Where next for the Class 442s?

[Zomboid]

I think that fair comments have been made here about lack of a long-term future for these units. But while there may be plenty of units in the pipeline due to the Anglia franchise commitments, a lot of services are overcrowded now. In that context, it seems very irresponsible not to use them somewhere in push-pull mode to free up DMUs to lengthen trains elsewhere.

 

Of course I am biased as I would like to have the 442s on our local service rather than 159s.

159s are about as good as it gets this side of a HST...

There might be a market for using them in push pull if they were compatible with anything.

[stewartingram]

I had thought about conversion to AC, but why would anybody go to that expense when there will be 317s surplus soon? I know they are older but no conversion is required. Although Angel Trains seems prepared to spend money on them (e.g. AC traction motors).

 

Cheers

David

 

A 317 v 442 for passenger comfort? That is a no-brainer. I shan't be sorry to see the last of them on GN services.

 

Stewart

[Joseph_Pestell]

159s are about as good as it gets this side of a HST...

There might be a market for using them in push pull if they were compatible with anything.

The 159s are indeed pretty good in most respects and Salisbury looks after them very well. But one can't get away from the noise of the diesel engine under the floor.

[Oldddudders]

The 159s are indeed pretty good in most respects and Salisbury looks after them very well. But one can't get away from the noise of the diesel engine under the floor.

 

Good summary. As a 3rd rail person for the first 25 years of my career, and continuing to commute thus for the rest, I found my first trip on a then-new 158 unfulfilling for the same reason. That my elderly Mk1 EMU felt superior to a brand new DMMU was a bit disappointing. The 159s suit me because of their route - and of course I admit to travelling free first class, which always helps. 

[cheesysmith]

I think the only future for these will be as razor blades. Which is a pity in my opinion. These are one of the last proper inter city standard of units. As for retractioning these, the use of the class 313 transformers would not work. The 313 are rated at 880hp at the rail, or about half of the power of the 442s. That means you would have to fit 2 of them. But there will be plenty of p7 motor bogies that due to the ac motor repowering of the 317-321 fleets already have a ac motor design and the bits like inverters required. Also, the centre cars were originally fitted out as guards compartments so the structure has the fittings for double doors, which could be fitted as disabled access doors to get round the problems of the doors not being big enough.

 

But this idea is from the man who thinks the 153s should be rebuilt (including the WYPTE ones) as 3 car units. It would be cheaper to only have to provide 1 disabled toilet. And these units would be perfect for the ore scenic lines on the network.

[John M Upton]

As an aside, the 442's still in use have acquired yellow tape crosses on the guards door drop light windows, presumably in connection with recent events.

[frobisher]

313s are lightweight suburban trains and 442s are express/ intercity units. So even putting aside the madness of fitting the AC gear to a 442, chances are it won't be sufficiently rated to run the REP motors on the kinds of duty that the units would actually be any good at.

But the electrical gear from TWO 313s might be, just saying

[roythebus]

The failings of the 442s have been listed by my son as door problems, wiring problems, window seals need replacing (a problem I noticed on a 313 recently), and generally run down and knackered.

 

Window rubber has a life of about 25-30 years tops, and that has been reached. I see how many vintage buses come to me for repairs and the windows are hanging out because the rubber is life-expired.

[Foulounoux]

Take the gear out fit them to a reconditioned mk1 and let's call them 4-reps. Job done ;-)

 

 

Seriously Great fan of them ( and the 313's) having moved from Hertford to the New Forest was there for both introductions. And still seeing 313's at Havant is surreal expected them to have been long gone

 

Colin

[John M Upton]

The Southern 313's are currently being sent one at a time to Wolverton for a overhaul.  They are not slated for binning now until at least 2021 and it has not been ruled out that their numbers could increase with surplus GN ones being added.

[RJS1977]

Might there not be a case for electrifying Salisbury- Exeter and putting the 442s on that, to release 159s elsewhere?

[Dunsignalling]

Might there not be a case for electrifying Salisbury- Exeter and putting the 442s on that, to release 159s elsewhere?

That would actually have to be Worting Junction - Exeter but I understand that major installations of new third rail electrification are not going to happen anywhere.

 

Honiton's and Axminster's (relatively) new footbridges are built to NR group standards with 25kv AC in mind. The extra steps are good exercise.   

Edited September 6, 2016 by Dunsignalling

[phil-b259]

I think that fair comments have been made here about lack of a long-term future for these units. But while there may be plenty of units in the pipeline due to the Anglia franchise commitments, a lot of services are overcrowded now. In that context, it seems very irresponsible not to use them somewhere in push-pull mode to free up DMUs to lengthen trains elsewhere.

 

Of course I am biased as I would like to have the 442s on our local service rather than 159s.

And where are you going to get suitablely equipped locos from. Please remember that the ONLY diesel locos that can work in push pull mode without the 442s requiring extensive work to fit modern TDM / ARR based multiple working systems are the 33/1s and possibly those rebuilt 73s that still retain their high level jumpers

[Dunsignalling]

And where are you going to get suitablely equipped locos from. Please remember that the ONLY diesel locos that can work in push pull mode without the 442s requiring extensive work to fit modern TDM / ARR based multiple working systems are the 33/1s and possibly those rebuilt 73s that still retain their high level jumpers

Could they be used with TDM, by-passing their own cabs/controls and using a DVT to provide the p/p capability?  

 

I think I remember reading somewhere that TDM signals were passed via the lighting circuits (at least in some cases).

 

John

[Zomboid]

That would actually have to be Worting Junction - Exeter but I understand that major installations of new third rail electrification are not going to happen anywhere.

 

Honiton's and Axminster's (relatively) new footbridges are built to NR group standards with 25kv AC in mind. The extra steps are good exercise.

There's no real reason why extending 3rd rail is not possible, just look at the East London Line.

Though, if the Exeter line is ever electrified it is most likely to be using 25kV and dual voltage units.

If it was done using 3rd rail, 442s would still be no good as if the project started now it would still be a few years before anything was running, by which time the tinworm will have finished with the 442s.

[Dunsignalling]

There's no real reason why extending 3rd rail is not possible, just look at the East London Line.

Though, if the Exeter line is ever electrified it is most likely to be using 25kV and dual voltage units.

If it was done using 3rd rail, 442s would still be no good as if the project started now it would still be a few years before anything was running, by which time the tinworm will have finished with the 442s.

It would certainly be possible, but my understanding is that NR/DFT policy is that new third rail schemes will only be considered in relation to linking up existing lines already so equipped or making modest extensions thereto. Worting Jn to Exeter St Davids wouldn't fulfil either criterion. I think the route will get 25kv eventually, but that is probably half a century away.

 

In the meantime, it does seem an awful waste of power door-equipped Mk III stock fifteen years younger than most of the HST fleet to have the 442s standing idle and quite possibly being scrapped prematurely. 

 

John

[DavidB-AU]

It would certainly be possible, but my understanding is that NR/DFT policy is that new third rail schemes will only be considered in relation to linking up existing lines already so equipped or making modest extensions thereto. Worting Jn to Exeter St Davids wouldn't fulfil either criterion. I think the route will get 25kv eventually, but that is probably half a century away.

I think that would in turn depend on 25kV "Electric Spine" getting to Southampton as proposed a few years ago but delayed until after 2019.

 

Cheers

David

[phil-b259]

 

In the meantime, it does seem an awful waste of power door-equipped Mk III stock fifteen years younger than most of the HST fleet to have the 442s standing idle and quite possibly being scrapped prematurely. 

 

 

Look can we stop getting obsessed by build dates. It makes sod all difference whether the 442s are newer than the HST fleet or other loco hauled Mk3s - what matters is the condition of them. The 442s are electrically and mechanically shot (including those much lauded power doors) and desperately need SERIOUS MONEY spent on them to make them suitable for medium - long term operation. By contrast much of the HST fleet has already received such overalls in recent years - as have many of the loco hauled ones now on Anglia. The railway system does not run  on 'wouldn't it be nice' sentiments - especially when it comes to rolling stock leasing and thanks to the recent Anglia franchise plans no leasing company is going to spend a penny on the 442s when much more modern / suitable units will be flooding the market for 'used' stock within 5 years

[Dunsignalling]

Look can we stop getting obsessed by build dates. It makes sod all difference whether the 442s are newer than the HST fleet or other loco hauled Mk3s - what matters is the condition of them. The 442s are electrically and mechanically shot (including those much lauded power doors) and desperately need SERIOUS MONEY spent on them to make them suitable for medium - long term operation. By contrast much of the HST fleet has already received such overalls in recent years - as have many of the loco hauled ones now on Anglia. The railway system does not run  on 'wouldn't it be nice' sentiments - especially when it comes to rolling stock leasing and thanks to the recent Anglia franchise plans no leasing company is going to spend a penny on the 442s when much more modern / suitable units will be flooding the market for 'used' stock within 5 years

I must admit, it is about eight years since I last rode on a 442 and my thoughts were coloured by what they were like at that time, which was still pretty good.

 

They have obviously taken a bit of a hammering since.

 

John

Edited September 7, 2016 by Dunsignalling

[phil-b259]

The Southern 313's are currently being sent one at a time to Wolverton for a overhaul.  They are not slated for binning now until at least 2021 and it has not been ruled out that their numbers could increase with surplus GN ones being added.

 

I think much will depend on the situation regarding the next TSGN franchise - which could be quite different in route structure from the current one. One of the justified criticisms of the current franchise is just how large and complicated an entity it is to run with lots of different markets to serve meaning management cannot focus their energies properly. With brand new trains and brand new infrastructure through the core, one suggestion is to split the franchise up again into Southern / Gatwick Express and Thameslink. Alternatively, with TfL seeking more involvement in national rail operations, there have been suggestions that the Southern Metro routes could go to TfL - leaving the TSGN management to focus on outer suburban routes.

 

Also we need to remember the recent Anglia franchise announcement, because if what the Government say is true (that bidders proposing measures well above the baseline will 'score' well in the franchise competitions) then its not impossible to imagine that the winner of the next franchise could well commit to getting rid of the 313s on Coastway services - much as GTR are doing with the 313s into Moorgate.

Edited September 7, 2016 by phil-b259

[298]

It might be possible to save a cab from one, but since the distinctive class 460 "Darth Vader" fronts seemed to have become extinct, I wouldn't hold out much hope.

[Gwiwer]

 

 

One of the justified criticisms of the current franchise is just how large and complicated an entity it is to run with lots of different markets to serve meaning management cannot focus their energies properly.

 

I've said it before but Chris Green managed it which means it can be done and done well.  What it takes is the right leader.  What TSGN have is a bunch of wrong 'uns.  

 

In terms of what happens in future this enormous management contract has only recently come into play.  The dreadful 313s are already undergoing yet another life extension which is a kick in the teeth to coastal customers who thought they finally had fit-for-purpose trains when the 377s arrived only to see them taken away again.  Why does LOROL no longer run 313s?  Why is the GN division getting rid of them?  Because they are 40 years old and stuffed.

 

For my money there would be three franchises (not management contracts) each of which covered all operations approximating to the former BR SED/CD/SWD areas.  GN can be a standalone operation unless TfL wrests control of the inner routes in which case the remainder might need to be part of East Coast.  Thameslink would be an interesting scenario.  I would consider a split deal whereby it was managed by the SC franchise south of Farringdon (exclusive) and by the relevant main line franchisee (East Midlands, East Coast or Great Northern) from Farringdon (inclusive) to points north.  And there would be no premium fares on Gatwick Express either.  As part of the SC franchise its trains are just as much a part of the Brighton main line as any other and should be open to ticket-holders accordingly.

[Fenman]

... GN can be a standalone operation unless TfL wrests control of the inner routes in which case the remainder might need to be part of East Coast. ...

That's the problem with "crayonista" franchising - what possible relationship is there between the East Coast mainline operation, and the intensive express Cambridge shuttles/ Fenline branch services? With TfL taking suburbans, and Thameslink as a standalone operation, outer GN could more happily be part of Thameslink or join Anglia.

 

But whatever crayonista franchises we come up with, there will be awkward bits left over.

 

Paul

 

PS: I've just realised how wildly OT my post was, so... Much as I loved the 442s on glorious non-stop sprints between Waterloo and Southampton, it feels as if their time has passed. Which is a pity. But that's life. It's a bit like the GWML intercity services which justified the long-haul HSTs are now history as that route has morphed into a high-intensity outer suburban service.

Edited September 7, 2016 by Fenman

[The Stationmaster]

That's the problem with "crayonista" franchising - what possible relationship is there between the East Coast mainline operation, and the intensive express Cambridge shuttles/ Fenline branch services? With TfL taking suburbans, and Thameslink as a standalone operation, outer GN could more happily be part of Thameslink or join Anglia.

 

But whatever crayonista franchises we come up with, there will be awkward bits left over.

 

Paul

 

PS: I've just realised how wildly OT my post was, so... Much as I loved the 442s on glorious non-stop sprints between Waterloo and Southampton, it feels as if their time has passed. Which is a pity. But that's life. It's a bit like the GWML intercity services which justified the long-haul HSTs are now history as that route has morphed into a high-intensity outer suburban service.

 

The latter is not really the case as by far the larger part of the GWML HST network is long distance running - I certainly wouldn't fancy my upcoming trip from Reading to Truro (c.4 hours) on some tuppeny ha'penny commuter train and the same goes for my fairly recent trips to/from Swansea.  The real situation is that the GWML network does have some heavy commuter traffic but the vast majority of it is from Swindon and east thereof and it is basically during peak hours only - the rest of the day it is an InterCity network in the market for longer distance leisure and business traffic and over much of its length competing with the motorways.  

 

You don't attract passengers by giving them grotty accommodation in carp trains when they can have their own air-conditoned personal transport with all mod cons - you have to offer something which can at least equal and ideally better that offering this  they can't get in their car or on a road coach.  If you just build long distance commuter trains (whatever on of those is) you are effectively building stock that will offer no commercial advantage during the rest of the day - Crossrail and Class 700 all over again but running even longer distances.  DafT hasn't lost the plot - they're still looking for it and they'll never find it because they lack the commercial knowledge and vision which created trains such as the HST in the first place.

[Fenman]

The latter is not really the case as by far the larger part of the GWML HST network is long distance running - I certainly wouldn't fancy my upcoming trip from Reading to Truro (c.4 hours) on some tuppeny ha'penny commuter train and the same goes for my fairly recent trips to/from Swansea.  The real situation is that the GWML network does have some heavy commuter traffic but the vast majority of it is from Swindon and east thereof and it is basically during peak hours only - the rest of the day it is an InterCity network in the market for longer distance leisure and business traffic and over much of its length competing with the motorways.  

 

You don't attract passengers by giving them grotty accommodation in carp trains when they can have their own air-conditoned personal transport with all mod cons - you have to offer something which can at least equal and ideally better that offering this  they can't get in their car or on a road coach.  If you just build long distance commuter trains (whatever on of those is) you are effectively building stock that will offer no commercial advantage during the rest of the day - Crossrail and Class 700 all over again but running even longer distances.  DafT hasn't lost the plot - they're still looking for it and they'll never find it because they lack the commercial knowledge and vision which created trains such as the HST in the first place.

 

You're right, of course; sloppy writing on my part. I was trying to compare London-Southampton and London-Bristol - both routes now take longer than in BR days when significant numbers of InterCity services ran non-stop; both now are served by trains that stop along the way, in both cases to handle commuter traffic. Southampton Airport used to be reached in 59 minutes every hour (I'm sure that timing wasn't accidental) - now the fastest trains take about 15% longer.

 

I'm with you on crap new trains: as modern cars get more spacious and luxurious and economical, trains get slower, more cramped and more expensive. It's as if we want to encourage people to shift from railways to roads. I can understand the immediacy of overcrowding problems, but the usual solution* - take out more seats so standing is more comfortable less uncomfortably rammed - strikes me as a bizarrely counter-productive and short-term approach.

 

* This includes journeys like Cambridge-Gatwick Airport on Thameslink.

 

Paul