SWT further 10 car strengthening

[swt_passenger]

Right then, fast forwarding to some time in summer 2014, and the 458/5s are all now in service on the Windsor side, Hounslow loop, Weybridge etc etc.

Let's suppose the plan to extend the platforms west of Virginia Water comes about, as shown in the CP5 enhancement proposals. So can the 450s, which are generally assumed to be running on this route by then, still be lengthened by adding 5th carriages - as originally proposed before the 458/460 merger was thought of?

Will Herr Siemens still be able to build 450 trailer cars, even though the whole unit is no longer being produced, or will there have to be another 'messy' solution involving rebuilding units into 3s and 5s, with a few extras of a new class being ordered to fill in the gaps?

 

[Aictos]

They have the jigs don't they?

So why not place a order for 178 trailers consisting of:

127 trailers to extend the South West Trains Class 450s to 5 cars.
30 trailers to extend the London Midland Class 350/1s to 5 cars.
21 trailers to extend the National Express East Anglia Class 360s to 5 cars.

Then with regards to the potential Class 350 order for the TransPennine Express franchise, why not just place the order for 5 car EMUs together with 8 more 5 car Class 350/1s for London Midland?

 

[Ivo]

They have the jigs don't they?

So why not place a order for 178 trailers consisting of:

127 trailers to extend the South West Trains Class 450s to 5 cars.
30 trailers to extend the London Midland Class 350/1s to 5 cars.
21 trailers to extend the National Express East Anglia Class 360s to 5 cars.

Then with regards to the potential Class 350 order for the TransPennine Express franchise, why not just place the order for 5 car EMUs together with 8 more Class 350/1s for London Midland?

But what about the 12-car services LM and LE operate using these trains? Your idea would result in a reduction on those services...

 

[swt_passenger]

But what about the 12-car services LM and LE operate using these trains? Your idea would result in a reduction on those services...

Exactly the same already applies to SWT as well - they run loads of twelve car trains too. In their case though they could justify subfleets, they'd only need around 25-30 for the Reading line as a stand alone fleet.

 

[Helvellyn]

I thought the plan would see Reading services go 12-car in CP5, to avoid the need for a subfleet again?

 

[swt_passenger]

I thought the plan would see Reading services go 12-car in CP5, to avoid the need for a subfleet again?

That was mentioned in the route plans a few years ago, but the CP5 proposals are still only for 10 car services, and of course the stations Waterloo to Virginia Water are also nearly all limited to 10 car - unless they get extended again.

 

[Goldfish62]

That was mentioned in the route plans a few years ago, but the CP5 proposals are still only for 10 car services, and of course the stations Waterloo to Virginia Water are also nearly all limited to 10 car - unless they get extended again.

CP5 states 12 car platforms Virginia Water to Reading, hence additional 4-car units compatible with 450/0s must surely be the order of the day.

As regards platform extensions as far as Virginia Water this would only be those stations where the Reading services predominantly stop, wouldn't it? In other words, Clapham, Richmond, Twickenham, Staines, Egham. Assuming Feltham still has the level crossing issue it would remain ASDO.

 

[DjU]

CP5 states 12 car platforms Virginia Water to Reading, hence additional 4-car units compatible with 450/0s must surely be the order of the day.

Whilst extra units compatible with the 450s to directly extended to 12 car would be a slightly more straight forward way, you could theoretically get to a similar results by freeing up existing 450 units with other units.

As discussed in the Thameslink thread, by the end of Decade there is likely to be a reasonable number of '3rd rail' units freed up from the introduction of the Desiro City units and the resultant internal cascade in the current Southern fleet, many of these will likely be 'surplus'.

You could likely use the cascade to remove the 442s from Southern, send them back to SWT and use them on the longer distant routes in turn freeing up 450s for Reading 12 car, as well as enlarging the Electric fleet to replace the Diesel units used in pure DC areas such as the Lymington Pier and the 'Hampshire Locals'. You also go some way to please the people who whinge about getting a 450 insted of a 444, now they can get a clapped out 442.

The downside of this idea is that the 442 would likely need a complete rebuild below solebar as their traction equipment would be very old (but the bodies would have at least 10 to 15 years life in them, by which the 455 would need replacing too, if they hadn't already - not that their traction Equipment is any younger ).

Of course all that makes ordering some more 450 compatible units look easier an you wouldn't have to wait as potentially long..

 

[HSTEd]

I thought the whole raison d'etre for using Mark 1 traction equipment in the Cl442 was that it lasted effectively forever?

 

[swt_passenger]

CP5 states 12 car platforms Virginia Water to Reading, hence additional 4-car units compatible with 450/0s must surely be the order of the day.

What info are you referring to then? Because it definitely states 10 car on page 65/66 of the "definition of proposed enhancements" document linked to here:

http://www.networkrail.co.uk/IIP.aspx

The London and SE RUS also consistently refers to 10 car on Waterloo to Reading services.

With respect, I did do some research before posing the original question...

--- old post above --- --- new post below ---

Whilst extra units compatible with the 450s to directly extended to 12 car would be a slightly more straight forward way...

That's all fine in theory, but the published info is only for a ten car service.

 

[Goldfish62]

What info are you referring to then? Because it definitely states 10 car on page 65/66 of the "definition of proposed enhancements" document linked to here:

http://www.networkrail.co.uk/IIP.aspx

The London and SE RUS also consistently refers to 10 car on Waterloo to Reading services.

With respect, I did do some research before posing the original question...

--- old post above --- --- new post below ---



That's all fine in theory, but the published info is only for a ten car service.

Apologies, having looked again at the CP4 december update I do appear to be talking nonsense.

However, in their response to the latest RUS, TfL have stated that they consider the Reading should be 12-car rather than 10, because they believe that future growth will justify it. So it may yet happen.

 

[swt_passenger]

Apologies, having looked again at the CP4 december update I do appear to be talking nonsense.

However, in their response to the latest RUS, TfL have stated that they consider the Reading should be 12-car rather than 10, because they believe that future growth will justify it. So it may yet happen.

I don't really disagree with TfL on that point, apart from anything because you'd expect economies if you mobilised these contractors for platform extensions once rather than getting them to come back later. On the other hand it costs big bucks to do this work, IIRC over £30 million to do the main line suburban platforms, eg the branches from Raynes Park, Hampton Court etc.

 

[150222]

South West Trains have to operate 12-car 450's on the Portsmouth line and would not fit 15-car so that is out. Also I don't think Southern will be too chuffed to give back the refurbished 442's and have to put 377's on the Gatwick Express.

 

[swt_passenger]

South West Trains have to operate 12-car 450's on the Portsmouth line and would not fit 15-car so that is out.

But no-one is seriously suggesting converting the whole 450 fleet to 5 car
(except ajax103 who seems to have forgotten about the existing 12 car services in three separate TOCs).

 

[lewisf]

Oh course another solution would be to build new trailers with the newer body style, something like a 455/7 but with the ages in reverse!

 

[Minstral25]

South West Trains have to operate 12-car 450's on the Portsmouth line and would not fit 15-car so that is out. Also I don't think Southern will be too chuffed to give back the refurbished 442's and have to put 377's on the Gatwick Express.

I don't think they will mind and in any case it will be the next franchise.

Problem is you need 3x377 to replace 2x442 in seat numbers and there probably isn't enough being released.

We know 23x 377/5 plus the 3x377/2 will become available for the Southern operations within the new franchise - that's 26 units or 6 12 coach trains (plus spares) to replace 21 or 10 10 coach 442's. That's four sets short.

Horsham local trains are being taken over by new Thameslink stock which will release say 6x 377's, that's 2 more trains. Still 2 short

That only leaves the Caterham locals which are mostly 455's so won't release any 377's.

Plus Southern will be wanting to strengthen quite a few trains (Milton Keynes for example) so based on this analysis I can't see the 442's going to SWT.

Probable only casualties will be the 313's on the coast replaced with 455's with toilets to cut fleet types.

 

[RobShipway]

I don't think they will mind and in any case it will be the next franchise.

Problem is you need 3x377 to replace 2x442 in seat numbers and there probably isn't enough being released.

We know 23x 377/5 plus the 3x377/2 will become available for the Southern operations within the new franchise - that's 26 units or 6 12 coach trains (plus spares) to replace 21 or 10 10 coach 442's. That's four sets short.

Horsham local trains are being taken over by new Thameslink stock which will release say 6x 377's, that's 2 more trains. Still 2 short

That only leaves the Caterham locals which are mostly 455's so won't release any 377's.

Plus Southern will be wanting to strengthen quite a few trains (Milton Keynes for example) so based on this analysis I can't see the 442's going to SWT.

Probable only casualties will be the 313's on the coast replaced with 455's with toilets to cut fleet types.

I think you will find that when the class 377's become available and when the new class 377 trains that have been requested are built that they will replace the 313's on the coast route. I am assuming that the 3 car 377's will return to the place they were designed for i.e the Route from Seaford to Brighton.

 

[150222]

Would it make a lot of differance if 10 car 442's were replaced by 8 car 377's? Although I have never been on the Gat-Ex I am led to believe that there is an overprovision of capacity. Also slightly off topic but is UDS operated at Portsmouth Harbour? As I am told that one car hangs of the end of the platform.

 

[The Colonel]

Although I have never been on the Gat-Ex I am led to believe that there is an overprovision of capacity.

On many GatEx services a 153 would be an overprovision of capacity

Not for nothing in the early days were they known as railshiners or the worlds most frequent ECS sevice.

 

[lookingforit35]

How about moving the 442s to the coast route to replace the 313s.

Only joking, but it'd cause some excitement.

 

[swt_passenger]

Would it make a lot of differance if 10 car 442's were replaced by 8 car 377's? Although I have never been on the Gat-Ex I am led to believe that there is an overprovision of capacity. Also slightly off topic but is UDS operated at Portsmouth Harbour? As I am told that one car hangs of the end of the platform.

The capacity of the 10 car 442s is really only there for the extended Brighton - Victoria expresses that replace the GatEx service in the peaks. So those are the services for which the 8.377 would have to provide adequate seat numbers - and that would depend on the variant of 377 actually used, because of their varying seating layouts.

A single 442 would probably be adequate for the Gatwick - Victoria offpeak service.

 

[Minstral25]

A single 442 is the majority of off peak services on Gatwick Express and they normally cart a lot of air - a 153 would probably be enough for the off peak services.

The 7 Brighton GatEx in the Am peak and 6 back pm would need 3x 377 and that is where the shortage is.

Any four car variant of 377 would suffer as a there are only about 30 extra seats in the high density units compared to the normal 377.

I think Southern wouldn't be upset to lose the 442's as they seem to have very long station dwell times and break down quite a lot, but unless there are even more units to arrive I can't see them being replaced

I also think from a practical standpoint the Gatwick Express should be replaced by a every 15 minutes non-premium "Gatwick Connect" service calling at East Croydon and Clapham Junction to relieve the pressure on the Victoria to East Croydon trains. But I doubt the Politico's will allow that.

 

[cslusarc]

I'd like to see the Gatwick Express trains become a 4 tph "Gatwick and Brighton Express" stopping at Clapham Junction, East Croydon, Gatwick and Haywards Heath before terminating at Brighton possibly with a portion disconnecting and remaining at Gatwick while the two semifast Thameslink trains become all station stoppers south of Gatwick(except at Balcombe, Wivelsfield, Preston Park which could be skipped on some services)

 

[Minstral25]

I've mentioned that before but it is a bit unfair on the Balcombe, Wivelsfield etc. passengers who want to go to Victoria and for Thameslink Core passengers who want a fast train from Brighton.

 

[Rational Plan]

Big spread in Modern Rail. New end units will replace the old Darth Vador cab ends.

A new cab will be built and new gangway connectors with a lighter and more robust coupler to allow for more frequent splitting and joining. These changes will allow passengers to move between units and will also be capable of joining a Desiro unit and so will allow for trains to be coupled to allow for detrainment in an emergency.

As these are for the inner suburbs the seating will change to 2 x 2 from 2 x 3, with 1 x 1 near the doors. Also partitions will be cut back for bigger vestibules. The seats will also be further apart so there will be elbow room.

 

[swt_passenger]

Big spread in Modern Rail. New end units will replace the old Darth Vador cab ends.

A new cab will be built and new gangway connectors with a lighter and more robust coupler to allow for more frequent splitting and joining. These changes will allow passengers to move between units and will also be capable of joining a Desiro unit and so will allow for trains to be coupled to allow for detrainment in an emergency.

As these are for the inner suburbs the seating will change to 2 x 2 from 2 x 3, with 1 x 1 near the doors. Also partitions will be cut back for bigger vestibules. The seats will also be further apart so there will be elbow room.

A thread about it already: http://www.railforums.co.uk/showthread.php?t=59133