Rolling stock cascade to eliminate all ex-BR third rail stock

[JonathanH]

From https://www.railforums.co.uk/thread...-rail-services-next-year.211176/#post-4860565

Other than the ones converted to 769s, it should be possible, I reckon, to get rid of all the ex-BR stock in the South East, and possibly the Junipers too.

Unless you are thinking of ordering at least some new rolling stock that's not already been ordered, I doubt the Networker side of withdrawing all SE ex-BR stock can be fulfilled; there are 190 units (147x 465 and 43x 466) with 674 carriages, plus 180 carriages with the 36 376s making up the metro fleet.

I reckon that eliminating Networkers is feasible on the assumption of a 20% reduction in the overall train fleet - one possible way to do it would be redeploying the 350/2 fleet and displacing 701s.

Let's work on the assumption that a 20% reduction in the train fleet is possible and that 442s don't count because they are already out of use.

Ignoring the diesel fleets, SWR has 127 450s (508 vehicles), 45 444s (225 vehicles), 91 455s (364 vehicles), 24 456s (48 vehicles), 36 458s (180 vehicles) and 30 707s (150 vehicles) - total = 1,475 vehicles
Southern has 19 313s (57 vehicles), 46 455s (184 vehicles), 29 377/3s (87 vehicles), 151 4-car 377s (604 vehicles), 32 5-car 377s (160 vehicles) and 27 387/2s (108 vehicles) - total = 1,200 vehicles
Southeastern has 147 465s (588 vehicles), 43 466s (86 vehicles), 36 376s (180 vehicles), 10 3-car 375s (30 vehicles), 102 4-car 375s (408 vehicles), 25 377s (100 vehicles) and 29 395s (174 vehicles) - total = 1,566 vehicles

There are also 1,140 Thameslink class 700 vehicles in use. SWR has 750 701 vehicles replacing 742 existing vehicles so broadly a one-for-one replacement.

A 20% reduction means we are aiming for 1,180 vehicles at SWR, 960 at Southern and 1,253 at Southeastern.

SWR = Add 37 350/2 units (148 vehicles) - the combined 444, 450 and 350 fleet would be 881 vehicles - the balance would be 299 701 vehicles - ie 30 10-car 701s.
Southern = The combined 313 and 455 fleet is 241 vehicles - leaving 959 Electrostar vehicles.
Southeastern = The 707s are already committed. Then 30 10-car and 30 5-car 701 units displaced from SWR would be available. This is a combined fleet of 600 vehicles which is more than enough to displace the Networkers given the 20% reduction. Indeed, perhaps too many. Indeed, 600+180+30+408+100+174 = 1,492

On top of this, there would be slack in the Class 700 fleet from a similar reduction. Perhaps the 350/2s aren't even needed in these calculations or perhaps the cut doesn't need to be as drastic as 20%

It seems @Bletchleyite's aim of displacing all the ex-BR vehicles probably doesn't need that drastic a cut in formations.

I suppose the next question is how a 20% cut in rolling stock is actually implemented - whether entire service groups are culled or just shorter formations. The fixed formation nature of some of the fleets might make it a little difficult.

 

[Bletchleyite]

FWIW I'd forgotten about the Networkers (DMU and EMU) - I was more thinking the Mk3 based stock plus the odd PEPs still knocking around. Thanks for going into detail though - sounds like at least as far as EMUs go it is feasible.

 

[brad465]

Okay maybe it's not as difficult as I first thought, that is some good calculating I confess. The only other challenge though I see from a Southeastern perspective is the future of operations after the latest franchise extension needs to be resolved if long term commitments are to be made more easily.

 

[Philip Phlopp]

The 350/2 fleet isn't DC compatible without a fair chunk of cash being spent on them.

 

[JonathanH]

The 350/2 fleet isn't DC compatible without a fair chunk of cash being spent on them.

Yes, I think in practice, my calculations would work better if 350/2s were to be used somehow to release 700s to Southeastern along with the general reduction in Thameslink services themselves. The last thing the railway should be spending money on is converting rolling stock to operate on routes that other units can already be used on.

 

[D365]

Where’s the idea for a 20% fleet reduction coming from?

 

[Bletchleyite]

Where’s the idea for a 20% fleet reduction coming from?

The likely 20% reduction in services in December.

 

[A0]

The likely 20% reduction in services in December.

In which case that logic is flawed - there's utilisation to be considered so a reduction in 20% of services may still require the same number of units, it may simply just reduce the utilisation but not by enough to free up any units.

 

[43096]

In which case that logic is flawed - there's utilisation to be considered so a reduction in 20% of services may still require the same number of units, it may simply just reduce the utilisation but not by enough to free up any units.

Given that service cuts will likely affect peak extras (over the base daytime/Saturday service), the sets for which are usually stabled between the peaks, it’s a valid assumption to assume a fleet cut in proportion.

 

[Bald Rick]

The likely 20% reduction in services in December.

Which isn’t happening.

 

[brad465]

My understanding is one of the problems with the Networker's fleet reliability is down to being overworked over the years, at the very least they don't have much wiggle room in the fleet for many to be out of service for maintenance/refurbishment. Even if cascading stock is possible as a consequence of an overall service reduction, improving flexibility/resilience needs to be factored in.

 

[D365]

My understanding is one of the problems with the Networker's fleet reliability is down to being overworked over the years, at the very least they don't have much wiggle room in the fleet for many to be out of service for maintenance/refurbishment. Even if cascading stock is possible as a consequence of an overall service reduction, improving flexibility/resilience needs to be factored in.

Isn't that where the Class 707s come in?