Class 304 EMUs

AM9 · 16 Oct 2018

ChiefPlanner said:
Useless fact - but one of the 304's was converted for in cab signal display trials between (I think) Wilmslow and Sandbach , obvious early transponders etc fitted. Sort of "Southern AWS" trials , but away from the Southern ! - the signal displays were apparently replicated in the cab . BRB were increasingly aware of the risk of drivers repeatedly cancelling AWS "automatically" , such that a risk of not fully appreciating the risk of cancelling on a single yellow , vice a double yellow. Good idea , but I do not think it came to anything.

What struck me about these robust units , was the retention of classic 1950's style bulbs in big lightshades which lasted pretty much to the end ,and some ill-inspired painting of the rear bulkheads in so- 1970's meringue yellow.....which contrasted badly to the original varnished woodwork ...!

Yes the bulbs were 110V and of the rugged type (as in underrun) to extend their life. So, when added to the grimy interior of smoking accomodation and indifferent cleaning cycles, reading a newspaper under them could be quite difficult.

RailUK Forums

ChiefPlanner · 16 Oct 2018

AM9 said:
Yes the bulbs were 110V and of the rugged type (as in underrun) to extend their life. So, when added to the grimy interior of smoking accomodation and indifferent cleaning cycles, reading a newspaper under them could be quite difficult.

Would be difficult with the hard riding bogies and the lateral sway in any case.

Never , really a proper user , but they seemed to run around pretty empty in the Manchester area. The compartment vehicles were as vandalized as their 501 friends in London ....

Dr Hoo · 16 Oct 2018

ChiefPlanner said:
Would be difficult with the hard riding bogies and the lateral sway in any case.

Never , really a proper user , but they seemed to run around pretty empty in the Manchester area. The compartment vehicles were as vandalized as their 501 friends in London ....

Definitely. I had the doubtful pleasure of often commuting between Birmingham and Wolverhampton on them and in my view they were manky units from the word go.
The Class 310s seemed decades ahead in comparison. Really liked them although the 75mph limit was a bit of a drawback on long main line runs. The disc brakes meant that wheel treads didn’t get conditioned and they could be skittish on leaves. Bletchley drivers mastered them but mixed traction drivers often took them quite gingerly in autumn.

Journeyman · 17 Oct 2018

AM9 said:
Yes the bulbs were 110V and of the rugged type (as in underrun) to extend their life. So, when added to the grimy interior of smoking accomodation and indifferent cleaning cycles, reading a newspaper under them could be quite difficult.

Agreed, most units of that particular vintage seemed to combine dark colours, dirt, nicotine stains and poor lighting to create an almost permanently gloomy interior, even in bright sunny weather.

AM9 · 17 Oct 2018

Journeyman said:
Agreed, most units of that particular vintage seemed to combine dark colours, dirt, nicotine stains and poor lighting to create an almost permanently gloomy interior, even in bright sunny weather.

Yup! Just like the Ovaltine advert but without the warmth. MKI nostalgia through brown tinted glasses.

Journeyman · 17 Oct 2018

AM9 said:
Yup! Just like the Ovaltine advert but without the warmth. MKI nostalgia through brown tinted glasses.

Yeah, I'm not buying this idea that they were more luxurious/comfortable than modern trains. The final units of that basic design to operate in service were the Thumpers, which ran until 2004. Much as I loved them from a nerdy enthusiast perspective, the regular users absolutely detested them and - quite rightly - felt seriously hard done by that they were forking out a fortune to travel on such uncomfortable and grotty trains.

It's quite telling that usage of Uckfield - London trains has gone through the roof since the Turbostars were introduced.

43096 · 17 Oct 2018

Journeyman said:
Yeah, I'm not buying this idea that they were more luxurious/comfortable than modern trains. The final units of that basic design to operate in service were the Thumpers, which ran until 2004. Much as I loved them from a nerdy enthusiast perspective, the regular users absolutely detested them and - quite rightly - felt seriously hard done by that they were forking out a fortune to travel on such uncomfortable and grotty trains.

It's quite telling that usage of Uckfield - London trains has gone through the roof since the Turbostars were introduced.

As a semi-regular user of the 304s, the arrival of the 323s in Manchester was a huge improvement. I don’t buy all the nostalgia for the 304s - they were not good. In fairness the similar vintage Class 309s that arrived in 1994 for peak workings were fabulous units.

Journeyman · 17 Oct 2018

43096 said:
As a semi-regular user of the 304s, the arrival of the 323s in Manchester was a huge improvement. I don’t buy all the nostalgia for the 304s - they were not good. In fairness the similar vintage Class 309s that arrived in 1994 for peak workings were fabulous units.

Agreed, but the 309s were built with proper main line facilities, and had also been extensively refurbished. The 304s were left to moulder in more or less original condition.

Helvellyn · 17 Oct 2018

Why didn't the 304s get a big refurbishment like some 302s, 305s, 307s and 308s. Heck, when the 307s were displaced from the Great Eastern I am surprised they weren't snapped up to replace the 304s (excluding the small number that went to West Yorkshire).

yorksrob · 17 Oct 2018

On the subject of the thumpers (off topic I know, but it has been raised), they weren't very well looked after by Connex in the end. To be fair, none of their trains were particularly, which was a shame.

Journeyman · 17 Oct 2018

Helvellyn said:
Why didn't the 304s get a big refurbishment like some 302s, 305s, 307s and 308s. Heck, when the 307s were displaced from the Great Eastern I am surprised they weren't snapped up to replace the 304s (excluding the small number that went to West Yorkshire).

I'd imagine it's because such decisions were made at regional level, and the Eastern Region was happy to fork out the cash, whereas the London Midland Region wasn't, for whatever reason.

Journeyman · 17 Oct 2018

yorksrob said:
On the subject of the thumpers (off topic I know, but it has been raised), they weren't very well looked after by Connex in the end. To be fair, none of their trains were particularly, which was a shame.

Even with proper maintenance, they were dreadful.

AY1975 · 16 Aug 2019

jonesy3001 said:
The 304s also served the Glossop/Hadfield line mixed with the 303s and 305s after conversion to 25kv, remember getting them from piccadilly to flowery field

From what I recall, I thought the Glossop/Hadfield line was pretty much worked solely by 303s from conversion to 25kV in 1984 until the last 303s disappeared from the North-West in about 1990ish, then it was 304s and 305s until the 323s entered service. Other lines that had traditionally been 304s, such as Altrincham and Styal, were worked by a mix of 303s and 304s, though.

Does anyone know if 303s and 304s ever worked in multiple, or if a 303 was ever used to rescue a failed 304 or vice versa? Would that have been possible?

My guess would be that the two types would have had the same type of coupler but would not have been mechanically compatible so the head and tail lamps and the interior heating and lighting would only have worked in the unit that was under power, not in the unit that was being "dragged".

Ianno87 · 16 Aug 2019

AY1975 said:
From what I recall, I thought the Glossop/Hadfield line was pretty much worked solely by 303s from conversion to 25kV in 1984 until the last 303s disappeared from the North-West in about 1990ish, then it was 304s and 305s until the 323s entered service. Other lines that had traditionally been 304s, such as Altrincham and Styal, were worked by a mix of 303s and 304s, though.

I'm *just* too young to remember 303s in Greater Manchester, but do remember both 304s and 305s to Hadfield. 304s were withdrawn first, leaving 305s to cover Hadfield until the [eventual] introduction of 323s on that line in November 1997.

Sprinter107 · 16 Aug 2019

The 304s were great. Always nice and warm in winter. I rode on them a lot, along with 310s, which were also nice units but in a different way, on local trains in the West Midlands. The 304s were lively to say the least. I remember travelling in one from Manchester to Birmingham, which was deputising for an Inter City train on a Sunday afternoon in the early 90s, and was bounced all the way to New Street. Very dimly lit, you noticed it more at night obviously, quite a contrast to the glare of fluorescent lights in other trains. The only thing that I didn't like was travelling in them late at night, because they were non gangwayed, so if you were having problems, you were stuck in that carriage, unlike the 310s, which were semi gangwayed up to refurb, and then gangwayed throughout each set. They certainly had character.

43096 · 16 Aug 2019

Sprinter107 said:
The 304s were great. Always nice and warm in winter. I rode on them a lot, along with 310s, which were also nice units but in a different way, on local trains in the West Midlands. The 304s were lively to say the least. I remember travelling in one from Manchester to Birmingham, which was deputising for an Inter City train on a Sunday afternoon in the early 90s, and was bounced all the way to New Street. Very dimly lit, you noticed it more at night obviously, quite a contrast to the glare of fluorescent lights in other trains. The only thing that I didn't like was travelling in them late at night, because they were non gangwayed, so if you were having problems, you were stuck in that carriage, unlike the 310s, which were semi gangwayed up to refurb, and then gangwayed throughout each set. They certainly had character.

Ah, “character”. That usually means something was absolute dross but rateable because it was old. The reality is that the 323s were a dramatic step up in quality that was very welcome.

It’s the same as anyone who tries to argue a VEP was better than a Desiro, Electrostar or Juniper.

delt1c · 16 Aug 2019

43096 said:
Ah, “character”. That usually means something was absolute dross but rateable because it was old. The reality is that the 323s were a dramatic step up in quality that was very welcome.

It’s the same as anyone who tries to argue a VEP was better than a Desiro, Electrostar or Juniper.

Not all new is better than old, are you saying crush loaded 3+2 units are better than ( where replaced ) hauled stock. Yes many new replacements are an improvement but not all, look at a pendo seat against s solid panel v a mk3 against a window, is that an improvement?

yorksrob · 16 Aug 2019

Journeyman said:
Even with proper maintenance, they were dreadful.

No, they were lovely units to travel in when well looked after.

Oh, to travel in well cushioned, wooden pannelled trains with gentle tungsten lighting, rather than ironing board seats, clinical white pannelling and stark flourescent lighting !

43096 · 16 Aug 2019

delt1c said:
Not all new is better than old, are you saying crush loaded 3+2 units are better than ( where replaced ) hauled stock. Yes many new replacements are an improvement but not all, look at a pendo seat against s solid panel v a mk3 against a window, is that an improvement?

I didn’t say all new stock was better than old. I instanced two cases where new was better and there is plenty of evidence on here where I have argued old stock is better. You just cannot generalise.

Sprinter107 · 16 Aug 2019

43096 said:
Ah, “character”. That usually means something was absolute dross but rateable because it was old. The reality is that the 323s were a dramatic step up in quality that was very welcome.

It’s the same as anyone who tries to argue a VEP was better than a Desiro, Electrostar or Juniper.

When I said character, I meant just that. I never said character because I thought they were dross. Had I have meant that, I would have said it. I liked the 304s, and travelled on them many many times. I also very much like the 323s that replaced them, and always enjoy travelling on them.

delt1c · 16 Aug 2019

43096 said:
I didn’t say all new stock was better than old. I instanced two cases where new was better and there is plenty of evidence on here where I have argued old stock is better. You just cannot generalise.

Not how it read but accepted

Dr Hoo · 16 Aug 2019

Had some absolutely awful longer runs on 304s, such as Liverpool or Manchester to Birmingham on a Saturday morning during the football season. Too many fans wedged in a train that really ought to have been locomotive-hauled coaching stock, lumbering along at less than 75mph up Madeley Bank with no toilet in the coach. Not much opportunity to savour the ‘cosy’ atmosphere, ‘subdued’ lighting and ‘comfy’ seating if you couldn’t even sit down. Even remember one desperate individual opening a door in a frantic search for ‘relief’ and then the whole coachload of us waiting for it to get ripped off by a train coming the other way. Fortunately nothing passed us before Stafford.
Truly ghastly units.

yorksrob · 16 Aug 2019

Dr Hoo said:
Had some absolutely awful longer runs on 304s, such as Liverpool or Manchester to Birmingham on a Saturday morning during the football season. Too many fans wedged in a train that really ought to have been locomotive-hauled coaching stock, lumbering along at less than 75mph up Madeley Bank with no toilet in the coach. Not much opportunity to savour the ‘cosy’ atmosphere, ‘subdued’ lighting and ‘comfy’ seating if you couldn’t even sit down. Even remember one desperate individual opening a door in a frantic search for ‘relief’ and then the whole coachload of us waiting for it to get ripped off by a train coming the other way. Fortunately nothing passed us before Stafford.
Truly ghastly units.

The same can be said of every 160, pacer, 158, Networker, Electrostar, Voyager, Pendolino, 125, 225 and everything else that's ever graced the railway in this country.

No train is a pleasent experience when crush loaded.

Sprinter107 · 16 Aug 2019

yorksrob said:
The same can be said of every 160, pacer, 158, Networker, Electrostar, Voyager, Pendolino, 125, 225 and everything else that's ever graced the railway in this country.

No train is a pleasent experience when crush loaded.

Absolutely right.

AM9 · 16 Aug 2019

AY1975 said:
From what I recall, I thought the Glossop/Hadfield line was pretty much worked solely by 303s from conversion to 25kV in 1984 until the last 303s disappeared from the North-West in about 1990ish, then it was 304s and 305s until the 323s entered service. Other lines that had traditionally been 304s, such as Altrincham and Styal, were worked by a mix of 303s and 304s, though.

Does anyone know if 303s and 304s ever worked in multiple, or if a 303 was ever used to rescue a failed 304 or vice versa? Would that have been possible?

My guess would be that the two types would have had the same type of coupler but would not have been mechanically compatible so the head and tail lamps and the interior heating and lighting would only have worked in the unit that was under power, not in the unit that was being "dragged".

Had the Hadfield/Glossop line been made 25kvac three years earlier, some of the outgoing class 306s could have been sent from the GE lines to replace the class 506s. I doubt whether most passengers would have noticed the difference, apart from the swap of the guard's van location.*
* yes I know that they had been worked hard down south for over 30 years, but they would have been as fast as the 304s on the gradients.

Sprinter107 · 16 Aug 2019

AM9 said:
Had the Hadfield/Glossop line been made 25kvac three years earlier, some of the outgoing class 306s could have been sent from the GE lines to replace the class 506s. I doubt whether most passengers would have noticed the difference, apart from the swap of the guard's van location.*
* yes I know that they had been worked hard down south for over 30 years, but they would have been as fast as the 304s on the gradients.

Thats quite an interesting thought. I think originally they were basically the same design.

Taunton · 18 Aug 2019

Sprinter107 said:
Thats quite an interesting thought. I think originally they were basically the same design.

They were the same design. The LNER ordered 100 1500v emus in 1939 from a combined Met-Cam/BRCW consortium, who had done other dual orders for the LMS Wirral units and the Underground. They were not built until after the war, indeed after nationalisation. 92 went to Liverpool Street and the remaining 8 went to Hadfield, which was still under the Eastern Region at the time.

I wonder why Woodhead wasn't converted to AC in 1960, the same as the Liverpool Street lines. Both had similar trains, and indeed equipment, just a few years old, and ran into the terminus alongside new AC electrification.

AndrewE · 18 Aug 2019

Taunton said:
They were the same design. The LNER ordered 100 1500v emus in 1939 from a combined Met-Cam/BRCW consortium, who had done other dual orders for the LMS Wirral units and the Underground. They were not built until after the war, indeed after nationalisation. 92 went to Liverpool Street and the remaining 8 went to Hadfield, which was still under the Eastern Region at the time.

I wonder why Woodhead wasn't converted to AC in 1960, the same as the Liverpool Street lines. Both had similar trains, and indeed equipment, just a few years old, and ran into the terminus alongside new AC electrification.

Maybe because Woodhead was electrified for and had a fleet of dedicated locos for the coal traffic that flowed over the Pennines. DC allowed regenerative braking and major electricity savings.

Taunton · 18 Aug 2019

You know you're right. Regen into AC wasn't possible with the technology of the day.

AM9 · 18 Aug 2019

AndrewE said:
Maybe because Woodhead was electrified for and had a fleet of dedicated locos for the coal traffic that flowed over the Pennines. DC allowed regenerative braking and major electricity savings.

I think that it was more the forseen end of coal traffic across the Pennines and to/from Barnsley. By the '60s, the passenger service, (which wasn't the real reason for electrification), was being slowly run down, in part because it was getting in the way of the freight services. Beeching dictated that there wasn't the requirement for two cross-pennine lines and there was less passenger demand on the Woodhead route. The EM2 locos were the first to be scrapped, leaving the EM1s to run slow but heavy goods services.
Once the cross-Pennine trains stopped in the '80s, the remaining line to Glossop/Hadfield was just a spur from Piccadilliy representing a island in an increasing ac landscape.

Class 304 EMUs

Veteran Member

RailUK Forums

Established Member

Established Member

Established Member

Veteran Member

Established Member

On Moderation

Established Member

Established Member

Veteran Member

Established Member

Established Member

Established Member

Veteran Member

Member

On Moderation

Established Member

Veteran Member

On Moderation

Member

Established Member

Established Member

Veteran Member

Member

Veteran Member

Member

Established Member

Established Member

Established Member

Veteran Member