Class 442 - Finally back in service on the LSWR.

[Suzie]

Move away from 3+2 seating? That is just a dream in some places all the while it is a cheap way to provide extra seats without giving passengers anywhere to actually sit!

[Nearholmer]

More a surrender to the tide of swelling posteriors than anything else - I’m sure modern people couldn’t ram themselves six or seven aside into 4-SUBs the way people used too - the carriages would simply burst at the seams.

[jim.snowdon]

Without doing the sums, it is quite likely that the old 6 a side seating would not comply with the requirements of the Rail Vehicle Accessibility Regulations for minimum seat width.

 

Bombardier's 387 units for GW are 2+2 throughout, as are some of Southern's 377s, but then other 377 cars are 3+2, with really minimal aisles.

 

Jim

[John M Upton]

3+2 seated 377's started with 377120 and continued through to 377475 plus the (then) FCC 377/5's.   All 377's built subsequently (377/6 and 377/7) plus the basically identical 378's have reverted to the much better 2+2 format throughout.

[DY444]

9 hours ago, John M Upton said:

3+2 seated 377's started with 377120 and continued through to 377475 plus the (then) FCC 377/5's.   All 377's built subsequently (377/6 and 377/7) plus the basically identical 378's have reverted to the much better 2+2 format throughout.

 

378s are not 2+2.  They have longitudinal seating.  Perhaps you meant 379s?

Edited June 19, 2019 by DY444

[Zomboid]

Probably meant 387s. They have 2+2 seating.

[John M Upton]

Yes  I meant 387's!

 

Whoops...

[Zomboid]

Anyone who can keep up with the various electrostar class numbers has both my admiration and sympathy. I'd personally completely missed the existence of 379s, but it seems they are indeed a thing.

[Fenman]

19 minutes ago, Zomboid said:

Anyone who can keep up with the various electrostar class numbers has both my admiration and sympathy. I'd personally completely missed the existence of 379s, but it seems they are indeed a thing.

 

The 379s are far and away the most comfortable Electrostar from a passenger perspective (proper 2+1 seats in 1st class). Guess which Electrostars are unallocated in the great rolling stock reshuffle, and are going into storage?

 

Paul

[Zomboid]

New, comfortable, immediately available electric trains? Sounds like they'd be ideal for... Ooh, I don't know, increasing capacity on the London - Portsmouth line...

 

(Well, I say that not knowing if they can run on DC, but I bet that would be technically pretty simple if not, most electrostars can).

[Suzie]

AC only unfortunately. The sooner they get the knitting to Waterloo the better by the sound of things.

[jim.snowdon]

Virtually, if not literally, any modern electric traction equipment is capable of running from both AC And DC supplies by definition, as they are all based on DC to variable voltage variable frequency inverters. For DC, the incoming supply goes straight into the inverter; for AC, the first stage is to transform and rectify the incoming 25kV AC to DC at nominally 750V. 

 

As for 25kV into Waterloo, I would put that into the wishful thinking category. There are many technical problems to be dealt with in overlaying AC traction onto DC, as well as quite a few significant problems with lack of clearance.

 

Jim 

[DY444]

From a technical perspective any of the AC only Electrostars can easily be converted to DC or DV and any of the DC Electrostars can easily be converted to AC or DV.   The problem with the 379s finding a new home is a commercial one.  Their current lease charges are quite high and the rumour is that the owner hasn't been too keen to entertain changing that.  That may of course change once they are all stood idle.  As a class they would be much better suited to the Corby service imo than the 360s as they are gangwayed throughout, have a better interior and are 110mph capable already - but the 360s are much cheaper. 

[Nova Scotian]

BBC Article

 

'Newly-refurbished trains have been withdrawn from service over fears they wrongly turn signals yellow or red...."

[St. Simon]

28 minutes ago, Nova Scotian said:

BBC Article

 

'Newly-refurbished trains have been withdrawn from service over fears they wrongly turn signals yellow or red...."

 

Not fears, they have been causing revisions, I've seen at least two in the daily log since their reintroduction, although I don't think that there have been as many as people have been saying (however, it might be that what seemed at the time to be completed unconnected with the 442s might have subsequently been found to be connected to them)

 

I've seen comments on Facebook complaining it is either fancy new electric motors or fancy new signalling, it is neither, the signalling is the same as it was when they last ran on the route (although filament heads have been changed for LEDs, but that shouldn't be a factor) and they haven't had new traction motors fitted. 

 

It is simply the electrically 'leaky' 4-REP (I think) motors on the 442s are inducing a current in the Track Circuits on adjacent lines as they pass, causing the track circuit to drop. At least, that's how I understand it.

 

Simon

[caradoc]

Thanks for the info St.Simon.

 

A couple of questions;

Presumably interference with TCs was not an issue when the 442s ran on the South Western previously, or more recently on the Central Section ?

How can this problem be overcome ?

 

[St. Simon]

14 minutes ago, caradoc said:

Thanks for the info St.Simon.

 

A couple of questions;

Presumably interference with TCs was not an issue when the 442s ran on the South Western previously, or more recently on the Central Section ?

How can this problem be overcome ?

 

 

Hi,

 

I believe it was an issue before, but I think it depends on the type, and status, of track circuit, I suppose that AC Frequency Track Circuits are the most problematic, which is why it is almost random revisions they are getting.

 

It might be, I'm just make a rather basic intelligent guess, that a change (fitting electrical suppressors) on the 442s that overcame the problem, much like what they are doing with the Class 800s on East Coast, and the change might have been removed during the refurbishment pending the new traction package.

Simon

[Dunsignalling]

If I'm reading the BBC report correctly (and assuming they have got it right in the first place) only ten-car workings are being pulled, with shorter-distance services that (by implication) only use a single set continuing to run. Is that the case, or are the 442s not involved in those anyway?

 

John

Edited September 3, 2019 by Dunsignalling

[phil-b259]

27 minutes ago, caradoc said:

Thanks for the info St.Simon.

 

A couple of questions;

Presumably interference with TCs was not an issue when the 442s ran on the South Western previously, or more recently on the Central Section ?

How can this problem be overcome ?

 

 

Actually the 442s DID cause problems on the Central section too. There definitely was one particular track circuit on the down slow at three Bridges which used to have its fuses (or TI21 ETU) blow if a 442 ran over it - and it wouldn't surprise me if the problems on the SWML were also with TI21 (or EBI tracks as they are now known).

 

The REP traction package may well have been 'sate of the art' in 1968 - but it most certainly is not today and these units need to be kept off the railway until it is replaced. We don't have the luxury of crossing our fingers and hoping it doesn't end up taking out one of the lines in the morning / evening peaks.

[phil-b259]

4 minutes ago, Dunsignalling said:

If I'm reading the BBC report correctly (and assuming they have got it right in the first place) only ten-car workings are being pulled, with shorter-distance services that (by implication) only use a single set continuing to run. Is that the case, or are the 442s not involved in those anyway?

 

John

 

If the issue is to do with the 1968 vintage traction gear dumping lots of nasty electrical interference onto the tracks and damaging certain types of track circuit equipment, it follows that double units will dump double the interference!

 

Reducing the 442 diagrams to a single unit might reduce said interface to within a level which the track circuit equipment can tollerate thus preventing it from failing and causing chaos in the peaks.

[jim.snowdon]

34 minutes ago, phil-b259 said:

 

Actually the 442s DID cause problems on the Central section too. There definitely was one particular track circuit on the down slow at three Bridges which used to have its fuses (or TI21 ETU) blow if a 442 ran over it - and it wouldn't surprise me if the problems on the SWML were also with TI21 (or EBI tracks as they are now known).

 

The REP traction package may well have been 'sate of the art' in 1968 - but it most certainly is not today and these units need to be kept off the railway until it is replaced. We don't have the luxury of crossing our fingers and hoping it doesn't end up taking out one of the lines in the morning / evening peaks.

The REP traction equipment was hardly state of the art in 1968, being nothing more than the standard English Electric camshaft controlled resistance grid, all straight DC and well established by the time the REPs were built. The only potential sources of electrical noise from the traction equipment itself are from the motor commutators and any arcing at the shoegear. The same control gear was still running until quite recently on SWT's 455s, and is still running on Southern's 455s. The only difference was the 1600hp rating of the 4-REP equipment compared to the standard 1000hp of everything else.

 

If the problem is confined to particular track circuits (not track circuit types), I think one area I would start looking at is the negative bonding and where the return currents are going. A location specific fault like that hints at a trackside failure rather than rolling stock, although with a four track line, the multiple return paths offer all manner of possibilities for obscure failures.

 

Jim 

[Zomboid]

Impedance bonds was my first thought, but I'm mostly happy that it's not my job to fix something like this. Something works without apparent problems for years and then stops working when nothing changes... Good luck finding that!

[phil-b259]

14 minutes ago, jim.snowdon said:

The REP traction equipment was hardly state of the art in 1968, being nothing more than the standard English Electric camshaft controlled resistance grid, all straight DC and well established by the time the REPs were built. The only potential sources of electrical noise from the traction equipment itself are from the motor commutators and any arcing at the shoegear. The same control gear was still running until quite recently on SWT's 455s, and is still running on Southern's 455s. The only difference was the 1600hp rating of the 4-REP equipment compared to the standard 1000hp of everything else.

 

If the problem is confined to particular track circuits (not track circuit types), I think one area I would start looking at is the negative bonding and where the return currents are going. A location specific fault like that hints at a trackside failure rather than rolling stock, although with a four track line, the multiple return paths offer all manner of possibilities for obscure failures.

 

Jim 

 

Given the track circuit which kept failing behind 442s at Three Bridges was of the ‘single rail traction return’ type (going through several point ends) then it could well be a traction return issue in the Earlsfield area is causing the track circuit problems.

 

Then again didn’t SWR win the franchise based on a timetable running significantly more services despite Network Rail repeatedly telling the DfT the traction supply (and presumably the negative return side too) couldn’t cope?

 

Of course when the 442s were last used on the SWML, All suburban operations were limited to 8 cars - these days many have become 10 cars adding yet more stress on the power supply side.

 

If the negative return setup at Earlsfield was already running on max, then the addition of the high powered - and noisy electrically speaking (due to the lack of modern control systems specifically designed to limit said noise from overwhelming signalling kit) might have pushed things over the edge as it were.

 

 

 

[phil-b259]

22 minutes ago, Zomboid said:

Impedance bonds was my first thought, but I'm mostly happy that it's not my job to fix something like this. Something works without apparent problems for years and then stops working when nothing changes... Good luck finding that!

 

Yup - been there, done that as the saying goes.....

 

Traction return is a real pain for us signalling folk when it comes to track circuit faults.

[Nearholmer]

Has the sensitivity of the track circuits to imbalance been deliberately increased, or allowed to increase, since this stock was last used in the area?