Our new ticketing site is now live! Using either this or the original site (both powered by TrainSplit) helps support the running of the forum with every ticket purchase! Find out more and ask any questions/give us feedback in this thread!
In the former 508 trailer in a 455/7, you have to press and hold the door open button for it to work, while in a native 455 car a momentary press will work.
There is a sign near the buttons on the inside of the 508 cars but people still get caught out.
Why do the door buttons work differently, and was there ever an attempt to make them work the same?
Presumably there was an improvement in technology between the PEPs and the 455s but the difference wasn’t great enough to warrant expenditure on alterations.
The door buttons weren't the only problem encountered when the 508 cars were first combined with the 3 car 455/7's, but overall, they worked, and provided a step up passenger wise over the SUB's (and EPB's) they replaced. But it does still put a wry smile on my boat-race when travelling in the 508 car and witness the 'hss-clunk' when someone just prods the button momentarily and the door doesn't move.....my warped sense of humour.
To open the doors on a 317 you have to push the button firmly for about half a second. Most people don't cope with this very well. It's got much worse in the past few months. In my experience over 75% of adults, of all ages, fail to get the doors open at the first attempt. The school kids have...
That was just Merseyrail policy to have all doors open at all stops like on London Underground. The surplus 508s that moved to Kent and the Watford DC had door controls refitted.
In the former 508 trailer in a 455/7, you have to press and hold the door open button for it to work, while in a native 455 car a momentary press will work.
There is a sign near the buttons on the inside of the 508 cars but people still get caught out.
Why do the door buttons work differently, and was there ever an attempt to make them work the same?
Because the feed to the door open solenoid is not retained until the door interlock maglock is broken, ie the door starts to physically move. If you remove your finger from the button before this has happened, the solenoid will de-energise and the door won’t open.
The door buttons weren't the only problem encountered when the 508 cars were first combined with the 3 car 455/7's, but overall, they worked, and provided a step up passenger wise over the SUB's (and EPB's) they replaced. But it does still put a wry smile on my boat-race when travelling in the 508 car and witness the 'hss-clunk' when someone just prods the button momentarily and the door doesn't move.....my warped sense of humour.
I don't want to major fall off topic but what other problems did the 508's trailers have when inserted to a 455/7? I saw a NSE troubleshooting video on the 455/7 and they mentioned something operationally the 508 trailer was similar to a normal 455 trailer.
I remember using 455/7s years ago in BR days when the low back seats existed and found the 508s hissing loud before opening as well explained in the previous comment. Also, the corridor doors including window seemed to be a tad wider than the 455 ones.
Preferred the normal 455 doors as responsive and when closing they went 90% closed,slight millisecond pause, then clunk!
I believe (it was a long time ago) that there were problems with the heating in winter, the 508 trailer would sometimes be at odds with the 455 vehicles. It may have only been certain units, but the subject did get raised more than once in planning circles, so am guessing there was some truth to it?
I don’t mind if the thread turns into more of a general discussion about the 508 trailers in 455/7s. I find the subject interesting. I can change the thread title if need be.
Well if it's a general discussion about ex 508 trailers, I'll add that my train home today (2C49) was shot at by an air rifle, shattering one of the windows in 455721's 508 coach...
Well if it's a general discussion about ex 508 trailers, I'll add that my train home today (2C49) was shot at by an air rifle, shattering one of the windows in 455721's 508 coach...
As someone from the signaller grade at CJ in the late 70's we were victims of scum bags who shot at us from the Grant road estate (Windsor side) back then. There was a bullet hole in the pain of glass behind my position (as a booking boy) in Clapham B box, throughout my time there.
We as signallers/box boys were on our guard 24/7, it what was what it was at that time.
I believe (it was a long time ago) that there were problems with the heating in winter, the 508 trailer would sometimes be at odds with the 455 vehicles. It may have only been certain units, but the subject did get raised more than once in planning circles, so am guessing there was some truth to it?
In the winter the 508 trailers are always either much warmer than the rest of the train, or broken and freezing cold. They're definitely broken less frequently than they were a few years ago though.
I also remember a dodgy double glazing window with water almost half way in between the panes in a 508 trailer. I think the water came in through a bad seal and not pushed by the adjacent door mechanism as door pockets are used.
And those trailers used to have squeaky brakes when stopping!
Have always found the 508 oddity with the 455/7 quite intriguing though likely most commuters do not notice.
And reminisecent of 4SUBs in the post-war era, many of which were pre-war 3SUBs with an odd (and definitetly non-matching) trailer from elsewhere. The 3SUbs were, on the whole, converted from pre-grouping hauled stock - the additional trailer could have come from a disbanded trailer unit, or it might be one of the "augmentation trailers" of Bulleid design, which would later be incorporated in new all-steel 4SUBs: and some later still into EPBs.
Here is a unit of ex-LSWR stock with a Bulleid augmentation trailer - the wider body profile can be seen.
The District Line also had a habit, particularly with the Q stock, of mix and match. Q23 (formerly G) stock with a Q38 as the second car
Thank you for those pics. The first a classic case of how the SR has always repurposed things on a rolling basis as and when the need arose, and the second the Q38 car reminds me of my early days on the job when everything in p1-4 at Wimbledon was CO/COP stock. Always admired that body design, albeit LUL wise the Standard stock is my fav (for other reasons).
Back to 455/7 etc, took the attached which shows a few 8 car 455 sets, all of which have one 455/7 as part of their consist. This also shows part of the success of the original 10 car (SWT) plan, in that additional EMU capacity was successfully added to the network to allow stock to be cascaded away from Wimbledon depot which in turn allowed additional space at the latter for 10 car 458's etc.
Mention above about squeeking brakes on 508 trailers in 455/7s reminds me that the suspension levelers (for want of the technical term) used to squeek like anything on the 508s when they were new. I beleive they were eventually taken off, or replaced by something that didn't squeek !!
The memories keep coming back, at night in the 90s could tell if a 508 was in the set as the carriage open door yellow light used to be quite a bit higher than the other three and the light was much smaller. They standardised pep stock late 90's with a more standard door open light further down like fitted to mk3 carriages.
Also a small benefit of 508 trailers in summer was the window being bigger and would stay open unlike 455 carriages where a passing train would slam the two piece ones shut
When privatisation started, they put tube style rectangle adverts in the 455s and the mounting did not work as well for the 508 trailers due to the squarer corner to the roof.
Lastly the 508 carriage used has 455 numbered on it on the outside by the carriage connector, more to do with the set than the original coach type.
Firstly apologies to others who may well have noticed these previously in other discussions ref 455's but for DM352 a couple of views I took, albeit 43 years apart!
Attachments
BJ-508 interior, car 71552, Waterloo M-W rounder service.130923..JPG
Because the feed to the door open solenoid is not retained until the door interlock maglock is broken, ie the door starts to physically move. If you remove your finger from the button before this has happened, the solenoid will de-energise and the door won’t open.
So the technology changed sometime between the first series of class 317s and the first series of 455s. I've already forgotten how the doors on the second series of class 317s behaved. I.e, did they work the same as the first series, or like the 455s?
They were part of the Class 508 sets when built, which were 4-car sets for South West suburban services out of Waterloo. They were later transferred to Merseyside to replace the Class 503s, but only 3-car sets were needed. Therefore one trailer was removed and used in the second batch of Class 455s (Class 455/7).
They were part of the Class 508 sets when built, which were 4-car sets for South West suburban services out of Waterloo. They were later transferred to Merseyside to replace the Class 503s, but only 3-car sets were needed. Therefore one trailer was removed and used in the second batch of Class 455s (Class 455/7).
Thanks! But was that the plan from the start? I mean would you not have intended to have a complete matching set of carriages when you built the 455s ? Am I making sense?
Thanks! But was that the plan from the start? I mean would you not have intended to have a complete matching set of carriages when you built the 455s ? Am I making sense?
As far as I know there was no plan to make an additional matching trailer in the 43 unit subclass and if they did, the 43 spare trailers may have trouble being absorbed elsewhere for 3/6 car pep diagrams. Also the government at the time was not a huge fan of railways where we were getting 3 for 2 carriage DMU replacements elsewhere.
Most folks don't notice the oddity except someone like me!
The 508 carriages blend in better with red colours than BR blue from when I saw the first one passing through Clapham in the mid 80's thinking something doesn't look right!
I read somewhere years back the Merseyrail was going to be 4 and 2 car pep stock but cannot find a source and it could have been assumed at the times of the early prototypes.
I suspect it was more a case of the timing of events in general, as in Merseyside's need for additional (3 car) units of the PEP design/profile, and the gradually increasing new build 455 ramping up, combined with that old chestnut - costs!
Seem to recall someone mentioned on here many moons ago that there had been a suggestion of a 'bigger picture' plan in this regard (at BRB level), even before the 508's were delivered as new to the SR/SWD, but I never heard of any such thing. They (508's) were ours (SW's) to keep as far as we lower minions were concerned at the time, the plans to transfer them North only coming along at a later date.
My recollection from the time (so possibly suspect now) is that as Big Jumby says, the 508s were intended to stay permanently on the south-western division. But SWD were used to heavyweight Southern stock, and didn't like the lightweight aluminium BR units, which were considered to have resulting winter adhesion problems (leaf fall and ice). So when Merseyside needed new DC stock, it offered an opportunity to find the 508s a new home, and to replace them with a new heavyweight steel fleet (the 455s) for the South Western.
As far as I know there was no plan to make an additional matching trailer in the 43 unit subclass and if they did, the 43 spare trailers may have trouble being absorbed elsewhere for 3/6 car pep diagrams. Also the government at the time was not a huge fan of railways where we were getting 3 for 2 carriage DMU replacements elsewhere.
Most folks don't notice the oddity except someone like me!
The 508 carriages blend in better with red colours than BR blue from when I saw the first one passing through Clapham in the mid 80's thinking something doesn't look right!
I read somewhere years back the Merseyrail was going to be 4 and 2 car pep stock but cannot find a source and it could have been assumed at the times of the early prototypes.
I suspect it was more a case of the timing of events in general, as in Merseyside's need for additional (3 car) units of the PEP design/profile, and the gradually increasing new build 455 ramping up, combined with that old chestnut - costs!
Seem to recall someone mentioned on here many moons ago that there had been a suggestion of a 'bigger picture' plan in this regard (at BRB level), even before the 508's were delivered as new to the SR/SWD, but I never heard of any such thing. They (508's) were ours (SW's) to keep as far as we lower minions were concerned at the time, the plans to transfer them North only coming along at a later date.
My recollection from the time (so possibly suspect now) is that as Big Jumby says, the 508s were intended to stay permanently on the south-western division. But SWD were used to heavyweight Southern stock, and didn't like the lightweight aluminium BR units, which were considered to have resulting winter adhesion problems (leaf fall and ice). So when Merseyside needed new DC stock, it offered an opportunity to find the 508s a new home, and to replace them with a new heavyweight steel fleet (the 455s) for the South Western.
I could be wrong, but I understood that the original plan was for both the Wirral and SW division to have 455-type stock (known as Class 510 at one time) but it was decided that it would be more practical for each area to have a single fleet rather than a mixed one.
== Doublepost prevention - post automatically merged: ==
Even my then-three year old knew the difference - "red carriages" and "yellow carriages" (the colour of the insides of the doors in BR days). refurbishment) - without any prompting from me
I read somewhere years back the Merseyrail was going to be 4 and 2 car pep stock but cannot find a source and it could have been assumed at the times of the early prototypes.
That's something that has just been going through my head, as at the time the 4 car and 2 car PEP's were still hovering around, albeit withdrawn from revenue service by the time the 508's were built. AFAIR only ever witnessed the 2 car (as a silver/bare metal 2 car unit) on Shields Road if my memory is half correct, although 4001/4002 being on my old patch I got to ride on, the last occasion being on an UP Sheppy service one dark, rainy, dismal November evening in 1976, just before they were taken out of service. Remember the brightness of the interior compared to my usual SUB/EPB modes of transport, but also recall how all the windows were so misted up that many people were struggling to see the stations/names they wanted to alight at, not helped by station lighting also being dimmer in many cases back then.
Couple of not so good images, which I may have posted previously, so apologies for any repetitiveness ! The PEP, although it may appear that the silver/bare metal 2 car is sandwiched between the two blue 4 car units, this is not so, as the siding they are sitting on could only accommodate 8 cars between the buffers and the boarded crossing in the foreground, so suggest that 4002 had one silver MOBS at the time?
The 3 car 508 (visible) 508010, plus at least one other, being on Birkenhead shed awaiting entry to service with Merseyrail.
== Doublepost prevention - post automatically merged: ==
I could be wrong, but I understood that the original plan was for both the Wirral and SW division to have 455-type stock (known as Class 510 at one time) but it was decided that it would be more practical for each area to have a single fleet rather than a mixed one.
BOLD highlighted by me: Yes, a very fair point, from a planning, and all operational angles come to that, a single fleet type is the optimum for any one specific service group, which is why even today the 701 concept on SWR was potentially/should have been a game changer (in theory) for the old L&SW area, the nearest to it being during the all steel 4 SUB era. But having said that, having come from an age when four different types operated side by side out of one maintenance facility, there are certain other issues (relating to a single fleet type) that may cause very real and valid concerns for some involved on the ground.
RailUK was launched on 6th June 2005 - so we've hit 20 years being the UK's most popular railway community! Read more and celebrate this milestone with us in this thread!
