It’s gone for overhaul.(that comes from a TPE source who knows what the unit is there for).According to Railcam, 397003 has gone to Wabtec for ETCS fitment.
Yeah I would agree with you. Not too sure why ETCS will need to be fitted. At present time there is no need for ETCS to be implemented on the Class 397 fleet.I would take that with a pinch of salt.
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...
They have passive provision for ETCS but the equipment isn’t fitted.Surely the 397 being only 5 year old already have ETCS fitted? Like the 80X fleet does.
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.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
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.
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).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.
I'm sure anything is possible with CAF production now they have the LNER order.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.
I expect 397s are "ETCS ready" rather than "ETCS fitted" like 80x.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.
ETCS from Warrington northwards - is this not a work package that is to be mobilised under the auspices of ”Trilink”.There's no call for ETCS on the WCML yet, or even a target date for places like Warrington/Preston/Carlisle.
Not me!@eastwestdivide was this you
No.Quick question about this. Would the 397 be used for LNER crew training, as they are getting some units from CAF?
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!397 parked beside a SE 466 visible from the platforms at Doncaster right now, Sat 28/9 afternoon.
Haymarket can accommodate 9 cars no problem.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.
Hope they redo the vinyl, it's a mess.At only 5 years old, what kind of overhaul are these having?
Quoting myself, no sign of it today as I passed through, even looking back at an angle into the sidings that you can't see from the platforms.397 parked beside a SE 466 visible from the platforms at Doncaster right now, Sat 28/9 afternoon.
...
30000 mile service!At only 5 years old, what kind of overhaul are these having?
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...).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!
St Helens Central cannot.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
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?See above post outlining Platforms 1-3 at Manchester Airport being extended to 300m. It’s Oxford Road that’s the permanent problem.
Not the biggest issue as the units have ASDO and pax can be told to move forward to exit. Other solutions would be to remove SNH from the stopping patterns or make it pickup only leaving Liverpool.St Helens Central cannot.
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.
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.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.