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

Discussion in 'Traction & Rolling Stock' started by aformeruser, 2 Dec 2016.

  1. aformeruser

    aformeruser Veteran Member

    Messages:
    30,637
    Joined:
    23 Jan 2009
    This has been brought up in two different threads but probably warrants it's own thread:

    I would imagine if this is to happen the most logical thing would be to trial it on a fully electrified route with Northern, in the same way the IPEMU 379 was trialled on a fully electrified route with Anglia. That way if there's a problem with running off the wires the pantograph can be put up or another unit of the same class can be sent to rescue it.

    Given a batch of bi-mode 319s won't appear overnight and they won't meet the requirements for 'Northern Connect' Barrow/Windermere services which will be the most obvious route for Northern to use bi-modes, I wonder if the plan is to offer them to bidders of the next Great Western and Wales & Borders franchises?
     
    Last edited: 5 Jun 2017
  2. Registered users do not see these banners - join or log in today!

    Rail Forums

     
  3. Bletchleyite

    Bletchleyite Veteran Member

    Messages:
    35,746
    Joined:
    20 Oct 2014
    Location:
    Up and down the south WCML (mostly)
    How do you know they won't meet the Northern Connect specification?

    I see no reason they could not receive an interior refurbishment to that standard including aircon fitting. The "Renatus" scheme could basically be applied.
     
  4. superkev

    superkev Established Member

    Messages:
    1,199
    Joined:
    1 Mar 2015
    Location:
    west yorkshire
    Thinking of the time the other diesel transplant has seemingly been bogged down in red tape I can't see it happening.
    As for a bi mode how about the 313 type which is aluminium rather than steel and has 8 motored axles. 750v/ 25kv/ diesel a tru bi mode.
    Aluminium lasts forever so age shouldn't be a problem.
    K
     
  5. aformeruser

    aformeruser Veteran Member

    Messages:
    30,637
    Joined:
    23 Jan 2009
    I thought the high specification 319 proposal proved to be non-economically viable which is why it was rejected in favour of brand new 331s on Blackpool and Windermere services.
    --- old post above --- --- new post below ---
    That's why I think the next GW and W&B franchises would be the place they are most likely to go. Northern will probably have all their transferred DMUs and new build trains in service by the time a batch can be produced. On another forum some people are suggesting they can run Manchester to Blackpool services prior to the wiring being complete - I can't see that happening!
     
  6. notlob.divad

    notlob.divad Established Member

    Messages:
    1,101
    Joined:
    19 Jan 2016
    One big question I have is, If it can be done now, why was it not thought about prior to splitting the Liverpool - Blackpool service? I appreciate times change but this service has been split at Preston for a number of years now and this 'solution' could have provided a stopgap measure and released some DMUs for other routes.

    Anyway, the past is the past. I think they will be looking at the Windemere branch for testing, because at least if it failed off the wires there it would only impact upon itself and not block lines for other traffic.

    I also wonder if once a proven concept, keeping the shoe gear and removing the pantograph would provide a solution for the Wrexham - Bidston line allowing it to switch to 3rd rail pickup at Bidston and run around the Liverpool Loop line.
     
  7. Bletchleyite

    Bletchleyite Veteran Member

    Messages:
    35,746
    Joined:
    20 Oct 2014
    Location:
    Up and down the south WCML (mostly)
    But that was in the context of electrification. The context has changed.
     
  8. trainmania100

    trainmania100 Established Member

    Messages:
    1,573
    Joined:
    8 Nov 2015
    Location:
    Newhaven
    Could use Bi Mode 319s on the Marshlink line :P saves electrification
     
  9. Bletchleyite

    Bletchleyite Veteran Member

    Messages:
    35,746
    Joined:
    20 Oct 2014
    Location:
    Up and down the south WCML (mostly)
    But the *whole point* is that Northern need a solution for Windermere, as they have insufficient quality DMUs to run the through service using those.
    --- old post above --- --- new post below ---
    There are lots of contexts where bi-mode EDMUs would be useful. I remain flummoxed as to why Northern were allowed to order straight DMU, and why the franchise agreement did not require bi-mode for maximum flexibility.

    Yes, DMUs were cheaper now, but buy cheap, buy twice.
    --- old post above --- --- new post below ---
    Or Ormskirk-Preston and Kirkby-Wigan through running. But that said, it would rather complicate Merseyrail's presently very simple (and as a result highly punctual and reliable) operation.
     
    Last edited: 2 Dec 2016
  10. aformeruser

    aformeruser Veteran Member

    Messages:
    30,637
    Joined:
    23 Jan 2009
    One of the problems both VivaRail and Porterbrook have faced recently is CAF and Stadler have offered competitively priced products which are much better than their offerings. As the market has changed other manufacturers and ROSCOs might up come with more alternatives e.g. DEMU 321s or 379s, Bombardier DEMUs, Siemens DEMUs or CAF DEMUs.
     
  11. Bletchleyite

    Bletchleyite Veteran Member

    Messages:
    35,746
    Joined:
    20 Oct 2014
    Location:
    Up and down the south WCML (mostly)
    Yes, I think DfT/Northern should seriously consider a follow-on order for Stadler FLIRT bi-modes, probably 4-car units, for dedicated use on the Barrow and Windermere circuit. They would be absolutely perfect for the role.

    Two good options would exist for the service - either portion-work through from Manchester Airport on a 2-hourly cycle with a shuttle in the other hour, or run an hourly through service to each branch alternating with a connection from Lancaster, a bit like the Swiss do in a few places. The latter would require more traincrew, but both should require a similar number of units.
     
  12. bangor-toad

    bangor-toad Member

    Messages:
    492
    Joined:
    20 Feb 2009
    Ohh, with diesel engines in the driving trailers is it back to the future?

    [​IMG]
    (Not my image - found on Google)

    I know it's unlikely that some of each driving trailer seats would be converted to the engine bay but at least this shows how it could look!
    Cheers,
    Mr Toad
     
  13. Bletchleyite

    Bletchleyite Veteran Member

    Messages:
    35,746
    Joined:
    20 Oct 2014
    Location:
    Up and down the south WCML (mostly)
    Convert a 317 instead and that's near exactly how it would look :)
     
  14. MatthewRead

    MatthewRead On Moderation

    Messages:
    1,208
    Joined:
    21 Nov 2014
    Bi Mode 377's were being considered!
     
  15. notlob.divad

    notlob.divad Established Member

    Messages:
    1,101
    Joined:
    19 Jan 2016
    So on the practicalities of this idea:

    How much extra weight will a suitably sized diesel generator plus fuel tank and other ancillaries weigh? There can be no extra power from this, so what will that do to the acceleration performance?

    Are people assuming an 'above floor solution'? Thus what would be lost in terms of number of seats/amount of standing space?

    Is there room to sling several smaller units underneath each driving trailer? Would that give better weight distribution?

    Whilst it seems like a good idea, just like the class 230 units there are some not insignificant engineering challenges to overcome.
     
  16. dgl

    dgl Member

    Messages:
    881
    Joined:
    5 Oct 2014
    I take that project is due to Electrification delays and the need for more trains that need to be able to run without wires.

    Does show the ingenuity us Brits have.

    and whilst I know this is all theories at the moment but I wonder if having 750v equipment (as the traction supply not just the motor voltage) + changeover gubbins makes the project easier than doing it with a 25kV only EMU.
     
    Last edited: 2 Dec 2016
  17. Greybeard33

    Greybeard33 Established Member

    Messages:
    1,810
    Joined:
    18 Feb 2012
    Location:
    Greater Manchester
    So how could Arriva justify commercially ordering yet more new trains for the Barrow to Manchester Airport services, when the 195s are already on order?
     
  18. notlob.divad

    notlob.divad Established Member

    Messages:
    1,101
    Joined:
    19 Jan 2016
    That does seem to be the working assumption. Or it could just be Porterbrook speculating with their unleased units. If it is as you say, I wonder who is going to foot the bill of conversion and higher running costs. Presumably Northern will want a decent rebate on their franchise returns for this.

    Playing Devil's advocate, whilst it does, maybe we are the only country that needs to be so ingenious. ....

    I suspect this to be the case, and why my suggestion above may not be so easy. Removing the shoe gear and connecting a generator/rectifier to the 750dc busbar in its place, will presumably be a lot more straight-forward. The 'switch' will then be done in the same way as 25kv to 750dc is done currently.
     
  19. sprinterguy

    sprinterguy Established Member

    Messages:
    9,797
    Joined:
    4 Mar 2010
    Location:
    Macclesfield
    A class 150 driving car, which uses the same bodyshell, weighs around 8 tonnes more than a class 319 driving vehicle.

    I would seriously doubt it. Is there much under the floor of a class 319 driving trailer? I have no idea but I would have thought that an underfloor arrangement as per a class 150 would be the preferred option.
     
  20. physics34

    physics34 Established Member

    Messages:
    3,036
    Joined:
    1 Dec 2013
    makes sense to try with the spare and unallocated 319s that will exist.

    Any Thumper English Electric 4SRKT engines going spare lol
     
  21. D365

    D365 Established Member

    Messages:
    6,339
    Joined:
    29 Jun 2012
    Especially important for Poterbrook with the seemingly endless tranche of Eversholt Class 321s that will be going spare in the next decade.
     
  22. physics34

    physics34 Established Member

    Messages:
    3,036
    Joined:
    1 Dec 2013
    ahh, didnt think of that
     
  23. JohnElliott

    JohnElliott Member

    Messages:
    116
    Joined:
    15 Sep 2014
    So would the bi-mode results be called class 219?
     
  24. 61653 HTAFC

    61653 HTAFC Established Member

    Messages:
    9,449
    Joined:
    18 Dec 2012
    Location:
    Another planet...
    Logically (yes, I know...:roll:) the 2xx series is for diesel units with electric transmission, hence the 230s. These units would be a first (SETs notwithstanding) so there's no precedent in terms of numbering. They'll be EDMUs, not DEMUs. My guess is that they'll either retain their current numbers or become 3199xx or similar.
     
  25. tbtc

    tbtc Veteran Member

    Messages:
    15,101
    Joined:
    16 Dec 2008
    Location:
    Sheffield
    There are a number of lines where DMUs spend a good chunk of the journey on electrified lines - the Southern 171s being an example.

    Those 171s would be in great demand at various other franchises if a "219" could be introduced to replace them.

    In Northernland, we'll have DMUs running routes like Manchester Airport - Liverpool (via Warrington), Manchester - Rose Hill Marple (via Guide Bridge), Metro Centre - Morpeth (via Newcastle) and Leeds - Sheffield (via Moorthorpe) that are under the wires for a reasonable part of the journey.

    A "219" would also allow some services to be extended beyond the electrification boundaries - e.g. some Leeds - Skipton services running up to Settle to provide peak hour services further up the valley.

    Agreed - we got the cheapest shortest stock for the short term, rather than the best long term option. Having a slightly higher number of carriages makes for better short term headlines, I guess.

    New DMUs are built with cameras to make DOO possible at a later date (even if it isn't intended for DOO routes in the short term) - we should be looking at "future proof" stock (as Greater Anglia are).

    True - there will be a lot of EMUs going spare in a few years (with the Greater Anglia order replacing almost a hundred 321s, plus the 317/ 321s from Great Northern etc).

    Yet we have a shortage of DMUs.

    If 319s can be converted then this is potentially excellent news. Two birds, one stone.
     
  26. Domh245

    Domh245 Established Member

    Messages:
    4,599
    Joined:
    6 Apr 2013
    Location:
    Wolverhampton
    I suspect that the weight difference would be higher than 8tonnes as you'd have to take into account exhaust cleaning and an alternator. As for the second point, I'm not sure that there would be an engine on the market today that would fit under the floor with all of the associated exhaust cleaning equipment. The AT300s have had to raise the floor in order to accommodate a stage IIIB compliant engine in an optimised design (and being an intercity train had more room to play with from the start).
     
  27. LNW-GW Joint

    LNW-GW Joint Veteran Member

    Messages:
    12,528
    Joined:
    22 Feb 2011
    Location:
    Mold, Clwyd
    We haven't got an (affordable) technical solution yet.
    First find an emission-compliant engine.
    The re-engineering of an obsolescent EMU will be amazing.
    Maybe we will have Ford truck engines like the class 230.
    And all for a tiny handful of units.

    And yet we are already into fatuous class numbers... ;)
     
  28. Bletchleyite

    Bletchleyite Veteran Member

    Messages:
    35,746
    Joined:
    20 Oct 2014
    Location:
    Up and down the south WCML (mostly)
    Erm, whatever they've shoved under the D-train, for one? Those rafts are designed for supplying a third-rail EMU to run at low speeds - sounds familiar here?

    These units would not need to run at 100mph on diesel, let alone 125mph - the concept is for something that can keep up on the electrified mainline and then run onto low-speed branch lines. 60mph on diesel would probably be quite adequate.

    The requirement is not for a 4-car direct Class 150 substitute, even if the result might look like one :)
     
  29. notlob.divad

    notlob.divad Established Member

    Messages:
    1,101
    Joined:
    19 Jan 2016
    Interesting, so if done on both Driver units that would be 16 tonnes extra approximate 11% extra weight on the total of a 4 car.

    There isn't a great deal under the floor from pictures I have seen. However, we don't know if this arrangement can give enough power, or meet modern emissions standards.

    A 150s engine (of which there are 1 per car) would output 213kW. There would then be some losses in the conversion to Electricity. Therefore to power a 319 at full chaff 4x247.5kW motors, you would need 4.6 of the engines in a 150. even if you allow for a lower top end power (if that is even possible) you are still looking at 4 engines which would take up the undercarriage of all 4 units of a 319. Which is not possible because there is stuff there already on the middle two.
     
  30. Bletchleyite

    Bletchleyite Veteran Member

    Messages:
    35,746
    Joined:
    20 Oct 2014
    Location:
    Up and down the south WCML (mostly)
    You are not going to need to power it at "full chaff" - take a look at the use-case. 100mph, or even 75mph, is completely unnecessary.

    The concept is a "last few miles" DMU, not one that can keep up on the mainline on diesel. The diesel engines would only be used on the mainline in the event of a power failure.
     
  31. notlob.divad

    notlob.divad Established Member

    Messages:
    1,101
    Joined:
    19 Jan 2016
    But with the extra weight, they may not be able to run at 100mph on the OHLE either, and it will certainly put a dent into their acceleration profile.

    The power output of the 230 is 300kW per car produced from 2 150kw underfloor generator sets. 319s have a total of 990kw of motor drive so you are looking at needing 6-7 of those same generator sets. Going for 6, you would have to get 3 generators into a very similar space that Vivarail have managed to fit 2 under each driving car. I am not saying it isn't possible, but there is certainly a technical challenge to overcome.
     
    Last edited: 2 Dec 2016

Share This Page