Class 717 speed up-rating (85 to 100mph)

[Ianno87]

As owners of the 365 fleet, why would DfT want to shoot themselves in the foot by taking 365s off lease. They should be looking to get them all back in use!

They didn't get them for free, and they're also paying out for storage on the units that are currently off lease.

They could go for scrap so they're no longer costing anybody anything whatsoever, if there's no demand need for them that can't be met by other more modern fleets.

 

[hexagon789]

Assuming that was the case, then a 6-car unit with 2400kW wouild seem a good spin-off of the class 700 design and might make a good match for updating SE services alonside the 700s running to Rainham, Sevenoaks et al. Of course their maximum power would be lower on DC and there might be some platform length issues (i.e. many have been upgraded to accommodate 10-car trains). Their high capacity and performance with a degree of training and maintenance commonality with the largest fleet of the new train designs (class 700s) might make them a good fit.

I think it must be 2400kW per UNIT, hand that would be very poor for a modern train.

Yes, I would tend to agree - perhaps with a few tweaks

Complete guess - could it be that with the downturn in commuter traffic, some of the 717s are going to be ‘spare’, and could be deployed on other GN services where the 100mph capability would be useful? Thus releasing other stock for the scrap heap (and not necessarily from the GN).

That would seem logical enough, might be behind the 100mph uprating as well

 

[swt_passenger]

They could go for scrap so they're no longer costing anybody anything whatsoever, if there's no demand need for them that can't be met by other more modern fleets.

Doesn’t DfT have to pay a ROSCO to look after them on DfT’s behalf? They’d still need maintenance, and DfT won’t have in-house maintainers....

 

[D365]

The DfT got them for free so they wouldn't be losing money just not gaining any.

How do you know that? Are/were you privy to the special arrangements with Eversholt Rail?

 

[Energy]

How do you know that? Are/were you privy to the special arrangements with Eversholt Rail?

Just double checked and they paid back RBS (Eversholt) after 30 years for ownership, it wasn't free but I doubt it was a lot given the units were 30 years old at that time.

 

[43096]

Just double checked and they paid back RBS (Eversholt) after 30 years for ownership, it wasn't free but I doubt it was a lot given the units were 30 years old at that time.

How the hell do you get 30 years?

The oldest were accepted into traffic in 1996 and ownership changed to DfT in 2019. I make that 23 years.

 

[Ianno87]

Doesn’t DfT have to pay a ROSCO to look after them on DfT’s behalf? They’d still need maintenance, and DfT won’t have in-house maintainers....

So scrap them and save all the bother!

 

[43096]

So scrap them and save all the bother!

Fine, more taxpayers money squandered.

 

[Ianno87]

Fine, more taxpayers money squandered.

Not sure I follow?

There's a real chance, post-Covid, that the whole UK rolling stock fleet will be oversized compared to what is required, for a good 5-10 years at least. At which point 365s will be rapidly approaching life-expiry.

Therefore continuing to pay for trains that are simply not needed strikes me as squandering of taxpayers money.

 

[43096]

Not sure I follow?

DfT bought the trains. Almost half of them have done nothing since they were bought. Given that DfT decide rolling stock allocations, you'd think somebody in DfT would have mandated their use somewhere so that they start earning money rather than costing money. Ironically, the only place they were used was Scotland - where DfT has no say.

I'd say that not finding a use for trains that you own whilst also having final say on stock allocations is pretty incompetent - in other words, squandering taxpayers' money.

 

[Ianno87]

DfT bought the trains. Almost half of them have done nothing since they were bought. Given that DfT decide rolling stock allocations, you'd think somebody in DfT would have mandated their use somewhere so that they start earning money rather than costing money. Ironically, the only place they were used was Scotland - where DfT has no say.

I'd say that not finding a use for trains that you own whilst also having final say on stock allocations is pretty incompetent - in other words, squandering taxpayers' money.

1) DfT only pays for these trains because it legally has to.

2) That was August 2019, and things have changed a little since then... You can't find a use for them if they are genuinely not needed by anybody!

 

[Energy]

How the hell do you get 30 years?

Whoops, assumed it was 1990s ish like the other networkers.

 

[hwl]

Complete guess - could it be that with the downturn in commuter traffic, some of the 717s are going to be ‘spare’, and could be deployed on other GN services where the 100mph capability would be useful? Thus releasing other stock for the scrap heap (and not necessarily from the GN).

Given the recent contract awards in late 2020, I'd go for providing cover while the GN 387 and GN 365 fleets get ETCS fitted.

 

[Energy]

Given the recent contract awards in late 2020, I'd go for providing cover while the GN 387 and GN 365 fleets get ETCS fitted.

365s have quite low fleet utilisation and there are the 19 365s in storage.

 

[bramling]

Given the recent contract awards in late 2020, I'd go for providing cover while the GN 387 and GN 365 fleets get ETCS fitted.

Not sure on that one. For sure you could knock some 700/0s off the Welwyn to KX service (assuming Sevenoaks doesn’t happen for the time being), and use them to backfill 365 or 387. However this wouldn’t require 100 mph. Likewise if some 700/0 were displaced from the Cambridge stopping service 85 mph would still be perfectly satisfactory.

Any straight swap 365 or 387 to 717 would mean first class not being provided, though I realise that’s not an insurmountable issue.

I’d have thought any backfill for ETCS could be done using the Gatwick 387s?

 

[Energy]

I’d have thought any backfill for ETCS could be done using the Gatwick 387s?

GTR covers both GatEx and GN so probably.

 

[Skimble19]

They could go for scrap so they're no longer costing anybody anything whatsoever, if there's no demand need for them that can't be met by other more modern fleets.

I wouldn’t bank on the 365s going anywhere just yet.

There may be a reduction in the overall GTR fleet size that may require a bit of a reshuffle, but I’d say the fact the 365s are about to be fitted with ETCS suggests you should be looking elsewhere.. I’m not privy to the conversations happening at a very high level, but if I had to guess, I’d go with the far older stock somewhere a little more Southern!

However, as said, I’m not privy to those conversations so could be completely wrong, but it would be very odd for the 365s to be scrapped whilst the far older 313s continue to linger on..

 

[AverageTD]

For the people suggesting 2x717s covering for longer distance routes, wouldn't the use of toilets prevent them operating on many services north of Stevenage? They could get usage on the Letchworth Peaks whenever they come back.

 

[choochoochoo]

For the people suggesting 2x717s covering for longer distance routes, wouldn't the use of toilets prevent them operating on many services north of Stevenage? They could get usage on the Letchworth Peaks whenever they come back.

There is space for toilets to be retrofitted to the fleet. Might be a wise idea if we're not going to see crush-loaded peaks for a while

 

[Hadders]

For the people suggesting 2x717s covering for longer distance routes, wouldn't the use of toilets prevent them operating on many services north of Stevenage? They could get usage on the Letchworth Peaks whenever they come back.

But we would get power sockets in standard as a bonus....

 

[choochoochoo]

But we would get power sockets in standard as a bonus....

I was going to say you'd get guaranteed wifi too. But even though the 717s all have it, sometimes it just doesn't work.

 

[AM9]

But we would get power sockets in standard as a bonus....

I can't quite see how power sockets are a substitute for toilets.

 

[JonathanH]

I can't quite see how power sockets are a substitute for toilets.

Using more battery on a phone might preoccupy someone enough to take their mind off the need to relieve themselves.

 

[AM9]

Using more battery on a phone might preoccupy someone enough to take their mind off the need to relieve themselves.

The extra warmth might in the cold weather.

 

[D6975]

While I'll agree they were sluggish at higher speeds, they should be capable of 100mph readily enough given they had the same motors as the 4REPs they replaced and those could manage 100+ with two 4TCs in tow!

REPs were a touch 'lively' at 100mph. Anyone who experienced taking a cup of char in the buffet will remember what that was like!!

 

[Railperf]

Does anyone know what mods are required for this? I'd have assumed these were mechanically identical to the 700's in terms of running gear? Truthfully the 700's should have been 110mph capable for fast line ECML running. So if the 717's are going to use the fast lines - they should be too!

 

[Hadders]

Does anyone know what mods are required for this? I'd have assumed these were mechanically identical to the 700's in terms of running gear? Truthfully the 700's should have been 110mph capable for fast line ECML running. So if the 717's are going to use the fast lines - they should be too!

I'm not sure 110mph for class 700s makes much sense. Generally they only run on the fast lines between Finsbury Park and Woolmer Green, and I don't even think the line speed gets to 125mph until Woolmer Green.

North of Woolmer the 700s generally run on the slow lines.

 

[Railperf]

I'm not sure 110mph for class 700s makes much sense. Generally they only run on the fast lines between Finsbury Park and Woolmer Green, and I don't even think the line speed gets to 125mph until Woolmer Green.

North of Woolmer the 700s generally run on the slow lines.

Yes, it does increase to 115mph at Oakleigh Park on the down main.

 

[Hadders]

Yes, it does increase to 115mph at Oakleigh Park on the down main.

It's about 15 miles from Oakleigh Park to Woolmer Green so is it really worth spending the money for 700s to operate at 110mph over such a short distance. You'd save less than a minute, possibly less given that you have to slow down to diverge to the slow lines.

 

[Railperf]

It's about 15 miles from Oakleigh Park to Woolmer Green so is it really worth spending the money for 700s to operate at 110mph over such a short distance. You'd save less than a minute, possibly less given that you have to slow down to diverge to the slow lines.

In the context that main line paths are a rare and valuable resource - then it could have been worth specifiying the 700s to run at 110mph for reliability and capacity improvements.