Reader Comments:

Views expressed in submitted comments are that of the author, and not necessarily shared by Railnews.

• Joel, London

  I think I've read here that FCC is receiving new 377s in greater numbers more quickly than the 319s that it is releasing. Does anybody know whether this means there will be more 12 car trains on the thameslink route from the 377s, or if the capacity of thameslink will remain unchanged until the class 700s start to arrive?
  
  (I believe the number of 12-car trains may be set to increase in the shorter term as more 377/387s become available.--Editor)

• Philip Russell, carlisle

  I'm sure with a decent refurbishment these trains can provide a fair few years service in Northern England ,but I do wonder why some years after the Mc Nulty report we are fitting guards panels rather than tacking the opportunity to go Convert the service to DOO (the service could be run like SPT so the unions complaint of redundancies need not apply )

• Graham LEES, KENSINGTON

  "Although built for driver-only operation in the late 1980s, the 319s for Northern will have conductors’ door control panels fitted."
  
  Can anyone provide a valid reason as to why this should be?
  
  [The routes in the north are not equipped for DOO (mirrors, cctv, etc.) and no agreement for DOO exists with ASLEF/RMT. Both these situations could be adjusted, given enough time, but not necessarily by December.--Editor.]

• Chris, London

  Surely the onus is on RailNews to make sure that articles are correct, not your readers? Simply go back to Southern and ask if they are confusing the 377/7s going to Southern with the /2s that are then freed up. They'll apologise for the obvious oversight and the article can be amended.
  
  [Indeed, we have now done that, and you are correct when you suggest Southern got it wrong. Their earlier statement has now been withdrawn. However, it is hard to know what we could have done originally, other than report what an apparently authoritative source was saying. That said, I am happy to put the record straight. The five-car units are NOT going to Thameslink.--Editor.)

• Chris Neville-Smith, Durham, England

  For what it's worth, I think age of rolling stock is a red herring. All I care about with rolling stock is the following:
  
  1) Will it provide the service we need, at the required level of speed, frequency, carriage space and reliability?
  2) Is the inside of the train all right?
  
  2) can be fixed by refurbishment. Other than that, provided the rolling stock does the job it's needed for, I'm not that bothered whether the carriages are 3 years olf or 30 years old.
  
  (Having said that, the Pacers have to go. They are now far too unreliable to form an acceptable solution.)
  
  [Precisely so.--Editor.]

• Lee, Manchester

  Pay half as much, and get something older (although entirely serviceable). Fact of life -- and wishing otherwise won't make it so!--Editor.
  
  This is true, however the existing diesel rolling stock used by Northern can also be regarded as entirely servicable in so much as it can still be used, however it is woefully inadequate to meet the demand placed upon it. Yes older rolling stock is typically the favourite to be cascaded, however at 24-27 years old, the cascaded rolling stock is virtually life expired itself, although it should offer enhanced capacity.
  
  The problem us northern commuters have is that we currently have to make do with 20+ year old rolling stock that is prone to failing and is operating in excess of capacity. Although the cascaded stock solves one of those problems, it does not address the age/reliability issue. Hence the concern why is the stock not being refurbished?
  
  Although us norvernurs might pay less in fares, however the cost of living is lower as well, therefore taking the cost of living, inflation, etc. into account, we are paying perceivably just as much up here as you savarnurs but we are getting a lesser service in relation. Apart from the 51 Class 185's and the handful of 350's, there has been no new rolling stock in the North since the introduction of the 321/9, 323 and 333 EMU's in the 1990's/early 2000's whereas London and the southeast has seen an almost non-stop replacement of the vast majority of its commuter trains since then.
  At the end of the day, all commuters, regardless of location require rolling staock with adequate capacity to meet the demand placed upon it and journey reliability. Although technically speaking, the Class 319's might be capable of meeting these requirements, their age and unrefurbished nature does not convey that impression as well as it might if it was known they were to be refurbished. lastly, it has also been rumoured that the Class 319's may be reduced to three car format. Is this true. If it isn't, the DfT and Northern could do a significantly better job of telling commuters what the stock is going to comprise, when it get here and reassure us that the cascaded diesel units will actually be used to bolster services along non-electrified lines and what those services will be rather than disappearing to the south west. Generally, try to reassure the public that both organisations actually do know what they are doing rather than providing snippets of information.
  
  (I agree with you. The 14x diesels in particular are outstaying their welcome [whenever that was] and I also agree that the 319s should be refurbished before they go north. They do have a good reliability record, though. It is also true that much of the fleet south of the Thames has been replaced since 2000 or so, but much of the slam door stock then withdrawn dated from the 1960s or even earlier. By comparison, a Class 150 was quite new!--Editor.)

• Steve Alston, Crewe

  Units Schmunits.
  
  Well, good news for the North - additional trains at long last for a line which is simply battered with passengers.

• Chris, London

  Information coming directly from Southern doesn't mean that it's correct, this has to be someone getting confused about Southern receiving new units and this freeing up others for Thameslink - easily done. The idea that Thameslink would receive 5-car units instead of more 4-car 377/2s just doesn't make sense.
  
  (We are constrained by what we are told. We report what is being said by official sources with appropriate attribution. If you know otherwise, I suggest you contact those sources directly.--Editor.)

• MikeB, Liverpool

  The latest rumour has it that the 319s will not be refurbished and are merely meant as a stop-gap, until the Class 387s are available for Northern when displaced on Thameslink by the Class 700s. However, we shall see!!!

• Ian, Bolton

  Totally agree with Tim.
  
  While the SE may well pay more, they get a far better service for it - far longer trains and more frequent service. We have to put up with an hourly service and two carriages resulting in conditions that you aren't legally allowed to transport cattle in.
  
  Regarding the 'cascade' to Chiltern, that is not how it's seen up here. It's seen as stock we can't afford to lose being given to the south again. Even if the speculation mentioned in the article is true, it means that we are losing 9-16 yr old 170s to be replaced by 24-27 yr old 319s.

• John Gilbert, Cradley

  Re Your answer to "Mack" Mr Editor, the question is, how SOON after the first two units arrive will the rest follow? No answer to that! And how can Northern operate between Liverpool and Manchester with just TWO sets? Even four would make that possible but not with just two. Originally there were to have been six units, even though not refurbished. But FCC, so I read, suddenly discovered that they needed the others and refused to let them go. It's the south-east syndrome again is it not, the evidence is there to see.
  Your statement, Mr Editor, that, effectively, it's OK to send poor units in penny numbers to the north because the South-East pays higher fares does not hold water; surely you are not suggesting that because of this northern folk should be content with old, unrefurbished stock but not until the south-east is prepared to let them go? For shame on you sir!
  
  (How soon? I don't know. All we can do is to quote the DfT and Northern, who say the remainder will follow in 2015. As for fares, I am not remotely repentant. Pay LSE fares, and have LSE trains. Pay half as much, and get something older (although entirely serviceable). Fact of life -- and wishing otherwise won't make it so!--Editor.)

• Melvyn Windebank, Canvey Island, Essex

  One piece of potential controversy could arise if news of brand new trains for Moorgate services where new class 700 trains can't be used is announced when the new franchise is awarded!
  
  

• Melvyn Windebank, Canvey Island, Essex

  The irony of this DMU shortage is the fact that despite being totally rebuilt London Bridge Station is still served by DMUs on services that Chris Green planned to electrify in the days of Network South East but privitisation prevented the holes in the former Southern Region being filled .
  
  And now we have the DFT who won't allow orders for new DMUs or Extenstions to 3rd rail DC electrification and while new DMUs might be more difficult to justify surely extending 3rd rail electrification to Uckfield would make sense as would any other small scheme that would release diesel trains so they operate on largely non electrified lines instead of the reverse!
  
  While AC electrification on SWT non electrified route could release further diesels and begin conversion of 3rd rail network in a better way than just converting an already electried line to Southampton.
  
  Longer term the new TSGN raises the possibility of converting Brighton main line to AC at least South of London ?
  
  Its odd how rail magazines still cover news of new DMUs being delivered on mainland Europe its a pity we can't do the same !

• Roshan, Leeds

  Will the 319s be replacing Pacers? I hope they will be.

• Tim, Devon

  25 year old hand me downs. What a delight.
  Who on earth could say that London gets all the transport funding?
  
  (London area passengers pay roughly twice the price per rail travel km. London & SE level fares would not be welcome in the north of England, I suspect. In addition, the north west has just received 10 new electric Siemens Desiros for Manchester-Scotland, while Chiltern will be running its new Oxford-London service with second-hand 170s. Cascades work both ways.--Editor)

• Chris Neville-Smith, Durham, England

  I suppose this is a reasonable course of action given the situation we are in now, but this hasty scrabble for rolling stock is far from satisfactory. We've had uproar twice so far over movements in rolling stock, firstly Bolton with the Wigan diversion, and then Hull with the upcoming move of 170s to the Chiltern Line. In both cases, they should have seen this coming.
  
  I hope the lesson we learn from this is stop leaving decisions on rolling stock to the last moment. There should really have been a plan in place at least two years in advance.

• Mack, London

  Your comments of two 377/7 transferring to Thameslink is wrong. Its only six 377/2 as you put correctly later on. No way is Thameslink getting two five car units, it doesn't make sense.
  (Oh, yes it does. Both statements are correct. The FIRST transfer is expected to be just two units, and more will follow soon afterwards. This information is directly from Southern.--Editor.)