• 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!

Class 315 and 317

Status
Not open for further replies.

zn1

Member
Joined
3 Sep 2011
Messages
435
the 456's were originally destined for the south western division, then it became a necessity to get rid of the 416's that selhurst had allocated to it, as only the Central and Eastern were still operating EPB stock, They were designed to be DOO from the start, but there were issues with the doo arrangements and the cabs were modified.

Why they have the 320-2 cabs ? I suspect it was a cost issue..at the time the only cabs with doors were 319, and these are emergency egress only due to tunnel regs..
 
Sponsor Post - registered members do not see these adverts; click here to register, or click here to log in
R

RailUK Forums

A-driver

Established Member
Joined
9 May 2011
Messages
4,482
Couldn't agree more. So guess what, armed with cab passes and stop watches that is exactly what we did. Comments passed to me were from drivers on a 1-1 basis whose opinion I respected. Not messroom moaning, hearsay or prejudice.

315s and 317s were timed to the second and once all the details were analysed, class 315's came out marginally better on running times, and shorter dwell times were recorded. Now if that doesn't coincide with your experience so be it, I don't have a problem with that. We would have welcomed your driving, as that would have made our results closer.

It's more to do with how they are driven. Generally the brakes on 317s are not as hot as 313/5 and so drivers brake differently. But we have a few 317 stoppers round the Hertford loop and they will easily keep to time with a 313.

I agree that a 317 is harder to get going in slippy conditions but mainly because a 313 can be hand notched which makes a huge difference.

In the dry though there is little in it acceleration wise. I have left Finsbury park in a 317 alongside a 313 on the down slow and down fast and have kept up with the 313 in a 317. The initial acceleration is better on a 313 but we are talking the first 10-20mph only. After that there isn't a lot in it.
 

slick

Member
Joined
5 Feb 2006
Messages
175
Location
Scotland
Couldn't agree more. So guess what, armed with cab passes and stop watches that is exactly what we did. Comments passed to me were from drivers on a 1-1 basis whose opinion I respected. Not messroom moaning, hearsay or prejudice.

315s and 317s were timed to the second and once all the details were analysed, class 315's came out marginally better on running times, and shorter dwell times were recorded. Now if that doesn't coincide with your experience so be it, I don't have a problem with that. We would have welcomed your driving, as that would have made our results closer.

Interesting. But I must also stress that the test and comparison cannot alone be judged upon a journey of each. Simply because all units perform differently within the class. Some 317s taking into consideration maintenance and wear, load etc (all be it a handfull these days) absolutley fly and others act like they are towing a whale. Same applies for the 315s. You would need to do several journeys and perhaps work out an average of each. If you did this already my appologies.

To echo what O L Leigh has said, on the inner suburbans timing wise there is next to no difference. You dont get above 60 on the inners and what you loose in a 317 from pulling away up to 20-30ish you make back up to 60mph where 315s generally say thats your lot around 30-40 and then continue on a pretty shallow accel curve any higher. In the rain as A-Driver pointed out there will only be one winner (although 315s cannot be subnotched) Dwell times I cannot notice a difference. Although again too many variables. Door runner dirt, number of passengers number of doors actually opened etc can all affect how long I spend in a station.

This is in no way to discredit your test I'd in infact be intrested to know your findings if you intend to dig deeper as it is something alot of drivers who drive both units have differing opinions on.
 
Last edited:

A-driver

Established Member
Joined
9 May 2011
Messages
4,482
Interesting. But I must also stress that the test and comparison cannot alone be judged upon a journey of each. Simply because all units perform differently within the class. Some 317s taking into consideration maintenance and wear, load etc (all be it a handfull these days) absolutley fly and others act like they are towing a whale. Same applies for the 315s. You would need to do several journeys and perhaps work out an average of each. If you did this already my appologies.

To echo what O L Leigh has said, on the inner suburbans timing wise there is next to no difference. You dont get above 60 on the inners and what you loose in a 317 from pulling away up to 20-30ish you make back up to 60mph where 315s generally say thats your lot around 30-40 and then continue on a pretty shallow accel curve any higher. In the rain as A-Driver pointed out there will only be one winner (although 315s cannot be subnotched) Dwell times I cannot notice a difference. Although again too many variables. Door runner dirt, number of passengers number of doors actually opened etc can all affect how long I spend in a station.

This is in no way to discredit your test I'd in infact be intrested to know your findings if you intend to dig deeper as it is something alot of drivers who drive both units have differing opinions on.

Can 315s really not be sub notched? I thought that they were pretty much identical to 313s mechanically?
 

slick

Member
Joined
5 Feb 2006
Messages
175
Location
Scotland
Can 315s really not be sub notched? I thought that they were pretty much identical to 313s mechanically?

Theres a chance I may have my meaning of sub notching wrong...If you could tell me your understanding of it I can confirm?
 

A-driver

Established Member
Joined
9 May 2011
Messages
4,482
Theres a chance I may have my meaning of sub notching wrong...If you could tell me your understanding of it I can confirm?

Basically slowly knocking out resistances to build up speed-open into power 1 then quickly knock it into 2, back to 1 and repeat 6 times then into 3, back to 2 quickly and go 2-3 6 times.
 

slick

Member
Joined
5 Feb 2006
Messages
175
Location
Scotland
Basically slowly knocking out resistances to build up speed-open into power 1 then quickly knock it into 2, back to 1 and repeat 6 times then into 3, back to 2 quickly and go 2-3 6 times.

Yeah Im pretty sure you cant do this nor have I ever heard anyone mention it on 315s other than what I've heard about it on 313s. Hazarding a guess on my understanding wasnt the sub notching possible because 313s had resistors which you could knock out individually as a pose to thyristors? We have the latter on 315s. Pretty sure its just a plain old shunt series parallel weak field job with nothing in between with the thyristors controlling the flow.
 
Last edited:

A-driver

Established Member
Joined
9 May 2011
Messages
4,482
Yeah Im pretty sure you cant do this nor have I ever heard anyone mention it on 315s other than what I've heard about it on 313s. Hazarding a guess on my understanding wasnt the sub notching possible because 313s had resistors which you could knock out individually as a pose to thyristors? We have the latter on 315s. Pretty sure its just a plain old shunt series parallel weak field job with nothing in between with the thyristors controlling the flow.

Ok, I assumed 313,4&5 were all identical with camshafts and resistors. Same as 455s. Didn't realise that 315s were thyristor controlled- more like 317s. Thyristor controlled units can't sub notch, although some say you can sub notch into weak field if it's slippy. Not tried it myself though.
 

zn1

Member
Joined
3 Sep 2011
Messages
435
313's are camshaft controlled as memory serves its been a while since i sat on one, strange as it sounds i always enjoy having a ride on em...
 

A-driver

Established Member
Joined
9 May 2011
Messages
4,482
313's are camshaft controlled as memory serves its been a while since i sat on one, strange as it sounds i always enjoy having a ride on em...

They are camshaft controlled, yes.
 

slick

Member
Joined
5 Feb 2006
Messages
175
Location
Scotland
Ok, I assumed 313,4&5 were all identical with camshafts and resistors. Same as 455s. Didn't realise that 315s were thyristor controlled- more like 317s. Thyristor controlled units can't sub notch, although some say you can sub notch into weak field if it's slippy. Not tried it myself though.

I sometimes wish we could. Anything to make driving more technical I embrace. Although completely unrelated mechanically the actions remind me of a tap changer on an 87. Into 4 then shut off at desired speed is more common practice around here. :o Drivers who have driven both 313s and 315s together when there was a mixed WAGN fleet have often shown their love for them having that ability.

Sub notching into weakfield. Never tried it either. Although we have so many units with defective weak field contactors might take me a few weeks to find one to try. :lol:
 

edwin_m

Veteran Member
Joined
21 Apr 2013
Messages
28,785
Location
Nottingham
Thyristor control can be made to be infinitely variable and to remain in any power setting for an indefinite period, but I can't speak for the system as installed on 315s or 317s.
 

A-driver

Established Member
Joined
9 May 2011
Messages
4,482
Thyristor control can be made to be infinitely variable and to remain in any power setting for an indefinite period, but I can't speak for the system as installed on 315s or 317s.

I have signed 316,321,319 and 456 and none of them can be sub notched. As I say, I don't even know if 317s can be between full power and weak field, It may just be a myth. You certainly can sub notch on 313 & 455 though which is not only a life saver in slippy conditions but also makes life very easy when taking power onto low speed lines-open up fully and run back to notch 1 at some point and you will hold a speed like 20 or 30 mph perfectly, even uphill. Infact I can hold 10mph over the harringay flyover without touching the controls in a 313 just by setting the sub notches correctly. In 365s etc you are constantly adjusting power between 1&2 and possibly even 3.
 

Peter Sarf

Established Member
Joined
12 Oct 2010
Messages
9,855
Location
Croydon
Eh 316. Is that meant to be 313 A-driver ?. My poor brain was trying to remember where 316s work !. Curious also as 456s must be an odd one out - but I guess Selhurst must the commonality ?. So you worked Southern followed by GN or vice versa ?.

I think too much - I will go back to sleep now :cry:.
 
Last edited:

A-driver

Established Member
Joined
9 May 2011
Messages
4,482
Eh 316. Is that meant to be 313 A-driver ?. My poor brain was trying to remember where 316s work !. Curious also as 456s must be an odd one out - but I guess Selhurst must the commonality ?. So you worked Southern followed by GN or vice versa ?.

I think too much - I will go back to sleep now :cry:.

316 should say 317. I used to drive for southern so signed 455,456,319 & 377. Now work on the GN so sign 321,317,365 & 313.
 

306024

Established Member
Joined
23 Jan 2013
Messages
3,974
Location
East Anglia
Interesting. But I must also stress that the test and comparison cannot alone be judged upon a journey of each. Simply because all units perform differently within the class. Some 317s taking into consideration maintenance and wear, load etc (all be it a handfull these days) absolutley fly and others act like they are towing a whale. Same applies for the 315s. You would need to do several journeys and perhaps work out an average of each. If you did this already my appologies.

To echo what O L Leigh has said, on the inner suburbans timing wise there is next to no difference. You dont get above 60 on the inners and what you loose in a 317 from pulling away up to 20-30ish you make back up to 60mph where 315s generally say thats your lot around 30-40 and then continue on a pretty shallow accel curve any higher. In the rain as A-Driver pointed out there will only be one winner (although 315s cannot be subnotched) Dwell times I cannot notice a difference. Although again too many variables. Door runner dirt, number of passengers number of doors actually opened etc can all affect how long I spend in a station.

This is in no way to discredit your test I'd in infact be intrested to know your findings if you intend to dig deeper as it is something alot of drivers who drive both units have differing opinions on.

You are right, there are a huge number of variables, including driver technique mentioned in another post. The only way to eliminate these as much as possible is to do a considerable number of runs, which is what we tried to do, and then average it out. No need to apologise, and yes we need to be sure the unit(s) are in reasonable nick. Usually the driver would comment on their performance, but no one said they were also towing a whale :lol:. As with all exercises like this, the more data the better, but any signal check en route invalidates that particular timing, as does any unit with motors cut out. The whole exercise can be very time consuming for those with a day job as well.

At the end of the day the results were a little academic because even if we wanted to slacken out the running times a little, the turnround time at Cheshunt made if very difficult. In fact I'm slightly heartened by the comments from drivers on here that the problem may not be as big as those that asked us to investigate thought.

Reading back on previous posts I am prepared to accept I may have overstated things by saying 317s were "not at all suitable", but my money is still on a 315. Anyway it provoked a decent discussion.
 
Last edited:

EssexGonzo

Member
Joined
9 May 2012
Messages
637
Well, it was a 315 which failed this morning at Chadwell Heath on one of the few fast Southend to LST services they operate on. The 0701 Shenfield departure, emergency brakes applied just after Romford and we limped into Chadwell Heath before de-training and attempting to get onto the already full Metro services.

I gave up after trying to get onto three Metros and went back to SNF to work from home.

I was at Chadwell Heath for about 30 minutes and they hadn't begun to move the failed train. The backlog of fast trains queuing back towards SNF was "significant" even with a few using the slow line to go around Chadwell.
 

cslusarc

Member
Joined
27 Jan 2011
Messages
167
Post-Crossrail, I would like all 61 Class 315s exclusively operate:
1) West Anglia Metro services that will be cascaded to a TfL Concession;
2) London Overground services on an electrified GOBLIN
 

306024

Established Member
Joined
23 Jan 2013
Messages
3,974
Location
East Anglia
Well, it was a 315 which failed this morning at Chadwell Heath on one of the few fast Southend to LST services they operate on. The 0701 Shenfield departure, emergency brakes applied just after Romford and we limped into Chadwell Heath before de-training and attempting to get onto the already full Metro services.

I gave up after trying to get onto three Metros and went back to SNF to work from home.

I was at Chadwell Heath for about 30 minutes and they hadn't begun to move the failed train. The backlog of fast trains queuing back towards SNF was "significant" even with a few using the slow line to go around Chadwell.

And then a freightliner failed in the up platform at Chelmsford at the tail end of the peak. Good place to stop as we only had to run bi-di for a short distance via the down platform so not too much damage done. None of this impressed the passenger who also got caught up in last night's fatality at Seven Kings and treated us to swearing to his friend on his mobile phone though.

cslusarc said:
Post-Crossrail, I would like all 61 Class 315s exclusively operate:
1) West Anglia Metro services that will be cascaded to a TfL Concession;
2) London Overground services on an electrified GOBLIN.

Fair enough in the short term, but that would only take just over half the fleet. Leaves room for further imagination.
 

samuelmorris

Established Member
Joined
18 Jul 2013
Messages
5,121
Location
Brentwood, Essex
Yeah I sometimes forget, wasn't it originally a 43/18 split with the 315s between GE and WA? Assuming there's little need for any more than that nowadays (maybe 20?) and adding the Goblin units, which would already double the capacity like-for-like by having 4 cars vs. 2, that leaves 28 units used - what about the other 33? Admittedly though lots of the WA routes 315s serve still seem to be 4 car. That could be because the demand's not there for more of course.
 

jopsuk

Veteran Member
Joined
13 May 2008
Messages
12,775
Fair enough in the short term, but that would only take just over half the fleet. Leaves room for further imagination.

I know there's currently inter-working with Cambrdge services using 317s, but if that link was broken, how many units would it take to run all Enfield, Cheshunt, Hertford and Chingford services using 2x315?
 

cslusarc

Member
Joined
27 Jan 2011
Messages
167
I didn't realize that up to 43 Class 315 units were used on the Great Eastern Rail Line.

Now after thinking about it more, could 33 or so Class 315s be sent up north Post-Crossrail to the West Midlands, West Yorkshire or the Northwest?
 

306024

Established Member
Joined
23 Jan 2013
Messages
3,974
Location
East Anglia
I know there's currently inter-working with Cambrdge services using 317s, but if that link was broken, how many units would it take to run all Enfield, Cheshunt, Hertford and Chingford services using 2x315?

IF that link is broken. But then it becomes difficult to platform all the services at Liverpool St in the peak.

And then there are the Hertford - Stratford peak services which interwork with the Stratford - Bishops Stortford services.

Still here is the chance to do a bit of diagramming and see what figure you come up with. Clue, for once the answer is not 42.
 
Status
Not open for further replies.

Top