1D53
Established Member
- Joined
- 2 Apr 2006
- Messages
- 2,900
Only one available for use. As above they can't be used if only one available so none are out.
-
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
Sponsor Post - registered members do not see these adverts; click here to register, or click here to log in
R
RailUK Forums
Covered by 3 x 4 car DMU's, 3 x 2 car DMU. So yesterday thats just the 9 DMU's covering, is it any wonder that there are shortforms elsewhere?
The silence from Northern is deafening....................apparently there is a 'good' service to Southport!!
The silence from Northern is deafening....................apparently there is a 'good' service to Southport!!
Halwynd
Member
Apart from during the peak, two carriages seem to be more than adequate, at least between Wigan & Southport.
Last Friday I witnessed a lunchtime arrival from Southport, comprising of a single 156, with just half a dozen on board, and not many more from Wigan. Heading towards Southport a few minutes later I had the whole carriage of a 150 to myself.
In recent years a lot of damage has been done to the Southport line by various parties resulting in the number of passengers who once used the it reducing considerably in my experience. The reliability of the 769s is unfortunate because otherwise I find them a decent train for the journey length.
As @DavidL says, the silence from Northern is deafening; but I don't think they have any answers. Local MPs seem unaware or uninterested, despite the huge amount spent on electrification; Mayor Andy Burnham is busy on manouvres to replace Starmer - and I'm not quite sure what Heidi Alexander does.
This doesn't look like being resolved anytime soon, so perhaps a first step should be yet another emergency timetable somehow utilising the 769s on AC only between Manchester and Wigan North Western.
Last Friday I witnessed a lunchtime arrival from Southport, comprising of a single 156, with just half a dozen on board, and not many more from Wigan. Heading towards Southport a few minutes later I had the whole carriage of a 150 to myself.
In recent years a lot of damage has been done to the Southport line by various parties resulting in the number of passengers who once used the it reducing considerably in my experience. The reliability of the 769s is unfortunate because otherwise I find them a decent train for the journey length.
As @DavidL says, the silence from Northern is deafening; but I don't think they have any answers. Local MPs seem unaware or uninterested, despite the huge amount spent on electrification; Mayor Andy Burnham is busy on manouvres to replace Starmer - and I'm not quite sure what Heidi Alexander does.
This doesn't look like being resolved anytime soon, so perhaps a first step should be yet another emergency timetable somehow utilising the 769s on AC only between Manchester and Wigan North Western.
3 out today (so far!) 448/450/458. Other 3 diagrams covered by 2 x 4car DMU, 1 x2 car DMU.....good job all those ex Anglia/EMR 156's that weren't going to be moved were in fact shifted, 156402/16/17 along with 156460 (is this back at NH from HT?) on these today- along with 150115.
Halwynd
Member
I'm sure when that's planned for, it just seems a waste having perfectly decent trains, that seem to run fine on AC, constantly out of service.
Edit: I'm not sure...
Last edited:
Peter Sarf
Established Member
Snag will be 323 = 3car whereas 769 = 4car. Now 319s on the other hand.........
Although realistically a 323 is longer than a single 150/156 !.
My hunch is the lease charges for a 769 are very cheap or very hard to get out of.
thealexweb
Member
- Joined
- 5 Jan 2014
- Messages
- 1,106
323 is three cars of 23m vs 319 having 4x20m. The difference isn't as much as you think.
Halwynd
Member
I was thinking more of Platform 1. Appreciate it's the Up Passenger Loop (useful when required) but it's only used by a handful of trains daily.
Peter Sarf
Established Member
Gosh, how could I have forgotten !.
769421 has indeed left AN today behind 37800 and is currently en-route to Long Marston.
For the record, this unit entered service with Northern in late July, managed to enter service on three days, and never got beyond lunch-time failing each time. Latterly spent some time at SP as a training unit. Northern got good value out of that one......
769431 has re-entered traffic today fro the first time since early October. There are, in total out today 431/442/450/458. The other 2 diagrams are 1 x 4 car DMU, and 1 x2 car DMU.
For the record, this unit entered service with Northern in late July, managed to enter service on three days, and never got beyond lunch-time failing each time. Latterly spent some time at SP as a training unit. Northern got good value out of that one......
769431 has re-entered traffic today fro the first time since early October. There are, in total out today 431/442/450/458. The other 2 diagrams are 1 x 4 car DMU, and 1 x2 car DMU.
Jamesrob637
Established Member
- Joined
- 12 Aug 2016
- Messages
- 6,083
Again, could be worse today. Will we manage 5 sets out and only one 4 car short form any time soon? At least, in that way, everything will be 4 car.
Just to note, 769424 went to Brodies on 16 November, and 769452 (the other exTfW unit) hasn't been in service since 6 November.
Wyrleybart
Established Member
That to me is the bonkers part of the story. Porterbrook ended up with 80 odd dual voltage EMUs off lease, and wanted another revenue stream from them, So they were overhauled at Wolverton then hauled to Brush at Loughborough to receive the diesel traction conversions. But here's the thing the units appear to have been loco hauled to and from their various assignments, although I believe the 769/9s did run on their own diesel engines between Reading and Eastleigh.
I believe the reason the 769s were / are hauled was due to route certification, but I still remain amazed that some of the TfW examples were roaded to Cardiff on four low loaders, for a class 37 to run light from Leicester to Cardiff to haul the 769s a few hunded yards from one side of the railway to the other.
As I understand it, the 319s were only cleared for self propulsion on the Thameslink routes (obviously) and small parts of the Southern network including to Victoria. Two of them were specially cleared for running into the Channel Tunnel, and in ther later years, the class was cleared from Euston to (I think) Rugby for some peak services during class 350 refurbishment. So there was little opportunity to run them under their own power (electric or diesel) as an easy way to get to various maintenance/modification locations.
GilfachFargoed
Member
319s certainly operated to Rugby during the Connex era when the Rugby - Brighton through services ran. Occasionally 'fun' on Monday mornings when the civils on the LM side hadn't accounted for stock with shoebars and following weekend engineering work accidentally left things in the way to knock them off (IIRC ballast shoulders were the normal culprit).
769431 on its first day back in traffic since early October has expired on the 17.27 Man Ox Road-Southport which has terminated at Wigan Wallgate with rest of diagram showing as cancelled. Looks like problem at Ince (changeover from electric to diesel)
Modern Railways Jan 2026 issue has an article on reliabilty review 2025. Absolutely no surprise to see in table 13 page 63 that the 769 reliability is the current worst in the country with a figure of 1418 miles per casualty in period 6 2025/6 (mp701D is the bit that centrally attributes traction and rolling stock failure for those interested), moving average in 2025/6 being 1537 miles per casualty which is a drop of 26.6% from the figure of 2095 miles moving average achieved in 2024/5. Enough said.
Modern Railways Jan 2026 issue has an article on reliabilty review 2025. Absolutely no surprise to see in table 13 page 63 that the 769 reliability is the current worst in the country with a figure of 1418 miles per casualty in period 6 2025/6 (mp701D is the bit that centrally attributes traction and rolling stock failure for those interested), moving average in 2025/6 being 1537 miles per casualty which is a drop of 26.6% from the figure of 2095 miles moving average achieved in 2024/5. Enough said.
Peter Sarf
Established Member
Something has always got to be at the bottom BUT these 769s are absolutely dire. What on earth are Northern doing unless these 769s are almost free of charge ?.
The original tender for the two exTfW units 769421/52 was for around £400k for around 6 months. If thats split between the 2 units, then 769421 cost well over £20k per hour for the 3 part days it spent in traffic, but suppose an allowance should be made for its static use as a training unit at SP.
Todays scores 4 out (including 431 which despite failing yesterday has been fixed and started from NH as diagrammed), others are 442/48/58. with 1 x 4 car DMU, and 1 x 2 car DMU covering.
Todays scores 4 out (including 431 which despite failing yesterday has been fixed and started from NH as diagrammed), others are 442/48/58. with 1 x 4 car DMU, and 1 x 2 car DMU covering.
I think it's a little unfair to place the blame on "Northern" when they keep hundreds of units of similar vintage running everyday. The 769s have a very intensive depot regime, they have diagrams that are specifically created for them to visit the depots more often than every other unit.
There is something fundamentally wrong with the power change over system that no amount of money seems to be able to fix. To me trying to fool the train into believing its connected to the electrical supply seems to be something. Yes I have a line light but what exactly is it?! It can work fine at the depot until suddenly it doesn't, sometimes it's going back to 25k sometimes the engines refuse to start, every single day. Everyone who works at Northern is just as frustrated.
I wonder how the depots are actually fixing failures, - is it a case of keep changing things until it works again, or is there some diagnostic approach where the actual fix is recorded for off-line analysis. I asked this question (in a different way) a few years ago when Allerton was dealing with the original 319s that were failing far more frequently on relatively benign duties, that they had been on far more intense Thameslink workings a few months earlier, but the question seemed to be deflected as it could be a commercial matter. So back to the 769s today, however long these units are expected to remain in service, there must be some examination of failures and an inkling on their causes otherwise the services that they are diagrammed for can only get worse.
Good, they may well be near the end of their active service life, but as what is effectively a technology demonstrator, information on failure modes and their rectification are key bits of information for the future.
Nym
Established Member
If only Wabtec engineers were still sufficiently employed and motivated to do anything about it.
Most of the FLEX teams are now long gone with the last few vestiges within the vehicles team leaving soon as that team is disbanded.
Peter Sarf
Established Member
Sorry if I come across as bashing Northern that is not what I am driving at. To me it seems this microfleet (769s) just is not worth it unless the costs are very low. It is arguably ground breaking tech and I am all for experimentation. I just hope/expect this is not costing Northern (too) much.
It is nice to see that data is being collected that might help engineers understand what the problem is and thus arrive at a solution.
Now that indicates to me that the 769s are a sinking ship......
Bit of a shame if a lot of effort has gone into the 769s thus far BUT I admit I would be terrible at letting go and cutting my losses.
It really would be nice to see these 769s working well.
The 6.12 from Wigan Wallgate to Stalybridge seems to have failed between Hindley and Westhoughton this morning, causing the Bolton bound line to be blocked for over an hour. All trains diverted via the Atherton line. RTT does not say what unit it was.
Points failure Westhoughton
Points failure (as above) but 5 have started the day, 431/42/48/50/58, 1 x 4 car DMU covering. First day since 3 November that all 6 diagrams are of correct train formation, and first time since 1 December that as many as 5 have been out.
Missing are 768424 (Brodies since 16 Nov), 769434 (last seen 5 December), 769452 (last seen 6 November- still on lease??), 769456 (last seen mid-October and requiring a transformer).
Missing are 768424 (Brodies since 16 Nov), 769434 (last seen 5 December), 769452 (last seen 6 November- still on lease??), 769456 (last seen mid-October and requiring a transformer).
Last edited:
Soft Hands
Member
Credit where credit is due to the maintenance teams for getting five 769's out this morning, plus 2 x 156 covering the sixth turn. This was 156402 plus 156460, which seems to have come "home" back to NH from HT, on loan possibly to cover 150224 going to NL? However the service still fell apart later in the day due to a lack of traincrews to operate the service, as seems traditional at this time of year with Northern? A quick RTT line up for Wigan Wallgate, from about 3pm, gives you the gory details!