Class 442s - Now at the end of the road and to be withdrawn permanently

[HarleyDavidson]

Forgive a rather stupid question, but has it been confirmed that the 442s are actually going to be retractioned? All I've found in press releases etc. is confirmation that they'll be refurbished to 'As new' condition, which is pretty vague. Northern seem to consider refurbishing trains to 'as new' consists of little more than new vinyl, seat covers and a usb point.

If you think that will suffice on the Portsmouth line you're very much mistaken.

They'll need to be virtually stripped down to the core and redone and they're going to have new traction system fitted to be energy efficient and more reliable than before, also it's becoming increasingly difficult to source the replacement components for the old air oil camshaft control system (of which there are two on a 442).

 

[43096]

A 5 second Google search would tell you that the 4 trailers are fitted with BREL T4 bogies .... does that help? :roll:

And your google search returns the wrong answer - it's a long standing error in numerous places, which often also state they have SR Mark 6 motor bogies. 442s have P7-3 motor and T3-7 trailer bogies. Take a look at a photo!

 

[CosherB]

And your google search returns the wrong answer - it's a long standing error in numerous places, which often also state they have SR Mark 6 motor bogies. 442s have P7-3 motor and T3-7 trailer bogies. Take a look at a photo!

The joys of the internet. :roll:

I stand corrected.

 

[D365]

Not that it matters though.

Without significant re-engineering, the only way that the Class 442s will be 'retractioned' is a like-for-like replacement of the existing configuration.

 

[AndrewE]

Not that it matters though.

Without significant re-engineering, the only way that the Class 442s will be 'retractioned' is a like-for-like replacement of the existing configuration.

Could an economical re-tractioning upgrade mod be done by putting (subsituting) an extra motor bogie under the vehicle either side of the power car? I think TGVs and Eurostars did it that way. A set of heavy jumper cables would be connected into each adjacent bogie, but there wouldn't be much more wiring involved. (apart from beefing up the EMUs power supply and controls.) It wouldn't be like taking a much bigger load off an AC EMU's transformer, for example.

 

[HarleyDavidson]

Not that it matters though.

Without significant re-engineering, the only way that the Class 442s will be 'retractioned' is a like-for-like replacement of the existing configuration.

Really? Proof please.

A traction package is merely a box with the electronics in it, it can be designed to hang on the existing bolt holes connections underneath, as they've done with the 455s.

As I've said the old traction equipment is very hard to source replacement parts for now, as it's obsolete technology, so they're going to have real problems sourcing those parts to start with. So the only way they can really do it is with modern traction equipment.

 

[D365]

Really? Proof please.

Think you've got the wrong end of the stick, what I'm saying is that the configuration of the new motors would have to be the same as now in order to avoid significant reengineering costs, i.e. there's no real possibility of fitting additional motors to the trailer coaches.

 

[HarleyDavidson]

Ah, got you now. My apologies.

The overhauled units should be lighter without the heavy camshafts and possibly the removal of control air reservoir connections as well and a traction package fitted in.

 

[LowLevel]

Do they still have guard's panels? I know during their SWT's days the guards panel was in the motor/buffet coach, was that just blanked off or physically removed when they moved to GTR?

I believe they're still there just with the release buttons blanked off? They were still guard operated on certain services until they finished .

 

[SpacePhoenix]

It'd be difficult to do as the motor coach on a 442 was structurally reinforced to take the extra weight of the traction equipment when they were built.

You're also going to have a tough time in relocating the CET tanks, Static Converters, HVAC equipment and compressors.

With the Static Converters, HVAC equipment and compressors is it one of each per coach?

Ah, got you now. My apologies.

The overhauled units should be lighter without the heavy camshafts and possibly the removal of control air reservoir connections as well and a traction package fitted in.

Does the weight of the cam shafts make up a very large chunk of the overall weight of the MLC?

Hopefully the refurb (if it does happen) will be to the same level that the 456s were done to

 

[HarleyDavidson]

Compressors there are 2 per unit, HVAC is of the heat pump type, unless they changed it, I can't remember about the static converters though, ss its been about 8 years since I last drove one.

Two sets of camshafts aren't going to be light weight by any stretch of the imagination

They better be done to a higher standard than a 456, who wants to sit on those seats for an hour or more.

 

[Deepgreen]

Any thoughts on how any re-tractioning might deal with both the sluggishness of the units and their relatively primitive wheel slip control capabilities, given the topography of the Portsmouth route?

 

[cjmillsnun]

The retractioning will more than likely involve ripping out the old motors and all control systems. Any new motors will be three phase AC motors as are fitted to modern stock, and any new control system will have up to date methods of dealing with wheel slip. Whilst it may not fully resolve the issues I would expect a significant improvement in both.

 

[infobleep]

It is inconceivable that they will run as single units. The line capacity problem doesn't really go away even running them in pairs. The existing services they will take over are already 10.444 or 12.450 after all.

I was on a Portsmouth and Southsea stopper from Woking yesterday at 13.13. It was only 4 carriages and there was clearly space for everyone to sit down if they so wished.

Are the stoppers generally far less busy than the fasts to Portsmouth?

 

[swt_passenger]

I was on a Portsmouth and Southsea stopper from Woking yesterday at 13.13. It was only 4 carriages and there was clearly space for everyone to sit down if they so wished.

Are the stoppers generally far less busy than the fasts to Portsmouth?

The 442s are announced as being for the fast services anyway, but I would expect mid day stoppers to be fairly quiet on most routes where there are different calling patterns like this one, it sin't surprising is it?

 

[Deepgreen]

The retractioning will more than likely involve ripping out the old motors and all control systems. Any new motors will be three phase AC motors as are fitted to modern stock, and any new control system will have up to date methods of dealing with wheel slip. Whilst it may not fully resolve the issues I would expect a significant improvement in both.

Thanks - is there any reason why the new motors could not deliver increased power - say, a total of 1800hp for a five car unit? I appreciate there's a limit to the amount that can be channelled through four axles, but I imagine this wouldn't stretch the rolling stock too much. Tweaked gearing might give a good compromise between top speed and acceleration, giving a better fit with the Desiros' performance.

 

[HarleyDavidson]

I was on a Portsmouth and Southsea stopper from Woking yesterday at 13.13. It was only 4 carriages and there was clearly space for everyone to sit down if they so wished.

Are the stoppers generally far less busy than the fasts to Portsmouth?

Don't forget you still have some schools on Easter break so they will be, but it does depend on the day you travel.

It's quite quiet Mon/Tues, Weds/Thurs are usually quite busy with OAPs and Friday is usually busy with the Matelots, if you want to see it really manic wait until an American Aircraft Carrier or Battleship arrives! It's NUTS!

Fast services (if that's what you can call them) are generally more popular than the stoppers by quite a margin.

 

[HarleyDavidson]

Thanks - is there any reason why the new motors could not deliver increased power - say, a total of 1800hp for a five car unit? I appreciate there's a limit to the amount that can be channelled through four axles, but I imagine this wouldn't stretch the rolling stock too much. Tweaked gearing might give a good compromise between top speed and acceleration, giving a better fit with the Desiros' performance.

You want it to have the ability to do 100 mph for when it gets sent via Eastleigh/Winchester when the direct is blocked.

I mean even in their old guise, they weren't as slow as some people make out getting away. I took one out of Farnborough a good few years ago and got to just under the 100 by Fleet, so you can hardly say that is slow getting away for something that had old technology on it.

 

[cjmillsnun]

Thanks - is there any reason why the new motors could not deliver increased power - say, a total of 1800hp for a five car unit? I appreciate there's a limit to the amount that can be channelled through four axles, but I imagine this wouldn't stretch the rolling stock too much. Tweaked gearing might give a good compromise between top speed and acceleration, giving a better fit with the Desiros' performance.

The biggest problem with too much power or more specifically too much torque could be wheelslip, which would mean being more gentle with the power handle and reduced acceleration.

 

[SpacePhoenix]

The retractioning will more than likely involve ripping out the old motors and all control systems. Any new motors will be three phase AC motors as are fitted to modern stock, and any new control system will have up to date methods of dealing with wheel slip. Whilst it may not fully resolve the issues I would expect a significant improvement in both.

Will it be near enough everything below buffer-beam level between the bogies that gets ripped out and replaced?

Will they get equipped with regenerative braking as part of the retractioning?

 

[HarleyDavidson]

The biggest problem with too much power or more specifically too much torque could be wheelslip, which would mean being more gentle with the power handle and reduced acceleration.

I was taught to start away in Notch 2 and progress upward when the speed go to 20 mph, there were 3 stages of weak field on them. the standard 40-45 range, then stage 2 was at around 70 mph mark & 3rd stage around the 80 mark and you were away quite quickly on dry rail up to the 100 and you had to keep a close eye on them, because they didn't have a speed restrictor on them and the ride was so good, you could find accidentally yourself going a little faster than what you should have been!

As we don't know what sort of traction system will replace the old air/oil camshaft one, it will be hard to say whether it will have a speed restriction system on it to prevent you going over 100 (where permitted), nor do we know if the old EP/Auto braking system will be replaced with an updated electronic version. It will also be interesting to see how much hp will be available to the wheel/rail and whether they retain the buckeye couplings or they get replaced by a Desiro compatible "Dellner" type instead which incorporates the electrical connections, hence the removal of the multiple unit jumpers and air pipes.

 

[43096]

Thanks - is there any reason why the new motors could not deliver increased power - say, a total of 1800hp for a five car unit? I appreciate there's a limit to the amount that can be channelled through four axles, but I imagine this wouldn't stretch the rolling stock too much. Tweaked gearing might give a good compromise between top speed and acceleration, giving a better fit with the Desiros' performance.

There's no reason why they couldn't have the power increased as part of re-tractioning, as you say. The current power rating was carried over from the REPs, and couldn't be increased much anyway because of the power supply limitations. With power supplies having been increased for the Desiros, they could (in theory at least) give the 442s a similar output to the 444s.

 

[HarleyDavidson]

444s have been derated though.

 

[AndrewE]

Thanks - is there any reason why the new motors could not deliver increased power - say, a total of 1800hp for a five car unit? I appreciate there's a limit to the amount that can be channelled through four axles, but I imagine this wouldn't stretch the rolling stock too much. Tweaked gearing might give a good compromise between top speed and acceleration, giving a better fit with the Desiros' performance.

... but still, as you say, only 2 power bogies/4 axles per set. Time for some lateral (or fore-and-aft) thinking!

 

[43096]

444s have been derated though.

To what rating?

 

[HarleyDavidson]

How many more times do you need to be told you cannot put traction packages on anything other than the current motor coach without substantial reinforcement, the motor coaches are heavily modified Mk3s to take the extra weight of all of the traction equipment that has been slung underneath it.

If you were to open the doors on any other coach you won't find much apart from a couple of compressors, CETs, HVAC equipment, static convertor and braking equipment.

So unless you know a way of hanging very heavy traction packs, auxiliary converters. traction converters without impacting on the structural viability of the other coaches with resorting to re-engineering them, you can forget the notion of putting traction systems on anything other than the motor coach.

 

[spark001uk]

There's no reason why they couldn't have the power increased as part of re-tractioning, as you say. The current power rating was carried over from the REPs, and couldn't be increased much anyway because of the power supply limitations...

Don't forget though, a 442 has half the motors that one REP unit had, so the REP's limitation would only be neared with a 10 car. Unless power supplies will/have been upgraded since then?

 

[SpacePhoenix]

Are they currently 1 traction motor per axle or 1 per bogie?

 

[SpacePhoenix]

How many more times do you need to be told you cannot put traction packages on anything other than the current motor coach without substantial reinforcement, the motor coaches are heavily modified Mk3s to take the extra weight of all of the traction equipment that has been slung underneath it.

If you were to open the doors on any other coach you won't find much apart from a couple of compressors, CETs, HVAC equipment, static convertor and braking equipment.

So unless you know a way of hanging very heavy traction packs, auxiliary converters. traction converters without impacting on the structural viability of the other coaches with resorting to re-engineering them, you can forget the notion of putting traction systems on anything other than the motor coach.

Would the traction package necessarily have to be on the same coach as the bogies they power? If there ends up being space under the MLC for the stuff to support extra powered bogies (none of us can really say what space will be available as we don't know what the detailed plans are for the retraction), if the bogies adjacent to the MLC were either modified or replaced to have traction motors, could a high voltage cable be run between the coaches?

 

[HarleyDavidson]

To what rating?

IIRC 66% of maximum. So that'll be somewhere around 3400 hp, anymore and it causes power supply issues.