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

[notlob.divad]

455s are older than 319s, and older even than the 150s Plus they don't have the benefit of a pantograph, and associated 25kv equipment. How on earth is this a good idea?

 

[D365]

Only benefit the Class 455s would have is the AC traction package and the different interior option.

 

[1179_Clee2]

RAIL magazine 856:

Testing of the first Class 769 flex at Brush Traction was due to start as this issue of RAIL went to press.
Two Bi-mode 769 are at the Wabtec facility having been converted from 319 EMU's (769434/456) although their entry into traffic has been delayed while testing continues..
While gensets fitted to the trains had been started in test rigs at Brush, they have yet to be started when fitted to a 769. Once this is completed, a four car Flex will move to the Great Central Railway for testing.
A genset from Unit 2 was displayed at Rail Live while 319426 was renumbered 769000 and reliveried into something similar to the scheme that will be carried by Flex in traffic.

 

[northwichcat]

But there was no way for the old Northern to equip the new NW electric lines without 319s (or equivalent cascade from the south).

That wasn't the case in the end. The 319s weren't ready to be released on time so Thameslink had to temporarily take on brand new Electostars to be able to release the 319s. No reason why the 387s couldn't have been ordered for TPE and Northern (and given an appropriate interior for the respective routes), ordering the 350/4s for TPE was also a bodge and really exploiting a loophole to prevent a new tendering process being required. If it was tendered properly it wouldn't have been limited to 10 x 4 car EMUs for TPE and the 319s could have been given a proper refurbishment before being reintroduced in to service elsewhere e.g. Southeastern.

 

[The_Engineer]

A genset from Unit 2 was displayed at Rail Live while 319426 was renumbered 769000 and reliveried into something similar to the scheme that will be carried by Flex in traffic.

That confirms our thoughts that it was not a converted unit.... Ten months ago Rail Magazine said that diesel engine testing was imminent, what has caused this massive programme slippage? No news on that is there?

https://www.railmagazine.com/news/network/exclusive-engine-testing-about-to-begin-on-flex-class-769s from 30/08/2017

 

[D365]

That confirms our thoughts that it was not a converted unit....

If it was a working diesel I’m sure they would have made some attempt to retrieve the units by now

 

[The_Engineer]

While gensets fitted to the trains had been started in test rigs at Brush, they have yet to be started when fitted to a 769. Once this is completed, a four car Flex will move to the Great Central Railway for testing.

It looks as though the Gen Set has been trial fitted to the underframe then, but only tested off-train. This means that the Gen-Set still needs testing under the actual load of the traction system; stability of the Gen-Set under load will be a real worry and could take some fine tuning. I really do hope and want for this train to be a success. But there are still so many hoops to jump through in testing and obtaining Network Rail certification that are still delay risks to the project.

Plus, given that even after a delivery to Northern Rail of the first units, there will need to be driver and artisan testing. Drivers will need a conversion course from Class 319. Given it could be another month or so to get the unit onto the GCR, then it is still looking like at least 12 months from now before passenger service will be seen.

 

[47802]

Isn't the period when Porterbrook first announced these trains for Northern nearly as long as when Anglia announced it was buying Stadler Bi-modes, and yet the first of these Stadler trains is built and ready for testing. I think that's a clear message buy new trains and stop messing about with this old junk.

The leasing cost of these trains is allegedly very high so perhaps people should be asking the question of whether these trains represent good value for money compared to buying new or looking at alternates. A key advantage was meant to be getting these things running before the PRM deadline but that seems to disappearing fast.

 

[61653 HTAFC]

323s are in any case not notably superior to 319s and are of a similar age.

I'd argue that in many ways the 323s ARE significantly superior to 319s. They're of a similar age but a far more modern design than the 319s with their early 80s bodyshells first seen on the 455s. Despite being 10mph slower, they accelerate significantly faster so would be more suited to many Northern electric services. They can't meet Connect requirements without significant investment but nor could 319s.

Anyway, this is off topic for 769s. I too hope that the proposal actually works, but I expect at best we'll still have sow's ears rather than silk purses.

 

[1179_Clee2]

That confirms our thoughts that it was not a converted unit.... Ten months ago Rail Magazine said that diesel engine testing was imminent, what has caused this massive programme slippage? No news on that is there?

https://www.railmagazine.com/news/network/exclusive-engine-testing-about-to-begin-on-flex-class-769s from 30/08/2017

Sorry no news on why the programme has slipped.
It does say that Porterbrook has confirmed orders for 32 units, but could rise to 36.
8 for Northern (to be released first)
5 for Transport for Wales (but could rise to 9)
19 for GWR
ONLY 8 units for Northern NOT 11 units
The University of Birmingham has expressed interest in working with Porterbrook on a hydrogen version of Flex, but this is at a early stage, and Porterbrook refused to confirm or deny the project.
The 455 flex is also a possibility when they are sent off lease by SWR.

 

[AM9]

That wasn't the case in the end. The 319s weren't ready to be released on time so Thameslink had to temporarily take on brand new Electostars to be able to release the 319s. No reason why the 387s couldn't have been ordered for TPE and Northern (and given an appropriate interior for the respective routes), ordering the 350/4s for TPE was also a bodge and really exploiting a loophole to prevent a new tendering process being required. If it was tendered properly it wouldn't have been limited to 10 x 4 car EMUs for TPE and the 319s could have been given a proper refurbishment before being reintroduced in to service elsewhere e.g. Southeastern.

The procurement/deployment of Electrostars (both 377 & 387) was just as much because of the rapidly increasing passenger loads experienced on Thameslink lines. There were peak trains running as 4-car trains using valuable paths through the core. The 319s were only cleared to run as 8-car DOO whereas the 377/2, /5 & 387 were cleared for full 12-car operation.

 

[northwichcat]

Sorry no news on why the programme has slipped.
It does say that Porterbrook has confirmed orders for 32 units, but could rise to 36.
8 for Northern (to be released first)
5 for Transport for Wales (but could rise to 9)
19 for GWR
ONLY 8 units for Northern NOT 11 units
The University of Birmingham has expressed interest in working with Porterbrook on a hydrogen version of Flex, but this is at a early stage, and Porterbrook refused to confirm or deny the project.
The 455 flex is also a possibility when they are sent off lease by SWR.

Hopefully that means if Northern don't get the 'Angel 12' class 150 vehicles that they'll get an extra 6 x 156s or similar instead.

Another unanswered question is the Northern franchise spec refers to 5 x 319s going off-lease in 2020. If Network Rail manage to wire Manchester-Stalybridge and Wigan-Bolton by then, will it be 319s or 769s which go off-lease? (Note the latest public version of the franchise spec doesn't refer to 769s at all.)

 

[Grumpy]

Isn't the period when Porterbrook first announced these trains for Northern nearly as long as when Anglia announced it was buying Stadler Bi-modes, and yet the first of these Stadler trains is built and ready for testing. I think that's a clear message buy new trains and stop messing about with this old junk.

I wonder if "this old junk" should really mean "all" old junk. The original idea seemed ok in theory but perhaps we no longer have the engineering ability/resources to implement. Certainly everything WABTEC touch seems to be seriously overdue-perhaps they need some competition.

 

[LNW-GW Joint]

That wasn't the case in the end. The 319s weren't ready to be released on time so Thameslink had to temporarily take on brand new Electostars to be able to release the 319s. No reason why the 387s couldn't have been ordered for TPE and Northern (and given an appropriate interior for the respective routes), ordering the 350/4s for TPE was also a bodge and really exploiting a loophole to prevent a new tendering process being required. If it was tendered properly it wouldn't have been limited to 10 x 4 car EMUs for TPE and the 319s could have been given a proper refurbishment before being reintroduced in to service elsewhere e.g. Southeastern.

I'm sure you know that the DfT were not going to support new EMUs to Northern before Patrick MacLoughlin overruled his officials on the new franchise ITT.
Yes, 387s to Northern could have happened, but it didn't because the 387s were targeted at Thameslink (and later at GWR).
We are where we are, Northern has a sizeable fleet of 319s and no scope to keep the 323s.
The 331s will displace many of the 319s in due course.

 

[EE Andy b1]

Isn't the period when Porterbrook first announced these trains for Northern nearly as long as when Anglia announced it was buying Stadler Bi-modes, and yet the first of these Stadler trains is built and ready for testing. I think that's a clear message buy new trains and stop messing about with this old junk.

If this Class 769 Flex idea had been started a lot earlier and we would have had a couple of prototypes out testing it might have made some sort of sense but its so far behind not even one working train, everything kept very secret, so i think those TOCs that need something like this should have gone with the likes of Stadler with a design that is new, already up and running, proven and probably more cost effective in the long run and if you don't need the diesel or battery configuration in the future you can remove the power car, saving weight, improving running costs.

I think this was a scheme set in motion for the ROSCO to try and get every last penny they could out of older rolling stock, which had a use but is displaced by newer stock.
But once again the passenger suffers by not having trains for the service they require.

 

[northwichcat]

I'm sure you know that the DfT were not going to support new EMUs to Northern before Patrick MacLoughlin overruled his officials on the new franchise ITT.
Yes, 387s to Northern could have happened, but it didn't because the 387s were targeted at Thameslink (and later at GWR).
We are where we are, Northern has a sizeable fleet of 319s and no scope to keep the 323s.
The 331s will displace many of the 319s in due course.

I think it's a red herring comparing Pacer replacement to introduction of EMUs on Northern. One of the objectives of wiring Chat Moss was to get passengers travelling between Liverpool and Manchester on to Chat Moss services, instead of overcrowded CLC services. Providing high quality trains would have helped achieve that. Rutman's objection to Pacer replacement was the Pacer lines didn't need better trains to attract passengers as they were doing well anyway.

Only 5 x 319s are due to be returned in 2020, along with the 321s and 322s, so they'll be 27 x 319s remaining with Northern until 2025 unless something changes.

 

[LOL The Irony]

323s are in any case not notably superior to 319s and are of a similar age.

I have to disagree with you there. They are much better suited to inter-suburban stopping services than the 319 despite the fact that they're designed for the same job.

 

[samuelmorris]

All very well looking at hindsight - when first proposed, the idea of moulding Stadler's EU product to UK gauge was seen as a massive punt and the 769 project would have been far more 'play it safe'. I don't think any TOC could reasonably have expected the conversion programmes to have gone this badly. The 321 Renatus looks neat at first glance and it's marvellous to have an air-conditioned unit in this weather, but look closely and you can clearly see what a lash-up it is.

 

[rich-leeds]

I guess the three ex BR ROSCOs are having to deal with the mass replacement of their legacy stock 1980s stock. Never in their history have they faced faced this level of asset redundancy before - it's not surprising that they'll try eek out every last penny, but it looks increasingly desparate. For the vast majority of the network, old fashioned naturally ventilated trains do not meet modern passenger expectations. What gap remains may be best filled by Vivarail?

 

[EE Andy b1]

Slightly off topic but perhaps KiwiRail in New Zealand could take some of our older rolling stock from ROSCOs like they did with a fleet of Mk2s some years ago.
Some of those were fitted with plug doors of a type as well. Would need a bogie or wheelset swap though for there 3'6" gauge at very least.

 

[The Ham]

Slightly off topic but perhaps KiwiRail in New Zealand could take some of our older rolling stock from ROSCOs like they did with a fleet of Mk2s some years ago.
Some of those were fitted with plug doors of a type as well. Would need a bogie or wheelset swap though for there 3'6" gauge at very least.

IIRC very little of their network is electrified, so unless they loco haul units there may not be that much demand.

 

[a_c_skinner]

I'm depressed by this. The idea of quick, cheap(ish) rolling stock in the North that would zip along on the electrified main line but then potter off reliably to Barrow, Windermere, under the bridge at Wigan, round the Halton Curve and so on seemed so attractive, yet here we are into yet another overrun/overspend scenario that seems not typical of the railways but universal. I am depressed by this. I know this post adds nothing.

 

[EE Andy b1]

Just think if we would have still had a Derby Technical Centre like in British Rail days supported by all TOCs & FOCs then Britain's once engineering excellence could have maybe come up with some of the solutions to projects like FLEX long before they were needed.
But why would our government put money into something like that when they can go abroad and import everything and send most profits back out.

 

[37201xoIM]

I'm depressed by this. The idea of quick, cheap(ish) rolling stock in the North that would zip along on the electrified main line but then potter off reliably to Barrow, Windermere, under the bridge at Wigan, round the Halton Curve and so on seemed so attractive, yet here we are into yet another overrun/overspend scenario that seems not typical of the railways but universal. I am depressed by this. I know this post adds nothing.

I must confess that personally I've never seen a 319 "zip" anywhere......

 

[Bertie the bus]

Testing of the first Class 769 flex at Brush Traction was due to start as this issue of RAIL went to press.
Two Bi-mode 769 are at the Wabtec facility having been converted from 319 EMU's (769434/456) although their entry into traffic has been delayed while testing continues..

Testing is about to start but the delay has been caused while testing continues...

That makes no sense at all and suggests they aren't really anywhere with this project.

 

[Jonny]

IIRC very little of their network is electrified, so unless they loco haul units there may not be that much demand.

And a lot that is, is at 3kV DC (although some is 25kV AC).

Also, I saw a load of ex-BR stuff sitting in sidings in the central North Island.

 

[a_c_skinner]

never seen a 319 "zip" anywhere

On 25kV I've only ever done Farringdon to St P! I was comparing them with the Pacers and Sprinters that are doing those turns at present. I'm still depressed esp. after this pertinent posting:

Just think if we would have still had a Derby Technical Centre

 

[samuelmorris]

Depends what you mean by zip, the acceleration might not be wonderful, but you get a bit more of a sense of speed on an old unit like a 319 when screaming down a mainline at 90+, than you would on something a bit more modern and refined.

 

[mushroomchow]

Railway Magazine suggested they will be on the GCR later this month. We'll see.

 

[Bertie the bus]

I guess the three ex BR ROSCOs are having to deal with the mass replacement of their legacy stock 1980s stock. Never in their history have they faced faced this level of asset redundancy before - it's not surprising that they'll try eek out every last penny, but it looks increasingly desparate. For the vast majority of the network, old fashioned naturally ventilated trains do not meet modern passenger expectations. What gap remains may be best filled by Vivarail?

It looks very sad and desperate to me and shows what a poor job the established ROSCOs have done. A lot of new money is coming into the train leasing market, which is why there are so many new builds coming in the next couple of years as the companies financing them don’t have to worry about old assets on their books, and if this sort of thing is the best the existing ROSCOs can do then they will be out of business in a few years and deservedly so.

It wouldn't be so bad if they actually delivered these reengineered trains but they can't even do that.