Modern Looking Old EMUs

Status
Not open for further replies.

HSTEd

Veteran Member
Joined
14 Jul 2011
Messages
13,009
Well I've been working on my secret low cost plan to ensure Sprinter Domination forever more.....

But I've been trying to get as much electrification as possible with as few a new EMU orders as possible, and when it comes to this EGIP is an enormous project, requiring at-least 55 sets (does that assume 4 cars?) and possibly releasing 40 DMU sets (I assume that is Sprinter sets with the remaining vehicles for capacity enhancement?)

But while I imagine the secondary services would be happy with rebuilt (along the lines of proposed 319 rebuilds) Class 317s, I have my doubts that the premier ScotRail service between Edinburgh and Glasgow would be happy with such old fashioned looking trains.

So what is the oldest class that looks sufficiently modern to be deployed on those services without causing political problems? (Even if a Class 317 or 321 fitted with a new interior and air con would be perfectly acceptable in journey experience terms).
 
Sponsor Post - registered members do not see these adverts; click here to register, or click here to log in
R

RailUK Forums

fgwrich

Established Member
Joined
15 Apr 2009
Messages
6,640
Location
Between Edinburgh and Exeter
I don't want to mention how old they are, but the 332s are still very very modern looking, despite being 14 years old. However - Scotland isnt having those, nor the 333s either. However, they could have a new build if desired....

Other than that, id have to say the 365s too. And im saying that not just because im not that much of a fan of the 321, but ive always thought they looked dated from the start, especially when often dirty. But 317/7s would probably do for secondary routes up there but ideally the North could do with them first...
 

BestWestern

Established Member
Joined
6 Feb 2011
Messages
6,736
I don't want to mention how old they are, but the 332s are still very very modern looking, despite being 14 years old. However - Scotland isnt having those, nor the 333s either. However, they could have a new build if desired....

The 332 & 333 sets are surely just about the smartest units we have in the UK? They look absolutely superb, I really can't understand why the Desiro family is so blandly styled when clearly somebody at Siemens has (or had?) the right idea?! :|
 

aformeruser

Veteran Member
Joined
23 Jan 2009
Messages
30,636
The 332 & 333 sets are surely just about the smartest units we have in the UK? They look absolutely superb, I really can't understand why the Desiro family is so blandly styled when clearly somebody at Siemens has (or had?) the right idea?! :|

They were built in conjunction with CAF and built in Zaragoza.

CAF have built some excellent new units for the Spanish network which are much better for a passenger view point than Siemen's German built Desiro offerings for the UK.

Maybe Bombardier should work with CAF to build high quality units in the UK.
 

HSTEd

Veteran Member
Joined
14 Jul 2011
Messages
13,009
Problem was I already had the 365s chalked down for TPE..... assuming they can be modified for 110 running on the ECML......

How about sending them a load of Class 317s but "reverse cascading" the brand new Class 380s and the Junipers to the premier Glasgow-Edinburgh services?
That way the flagship service gets modern EMUs and everyone is happy?
 

sprinterguy

Established Member
Joined
4 Mar 2010
Messages
10,612
Location
Macclesfield
How about sending them a load of Class 317s but "reverse cascading" the brand new Class 380s and the Junipers to the premier Glasgow-Edinburgh services?
That way the flagship service gets modern EMUs and everyone is happy?
I don't feel that the interiors of the 380s are suitably high-spec for the Edinburgh - Glasgow "Premier" service, and the same goes for the 334s.

I would think that you would have one hell of a job on your hands getting Scotrail to accept second hand stock in lieu of new, let alone replacing the 380s on their present services with 1980s EMUs! Sounds like a losing battle to me. Scotrail and Transport Scotland certainly wouldn't be happy about it.
 

WatcherZero

Established Member
Joined
25 Feb 2010
Messages
9,525
Transport Scotlands rolling stock policy is to replace all rolling stock with new builds like the 380's.
 

317666

Established Member
Joined
4 Sep 2009
Messages
1,623
Location
Ely
I think the PEP-based EMUs such as 315s don't look as old as they are, particularly the handful of units fitted with Electrostar-style lamp clusters. Like a lot of older EMUs, if you ask me the design is timeless - it doesn't look old and it doesn't look new. Trains which are built with streamlining etc can often look outdated within 10 years as fashion changes, whereas plainer designs stay the same in my eyes.
 

tbtc

Veteran Member
Joined
16 Dec 2008
Messages
16,594
Location
Yorkshire, Yorkshire, Yorkshire
I don't feel that the interiors of the 380s are suitably high-spec for the Edinburgh - Glasgow "Premier" service

I don't know how "premier" they need to be though - it's a service with an end to end journey time of under an hour so there's no need for many "perks".

Plus if you did want a specific "premier" class of units for the Falkirk High "shuttle" then it'd be a fairly small class.
 

jopsuk

Veteran Member
Joined
13 May 2008
Messages
12,571
It has had its own dedicated fleets in the past- original DMUs used on the route, the top and tail sets and the push-pull 47 were all dedicated fleets (that eventually roamed a little)
 

tbtc

Veteran Member
Joined
16 Dec 2008
Messages
16,594
Location
Yorkshire, Yorkshire, Yorkshire
It has had its own dedicated fleets in the past- original DMUs used on the route, the top and tail sets and the push-pull 47 were all dedicated fleets (that eventually roamed a little)

True, although the 27s and 47s were just normal locos that they adapted to the route (rather than new builds specifically built for that purpose). Same with the coaches. The only "unique" aspect was the DBSOs.

Building a whole separate fleet of EMUs would be different (in my book).

It's a bit like the 322s being built for Stansted - essentially the same as any 321s (but with a different interior - luggage space etc) rather than a whole new design of train.
 

HSTEd

Veteran Member
Joined
14 Jul 2011
Messages
13,009
Transport Scotlands rolling stock policy is to replace all rolling stock with new builds like the 380's.

Must be nice to have unlimited money......

I could just chalk in 55 Class 379s for EGIP but that is extremely expensive..... and effectively removes any reason to electrify additional routes in Scotland since they will not provide homes for cascaded EMUs.

Class 321s are not really that old and if the currently out of service Cl317s and those that will be released by the Cl700s going to FCC/Southern could be shunted to Greater Anglia you could probably fill a large part of the requirement with them.

Send the nonstandard Class 360s up there to make up the numbers.... but Transport Scotland might not accept that.... this is why not having a single national transport authority is bad, the devolved bodies get upset and throw toys out of the pram when they don't get the shinest stuff.

(As part of the deal could just take the 40 DMUs from the Cl156/158 fleet rather than taking all the Turbostars)
 

BestWestern

Established Member
Joined
6 Feb 2011
Messages
6,736
They were built in conjunction with CAF and built in Zaragoza.

CAF have built some excellent new units for the Spanish network which are much better for a passenger view point than Siemen's German built Desiro offerings for the UK.

Maybe Bombardier should work with CAF to build high quality units in the UK.

That's quite interesting, I wasn't aware of that. So were Siemens not 'proper' train builders at that stage?
 

WatcherZero

Established Member
Joined
25 Feb 2010
Messages
9,525
I think they just wernt interested in directly entering the UK market until the last decade (probably the cost of adjusting its products to our gauge), before that they were interested indirectly by providing the equipment. Perhaps they liked the taste they got from that contract and thats what led them to the Desiro UK model 5 years later.
 

ainsworth74

Forum Staff
Staff Member
Global Moderator
Joined
16 Nov 2009
Messages
23,128
Location
Redcar
They look absolutely superb, I really can't understand why the Desiro family is so blandly styled when clearly somebody at Siemens has (or had?) the right idea?! :|

Another factor that I've heard (but not seen anything official to independently confirm) that caused such a change was that the curved glass fronts whilst looking really good are quite expensive to build and therefore also to replace in the event of damage.
 

sprinterguy

Established Member
Joined
4 Mar 2010
Messages
10,612
Location
Macclesfield
I could just chalk in 55 Class 379s for EGIP but that is extremely expensive..... and effectively removes any reason to electrify additional routes in Scotland since they will not provide homes for cascaded EMUs.
I hardly think that Scotrail would take on an order of 379s when they seem content with their 380s, and given free reign (Of course, the actual orders for EGIP will have to go out to competitive tender) are likely to order more for the Central Belt electrification. Having both 380s and 379s would hardly be conducive to standardisation of their EMU fleet, plus the 380s are a better quality product IMO.
--- old post above --- --- new post below ---
I don't know how "premier" they need to be though - it's a service with an end to end journey time of under an hour so there's no need for many "perks".

Plus if you did want a specific "premier" class of units for the Falkirk High "shuttle" then it'd be a fairly small class.
Carpets and full size tables would be nice though, and wouldn't look out of place on Central Belt commuter services to the likes of Stirling either, so could be applied to the entire order for Central Belt EMUs. However, if the present lino floors and no frills layout assists Scotrail in keeping the trains clean more easily and saves time on cleaning the units and a few quid on maintenance bills then I won't object.
--- old post above --- --- new post below ---
Another factor that I've heard (but not seen anything official to independently confirm) that caused such a change was that the curved glass fronts whilst looking really good are quite expensive to build and therefore also to replace in the event of damage.
Yes, that is very much the case. As you say, large expanses of curved glass are far more expensive to manufacture and to replace, and are also more susceptible to damage as well. This is why the original wrap-round cab windows on EMU classes such as the 303s, 309s and 310s were replaced not that long into their lives which much more plain, cheaper, flat panes of glass with the curved sections blanked off, and IIRC were omitted from some first-gen DMU designs at the design stage.
 
Last edited:

tbtc

Veteran Member
Joined
16 Dec 2008
Messages
16,594
Location
Yorkshire, Yorkshire, Yorkshire
Carpets and full size tables would be nice though, and wouldn't look out of place on Central Belt commuter services to the likes of Stirling either, so could be applied to the entire order for Central Belt EMUs

The 47/7s with DBSOs on the Edinburgh - Glasgow route shared stock with the Edinburgh/Glasgow - Aberdeen services.

Sadly due to lack of electrification beyond Dunblane this won't be possible to do with EMUs (and the Dunblane stoppers aren't catering to the same "long distance" passengers).

I suppose it depends on whether we are talking about fifty EMUs to replace most central belt DMUs (excl Fife) or over one hundred EMUs to also replace the 314, 318 and 320s too.

I'm partly reluctant to have a small "specialist" fleet of "shuttle" EMUs because FSR seem to struggle with how to allocate the ex Hull Trains 170s (with buffets)
 

Yew

Established Member
Joined
12 Mar 2011
Messages
5,203
Location
Nottingham
The 150's FGW refurbished are pretty smart apparently, I think anything with a good refirb can easily be confused for new stock. Just look at EMT's 158's
 

sprinterguy

Established Member
Joined
4 Mar 2010
Messages
10,612
Location
Macclesfield
The 47/7s with DBSOs on the Edinburgh - Glasgow route shared stock with the Edinburgh/Glasgow - Aberdeen services.

Sadly due to lack of electrification beyond Dunblane this won't be possible to do with EMUs (and the Dunblane stoppers aren't catering to the same "long distance" passengers).

I suppose it depends on whether we are talking about fifty EMUs to replace most central belt DMUs (excl Fife) or over one hundred EMUs to also replace the 314, 318 and 320s too.

I'm partly reluctant to have a small "specialist" fleet of "shuttle" EMUs because FSR seem to struggle with how to allocate the ex Hull Trains 170s (with buffets)
Having all of the future Central Belt EMUs (Will there really be a requirement for over fifty units? I just can't envisage it) with one interior featuring carpets and full size tables as I suggest, while all the 380s operating Glasgow suburban services - The present 380/0 and 380/1 fleets, plus hopefully additional units to replace the 314s, 318s and 320s eventually - feature the existing "no frills" interior would be no different to the present arrangement of these two completely separate fleets and service groups.

This would be worlds away from Scotrails' present difficulties in allocating appropriately laid out 170s to services (SPTE 170s with no first class on Edinburgh - Glasgow Fasts, the Hull Trains 170/3s being on anything but Edinburgh/Glasgow - Inverness services). In fact, it would lead to greater standardisation, around just one type of EMU with two different interior layouts, on all electrified commuter and suburban services across Ayrshire, the Clyde and the Central Belt, than is seen at present with the mix of EMU and DMU classes.
 

tbtc

Veteran Member
Joined
16 Dec 2008
Messages
16,594
Location
Yorkshire, Yorkshire, Yorkshire
Having all of the future Central Belt EMUs (Will there really be a requirement for over fifty units? I just can't envisage it)

Assuming doubled up units at peak times (as now) for the Falkirk High service, you'd need sixteen just for that route (which would mean around twenty to cover spares etc).

Add in the Edinburgh/Glasgow - Stirling - Dunblane/Alloa route and you get a similar number.

Add in the Cumbernauld/ Whifflet/ Paisley Canal/ East Kilbride...

...I reckon around fifty, maybe a few more.
 

sprinterguy

Established Member
Joined
4 Mar 2010
Messages
10,612
Location
Macclesfield
Assuming doubled up units at peak times (as now) for the Falkirk High service, you'd need sixteen just for that route (which would mean around twenty to cover spares etc).

Add in the Edinburgh/Glasgow - Stirling - Dunblane/Alloa route and you get a similar number.

Add in the Cumbernauld/ Whifflet/ Paisley Canal/ East Kilbride...

...I reckon around fifty, maybe a few more.
Thanks for that, that's interesting to contemplate.

I would wager that four units as maintenance spare for a peak requirement of sixteen units in service is a bit high though, even for the present 170s, and certainly for a modern EMU: That's only an availability of 80%, whilst C2C utilise 71 out of their 74 class 357s during peak times, and I recall that London Midland manage a high figure out of their 350s, although I can't remember what it is.

Still though, you are probably not far off.
 

HSTEd

Veteran Member
Joined
14 Jul 2011
Messages
13,009
The EGIP website says there will be a requirement for 55 EMUs to run the services envisaged as part of the upgrade work.

The problem, in my opinion, with ordering huge numbers of new Desiros is that this would sort of undermine any attempt at standardisation if English railways decided on the Electrostar (for maximum parts sharing with the Turbostar).

Privatisation causes yet more problems.

In my opinion rebuilt Class 321s would be just as good for passengers' internal experience, while not causing all the issues mentioned above.
And ScotRail already has a fleet of EMUs similar to them (320s)
 

BestWestern

Established Member
Joined
6 Feb 2011
Messages
6,736
The 150's FGW refurbished are pretty smart apparently, I think anything with a good refirb can easily be confused for new stock. Just look at EMT's 158's

The 150/2 fleet were pretty smart when first completed, though they are looking worn again now, the 150/1's were done on the cheap and this is quite apparent. Neither could ever be mistaken for new trains, they're too noisy, too rattly and lack any of the basics you would expect to find on something newish, like powered internal doors or disabled access toilets etc.

I would suggest though that a well kept 158 could pass for fairly new, and indeed many would argue they are actually a better train to some units which are actually new!
 

fgwrich

Established Member
Joined
15 Apr 2009
Messages
6,640
Location
Between Edinburgh and Exeter
The 150/2 fleet were pretty smart when first completed, though they are looking worn again now, the 150/1's were done on the cheap and this is quite apparent. Neither could ever be mistaken for new trains, they're too noisy, too rattly and lack any of the basics you would expect to find on something newish, like powered internal doors or disabled access toilets etc.

I would suggest though that a well kept 158 could pass for fairly new, and indeed many would argue they are actually a better train to some units which are actually new!

As a fairly regular used of FGWs 150s - I'll agree with that! It is a shame that FGW has decided to keep the 150/1s in their original internal form, as in this day and age those original seats are to be honest, passed there best, and certainly not suited for some of the services they rack up. Fair enough, they’re probably suitable for the Bristol area commuter services, but hardly so for Gloucester to Weymouth / Bristol to Penzance. As although they were done with a year left on the franchise, some of them seem to feel that way - ive come across 150/1s with FGW seat covers, FGW painted interior and CT Green Flooring, 150/1s FGW seat covers, FGW painted interior and CT Green Flooring, CT Green Grab Handles & Door Buttons (Although that one may have changed now), Some were the ceiling panels haven't been removed at all - Just cleaned, but in doing so you can still see the old Advert / NWM Route maps, and 150126 still has in big bold letters on the disabled ramp - PROPERTY OF LONDON MIDLAND.

As for the 150/2s - I'll agree with the comments about those too. Just after they were refurbished, they did look very smart indeed - and quite possibly the best of all the class 150 refurbishments. Sadly though, after a few years they, and an ever growing number of DMUs / Mk3s are starting to show signs of wear and tear and sadly very little seems to be done about it, Which i think is a shame for what has to be one of the best TOCs on the network, to let standards slip in such a way.

Yes, that is very much the case. As you say, large expanses of curved glass are far more expensive to manufacture and to replace, and are also more susceptible to damage as well. This is why the original wrap-round cab windows on EMU classes such as the 303s, 309s and 310s were replaced not that long into their lives which much more plain, cheaper, flat panes of glass with the curved sections blanked off, and IIRC were omitted from some first-gen DMU designs at the design stage.

Which is also why CAF then changed the design for later orders without the glass front, for the NIR C3Ks, and rather attractive C4Ks. Which as you can see, is the same body as the 332/3, just modified for NIR Use with wider footsteps.

(Picture from Wikipedia)
 

Attachments

  • Helen's_Bay_station_(6)_-_geograph_org_uk_-_1503708.jpg
    Helen's_Bay_station_(6)_-_geograph_org_uk_-_1503708.jpg
    71.8 KB · Views: 26

WatcherZero

Established Member
Joined
25 Feb 2010
Messages
9,525
Ive never really got why every bus nowadays seems to have curved full length glass frontages, particularly double deckers. They must cost several grand each, maybe as much as 5 digits.
 

aformeruser

Veteran Member
Joined
23 Jan 2009
Messages
30,636
The 150's FGW refurbished are pretty smart apparently, I think anything with a good refirb can easily be confused for new stock. Just look at EMT's 158's

It doesn't normally fool a regular passenger in to believing it's new stock unless the refurbished stock appears in a new area. Also with EMT they were quite public over the refurbishment schedule in response to criticism of overcrowding.
--- old post above --- --- new post below ---
Another factor that I've heard (but not seen anything official to independently confirm) that caused such a change was that the curved glass fronts whilst looking really good are quite expensive to build and therefore also to replace in the event of damage.

Would probably help increase insurance costs as well even if the units are never involved in crashes.
 

jopsuk

Veteran Member
Joined
13 May 2008
Messages
12,571
If it was me, the Scotrail EMU order would be mainly 380/0 (unless there's going to be significant work, 3/6 car operation is going to be the rule), for both the diesel replacement and to replace/cascade the the 315, 318, 320 and possibly even the 334 fleets (the latter especially should be able to find a good home, the 318s and 320s would be handy in East Anglia if lots of wires went up on the rural routes, especially if modded to work at the same performance as 317s and 321s) with a subfleet of 6/7/8 car (whatever is going to fit) 380/2, fixed formation E-G express units with 1st class, catering trolley facilities and no inter-unit gangway- but otherwise (shell/traction/standard class eats/etc) identical to the shorter units. If the wires snake their way up to Aberdeen and even Inverness, I'd suggest expanding the micro fleet to cover those routes. Shhould then be no excuse for standard-class only units being used on the premier express services.
 
Status
Not open for further replies.

Top