Class 458/5

[infobleep]

SWT also published this a while ago, which needs some reading between the lines:



Although it doesn't expressly mention 458/5s it clearly describes how the nett result of the 707s arrival is that Reading will get longer trains, (and that's known to be a 10 car project) and 'mainline' services will be increased and lengthened. So that latter bit needs 450s, and the only realistic place to get them from is the Reading line.

There is already two 10 car services from Guildford to Waterloo via Cobham. The 7.16 and 8.07.

I hope more carriages will also be available for the 18.39 Waterloo to Poole. It's currently only 5 and that's not enough between Waterloo and Woking if they want people to not be standing the eighth of the train. A 450 would be better in terms of space for standing but they are only 4 carriages.

I can't remember if 4 carriages is as good as 5 in terms of numbers of people.

 

[swt_passenger]

I hope more carriages will also be available for the 18.39 Waterloo to Poole. It's currently only 5 and that's not enough between Waterloo and Woking if they want people to not be standing the eighth of the train.

It should be operated by an 8.450 from Dec 2015 (or at least by early 2016 as the entire 458/5 fleet is needed for the alterations). I'm getting a sense of deja vu here, I'm sure we've had this exact same discussion before.

Here's the SWT newsletter from earlier this year which includes a table of service changes on page 2:

http://www.southwesttrains.co.uk/uploads/customerupdatespringweb.pdf

 

[infobleep]

It should be operated by an 8.450 from Dec 2015 (or at least by early 2016 as the entire 458/5 fleet is needed for the alterations). I'm getting a sense of deja vu here, I'm sure we've had this exact same discussion before.

Here's the SWT newsletter from earlier this year which includes a table of service changes on page 2:

http://www.southwesttrains.co.uk/uploads/customerupdatespringweb.pdf

Cheers for that. We probably have but I don't always remember things.

 

[Goldfish62]

It should be operated by an 8.450 from Dec 2015 (or at least by early 2016 as the entire 458/5 fleet is needed for the alterations). I'm getting a sense of deja vu here, I'm sure we've had this exact same discussion before.

Here's the SWT newsletter from earlier this year which includes a table of service changes on page 2:

http://www.southwesttrains.co.uk/uploads/customerupdatespringweb.pdf

I see two of the promised four extra Reading line peak hours services appear in the December timetable, 0624 from Reading and 1935 from Waterloo, indicating that there's some confidence of a net fleet increased in 458s by then to displace further 450s.

 

[RobShipway]

There was a couple of 458/5's coupled together on test earlier on the Reading route which look to have originally been 458/0's as the pantograph slot within the roof of one of the coaches within each 5 car set. Unfortunately, I was not able to get the numbers.

 

[SpacePhoenix]

Could pan wells be added to the ex Gatwick Express units at a later date without compromising the crash structure?

 

[jopsuk]

Could pan wells be added to the ex Gatwick Express units at a later date without compromising the crash structure?

I would have thought that should there be a requirement to fit pantographs to the ex CLass 460 Class 458/5s then yes, an engineering solution WILL be found. But it won't be cheap. Overhead electrification from Waterloo to Reading is likely to be some way off, almost certainly after SWML OHLE- which itself is slipping with the delays (dropping?) of the Electric Spine project.

 

[hassaanhc]

It should be operated by an 8.450 from Dec 2015 (or at least by early 2016 as the entire 458/5 fleet is needed for the alterations). I'm getting a sense of deja vu here, I'm sure we've had this exact same discussion before.

Here's the SWT newsletter from earlier this year which includes a table of service changes on page 2:

http://www.southwesttrains.co.uk/uploads/customerupdatespringweb.pdf

Can't believe I'd missed that document . I see Hounslow is to lose both of the evening 455 workings, at 1607 and 1707 from Waterloo, which personally is a huge shame . If I'm travelling around that time I specifically attempt to go for one of those two services. The current next working of the second set (1843 Waterloo to Shepperton via Richmond) is to go 10 as well, so 458s look to have booked use on the Shepperton line. The current diagram only does those two services in the evening.
One of our four morning 455 services, the 0815 from Waterloo (0901 from Hounslow) is to go 10 as well, likewise the current previous working for the set (0700 Shepperton to Waterloo via Richmond). As above, the current diagram only does those two services in the morning.

At least the 0646, 0931 and 1001 from Hounslow look safe for 455s at the moment (I actually have used the 0646 more than the other two :P)

 

[SpacePhoenix]

I would have thought that should there be a requirement to fit pantographs to the ex CLass 460 Class 458/5s then yes, an engineering solution WILL be found. But it won't be cheap. Overhead electrification from Waterloo to Reading is likely to be some way off, almost certainly after SWML OHLE- which itself is slipping with the delays (dropping?) of the Electric Spine project.

By the time Reading-Waterloo gets converted to overhead how far though their overall lifespan with the 458s likely to be?

 

[Emblematic]

I would have thought that should there be a requirement to fit pantographs to the ex CLass 460 Class 458/5s then yes, an engineering solution WILL be found. But it won't be cheap. Overhead electrification from Waterloo to Reading is likely to be some way off, almost certainly after SWML OHLE- which itself is slipping with the delays (dropping?) of the Electric Spine project.

That requirement will never arise however - even if there was a programme in place to convert all the 3rd rail to OHLE, it would take at least a couple of decades to fully implement, so the few remaining DC-only fleets would just be kept on remaining DC lines until life-expired.
I understand that, unlike the Desiros, there was no design prepared for dual-fitting the DC Junipers beyond fitting the pan well to the 458s. Even without the bodyshell modifications, it's unlikely that this work would ever be justified on such a small fleet.
--- old post above --- --- new post below ---

By the time Reading-Waterloo gets converted to overhead how far though their overall lifespan with the 458s likely to be?

There's no definite timeline for Southampton-Basingstoke yet, let alone anything further. Once (if) the Electric Spine is in place, extending the OHLE to Salisbury and down to Southampton has been mentioned to provide a second AC route and further extend the electric network (and there's a good argument for doing this route first, rather than starting off with conversion of the main line.) You would hope that progression of AC conversions, if any, would follow a logical route plan.
The Reading and Windsor routes are a long way down any future AC conversion list, so there's no real concerns over the future of the 458s.

 

[wokspotter]

There was a couple of 458/5's coupled together on test earlier on the Reading route which look to have originally been 458/0's as the pantograph slot within the roof of one of the coaches within each 5 car set. Unfortunately, I was not able to get the numbers.

458519 + 458529 passed Wokingham yesterday on test.

 

[5920]

I would have thought that should there be a requirement to fit pantographs to the ex CLass 460 Class 458/5s then yes, an engineering solution WILL be found. But it won't be cheap. Overhead electrification from Waterloo to Reading is likely to be some way off, almost certainly after SWML OHLE- which itself is slipping with the delays (dropping?) of the Electric Spine project.

I would reckon no chance.

The dual voltage is modded out on the /0 to make them DC only, so that would have to be reinstated and pan wells on ex-460 roofs - would probably write off the train.

 

[456]

Since we are talking 3rd rail and OHLE. I thought would the 3rd rail be safe for at 50 years because the OHLE would be useful on mainlines and the 3rd rail would be used on branch line like the lymington line. As I thought OHLE is more expensive to build then the 3rd rail. Please don't criticise just correct me if I'm wrong or if I don't make sense.

 

[swt_passenger]

Since we are talking 3rd rail and OHLE. I thought would the 3rd rail be safe for at 50 years because the OHLE would be useful on mainlines and the 3rd rail would be used on branch line like the lymington line. As I thought OHLE is more expensive to build then the 3rd rail. Please don't criticise just correct me if I'm wrong or if I don't make sense.

It isn't quite as simple as that. I'm assuming you are suggesting leaving branches off the main route DC and concentrating on AC electrification of the main trunk network.

What you'd need is a dual electrified changeover section at each branch junction, and sufficient dual voltage stock (and spares) to run the branch - as it would invariably have to get to and from a depot somewhere else. Not much of an initial issue if existing stock has AC added and retains its DC, but another feature required when that stock comes up for replacement.

Dual electrification sections are technically complex (if built to current standards) because of the different current return and earth bonding rules that the two systems have.

A short branch such as Lymington would be 'end fed' off the main line if AC, so it wouldn't need its own traction feed, but if left DC it would still need all the existing supply and switchgear and long term maintenance of them.

How many short branches like Lymington are there though, as a percentage of the entire 'Southern' route mileage surely they are loose change?

 

[SpacePhoenix]

A short branch such as Lymington would be 'end fed' off the main line if AC, so it wouldn't need its own traction feed, but if left DC it would still need all the existing supply and switchgear and long term maintenance of them.

How many short branches like Lymington are there though, as a percentage of the entire 'Southern' route mileage surely they are loose change?

Couldn't short branches like the Lymington branch be done using battery trains? Charging at where they terminate on the main line? Timetabled so that there's sufficient time on the main line to charge up

 

[D365]

Couldn't short branches like the Lymington branch be done using battery trains? Charging at where they terminate on the main line? Timetabled so that there's sufficient time on the main line to charge up

Why would you need to go to the expense of battery-operated trains when, as was just explained, a short branch line like Lymington or Windemere (for example) can in the future be end-fed off a mainline AC installation.

 

[infobleep]

Can't believe I'd missed that document . I see Hounslow is to lose both of the evening 455 workings, at 1607 and 1707 from Waterloo, which personally is a huge shame . If I'm travelling around that time I specifically attempt to go for one of those two services. The current next working of the second set (1843 Waterloo to Shepperton via Richmond) is to go 10 as well, so 458s look to have booked use on the Shepperton line. The current diagram only does those two services in the evening.
One of our four morning 455 services, the 0815 from Waterloo (0901 from Hounslow) is to go 10 as well, likewise the current previous working for the set (0700 Shepperton to Waterloo via Richmond). As above, the current diagram only does those two services in the morning.

At least the 0646, 0931 and 1001 from Hounslow look safe for 455s at the moment (I actually have used the 0646 more than the other two [emoji14])

What do you like about the 455s?

 

[RobShipway]

What is the next class 458/0 to be converted to be a 458/5 please?

 

[capital12]

Can't believe I'd missed that document . I see Hounslow is to lose both of the evening 455 workings, at 1607 and 1707 from Waterloo, which personally is a huge shame . If I'm travelling around that time I specifically attempt to go for one of those two services. The current next working of the second set (1843 Waterloo to Shepperton via Richmond) is to go 10 as well, so 458s look to have booked use on the Shepperton line. The current diagram only does those two services in the evening.
One of our four morning 455 services, the 0815 from Waterloo (0901 from Hounslow) is to go 10 as well, likewise the current previous working for the set (0700 Shepperton to Waterloo via Richmond). As above, the current diagram only does those two services in the morning.

At least the 0646, 0931 and 1001 from Hounslow look safe for 455s at the moment (I actually have used the 0646 more than the other two :P)

The document doesn't specify class though - merely stating 8 to 10 - so could in theory be 455+455+456, especially if it works to Shepperton afterwards as didn't think 458/5s were going onto that route.

 

[hassaanhc]

What do you like about the 455s?

Opening windows for fresh air, the motor noise and being spacious. Oh, and I've never had one fail when I'm travelling on it (450 twice, 458/5 about 8-10 times!)

The document doesn't specify class though - merely stating 8 to 10 - so could in theory be 455+455+456, especially if it works to Shepperton afterwards as didn't think 458/5s were going onto that route.

Good point. After all, diagram alterations have been done as 458s have been introduced, so could happen here too.

 

[swt_passenger]

Whether a 10 car service is made up of 458/5 or 455&456 must depend if there are any SDO requirements. If there are short platforms somewhere on the overall diagram the train will have to be 458/5?

 

[jopsuk]

isn't the basic plan (with some out of pattern due to exact fleet composition) that all Windsor side 10-car will be 458/5 and SWML (and branches- eg Mole Valley) 10-car 455/456? With the 707s to directly replace the 458/5s in due course.

 

[swt_passenger]

isn't the basic plan (with some out of pattern due to exact fleet composition) that all Windsor side 10-car will be 458/5 and SWML (and branches- eg Mole Valley) 10-car 455/456? With the 707s to directly replace the 458/5s in due course.

Seems a reasonable rule of thumb to me.

 

[TEW]

The only services which can be 455+455+456 on the Windsor Line side are the Waterloo-Waterloo via Twickenham and Kingston services. Anything else would encounter short platforms, either on the Hounslow Loop or at Feltham. There already are some of those services formed of 10-carriages (455+455+456) in the evening peak. The Shepperton services could be 455+455+456 but if the diagrams interwork with Hounslow Loop services as they do now, they'll have to be 458/5s.

 

[swt_passenger]

It's the interworking of diagrams that is the key to the whole thing isn't it, you could spend a day on opentraintimes at this stage trying to see what changes there might be.

When I was looking at the likely changes from DMU to EMU the other day (for the South Hants locals) I predictably found all sorts of knock-on effects on ECS moves around Portsmouth and Fratton, Eastleigh, Basingstoke etc. Does your head in...

 

[jopsuk]

It's as diagramming is something that's complex enough to require full time professionals!

 

[RobShipway]

Maybe we should have a separate thread for class 455/456?

 

[swt_passenger]

Maybe we should have a separate thread for class 455/456?

I'd agree that we don't really need to discuss preferences about 455 interiors and stuff here, but it is difficult to discuss future allocation of units to routes and services (e.g. whether 5+5 or 4+4+2, and ASDO) without mentioning the alternative possibilities, and the reasons for and against...

 

[Bigfoot]

Perhaps a new thread in general discussion to discuss stock movements/changes within SWT because of the completion of the 458s 456s and arrival of 707s? Leaving this thread purely for 458 rolling stock chatter.

 

[swt_passenger]

Perhaps a new thread in general discussion to discuss stock movements/changes within SWT because of the completion of the 458s 456s and arrival of 707s? Leaving this thread purely for 458 rolling stock chatter.

A reasonable idea but it would never catch on. We're 186 pages into this thread and future allocations, cascades etc have been discussed regularly within it, for instance there was loads of stuff on page 3...