ASLEF refuse to sanction 769's as fit for purpose until cab ergonomics are attended to.
Rumour has it Northern may be kicking them into the long grass
Something to do with the requirement of in cab air-conditioning be fittedI think we’ve had this disxussion before, but what is it about a 769 vs. a 319 that ASLEF don’t agree with exactly please?
What will they replace them with though? Battery trains will require some midway charging points and there aren't enough diesel trains.Rumour has it Northern may be kicking them into the long grass
Can the passengers get some as well?Something to do with the requirement of in cab air-conditioning be fitted
Something to do with the requirement of in cab air-conditioning be fitted
ASLEF refuse to sanction 769's as fit for purpose until cab ergonomics are attended to.
Rumour has it Northern may be kicking them into the long grass
Why is it that they were satisfactory for intensive service on TL in the sunny south-east, yet for some reason unacceptable for the cooler climes of Lancashire on far easier runs?Presumably also means the TfW and GWR ones as well, unless the Northern Aslef reps are out of tune with the other TOCs.
Wasn't that the spot coolers that GWR had fitted rather than proper cab air conditioning on the 150s?Isn't this the same TOC who ripped out the cab cooling from the 150s transferred from GWR.
That would be because in London and the SE they've not just come off a significant heavy overhaul and rebuild on the cheap that didn't fit them.Why is it that they were satisfactory for intensive service on TL in the sunny south-east, yet for some reason unacceptable for the cooler climes of Lancashire on far easier runs?
Wasn't that the spot coolers that GWR had fitted rather than proper cab air conditioning on the 150s?
That would be because in London and the SE they've not just come off a significant heavy overhaul and rebuild on the cheap that didn't fit them.
I strongly suspect there are other ergonomic issues with the cabs beyond the lack of decent cab air cooling.
Being hemmed in a box for one doesn't help, compared with the full width cabs of their new units.
Looking at the state of the cabs they don't seem to have done too badder job on the prototype, but the quality is rarely kept up, and even in the image shown, it's a complete mish mash of button types, uses them horrible pin prick constant lamp units, and isn't exactly very clear of sensible in it's layout from a human factors standpoint.
(Image of a Class 769 Flexx Cab)
View attachment 78851
So the stated 'need' for a/c might just be a proxy for 30 year old trains not being like new types then?It doesn’t look like there’s that many more buttons vs. a 319 desk. I’ve always thought the 319 was a little cramped in terms of button layout though.
The grouping and consistency of the primary field of view controls is horrific though. They seem to have just put stuff wherever it will fit with whatever will fit rather than considering the usage rates and cases. Yes it's compliant to the position by FoV because everything is in primary. But the ergonomics need further consideration.It doesn’t look like there’s that many more buttons vs. a 319 desk. I’ve always thought the 319 was a little cramped in terms of button layout though.
Just a question. Do you sign 319's?The grouping and consistency of the primary field of view controls is horrific though. They seem to have just put stuff wherever it will fit with whatever will fit rather than considering the usage rates and cases. Yes it's compliant to the position by FoV because everything is in primary. But the ergonomics need further consideration.
I do think that these trains have, missed the boat now. Good idea at the time, to try and get further life out of them. But they are a 30+ year very obselete EMU, with what is now vintage technology, with diesel engines added on. Trains, the industry, technology, has moved on massively since then. I see them quietly disapearing.
I don't sign anything unless it's been done right...Just a question. Do you sign 319's?
Do Northerns 319s have working aircon in the cabs?Something to do with the requirement of in cab air-conditioning be fitted
Do Northerns 319s have working aircon in the cabs?
K
The 319s were supposed to have been fully refurbished with full aircon and new traction package before coming to Northern. However, plans change!
therefore it must meet the cab standards required.
If they are going to go down the route of claiming it's a new train then wouldn't the cabs need to meet modern crashworthiness standards? Game over.It's a very simple point that aslef raise.
The 769 is a new type of train. All new trains must be fitted with a sufficient means of cab cooling, and sufficient ergonomic features. The onlder trains that don't meet this standard (150/319) have grandfather rights and therefore require no acceptance.
Strapping an engine on changes it and therefore it must meet the cab standards required.
Same for 230's
It's a very simple point that aslef raise.
The 769 is a new type of train. All new trains must be fitted with a sufficient means of cab cooling, and sufficient ergonomic features. The onlder trains that don't meet this standard (150/319) have grandfather rights and therefore require no acceptance.
Strapping an engine on changes it and therefore it must meet the cab standards required.
Same for 230's
At risk of asking a foolish question why don't builders etc ask the staff side about acceptability at the outset?
It's exploiting a technicality to get something that, while perfectly reasonable to ask for as an employee, is not necessarily a given. There is no real reason that the changes made to turn a 319 into a 769 require it to adhere to new standards on cab cooling, other than that it would ideally have been added anyway.Because it's not the builder's problem, it's the TOC's problem. Builders build the trains they are asked to build, if they do that that's their side of the deal completed.
Because it's not the builder's problem, it's the TOC's problem.
Because you’d get a list of requirements as long as your arm that were both unachievable and/or unaffordable.At risk of asking a foolish question why don't builders etc ask the staff side about acceptability at the outset?
If they are going to go down the route of claiming it's a new train then wouldn't the cabs need to meet modern crashworthiness standards? Game over.
230s have a rebuilt cab, 769s don't, they are a Class 319 with engines strapped on. So I don't agree with them.
Not only that, - the TOC as the customer of the supplier is the party that has to pay the bill, whereas all other interested sundries don't so there's no self control in their aspirations.Because you’d get a list of requirements as long as your arm that were both unachievable and/or unaffordable.