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

[dgl]

In theory if the original microprocessor hardware is quite simple then making a modern "compatible" replacement would be easy and cheap, and might not need much more than a suitably powerful PIC micro plus of course the supporting hardware, you might even just need to replace the main CPU and it's support chips and leave all the other electronics as is if they have a long enough lifespan left.

 

[HSTEd]

It probably depends just what 80s microprocessor it is.
If its a Z80 or derivative thereof there are no shortage of familiar programmers.
And as dgl notes there are plenty of 5V compatible microcontrollers that do not require many support components available, including soome surprisingly powerful Microchip PIC16/18s programmable in C.

 

[43074]

I'll admit I haven't. Are they busier than those in other parts of the country?

I'm not thinking regional expresses here, I'm thinking the branch lines, which could have continued to use 153s (or e-Pacers, or 230s, or whatever) but won't.

It's off topic but most of the branch lines can't cope with 153s at the moment - the flows are seasonal but there is always fairly strong demand on the Sheringham and Great Yarmouth lines, Norwich to Lowestoft not so much, the southern end of Ipswich to Lowestoft in particular has boomed since the introduction of the hourly services and services are frequently full and standing on arrival at Ipswich with 3-car 170s and the Felixstowe branch uses a 153 most of the time which is usually well filled, far from the one-man-and-a-dog you are suggesting.

 

[superkev]

+2

I know a handful of people who could still get their head around 1980s assembler if push came to shove, but the time to do it for a handful of units seriously would not be worth it. Just because it is 'software' doesn't make it easy or even cheap.

quite.

As with working with all old electronic and computer systems, what looks easy on a piece of paper for a ball park estimate of cost can quite quickly become a hellish nightmare. This idea of just bang a couple of gensets under the carriage and hey presto, doesn't wash. Yes I have no doubt that it is possible and could provide an increase in viability for the future of these units, whilst at the same time giving a work around to the current infrastructure issues. However as always there will be something that with the best will in the world everyone on this forum and possibly even the people working on the feasibility study, will have overlooked.
--- old post above --- --- new post below ---


I did some calcs over the weekend based on this assumption that the class 230 gensets were used. I do not know the weight of each of the gensets including fuel tank, fuel etc etc,

The calcs I did were thus:
current power to weight ratio of a 319 with no people. 7.05 kw/tonne with 400 65kg people on board 5.95 kw/tonne
P:W limited to 600kw of genset with no people (and asssuming no weight increase which is clearly absurd) 4.27 kw/tonne dropping to 3.61 kw/tonne with the people on board.

For comparison to other classes, a 142 pacer has 6.9kw/tonne when empty a 153 has a 5.17 kw/tonne.

By my very rough calcs, a 319 with the same 4 gensets from a 230 would be the lowest power to weight ratio on the network. I think you are looking for at least 5 maybe 6 of these to get you anything like a useable vehicle.

Depends how fast you want to go. A 750hp Cummins would perhaps achieve 40mph on the flat.
Can't see it happening. Too many can't do people around. Shame really as nice to see some innovation. Think how long did the Parry people mover and class 230's take to approve.
K

 

[daikilo]

With some all-electric buses now using a pantograph at the ends of the route for high speed charging, and others using a hybrid drive with a smaller engine, the options are interesting. It may even make sense to have short sections of third rail to do the recharge.

 

[LNW-GW Joint]

From the CAF website

All the manufacturers say they can do anything with their platforms.
Northern might not have liked the spec/price from CAF for a small number of bi-mode units (if offered).
I would have though the Stadler FLIRT AGA order changes things, because there will be a UK-compliant bi-mode on NR metals in worthwhile numbers, probably with further options available.
Adding a supplementary order for Northern would be much more straightforward that buying from scratch.

 

[urpert]

So hypothetically using the same Ford Duratorq engines as the 230, perhaps stacking them up above the floor behind each cab would be better?

Though if you're going above the floor, simply re-using engines which already exist (would that not bypass the emissions regulations?) would be better, such as all those lovely Valentas that are currently hidden in the disused bore of Standedge Tunnel?

If they did the 319/0s they could just close off the section behind the cab with the sliding door for when they were used as postal units :-P

 

[Bletchleyite]

Adding a supplementary order for Northern would be much more straightforward that buying from scratch.

Yes, such an order could well be worthwhile for the Lakes and Furness Lines service groups, with the original Northern Connect DMU order initiating a cascade of 150s or similar (maybe 158s to ATW as they could do with one or two more?), or even just providing much needed additional capacity.

A 4-car version (they are 4 slightly short coaches) with central traction module would probably be a good fit. The large windows Stadler prefer would also be good for these rather scenic lines, and dedicated "Lakes and Furness" type branding together with rationalised clockface timetables could serve as a powerful marketing tool - the whole thing would be similar to the German-style small-franchise regional approach which has proven quite successful.

 

[notlob.divad]

Depends how fast you want to go. A 750hp Cummins would perhaps achieve 40mph on the flat.
Can't see it happening. Too many can't do people around. Shame really as nice to see some innovation. Think how long did the Parry people mover and class 230's take to approve.
K

Depends how quickly you want to accelerate more than how fast you want to go.

 

[route:oxford]

P:W limited to 600kw of genset with no people (and asssuming no weight increase which is clearly absurd) 4.27 kw/tonne dropping to 3.61 kw/tonne with the people on board.

That's still more than the DMBS-TSL-TSL-DMCL Class 101 formation which was 3.89 kw/tonne unloaded.

They could manage 70mph.

 

[HSTEd]

Are the throttle controllers on Class 319s notched or continuous?
You could just place a stop on the throttles to lock out the high level throttle settings that could use more than the installed gen-set power.
You only have to get 142 level performance after all.

 

[61653 HTAFC]

Are the throttle controllers on Class 319s notched or continuous?
You could just place a stop on the throttles to lock out the high level throttle settings that could use more than the installed gen-set power.
You only have to get 142 level performance after all.

So, removing 50% of the wheels then?

 

[Roast Veg]

+2

I know a handful of people who could still get their head around 1980s assembler if push came to shove, but the time to do it for a handful of units seriously would not be worth it. Just because it is 'software' doesn't make it easy or even cheap.

Personally, as a programmer I would kill for the opportunity to get to grips with some classic assembly. If anyone wants to set me up with that job I am more than ready.

 

[AM9]

It probably depends just what 80s microprocessor it is.
If its a Z80 or derivative thereof there are no shortage of familiar programmers.
And as dgl notes there are plenty of 5V compatible microcontrollers that do not require many support components available, including soome surprisingly powerful Microchip PIC16/18s programmable in C.

It's much more likely that the controller was microcontroller based. Typically an Intel MCS-96 device which has the necessary watchdog timers, pulse generator outputs, ADCs, enhanced protection for lock-ups etc.. These devices were used in early engine managements systems where the harsh electromagnetic and temperature environment required enhanced protection over and above basic CPUs like Z80s, 80xx and 68xxs.
The real engineering would be to interface the sensor and control I/O of the power electronics.

 

[HSTEd]

It's much more likely that the controller was microcontroller based. Typically an Intel MCS-96 device which has the necessary watchdog timers, pulse generator outputs, ADCs, enhanced protection for lock-ups etc.. These devices were used in early engine managements systems where the harsh electromagnetic and temperature environment required enhanced protection over and above basic CPUs like Z80s, 80xx and 68xxs.
The real engineering would be to interface the sensor and control I/O of the power electronics.

It is really interesting looking back just how much we get on modern microcontrollers. The top of the range MCS-96 now has features we would expect on a sub-dollar microcontroller from a manufacturer's basic line.
I am doing an MPhys project in the internet of things and my father, an electronics hobbyist and ex-railway computing worker from the 70s, is amazed at the sort of thing we have at our disposal.

Multiple independent serial controllers on baseline processors and multiple 16 bit PWM outputs for example.
The hard part is finding a processor with the correct environmental hardness - best bet would be existing automotive lines - I believe Microchip have suitable devices.

 

[northwichcat]

All the manufacturers say they can do anything with their platforms.
Northern might not have liked the spec/price from CAF for a small number of bi-mode units (if offered).

Indeed. Arriva would have wanted to produce a bid which they felt could beat two rival bids so if the BCR for normal DMUs was better than the BCR for bi-modes they probably wouldn't have wanted to go for the latter.
--- old post above --- --- new post below ---

Yes, such an order could well be worthwhile for the Lakes and Furness Lines service groups, with the original Northern Connect DMU order initiating a cascade of 150s or similar (maybe 158s to ATW as they could do with one or two more?), or even just providing much needed additional capacity.

A 4-car version (they are 4 slightly short coaches) with central traction module would probably be a good fit. The large windows Stadler prefer would also be good for these rather scenic lines, and dedicated "Lakes and Furness" type branding together with rationalised clockface timetables could serve as a powerful marketing tool - the whole thing would be similar to the German-style small-franchise regional approach which has proven quite successful.

The one problem is unless it's a large order of Stadler FLIRTs (so that a complete class can be cascaded away) you're adding an additional type of train to the Northern fleet which isn't compatible with other types of train. When the TPE franchise was awarded people questioned why TPE were proposing to use 4 different types of train, yet Northern will eventually have 9 different types of train even without getting any bi-modes.

 

[Bletchleyite]

The one problem is unless it's a large order of Stadler FLIRTs (so that a complete class can be cascaded away) you're adding an additional type of train to the Northern fleet which isn't compatible with other types of train. When the TPE franchise was awarded people questioned why TPE were proposing to use 4 different types of train, yet Northern will eventually have 9 different types of train even without getting any bi-modes.

But that doesn't overly matter if (a) it's only used on the Lakes/Furness services group, and (b) nothing else is used there.

 

[Andrew1395]

If this happens can the rebuild include a proper "guards" area for storage of bikes and get them out of vestibules - like the 210 further up the thread?

 

[northwichcat]

But that doesn't overly matter if (a) it's only used on the Lakes/Furness services group, and (b) nothing else is used there.

So are you saying only used between Lancaster and Barrow/Windermere? If not there's still the issue of a unit failure blocking the line and a unit of the same type and a driver who signs it needing to be sourced for a rescue.

 

[Bletchleyite]

So are you saying only used between Lancaster and Barrow/Windermere?

I'm saying that nothing else would go past Carnforth/Oxenholme. There would be areas of crossover south of there.

If not there's still the issue of a unit failure blocking the line and a unit of the same type and a driver who signs it needing to be sourced for a rescue.

You've heard of emergency couplings, right?

Despite serious unreliability and LM only having a few, for example, 319s are not causing lengthy obstructions to WCML services with these issues.

 

[gsnedders]

Personally, as a programmer I would kill for the opportunity to get to grips with some classic assembly. If anyone wants to set me up with that job I am more than ready.

OT, I know, but the short answer is get into working on modern embedded systems first.

 

[Bletchleyite]

OT, I know, but the short answer is get into working on modern embedded systems first.

A friend used to work in that area and he wrote plenty of assembly, so embedded systems is indeed the way to go if you want to write assembly language in 2016 - nobody uses it for application development these days.

 

[HSTEd]

Even embedded systems are trending to Java and C these days, or even BASIC (the greatest of all programming languages).

Additionally - lets say the driver demands too much power from the gensets and they trip out.... is that actually an unsafe condition? The train's control equipment etc will still be powered from the battery supply, just as if it had lost line power right?
He just has to coast and press the buttons to restart the gensets? If they are D-Train type ones they will be able to reach full power not long after a warm restart at least.

 

[hwl]

Even embedded systems are trending to Java and C these days, or even BASIC (the greatest of all programming languages).

Additionally - lets say the driver demands too much power from the gensets and they trip out.... is that actually an unsafe condition? The train's control equipment etc will still be powered from the battery supply, just as if it had lost line power right?
He just has to coast and press the buttons to restart the gensets? If they are D-Train type ones they will be able to reach full power not long after a warm restart at least.

There are plenty or areas in 3rd rail land where units are limited to notch 2 on the power controller due to poor power supply which is achieved with line side signs rather than complex interlocking! (319s have notched power controllers, the usual notches 1-4).

 

[Chester1]

I will avoid the technical debate as I don't know anything about it! I hope the concept proves to be viable because it would end the DMU shortage and significantly reduce running under the wires in one go. The lines near me (Stockport) would be an excellent choice. Most Hazel Grove-Manchester services are run by DMUs despite much of the line being electrified. All Buxton/New Mills Newown/Hazel Grove to Manchester Picadilly/Preston or even Blackburn/Clitheroe could be switched to bi mode 319s. Many of the services are doubled up units therefore the DMUs freed would be substantial. I think the Valleys lines would also be suitable once Cardiff is wired. New EMUs can easily be ordered but I doubt that Porterbrook etc will be keen to build a large number of DMUs. There is no guarantee they will be allowed to run for long enough to pay their way. Makes sense to switch as many lines as feasible to bi mode 319s, which could be a large proportion or all of the 86 units if the top diesel speed is sufficient.

 

[northwichcat]

Most Hazel Grove-Manchester services are run by DMUs despite much of the line being electrified.

All Buxton/New Mills Newown/Hazel Grove to Manchester Picadilly/Preston or even Blackburn/Clitheroe could be switched to bi mode 319s. Many of the services are doubled up units therefore the DMUs freed would be substantial.

Network Rail will probably have the Deansgate to Leyland wires ready which will likely see half of Hazel Grove services being electric again, before there's any 319 bi-modes available for service,.

Northern do have plans to use doubled up 156s on Buxton services so switching to 319s instead won't allow for the planned capacity enhancement. It also remains to be seen how powerful a 319 on diesel is - it might have issues with getting to/from Buxton without extending journey times.

New EMUs can easily be ordered but I doubt that Porterbrook etc will be keen to build a large number of DMUs.

That's been said before. However, it didn't stop Beacon Rail Leasing signing an order for diesel only CAF Civities and it could potentially add some much needed competition to the train leasing market in the future rather than forcing TOCs to use 30+ year old DMUs for the duration of their new franchise because there's nothing else.

There is no guarantee they will be allowed to run for long enough to pay their way

The same can be said about EMUs converted to DEMUs - if they are already more than 25 years old will the cost of conversion be recoverable?

 

[Skutter]

It's much more likely that the controller was microcontroller based. Typically an Intel MCS-96 device which has the necessary watchdog timers, pulse generator outputs, ADCs, enhanced protection for lock-ups etc.. These devices were used in early engine managements systems where the harsh electromagnetic and temperature environment required enhanced protection over and above basic CPUs like Z80s, 80xx and 68xxs.
The real engineering would be to interface the sensor and control I/O of the power electronics.

I agree, I'd expect developing the code to be straightforward with plenty of programmers qualified and able to do it. The tricky bit is assembling a test bed, or an actual train you don't mind damaging, to get it evaluated and accepted for use.
--- old post above --- --- new post below ---

There are plenty or areas in 3rd rail land where units are limited to notch 2 on the power controller due to poor power supply which is achieved with line side signs rather than complex interlocking! (319s have notched power controllers, the usual notches 1-4).

Yep, driver training would surely be fine for this. There's plenty of opportunity to give the driver additional gauges like engine rpm, line voltage, power demand to assist with this. No substantial changes to the drive system needed.

 

[gsnedders]

Even embedded systems are trending to Java and C these days, or even BASIC (the greatest of all programming languages).

Plenty of embedded systems are C and some Java nowadays; I only mentioned modern embedded stuff as a way into the even more specialised field of doing it all in assembly, which is mostly limited to things on very limited hardware and existing codebases nowadays.

 

[Chester1]

Network Rail will probably have the Deansgate to Leyland wires ready which will likely see half of Hazel Grove services being electric again, before there's any 319 bi-modes available for service,.

At the current rate of progress I am not so sure :grin: That still leaves services from Buxton and New Mills Newtown of 2tph post Ordsall completion. Also, Clitheroe/Blackburn services. Marple Rose Hill-Piccadilly also.

Northern do have plans to use doubled up 156s on Buxton services so switching to 319s instead won't allow for the planned capacity enhancement. It also remains to be seen how powerful a 319 on diesel is - it might have issues with getting to/from Buxton without extending journey times

.

Wouldn't this be counter balanced by replacing the New Mill NT service from a (likely) single sprinter to a 319? Your right about the power issue though.

Valleys line would be the biggest opportunity with 30 pacers to replace by 2020 and no electrification plan agreed yet. Bi mode 319 would allow a slower approach while still replacing DMUs.

That's been said before. However, it didn't stop Beacon Rail Leasing signing an order for diesel only CAF Civities and it could potentially add some much needed competition to the train leasing market in the future rather than forcing TOCs to use 30+ year old DMUs for the duration of their new franchise because there's nothing else.

The same can be said about EMUs converted to DEMUs - if they are already more than 25 years old will the cost of conversion be recoverable?

40 DMUs is a limited order. At some point Environmental concerns will lead to a ban on combustion engine cars, there are already efforts in Germany to ban sale by 2030. The natural extension of this would be to continually tighten DMU emissions rules and restrict grandfather rights. I am not sure there will be any DMU in use in UK on commericial services post 2050 (80% emission cut target date). Converting a 319 that could last another 15 years and building a new EMU that could last 40, might work out better value than building an DMU that might be forced into retirement after less than 30 years. We don't have much of an idea of conversion cost.

 

[The Ham]

40 DMUs is a limited order. At some point Environmental concerns will lead to a ban on combustion engine cars, there are already efforts in Germany to ban sale by 2030. The natural extension of this would be to continually tighten DMU emissions rules and restrict grandfather rights. I am not sure there will be any DMU in use in UK on commericial services post 2050 (80% emission cut target date). Converting a 319 that could last another 15 years and building a new EMU that could last 40, might work out better value than building an DMU that might be forced into retirement after less than 30 years. We don't have much of an idea of conversion cost.

Following on from this, it could well be that bimodal trains would be able to claim their average emissions over their fleet, thus being able to reduce it on electric parts of their runs whilst still belching out higher than allowed (for DMU's) emissions when running on diesel.

Of course it is likely to be that the average limit will creep down over time, buy this will be offset by the wiring up of more and more routes. It is also likely that the average would be lower than that for DMU's.