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

[PHILIPE]

We'll believe it when we see it, but TFW's 769's in service in September according to one of this afternoons tweets. Which year is anyone's guess.

This thread has been divided and TFW discussion can be found here in it's dedicated thread:-

www.railforums.co.uk/threads/transport-for-wales-769s.179770/page-3

It has already been posted that training should start in September. Likewise GWR has it's own thread.

 

[Bertie the bus]

I think it's entirely reasonable for the industry, not just enthusiasts, to be concerned about the lack of information on what is going on. You'd expect for their own reputation that if the problem wasn't too serious Porterbrook would put out a press release explaining things and estimating the amount of delay and then deliver to that timescale. Even if there is something more serious going on it's probably better to fess up - the Vivarail engine fire being the most obvious example, although that was a bit too public for them just to keep quiet about it. The fact they haven't done this creates rumours that there is some fundamental problem.

I would suggest lack of transparency, information, and even respect for passengers is a fairly common trait across the entire rail industry. How many times have a TOC said rolling stock will enter service by X, or new services will start by Y for it not to happen and then complete silence? No acknowledgement that it hasn’t happened or even that they said it would.

The lap dog rail press has a lot to do with it.

 

[js1000]

I think it's entirely reasonable for the industry, not just enthusiasts, to be concerned about the lack of information on what is going on. You'd expect for their own reputation that if the problem wasn't too serious Porterbrook would put out a press release explaining things and estimating the amount of delay and then deliver to that timescale. The fact they haven't done this creates rumours that there is some fundamental problem.

I'm inclined to agree. The problem the 769 delays create is an industry wide one. We are hearing talk of diesel, battery, hydrogen etc bi-mode conversion of surplus trains. But if the 769 project is anything to go by, TOCs aren't going to touch these conversion projects with a barge pole and become a guinea pig.

Some can say there are impatient people on here but let's be honest: would Northern have agreed to take 769s in December 2016 if it meant waiting until 2020? Of course not.

 

[samuelmorris]

I would suggest lack of transparency, information, and even respect for passengers is a fairly common trait across the entire rail industry. How many times have a TOC said rolling stock will enter service by X, or new services will start by Y for it not to happen and then complete silence? No acknowledgement that it hasn’t happened or even that they said it would.

The lap dog rail press has a lot to do with it.

The problem is, there's not a lot they can say if they don't actually know what the new date will be. TOCs love to boast about new fleet introductions, if they haven't offered a date, it's probably because they still don't know when the new stock will be available for training themselves.

 

[Bertie the bus]

This is getting a bit off topic now, but that isn't the reason. There is a real arrogance and detachment from reality in certain parts of the rail industry. For example, Northern and TPE have put out numerous press releases regarding introducing new stock. Many of the deadlines have been missed and they give little or no information and keep banging on about how they are delivering on their promises and investment of £x million and creating a Northern Powerhouse. They're not. It's absolute nonsense. So far, after 3 1/2 years, they've both delivered next to nothing and don't feel the need to explain why.

 

[a_c_skinner]

The only conclusion to draw is that they don't work and are not close to working.

 

[AMD]

However there's still a plan internally to have them in service for the December 2019 timetable change.

 

[ed1971]

Diesel trains will be in use long after the sale of petrol and diesel cars is banned, I guarantee it. Saying is a lot different to doing - the government has to be seen to be doing something about climate change, but bringing the public transport infrastructure green is easier done with buses as that's all private investment. Public investment in infrastructure though, absolutely not.
.

This is probably for another thread, but It needs to be remembered that the UK is very small compared to other countries and continents.
One of the biggest issues when it comes to climate change is the depletion of rain forests to rear cattle. Last week, it was reported that in Brazil alone, an area the size of a football pitch is being cut down every day. I have previously read that there is a total rain forest loss equivalent to an area the size of Wales everyday. 40% of forests have been lost since 1992 and the global population has increased by 35%.

Back in the UK, the government has previously said that x number of houses need to built every year. The trouble is that green land is being taken to do this and trees cut down at a time when we should be planting more. The result is even more traffic on the roads. Clearly this is not sustainable in view of the small size of the UK.

 

[Energy]

I think it is important to mention this:
https://www.caf.net/en/productos-servicios/familia/civity/modularidad.php
On this page on CAF's website it says they offer BMUs and EMUs with batteries. Could see bimode versions of 331/195 or 195s converted to bimode.

 

[Greybeard33]

I think it is important to mention this:
https://www.caf.net/en/productos-servicios/familia/civity/modularidad.php
On this page on CAF's website it says they offer BMUs and EMUs with batteries. Could see bimode versions of 331/195 or 195s converted to bimode.

There is a specific thread to discuss this topic: https://www.railforums.co.uk/thread...195s-be-possible-as-a-follow-on-order.185807/

 

[59CosG95]

http://www.realtimetrains.co.uk/train/Y63171/2019/07/24/advanced - this is apparently booked for a 319, from Man Pic to Wigan NW via Westhoughton & Hindley. A 769 test run, perhaps?
(Chances seem remote, but who knows?)

 

[JN114]

http://www.realtimetrains.co.uk/train/Y63171/2019/07/24/advanced - this is apparently booked for a 319, from Man Pic to Wigan NW via Westhoughton & Hindley. A 769 test run, perhaps?
(Chances seem remote, but who knows?)

It will not be a test run on a passenger train.

Timing load does not offer any indication a to intended traction. It is ONLY indicative of what types’ performance has been used to compile the timetable.

 

[Bertie the bus]

(Chances seem remote, but who knows?)

I would suggest everybody knows, except you apparently. There are so many reasons why it couldn't be a 769 I'm not going to list them but if you'd looked at the ECS that forms the service you would have seen that is shown as being pathed as a Sprinter - http://www.realtimetrains.co.uk/train/S02369/2019/07/24/advanced.
The 319 is just an input error.

 

[Greybeard33]

http://www.realtimetrains.co.uk/train/Y63171/2019/07/24/advanced - this is apparently booked for a 319, from Man Pic to Wigan NW via Westhoughton & Hindley. A 769 test run, perhaps?
(Chances seem remote, but who knows?)

I have created a new thread, Northern Alderley Edge services split at Piccadilly 20-27 July, to discuss these STP services during the Acton Grange blockade. Nothing to do with 769 testing. Some sections of the normal Alderley Edge - Wigan services have 319 timings in the working timetable, presumably because the original plan was for 769s to be working them by now.

 

[Plethora]

Every time I see a 319 I am reminded of the fact that these things are forming the base of a conversion to something which is presumably supposed to last another twenty years. Just came across 319368 - it was running almost 10 mins late, and the reason for this was very clear on leaving the station. Almost no acceleration from the off! Does anybody know if the electric engines are being overhauled as part of the conversion?

 

[Llama]

Traction motors will remain the same on the 769s.

 

[js1000]

Every time I see a 319 I am reminded of the fact that these things are forming the base of a conversion to something which is presumably supposed to last another twenty years. Just came across 319368 - it was running almost 10 mins late, and the reason for this was very clear on leaving the station. Almost no acceleration from the off! Does anybody know if the electric engines are being overhauled as part of the conversion?

10 years max I suggest. It's acceleration lets it down compared with the 323s and a deficiency which will only be magnified further once the 331s are in operation.

 

[FenMan]

10 years max I suggest. It's acceleration lets it down compared with the 323s and a deficiency which will only be magnified further once the 331s are in operation.

I do wonder if GWR will do a Northern, but are biding their time for political reasons. Insiders posting on this thread previously have mentioned their doubts about the 769s' ability to keep to the current timetable on the Reading-Gatwicks, a key route, so fitness for purpose will be a big issue for GWR.

Surely the window for delivering a product that can be tested, let alone be put into service, is closing fast as increasingly expensive contract provisions presumably have kicked in that could undermine the whole project?

 

[big all]

I do wonder if GWR will do a Northern, but are biding their time for political reasons. Insiders posting on this thread previously have mentioned their doubts about the 769s' ability to keep to the current timetable on the Reading-Gatwicks, a key route, so fitness for purpose will be a big issue for GWR.

Surely the window for delivering a product that can be tested, let alone be put into service, is closing fast as increasingly expensive contract provisions presumably have kicked in that could undermine the whole project?

if a rolling changeover between electric and diesel can be sorted out about 40% between gatwick and reading will be under electric

in general if you double the power your reduction in journey time will only be perhaps 15-30% dependant on several factors
indeed a 25% reduction in power will equal a perhaps hard worked for right time or perhaps 5-10% late running if on a tight schedule

 

[SEPS]

Latest alleged views from GWR is that 769s are pushed back to 2020 timeframe if ever
Turbos will remain in Thames area and fill in for 387s working HEX
More FG owned HST configs to be deployed in SW in lieu of Turbos not moving
Financial arrangement made with DfT

 

[JN114]

Turbos will remain in Thames area and fill in for 387s working HEX

Always the plan until Crossrail came in - 769s were never intended to directly replace 387s.

Instead of 769s releasing Turbos releasing 387s, we now have Mini-HSTs releasing Turbos from the West releasing 387s - 166202 has already recently transferred back East to support the 387 mods programme.

ASLEF and GWR are working through some issues with the 319s, which will also be applicable to 769s - this has put a pause on 769 procurement for GWR until those modifications to the 319s are delivered and certified - although that was last I heard to be partly mitigated by jumping onboard with TfW for driver training, and using the 319s for majority of driver training - compressing the lead time from units being accepted and EIS.

The issues ASLEF have raised are common to both fleets; so not really a 769 programme problem.

Long term there aren’t enough vehicles in the GWR fleet, 769s will have to be made to “work”, and significant pressure is being placed by GW on Porterbrook and Wabtec/Faively to get on with it.

Some of the planned enhancements to Thames Valley services (in particular enhanced peak Basingstoke service and 3tph North Downs) have been partly or wholly descoped from December TT; with rolling stock availability a main concern in that decision making process.

Late 2019 is the date I’ve heard for first unit delivery; with EIS on 8 diagrams from Spring 2020 - a change from July 2019/Dec 2019 respectively.

EDIT:- and no use of DC electric equipment for infrastructure reasons. Use primarily in Diesel mode; with AC available on Western route infrastructure (although minimal work on AC routes)

 

[jfowkes]

EDIT:- and no use of DC electric equipment for infrastructure reasons. Use primarily in Diesel mode; with AC available on Western route infrastructure (although minimal work on AC routes)

Wait: a 3rd-rail & diesel capable unit, ideal for the North Downs line, will operate entirely in diesel mode over it? I'd be interested to know a bit more detail about the reasons, because on the face of it that seems a terrible irony.

 

[aleggatta]

Wait: a 3rd-rail & diesel capable unit, ideal for the North Downs line, will operate entirely in diesel mode over it? I'd be interested to know a bit more detail about the reasons, because on the face of it that seems a terrible irony.

I mean, I can see that there would probably be a requirement to modify some junctions by NR unless they could fit retractable shoegear (mainly 3rd rail ramps I would guess) but it does seem silly that they wont be able to take advantage of the traction power available, unless it has been deemed that the available 3rd rail is so small in relation to the whole route that its simply not worth the extra training/equipment or time/risk at the changeover points en route...

 

[JN114]

With power consumption increases with new/recently introduced traction on their routes; neither NR Wessex nor NR Sussex will permit further new electric services over their network - nor will they further upgrade power supplies to support new electric services at this time.

Wisely the DC capabilities of the GW 769s will be retained in the event NR change their minds in future.

 

[swt_passenger]

They’ve only just gone through the process of upgrading the Reading - Waterloo line for a 4 tph 10 car service, basically playing catch up with plans first raised by SWT. I suppose adding 2 or 3 tph 769 on DC was never planned for on that bit. Similar with Redhill - Gatwick.

DC power supplies seem to augmented only on a “only just enough, just after they’re needed” basis. Not even “just enough just in time”...

 

[Clarence Yard]

Latest alleged views from GWR is that 769s are pushed back to 2020 timeframe if ever
Turbos will remain in Thames area and fill in for 387s working HEX
More FG owned HST configs to be deployed in SW in lieu of Turbos not moving
Financial arrangement made with DfT

Total and utter wibble.

The covering of 387 stock is only till the Crossrail service to Reading starts in December 2019. Then there is a surplus of 387 stock, which is being absorbed by the Heathrow Express project.

No extra HSTs are to substitute for Turbos from December because the December 2019 service in the West was with existing stock, including the already paid for 11 GTi sets, which effectively use up the FG owned fleet. There is no financial arrangement with the DfT to convert any more because.......

The cost of HST conversions is huge and the running costs are eye watering compared to a DMU. The 769 units were originally intended to send more Turbos west to replace cl.150 sets (to go North - up to 12 units) and/or run extra services (Bristol Metro). If the 769 units never appear there are plenty of relatively cheap cl.158 appearing on the horizon. 5 sets potentially released from December 2020 are already being eyed up by operators. More should follow in 2021.

What Porterbrook need to do is come clean with operators as to the issues and give them a proper revised programme which everyone can work to.

 

[FenMan]

With power consumption increases with new/recently introduced traction on their routes; neither NR Wessex nor NR Sussex will permit further new electric services over their network - nor will they further upgrade power supplies to support new electric services at this time.

Wisely the DC capabilities of the GW 769s will be retained in the event NR change their minds in future.

Given the tight turnarounds on the Reading-Gatwicks and the known problem of threading NDL services between Thameslink services at Gatwick, have the doubts about the ability of the 769s to keep to the timetable been overcome?

 

[JN114]

Given the tight turnarounds on the Reading-Gatwicks and the known problem of threading NDL services between Thameslink services at Gatwick, have the doubts about the ability of the 769s to keep to the timetable been overcome?

As far as I’m aware those doubts exist only in the minds of people not involved in the project. The GUs can supply the same amount of electrical power as is drawn by a 319 on 3rd rail mode; thus the performance won’t be that dissimilar - a tad slower due to additional weight of GUs. But significantly better performance than a DMU.

The principal concern in that respect is fuel range, which is likely to be considerably less than existing.

 

[Greybeard33]

As far as I’m aware those doubts exist only in the minds of people not involved in the project. The GUs can supply the same amount of electrical power as is drawn by a 319 on 3rd rail mode; thus the performance won’t be that dissimilar - a tad slower due to additional weight of GUs. But significantly better performance than a DMU.

The principal concern in that respect is fuel range, which is likely to be considerably less than existing.

See Post #2971. The electrical power available to the traction motors in diesel mode is only about 550kW, which is considerably less than a 319 can draw from the 3rd rail.

769 performance on diesel is claimed to be as good as a 150. But Turbos have a higher power to weight ratio than a 150.

 

[Avid Fan]

The GUs can supply the same amount of electrical power as is drawn by a 319 on 3rd rail mode; thus the performance won’t be that dissimilar - a tad slower due to additional weight of GU

Not true, believe me....