Class 365 vs 350

[JonD]

Hi All,
(EDIT: OOPS, I meant Class 350 Desiros, not the APT, though that would be even more interesting...)

I've had the pleasure of travelling on an express service from Kings X to Cambridge lately on a 365 Networker Express and it was absolutely lovely. It made me wonder why we are designing new trains when the 365 seems Mary Poppins like, being practicially perfect in every way.

I also saw (but haven't been on) a Class 350 Desiro on the WCML lately, which I guess is the modern equivalent (discounting high-speed-trains like the 395s) and I wondered what they are like in comparison.

So, if you were in charge of procuring new 25kV trains how would you chose between them (or indeed other trains)

Just curious really to know if we have moved forward in the last 15 years...

Best regards
Jonathan

 

[33056]

..........a Class 370 Desiro on the WCML lately......

Don't you mean class 350 :-?

I quite like the 350/1 series (the seats are c**p on the 350/2s), but I have not been on a 365 for a very long time so don't really feel qualified to compare the two.

 

[the sniper]

It's inevitable that someone will point this out, so I might as well be the one to say it; you would have seen a class 350 on the WCML, as a Class 370 is the old APT. (EDIT: Too late. )

I haven't been on a 365 so I can't compare, but I am personally a fan of the 350's. Quiet (apart from the air con, sometimes), smooth, and the seat layout in the 350/1's is pretty good too.

 

[Failed Unit]

Two very minor points I would change on the 365's no corridor connections (but I am sure the drivers would disagree) and I would like seats with armrests. But they have got the train pretty good to be honest. Baggage space avaiable and not seats with no view at all. I guess by the time they were built the "networker" class had been fairly refined.

 

[JonD]

Yes, a quick check on Wikipedia and I realised the error of my ways. Mind you, 2 people had already corrected me by the time I got back to the forum!


--- old post above --- --- new post below ---

I quite like the 350/1 series (the seats are c**p on the 350/2s).

Yes, the 350/1 has 2+2 seating like the 365 which is a lot more spacious. But what struck me about the 365 was the feeling of openness and space. The lack of tombstone seats gives you so much more open space, and the fact that the dividers and even the luggage racks are smoked glass means that they don't appear to intrude on the cabin space.

Plus, the fact that the wide walkway is carpetted, well... such luxury is unknown to us down in SWT Class 455 territory...

Jon

 

[Aictos]

I can't comment on the 350s as I've never used them yet but tend to use the 365s nearly all the time.

So for the OP, I'm quite happy with the 365 design although if it came down to getting new stock, I would have been happy for Desiros to come in as a order for both the GN and TL so 317s and 321s wouldn't be needed plus they would be working out of the box unlike the 377s!

But saying that, I guess the 377s would have been acceptable to run on both GN and TL with enough stock to cascade 317s and 321s elsewhere and have more 12 cars

Saying that, the problem with the TL is Snow Hill tunnel, it would be nice if the tunnels were widened as part of the Thameslink Project but I realise that probably is too hard to do.

 

[Pumbaa]

Used both - both have good and bad points.

350/1 feels more open and inviting than the drab interior of 365, rides a hell of a lot better and is generally a better travelling environment. Comfy seats, armrests and good number of tables.

365s have luggage racks but don't have proper sized tables or armrests, which is a definite need I think.

For me the 350/1 every time hands down. What would make it better is to install luggage racks (which LM have said they're going to do now they're rostered to long-haul runs) and remove the scrolly PIS that's only constantly throughout the journey - it only needs to scroll every few minutes on suburban runs, and between stops once or twice on long distance runs.

 

[Aictos]

Rather then spend millions on new trains for FCC, I would prefer them to either get their own 377s and let Southern do their own mileage on the 377/5s or place a order for 350s to work the GN cascading 317s, 321s elsewhere.

About 30 350s would do the trick,

 

[RobShipway]

Having used the DC equivalents to the Class 350 and 365 which is Class 450 and Class 465 trains, they are both very good trains. Both types of train can be setup to work either ac or dc modes which in todays train market is very useful.

However, I feel that the class 450/350 trains for me are just that little more smoother on their ride.

 

[Fincra5]

I do like the 350s (and desiros) but one thing that always got to me is the huge SLAM as the doors shut.

 

[LE Greys]

I have always liked the 365s, partly for the strange noises they make when setting off/stopping. However, I wish FCC would look after the interiors a bit better. Still, I often wonder what would have happened had the Networker project been completed. We would probably have had similar units on the LT&S, a full-gangway version to replace the slammers on Southern, and the very similar Turbos to replace the Thumpers. They also wanted them on HS1 domestic services and on Crossrail. Perhaps we would not have had any Electrostars at all, since there would be no need for them. However, the UK trainbuilding industry would have survived through to privatisation, so perhaps no Desiros, no Pendys and a number of new MkIV- or MkV-based designs running in their place. Oh, and IC 250 in full service on the WCML.

 

[atomicdanny]

I have always liked the 365s, partly for the strange noises they make when setting off/stopping. However, I wish FCC would look after the interiors a bit better. Still, I often wonder what would have happened had the Networker project been completed. We would probably have had similar units on the LT&S, a full-gangway version to replace the slammers on Southern, and the very similar Turbos to replace the Thumpers. They also wanted them on HS1 domestic services and on Crossrail. Perhaps we would not have had any Electrostars at all, since there would be no need for them. However, the UK trainbuilding industry would have survived through to privatisation, so perhaps no Desiros, no Pendys and a number of new MkIV- or MkV-based designs running in their place. Oh, and IC 250 in full service on the WCML.

It would have been the Networker 471, something like this apparently!

(I found this a while ago and scanned it in, but these would have been much better than most of the current plastic electrostars / desiros)

(Its about 9MB)

http://www.btinternet.com/~dan.leach/Images/Networker471.pdf

 

[jopsuk]

Perhaps we would not have had any Electrostars at all, since there would be no need for them.

Though Electrostars are the descendents of the Networker - though no doubt the design would somewhat different had the 1000 day order freeze never occurred.

 

[Mojo]

I'm also quite fond of the 350s. I prefer the /1s because of the tables and the armwrests, which I know you don't get in 3+2 seating, but I don't object to 3+2 unlike some people do. I think a huge omission on the /2s is the failure to provide even quarter sized tables like the 321s have.

I'd go as far to say they're better than proper InterCity trains such as Voyagers (although their electric nature might help being quieter) and I find that using London Midland to Liverpool is more pleasurable than XC to Manchester.

 

[Fincra5]

Though Electrostars are the descendents of the Networker - though no doubt the design would somewhat different had the 1000 day order freeze never occurred.

That is quite apparent when you look at the 1st Class 168s which evolved from the Networker Turbo. Shares a similar body to that of the current Turbostars and Electorstars .

 

[jon0844]

365s have luggage racks but don't have proper sized tables or armrests, which is a definite need I think.

They would presumably be fairly easy to add. The current tables aren't as pathetic as the 317s, but are only good for those by the window. That said, it gives more room to get in/out and full tables (as in first class) would probably be hated!

I do think they're a great class of train and it's a shame more weren't built. They seem very reliable and the only thing lacking is air conditioning, which is a nightmare in the summer. The hopper vents rarely work, while the windows are of a design that means many won't open or close properly - and a 100mph train goign through the many tunnels on the approach to London makes it a very noisy experience.

But, minor complaints really. Only if a train has come from Hornsey depot and has heated up to a billion degrees without the windows open, and you board the oven at King's Cross 10-15 minutes before it leaves and you can get some airflow, is it like hell!

With regards to the comment about the internal look; I'd say that some of them get used and abused because of the times they work and the stopping patterns (I suspect the fast services to Cambridge do a lot better). Take a look at some when they arrive in London at night and you'd realise just how much work the cleaning teams have to do. And they do a sterling job, given the circumstances (tightish turnarounds). It's why I think FCC would prefer to run all night trains as 313s that have flooring that you can imagine them jet washing!! The problem is the lack of toilets, which makes some of the last-trains a nightmare to travel on. The First interior looks good though, and the carpet has settled down after some rather dodgy fitting ('air' bumps all over the place when they were first refreshed).

 

[Aictos]

With the 377s on the Thameslink route, the government and FCC could save so much money by scrapping the NXEMUs and just going for a second batch of 377s instead as we already have the experience of 377s and order enough to cascade 319s, 317s and 321s elsewhere with 313s being replaced by 378s with Southern 313 type interior,

That money saved could go back into improving services, just seems a waste to spend billions on NXEMUs when a batch of 377s would do just as well as for less money.

 

[LE Greys]

With the 377s on the Thameslink route, the government and FCC could save so much money by scrapping the NXEMUs and just going for a second batch of 377s instead as we already have the experience of 377s and order enough to cascade 319s, 317s and 321s elsewhere with 313s being replaced by 378s with Southern 313 type interior,

That money saved could go back into improving services, just seems a waste to spend billions on NXEMUs when a batch of 377s would do just as well as for less money.

I think 378s would be out of gauge for the GN&City tunnels, but I'm not quite sure. On GE, I am rather surprised that they have not ordered another batch of 360s. However, I agree with the 377 idea, although we might run out of numbers at some point.

 

[Aictos]

I think 378s would be out of gauge for the GN&City tunnels, but I'm not quite sure. On GE, I am rather surprised that they have not ordered another batch of 360s. However, I agree with the 377 idea, although we might run out of numbers at some point.

I have it on very good authority that the 378s are cleared for the NCL route and have been seen at Moorgate GN on tests.

I reckon we need 109 Class 377s just to replace all the 319s/Southern 377s, add to that the need for more Class 377s to form 12 cars and also about 30 Class 377s for the GN which will be enough to cascade the 317s/321s plus be enough to form more 12 car trains

 

[jopsuk]

Reckon 200 will be enough then? Maybe cascade the 365s elsewhere (they are good, but hey, it would mean the Thameslink franchise having a single class, especially if Great Northern metro services went TfL) so call it 250 (just to make sure there's plenty of 12 car services). There's "only" 177 377s plus 28 re-numbered from 375s. Even if the remaining 112 375s were renumbered, that would only make for a grand total of 567.

(maybe 38 extra MSO cars could be built at the same time? Go for all-four car)

Plenty of room there still to replace other Southern/Southeastern units with them. Reckon Southeastern could cheerfully run with just 377s (in varying interior configurations), 376s and 395s. Southern could go just 376/377.

But that's way off topic when comparing 365s and 350s.

 

[LE Greys]

Reckon 200 will be enough then? Maybe cascade the 365s elsewhere (they are good, but hey, it would mean the Thameslink franchise having a single class, especially if Great Northern metro services went TfL) so call it 250 (just to make sure there's plenty of 12 car services). There's "only" 177 377s plus 28 re-numbered from 375s. Even if the remaining 112 375s were renumbered, that would only make for a grand total of 567.

(maybe 38 extra MSO cars could be built at the same time? Go for all-four car)

Plenty of room there still to replace other Southern/Southeastern units with them. Reckon Southeastern could cheerfully run with just 377s (in varying interior configurations), 376s and 395s. Southern could go just 376/377.

But that's way off topic when comparing 365s and 350s.

Well, the idea of cascading the 319s to the Thames Valley might not go ahead, and they already have Turbo-based units. Transferring 40 365s there would be a very effective replacement for 37 165s and 21 166s, assuming that electrification goes ahead and some stay on the route.

From my point of view, 365s are very good suburban units. I've never actually travelled on a 350, but 360s, 450s and 444s are generally OK, but not very comfortable. That is mostly because the 365s have opening windows and those little blower-outlets above the seats. Even in air-con units, those blowers should be fitted as standard, which would vastly improve almost every form of Desiro.

 

[jon0844]

The vents don't operate on a lot of the 365s. There must be a fan to push air through them, as against just working when the train is moving. I say this because you can get airflow when the train is stopped on some, and nothing out of them at all on others - even at 100mph.

I'd put this down to a lack of maintenance. Loads of windows don't 'work' properly either. The ones that don't close properly must be great when the train is put through the train wash!

 

[Aictos]

The best thing about the Desiros vs Networkers is the fact that the Desiro has a end gangway useful when units are coupled together, passengers and staff can walk between units which is something you cannot do with Networkers.

It's one reason why I like 317s,

Saying that, a mix fleet of 444s and 450s would have been better for FCC to have on both routes,

 

[LE Greys]

The best thing about the Desiros vs Networkers is the fact that the Desiro has a end gangway useful when units are coupled together, passengers and staff can walk between units which is something you cannot do with Networkers.

It's one reason why I like 317s,

Saying that, a mix fleet of 444s and 450s would have been better for FCC to have on both routes,

The 471 version of the Networker was designed for gangways, but it never happened. They would have been introduced in about 1993, and would have replaced almost the entire SR MkI fleet. However, it's possibly a good thing that the 342s never got built, we would never have had the 395s otherwise.

 

[MCR247]

Why not?

 

[jopsuk]

342 was the proposed class number for Networker-derived units for the CTRL. No artitst impressions though- presumbaly they would in reality have been streamlined.

Class 341 was the original proposal for Crossrail, and would have not had a gangway.

Class 471 was for Kent services- essentially, what the 375s are now used for. There were also proposals for classes 371 and 381- the latter being for what is now roughly Southern's 377 routes plus most of South West Trains, Great Northern (this is pre-365 being developed) and Fenchurch Street; and the former for Thameslink. No doubt in time the Networker family would have also been found at Liverpool Street and replaced/cascaded elsewhere the Mark 3 and PEP units- perhaps the Wessex units too. The idea was that NSE would have had a unified, modern, fleet giving similar service standards across its entire area.

 

[87015]

The best thing about the Desiros vs Networkers is the fact that the Desiro has a end gangway useful when units are coupled together, passengers and staff can walk between units which is something you cannot do with Networkers.

But DOO Desiros for FCC would be more likely to be 360 rather than 350 front ends so thats a moot point.

Not sure what the point in spending billions on a new fleet for GN when there is a perfectly good one and nowhere to send the 317/321/365 fleet in the main given the current unlikelihood of mass further electrification.

 

[Fincra5]

The 471 version of the Networker was designed for gangways, but it never happened. They would have been introduced in about 1993, and would have replaced almost the entire SR MkI fleet. However, it's possibly a good thing that the 342s never got built, we would never have had the 395s otherwise.

Not really sure how that would have stopped HS1 and 395s being built.

 

[Aictos]

But DOO Desiros for FCC would be more likely to be 360 rather than 350 front ends so thats a moot point.

Not sure what the point in spending billions on a new fleet for GN when there is a perfectly good one and nowhere to send the 317/321/365 fleet in the main given the current unlikelihood of mass further electrification.

And? The 313s were and are still equipped with guard panels behind the cabs although they have now been refurbished so requires a driver's master key.

Same could be said for the FCC 377s, they have gangway doors but no guards.

 

[jopsuk]

Not really sure how that would have stopped HS1 and 395s being built.

HS1 would have been built- foreign import 395s would not have been needed had the (to be domestically built) 342s been built first, as they were the (proposed) Networker for domestic CTRL (as it was known at the time) duties.