Transport for Wales 769's

[507020]

I believe the 319/769 has the same GEC traction motors as the 317, so it might be expected that ageing of the enamel insulation would afflict both classes equally.

However, the traction control electronics are different. The 317 is an AC only unit and has thyristor control, with the thyristors commutated by the AC supply. This was unsuitable for the 319 dual voltage unit, which was the first BR application of an Insulated Gate Bipolar Transistor (IGBT) chopper control. Earlier DC EMUs had electromechanical controls.

This is speculation on my part, but it is theoretically possible that the 319 control allows the motors to be stressed by a higher maximum current on startup than the 317 control, thereby increasing the risk of failure.

Rewinding a burned out motor is a costly repair, and I understand Northern experienced a number of failures before mandating a more cautious driving policy across its 319 fleet.

I’ve read that GWR have also experienced total motor burnout on some 769 test runs necessitating rewinding, hence them not entering service. Does rewinding a 30 year old motor do anything to help deteriorated enamel insulation?

 

[AM9]

I’ve read that GWR have also experienced total motor burnout on some 769 test runs necessitating rewinding, hence them not entering service. Does rewinding a 30 year old motor do anything to help deteriorated enamel insulation?

Assuming the 'enamel' is the insulation coating of the copper conductors, yes, - it will be replaced. Modern winding wire coatings are much more robust than traditional types, some being specially designed to endure high voltage discharges as might occur when used with a switch-mode drive system.

 

[507020]

Assuming the 'enamel' is the insulation coating of the copper conductors, yes, - it will be replaced. Modern winding wire coatings are much more robust than traditional types, some being specially designed to endure high voltage discharges as might occur when used with a switch-mode drive system.

Would it not have been sensible to rewind the motors on all 319s destined for extended careers as DEMUs/bi-modes for improved resilience given the amount of failures that have occurred?

 

[AM9]

Would it not have been sensible to rewind the motors on all 319s destined for extended careers as DEMUs/bi-modes for improved resilience given the amount of failures that have occurred?

At what point would it.have been appropriate to do that?

 

[Richard Scott]

At what point would it.have been appropriate to do that?

When they were converted?

 

[Wyrleybart]

At what point would it.have been appropriate to do that?

Probably after the bodywork was done at Wolverton and before the rafdts and wiring was down at Loughborough maybe ? With the number of stored 319s at Long Marston a float of motor bogies for overhaul could have been easily established surely ?

 

[AM9]

Probably after the bodywork was done at Wolverton and before the rafdts and wiring was down at Loughborough maybe ?

But unless their performance as 319s had shown continual failures, when they were worked at full load, there was nothing to rectify.

 

[507020]

But unless their performance as 319s had shown continual failures, when they were worked at full load, there was nothing to rectify.

Their performance post-conversion has shown continual failures, although not all motor related. What I had suggested was that since 319s were withdrawn from Thameslink due to being virtually life-expired, were they really ever intended as anything other than a short term experiment given the condition of some of the original equipment?

 

[AM9]

Their performance post-conversion has shown continual failures, although not all motor related. What I had suggested was that since 319s were withdrawn from Thameslink due to being virtually life-expired, were they really ever intended as anything other than a short term experiment given the condition of some of the original equipment?

Well, as we know, this short-term experiment has followed a few years of deployment in thei 319 state in the north&west and thrashing up and down the WCML, so presumably, there was insufficient attrition by the time that the conversion if them to 759s to warrant wholesale refurbishment of the motors.

 

[TurboMan]

But unless their performance as 319s had shown continual failures, when they were worked at full load, there was nothing to rectify.

Traction motors have always been a bit of an Achilles' heel for 319s, but it hasn't helped that a lot of the 319s pre-769 conversion sat around in damp fields. The engineering team at GWR have had to focus significantly on traction motor reliability recently on the 769 fleet as a result.

Would it not have been sensible to rewind the motors on all 319s destined for extended careers as DEMUs/bi-modes for improved resilience given the amount of failures that have occurred?

Yes, very much so. But that was outside the scope of the project unfortunately.

 

[56xx]

Presumably if reliability is more acceptable by the time that's possible, they'll revert to Plan A? Dare I say the 769s seem to have turned a corner this year.

Not wishing to tempt fate. Any up to date figures on reliability? 769s seem to be the mainstay on Rhymney Valley services this summer even in the heatwaves.

 

[TT-ONR-NRN]

Not wishing to tempt fate. Any up to date figures on reliability? 769s seem to be the mainstay on Rhymney Valley services this summer even in the heatwaves.

I live in Cardiff and it would appear the 769s are far more reliant than they used to be, about 75/80% of Rhymneys are 769 operated although it would appear TfW prefer putting them on the diagrams that finish at Rhymney than Cardiff. They all seem to head north around 4pm and stay there, while 150s do the late night services. Similarly, in the mornings the 769s are all on Rhymney - Cardiff and the first Cardiff - Bargoed/Rhymneys are Sprinters.

This is on both on days when services run all day and on days when buses replace trains in the evening due to Metro work.

 

[Express380]

I live in Cardiff and it would appear the 769s are far more reliant than they used to be, about 75/80% of Rhymneys are 769 operated although it would appear TfW prefer putting them on the diagrams that finish at Rhymney than Cardiff. They all seem to head north around 4pm and stay there, while 150s do the late night services. Similarly, in the mornings the 769s are all on Rhymney - Cardiff and the first Cardiff - Bargoed/Rhymneys are Sprinters.

This is on both on days when services run all day and on days when buses replace trains in the evening due to Metro work.

Not a clue if this is the sole reason but from what I've viewed when visiting Rhymney recently is during the evenings all the terminating services which then stable in the sidings each one by one go and get fuel I don't know whether this to reduce Cantons workload or not but seems like the diagrams ending in the sidings at Rhymney sidings are planned so the 769s get attended to up there with the exception of the heavy maintenance of course is still done at Canton. Could be wrong but it's just how I've seen it the last few visits up there.

 

[Big George]

Not a clue if this is the sole reason but from what I've viewed when visiting Rhymney recently is during the evenings all the terminating services which then stable in the sidings each one by one go and get fuel I don't know whether this to reduce Cantons workload or not but seems like the diagrams ending in the sidings at Rhymney sidings are planned so they get attended to up there with the exception of the heavy maintenance of course is still done at Canton. Could be wrong but it's just how I've seen it the last few visits up there.

Correct

 

[Rhydgaled]

Not wishing to tempt fate. Any up to date figures on reliability? 769s seem to be the mainstay on Rhymney Valley services this summer even in the heatwaves.

The 769s are included in Modern Railways' monthly 'New Train TIN-watch'. The latest installment (September 2022 issue) provides the figures for 2022-23, period 3 (sorry, I'm not sure of the date range covered in each period). Here's an extract:

Fleet​	Fleet Size​	Unit Miles​	TINs​	MTIN​	MTIN MAA​
Northern class 769	8 units​	22,617​	6​	3,770​	1,123​
TfW class 769	9 units​	28,328​	13​	2,179​	1,587​

TIN = Technical Incident (train stopped for 3 minutes or more)
MTIN = Miles per TIN
MAA = Moving Annual Average

 

[Wyrleybart]

I think the TfW data is incorrect because they have never, neither will they ever have nine in the fleet. I believe the ninth unit was delivered to Canton with a defective car, but was returned, and possibly scrapped now.

Not sure whether the 13 TINs over eight units produces a better or worse figure, but I am surprised that has slipped past MR to be honest.

 

[tomuk]

I think the TfW data is incorrect because they have never, neither will they ever have nine in the fleet. I believe the ninth unit was delivered to Canton with a defective car, but was returned, and possibly scrapped now.

Not sure whether the 13 TINs over eight units produces a better or worse figure, but I am surprised that has slipped past MR to be honest.

It doesn't effect the quoted figures MTIN is Mileage divided by TINs. Comparing the MTIN with the MAA it would appear the reliability is improving moreso with the Northern sets that run on electric part of the time.

 

[Roger B]

I think the TfW data is incorrect because they have never, neither will they ever have nine in the fleet. I believe the ninth unit was delivered to Canton with a defective car, but was returned, and possibly scrapped now.

Not sure whether the 13 TINs over eight units produces a better or worse figure, but I am surprised that has slipped past MR to be honest.

I had thought that 769426 was dumped outside Canton, but having passed both sides (to Ninian Park and Bridgend), I can't see it.
Nor can I find confirmation that it's been scrapped.
Does anyone have an update on it - where it is, current formation / disposal details?
Many thanks

 

[plugwash]

Does failing to make it out of the depot in the first place count as a "technical incident"? or only failures while in operation?

 

[Wyrleybart]

I had thought that 769426 was dumped outside Canton, but having passed both sides (to Ninian Park and Bridgend), I can't see it.
Nor can I find confirmation that it's been scrapped.
Does anyone have an update on it - where it is, current formation / disposal details?
Many thanks

Might be wrong Roger but I think at least one "319" car was shipped by road from Long Marston to Sims some months ago, and IIRC the online consensus at the time suggested it was a car from 769426.

 

[Bikeman78]

Does failing to make it out of the depot in the first place count as a "technical incident"? or only failures while in operation?

I think it depends. If the failure causes a late start or a cancellation then yes it would probably count. If they put a 150 on the diagram with no delay then no it would not count.

 

[Roger B]

Might be wrong Roger but I think at least one "319" car was shipped by road from Long Marston to Sims some months ago, and IIRC the online consensus at the time suggested it was a car from 769426.

Many thanks Wryleybart.

Perhaps that was 77340 from 319026 - which I think I've read as accident damage. The same article (sorry, I can't lay my hands on it now), also said that 769426 was being reformed with 77340 being replaced by 77290 from 319001. But I've not seen anything more recently concerning intentions / formation / whereabouts.

As an aside, I wonder if the reliability of the TfW 769s is finally starting to see some improvement. On a trip to Cardiff this week, I saw all operational 769s (ie excluding 426) bar 2 in service on Monday (absentees were 002 and 008), with only a couple of cancellations on the Rhymney line, and I saw 002 in service on Tuesday. Guess which one I was hoping to see .....

 

[StKeverne1497]

Not sure about absolute reliability, or whether it's just that TfW are learning to manage the foibles - at the peak of the heat a few weeks ago, 769s on Rhymney seemed occasionally to be timetabled "fast" - skipping some stations, presumably to avoid overheating caused by lots of starts?

 

[Caaardiff]

Not sure about absolute reliability, or whether it's just that TfW are learning to manage the foibles - at the peak of the heat a few weeks ago, 769s on Rhymney seemed occasionally to be timetabled "fast" - skipping some stations, presumably to avoid overheating caused by lots of starts?

Correct. Allowing them some 'cool down' time.

 

[Train Maniac]

Had a go on the Welsh 769s over the weekend, lots of fun charging up the valley to Bargoed!
Overall i think they are a fairly decent refurb. They certainly make the valleys fell more Metro-y!
My only real complaint is, although the interior is light and airy, i had a real problem finding any bins.

 

[Razorblades]

.... i had a real problem finding any bins.

As well you might, there's no Class 321s operating in the Valleys

 

[Wyrleybart]

As well you might, there's no Class 321s operating in the Valleys

Badum tish

Other EMU designs are available

 

[Train Maniac]

As well you might, there's no Class 321s operating in the Valleys

Hahaha good one

 

[Express380]

Anyone know if the fueling and light maintenance of the 769s is going to remain at Rhymney after the December timetable change until they leave TFW please? I intend on returning for a trip after getting a fair few shots in May and August up there to take some pictures of the moves to and from the fuel road but don't want a wasted journey!
Many thanks

 

[JonathanH]

Anyone know if the the fueling and light maintenance of the 769s is going to remain at Rhymney after the December timetable change until they leave TFW please?

The Penarth to Rhymney route is the only one they operate so until they leave TfW, Rhymney has to play a part in their fueling and light maintenance.