Merseyrail Class 777

Sponsor Post - registered members do not see these adverts; click here to register, or click here to log in
R

RailUK Forums

D365

Established Member
Joined
29 Jun 2012
Messages
7,254
Err... I was under the impression that 750-799 is being reserved for EDMUs...
 

AM9

Established Member
Joined
13 May 2014
Messages
8,330
Location
St Albans
Err... I was under the impression that 750-799 is being reserved for EDMUs...
Whoever manages rolling stock class numbering is as bad as Ofcom is with phone number allocations.

At least it means that they should be equipped for ac as well as DC.
 
Last edited:

bb21

Forum Staff
Staff Member
Global Moderator
Joined
4 Feb 2010
Messages
23,784
Could the classification have been 509 or 510 as a continuation of the 507s and 508s that are being replaced?

When I looked at the TOPS classification list a long time ago, there is a lot of unused numbers between 509 to 599 inclusive.
Don't forget car numbers are now six digits, and starting with the 400 series. It wouldn't surprise me if the 500 series are reserved accordingly.
 

507021

Established Member
Joined
19 Feb 2015
Messages
3,807
Location
Liverpool
I was also expecting a designation close to that of the existing units, but at least we have confirmation now.

Thanks to the OP for sharing.
 

Domh245

Established Member
Joined
6 Apr 2013
Messages
5,612
Location
Nottingham
Don't forget car numbers are now six digits, and starting with the 400 series. It wouldn't surprise me if the 500 series are reserved accordingly.
You'd have thought so, but the 385/0 subclass have vehicles numbered 444001 to 444046, which overlaps with a certain SWR fleet almost perfectly so it seems that whoever issues vehicle numbers either doesn't care about overlaps or was a bit forgetful one day
 

jopsuk

Veteran Member
Joined
13 May 2008
Messages
12,291
creaking, groaning system... needs a wholescale replacement. I'd go for 8-digit vehicle numbers, with all existing vehicles renumbered. It would then be xxxyyyzz
xxx: class number (could "rationalise" this whilst they're at it, been done before)
yyy: set number
zz: vehicle number

(and for locos: 0xxyyy00)
 

43096

Established Member
Joined
23 Nov 2015
Messages
7,125
creaking, groaning system... needs a wholescale replacement. I'd go for 8-digit vehicle numbers, with all existing vehicles renumbered. It would then be xxxyyyzz
xxx: class number (could "rationalise" this whilst they're at it, been done before)
yyy: set number
zz: vehicle number

(and for locos: 0xxyyy00)
Just use the EVN system.
 

Brian Aylott

Member
Joined
11 Oct 2012
Messages
262
You'd have thought so, but the 385/0 subclass have vehicles numbered 444001 to 444046, which overlaps with a certain SWR fleet almost perfectly so it seems that whoever issues vehicle numbers either doesn't care about overlaps or was a bit forgetful one day
Am I misunderstanding what you saying?
Overlaps?
How?
There is no problem with having identical vehicle numbers to set numbers - there is no connection between vehicle and set numbers
There only cannot be 2 vehicles with identical numbers
Brian
 

Domh245

Established Member
Joined
6 Apr 2013
Messages
5,612
Location
Nottingham
Am I misunderstanding what you saying?
Overlaps?
How?
There is no problem with having identical vehicle numbers to set numbers - there is no connection between vehicle and set numbers
There only cannot be 2 vehicles with identical numbers
Brian
bb21 was talking about the carriage numbers and implied that the 5xxxxx could potentially be blocked out for use as carriage numbers. I was pointing out that there was already a range of overlaps between the units 444001 to 444045 and 385001 to 385045 (the latter having driving vehicles numbered 444001 to 444046) so *theoretically* these new units could have been 509xxx with that range of numbers also utilisable for vehicle numbers.

As for issues it may throw up, I'd be surprised if there were none, but seeing as there is already this exception (and I've no doubt some others) I suppose it is ok.
 

bb21

Forum Staff
Staff Member
Global Moderator
Joined
4 Feb 2010
Messages
23,784
You'd have thought so, but the 385/0 subclass have vehicles numbered 444001 to 444046, which overlaps with a certain SWR fleet almost perfectly so it seems that whoever issues vehicle numbers either doesn't care about overlaps or was a bit forgetful one day
There may not be issues one envisage in the immediate environment, but having duplication can be a potential cause for problems in the future, especially when this is completely unnecessary. This is typical of a certain attitude in the industry which I have seen plenty so far. Stupid is putting it mildly.

But what do I know I guess eh? ;)
 

12CSVT

Established Member
Joined
18 Aug 2010
Messages
2,612
Could the classification have been 509 or 510 as a continuation of the 507s and 508s that are being replaced?

When I looked at the TOPS classification list a long time ago, there is a lot of unused numbers between 509 to 599 inclusive.
There's also a lot of unused class numbers between 324 and 398 (and between 400 and 499)
 

dp21

Member
Joined
10 May 2017
Messages
352
Evening all,

It is my understanding that this is to do with European regulation.

Someone in the know made a fleeting comment that this was the reason but I didn't get the chance to ask any more info.

For the number takers around, you may be interested to know that I hear it will be mandated for trains to feature that really long numbering system along the sole bar (it's the UIC mark I believe and wiki can tell you more).

When? Not sure. But some people might need a larger note book to get all those numbers in ;).
 

Peter Mugridge

Established Member
Joined
8 Apr 2010
Messages
10,874
Location
Epsom
When? Not sure. But some people might need a larger note book to get all those numbers in ;).
Not necessarily...

Most railways have so far managed to arrange their fleet numbers and EVNs to coincide so as long as you know which country and which operator you are looking at you should be able to manage with the normal short form of the number.

For example, for SNCF carriage 50.87.22.37.025-3 you only need the underlined bit; in fact SNCF actually do underline that part - their own fleet number - on all their carriages. Other countries are not so helpful but the basic principle applies.

Besides, don't some things in the UK already carry the EVNs without causing problems?
 

Bevan Price

Established Member
Joined
22 Apr 2010
Messages
4,850
Evening all,

It is my understanding that this is to do with European regulation.

Someone in the know made a fleeting comment that this was the reason but I didn't get the chance to ask any more info.

For the number takers around, you may be interested to know that I hear it will be mandated for trains to feature that really long numbering system along the sole bar (it's the UIC mark I believe and wiki can tell you more).

When? Not sure. But some people might need a larger note book to get all those numbers in ;).
And from March 2019 (post Brexit) we will be able to ignore European regulations for any stock that remains exclusively within UK.
 

swt_passenger

Veteran Member
Joined
7 Apr 2010
Messages
22,485
Evening all,

It is my understanding that this is to do with European regulation.

Someone in the know made a fleeting comment that this was the reason but I didn't get the chance to ask any more info.

For the number takers around, you may be interested to know that I hear it will be mandated for trains to feature that really long numbering system along the sole bar (it's the UIC mark I believe and wiki can tell you more).
This has been suggested before, and at the moment UIC numbers most definitely do NOT have to be displayed externally on passenger stock that stays permanently within GB. It's all explained in the group standard.

EMU and DMU set numbers are separate thing to the long UIC numbering scheme, the latter is applied to individual vehicles or locos only, but not sets.
 

43096

Established Member
Joined
23 Nov 2015
Messages
7,125
And from March 2019 (post Brexit) we will be able to ignore European regulations for any stock that remains exclusively within UK.
Except for the fact that the Government is hoping to pass legislation that folds EU regulations into U.K. law.

The EVN system is far more sensible than the utter mess we have currently. Just one example being the use of 66xxx vehicle numbers in the Desiro fleet, when Class 66 already existed in the loco series. There are plenty of other stupidities and inconsistencies.
 

fowler9

Established Member
Joined
29 Oct 2013
Messages
8,363
Location
Liverpool
The designation of the new Merseyrail rolling stock is Class 777, according to the latest company safety brief.
And if the devil is six then god is seven. This monkeys gone to heaven.

Pixies know the answer but I'm not holding my breath. Ha ha.
 
Last edited:

Top