Transfer of TPE 350/4s to West Midlands Trains (LNR)

[TT-ONR-NRN]

Uses for the Class 350/2's could be:
In Scotland (either extra capacity or to replace Class 318, although their 4-car formations mean no multiple working), Northern as said in this post to replace Class 319 or even any of South Western Railway, Southern or South Eastern either to provided extra capacity or replace some such as Class 313 or 465? Yes the Class 350/2 are dual voltage capable as 350/1 have worked on the southern briefly in the past. All in all plenty of options and for trains which are less than 10 years old will not be hanging around spare for long.

350/1 are dual voltage yes, but actually the 350/2s are AC only at present. I personally think they would do well removing a carriage and using them to replace Argyle 318s but we’ll just have to see.

I assume the 350/4s will have 2x2
First class which is a bit of a bummer

 

[samuelmorris]

350/1 are dual voltage yes, but actually the 350/2s are AC only at present. I personally think they would do well removing a carriage and using them to replace Argyle 318s but we’ll just have to see.

I assume the 350/4s will have 2x2
First class which is a bit of a bummer

I'd forgotten about the 318s - I assumed the option of 10 extra 385s was something to do with their replacement, though admittedly that won't be enough by itself.

 

[59CosG95]

I'd forgotten about the 318s - I assumed the option of 10 extra 385s was something to do with their replacement, though admittedly that won't be enough by itself.

There's a lot of spare 321/4s coming up in a similar timeframe...

 

[samuelmorris]

There's a lot of spare 321/4s coming up in a similar timeframe...

Is there any point replacing 318s dating from 1986 with 321s dating from 1990?

 

[gingertom]

350/1 are dual voltage yes, but actually the 350/2s are AC only at present. I personally think they would do well removing a carriage and using them to replace Argyle 318s but we’ll just have to see.

I assume the 350/4s will have 2x2
First class which is a bit of a bummer

Is there any important equipment on the trailer car that would prevent its removal or could that be relocated easily (=cheaply)?
Would they be a good fit for the Inverclyde lines?

 

[RealTrains07]

There's a lot of spare 321/4s coming up in a similar timeframe...

Bin them. They need to go scrap pile unlike the 350/2s

 

[RealTrains07]

100% desiro fleet would have made more sense for LNR but their you go

How difficult would it be to fit shoes onto the 350/2s if they did go down south (SWR) cause having 12 car unit options is better than 10 car especially since they can be split up easily unlike the 442

 

[Bletchleyite]

Bin them. They need to go scrap pile unlike the 350/2s

Are these the ones GA have tarted up? They are really very nice and still have at least 10 years in them.

 

[59CosG95]

Are these the ones GA have tarted up? They are really very nice and still have at least 10 years in them.

Nope, I was thinking of the 321/4s (ex WCML/ECML) that haven't yet been sent to Kilmarnock for conversion into Class 320/4s. The Renatus 321s have plenty life left in them yet, and I have an inkling they won't be bound for ScotRail after GA...

 

[59CosG95]

100% desiro fleet would have made more sense for LNR but their you go

How difficult would it be to fit shoes onto the 350/2s if they did go down south (SWR) cause having 12 car unit options is better than 10 car especially since they can be split up easily unlike the 442

One problem with that is finding all the stabling space for 37 extra units - even if the 442s went at the end of the next SWR franchise, there'd still be an overall net gain of vehicles that you couldn't park anywhere.
Another problem is the power supply - the 750V feeders across the SWT network struggled to cope when the 450s and 444s first came on stream, and it's really groaning now...
There simply isn't enough electricity for 37 more units.

 

[43096]

I'd forgotten about the 318s - I assumed the option of 10 extra 385s was something to do with their replacement, though admittedly that won't be enough by itself.

If you replace the 318s you should be looking at the 320s as well as they are essentially one common fleet of 55 3-car sets. As a lot run in pairs, then a fixed 6-car train would make sense. The 30 707s would be a starting point with an extra motor car including toilets added to the set.

 

[VT 390]

Why are the 350/2's being replaced by Aventras when they are not that old and would it not make more sense to have all their fleet as similar as possible?

 

[Bletchleyite]

Why are the 350/2's being replaced by Aventras when they are not that old and would it not make more sense to have all their fleet as similar as possible?

Because the lease contract is too expensive.

 

[hwl]

Why are the 350/2's being replaced by Aventras when they are not that old and would it not make more sense to have all their fleet as similar as possible?

As new additional stock is being brought it makes sense make that fleet size larger to avoid micro fleet type issues that have plagued TOCs for years.
They are keeping all of the Angel units and getting rid of the Porterbrook ones.
The Aventra maintenance and running costs should be lower especially as they are 24m cars and far lighter than the Desiro 20m cars.

 

[Kite159]

350/1 are dual voltage yes, but actually the 350/2s are AC only at present. I personally think they would do well removing a carriage and using them to replace Argyle 318s but we’ll just have to see.

I assume the 350/4s will have 2x2
First class which is a bit of a bummer

Other than the doors not being the fastest to open/close compared to a 318.

 

[RealTrains07]

As new additional stock is being brought it makes sense make that fleet size larger to avoid micro fleet type issues that have plagued TOCs for years.
They are keeping all of the Angel units and getting rid of the Porterbrook ones.
The Aventra maintenance and running costs should be lower especially as they are 24m cars and far lighter than the Desiro 20m cars.

Still unlike 350/2 the build quality is poor. They look like plastic. 350/2 are longer combined cause lets be honest aint gonna get a 15 coach train into anywhere here

 

[samuelmorris]

If you replace the 318s you should be looking at the 320s as well as they are essentially one common fleet of 55 3-car sets. As a lot run in pairs, then a fixed 6-car train would make sense. The 30 707s would be a starting point with an extra motor car including toilets added to the set.

Would still require new motor vehicles to be manufactured - very possible on the Desiro City line but if you're going that far, most TOCs would end up preferring simply to order new whole units again.
Does the Desiro UK electrical system permit 6-car unit formations? You could potentially amalgamate 360/1s, 360/2s and 350/2s together into 28 6-car units if that was possible.

 

[hwl]

350/2 are longer combined cause lets be honest aint gonna get a 15 coach train into anywhere here

??? No they aren't.

10 coach 730 is the same length (to the nearest metre, 244m) as 12 coach 350.

No 15 coaches involved - may be an idea to do some quick mental arithmetic checks before commenting some incorrect "facts".

A 15 coach 730 would be almost the same length as the Cally Sleeper leaving Euston! (just 10m less than the all the coaches + 92 on the front)

 

[RealTrains07]

??? No they aren't.

10 coach 730 is the same length (to the nearest metre, 244m) as 12 coach 350.

No 15 coaches involved - may be an idea to do some quick mental arithmetic checks before commenting some incorrect "facts".

A 15 coach 730 would be almost the same length as the Cally Sleeper leaving Euston! (just 10m less than the all the coaches + 92 on the front)

Still never be loved like a 350. Its a waste replacing them same length or not total waste. Feel like the aventras will become the modern day plastic pig

At least we will get a year with all 350s under the same roof? Before the transfer begins

 

[James Kevill]

The 350/2s will soon be withdrawn in favour of the 350/4s.

Can anyone confirm when the 350/2s will begin to leave, when the 350/4s will be entering service and whether or not they’ll be refurbished first please? Also, will they retain 2x1 first class does anyone know.

I was thinking that if the 10 of the Class 350/4 Desiros would go to London Northwestern Railway, they will be refurbished and the seat layouts might change into 2+2 and possibly would renumber the 350/4s into 350/3s or they'll keep the number the way it is, and it'll be total of 20 Class 350/3 Desiros.

 

[causton]

Still never be loved like a 350.

Train companies are to transport passengers and make money. They couldn't care less about people's personal love for a train, as has been proven many times over!

 

[samuelmorris]

Train companies are to transport passengers and make money. They couldn't care less about people's personal love for a train, as has been proven many times over!

Indeed not, but it is a somewhat valid point - the most reliable fleet in the country is being replaced prematurely with one that I could almost guarantee will never be.

 

[RealTrains07]

I was thinking that if the 10 of the Class 350/4 Desiros would go to London Northwestern Railway, they will be refurbished and the seat layouts might change into 2+2 and possibly would renumber the 350/4s into 350/3s or they'll keep the number the way it is, and it'll be total of 20 Class 350/3 Desiros.

350/4 already have 2+2 seating layout. Would be interesting if re numbered since they originally started out as /3s

 

[43096]

350/4 already have 2+2 seating layout. Would be interesting if re numbered since they originally started out as /3s

They didn’t: the 350/4s were never numbered as /3s.

 

[F Great Eastern]

The Aventra maintenance and running costs should be lower especially as they are 24m cars and far lighter than the Desiro 20m cars.

Some would argue that replacing the most reliable fleet of trains in the country is not going to improve reliability and maintenance costs.

It's all about short term thinking to win bids sadly, that's what Abellio do, they know the theory of everything, but practice of nothing.

That's what happens when you let bid managers and finance people run the show fully based on their projections without adequate input from the operations people who know what is possible in reality.

 

[Bletchleyite]

Some would argue that replacing the most reliable fleet of trains in the country is not going to improve reliability and maintenance costs.

Neither is overcomplicating the timetable and diagrams to go from a very reliable (if a little sloppy in terms of punctuality) service to a very unreliable one. But they did that, too.

I'm definitely unimpressed compared with LM.

 

[hwl]

Some would argue that replacing the most reliable fleet of trains in the country is not going to improve reliability and maintenance costs.

It's all about short term thinking to win bids sadly, that's what Abellio do, they know the theory of everything, but practice of nothing.

That's what happens when you let bid managers and finance people run the show fully based on their projections without adequate input from the operations people who know what is possible in reality.

The Siemens maintenance contracts are very expensive and you end up paying for a level of maintenance that may not be worth it.

The reliability stats may not be quite want they seem as SWR showed especially when the penalties for failures can be big.

As an example CAF makes most of it money globally from maintenance contracts probably with a minimum of 40% of profits over 2 decades from 1 really badly negotiated contract alone.

Very few rolling stock manufacturers actually make money from the manufacture!

 

[hwl]

Neither is overcomplicating the timetable and diagrams to go from a very reliable (if a little sloppy in terms of punctuality) service to a very unreliable one. But they did that, too.

I'm definitely unimpressed compared with LM.

Blame DfT for that one as that was the only real difference between the bids and the went with the LNWR approach rather than LM

 

[samuelmorris]

The Siemens maintenance contracts are very expensive and you end up paying for a level of maintenance that may not be worth it.

The reliability stats may not be quite want they seem as SWR showed especially when the penalties for failures can be big.

As an example CAF makes most of it money globally from maintenance contracts probably with a minimum of 40% of profits over 2 decades from 1 really badly negotiated contract alone.

Very few rolling stock manufacturers actually make money from the manufacture!

Valid point. though in SWR's case every fleet had inflated stats, whereas with LM/LNWR I believe that the 350s still stood out well above all their other units.

 

[hwl]

Valid point. though in SWR's case every fleet had inflated stats, whereas with LM/LNWR I believe that the 350s still stood out well above all their other units.

The contract incentivises a very low failure rate hence that is what is delivered.
When maintenance is done in house by TOCs (much more common for Bombardier) the TOC can chose what is the most economically sensible optimisation of maintenance. Southern have much greater freedom over unit mileage than SWT/SWR due to the nature of the contracts.
The manufacturer maintenance contracts also have lower unit utilisation levels to allow more time for maintenance so you end up needing slightly more units than the in-house approach.

Manufacturer maintenance contract margins are very much in operators crosshairs across Europe at the moment as that is the most obvious "fat" that can easily be trimmed to lean the overall system costs.