Adding trailers to Networker Turbos from EMU stock

[D365]

What might have been easy at the time with the original design staff on hand and a significant works infrastructure available could easily be almost impossible in our far "leaner" and more highly divided industry - where I doubt very many of the original design team are not retired, if they are even still alive.

I would speculate that it depends on how much of BREL's intellectual property has been retained by Bombardier Transportation - which, of course, is soon to become Alstom...

 

[t_star2001uk]

The 165 carriages might retain their current power arrangements, and the ex 465 carriage could be independantly fed from either end. Are things like the PIS and door controls the same for both units?

A 165 electrical system was never designed to cross feed. The Chiltern units especially do not have any extra capacity in the converters to power an extra vehicle.

 

[Roast Veg]

So perhaps the fitment of secondary alternators just for the new carriages might be required. I don't suppose anyone has the pinouts of the data connections for both units handy to see if the data connection would be easy...

 

[JonathanH]

On a technical point, why were 465s built with anti-rise collision 'buffers' including between cars but the 165/166s weren't? Was it simply a reaction to the Cannon Street crash in early 1991? If so, was the risk of Turbos being involved in an incident somehow less than their electric counterparts?

 

[t_star2001uk]

So perhaps the fitment of secondary alternators just for the new carriages might be required.

How would the proposed secondary alternator be powered?

 

[Roast Veg]

Presumably by fitting them directly to the crankshaft when the proposed new engine is fitted. If it means not having to rewire the 465 trailers then I think it would be most beneficial.

Additionally, it was confirmed by @Clarence Yard in another thread that this proposal applies only to the Angel owned class 465s, and not the 365s. It is contingent on the engine upgrade trial being successful.

 

[t_star2001uk]

Presumably by fitting them directly to the crankshaft when the proposed new engine is fitted. If it means not having to rewire the 465 trailers then I think it would be most beneficial.

A 165 is an OK performer when all traction equipment is functional. As soon as 1 car has a fault with the traction equipment ( Gearbox fault, engine problem etc), performace suffers significantly. Which means dragging a 465 trailer around will have a significant effect on perfomance. The only real ways this proposal would ever work is to either...

1. Retraction the entire fleet with more powerful engines, transmissions etc...
2. Take a 465 trailer and fit it with its own engine, transmission, alternator, static convertor etc

Both of the above would have a rather large cost implication along with the design and build time. Also would any significant modification from the original design of a 465 trailer need recertification from the Vehicle Acceptance Body.....

 

[JonathanH]

A 165 is an OK performer when all traction equipment is functional. As soon as 1 car has a fault with the traction equipment ( Gearbox fault, engine problem etc), performace suffers significantly. Which means dragging a 465 trailer around will have a significant effect on perfomance. The only real ways this proposal would ever work is to either...

1. Retraction the entire fleet with more powerful engines, transmissions etc...
2. Take a 465 trailer and fit it with its own engine, transmission, alternator, static convertor etc

Both of the above would have a rather large cost implication along with the design and build time. Also would any significant modification from the original design of a 465 trailer need recertification from the Vehicle Acceptance Body.....

Retraction is exactly what this proposal is about. It is the retraction exercise which leads to the realisation that by having more power, trailers can be added and 465 centre coaches are the obvious source. It doesn't appear to be led by the availability of trailers from 465s.

 

[edwin_m]

I think all this is based on the expectation that the extra engine plus hybrid drive allow a similar performance to today but with the extra weight of a trailer. So a failure affecting one of two powered cars will have the same effect as today - half power will still get you home but won't keep to timings. Replacing an ageing engine and mechanical/hydraulic transmission with a new engine and electric transmission might even make those failures less likely.