Class 442s - Now at the end of the road and to be withdrawn permanently

[kevinwaltets]

I expect the 442 motors could be reused in a new build

 

[D365]

I expect the 442 motors could be reused in a new build

I expect not. They're already ancient, having been pulled from the former 4REPs. Never mind that the technology is far outdated.

 

[Class 66's]

they could have a separate forum section just for the deluded to post daft comments about them.

I like this idea, keep them all in one place. There must be so many threads on them-they deserve their own place.

 

[Railengineer]

I expect the 442 motors could be reused in a new build

No chance, they are EE546 50 odd years old and only similar to class 73 locos. DC motors for traction are generally only good for the scrapheap now the AC power technology has improved. look at the modified 455's which had similar motors until recently.

 

[43096]

No chance, they are EE546 50 odd years old and only similar to class 73 locos. DC motors for traction are generally only good for the scrapheap now the AC power technology has improved. look at the modified 455's which had similar motors until recently.

So that would explain why the Class 73 rebuilds retain EE546 motors, with design life of 20 years+, then?

There's only 2 455s so far fitted with AC motors and they're on test. The case for doing them is really about maintenance savings on the camshaft control gear which frees capacity at Wimbledon for the 707s.

 

[D365]

So that would explain why the Class 73 rebuilds retain EE546 motors, with design life of 20 years+, then?

But you wouldn't design the motors into a brand-new EMU or locomotive.

 

[222ben]

i bring you this!

 

[absolutelymilk]

i bring you this!

Image isn't displaying properly (sorry to ruin the effect)

 

[Domh245]

This is what I think he was going after:

A fine example of Southern Region ingenuity!

 

[222ben]

its a
BR class 424 EMU

 

[D365]

Once again, it was not brand-new, and obviously no orders were made.
--- old post above --- --- new post below ---

A fine example of Southern Region ingenuity!

The prototype was developed by ADTranz (now Bombardier).

 

[222ben]

But you wouldn't design the motors into a brand-new EMU or locomotive.

That's what they did with the 442s though.

 

[NSEFAN]

That's what they did with the 442s though isn't it

That was done because BR had to do it. The rule for BR was do it cheap or not at all, which meant recycling rolling stock. If you were to keep 442s, you would probably retraction them with AC motors. This assumes that the body shells are in good condition, which isn't necessarily the case. In which case, why not just build new trains according to a modern design that's ready to go from someone like Siemens or Bombardier?

 

[swt_passenger]

Would more paths be available once SWT take over the International Platforms at Waterloo plus (and if built according to NR SWML RUS) Woking and Basingstoke flyovers?

Yes, and Crossrail 2 also provides more mainline paths. But none of that is in the sort of timescales needed to re-use 442s in a few months time.

 

[Railengineer]

So that would explain why the Class 73 rebuilds retain EE546 motors, with design life of 20 years+, then?

There's only 2 455s so far fitted with AC motors and they're on test. The case for doing them is really about maintenance savings on the camshaft control gear which frees capacity at Wimbledon for the 707s.

No it doesn't explain why the 73's have kept them. If you had to design new motors and traction converters and then go through the pain of trying to certificate them like SWT are with the class 455's you might as well scrap them. For a handful of locos there is no business case for new traction. As a bonus there should be plenty of spare motors available from the 442's as well when they get torched.

There are actually 3 455's fitted now and testing has finished, they are just going through the pain of trying to get some pieces of paper to say they can carry passengers on them. The case is not all about maintenance for the 455's, a large part of the savings is a reduction of unsprung weight on the motor coach. Thus reduction of track access charges and the fact that the new AC traction system allows regeneration (which the old system wouldn't), which when coupled with metered energy billing means significant savings in traction energy.

 

[DerekC]

So that would explain why the Class 73 rebuilds retain EE546 motors, with design life of 20 years+, then?

There's only 2 455s so far fitted with AC motors and they're on test. The case for doing them is really about maintenance savings on the camshaft control gear which frees capacity at Wimbledon for the 707s.

And presumably about energy savings and reduced pad wear from regenerative brakes, although if I remember right a 455 has only 25% motored axles so that may not be very large. Regeneration is even less beneficial on a locomotive because most of the braking is done on the hauled stock which has no motors.

 

[D365]

Regenerative braking > reduced brake pad wear > maintainance regime can be further improved.

 

[SpacePhoenix]

Can regenerative braking (or something like KERS out of F1) be used to recharge carriage batteries?

 

[HMS Ark Royal]

Can regenerative braking (or something like KERS out of F1) be used to recharge carriage batteries?

Can't see why not... I think it is indeed used in some applications - just scale it up a bit

 

[43096]

And presumably about energy savings and reduced pad wear from regenerative brakes, although if I remember right a 455 has only 25% motored axles so that may not be very large. Regeneration is even less beneficial on a locomotive because most of the braking is done on the hauled stock which has no motors.

Energy savings are part of the benefit, yes. However, the financial case didn't stack up until maintenance capacity for the Class 707s was factored in. Without the re-traction of the 455s and the maintenance time saving, a new depot would have been required, which would obviously be a substantial cost.

 

[arabianights]

Still if they kept them in service somewhere they could have a separate forum section just for the deluded to post daft comments about them.

For this reason, I'm not creating a new thread to ask this question which has always perplexed me (and while I don't post much, I'm quite a lurker) - what's actually special about 442s? That they got a speed record? That they used to have compartments? I don't geddit.

Serious question btw and I'd really appreciate it if at least one 442 lover tries to explain.

 

[D365]

Can regenerative braking (or something like KERS out of F1) be used to recharge carriage batteries?

KERS is a form of regenerative braking (using motor(s) to provide a retarding force). Presumably you're asking if batteries can be recharged for independent power, as when electrification is available, it makes sense to put it back into the line feed.

 

[HMS Ark Royal]

Couldn't they do some flywheel thing with the 442s like they did with the 139s? Couldn't be too hard to do

 

[D365]

For this reason, I'm not creating a new thread to ask this question which has always perplexed me (and while I don't post much, I'm quite a lurker) - what's actually special about 442s? That they got a speed record? That they used to have compartments? I don't geddit.

Serious question btw and I'd really appreciate it if at least one 442 lover tries to explain.

The third rail speed record is indeed held by a 442, but that is only the beginning of the legend...

 

[D365]

Couldn't they do some flywheel thing with the 442s like they did with the 139s? Couldn't be too hard to do

 

[HMS Ark Royal]

Pray tell how I am wrong

 

[SpacePhoenix]

as when electrification is available, it makes sense to put it back into the line feed.

On unit's like 455s that have a "power bus", would that be into the power bus and then onto the the equipment on the motor coach that deals with the regenerative braking?

 

[JamesRowden]

Can regenerative braking (or something like KERS out of F1) be used to recharge carriage batteries?

Batteries are damaged when recharged too quickly. From experience of developing a prototype portable power system which included a battery, I would suggest that one would not want to recharge the battery at a greater rate than 1C (which means one hour to recharge the whole battery). Subsequently batteries are not suitable for use within a regenerative braking system for an economical cost. It therefore makes sense to use energy storage devices of greater power density such as supercapacitors and fly-wheels. A combination of batteries and a higher power density energy storage device can be used to produce high energy density and high power density at the same time, but this produces additional costs and additional potential reliability problems (as does having a regenerative braking system to power carriage batteries in the first place).

 

[kevinwaltets]

I expect not. They're already ancient, having been pulled from the former 4REPs. Never mind that the technology is far outdated.

I was only joking.

The REP's were fantastic and I travelled many thousands of miles on them. I also have to suffer 444's quite regularly these days.

Although I probably only travelled 20 times on the 442's when is BR and SWT, I think they were brilliant for comfort and layout.

I have no idea of what happened to them after they moved to Southern though.

Kevin

 

[The Ham]

I was only joking.

The REP's were fantastic and I travelled many thousands of miles on them. I also have to suffer 444's quite regularly these days.

Although I probably only travelled 20 times on the 442's when is BR and SWT, I think they were brilliant for comfort and layout.

I have no idea of what happened to them after they moved to Southern though.

Kevin

Funny, I find the 444's much better. Much lighter, easier to get bikes on and off and appear to be less of a step between the platform. (That's not to say the 442's are bad, rather their replacement is a little better - although as with beauty so comfort on a train is in the eye of the beholder).

There is also the element of what else was available during the BR days (I.e. the slammers) which couldn't touch the 442's in terms of comfort and the rare nature of the 442's as there is just over half as many as the 444's. This can also colour people's views as they are less likely to use them so are less likely to have had a difficult or problematic journey on them.