What will happen to Northern, ATW & GWR if the Class 769 "FLEX" fails?

[The_Engineer]

319-era electronics is likely to be extremely difficult to modify or integrate with modern systems, due to its use of obsolete hardware components and legacy software languages/programming techniques alien to today's engineers

There are one or two engineers around who still have original knowledge of the software, and one has indeed updated it recently for the Northern Rail units. Whether Brush/Porterbrook have taken advantage of their knowledge though I do not know…….

 

[js1000]

then you have a new trains are late story - that is hardly new! In Northern land the story will be why oh why are we getting 30 year old cast offs?

I remember the previous Northern franchise having the temerity to brand the routes operated by the 319s as 'Northern Electrics' as if the trains were new.

They were oblivious that the 319s replaced the more modern 323s on some routes and their introduction represented a downgrade to many!

 

[Bletchleyite]

They were oblivious that the 319s replaced the more modern 323s on some routes and their introduction represented a downgrade to many!

They probably also shouted about 4 coaches rather than 3, omitting to mention that they are only 11m longer than a 323

 

[edwin_m]

I "think" that each 230 genset supplies only the adjacent motor bogie so load sharing isn't a problem, but I might be wrong.....

As I understand it they are all interconnected by the bus cable that formerly linked the third rail shoes. They are certainly interconnected under AC as there's only one transformer.

 

[HSTEd]

As I understand it they are all interconnected by the bus cable that formerly linked the third rail shoes. They are certainly interconnected under AC as there's only one transformer.

London Underground Practice is to not interconnect the third rail shoes
Each power bogie has it's own - as I understand this applies to the 230s as well.

The 319s are very different.
Load Sharing could however be achieved using a simple chopper circuit on the output of the generator that allows the output voltage to sag if the current draw exceeds the power output capability of the genset.

 

[Bletchleyite]

London Underground Practice is to not interconnect the third rail shoes
Each power bogie has it's own

Indeed, that's why on older LU stock such as D-stock you used to get lights going out as you went over points and quite a bit of juddering - one set of lights is connected to the shoe at each end of the coach, while you'd get different bogies losing and gaining power as you went.

Not to say Vivarail haven't linked them together, of course, but it'd no doubt be simpler not to as it's one less thing to change from the original.

 

[The_Engineer]

I find that unlikely, but Rail certainly should be asking more searching and critical questions about this project.

I totally agree!! I challenged Rail's reporter on Twitter, on this very issue, after he tweeted upbeat news on Class 769 from Rail live, but before his article appeared in Rail. In the end his article appears to be just a verbatim Porterbrook press release! I really do expect more challenging investigative journalism from our rail magazines.....

 

[LNW-GW Joint]

Fortunately, Northern may yet keep some if not all of their 323's.

Why would they do that?
They have no need of them when the CAF EMUs arrive, in fact the need for EMUs has reduced with the cancellation/deferral of electrification to Windermere/Wigan, hence the 769 conversions.

 

[pemma]

I can't think of this name but is the former Porterbrook man who wrote an article calling the idea of using D78s for mainline services a late April Fools but then wrote an article saying how 4 car PRM compliant Pacers could be created from the 143s and 144s, someone who works for Modern Railways?

Ian Walmsley was the person I was thinking of.

 

[pemma]

I remember the previous Northern franchise having the temerity to brand the routes operated by the 319s as 'Northern Electrics' as if the trains were new.

I'm not sure about that. I think it was a Northern equivalent to Merseyrail Electrics. Don't forget George Osborne officially named one of them 'Northern Powerhouse' only for it to break down every 5 minutes after the naming!

 

[pemma]

Why would they do that?
They have no need of them when the CAF EMUs arrive, in fact the need for EMUs has reduced with the cancellation/deferral of electrification to Windermere/Wigan, hence the 769 conversions.

Porterbrook are claiming there is so much interest in the 769 Flex that they might run out of 319s to convert. If that really is the case maybe Northern and Porterbrook will agree on a new lease for 323s so that Porterbrook can have their 319s back. Given Porterbrook haven't produced 769s on time they will need to renegotiate agreements with Northern again.

 

[LOL The Irony]

Plus you need cover for units away for conversion.

 

[LOL The Irony]

I think some one (or better still multiple people) from Greater Manchester needs to drop an email to Andy Burnham reminding him what 769s are, that the 769s were proposed due to delays in electrification to Wigan-Bolton, Stalybridge-Manchester and Windermere-Oxenholme and that they weren't delivered by May 2018 as scheduled and there still hasn't been a single unit produced. If Burnham raises the issue the media will be all over it.

Good idea. What if we all do that?

 

[43096]

They were oblivious that the 319s replaced the more modern 323s on some routes and their introduction represented a downgrade to many!

What routes went from 323 to 319 operation under the old franchise, then? If there were any, it wasn't many services as the 323s essentially remained on the Macclesfield/Stoke/Airport/Crewe/Glossop routes they have worked since new.

 

[158752]

Crewe via Manchester Airport and Crewe via Stockport services are in the hands of class 319s and were so with the introduction of the much publicised May 20th service changes. The closure of Liverpool Lime street station for upgrade work did see 323s used for certain journeys but these are now back to 319. Stoke on Trent via Alsager and Poynton are also both now good for 319 allocation.

 

[mushroomchow]

Friendly reminder that, in the latest revision, the first 769 was supposed to be at the GCR for testing "by the end of the month". Well, by my understanding it needs to show up by tomorrow - and this following the GCR twiddling their thumbs waiting for its arrival since March now.

Considering that we're still sat here speculating on the project's potential failure a full month on from the most recent noise from Porterbrook, something tells me that update was being liberal with the truth. Again.

 

[Bletchleyite]

Though having said that, we also haven't heard anything recent about 230s for the Marston Vale despite those being under construction. Though at least there exist photos of those under construction!

 

[mushroomchow]

And at least we've seen them running under their own power - ironically, most recently past lines of mothballed 319s with "Flex" stickers on them at Rail Live!

 

[delticdave]

• 
  
• 
  
• There is an interesting article in the August (2018...) edition of Railway Magazine, entitled "Flex, the Go-Anywhere Train" which covers many of the above-mentioned points, including the GCR.N testing which is now scheduled for August.
• 
  
• Worth reading, perhaps?

 

[js1000]

They probably also shouted about 4 coaches rather than 3, omitting to mention that they are only 11m longer than a 323

Yes, the carriages are so small on the 319s there is very little difference in capacity compared to the 323.

 

[The_Engineer]

GWR are using some of their Class 769s to replace Class 387s on Paddington suburban runs initially, so I suppose a fall-back for non-delivery of Class 769s for GWR is to take unconverted Class 319s in the interim. Bad news for Turbo replacement on the North Downs route though.....

There is an interesting article in the August (2018...) edition of Railway Magazine, entitled "Flex, the Go-Anywhere Train" which covers many of the above-mentioned points, including the GCR.N testing which is now scheduled for August.
Worth reading, perhaps?

I have read it, it ties in very much with the RAIL magazine article which said a Class 769 would commence testing by the end of July. That implies testing in August. We shall see....

 

[Bletchleyite]

I still think Mr Shooter is watching with great interest, with quite some potential to be having a bit of a giggle while heading bank-wards, so to speak.

 

[pemma]

I still think Mr Shooter is watching with great interest, with quite some potential to be having a bit of a giggle while heading bank-wards, so to speak.

I think it's Stadler who should be the ones laughing, given how far they have got with brand new bi-modes for Anglia in comparison to how far Porterbrook haven't got with conversions of existing trains. Vivarail did miss their London Midland deadline which would have resulted in the previous franchise trialing their prototype.

 

[Bantamzen]

I think it's Stadler who should be the ones laughing, given how far they have got with brand new bi-modes for Anglia in comparison to how far Porterbrook haven't got with conversions of existing trains. Vivarail did miss their London Midland deadline which would have resulted in the previous franchise trialing their prototype.

And perhaps CAF, who I'm sure will be letting the Northern procurement team know that extra units could be bolted onto the current order should they so wish, and of course DfT allow (not that they've much of a choice as things stand).

 

[pemma]

And perhaps CAF, who I'm sure will be letting the Northern procurement team know that extra units could be bolted onto the current order should they so wish, and of course DfT allow (not that they've much of a choice as things stand).

I think it could depend on time scales for additional units and what happens with other DMUs, noting that there's currently 156s, 170s and 185s which will be going off-lease and don't have future homes confirmed.

 

[Bantamzen]

I think it could depend on time scales for additional units and what happens with other DMUs, noting that there's currently 156s, 170s and 185s which will be going off-lease and don't have future homes confirmed.

True, although I wouldn't be entirely surprised if the 769s don't soon see the light of day & if CAF keep up to build & delivery schedules them being considered over the existing DMUs due to come off lease. Saying that, I still do think the 185s in particular could find use on the Northern network & have some crews already signed for them (but that is showing a slight personal bias!), and if there are 156s & 170s looking for homes then maybe Northern might be sniffing around them too (as I'm sure at least one other TOC might be doing).

 

[LOL The Irony]

Well today is the last day of July so they best get one out today.

 

[Bletchleyite]

GWR are using some of their Class 769s to replace Class 387s on Paddington suburban runs initially, so I suppose a fall-back for non-delivery of Class 769s for GWR is to take unconverted Class 319s in the interim. Bad news for Turbo replacement on the North Downs route though.....

Another option would be the HConn 360s when those become spare? They'd miff people off a bit less with those as they aren't 30 odd years old and they already operate Paddington suburban services. They'd also allow for a 5 or 10 car formation so more flexibility than everything in 4s.

 

[Bletchleyite]

Talking of CAF, I wonder would they be persuaded to, instead of doing more single-mode filthy DMUs, produce a bi-mode for Northern? That would be perfect, as I've said many times before, for the Lakes and Furness lines as a self contained service group.

 

[AndrewE]

[if] of course DfT allow (not that they've much of a choice as things stand).

I don't think DfT would care at all. They are supremely good at taking a position then ignoring all the consequences. They will say
"No 769s? well there's a thing! You (the TOCs) will have to talk to the RoSCOs about some other option then, won't you. Timescales, what timescales? Nothing to do with us!"