Great Northern Fleet - 379s

[scrapthe503]

Just as well, because for the most part your "official sources" appear to be incorrect on several counts

I look forward to seeing what pans out, in the fullness of time.

 

[wickham]

"Scrapthe503" is quite correct regarding Class 700 utilisation - go past Three Bridges Depot any day of the week and the place is stacked out with spare Class 700 units (both up and down site yards) ! So it really would make a lot of sense to find a use for them.

 

[brad465]

Have we even had official confirmation that the 379s are going to Great Northern for starters? (apologies if they have and I've missed the key post/details)

 

[scrapthe503]

Have we even had official confirmation that the 379s are going to Great Northern for starters? (apologies if they have and I've missed the key post/details)

Strangely, part of a rail forum is usually that people who do know, put something out there before an official story. A bit like budget leaks or what not.

 

[JonathanH]

Have we even had official confirmation that the 379s are going to Great Northern for starters? (apologies if they have and I've missed the key post/details)

In amongst the various discussions and speculation, there are two particular posts which can be considered to be 'informed'.

One that they were on a retainer to GTR.
https://www.railforums.co.uk/threads/future-of-class-379.163185/page-30#post-6498270

No they, they’ll replace 387s to Southern. They are on retainer at GTR, not available to anyone else, just waiting for them to bring them in rather than store them.

Another which indicates that they are to be sold to another lease company, before the official announcement of a return to service is made.
https://www.railforums.co.uk/threads/great-northern-fleet-tender.247756/page-9#post-6581933

The 379s are set to be sold to a different Rosco who are waiting for the DFT to sign the Great Northern lease agreement before the deal is announced. They need to hurry up as it is the intention to have them in service for the Dec 24 timetable change.

 

[Fincra5]

Have we even had official confirmation that the 379s are going to Great Northern for starters? (apologies if they have and I've missed the key post/details)

Not yet...

 

[Nicholas Lewis]

"Scrapthe503" is quite correct regarding Class 700 utilisation - go past Three Bridges Depot any day of the week and the place is stacked out with spare Class 700 units (both up and down site yards) ! So it really would make a lot of sense to find a use for them.

Not only Three Bridges you can also see them lying idle at Hornsey, Cricklewood and Jowetts at Bedford. Furthermore Bedford doesn't need 4 Tlks per hour with the EMR 360 service now the primary service there so more diagrams could be saved. Makes absolute sense to utilise the 700's on ECML as they are already ETCS enabled and are being expensively upgraded to the latest version.

 

[JonathanH]

Furthermore Bedford doesn't need 4 Tlks per hour with the EMR 360 service now the primary service there so more diagrams could be saved.

What about Flitwick and Leagrave? (I'll give you that Harlington could cope with 2tph.) However, the peak demand dictates the number of diagrams, not cutting back off-peak services.

 

[scrapthe503]

Not only Three Bridges you can also see them lying idle at Hornsey, Cricklewood and Jowetts at Bedford. Furthermore Bedford doesn't need 4 Tlks per hour with the EMR 360 service now the primary service there so more diagrams could be saved. Makes absolute sense to utilise the 700's on ECML as they are already ETCS enabled and are being expensively upgraded to the latest version.

I am 95% certain only 48 units out of 60 get used from the 8 car 700 fleet, on actual Thameslink work. I also think it's only 50 of 55 from the 12 car fleet. Someone would have to confirm or deny.

If you assume all of the Peterborough fast trains come back (circa 16:42-19:12) in December and you need 6 diagrams, a mix of 12 car 700s and 3 8 car 700s would leave some slack for maintenance in the 12 car fleet. You'd then only want to use about 6 of the remaining 8 car 700s, which would be the Ely fast / Cambridge slow diagrams bar one. Then use all the 379s for whatever else you so desire, namely King's Lynn.

 

[bramling]

It's not entirely correct to put it in those terms.

Class 700 utilisation is nothing like it should be - for many very obvious reasons.

In respect of the Cambridge to Maidstone, the unit saving on only going to Kings Cross must be at least 6 on a half-hourly timetable, and they were procured to be used.

This is about right, *however* doesn’t take into account that the 700/0 fleet was not sized for the long and slow trundle out to Rainham, which uses a lot of units. Any 700/0s notionally for Maidstone are now committed to Rainham.

Add in the fact you don't have the services to Littlehampton, and there's a couple of 12 car units also not used.

One of these is now covering for what originally would have been 3x365 on peak Peterborough services.

As a result, you have to start at the base of some of the Ely trains by all accounts being 700s in the new timetable in May which will roll over to December. That's a part of the puzzle solved, as 700s just get used on lots of GN services.

One could, I think, suggest that yes there might be a couple of 387s brought up and down to Hornsey, but one assumes it is not likely.

The current timetable has 31x387, 4x700/0 and 1x700/1 delivering GN outer services. On top of that there are allegedly two further 8-car Peterborough services each peak starting in June.

This is getting very tight to deliver the whole GN service with just the 30x 379s. Whilst 700/0 usage has reduced by four complete units compared to 2018, these seem to be being used to cover for poorer than envisaged availability across both the 700/0 and 700/1 fleets. Despite the Covid reductions, it is still very common to find 700/0s substituting for 700/1s - indeed it’s a pretty much daily occurrence on the GN side to find at least one such disgram substituted - which indicates there isn’t much slack on the 700/1 side.

I agree it would theoretically be possible to deliver the whole GN service with just the 379 and 700 fleets, but it is a massive ask, and is essentially guaranteed to lead to significant numbers of cancellations due to unavailable stock.

I guess it might be possible in theory to ditch Thameslink to East Grinstead, in which case this would certainly free up some 700s for GN only work. But that is getting speculative.

 

[scrapthe503]

This is about right, *however* doesn’t take into account that the 700/0 fleet was not sized for the long and slow trundle out to Rainham, which uses a lot of units. Any 700/0s notionally for Maidstone are now committed to Rainham.




One of these is now covering for what originally would have been 3x365 on peak Peterborough services.




The current timetable has 31x387, 4x700/0 and 1x700/1 delivering GN outer services. On top of that there are allegedly two further 8-car Peterborough services each peak starting in June.

This is getting very tight to deliver the whole GN service with just the 30x 379s. Whilst 700/0 usage has reduced by four complete units compared to 2018, these seem to be being used to cover for poorer than envisaged availability across both the 700/0 and 700/1 fleets. Despite the Covid reductions, it is still very common to find 700/0s substituting for 700/1s - indeed it’s a pretty much daily occurrence on the GN side to find at least one such disgram substituted - which indicates there isn’t much slack on the 700/1 side.

I agree it would theoretically be possible to deliver the whole GN service with just the 379 and 700 fleets, but it is a massive ask, and is essentially guaranteed to lead to significant numbers of cancellations due to unavailable stock.

I guess it might be possible in theory to ditch Thameslink to East Grinstead, in which case this would certainly free up some 700s for GN only work. But that is getting speculative.

Only 4 x 8/700 in a world where there's potentially 12 more idle, would suggest there's some play if you use more 700s on the East Coast.

And, of course, the somewhat nuclear option (if you change a couple of diagrams) of making the off-peak Letchworth services (3 diagrams) 717s, giving the fleet time to have maintenance and exams during the day at Hornsey, getting your peak utilisation of 700s / 379s really high...

 

[bramling]

If you assume all of the Peterborough fast trains come back (circa 16:42-19:12) in December and you need 6 diagrams, a mix of 12 car 700s and 3 8 car 700s would leave some slack for maintenance in the 12 car fleet. You'd then only want to use about 6 of the remaining 8 car 700s, which would be the Ely fast / Cambridge slow diagrams bar one. Then use all the 379s for whatever else you so desire, namely King's Lynn.

One slight difficulty with the above is what happens to the 700/0s during the peaks. It isn’t going to be possible with the current timetable setup to guarantee that the 700/0s end up confined to Cambridge stopping services. Keeping them off diagrams which require 12-cars at some point would be a considerable headache.

 

[Murray J]

I guess it might be possible in theory to ditch Thameslink to East Grinstead, in which case this would certainly free up some 700s for GN only work. But that is getting speculative.

For fear of getting slightly off-topic, I know from being a local to East Grinstead that the temporary axing of the Thameslink peak extras to EG was a political concern raised with the local MP on multiple occasions, who in turn raised it with GTR on multiple occasions.
I have no idea what the loadings are like but the fact they still exist (combined with my one experience on a peak time EG train) suggests they can't be too bad.

 

[scrapthe503]

One slight difficulty with the above is what happens to the 700/0s during the peaks. It isn’t going to be possible with the current timetable setup to guarantee that the 700/0s end up confined to Cambridge stopping services. Keeping them off diagrams which require 12-cars at some point would be a considerable headache.

Nothing is impossible, by the time you get to December.

 

[Nicholas Lewis]

Only 4 x 8/700 in a world where there's potentially 12 more idle, would suggest there's some play if you use more 700s on the East Coast.

And, of course, the somewhat nuclear option (if you change a couple of diagrams) of making the off-peak Letchworth services (3 diagrams) 717s, giving the fleet time to have maintenance and exams during the day at Hornsey, getting your peak utilisation of 700s / 379s really high...

Good point on 717s plenty of them sitting at Hornsey as well and the fleet was sized for a much intensive service on the inners than is now being delivered. This is the sort smart utilisation that BR was good at and to be fair several of the franchises and demonstrates to teh DfT that the industry understands the cost challenges and drives the solution rather than letting DfT impose daft ideas.

 

[bramling]

And, of course, the somewhat nuclear option (if you change a couple of diagrams) of making the off-peak Letchworth services (3 diagrams) 717s, giving the fleet time to have maintenance and exams during the day at Hornsey, getting your peak utilisation of 700s / 379s really high...

The above is certainly possible - indeed I’ve wondered for some while how long the current situation is very low 717 utilisation is likely to be tolerated. Possible, but certainly not desirable. Committing the 717s in this way would also preclude restoring the inners to 2019 levels of service, whether that is likely to be needed in the future is of course a matter of conjecture. Squeezing the 700 fleets is not a good idea with current levels of availability, at least not if we don’t want to see a return of numerous “cancelled due to a fault with the train” cancellations.

 

[scrapthe503]

The above is certainly possible - indeed I’ve wondered for some while how long the current situation is very low 717 utilisation is likely to be tolerated. Possible, but certainly not desirable. Committing the 717s in this way would also preclude restoring the inners to 2019 levels of service, whether that is likely to be needed in the future is of course a matter of conjecture. Squeezing the 700 fleets is not a good idea with current levels of availability, at least not if we don’t want to see a return of numerous “cancelled due to a fault with the train” cancellations.

I don't know why they ordered the number they did, but one assumes it was for what was supposed to be 16tph from Moorgate when ETCS came in (e.g. 4 trains every 15 minutes). It's now a train every 6 minutes I think, so they are definitely not entirely used. They could certainly 'help out' a bit, now that you've got more links and depots signing them.

 

[bramling]

Good point on 717s plenty of them sitting at Hornsey as well and the fleet was sized for a much intensive service on the inners than is now being delivered. This is the sort smart utilisation that BR was good at and to be fair several of the franchises and demonstrates to teh DfT that the industry understands the cost challenges and drives the solution rather than letting DfT impose daft ideas.

The 717 utilisation borders on ridiculous. I forget the numbers, but a massive proportion of the fleet goes away between the peaks, in the evenings and at weekends. And a good number don’t even leave the depot each day at all.

They’d probably be more suitably deployed on peak Peterborough services as 12 cars compared to Letchworth or Cambridge though.

I don't know why they ordered the number they did, but one assumes it was for what was supposed to be 16tph from Moorgate when ETCS came in (e.g. 4 trains every 15 minutes). It's now a train every 6 minutes I think, so they are definitely not entirely used. They could certainly 'help out' a bit, now that you've got more links and depots signing them.

ISTR the fleet was sized for the full 2018 inners timetable, with the intention of some further peak extras appearing at some point.

 

[scrapthe503]

The 717 utilisation borders on ridiculous. I forget the numbers, but a massive proportion of the fleet goes away between the peaks, in the evenings and at weekends. And a good number don’t even leave the depot each day at all.

They’d probably be more suitably deployed on peak Peterborough services as 12 cars compared to Letchworth or Cambridge though.



ISTR the fleet was sized for the full 2018 inners timetable, with the intention of some further peak extras appearing at some point.

Use them on Welwyn to Sevenoaks services if you have to - I doubt you need 8 coaches at high peak through the core on a Sevenoaks when the Orpington trains run as well. That's entirely speculative, but I remember 313s couldn't go beyond St Neots (?) with the tripcock equipment, nor I don't think north of Royston, so who knows.

 

[Robski_]

It is well discussed that full replacement of pre-pandemic peak capacity is not likely, and indeed not necessary.

I commute on GN outer suburban regularly - it is desperately necessary. People being left behind is generally a good indication of more capacity being needed.

It is conceivable that the desire of the DfT to bin off more networkers is the difference between using a small number of 379s, sufficient to restore some more GN services, and the full fleet of 30 units.

It is conceivable that that can be achieved without additional rolling stock - the number of 465 and 466 diagrams has been cut by roughly 20% in December 2023. Withdrawing the Met-Cam units would represent a 30% reduction in the networker fleet.

If you assume all of the Peterborough fast trains come back (circa 16:42-19:12) in December

They are coming back in June.

They’d probably be more suitably deployed on peak Peterborough services as 12 cars compared to Letchworth or Cambridge though.

I have seen some 717's running ECS towards Peterborough recently...

 

[scrapthe503]

I commute on GN outer suburban regularly - it is desperately necessary. People being left behind is generally a good indication of more capacity being needed.

It is conceivable that that can be achieved without additional rolling stock - the number of 465 and 466 diagrams has been cut by roughly 20% in December 2023. Withdrawing the Met-Cam units would represent a 30% reduction in the networker fleet.

They are coming back in June.

I have seen some 717's running ECS towards Peterborough recently...

The main issue, one assumes, is diagramming something like a 717 to Peterborough when Peterborough drivers don't sign for them. Neither do Cambridge, but it seems more likely that Cambridge would be 'slightly easier' if the units rolled off Letchworth of a morning, with Hitchin drivers.

 

[bramling]

I commute on GN outer suburban regularly - it is desperately necessary. People being left behind is generally a good indication of more capacity being needed.

Agreed. Rather than the discourse being essentially “how much can we squeeze out of the rolling stock”, it should really be about restoring lost services, notably the Baldocks. Realistically sadly it seems to be the first of those though.

They are coming back in June.

I think we are still one service down each peak. Also worth remembering all but one of the current services are 8-cars, and my belief is the services being reintroduced in June will be 8-cars as well. And I think it’s fair to speculate that I wouldn’t be laying money on it being 100% certain these two extra services will actually materialise, as it isn’t at all clear where the stock comes from.

 

[Kite159]

The 717 utilisation borders on ridiculous. I forget the numbers, but a massive proportion of the fleet goes away between the peaks, in the evenings and at weekends. And a good number don’t even leave the depot each day at all.

They’d probably be more suitably deployed on peak Peterborough services as 12 cars compared to Letchworth or Cambridge though.

Weren't the 717s ordered when Moorgate services was 4tph for both branches before Covid hit slashing the timetable down to 2tph with a few peak time extras?

The issue with using 717s is the lack of toilets, even on a peak time limited stop Peterborough train

 

[bramling]

Weren't the 717s ordered when Moorgate services was 4tph for both branches before Covid hit slashing the timetable down to 2tph with a few peak time extras?

Yes. Full 4tph off-peak service plus numerous peak extras, with more envisaged. A far cry from today’s rather pathetic inner service.

The issue with using 717s is the lack of toilets, even on a peak time limited stop Peterborough train

Not ideal for sure, but is this really a showstopper? Every destination has an alternative service to London if someone wants a train with toilets, and even from Peterborough the journey isn’t massively longer than Hertford to Moorgate.

 

[Failed Unit]

Weren't the 717s ordered when Moorgate services was 4tph for both branches before Covid hit slashing the timetable down to 2tph with a few peak time extras?

The issue with using 717s is the lack of toilets, even on a peak time limited stop Peterborough train

They were, although it could be argued that the 15 minute interval on both branches is not needed. (But in the peak the 717s are struggling to cope so some extra could definitely be used on the Hertford Branch)

However, I don't think GTR have enough drivers to run the "May 2018" service even if they wanted to.

The 700s defiantly. are not reliable enough to consider it.

Diagramming 700s on the Kings Cross - Cambridge would need to be done very careful (if it happens) as having a 6 car service on a peak time run would not be pleasant .

 

[Nicholas Lewis]

Agreed. Rather than the discourse being essentially “how much can we squeeze out of the rolling stock”, it should really be about restoring lost services, notably the Baldocks. Realistically sadly it seems to be the first of those though.

The passengers aren't there though so restoring lost services is a fallacy especially as there is now no interest in PIXC (passenger in excess of capacity metric). Mind you dealing with the widescale fare evasion would be a good start by the industry to again demonstrate to DfT they are maximising revenue.

 

[bramling]

The passengers aren't there though so restoring lost services is a fallacy especially as there is now no interest in PIXC (passenger in excess of capacity metric). Mind you dealing with the widescale fare evasion would be a good start by the industry to again demonstrate to DfT they are maximising revenue.

The problem with stripping out capacity, is it can be very problematic to restore it should there be a need in the future. This lesson was learned in the 1980s. It’s quite conceivable that two or three years from now we could be back to 2019 levels of peak demand. Indeed even now we are reminded that revenue lags behind demand when comparing to 2019.

I’d imagine if the peak Baldocks were restored then it wouldn’t be massively long before they reached the stage of having all seats taken, at the very least.

 

[43096]

I am 95% certain only 48 units out of 60 get used from the 8 car 700 fleet, on actual Thameslink work. I also think it's only 50 of 55 from the 12 car fleet. Someone would have to confirm or deny.

So it's 80% availability for the 8-cars and almost 91% for the 12-cars. You aren't going to push the 12-cars any further than that - they do have maintenance requirements, you know. If the 8-car units had similar availability, you've got another 6 units in traffic. That, in turn, would free up 12 x 377/387 for use elsewhere.

 

[scrapthe503]

The problem with stripping out capacity, is it can be very problematic to restore it should there be a need in the future. This lesson was learned in the 1980s. It’s quite conceivable that two or three years from now we could be back to 2019 levels of peak demand. Indeed even now we are reminded that revenue lags behind demand when comparing to 2019.

I’d imagine if the peak Baldocks were restored then it wouldn’t be massively long before they reached the stage of having all seats taken, at the very least.

I'm trying to think of the old timetable, pre-Covid and 700s?

Half-hourly Cambridge stopper, which I think split a unit off the back at Letchworth or Welwyn.
Half-hourly Royston fast, often 317s. Welwyn North, not Knebworth.
Half-hourly Kings Lynn.
Half-hourly Peterborough semi-fast with the Knebworth stop.
Half-hourly Peterborough flyer.
Half-hourly Welwyn, fast from Finsbury to New Southgate.

Which was resourced with a fleet comprising 12 317s, 13 321s, 40 365s and 29 387s, for a vehicle total of 376.

With 120 vehicles of 379, and a large amount of rolling stock coming from the 700 fleet, what more units do you actually need? In future, there would still be fleet capacity for some service restoration.

 

[bramling]

I'm trying to think of the old timetable, pre-Covid and 700s?

Half-hourly Cambridge stopper, which I think split a unit off the back at Letchworth or Welwyn.
Half-hourly Royston fast, often 317s. Welwyn North, not Knebworth.
Half-hourly Kings Lynn.
Half-hourly Peterborough semi-fast with the Knebworth stop.
Half-hourly Peterborough flyer.
Half-hourly Welwyn, fast from Finsbury to New Southgate.

Which was resourced with a fleet comprising 12 317s, 13 321s, 40 365s and 29 387s, for a vehicle total of 376.

With 120 vehicles of 379, and a large amount of rolling stock coming from the 700 fleet, what more units do you actually need? In future, there would still be fleet capacity for some service restoration.

From memory the GN fleet from early GTR days was
40x 365
13x 321
12x 317
45x 313

The 29 x 387 replaced the 317 and 321 fleets. Originally GN was going to get the 377/5 fleet not the 387s.

The 2019 GN fleet I think was
29x 387
21x 365 (two of these were additional to what was planned)
8x 700/0

Pre Thameslink the GN service was

2tph KX to Cambridge, with one extended to Kings Lynn. Originally the second terminated at Cambridge, however latterly the second went to Ely. On top of this at peak times the second service tended to go to Kings Lynn as well.

1tph KX to Cambridge semi fast
1tph KX to Cambridge stopping
1tph KX to Peterborough semi fast
1tph KX to Peterborough stopping

For the peaks we can add
2tph KX to Peterborough fast
2tph KX to Royston fast
2tph KX to Welwyn stopping

Also in the peaks the Peterborough stopping service changed to become a Cambridge service, and the Cambridge semi-fast became a Peterborough semi-fast. This pattern continued into the late evening but with one of the Cambridge stopping services terminating at Letchworth, and one of the Peterborough semi-fasts becoming Cambridge. Many peak services attached or detached units along the way, particularly at Cambridge or Royston.