfleet despite having more units than the 395s, which I have yet to see anyone describe as a microfleet. Plus, the 376s and 377s share many parts with the large 375 fleet (and the main 377 fleet since the 377s are maintained at Selhurst). The Class 707s are currently a microfleet but once all of them are transferred will be a larger fleet than the 395s. If we're planning on cutting down SE's fleet based on fleet sizes and differences from the rest of the fleet, the Class 395s would be the ones to go, proving how ridiculous the SE microfleet argument is.

395 is specific case, as they are high speed units.

Metro units should be unified. Now they have Networkers (various variants), 376s and 707s to run effectively the same suburban lines. This is silly. They should aim for one unified fleet for the main lines into depths of Kent (which they pretty much have) and another one for metro services. That will make maintenance and operations much easier.

 

[Roast Veg]

395 is specific case, as they are high speed units.

Metro units should be unified. Now they have Networkers (various variants), 376s and 707s to run effectively the same suburban lines. This is silly. They should aim for one unified fleet for the main lines into depths of Kent (which they pretty much have) and another one for metro services. That will make maintenance and operations much easier.

I don't think it's nearly as big a problem as you suggest. SE and the DfT will have reports on exactly how much each option will cost them.

 

[brad465]

But a refurbishment for the 376s has already been confirmed...

How? Southeastern have two large fleets, the 375s and Networkers. The Class 376 is often described as a microfleet despite having more units than the 395s, which I have yet to see anyone describe as a microfleet. Plus, the 376s and 377s share many parts with the large 375 fleet (and the main 377 fleet since the 377s are maintained at Selhurst). The Class 707s are currently a microfleet but once all of them are transferred will be a larger fleet than the 395s. If we're planning on cutting down SE's fleet based on fleet sizes and differences from the rest of the fleet, the Class 395s would be the ones to go, proving how ridiculous the SE microfleet argument is.

Even if not meeting the definition of microfleet, there are too many different classes, and I was quoting someone who was implying SE could/should get more different fleets. Things were probably okay when the Metro was just Networkers and 376s, but adding 707s on top is too many. Also, there has been a plan (presumably delayed due to the 701 rollout delays), to send half of the 377s with SE back to Southern once 313s leave. Were this to happen then 377s would surely be a microfleet at SE.

 

[Milo T.K]

Oh yes they are, in fact, I’m riding on one now (we are, per the thread title, discussing the current Southeastern Networker fleet - the 365s left SE land many years ago now).

I find them more pleasant than the 376s in the summer, because they at least have decent hopper windows. I can’t disagree with the comment about the aroma, though!

Did you read the brackets. I did say the others are in service

 

[PGAT]

Also, there has been a plan (presumably delayed due to the 701 rollout delays), to send half of the 377s with SE back to Southern once 313s leave. Were this to happen then 377s would surely be a microfleet at SE.

I think the plan was to send all the 377s. Not that it matters of course because it probably won’t happen

 

[Milo T.K]

I think the plan was to send all the 377s. Not that it matters of course because it probably won’t happen

Knowing the DfT could change quickly