Class 387 to GN

[SprinterMan]

Do we know what is happening with the Class 365s yet? I have heard from various colleagues that we are keeping all, some and none of them :P Any idea what is correct. I love the 365s and want them to stay with us

Adam

 

[Class377/5]

Do we know what is happening with the Class 365s yet? I have heard from various colleagues that we are keeping all, some and none of them :P Any idea what is correct. I love the 365s and want them to stay with us

Adam

The 365 plan is unchanged. 20 are staying, other 20 are going.

 

[43096]

The 365 plan is unchanged. 20 are staying, other 20 are going.

That's a change then as it was 21 to GWR, 19 staying with Great Northern.

 

[Class377/5]

That's a change then as it was 21 to GWR, 19 staying with Great Northern.

You might be right. I've always had it in my head as half the fleet but I may be one unlit out. It's the same as previous announced. Timetable consultation confirms the extra 387s coming are extra carriages above pervious announcements too.

 

[superalbs]

You might be right. I've always had it in my head as half the fleet but I may be one unlit out. It's the same as previous announced. Timetable consultation confirms the extra 387s coming are extra carriages above pervious announcements too.

I always thought it was the odd numbered ones departing, even numbered ones staying (or vice versa), and due to the crashed unit, the numbers are one off or something?

 

[SprinterMan]

I always thought it was the odd numbered ones departing, even numbered ones staying (or vice versa), and due to the crashed unit, the numbers are one off or something?

That is a really odd way of splitting the fleet, is there any reason for it being done this way?

Adam

 

[fgwrich]

I always thought it was the odd numbered ones departing, even numbered ones staying (or vice versa), and due to the crashed unit, the numbers are one off or something?

That was the original plan within GWR. No idea, presumably an easier way to split the fleet? Some of the ex LM 150/1s were done in the same way, 102 - Fgw, 103 Northern, 104 Fgw, 105 LM, 106 Fgw, 107 LM etc.

 

[physics34]

Still no idea where the 21 spare 365s will go?

 

[luap]

I've been reading the Great Northern timetable consultation document here

It reads that "Newer class 387 introduced from May 2017." At least that answers when they will make it onto the Kings Lynn to Kings Cross services. Do we know what diagrams they will serve in the meantime, and when?

 

[petersi]

With the usual GTR clarity on the same page is says this
"This transformation starts later this autumn with 29 Class 387 introduced and new Class 700 trains later in 2017 increasing capacity."

 

[jopsuk]

I've been reading the Great Northern timetable consultation document here

It reads that "Newer class 387 introduced from May 2017." At least that answers when they will make it onto the Kings Lynn to Kings Cross services. Do we know what diagrams they will serve in the meantime, and when?

It's possible they'll initially replace Class 317 diagrams until there's enough to start replacing them on the Cambridge Express/Kings Lynn services. The 317s and 321s are to be released before the 365s.

They'll also need to separate out diagrams- I'm pretty sure that at the moment Cambridge Express services are entwined with Peterborough and semi-fast (even slow) Cambridge services?

 

[Class377/5]

The come onto the 317/321 diagrams shortly before replacing the 365 on the King's Lynn from May.

 

[Failed Unit]

The come onto the 317/321 diagrams shortly before replacing the 365 on the King's Lynn from May.

That will be a nice "upgrade" as most of the trains I use in the peak are 317s. I was expecting a mini cascade which would result in the 387s going on the faster services and the 365s moving over to what is currently a 317 diagram.

For interest and a little off topic, will they use the corridor connections? Why don't they on the 317s any more.

In the evening we have many services that split at Welwyn Garden City / Letchworth / Royston to avoid causing issues on the 4 car stations further up the line. But if you are in the wrong end you need to move between trains at the station the train splits. Never understood this where other areas that split / join trains seem happy to use the corridor connections. If these services are re-diagrammed to a 365 it wouldnt matter anyway, but I did wonder if the corridor connections are not used as so few units in the fleet have them so it provides a consistently poor experience for everyone when services split.

 

[jon0844]

It was always hit and miss on the 317s and seemed to be down to personal preference on the part of the driver.

But, I also noticed that on many evening peak trains out of King's Cross, passengers themselves closed the doors to effectively give themselves a private area to stand/sit in (not a particularly nice place, I might add) so it could have been the case that the trains were actually connected.

At least on the 387s, nobody can close the doors (easily).

 

[Ianno87]

That will be a nice "upgrade" as most of the trains I use in the peak are 317s. I was expecting a mini cascade which would result in the 387s going on the faster services and the 365s moving over to what is currently a 317 diagram.

For interest and a little off topic, will they use the corridor connections? Why don't they on the 317s any more.

In the evening we have many services that split at Welwyn Garden City / Letchworth / Royston to avoid causing issues on the 4 car stations further up the line. But if you are in the wrong end you need to move between trains at the station the train splits. Never understood this where other areas that split / join trains seem happy to use the corridor connections. If these services are re-diagrammed to a 365 it wouldnt matter anyway, but I did wonder if the corridor connections are not used as so few units in the fleet have them so it provides a consistently poor experience for everyone when services split.

I suppose phasing the 387s in on 317/321 diagrams makes more sense initially until there is a critical mass of 387s in service.

The 317/321 diagrams are (naturally) much more self contained (as there are relatively few of them), unlike the 365 diagrams which are complex, with interworking, splitting and joining all day long (with a risk that a 387 ends up attempting to attach to a 365 at some point!)

 

[luap]

Would appear GTR have announced the launch of the 387's running from Cambridge next month, with services from Kings Lynn next year as previously advised on here.

Would appear that 387 110 is now in Great Northern branding

Source: https://twitter.com/GNRailUK/status/779260503944200193

 

[Domh245]

Would appear that 387 110 is now in Great Northern branding

Not exactly difficult to change that branding though!

 

[physics34]

Not exactly difficult to change that branding though!

very cheap rebranding lol, still green doors.

Light blue on the doors to match the 365s would be welcome.

 

[387star]

Every gtr brand has had a new logo recently perhaps they are waiting for that

 

[jon0844]

Every gtr brand has had a new logo recently perhaps they are waiting for that

No. The process would be to put the logo on all trains, then introduce a new logo.

Not the other way around. That would be silly.

 

[luap]

Not exactly difficult to change that branding though!

It was more that they have changed the logo, sorry, my bad wording.

 

[Domh245]

No. The process would be to put the logo on all trains, then introduce a new logo.

Not the other way around. That would be silly.

No no no, all wrong. You place the contract for the new vinyls, start applying them and then after the 2nd or 3rd train, change the logo. You then start replacing the logos once they've all been applied and repeat the whole process.

 

[jon0844]

No no no, all wrong. You place the contract for the new vinyls, start applying them and then after the 2nd or 3rd train, change the logo. You then start replacing the logos once they've all been applied and repeat the whole process.

Actually, I was wrong wasn't I. You commit to installing a logo on all your stock before changing the logo, so you keep applying the old logo six months after you've changed the website, social media accounts, Facebook etc.

All the 700s will presumably come with the old logo before they're peeled off and replaced. Because that's what a contract says somewhere, even though you'd think you could write off the cost of the wrong vinyls and make sure the fitters install the right one to the train..

 

[JaJaWa]

Actually, I was wrong wasn't I. You commit to installing a logo on all your stock before changing the logo, so you keep applying the old logo six months after you've changed the website, social media accounts, Facebook etc.

All the 700s will presumably come with the old logo before they're peeled off and replaced. Because that's what a contract says somewhere, even though you'd think you could write off the cost of the wrong vinyls and make sure the fitters install the right one to the train..

I did like how one of the refreshed Class 377/5s got the old logo too after the new one had launched "as to not dilute the Thameslink brand" and then the other 377/5s got the new logo.

 

[jon0844]

You can't have new and old logos to somehow show that something is new and something is old.

Well, you can do what you like but it's stupid.

You have a company and one identity. You only use one on your headed paper, website, social media etc so to continue using the old logo is just idiocy (IMO). It serves no purpose, other than to make you look incompetent.

You might say you won't change all the old logos straight away, to save money or for logistical reasons, but you can't then go and use the old logo on your brand new flagship fleet of trains. Nor argue that the contract was signed so there's nothing you can do.

If that was the case, as it's the DfT funding the livery and logos being put on, then you don't change the logo.

There was no good reason to change the logo anyway. The last logo was already new. It fits well with Great Northern, especially when GN and TL trains will work alongside each other on sections of track. It had familiarity, but was still independently recognisable. Useful for when you're at Cambridge and can see both on trains to London, but different onward destinations.

Nothing is going to convince me there was any benefit changing the logo, and it has just confused matters during the roll out of the 387s and 700s.

 

[Class377/5]

You all seem to forget that while GTR is a company, it's spends are actually government money and requires thier approval first. It's changing logo according it it's agreements but don't forget that stuff like viynal gets ordered with far bigger time frames than a simple Web page.

 

[jon0844]

You all seem to forget that while GTR is a company, it's spends are actually government money and requires thier approval first. It's changing logo according it it's agreements but don't forget that stuff like viynal gets ordered with far bigger time frames than a simple Web page.

Which is why at the initial meeting to discuss a logo not even two years old, it should have been considered a no go for the very reason that it wasn't practical, or even possible, to change effectively leaving a really messy situation like this.

Brand new state of the art trains with the old logo, and a logo that looks silly (IMO) anyway. T/ on Twitter instead of, say, TL looks dumb and meaningless.

I realise this is an opinion and if GTR could replace everything then it wouldn't have been so bad.

 

[Class377/5]

Which is why at the initial meeting to discuss a logo not even two years old, it should have been considered a no go for the very reason that it wasn't practical, or even possible, to change effectively leaving a really messy situation like this.

Brand new state of the art trains with the old logo, and a logo that looks silly (IMO) anyway. T/ on Twitter instead of, say, TL looks dumb and meaningless.

I realise this is an opinion and if GTR could replace everything then it wouldn't have been so bad.

In the case of the T\ logo, it didn't exist two years ago. It's a lot newer.

 

[physics34]

You can't have new and old logos to somehow show that something is new and something is old.

Well, you can do what you like but it's stupid.

You have a company and one identity. You only use one on your headed paper, website, social media etc so to continue using the old logo is just idiocy (IMO). It serves no purpose, other than to make you look incompetent.

You might say you won't change all the old logos straight away, to save money or for logistical reasons, but you can't then go and use the old logo on your brand new flagship fleet of trains. Nor argue that the contract was signed so there's nothing you can do.

If that was the case, as it's the DfT funding the livery and logos being put on, then you don't change the logo.

There was no good reason to change the logo anyway. The last logo was already new. It fits well with Great Northern, especially when GN and TL trains will work alongside each other on sections of track. It had familiarity, but was still independently recognisable. Useful for when you're at Cambridge and can see both on trains to London, but different onward destinations.

Nothing is going to convince me there was any benefit changing the logo, and it has just confused matters during the roll out of the 387s and 700s.

It completely undermines the whole point of a logo if the new trains are being delivered with the old logo. Do they not spend enough time in the sidings overnight for the logos to be changed then?

Similar situation at Gatwick express where the old logo is still very very common...

It just shows a slapdash attitude throughout and lack of attention to detail.

 

[jon0844]

In the case of the T\ logo, it didn't exist two years ago. It's a lot newer.

I meant the ribbon one. Which fits better alongside Great Northern, in my opinion.