• Our booking engine at tickets.railforums.co.uk (powered by TrainSplit) helps support the running of the forum with every ticket purchase! Find out more and ask any questions/give us feedback in this thread!

Class 387

Status
Not open for further replies.

Class377/5

Established Member
Joined
19 Jun 2010
Messages
5,594
The new edition of Modern Railways has some information on the new 387 Electrostar Southern has ordered for Thameslink.

The 29x four car dual voltage 110mph capable units will start to arrive from October 2014 with them entering passenger service from May 2015 and will be similar to the 377/6 and /7 fleets.

Due to the requirement for higher reliability of 40k between incidents (MTIN) the units will have a new communications backbone according to Southern's Fleet Director which means they won't work with 377s expect in an emergency.

So this means that during 2016 you end up with 4 completely different fleets working Thameslink together.

Depot allocation will change with the 387 fleet being based at Lovers Walk (better for Thameslink diagrams), the 377 at Selhurst and 442/455 at Stewarts Lane.

In the long term the new Field Sidings at Selhurst will be used for class 700 stabling.
 
Sponsor Post - registered members do not see these adverts; click here to register, or click here to log in
R

RailUK Forums

TEW

Established Member
Joined
16 May 2008
Messages
5,841
So all the 377s are going back to Selhurst then, the /1s only moved from Selhurst to Lovers Walk last year didn't they?
 

nomis1066

Member
Joined
6 Sep 2013
Messages
66
Location
Hastings
The new edition of Modern Railways has some information on the new 387 Electrostar Southern has ordered for Thameslink.

The 29x four car dual voltage 110mph capable units will start to arrive from October 2014 with them entering passenger service from May 2015 and will be similar to the 377/6 and /7 fleets.

Due to the requirement for higher reliability of 40k between incidents (MTIN) the units will have a new communications backbone according to Southern's Fleet Director which means they won't work with 377s expect in an emergency.

So this means that during 2016 you end up with 4 completely different fleets working Thameslink together.

Depot allocation will change with the 387 fleet being based at Lovers Walk (better for Thameslink diagrams), the 377 at Selhurst and 442/455 at Stewarts Lane.

In the long term the new Field Sidings at Selhurst will be used for class 700 stabling.

Southern was just beginning to see light by ordering 5 and 6 car EMUs - now it's a backward step to 4 cars which frequently suffer from over crowding. They should all be 6 cars - with one of those extra cars laid out like the old slam door - dedicated decent sized space for bikes, an office and passenger accomodation. Yes, an office for a conductor though there is talk of conductors being done away with and all trains DOO - another backward step.

TOC's should conduct a proper survey and ask their passengers if they would prefer their trains to be crewed with conductors or not. They will never do that because they know what the overwhelming response will be.
 

Wolfie

Established Member
Joined
17 Aug 2010
Messages
6,050
Southern was just beginning to see light by ordering 5 and 6 car EMUs - now it's a backward step to 4 cars which frequently suffer from over crowding. They should all be 6 cars - with one of those extra cars laid out like the old slam door - dedicated decent sized space for bikes, an office and passenger accomodation. Yes, an office for a conductor though there is talk of conductors being done away with and all trains DOO - another backward step.

TOC's should conduct a proper survey and ask their passengers if they would prefer their trains to be crewed with conductors or not. They will never do that because they know what the overwhelming response will be.

You do realise that the fundamental premise of your comment is flawed as these trains will never actually be used by Southern. They were "ordered for Thameslink" as stated in order in the short-term to free Class 319s to go north and, when the new Thameslink stock is delivered by Siemens, will be deployed elsewhere - the informed speculation is on the GWML but who knows.....
 

Class377/5

Established Member
Joined
19 Jun 2010
Messages
5,594
You do realise that the fundamental premise of your comment is flawed as these trains will never actually be used by Southern. They were "ordered for Thameslink" as stated in order in the short-term to free Class 319s to go north and, when the new Thameslink stock is delivered by Siemens, will be deployed elsewhere - the informed speculation is on the GWML but who knows.....

Not informed speculation now as FGW have publicly stated they want the units and are in talks with the DfT over getting them. No-one else has said they want the units publicly.

Of course the units are to replace four car units makes it sensible to do that with four cars especially when you plan to cascade them else where in the future.

Southern was just beginning to see light by ordering 5 and 6 car EMUs - now it's a backward step to 4 cars which frequently suffer from over crowding. They should all be 6 cars - with one of those extra cars laid out like the old slam door - dedicated decent sized space for bikes, an office and passenger accomodation. Yes, an office for a conductor though there is talk of conductors being done away with and all trains DOO - another backward step.

TOC's should conduct a proper survey and ask their passengers if they would prefer their trains to be crewed with conductors or not. They will never do that because they know what the overwhelming response will be.

Don't confuse onboard staff as having to be guards only. Passengers would be fine with someone, but it doesn't have to be a guard. In fact if you asked do you want someone that does purely customer services action or a guard they'd say the former.

Although this is off the point of the thread.
 
Last edited:

hwl

Established Member
Joined
5 Feb 2012
Messages
7,355
Depot allocation will change with the 387 fleet being based at Lovers Walk (better for Thameslink diagrams), the 377 at Selhurst and 442/455 at Stewarts Lane.

In the long term the new Field Sidings at Selhurst will be used for class 700 stabling.

Is there enough space for all the 442 and 455 at SL or will a large number be still be stabled at Streatham Hill?

Will they have bring some of the disused sidings at SL back in to use?
 

TheGrew

Member
Joined
31 Jul 2012
Messages
334
I am a little confused, arn't the class 700s going to be the main traction for Thameslink. Where could 110MPH really be used apart from the MML/ECML fasts before the train has to stop for the next station?
 

sprinterguy

Established Member
Joined
4 Mar 2010
Messages
11,048
Location
Macclesfield
I am a little confused, arn't the class 700s going to be the main traction for Thameslink. Where could 110MPH really be used apart from the MML/ECML fasts before the train has to stop for the next station?
Due to previous delays in the procurement process for the Thameslink class 700 units, other units will need to be introduced in the form of the class 387s as a stop gap measure to ensure that sufficient class 319s are available to be cascaded to the North West electrication scheme (and perhaps Great Western?) as it comes online.

110mph capability has been stated as a preference for the electrified Thames Valley services out of Paddington to increase path utilisation: I don't know whether the 110mph capability is expected to be used during the trains' short stint on Thameslink, rather that it is more a case of "future-proofing" the units for wherever they get sent to after a couple of years.
 
Last edited:

samuelmorris

Established Member
Joined
18 Jul 2013
Messages
5,121
Location
Brentwood, Essex
I always thought 5-car was an odd choice, as it means you can only go as high as 10 with two units coupled, whereas with 4-cars if you couple three units you can make 12-car trains at peak times. My assumption was that 5/10 car train lengths were used where there were too many stations that would not fit 12-car trains on the intended route. Given how many 12s I see formed of either 3x4-car 377s or 4x3-car 377s coming out of London Bridge or going through Clapham Junction on Southern, it's clear there are plenty of routes where 12-car length services will work. Add to that Thameslink being upgraded along the whole route to fit that length, surely 4 is a better choice than 5?
 

joeykins82

Member
Joined
24 Jul 2012
Messages
601
Location
London
The Southern metro services in to Victoria via Hackbridge, Norbury & Gipsy Hill are being lengthened from 8 to 10 car operation. The choice is either 4+3+3 or 5+5 (or 10-car fixed I suppose).
 

swt_passenger

Veteran Member
Joined
7 Apr 2010
Messages
31,274
I always thought 5-car was an odd choice, as it means you can only go as high as 10 with two units coupled, whereas with 4-cars if you couple three units you can make 12-car trains at peak times. My assumption was that 5/10 car train lengths were used where there were too many stations that would not fit 12-car trains on the intended route. Given how many 12s I see formed of either 3x4-car 377s or 4x3-car 377s coming out of London Bridge or going through Clapham Junction on Southern, it's clear there are plenty of routes where 12-car length services will work. Add to that Thameslink being upgraded along the whole route to fit that length, surely 4 is a better choice than 5?

The 5 car trains are designed for the inner suburban routes that are currently still being lengthened to 10 car - as mentioned in the above post. (This possibly accounts for them being 'run-in' in areas where they are not expected to work in the medium term.) AFAICS the number of 5 car units and thus 10 car sets, seems just about right for the relevant inner suburban routes, allowing for the fact that the 456s are notionally being replaced by some of the 377/6 extra capacity.

The 12 car services are mostly longer distance services, and they can initially be augmented from 8 to 12 using displaced 4 car units. But they obviously see a future surplus of 4 car units, as they are intending to transfer a load out of the franchise later, e.g. to Southeastern in 2017...
 
Last edited:

hwl

Established Member
Joined
5 Feb 2012
Messages
7,355
The 5 car trains are designed for the inner suburban routes that are currently still being lengthened to 10 car - as mentioned in the above post. (This possibly accounts for them being 'run-in' in areas where they are not expected to work in the medium term.) AFAICS the number of 5 car units and thus 10 car sets, seems just about right for the relevant inner suburban routes, allowing for the fact that the 456s are notionally being replaced by some of the 377/6 extra capacity.

Only about 50% of the peak services on the 10 car routes can be lenghtened unless you start withdrawing 455s or cascading them elsewhere, the number of 5 car units is the maximum justifiable while still using all the 455s on metro routes.

The 12 car services are mostly longer distance services, and they can initially be augmented from 8 to 12 using displaced 4 car units. But they obviously see a future surplus of 4 car units, as they are intending to transfer a load out of the franchise later, e.g. to Southeastern in 2017...

Some of the current Thameslink SE services will be transferred to SE so they need the rolling stock to run them without ordering more themselves it is that simple...
 

Domh245

Established Member
Joined
6 Apr 2013
Messages
8,426
Location
nowhere
Whilst the informed guesses are that the 387s will go to the GWML, could it not be possible that some will go up North to supplement the 319s as the wires go up elsewhere? Just assume that somehow a deal is brokered to keep the leasing costs low, so looking at the operational points of it
 

Manchester77

Established Member
Joined
4 Jun 2012
Messages
2,628
Location
Manchester
I've always though FGW will end up ordering new Desiro 118mph EMUs with the 387s moving up north for TPE Electric services
 

nomis1066

Member
Joined
6 Sep 2013
Messages
66
Location
Hastings
Not informed speculation now as FGW have publicly stated they want the units and are in talks with the DfT over getting them. No-one else has said they want the units publicly.

Of course the units are to replace four car units makes it sensible to do that with four cars especially when you plan to cascade them else where in the future.



Don't confuse onboard staff as having to be guards only. Passengers would be fine with someone, but it doesn't have to be a guard. In fact if you asked do you want someone that does purely customer services action or a guard they'd say the former.

Although this is off the point of the thread.

Doesn't matter whether these trains operate south, north, west or east - four cars should be history - nationwide it is a fact that far too many passengers are crammed into nowhere near enough coaches. Hence my comments re 6 car formation. As for my point re on train staff - well, yes, call them what you like - passengers will always want them on board.
 

YorkshireBear

Established Member
Joined
23 Jul 2010
Messages
8,677
Doesn't matter whether these trains operate south, north, west or east - four cars should be history - nationwide it is a fact that far too many passengers are crammed into nowhere near enough coaches. Hence my comments re 6 car formation. As for my point re on train staff - well, yes, call them what you like - passengers will always want them on board.

That is all well and good but the rest of the country is not like Hastings my friend. Many places in the East Midlands, Wales, Scotland, Northern England, East Anglia, South West cannot take more than 4 carriages so producing them longer would reduce their cascadableness. (note that word will be in the dictionary from next week :P)
 

Peter Sarf

Established Member
Joined
12 Oct 2010
Messages
5,644
Location
Croydon
Southern was just beginning to see light by ordering 5 and 6 car EMUs - now it's a backward step to 4 cars which frequently suffer from over crowding. They should all be 6 cars - with one of those extra cars laid out like the old slam door - dedicated decent sized space for bikes, an office and passenger accomodation. Yes, an office for a conductor though there is talk of conductors being done away with and all trains DOO - another backward step.

TOC's should conduct a proper survey and ask their passengers if they would prefer their trains to be crewed with conductors or not. They will never do that because they know what the overwhelming response will be.

No 6-car units are being ordered but granted 6-car units have their uses for a 12-car railway but ONLY in the South.

The routes taking 4-car 387s are capable of taking 12-car trains but, after a cascade which will happen soon, 4-car units have more use elsewhere in the country than 6-car units. Also 5-car units would be useless on the 12-car Thameslink routes that 387s are to be used on initially. Remember that one of the problems for the 4-car 319s being cascaded is that many are arguing that 3-car units would be preferable so 5-car units away from London would be unwanted. Making 6-car trains from two 3-car units is the more likely scenario as this gives the flexibility required to run 3-car and 6-car trains thus increasing capacity on appropriate trains.

Doesn't matter whether these trains operate south, north, west or east - four cars should be history - nationwide it is a fact that far too many passengers are crammed into nowhere near enough coaches. Hence my comments re 6 car formation. As for my point re on train staff - well, yes, call them what you like - passengers will always want them on board.

Would you rather have the conductor/guard sat in their own office space reducing seating space for the passengers ?. I think most passengers would rather see a member of staff wandering along the train and not holed up in one part of the train. Having a guards office would not help achieve what you want but could prevent it.
--- old post above --- --- new post below ---
.....
Due to the requirement for higher reliability of 40k between incidents (MTIN) the units will have a new communications backbone according to Southern's Fleet Director which means they won't work with 377s expect in an emergency.

So this means that during 2016 you end up with 4 completely different fleets working Thameslink together.
.....

Good point. Provokes a few thoughts.

Would that be a good excuse to order more 387s so as to cascade the 377/5s thus reducing the types to three on Thameslink ?. Southern would probably benefit from the extra 377s. But its still a lot of different types of unit South of the Thames !.

Made me wonder. On the Southern we now possibly have fewer classes of EMUs but in larger (?) quantities than, say 1975. BUT we have less compatibility now than in 1975 because iirc all 3rd rail units worked together and with locomotives of class 33/1 and class 73. I just thought maybe excluding the 4-SUBs.

That is probably the price of progress. Thinking of the monitoring equipment you mentioned for the 387s. Could that be retro fitted to 377/6 and 377/7 (as these are not real 377s) so as to make them compatible with 387s. Not sure if that is a benefit as then these units could not interwork with real 377s and are unlikely to ever need to work with 387s anyway.
 
Last edited:

nomis1066

Member
Joined
6 Sep 2013
Messages
66
Location
Hastings
That is all well and good but the rest of the country is not like Hastings my friend. Many places in the East Midlands, Wales, Scotland, Northern England, East Anglia, South West cannot take more than 4 carriages so producing them longer would reduce their cascadableness. (note that word will be in the dictionary from next week :P)

We do have the Hastings to Ashford line with single car length platforms :o.

Re other places - point taken re 6 cars and maybe I am being a tad parochial as I see all the time down here how useless 4 cars often are - but elsewhere longer trains work fine with selective door opening, overcrowded trains run everywhere and it is a problem that has not been dealt with .

How about 185s being extended another coach then?

Cascadescence?
--- old post above --- --- new post below ---
No 6-car units are being ordered but granted 6-car units have their uses for a 12-car railway but ONLY in the South.

The routes taking 4-car 387s are capable of taking 12-car trains but, after a cascade which will happen soon, 4-car units have more use elsewhere in the country than 6-car units. Also 5-car units would be useless on the 12-car Thameslink routes that 387s are to be used on initially. Remember that one of the problems for the 4-car 319s being cascaded is that many are arguing that 3-car units would be preferable so 5-car units away from London would be unwanted. Making 6-car trains from two 3-car units is the more likely scenario as this gives the flexibility required to run 3-car and 6-car trains thus increasing capacity on appropriate trains.



Would you rather have the conductor/guard sat in their own office space reducing seating space for the passengers ?. I think most passengers would rather see a member of staff wandering along the train and not holed up in one part of the train. Having a guards office would not help achieve what you want but could prevent it.
--- old post above --- --- new post below ---


Good point. Provokes a few thoughts.

Would that be a good excuse to order more 387s so as to cascade the 377/5s thus reducing the types to three on Thameslink ?. Southern would probably benefit from the extra 377s. But its still a lot of different types of unit South of the Thames !.

Made me wonder. On the Southern we now possibly have fewer classes of EMUs but in larger (?) quantities than, say 1975. BUT we have less compatibility now than in 1975 because iirc all 3rd rail units worked together and with locomotives of class 33/1 and class 73. I just thought maybe excluding the 4-SUBs.

That is probably the price of progress. Thinking of the monitoring equipment you mentioned for the 387s. Could that be retro fitted to 377/6 and 377/7 (as these are not real 377s) so as to make them compatible with 387s. Not sure if that is a benefit as then these units could not interwork with real 377s and are unlikely to ever need to work with 387s anyway.

At the risk of being banished like Napoleon was and going off thread a tad - why shouldn't on train staff have a small office? It wouldn't be there for a conductor to spend the whole shift and I'm sure the vast majority wouldn't - just a private small area where they can go to between ticket checks etc instead of having to stand by the doors as they do now.
 

tsr

Established Member
Joined
15 Nov 2011
Messages
7,400
Location
Between the parallel lines
At the risk of being banished like Napoleon was and going off thread a tad - why shouldn't on train staff have a small office? It wouldn't be there for a conductor to spend the whole shift and I'm sure the vast majority wouldn't - just a private small area where they can go to between ticket checks etc instead of having to stand by the doors as they do now.

You have a point. But there's already a solution. It's called the back cab. There just isn't the space for an office on most trains.
 

swt_passenger

Veteran Member
Joined
7 Apr 2010
Messages
31,274
..why shouldn't on train staff have a small office?
On the 'small office for the conductor' point, you'll possibly have noticed that SWT's 450s and 444s have this, and most guards do tend to use them in my experience. The down side is there's only one guard, and a 12 car train has three places where 4 more seats could be provided.

However on the initial LM 350s the very same small office was never used as such, so I asked a guard why not. He replied categorically that his trade union (presumed to be the RMT) had not agreed to it being used. AIUI on later LM variants the 'office' is not fitted.
 

Peter Sarf

Established Member
Joined
12 Oct 2010
Messages
5,644
Location
Croydon
Overnight I thought about the Hastings units. One of the few examples of a 6-car multiple unit !. They were diesel of course and ran to Hastings. The route reverted to four car units once electrified !. Still the same length trains though 12 cars but with the option to alternatively run 8 or 4 rather than just 6-car.
 

Class377/5

Established Member
Joined
19 Jun 2010
Messages
5,594
Good point. Provokes a few thoughts.

Would that be a good excuse to order more 387s so as to cascade the 377/5s thus reducing the types to three on Thameslink ?. Southern would probably benefit from the extra 377s. But its still a lot of different types of unit South of the Thames !.

Made me wonder. On the Southern we now possibly have fewer classes of EMUs but in larger (?) quantities than, say 1975. BUT we have less compatibility now than in 1975 because iirc all 3rd rail units worked together and with locomotives of class 33/1 and class 73. I just thought maybe excluding the 4-SUBs.

That is probably the price of progress. Thinking of the monitoring equipment you mentioned for the 387s. Could that be retro fitted to 377/6 and 377/7 (as these are not real 377s) so as to make them compatible with 387s. Not sure if that is a benefit as then these units could not interwork with real 377s and are unlikely to ever need to work with 387s anyway.

Cascading the 377/5 away wouldn't be the best opinion as post 700 they will need to come back to the franchise while the 387 will leave.

Looking at how things are actually going to pan out it seems the 387 need will be even shorter than I'd thought.

The main issue with the 377 and 387 not working together is the issue of inter working diagrams. Having four types of incompatible stock means you need more trains to provide the same level of service which is inefficient.

It sounds like even the 377/6 and /7 fleets won't work with the 387s even as they use the same basic comms tech.

I'm starting to wonder are the 387 actually Aventra units in all but name. Would make sense of why Bombardier has suddenly started teasing about the design on social media.
 

Class377/5

Established Member
Joined
19 Jun 2010
Messages
5,594
I believe they are Aventras according to my source...

Not according to Bombardier....

http://www.bombardier.com/en/media-...f-month=all&f-type=all&show-by-page=50&page=1

Who state

The new cars will be designed and manufactured at Bombardier’s Derby facility. The vehicles will initially be used on the Thameslink route and in the longer term will be cascaded onto other routes. The rolling stock contract includes an option for 140 additional vehicles which, if exercised, would bring the total number of vehicles ordered to 256 and the total value of the order to approximately £385 million GBP (441 million euro, $585 million US).

Bombardier will supply Southern with the latest version of the BOMBARDIER ELECTROSTAR family of electrical multiple units, capable of 110 mph operation.

Now if Aventra is the follow up from the Electrostar (which itself was a follow on from the Networker) I'd expect to have Bombardier shouting from the roof tops especially as this would mean a bog standard version of Aventra would be on Thameslink before the Desiro City (to not by much).

Then again this is Bombardier.
 

12CSVT

Established Member
Joined
18 Aug 2010
Messages
2,612
Depot allocation will change with the 387 fleet being based at Lovers Walk (better for Thameslink diagrams), the 377 at Selhurst and 442/455 at Stewarts Lane.

So nothing based at Bedford Cauldwell ?
 

Fincra5

Established Member
Joined
6 Jun 2009
Messages
2,486
I always thought 5-car was an odd choice, as it means you can only go as high as 10 with two units coupled, whereas with 4-cars if you couple three units you can make 12-car trains at peak times. My assumption was that 5/10 car train lengths were used where there were too many stations that would not fit 12-car trains on the intended route. Given how many 12s I see formed of either 3x4-car 377s or 4x3-car 377s coming out of London Bridge or going through Clapham Junction on Southern, it's clear there are plenty of routes where 12-car length services will work. Add to that Thameslink being upgraded along the whole route to fit that length, surely 4 is a better choice than 5?

Southern can't run 12 Car DOO trains except in emergency's... 10 car is the agreed limit.. so 5 car units make sense as you only need 2 units instead of 3 (4+3+3) ...
 

samuelmorris

Established Member
Joined
18 Jul 2013
Messages
5,121
Location
Brentwood, Essex
Surely though they're using guards for the 12-car peak services, because there's plenty of them. You'd only need them for the 12s, 8-car trains during the rest of the day would be fine. In my experience there are fairly narrow windows where you need that big boost in capacity and you want as long a train as possible. I would have thought the trade off of having 8s most of the day instead of 10s versus having 12s on the busiest routes instead of 10s would be worth it, and looking at how most TOCs run things at the moment, it seems that's their opinion too.
 
Status
Not open for further replies.

Top