GWR Class 769 information. (Units no longer with GWR - Off Lease March 23)

[JonathanH]

Guys, anyone know when will the GWR Class 769s be in service

Never, is the most likely answer, based on the comments above.

 

[adc82140]

Guys, anyone know when will the GWR Class 769s be in service

Never. See the last few pages of posts, and the thread title

Edit- what JonathanH said.

 

[Stephen Lee]

Never. See the last few pages of posts, and the thread title

Edit- what JonathanH said.

They probably need to order new bi-modes, e.g. Bi-Mode Aventra

 

[JonathanH]

They probably need to order new bi-modes, e.g. Bi-Mode Aventra

Not until 2028, once they have considered the requirements for complete replacement of the 150/158/165/166 fleet. There is publicly announced project which GWR are working on to determine this.

 

[Snow1964]

They probably need to order new bi-modes, e.g. Bi-Mode Aventra

Not until 2028, once they have considered the requirements for complete replacement of the 150/158/165/166 fleet. There is publicly announced project which GWR are working on to determine this.

I would suggest they need to order in 2023 or 2024 as new trains often take 3-5 years, if need a fleet from 2028.

Waiting until 2028 to order them is daft

 

[JonathanH]

Waiting until 2028 to order them is daft

Yes, potentially, but equally they aren't going to be ordered tomorrow and given the need to replace 150, 158, 165 and 166 with one basic platform, it isn't necessarily off the shelf either. Neither does it need to be done as a knee jerk reaction to the 769 project being cancelled.

The January edition of Todays Railways UK says:

"Operation Churchward" looks at future rolling stock requirements

Although no formal notice has yet been published, GWR is looking at its medium and longer-term rolling stock requirements for local and regional trains, given that much of its DMU fleet is now more than 30 years old. According to Managing Director Mark Hopwood, speaking at an RCTS members weekend in Reading in late October, "Operation Churchward" sees replacement potentially in the shape of one standard design of unit with a common type of driving cab, probably with different local and longer distance interiors. Capable of running on AC, DC and diesel, with a view to conversion of the latter to battery in due course, the design would be ideal for the Thames Valley and Devon and Cornwall branches and potentially as replacement for everything not IET or Class 387 operated. Further details will be made available in due course.

 

[heathrowrail]

Not until 2028, once they have considered the requirements for complete replacement of the 150/158/165/166 fleet. There is publicly announced project which GWR are working on to determine this.

Sounds good. I would say something like the Class 196/197 would be the best possible option. A mix of 2/3/4 & maybe 5 cars for Portsmouth - Cardiff? Although I do wonder if the leases are cheap enough GWR might look at replacing the 387s as well?

 

[Nicholas Lewis]

I would suggest they need to order in 2023 or 2024 as new trains often take 3-5 years, if need a fleet from 2028.

Thats because we keep starting from scratch rather than adopting designs already approved and issuing follow on orders

 

[infobleep]

The fact they had never entered service so far is down to the Union not signing off the cab mods to allow driver training to start. Once driver training had been commenced there would have been the 6 units at Reading (the current 3 + the 3 at Oxford) with 3 in service daily. The three weekly runs were purely to keep the driver managers / trainers competency up. The units were working (mostly )!


I believe this had actually been signed off and driver training was due to commence but the IA put paid to that.


see above for the “test run”. As the runs are only for competency retention, they probably won’t, I’m sure the Driver Managers have better things to do but you never know! Hopefully the 769s will depart for Long Marston (or elsewhere) sooner rather than later and not take up valuable siding space.


The order has not been cancelled, it was fulfilled - GWR ordered 19 and received 19. The lease is not being renewed when it expires next year.

So would they have made a profit from these units or did issues and delays eat up any profit?

 

[43096]

I would say something like the Class 196/197 would be the best possible option.

If CAF is the best possible option then we're in trouble. A large fleet of level-boarding FLIRTs is the best answer, like Greater Anglia have.

 

[FGW_DID]

So would they have made a profit from these units or did issues and delays eat up any profit?

Are you asking about Porterbrook?

 

[infobleep]

Are you asking about Porterbrook?

Yes

 

[FGW_DID]

I wouldn’t have a clue on the financial aspects, probably the only people who have profited (or will do) are the lawyers!

 

[JonathanH]

Sounds good. I would say something like the Class 196/197 would be the best possible option. A mix of 2/3/4 & maybe 5 cars for Portsmouth - Cardiff? Although I do wonder if the leases are cheap enough GWR might look at replacing the 387s as well?

I suggest that further discussion should really be here https://www.railforums.co.uk/thread...ure-local-regional-fleet.236368/#post-5822075

 

[Stephen Lee]

Not until 2028, once they have considered the requirements for complete replacement of the 150/158/165/166 fleet. There is publicly announced project which GWR are working on to determine this.

They can order Quadruple-mode Aventra(OHLE+3rd rail+Diesel+Battery) and immediately cancel the 769s order just like ÖBB and STA when they cancel the Talent 3 order and instead order Siemens Desiro/Alstom Coradia

== Doublepost prevention - post automatically merged: 22 Dec 2022 ==

Not until 2028, once they have considered the requirements for complete replacement of the 150/158/165/166 fleet. There is publicly announced project which GWR are working on to determine this.

They can order Quadruple-mode Aventra(OHLE+3rd rail+Diesel+Battery) and immediately cancel the 769s order just like ÖBB and STA when they cancel the Talent 3 order and instead order Siemens Desiro/Alstom Coradia

 

[Energy]

They can order Quadruple-mode Aventra(OHLE+3rd rail+Diesel+Battery) and immediately cancel the 769s order just like ÖBB and STA when they cancel the Talent 3 order and instead order Siemens Desiro/Alstom Coradia

== Doublepost prevention - post automatically merged: 22 Dec 2022 ==


They can order Quadruple-mode Aventra(OHLE+3rd rail+Diesel+Battery) and immediately cancel the 769s order just like ÖBB and STA when they cancel the Talent 3 order and instead order Siemens Desiro/Alstom Coradia

This is pretty different to the Talent 3 which had major problems with the contract ended, Porterbrook and GWR/DfT's contract for the 769s ends in April 2023, the lease has run its course without being cancelled or extended.

I heavily doubt quadruple mode would be possible just in the space required underneath to fit everything in, nor would it be useful for North Downs which could be done end to end by a battery unit. Fitting either GWR 387s or 379s with batteries (379s has been done before) would be a better solution.

 

[Snow1964]

I heavily doubt quadruple mode would be possible just in the space required underneath to fit everything in, nor would it be useful for North Downs which could be done end to end by a battery unit. Fitting either GWR 387s or 379s with batteries (379s has been done before) would be a better solution.

A lot would depend on what is mounted at roof height, normally can fit air conditioning, water tanks, and pantograph’s there.

If you do not fit a diesel alternator under same vehicle as the transformer, can spread the weight, and for a train that probably doesn’t need to exceed 100mph on diesel, only having 3 of 4 cars with diesel sets should be ok. Of course the installed power determines acceleration.

On a service like Portsmouth-Cardiff the fastest parts are already 25kv so having 110mph for these is desirable. 95-100mph on diesel and third rail, but unlikely to exceed 60mph (or go more than 30 miles) on battery, so batteries don’t need to be huge. Whilst not needed on Portsmouth route, having them capable of 100mph on third rail would allow a similar fleet to replace 159s.

 

[heathrowrail]

Fitting either GWR 387s or 379s with batteries (379s has been done before) would be a better solution.

As I said in a previous post GWR have ruled out fitting batteries to the 387s, Bedwyn Passenger Group raised this idea to get Bedwyn - Paddington directs back. Quote : " 1. There are too many issues with adding batteries to the 387 fleet to enable them to serve Bedwyn. Therefore we should forget this option. " https://pennypost.org.uk/2021/05/me...roup-about-changes-to-rail-services-may-2021/

 

[Energy]

As I said in a previous post GWR have ruled out fitting batteries to the 387s, Bedwyn Passenger Group raised this idea to get Bedwyn - Paddington directs back. Quote : " 1. There are too many issues with adding batteries to the 387 fleet to enable them to serve Bedwyn. Therefore we should forget this option. " https://pennypost.org.uk/2021/05/me...roup-about-changes-to-rail-services-may-2021/

Thanks for this, I saw in a previous post but couldn't find any further information on it.

 

[LNW-GW Joint]

I wouldn’t have a clue on the financial aspects, probably the only people who have profited (or will do) are the lawyers!

Plenty of engineering consultants (TOC and Rosco) will have trousered money on the project, most of it coming from the DfT in one form or another.
Plus loads of training money for operations which could have been spent on something more useful.
The railway is expert at spending money on useless projects.
I expect the DfT is about to call time on some other stock options too.
And no new orders have materialised since Covid (bar the HS2 outline contract).

 

[The_Train]

Reading TCD: 935, 938, 943
Oxford UCS: 930, 949, 959

All the rest are in store at Long Marston.

Edit: 927 is showing as back at Long Marston.

Thanks a lot mate

 

[Deepgreen]

Does a driver’s “pee break” halfway through a 90 minute commuter service really constitute a reason for not tightening the timetable

These days - probably yes. Timings become slacker and slacker to account for anything and everything. The spiral of decline tightens and steepens.

 

[RobShipway]

Will Class 769 units be running this coming Wednesday or Thursday on the North Downs route?

 

[foggy69]

These days - probably yes. Timings become slacker and slacker to account for anything and everything. The spiral of decline tightens and steepens.

When you have been backwards and forwards on a short commuter run with the same unit for 5 hours with minimum turn around time, then any chance for a comfort break is most useful

 

[GoneSouth]

When you have been backwards and forwards on a short commuter run with the same unit for 5 hours with minimum turn around time, then any chance for a comfort break is most useful

Doesn’t sound too unreasonable to me. Some on here would have you not leave the cab for 10 hours. I do sympathise.

On the other hand, you do drag at least one toilet around with you all day so don’t have far to walk

Genuine question, when are you allowed to leave the cab for an emergency loo break?

 

[class ep-09]

Genuine question, when are you allowed to leave the cab for an emergency loo break?

Any time a driver needs it ( at a station of course ) .
Delay ?
So what .

 

[GoneSouth]

Any time a driver needs it ( at a station of course ) .
Delay ?
So what .

Just wondering if you were allowed to leave a train in service full of passengers that’s all, no other reason.

 

[LowLevel]

Doesn’t sound too unreasonable to me. Some on here would have you not leave the cab for 10 hours. I do sympathise.

On the other hand, you do drag at least one toilet around with you all day so don’t have far to walk

Genuine question, when are you allowed to leave the cab for an emergency loo break?

Not all trains have toilets and when they do they aren't necessarily working!

If you need the loo you need the loo, as long as it isn't every day you'll never be pulled up for going if need be.

 

[Class15]

It’s a real shame that a project can be cancelled like this when so much money has already gone into it, they would’ve been far “greener” than the 165s on the Gatwick trains but GWR decided to cancel this even though money had been spent.

 

[WizCastro197]

It’s a real shame that a project can be cancelled like this when so much money has already gone into it, they would’ve been far “greener” than the 165s on the Gatwick trains but GWR decided to cancel this even though money had been spent.

I don’t think GWR were responsible for the decision to cancel it, it seems more the Government who ultimately made the decision not to renew the lease.