Class 350/1 refurbishment

[RailWonderer]

Eh? The other poster asked why they were a microfleet, so I answered.

I agree with you, it was him I just disagree with. We all have different ideas of a micro fleet. 360s are mechanically and electronically similar to other Desiros but probably wont see service with each other because of clearances, driver training, route testing, all that costly stuff.

 

[RealTrains07]

I agree with you, it was him I just disagree with. We all have different ideas of a micro fleet. 360s are mechanically and electronically similar to other Desiros but probably wont see service with each other because of clearances, driver training, route testing, all that costly stuff.

Plus it wouldnt make sense to run a 350 attached to a 360 considering 360s have no end cab gangway

 

[700007]

Plus it wouldnt make sense to run a 350 attached to a 360 considering 360s have no end cab gangway

I imagine the 360s would run with other 360s only. They would be diagrammed in such a way to do so. In a similar way you don't find 319s running around with 350s!

 

[Bletchleyite]

I agree with you, it was him I just disagree with. We all have different ideas of a micro fleet. 360s are mechanically and electronically similar to other Desiros but probably wont see service with each other because of clearances, driver training, route testing, all that costly stuff.

Why would any of that be needed? They are standard Desiros, exactly the same as every other Desiro apart from having no cab end gangway. There may need to be a short conversion module for drivers between the gangway and non-gangway cab, but other than that they are identical. No other testing, training, clearances or similar to look at.

 

[pt_mad]

A quick search for 'Greater Anglia Aventra Interior' images shows just how nice these Aventras are likely to be inside considering its 3+2.

Would perhaps have been nice to have a fold down arm rest but I'm guessing with the narrow 3+2 seats it would make things too narrow for some passengers.

 

[RealTrains07]

I imagine the 360s would run with other 360s only. They would be diagrammed in such a way to do so. In a similar way you don't find 319s running around with 350s!

Would be funny if their was a 350+360 combo though

319 and 350 combo would never happen just like the above but it just would be a funny thing to see

Do you think it would be possible to add an end gangway to the 360s??

 

[swt_passenger]

Do you think it would be possible to add an end gangway to the 360s??

You can theoretically re-engineer anything if you can pay for it, but there may be problems with updated crash worthiness standards, so it might not end up exactly the same as the 350 or 450...

 

[RealTrains07]

You definitely tell the 350/1s were originally meant for SWT

I hope the first refurbished train wont be far off from being done

 

[Bletchleyite]

You definitely tell the 350/1s were originally meant for SWT

I hope the first refurbished train wont be far off from being done

The internal stickers (e.g. the toilet door one) are all in SWT house style too.

 

[59CosG95]

According to this post on Flickr (https://flic.kr/p/2ewCwRp), 350115 is the 2nd 350/1 to be refurbished. No idea what the 1st one is though. EDIT: 350104 was the 1st 350/1 to be refurbished.

 

[59CosG95]

Not anymore, 360/2 are meant to be going;

First run the heathrow express services replacing the trains currently on it with electrostars.

Crossrail replaces heathrow connect. Once the 345s are in, no more 360/2 their either.

AIUI, the TfL Rail 360/2 are set to continue Airport duties...in Thailand. There are a fleet of 9 Class 360/2s in Bangkok dedicated to services on the Airport Rail Link (4 4-car units, 5 3-car units); I suspect that the 5th car in each ex-TfL set will be used to make all 14 units 4 cars long. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Airport_Rail_Link_(Bangkok)

 

[pt_mad]

According to this post on Flickr (https://flic.kr/p/2ewCwRp), 350115 is the 2nd 350/1 to be refurbished. No idea what the 1st one is though. EDIT: 350104 was the 1st 350/1 to be refurbished.

Is 350104 done?

 

[sd0733]

Is 350104 done?

No it's not apart from a coach full of LM green bases

 

[59CosG95]

No it's not apart from a coach full of LM green bases

So...3 coaches are refurbished and 1 isn't?

 

[RealTrains07]

AIUI, the TfL Rail 360/2 are set to continue Airport duties...in Thailand. There are a fleet of 9 Class 360/2s in Bangkok dedicated to services on the Airport Rail Link (4 4-car units, 5 3-car units); I suspect that the 5th car in each ex-TfL set will be used to make all 14 units 4 cars long. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Airport_Rail_Link_(Bangkok)

Doesn’t mention anything about taking on more trains?

 

[59CosG95]

Doesn’t mention anything about taking on more trains?

Nothing official's been mentioned yet, but the Thai transfer is the plan - or so my source from Siemens tells me...

 

[LOL The Irony]

The internal stickers (e.g. the toilet door one) are all in SWT house style too.

Weren't they ordered to replace the 458's but for some reason, that never happened so late on, they became 350's which is why the /1's have shoe gear?

 

[Bletchleyite]

Weren't they ordered to replace the 458's but for some reason, that never happened so late on, they became 350's which is why the /1's have shoe gear?

They were a growth build related to the move to 10-car suburban operation which was meant to happen much earlier. Though things were changed about them - 2+2 rather than 3+2 seating and the addition of a pantograph - so I'm not sure anything was forcing them to SWT spec. I'm not even sure they weren't ordered as 5-car sets originally?

 

[LOL The Irony]

They were a growth build related to the move to 10-car suburban operation which was meant to happen much earlier. Though things were changed about them - 2+2 rather than 3+2 seating and the addition of a pantograph - so I'm not sure anything was forcing them to SWT spec.

Ah OK.

 

[anamyd]

They were a growth build related to the move to 10-car suburban operation which was meant to happen much earlier. Though things were changed about them - 2+2 rather than 3+2 seating and the addition of a pantograph - so I'm not sure anything was forcing them to SWT spec. I'm not even sure they weren't ordered as 5-car sets originally?

I remember reading something a while back saying that they were intended to be 5-car sets but the vehicles were reconfigured into 4-car sets

 

[LOL The Irony]

I remember reading something a while back saying that they were intended to be 5-car sets but the vehicles were reconfigured into 4-car sets

I'm guessing same number of carriages, more trains.

 

[Bletchleyite]

I'm guessing same number of carriages, more trains.

Yes, I believe so. Obviously it'll have cost a little more for the extra cabs, unless they offset that by reducing the number of vehicles.

It's funny how the class of unit which is arguably the best thing that ever happened to south WCML local services (and which itself drove the brand and concept for an entire TOC) only ended up there due to what is essentially a historical accident. Without that, it might still have been 319s and 321s all round.

 

[LOL The Irony]

It's funny how the class of unit which is arguably the best thing that ever happened to south WCML local services only ended up there due to what is essentially a historical accident. Without that, it might still have been 319s and 321s all round.

Was it the same sort of historical accident that lead to the 159's?

 

[43096]

I'm guessing same number of carriages, more trains.

The original SWT order was 32 x 5-car, which was modified to 10 x 4-car for SWT (450101-110) and 30 x 4-car for Silverlink/Central (350101-130). Same number of cars (160) but a nice variation order for Siemens for extra cabs and AC kit for the 350s.

 

[Energy]

Deleted as I read the post I was replying to incorrectly.
Also can you please add a delete button as I can't find one.

 

[anamyd]

Deleted as I read the post I was replying to incorrectly.
Also can you please add a delete button as I can't find one.

report your own "deleted" post with the reason "delete" and a moderator will delete it.

 

[RealTrains07]

Nothing official's been mentioned yet, but the Thai transfer is the plan - or so my source from Siemens tells me...

Thats irritating since we could use them instead of ordering cheap trains. Doesnt seem right given them away

 

[59CosG95]

Thats irritating since we could use them instead of ordering cheap trains. Doesnt seem right given them away

Rules & Regulations on crash protection mean that we can't just order Siemens to fabricate gangway cabs to be affixed instead. Besides, they've already taken down the jigs for them in favour of the Desiro City Disastro Sh**ty units instead.

(my opinion of them might change if the Dft decided not to go for ironing boards)

That's not to say that Bombardier's Aventras aren't cheap - they're built well, but just plagued with software issues that *finally* appear to have been resolved. CAF meanwhile...you need only look at the farce of the 397s and Mk5a coaches to think of a derogatory acronym.

Again, it wouldn't usually seem right, but as mentioned, the ARL in Bangkok basically already operates Class 360/2s, and desperately needs more capacity, so it's a no-brainer IMHO.

This mini-conversation on Class 360/2 Retention is wildly off the topic of refurbishment of Class 350/1 Refurbishment though.

 

[RealTrains07]

Rules & Regulations on crash protection mean that we can't just order Siemens to fabricate gangway cabs to be affixed instead. Besides, they've already taken down the jigs for them in favour of the Desiro City Disastro Sh**ty units instead.

(my opinion of them might change if the Dft decided not to go for ironing boards)

That's not to say that Bombardier's Aventras aren't cheap - they're built well, but just plagued with software issues that *finally* appear to have been resolved. CAF meanwhile...you need only look at the farce of the 397s and Mk5a coaches to think of a derogatory acronym.

Again, it wouldn't usually seem right, but as mentioned, the ARL in Bangkok basically already operates Class 360/2s, and desperately needs more capacity, so it's a no-brainer IMHO.

This mini-conversation on Class 360/2 Retention is wildly off the topic of refurbishment of Class 350/1 Refurbishment though.

True it is probably needs moving but to finish it. 360/2 dont need gangways in order to be suitable to be taken on by other operators here in uk. (didnt suggest in my reply they needed it)

At least if LNR kept them the refurbishment plan would be easier since it would be the exact same plan and layout they are using for 350/1 and 3 refurbs

 

[aleggatta]

Thats irritating since we could use them instead of ordering cheap trains. Doesnt seem right given them away

the thing you've got to remember also is that we have 357s, 379s, 350/2s all coming off lease with no home to go to as well as all the heathrow stock. in an ideal world where there is scope to electrify everything and it was actively being done I could see your point, but in a privatised world of cheap new trains and ROSCO"s being profit making machines the ideal use of resources in a economic way is given up to profit. Also, I imagine they are simply not being 'given' away, and that a ROSCO is either going to be leasing them or selling them outright (for the life of me I can't remember which stock is owned by Heathrow airport so some of this might be wrong)