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

[The_Train]

769002 is the one in question!

Interesting that it is off to Crewe Electric. I presume this unit is still missing its panto after TfW ripped them off?

 

[Wyrleybart]

Interesting that it is off to Crewe Electric. I presume this unit is still missing its panto after TfW ripped them off?

I suspect the TfW 769s were actually delivered to Canton without their pantographs, rather than TfW "ripping them off"

 

[Bob Price]

No. They had their pantographs on. They were taken off by TfW and stored. This is 002 being delivered.

 

[The_Train]

No. They had their pantographs on. They were taken off by TfW and stored. This is 002 being delivered.

I did think that I'd read somewhere that the pantographs were removed by TfW.

The main crux of me bringing that up was as a bit of a wonder as to whether a visit to Crewe Electric could be for the reinstatement of said pantographs?

 

[diligentdave]

I did think that I'd read somewhere that the pantographs were removed by TfW.

The main crux of me bringing that up was as a bit of a wonder as to whether a visit to Crewe Electric could be for the reinstatement of said pantographs?

If you look at the video at about 14 seconds in you will see that actually 002 already has the pantograph fitted.

 

[The_Train]

If you look at the video at about 14 seconds in you will see that actually 002 already has the pantograph fitted.

That was when it was being delivered to Cardiff though. I am pretty sure TfW removed them all after they became the custodians of their 769 fleet

 

[Bob Price]

I did think that I'd read somewhere that the pantographs were removed by TfW.

The main crux of me bringing that up was as a bit of a wonder as to whether a visit to Crewe Electric could be for the reinstatement of said pantographs?

Very possibly. It may have been on board. Someone would need to fit it.

 

[D365]

From the Class 325 withdrawal discussion…

I understand the Varamis operation, and I am assuming Orion has been parked, but do we know who the converted 769/9s (769/5s) are four ? I understand there are two at Doncaster - 769535 ?

Not sure if that information has been made public.

I don't believe so. What I can say is that it has been reconfigured for parcels though.. make of that what you will.

Would it be safe to say that, unless a new open access operator is granted a track access agreement, there will be no further passenger operators for 769s beyond Northern..?

 

[Nym]

From the Class 325 withdrawal discussion…




Would it be safe to say that, unless a new open access operator is granted a track access agreement, there will be no further passenger operators for 769s beyond Northern..?

No-one knows what logic exists in the minds of Porterbrook and their customers.

 

[fgwrich]

Thought I’d post this here as well as in the Hythe proposal thread as it involved Grand Unions plans for their 769s.

Waterside Line - Grand Union Trains Ltd

Under the 'Alliance' banner, we are also planning to introduce a new service between Marchwood and Southampton and London Waterloo during 2027. Marchwood is currently a closed station and has not seen regular passenger trains since 1966. This service would build on a recent comprehensive study...

www.granduniontrains.co.uk

 

[Fincra5]

Thought I’d post this here as well as in the Hythe proposal thread as it involved Grand Unions plans for their 769s.

Waterside Line - Grand Union Trains Ltd

Under the 'Alliance' banner, we are also planning to introduce a new service between Marchwood and Southampton and London Waterloo during 2027. Marchwood is currently a closed station and has not seen regular passenger trains since 1966. This service would build on a recent comprehensive study...

www.granduniontrains.co.uk

So much FC seems a little overkill!

 

[david l]

5 out of 6 diagrammed 769's in service with Northern today, the highest for weeks. However is there any sign of the cavalry (421) emerging from Crewe IEMD? - or indeed the second unit (452??), as the continuing efforts of NH to turn out 150/156's to cover surely can't continue, of late shortages of 769's and failures during the day have meant that cover has been thin with 150/156's being split during the day to provide a service, albeit short formed.

 

[Wyrleybart]

5 out of 6 diagrammed 769's in service with Northern today, the highest for weeks. However is there any sign of the cavalry (421) emerging from Crewe IEMD? - or indeed the second unit (452??), as the continuing efforts of NH to turn out 150/156's to cover surely can't continue, of late shortages of 769's and failures during the day have meant that cover has been thin with 150/156's being split during the day to provide a service, albeit short formed.

I noticed on a Youtube video by Leslie Gilpin that 769006 is sat in Eastriggs seemingly white all over. Was this a TfW unit with red doors originally, and might it be summat to do with the Northern project ? Or do the Northern "backup 769s" need to be /4s ?

 

[507020]

5 out of 6 diagrammed 769's in service with Northern today, the highest for weeks. However is there any sign of the cavalry (421) emerging from Crewe IEMD? - or indeed the second unit (452??), as the continuing efforts of NH to turn out 150/156's to cover surely can't continue, of late shortages of 769's and failures during the day have meant that cover has been thin with 150/156's being split during the day to provide a service, albeit short formed.

We still await the arrival of the Welsh regiment, but since the December timetable change, I don’t actually perceive any drop in reliability for the 769s (or any improvement) but NH’s Sprinter diagrams are much less optimised, so when the 769s fail, there are a lot less 150/156s available to cover, so we’ve had nothing but 2 cars to cover.

 

[Bikeman78]

We still await the arrival of the Welsh regiment, but since the December timetable change, I don’t actually perceive any drop in reliability for the 769s (or any improvement) but NH’s Sprinter diagrams are much less optimised, so when the 769s fail, there are a lot less 150/156s available to cover, so we’ve had nothing but 2 cars to cover.

I'm still mystified as to why Northern are persisting with them. They must be getting a very good deal on the leasing charge. Before anyone says, there is no alternative, I think the Rosco that owns the Welsh 150s would do the required C6 if Northern signed a five or six year lease. The Northern 150s are having another round of C6 overhauls.

 

[skyhigh]

The additional units will be 769 421 and 452.

 

[Ribbleman]

I'm still mystified as to why Northern are persisting with them. They must be getting a very good deal on the leasing charge. Before anyone says, there is no alternative, I think the Rosco that owns the Welsh 150s would do the required C6 if Northern signed a five or six year lease. The Northern 150s are having another round of C6 overhauls.

Porterbrook own the TfW 150s and have said categorically that they will not put them through another set of exams, hence some sets having already been scrapped rather than being offered to other TOCs.

The existing lease on the 769s was said to be expiring next month. The fact that Porterbrook are paying to have the 8 sets put through C6 exams at Brodies suggests that they must have a new lease agreed. Probably with a get out clause for Northern if the overhauls fail to produce a substantial improvement in reliability by later this year. If that point is reached then the rumoured alternative of obtaining some of the TfW 158s when available may well come to pass. Not really suitable for the Southport-Manchester flows but could enable an internal cascade to release 150 and 156 units from other Northern routes. Nothing, of course, will happen without the approval of the DfT.

 

[Nym]

Not fully clued up on Northern service patterns, but if they were to take on more EMUs, would they be able to alter the service patterns to reduce direct journeys, but have more seats available?

 

[pokemonsuper9]

Not fully clued up on Northern service patterns, but if they were to take on more EMUs, would they be able to alter the service patterns to reduce direct journeys, but have more seats available?

I think that's already the plan with 323s to take over services via Westhoughton eventually.

In theory you could just have more EMUs and run 6 car vs 3/4 car on services like the Liverpool - Blackpools, but that would need depot space and maintenance avaliability.

 

[Gricer99]

Porterbrook own the TfW 150s and have said categorically that they will not put them through another set of exams, hence some sets having already been scrapped rather than being offered to other TOCs.

The existing lease on the 769s was said to be expiring next month. The fact that Porterbrook are paying to have the 8 sets put through C6 exams at Brodies suggests that they must have a new lease agreed. Probably with a get out clause for Northern if the overhauls fail to produce a substantial improvement in reliability by later this year. If that point is reached then the rumoured alternative of obtaining some of the TfW 158s when available may well come to pass. Not really suitable for the Southport-Manchester flows but could enable an internal cascade to release 150 and 156 units from other Northern routes. Nothing, of course, will happen without the approval of the DfT.

Why are 158s not suitable for Southport to Manchester?

 

[Wyrleybart]

Porterbrook own the TfW 150s and have said categorically that they will not put them through another set of exams, hence some sets having already been scrapped rather than being offered to other TOCs.

The existing lease on the 769s was said to be expiring next month. The fact that Porterbrook are paying to have the 8 sets put through C6 exams at Brodies suggests that they must have a new lease agreed. Probably with a get out clause for Northern if the overhauls fail to produce a substantial improvement in reliability by later this year. If that point is reached then the rumoured alternative of obtaining some of the TfW 158s when available may well come to pass. Not really suitable for the Southport-Manchester flows but could enable an internal cascade to release 150 and 156 units from other Northern routes. Nothing, of course, will happen without the approval of the DfT.

Presumably, if GWR are allowed to split the Cardiff - Penzance service at Exeter forcing passengers to change trains, then the same could happen at Wigan with the Southports. Run a DMU shuttle between Southport and Wigan then swap people onto EMUs for the journey to the metropolis.

What is good for the goose is also good for the gander as they say

 

[M60lad]

158s not suitable for Southport to Manchester? Can't see how that can be the case as I'm sure only recently they've been used to Southport during engineering works or have done in the past.

 

[pokemonsuper9]

Why are 158s not suitable for Southport to Manchester?

I would guess there is no problem with suitability, jt availability.
158s are short formed regularly, and the 769s aren't an excuse for that since it's 150/156s that take their place.

I'm the past 158s have gone to Southport and diverted via Westhoughton, so I think they are cleared for the whole route.

 

[AMD]

The 769 fleet is on lease with Northern till 2027. I can't say too much about the lease terms however it's not a standard lease in the sense of how much money Northern is handing over to Porterbrook.
158s have and do on occasion (often around Sunday engineering works) work to Southport, the main reason they aren't scheduled that way normally is that there isn't enough of them, so it's 150/156/769 for the Southport diagrams. There is one 158 diagram which takes them to Bolton on a daily basis - https://www.realtimetrains.co.uk/service/gb-nr:G37986/2025-02-26/detailed#allox_id=0

 

[Ribbleman]

158s not suitable for Southport to Manchester? Can't see how that can be the case as I'm sure only recently they've been used to Southport during engineering works or have done in the past.

Not suitable in the sense that in peak hours they cannot adhere to the current boarding and alighting times that are required to maintain time. The narrowness of the doors and aisle makes passenger movement much slower than can be attained on 150s and 769s, an issue that also applies to a lesser extent to use of 156s. A 158 that is full and standing on an all stations run is bound to lose time. Anyway, this remains a hypothetical situation at present. It is to be hoped that Brodies can sort out the 8 x 769s.

== Doublepost prevention - post automatically merged: 26 Feb 2025 ==

Presumably, if GWR are allowed to split the Cardiff - Penzance service at Exeter forcing passengers to change trains, then the same could happen at Wigan with the Southports. Run a DMU shuttle between Southport and Wigan then swap people onto EMUs for the journey to the metropolis.

What is good for the goose is also good for the gander as they say

Aside from the unpopular measure of making people change trains, there would be the matter of also asking them to change stations in Wigan. Wigan Wallgate, the station used by Southport services, is not electrified. Due to clearance and structural issues with the road bridge immediately south of the platform, to do so would require a very expensive reconstruction.

 

[Bikeman78]

Porterbrook own the TfW 150s and have said categorically that they will not put them through another set of exams, hence some sets having already been scrapped rather than being offered to other TOCs.

The existing lease on the 769s was said to be expiring next month. The fact that Porterbrook are paying to have the 8 sets put through C6 exams at Brodies suggests that they must have a new lease agreed. Probably with a get out clause for Northern if the overhauls fail to produce a substantial improvement in reliability by later this year. If that point is reached then the rumoured alternative of obtaining some of the TfW 158s when available may well come to pass. Not really suitable for the Southport-Manchester flows but could enable an internal cascade to release 150 and 156 units from other Northern routes. Nothing, of course, will happen without the approval of the DfT.

Okay, so that's even more barmy than I thought. Porterbrook would rather waste money on a niche fleet that cannot multi with anything else or work off a specific set of routes? As opposed to a fleet that can go anywhere and multi with many other types of trains operated by several TOCs. Something very odd about this situation. And the passengers are the biggest losers as they have trains that are three times as likely to break down.

 

[The exile]

Okay, so that's even more barmy than I thought. Porterbrook would rather waste money on a niche fleet that cannot multi with anything else or work off a specific set of routes? As opposed to a fleet that can go anywhere and multi with many other types of trains operated by several TOCs. Something very odd about this situation. And the passengers are the biggest losers as they have trains that are three times as likely to break down.

Presumably a lot of work (bodywork etc) was done on the 769s at conversion, so this overhaul may be relatively cheap. AIUI the state of the 150s may well mean that an almost complete rebuild would be required- not to mention the fact that more spares for the remaining fleet(s) are probably desperately needed.

 

[Nym]

Not suitable in the sense that in peak hours they cannot adhere to the current boarding and alighting times that are required to maintain time. The narrowness of the doors and aisle makes passenger movement much slower than can be attained on 150s and 769s, an issue that also applies to a lesser extent to use of 156s. A 158 that is full and standing on an all stations run is bound to lose time. Anyway, this remains a hypothetical situation at present. It is to be hoped that Brodies can sort out the 8 x 769s.

== Doublepost prevention - post automatically merged: 26 Feb 2025 ==


Aside from the unpopular measure of making people change trains, there would be the matter of also asking them to change stations in Wigan. Wigan Wallgate, the station used by Southport services, is not electrified. Due to clearance and structural issues with the road bridge immediately south of the platform, to do so would require a very expensive reconstruction.

In this instance I’d say the Southports all run via Atherton that needs to retain diesel anyway…?

Was more wondering if there’s any other instances of extensive diesel under wires on Northern’s network that could free up DMUs…?

 

[themiller]

In this instance I’d say the Southports all run via Atherton that needs to retain diesel anyway…?

Was more wondering if there’s any other instances of extensive diesel under wires on Northern’s network that could free up DMUs…?

Do you mean like Manchester Airport to Oxenholme en-route to Windermere?

 

[Ribbleman]

In this instance I’d say the Southports all run via Atherton that needs to retain diesel anyway…?

Was more wondering if there’s any other instances of extensive diesel under wires on Northern’s network that could free up DMUs…?

I’m given to understand that at a date to be announced, the current hourly Southport-Stalybridge service will change to run via Atherton and terminate at Manchester Victoria. The hourly Southport-Manchester Oxford Road will remain unchanged. A new service will run from Wigan North Western to Stalybridge via Bolton using Class 323 sets.