GWR Class 769 information. (Units no longer with GWR - Off Lease March 23)

[zwk500]

I would assume there's one of the red signs (such as below) there as well - that sign is probably a reminder to the driver and is the same as all the 80x 'power changeover' signs dotted around the network.

Love that the NSE flash is still there above the 80x sign!

 

[Deepgreen]

I would assume there's one of the red signs (such as below) there as well - that sign is probably a reminder to the driver and is the same as all the 80x 'power changeover' signs dotted around the network.

View attachment 128360View attachment 128361

No red sign that I could see, but I could have missed it.

 

[TurboMan]

I would assume there's one of the red signs (such as below) there as well - that sign is probably a reminder to the driver and is the same as all the 80x 'power changeover' signs dotted around the network.

View attachment 128360View attachment 128361

The sign on the left ('Electric trains No access to...') is generally used where there is a risk of a pantograph being run off the OLE (although a pan down sign has also been used for 769s and 800s on the GW network). There's no such risk at Reigate so there's no such sign there.

I'm amazed they've used the word "Diesel" rather than "Self powered" or some other DfT-approved twaddle.

Self-powered is the term used by RIS-2713-RST (on multi-mode traction) because decarbonisation means that at some point in the future battery power, hydrogen power etc. will be what is used on traction operating away from electrified lines.

Judging by how the test run to Redhill on the 26th ran, is it likely the 8 car set will run on the 7th? I hope it does as while they aren't doing well, I really want to see one in service before they go for storage. I am assuming this is a final chance?

Not happening tomorrow (7th) unfortunately. Software issues with the ASDO system so the test run has been postponed. No new date as yet.

 

[Intercity110]

Why are they testing them if they’re not going into service?

 

[DelW]

Why are they testing them if they’re not going into service?

According to post 2671, the system being tested (ASDO) is also being fitted to 165s and 166s. (I don't know any more than is stated in that post).

Today's run is still in RTT, but as predicted above, it doesn't seem to have been activated.

 

[Intercity110]

According to post 2671, the system being tested (ASDO) is also being fitted to 165s and 166s. (I don't know any more than is stated in that post).

Ok thanks

 

[Ashley Hill]

Why is ASDO being fitted to Turbos?

 

[DelW]

Why is ASDO being fitted to Turbos?

This is speculation, since I don't know the answer:

Currently if a train formed of two units runs on the North Downs, one unit has to be locked out of use. Presumably ASDO would allow both to be in service, which would allow e.g. 2 x 2-car sets to be used.

Alternatively, maybe it's to allow for changes to services in the west when turbo diagrams are amended, as a result of HST withdrawal and NDL units staying at Reading?

 

[RPI]

Why is ASDO being fitted to Turbos?

So that multiples can be run, for example, on the Exmouth line you can't run 2 x 165 due to short platforms, same on the Barnstaple line.

 

[800301]

This is speculation, since I don't know the answer:

Currently if a train formed of two units runs on the North Downs, one unit has to be locked out of use. Presumably ASDO would allow both to be in service, which would allow e.g. 2 x 2-car sets to be used.

Alternatively, maybe it's to allow for changes to services in the west when turbo diagrams are amended, as a result of HST withdrawal and NDL units staying at Reading?

And it just so happens the system fitted is the same system that is currently fitted to the 769’s so they might as well get some use out of them

 

[Deepgreen]

The 0915 run from Reading was activated in RTT at 0815 but has not run, it seems. It also seems that anything connected to a 769 (in this case ASDO) is doomed to failure!

 

[TurboMan]

Alternatively, maybe it's to allow for changes to services in the west when turbo diagrams are amended, as a result of HST withdrawal and NDL units staying at Reading?

That's why the 16x ASDO project was first proposed several years ago, to allow for planned longer 16x formations in GWR's central region. But the pandemic overtook events, so there's less requirement for that currently.

16x ASDO is now being rolled out initially in the LTV/East region because although SDO isn't really required for the formations in this region, the system also includes OTCM (on-train camera monitoring, i.e., monitors in the driving cab displaying images from external cameras). All the platform-mounted DOO self-dispatch equipment (mirrors/monitors) in the east is life-expired, so having the monitors in the 16x cab means that there will no need to replace the platform-mounted equipment, thus saving £several million.

Having monitors in the cab also helps manage the risk of a PTI incident as they will remain active while the train starts away allowing the driver to make a final check (which you can't do with platform-mounted mirrors/monitors). Also, the ASDO part of the system includes correct-side door enable (CSDE) capability as protection against wrong-side door releases. So there are significant safety benefits even if the SDO part of the system isn't necessarily required.

And it just so happens the system fitted is the same system that is currently fitted to the 769’s so they might as well get some use out of them

Yes, same software, same database, and mostly the same hardware. But getting hold of a 769 to do some testing is much, much easier than getting hold of a 16x, so using the 769 as a test-bed helps the implementation on 16x to progress.

 

[Deepgreen]

Yes, same software, same database, and mostly the same hardware. But getting hold of a 769 to do some testing is much, much easier than getting hold of a 16x, so using the 769 as a test-bed helps the implementation on 16x to progress.

Harder to get two 769s together that work, perhaps. Yes, it makes sense to use the 769s. Is it planned only to do one return test run over the NDL with an 8 car formation - is one run enough for such testing?

 

[Ashley Hill]

So that multiples can be run, for example, on the Exmouth line you can't run 2 x 165 due to short platforms, same on the Barnstaple line.

Is this likely to happen?

That's why the 16x ASDO project was first proposed several years ago, to allow for planned longer 16x formations in GWR's central region. But the pandemic overtook events, so there's less requirement for that currently.

16x ASDO is now being rolled out initially in the LTV/East region because although SDO isn't really required for the formations in this region, the system also includes OTCM (on-train camera monitoring, i.e., monitors in the driving cab displaying images from external cameras). All the platform-mounted DOO self-dispatch equipment (mirrors/monitors) in the east is life-expired, so having the monitors in the 16x cab means that there will no need to replace the platform-mounted equipment, thus saving £several million.

Having monitors in the cab also helps manage the risk of a PTI incident as they will remain active while the train starts away allowing the driver to make a final check (which you can't do with platform-mounted mirrors/monitors). Also, the ASDO part of the system includes correct-side door enable (CSDE) capability as protection against wrong-side door releases. So there are significant safety benefits even if the SDO part of the system isn't necessarily required.


Yes, same software, same database, and mostly the same hardware. But getting hold of a 769 to do some testing is much, much easier than getting hold of a 16x, so using the 769 as a test-bed helps the implementation on 16x to progress.

Thanks for the reply.

 

[RPI]

Is this likely to happen?

Certainly the possibility of 4 car turbos in Devon shouldn't be ruled out in certain circumstances, its happened before where a 2 car 165 was covering a 166 on one of the "Golden trains" (ones that can't be short formed for certain sections), another 165 was coupled for the Exeter to Paignton section where there are no platform issues, but then had to be detached at St Davids before heading to Exmouth.

It would also make 5 cars Taunton Cardiff possible, again, probably not a daily occurrence but it allows flexibility

Likewise 6 cars Cardiff-Portsmouth if/when necessary.

 

[Anonymous10]

Certainly the possibility of 4 car turbos in Devon shouldn't be ruled out in certain circumstances, its happened before where a 2 car 165 was covering a 166 on one of the "Golden trains" (ones that can't be short formed for certain sections), another 165 was coupled for the Exeter to Paignton section where there are no platform issues, but then had to be detached at St Davids before heading to Exmouth.

It would also make 5 cars Taunton Cardiff possible, again, probably not a daily occurrence but it allows flexibility

Likewise 6 cars Cardiff-Portsmouth if/when necessary.

4 cars Bristol to Weymouth as well

 

[Deepgreen]

Of course, running 'Turbos' in multiple presents the problem of effective ticket selling and checking without gangway connections between units.

 

[800301]

Of course, running 'Turbos' in multiple presents the problem of effective ticket selling and checking without gangway connections between units.

That would also be assuming that enough turbo’s are fit enough to run in multiple…

I’m sure other TOC’s manage just fine

 

[WarrenTManager]

Does anyone know what system it is. Wondering if it is Hima-Sella Tracklink.

 

[TurboMan]

Does anyone know what system it is. Wondering if it is Hima-Sella Tracklink.

Petards, as fitted to class 745/755.

 

[Deepgreen]

That would also be assuming that enough turbo’s are fit enough to run in multiple…

I’m sure other TOC’s manage just fine

Which other TOCs use Turbos on lines where on-train ticket selling is the norm?

 

[dgl]

Petards, as fitted to class 745/755.

So this then, https://www.petards.com/our-solutions/eyetrain/ ,

Identifies train location using GNSS satellite input plus speed and distance measurement derived from the vehicle axles

 

[aleggatta]

Happy to be corrected, but as far as I was aware Petards provide DOO CCTV equipment, and don't have anything to do with the control of door releases?

 

[dgl]

Happy to be corrected, but as far as I was aware Petards provide DOO CCTV equipment, and don't have anything to do with the control of door releases?

Looking at their website their eyetrain solution has a whole host of available features, including GNSS (GPS) combined with axle distance information to do automated selectable door release, on top of all the CCTV stuff.

 

[TurboMan]

So this then, https://www.petards.com/our-solutions/eyetrain/ ,

Yes, that's the one, although as fitted to 16x and 769 on GWR, not including all the features (e.g. no pan cam), and with some additional features that GWR requested such as CSDE.

Happy to be corrected, but as far as I was aware Petards provide DOO CCTV equipment, and don't have anything to do with the control of door releases?

They do supply standalone CCTV and FFCCTV equipment, but in this case the system also controls selective door opening.

 

[RPI]

4 cars Bristol to Weymouth as well

They can and do run that route in four car formations already.

Of course, running 'Turbos' in multiple presents the problem of effective ticket selling and checking without gangway connections between units.

GWR has a fair number of Ticket Examiners which can be rostered on such trains as they are now, GWR also don't restrict guards to just riding in the rear set and can unit hop as necessary.

 

[Anonymous10]

They can and do run that route in four car formations already.

GWR has a fair number of Ticket Examiners which can be rostered on such trains as they are now, GWR also don't restrict guards to just riding in the rear set and can unit hop as necessary.

I've been on the route on a 4 car formation with rear 2 locked out of use between Weymouth and Westbury due to short platforms as announced by the guard

 

[Train Boy]

I've been on the route on a 4 car formation with rear 2 locked out of use between Weymouth and Westbury due to short platforms as announced by the guard

This is normally in relation to Castle Cary platform 3, which can only accommodate 3 coaches and is routine on Weymouth's 1111 departure.

 

[Anonymous10]

This is normally in relation to Castle Cary platform 3, which can only accommodate 3 coaches and is routine on Weymouth's 1111 departure.

Yes that would be it still would be useful for formations on the Weymouth line in any case

 

[BN 91119]

The sign on the left ('Electric trains No access to...') is generally used where there is a risk of a pantograph being run off the OLE (although a pan down sign has also been used for 769s and 800s on the GW network). There's no such risk at Reigate so there's no such sign there.


Self-powered is the term used by RIS-2713-RST (on multi-mode traction) because decarbonisation means that at some point in the future battery power, hydrogen power etc. will be what is used on traction operating away from electrified lines.


Not happening tomorrow (7th) unfortunately. Software issues with the ASDO system so the test run has been postponed. No new date as yet.

Ah thats a shame. I assume the new date will be put on here when its found out? Then after that all to Long Marston?