Merseyrail Class 777 introduction updates

[karlbbb]

A 3 car 507/508 is 60m but a 4 car 777 is (as it says at the cab end) 65m. Therefore an 8 car 777 is 10m longer than a 6 car 507/508 which is a significant enough difference to require some variation of platform lengthening at most stations.

Fair enough. Could I infer from this that where a platform is long enough, Merseyrail could get away with just moving a signal forward from the platform end to allow the 8 car train's cabs to stop just past the platform (and thus fit in all the doors to existing platform)?

 

[LNW-GW Joint]

It only affects termini - the door positions are as they are deliberately so they fit 6 car platforms with the back cab hanging off if necessary.

There's a platform extension being built at Birkenhead Central (towards Chester).

 

[Bertie the bus]

And as pointed out in the comments, this is likely to be cow excrement as the unions/guards/drivers/everyone is yet to agree exactly how the trains will be operated.

Indeed, and as the myriad of reasons listed for the delay doesn't even include 'Oh, and our employees won't operate them and we have no plan to make/persuade them to' shows how seriously we should take that statement.

These are the alleged reasons for the delay:

Why the delays?

The CA explained that the introduction of the new trains has faced a 'myriad of challenges'. The spokesperson said: "From the pandemic, factory floods, international travel restrictions preventing Stadler engineers travelling to the UK to carry out work on the trains and, of course, the impact of the ‘pingdemic,’ which meant that many staff were unable to operate the current fleet, let alone test and train on the new one."

Where are our new Merseyrail trains and when will they arrive

We asked for an update on when we will finally get on board the shiny new Merseyrail trains

www.liverpoolecho.co.uk

 

[507020]

Fair enough. Could I infer from this that where a platform is long enough, Merseyrail could get away with just moving a signal forward from the platform end to allow the 8 car train's cabs to stop just past the platform (and thus fit in all the doors to existing platform)?

Yes, but in all of these cases Network Rail will find that it will be significantly cheaper just to extend the platforms with a few feet of concrete, rather than make any alterations to the signalling infrastructure.

 

[Bletchleyite]

Yes, but in all of these cases Network Rail will find that it will be significantly cheaper just to extend the platforms with a few feet of concrete, rather than make any alterations to the signalling infrastructure.

The whole idea of the centre doors on the end vehicles (not usually done on UK trains since the early Mk2 coach due to the stepping distance) was that all passenger doors on an 8-car formation would fall within the length of a 6-car 50x formation, was it not? If a double formation is 65m long and FLIRT vehicles are 16-18m that'll easily be the case, you'd just have the back cab hanging off, which as guards aren't to work from the cabs isn't a problem.

So I'm not sure I understand the need for this, unless it's only the stations where units can reverse. I know Southport needs the platforms cutting in towards the concourse or signals moving (I think the former may well be easier), and Ormskirk might need the buffer stops shifting a bit as I'm fairly sure a double 50x goes right up to the end of the platform, but I'm very confused about intermediates.

 

[507020]

The whole idea of the centre doors on the end vehicles (not usually done on UK trains since the early Mk2 coach due to the stepping distance) was that all passenger doors on an 8-car formation would fall within the length of a 6-car 50x formation, was it not? If a double formation is 65m long and FLIRT vehicles are 16-18m that'll easily be the case, you'd just have the back cab hanging off, which as guards aren't to work from the cabs isn't a problem.

So I'm not sure I understand the need for this, unless it's only the stations where units can reverse. I know Southport needs the platforms cutting in towards the concourse or signals moving (I think the former may well be easier), and Ormskirk might need the buffer stops shifting a bit as I'm fairly sure a double 50x goes right up to the end of the platform, but I'm very confused about intermediates.

The door positions allow all doors on an 8 car 777 to be on the platform at stations such as Conway Park or Green Lane which can’t be lengthened, but only when the train is perfectly centred with both ends hanging off. I have a suspicion a signal is easier to move when in a tunnel. None of the ex-L&Y have this problem.

At a station where the 8 car formation only just fits in between the signal and the end of the platform, you will have a problem where the train isn’t centred on the platform and the rear passenger door still hangs off, necessitating a short platform rather than moving the signal, which in many cases is impossible due to buildings/level crossings in the way. Southport and Ormskirk are more complicated and will effectively require stations to be returned to something closer to original condition, i.e. restore 2 platforms at Ormskirk and the platforms at Southport being re-extended having been shortened inwards away from Chapel Street in the 1970s. This issue on the Kirkby line has already been solved by the extension to a purpose built 777 terminus at Headbolt Lane.

Another problem though is that the proposed method of operation made no provision for what to do if the train was crush loaded and there was insufficient space in the passenger saloon for the Train Manager to carry out their duties, necessitating some facility for them to work from a centre cab in this instance.

 

[Bletchleyite]

At a station where the 8 car formation only just fits in between the signal and the end of the platform, you will have a problem where the train isn’t centred on the platform and the rear passenger door still hangs off, necessitating a short platform rather than moving the signal, which in many cases is impossible due to buildings/level crossings in the way.

Here's a 777 end vehicle (courtesy of Ned's Trains on Youtube):

There is no way that the distance from the left hand edge of that door to the end of the cab is less than 5m (the additional length of a double formation) - if the end vehicles are the usual FLIRT 16m then assuming a 2m door aperture it'll be about 7m, and that's if the door is bang in the middle, it actually appears to be a couple of metres closer to the inner end so it's probably more like 8-10m from the coupler. So either the difference in length is (considerably) more than 5m, or the rear passenger door will always be platformed on a 60m platform if the unit stops with the front in the same place as a 50x would stop. Thus only the cab door would be off, unless there are platforms where the rear cab door of a 50x already would hang off - and from extensive Merseyrail use I can't think of any where it would bar the two "awkward" underground stations you mention.

Southport and Ormskirk are more complicated and will effectively require stations to be returned to something closer to original condition, i.e. restore 2 platforms at Ormskirk and the platforms at Southport being re-extended having been shortened inwards away from Chapel Street in the 1970s. This issue on the Kirkby line has already been solved by the extension to a purpose built 777 terminus at Headbolt Lane.

I'm not clear why you'd need to fully remodel Ormskirk at huge cost and making it less convenient for accessibility (level access to lifts would be a downgrade). You could simply move the Merseyrail buffer stops back a few metres towards Preston, and if needing 2 x 23m units to still fit at the Preston end put a short extension there, there is definitely room, all that's alongside the line there is the car park which could be moved back a bit if needed. No signal to move at that end that I recall.

If you were going to change Ormskirk revising the old proposal to move it closer to the town centre would be the way to go (there is plenty of space in the cutting after it goes down to a single line), but I really don't think there's any need.

Another problem though is that the proposed method of operation made no provision for what to do if the train was crush loaded and there was insufficient space in the passenger saloon for the Train Manager to carry out their duties, necessitating some facility for them to work from a centre cab in this instance.

No different, presumably, from a Northern Pacer (when they existed), 156 or 158. And can 195/331 be worked from the cabs? I've not seen it, including on crush-loaded units. People move around to make it possible for the guard to dispatch, because otherwise they aren't going anywhere.

== Doublepost prevention - post automatically merged: 23 May 2022 ==

---

As an aside I've just noticed that the bogies seem very wide - are they steering bogies, or are we about to have a load more Liverpool Echo articles about wheel wear issues on the Loop?

 

[railwaytrack]

Here's a 777 end vehicle (courtesy of Ned's Trains on Youtube):

There is no way that the distance from the left hand edge of that door to the end of the cab is less than 5m (the additional length of a double formation) - if the end vehicles are the usual FLIRT 16m then assuming a 2m door aperture it'll be about 7m, and that's if the door is bang in the middle, it actually appears to be a couple of metres closer to the inner end so it's probably more like 8-10m from the coupler. So either the difference in length is (considerably) more than 5m, or the rear passenger door will always be platformed on a 60m platform if the unit stops with the front in the same place as a 50x would stop. Thus only the cab door would be off, unless there are platforms where the rear cab door of a 50x already would hang off - and from extensive Merseyrail use I can't think of any where it would bar the two "awkward" underground stations you mention.



I'm not clear why you'd need to fully remodel Ormskirk at huge cost and making it less convenient for accessibility (level access to lifts would be a downgrade). You could simply move the Merseyrail buffer stops back a few metres towards Preston, and if needing 2 x 23m units to still fit at the Preston end put a short extension there, there is definitely room, all that's alongside the line there is the car park which could be moved back a bit if needed. No signal to move at that end that I recall.

If you were going to change Ormskirk revising the old proposal to move it closer to the town centre would be the way to go (there is plenty of space in the cutting after it goes down to a single line), but I really don't think there's any need.



No different, presumably, from a Northern Pacer (when they existed), 156 or 158. And can 195/331 be worked from the cabs? I've not seen it, including on crush-loaded units. People move around to make it possible for the guard to dispatch, because otherwise they aren't going anywhere.

== Doublepost prevention - post automatically merged: 23 May 2022 ==

---

As an aside I've just noticed that the bogies seem very wide - are they steering bogies, or are we about to have a load more Liverpool Echo articles about wheel wear issues on the Loop?

No the 195s and 331s do not have door controls in the cab. So the Guards can only despatch from the saloon. During the corona virus some Guards were blocking off an entire carriage just for themselves. It is quite ridiculous that the 195s and 331s were not ordered with door controls in the cabs for the Guards to use. I believe the 197s do have door controls in both the cabs and the saloons though. Possibly the 196s may do too.

 

[Peter Mugridge]

if the end vehicles are the usual FLIRT 16m

The end vehicles are 19m and the inner vehicles are 13.50m.

 

[MattRat]

If you were going to change Ormskirk revising the old proposal to move it closer to the town centre would be the way to go (there is plenty of space in the cutting after it goes down to a single line), but I really don't think there's any need.

Why not go all out if talking about remodelling? Double track the station and up to the points, and bring platform 2 back into working order. Then it's so long there'd be plenty of room for an accessible ramp and lift.

 

[507020]

Why not go all out if talking about remodelling? Double track the station and up to the points, and bring platform 2 back into working order. Then it's so long there'd be plenty of room for an accessible ramp and lift.

You don’t need lifts at Ormskirk there was already step free access to both platforms via the road bridge, which is the same layout as at Burscough Bridge and no longer of a ramp than a purpose built one would be.

 

[L401CJF]

No the 195s and 331s do not have door controls in the cab. So the Guards can only despatch from the saloon. During the corona virus some Guards were blocking off an entire carriage just for themselves. It is quite ridiculous that the 195s and 331s were not ordered with door controls in the cabs for the Guards to use. I believe the 197s do have door controls in both the cabs and the saloons though. Possibly the 196s may do too.

197s do indeed have guards panels in the cabs, and at alternate doors in the saloons.

I do agree about the comments about no guards use of the cabs, it would mean the guard (or whatever they eventually agree to call them in their new role) during crush loading they would have to leave a few people behind to ensure they have room to move around at a pair of doors in the saloon. Similar issue as on the 158s where the guard has to dispatch from passenger doors.

Managing passenger numbers in the rear vestibule on a 158 to ensure you can dispatch the train from either side and access the rear cab during crush loads can be challenging and doesnt go down well!

 

[Bletchleyite]

The end vehicles are 19m and the inner vehicles are 13.50m.

In which case that rear door would definitely be platformed on a 120m (6.50x) platform. (I may have said 60m above, I meant 120m )

== Doublepost prevention - post automatically merged: 24 May 2022 ==

You don’t need lifts at Ormskirk there was already step free access to both platforms via the road bridge, which is the same layout as at Burscough Bridge and no longer of a ramp than a purpose built one would be.

Unless you have full facilities on both sides (booking office so long as one exists there, toilets, disabled parking) there would be considered to be a need for a bridge.

It's a stupid, costly idea and completely unnecessary when you can just extend the Preston end by 10m or so (there is definitely space) and move the buffer stops along. It would make everything about the station worse and cost a fortune.

== Doublepost prevention - post automatically merged: 24 May 2022 ==

Why not go all out if talking about remodelling? Double track the station and up to the points, and bring platform 2 back into working order. Then it's so long there'd be plenty of room for an accessible ramp and lift.

There is no need whatsoever. The layout as it is is fully accessible and far more convenient for interchange than having to change platforms. Just extend the platform at the Preston end where there's no starter signal (that I recall) and there's loads of space to even double it in length if you needed to. Even if you ran through to Preston on batteries there'd be no need to double the station unless you doubled the whole route, you'd just need a reversing siding for services not running through to Preston.

 

[Bow Fell]

It’s worth pointing out that while all the excuses about staff disputes / pandemic etc causing the delay of the units, which for both sides, is an easy excuse to use.

The simple fact is, the out of the units that have been accepted, not a single one is officially ready to roll in passenger service anyway, regardless if there was crew for it or not, the units were accepted, in terms of the fault free running, but there are still faults to iron out, that were picked up, but not serious enough to not accept them.

 

[Liverpool 507]

There are some platform extension works taking place at Formby and recently at Birkdale to accommodate the 777s in multiple running. This is in addition to the work at Freshfield, Birkenhead Central and Birkenhead Park mentioned above. The latter mainly being down to the location of the new lift being installed.

 

[Thomas cooper]

No the 195s and 331s do not have door controls in the cab. So the Guards can only despatch from the saloon. During the corona virus some Guards were blocking off an entire carriage just for themselves. It is quite ridiculous that the 195s and 331s were not ordered with door controls in the cabs for the Guards to use. I believe the 197s do have door controls in both the cabs and the saloons though. Possibly the 196s may do too.

I've seen guards on a few occasions not even attempt to get back to the cab just stayed at the door until they could move

 

[yorkie]

Just a gentle reminder this is a Traction & Rolling Stock thread to discuss Merseyrail Class 777s

The forum has plenty of spare capacity for threads to discuss any other topic; speculative discussion belongs in the Speculative Discussion area please.

Thanks

 

[8A Rail]

Indeed, and as the myriad of reasons listed for the delay doesn't even include 'Oh, and our employees won't operate them and we have no plan to make/persuade them to' shows how seriously we should take that statement.

These are the alleged reasons for the delay:

Where are our new Merseyrail trains and when will they arrive

We asked for an update on when we will finally get on board the shiny new Merseyrail trains

www.liverpoolecho.co.uk

People are better off asking the RMT And ASLEF when the Classs 777's may be introduced as they currently hold the aces and not Merseytravel. Until their members, RMT first then ASLEF agree on operating terms and conditions then no possible introduction dates are able to be made. Yes could be Autumn, could also be next year etc too. It is an open question with no answer in sight.

In the meantime, we await for further arrivals of the Class 777's into the UK. I am not aware of any coming soon?

 

[Pacef8]

For two years now regular as clockwork between 1 and 4.30 am network rail rock up to look at the transformer installed track side in port sunlight . We believe their is a work scam going on here as surely it can not still be broken after this time . Who would i complain to ? A serious amount of money and time is being spent on this one green box.
The box fixed its self between Christmas and new year with no visits .

 

[507020]

People are better off asking the RMT And ASLEF when the Classs 777's may be introduced as they currently hold the aces and not Merseytravel. Until their members, RMT first then ASLEF agree on operating terms and conditions then no possible introduction dates are able to be made. Yes could be Autumn, could also be next year etc too. It is an open question with no answer in sight.

In the meantime, we await for further arrivals of the Class 777's into the UK. I am not aware of any coming soon?

No we don’t. You were correct at first. While no possible introduction dates are able to be made, no more 507/508s are able to be withdrawn to free up space at Kirkdale, so we do not yet await further arrivals of 777s either.

 

[AltcarBob]

777-009 at Southport now, departed 15:55 Tues, to Reversing Siding at Sandhills. Itching to have a run on one, so near yet so far! Notice platform works also at Ainsdale.

 

[Bletchleyite]

The lack of branding (when the bike transfers have been applied) is still creating a mystery in my mind. Just not done it yet, keeping it "clean" with none at all, or a rebrand?

 

[Skie]

The lack of branding (when the bike transfers have been applied) is still creating a mystery in my mind. Just not done it yet, keeping it "clean" with none at all, or a rebrand?

Didn’t some Metro branding images slip out early on? Would tie in with the Metro card replacing the Walrus.

Which was silly, rotate the W and you have M anyway, could have been a fun bit of M/W branding. Metro is such a generic term.

 

[Bletchleyite]

Didn’t some Metro branding images slip out early on? Would tie in with the Metro card replacing the Walrus.

Which was silly, rotate the W and you have M anyway, could have been a fun bit of M/W branding. Metro is such a generic term.

The Merseytravel "M" is actually an upside down W anyway.

 

[Sorcerer]

Truth be told I'm not quite sure where you could put the Merseyrail branding besides an M vinyl on the doors as was the case with the later 507/508 liveries. That said I feel like branding might be somewhat unnecessary anyway seeing as I don't think they'll be operating outside of the Merseyrail network (they're barely operating on it now) and won't really cross paths with most other National Rail services outside of stations such as Southport and Hunt's Cross. From a local's point of view I think most people will still recognise it as Merseyrai anyway.

 

[MCR247]

It’s quite an odd livery personally. Obviously I understand the yellow and black colours but the way the black window band doesn't cover the passenger window closest to the cab is a strange decision

 

[Liverpool 507]

Mock ups originally show 'M' logos applied at the end of each carriage, halfway down. Similar level to the TPE logos on 802s.

 

[Spirit555]

Does anyone has an updated list of what is at Crewe. There seemed to more there than the last time I went. 4 by WCML and at least 3 or 4 more next to Stoke line.

Any info would be appreciated.

MTIA.

Mark

 

[Pinza48]

Does anyone has an updated list of what is at Crewe. There seemed to more there than the last time I went. 4 by WCML and at least 3 or 4 more next to Stoke line.

Any info would be appreciated.

MTIA.

Mark

777.002, 004, 006 and 014 were by the WCML on Tuesday.
777.012 and I think 4 more were by the Stoke line

 

[M60lad]

Another article about the new trains and why their not in service yet on Liverpool Echo's website:

Faults, delays & no new trains: What is going on with Merseyrail

We take an in depth look to try and answer some crucial questions about the region's under-pressure rail network

www.liverpoolecho.co.uk

Makes interesting reading in that in part of the article it states It is understood that the ASLEF union is ready to sign its own deal for drivers on the new trains, but will await the result of the RMT ballot (Which closes on July 12) before doing so.