Southeastern metro fleet replacement/improvement

[NSEWonderer]

Just madness.. repaint them into new GBR livery now lol


Sadly saw them pass me at Newport earlier on. I wouldnt say i had a tear in my eye, but its still sad nonetheless.

What is the GBR livery? Wouldn't be surprised different services retain similar liveries to what they have now and only at the most uniforms is Standardized.

 

[physics34]

What is the GBR livery? Wouldn't be surprised different services retain similar liveries to what they have now and only at the most uniforms is Standardized.

I jest a little bit. They shouldve come up with it by now. It's seems a waste of time and money to outshop rolling stock in TOCs colours now.

Theyve 'hinted' at one branding, but that's all I've heard.

 

[Wolfie]

I know this statement is directed at the Met-Cams, but the BREL/ABB have deteriorated a lot recently.
I’ve been on quite a few and most have had a motor off. If not that, they have had something else broken, whether it be the roof fans, heating or a toilet - not to mention 2 of them (465178/005) are stuck in the Grosvenor wall siding. Couple this with the fact that the early 2020s golden spanner awards (2020-2022) have the /9 and 466 listed as more reliable than the /0 and /1, and it could throw a spanner in the works for SE if not monitored.

The fact that they've all had pretty much zero (well in reality the bare minimum, absolutely nothing discretionary) spent on them since new might offer an explanation

 

[MikeWM]

And at Ely this morning. (Yes, I should have worked out how to take a photo without an electrification mast in the way, but I was barely awake

 

[Goldfish62]

I jest a little bit. They shouldve come up with it by now. It's seems a waste of time and money to outshop rolling stock in TOCs colours now.

Theyve 'hinted' at one branding, but that's all I've heard.

Given that GBR doesn't exist yet and I sincerely hope it's GBR that develops its branding and not the DfT then it's some way off. In the meantime, if it's not to be TOC livery what should it be?

 

[XCTurbostar]

And at Ely this morning. (Yes, I should have worked out how to take a photo without an electrification mast in the way, but I was barely awake

Take two photos and photoshop them together

 

[Wolfie]

Having one fleet of 4 car 465s would make life far easier, >75% of the 4car networker fleet is now BREL/ABB/Hitachi.

Generally the MetCamm/Alstom ones have been less reliable, more problematic and have more issues on some parts availability.

Am l right in thinking that all of the diesel Networker variants were produced by BREL/successors?

Otherwise perhaps scrapping the MetCamm ones might at least offer some common parts....

Any unit can be kept going, it's just a matter of it eventually becoming extremely expensive. I think the old tube trains on the Isle of Wight were nearly 80 years old by the end! Quite a target for Networkers to beat that

Those Isle of Wight trains didn't have obsolete electronics...

 

[brad465]

The two units that went to scrap today actually moved into Ely relatively recently, and the obvious finally occurred to me that, logically, the first units that would go for scrap are the ones that last entered the sidings. Therefore, I wouldn't be surprised if there are a few /9s that go before all the /2s, given the latter entered the sidings first so are buried in.

 

[Wolfie]

What that unit does show is how well the NSE livery (the later one with more white) suits the Networkers. The subsequent liveries they've worn are really dowdy in comparison.

I remember NSE (irrelevant but hopefully amusing side-track - predictive text tried to change to BSE!) starting - an absolute breath of fresh air and a bright new livery.....

Where have the years gone???

 

[43066]

I remember NSE (irrelevant but hopefully amusing side-track - predictive text tried to change to BSE!) starting - an absolute breath of fresh air and a bright new livery.....

Where have the years gone???

Agreed. I can remember the Networkers coming in during the early-mid nineties (I was a young kid at the time). They were revolutionary compared to what went before, as shown in my profile picture!.

It certainly makes me feel old that stock I can remember being introduced is now starting to be scrapped, albeit most of the fleet has a few years to go yet.

 

[XCTurbostar]

The two units that went to scrap today actually moved into Ely relatively recently, and the obvious finally occurred to me that, logically, the first units that would go for scrap are the ones that last entered the sidings. Therefore, I wouldn't be surprised if there are a few /9s that go before all the /2s, given the latter entered the sidings first so are buried in.

Good chance 465917 is next then since 466032 (Which went today) arrived at Ely at the same time.

 

[SolomonSouth]

Don't know why some of the 465/2 are still on standby as donors at Worksop while the better 465/9 could be going for scrap now. A shame since

The fact that they've all had pretty much zero (well in reality the bare minimum, absolutely nothing discretionary) spent on them since new might offer an explanation

Same with GECs, but those don't seem to have the same issues as BREL units (at least not nearly as often). A shame those are the ones going for scrap, while the rank and unreliable BREL units solder on with little more than superglue and duct tape keeping them together.

By the way, 465178 and 005 are still stuck in the wall siding. Any word on whether these will be stored/scrapped? They've been there a good while now.

 

[FOH]

I jest a little bit. They shouldve come up with it by now. It's seems a waste of time and money to outshop rolling stock in TOCs colours now.

Theyve 'hinted' at one branding, but that's all I've heard.

Not for this thread really but if they do this they'd be best doing a SWT style approach, different colours that mean something but common scheme to bind it

 

[Doomotron]

Laziness and a tight clutch of the purse strings on Govia’s part.

Or the more likely reason which is that First purple is close enough and most people wouldn't notice the difference compared to the blue on the 375s.

Just madness.. repaint them into new GBR livery now lol

We're quite a few years off GBR existing in any capacity, let alone a point where we have a livery. I wouldn't be surprised if we'd still be waiting after 2030 for GBR to properly start.

 

[Goldfish62]

We're quite a few years off GBR existing in any capacity, let alone a point where we have a livery. I wouldn't be surprised if we'd still be waiting after 2030 for GBR to properly start.

There's every chance it never will given there'll be a general election before then.

 

[Mikey C]

Is it just 466s being scrapped? Are these the units which didn't have the full RVAR modifications?

 

[PZ 08895]

Am l right in thinking that all of the diesel Networker variants were produced by BREL/successors?

Otherwise perhaps scrapping the MetCamm ones might at least offer some common parts....

Yes the 165s and 166s, the diesel version of the Networkers "Network Turbos" were built by BREL in York. However, I was told be a Depot Engineer at Slade Green a number of years ago that the only common parts between the MetCamm Networkers and the BREL units were the seats. Everything else is different. Generally what a BREL unit will do pneumatically (doors, windscreen wipers etc) a MetCamm will do electrically. Obviously not great for maintaining them, as two different sets of parts are required for the two fleets.

 

[brad465]

Is it just 466s being scrapped? Are these the units which didn't have the full RVAR modifications?

I haven't seen an image of what Ely Papworth sidings looked like just before those 2x 466s left, but I'm willing to bet they went into the sidings parked infront of 465/2s and /9s, so by definition would leave the sidings first. If in the coming days a few /9s go for scrap, then /2s, this will confirm this reasoning. But yes, the 466s only received core essential modifications regarding door buttons, sounds and handles. A derogation allowed them to get away with not needing an accessible toilet or wheelchair seating area, as long as the units were always coupled to a 465 in passenger service.

 

[fgwrich]

Yes the 165s and 166s, the diesel version of the Networkers "Network Turbos" were built by BREL in York. However, I was told be a Depot Engineer at Slade Green a number of years ago that the only common parts between the MetCamm Networkers and the BREL units were the seats. Everything else is different. Generally what a BREL unit will do pneumatically (doors, windscreen wipers etc) a MetCamm will do electrically. Obviously not great for maintaining them, as two different sets of parts are required for the two fleets.

Surely even the doors and some of the interior components would be the same, even if mechanically they are different.

Still does seem crazy to see the 466s go for scrap though. It’s a shame they aren’t compliant or confined to the South East. They’d be ideal for a handful of routes on our side (eg Lymington, or if a battery conversion could be sort, Marchwood).

 

[bramling]

Surely even the doors and some of the interior components would be the same, even if mechanically they are different.

There are a lot of differences between the two fleets. Whilst they may, outwardly, look similar, if you look closely it becomes clear just how different they are.

Still does seem crazy to see the 466s go for scrap though. It’s a shame they aren’t compliant or confined to the South East. They’d be ideal for a handful of routes on our side (eg Lymington, or if a battery conversion could be sort, Marchwood).

The Networker fleet has never really been valued by successive operators. One wonders if the replacement fleet will be left to rot in the same way. The 376s are the same.

I tend to agree that it’s unfortunate to be scrapping trains that are barely 30 years old. Another example of the mess that has been rolling stock procurement over the last decade or so.

 

[3141]

Agreed. I can remember the Networkers coming in during the early-mid nineties (I was a young kid at the time). They were revolutionary compared to what went before, as shown in my profile picture!.

It certainly makes me feel old that stock I can remember being introduced is now starting to be scrapped, albeit most of the fleet has a few years to go yet.

Wait till you're 85! I remember how excited my friends and I were about the arrival of 70000 Britannia.

 

[brad465]

The Networker fleet has never really been valued by successive operators. One wonders if the replacement fleet will be left to rot in the same way. The 376s are the same.

I tend to agree that it’s unfortunate to be scrapping trains that are barely 30 years old. Another example of the mess that has been rolling stock procurement over the last decade or so.

While this could have been handled much better, the biggest problems I'd say have been a botched rolling electrification programme combined with setting goals that have no concrete plans behind their delivery - the goal of removing all diesel stock from the network by 2040 being the chief case here. The goal in itself is fine and I think necessary and beneficial, but the action behind it is well short. Insufficient electrification combined with this target, has left diesel fleets going on beyond their intended lifespan while EMUs are stored/scrapped short of their intended lifespan.

In the case of Southeastern, their rolling stock problem is largely down the repeated short-term contract extension seen pre-covid. If in 2014, or 2018, a new long term contract was awarded to either Govia or a new operator (preferably the latter given Govia's record), a new fleet would likely have been ordered, and/or the existing fleet received much better attention. But there was no incentive to do new fleet orders and limited the incentive to do TLC on the existing fleets when only months of franchise operation were guaranteed. With the exception of the 375 mid-life refurb, Southeastern only did what the law required them to do in PRM requirements, and even then the 466s got a derogation to limit what was done to them. Now Southeastern are reliant on receiving other operator's microfleets (707s and 377s) to chip away at their ageing fleet while a full replacement tender drags its heels. Still, could be worse, they could be SWR...

 

[Goldfish62]

Now Southeastern are reliant on receiving other operator's microfleets (707s and 377s) to chip away at their ageing fleet while a full replacement tender drags its heels. Still, could be worse, they could be SWR...

30 707s might be a relatively small number and non-standard compared with the total number of trains in the SE fleet but 30 is hardly a "microfleet"! If that were true then nearly the entire GWR rolling stock contingent, for example, would consist of microfleets!

 

[brad465]

30 707s might be a relatively small number and non-standard compared with the total number of trains in the SE fleet but 30 is hardly a "microfleet"! If that were true then nearly the entire GWR rolling stock contingent, for example, would consist of microfleets!

Okay, maybe now microfleet, but relative to the overall size of all fleets the operator has. 30x 707s is small in comparison to 147x 465s + 43x 466s. The additional 36x 376s isn't ideal either, but one extra fleet variety in this area is probably manageable. Two small fleets on top of a large fleet though is just more complexity than necessary.

 

[Goldfish62]

Okay, maybe now microfleet, but relative to the overall size of all fleets the operator has. 30x 707s is small in comparison to 147x 465s + 43x 466s. The additional 36x 376s isn't ideal either, but one extra fleet variety in this area is probably manageable. Two small fleets on top of a large fleet though is just more complexity than necessary.

Agreed! Ideally for their metro services it should be one homogeneous fleet.

 

[Wolfie]

Agreed! Ideally for their metro services it should be one homogeneous fleet.

The problem is that there are only three (possibly five if you include London Overground and Merseyrail) metro operators needing third rail stock. Currently, unless significant quantities of relatively new stock are scrapped, such homogeneity isn't possible for at least one of them. In the medium/long-term when GBR is up and running that will hopefully change.

 

[gmaguire]

The problem is that there are only three (possibly five if you include London Overground and Merseyrail) metro operators needing third rail stock. Currently, unless significant quantities of relatively new stock are scrapped, such homogeneity isn't possible for at least one of them. In the medium/long-term when GBR is up and running that will hopefully change.

Might be possible if the 376s went to Southern and Southeastern could somehow order more 707s.

Or if the 376s are not similar enough to 377s, expand the Overground and basically convert them into 378s.

 

[43066]

Surely even the doors and some of the interior components would be the same, even if mechanically they are different.

Virtually no components are shared between BREL and METCAM built Networkers. It’s a little bonkers, really.

 

[SolomonSouth]

Might be possible if the 376s went to Southern and Southeastern could somehow order more 707s.

Or if the 376s are not similar enough to 377s, expand the Overground and basically convert them into 378s.

376s aren't going to go anywhere, SE have just (supposedly) decided to refurbish them.

 

[Class15]

By the way, 465178 and 005 are still stuck in the wall siding. Any word on whether these will be stored/scrapped? They've been there a good while now.

They’re always powered down too. However they are BREL units so they might get repaired at some point. Was it 465921 that was there for ages? Whichever 465/9 it was, it came back eventually.