013 is definitely out too, was paired with 014 the other day.
-
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!
Northern Class 331: Construction/Introduction Updates
- Thread starter BMIFlyer
- Start date
- Status
Sponsor Post - registered members do not see these adverts; click here to register, or click here to log in
R
RailUK Forums
jonesy3001
Established Member
So what are the extra 9 newbies that have entered service this week, since northern sent 8 142s to Heaton at the weekend.
D365
Veteran Member
- Joined
- 29 Jun 2012
- Messages
- 11,448
What do you mean?
superkev
Established Member
On the 195 thread member "Philip" posted on the 22nd Feb that Class 331s; 012 and 022-031 where not yet in service.
Of these I haven't heard that 027-31 have being delivered.
K
Of these I haven't heard that 027-31 have being delivered.
K
palmersears
Established Member
- Joined
- 20 Sep 2011
- Messages
- 1,485
027 has been delivered, saw it at Edge Hill last week.
Halish Railway
Established Member
Don’t know if it’s been mentioned before, but from observations over the weekend it sounded as if some 331s have had they’re regenerative breaks turned back on.
Halish Railway
Established Member
That’s good to hear that they’ve finally found a fix. When I rode it on Saturday, 331 106 was still using friction brakes.
Also, does anyone know which two 331/0s are at Skipton (I’ll assume that it will be two that haven’t seen service).
Last edited:
There are still a few drivers isolating the dynamic brakes on 331s if they were trained on 331s while instructions mandated the dynamic brake was isolated at all times and they don't sign any other traction with a dynamic brake. They need a brief and a ride out with an instructor before they can use it.
bengley
Established Member
- Joined
- 18 May 2008
- Messages
- 1,842
Northern do crack me up sometimes
superkev
Established Member
I believe 3 car 331 004 and 012 are the Skipton trainers.
K
northernchris
Established Member
- Joined
- 24 Jul 2011
- Messages
- 1,509
331012 definitely is, saw it yesterday head through Keighley
grumpyoldman01
Member
Some time ago, there was a 333 at the Railway Technical Centre which appeared to have very recently been repainted into the current northern livery; however, the last time I saw it (I guess about two weeks ago) it's body was totally wrapped in white - looked like some sort of material. My thoughts were that it had been wrapped to prevent the paint work whilst being transferred by road back to Yorkshire. Is this the set you're referring to, or are there more than one at Derby?
grumpyoldman01
Member
Received my March 'Modern Railways' today, and there's an article about battery powered 331s being used on the Windermere branch.
It claims that, subject to DfT approval, 5x3-car units are going to be converted to 4-car sets, with both the new vehicles and the existing centre cars being battery carriers; it suggests that these will provide sufficient power to operate one return trip between Oxenholme and Windermere, but as most of the current diagrams require two return trips, a fast recharge facility will be required at either Windermere or Oxenholme.
Couldn't see anything about this by doing a quick look back on this thread; anything further known, please?
It claims that, subject to DfT approval, 5x3-car units are going to be converted to 4-car sets, with both the new vehicles and the existing centre cars being battery carriers; it suggests that these will provide sufficient power to operate one return trip between Oxenholme and Windermere, but as most of the current diagrams require two return trips, a fast recharge facility will be required at either Windermere or Oxenholme.
Couldn't see anything about this by doing a quick look back on this thread; anything further known, please?
No Windermere diagrams do fewer than three return trips in a row, Oxenholme - Windermere, and a minority do four. Perhaps someone has in mind recharging facilities at one of the termini?
Or perhaps the plan is to run an hourly service, Windermere to somewhere or other (i.e. on the WCML)?
Are you saying drivers should be allowed to use brakes they haven't been trained on?
This seems a simple sensible solution until all are trained.
bengley
Established Member
- Joined
- 18 May 2008
- Messages
- 1,842
It's the same brake. The brake force is not changed. I've never heard of any TOC having such weird restrictions like this.
It is, I'm fairly sure, part of the safety case that all traction with a dynamic brake needs drivers to be specifically trained (including practical handling) on the operation of the brake, and an extra assessment in the two yearly cycle specifically on traction with a dynamic brake. If they haven't had the practical handling with the dynamic brake in use and don't sign any other traction with it then they need a bit more practical handling on it before they can use it.
Seems fairly belt and braces to me. If there was an incident whereby a driver wasn't familiar with all the quirks of that brake, how the friction brake blends with it (or doesn't) and what it feels like in different scenarios, and the dynamic brake did something it shouldn't (which is what led to it being isolated on the fleet in the first place) I'm sure there'd be finger-pointing at an inquiry.
Seems fairly belt and braces to me. If there was an incident whereby a driver wasn't familiar with all the quirks of that brake, how the friction brake blends with it (or doesn't) and what it feels like in different scenarios, and the dynamic brake did something it shouldn't (which is what led to it being isolated on the fleet in the first place) I'm sure there'd be finger-pointing at an inquiry.
Philip
On Moderation
In the case of the 175s and 185s, I didn't think the driver had the option whether or not to use the dynamic brake? I thought the driver just pulls the throttle stick to the brake position if active and higher than 20-30mph, then the dynamic brake would apply, if isolated then it wouldn't?
Greybeard33
Established Member
The Windermere services currently interwork with the Barrow services at Manchester Airport. In order to disentangle the diagrams, I think the Windermere - Airport service frequency would have to change from the current 1tp3h to 1tp2h (the round trip time is 5 hours, less an hour's overlap between Oxenholme and Windermere). This would mean that the frequency of direct Airport - Barrow services would also have to change to an even 1tp2h, so further reducing DMUs under the wires between Lancaster and the Airport.
The 331 diagrams would then make two successive return trips Oxenholme - Windermere before returning to the Airport, as suggested in post #1516.
Post #1516 inferred that that is what prevails now, and it doesn't. The said post doesn't 'suggest' anything, that I can see.
themiller
Member
The platform at Oxenholme is already wired so they could recharge the batteries from this during the station call.
Of course.
Greybeard33
Established Member
Under the current timetable, turnaround times at Oxenholme vary from hour to hour. The longest is 32 minutes, but the shortest is only 4 minutes!
The battery charging rate from OLE would be limited by the power rating of the 25kV transformer, i.e. roughly the same as the traction power demand during maximum acceleration. I would guess that a charging time of at least 20 minutes would be needed to transfer enough energy for a round trip to Windermere with aircon on.
If a charging facility were also provided at Windermere, the charging time could be much less. But then a 25kV "extension lead" from Oxenholme would be needed, or a dedicated rapid charge installation fed from the local DNO network. Perhaps better to spend the money on a few miles of OLE, as originally intended, rather than on battery trains?
td97
Established Member
- Joined
- 26 Jul 2017
- Messages
- 1,298
I recently made a post detailing that in principle electrification is the most cost effective solution for the branch (the original question was regarding further procurement of diesel trains, but the same principle applies for battery trains; if anything likely to be even more expensive than a diesel counterpart).
How much is electrification currently costing per mile? Five additional coaches for Nothern would be very welcome, especially they lead to follow on orders. The CLC would be the obvious next route, potentially Airport - Blackpool to allow interworking (and recharging).
Greybeard33
Established Member
Northern ordered the 331s before Windermere electrification was cancelled, so some of them (presumably 3-car units) were originally intended to work the Windermere services. When, in 2018, additional 195s were ordered for Windermere, the 331 order was not reduced.
I presume that the main reason for ordering additional carriages is that a 3-car does not have sufficient underfloor space for enough batteries.
superkev
Established Member
Getting bit off topic but I would think that electrification costs are as inflated as ever due to most of the hard won skilled crews are disbanded and expensive plant scrapped or rusting away. I hate politicians!
Incidentally battery costs goes an electric car are about £300 a KWhr plus controllers and installation say 500kwhr total and last around 7 years.
Depending on the size needed and how many trains need fitting I suspect batteries will be more expensive than the life costs of a simple tram style catenary.
Re battery capacity for interest BR in the 1950s had an experimental BEMU based on a 2 car Derby Lightweight dmu for the Balletar branch which had a 500kw/hr battery. I suspect at least that per car would be required for the Windemere branch so at £500 a kwhr that's £500000 per car - hmmm.
See
https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/British_Rail_BEMU
K
- Status