• Our booking engine at tickets.railforums.co.uk (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!

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

Sponsor Post - registered members do not see these adverts; click here to register, or click here to log in
R

RailUK Forums

swt_passenger

Veteran Member
Joined
7 Apr 2010
Messages
31,267
Which I didn't say. Employers are able to effectively exclude anyone by making an offer they can't refuse. In my specific case roughly half took redundancy on standard terms, half got TUPE'd and a small number got an enhanced offer. Clearing old management is a normal consideration.
I know you didn’t, but a “cutoff” was what the poster I was originally replying to thought.
 

pemma

Veteran Member
Joined
23 Jan 2009
Messages
31,474
Location
Knutsford
it's Transfer of Undertakings (Protection of Employment). Basically means you work for the new company under the same Ts & Cs as you had in the old company.

Importantly your contract start date remains the date you started working for the old employer not the date you are transferred to your new employer, which is relevant if you are ever made redundant.
 

EE Andy b1

Established Member
Joined
12 Dec 2013
Messages
1,212
Location
CLC
Haven't come across TUPE before. Could somebody explain please?

From Google....

The TUPE Regulations preserve employees' terms and conditions when a business or undertaking, or part of one, is transferred to a new employer. Any provision of any agreement (whether a contract of employment or not) is void so far as it would exclude or limit the rights granted under the Regulations
 

EE Andy b1

Established Member
Joined
12 Dec 2013
Messages
1,212
Location
CLC
Back to 769s...

So now they've got two Flex 769s on Great Central Railway for testing are they going to run them in multiple and does this hopefully mean a step up in the progress and re-build of these sets.
 

AM9

Veteran Member
Joined
13 May 2014
Messages
14,191
Location
St Albans
Nothing to do with 369s, plenty to do with 769s! :D:lol:
Very clever of you spotting a typo. However, the post is still relevant, all this talk about TUPE has nothing to do with the lass 769 programme. The title ofthe thread: 'Porterbrook Cl.769 'Flex' trains from 319s, initially for Northern' gives the clue.
 

EE Andy b1

Established Member
Joined
12 Dec 2013
Messages
1,212
Location
CLC
Yep sometimes.the conversation goes slightly off topic as you've probably noticed before in other threads which many people reply to as I was doing.
So get over it and back to Flex 769s which I had done in #2466!!
 

hooverboy

On Moderation
Joined
12 Oct 2017
Messages
1,372
Back to 769s...

So now they've got two Flex 769s on Great Central Railway for testing are they going to run them in multiple and does this hopefully mean a step up in the progress and re-build of these sets.
probably not.
the 769's are basically there to replace doubled up pacers/150's,so theoretically very little need to run in multiple.

might be done once or twice to prove "tow home" capability,but that's about it
 

AM9

Veteran Member
Joined
13 May 2014
Messages
14,191
Location
St Albans
Yep sometimes.the conversation goes slightly off topic as you've probably noticed before in other threads which many people reply to as I was doing.
So get over it and back to Flex 769s which I had done in #2466!!
I have nothing to 'get over' but thank you for acknowleding the drift.
 

trash80

Established Member
Joined
18 Aug 2015
Messages
1,204
Location
Birches Green
probably not.
the 769's are basically there to replace doubled up pacers/150's,so theoretically very little need to run in multiple.

might be done once or twice to prove "tow home" capability,but that's about it

Now maybe but in 5 years time? Its best to get the multiple capability working well now incase you need it in future though as we all know needs and plans never change :)
 

notlob.divad

Established Member
Joined
19 Jan 2016
Messages
1,609
probably not.
the 769's are basically there to replace doubled up pacers/150's,so theoretically very little need to run in multiple.

might be done once or twice to prove "tow home" capability,but that's about it

Now maybe but in 5 years time? Its best to get the multiple capability working well now incase you need it in future though as we all know needs and plans never change :)

I think I read that they will be testing in multiple and it would not surprise me if when it gets to mainline testing, they check to see if a converted unit still runs fine in multiple with a none converted 319. (Both running on electric). Whether they do the 319 on electric and the 769 on diesel would be interesting, but if it was me I'd test it, you never know.

Even if it is not required to run in multiple for passenger services, running ECS moves as multiples or pulling a locked out empty unit on the back of a passenger service to save an ECS move will undoubtedly be required at some point. Better to find out now rather than waiting until you need it and find it doesn't work.
 

EE Andy b1

Established Member
Joined
12 Dec 2013
Messages
1,212
Location
CLC
I think I read that they will be testing in multiple and it would not surprise me if when it gets to mainline testing, they check to see if a converted unit still runs fine in multiple with a none converted 319.

Even if it is not required to run in multiple for passenger services, running ECS moves as multiples or pulling a locked out empty unit on the back of a passenger service to save an ECS move will undoubtedly be required at some point. Better to find out now rather than waiting until you need it and find it doesn't work.

This would make sense to me especially for ECS (Empty Stock) moves. So maybe they will test a 319/769 combination once out on the mainline proper.
 

The_Engineer

Member
Joined
24 Mar 2018
Messages
524
This would make sense to me especially for ECS (Empty Stock) moves. So maybe they will test a 319/769 combination once out on the mainline proper.

And, don't forget, the GWR Class 769s are to supposed get used in multiple, when initially used as temporary as Class 387 stand-ins. Or will delivery be too late for that?? ;)
 

JN114

Established Member
Joined
28 Jun 2005
Messages
3,346
And, don't forget, the GWR Class 769s are to supposed get used in multiple, when initially used as temporary as Class 387 stand-ins. Or will delivery be too late for that?? ;)

No they aren’t for the zillionth time.

769s replace Turbos on Branches, Basingstokes etc.
Turbos replace 387s on Mainline suburban duties.
387s go away for mods and work HX services
Crossrail replaces Turbos once fully open.

769s will not be SDO fitted so will not be able to work stopping services to Padd in 8 car formation.
 

The_Engineer

Member
Joined
24 Mar 2018
Messages
524
No they aren’t for the zillionth time.

769s replace Turbos on Branches, Basingstokes etc.
Turbos replace 387s on Mainline suburban duties.
387s go away for mods and work HX services
Crossrail replaces Turbos once fully open.

769s will not be SDO fitted so will not be able to work stopping services to Padd in 8 car formation.

I know! Just trying to inject some humour. But the wink went un-noticed…..I'll do forty lines and retire to my padded cell for the night :)
 

Jpeg

Member
Joined
9 May 2017
Messages
44
Customers are going to be pretty upset when they have to go back to Turbos after being used to the 387s, could be more than a year of turbos I’m guessing before the 345s come?

What branches will the 769s run on?
 

MML

Member
Joined
25 Oct 2015
Messages
587
Are the various 769 fleets going to be fitted with improved seating ?
Having used the 319s on Thameslink services for many years, IMHO the worst aspect of these units was the low seating and limited legroom. Simply providing new seat covers will not improve the internal layout.
If the 769 units were fitted more modern upright seating, then legroom would improve and there would be more room for additional seating or luggage space.
769 would certainly be very useful on the Gatwick to Reading services, as the current 3-car turbos have inadequate seating capacity and insufficient luggage space for the current hourly service frequency.
 

Bletchleyite

Veteran Member
Joined
20 Oct 2014
Messages
97,540
Location
"Marston Vale mafia"
There are a number of seating layouts. The 2+2 Cityflyer layout is reasonably acceptable, with well-spaced bays on one side and well-spaced airlines on the other even though the Ashbourne seats are a bit rubbish. Then there's the Chapman-seated 319/2s which are probably the most comfortable thing the south WCML has ever seen - a definite bonus when one of those shows up.

The other layout (all facing 3+2) is rubbish, though, and sadly LNR has some of those too.

First Class in any of them is easily the best in any commuter unit - proper wide 2+1.
 

samuelmorris

Established Member
Joined
18 Jul 2013
Messages
5,121
Location
Brentwood, Essex
Are the various 769 fleets going to be fitted with improved seating ?
Having used the 319s on Thameslink services for many years, IMHO the worst aspect of these units was the low seating and limited legroom. Simply providing new seat covers will not improve the internal layout.
If the 769 units were fitted more modern upright seating, then legroom would improve and there would be more room for additional seating or luggage space.
769 would certainly be very useful on the Gatwick to Reading services, as the current 3-car turbos have inadequate seating capacity and insufficient luggage space for the current hourly service frequency.
Would a 769 in 2+2 provide any seating capacity benefit over a 166?
 

js1000

Member
Joined
14 Jun 2014
Messages
1,011
Are the various 769 fleets going to be fitted with improved seating ?
Having used the 319s on Thameslink services for many years, IMHO the worst aspect of these units was the low seating and limited legroom. Simply providing new seat covers will not improve the internal layout.
If the 769 units were fitted more modern upright seating, then legroom would improve and there would be more room for additional seating or luggage space.
769 would certainly be very useful on the Gatwick to Reading services, as the current 3-car turbos have inadequate seating capacity and insufficient luggage space for the current hourly service frequency.
The low seating is the weirdest thing about the 319s. Clearly ergonomics wasn't paid much attention to during the design stage.
 

MML

Member
Joined
25 Oct 2015
Messages
587
The low seating is the weirdest thing about the 319s. Clearly ergonomics wasn't paid much attention to during the design stage.
Indeed. The seats themselves have loads of cushioning but they remain really uncomfortable due to the design. Your bum is so low in the seat, your knees are actually above it and the lower legs intertwine with those sitting opposite.
More upright seats with a reasonable amount of padding would be ideal.
 

hooverboy

On Moderation
Joined
12 Oct 2017
Messages
1,372
Indeed. The seats themselves have loads of cushioning but they remain really uncomfortable due to the design. Your bum is so low in the seat, your knees are actually above it and the lower legs intertwine with those sitting opposite.
More upright seats with a reasonable amount of padding would be ideal.
+1

the low seat height is actually what causes the feeling of restricted legroom, as your knees have to protrude way over the seat edge,your legs automatically stretch out to compensate.
raising the seat by an extra inch or two will feel a lot more comfortable. Legs in the correct position and also a better line-up between head/shoulders and window, which will give an improved view and should feel much more spacious.
(FWIW a lot of the 15x units also have the same problem vis a vis seat height)

the seat pitch is generally OK,as is the padding.
 

MatthewRead

On Moderation
Joined
21 Nov 2014
Messages
1,636
Location
West london
No they aren’t for the zillionth time.

769s replace Turbos on Branches, Basingstokes etc.
Turbos replace 387s on Mainline suburban duties.
387s go away for mods and work HX services
Crossrail replaces Turbos once fully open.

769s will not be SDO fitted so will not be able to work stopping services to Padd in 8 car formation.
Actually it says on wikipedia 769's will operate some services out of Paddington! https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/British_Rail_Class_769#Great_Western_Railway
 

Pshambro

Member
Joined
4 Oct 2015
Messages
49
There is often a lot of discussion on here around there being a valid technical or commercial reason for a suboptimal situation which the public for whatever reason don’t grasp.

If people end up shoehorned onto 165s on the mainline and they look out the window at all the new 345s stabled at OOC I have a feeling we will be very much back in that territory.
 

37201xoIM

Member
Joined
29 Apr 2016
Messages
334
the 769's are basically there to replace doubled up pacers/150's ....
Apologies if this is slightly pedantic, but that's not quite accurate - they are coming to NT basically to provide desperately needed extra capacity. To the extent that the 14x and 153s are planned to leave the franchise, you could say that the 769s are indirectly replacing those classes, but certainly not (most unfortunately) replacing the 150s let alone other units of the Sprinter family.

Overwhelmingly it's about delays to, and cuts in the scope of, electrification (including e.g. Windermere and Notlob - Wigan) - and the general DMU crisis, if I can call it that. As for replacing doubled-up units, that will be the case in some instances, but the reality is that an awful lot is still 2-car DMUs, even on routes in the frame for 769s and even in the peaks - and that's just per the diagrams, let alone what actually limps in on the day!

At the end of the day, the numbers that come out of the original franchise commitments for ARN for numbers of vehicles are frightening, to me, in terms of just how little the fleet is supposed to grow in total, despite the TSR commitments and the commitments to get crowding down to national levels - as well as accommodating fairly ambitious growth forecasts!

And yes, somebody believed strongly enough that the sums would add up that they were willing to sign this franchise agreement off.....! #cognitivedissonance #opinionengineering
 
Last edited:

Top