Class 314 Withdrawals

[Highlandspring]

203 still has a local work restriction and isn't allowed on Inverclydes.

 

[Bod]

OK thanks so that could impinge on Cathcart Circles as well. I might be out of luck looking for it on a weekend then as more likely to do 1718 Neilston weekday diagram.

 

[snookertam]

OK thanks so that could impinge on Cathcart Circles as well. I might be out of luck looking for it on a weekend then as more likely to do 1718 Neilston weekday diagram.

No you'll likely find it on Cathcart Circle services if it is working on the Newton route. In all likelihood it'll do anything where it doesn't need to go very fast.

 

[Highlandspring]

The restriction is no Inverclydes. So Gourock and Wemyss Bay no, Canal, Neilston and Circles yes.

 

[alexf380]

Perhaps @Highlandspring will know, since the 385s have been reinstated, have the two 314s been re-withdrawn or are they still running?

 

[Highlandspring]

They're still running as of this morning, 207 is out on GW101 and 213 is unallocated a Shields.

 

[alexf380]

Interesting, thank you very much.

 

[snookertam]

I realise we're maybe a bit early, but just wondering if there is any word on the introduction of 4 car cl380s to the Neilston line in December? Have any proposed diagrams been seen at all?

I can't imagine it will be all Neilston workings as doing so would probably leave other routes short.

 

[Bod]

If 203 and 213 are on local duties then does this mean they will be the next to go if they have traction motors isolated rather than 207 and 212? I gather 203 was out on its own yesterday. I am hoping to get 203 next weekend.

 

[Southsider]

If 203 and 213 are on local duties then does this mean they will be the next to go if they have traction motors isolated rather than 207 and 212? I gather 203 was out on its own yesterday. I am hoping to get 203 next weekend.

203 on a Newton run at lunchtime today. One blue and two Carmine sets parked in the siding at Shields when I passed.

 

[Fleetwood Boy]

203 on a Newton run at lunchtime today. One blue and two Carmine sets parked in the siding at Shields when I passed.

203 seems something of a regular paired up with another 314 on 1737 Neilston. Done that a few days this week.

 

[Fleetwood Boy]

No less than four 314s on shed at Shields this evening peak. (205 207 211 213 I think). Don’t know when I last saw that many. Can’t be long till some get withdrawn again.

 

[Highlandspring]

213 is stopped for maintenance, 203 and 209 are on local working restrictions. 214 and 215 are multi only.

 

[Bod]

Thanks I will have to take a gamble and hope that 203 is out next Saturday and Sunday.

 

[hexagon789]

213 is stopped for maintenance, 203 and 209 are on local working restrictions. 214 and 215 are multi only.

So 203 and 209 have motors isolated then? And how does the multi-only restriction cone about? Just curious.

 

[jazza374]

So 203 and 209 have motors isolated then? And how does the multi-only restriction cone about? Just curious.

Possibly faulty cab equipment at one end that they can join to another unit in the middle of a six car set, therefore negating the need to use that cab. Certainly used to happen like that with older London Underground stock (A, C, D stock for example)

 

[hexagon789]

Possibly faulty cab equipment at one end that they can join to another unit in the middle of a six car set, therefore negating the need to use that cab. Certainly used to happen like that with older London Underground stock (A, C, D stock for example)

That makes sense. I considered it might be issues with certain cabs, therefore needing them "boxed-in" but I'm far more used to hearing "non-multi" than "multi-only".

 

[snookertam]

So 203 and 209 have motors isolated then? And how does the multi-only restriction cone about? Just curious.

Can be defective cab equipment as the poster above said, which means that the unit will be multi only at that end. Can also be a performance issue or related defect, meaning that it's decided the unit should only run attached to another to avoid possible loss of time running as a single unit.

 

[The_Engineer]

Possibly faulty cab equipment at one end that they can join to another unit in the middle of a six car set, therefore negating the need to use that cab. Certainly used to happen like that with older London Underground stock (A, C, D stock for example)

If these units had 1/2 the motors cut-out, the same a one power car being dead, then it would also have a multi-only restriction.

With DC motors, when only half the motors are working on a unit it accelerates at a lower rate and the train balances at a lower top speed (and higher motor current), it means the motors are drawing the higher currents for a longer period, This is within the short term (one hour) rating limits of the motor, but not the continuous rating. If you exceed the continuous rating for more than one hour, even though you're within the one hour rating, you risk overheating the motors and damaging the insulation, and so lead to potential motor failures.

Operating with another good unit means the train is effectively at 3/4 power instead of 1/2 power, and the motor continuous rating CAN accommodate the extra motor current without damage. Hence the 314s can run multi only, and not singly, with 1/2 motors cut out. This was requirement when BR specified these and similar units at that time.

The half-power situation is specified and designed to give enough time for a single unit to run at least one hour in service to complete its run, before being run or towed back to depot. It was included in the BR specification that a good unit should be able to rescue a dead unit (again 1/2 power) and get it to a siding or depot to clear running lines within the one hour period, as were doing repeated starts of a unit on 1/2 power on a specified incline without motor overheating.

Early in my career, I was present at on-line type testing in 1979 of a very similar build (Class 507 units) for both repeated starts on an incline (northbound out of Moorfield onto the original viaduct) and dead unit rescue from Southport to Kirkdate depot. Not done one after the other of course!! Unit 507.012 was used if I recall correctly...…

 

[hexagon789]

Can be defective cab equipment as the poster above said, which means that the unit will be multi only at that end. Can also be a performance issue or related defect, meaning that it's decided the unit should only run attached to another to avoid possible loss of time running as a single unit.

I can understand running a unit with motors out as part of a longer set, so I wondered if the multi-only restriction was related to that.

 

[hexagon789]

The half-power situation is specified and designed to give enough time for a single unit to run at least one hour in service to complete its run, before being run or towed back to depot. It was included in the BR specification that a good unit should be able to rescue a dead unit (again 1/2 power) and get it to a siding or depot to clear running lines within the one hour period, as were doing repeated starts of a unit on 1/2 power on a specified incline without motor overheating.

Is that still included in modern unit specifications?

 

[The_Engineer]

Is that still included in modern unit specifications?

I am not sure…. I was not involved with new build towards the end of my career, only renovation and enhancement projects.

However, all modern rolling stock now utilises inverter-driven AC motors with microprocessor control. The modern controls allow you to twiddle software to limit the currents within the motor continuous rating when you lose motors or a complete car of traction packages. This is at the expense of a degraded train performance, but dependant on the number of motors and motored axles in an EMU or locomotive it can be sufficient to keep the train in normal service, or allow the train to get back to depot, without motor damage, and less likely to cause service disruption.

N.B. - the repeated starts on inclines was a tougher requirement on the starting resistors used on DC supply resistance-controlled stock (i.e. 507s but not 314s) rather than the motors. This specified performance duty was more to test the resistors, which would be designed for this occasional duty, but motor temperature also needed to be checked. The resistor grids were short-time rated only, as they were normally only used for a brief period in starting from a standstill up to a certain speed. The incline starts were a specified emergency duty, and had to be type tested to show the resistors could withstand this use without permanent damage. Modern rolling stock with AC drives can be monitored and controlled so much better to protect the equipment against use outside their ratings

 

[hexagon789]

I am not sure…. I was not involved with new build towards the end of my career, only renovation and enhancement projects.

However, all modern rolling stock now utilises inverter-driven AC motors with microprocessor control. The modern controls allow you to twiddle software to limit the currents within the motor continuous rating when you lose motors or a complete car of traction packages. This is at the expense of a degraded train performance, but dependant on the number of motors and motored axles in an EMU or locomotive it can be sufficient to keep the train in normal service, or allow the train to get back to depot, without motor damage, and less likely to cause service disruption.

N.B. - the repeated starts on inclines was a tougher requirement on the starting resistors used on DC supply resistance-controlled stock (i.e. 507s but not 314s) rather than the motors. This specified performance duty was more to test the resistors, which would be designed for this occasional duty, but motor temperature also needed to be checked. The resistor grids were short-time rated only, as they were normally only used for a brief period in starting from a standstill up to a certain speed. The incline starts were a specified emergency duty, and had to be type tested to show the resistors could withstand this use without permanent damage. Modern rolling stock with AC drives can be monitored and controlled so much better to protect the equipment against use outside their ratings

Thank you very much for the detailed explanation.

 

[303032]

I was in Glasgow this morning and saw 15 of the 16 314's. The workings I saw them on were:

314203 on 10.20 and 13.20 services to Newton via Queens Park
314202+314204 on 10.35 Glasgow Central - Neilston
314216 10.55 Glasgow Central - Gourock
314210 10.57 Glasgow Central - Weymss Bay
314214+314215 11.05 Glasgow Central - Neilston
314206 11.12 Glasgow Central - Paisley Canal
314208 11.35 Glasgow Central - Neilston

314201 and 314209 were stabled at Corkerhill
314205, 314207, 314211 and 314213 were stabled at Shields

The only set I didn't see was 314212.

 

[Craig2601]

This guys been posting links to his YouTube channel on multiple threads, account created today for four advertisements for channel but couldn’t see a report button so had to write this instead.

 

[hexagon789]

This guys been posting links to his YouTube channel on multiple threads, account created today for four advertisements for channel but couldn’t see a report button so had to write this instead.

To the left of the quote and reply buttons, you'll see three lines one above the other, the report option is via that button.

 

[Craig2601]

To the left of the quote and reply buttons, you'll see three lines one above the other, the report option is via that button.

Ahh thanks for that.

 

[hexagon789]

Ahh thanks for that.

No worries.

 

[SC318250]

Is 314212 still stored at Yoker, or did it return to Shields?

 

[scotrail170407]

This guys been posting links to his YouTube channel on multiple threads, account created today for four advertisements for channel but couldn’t see a report button so had to write this instead.

Whoever runs the channel steals images from other channels without crediting them, and his own videos are pretty bad. God knows how he managed to get 12,000 subscribers