• 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

fgwrich

Established Member
Joined
15 Apr 2009
Messages
9,250
Location
Between Edinburgh and Exeter
From what I've heard, from a reliable source, there was an issue with exhaust gauge clearance, but it was more related to a crunch as the first unit negotiated a tight curve departing Loughborough sidings...

The exhaust clearance issue certainly is no rumour. It's one of the reasons why the project has suffered it's fair share of delays, and thankfully was discovered before certain 769s hit the valleys.
 
Sponsor Post - registered members do not see these adverts; click here to register, or click here to log in
R

RailUK Forums

The Ham

Established Member
Joined
6 Jul 2012
Messages
10,282
The exhaust clearance issue certainly is no rumour. It's one of the reasons why the project has suffered it's fair share of delays, and thankfully was discovered before certain 769s hit the valleys.

Deliberate or unintentional pun?
 

a_c_skinner

Established Member
Joined
21 Jun 2013
Messages
1,576
Was the Loughborough crunch part of the exhaust? That would mean a bigger redesign leading to re-testing.

I do hope these vehicles work. Northern's order (eight IIRC) is either eight too many - micro fleet woes, made worse by the departure of the 319s - or far too few. Even without the electrification cutbacks bi-mode should have been on Northern's shopping list. I've taken a self denying vow to not mention Barrow and Windermere on here but there are lots of other routes where bi-modes could reduce inner city diesel burn even if the bulk of the mileage isn't electric, though that would need agile, mobile switching from one mode to the other.
 

AM9

Veteran Member
Joined
13 May 2014
Messages
14,191
Location
St Albans
... Even without the electrification cutbacks bi-mode should have been on Northern's shopping list. I've taken a self denying vow to not mention Barrow and Windermere on here but there are lots of other routes where bi-modes could reduce inner city diesel burn even if the bulk of the mileage isn't electric, though that would need agile, mobile switching from one mode to the other.
That last sentence is key whether they run much of their diagrams on diesel or not, - key is the volume of diesel emissions in the environs of cities, - in Northern's case, Manchester, Liverpool, and even some places east of the Pennines should they be deployed there.
Has any figure of diesel consumption been released for the 769s. A comparison between a single 4-car unit in diesel mode and a pair of 150s or 156s would be very interesting. The 769s more recent engine design might plus the potential for diesel-electric to have a better power/torque curve for their intended duties notwithstanding their higher top speed limit, might well negate the theoretical impediment of the additional weight that they carry.
 
Last edited:

a_c_skinner

Established Member
Joined
21 Jun 2013
Messages
1,576
Do the 769's engines run in their more efficient power/revs range compared with conventional DMUs? That might in theory be possible. The other advantage of bi-modes is that they take advantage of rolling electrification.
 

Roose

Member
Joined
23 May 2014
Messages
250
How long before they try them up a hill, I wonder? Perhaps they will be reserved for flat routes?

;)
 

AM9

Veteran Member
Joined
13 May 2014
Messages
14,191
Location
St Albans
Do the 769's engines run in their more efficient power/revs range compared with conventional DMUs? That might in theory be possible. The other advantage of bi-modes is that they take advantage of rolling electrification.
The engine in a diesel electric should be run more efficiently than in a diesel mechanical. At start, peak power can be achieved by running the diesel engine at its most efficient speed allowing the motors to create maximum torque when it is needed at low speed. Even with a torque converter, the thermal efficiency of a mechanical transmission is lower than the generator and motors' conversion losses.
Once speeds rise with rail vehicles, much of the energy is already invested as kinetic energy, so the additional mass of DE is largely out of the equation. I understand than electric transmission requires lower maintennance than a hydraulic system including its cardan shafts, but others here might be able to verify that.
 

AM9

Veteran Member
Joined
13 May 2014
Messages
14,191
Location
St Albans
How long before they try them up a hill, I wonder? Perhaps they will be reserved for flat routes?

;)
Why is everybody here so concerned about 769 hill-climbing capability? Apart from adhesion, which can give any vehicle problems, the ability of diesel-electric stock to create maximum torque at zero revolutions means that it will climb any gradient that is normal on the railway, albeit slowly sometimes. The motors on the class 319 are rated for higher contiuous power than the two diesel gensets produce so they are unlikely to suffer from overheating. For proof of the 319s hill climbing ability, the gradients of 1:27 in the Thameslink core were climbed from a standing start for over 30 years with crush loads of passengers that give a gross weight far exceeding the weight of the 769s with their gensets and fuel tanks. Once on the open they would then run at speeds into the '90s on long rising gradients like the MML up to Borehamwood tunnel.
So which hills do you have concerns about in Lancashire?
 

a_c_skinner

Established Member
Joined
21 Jun 2013
Messages
1,576
I think one concern is adhesion because of the number of driven axles - 4; the Thameslink core will have better railhead conditions than a lot of hills outdoors near trees one assumes. Anyhow we will soon see; assuming they work properly and reliably.
 

superkev

Established Member
Joined
1 Mar 2015
Messages
2,682
Location
west yorkshire
Re 319/769 adhesion the similar 321s manage to climb out of Apperly Junction to Guisely probably better than the 333s which have less weight on the driven axles.
K
 

Bertie the bus

Established Member
Joined
15 Aug 2014
Messages
2,781
I do hope these vehicles work. Northern's order (eight IIRC) is either eight too many - micro fleet woes, made worse by the departure of the 319s - or far too few. Even without the electrification cutbacks bi-mode should have been on Northern's shopping list. I've taken a self denying vow to not mention Barrow and Windermere on here but there are lots of other routes where bi-modes could reduce inner city diesel burn even if the bulk of the mileage isn't electric, though that would need agile, mobile switching from one mode to the other.

They are basically a 150 with a pantograph. They would be totally unsuitable for Barrow, Windermere or other longer distance services. There is far more to a train, from a passenger's perspective, than what powers it.
 

transmanche

Established Member
Joined
27 Feb 2011
Messages
6,018
They are basically a 150 with a pantograph. They would be totally unsuitable for Barrow, Windermere or other longer distance services. There is far more to a train, from a passenger's perspective, than what powers it.
But in their former lives as 319/4s, their daily work used to be 'longer-distance' services from Bedford to Brighton: a similar distance and similar journey time.

The 319 has proved to be very flexible: the 319/3s were created with a metro style layout for the 'CityMetro' services, whilst the 319/2s were created with lower-density seating for Connex express London-Brighton services and even had a buffet! All you have to do is change the interior to suit the operation.
 

Bertie the bus

Established Member
Joined
15 Aug 2014
Messages
2,781
But in their former lives as 319/4s, their daily work used to be 'longer-distance' services from Bedford to Brighton: a similar distance and similar journey time.
Sorry, but that is just nonsense. The distance the service travels is of no importance. Virtually nobody travelled from Bedford to Brighton. Many people on Barrow - Manchester Airport services travel for 1 1/2 - 2 hours.
 

transmanche

Established Member
Joined
27 Feb 2011
Messages
6,018
Sorry, but that is just nonsense.
I see you totally ignored the section about the different interiors designed to suit the different types of work, as it didn't fit with your 'nonsense' point of view.

Virtually nobody travelled from Bedford to Brighton. Many people on Barrow - Manchester Airport services travel for 1 1/2 - 2 hours.
And I'm certain 'many' people travel from Bedford to Gatwick Airport for 1 3/4 hours too.
 
Last edited:

AM9

Veteran Member
Joined
13 May 2014
Messages
14,191
Location
St Albans
They are basically a 150 with a pantograph. ...
Apart from being 4-car, powered by diesel electric traction system, have a higher permitted top speed, have more luggage space ...

... They would be totally unsuitable for Barrow, Windermere or other longer distance services. There is far more to a train, from a passenger's perspective, than what powers it.
That's true for all trains, for instance their order of importance might be:
they are there to turn up at all
...
...
they are safe
...
...
they have enough space for the passengers wishing to board
they make more or less noise when running
they pollute more or less in service
...
...
they are more or less comfortable
...
...
and at the bottom of the list, they have lots of other characteristics that some here claim are important like windows that line up with seats, collectable numbers, weren't "London's cast offs" and so on.
 

Bertie the bus

Established Member
Joined
15 Aug 2014
Messages
2,781
I see you totally ignored the section about the different interiors designed to suit the different types of work, as it didn't fit with your 'nonsense' point of view.
They are 30 year old outer suburban trains. Nobody in their right mind would spend large sums of money on 30 years old trains totally redoing their interiors. The whole point of the 769 project is that it was supposed to be cheap and cheerful short term solution.
 

LNW-GW Joint

Veteran Member
Joined
22 Feb 2011
Messages
19,553
Location
Mold, Clwyd
They are basically a 150 with a pantograph. They would be totally unsuitable for Barrow, Windermere or other longer distance services. There is far more to a train, from a passenger's perspective, than what powers it.

150s without pantographs work from Manchester/Holyhead to Cardiff and beyond regularly, 5-hour journeys or more.
319s are excellent crowd-shifters whatever the route, with better interiors than 150s, and they don't come in half-length form.
As long as the diesel noise/vibration is under control the 769s should be fine on any of Northern's routes.
 

transmanche

Established Member
Joined
27 Feb 2011
Messages
6,018
Nobody in their right mind would spend large sums of money on 30 years old trains totally redoing their interiors.
Such as Northern refurbishing thirty-year-old 158s for Northern Connect services? Or London Underground having just refurbished their 1972 stock and soon to start on their 1992 stock?

Changing the layout (if thought necessary) is an option and it need not be a prohibitively expensive option either. The point is that they aren't the 'wrong sort of train', they're the right sort of train if they have the correct interior.

The whole point of the 769 project is that it was supposed to be cheap and cheerful short term solution.
In which case the 319/4 layout is perfectly suitable as a short-term solution for such journeys as Barrow-Manchester Airport.
 

a_c_skinner

Established Member
Joined
21 Jun 2013
Messages
1,576
I didn't mean to open a can of worms on the Furness Line question! Most of the time on Furness trains it is clear that most people are doing a shorter journey. My Manchester to Arnside trips see a large proportion of passengers alighting and others boarding en route. In any case the big issue for longer journeys is "do I get a seat?". I did use 319s from Brighton to St Pan from time to time. They are not intercity but they are not totally unsuitable. The key issue for Northern is capacity. Enough space is the first question on comfort, ridership and such like and it is first by a country mile. As I said Northern needs to look to more bi-modes if only to help meet environmetal ambitions. 6 cars with aircon, first class, SDO, cycle spaces etc. etc. would be nice but Northern is already heavily subsidised and that may well be beyond our collective purse. I'd sooner sit to Manchester on a Pacer than stand on a Mk4. Anyone would. (Yes I know we won't have Mk4s).
 

samuelmorris

Established Member
Joined
18 Jul 2013
Messages
5,121
Location
Brentwood, Essex
They are 30 year old outer suburban trains. Nobody in their right mind would spend large sums of money on 30 years old trains totally redoing their interiors. The whole point of the 769 project is that it was supposed to be cheap and cheerful short term solution.
Except for the Class 321 Renatus... (I'm not suggesting that was successful).
 

Mathew S

Established Member
Joined
7 Aug 2017
Messages
2,167
In which case the 319/4 layout is perfectly suitable as a short-term solution for such journeys as Barrow-Manchester Airport.
It's really not. Half of the seats are unusable because there's insufficient space between them, and they're 3+2. They're just about acceptable for a 30-40 minute commute, more than that and I, for one, would rather drive).
 

transmanche

Established Member
Joined
27 Feb 2011
Messages
6,018
It's really not. Half of the seats are unusable because there's insufficient space between them, and they're 3+2. They're just about acceptable for a 30-40 minute commute, more than that and I, for one, would rather drive).
There's lots of 2+2 seating in a 319/4 as they have a mix of 3+2 and 2+2 - and the first class section was 2+1. They also have proper luggage stacks, perfect for an airport service. (It's the 319/3s that are 3+2 throughout.)

You could always ask Northern to swap some 319s with WMTs 319/2s though...



A 319/4 interior.
319437 Standard Class Saloon
PeterSkuce [CC BY-SA 4.0 (https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-sa/4.0)], via Wikimedia Commons



A 319/2 interior.
London Midland, 319216 Standard Class Interior
Vauxhallvauxhall [CC BY-SA 4.0 (https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-sa/4.0)], via Wikimedia Commons
 

Mathew S

Established Member
Joined
7 Aug 2017
Messages
2,167
Uncomfortable yes, unusable no.
I disagree. On a packed commuter service half the seats are unusable because you either a) can't physically get to them, or b) there isn't room for both your legs, and the legs of the person opposite you. Perverse though it may be, removing some seats would actually increase the real world seating capacity.
 

Baxenden Bank

Established Member
Joined
23 Oct 2013
Messages
4,002
I disagree. On a packed commuter service half the seats are unusable because you either a) can't physically get to them, or b) there isn't room for both your legs, and the legs of the person opposite you. Perverse though it may be, removing some seats would actually increase the real world seating capacity.
Yes, exactly. More people need to understand this concept.
People stand at peak times, blocking the doorways, because they prefer that to sitting in a middle seat of three, or crushing their knees on the seat in front.
Take out a couple of rows of seats, spread the remaining seats out. The off-peak capacity is met, even by the reduced number of seats. The 'real world' peak seating capacity is increased because all seats are utilised rather than people choosing to stand.
 

Mogster

Member
Joined
25 Sep 2018
Messages
902
Agree with the above. I do hate 3+2 seating, the seats just aren’t wide enough for 3 average framed adults. I can’t say I’ve noticed many people choosing to stand on my peak services though, I do see it off peak.

I thought Northern were keen to dispense with their 319s as they were proving to be a bit creaky? As a Southport - Alderley user I can’t say I’m enthused by the prospect of these things appearing. They are just a 150 in disguise...
 

AM9

Veteran Member
Joined
13 May 2014
Messages
14,191
Location
St Albans
I disagree. On a packed commuter service half the seats are unusable because you either a) can't physically get to them, or b) there isn't room for both your legs, and the legs of the person opposite you. Perverse though it may be, removing some seats would actually increase the real world seating capacity.
Northern passengers must be a bit too precious. The 319s were in /4 service for 18 years, on one of the busiest commuter lines on either side of London. Passenger filled them every work morning and evening, when most of the centre seats were occupied typically for 30 minutes either side of the core. Standing passengers were packed to the doors yet the trains were still running with shorter dwells than many I've seen on Northern.
Given how many posts there have been about overloaded Pacers and 150s on Northern, I can't see where the 769s won't improve the provision considerably.
Which of the services on Northern routes are the 769s planned to be used on, and how many of those will be able to fill those trains anywhere near the levels that they carried over many years down here?
 
Last edited:

Greybeard33

Established Member
Joined
18 Feb 2012
Messages
4,229
Location
Greater Manchester
Which of the services on Northern routes are the 769s planned to be used on, and how many of those will be able to fill those trains anywhere near the levels that they carried over many years down here?
See upthread:
An internal communication has indicated a likelihood of three x 769s on Southport-Alderley Edge diagrams from next March.
This service carries commuters from Southport, Wigan, Bolton, Wilmslow and Stockport to Manchester and is currently worked by 4-car DMU formations. I understand it is rammed in the peaks (though only on the sections under the wires).

The route will require 5 diagrams in total from the December timetable change and so will need most of Northern's 8-strong 769 fleet if they eventually take over all the diagrams. This would leave 1 or 2 available for other routes depending on maintenance. My guess is that these will most likely be used on some of the Southport to Stalybridge via Bolton diagrams, which will provide the hourly stopper between Bolton and Victoria. This would minimise the number of crew depots/links that Northern would have to train on the 769.
 

Top