As has been mentioned elsewhere on the forum, the wiring isn't going to get to Wigan Wallgate without an expensive solution for the tunnel under the main road. I guess that sort of level of disruption for a rebuild would take years of planning.
It wasn't me that suggested Wigan to Southport, try getting a response from @Grumpy Git . Maybe he doesn't know that Wallgate can't (easily) be wired, - but does seem to know what the cost is!
No offence intended.
For all we outsiders know, it might be that the cause(s) of the 769 failures are understood, and can be fixed by straightforward mechanical/electrical/software modifications that are under development and will be rolled out across the fleet in the next few weeks or months. In which case it would be foolish to scrap the units now, when it will be several years before replacement self-powered rolling stock can be sourced.
... and I suspect that the funders of Northern's financial shortfalls (DfT) would be happy with letting it run.
... and diagnose faults/maintain them. The whole human interface with trains and their infrastructure in general seems to have evolved from when driving a steam trains was sometimes so critical that only a few drivers could master the 'art'. The other extreme is with much automation and monitoring that that system itself struggles to even get to full introduction, (e.g. Crossrail).
Will confess to being somewhat amused by this argument! Guessing that the reference to TACs (alone) was perhaps unintentional, but it's the other half that is, ahem, shall we say, a little "intellectually naughty"! Even in the era of franchises, an OLE scheme would never have been appraised over the lifetime of the one franchise in place at the time - and it most certainly isn't now. [Indeed in a conversation with a TOC's planning people on Monday, they made the point that even in their service planning, they are now changing their thinking towards WebTAG-style 60-year economic appraisals rather than 5-7-year franchise-led financial / commercial appraisals - which was of course music to my ears, even at a time of obvious immediate financial pressures on the railway.]
That made me chuckle.
Although very rarely triggered, it is impossible that the franchise would not have a termination clause for faulty train units that do not deliver the expected performance. As with anything, the debate would be at threshold in terms of cancellations or unavailability that constitutes "faulty" and "not as described"?
Northern already went over to the Operator of Last Resort, so the question of terminating the franchise is irrelevant.
I believe @js1000 was referring to potential termination of the contract between the Northern franchise and Porterbrook for conversion of the eight 319s to 769s, not termination of the franchise itself. Although Porterbrook's 769 contract was originally with Arriva Rail North, it will have been inherited by Northern Trains Ltd, the current operator, which is a subsidiary of DfT OLR Holdings Ltd.
RTT indicates that 769442 was terminated short at Wallgate at 0752 on 29 September, while working the 0716 Southport to Alderley Edge. 150145 picked up the working from Piccadilly at 0839, and continued to work subsequent services in the diagram.
RTT does not show any workings by 769458 on that day. However, although 150145 is shown as working the 1450 Alderley to Southport (1554 from Wallgate) it seems likely that 769458 in fact took over the working from Wigan and worked the remainder of the diagram, but that the unit ID was not updated for the subsequent services. The diagram ended the day in Manchester Victoria Reversing Siding, and 769458 emerged from the siding on 30th September to work the 0637 Victoria to Southport.
What's the issues in this area? Are you traction trained, or have any knowledge of driver responsibilities on the class?
Appears to have worked 2K82 0716 SOP- departing late due to late inwards 2F82. Required Fitters at Walgate and was cancelled
Yes it was definitely rail adhesion pulling out of Westhoughton I was sat on it. Once it got to near Lostock junction it was fine..
Hopefully modifications which involve turning them into tin cans.
I’ve lost count on the amount of times I’ve seen forum posts saying ‘769xxx has failed at <insert location >’
The 2W00 07:20 is formed from the ECS 5W00 which arrives from Newton Heath at 07:15. Does NH handle 769s?
