Great Northern Fleet - 379s

[Robski_]

Is it me or has the 379 Award notice gone behind some sort of Bidstats security wall?

Here is the gov.uk link: https://www.find-tender.service.gov.uk/Notice/007878-2024

 

[Energy]

Since when does Porterbrook own the 30 379s? I assumed it was still Akiem.

The deal is with Porterbrook, either they bought them of Akiem or are subleasing from (or managing the asset) for Akiem.

Here is the award £50,112,000 for 30 class 379s

Leasing for the GN Network of Additional Rolling Stock [VEAT]

Supply of 30 Electric Multiple Units for use of the Great Northern fleet.... A Voluntary Ex-Ante Transparency (VEAT) Notice by Govia Thameslink Railway. Value £50M.

bidstats.uk

Good to see.

So the 379 confirmation was duly called. Only the rest to pan out now…

Which bit was wrong? The 379 bit?

That's still a lot to "pan out". The 379s have been speculated for GN on here for years and they fit the 30x4 car Great Northern bid perfectly. It isn't some shocking fleet development.

 

[Bikeman78]

I don't think there is any evidence of 40 377s to Southeastern. It sounds like it could be as little as the 15 377/2s, as it's 377/7s only (to be confirmed) on Watford trains shortly, if not already. You've got the benefit of the entire fleet of 707s in squadron service, as well as the 376s for the 10-car railway (albeit a lot of Southeastern isn't a 10 car railway, it's 8 car on the Chatham or 12 car on the Charing Cross sides, save for Woolwich Dockyard and Hayes (?)).

Don't forget, on the main line you don't have extra peak services from Blackfriars as you once did, the Cannon Street to Thanet trains aren't all 12 car, and so one has to surmise that Southeastern doesn't need it's full fleet of 465/466 units (especially as Crossrail now does a lot of heavy lifting). The Networker fleet also harks back to a time when Metro went to Gillingham, which it doesn't anymore. It went to Faversham, Tunbridge Wells - this will all change / has changed.

I am surprised that South Eastern has not culled its fleet like SWR and Southern. The whole of the South Eastern metro used to be 10 car, except trains to Blackfriars and Victoria. Some routes were extended to 12 cars in the 1990s but very few 12 cars actually run. Terminating trains at Tunbridge Wells are 10 car max. South Eastern only has 10 three car 375s so limited scope to make 10 car formations with them. I'm not sure what the three cars are used on now. Strood to Paddock Wood and possibly Sittingbourne to Sheerness?

 

[LNW-GW Joint]

Here is the gov.uk link: https://www.find-tender.service.gov.uk/Notice/007878-2024

Thank you.

 

[pokemonsuper9]

Opening the link in an incognito tab seems to bring it back for me.

Thanks for that, I've popped it on the web archive in case anyone who can't wants to see it (takes a while to load).
Contents same as quoted in #439

Leasing for the GN Network of Additional Rolling Stock [Award]

Supply of 30 Electric Multiple Units for use of the Great Northern fleet.... A Contract Award Notice by Govia Thameslink Railway. Value £50M.

web.archive.org

 

[Bikeman78]

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.

The 2018 timetable worked by 313s required 18 trains off peak and 21 in the peaks. Assuming two are stopped each day then there would only be two spare 717s if that timetable had continued. Presumably the plan was a slight increase in peak workings.

 

[bramling]

Yes I think we would have been looking at a small handful of extra Gordon Hill trips or similar.

 

[03_179]

Been coming

 

[D365]

… believe it when I see it?

Or am I too cynical?

 

[brad465]

Spending one‘s life waiting for LIAR is not wise…

Spending one's life displaying arrogance is not wise...

 

[Fincra5]

Be under no illusion, there's a bit of work to do to these units to get them fit for service with the GN.

For ages they were class XXX even internally .

 

[TT-ONR-NRN]

Spending one‘s life waiting for LIAR is not wise…

In fairness, over the few days in which you've been on the forum and made a large number of assertions, I don't remember seeing a credible source to back them up from you, either?

Be under no illusion, there's a bit of work to do to these units to get them fit for service with the GN.

For ages they were class XXX even internally .

I wonder if we can expect a minor cosmetic refresh before they enter service too. The 2+1 first class area would eat quite a lot of capacity for services that currently leave King's Cross full and standing as 387s. Mind you, the 387s have first class too, I suppose. I forget that with how little difference there is between the two classes in that particular case.

 

[Kite159]

In fairness, over the few days in which you've been on the forum and made a large number of assertions, I don't remember seeing a credible source to back them up from you, either?


I wonder if we can expect a minor cosmetic refresh before they enter service too. The 2+1 first class area would eat quite a lot of capacity for services that currently leave King's Cross full and standing as 387s. Mind you, the 387s have first class too, I suppose. I forget that with how little difference there is between the two classes in that particular case.

Is there much in the way of First Class demand on the Great Northern route in the current climate?
How many of the passengers you see sat in first class on a full & standing service simply are chancing it with a standard class ticket knowing a revenue check is unlikely.

 

[jon0844]

In fairness, over the few days in which you've been on the forum and made a large number of assertions, I don't remember seeing a credible source to back them up from you, either?


I wonder if we can expect a minor cosmetic refresh before they enter service too. The 2+1 first class area would eat quite a lot of capacity for services that currently leave King's Cross full and standing as 387s. Mind you, the 387s have first class too, I suppose. I forget that with how little difference there is between the two classes in that particular case.

If you're going to keep first class, it should be a bit better than on the 387s. Otherwise get rid of it entirely.

The thing is, if trains are going to go back to being cramped then this means first class might become worthwhile.

 

[gabrielhj07]

If you're going to keep first class, it should be a bit better than on the 387s. Otherwise get rid of it entirely.

The thing is, if trains are going to go back to being cramped then this means first class might become worthwhile.

If they do nothing to the 379s first class then it'll be fine. Much better than the 387.

 

[jon0844]

If they do nothing to the 379s first class then it'll be fine. Much better than the 387.

Yes, I think it will likely stay as is. Makes little sense to spend loads of money changing the internal layout.

I wonder if they'll get the colour displays and power sockets with USB-A ports though, albeit not immediately?

 

[JonathanH]

Yes, I think it will likely stay as is. Makes little sense to spend loads of money changing the internal layout.

On the contrary, keeping first class in that area on the 379s means both a reduction in first class capacity, and standard class capacity. Question really is whether there are some suitable standard class seats in storage to replace the first class ones.

 

[Nicholas Lewis]

That is kind of my point, it’s natural that any train is going to accrue some level of obsolescence. In the case of the Networker fleets this doesn’t seem to have been managed effectively.

Not according to Modern Railways golden spanner awards they were 3rd to 6th most reliable ex BR units being over twice as reliable as 323 and outperformed plenty of more modern EMUs.

By chance had a 465/0 on a Rochester to Victoria service earlier which was in reasonable condition although the newish accessible WC ironically shows what could be achieved with a refurbishment. Rode far better at speed than a jittery electrostar.

 

[OneOfThe48]

Be under no illusion, there's a bit of work to do to these units to get them fit for service with the GN.

Well they have been sat in a field for however many years haven't they?

Hopefully they're in good nick but I'd be surprised if they haven't developed some gremlins over that time.

 

[Cowley]

There’s been loads of speculation in this thread but it’s too complicated to separate in reality. Now that there’s some firm news though, can we concentrate on that please.

Thank you.

 

[bramling]

In fairness, over the few days in which you've been on the forum and made a large number of assertions, I don't remember seeing a credible source to back them up from you, either?


I wonder if we can expect a minor cosmetic refresh before they enter service too. The 2+1 first class area would eat quite a lot of capacity for services that currently leave King's Cross full and standing as 387s. Mind you, the 387s have first class too, I suppose. I forget that with how little difference there is between the two classes in that particular case.

I wouldn’t be surprised to see some reconfiguring of the seating, to make the layout the same as on the 387s. Though of course the ideal would be to put first in the sections adjacent to both cabs.

Would it be feasible to swap the seats with the 387/2s? Not that I’m suggesting it by any means at all, however this would give something better for the Gatwick services whilst keeping the 387/1s and 379s uniform.

 

[dk1]

Excellent news breaking this afternoon

 

[skyhigh]

Well they have been sat in a field for however many years haven't they?

Hopefully they're in good nick but I'd be surprised if they haven't developed some gremlins over that time.

They've not just been sat, they've still been going out under the wires and through routine maintenance to keep them fit to work.

 

[D365]

They've not just been sat, they've still been going out under the wires and through routine maintenance to keep them fit to work.

routine maintenance and cleaning I would hope!

 

[Sussex Ben]

Would it be feasible to swap the seats with the 387/2s? Not that I’m suggesting it by any means at all, however this would give something better for the Gatwick services whilst keeping the 387/1s and 379s uniform.

As a frequent Gatwick Express user, I wholeheartedly support this proposal

 

[43102EMR]

On the contrary, keeping first class in that area on the 379s means both a reduction in first class capacity, and standard class capacity. Question really is whether there are some suitable standard class seats in storage to replace the first class ones.

The majority of people in first class don’t even pay for it, and even then that’s a very small number who actually use it. I personally don’t think it will make much of a difference if it’s retained.

 

[JonathanH]

The majority of people in first class don’t even pay for it, and even then that’s a very small number who actually use it. I personally don’t think it will make much of a difference if it’s retained.

It is the reduction in standard class seats that may be more telling.

 

[westcoaster]

When we learnt the 387/1's on the Thameslink route, it was a one day course.
From a drivers point of view it was just subtle differences from the 377's we already drove nothing major was introduced. Can see the same with the 379's.

Theoretically the 377/6/7, 387/1/2/3, and 379 is the same basic product with slight variations.

 

[43102EMR]

When we learnt the 387/1's on the Thameslink route, it was a one day course.
From a drivers point of view it was just subtle differences from the 377's we already drove nothing major was introduced. Can see the same with the 379's.

Especially as the 387s are directly derived from the 379s

 

[CarrotPie]

Especially as the 387s are directly derived from the 379s

Which themselves are derived from the later examples of the first generation of 377s (/4/5).