175001
On Moderation
That was the plan till Chris Failing put a pause to it.
And of course now it's back on, it's packaged as a gift to the local area, despite it costing nearly double what it initially did.
-
Our new ticketing site is now live! Using either this or the original site (both powered by TrainSplit) helps support the running of the forum with every ticket purchase! Find out more and ask any questions/give us feedback in this thread!
Porterbrook Cl.769 'Flex' trains from 319s, initially for Northern
- Thread starter northwichcat
- Start date
And of course now it's back on, it's packaged as a gift to the local area, despite it costing nearly double what it initially did.
Sponsor Post - registered members do not see these adverts; click here to register, or click here to log in
R
RailUK Forums
py_megapixel
Established Member
Appears to be no less than four (might be five, not 100% sure) single Sprinters on Southport line diagrams today (two Alderley Edge, three Stalybridge). Poor.
Greybeard33
Established Member
From RTT for 19 April, 769434 was withdrawn from service at Southport "due to a problem with the traction equipment" after working the 0638 from Wigan Wallgate. 150106 later took over the remainder of this diagram.
769424 was withdrawn at Southport "due to a problem with the train" after working the 1251 from Alderley Edge. 156441 later took over the remainder of this diagram.
769456 and 769458 survived the day in service.
The other two Northern 769 diagrams were worked by DMUs throughout.
Greybeard33
Established Member
It seems unlikely that Northern will give an "official" running commentary on the reasons for the poor availability of the 769s.
Today (21st) there are 3 in service again (450, 456 & 458, the same as yesterday, but all on Alderley Edge). A 4th unit failed to depart Allerton depot to start its diagram, causing two cancellations before a 150 stepped in. RTT gave the reason as "a problem at the depot", while Northern Journey Check blamed "a fault on this train".
Update: 450 withdrawn from service at Bolton while working the 1050 ex Alderley Edge "due to a problem with the train" (issue switching to diesel mode?) 156401 (ex EMR) later took over the remainder of its diagram.
424, 456 and 458 appear to be the only 769s in service on Friday 22nd.
Last edited:
Jamesrob637
Established Member
- Joined
- 12 Aug 2016
- Messages
- 6,074
458 has now broken down
Heap of expletive.
Heap of expletive.
a_c_skinner
Established Member
- Joined
- 21 Jun 2013
- Messages
- 1,700
Is any progress being made with these units' reliability? It strikes me not.
It’s likely to go backwards as the weather improves. The engines have issues with cooling, so they performed adequately in freezing temperatures through Winter, giving the illusion of progress, but with summer temperatures coming back, we could be back to the almost constant failures soon.
Why do you think that?
I was told that by a Northern driver last year. It is a consequence of an engine double the size of one on a Sprinter being crammed along with a generator under a Class 319 DTSO/DTCO vehicle.
DustyBin
Established Member
The engines are only 12.8L (versus 14L in a sprinter), although there are two of them if that's what you mean?
The Welsh units definitely struggled last year. In May I heard a few with the fans working flat out. The temperature was in the low 20s.
Mikey C
Established Member
- Joined
- 11 Feb 2013
- Messages
- 8,268
If they struggle with the heat, can we send them to the Highlands of Scotland 
edwin_m
Veteran Member
They seem to have very few fans either under the train or in this forum!
I presume by "bigger" he meant higher power, not higher volumetric capacity.
At least according to what I can find online a 769 has 2x523 hp engines. While a sprinter has a 286 hp engine in each car. So each engine on te 769 is nearly double the power output, effectively total power for a 4 car train is similar but it's concentrated under only 2 cars rather than spread over all 4.
Jamesrob637
Established Member
- Joined
- 12 Aug 2016
- Messages
- 6,074
Comment of the thread!
But the two 769 engines get a much better use of their power curve, and they aren't thrashed like the sprinters'.
This is what I meant. The 769 engines have to supply double the power output of Sprinter engines, given that there half as many of them.
Greater efficiency of the electric drivetrain should account for the marginally lower power output of the two 769 engines over 4 Sprinter engines, making them ~equivalent to a pair of Sprinters, but not the extra weight of all the electrical equipment that is additionally carried.
A pair of 2-car 150s weighs 143.2 tonnes, whereas an unmodified 319 tips in at 140.3. Add in the 8 tonnes weight of the gensets et Al and the 769's total is 156.3 tonnes. That's less than 10% difference so unlikely to present a significant burden on 21st century traction engines, compared with something from the early '80s. I've travelled in a 869 at around their maximum speed (70+ mph) and both getting there and sustaining those speeds didn't sound like the units were under any stress. Maybe the forced air cooling does need some tweak, but I don't think that there is an overall power deficit preventing a fix.
DustyBin
Established Member
From what I’ve read (on here) it sounds like a cooling issue. On the basis that it hasn’t been sorted one can only assume that retrofitting bigger fans, radiators, intercoolers etc. isn’t straightforward.
Greybeard33
Established Member
According to RTT, 442 was also out on Wednesday 27th and lasted through the day. 456 was withdrawn at Oxford Road at 1820, but that was attributed to an issue with the traincrew. 458 was withdrawn at Southport "due to a problem with the traction equipment" having lost 11 minutes after switching to diesel at Bolton on its last working.
458 was out again this morning (28th), together with 450, 442 and 434. But 450 only lasted until 1057, when it failed at Wigan Wallgate "due to a problem with the traction equipment". The temperature at that time was only 9C.
Not all failures are due to cooling issues. Most are due to software issues and some have been as simple as them running out of Diesel!
py_megapixel
Established Member
You'd think that having one of the largest diesel fleets of all the English TOCs (at least by number of units), they'd have the idea of putting fuel in pretty well sorted out!
Greybeard33
Established Member
From Modern Railways:
One of the design compromises in the 769 conversion was the small fuel tanks.
Peter Sarf
Established Member
Oh. Was it the 230s that also use up fuel too quick ?.
We might have one of the largest Diesel fleets, but until recently the 319s were not part of it. The 769s have some of the smallest fuel tanks among the Diesel fleet!
I don’t know but I wouldn’t be surprised. It’s not that they use up Diesel too quick, it’s more that they haven’t got enough of it to start with. They are only really suitable for running services which include significant distances of electric running, where Diesel is conserved relative to running Sprinters and their range is consequently increased.
If it was a compromise, it really only affects running on diesel for a much larger proportion of the total miles than was planned, however, running out is not only forseeable but it must be the simplest failure mode of the 769s to fix, i.e. fill it up daily. Hardly a difficult concept.
This would be alright for units stabled at Allerton or Springs Branch, but the amount of outstabling in platforms at the likes of Southport, Wigan Wallgate, Salford Crescent, Manchester Victoria or even Liverpool Lime Street, where there are no refuelling facilities, particularly on Sundays (when I have seen 769s in all of these places) this is no mean feat.
That said, being electric depots, how much refuelling infrastructure exists at Allerton and Springs Branch and how often do 769s reach Newton Heath, where there of course is.
Well the simple answer is that operators must 'cut their coat according to their cloth'. Diagrams must recognise the reality of the situation.