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

[Bletchleyite]

Crikey, 2 threads in one day...sounds like the kind of thing I was proposing (generation into the DC bus on the end coaches, albeit with larger engines), and the naysayers were naysaying

Anyone for a 442-Flex? (only joking)

In all seriousness, 750hp x 2 should make it *vaguely* equivalent to a 150 in performance terms, fine for branch lines and the likes - potentially perfect for Barrow/Windermere.

 

[Domh245]

In all seriousness, 750hp x 2 should make it *vaguely* equivalent to a 150 in performance terms, fine for branch lines and the likes - potentially perfect for Barrow/Windermere.

Now you just need to find a 750hp stage IIIB compliant engine that'll fit under the floor of a 319.

 

[randyrippley]

The OLE does get close to Hunts Cross

We used to have OLE at Morecambe............look closely, some of the stumps are still there

 

[ac6000cw]

Now you just need to find a 750hp stage IIIB compliant engine that'll fit under the floor of a 319.

That's why I suspect we might not be talking about normal, Turbostar-type DMU levels of performance e.g. lower top speeds due to limited power in diesel mode.

Note the "the concept for the Class 319 Flex was developed to minimise alterations to the existing vehicle design" bit in the Porterbrook press release.

 

[kevconnor]

Pure speculation but if it's possible that they are looking at use on a last mile basis is it possible (or even feasible) this could be used to stable some units overnight at Newton Heath once the knitting is up as far as Miles Platting Junction.

 

[Clarence Yard]

That's why I suspect we might not be talking about normal, Turbostar-type DMU levels of performance e.g. lower top speeds due to limited power in diesel mode.

Note the "the concept for the Class 319 Flex was developed to minimise alterations to the existing vehicle design" bit in the Porterbrook press release.

As I mentioned up thread something like a MAN D2876 would be suitable. They are used abroad and look as if they might fit.

 

[CosherB]

Now you just need to find a 750hp stage IIIB compliant engine that'll fit under the floor of a 319.

Suggestion elsewhere on the interweb is a 520 bhp MAN engine.

Edit - beat me to it!

 

[Townsend Hook]

Will a 319 minus pan fit the Northern Line tunnels in Liverpool? Could then easily extend the Ormskirk services to Preston and Kirkby services to Wigan?

I did a test train through the Northern and Wirral tunnels with pantograph-fitted test car Mentor a couple of months ago. No problems fitting that through.

 

[507021]

Excellent news, I look forward to travelling on one.

 

[edwin_m]

I expect Adrian Shooter is feeling a tad worried.

520bhp is pretty much exactly twice the power of the engine in a class 150, so if this guess is correct the power:weight would be very similar, but possibly a bit less low speed acceleration as only 25%ish of weight will be on motored axles. Use of electric rather than hydrostatic transmission may compensate for this though.

I guess it will retain a similar interior to the 319 or 150 rather than being upgraded to match the "Northern Connect" standard (aircon would use a lot of power from the diesels) so Windermere passengers will have to get accustomed to a lower level of comfort than at present.

 

[507021]

Will a 319 minus pan fit the Northern Line tunnels in Liverpool? Could then easily extend the Ormskirk services to Preston and Kirkby services to Wigan?

I'd imagine it would, but I don't know if the 319 Flexes are retaining their pick-up shoes.

 

[Roose]

The franchise agreement says Windermere branch will get four Northern Connect services each weekday from Manchester Airport in addition to the branch shuttles to Oxenhome/Lancaster.

(The Furness line will get a minimum of eight Manchester Airport Northern Connect services on weekdays in addition to local services to Lancaster and Preston)

The climbs from Kendal to Windermere on the Windermere branch (and over Lindal Banks on the Furness line) will require decent power outputs on diesel.

 

[ac6000cw]

520bhp is pretty much exactly twice the power of the engine in a class 150, so if this guess is correct the power:weight would be very similar, but possibly a bit less low speed acceleration as only 25%ish of weight will be on motored axles. Use of electric rather than hydrostatic transmission may compensate for this though.

Yes, we're talking about a cheap'n'cheerful bi-mode equivalent of a 1980s DMU, with an average of only one powered axle per car instead of two for a real DMU. Probably still equipped with 1980s vintage DC drive wheel-slip control as well. Sounds perfect for those wet and windy north-western gradients...

 

[Geeves]

Maybe I am reading it wrong and this could have already been said, but the original guff says two diesel alternators powering the existing motors, there for if it has 50hp or 5000hp so long as it generates enough electricity to turn the motors the train will still have the same power being put down on the rail (the 319s GEC G315BZ motors) regardless. It will (or should) accelerate no different than any other 319. The 319 isnt being directly driven by said engines.

The problem here is that the bigger the engine the more weight the original motor coach now has to move. I am interested to see how that 'pans' out.

 

[fgwrich]

Suggestion elsewhere on the interweb is a 520 bhp MAN engine.

Edit - beat me to it!

As I mentioned up thread something like a MAN D2876 would be suitable. They are used abroad and look as if they might fit.

Last use of the MAN MD2876 in the UK are under the floors of the NI Railways C3K Fleet. I wonder if the choice of this could indicate the choice of engines for the CAF Northern Connect fleet I wonder?

This is the engine spec of the chosen MAN Engine.
http://www.engines.man.eu/global/en/off-road/rail/product-range/Product-Range.html

 

[Domh245]

Maybe I am reading it wrong and this could have already been said, but the original guff says two diesel alternators powering the existing motors, there for if it has 50hp or 5000hp so long as it generates enough electricity to turn the motors the train will still have the same power being put down on the rail (the 319s GEC G315BZ motors) regardless. It will (or should) accelerate no different than any other 319. The 319 isnt being directly driven by said engines.

The problem here is that the bigger the engine the more weight the original motor coach now has to move. I am interested to see how that 'pans' out.

Energy must be conserved, it can't be created or destroyed. If you only have a 50hp engine, then there will be nothing left to go to the motors once hotel services and inefficiencies are accounted for. If you had a 250hp engine, then you will get less than 250hp at the rail assuming that the control electronics work properly. If you want to get 1327.6hp at the rail, you'll have to put in at least that much to start with.

Even then, the acceleration will be different. The acceleration is a function of mass and force, and assuming that the tractive effort (force) remains the same (for power provided to motors), the mass of the train will be greater by merit of the engines and fuel onboard, and meaning that the acceleration will be less.

 

[Shaw S Hunter]

Will a 319 minus pan fit the Northern Line tunnels in Liverpool? Could then easily extend the Ormskirk services to Preston and Kirkby services to Wigan?

Oh dear not this again. Merseyrail comes under the control of Merseytravel and they have no interest in running onwards from Ormskirk to Preston. And why would they? It's almost entirely rural and of almost no consequence to their needs or aspirations. As for the Kirkby route the only change there will be an extension to Skelmersdale with the route from Wigan also likely to be going there too. We're fast approaching the 2020s not the 1920s!

 

[physics34]

so how many 319s are they talking about? That takes into account the spare ones now maybe.....

Now we just need to work out where the spare GN 365s are going.

 

[childwallblues]

It's not clear how many are being converted and the article hints at them being used by multiple operators with Northern getting the first batch.

Quoted on another website as four to start with.

 

[a_c_skinner]

Off topic but Merseyrail ought to want to run to Preston and Wigan because they are obvious journeys. There are Ormskirk-Preston and Kirkby-Wigan trains and not having them as through services is frankly silly. Times have changed since the lines were severed, people travel more for work and leisure, even Liverpool has become less insular! No one is asking why through trains to Chester or why the Halton Curve. I doubt there is an easy fix, almost certainly not bi-mode 319s, but to simply ask why would they doesn't wash for me.

 

[43096]

Ooh. If one unit retains both AC and third rail capability do you think this'll be the first ever tri-mode? (Nothing immediately springs to mind that can do all three in the UK). I can't imagine any reasonable situations in which that'd be useful though (unless Southen introduces a through service from Milton Keynes to Uckfield or something...!)

In the U.K., yes. However the French have AGC units that have similar capacity, known as BiBi (bi-mode bi-voltage).

 

[LNW-GW Joint]

If Merseytravel had wanted a bi-mode solution they would have ordered it from Stadler, or added it to the design in the future.
They are not going to turn the clock back with 319s.

 

[Xenophon PCDGS]

Let us not forget that there already is a running "Merseyrail Expansion" thread for any posters who want to debate that issue.

 

[daikilo]

In the U.K., yes. However the French have AGC units that have similar capacity, known as BiBi (bi-mode bi-voltage).

The AGC bi-mode has diesel or overhead, the latter at 25kV AC and 1.5kV DC, whereas the 319 would be diesel, overhead at 25kV AC or third rail at 750V DC, assuming the latter is retained. I would describe the 319 as tri-mode.

 

[Camden]

I think in the context of working out what exactly Northern intend to do with these, nothing is really off topic.

I agree with the previous comments though that Merseyrail would deal with any extensions, and there is no sign that they have any interest in anything other than the wonders of electricity.

I do wonder where these will be running to, and for how long.

 

[Camden]

The AGC bi-mode has diesel or overhead, the latter at 25kV AC and 1.5kV DC, whereas the 319 would be diesel, overhead at 25kV AC or third rail at 750V DC, assuming the latter is retained. I would describe the 319 as tri-mode.

I can't see why the third rail capability would be retained for use in the Northern area. The only place it would come into play is Merseyrail, and that's just not going to happen. What would be the point.

They will be "tri mode" in terms of capability just as they are still "bi mode" now with the shoes off, but I expect that will be all.

 

[northwichcat]

Quoted on another website as four to start with.

That was previously suggested with the idea being Liverpool to Blackpool would be the first bi-mode route. However, the Porterbrook release doesn't confirm that or say anything to contradict that.

 

[AM9]

I can't see why the third rail capability would be retained for use in the Northern area. The only place it would come into play is Merseyrail, and that's just not going to happen. What would be the point.

They will be "tri mode" in terms of capability just as they are still "bi mode" now with the shoes off, but I expect that will be all.

As has been demonstrated many times in the 319s life so far, removing shoes (and pantographs) on individual units is common practice when their role doesn't require them. Restoring then to full dual voltage working is a simple as replacing the bits and making sure that the driver knows which systems are available to him.

 

[swt_passenger]

As has been demonstrated many times in the 319s life so far, removing shoes (and pantographs) on individual units is common practice when their role doesn't require them. Restoring then to full dual voltage working is a simple as replacing the bits and making sure that the driver knows which systems are available to him.

There's a risk that the 'DC equipment' is over thought. Other than the actual shoe gear there is fundamentally nothing over than some cabling and a few fuses. As the Porterbrook spiel linked above mentions, the DC bus along the unit is retained, (as I anticipated a few pages back), so the only hardware that I'd expect to be removed is nearly all on the bogies.

The idea that removing and replacing DC capability is a significant issue, or that it gains space or reduces weight significantly just doesn't wash.

 

[SpacePhoenix]

When a 319 is switched from AC to DC or vice versa does the driver have to press any buttons in addition to the pan up/pan down buttons?