Grumpy Git
On Moderation
On 29th April, I was driving north through Pontlottyn on the A469 at about 13:00 and a TfW liveried 769 had just departed en route to Rhymney.
Interesting to note that Northern had 5 or 6 769s out working yesterday, including diesel / electric power changeover en route. Whereas TfW were able to muster a single 769 (diesel only) on the Rhymney services.My opinion Tfw are doing their level best and not only that but going well beyond the needs off execptiton etc. By going that extra mile. All around using all Pacers to the very very end. And any 769s are out. Avoiding any cancellations possible and any shortformed booked working.
Unlike northern which are standing in the hall off shame. For last November when Pacers withdrew early and customers left behind.
Most certainly TFW need to be highly recommended for what they are doing at the momment. Even the security staff are very excellent as well especially on the valley lines in this challenging circumstances.
It's a pleasure to travel on tfw Pacers and 769 at the momment. Tfw again in my opinion are working hard and need praise for this . Well done tfw in very hard circumstances beyond your control
I'd replace the word 'ambitious' with naïve and foolish. But then it was Chris Grayling as Transport Secretary that signed off the 769 project.......Northern did already have experience with maintaining and fixing 319's so they had a better head start sorting out their 769's. I think TfW were a bit caught out by how badly bashed about the 769's they have were. If they had ordered 10 195's off the back of the Northern order they would be in service by now. This was an ambitious project and I hope other conversation projects take this into account.
I'd replace the word 'ambitious' with naïve and foolish. But then it was Chris Grayling as Transport Secretary that signed off the 769 project.......
Well there about 50 pages of how they work if you want a readIndeed, the 319s were slugs anyway, goodness knows how slow they must be in diesel mode?
Interesting to note that Northern had 5 or 6 769s out working yesterday, including diesel / electric power changeover en route. Whereas TfW were able to muster a single 769 (diesel only) on the Rhymney services.
Definitely a less than shameful performance from Northern. If TfW are indeed 'pulling out all the stops' to get their 769s in service (and indeed, why wouldn't they), makes you wonder whether they're pulling the right stops in the right order - because it doesn't seem to be working very well....
These posters don't seem to have anything else to offer in threads about 319s or 769s. Once their drivers understand how they are best driven, the broken record whingeing here will eventually cease.Well there about 50 pages of how they work if you want a read
What is with the constant these units must fail? it just goes to show how many negative people there are on this forum and most are comenting on stuff they have no idea about and have not been within 100 miles
Not a whinge, merely stating a fact, (and please point me to where I suggested I want them to fail).
I'll say it in more agreeable language for those offended: the 319s have poor acceleration, goodness knows how poor they must accelerate when in diesel mode?
I would however suggest they are a "train on the cheap" for areas which never include the London or Home Counties routes, (i.e. Chat Moss gets wired, London gets new trains, North-West gets the 319s)
I once read an article in "Rail" in the late 1980's regarding how much energy is used when driving electric traction in an "aggressive" way as opposed to a in "gentle" way. The study showed, that driving with a faster rate of acceleration from a standing start actually used less energy overall point to point, as you have more time effectively "coasting" once up to speed in most circumstances.In fairness though the 319s weren't sluggish on Thameslink, the issue is apparently the way Northern drivers were instructed to drive them. They're no FLIRT by any means but they aren't notably slower than any other MK3 based EMU.
I would however suggest they are a "train on the cheap" for areas which never include the London or Home Counties routes, (i.e. Chat Moss gets wired, London gets new trains, North-West gets the 319s)
The largest fleet of them is being built for services in the Home Counties?
Oh dear, this thread has decended into yet another London vs the North argument.I would however suggest they are a "train on the cheap" for areas which never include Londonor Home Countiesroutes, (i.e. Chat Moss gets wired, London gets new trains, North-West gets the 319s)
Did the 319s that went to London Midland never run into London?I would however suggest they are a "train on the cheap" for areas which never include Londonor Home Countiesroutes, (i.e. Chat Moss gets wired, London gets new trains, North-West gets the 319s)
Did the 319s that went to London Midland never run into London?
That's because the LM services were run entirely under OLE. What would be your point about them not being 769s?Not as a 769.
It won’t be the original coach from 426 as the chassis is twisted beyond repair. Still waiting vehicle detail to be confirmed by PorterbrookDoes anybody know the formation of 769426 please?
I have a source suggesting that 3 of the coaches came from 319426 and the other is a driving vehicle from 319374 - either 77485 or 77484. This would tie in with what others have said about it originally only having 3 coaches due to corrosion issues with the 4th that was originally planned. If anyone can shed any light it would be appreciated.
Cheers
Edit: Ignore this, just found out that the original driving car from 319426 is now being added back to the formation hence the unit's return to Brush
True (I don't think LM ever had 769s or plans to get any did they?), but your post (that I was responding to) said "London gets new trains, North-West gets the 319s" (bold added by me) so you were talking about 319s anyway there and not 769s.Not as a 769.
They may be more fuel efficient (I've no idea how to find out) but I don't think they will ever beat the performance of the 150s or Pacers. I've done several runs on 769s. The drivers are definitely going for it a lot more now but in every measurable way, they are still slightly slower than 150s. Pacers were the fastest when they were let loose on their own. They actually have the same power to weight ratio as a 175.Once TfW drivers and maintainers get the feel of them they will probably prove to be far better than the 142/143/150/156 current encumbents as DMUs.
They may be more fuel efficient (I've no idea how to find out) but I don't think they will ever beat the performance of the 150s or Pacers. I've done several runs on 769s. The drivers are definitely going for it a lot more now but in every measurable way, they are still slightly slower than 150s. Pacers were the fastest when they were let loose on their own. They actually have the same power to weight ratio as a 175.
Good question. The only time they'll ever get above 60 mph is downhill from Heath High Level to Cardiff Queen Street.I’m sure this will have been answered somewhere previously, but what is the top speed of a 769 on diesel? If it’s over 75mph but there’s nowhere they can actually stretch their legs their gearing is a disadvantage. If on the other hand they can and do get to 90-100mph that should make up for any shortfall in acceleration (assuming a decent length run at speed).
They will do 100+ on dieselI’m sure this will have been answered somewhere previously, but what is the top speed of a 769 on diesel? If it’s over 75mph but there’s nowhere they can actually stretch their legs their gearing is a disadvantage. If on the other hand they can and do get to 90-100mph that should make up for any shortfall in acceleration (assuming a decent length run at speed).
eventually - on level track.They will do 100+ on diesel
I’m sure this will have been answered somewhere previously, but what is the top speed of a 769 on diesel? If it’s over 75mph but there’s nowhere they can actually stretch their legs their gearing is a disadvantage. If on the other hand they can and do get to 90-100mph that should make up for any shortfall in acceleration (assuming a decent length run at speed).
Ah right, thanks for that info. I shall sit tight until further info is knownIt won’t be the original coach from 426 as the chassis is twisted beyond repair. Still waiting vehicle detail to be confirmed by Porterbrook
426 in the yard at canton next to a class 67 at the western end minus its original driving carriage at the Eastern end of the train.It won’t be the original coach from 426 as the chassis is twisted beyond repair. Still waiting vehicle detail to be confirmed by Porterbrook