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

[Mollman]

Spotted what seemed to be a 769 (the pan looked to be down) working through Preston on Springs Branch - Blackpool (and return). Does anyone know if this is driver training or a unit on test?
https://www.realtimetrains.co.uk/service/gb-nr:C25545/2021-11-17/detailed

 

[Halish Railway]

Spotted what seemed to be a 769 (the pan looked to be down) working through Preston on Springs Branch - Blackpool (and return). Does anyone know if this is driver training or a unit on test?
https://www.realtimetrains.co.uk/service/gb-nr:C25545/2021-11-17/detailed

The fact that it is a ‘Z’ headcode & operated by Northern suggests driver training. A test train would have a ‘Q’ headcode & be operated by a freight company e.g. ROG (usually).

 

[175001]

Yup definitely driver training.

Courses are constant at the moment, clearing the backlog caused by covid and the air con issue.

In other news 448 failed at New Lane this morning, caused by a CB not resetting.

 

[Mollman]

The fact that it is a ‘Z’ headcode & operated by Northern suggests driver training. A test train would have a ‘Q’ headcode & be operated by a freight company e.g. ROG (usually).

Yup definitely driver training.

Courses are constant at the moment, clearing the backlog caused by covid and the air con issue.

In other news 448 failed at New Lane this morning, caused by a CB not resetting.

Thanks both. I didn't explain very well but I was thinking more of a post repair / modification test rather than mileage accumulation.

 

[adrock1976]

With the various failures of converted 319s, is it now the time for the Government to admit that they are not working as intended in real life use?

After all, the 319s were not designed for the purpose of having diesel engines/generators strapped underneath the body when first built back in 1987/88.

 

[AM9]

With the various failures of converted 319s, is it now the time for the Government to admit that they are not working as intended in real life use?

After all, the 319s were not designed for the purpose of having diesel engines/generators strapped underneath the body when first built back in 1987/88.

Posts in this thread like this come up about once per month since the 769s were first on test. Nothing has changed (apart from the average mileage between failures improving), so why should "the Government" admit anything or do anything?

 

[adrock1976]

Posts in this thread like this come up about once per month since the 769s were first on test. Nothing has changed (apart from the average mileage between failures improving), so why should "the Government" admit anything or do anything?

It was the Government that backed the conversion of the 319s in the first place.

Being as the project was delayed in pre-pandemic times, and none have yet entered passenger service on the Reading - Redhill route as they were supposed to have been in passenger service back in the first quarter of 2019, it does demonstrate that the 319s were not designed with the provision for or the purpose to have diesel engines/generators attached underneath the bodyshell.

Forgive me if I have got this muddled with one of the other two of the unholy trinity of the early post privatisation ROSCOs, but was Porterbrook owned by the Royal Bank of Scotland - one of the banks that got bailed out when the 2008 economic crisis happened, with the former Chief Exec Fred Goodwin being stripped of his knighthood?

 

[ABB125]

Forgive me if I have got this muddled with one of the other two of the unholy trinity of the early post privatisation ROSCOs, but was Porterbrook owned by the Royal Bank of Scotland - one of the banks that got bailed out when the 2008 economic crisis happened, with the former Chief Exec Fred Goodwin being stripped of his knighthood?

Wasn't that Eversholt?

 

[GC class B1]

Wasn't that Eversholt?

Eversholt was owned by HSBC bank.

 

[JN114]

Ok, so the government and Porterbrook admit the project is a failure. Congratulations you get your wish.

Then what?

There isn’t the money to build new.

There aren’t the diesels to replace them (hence why it’s such a disaster they’re not working as promised/hoped/designed).

A sudden confession isn’t going to result in a corresponding uptick in reliability.

Bankrupting the ROSCO with fines and penalties isn’t going to achieve anything.

They’re here now, they’re what they are.

The people of the North / South Wales / North Downs are just going to have to put up with them as they are until government policy changes and allows more funding.

 

[YorkshireBear]

Ok, so the government and Porterbrook admit the project is a failure. Congratulations you get your wish.

Then what?

There isn’t the money to build new.

There aren’t the diesels to replace them (hence why it’s such a disaster they’re not working as promised/hoped/designed).

A sudden confession isn’t going to result in a corresponding uptick in reliability.

Bankrupting the ROSCO with fines and penalties isn’t going to achieve anything.

They’re here now, they’re what they are.

The people of the North / South Wales / North Downs are just going to have to put up with them as they are until government policy changes and allows more funding.

100% and something we simply dont seem to grasp in this country.

The focus now should be on making them reliable not on replacing them and fining everyone!

 

[py_megapixel]

The focus now should be on making them reliable not on replacing them and fining everyone!

But how much of a money pit will making them properly reliable be? And is it really worth it for trains which are basically falling to bits already?

 

[Bikeman78]

100% and something we simply dont seem to grasp in this country.

The focus now should be on making them reliable not on replacing them and fining everyone!

As I understand it, TfW plans to start withdrawing them next year so I doubt much more money will be thrown at them. Does Northern have any replacement lined up?

 

[childwallblues]

As I understand it, TfW plans to start withdrawing them next year so I doubt much more money will be thrown at them. Does Northern have any replacement lined up?

Not at present.

 

[plugwash]

As I understand it, TfW plans to start withdrawing them next year so I doubt much more money will be thrown at them. Does Northern have any replacement lined up?

AIUI there are Electrification plans for Wigan to Bolton and Victoria to staylybridge and the government have suggested that once these are complete Manchester to Wigan via Bolton will be run with pure EMUs rather than bi-modes.

That does still leave the question of what to do about Wigan to Southport. I presume it will most likely be run as an extension of the Manchester to Wigan via Atherton services but whether northern will have enough spare DMUs to cover that or whether the 769s will still be needed I don't know.

 

[JN114]

But how much of a money pit will making them properly reliable be? And is it really worth it for trains which are basically falling to bits already?

The only way of improving the current “lot” is to make the 769s work - across all 3 operators.

There is nothing else on the horizon or budgeted for.

If they don’t then cancellations and short forms will continue, or in GWRs case planned cascades off their introduction won’t be able to happen.

Anything beyond that would need an enormous shake-up of Westminster policy on rail investment - now I might sound a pessimist but that isn’t going to happen. So it’s 769s or nothing.

It really is as simplistic as that.

 

[Nicholas Lewis]

But how much of a money pit will making them properly reliable be? And is it really worth it for trains which are basically falling to bits already?

SWR pulled the 442's after spending 24m so there is precedence.

 

[Peter Sarf]

It was the Government that backed the conversion of the 319s in the first place.

Being as the project was delayed in pre-pandemic times, and none have yet entered passenger service on the Reading - Redhill route as they were supposed to have been in passenger service back in the first quarter of 2019, it does demonstrate that the 319s were not designed with the provision for or the purpose to have diesel engines/generators attached underneath the bodyshell.

Forgive me if I have got this muddled with one of the other two of the unholy trinity of the early post privatisation ROSCOs, but was Porterbrook owned by the Royal Bank of Scotland - one of the banks that got bailed out when the 2008 economic crisis happened, with the former Chief Exec Fred Goodwin being stripped of his knighthood?

My bold.

Really ?. Is that the basic problem then - are the body-shells buckling under the weight of diesel engines ?. I don't see that.

I think it is more to do with the technology. This problem could hit any new build of course and does. I suspect that these 769s are being developed on a lower budget than a more expensive and larger fleet of new build.

I like to see new ideas being tried out and it is inevitable that there will be teething problems. I am not sure this idea has reached its failure point yet. That will of course depend on the need for them vs cost.

Of course the simplistic solution is to scrap this idea and spend MORE MONEY on a new build of new diesel+electric multiple units. Anyone want to pay ?.

 

[Nicholas Lewis]

My bold.

Really ?. Is that the basic problem then - are the body-shells buckling under the weight of diesel engines ?. I don't see that.

I think it is more to do with the technology. This problem could hit any new build of course and does. I suspect that these 769s are being developed on a lower budget than a more expensive and larger fleet of new build.

I like to see new ideas being tried out and it is inevitable that there will be teething problems. I am not sure this idea has reached its failure point yet. That will of course depend on the need for them vs cost.

Of course the simplistic solution is to scrap this idea and spend MORE MONEY on a new build of new diesel+electric multiple units. Anyone want to pay ?.

I'd like to see them sling some batteries under one vice the engines and fuel tanks as at least a demonstrator as that has potential on the NDL with the opportunity to recharge over the electrified sections and not need any new infrastructure.

 

[Pete_uk]

In other news 448 failed at New Lane this morning, caused by a CB not resetting.

10-4

 

[Peter Sarf]

I'd like to see them sling some batteries under one vice the engines and fuel tanks as at least a demonstrator as that has potential on the NDL with the opportunity to recharge over the electrified sections and not need any new infrastructure.

That must be getting more and more of a possibility as battery technology improves.

 

[edwin_m]

That must be getting more and more of a possibility as battery technology improves.

Porterbrook is putting batteries in a 350 aren't they?

 

[anthony263]

As I understand it, TfW plans to start withdrawing them next year so I doubt much more money will be thrown at them. Does Northern have any replacement lined up?

Tfw have received the final class 769 yet . Not sure how they are behaving but I saw 5 of them out the other day

 

[nightflyian]

Just checked Realtime to see what bundle of joy I will be commuting on today the 0716 SOP-ALD and it appears no 769's are scheduled to run today so far SOP-ALD . No units assigned so far on any of the SOP-ALD services and JourneyCheck advising its a 2 carriage service. Also the 5F82 Allerton to Wigan is also cancelled on RT and everything declared is 2 carriages.

 

[D9006]

Just checked Realtime to see what bundle of joy I will be commuting on today the 0716 SOP-ALD and it appears no 769's are scheduled to run today so far SOP-ALD . No units assigned so far on any of the SOP-ALD services and JourneyCheck advising its a 2 carriage service. Also the 5F82 Allerton to Wigan is also cancelled on RT and everything declared is carriages.

Yes just checked as always hear the 1st one pull out of Hindley and was surprised to hear Diesel engines, the 0550 Wigan - Alderley Edge has been a near solid 769 .

Yes just checked as always here the 1st one pull out of Hindley and was surprised to hear Diesel engines, the 0550 Wigan - Alderley Edge has been a near solid 769 .

No unit showing on real-time for your train, but on northern live journey checker does say it’s formed of 2 rather than 4 carriages, hopefully 2w00 which forms 0915 is a 769, no unit showing on realtimes and not showing as short form on journey checker

 

[Geeves]

2W00 is two 150s this morning getting split later unfortunately. No 769s out at all currently so far!

 

[nightflyian]

On my commute in, 2K82 a 2 car 150 this morning, 769424 was parked up on Platform 3 at Southport and 769431 was sat in the sidings at Wigan Wallgate. Is this not a little strange ?

 

[david l]

From the December timetable change, the current 3 Northern 769 diagrams are supposed to go back to 6. Hmmm.

 

[Wyrleybart]

Tfw have received the final class 769 yet . Not sure how they are behaving but I saw 5 of them out the other day

AIUI 769426 has not been commissioned. On another forum apparently three vehicles of the unit were delivered but with an unconverted driving car from a 319, possibly from 319374. These vehicles apparently returned to Wabtec with the 319 car moving to Long Marston.

Therefore TfW have eight of their nine 769s, all have been in service and they seem to be using four or five a day with six out on one day this week.

I don't really understand electric technology but I believe the class 319s were of a particular design where their chopper control makes them far more suitable for conversion than subsequent builds like class 321 onwards. It does seem to me that the conversion has left them at a disadvantage with straight diesel multiple units, but perhaps a considerably deeper level of conversion would resolve some of the issues. I believe that when a diesel engine needs restarting for example, it is not simply a case of "engine stop" then "engine start" buttons in the cab - a sequence needing to be followed so that the train understands it needs to shut down, then restarted. Older straight diesels tend to allow the driver to restart an engine without "killing" the train.

Regarding the TfW units, although they only work one route so far, it seems to be that same piece of railway where the failures tend to occur. One of the most bizarre reasons I have seen suggests some high voltage power lines across the route cause the shut downs. I struggle to believe it, but would never rule anything out in this day and age.

AIUI the TfW class 769s are redundant once the new trains are delivered - which is classes 197 230 231 756 and the tram trains, as well as the Mk4s of course. The final new 197s are apparently to replace the 158s on the Cambrian so it would theoretically be slightly sooner.

 

[Nicholas Lewis]

I don't really understand electric technology but I believe the class 319s were of a particular design where their chopper control makes them far more suitable for conversion than subsequent builds like class 321 onwards. It does seem to me that the conversion has left them at a disadvantage with straight diesel multiple units, but perhaps a considerably deeper level of conversion would resolve some of the issues. I believe that when a diesel engine needs restarting for example, it is not simply a case of "engine stop" then "engine start" buttons in the cab - a sequence needing to be followed so that the train understands it needs to shut down, then restarted. Older straight diesels tend to allow the driver to restart an engine without "killing" the train.

Interesting never considered that before but as 319's were dual voltage straight thyristor control wouldn't have worked on DC so hence the need to use a GTO chopper. Not sure why a 321 couldn't be converted other than it would need a single phase supply from diesel sets but that would need a bus line running down the train which the 319's already had due to the shoegear either end of the unit to feed the power equipment was on the driver trailer.

Found this video on IMeche YouTube site which gives some background to the conversion but doesn't answer any of your questions though

Class 769 FLEX: Re-purposing rolling stock to meet industry demands