EMR Class 360's

[43096]

The move last sunday was formed of 3x360 (12-car) and only had 47727 at the front hauling all three alone.

So the reversal at Bletchley would've been difficult as the loco would have to run round, that's assuming you could even fit 3x360 plus a loco in platform 5 at Bletchley.

So in the case of the above it had to take the long way.

But if one or two units were together with 2 locos, going via Bedford and Bletchley is much easier. (note Bletchley P5 cannot accomodate a 12 car 360 + 1 loco, let alone 2. So 12 car 360 moves via Bedford and Bletchley will never happen.

You could of always remove the loco and put the pans up on the units and they could power themselves from Bletchley to Northampton. No doubt paperwork would stop that as a 360 probably isn't allowed even though the almost identical 350s are.

 

[OTRail]

You could of always remove the loco and put the pans up on the units and they could power themselves from Bletchley to Northampton. No doubt paperwork would stop that as a 360 probably isn't allowed even though the almost identical 350s are.

Desiros are cleared to operate most of this country’s routes so I don’t see why that wouldn’t be feasible

 

[221101 Voyager]

You could of always remove the loco and put the pans up on the units and they could power themselves from Bletchley to Northampton. No doubt paperwork would stop that as a 360 probably isn't allowed even though the almost identical 350s are.

Desiros are cleared to operate most of this country’s routes so I don’t see why that wouldn’t be feasible

You are right there, as on the sectional appendix, 360s are not permitted on the Southern WCML under their own power.

Don't know why this is as they are identical units to the 350/2 except they don't have the gangway.

 

[Fincra5]

You are right there, as on the sectional appendix, 360s are not permitted on the Southern WCML under their own power.

Don't know why this is as they are identical units to the 350/2 except they don't have the gangway.

Probably something like Paperwork thats never been done, as there was never a need before...

 

[221101 Voyager]

Probably something like Paperwork thats never been done, as there was never a need before...

I would imagine it is something simple like paperwork, or like you say maybe they don't allow them as they have indeed never needed to run down the WCML.

 

[edwin_m]

From what i remember of doing some of said paperwork, as part of the deal where a follow-on order of 450s was delivered as 350s, they were cleared for most of the AC network with the major exception of the ECML (and I suspect the MML was excluded too). The 360s were supplied under different arrangements so probably only cleared for the routes they were expected to use.

 

[D365]

I would imagine it is something simple like paperwork, or like you say maybe they don't allow them as they have indeed never needed to run down the WCML.

So you’ve literally just repeated what @Fincra5 said

 

[JN114]

There’s electrical interference to consider - the signalling on the West Coast is very different to that on the GE and different still to the MML. The 350s will have been “tuned” for lack of a better word to not interfere with the signalling on the West Coast, the 360s the GE and the MML. Those two “tunings” may be far from identical or compatible.

That electrical output has to be assessed as part of route compatibility. Sometimes it is just a tick in a box, often it involves subtle tweaks to train software and control electronics however.

 

[59CosG95]

There’s electrical interference to consider - the signalling on the West Coast is very different to that on the GE and different still to the MML. The 350s will have been “tuned” for lack of a better word to not interfere with the signalling on the West Coast, the 360s the GE and the MML. Those two “tunings” may be far from identical or compatible.

That electrical output has to be assessed as part of route compatibility. Sometimes it is just a tick in a box, often it involves subtle tweaks to train software and control electronics however.

Worth mentioning too that units/locos with DC drive (i.e. motors) are, on the whole, significantly less messy than those with AC drive. 317s have operated over all three of the GEML, WCML & MML, after all - with little to no change AFAIK.
88s and 92s (the latter infamously dirty in terms of interference) have also operated over the GEML (to Ipswich in the latter's case) and WCML (but not the MML).

Re the signalling, much of the WCML is now covered by axle counters (inc. Bletchley - Northampton), the GEML is entirely track-circuited, and so is the electrified stretch of the MML.
It could be that the 360s lack immunisation against axle counters - unsurprisingly, they've never been fitted with them as there's been no need to do so for the routes they operate on (past and present).
I'm also unsure whether the GEML/MML (or both) have Insulated Block Joints (IBJs) in the rails, i.e. whether the circuits are single traction rail return (with IBJs) or double traction rail return (without IBJs).

 

[Roger B]

Worth mentioning too that units/locos with DC drive (i.e. motors) are, on the whole, significantly less messy than those with AC drive. 317s have operated over all three of the GEML, WCML & MML, after all - with little to no change AFAIK.
88s and 92s (the latter infamously dirty in terms of interference) have also operated over the GEML (to Ipswich in the latter's case) and WCML (but not the MML).

Re the signalling, much of the WCML is now covered by axle counters (inc. Bletchley - Northampton), the GEML is entirely track-circuited, and so is the electrified stretch of the MML.
It could be that the 360s lack immunisation against axle counters - unsurprisingly, they've never been fitted with them as there's been no need to do so for the routes they operate on (past and present).
I'm also unsure whether the GEML/MML (or both) have Insulated Block Joints (IBJs) in the rails, i.e. whether the circuits are single traction rail return (with IBJs) or double traction rail return (without IBJs).

They also covered the southern end of the ECML, being allocated to Hornsey for a number of years!

 

[221101 Voyager]

I've not seen any photos from Sundays 47727 + 3x360 to Northampton move so thought I'd share mine.

Search: 5Q60 1154½ Kettering Stabling Sidings to Northampton Emd | Flickr

www.flickr.com

47727 sounded great as it screamed past at speed with the 3 360's.

Hope you all enjoy these photos and the video!

 

[edwin_m]

There’s electrical interference to consider - the signalling on the West Coast is very different to that on the GE and different still to the MML. The 350s will have been “tuned” for lack of a better word to not interfere with the signalling on the West Coast, the 360s the GE and the MML. Those two “tunings” may be far from identical or compatible.

That electrical output has to be assessed as part of route compatibility. Sometimes it is just a tick in a box, often it involves subtle tweaks to train software and control electronics however.

Worth mentioning too that units/locos with DC drive (i.e. motors) are, on the whole, significantly less messy than those with AC drive. 317s have operated over all three of the GEML, WCML & MML, after all - with little to no change AFAIK.
88s and 92s (the latter infamously dirty in terms of interference) have also operated over the GEML (to Ipswich in the latter's case) and WCML (but not the MML).

Re the signalling, much of the WCML is now covered by axle counters (inc. Bletchley - Northampton), the GEML is entirely track-circuited, and so is the electrified stretch of the MML.
It could be that the 360s lack immunisation against axle counters - unsurprisingly, they've never been fitted with them as there's been no need to do so for the routes they operate on (past and present).
I'm also unsure whether the GEML/MML (or both) have Insulated Block Joints (IBJs) in the rails, i.e. whether the circuits are single traction rail return (with IBJs) or double traction rail return (without IBJs).

The early EMC safety cases such as the Networkers and 92s had to demonstrate compatibility from first principles for each item of signalling equipment on every route they needed to use, or pay for it to be replaced by something less problematic.

By the time of the Desiro units that had simplified somewhat. Compatiblity would be demonstrated with all standard items of equipment on the chosen routes, and the assumptions written down such as length and type of track circuits. If the signalling on a new operating route was within those assumptions then extending EMC approval became relatively (relatively!) simple. This would certainly have included axle counters and all track circuits used on new installations, to the maximum length and other characteristics permitted by the standards at the time. So in theory they would be compatible with other equipment installed later, which would have followed those standards or had to make its own safety case to change them. The difficulty arose in checking that the infrastructure actually did comply with the assumptions, as Railtrack at the time notoriously didn't have reliable data on its own assets. The signalling on the ECML south of York goes back to the 1970s so might have had lots of unknown non-standard features, and while I don't know for sure I strongly suspect this was the reason the 350s never applied for approval to run there (there was certainly enough trouble getting approval for the 365s).

The 360s were highly similar electrically to the 350s, but I think their area of operation was limited to the intended operating routes whereas the 350 was approved much more widely. Due to the electrical similarity between them, I suspect it would be pretty straightforward to extend the operating area of the 360 using elements of the 350 safety case as evidence.

Worth mentioning too that units/locos with DC drive (i.e. motors) are, on the whole, significantly less messy than those with AC drive. 317s have operated over all three of the GEML, WCML & MML, after all - with little to no change AFAIK.

317s did/do have a nasty habit of de-magetising AWS magnets - something to do with the positioning of suppressor coils creating a strong field in the wrong place. A colleague of mine who I think was involved the first time this happened used to recall how the local engineers re-discovered the problem every time they were transferred to another route.

 

[43055]

It could be that the 360s lack immunisation against axle counters - unsurprisingly, they've never been fitted with them as there's been no need to do so for the routes they operate on (past and present).
I'm also unsure whether the GEML/MML (or both) have Insulated Block Joints (IBJs) in the rails, i.e. whether the circuits are single traction rail return (with IBJs) or double traction rail return (without IBJs).

As part of the upgrade north of Bedford to Corby Axle Counters have been installed. South of Bedford and maybe up to Market Harborough (from Kettering) is still track circuits.

 

[Hey 3]

I find it funny how Northampton’s right next to Kettering yet the 360s are having to take the so-called scenic route to get there - if they’re being based there for maintenance, long term the DfT should consider electrification between the MML and Northampton ...

I am going a bit off topic, but how do EMR Class 360's get from King's Heath in Northampton to Kettering and the Midland Main Line

 

[221101 Voyager]

I am going a bit off topic, but how do EMR Class 360's get from King's Heath in Northampton to Kettering and the Midland Main Line

They go via Bedford to Bletchley then driver changes ends and goes straight to Northampton if 1 or 2 sets hauled by 2 locos. 12 car moves cannot occur as Bletchley platform 5 is too short to accomodate 3x 360 + 1 or 2 locos.

If hauled by one loco, they go via Upper Holloway along the NLL to Camden then they go on the WCML from there straight to Northampton.

360s are not permitted anywhere on the Southern WCML under their own power, they must be loco hauled.


This is the route that the last 360 move from Kettering took.

Realtime Trains - 5Q60 1154½ Kettering Stabling Sidings to Northampton Emd

Realtime Trains provides live realtime running information for the Great British railway network using open data.

www.realtimetrains.co.uk

It took the long way as 1) it was hauled by one loco only and 2) it was hauling a 12 car set so couldn't go via Bedford to Bletchley due to the lack of a 2nd loco and Bletchley P5 being too short.

 

[59CosG95]

I am going a bit off topic, but how do EMR Class 360's get from King's Heath in Northampton to Kettering and the Midland Main Line

Dragged by a diesel between Kings Heath and Temple Mills East siding(?), diesel runs round, diesel drags again to the MML from there. Cricklewood & Bedford Cauldwell are both alternative destinations to Kettering.

The diesel is required as 360s aren't cleared to draw power over the WCML, nor (AFAIK) the North London Line & GOBLIN between the WCML & other points in London. Even if they were, the diesel would still be required as the chord between the MML & GOBLIN is unelectrified.

 

[swt_passenger]

I am going a bit off topic, but how do EMR Class 360's get from King's Heath in Northampton to Kettering and the Midland Main Line

Post #944 a few days ago includes an example of a route taken for the return direction...

 

[221101 Voyager]

Dragged by a diesel between Kings Heath and Temple Mills East siding(?), diesel runs round, diesel drags again to the MML from there. Cricklewood & Bedford Cauldwell are both alternative destinations to Kettering.

The diesel is required as 360s aren't cleared to draw power over the WCML, nor (AFAIK) the North London Line & GOBLIN between the WCML & other points in London. Even if they were, the diesel would still be required as the chord between the MML & GOBLIN is unelectrified.

A quick flick through the sectional appendix shows you are spot on with that point.

 

[Class 170101]

Dragged by a diesel between Kings Heath and Temple Mills East siding(?), diesel runs round, diesel drags again to the MML from there. Cricklewood & Bedford Cauldwell are both alternative destinations to Kettering.

No change of ends / runround at Temple Mills East. It leaves MML to T&H Lines at Upper Holloway then straight on via WA at Tottenham South, Stratford Platform 11, then NLL, to Camden and thence WCML to Northampton.

 

[221101 Voyager]

More 360 moves for tomorrow.

Realtime Trains - 5Q60 0835 Cricklewood Depot to Northampton Emd

Realtime Trains provides live realtime running information for the Great British railway network using open data.

www.realtimetrains.co.uk

Realtime Trains - 5Q61 1425 Northampton Emd to Cricklewood Depot

Realtime Trains provides live realtime running information for the Great British railway network using open data.

www.realtimetrains.co.uk

 

[Edvid]

The first 360 has completed the entire route. Happened last night https://www.realtimetrains.co.uk/train/J03612/2021-02-15/detailed

https://twitter.com/MattStacey93/status/1361436996426604544

STP to LTN in under 22 minutes is fast for a train limited (by the OHLE) to 100mph.

Incidentally, have any of them actually hit 110mph north of Bedford yet?

 

[westcoaster]

STP to LTN in under 22 minutes is fast for a train limited (by the OHLE) to 100mph.

Incidentally, have any of them actually hit 110mph north of Bedford yet?

22 mins is easy from high level not so much from low level.
Only seen the 360's using the slows north of bedford so far.

 

[Kneedown]

Incidentally, have any of them actually hit 110mph north of Bedford yet?

Although all necessary modifications have been carried out, they're not as yet authorised to exceed 100mph.

 

[DBS92042]

360114 heading to Northampton currently:

Realtime Trains - 5Q18 1025 Cricklewood Depot to Northampton Emd

Realtime Trains provides live realtime running information for the Great British railway network using open data.

www.realtimetrains.co.uk

And another/s heading back later:

Realtime Trains - 5Q19 1430 Northampton Emd to Cricklewood Depot

Realtime Trains provides live realtime running information for the Great British railway network using open data.

www.realtimetrains.co.uk

Does anyone know how many are currently at Northampton (I think maybe 3 or 4 but I'm not sure)?

 

[OTRail]

Another 360 heading to Northampton currently:

Realtime Trains - 5Q18 1025 Cricklewood Depot to Northampton Emd

Realtime Trains provides live realtime running information for the Great British railway network using open data.

www.realtimetrains.co.uk

And another/s heading back later:

Realtime Trains - 5Q19 1430 Northampton Emd to Cricklewood Depot

Realtime Trains provides live realtime running information for the Great British railway network using open data.

www.realtimetrains.co.uk

Does anyone know how many are currently at Northampton (I think maybe 3 or 4 but I'm not sure)?

Presuming it’s remained unchanged from when the first ones went the other week, should be 3

 

[Aictos]

Not sure if it's been answered or not as I haven't yet seen the answer but at the moment there are two different speed limits for EMR services depending if the traction is a HST or Class 222 while the Class 360s have all been upgraded to 110mph running so my question is simply where HSTs can run at a higher line speed such as just north of At Alban's, will the Class 360s be permitted to travel at those speeds or will they be restricted to the lower speed?

 

[43066]

Not sure if it's been answered or not as I haven't yet seen the answer but at the moment there are two different speed limits for EMR services depending if the traction is a HST or Class 222 while the Class 360s have all been upgraded to 110mph running so my question is simply where HSTs can run at a higher line speed such as just north of At Alban's, will the Class 360s be permitted to travel at those speeds or will they be restricted to the lower speed?

HST speed boards apply to both HSTs and 222s.

360s will also be able to use the highest speed available (up to their maximum speed of 110mph) as their braking performance is superior to both 222 and HST.

 

[InTheEastMids]

HST speed boards apply to both HSTs and 222s.

360s will also be able to use the highest speed available (up to their maximum speed of 110mph) as their braking performance is superior to both 222 and HST.

Yes I think realtimetrains is the root cause of this confusion by showing HST paths as110 max. I think this is some sort of historic quirk.

 

[spotify95]

HST speed boards apply to both HSTs and 222s.

360s will also be able to use the highest speed available (up to their maximum speed of 110mph) as their braking performance is superior to both 222 and HST.

Thanks for confirming. I would have assumed the 360s were going to use the lower of the two speeds (i.e. not the HST/222 speeds) as they're not a 125 rated train.

 

[OTRail]

HST speed boards apply to both HSTs and 222s.

360s will also be able to use the highest speed available (up to their maximum speed of 110mph) as their braking performance is superior to both 222 and HST.

I thought the wiring south of Bedford needed to be upgraded to enable running above 100mph?