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

[sprinterguy]

er, I wasn't aware that a 230 has actually run anywhere, let alone worked a duty that a rail passenger (or even crew) would recognise!

The prototype diesel unit 230001 was briefly tested between Coventry and Leamington Spa before the fire at Kenilworth in December 2016 put paid to that, and has since been tested between Evesham and Moreton in Marsh ahead of operating a passenger shuttle service between Honeybourne and Long Marston for Rail Live in June 2017. Presumably extensive testing has continued to take place on the Long Marston test track.

Interesting to see the amount of vitriol going Porterbrook’s way. Yet everyone seems to think the 230s will work fine out of the box, on totally different duties to what they have worked before.

You must have missed most of the Class 230 thread since it started four years ago then!

 

[NoOnesFool]

Does anyone know if any further progress has been made? Is the testing at GCR still going ahead?

 

[507021]

Is the testing at GCR still going ahead?

Yes, a set of barrier coaches have arrived there recently to be used with the 769 testing.

 

[jimm]

The prototype diesel unit 230001 was briefly tested between Coventry and Leamington Spa before the fire at Kenilworth in December 2016 put paid to that, and has since been tested between Evesham and Moreton in Marsh ahead of operating a passenger shuttle service between Honeybourne and Long Marston for Rail Live in June 2017. Presumably extensive testing has continued to take place on the Long Marston test track.

You must have missed most of the Class 230 thread since it started four years ago then!

230001 has also been out on the Cotswold Line on a number of occasions this year - pictures from last month and May taken by Peter Tandy are here http://www.petertandy.co.uk/Diesel Units.htm

 

[HBUG]

If I may join this discussion from a GWR perspective late (or non) arrival of the 769s will cause some serious problems. As you may remember DfT came up with the brilliant idea of scrapping the new Heathrow Express depot at Langley in order to save £2M off the HST2 budget. The only problem was that the existing Hex units could not then be maintained after Jan 2020 because their depot at Old Oak Common will be demolished in order to start HST2 construction. No problem said DfT GWR can take over running the Hex service using refurbished 387s that will be maintained at Reading and the 387s that will be withdrawn from service during 2019 for refurbishment will be backfilled by the 769s. We will therefore start losing existing 387 sets from some time in early 2019 which are extremely unlikely to be backfilled by 769s at the time they are withdrawn thus reducing the available stock to run existing services on the lines in and out of Paddington coupled with driver training for the 769s further reducing driver availability at a time when lack of a driver is a frequent excuse for train cancellations. There is clearly the possibility that the withdrawn 387s could be backfilled by one of the other overhead equipped withdrawn classes as we do at least have wires up and the only routes where bi or tri mode Would be of real value are Reading to Gatwick and Reading to Basingstoke both currently operated by turbos which GWR want to cascade to the West Country. However, the whole plan seems destined to be about as well thought through as the electrification plan and the IEPs.

 

[43096]

If I may join this discussion from a GWR perspective late (or non) arrival of the 769s will cause some serious problems. As you may remember DfT came up with the brilliant idea of scrapping the new Heathrow Express depot at Langley in order to save £2M off the HST2 budget. The only problem was that the existing Hex units could not then be maintained after Jan 2020 because their depot at Old Oak Common will be demolished in order to start HST2 construction. No problem said DfT GWR can take over running the Hex service using refurbished 387s that will be maintained at Reading and the 387s that will be withdrawn from service during 2019 for refurbishment will be backfilled by the 769s. We will therefore start losing existing 387 sets from some time in early 2019 which are extremely unlikely to be backfilled by 769s at the time they are withdrawn thus reducing the available stock to run existing services on the lines in and out of Paddington coupled with driver training for the 769s further reducing driver availability at a time when lack of a driver is a frequent excuse for train cancellations. There is clearly the possibility that the withdrawn 387s could be backfilled by one of the other overhead equipped withdrawn classes as we do at least have wires up and the only routes where bi or tri mode Would be of real value are Reading to Gatwick and Reading to Basingstoke both currently operated by turbos which GWR want to cascade to the West Country. However, the whole plan seems destined to be about as well thought through as the electrification plan and the IEPs.

You don’t need a diesel engine to replace a 387. They can use a 319 in the interim before they are converted. What it does affect is cascade of 165s to the west off the North Downs.

 

[FGW_DID]

If I may join this discussion from a GWR perspective late (or non) arrival of the 769s will cause some serious problems. As you may remember DfT came up with the brilliant idea of scrapping the new Heathrow Express depot at Langley in order to save £2M off the HST2 budget. The only problem was that the existing Hex units could not then be maintained after Jan 2020 because their depot at Old Oak Common will be demolished in order to start HST2 construction. No problem said DfT GWR can take over running the Hex service using refurbished 387s that will be maintained at Reading and the 387s that will be withdrawn from service during 2019 for refurbishment will be backfilled by the 769s. We will therefore start losing existing 387 sets from some time in early 2019 which are extremely unlikely to be backfilled by 769s at the time they are withdrawn thus reducing the available stock to run existing services on the lines in and out of Paddington coupled with driver training for the 769s further reducing driver availability at a time when lack of a driver is a frequent excuse for train cancellations. There is clearly the possibility that the withdrawn 387s could be backfilled by one of the other overhead equipped withdrawn classes as we do at least have wires up and the only routes where bi or tri mode Would be of real value are Reading to Gatwick and Reading to Basingstoke both currently operated by turbos which GWR want to cascade to the West Country. However, the whole plan seems destined to be about as well thought through as the electrification plan and the IEPs.

I did post similar in post #1944 on Sunday but such is the volume of posts that is now 4 pages back!

The plan is/was for

• the 769s to replace the Turbos on the North Downs (hence you only need Reading drivers to learn the 769)
• Turbos will replace some of the existing 387 services!
• 387s will go for conversion (at Ilford?)
• Airport 387s will then take over from the 332s. (Two at a time)

I presume that plan however was also somewhat dependent on Crossrail being operational and having taking over the majority of the stopping services between Pad & Reading.

 

[JN114]

I did post similar in post #1944 on Sunday but such is the volume of posts that is now 4 pages back!

The plan is/was for

• the 769s to replace the Turbos on the North Downs (hence you only need Reading drivers to learn the 769)
• Turbos will replace some of the existing 387 services!
• 387s will go for conversion (at Ilford?)
• Airport 387s will then take over from the 332s. (Two at a time)

I presume that plan however was also somewhat dependent on Crossrail being operational and having taking over the majority of the stopping services between Pad & Reading.

Per our last update that remains the plan - the only difference being the potential use of 319s on Reading - Newbury services in the new year vice 769s; and that 769s won’t just be limited to North Downs but likely used on Windsors, Henleys, Basings and Newburys.

319s/769s likely won’t see much (if any) use on mainline suburban work as they’d be limited to 4 car with no SDO; and there aren’t really any viable 4 car only diagrams they can work; plus it’s difficult to keep mainline suburban work Reading drivers only.

 

[Bertie the bus]

If I may join this discussion from a GWR perspective late (or non) arrival of the 769s will cause some serious problems. As you may remember DfT came up with the brilliant idea of scrapping the new Heathrow Express depot at Langley in order to save £2M off the HST2 budget.

£200 million, not £2 million.

 

[HBUG]

£200 million, not £2 million.

Many thanks to all for the helpful replies on this issue (particularly the correction of my typo above). It remains to be seen what impact the slippage in Elizabeth Line running between Paddington and Reading will have as that would have replaced two 387 trains per hour in each direction so there may be a need for more 319s or whatever else is available than was thought

 

[Clarence Yard]

The delay to implementing the December 2018 GWR service plan (now December 2019) means that GWR will have surplus rolling stock from May 2019 so turbos can be sent back to Reading to backfill for any shortfall in 769 deliveries and that is the current plan as mass use of 319 or any other type of EMU is not now possible.

December 2019 and crossrail delay may be solved by subbing 345 units onto pad-RDG services because crossrail may need to ramp up operations on the west side prior to full introduction to shake down the units and keep their drivers fully employed.

 

[Mollman]

I did post similar in post #1944 on Sunday but such is the volume of posts that is now 4 pages back!

The plan is/was for

• the 769s to replace the Turbos on the North Downs (hence you only need Reading drivers to learn the 769)
• Turbos will replace some of the existing 387 services!
• 387s will go for conversion (at Ilford?)
• Airport 387s will then take over from the 332s. (Two at a time)

I presume that plan however was also somewhat dependent on Crossrail being operational and having taking over the majority of the stopping services between Pad & Reading.

December 2019 and crossrail delay may be solved by subbing 345 units onto pad-RDG services because crossrail may need to ramp up operations on the west side prior to full introduction to shake down the units and keep their drivers fully employed.

I think the plan for CrossRail was to have the Paddington - Reading service operating separately from the tunnel services at first.

In regards to the Turbos replacing the 387s I wouldn't be surprised if this will only be until more 387s or 379s are made available from GA or C2C.

 

[Clarence Yard]

Turbo substitution will be months, not years. GWR are not remotely interested in 379's.

 

[bunnahabhain]

The first unit landed at Quorn and Woodhouse earlier this afternoon for testing.

 

[EE Andy b1]

Nice to finally see something for real. Hope it goes well with the testing now as late as it is but urgently needed.
Looks a tidy setup.
Let the fun begin!!

 

[AndrewE]

That's an interesting cyclone air (pre-)filter that I see... one of those was kicking around in the BR Research specialist filter lab for decades until it was thrown away.
I think the early modernisation plan diesels might have had them for a short while - until they were abandoned and oil-wetted metal mesh (later oiled glass fibre) was substituted. I suspect that keeping them clean enough to allow air through (let alone sucking in lumps of accumulated solids) was what finished them in the railway environment. Those are a lot nearer the track than bodyside air inlets on locos too...

 

[The_Engineer]

Thank you very much for posting these photographs. Great to see one appear out of the Brush works at last!! Mind you, that's a very tightly packed underframe on the driving cars; I wonder what maintenance will be like? Here's to seeing it move under it's on power very soon...…

Oh, and why has the unit number been taped over on the cab front??

 

[deltic08]

The prototype diesel unit 230001 was briefly tested between Coventry and Leamington Spa before the fire at Kenilworth in December 2016 put paid to that, and has since been tested between Evesham and Moreton in Marsh ahead of operating a passenger shuttle service between Honeybourne and Long Marston for Rail Live in June.

Was Moreton in Marsh chosen because it is home of the fire training College?

 

[LOL The Irony]

Was Moreton in Marsh chosen because it is home of the fire training College?

nice one. That'll give them real life training.

 

[LOL The Irony]

View attachment 52580 View attachment 52581 View attachment 52582 View attachment 52583 The first unit landed at Quorn and Woodhouse earlier this afternoon for testing.

Is it just me or does that Northern logo seem bigger?

 

[Alasdair Clift]

Is it just me or does that Northern logo seem bigger?

Might be because unlike most of the other units it doesn't seem to have the 'by arriva' branding added to it yet that most repainted units now have

 

[Flyingsprinter]

Really hope testing goes well. These units are desperately needed in service

 

[LOL The Irony]

Might be because unlike most of the other units it doesn't seem to have the 'by arriva' branding added to it yet that most repainted units now have

I took a look at other 319's and that logo is bigger.

 

[Alasdair Clift]

I took a look at other 319's and that logo is bigger.

I looked at some of the original repainted 319s, without the 'by arriva' branding and some with it, and all the ones without seem to have bigger logos on the side. Seems odd as I would've thought they just added a vinyl to say 'by arriva' rather than replacing the entire logo

 

[158752]

If the Northern branding is larger than standard I'd imagine it'd be one of the details that'd be rectified on acceptance by the operator. From the images two other differences stand out from the current standard, that being the coloured n 'bubbles' are those of the former colour palette, not the current and the blue accents around the bodyside passenger door controls aren't present, leaving the control panels looking almost lost on the sea of white. Obviously these are insignificant omissions and are rightly at the bottom of the manufacturers priorities considering the issues which have delayed entry into service of this product. Hopefully testing will find only minor faults which can be rectified quickly and the touted
versatility of the units will finally provide benefit to passengers where they are sorely required.

 

[pemma]

@bunnahabhain You might want to look at optimsing those images for the web, otherwise the mobile providers will do very well out of excess data charges for those viewing this thread on their mobile.

 

[squizzler]

That's a tight bit of packaging. No wonder they spent a bit of time working out how to fit that lot under the car.

The other thing that strikes me from the photos above are the large number of flexible sections in both the supercharged air after the turbocharger and the exhaust system. Strikes me as something of an achilles heel. Maybe all units are similar but goes unnoticed because of the grime on the bottom of most trains. Is this number of joints excessive by DMU standards, or likely to be rectified in production units?

 

[Bertie the bus]

Oh, and why has the unit number been taped over on the cab front??

Official unveiling by the Queen? Or it's still really a 319 with bits of cardboard sellotaped to it.

One of those probably.

 

[Domh245]

That's a tight bit of packaging. No wonder they spent a bit of time working out how to fit that lot under the car.

The other thing that strikes me from the photos above are the large number of flexible sections in both the supercharged air after the turbocharger and the exhaust system. Strikes me as something of an achilles heel. Maybe all units are similar but goes unnoticed because of the grime on the bottom of most trains. Is this number of joints excessive by DMU standards, or likely to be rectified in production units?

Here's an image of the MTU unit off of a 172, and there seem to be a fair few flexible sections around there. I think it's a combination of brand new equipment making it all look very prominent, as well as possibly a newer engine requiring more plumbing with EGR, SCR etc compared to earlier engines

 

[squizzler]

Here's an image of the MTU unit off of a 172, and there seem to be a fair few flexible sections around there. I think it's a combination of brand new equipment making it all look very prominent, as well as possibly a newer engine requiring more plumbing with EGR, SCR etc compared to earlier engines

I disagree with your assertion that the 172 uses similar amounts of flexible pipes: the linked picture shows the air from the turbocharger (silvery bit on right hand of turbo) going straight into a manifold on the top of the engine block. The flexible sections on left and right are the exhaust downstream of turbine and air upstream of compressor respectively - so not under high pressure. So a very short run and no flexible section of charge air pipe is obvious from photo. The 769, by contrast, has five flexible sections on the charge air plumbing that we can see, presumably leading to and from an intercooler. This is air under pressure. It strikes me as an awful lot of joins where a hose could blow off and probably does no favours to the internal aerodynamics of the system. I hope this is only the case for the prototype!

The 172 is an unfortunate choice of example. This had teething problems relating to exhaust system back pressure which was due to the Flexx Eco bogies being where the exhaust use to go on the 170's and requiring a convoluted exhaust system. The engine management system had to be modified to cope with the restricted breathing...