Separate names with a comma.
Discussion in 'Traction & Rolling Stock' started by aformeruser, 2 Dec 2016.
would you say a 20 towing a dead 20 would be overloaded ??
a similar weight at around 150 tonnes
769s will be nowhere near 1044hp at the rail.
So now we are getting even more suggestions of where these trains could theoretically be used. Yet we are still in the position where they haven't turned a wheel under their own power on the national network. Let alone run a passenger service yet.
I read in the Wales stock shortage thread that TfW has ordered a bunch more of these units, so decision makers in the know must be happy with progress behind the scenes.
Well of course, - if somebody was prepared to fund it. Just how many passengers are there wishing to use such a route from Leeds to Carlisle and Glasgow?
And if the line was to get bi-mode local trains, the 60mph would probably be achievable, even up the 1% gradients.
And maybe this thread could get back on topic with 769s, instead of becoming yet another one about what sort of services should run on the Settle & Carlisle, of which there are plenty knocking about on the forum.
This user mentioned them in another thread. Spring turns to summer once again.
Yes but with 1044hp for 4 heavy coaches one with a transformer 0 to 60 is going to be glacial.
They had already ordered the 4 more a while back, just that there is new media confirmation of the 4 more after only the 5 WAG/ATW had ordered were mentioned in the 9/1/19 Senedd Committee.
Try a class 307 with 700hp on a 4-car then!
Or a 3-car thumper which has 450kW gross diesel engine (say 360kW net available power) driving two EE507 motors and pulling 118 tons. Like the 307s, they managed (this time all over 3rd rail land) at up to 75mph for decades.
i sort off get the impression that some dont realize there a law off diminishing returns you double power to weight or half power to weight the difference is far far less than than double or half performance
as i said before an 73 at 1600hp would be timed for say600 tonne to take 1hr for a journey
on diesel at 600hp or perhaps 450hp to the rail or about 28% power would require a 40% increase off journey time
or for the same timings a 60% reduction in load to 240 tonnes
Well as stated by another poster earlier, this sort of thinking shows how out of touch with reality some posters are. Anyone in their right mind would immediately dismiss any proposal for running dieselised 319's for a journey of nearly 3 hours, in replacement of the air-conditioned, comfortable 158's which are almost ideal for this service.
Quite - 769's are older, not air-conditioned, less powerful and have a 1/3 2/3 door layout without proper vestibules (so that when the doors are opened in bad weather, the wind and rain blows more-or-less straight into/through the passenger accommodation). It's hard to think of something *less* suitable for the S&C.
A lot of the energy required to move a train at speed is because of air resistance. And a lot of the energy used is for the slab sided front to push air out of the way, so for example a 4 car unit would use somewhat less energy than 2 x 2 car units running independently.
Also an electric transmission enables full power to be delivered over a wide speed range, compared to a mechanical transmission so a lower powered DEMU may out preform a DMU on a service particularily those with hills and lots of stop starts.
So, the 5 319s originally pencilled in for TfW are (as I recall):
Assuming that LNWR retain 319005, 319012 & 319013, TfW seem likely to take
(As mentioned, possibly on this thread, 319001 is the unit pencilled in for the Porterbrook/BCRRE HydroFlex programme)
All the sets going to GWR will have air-cooling installed, presumably the same kit as being fitted on the Class 165s. It is up to the TOCs what interior modifications they specify.
But I don't see any chance whatever of a 769 going anywhere near the Settle & Carlisle.
Considerations should be made regarding faults and failures. Could a 769 say on one engine or with a pair of traction motors isolated complete a journey or part journey over any part of that route, and without wrecking the service? Could one 769 assist another disabled 769? What other stock runs on the route which is capable of attaching to them, and to what extent (full compatibility or just 5mph/clear the main line without brake continuity)? Where would other technical assistance come from, eg fitters in a van?
Brighton to Bedford for 30+ years??
Unsure if this question would be better in the "Thameslink Class 319s into storage" thread or not.
Could somebody clarify if 319426 is presently in service with Northern, or has that come straight out of storage to be converted?
The big comfort issue in the Northern area is will there be a seat or at worst a tolerable place to stand. All the rest is second and second by a long way. You can argue that we should have built more new DMUs or perhaps more new bimodes but it was decided that wouldn't be afforded. Even for a long journey like Leeds to Carlisle, I'd sooner sit on a Pacer than stand on a modern DMU, the big deal is enough space.
You are confusing matters. There may well be an argument around the provision of adequate seating/tolerable standing on some Northern services. However that's not an argument for replacing the present comfortable trains ( which in my experience generally provide sufficient seats-unless you're someone like Corbyn) on the S&C by inadequate clapped out commuter stock. There are plenty of suggestions on these threads of routes where the 769's might be used for shorter commuter-type journeys where they might be seen by passengers as no worse than the stock they would be replacing and might provide increased capacity.
This is the country in which I commuted for years on 2 buses stuck on freight wagons.
I suppose the question I was really asking, badly, is how economic these things will be on diesel only or long runs of diesel. Will they guzzle less gas than say a 158.
That one was the unit that had the 769000 stickers applied when wheeled out at Rail Live last year. Since then I believe it's stayed at Long Marston. Certainly isn't out with Northern.
Not in service with Northern. The only /4 up here is 319446 which is in Thameslink colours and on loan from Porterbrook with 319372/73.
Bizarelly given the fact it was repainted to Northern livery 319426 isn't even in the current list to be converted to a 769 at all.
Sorry I wasn't suggesting 769s for the S&C, though the point still applies, a seat on an old train is better than standing on a new one. If new ones won't be affordable in sufficient numbers then old trains are better than too few trains. Were the 769's able to keep time and be reliable on the S&C then fine, they'd improve (a bit) air quality in the Aire Valley. I've used 319s for hour long trips and they are OK. Not better than OK, but OK.
These fora go on and on about air con, USB, seats, Northern Connect specification but they all pale into insignificance compared with enough seats and if old, reconditioned stock is the way to get enough seats then fine.
According to the latest issue of RAIL magazine, 319426 will be converted to 769 for TfW, as it will be the first of the extra 4 x 769s that TfW have ordered.