• Our new ticketing site is now live! Using either this or the original site (both powered by TrainSplit) helps support the running of the forum with every ticket purchase! Find out more and ask any questions/give us feedback in this thread!

TransPennine class 397

driverd

Member
Joined
29 Mar 2021
Messages
607
Location
UK
Given they already have (some/most/full?) ETCS fitted as standard, I wonder what they're fitting?
 
Sponsor Post - registered members do not see these adverts; click here to register, or click here to log in
R

RailUK Forums

800001

Established Member
Joined
24 Oct 2015
Messages
4,503
According to Railcam, 397003 has gone to Wabtec for ETCS fitment.
It’s gone for overhaul.(that comes from a TPE source who knows what the unit is there for).

Surely the 397 being only 5 year old already have ETCS fitted? Like the 80X fleet does.
 

thealexweb

Member
Joined
5 Jan 2014
Messages
1,022
I was hoping they would order more middle cars to make the 397s 7 cars or something, or 6 at least
5 cars are surely gonna burst on the north WCML at some point...

You go down the 6/7 route then you rule out double sets as an option no? With the exception of Oxford Road every TPE Scotland call can take 10x23m
 

DanNCL

Established Member
Joined
17 Jul 2017
Messages
4,640
Location
County Durham
Surely the 397 being only 5 year old already have ETCS fitted? Like the 80X fleet does.
They have passive provision for ETCS but the equipment isn’t fitted.

You go down the 6/7 route then you rule out double sets as an option no? With the exception of Oxford Road every TPE Scotland call can take 10x23m
Manchester Airport can’t take 10 car formations either which completely rules out running double sets, regardless how many any of the other stations can take them.
 

td97

Established Member
Joined
26 Jul 2017
Messages
1,396
Wouldn’t the issue then become, how are these platformed at Manchester Airport if they are made longer?
How does the platforming of these currently work at Airport? Do they share with other services? Or use platform on their own?

As originally built the 397 had an option to be extended up to 8 coaches in length.

Manchester Airport platforms can hold 8 coaches but if a train longer than 4 vehicles is in the platform permissive working can't be used. Essentially a 397 (or 802) must use an empty platform and can't have another short unit put on top.

They have passive provision for ETCS but the equipment isn’t fitted.


Manchester Airport can’t take 10 car formations either which completely rules out running double sets, regardless how many any of the other stations can take them.
Manchester Airport platforms 1, 2 and 3 are to be extended to 300m (i.e. will be able to take up to twelve 24m carriages).
 

LNW-GW Joint

Veteran Member
Joined
22 Feb 2011
Messages
20,447
Location
Mold, Clwyd
Would there be an opportunity for them to revisit this while the production line is open for the 897s?
I'm sure anything is possible with CAF production now they have the LNER order.
But it depends what TPE want in their new procurement, and whether the 397 design is still appropriate for that.
 

sh24

Member
Joined
28 Sep 2023
Messages
310
Location
London
I'm sure anything is possible with CAF production now they have the LNER order.
But it depends what TPE want in their new procurement, and whether the 397 design is still appropriate for that.

If they could resolve the ride quality more 397's would be fine.
 

LNW-GW Joint

Veteran Member
Joined
22 Feb 2011
Messages
20,447
Location
Mold, Clwyd
It’s gone for overhaul.(that comes from a TPE source who knows what the unit is there for).
Surely the 397 being only 5 year old already have ETCS fitted? Like the 80X fleet does.
I expect 397s are "ETCS ready" rather than "ETCS fitted" like 80x.
There's no call for ETCS on the WCML yet, or even a target date for places like Warrington/Preston/Carlisle.
 

D365

Veteran Member
Joined
29 Jun 2012
Messages
11,696
There's no call for ETCS on the WCML yet, or even a target date for places like Warrington/Preston/Carlisle.
ETCS from Warrington northwards - is this not a work package that is to be mobilised under the auspices of ”Trilink”.
 

Donny Dave

Established Member
Joined
9 Jul 2005
Messages
5,323
Location
Doncaster
Quick question about this. Would the 397 be used for LNER crew training, as they are getting some units from CAF? I did speak to 1 photographer at Doncaster this afternoon (@eastwestdivide was this you?) who mentioned before I jumped on a TPE to Sheffield.
 

Ianigsy

Established Member
Joined
12 May 2015
Messages
1,204
397 parked beside a SE 466 visible from the platforms at Doncaster right now, Sat 28/9 afternoon.
I took a similar picture on Friday, on the grounds that in normal service those units wouldn’t be within 200 miles of each other!
 

p.d87

Member
Joined
18 May 2010
Messages
163
Generally speaking 397's and 802's don't share platforms at the airport anyway, you could fit a 7 car 802 or an 8 car 397 in the airport.

The only other place I'd anticipate an issue on the WCML would be Haymarket which only fits 7 carriages of a Pendo in.
Haymarket can accommodate 9 cars no problem.

Actually 10 cars but ASDO kicks in as ½ the 2nd last carriage hangs off.
 

chazi898

Member
Joined
18 Sep 2021
Messages
26
Location
Can't remember - brain numb
You go down the 6/7 route then you rule out double sets as an option no? With the exception of Oxford Road every TPE Scotland call can take 10x23m
That might sound good in theory, but as others have said Manchester Airport can't take 10 (unless you extend it; major job!), and I doubt Oxford Road can take more than 7 to be honest (that needs doing too...).
6 might be 'alright' in the short term, but bulk ordering to get them all to 7 cars would probably be better, because you'll have the same problem soon enough. And then maybe an extra 2 to make them 9 cars in the future (if we even make it to 2050 at this rate lol).
I personally prefer single longer units because as many operators have proved, they will always want to use the other unit somewhere else to provide a different service (providing its functional), so you end up with the single unit (cough 185s cough). Also guard doesn't have to hop between sets.
The other benefit is its surprising how much extra seating/standing room you could have if the unit was a full singular 10 compared to a 5+5 for example, remember the galley, cab and nose all take up space. It is noted (on wiki) that an 800/1 (9 car) has 611 seats, whereas an 800/2 (5 car) has only 302 seats, meaning a double 5 is only 604 seats!
 

thealexweb

Member
Joined
5 Jan 2014
Messages
1,022
That might sound good in theory, but as others have said Manchester Airport can't take 10 (unless you extend it; major job!), and I doubt Oxford Road can take more than 7 to be honest (that needs doing too...).
6 might be 'alright' in the short term, but bulk ordering to get them all to 7 cars would probably be better, because you'll have the same problem soon enough. And then maybe an extra 2 to make them 9 cars in the future (if we even make it to 2050 at this rate lol).
I personally prefer single longer units because as many operators have proved, they will always want to use the other unit somewhere else to provide a different service (providing its functional), so you end up with the single unit (cough 185s cough). Also guard doesn't have to hop between sets.
The other benefit is its surprising how much extra seating/standing room you could have if the unit was a full singular 10 compared to a 5+5 for example, remember the galley, cab and nose all take up space. It is noted (on wiki) that an 800/1 (9 car) has 611 seats, whereas an 800/2 (5 car) has only 302 seats, meaning a double 5 is only 604 seats!

See above post outlining Platforms 1-3 at Manchester Airport being extended to 300m. It’s Oxford Road that’s the permanent problem.
 

pokemonsuper9

Established Member
Joined
20 Dec 2022
Messages
2,178
Location
Greater Manchester
See above post outlining Platforms 1-3 at Manchester Airport being extended to 300m. It’s Oxford Road that’s the permanent problem.
For Oxford road could you not overshoot/undershoot and use ASDO given that there isn't any overtaking (that I'm aware of) using the other platforms at Oxford Road?

Probably wouldn't be perfect, I bet some people would fail to get to the "back 6 carriages" for Platform 4 (to avoid blocking access to P5), but it feels like the best solution without having to demolish and rebuild the whole area.
 

dk1

Veteran Member
Joined
2 Oct 2009
Messages
17,053
Location
East Anglia
No idea why it's taken me so long but today is the first time that I've travelled on a 397. I honestly cannot fault it. The queue for the 09:09 to Manchester Airport w/ent right across Glasgow Central concourse filling me with some trepidation but needn't have worried as several spare unreserved seats in coach D. Carlisle was reached a few minutes early giving plenty of time for the Settle & Carlisle Leeds connection.
 

Fudgie

Member
Joined
17 Aug 2023
Messages
19
Location
UK
I have used them a few times between Glasgow and Manchester recently and they have been packed out each time. If there is a possibility of adding extra cars then it looks to me like a no brainer.
 

Lg_

Member
Joined
29 Jun 2023
Messages
22
Location
Lancashire
No idea why it's taken me so long but today is the first time that I've travelled on a 397. I honestly cannot fault it. The queue for the 09:09 to Manchester Airport w/ent right across Glasgow Central concourse filling me with some trepidation but needn't have worried as several spare unreserved seats in coach D. Carlisle was reached a few minutes early giving plenty of time for the Settle & Carlisle Leeds connection.

The biggest issue with the 397's is reliability, I know TPE are trying to improve it but mostly at the moment they're running trains with faults instead of fixing them.

I have used them a few times between Glasgow and Manchester recently and they have been packed out each time. If there is a possibility of adding extra cars then it looks to me like a no brainer.
I think the issue is cost, unless they can add the extra carriages onto the LNER order or CAF come out on top of the current bidding for new trains.
 

Top