Future of Class 379

[Fincra5]

There are 4 spare 700s from memory, I wouldn't be surprised if these got used instead of 387s.

When there aren't more 700s than usual needing repairs...

 

[Failed Unit]

Hopefully the 700s will be sent elsewhere, The 717s if passenger numbers pick up would probably be still be needed (although looking unlikely) You hope they don’t put toilet less trains on longer routes then they are already on (although I know the 313s did run to Letchworth in the past) -

When there aren't more 700s than usual needing repairs...

I have noticed they are not living up to the expectations sold to us as part of the thameslink project. If they had ever implemented the full timetable it would not be good in terms of cancellations. Lots of 8 cars vice 12 on recent observations. So I suspect they will need to either fix the issues (which will take units out of service) or diagram them less intensively.

 

[bramling]

When there aren't more 700s than usual needing repairs...

It does seem to be the case that the nominally spare 700/0s are regularly covering 700/1 diagrams. Clearly 8-cars is better than a cancelled 12-car, but it does seem to be the case that the 700 fleet has never been quite as available as hoped.

 

[43074]

GTR don't run, and aren't likely to run, as many services on the GN as they did when they had 365s. It looks like what they are likely to run was built around 36 4-car units so seems possible it would be the 30 379s plus the 6 387/3s.

With respect this is not true, June and indeed December both need over 40 4 car units and a number of both 8- and 12-car 700 units on GN. The extra Peterborough services in June have already been mentioned, whilst the East Coast recast (as per the public consultation a few years ago) increases the number of units required on GN further. There is a net increase in the number of units overall, even with the cascade of 387s elsewhere.

 

[Magdalia]

It looks like what they are likely to run was built around 36 4-car units so seems possible it would be the 30 379s plus the 6 387/3s.

That's not correct, now that the Kings Cross-Cambridge stoppers are included. The basic off peak service requires 32*4 car equivalents. The extra peak workings that applied before December 2023 required a further 10*4 car equivalents.

That makes 42*4 car equivalents, with 11 of those currently covered by class 700s, and the remaining 31 by class 387s.

Running more peak hour trains to Peterborough, or running more 12 car trains to/from Cambridge, would add to that requirement.

36*4 car equivalents is nowhere near sufficient to run the GN service.

 

[JonathanH]

With respect this is not true, June and indeed December both need over 40 4 car units and a number of both 8- and 12-car 700 units on GN. The extra Peterborough services in June have already been mentioned, whilst the East Coast recast (as per the public consultation a few years ago) increases the number of units required on GN further. There is a net increase in the number of units overall, even with the cascade of 387s elsewhere.

Thanks for posting.

The outside impression I had was that everything had been set up around 35 or 36 units, and it had been previously indicated that 387172 to 387174 were covering work on the other 387s.

If 40 (or more) 4-car units are needed on GN on top of 700s and up to 17 377s may go from Southern to Southeastern, it sounds like the uplift of units on Southern could be in single figures or the low teens?

36*4 car equivalents is nowhere near sufficient to run the GN service.

I'm not sure that is what I was suggesting as there is a 700 allocation on top of the 387s. Where else are GN's share of the 8-car 700s needed such that they don't form part of the core GN operation?

 

[Failed Unit]

Thanks for posting.

The outside impression I had was that everything had been set up around 35 or 36 units, and it had been previously indicated that 387172 to 387174 were covering work on the other 387s.

If 40 (or more) 4-car units are needed on GN on top of 700s and up to 17 377s may go from Southern to Southeastern, it sounds like the uplift of units on Southern could be in single figures or the low teens?


I'm not sure that is what I was suggesting as there is a 700 allocation on top of the 387s. Where else are GN's share of the 8-car 700s needed such that they don't form part of the core GN operation?

The peak Peterborough‘s can be formed of 700s, Either 8 car or 12 cars. Keeps the mileage down I guess so they don’t fail as much. Not sure if the 700s have a mileage base to the least so using a 387 over a 700 is better from a cost point of view.

 

[bramling]

The peak Peterborough‘s can be formed of 700s, Either 8 car or 12 cars. Keeps the mileage down I guess so they don’t fail as much. Not sure if the 700s have a mileage base to the least so using a 387 over a 700 is better from a cost point of view.

Worth commenting that 700s on the Peterborough services isn’t ideal from an end-user perspective, as they are designed for large amounts of standing - essentially the opposite of what these services ideally need. The 365s were perfect.

That's not correct, now that the Kings Cross-Cambridge stoppers are included. The basic off peak service requires 32*4 car equivalents. The extra peak workings that applied before December 2023 required a further 10*4 car equivalents.

That makes 42*4 car equivalents, with 11 of those currently covered by class 700s, and the remaining 31 by class 387s.

Running more peak hour trains to Peterborough, or running more 12 car trains to/from Cambridge, would add to that requirement.

36*4 car equivalents is nowhere near sufficient to run the GN service.

If I’m reading that correctly, then with four extra 700/0 diagrams it would be possible to run with 23x 387s or equivalent. So if one were to aim for an availability of 27 out of 30 (which I think is still less than what the 365s managed, albeit with 317 or 321 as potential substitutes), that still gives headroom for two extra 8-car workings per peak.

I’m not saying any of this is desirable, but seems theoretically workable based on the current timetable.

 

[Magdalia]

Comparisons with before 2018, or even 2018-2020, are not really valid.

The big difference now is that a far higher proportion of the fleet work off peak, because everything off peak is booked 8 cars. Up to 2018 most of the off peak stoppers were 4 cars, and up to 2020 nearly everything north of Cambridge was 4 cars.

This means far fewer units get onto Hornsey between the peaks, and that's when the exams are done. In particular, when the service was classes 317/321/365, most of classes 317/321 worked peak only, and when the service was classes 365/387, all of class 365 only worked peak only. It wouldn't be possible to operate a mixed fleet like that now, because the number of peak only diagrams is too small.

Ideally the GN needs a fleet of about 48*4 car units that are all the same!

 

[Fincra5]

Hopefully the 700s will be sent elsewhere, The 717s if passenger numbers pick up would probably be still be needed (although looking unlikely) You hope they don’t put toilet less trains on longer routes then they are already on (although I know the 313s did run to Letchworth in the past) -


I have noticed they are not living up to the expectations sold to us as part of the thameslink project. If they had ever implemented the full timetable it would not be good in terms of cancellations. Lots of 8 cars vice 12 on recent observations. So I suspect they will need to either fix the issues (which will take units out of service) or diagram them less intensively.

You'd be better giving some 717s to SN Metro. They're not much use on GN "Outer" services. However there is more work for them in Peak than Off-Peak presently.

If the GN get 379s they'd release equivalent 387s (and maybe a couple more) South to SN. 379s make the most sense, especially from a Training POV, they're just another Electrostar (sure a few differences, especially MITRAC)... but then we're dealing with the DfT here

 

[jon0844]

717s can have a toilet fitted, if some units were to go longer distances. Highly unlikely though, just like adding in the extra four coaches to some 700/0s.

 

[pompeyfan]

The first batch (ex-GWR examples) are due to Lovers Walk for use on Brighton - Southampton services, then further phases will see them on more coastway work. When enough are available they are planned (always subject to change) for the Eastbourne-Vic.

I would challenge that as currently NR (RAM team? Unsure what it stands for) need to authorise every single 387 that runs across the Netley line due to power supply issues (oddly 12 car 450s can run along the route in power reduction mode but don’t need further authorisation but a 4 car 387 needs special authorisation.)

 

[Bald Rick]

NR (RAM team? Unsure what it stands for)

Regional Asset Manager

 

[Failed Unit]

I must admit that is odd world that we live in that these are stored.

It is easy to look at BR in rose tinted spectacles with respect they would be looking at DMU fleets that are need replacement and use a cascade as part of the justification for electrification Schemes. (Or not allowed the ordering of the extra EMUs in the first place)

 

[LA50041]

I would challenge that as currently NR (RAM team? Unsure what it stands for) need to authorise every single 387 that runs across the Netley line due to power supply issues (oddly 12 car 450s can run along the route in power reduction mode but don’t need further authorisation but a 4 car 387 needs special authorisation.)

Feel free to challenge that - all I am quoting is what GTR train planning and fleet planning have said is what is happening from June TT change.

 

[pompeyfan]

Feel free to challenge that - all I am quoting is what GTR train planning and fleet planning have said is what is happening from June TT change.

Interesting, maybe there’s a work around and drivers will be briefed to drive in a certain manner or NR have done some behind the scenes work?

 

[Fincra5]

717s can have a toilet fitted, if some units were to go longer distances. Highly unlikely though, just like adding in the extra four coaches to some 700/0s.

They can do but who pays for that?
Then you have a specific subfleet. 717s are all about capacity during the peaks to Moorgate! A toilet takes up a fair chunk of space for those services.

 

[fgwrich]

The first batch (ex-GWR examples) are due to Lovers Walk for use on Brighton - Southampton services, then further phases will see them on more coastway work. When enough are available they are planned (always subject to change) for the Eastbourne-Vic.

I hope they receive a re-livery before entry into service - two GWR Green liveried units will cause some confusion at places like Southampton - Fareham - Portsmouth, even if we know one is and one isn't with GW!

 

[Sutton in Ant]

I have seen somewhere that there is going to be a lot of shuffling that is going to happen this year with the electrostars unless that is proven not to be true.

 

[brad465]

It'll be good for SE to get some working 377s to supplement the awful 377/5s that seem to have worsening reliablity. SE have had to roll out an addititonal 2x6 car 465/466 diagrams on the Maidstone East Line on a short term basis to cover for the high failure rate of 377/5s.

Is it still the case that SE are utilising all their stabling capacity? I haven't caught up since covid and the 707 cascade changed things somewhat. Until you mentioned this I thought 377/5s were more limited as they were being refurbished.

If I've read this right the whole process being proposed seems to be the biggest game of rolling stock pass the parcel ever.

 

[Doomotron]

Is it still the case that SE are utilising all their stabling capacity? I haven't caught up since covid and the 707 cascade changed things somewhat. Until you mentioned this I thought 377/5s were more limited as they were being refurbished.

If I've read this right the whole process being proposed seems to be the biggest game of rolling stock pass the parcel ever.

When the 707s were transferred to Southeastern room was made for them by withdrawing 465s, despite the press being told that the 707s wouldn't be replacing anything. I expect that the possible 377 movement to Southeastern would involve more 465s being withdrawn if the space is needed, although if I remember correctly some 465/9s are going/have already left. I do not know what progress, if any, has been made on the reopening of Chart Leacon as extra storage space for trains.

 

[Sutton in Ant]

When the 707s were transferred to Southeastern room was made for them by withdrawing 465s, despite the press being told that the 707s wouldn't be replacing anything. I expect that the possible 377 movement to Southeastern would involve more 465s being withdrawn if the space is needed, although if I remember correctly some 465/9s are going/have already left. I do not know what progress, if any, has been made on the reopening of Chart Leacon as extra storage space for trains.

What I thought is that Southeastern railway were going to order new trains to replace the networkers?

 

[brad465]

What I thought is that Southeastern railway were going to order new trains to replace the networkers?

It's what they want, but they're not getting anywhere with gaining approval. In the meantime they just seem to be getting micro-fleets cascaded to chip away at them, this latest proposal initiating a chain reaction from 379 to 387 to 377 could be the latest such example.

 

[Sutton in Ant]

It's what they want, but they're not getting anywhere with gaining approval. In the meantime they just seem to be getting micro-fleets cascaded to chip away at them, this latest proposal initiating a chain reaction from 397 to 387 to 377 could be the latest such example.

With this government. You never get anywhere with anything. Especially the Dft

 

[Energy]

It's what they want, but they're not getting anywhere with gaining approval. In the meantime they just seem to be getting micro-fleets cascaded to chip away at them, this latest proposal initiating a chain reaction from 379 to 387 to 377 could be the latest such example.

465s also show up on mainline routes alongside 375s. Replacing these with cascaded 377s would be preferable to a future metro unit.

I'd expect the DfT/SE to want to remove the remaining 465/9s, the /2s are already in storage, /0s and /1s were retractioned.

 

[brad465]

465s also show up on mainline routes alongside 375s. Replacing these with cascaded 377s would be preferable to a future metro unit.

I'd expect the DfT/SE to want to remove the remaining 465/9s, the /2s are already in storage, /0s and /1s were retractioned.

While I can see them wanting it, if it's 17x 377s coming over that won't be enough, as there are still around 23-25 465/9s in service, and then there are 29x 466s still present (14.5x 4 car equiv). The 466s make things more complicated as their 2 car length is key to forming 10 car sets, including on Tunbridge Wells' diagrams, and unless SE are planning to receive the 5-car variant of the 377s (not sure why though as I imagine Southern need them more while SE's logistics are evermore complicated). Hopefully when this proposal is public/more concrete we'll know for sure what's going on.

 

[Energy]

hile I can see them wanting it, if it's 17x 377s coming over that won't be enough, as there are still around 23-25 465/9s in service

Agreed, I presume there isn't much to stretch in the rest of the SE fleet.

including on Tunbridge Wells' diagrams

Aren't these handled by 3 car 375s? I know SE has had to move some around due to 466s being uncompliant with PRM.

 

[CarrotPie]

I know SE has had to move some around due to 466s being uncompliant with PRM.

466s can't work on their own, but they can work with one or two 465s (because they're PRM compliant) - it's like the Pacers in their final days. Where they used to work on their own (Sheerness & Bromley branches), they've been replaced by 375/3s and 465s.

 

[Class 466]

Agreed, I presume there isn't much to stretch in the rest of the SE fleet.

Aren't these handled by 3 car 375s? I know SE has had to move some around due to 466s being uncompliant with PRM.

Tunbridge Wells to Charing Cross services are all 10 car Networkers currently. You’re probably thinking of the Strood to Tonbridge (Medway Valley Line) service which has been 375/3 since May 2012

 

[Sutton in Ant]

I have seen on the Southern Railway website that the major engineering works were due to be done between the 10th and 16th of Feb for the transfer of signaling to Three Bridges Digital to be put on hold till later in 2024 and I think that the if the 379s is to be going to Great Northern? Then I would think it will be delayed until later in 2024 and the electro star merry-go-round might not happen till the 2nd half of 2024.