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

[Eccles1983]

You'll get 6 cars in P2. Just.....

 

[Greybeard33]

Can anyone give platform lengths for Stalybridge? Almost certainly the 3 long platforms could take 8 car 319s? I appreciate that Ashton couldn’t!

Irrelevant. Northern has only eight 769s on order. They will not be operated in 8-car formations.

 

[Llama]

The through platforms at Stalybridge are plenty long enough. Platforms 1 & 3 are 225m, platform 4 250m.

Re the 319s, isn't the power notch 4 current restricted when in DC mode?

 

[nat67]

There are two 319's at Reading traincare depot. Which ones are they please.

 

[JN114]

There are two 319's at Reading traincare depot. Which ones are they please.

449 and 440

 

[nat67]

449 and 440

Cheers, thanks.

 

[scrapy]

Can anyone give platform lengths for Stalybridge? Almost certainly the 3 long platforms could take 8 car 319s? I appreciate that Ashton couldn’t!

Neither could any other station between Staly and Wigan except Man Vic and Bolton. They won't even fit at Wigan NW 1,2 or 3 (4, 5 and 6 not accessible from Hindley). 8 car never going to happen on this route in the lifetime of 769s and would be a waste of capacity.

 

[AM9]

The benchmark EMUs in the North West are the 323 and the 350, which have much better acceleration than a 319.

The stock that they have/will be replacing is the benchmark as far as passengers are concerned. Apart from the TPE 350s from Manchester to Glasgow and the one per hour LM/LNW 350 to Brum, most non-enthusiast passengers probably haven't even notice the difference.
The discussion was about sprinters vs 319s (and by inference 769s when they come into service) in terms of acceleration, adhesion with passing comments on the improvement that 319s have brought to passenger accomodation since their introduction.

 

[Mogster]

Neither could any other station between Staly and Wigan except Man Vic and Bolton. They won't even fit at Wigan NW 1,2 or 3 (4, 5 and 6 not accessible from Hindley). 8 car never going to happen on this route in the lifetime of 769s and would be a waste of capacity.

I assume Wigan Wallgate could take 8. Then Bolton then Victoria. Salford Crescent can’t apparently which is a shame.

The stock that they have/will be replacing is the benchmark as far as passengers are concerned. Apart from the TPE 350s from Manchester to Glasgow and the one per hour LM/LNW 350 to Brum, most non-enthusiast passengers probably haven't even notice the difference.
The discussion was about sprinters vs 319s (and by inference 769s when they come into service) in terms of acceleration, adhesion with passing comments on the improvement that 319s have brought to passenger accomodation since their introduction.

Using a GPS app on my phone compared to the 350s the 319s seem quite slow. Downhill from Golborne Junction to Wigan NW the TPE 350s would really motor, making 100mph+ easily with the driver backing off well before Wigan. The same journey in a 319 and you don’t see 90mph with the driver only backing off to stop at Wigan. I get the impression it would take a 319 a very long time to reach 100mph.

The 350s are very superior units imo. Travelling on them was a huge step change from the usual 319s 150s and 142s. I fail to see how anyone couldn’t appreciate the difference.

 

[absolutelymilk]

I assume Wigan Wallgate could take 8. Then Bolton then Victoria. Salford Crescent can’t apparently which is a shame.



Using a GPS app on my phone compared to the 350s the 319s seem quite slow. Downhill from Golborne Junction to Wigan NW the TPE 350s would really motor, making 100mph+ easily with the driver backing off well before Wigan. The same journey in a 319 and you don’t see 90mph with the driver only backing off to stop at Wigan. I get the impression it would take a 319 a very long time to reach 100mph.

The 350s are very superior units imo. Travelling on them was a huge step change from the usual 319s 150s and 142s. I fail to see how anyone couldn’t appreciate the difference.

Hence "apart from the TPE 350s...."

 

[Greybeard33]

The stock that they have/will be replacing is the benchmark as far as passengers are concerned. Apart from the TPE 350s from Manchester to Glasgow and the one per hour LM/LNW 350 to Brum, most non-enthusiast passengers probably haven't even notice the difference.
The discussion was about sprinters vs 319s (and by inference 769s when they come into service) in terms of acceleration, adhesion with passing comments on the improvement that 319s have brought to passenger accomodation since their introduction.

For passengers on the newly-electrified lines out of Liverpool and Manchester, the 319s certainly provided a welcome increase in capacity, if not performance. But those of us who use the South Manchester electrified lines have, over many years, become accustomed to the superior performance of the 323s. When the relatively sluggish 319s began to appear on some of these routes, struggling to keep to the timetable, it was a clear step backwards.

Northern 323s now work some diagrams that extend to Liverpool, and have attracted favourable comments from passengers who had previously only been exposed to 319s and DMUs. This despite the 323s not having benefitted from refurbishment or rebranding.

 

[Cardiff123]

According to the latest edition of Modern Railways, deliveries of the 769s to TOCs "should now accelerate. Northern was expected to have two units by the end of January......" (So that's now then)

 

[a_c_skinner]

Deliveries are one thing, when will they move on the main line?

 

[Cardiff123]

Deliveries are one thing, when will they move on the main line?

Surely 769s can't be delivered to any TOC before at least one unit has been mainline tested?

 

[jonesy3001]

Next 769 to move to allerton?

http://www.realtimetrains.co.uk/tra...BZ5l4N0xzqcha7GMf4yWaPMG4ctjrKf4B_gveTTzM_bv0

 

[Elecman]

Surely 769s can't be delivered to any TOC before at least one unit has been mainline tested?

Yes they can be delivered

 

[js1000]

For passengers on the newly-electrified lines out of Liverpool and Manchester, the 319s certainly provided a welcome increase in capacity, if not performance. But those of us who use the South Manchester electrified lines have, over many years, become accustomed to the superior performance of the 323s. When the relatively sluggish 319s began to appear on some of these routes, struggling to keep to the timetable, it was a clear step backwards.

Northern 323s now work some diagrams that extend to Liverpool, and have attracted favourable comments from passengers who had previously only been exposed to 319s and DMUs. This despite the 323s not having benefitted from refurbishment or rebranding.

Agreed 100%.

I can understand why the 319/769s would be appreciated on newly electrified routes previously served by dirty and noisy 150/156s but they are inferior to the more spacious and nippier 323s.

 

[Mogster]

I can understand why people like the mostly bay seating on the 319s but other than that I don’t see how they are much of an improvement over the 150s. The 319s are slow, in 769 form they will be worse surely. More capacity and resilience in the diagrams will be welcome though.

The 156s are slow but I find them quite comfortable, they just need an as new refurb. When one rolls up the pax gravitate towards it, proper wide seats and tables. The long carriages give extra capacity as well.

 

[edwin_m]

I can understand why people like the mostly bay seating on the 319s but other than that I don’t see how they are much of an improvement over the 150s. The 319s are slow, in 769 form they will be worse surely. More capacity and resilience in the diagrams will be welcome though.

The 319 has the same basic interior as the 150 but is a lot quieter, and on many routes ought be a but quicker too even as a 769 in diesel mode.

 

[Bertie the bus]

Surely 769s can't be delivered to any TOC before at least one unit has been mainline tested?

It’s not just no mainline testing; they haven’t had any testing except perhaps tootling round Brush’s site a bit. I think delivered to Northern is pushing it a bit – shifted out of the way to make room at Loughborough is probably more accurate.

 

[a_c_skinner]

Didn't they run on the GCR? Mind you we heard little.

 

[Bertie the bus]

There are 2 on the GCR but 769431 didn't visit and was delivered straight from the works to Allerton. Presumably, if this is another one, that will be the same.

 

[gazthomas]

The 319s aren't slow, they bombed down the Midland Mainline quite happily. Yes, they aren't as nippy as a 323 but they'll get you there and they're faster and roomier than ant Sprinter or Leyland National on wagon bogies

 

[Greybeard33]

The 319 has the same basic interior as the 150 but is a lot quieter, and on many routes ought be a but quicker too even as a 769 in diesel mode.

In my experience the 319's motor coach and central trailer (which carries the underfloor compressor) are certainly not much quieter than a 150. The driving trailers are relatively quiet in the 319, but in the 769 they will have the diesel generators roaring away underfloor.

 

[samuelmorris]

I'd take Mk3 EMU noise over Sprinter engine noise to be honest, it's not present for as long and I don't think it's quite as loud except at high speeds (say 70mph+).

 

[big all]

The 319s aren't slow, they bombed down the Midland Mainline quite happily. Yes, they aren't as nippy as a 323 but they'll get you there and they're faster and roomier than ant Sprinter or Leyland National on wagon bogies

as i mentioned on another post some time ago extra available power was on quite drastically diminishing returns
as in with a class 73 it was something like 60% reduction in weight or 40% increase in running time to convert between 1600hp on jeuce or 600hp diesel in other words a massive increase in power off say 80% dosn'et equally a 80% reduction but perhaps a 25-30% reduction in journey time in the same way a 60% reduction in power may only be 40% increase in journey time
in other words sensible coasting with lower power will give slightly extended power times over higher powered units

 

[js1000]

The 319s aren't slow, they bombed down the Midland Mainline quite happily. Yes, they aren't as nippy as a 323 but they'll get you there and they're faster and roomier than ant Sprinter or Leyland National on wagon bogies

I don't dispute the 319s aren't quick units. They seem to roll along comfortably without the need for any more power once they hit 60mph. But acceleration wise (let's say from 0-50mph), particularly in comparison to the 323s they're poor. Hopefully the engines on the 769s won't diminish acceleration any further.

 

[AM9]

I don't dispute the 319s aren't quick units. They seem to roll along comfortably without the need for any more power once they hit 60mph. But acceleration wise (let's say from 0-50mph), particularly in comparison to the 323s they're poor. Hopefully the engines on the 769s won't diminish acceleration any further.

But 332s aren't much use away from OLE as they can't, (and won't) be converted to bimode. The current standard on mixed traction routes (as in part electrified) is sprinter DMUS. Despite claims by some, the 319s are faster away from stop on a typical sector with speed reaching about 65-75mph, than class 150 or 156.
Now, consider the performance of a class 769 against a sprinter on the routes where they are planned to be used; under OLE, again, there's no competition in suitability as needlessly running polluting noisy diesels under wires is soon to be unacceptable even if the marginal performance deficit of DMUS is ignored. So that leaves the expected 769's performance on diesel. The engineering expectation is that running the engines at their optimum speed gives a better power curve at low speeds (0-40 mph) than thrashing away to spin a torque converter transmission.
The only known disadvantage that the 769s have is the issue of adhesion owing to their provision of 25% driven axles as opposed to 50%, but even that isn't as significant as it may seem as the class 319s have a load of 12.5 tons on the driven axles whereas the 150s only have a maximum load of 9.75, with both types as a 4-car consist weighing just over 140t. Even with the modifications to a class 769 will weigh about 15 tons more but the adhesive weight stays the same, so on the few days when railhead conditions are poor, they may not have the advantage over the DMUS with their ageing power units.

 

[Killingworth]

But 332s aren't much use away from OLE as they can't, (and won't) be converted to bimode. The current standard on mixed traction routes (as in part electrified) is sprinter DMUS. Despite claims by some, the 319s are faster away from stop on a typical sector with speed reaching about 65-75mph, than class 150 or 156.
Now, consider the performance of a class 769 against a sprinter on the routes where they are planned to be used; under OLE, again, there's no competition in suitability as needlessly running polluting noisy diesels under wires is soon to be unacceptable even if the marginal performance deficit of DMUS is ignored. So that leaves the expected 769's performance on diesel. The engineering expectation is that running the engines at their optimum speed gives a better power curve at low speeds (0-40 mph) than thrashing away to spin a torque converter transmission.
The only known disadvantage that the 769s have is the issue of adhesion owing to their provision of 25% driven axles as opposed to 50%, but even that isn't as significant as it may seem as the class 319s have a load of 12.5 tons on the driven axles whereas the 150s only have a maximum load of 9.75, with both types as a 4-car consist weighing just over 140t. Even with the modifications to a class 769 will weigh about 15 tons more but the adhesive weight stays the same, so on the few days when railhead conditions are poor, they may not have the advantage over the DMUS with their ageing power units.

A big drawback of the 769 is that it will be a very small, and as yet untested in service, sub-class requiring specialist maintenance. Once it gets used we'll see how effective it will be. Sat in sidings it won't pay for it's keep.

 

[Llama]

As someone who drives 319s and all sprinter classes regularly, I think I should add this.

319s are awful up to 25-30mph. Consistently slower accelerating to that speed than any 15x unit. And that is when running on AC where full power is available from the transformer, and power notch 4 gives the full 653 amps. Above 30mph though they are much quicker than a sprinter unit to about 80mph. But again at that point any half-decent 158 wipes the floor with them to 90mph.
Given that the power available for traction on a 769 using the diesel engines is going to be a little over half (~550kW) that on AC mode, the ~7 tonnes of non-adhesive dead weight on the DTS vehicles, and the fact that when using 'DC mode' which the diesel the engines are used the unit will (unless modifications are made) be restricted to 450-odd amps under full traction power I fail to see how even having the engines running at optimal speed is really relevant. 769s will be slower than 319s even on AC.

The adhesion issue is definitely relevant. Even just on a wet rail it is very easy to make a 319 slip under power where even a 158 would rarely slip. Adding more weight in a 769 isn't going to go very well in October and November. I hope the sand boxes have been enlarged.