|
|
Post by TA1 on Jan 15, 2016 13:07:29 GMT
I suppose if those 19 365 units do transfer Southeasterly, some 466 units may get separated from the fleet. Or maybe the 466s can be paired together to form more 12-car workings. If I'm not mistaken, there's still a few stations that are not long enough for 12-car trains, and can't be extended easily. On the Woolwich line, I think. Latest rumours flying around recently was that SE was interested in some 319's from GTR, But no more 319's can be released until the 700/0's (8 car variant) arrive and enter service. But one thing for definite is that SE will receive 377/1 in the next few years. I believe Woolwich Dockyard cannot take trains in a 10 car formation due to short platforms, which cannot be extended. |
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Jan 15, 2016 13:23:22 GMT
I suppose if those 19 365 units do transfer Southeasterly, some 466 units may get separated from the fleet. Or maybe the 466s can be paired together to form more 12-car workings. If I'm not mistaken, there's still a few stations that are not long enough for 12-car trains, and can't be extended easily. On the Woolwich line, I think. Latest rumours flying around recently was that SE was interested in some 319's from GTR, But no more 319's can be released until the 700/0's (8 car variant) arrive and enter service. But one thing for definite is that SE will receive 377/1 in the next few years. I believe Woolwich Dockyard cannot take trains in a 10 car formation due to short platforms, which cannot be extended. Class 319s would be interesting. I think the people of Bexley might complain about how old they are.  |
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Jan 15, 2016 17:33:57 GMT
I suppose if those 19 365 units do transfer Southeasterly, some 466 units may get separated from the fleet. Or maybe the 466s can be paired together to form more 12-car workings. If I'm not mistaken, there's still a few stations that are not long enough for 12-car trains, and can't be extended easily. On the Woolwich line, I think. Latest rumours flying around recently was that SE was interested in some 319's from GTR, But no more 319's can be released until the 700/0's (8 car variant) arrive and enter service. But one thing for definite is that SE will receive 377/1 in the next few years. I believe Woolwich Dockyard cannot take trains in a 10 car formation due to short platforms, which cannot be extended. Woolwich Dockyard can take 10-coach trains (there are regular workings with pairs of 376s on the route) but I think it can't easily be extended to 12 coaches. I can't think of any along the Bexleyheath branch that haven't been extended, and the Sidcup branch has some diagrammed 12 coach workings (e.g. 1832 ex-Gravesend). Of course SDO could quite easily be deployed as necessary if there was an intention to extend all trains to 12 coaches. I think Southeastern are due 377s to displace 465/9s back to Metro working. There was also some talk of 376s having extra carriages added to make them 6-coach units (therefore running in pairs to make 12). I'd imagine that some sort of SDO would need to be enabled for that to be viable. On the note of Class 319s they'd be rather unsuited to Metro work I expect. They're geared for 100mph running and slow acceleration, neither of which are helpful to that particular type of service. They could potentially be used as replacements for the 465/9s, but the interior quality on a lot of them is also poor and wouldn't really be suited to a long distance service either! |
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Jan 15, 2016 17:34:51 GMT
Latest rumours flying around recently was that SE was interested in some 319's from GTR, But no more 319's can be released until the 700/0's (8 car variant) arrive and enter service. But one thing for definite is that SE will receive 377/1 in the next few years. I believe Woolwich Dockyard cannot take trains in a 10 car formation due to short platforms, which cannot be extended. Class 319s would be interesting. I think the people of Bexley might complain about how old they are. The last 319s were built a year before production of the 465s started. Not sure how that constitutes them being old in comparison |
|
|
|
Post by LX09FBJ on Jan 15, 2016 17:52:19 GMT
Class 319s would be interesting. I think the people of Bexley might complain about how old they are. The last 319s were built a year before production of the 465s started. Not sure how that constitutes them being old in comparison The Networkers were, at the time the next generation of EMU, but the 319 were based on the MK3 carriage design and 'PEP' (the basis for the class 313 et al.) The Networkers also look more like their successor, the Electrostars. Aren't the 465s/466s due to be refurbished? They're knocking on door of a quarter-century service yet they remain largely in original spec and it shows! I wonder if with a heavy refurb and update whether they'd be suitable to replace the Southern 313s* on the Coastway services as they are more suited to longer distance services than the 313s. Plus SE wouldn't be able to run them anyway, they're the "wrong type of train" *These were featured on a BBC London report where SE services were disrupted to the "wrong type of sunshine". I may give commuters stick for over-complaining, but this excuse is frankly pathetic. |
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Jan 15, 2016 18:19:58 GMT
Class 319s would be interesting. I think the people of Bexley might complain about how old they are. The last 319s were built a year before production of the 465s started. Not sure how that constitutes them being old in comparison What networker93 said. The Networkers were way ahead of their time. The BREL units are so sleek and modern, even now. The class 319s on the other hand were just more of the same old. Not that I dislike the class 319. I like them a lot. I just think that if Southeastern acquired some 319s, some passengers might make comparisons, and form negative opinions. My uncle lives in Barnehurst, and he refers to the late EPBs as "those horrible old slam door trains". The comments on this YouTube video really say it all: www.youtube.com/watch?v=xCO4tm5U_x0 |
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Jan 15, 2016 19:00:12 GMT
The last 319s were built a year before production of the 465s started. Not sure how that constitutes them being old in comparison What networker93 said. The Networkers were way ahead of their time. The BREL units are so sleek and modern, even now. The class 319s on the other hand were just more of the same old. Not that I dislike the class 319. I like them a lot. I just think that if Southeastern acquired some 319s, some passengers might make comparisons, and form negative opinions. My uncle lives in Barnehurst, and he refers to the late EPBs as "those horrible old slam door trains". The comments on this YouTube video really say it all: www.youtube.com/watch?v=xCO4tm5U_x0More of the same? There speaks someone that doesn't know much about 319s. Apart from being relatively uncommon dual-voltage units, they're also built to an odd loading gauge, they were also the first production EMUs to have chopper control. They are stock purpose built for running the Thameslink route, and it's that sort of medium-distance work they are best suited to. I agree Networkers are solid units, though the way they have been looked after is not exactly optimal. I agree the BREL units are better than the Met Cam units which have some fairly bad elements in their construction (particularly retention tanks which make a constant sloshing noise, and doors which aren't as good as York ones). I am not a big fan of 319s but I don't think there anywhere near as "old hat" as they're being made out to be. |
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Jan 15, 2016 19:04:47 GMT
The last 319s were built a year before production of the 465s started. Not sure how that constitutes them being old in comparison The Networkers were, at the time the next generation of EMU, but the 319 were based on the MK3 carriage design and 'PEP' (the basis for the class 313 et al.) The Networkers also look more like their successor, the Electrostars. Aren't the 465s/466s due to be refurbished? They're knocking on door of a quarter-century service yet they remain largely in original spec and it shows! I wonder if with a heavy refurb and update whether they'd be suitable to replace the Southern 313s* on the Coastway services as they are more suited to longer distance services than the 313s. Plus SE wouldn't be able to run them anyway, they're the "wrong type of train" *These were featured on a BBC London report where SE services were disrupted to the "wrong type of sunshine". I may give commuters stick for over-complaining, but this excuse is frankly pathetic. All Networkers were refurbished under Southeastern hence why they are in Southeastern livery and mpquette and not Connex or Network Southeast. |
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Jan 15, 2016 19:35:53 GMT
What networker93 said. The Networkers were way ahead of their time. The BREL units are so sleek and modern, even now. The class 319s on the other hand were just more of the same old. Not that I dislike the class 319. I like them a lot. I just think that if Southeastern acquired some 319s, some passengers might make comparisons, and form negative opinions. My uncle lives in Barnehurst, and he refers to the late EPBs as "those horrible old slam door trains". The comments on this YouTube video really say it all: www.youtube.com/watch?v=xCO4tm5U_x0More of the same? There speaks someone that doesn't know much about 319s. Apart from being relatively uncommon dual-voltage units, they're also built to an odd loading gauge, they were also the first production EMUs to have chopper control. They are stock purpose built for running the Thameslink route, and it's that sort of medium-distance work they are best suited to. I agree Networkers are solid units, though the way they have been looked after is not exactly optimal. I agree the BREL units are better than the Met Cam units which have some fairly bad elements in their construction (particularly retention tanks which make a constant sloshing noise, and doors which aren't as good as York ones). I am not a big fan of 319s but I don't think there anywhere near as "old hat" as they're being made out to be. I meant that mostly from a passenger's perspective. Sincerely, I ask you: if a person does not know why something is significant from a technical standpoint, how are they supposed to appreciate it? I'll be the first to admit that I don't know everything about the class 319. I'm just not sure where I can find this deep technical information, and there's only so much I can figure out on the way to meet my cousin in Bromley, for example. Though I was aware that they were the first EMU units to have Pulse Width Modulated/chopper controlled traction motors. Even while trying to learn everything there is to know about the Networkers and their history, I still don't know exactly what's under those equipment covers. I didn't know that the sloshing sound on the Met Cam Networkers was because of the retention tanks. I just learned something. Thank you. |
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Jan 15, 2016 19:42:03 GMT
As far as the Networker refurbishment goes:
The BREL 465s were refurbished internally in 2006/2007 I believe, after roughly 15 years of general wear and tear and petty vandalism. Everything was repainted and cleaned, so even though the interior looks original, it isn't quite.
The same was done with the class 466 and 465s 235-250
465s 201-234 were refurbished with a new interior resembling that of the class 375. They were renumbered 465s 901-934. This refurbishment was oversaw by Southeastern Trains in 2005, I believe.
From 2009-present all the Southeastern Networkers were repainted (for the first time in the case of the BREL units) into the current livery.
The 365s stayed mostly original until a few years ago when their interiors started to receive a comprehensive refurbishment, including cleaning, repaint and general overhaul of everything, including new floors. They were fully repainted for the first time as well during this.
|
|
|
|
Post by snoggle on Jan 15, 2016 22:12:25 GMT
*These were featured on a BBC London report where SE services were disrupted to the "wrong type of sunshine". I may give commuters stick for over-complaining, but this excuse is frankly pathetic. Well I am afraid you don't understand the issue and it is NOT pathetic. I had to deal with this for months every year when I worked at LU. The simple explanation is that the sun's position can completely "white out" camera lens, mirrors and monitors. This means the driver is unable to see the full platform / train interface and cannot safely close the doors. You can also get situations where the sun creates very dark shadows on platforms and people wearing dark clothing can disappear from view. I've actually seen this happen. Sometimes it does not matter what you do in terms of changing camera lens, providing hoods over mirrors etc there is still a time when the sun simply gets in the way. The sun's position at any time in daylight is changing quite rapidly at the moment as days get longer. We get the reverse during Autumn but the poor weather and cloud for weeks meant sunlight issues were lower this year. Would you prefer that people were stuck in the doors and dragged to their deaths? I get very annoyed when people go "ha ha morons morons wrong type of whatever" to create cheap headlines when the reality is about keeping the public safe. |
|
|
|
Post by vjaska on Jan 15, 2016 22:15:01 GMT
*These were featured on a BBC London report where SE services were disrupted to the "wrong type of sunshine". I may give commuters stick for over-complaining, but this excuse is frankly pathetic. Well I am afraid you don't understand the issue and it is NOT pathetic. I had to deal with this for months every year when I worked at LU. The simple explanation is that the sun's position can completely "white out" camera lens, mirrors and monitors. This means the driver is unable to see the full platform / train interface and cannot safely close the doors. You can also get situations where the sun creates very dark shadows on platforms and people wearing dark clothing can disappear from view. I've actually seen this happen. Sometimes it does not matter what you do in terms of changing camera lens, providing hoods over mirrors etc there is still a time when the sun simply gets in the way. The sun's position at any time in daylight is changing quite rapidly at the moment as days get longer. We get the reverse during Autumn but the poor weather and cloud for weeks meant sunlight issues were lower this year. Would you prefer that people were stuck in the doors and dragged to their deaths? I get very annoyed when people go "ha ha morons morons wrong type of whatever" to create cheap headlines when the reality is about keeping the public safe. Wow, I actually never knew this - you learn something everyday. |
|
|
|
Post by snoggle on Jan 15, 2016 22:50:05 GMT
Well I am afraid you don't understand the issue and it is NOT pathetic. I had to deal with this for months every year when I worked at LU. The simple explanation is that the sun's position can completely "white out" camera lens, mirrors and monitors. This means the driver is unable to see the full platform / train interface and cannot safely close the doors. You can also get situations where the sun creates very dark shadows on platforms and people wearing dark clothing can disappear from view. I've actually seen this happen. Sometimes it does not matter what you do in terms of changing camera lens, providing hoods over mirrors etc there is still a time when the sun simply gets in the way. The sun's position at any time in daylight is changing quite rapidly at the moment as days get longer. We get the reverse during Autumn but the poor weather and cloud for weeks meant sunlight issues were lower this year. Would you prefer that people were stuck in the doors and dragged to their deaths? I get very annoyed when people go "ha ha morons morons wrong type of whatever" to create cheap headlines when the reality is about keeping the public safe. Wow, I actually never knew this - you learn something everyday. Yes - the Piccadilly Line was my bete noir. As it runs east - west for a long section it was particularly prone to problems. The only short term solution was staff on the platform to give the all clear. In the end a load of money had to be spent to *improve* matters but you can never solve it entirely if you have mirrors, monitors and cameras. Train mounted CCTV cameras on each car, like some TOC trains have, may help matters as images are relayed directly into the train cab but I'm not sure LU has any trains with that capabilty. Some stocks have in cab monitors but the image usually comes from platform cameras. Must check what happens with S Stock. |
|
|
|
Post by Hassaan on Jan 16, 2016 0:09:16 GMT
I suppose if those 19 365 units do transfer Southeasterly, some 466 units may get separated from the fleet. Or maybe the 466s can be paired together to form more 12-car workings. If I'm not mistaken, there's still a few stations that are not long enough for 12-car trains, and can't be extended easily. On the Woolwich line, I think. I believe 466s are not allowed as part of 12-car consists as the platform lengths at Charing Cross are very tight. Networker driving vehicles are almost 21m in length whereas intermediate vehicles are closer to 20m, plus the coupler at the driving ends is a bit longer. |
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Jan 16, 2016 0:31:00 GMT
I suppose if those 19 365 units do transfer Southeasterly, some 466 units may get separated from the fleet. Or maybe the 466s can be paired together to form more 12-car workings. If I'm not mistaken, there's still a few stations that are not long enough for 12-car trains, and can't be extended easily. On the Woolwich line, I think. I believe 466s are not allowed as part of 12-car consists as the platform lengths at Charing Cross are very tight. Networker driving vehicles are almost 21m in length whereas intermediate vehicles are closer to 20m, plus the coupler at the driving ends is a bit longer. Good point. I didn't consider that. I remember reading about how British Rail permanently coupled some 2HAPs together to form 4HAPs. They even painted the ends black to hide the cabs. I suppose the older design allowed the coupled train to be only slightly longer than a 4EPB. |
|
