Class 442s - Now at the end of the road and to be withdrawn permanently

[GW43125]

I get the impression the 442s are turning into Trigger's Broom...

 

[swt_passenger]

What are the chances that the 442s will be kept in pairs M-F, especially if they retain their bagpipes? It reduces the risks of a lone unit being stranded from a failure and also reduces the need for coupling/uncoupling.

If there is a need for a Thunderbird, well one of the Class 73s could be stabled at Woking again like SWT did in the latter years of pig operation. That, however, brings further need to train staff up to operate the 73. Hence why I think that unlikely.

So my gut feeling is refurbished units, with a new traction package and they run in pairs M-F and possibly weekends too.

It is inconceivable that they will run as single units. The line capacity problem doesn't really go away even running them in pairs. The existing services they will take over are already 10.444 or 12.450 after all.

 

[pompeyfan]

It is inconceivable that they will run as single units. The line capacity problem doesn't really go away even running them in pairs. The existing services they will take over are already 10.444 or 12.450 after all.

Plus the fact that single units struggle up the bank just after Haslemere. The general opinion seems to be that they're not heavy enough to deal with steep gradients or fine rain etc in 5 car configurations.

I'd assume there'd still only be 4/5 down trains an hour, and trains that are currently 12.450 will remain that way. After all, what's the point in having a 10 car train stopping at multiple 7 car platforms (therefore only opening 5) when you can have 8 cars released on 450 stock.

 

[gimmea50anyday]

Think the cab layout of a 73 very closely matches SR stock of its time apart from the obvious additional power handles and switches which makes traction training and therefore crewing much simpler. The cab of a 442 isnt much different from the REPs they replaced or the VEP/CIG/HAP/EPB etc they worked alongside. A CEP has been used to rescue a failed 442 before and all the former SR EMU and DEMU stock is theoretically fully compatible with each other and with 33/1 and 73. The only exception being 455/456 stock but again these were theoretically compatible with 210.

Note the use of the word theoretically. In practice a REP MU with anything bigger than a 2EPB or a MLV overloaded the juice rail and 442 loco haulage proved to be troublesome!

 

[JohnElliott]

Think the cab layout of a 73 very closely matches SR stock of its time apart from the obvious additional power handles and switches which makes traction training and therefore crewing much simpler. The cab of a 442 isnt much different from the REPs they replaced or the VEP/CIG/HAP/EPB etc they worked alongside. A CEP has been used to rescue a failed 442 before and all the former SR EMU and DEMU stock is theoretically fully compatible with each other and with 33/1 and 73. The only exception being 455/456 stock but again these were theoretically compatible with 210.

DEMUs aren't compatible with EMUs -- just for starters, the cables have a different pinout. So if the rescue 'loco' was 1001, it could couple to a 442 and use air brakes, but EP brakes or multiple control wouldn't be possible.

 

[Deepgreen]

Plus the fact that single units struggle up the bank just after Haslemere. The general opinion seems to be that they're not heavy enough to deal with steep gradients or fine rain etc in 5 car configurations.

I'd assume there'd still only be 4/5 down trains an hour, and trains that are currently 12.450 will remain that way. After all, what's the point in having a 10 car train stopping at multiple 7 car platforms (therefore only opening 5) when you can have 8 cars released on 450 stock.

Their tractive effort per car will not change whether in five or ten car formations. There is only a tiny reduction in risk of a single unit's slipping being overcome with two units, as the railhead conditions are likely to be same over far longer stretches than a five or ten car train length. The way to overcome 'light-footedness' is to motor more axles per unit or increase the axle loading of the existing motored ones.

 

[coppercapped]

Their tractive effort per car will not change whether in five or ten car formations. There is only a tiny reduction in risk of a single unit's slipping being overcome with two units, as the railhead conditions are likely to be same over far longer stretches than a five or ten car train length. The way to overcome 'light-footedness' is to motor more axles per unit or increase the axle loading of the existing motored ones.

The Class 442s, like the 4REPs before them, use the sequential switching out of resistors to control the starting currents through the dc motors. The steps are quite coarse so control of wheel slip under marginal conditions is not very good. One assumes that the rebuild will see the replacement of the dc traction equipment with variable frequency 3-phase drives so motor control will be finer enabling much better performance on slippery rails with the same axle loading.

 

[SpacePhoenix]

As we've not seen any confirmation about liveries for the new franchise, if they decided to stick with the existing liveries, would the 442s get painted back into their old SWTs livery?

 

[CosherB]

As we've not seen any confirmation about liveries for the new franchise, if they decided to stick with the existing liveries, would the 442s get painted back into their old SWTs livery?

I don't know what you're on, but I don't want any of it! Why on earth would First MTR use a Stagecoach livery on the 442s in future? :roll:

 

[cjmillsnun]

As we've not seen any confirmation about liveries for the new franchise, if they decided to stick with the existing liveries, would the 442s get painted back into their old SWTs livery?

Expect a different livery. Expect a different TOC name. I'm guessing sWr. Also I'm guessing that sometime in July a 444 or a 450 will disappear inside Southam and re-emerge in the dead of night just after franchise changeover on a trip to Waterloo vinyled up and ready for the public unveiling of the new livery on day one. Until that time, the livery will be embargoed.

 

[BestWestern]

There is also the question of where maintenance is done. Bournemouth has the historic knowledge but might Fratton actually be their new home?

I don't think Fratton does anything more than clean them and empty the tanks these days? Bomo presumably has capacity (a problem at Fratton) after maintenance shifted to Northam?

 

[swt_passenger]

As we've not seen any confirmation about liveries for the new franchise, if they decided to stick with the existing liveries, would the 442s get painted back into their old SWTs livery?

Another completely unbelievable suggestion. Why ever would First paint something into what is basically a Stagecoach bus livery?

 

[HarleyDavidson]

It is inconceivable that they will run as single units. The line capacity problem doesn't really go away even running them in pairs. The existing services they will take over are already 10.444 or 12.450 after all.

Absolute nonsense. They run quite a few 5 car services on the Portsmouth Direct, our depot works several of them, so whether it be a 444 or 442, it won't make a jot of difference as they're both 5 cars.

 

[swt_passenger]

Absolute nonsense. They run quite a few 5 car services on the Portsmouth Direct, our depot works several of them, so whether it be a 444 or 442, it won't make a jot of difference as they're both 5 cars.

I must admit I was thinking more of the peak periods when as discussed a few weeks ago nearly everything already runs at maximum possible length, either 10 or 12 car.

 

[HarleyDavidson]

Ah, you didn't say peaks.

But we do run some 5 cars in the peaks 1715, 1719 ex PMH are booked 5 cars, although the latter regularly runs as 4v5 which is quite entertaining.

Favourite trick with me is wait for a cyclist to try and put a bike behind the cab security doors on a 444, they get ejected PDQ as they're blocking my emergency exit, the last couple of folk who tried to do it and got removed were two that really should know better in that they were police officers.

 

[swt_passenger]

Ah, you didn't say peaks.

Sorry, yes I should have been clearer.

But we do run some 5 cars in the peaks 1715, 1719 ex PMH are booked 5 cars, although the latter regularly runs as 4v5 which is quite entertaining.

I guess they'd be considered running against the peak flow direction though? Normally I think the TOC and DfT would be considering capacity at the Waterloo end in their public statements?

I'd seriously expect the few remaining shoulder peak trains arriving at Waterloo in the morning and departing in the evening will all be made full length.

But would that ever mean every train at the Portsmouth end of the route would be full length? Or every "via Eastleigh" service full length? I suppose they are in the high peak flow direction, but not otherwise.

 

[Deepgreen]

The Class 442s, like the 4REPs before them, use the sequential switching out of resistors to control the starting currents through the dc motors. The steps are quite coarse so control of wheel slip under marginal conditions is not very good. One assumes that the rebuild will see the replacement of the dc traction equipment with variable frequency 3-phase drives so motor control will be finer enabling much better performance on slippery rails with the same axle loading.

Yes - that would help. Will the power output be increased too, I wonder? Many have commented that the 442s were sluggish compared with newer stock on the BML, so I wonder if the same issue will pertain on the SWML (especially with its rolling profile)?

 

[HarleyDavidson]

Power isn't everything, it's how you use it and how it's delivered is what counts.

You can have 10000 hp available, but that's no good if the wheels can't get any grip during leaf fall or in wet/drizzly conditions. I can remember doing a 100 mph wheelspin on quite a few occasions between Woking & Southampton in the past and none were deliberate either.

 

[CosherB]

Power isn't everything, it's how you use it and how it's delivered is what counts.

You can have 10000 hp available, but that's no good if the wheels can't get any grip during leaf fall or in wet/drizzly conditions. I can remember doing a 100 mph wheelspin on quite a few occasions between Woking & Southampton in the past and none were deliberate either.

I guess this is the heart of the issue with the "retractioning" of the 442s - just how far are the driving carriages going to be rebuilt? I'd have thought that, in the same vein as the 319 Flex, the ROSCO will be looking for 10 years of beneficial use to claw back the costs of the rebuild.

 

[AndrewE]

I'd have thought that, ... the ROSCO will be looking for 10 years of beneficial use to claw back the costs of the rebuild.

Surely if rolling stock works reasonably well (and passenger numbers keep on rising) then it has a fair chance of staying in service?

However I am aware that there is all sorts of stock parked up for the arbitrary reasons of franchise changes etc...

 

[HarleyDavidson]

I guess this is the heart of the issue with the "retractioning" of the 442s - just how far are the driving carriages going to be rebuilt? I'd have thought that, in the same vein as the 319 Flex, the ROSCO will be looking for 10 years of beneficial use to claw back the costs of the rebuild.

The motor coaches should in theory at least become lighter as you won't need two sets of camshaft equipment for a start, new motors are generally lighter as well, if they're the AC type.

Traction packs are a bit of a mixed bag in weight, then there's the simplification of old traction systems on the motor coach too or should I call it MBLS (in old parlance).

 

[swt_passenger]

I guess this is the heart of the issue with the "retractioning" of the 442s - just how far are the driving carriages going to be rebuilt? I'd have thought that, in the same vein as the 319 Flex, the ROSCO will be looking for 10 years of beneficial use to claw back the costs of the rebuild.

The 442 is relatively unusual in having only the centre car of 5 powered. The 'driving carriages' are therefore both trailers, and in principle may have nothing to do with the retractioning, except for the cab equipment...

A good question to ask would be whether or not other more conventional traction layouts can be achieved by distributing traction packs and motored bogies under the whole of the unit.

 

[spark001uk]

The 442 is relatively unusual in having only the centre car of 5 powered. The 'driving carriages' are therefore both trailers, and in principle may have nothing to do with the retractioning, except for the cab equipment...

A good question to ask would be whether or not other more conventional traction layouts can be achieved by distributing traction packs and motored bogies under the whole of the unit.

Wouldn't that necessitate matching motor bogies to be made, or if that can't be done then new bogies throughout, possibly even conjuring up the need for some geometry changes to the bodies or such like?

 

[SpacePhoenix]

Do they still have guard's panels? I know during their SWT's days the guards panel was in the motor/buffet coach, was that just blanked off or physically removed when they moved to GTR?

 

[CosherB]

The 442 is relatively unusual in having only the centre car of 5 powered. The 'driving carriages' are therefore both trailers, and in principle may have nothing to do with the retractioning, except for the cab equipment...

A good question to ask would be whether or not other more conventional traction layouts can be achieved by distributing traction packs and motored bogies under the whole of the unit.

My use of 'driving' is perhaps incorrect in this context, I was referring to the MLC carriage. I can't see how traction can be distributed across the unit - surely this isn't "retractioning"? You might as well buy new in this case!

 

[SpacePhoenix]

My use of 'driving' is perhaps incorrect in this context, I was referring to the MLC carriage. I can't see how traction can be distributed across the unit - surely this isn't "retractioning"? You might as well buy new in this case!

Could the bogies adjacent to the MLC carriage accommodate a traction motor (size and weight)?

 

[CosherB]

Could the bogies adjacent to the MLC carriage accommodate a traction motor (size and weight)?

A 5 second Google search would tell you that the 4 trailers are fitted with BREL T4 bogies .... does that help? :roll:

 

[swt_passenger]

My use of 'driving' is perhaps incorrect in this context, I was referring to the MLC carriage. I can't see how traction can be distributed across the unit - surely this isn't "retractioning"? You might as well buy new in this case!

It was your use of the plural 'driving carriages' that made me wonder, but I suppose you possibly meant all 18 of them...

Yes, retractioning on more conventional lines along the length of the unit, say on 3 of 5 cars, would definitely imply a completely different level of alterations. But presumably not impossible if they chose to do it that way.

Depends if modern traction packages, in modular form, can be hung off any Mk3 coach I guess.

 

[HarleyDavidson]

It'd be difficult to do as the motor coach on a 442 was structurally reinforced to take the extra weight of the traction equipment when they were built.

You're also going to have a tough time in relocating the CET tanks, Static Converters, HVAC equipment and compressors.

 

[Rail Blues]

Forgive a rather stupid question, but has it been confirmed that the 442s are actually going to be retractioned? All I've found in press releases etc. is confirmation that they'll be refurbished to 'As new' condition, which is pretty vague. Northern seem to consider refurbishing trains to 'as new' consists of little more than new vinyl, seat covers and a usb point.