Class 442s - Now at the end of the road and to be withdrawn permanently

[infobleep]

According to the fire brigade it was definitely a hot brake, the HVAC didn’t help as it was pulling smoke into the coach.



1T70 would not have been a 442, or at least I’d be very much surprised if it was. Are you sure it wasn’t this: https://www.realtimetrains.co.uk/train/82165/2020-01-20/detailed

That was the one. I was struggling to find it for some reason.

 

[theironroad]

Seems today's 1915 PMH to WAT and 2105 WAT to POO both cancelled (same 10 car consist) due to 'train fault'.

 

[Mordac]

Seems today's 1915 PMH to WAT and 2105 WAT to POO both cancelled (same 10 car consist) due to 'train fault'.

Is there really a station code POO?

 

[LA50041]

Is there really a station code POO?

Yup, Poole

There’s also a WEE, Weeley in Essex

 

[Thumper1127]

Just a thought...

Setting aside Fratton, dwell times seem to be difficult at Liss, Liphook and Godalming on the up. The 0643 from Portsmouth Harbour typically loses time at these stations and there is the issue of slower acceleration. On other 442 services the running times seem to be achievable in the main; see the 0714 from Portsmouth Harbour today for example (but still extended dwell at Godalming). Subject to diagram implications, would it not make sense to make the 0643 10 444 and instead make the 0615 10 442 as this is non stop from Haslemere to Guildford? Surely this would reduce dwell time implications in the morning peak.

 

[HamworthyGoods]

Just a thought...

Setting aside Fratton, dwell times seem to be difficult at Liss, Liphook and Godalming on the up. The 0643 from Portsmouth Harbour typically loses time at these stations and there is the issue of slower acceleration. On other 442 services the running times seem to be achievable in the main; see the 0714 from Portsmouth Harbour today for example (but still extended dwell at Godalming). Subject to diagram implications, would it not make sense to make the 0643 10 444 and instead make the 0615 10 442 as this is non stop from Haslemere to Guildford? Surely this would reduce dwell time implications in the morning peak.

The 06.15 ex PMH is very tightly timed following a Southern Service at Havant and also calls at Woking at the height of the peak which bought different problems last time they operated on this service.

The TRUST berth is slightly out for Godalming which is why it often shows a small delay.

I wouldn’t be surprised if dwells in a few services are adjusted in a future timetable change.

 

[Thumper1127]

The 06.15 ex PMH is very tightly timed following a Southern Service at Havant and also calls at Woking at the height of the peak which bought different problems last time they operated on this service.


The TRUST berth is slightly out for Godalming which is why it often shows a small delay.

I wouldn’t be surprised if dwells in a few services are adjusted in a future timetable change.

Thanks for that. I was aware of the Havant issue with the 0615 (but hadn’t thought about Woking) but thought on balance that the 0643 was just ripe for delay due to the stopping pattern (not referring to today’s performance as it was delayed by the one in front).

 

[theironroad]

Just a thought...

Setting aside Fratton, dwell times seem to be difficult at Liss, Liphook and Godalming on the up. The 0643 from Portsmouth Harbour typically loses time at these stations and there is the issue of slower acceleration. On other 442 services the running times seem to be achievable in the main; see the 0714 from Portsmouth Harbour today for example (but still extended dwell at Godalming). Subject to diagram implications, would it not make sense to make the 0643 10 444 and instead make the 0615 10 442 as this is non stop from Haslemere to Guildford? Surely this would reduce dwell time implications in the morning peak.

To compound matters, power reduction is in force from haslemere to witley on the up line, which, while I've not done it in a 442 will mean an excruciating slow pull away from hsl up a slight gradient around the corner under the bridge . Fortunately, once clear of the curve it's a decent falling gradient towards witley which will help.

 

[Mikey C]

Is there really a station code POO?

Electrified with turd rail

 

[mchd2000]

The 06.15 ex PMH is very tightly timed following a Southern Service at Havant and also calls at Woking at the height of the peak which bought different problems last time they operated on this service.

The 0615 service is also significantly fuller than the 0643 service, probably because of it’s faster advertised journey time, south of Haslemere.
Moving a 442 set onto the 06:15 would mean fewer seats and more overcrowding so I would have thought likely longer dwell times

 

[HamworthyGoods]

The 0615 service is also significantly fuller than the 0643 service, probably because of it’s faster advertised journey time, south of Haslemere.
Moving a 442 set onto the 06:15 would mean fewer seats and more overcrowding so I would have thought likely longer dwell times

442s have more seats than the 444s

 

[RealTrains07]

GA spec Stadler FLIRTS would be wonderful for the SWML but as it's FirstGroup or the scrimping DfT (if SWR gets nationalised), I expect to see as you say LNR spec 24m Aventras or something like third-rail 800s with 385-like end gangways from Hitachi.

Already been covered. 800s are not an option as anything more than 5 car are too long and so would have less seating than current 158/159 combos. Plus aventras are not an option as no DMU or bi mode type exists as of yet.

442s and others are the best and only option for now.

the issues with the 442s are not the sort that can be fixed anyway. Its not like you can take an existing train and make the doorway bigger is it

 

[RealTrains07]

What are the diagrams like now their are 4 of the trains in service?

 

[K.o.R]

They need to do a bit of shuffling of the units if they're still planning to have the First Class sections paired in the centre.

 

[Energy]

Plus aventras are not an option as no DMU or bi mode type exists as of yet.

That just means that nobody has ordered them, Bombardier do offer them and will build them if ordered.

 

[Nammer]

Not everyone is fully fit. I have friends who have disabilities or are elderly and are not wheelchair users. The large step up to the 442s fears them with dread, especially the stupidly positioned grab rails outside the doors to haul them up on the train (which you have to let go of before you’ve steadied yourself on the train!!!) and the step boards you have to tread sideways on as one complete step from the platform to train is impossible for people who are unsteady on their feet.

 

[Rick1984]

The massive gaps at Portsmouth and Southsea will be quite a challenge for some

 

[pompeyfan]

They need to do a bit of shuffling of the units if they're still planning to have the First Class sections paired in the centre.

I think the plan is no different to the 444s where each 5 car unit is meant to be London end. The difficulty is where they’re shuttled between Portsmouth and Bournemouth if they’re sent via the Netley road the unit gets turned and there’s nowhere near Bournemouth where you can easily turn a unit, unlike Fratton and Northam.

 

[hwl]

That just means that nobody has ordered them, Bombardier do offer them and will build them if ordered.

Exactly Aventra Bimodes offered to bidders in several recent franchise bids but that doesn't stop people being in denial about it being a real product...

 

[Thumper1127]

Assuming the 0643 from Portsmouth Harbour was indeed formed 442 this morning, timekeeping was much better up the direct and new line. Virtually spot on. No doubt someone will burst my bubble and tell me it was 444 or 450!

 

[RealTrains07]

Exactly Aventra Bimodes offered to bidders in several recent franchise bids but that doesn't stop people being in denial about it being a real product...

End of the day whether you like them or hate them, 442s are staying.

Does anyone know how the timescale of when a unit re enters service?

by that I mean is a unit being delivered every week?, etc..

or is it that they just come back as soon as they are ready??

 

[pompeyfan]

Lets just get back to the topic in hand.

End of the day whether you like them or hate them, 442s are staying.

Does anyone know how the timescale of when a unit re enters service?

by that I mean is a unit being delivered every week?, etc..

or is it that they just come back as soon as they are ready??

they’re very resource hungry in that they require a second driver to route conduct and also enough guards and driver in general to sign them.

 

[HamworthyGoods]

they’re very resource hungry in that they require a second driver to route conduct and also enough guards and driver in general to sign them.

I understand at the moment it’s about stability - there’s enough 442s to have dispensed with the temporary short forms and the focus now is getting everyone necessary trained and solving some of the restrictions before increasing the amount in traffic.

 

[RealTrains07]

they’re very resource hungry in that they require a second driver to route conduct and also enough guards and driver in general to sign them.

They have their issues unfortunately and their isn’t going to be the suitable stock available for a while now unless SWR magic up some money to purchase more trains

I very much looking forward to at least ride them when I go to waterloo at some point

 

[SWT_USER]

I understand at the moment it’s about stability - there’s enough 442s to have dispensed with the temporary short forms and the focus now is getting everyone necessary trained and solving some of the restrictions before increasing the amount in traffic.

Do you mean the temporary short forms across the SWR network? Unless it's changed this week there have still been 8.455 on Windsor services and at least one 5.707 on a Windsor to Waterloo in the morning peak.

 

[HamworthyGoods]

Do you mean the temporary short forms across the SWR network? Unless it's changed this week there have still been 8.455 on Windsor services and at least one 5.707 on a Windsor to Waterloo in the morning peak.

Is the 8.455 on the Windsor now booked to provide one of the 10.707s needed for the Shepperton performance scheme?

 

[RichSwitch]

Not everyone is fully fit. I have friends who have disabilities or are elderly and are not wheelchair users. The large step up to the 442s fears them with dread, especially the stupidly positioned grab rails outside the doors to haul them up on the train (which you have to let go of before you’ve steadied yourself on the train!!!) and the step boards you have to tread sideways on as one complete step from the platform to train is impossible for people who are unsteady on their feet.

@Nammer is absolutely right and cuts to the matter. The issue as I see it is this: what happens when a passenger uses these badly positioned grab rails to try to haul themselves up on an icy platform edge at Godalming, and slips down into the gap unseen. The train is given the right away. Whose fault is the ensuing accident and the associated 2 hour delay? Does the guard cop it? Are SWR liable for the Delay Repay?
There will doubtless be those who say “well that could happen with any train”. But that would be missing the point by a mile. The point is that whoever gave these trains dispensation against PRM-TSI could find themselves the liable party in the event of an accident.
The real issue is that the Department for Transport caved in to Angel and SWR. They went for the softest implementation of the regulations against legacy rolling stock. It should have been the hardest: that if legacy stock could not be made compliant on any grounds (cost, unable to modify...) then it should have been withdrawn. If that resulted in gaps in the timetable then Train Operating Companies should have taken the government to court on the grounds that the issue was foreseeable given that the legislation allowed ample time to procure, test and introduce new, compliant rolling stock by the deadline.
My impression, if social media is anything to go by, is that the class 442s aren’t liked by our passengers very much. Who can blame them?!

 

[SWT_USER]

Is the 8.455 on the Windsor now booked to provide one of the 10.707s needed for the Shepperton performance scheme?

I suspect you are more likely to know than me! My understanding was that any 455 operation and long term short forms on Windsor/ Reading routes was a direct consequence of the 442's being delayed.

 

[pompeyfan]

9B95 18.48 WAT - POO is terminating at Eastleigh this evening due to a train fault... little bit odd for it to be announced at least 3 hours in advance?

 

[43096]

My impression, if social media is anything to go by, is that the class 442s aren’t liked by our passengers very much. Who can blame them?!

I rather suspect passengers on the Portsmouth direct wouldn’t be happy with anything you gave them. They whinged about 2+3 seats on the 450s, so they get 2+2 442s and aren’t happy. They need to get over themselves.