Could ex-Heathrow Connect (now ROG) Class 360s be given a FLEX conversion?

[D365]

What do they intend to use them for, I wonder? Evidently they must have a plan

One might hazard a guess that they will receive the FLEX treatment in order to compliment the Class 769.

EDIT: Thanks for splitting this out, @Moderating team

 

[DB]

One might hazard a guess that they will receive the FLEX treatment in order to compliment the Class 769.

Would mean a bespoke design - expensive for such a small fleet.

 

[D365]

Would mean a bespoke design - expensive for such a small fleet.

Hardly so if you contract Porterbrook to perform the mods.

 

[DB]

Hardly so if you contract Porterbrook to perform the mods.

Does Porterbrook own them?

Doesn't alter the fact that a design for such a small fleet is likely to be quite expensive per unit, and the cost would likely affect leasing charges.

 

[43096]

Does Porterbrook own them?

Doesn't alter the fact that a design for such a small fleet is likely to be quite expensive per unit, and the cost would likely affect leasing charges.

No. Porterbrook have never been involved with the 360/2s. They were owned by Heathrow Airport and presumably are now ROG's property.

 

[Energy]

Hardly so if you contract Porterbrook to perform the mods.

Get Wabtec or Brush to do them, why would Porterbrook do it?

 

[D365]

No. Porterbrook have never been involved with the 360/2s. They were owned by Heathrow Airport and presumably are now ROG's property.

Get Wabtec or Brush to do them, why would Porterbrook do it?

Because Porterbrook are developing a design for the Class 350/2. No need to reinvent the wheel, makes sense to "licence" their design.

 

[Domh245]

Because Porterbrook are developing a design for the Class 350/2. No need to reinvent the wheel, makes sense to "licence" their design.

The 350/2 'flex' is battery though - although that might be enough for whatever they've got in mind (short stretches into container ports for example!)

I'd also query how developing/developed the design actually is - quoting from their website

Porterbrook has modelled energy and power demands for routes such as the Windermere branch, where a BatteryFLEX version of the Class 350/2 fleet would eliminate diesel use on non-electrified lines, and maintain the ‘beneath the wires’ capability of these highly reliable trains.

Porterbrook is currently working with specialists in battery chemistry to create a demonstrator unit for interested train operators, their passengers and the communities they serve.

Which also appears near enough word for word ("working" has replaced "in discussion") in articles from October 2018 when they announced it - seems like it's been very much on the back burner and almost certainly not ready to be licensed out!

 

[D365]

I would imagine that on BatteryFLEX is still ongoing, what with the drive for decarbonisation

 

[Domh245]

I would imagine that on BatteryFLEX is still ongoing, what with the drive for decarbonisation

Oh definitely, but I'd be surprised if it was at the point where they could start installing it/licensing it out. The units themselves won't be coming off lease for a while yet, and there's no indication of a prospective next user to take them on, though plenty of possibilities and speculation, so it'd be a bold move to have developed a design (specifically for Desiros!) to completion in those circumstance.

Of course, a partnership where what PB have done so far is used on the ROG fleet as the aforementioned demonstrator (and convenient prototypes for batteryflex) certainly wouldn't be out of the question

 

[JN114]

I'm pleasantly shocked that they've managed to get a reprieve here in the UK.

Porterbrook were only sponsors/promoters for the 769s, they're in no way/shape/form an engineering company, it's a coalition of banks and investment holdings - it was Wabtec/Faiveley who did the actual design work and engineering for Flex, Porterbrook then marketed those conversions so they can get further use out of their assets.

As other Desiro operators have shown, they are a 110mph-capable design, albeit with modifications. If this Orion parcels service really takes off, then there may be a need for a small fleet of faster Parcels units to work "trunk" services along main lines in daytime amongst other Intercity traffic. A 110mph unit is going to be more attractive for that than a 319 that can barely reach 100mph. Put a few traction batteries under the 3 unpowered cars (there's plenty of room) and you get some last-mile, self-powering capability for unwired terminals or short/slow forays off OHLE land.

So to answer the OP's question - absolutely, presuming ROG's plans for them are expansion of the Orion operation. Whether it's actually the same design (allegedly) being developed for the 350s, or they go to another engineering firm or technology remains to be seen. But unless they have some open-access passenger operation up their sleeve; or fancy entering the leasing market themselves, I can't see what other use ROG has for them.

There's a lot of ifs, but it all does stack up business-sense wise.

Very best of luck to them!

 

[D365]

Porterbrook were only sponsors/promoters for the 769s, they're in no way/shape/form an engineering company, it's a coalition of banks and investment holdings - it was Wabtec/Faiveley who did the actual design work and engineering for Flex, Porterbrook then marketed those conversions so they can get further use out of their assets.

True, but Porterbrook do employ engineers and they will most likely own the rights to the FLEX intellectual property.

 

[Bringback309s]

Could there be a market for a part passenger and parcel service, with crates unloaded at main terminals which could then be scanned straight onto awaiting delivery vans in a dedicated area of the station? Most likely operating during the night with the seats being sold cheaply to students, etc looking for cheap no frills rail travel?

 

[JonathanH]

Could there be a market for a part passenger and parcel service, with crates unloaded at main terminals which could then be scanned straight onto awaiting delivery vans in a dedicated area of the station? Most likely operating during the night with the seats being sold cheaply to students, etc looking for cheap no frills rail travel?

No. Why would an expensive idea be linked to cheap fares? Either a parcel service is viable on its own or it isn't. Passengers are just a complication.

Overnight 'cheap no frills travel' is the domain of coaches which are
a) cheaper to provide
b) able to cope with route closures for engineering access
c) able to have lights dimmed to a lower level
d) possibly better for personal safety

If 'cheap fares' aren't commercially viable when a train is full they aren't going to be viable when a train is empty (as it would be in the middle of the night).