321448 demonstrator

[fgwrich]

Apparently, Wabtec were going to keep the openable windows but Eversholt insisted that sealed windows were fitted. I'm glad someone learned their lesson

...It just better be a reliable unit then. *cough* Wabtec installed 166s *cough*

 

[badassunicorn]

surprised from the pics they not fitted a marker light in the centre above the windows like they did to the 315/317's and other stock they do up. Anybody know why most modern trains have 3 marker lights?

 

[swt_passenger]

surprised from the pics they not fitted a marker light in the centre above the windows like they did to the 315/317's and other stock they do up. Anybody know why most modern trains have 3 marker lights?

The current version of the rail group standard requires three marker lights is the straightforward answer, but it isn't a retrospective standard or compulsory at refurb. Units so fitted don't create a precedent for other fleets AFAICT...

The following wording is used:

Where trains are being modified in the area covered by the scope of this standard, the design shall be reviewed and where reasonably practicable brought into line with the requirements set out in this standard.

http://www.rgsonline.co.uk/Railway_...ck/Railway Group Standards/GMRT2483 Iss 1.pdf

 

[edwin_m]

Somewhere in the European specifications I suspect. However in the UK trains that pre-date the regulation have grandfather rights and can continue without a top marker lights. Basically any post-privatisation stock needs them as well as anything older that works through the Tunnel (though I'm not sure if Eurostars and 92s use(d) their top light on the UK classic network).

 

[nxea321446]

321448 is due to start static testing today ahead of its return to greater anglia on 12th july

 

[SprinterMan]

321448 is due to start static testing today ahead of its return to greater anglia on 12th july

Hope everything goes well. Do we know if the carriages that were keeping their original seats got new seat covers?

Adam

 

[badassunicorn]

what? you don't like the FGE green?!? =P

 

[nxea321446]

the original seats have been removed and the whole train has been fitted with new seats

 

[jon0844]

The only opinion that matters will be from Ginger. If he likes it, GA and the ROSCO can consider the project a success.

 

[SprinterMan]

what? you don't like the FGE green?!? =P

I do not have words for how little I like FGE green :P

the original seats have been removed and the whole train has been fitted with new seats

I hope so, the rail article stated that 2 coaches would retain their original seating, but it sounds like they confused it with 317722.

Adam

 

[Skimble19]

The only opinion that matters will be from Ginger. If he likes it, GA and the ROSCO can consider the project a success.

Back to the drawing board it is then!!!

 

[F Great Eastern]

I do not have words for how little I like FGE green :P

I liked it after the refurbishment FGE did on the 321s.

However I learnt to appreciate it even more as the years went on with National Express at the helm, since towards the end of NXEA it was one of the only things left from the era of FGE and Anglia Railways when the service was of a far higher standard.

 

[jopsuk]

The only opinion that matters will be from Ginger. If he likes it, GA and the ROSCO can consider the project a success.

Oh come on, we all know this is fundamentally impossible. He could have his own private carriage and 100% on-time reliability and he'd still grumble.

 

[ginger]

Oh come on, we all know this is fundamentally impossible. He could have his own private carriage and 100% on-time reliability and he'd still grumble.

honestly children......play nicely!

 

[jopsuk]

I was maybe a little unfair there, sorry. Look forward to your review of the demonstrator!

 

[ginger]

I was maybe a little unfair there, sorry. Look forward to your review of the demonstrator!

like everyone else we will have a 1 in 94 chance of travelling on it!

 

[klewer]

like everyone else we will have a 1 in 94 chance of travelling on it!

...knowing GA, it'll probably get put on the Romford-Upminster shuttle, the ideal place for 100mph EMU stock.

 

[D365]

...knowing GA, it'll probably get put on the Romford-Upminster shuttle, the ideal place for 100mph EMU stock.

Oh come on! London Midland does that too on the Abbey Line. 75mph 313s have been used on branch lines and are used regularly on the 30mph NCL. 315s too in the GA area. We could go on forever about trains running on lines where maximum speed is lower than they are rated to go. Also, (generalising, this doesn't necessarily apply to you or anyone - I'm making a point) your car probably has a top speed a bit higher than 70mph, this 'wasted' by running it at the legal speed limit on motorways/dual carriageways? Why is this such a problem to you?

 

[A-driver]

Oh come on! London Midland does that too on the Abbey Line. 75mph 313s have been used on branch lines and are used regularly on the 30mph NCL. 315s too in the GA area. We could go on forever about trains running on lines where maximum speed is lower than they are rated to go. Also, (generalising, this doesn't necessarily apply to you or anyone - I'm making a point) your car probably has a top speed a bit higher than 70mph, this 'wasted' by running it at the legal speed limit on motorways/dual carriageways? Why is this such a problem to you?

But most trains get out onto lines where they use their full speed to. A 313 may only do 30 on the NCL but later in the journey will be doing 75 to Welwyn or Letchworth. A 100mph 365 will never get above 90 on a Cambridge stopper trip.

 

[87015]

Oh come on! London Midland does that too on the Abbey Line. 75mph 313s have been used on branch lines and are used regularly on the 30mph NCL. 315s too in the GA area. We could go on forever about trains running on lines where maximum speed is lower than they are rated to go. Also, (generalising, this doesn't necessarily apply to you or anyone - I'm making a point) your car probably has a top speed a bit higher than 70mph, this 'wasted' by running it at the legal speed limit on motorways/dual carriageways? Why is this such a problem to you?

LM haven't sent units off lease and shortened peak trains to save money whilst having a 317/321 shuffling up and down a branch line though...

 

[D365]

But most trains get out onto lines where they use their full speed to. A 313 may only do 30 on the NCL but later in the journey will be doing 75 to Welwyn or Letchworth. A 100mph 365 will never get above 90 on a Cambridge stopper trip.

My point is, if a train has a higher top speed than there is line speed found on [some of] the lines it runs on (100mph 357 on ≤75mph LTS is another example I can think of), its capability isn't 'wasted' as such. I just don't understand why some of our contributors have a problem with this.

LM haven't sent units off lease and shortened peak trains to save money whilst having a 317/321 shuffling up and down a branch line though...

All else is irrelevant to the original statement. Running a different train(s) on the branch would cost more money as these would be non-standard to the rest of the fleet. I don't see what else can be done to operate a branch line cost-effectively.

 

[oliMw]

Does it Really Matter whether the train is meeting its top speed is as long as the train gets you there on time.

 

[Bayum]

Does it Really Matter whether the train is meeting its top speed is as long as the train gets you there on time.

Unless the route has sufficient amount of slack in it, will a train running at less than the routes/usual units maximum speed limit actually arrive on time?

 

[SprinterMan]

LM haven't sent units off lease and shortened peak trains to save money whilst having a 317/321 shuffling up and down a branch line though...

The use of 317/7s on peak trains was causing overcrowding, specifically the 0629 IPS-LST was a nightmare apparently. After the Ilford christmas trees were fixed, there was just no need for them, especially when you consider a 317/7 is a full 3 times more expensive to lease than a 317/5. The Upminster branch is diagrammed for a 317 as the 315s are seeing more use on metro routes than they used to during timetable changes, and there is still a slight surplus of 317s since the 379s came along. Having a 317 on the branch and putting the 315s on mainline metro routes where their superior acceleration is needed is the best way of doing it. 321s rarely turn up on the branch these days, as it is a booked 317 working, but they do occasionally turn up if lots of 317s are out for maintenance.

Adam

 

[87015]

The use of 317/7s on peak trains was causing overcrowding, specifically the 0629 IPS-LST was a nightmare apparently. After the Ilford christmas trees were fixed, there was just no need for them, especially when you consider a 317/7 is a full 3 times more expensive to lease than a 317/5. The Upminster branch is diagrammed for a 317 as the 315s are seeing more use on metro routes than they used to during timetable changes, and there is still a slight surplus of 317s since the 379s came along. Having a 317 on the branch and putting the 315s on mainline metro routes where their superior acceleration is needed is the best way of doing it. 321s rarely turn up on the branch these days, as it is a booked 317 working, but they do occasionally turn up if lots of 317s are out for maintenance.

Adam

PIXC has increased - a poor show after stock is sent off lease. Those reduced from what was a full 12 321 to a PIXC busting 8 321 certainly have every reason to put out. A reduction in peak capacity, which has resulted, on one of the most overcrowded routes in the country is a bad turn however you want to spin it - there are fewer coaches and fewer seats provided in the GE peak now than there were prior to the 317 withdrawal.

 

[SprinterMan]

PIXC has increased - a poor show after stock is sent off lease. Those reduced from what was a full 12 321 to a PIXC busting 8 321 certainly have every reason to put out. A reduction in peak capacity, which has resulted, on one of the most overcrowded routes in the country is a bad turn however you want to spin it - there are fewer coaches and fewer seats provided in the GE peak now than there were prior to the 317 withdrawal.

I'm sorry, but what is PIXC, I'm not familiar with it. Sorry

 

[Pumbaa]

PIXC - passengers in excess capacity. The term is soon to change (at least on one TOC) to reflect 'customer' rather than 'passenger'... :roll:

 

[158722]

PIXC - passengers in excess capacity. The term is soon to change (at least on one TOC) to reflect 'customer' rather than 'passenger'... :roll:

No chance of it becoming Passengers In Suburban Squash?

 

[90019]

PIXC - passengers in excess capacity. The term is soon to change (at least on one TOC) to reflect 'customer' rather than 'passenger'... :roll:

So they're changing to Customers Under New Terms?

 

[Bald Rick]

PIXC - passengers in excess capacity. The term is soon to change (at least on one TOC) to reflect 'customer' rather than 'passenger'... :roll:

The new measure will include distance travelled over capacity to more accurately reflect the duration of the problem. Metricated, it will be customers over capacity / kilometre.