Porterbrook Cl.769 'Flex' trains from 319s, initially for Northern

[northwichcat]

Wow - I bet the passengers of Wales will be delighted with their 'new' four-axle trains!

Presumably they'll go to Valley Lines where they'll look just like 143s but with a different seating type and in a different colour (both internally and externally.)

I expect the objections will actually come for Northern passengers that 144s are being released while Merseytravel 142s remain in service!

 

[Cardiff123]

It's been mentioned elsewhere the new Wales & Borders franchise has secured some of the 2 car 144s on a short term lease so they'll transfer from Northern in the new year.

As much as I hope that's true, it hasn't officially been confirmed anywhere.

 

[northwichcat]

As much as I hope that's true, it hasn't officially been confirmed anywhere.

Could be it's a provisional agreement so W&B can opt out if Porterbrook do manage to produce their 769s.

 

[JN114]

Porterbrook massively over-promised and have utterly failed to deliver. They should have been upfront and honest with TOCs and government about the experimental nature and risks of the project to begin with.
At the very least, Porterbrook should be offering replacement trains from somewhere to TfW as compensation.

With respect, how do we as mere observers of this so-called farce know that isn’t the case? Just because there hasn’t been any wibble about it on an Internet forum doesn’t mean Porterbrook haven’t been open with the parties involved.

 

[twpsaesneg]

One of the major considerations was to avoid any modifications to the existing Alstom (GEC Traction!) control and power electronics that would require a new electromagnetic compatibility assessment (electrical safety cases are expensive and can require older rolling stock to be assessed against standards they were introduced long after they were introduced). To get around this the new power packs are configured to act as the 750V DC supply of the original dual voltage units. With two power packs feeding a single Traction Converter it is important to achieve a good load balance between the two engines to avoid excessive loading or hunting, both in steady state and transient conditions (such as wheelslip correction). This has been simulated on the static load bank in the factory.

It was also suggested that much of this technology could be transferable to other types of unit. However this all depends on the application as more modern EMUs that feature regenerative braking may be more appropriate for conversion to bi-mode using batteries rather than diesel power packs. Many partially electrified routes in the north west could be operated by battery EMUs given a battery range of 30 - 40 miles (the CLC route from Liverpool to Manchester is one such example).

It sounds like the same patter as was presented in the Derby IMechE talk back in May - minus the video! They refused to be drawn on introduction back then too.

Did they suggest that the load balancing had caused issues - they didn't mention much about that back then or load banking, so this has presumably been happening between May and now?

 

[Cardiff123]

With respect, how do we as mere observers of this so-called farce know that isn’t the case? Just because there hasn’t been any wibble about it on an Internet forum doesn’t mean Porterbrook haven’t been open with the parties involved.

It's not a 'so-called farce'. It is a farce. It's running over a year late and passengers are suffering the serious consequences of a project that is time-sensitive in Wales due to the 2020 PRM deadline rapidly approaching.
Whilst Porterbrook may well have been open about the difficulties to the parties involved, they've been giving very different signals out publicly.
From first saying that it would be an easy project, a quick fix to shortages of DMUs that would be ready within months and long before the 195s were in service, to then complete silence, even to respected railway journalists wanting information on the project.

 

[Gareth Marston]

It's not a 'so-called farce'. It is a farce. It's running over a year late and passengers are suffering the serious consequences of a project that is time-sensitive in Wales due to the 2020 PRM deadline rapidly approaching.
Whilst Porterbrook may well have been open about the difficulties to the parties involved, they've been giving very different signals out publicly.
From first saying that it would be an easy project, a quick fix to shortages of DMUs that would be ready within months and long before the 195s were in service, to then complete silence, even to respected railway journalists wanting information on the project.

private sector companies promising Government things they can't deliver seems to be a theme on today's railways see Virgin/ Stagecoad and the ECML. Given there recent comments moaning about new franchises ordering new trains it's rather clear Porterbrook were chasing £. When will people ever learn?

 

[JN114]

It's not a 'so-called farce'. It is a farce. It's running over a year late and passengers are suffering the serious consequences of a project that is time-sensitive in Wales due to the 2020 PRM deadline rapidly approaching.
Whilst Porterbrook may well have been open about the difficulties to the parties involved, they've been giving very different signals out publicly.
From first saying that it would be an easy project, a quick fix to shortages of DMUs that would be ready within months and long before the 195s were in service, to then complete silence, even to respected railway journalists wanting information on the project.

If things get that critical there will be a derogation against the PRM requirements and deferment until W&B can bring their fleet up to spec. The Welsh Assembley won’t allow W&B to halve their fleet overnight just because of some accessibility issues. Yeah, not great for equality but bottom line the railways are there to love people. If it comes to serving 1000s of passengers and keeping trains in service beyond the deadline or removing otherwise perfectly good trains from service because they don’t meet the accessibility requirements of less than 1% of their passenger base; they will serve the many over the few. To do otherwise would likely be more destructive to the equality movement than just pushing the deadline back.

If ATW are releasing more trains than they can afford to for these mods - even as it became apparent many months ago that Porterbrook’s proposes timescales were way off - that’s not Porterbrook’s problem. Projects run late; and should have adequate contingency. It appears ATW hadn’t put any form of contingency in place; and blindly ploughed on with their PRM mods programmes; without any care for the passengers those decisions would afflict.

 

[Domh245]

If ATW are releasing more trains than they can afford to for these mods - even as it became apparent many months ago that Porterbrook’s proposes timescales were way off - that’s not Porterbrook’s problem. Projects run late; and should have adequate contingency. It appears ATW hadn’t put any form of contingency in place; and blindly ploughed on with their PRM mods programmes; without any care for the passengers those decisions would afflict.

I think that ATW would have put some contingency in, but given the situation it was a bit of a catch 22, too much contingency and they'll miss the deadline, too little contingency and they'll get bitten. Of course what can't be accounted for is that even with what might have been considered ample contingency going into the programme, if the supplier completely drops the ball there isn't much that you can do (case in point the Wabtec Mk3 conversions)

 

[Bornin1980s]

One of the major considerations was to avoid any modifications to the existing Alstom (GEC Traction!) control and power electronics that would require a new electromagnetic compatibility assessment (electrical safety cases are expensive and can require older rolling stock to be assessed against standards they were introduced long after they were introduced). To get around this the new power packs are configured to act as the 750V DC supply of the original dual voltage units. With two power packs feeding a single Traction Converter it is important to achieve a good load balance between the two engines to avoid excessive loading or hunting, both in steady state and transient conditions (such as wheelslip correction). This has been simulated on the static load bank in the factory.

It was also suggested that much of this technology could be transferable to other types of unit. However this all depends on the application as more modern EMUs that feature regenerative braking may be more appropriate for conversion to bi-mode using batteries rather than diesel power packs. Many partially electrified routes in the north west could be operated by battery EMUs given a battery range of 30 - 40 miles (the CLC route from Liverpool to Manchester is one such example).

Does the electric part still use the original 1980something microprocessors?

 

[PHILIPE]

If things get that critical there will be a derogation against the PRM requirements and deferment until W&B can bring their fleet up to spec. The Welsh Assembley won’t allow W&B to halve their fleet overnight just because of some accessibility issues. Yeah, not great for equality but bottom line the railways are there to love people. If it comes to serving 1000s of passengers and keeping trains in service beyond the deadline or removing otherwise perfectly good trains from service because they don’t meet the accessibility requirements of less than 1% of their passenger base; they will serve the many over the few. To do otherwise would likely be more destructive to the equality movement than just pushing the deadline back.

If ATW are releasing more trains than they can afford to for these mods - even as it became apparent many months ago that Porterbrook’s proposes timescales were way off - that’s not Porterbrook’s problem. Projects run late; and should have adequate contingency. It appears ATW hadn’t put any form of contingency in place; and blindly ploughed on with their PRM mods programmes; without any care for the passengers those decisions would afflict.

ATW had no choice but to proceed with the PRM Mods just recently due to the time factor. The Welsh Government, to whom ATW were answering to, were tipped off about the Mods as far back as 2013 but did nothing about it perhaps leaving it to the new franchise. Now the day has dawned leaving little time. Surely the ROSCOs should have taken the initiative, though, as they actually own the units themselves.

 

[hooverboy]

One of the major considerations was to avoid any modifications to the existing Alstom (GEC Traction!) control and power electronics that would require a new electromagnetic compatibility assessment (electrical safety cases are expensive and can require older rolling stock to be assessed against standards they were introduced long after they were introduced). To get around this the new power packs are configured to act as the 750V DC supply of the original dual voltage units. With two power packs feeding a single Traction Converter it is important to achieve a good load balance between the two engines to avoid excessive loading or hunting, both in steady state and transient conditions (such as wheelslip correction). This has been simulated on the static load bank in the factory.

It was also suggested that much of this technology could be transferable to other types of unit. However this all depends on the application as more modern EMUs that feature regenerative braking may be more appropriate for conversion to bi-mode using batteries rather than diesel power packs. Many partially electrified routes in the north west could be operated by battery EMUs given a battery range of 30 - 40 miles (the CLC route from Liverpool to Manchester is one such example).

has it really taken this long to figure out that the whole lot needs to be converted to DC first?
just wait until they get back to having to re-convert it back into AC, with phase and frequency differences(assuming they want to use AC traction motors and relevent control electronics), might tax their poor little brains a bit too hard

 

[hooverboy]

Does the electric part still use the original 1980something microprocessors?

valves

the computer systems are a bit more up to date and run BASIC(heaven knows what they'll make of the visual C series languages.)

 

[samuelmorris]

has it really taken this long to figure out that the whole lot needs to be converted to DC first?
just wait until they get back to having to re-convert it back into AC, with phase and frequency differences(assuming they want to use AC traction motors and relevent control electronics), might tax their poor little brains a bit too hard

If they're keeping the original traction electrics to avoid recertification it'll be the same DC motors as before, or replacements to the same specification, I believe.

 

[Domh245]

has it really taken this long to figure out that the whole lot needs to be converted to DC first?
just wait until they get back to having to re-convert it back into AC, with phase and frequency differences(assuming they want to use AC traction motors and relevent control electronics), might tax their poor little brains a bit too hard

Why on earth would they have to use an AC supply to feed AC traction motors. Most modern EMUs just feed DC into the inverter to produce the AC for the motors, and I don't see why they couldn't do that if they wanted to (for some reason) fit AC motors and a new traction pack to the 319s. The only EMU that I'm aware that have AC fed inverters are the 323s

 

[swt_passenger]

has it really taken this long to figure out that the whole lot needs to be converted to DC first?

No, they announced very early on that the generator rafts would produce DC and emulate the third rail input to the trains.

 

[The_Engineer]

has it really taken this long to figure out that the whole lot needs to be converted to DC first?
just wait until they get back to having to re-convert it back into AC, with phase and frequency differences(assuming they want to use AC traction motors and relevant control electronics), might tax their poor little brains a bit too hard

No - you do not know the traction kit, obviously...... The Class 769 project was designed from the start with two gensets producing 750V dc. Stabilisation between the two gensets has been a major headache! The traction equipment itself is unchanged from Class 319s, being 750V input from third rail, OR from 25kV through a transformer and rectifier. The gensets add a third source of input power. The traction kit is a DC to variable DC chopper feeding DC motors.

 

[AM9]

No, they announced very early on that the generator rafts would produce DC and emulate the third rail input to the trains.

I think you have misunderstood what has been reported here by you saying: "the whole lot needs to be converted to DC first". The class 319s as built have a traction converter/controller that receives a nominal 750VDC whether the train is connected to a 25kV ac OLE supply or a 750V DC 3rd rail supply. Unlike most other ac powered EMUs of their age, they don't control their speed by simply tap changing the main transformer before rectification. The converter works from a constant full voltage DC supply which is then controlled to produce the appropriate DC voltage for the required speed/torque to the DC motors. As this converter is matched to the motor control and the speed/braking system of the motors, it is desireable to keep it working as it has been since their introduction. That would be the condition of their original EMC qualification. Thus to provide enough current at 750V, the combined output of the two generators need to share that task equally, emulating the bulk supply that would be collected from the 3rd rail. They have presumably had to select new diesel motor/generators that preform unconditionally stable when used in that way.

 

[swt_passenger]

I think you have misunderstood what has been reported here by you saying: "the whole lot needs to be converted to DC first". The class 319s as built have a traction converter/controller that receives a nominal 750VDC whether the train is connected to a 25kV ac OLE supply or a 750V DC 3rd rail supply. Unlike most other ac powered EMUs of their age, they don't control their speed by simply tap changing the main transformer before rectification. The converter works from a constant full voltage DC supply which is then controlled to produce the appropriate DC voltage for the required speed/torque to the DC motors. As this converter is matched to the motor control and the speed/braking system of the motors, it is desireable to keep it working as it has been since their introduction. That would be the condition of their original EMC qualification. Thus to provide enough current at 750V, the combined output of the two generators need to share that task equally, emulating the bulk supply that would be collected from the 3rd rail. They have presumably had to select new diesel motor/generators that preform unconditionally stable when used in that way.

I was only attempting a reply to hooverboy’s point, it was he who wrote "the whole lot needs to be converted to DC first", and I interpreted it as a criticism of the time taken for them to decide to use a DC output from the new generators...

 

[snowball]

bottom line the railways are there to love people.

Nice typo!

 

[Cardiff123]

If things get that critical there will be a derogation against the PRM requirements and deferment until W&B can bring their fleet up to spec. The Welsh Assembley won’t allow W&B to halve their fleet overnight just because of some accessibility issues. Yeah, not great for equality but bottom line the railways are there to love people. If it comes to serving 1000s of passengers and keeping trains in service beyond the deadline or removing otherwise perfectly good trains from service because they don’t meet the accessibility requirements of less than 1% of their passenger base; they will serve the many over the few. To do otherwise would likely be more destructive to the equality movement than just pushing the deadline back.

If ATW are releasing more trains than they can afford to for these mods - even as it became apparent many months ago that Porterbrook’s proposes timescales were way off - that’s not Porterbrook’s problem. Projects run late; and should have adequate contingency. It appears ATW hadn’t put any form of contingency in place; and blindly ploughed on with their PRM mods programmes; without any care for the passengers those decisions would afflict.

ATW are just doing what they've been told. ATW were under no obligation to do anything about PRM mods as their franchise ends in a few weeks. Welsh Govt are in charge of the Welsh PRM program. If ATW hadn't started sending 150s and 158s away for mods in June, Wales wouldn't have stood any hope at all of meeting the 2020 deadline. As things stand, it still doesn't stand much chance.
Things are critical now. Halving the capacity on peak time trains means inevitably passengers will be left behind on platforms, not being able to get to or home from work. ATW's fleet is stretched when it's running at full capacity - there is no slack at all to allow for only a few trains to be away for mods at a time without cover, without there being consequences. Hence why the 769s were ordered as they were sold to Welsh Govt as a quick way to get extra DMUs into service.
Look at ATW twitter. Last night there was the bizarre spectacle of Rhymney, Aberdare and Treherbert passengers arguing with ATW over who deserved the most carriages, as peak Rhymney trains have now been halved in capacity.
Peak time morning trains are being cancelled due to not enough trains being available thanks to "trains away for accessibility upgrades and needing repairs".
And yet some passengers honestly believe on 15th October, with ATW gone, the land of milk and honey will arrive.

Posters from outside of Wales fail to grasp how much Welsh Govt has riding on the new Transport for Wales franchise. Welsh Govt have publicly committed to eradicting Pacers from Wales by 2020. They won't risk the reputational damage of renegaging on that promise.

Personally I think the 2020 PRM deadline should be put back to 2022, I gather EMT have similar difficulties in meeting the 2020 deadline due to being a franchise that expires next year.

 

[AM9]

I was only attempting a reply to hooverboy’s point, it was he who wrote "the whole lot needs to be converted to DC first", and I interpreted it as a criticism of the time taken for them to decide to use a DC output from the new generators...

Apologies, yes Hooverboy seems to have misunderstood the DC design of the class 319s.

 

[AM9]

valves

the computer systems are a bit more up to date and run BASIC(heaven knows what they'll make of the visual C series languages.)

No emoticon here so do we assume that this is a serious post?

 

[43096]

With respect, how do we as mere observers of this so-called farce know that isn’t the case? Just because there hasn’t been any wibble about it on an Internet forum doesn’t mean Porterbrook haven’t been open with the parties involved.

Exactly. And the TOCs knew the risks involved - they knew it was a new project. I think it is called “caveat emptor”.

Interesting to see the amount of vitriol going Porterbrook’s way. Yet everyone seems to think the 230s will work fine out of the box, on totally different duties to what they have worked before.

 

[krus_aragon]

No emoticon here so do we assume that this is a serious post?

No. Nobody would be programming embedded systems in BASIC back then: you'd need a full-blown computer (with all the extra RAM/ROM) for that.

 

[hooverboy]

No. Nobody would be programming embedded systems in BASIC back then: you'd need a full-blown computer (with all the extra RAM/ROM) for that.

sorry, my bad......must still be machine code!

 

[AM9]

No. Nobody would be programming embedded systems in BASIC back then: you'd need a full-blown computer (with all the extra RAM/ROM) for that.

Indeed, and outside the educational sphere there isn't much interest in BASIC for anything. It would be very clunky using a non-realtime language for such a simple but real-time application as a traction power coverter/controller.
Given the age of the 319s, it is likely that they would have been microcontrollers (typically Intel MCS-96) that were introduced in the 1980s for applications such as engine management systems.

 

[krus_aragon]

Indeed, and outside the educational sphere there isn't much interest in BASIC for anything. It would be very clunky using a non-realtime language for such a simple but real-time application as a traction power coverter/controller.
Given the age of the 319s, it is likely that they would have been microcontrollers (typically Intel MCS-96) that were introduced in the 1980s for applications such as engine management systems.

There was a lot of use of BASIC for programming during the 1980s home computing boom, not only homemade code and type-in listings in magazines, but also some commercially released software. But as a rule, new programmers found that BASIC was too big and slow for what they wanted to do, and had to switch to assembly code for at least some of their program. (Similar to Java in the 90s.)

Today, yes, BASIC only exists in educational spheres. I know of a few individuals who run computer clubs using BBC Basic for Windows, for example.

 

[AndrewE]

Exactly. And the TOCs knew the risks involved - they knew it was a new project. I think it is called “caveat emptor”.

Interesting to see the amount of vitriol going Porterbrook’s way. Yet everyone seems to think the 230s will work fine out of the box, on totally different duties to what they have worked before.

er, I wasn't aware that a 230 has actually run anywhere, let alone worked a duty that a rail passenger (or even crew) would recognise!

 

[samuelmorris]

Interesting to see the amount of vitriol going Porterbrook’s way. Yet everyone seems to think the 230s will work fine out of the box, on totally different duties to what they have worked before.

That seems very unlikely. Having followed the 230 thread since the early days, I can't say I saw many people expecting it to work out of the box. Quite a few were still expecting it to fail. Right now though, at least we have evidence that project is moving - test units have been videoed under diesel power, and units have been spotted with the WMR livery in readiness for deployment. That's a lot more than can be said about the 769 project. When footage of a dynamic test appears, people's attitudes may very well change.