Third rail only EMUs numbered with '3'

[Eagle]

Speaking of locomotives, 70 seems to have been used twice (although the first round of 70s were withdrawn before they could be numbered individually). The same goes for 43.

 

[jopsuk]

of course, when BR originally numbered the HST powercars as "43xxx", that was as coaching-stock... something of a happy coincidence that they were Type 4s by power classification

 

[tbtc]

Speaking of locomotives, 70 seems to have been used twice (although the first round of 70s were withdrawn before they could be numbered individually). The same goes for 43.

And 26/27?

 

[Class377/5]

Back to the Electrostars and the reason they are in the 3xx range is because the first ones ordered were the 375/6's. Dual voltage units. Second batch was the 375/3 or the 377/3 as they are now numbered followed on from this numbering and lead to the current situation.

However it doesn't explain the leap from 357 to 375. Can only be because they wanted to separate the numbering system as the units are fairly different with DC and walk through cabs.

 

[swt_passenger]

The only other possibility is that SWT were adament they never wanted their units to be numbered 3xx.

The simplest explanation is usually the most likely.

It could well be that at the time it was being decided there was no realistic likelihood of any SWT (ie SW division) services being combined with any AC routes.

Whereas in the SC and SE divisions, Thameslink improvements, and various other through services via the WLL, or via HS1, or the ELL were all in full planning, so a future AC expansion was already on the horizon.

Nowadays of course, it is widely accepted that Basingstoke to Exeter could be electrified with AC - so if they were deciding on a class number today the decision might have been different.

 

[Eagle]

It could well be that at the time it was being decided there was no realistic likelihood of any SWT (ie SW division) services being combined with any AC routes.

Apart from Anglia's services from Basingstoke to the GEML (although these were run with Turbostars due to no dual-voltage stock being available).

 

[swt_passenger]

Apart from Anglia's services from Basingstoke to the GEML (although these were run with Turbostars due to no dual-voltage stock being available).

They weren't SW division services though - but academic anyway as the route wasn't fully electrified. EMUs couldn't get from South Acton to Brentford...

 

[Eagle]

EMUs couldn't get from South Acton to Brentford...

Yes of course (I was thinking they went via Richmond for some reason).

 

[John55]

465 and 466- and even 455- were arguably the "correct" numbers according the Southern Region system. The Wessex units seem to have though gone through as a "70-s design"- I suppose the Mark 3 coach was- as otherwise 4x2 was correct (as they had some sort of buffet).

The southern region system only worked though where you had centralised procurement, ensuring that effectively only one design per purpose was ever built in each time frame.

I don't know what you mean by the southern region system. Could you elaborate please?

 

[themiller]

Also, all TGV sets are given a unique number
consisting of 3 digits (325, 408, etc...). The TMST didn't fit that either as all sets are identified by a four digit number (3017, 3223, 3313, etc...).

If you look at the current European Handbook no 4, the Thalys PBKA, TGV POS And the TGV Reseau (TGV-R) all have 4 digit unit numbers! Also from personal observation.

 

[TGV]

If you look at the current European Handbook no 4, the Thalys PBKA, TGV POS And the TGV Reseau (TGV-R) all have 4 digit unit numbers! Also from personal observation.

Apologies: I meant at the time of the introduction of TMST they didn't fit the established TGV format.

 

[The 375 King]

I think that the '3' prefix on southern stock could be reexamined, things were easier to understand with letterd prefix such as BIL HAL SUB CIG VEP etc, all of these were both descriptive and easy to remember, new prefixes could be invented for each unit type could be invented by all of us on here that find 'dc land' interesting like me.

 

[RobShipway]

I think that the '3' prefix on southern stock could be reexamined, things were easier to understand with letterd prefix such as BIL HAL SUB CIG VEP etc, all of these were both descriptive and easy to remember, new prefixes could be invented for each unit type could be invented by all of us on here that find 'dc land' interesting like me.

I think re - examing the '3' prefix would make things even more complicated than they all ready are at the moment. However, when you consider that the class 450's and 444's are actually dual voltage so could be used with a pantograph to get power from a OHLE then I do see the point you are making in this thread.

But the 377's are correctly numbered in my point of view, as they do travel on the west coast mainline ven if it is only as far as Milton Keynes. Plus the original London Midland 350's where going to be extra 450's for SWT I believe until things got changed.

 

[tbtc]

I think re - examing the '3' prefix would make things even more complicated than they all ready are at the moment. However, when you consider that the class 450's and 444's are actually dual voltage so could be used with a pantograph to get power from a OHLE then I do see the point you are making in this thread.

But the 377's are correctly numbered in my point of view, as they do travel on the west coast mainline ven if it is only as far as Milton Keynes. Plus the original London Midland 350's where going to be extra 450's for SWT I believe until things got changed.

Should all the 350s and 450s have the same class number? There's nothing fundamentally different with them mechanically is there? (they could both work dual voltage services etc)

 

[westcoaster]

From what I have heard the new thameslink stock will be in the 7xx series, anyone any the wiser.

 

[RobShipway]

From what I have heard the new thameslink stock will be in the 7xx series, anyone any the wiser.

Since the order has not been finalised as yet, I don't believe any class number has been specified to the Siemens Desiro City trains that will be running Thameslink as yet. However, I suspect that it is going to be a 3xx number due to the fact of their dual voltage capability. I am suspecting that it is going to be Class 38x, possibly either 382 or 385.

 

[Eagle]

My money's on 340. :P

(Why? All AC/DV Desiros are 3x0, and 340 is the only one left. Also it ties in nicely with the Crossrail 345s.)

 

[IanXC]

From what I have heard the new thameslink stock will be in the 7xx series, anyone any the wiser.

Hasn't 700 been seen in writing somewhere? I wondered whether there was an intention for ATO stock to be classified in a separate sequence?

 

[RobShipway]

Hasn't 700 been seen in writing somewhere? I wondered whether there was an intention for ATO stock to be classified in a separate sequence?

The only mention of 700 that I can find, is that FCC have 700 drivers that will need to be trained up on the new trains. An other links that I found that mention Class 700 are hearsay on other Railway Forums.

 

[westcoaster]

Hasn't 700 been seen in writing somewhere? I wondered whether there was an intention for ATO stock to be classified in a separate sequence?

Ah forgot about ATO, can not for the life of me remember if it's 7xx or 7xxx series I read about.
--- old post above --- --- new post below ---

The only mention of 700 that I can find, is that FCC have 700 drivers that will need to be trained up on the new trains. An other links that I found that mention Class 700 are hearsay on other Railway Forums.

Look up the bogies they are sf700 or sf7000 so I'm sticking with 7xx series.

 

[swt_passenger]

An other links that I found that mention Class 700 are hearsay on other Railway Forums.

Sorry, but it definitely isn't just 'hearsay on other forums'.

The changes to the relevant Railway Group Standard were made last year, and unit number ranges specifically can be found on page 18:

Rail vehicle group - Class identifier range

Diesel mechanical / hydraulic multiple unit sets - 100 – 199

Diesel electric multiple unit sets - 200 – 299

Diesel multiple unit sets - 600 – 699

d.c. electric multiple unit sets - 400 – 599

a.c. and a.c. / d.c. electric multiple unit sets - 300 – 399

a.c. and a.c. / d.c. electric multiple unit sets - 700 – 799

High speed multiple unit / fixed formation sets - 800 – 899

Infrastructure maintenance / non-passenger multiple unit / fixed formation sets 900 – 999

http://www.rgsonline.co.uk/Railway_...ck/Railway Group Standards/GMRT2453 Iss 2.pdf

Doesn't mean Thameslink will necessarily be Class 700 exactly, but there is no reason why they won't be numbered in the Class 7xx series.

 

[Class377/5]

From what I have heard the new thameslink stock will be in the 7xx series, anyone any the wiser.

Since the order has not been finalised as yet, I don't believe any class number has been specified to the Siemens Desiro City trains that will be running Thameslink as yet. However, I suspect that it is going to be a 3xx number due to the fact of their dual voltage capability. I am suspecting that it is going to be Class 38x, possibly either 382 or 385.

The only mention of 700 that I can find, is that FCC have 700 drivers that will need to be trained up on the new trains. An other links that I found that mention Class 700 are hearsay on other Railway Forums.

Sorry, but it definitely isn't just 'hearsay on other forums'.

The changes to the relevant Railway Group Standard were made last year, and unit number ranges specifically can be found on page 18:

http://www.rgsonline.co.uk/Railway_...ck/Railway Group Standards/GMRT2453 Iss 2.pdf

Doesn't mean Thameslink will necessarily be Class 700 exactly, but there is no reason why they won't be numbered in the Class 7xx series.

So far no one has committed to the new numbering publicly but internally NR, Siemens and FCC are all using the 7xx numbering as I've stated before ("Class 700" was stated). (Infact it wasn't even me that initially reported this but someone inside NR, that has since been confirmed to me in the course of my work without me asking).

 

[Peter Mugridge]

Does this only apply to new stock or are we about to see a massive renumbering excercise?

 

[HSTEd]

... We haven't really run out of numbers have we?

 

[Class377/5]

Does this only apply to new stock or are we about to see a massive renumbering excercise?

Doubt it as it will cost a lot of money for it with no financial or operational benefit.

 

[Eagle]

... We haven't really run out of numbers have we?

No, but being as there seems to be a compulsion to keep new kinds of train at least five away from each other the 1xx and 3xx are getting a little tight.

 

[DXMachina]

Cl.70 got used twice, why shouldn't cl.103, 105, 110 etc?

Pretty sure there are no originals in revenue service and preserved ones out for a run would carry a special TOPS identity anyway...

 

[RobShipway]

Sorry, but it definitely isn't just 'hearsay on other forums'.

The changes to the relevant Railway Group Standard were made last year, and unit number ranges specifically can be found on page 18:



http://www.rgsonline.co.uk/Railway_...ck/Railway Group Standards/GMRT2453 Iss 2.pdf

Doesn't mean Thameslink will necessarily be Class 700 exactly, but there is no reason why they won't be numbered in the Class 7xx series.

To be honest it does not mean a thing. In the late 1970's/1980's you had the class 210 diesel/electric multiple train and diesel networker trains where to becomd class 230/231 I believe. In the end they became class 165/166 after someone within BR came to their senses.

 

[Eagle]

Cl.70 got used twice, why shouldn't cl.103, 105, 110 etc?

Because the original 70s etc weren't numbered in the 70xxx range (so no numbers have been duplicated); whereas the 103s etc were numbered 103xxx, so there'd be massive confusion in the system.

All the cases of duplicated numbers, one of them didn't number its units.

 

[MK Tom]

The more recent numberings aren't especially messy if you break it down. (Well, the 4xx range is, but that's because it's still trying to conform to the Southern Railway's long-obsolete system of classification.)

*deep breath*
1xx series

• The original series of DMUs were numbered sequentially, getting as far as 131.
• The Pacers were introduced, with the prototype jumping forward to the next round number, 140, and the actual units being 141–144.
• The next family, Sprinters, jumped forward again to 150. 151 and 152 were planned but never built.
• The next generation of Sprinter was felt different enough to warrant a jump forward to 155. 156 followed, and 157 was planned (for Scotland). When much later some 155s were broken up, they were simply given an available number, 153.
• The Express Sprinter continued with 158. When some were sent to the south, they were renumbered as 159.
• The next family to be introduced, the Networkers, decided to jump again to 165 (which also allowed their electric versions to take the free numbers 365 and 465). 166 followed.
• The Clubman had a minor jump forward to 168, and its successor, the Turbostar, another minor jump to 170–172.
• The next type of DMU to appear was the Coradia, which went to 175. Its successor, the Adelante, jumped again to 180.
• The most recent new design of DMU was the Desiro Pennine, which took 185.

2xx series

• The original series of DEMUs was numbered sequentially, up to 210.
• The Voyager came much later and was unrelated, so it jumped forward to the 220–222 range.

3xx series
Admittedly a lot more complex than the diesel series. In order of introduction:

• The sequential-style numbering got as high as 325.
• Networkers took 365, to match the 165s.
• The first EMUs since privatisation were the HEx units, which for no reason I can discern were numbered 332. Their successors in the North were numbered 333.
• Electrostars, again for no obvious reason, took 357. Why their next generations jumped to the 375–379 range is equally obscure.
• The Junipers went for 334, breaking the rule that different series of trains shouldn't use adjacent numbers.
• Pendolinos, presumably because they are high-speed units, went for a high number: 390.
• The WCML Desiros went for 350, because they were originally meant to be 450s. Subsequent Desiros went to 360, skipped 370 (which was the APT) and went to 380. Pretty silly way of numbering them if you ask me; why not 350, 351 and 352, Thameslink stock being 353?
• The Javelins took 395, because they're higher speed than the 390s.

5xx series
Only ever used the sequential system which got up to 510 (the 510s ended up in the Southern Region however, and were relabelled as 455s).

Sorry I'd just like to point a few things out here:

Class 154 was used for a converted 150 that never took off.
As someone else has already said, class 151s were built (a whole two of them).
Usually when a number is 'skipped' it's because something else was planned but either never got built or did but never took off. An example of that would be the class 316.
A number of 34x unit numbers were reserved in the 1990s for Networkers for services now run by Electrostars and Desiros, as well as Crossrail services.

I've always been confused by the 5xx series. It initially seemed to me like it was a 'freaky voltages' series, but that only really covers classes 504, 505 and 506. It then seemed like 'DC outside the South East' but that still doesn't explain class 501s.