Train Graphic
Great Western Passengers' Forum Great Western Coffee Shop - [home] and [about]
Read about the forum [here]. Register and contribute [here] - it's free.
Random Image
Train Running @GWR Twitter Acronyms/Abbreviations Station Comparator Rail News GWR co. site Site Style 1 2 3 4 Chat on off
June 18, 2018, 08:26:58 pm *
Welcome, Guest. Please login or register.

Login with username, password and session length
Forgotten your username or password? - get a reminder
Most liked recent subjects
[108] Great Western Main Line electrification - ongoing discussion
[94] Incident at Loughborough Junction, South London. Three dead. 1...
[72] Heathfield Branch Line - freight use and campaign to restore p...
[70] Bossing The Crossing
[69] Shortage of train crews on Great Western Railway since Septemb...
[45] Windermere branch Sunday 17 June
News: A forum for passengers ... with input from rail professionals welcomed too
 
   Home   Help Search Login Register  
Pages: 1 [2] 3 4 ... 61
  Print  
Author Topic: Class 387 coming to Thames Valley - ongoing discussion  (Read 251162 times)
paul7755
TransWilts Member
Hero Member
******
Posts: 4423


View Profile
« Reply #15 on: November 21, 2014, 06:30:51 pm »


I agree that in the longer term EMUs with a better performance than the 319s will be needed to maximise track capacity. However, it was reported several months ago, after the franchise was extended, that fGW were told by the DfT to stop work on procuring such trains. My impression then was that we were were going to be lumbered with the things[1] but I've since changed my mind. It may well be that the forthcoming Direct Award to fGW to continue operating the Western will permit, encourage or require that fGW starts procurement of more suitable trains. My reasoning is that the franchise extension is a continuation of the status quo, whereas the Direct Award is a new contract with different T&Cs and such requirements can be included.


My thoughts were that 'procurement' meant the full process of specifying the requirement in an ITT, and then organising finance via a Rosco etc.  But using trains that someone else had already procured on DfT's behalf would simply be taking over a lease as directed by DfT; and that could apply to the 387/1s...

I suppose it depends how much you read into the exact meaning of the word...

Paul
Logged
drandles
Newbie
*
Posts: 4


View Profile
« Reply #16 on: December 09, 2014, 05:33:03 pm »

I believe FGW have already indicated informally that they are negotiating to acquire the Class 387/1s.  The expected delivery rate of Class 700 units to Thamesllink should allow all 29 Class 387/1s to be released from Thameslink by December 2016 when the Oxford & Newbury electrification is due to be completed.

At present FGW uses (approx.) 36 Class 165/1 units and 21 Class 166 units.  Quite a few of these are used on diagrams over routes that will not be electrified under current plans (eg Reading-Gatwick, north of Oxford etc).  Additionally quite a few 166 diagrams will be worked by Class 800 IEPs (eg Cotswold services).  So it is not inconceivable that the 29 Class 387/1s would be sufficient to cover the electrified Thames Valley local services on the GWML.  The only uncertainty is what will be used on the electrified branch services to Marlow which will need to be 2 car units.

David

Logged
ChrisB
TransWilts Member
Hero Member
******
Posts: 9461


View Profile Email
« Reply #17 on: December 09, 2014, 06:10:30 pm »

Can you say to whom they have informally indicated this to?

Or is it just heresay (ie you don't know)
Logged
DidcotPunter
Sr. Member
****
Posts: 146


View Profile Email
« Reply #18 on: December 09, 2014, 06:14:50 pm »

I believe FGW have already indicated informally that they are negotiating to acquire the Class 387/1s.  The expected delivery rate of Class 700 units to Thamesllink should allow all 29 Class 387/1s to be released from Thameslink by December 2016 when the Oxford & Newbury electrification is due to be completed.

At present FGW uses (approx.) 36 Class 165/1 units and 21 Class 166 units.  Quite a few of these are used on diagrams over routes that will not be electrified under current plans (eg Reading-Gatwick, north of Oxford etc).  Additionally quite a few 166 diagrams will be worked by Class 800 IEPs (eg Cotswold services).  So it is not inconceivable that the 29 Class 387/1s would be sufficient to cover the electrified Thames Valley local services on the GWML.  The only uncertainty is what will be used on the electrified branch services to Marlow which will need to be 2 car units.

David



And don't forget that - eventually - the Reading to Paddington stoppers will be taken over by Crossrail and will be operated by Class 345 units. The 387/1s would be utilised on Padd-Newbury, Padd-Oxford services which aren't operated by IEP, and possibly Reading to Basingstoke. I expect the service to be completely recast post-electrification but I would have thought that 29 units would be enough, even allowing for some 8 or even 12 car trains on the main line in the rush hour.
Logged
ChrisB
TransWilts Member
Hero Member
******
Posts: 9461


View Profile Email
« Reply #19 on: December 10, 2014, 08:50:11 am »

That's eventually, while the largest number will be needed to start with....
Logged
IndustryInsider
TransWilts Member
Hero Member
******
Posts: 6452


View Profile
« Reply #20 on: December 10, 2014, 10:28:05 am »

Hence my post on the previous page suggesting that 319s might be used as a stop-gap for a couple of years with the 387s remaining post-Crossrail.
« Last Edit: December 10, 2014, 02:04:48 pm by IndustryInsider » Logged

To view my cab run over the new Reading Viaduct as well as a relief line cab ride at Reading just after Platforms 12-15 opened and my 'before and after' video comparison of the Cotswold Line Redoubling scheme, see: http://www.dailymotion.com/user/IndustryInsider/1
ChrisB
TransWilts Member
Hero Member
******
Posts: 9461


View Profile Email
« Reply #21 on: December 10, 2014, 11:13:02 am »

377s or 387s? Now I'm getting confused :-)
Logged
paul7755
TransWilts Member
Hero Member
******
Posts: 4423


View Profile
« Reply #22 on: December 10, 2014, 01:17:34 pm »

377s or 387s? Now I'm getting confused :-)

Well the 387s were usually referred to as 377/8s for quite a long time...

Now that the things are being seen in service on the Brighton - Bedfords, they aren't that different from a 377.  There seems to be a reasonable assumption that the class number change was purely to differentiate their top speed - which is of course unused in their current employment.

Paul
Logged
grahame
Administrator
Hero Member
*****
Posts: 20558



View Profile WWW Email
« Reply #23 on: December 10, 2014, 03:47:59 pm »

Can you say to whom they have informally indicated this to?

Or is it just heresay (ie you don't know)

Hmmm ... that reads a bit rude to me .... "Children!" or should I say "Child!"?

We have a separate board area - "The Rumour Mill" where we usually post completely unsubstantiated information, but that's only available to member who have reached a certain threshold of posts.   So in this thread, where the information comes from a newer member, it's perfectly  fine and the only place it could have been posted!
Logged

TransWilts Rail - Linking North to West and South 9 times a day. [see here]
Chris from Nailsea
Administrator
Hero Member
*****
Posts: 17371


I am not railway staff


View Profile Email
« Reply #24 on: December 10, 2014, 04:04:55 pm »

... is it just heresay ...

As a matter of interest, ChrisB, did you mean 'heresy' or 'hearsay'?  Roll Eyes
Logged

William Huskisson MP was the first person to be killed by a train while crossing the tracks, in 1830.  Many more have died in the same way since then.  Don't take a chance: stop, look, listen.

"Level crossings are safe, unless they are used in an unsafe manner."  Discuss.
ChrisB
TransWilts Member
Hero Member
******
Posts: 9461


View Profile Email
« Reply #25 on: December 10, 2014, 04:41:44 pm »

Hearsay :-)
Logged
ChrisB
TransWilts Member
Hero Member
******
Posts: 9461


View Profile Email
« Reply #26 on: December 10, 2014, 04:43:17 pm »

Hoping to get an answer to my Q though
Logged
bignosemac
TransWilts Member
Hero Member
******
Posts: 15556


Question everything.


View Profile
« Reply #27 on: December 10, 2014, 07:57:48 pm »

Hoping to get an answer to my Q though

Desmond Llewelyn?  Huh Undecided Grin
Logged

Former FGW/GWR regular passenger. No more. Despicable company.
Timmer
Global Moderator
Hero Member
*****
Posts: 4484


View Profile
« Reply #28 on: December 10, 2014, 09:03:50 pm »

Hoping to get an answer to my Q though
Desmond Llewelyn?  Huh Undecided Grin
Or the new Q Ben Whishaw aka Paddington (keeping it railway related...I'll get my coat)
Logged
Western Pathfinder
Global Moderator
Hero Member
*****
Posts: 685



View Profile
« Reply #29 on: December 10, 2014, 09:39:45 pm »

Hoping to get an answer to my Q though

Desmond Llewelyn?  Huh Undecided Grin

Best answer to a question ever 1 Never let them see you bleed. 2 Allways have an escape plan .
Logged
Do you have something you would like to add to this thread, or would you like to raise a new question at the Coffee Shop? Please [register] (it is free) if you have not done so before, or login (at the top of this page) if you already have an account - we would love to read what you have to say!

You can find out more about how this forum works [here] - that will link you to a copy of the forum agreement that you can read before you join, and tell you very much more about how we operate. We are an independent forum, provided and run by customers of Great Western Railway, for customers of Great Western Railway and we welcome railway professionals as members too, in either a personal or official capacity. Views expressed in posts are not necessarily the views of the operators of the forum.

As well as posting messages onto existing threads, and starting new subjects, members can communicate with each other through personal messages if they wish. And once members have made a certain number of posts, they will automatically be admitted to the "frequent posters club", where subjects not-for-public-domain are discussed; anything from the occasional rant to meetups we may be having ...

 
Pages: 1 [2] 3 4 ... 61
  Print  
 
Jump to:  

Powered by MySQL Powered by PHP Powered by SMF 1.1.2 | SMF © 2006-2007, Simple Machines LLC Valid XHTML 1.0! Valid CSS!
This forum is provided by a customer of Great Western Railway (formerly First Great Western), and the views expressed are those of the individual posters concerned. Visit www.gwr.com for the official Great Western Railway website. Please contact the administrators of this site if you feel that the content provided by one of our posters contravenes our posting rules (email link). Forum hosted by Well House Consultants