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

[gwr4090]

Is there any indication yet of the installed diesel power and the overall weight of the Class 769 ? Will it be able to maintain Sprinter timings ?

David

 

[northwichcat]

Is there any indication yet of the installed diesel power and the overall weight of the Class 769 ? Will it be able to maintain Sprinter timings ?

David

Porterbrook are claiming it will be able to perform as well as a class 150 off the wires. Obviously they'll have to produce one and test it before that claim can be verified.

 

[CosherB]

Is there any indication yet of the installed diesel power and the overall weight of the Class 769 ? Will it be able to maintain Sprinter timings ?

David

From the 'horses mouth' .....

http://www.railmagazine.com/news/rail-features/flex-and-flexibility-1

.... when running as an EMU the top speed for Flex is 100mph. She adds that, being conservative, when running on diesel it’s likely to be around 91mph-92mph. “Really detailed point-to-point analysis shows what it does well, and which routes and journeys will deliver the biggest benefits to operators.”

 

[MarkyT]

From the 'horses mouth' .....

http://www.railmagazine.com/news/rail-features/flex-and-flexibility-1

So these should be better than Sprinters for main line dashes under OHLE followed by meandering forays onto various unelectrified branches. Perfect for through Windermere, Barrow services from Manchester etc.

This is the subtlety with bi-modes. It's not a case of bi-mode good or bad, its the application. While I fully support these units for the north and the Anglia new builds, I think going for ALL bimode IETs on GWR for instance is a mistake long term, although accept it is a short term necessity given the wiring delays and cost overruns. Fortunately on GWR the length of the lease and the design of the trains gives time to reconsider this and if extension of wires to places like Swansea, even Weston super Mare can be made to wash its face diesels can be removed from a proportion of the fleet and the rolling stock provider can make significant savings in day to day costs of maintenance and can more flexibly schedule the all electric part of the fleet with no need to allow for refuelling and engine swap visits.

 

[northwichcat]

Perfect for through Windermere, Barrow services from Manchester etc.

Except that by the December 2019 Northern have to provide 'Northern Connect' standard trains on those services which must have 2+2 seating, tables, charging points, air conditioning and wi-fi. Apparently the plan to put air conditioning on 319s was dismissed as an option because it would drain too much power and affect the train's performance.

 

[Chester1]

I think Porterbrook will want some kind of long term commitment to use 769s before they start creating large quantities of them.

I would be surprised if they don't get further orders. There are insufficient DMUs after pacer and 153 withdrawal and there are many commuter services that run under wires for substantial sections. If the first batch are good and don't exceed their budget it is entirely possible that most or all 86 get converted eventually. Porterbrook are in a position to move around rolling stock if the prices make sense. GWRs mini HSTs are a good solution to the shortage of sprinters for regional routes but wouldn't work for commuter routes. Porterbook could approach Northern and ATW and see if they want to swap some sprinters for more 769s.

Except that by the December 2019 Northern have to provide 'Northern Connect' standard trains on those services which must have 2+2 seating, tables, charging points, air conditioning and wi-fi. Apparently the plan to put air conditioning on 319s was dismissed as an option because it would drain too much power and affect the train's performance.

769s are being used on Windermere services from May 2018 to December 2019. I don't know what their internal configuration will be though. 2+2 seating, tables, wifi and a limited number of power sockets + USB charging would make them reasonably comfortable. The franchise spec has already gone out of the window and the DfT would happily agree to further changes as long as the ToC is being reasonable because the situation is NRs fault. Carlisle-Newcastle is due to be run by 158s so would be an obvious alternative service to put 195s on.

 

[Bletchleyite]

Except that by the December 2019 Northern have to provide 'Northern Connect' standard trains on those services which must have 2+2 seating, tables, charging points, air conditioning and wi-fi. Apparently the plan to put air conditioning on 319s was dismissed as an option because it would drain too much power and affect the train's performance.

As there has been a material change to the situation of the franchise (no electrification to Windermere) I don't see why a change like this (to remove aircon from the spec) couldn't be agreed if appropriate.

The rest of those items can easily be installed. Indeed, the ex-Brighton Express 319/2s already have 2+2 Chapman seating with tables in a very comfortable layout indeed - the most comfortable seating layout (including the 2+1 1st) on any LM service.

 

[northwichcat]

As there has been a material change to the situation of the franchise (no electrification to Windermere) I don't see why a change like this (to remove aircon from the spec) couldn't be agreed if appropriate.

The franchise spec states the SoS will review the situation if the wiring is not done or not completed on time. It sounds like in the case of Windermere he's already done that

Passengers in the Lake District will benefit from double the number of direct services to Manchester Airport from May 2018. From 2019, there will be brand new trains with more seats and better on-board facilities including air conditioning, toilets, free wifi and plug sockets, subject to business case.

We have listened to concerns about electrification gantries spoiling protected landscapes. Northern, the train operator, will therefore begin work to explore the possibility of deploying alternative-fuel trains on the route by 2021, improving comfort and on-board facilities for passengers whilst protecting the sensitive environment of this World Heritage Site. This trial will pilot an alternative-fuelled train, removing the need to construct intrusive wires and masts in this National Park. Journeys between Windermere and Manchester Airport will be improved sooner and with less disruption to services and local communities. This replaces plans to electrify the line between Windermere and Oxenholme.

https://www.gov.uk/government/speeches/rail-update-bi-mode-train-technology

 

[AndrewE]

From the 'horses mouth' .....

http://www.railmagazine.com/news/rail-features/flex-and-flexibility-1

More smoke and mirrors then! A limited maximum speed tells us that it hasn't even got the welly to beat wind resistance, and nowhere is there any hint of how good the acceleration might (or might not) be!

I wouldn't hold my breath waiting for "a main line dash," unless your journey is between stations with steep downhill gradients leaving them!

 

[northwichcat]

Carlisle-Newcastle is due to be run by 158s so would be an obvious alternative service to put 195s on.

There will be some other Connect services which will get a mix of 158s and 195s e.g. Bradford to Nottingham is only guaranteed to have at least 10 services in each direction operated by 195s. Maybe 2 of the final batch of 331s (expected to be delivered during 2020) will get a battery fitted and then the rolling stock plan won't need to be changed at all?

 

[47802]

I

769s are being used on Windermere services from May 2018 to December 2019. I don't know what their internal configuration will be though. 2+2 seating, tables, wifi and a limited number of power sockets + USB charging would make them reasonably comfortable. The franchise spec has already gone out of the window and the DfT would happily agree to further changes as long as the ToC is being reasonable because the situation is NRs fault. Carlisle-Newcastle is due to be run by 158s so would be an obvious alternative service to put 195s on.

After which they get 195's and a connect service, given the timescale that they will be introduced its somewhat fanciful to talk about seating changes I think its pretty clear the seating will stay as is and they wont be used on connect services.

Of course not all services on the Windermere route have to be connect same applies to Barrow so some Barrow/Windermere-Lancaster/Preston could be 769 worked.

 

[Chester1]

After which they get 195's and a connect service, given the timescale that they will be introduced its somewhat fanciful to talk about seating changes I think its pretty clear the seating will stay as is and they wont be used on connect services.

Of course not all services on the Windermere route have to be connect same applies to Barrow so some Barrow/Windermere-Lancaster/Preston could be 769 worked.

Seating changes are only fanciful if rolling stock plans don't change. Maybe Northern's will stay largely intact but the cancellation of electrification across England and Wales will increase the shortage of DMUs. Northern has more services suitable for 769s than can be run by 8 units and leases a range of sprinters from Porterbrook, there is an obvious deal to be done that allows some Northern DMUs to be cascaded elsewhere.

 

[47802]

Seating changes are only fanciful if rolling stock plans don't change. Maybe Northern's will stay largely intact but the cancellation of electrification across England and Wales will increase the shortage of DMUs. Northern has more services suitable for 769s than can be run by 8 units and leases a range of sprinters from Porterbrook, there is an obvious deal to be done that allows some Northern DMUs to be cascaded elsewhere.

Well yes we already have another thread on the possibility that some GWR 150's may not transfer to Northern so yes Northern may well end up with more 769's, but they seemed fairly well aimed at the 150 market and from Northern viewpoint that going to be paired 150 diagrams, alternatively if you then start talking about using them on Connect services, with new interiors and Air Con then thats going to get expensive and then there is the extra load on the engines for the Air Con for a train which will have roughly similar Diesel Power to a 150.

Same thing applies to the 230's except the 769's already have a more usable seating layout, interesting that Porterbrook are intent on getting these things built, tested and into service pretty quickly, I bet Vivarail are sticking pins into the Porterbrook logo.

 

[Chester1]

Well yes we already have another thread on the possibility that some GWR 150's may not transfer to Northern so yes Northern may well end up with more 769's, but they seemed fairly well aimed at the 150 market and from Northern viewpoint that going to be paired 150 diagrams, alternatively if you then start talking about using them on Connect services, with new interiors and Air Con then thats going to get expensive and then there is the extra load on the engines for the Air Con for a train which will have roughly similar Diesel Power to a 150.

I didn't mention aircon, I agree its nots posssible at a reasonable cost. However, new seating should cost little relative to the conversion cost. If a follow on order is placed then there should be a fleet with a range of layouts. 2+3 seating only suits services where the average journey is short. A 150 2+2 layout would be the most suitable for services like Buxton-Manchester, although leg room sufficient for people taller than 5"6 would be a huge improvement. If they are leased for any regional services then a third layout with more tables and luggage space would be useful. They are comparable to 150s under diesel power but under electric power they should be similar to a 195 and have faster acceleration than any sprinter.

 

[a_c_skinner]

As far as I can see it all now hinges on how these sets work. Aircon, charging points and seating will all be minor points if these units work as well as a sprinter on diesel. In NW trains are full, overfull at peak times and the simple need is to put more capacity out there.

Aircon, USB, "new" trains are all promises written for a manifesto, for votes because 50 new trains sounds a load better to the average voter than 100 cascaded. We are at risk of missing a good opportunity if the franchise spec written purely to gerrymander is set in stone.

 

[northwichcat]

Aircon, USB, "new" trains are all promises written for a manifesto, for votes because 50 new trains sounds a load better to the average voter than 100 cascaded.

No the promise for Northern Connect on Manchester Airport to Blackpool/Barrow/Windermere/Liverpool was written in because people were concerned that they'd get tatty old trains from the 1980s replacing 185s when routes are transferred from TPE to Northern. Arriva extended that promise to other routes so that they got quality points in the bidding process by trying to have a better bid than the likes of Govia.

 

[Bletchleyite]

No the promise for Northern Connect on Manchester Airport to Blackpool/Barrow/Windermere/Liverpool was written in because people were concerned that they'd get tatty old trains from the 1980s replacing 185s when routes are transferred from TPE to Northern. Arriva extended that promise to other routes so that they got quality points in the bidding process by trying to have a better bid than the likes of Govia.

Yes, but there has been a substantial material change to the franchise.

And people are so fickle about 1980s trains. People don't refuse to buy Victorian houses, they refurbish them. Trains are more like that.

 

[notlob.divad]

The big thing with the 769s will be the leasing costs and possibly the track access charges. If the money saved on fuel by running more efficiently can offset increases in the leasing costs, then it will be well worth Northern and ATW working with Porterbrook and the DfT and looking to bring more in, or keep more on.

Factor in that the units being modified are already PRM compliant, and appear to be in much better condition than some of the units Northern are refurbishing,
I could certainly see some merit in removing almost all the pure DMUs from Manchester/Liverpool/Preston even Blackburn and Burnley and running local services that don't have brand new units destined for it with either 319s or 769s, and only keeping 2 car DMUs for services that really really cannot justify 4 car working.

 

[Bletchleyite]

To me it makes most sense to initially get 769s on services that will run in part (even a small part) under the wires. That way you get the most benefit, both in terms of making best use of the electrification, but also in terms of good publicity against "dirty diesels".

Any 150s freed up can of course be paired up to give essentially the same thing for diesel only lines.

 

[CosherB]

To me it makes most sense to initially get 769s on services that will run in part (even a small part) under the wires. That way you get the most benefit, both in terms of making best use of the electrification, but also in terms of good publicity against "dirty diesels".

Agreed, but let's not lose sight of the fact that we are now desperately short of DMUs, period. 769s could be the way to get out of the corner we've been backed into with electrification cancellations.

 

[Chester1]

769 leasing cost could be relatively low if they allow Porterbrook to charge a small premium on leases for any Sprinters that they free up. If Angel Trains and Eversholt don't have any suitable DMUs available then its an oppertunity for Porterbrook to make some money. It is in the DfTs interests for as many 319s to be converted so they would probably allow Porterbrook to take advantage of the situation and sign off the transfers.

 

[northwichcat]

769 leasing cost could be relatively low if they allow Porterbrook to charge a small premium on leases for any Sprinters that they free up. If Angel Trains and Eversholt don't have any suitable DMUs available then its an oppertunity for Porterbrook to make some money. It is in the DfTs interests for as many 319s to be converted so they would probably allow Porterbrook to take advantage of the situation and sign off the transfers.

Porterbrook are well aware they have an opportunity to make money. The 769s will reportedly cost almost as much to lease as brand new FLIRTs. If it wasn't for the December 2019 deadline and the poor planning for it the 769 would have been a non-starter. Look at what's happened with the D-Train, it's a non-starter as CAF are able to produce reasonably brand new DMUs which won't cost that much more than D-Trains.

It's certainly not in DfT's interests to produce more - it's in their interests to ensure as much electrification as possible in done in the next 2 years, so the redundant EMUs can be used as EMUs.

 

[IanXC]

It's certainly not in DfT's interests to produce more - it's in their interests to ensure as much electrification as possible in done in the next 2 years, so the redundant EMUs can be used as EMUs.

Aarrgghhh

They just don't know what is good for them!

 

[Chester1]

Porterbrook are well aware they have an opportunity to make money. The 769s will reportedly cost almost as much to lease as brand new FLIRTs. If it wasn't for the December 2019 deadline and the poor planning for it the 769 would have been a non-starter. Look at what's happened with the D-Train, it's a non-starter as CAF are able to produce reasonably brand new DMUs which won't cost that much more than D-Trains.

It's certainly not in DfT's interests to produce more - it's in their interests to ensure as much electrification as possible in done in the next 2 years, so the redundant EMUs can be used as EMUs.

Are there any figures available? I have read that before but not seen any evidence to justify it. Seems odd that adding diesel engines to dual volt electric trains with 10-15 years of life left would cost a similiar amount per year as a new unit, especially when you consider that there are now 47 class 319s off lease earning Porterbrook nothing.

 

[edwin_m]

Are there any figures available? I have read that before but not seen any evidence to justify it. Seems odd that adding diesel engines to dual volt electric trains with 10-15 years of life left would cost a similiar amount per year as a new unit, especially when you consider that there are now 47 class 319s off lease earning Porterbrook nothing.

Could be that this only applies to the first eight units, which have to bear the cost of design and "type approval"? I would guess DfT is paying this, or at least the difference between hiring 769s and hiring an equivalent number of Sprinters, as compensation for NR/DfT failing to deliver electrification as assumed in the franchise bid.

 

[northwichcat]

Are there any figures available? I have read that before but not seen any evidence to justify it. Seems odd that adding diesel engines to dual volt electric trains with 10-15 years of life left would cost a similiar amount per year as a new unit, especially when you consider that there are now 47 class 319s off lease earning Porterbrook nothing.

It was Tony Miles who originally made a claim that the 769 leasing costs are eyewatering so he must have a reliable source. DfT are picking up the bill for the difference between the 319 and 769 leasing costs for Northern, due to the missing overhead wiring.

Porterbrook claim there is enough interest for them to lease all their off-lease 319s but whether that's genuine interest or just something to prevent TOCs trying to lease their trains on the cheap is unclear. It turns out there was interest in continuing to use 442s on third rail, which seemed unlikely 2 years ago with people saying if TPE didn't use them with diesel locos they would be scrapped.

 

[Chester1]

It would be very interesting to know the difference between the cost of leasing for a South Wales unit vs Northern. Edwin_m has probably highlighted why the Northern 769 fleet was extremely expensive. The cost of parts cannot possibly be comparable and there is no major structural work required in contrast with D trains for instance.

 

[61653 HTAFC]

So, are the current plans still for Northern to receive 8 769s with 7 in use each day?

ONE spare unit? I can see how that will work reliably and consistently... :roll:

 

[YorkshireBear]

Leases could come down if we end up with say 50 769s?

 

[Dai Corner]

Leases could come down if we end up with say 50 769s?

The design and development costs per unit will obviously be lower, but the lease costs will be whatever the market will bear. In the current situation Porterbrook could probably charge almost whatever they want to.