Class 397s - Why?

[DanTrain]

So TPE are ordering new 397s for the Manchester - Scotland services. I don't quite understand why. There may be a completely obvious reason that I've missed, but as far as I can figure, the 350/4s seem perfectly capable (a couple short in number perhaps), and given their already brilliant accelleration, I don't see what is to be gained.

The 397s can do 125mph, but surely they'll be limited to 110 on the WCML anyway if they don't tilt, somethignthe 350s can easily do (even if they do feel like they're about to come off the rails!) The 397s strike me as a bit superflous, money that could be better spent elsewhere?

 

[Domh245]

1) It's a chance to increase the fleet size (10>12 (+ options presumably)) and train length (4>5 car) without the headache of reforming bits of 350/2s (owned by Porterbrook) into the 350/4 fleet (owned by Angel)

2) "More IC style" - by which I mean they've got end doors (although to some extent the 350/4s and 185s prove that isn't strictly necessary

3) New trains in your franchise bid is an easy way to the DfT's heart and the franchise - or so it seems of late!

 

[Agent_Squash]

I don't think it was the best choice to be perfectly honest, though. A smallish operator with 4 different fleets from 4 manufacturers doesn't sound like a good plan imo.

 

[D365]

... money that could be better spent elsewhere?

It’s First’s money, they won the TPE franchise bidding with it. Don’t know why people seem so concerned about private money going in.

 

[cjmillsnun]

IIRC The 350/4s are destined to join LNWR.

The 397s are 5 car and there will be 12 of them compared to the 10 4 car 350/4s

They will also have more seats 286 seats in the 397 compared to 205 in a 350/4.

In other words a greater number of larger units with greater space, and the 350s can be used to strengthen LNWR's fleet.

 

[Domh245]

It’s First’s money, they won the TPE franchise bidding with it. Don’t know why people seem so concerned about private money going in.

Eversholt's money strictly speaking

 

[Flyingsprinter]

Will 12 be enough? With new Liverpool to Scotland via WCML services 12 seems a couple too few to me. Do they have the option for anymore? Be very stupid if they have to still send 185s up the WCML.
What does seem odd is caf making a complete new class of train to only sell 12 units, unless of course they plan to sell some to someone else but I can’t think who would use and want them.
Why didn’t tpe Just order 12 more 802’s? Would’ve made a lot more sense.

 

[Halish Railway]

a) Why not just get 12 Class 801's with similar specs to the 802/2's that have been ordered.

b) Were the 397's just a tag on order after Eversholt/Northern's order of CAF 195 and 331 Civities.

 

[Domh245]

a) Why not just get 12 Class 801's with similar specs to the 802/2's that have been ordered.

b) Were the 397's just a tag on order after Eversholt/Northern's order of CAF 195 and 331 Civities.

With the Hitachi option, an important factor would be lead time - The 397s should be entering service later this year, an 801 derivative wouldn't be as Hitachi's factories are all pretty busy (and finding their feet in terms of punctual entry into service(!)). Also I think it's worth pointing out that at the time of the franchise award, the 80xs were the only bi-modal units that were available - and FWIW the ITT required bi-modal units...

No, they won't have been a tag on to the 195/331. They're more likely to have been a tag-on to TPE's other order for Mk5 than the 195/331s given that the tendering process will have been near enough parallel.

 

[Flyingsprinter]

With the Hitachi option, an important factor would be lead time - The 397s should be entering service later this year, an 801 derivative wouldn't be as Hitachi's factories are all pretty busy (and finding their feet in terms of punctual entry into service(!)). Also I think it's worth pointing out that at the time of the franchise award, the 80xs were the only bi-modal units that were available - and FWIW the ITT required bi-modal units...

No, they won't have been a tag on to the 195/331. They're more likely to have been a tag-on to TPE's other order for Mk5 than the 195/331s given that the tendering process will have been near enough parallel.

Would more mk5s not have been a better option then the class 397’s? Pulled by an electric loco instead of course. The 397’s do seem very puzzling. It doesn’t seem like the best option at all.

 

[Chester1]

Will 12 be enough? With new Liverpool to Scotland via WCML services 12 seems a couple too few to me. Do they have the option for anymore? Be very stupid if they have to still send 185s up the WCML.
What does seem odd is caf making a complete new class of train to only sell 12 units, unless of course they plan to sell some to someone else but I can’t think who would use and want them.
Why didn’t tpe Just order 12 more 802’s? Would’ve made a lot more sense.

802s would mean added cost and weight of diesel engines and 801s would mean a delay in delivery. The latter problem might not have been a deal breaker but it is entirely possible CAF under cut Hitachi on price to showcase the 397 for future orders. TPE have an option for 7-22 further units of one set length (5, 6 or 8 coaches). If TP electrification actually happens then a new order of EMUs will likely take place to remove running under wires and to cascade badly needed diesel units elsewhere.

 

[HSTEd]

It’s First’s money, they won the TPE franchise bidding with it. Don’t know why people seem so concerned about private money going in.

Because "private money" will inevitably be repaid at taxpayer's expense.

 

[Domh245]

Would more mk5s not have been a better option then the class 397’s? Pulled by an electric loco instead of course. The 397’s do seem very puzzling. It doesn’t seem like the best option at all.

Perhaps, but there be concerns with platform lengths that means loosing 1 loco length of platform space is OK for Liverpool - Scarborough, but not Manchester Airport/Liverpool - Scotland. Loco haul would also make it more difficult to run doubled up trains compared to EMUs, which will probably be something these units will do (if not joining a Liverpool Portion and a Manchester portion for the run up the WCML, then at least peak time doubling).

Then there is the question of what to pull the train with. A class 90 would have the same effective top speed as the 397s, and you could probably get your hands on some by the end of the year, although given that DBS have got an operational fleet of 6 (8 if you include the VTEC hires) - sourcing and maintaining them would be more difficult. A 91 would be able to match the 397s technical top speed, but won't be available in time in our alternate situation. Developing a new loco is out of the question, as it'd be too expensive.

 

[WatcherZero]

There has also been initial planning work by NR in to minor infrastructure upgrades that would allow 125mph non tilt operation on parts of the northern WCML (as part of HS2 to Scotland target times) so TPE are future proofing.

 

[absolutelymilk]

Who might CAF want to sell other 397s? The only place I can think of would be once GWML electrification is completed, but replacing 800s with 801s would seem the obvious choice so CAF would have to offer a steep discount. Maybe they wanted to sell to WMT, who instead went for 110mph Aventras.

 

[YorkshireBear]

Does anyone know if there are any plans to run the class 397s doubled up? If not will be interesting to see how an 8 car 350 becoming a 5 car 397 will cope.

 

[DanTrain]

Who might CAF want to sell other 397s? The only place I can think of would be once GWML electrification is completed, but replacing 800s with 801s would seem the obvious choice so CAF would have to offer a steep discount. Maybe they wanted to sell to WMT, who instead went for 110mph Aventras.

EMT probably seemed possible when this order was put in. Also, if the Transpennine upgrade goes ahead, TPE may want more to run 125 up the ECML.

 

[AM9]

... 2) "More IC style" - by which I mean they've got end doors (although to some extent the 350/4s and 185s prove that isn't strictly necessary...

I agree that this 'IC' layout isn't necessary and as far as the TPE services are concerned, will definitely make dwell times at Piccadilly longer. I hope that the access charges are adjusted to recognise this needless waste of critical infrastructure assets. Maybe that would send a message to those TOCs who seem to think that is a free lunch.

 

[Domh245]

Who might CAF want to sell other 397s? The only place I can think of would be once GWML electrification is completed, but replacing 800s with 801s would seem the obvious choice so CAF would have to offer a steep discount. Maybe they wanted to sell to WMT, who instead went for 110mph Aventras.

As @DanTrain suggests, EMT/MML were an option, and probably still are with the Corby services. That said, I don't think it's necessarily about selling more 397s as much as establishing themselves in the UK.

Does anyone know if there are any plans to run the class 397s doubled up? If not will be interesting to see how an 8 car 350 becoming a 5 car 397 will cope.

I would expect so. They've got more trains but their requirement hasn't really increased that much - there will only be 3 Liverpool - Scotland services a day - so they should still be able to double up the busiest trains

 

[Bletchleyite]

Would more mk5s not have been a better option then the class 397’s? Pulled by an electric loco instead of course. The 397’s do seem very puzzling. It doesn’t seem like the best option at all.

Mk5s are a metre shorter per vehicle, so about one row of seats per vehicle. Some of these services are quite badly overcrowded so this is quite important. CAF don't seem to be offering a 23/24m Mk5 for some reason, they're all 22m including the TPE ones.

 

[Bletchleyite]

As @DanTrain suggests, EMT/MML were an option, and probably still are with the Corby services. That said, I don't think it's necessarily about selling more 397s as much as establishing themselves in the UK.

Probably. They would be suitable for the LNR Crewe and Liverpool services, but those are already stated as Aventra or Desiro.

It's also quite possible that a bi-mode could be built in the same body. That could well be much better value than the 80x for something like EMT.

 

[Bletchleyite]

Then there is the question of what to pull the train with. A class 90 would have the same effective top speed as the 397s, and you could probably get your hands on some by the end of the year, although given that DBS have got an operational fleet of 6 (8 if you include the VTEC hires) - sourcing and maintaining them would be more difficult. A 91 would be able to match the 397s technical top speed, but won't be available in time in our alternate situation. Developing a new loco is out of the question, as it'd be too expensive.

Class 88 is the obvious answer (or a version of it without the diesel engine). I can't see them using used locomotives of the age of the existing electric ones.

 

[Domh245]

Class 88 is the obvious answer (or a version of it without the diesel engine). I can't see them using used locomotives of the age of the existing electric ones.

They're only 100mph though, so that'd be too slow. You could develop a 125mph 88-alike without the diesel engine, but at that point you've eliminated any of the cost savings that you've made by going for LHCS instead of an EMU.

 

[jh64]

Has there been any word on what First's open access outfit on the ECML will use? A follow-on order of 397s could be suitable.

 

[Flyingsprinter]

Probably. They would be suitable for the LNR Crewe and Liverpool services, but those are already stated as Aventra or Desiro.

It's also quite possible that a bi-mode could be built in the same body. That could well be much better value than the 80x for something like EMT.

If a bi-mode 397 was possible and cheaper then an 80X then you’d think they’d have offered it to tpe instead of the 802’s. A bi-mode 397 would make sense at it provides much needed competition for the 80X.
I doubt EMT/whoever gets the MML next will order any fully electric units, even to Corby as it offers no flexibility, therefore I can’t see them ordering 397’s unless of course a bi-mode is possible. If a bi-mode is not possible then I’m stuggling to see who will order any units.

 

[Flyingsprinter]

As regards the doubling up is 12 enough units? 1 unit will be on Liverpool-Scotland leaving 11 on Manchester-Scotland. At the moment with 10 units some services are still 185s. Will 1 extra unit be enough to fill all diagrams and double up?
If they can reduce journey times then does this free up an extra unit? As I’ve said previously 12 doesn’t seem enough. It takes no account into the future of any additional Liverpool-Scotland services.

 

[sprinterguy]

Does anyone know if there are any plans to run the class 397s doubled up? If not will be interesting to see how an 8 car 350 becoming a 5 car 397 will cope.

Can't run them doubled up throughout on Manchester services as they won't fit in the platforms at Manchester Airport. I don't know whether any combined working of Manchester and Liverpool portions north of Preston is expected, or whether they'll be entirely separate services.

It takes no account into the future of any additional Liverpool-Scotland services.

There are options for further units to be ordered if additional services were added (and presumably the larger fleet options also take into account prospective North Transpennine electrification).

 

[Bletchleyite]

I fear 5 x 23m is going to be too short in short order. Any scope to extend to 6?

(Mind you I fear that of TPE in general - I think the terrible overcrowding is causing suppressed demand given that driving is not as bad "up north" as it is into London - I think we'll see the same problem continuing, and possibly even the LH sets getting a follow on order or being reformed into 6 or even 7-car sets)

 

[47802]

I fear 5 x 23m is going to be too short in short order. Any scope to extend to 6?

(Mind you I fear that of TPE in general - I think the terrible overcrowding is causing suppressed demand given that driving is not as bad "up north" as it is into London - I think we'll see the same problem continuing, and possibly even the LH sets getting a follow on order or being reformed into 6 or even 7-car sets)

I'm not convinced about that especially with TPE's tendency to flog cheap tickets all over the place. As for driving "Up North" not being as bad as London I would say some parts are just as bad, and for many places "Up North" there is no alternate Rail Infrastructure, but that slightly getting off the point.

Anyway as far as 397's are concerned I expect CAF offered a lower price and quicker delivery than 801's from Hitachi, Electric Loco Hauled is somewhat pointless these days and the 5 Car EMU's can be run pairs platform length permitting.

I expect the Liverpool services will run at the busiest times to improve capacity by either combining with the Manchester Services at Preston or running separately and creating additional frequency.

Oh as for the Intercity door layout plenty on here in the past moaning that this route have Intercity style trains.

 

[BelleIsle]

IIRC The 350/4s are destined to join LNWR.

The 397s are 5 car and there will be 12 of them compared to the 10 4 car 350/4s

They will also have more seats 286 seats in the 397 compared to 205 in a 350/4.

In other words a greater number of larger units with greater space, and the 350s can be used to strengthen LNWR's fleet.

My undertanding was that the entire fleet was originally supposed to go to London Midland but that half were diverted away to Manchester-Scotland for political reasons. i.e. at that time all the stock being planned for the North West electrification scheme was second hand 319s. This was sold to the South as a loan deal with the trains to return once new stock had been procured (the term 'Baby Pendolino' was bandied around quite a bit). The big surprise is that it is going to actually happen.