Class 319 flex - upcycling for the north

[phil-b259]

IIRC the problem was a desire to bus together the shoegear on both motor coaches, but that wasn't allowed so the NLR sets had shoegear on all motor coach bogies. I cannot remember how the onboard traction system wiring goes, but wiki reports that unlike other DC units the motor cars have seperate supplies when working DC. 

SR units had a bus but the third rail lines were fitted with AC track circuits before the advent of traction immune types so no problem.

 The 313s working for Southern have had one retro fitted - as the number of 'Gapping' incidents at places like Brighton was unacceptably high.

[John M Upton]

Oddly though the additional shoe gear they had for NLL services was taken off!

[Red Baron]

Personally I don't see how this is anything but positive.  

 

1. Anything that allows removal of Pacers / 150's from service is good thing.  4 cars > 2 cars,  4 cars  > 2x 2 cars.

2. The lightly refurbed 319's are a pleasant place to travel.

3. If it allows Manchester  - Blackpool to go electric faster I'm all in.  Similarly Manchester  - Clitheroe services,  or Morecambe.  

[HillsideDepot]

While I accept that the 319s are far from new, it was once the plan (numerous iterations ago) that they would go to GWR for Thames Valley services. For whatever reason (good deal on leasing charges, who knows) GWR now have brand new units being delivered, so the 319s are "spare".

 

But "spare" on a network that is desperate for more capacity.

 

Now of course, GWR may have gone for the new trains deal because the 319s are rusted through and falling apart (we don't know for sure, but some GWR 150s have holes where they shouldn't) but in principle the life they could have had in the Thames Valley can now be used elsewhere. 

 

They aren't the idea solution, but much as Hornby has the Railroad 'budget' brand so the real railway is also having to look at alternatives.

[Red Baron]

While I accept that the 319s are far from new, it was once the plan (numerous iterations ago) that they would go to GWR for Thames Valley services. For whatever reason (good deal on leasing charges, who knows) GWR now have brand new units being delivered, so the 319s are "spare".

 

But "spare" on a network that is desperate for more capacity.

 

Now of course, GWR may have gone for the new trains deal because the 319s are rusted through and falling apart (we don't know for sure, but some GWR 150s have holes where they shouldn't) but in principle the life they could have had in the Thames Valley can now be used elsewhere. 

 

They aren't the idea solution, but much as Hornby has the Railroad 'budget' brand so the real railway is also having to look at alternatives.

 

I don't see any rust / falling apart  on any of the Northern Electrics I have witnessed.  I am sure one or two are in a crap state - maybe they will be the first ones to go hybrid and get a larger rebuild?

[TheSignalEngineer]

Interesting that they plan to use the DC bus. A long time ago there was a plan to put a DC bus on 313's for use on the North London line to overcome gapping problems, but the safety case was rejected as there was a possibility that the bus could cause the wring side failure of a DC track circuit. be interesting to see if this is still a problem. Any DC track circuits still in use in the North west?

One of the reasons for providing extra shoes on the 313s in addition to gapping a motor coach was the risk of losing all power at one end in the event of losing a shoe. In their first life it didn't matter as the only time they worked on DC was between Drayton Park and Moorgate.  Extra shoes were first provided when units were transferred to Bletchley  for use on the Euston - Watford DC and NLL services. 

 

I'm not sure where you get the information about it being for track circuit problems as ordinary DC track circuits could not be used on DC eletrified lines. The pure DC sections were traditionally done with 50Hz AC track circuits whilst dual electrified areas such as Euston - Watford and the NLL around Camden Road used 83¹/₃ Hz  to avoid interference from 50Hz traction return currents. In later times frequency type equipment such as Reed Tracks were used and of course nowadays Axle Counters.

 

Regarding wiring between carriages, this can be a problem with any type of train. I once investigated a report of alternate track circuits showing clear when occupied at Birmingham New St. The train in question was a DMU which had earth faults on the lighting wiring in two coaches and in effect was providing a mobile battery feed when on track circuits of one polarity but not the other. 

 

And yes, there are lots of DC track circuits in the North-west, mainly using BR930 series AC immune Track Circuit relays.

[Supaned]

Assuming the diesel kit is slung under the driving trailers , is the underframe strong enough to support this extra load? - I can understand the motor coach being built with a stronger frame to hold the transformer and electrical kit , but were the trailers built to the same spec? 

[phil-b259]

Assuming the diesel kit is slung under the driving trailers , is the underframe strong enough to support this extra load? - I can understand the motor coach being built with a stronger frame to hold the transformer and electrical kit , but were the trailers built to the same spec? 

 

One would have thought the leasing company would have checked this out before going ahead.

 

Personally I can see it would make sense to have a single bodyshell design (remember, like all MK3 based construction there is no separate 'underframe' in these or any other Mk3 EMUs)  in load bearing terms for all vehicles to simplify construction. If you sit a 455, a 321, a 319 driving car and a 150 diesel unit next to each other, the fundamental design is much identical

[cheesysmith]

Assuming the diesel kit is slung under the driving trailers , is the underframe strong enough to support this extra load? - I can understand the motor coach being built with a stronger frame to hold the transformer and electrical kit , but were the trailers built to the same spec? 

 

That`s the thousand dollar question. The MK3 bodies was built as a monocock, with different gauge steels used for different bodies, so much so that the 150/2 have light steels used compared to the 150/1. It may end up needing a underframe to carry the additional bit, attached to the monocock using load spreading (ok, big washes). Of course, this depends how the bodies were built in the first place, how much they were over engineered, and how much age/rot has reduced the strength of the body.

[Supaned]

It was a genuine thought. I'd hope the leasing company have checked this out before their big announcement, but , this is the UK railway network and anything can happen.

[bennyboy]

 The MK3 bodies was built as a monocock, 

 

While most male bodies are monocock I don't think the MK3s were. I'm guessing that you meant monocoque.

['CHARD]

While most male bodies are monocock I don't think the MK3s were. I'm guessing that you meant monocoque.

 

Surely post of the season!

[GordonC]

This is getting a bit desperate and surreal, isn't it? The 21st century railway is becoming a Make Do and Mend system. One could be forgiven for thinking that those in charge were not entirely up to the job.

 

you forgot .... While billions are being spent on HS2

[GordonC]

Looking at what happening on the railwys at the moment, you have to think that the DaFT don`t have a clue. Reusing the 319 up north was a good way to get electric trains cheaply and improve the running of the network. These will have the performance of a 150 when under diesel power (if were lucky) but have the higher track access cost due to the heavy axle mounted motors wearing the tracks out, but without the benifits of the higher performance that EMU bring. Are EMUs permitted to use the higher permissable speeds that sprinters can? (shades of the 185s again). Thats before we get to how much rot is under the skin of these trains, having the nice vinals stuck to them for years, that trap moisture and rot the steel bodies. And thats before we get to the disabled super bogs that take up a 1/3 of a 20m coach.

 

Heres a better idea. The 321s are going to be avalible soon, and some have already been reduced to 3 cars. Some of these as 3 cars to replace the 323s going to Birmingham(which would allow them to keep nearer to the performance of the 323s, which the 319s can`t), the spare trailers reused with the remotoring and some reforming of sets to make 6 coach 321s, with 2 power cars, to minimised the lost passinger capacity from the super bogs (you would only loose 2/3 of a coach for a 12 coach train instead of a full coach if using 3x4car vs 2x6 car). The increase of motors per train would allow regenerative braking to be more effective (the problem with the upgraded 321s is they cannot fully use regenerative braking like the newer units due to the lower number of powered axles).

 

As to where to use these longer 321s, well I`m sorry to all the londoners out there, but I cannot see the economics of using all brand new trains just to be used twice a day for the peak communting into and out of london. Spreading new trains around so they are used more of the time and reserving perfectly good older stock just for the rush hours that has already paid for itself sounds like a cheaper idea in the long run, and we are continually being told we like in a time of asterity.

 

Austerity doesn't apply in the south with all the trains being built for Crossrail and Thameslink and all the Electrostars

[cheesysmith]

Austerity doesn't apply in the south with all the trains being built for Crossrail and Thameslink and all the Electrostars

 

And the problem is that NR and DaFT have buggered up the chances of more wires up north, so what to do with all these older but still useable electric trains from down south? Whilst they are getting rid of good electric trains we are stuck with diesels that are older than what they are getting rid off.

[phil-b259]

And the problem is that NR and DaFT have buggered up the chances of more wires up north, so what to do with all these older but still useable electric trains from down south? Whilst they are getting rid of good electric trains we are stuck with diesels that are older than what they are getting rid off.

 

Which is why various players are looking to create hybrid units!

 

I don't think anyone disputes that nice new electric trains are the way forward for Northern services - but until there is some means of delivering the electricity (which is all due to the trouble electrification programme to date rather than any grand conspiracy against the north) alternatives need to be found - and quickly (due to current overcrowding)

['CHARD]

Austerity doesn't apply in the south with all the trains being built for Crossrail and Thameslink and all the Electrostars

 

Crossrail is a new railway, so you would expect new trains for such an operation, surely?

 

Thameslink is a political football and a rather shabby grand gesture, agree.

 

New E*s?  A handful for C2C and a few for GWR but that's it.  Hardly a soap-box?

[Glorious NSE]

Austerity doesn't apply in the south

 

We're down south, we might get our pacers replaced by cascaded 150s. We might even get to have some 158s back, after they were moved to the North many years ago.

 

The North is getting several newbuild fleets, guaranteed pacer replacement, plus full refurbs to a modern specification for everything, new or old, plus electrification of several routes, and connection into a new high speed system that has the potential to transform travel across your region. 

 

The whole 'poor relation' act really grates. Try living in a part of the country that doesn't have any of the benefits the north has. Cascaded Mk3 EMUs would be lovely.

[royaloak]

We're down south, we might get our pacers replaced by cascaded 150s. We might even get to have some 158s back, after they were moved to the North many years ago.

 

The North is getting several newbuild fleets, guaranteed pacer replacement, plus full refurbs to a modern specification for everything, new or old, plus electrification of several routes, and connection into a new high speed system that has the potential to transform travel across your region. 

 

The whole 'poor relation' act really grates. Try living in a part of the country that doesn't have any of the benefits the north has. Cascaded Mk3 EMUs would be lovely.

143s are here until 31st December 2019

158s are staying around Bristol

Apparently all 14 153s are staying now instead of 5 staying and 9 leaving soon.

Not sure what is happening with the 150/1s but if the 319 diesel powering works then Northern wont need our 150/1s so who knows.

 

Of course everything is subject to change.

[metropolitan cammell]

We're down south, we might get our pacers replaced by cascaded 150s. We might even get to have some 158s back, after they were moved to the North many years ago.

The North is getting several newbuild fleets, guaranteed pacer replacement, plus full refurbs to a modern specification for everything, new or old, plus electrification of several routes, and connection into a new high speed system that has the potential to transform travel across your region. 

 

The whole 'poor relation' act really grates. Try living in a part of the country that doesn't have any of the benefits the north has. Cascaded Mk3 EMUs would be lovely.

Unless the Isle of Wight has been moved the 1938 built tube stock in much older than anything in the north, by several decades.

[david.hill64]

One of the reasons for providing extra shoes on the 313s in addition to gapping a motor coach was the risk of losing all power at one end in the event of losing a shoe. In their first life it didn't matter as the only time they worked on DC was between Drayton Park and Moorgate.  Extra shoes were first provided when units were transferred to Bletchley  for use on the Euston - Watford DC and NLL services. 

 

I'm not sure where you get the information about it being for track circuit problems as ordinary DC track circuits could not be used on DC eletrified lines. The pure DC sections were traditionally done with 50Hz AC track circuits whilst dual electrified areas such as Euston - Watford and the NLL around Camden Road used 83¹/₃ Hz  to avoid interference from 50Hz traction return currents. In later times frequency type equipment such as Reed Tracks were used and of course nowadays Axle Counters.

 

Regarding wiring between carriages, this can be a problem with any type of train. I once investigated a report of alternate track circuits showing clear when occupied at Birmingham New St. The train in question was a DMU which had earth faults on the lighting wiring in two coaches and in effect was providing a mobile battery feed when on track circuits of one polarity but not the other. 

 

And yes, there are lots of DC track circuits in the North-west, mainly using BR930 series AC immune Track Circuit relays.

It's a long time ago but IIRC the issue wasn't about the bussed units working on DC where as you say they would be on AC track circuits but when they were on AC power and DC track circuits. This was the time when getting rolling stock safety cases past Railtrack was fraught with difficulty. I was at Eversholt at the time and it was a headache for us. What was the dreaded standard? 1917???

I know the problem of longitudinally induced voltages is real: it caused availability (not safety) issues on the BTS Bangkok skytrain system.

Still using BR930 relays: we installed some on a BTS metro extension a couple of years ago!

[cheesysmith]

The talk about track circuits reminds me of a comment brought up when all these problems getting rail track approval came up originally. It was easier the get approval in europe because their track circuits operated differently to ours. It was, very simply put that our signalling would assume a line was clear if the TC was unoccupied, but in Europe the signalling would have the line as occupied until the next TC was occupied. This means that a train could disappear off the signalling over here and give a clear line, but over there it could disappear but a clear line would not be given until it appeared elsewhere.

 

Modern axle counters now used in place of TCs work the same way. They count the number of axles entering a section, and count the numbers leaving, so know when a train has left its section.

 

This didn't make European TCs any more immune to interference than uk TCs, but the European signalling systems had less chance of a wrong side failure from it.

[cheesysmith]

I think the biggest problem I have with reusing EMUs with diesel engines is it brings non of their benefits, like lighter trains, higher power, cleaner, more reliable trains able to operate higher miles because they don't need to refuel. But it does bring the disadvantages that BR worked so hard to avoid, like heavier unsprung masses on small wheel, with the highest axle loads on the same vehicle. I would ask anybody to compair the track standards of the old SR region of BR in the 70s or 80s to that of a secondary line that only saw DMUs, with the lower axle loads and even lower unsprung masses. The sprinters were that track friendly that the old RR was able to have "maintenance holidays" when monies was tight, bowing there would be minimal degradation in the mean time. They were also able to extend the life of the track. And was also able to run said sprinters at higher speeds*, due to better brakes and less track damage even at higher speeds than a EMU running at slower speeds.

 

 

*example, a 158 vs the 185 through the hope valley. The 158 is still allowed to run at 90mph, but the lardbutt 185s are only allowed to run at the line speed of 70mph. The only reason they keep times are due to the fact they are overpowered and can climb hills a lot faster, although it is at the cost of awful fuel comsumptiion.

[eastwestdivide]

I suspect, as I do for the D78 conversions, that if the engineering side of the project is successful, they might still only be a niche product.

In the case of the 319 conversion, the niche being to cover the requirement (is it in the franchise?) for through trains from Manchester onto the Windermere branch, where electrification has been, at best, postponed.

[Red Baron]

I suspect, as I do for the D78 conversions, that if the engineering side of the project is successful, they might still only be a niche product.

In the case of the 319 conversion, the niche being to cover the requirement (is it in the franchise?) for through trains from Manchester onto the Windermere branch, where electrification has been, at best, postponed.

 

I think you are forgetting  Leeds- Lancaster/Morecambe -  wires from Leeds to Skipton - no wires from Skipton to Carnforth, back under the wires to Lancaster / Or Morecambe Junction.. No wires to Morecambe.

Or Manchester Clitheroe -  wires to Bolton ( soon) no wires to Clitheroe.

Or Blackpool  - Huddersfield 

 

and so on....  Bi-mode makes a lot of sense in the North West.