GWR to lease ‘tri-mode’ class 769 multiple units from Porterbrook

[John M Upton]

And they never carried a single fare paying passenger.  What a farce!

 

Pretty good odds it is now a year or two in storage and then a one way trip to Newport.

[woodenhead]

I don't know, Tri-mode might be good for Liverpool - there is a bit of everything there.

 

I know they have the new units coming but maybe it's time to make Kirkby a through station again - Wigan - Kirkby diesel and Kirkby to Liverpool using DC.  Then there is the CLC route - 25kV to Liverpool Parkway, diesel from Parkway to Trafford Park and 25kV into Manchester.  Especially useful if they then slowly wire the route as these units are more flexible to a part wired route.

 

And then why not find a way to bring passengers back to the Fiddlers Ferry to Warrington route (as I bet a high speed route is now off the cards).  These units would be good for that too.  And Northern do have experience of the 769s and 319s so it's about putting the units to use where they are already used.

[Northmoor]

1 hour ago, woodenhead said:

I know they have the new units coming but maybe it's time to make Kirkby a through station again - Wigan - Kirkby diesel and Kirkby to Liverpool using DC. 

I don't think the 319-deried units would fit the "new" Northern Line tunnels; 507/508 units are significantly smaller.  They would be able to operate Eastwards from Liverpool Central, although IIRC the link between the CLC and Merseyrail lines at Hunts Cross isn't intended for regular services to operate

[woodenhead]

31 minutes ago, Northmoor said:

I don't think the 319-deried units would fit the "new" Northern Line tunnels; 507/508 units are significantly smaller.  They would be able to operate Eastwards from Liverpool Central, although IIRC the link between the CLC and Merseyrail lines at Hunts Cross isn't intended for regular services to operate

I wasn't imagining them tunnelling - the CLC would route to Lime St as now, there is also the Ormskirk route to Preston that could become a through route again.  Mind you with the new Stadler units, they already have Skelmersdale, Wrexham and Warrington in their sights.

 

So actually, they've already solved the problem with their new stock, so back to the bin for the 769 tri-mode unless Northern fancy them.

Edited June 10, 2023 by woodenhead
completed a sentence

[MarkC]

24 minutes ago, Northmoor said:

I don't think the 319-deried units would fit the "new" Northern Line tunnels; 507/508 units are significantly smaller.  They would be able to operate Eastwards from Liverpool Central, although IIRC the link between the CLC and Merseyrail lines at Hunts Cross isn't intended for regular services to operate

ISTR that the old LMS-era Class 502s were pretty large as far as loading gauge dimensions were concerned, especially in cross-section; they operated through the Northern Line tunnels OK. They were certainly bigger than their Class 503 Wirral Line cousins. 

 

Mark

[009 micro modeller]

I think on Merseyrail electro-diesels, even in electric mode, are banned from the “new” loop tunnel under the city centre because it isn’t safe to carry flammable diesel around in there, although I’m not sure if that’s the route that was meant above.

[black and decker boy]

I think a key metric to consider is that neither Northern nor TfW 769s have achieved any reasonable level of reliability with MTIN figures no better and perhaps slightly worse than pacers.

 

these haven’t been a good investment so perhaps should be consigned to history 

[Northmoor]

20 hours ago, woodenhead said:

I wasn't imagining them tunnelling - the CLC would route to Lime St as now, there is also the Ormskirk route to Preston that could become a through route again.  Mind you with the new Stadler units, they already have Skelmersdale, Wrexham and Warrington in their sights.

Ormskirk services would still have same problem, they might not be able to enter the Northern tunnels to Moorfields and Central.  So you couldn't have a through service unless it started at Sandhills, which isn't much use to anyone.  We need someone on here to confirm the loading gauge. 

[ess1uk]

they are gong to be used for the shuttle to Rail Live this year.

Running from Honeybourne to Long Marston.

[The Stationmaster]

Just now, ess1uk said:

they are gong to be used for the shuttle to Rail Live this year.

Running from Honeybourne to Long Marston.

Well at least there won't be any worries about them being unable to match Turbo running times on a job like that.  But the performance on the gradients might be interesting with a full passenger load?

[admiles]

On 10/06/2023 at 09:01, John M Upton said:

And they never carried a single fare paying passenger.  What a farce!

 

Pretty good odds it is now a year or two in storage and then a one way trip to Newport.

 

Just underlines what a joke this country has become....

[The Stationmaster]

14 minutes ago, admiles said:

 

Just underlines what a joke this country has become....

The country or its Civil Servants dabbling in things they don't understand?

[Northmoor]

57 minutes ago, admiles said:

 

Just underlines what a joke this country has become....

That's quite a leap to take.  If the 769s are considered a failure as some are withdrawn before they have entered service everywhere that they were intended, then consider also how rare a sequence of events that is.  Compare the situation with the Modernisation Plan and the Beeching era; how many types can you remember being withdrawn as the traffics they were being built for, were being withdrawn (most BR Standard Steam, many Type 2 diesel classes and DMUs) or were a technical failure as well as redundant (Clayton Class 17, Metrovick Co-Bos).

[cctransuk]

1 hour ago, Northmoor said:

That's quite a leap to take.  If the 769s are considered a failure as some are withdrawn before they have entered service everywhere that they were intended, then consider also how rare a sequence of events that is.  Compare the situation with the Modernisation Plan and the Beeching era; how many types can you remember being withdrawn as the traffics they were being built for, were being withdrawn (most BR Standard Steam, many Type 2 diesel classes and DMUs) or were a technical failure as well as redundant (Clayton Class 17, Metrovick Co-Bos).

 

By that argument, this country became a joke in the 1960s!

 

CJI.

[The Stationmaster]

45 minutes ago, cctransuk said:

 

By that argument, this country became a joke in the 1960s!

 

CJI.

If you visit portsmouth you can see the remains of aship of war called 'The Mary rose.  On its way out of {ortsmouth to deal with teh French fleet capsized and sank - probably in large part due to the weight and distribution of its armamament.

 

And don't forget the Brunel reputedly said when one of his very flat arched bridges collap[sed that it was just as well because he was already planning to build more 'just like it'.  

 

Admiral Beatty asked of his staff at the Battle of Jutland 'What is wrong with our bloody ships today ?' as yet another Royal Navy battle crusiser hit by German gunfire blew up and sank   A tradition the RN maintained into WWII with the greatest battle cruiser Britain ever built - HMS Hood. (a ship well known for some perpetually wet mess decks in heavy seas) 

 

The Manchester heavy bomber of WWII was an unmitigated disaster until an extra couple of engines were added and the name was changed to Lancaster.

 

After WWII omebody built a very impressive, large, commercial airliner called the Brabazon and even jad to extend an airfield to enable it to take off once it had been completed.   Number entering commercial service - Nil   (partly due to the very high operational cost per passenger seat mile).

 

So the 769 fiasco is nothing new in the great la pantheon of British commercial developments but it has certainly fared better than ther R101 = which was another victim of Civil Service etc interfereence in its design complete with under-powered engines.

 

Anfd of course as a nation we are not alone when it comes to spectacular failures.   It's just that we rabbit on about them unlike, say, the french were various of their bright ideas simply slip out of sight unmentioned even after the most spectacular of promotions etc when they had first arrived on the scene.   Or the German narrow gauge diesels which were top heavy and quickly developed a habit of toppling off the track.

[KeithHC]

I go with the Ricky Gervais from the Office….. “If a first you do not succeed destroy the evidence”.

 

Keith

[Tankerman]

19 hours ago, The Stationmaster said:

If you visit portsmouth you can see the remains of aship of war called 'The Mary rose.  On its way out of {ortsmouth to deal with teh French fleet capsized and sank - probably in large part due to the weight and distribution of its armamament.

 

And don't forget the Brunel reputedly said when one of his very flat arched bridges collap[sed that it was just as well because he was already planning to build more 'just like it'.  

 

Admiral Beatty asked of his staff at the Battle of Jutland 'What is wrong with our bloody ships today ?' as yet another Royal Navy battle crusiser hit by German gunfire blew up and sank   A tradition the RN maintained into WWII with the greatest battle cruiser Britain ever built - HMS Hood. (a ship well known for some perpetually wet mess decks in heavy seas) 

 

The Manchester heavy bomber of WWII was an unmitigated disaster until an extra couple of engines were added and the name was changed to Lancaster.

 

After WWII omebody built a very impressive, large, commercial airliner called the Brabazon and even jad to extend an airfield to enable it to take off once it had been completed.   Number entering commercial service - Nil   (partly due to the very high operational cost per passenger seat mile).

 

So the 769 fiasco is nothing new in the great la pantheon of British commercial developments but it has certainly fared better than ther R101 = which was another victim of Civil Service etc interfereence in its design complete with under-powered engines.

 

Anfd of course as a nation we are not alone when it comes to spectacular failures.   It's just that we rabbit on about them unlike, say, the french were various of their bright ideas simply slip out of sight unmentioned even after the most spectacular of promotions etc when they had first arrived on the scene.   Or the German narrow gauge diesels which were top heavy and quickly developed a habit of toppling off the track.

All of these and many others, have the same reason. Unlike continental Europe and many other countries, engineering skills of whatever discipline and level of qualification, are given a very low rating and virtually no respect in this country. This is clearly shown by the term "Backroom Boys" given to engineers by various levels of management.

 

If this country paid engineers what the legal profession and GPs get paid and vice versa, we wouldn't have the engineering problems we have. This was brought home to me as long ago as 1983 when I stayed with an Italian family in Naples. Their three children were adults, one still being at university, when they showed me the photographs of the two older ones it was obvious that they were very proud of the eldest one. When I asked what he did I was told, again with pride in their voices "He is an Electrical Engineer" on asking what the other one did I was told "Oh he's just a Doctor."

[woodenhead]

From an engineering perspective, if you don't try you don't fail.

 

The 769 and the 230 are both good ideas - a method to introduce diesel and hybrid units within an emissions framework that really wants electrification or batteries not diesel engines.

 

The 319s were coming to the end of life on fast services (though I still see them at Euston!) and re-engineering older machinery with modern technology is nothing new and certainly not frowned upon in engineering circles.

 

It doesn't help that we've become so accustomed to 'new' trains, every new franchise wanted them and were busily ordering stock so fast that sometimes the franchise ended before implementation of the fleet and the next franchise holder wanted it's own new stock...

 

Whereas under BR we were used to make do and mend, of course much of that was politically driven - especially the idea that somehow privatisation would transform the railway.  It did, subsidy went from about £1bn under BR to £5bn (rising to 17bn as a result of Covid).  Some of that subsidy is going straight out of the door to shareholders of the various fingers in the public purse pie.

 

 

[Mike_Walker]

36 minutes ago, Tankerman said:

All of these and many others, have the same reason. Unlike continental Europe and many other countries, engineering skills of whatever discipline and level of qualification, are given a very low rating and virtually no respect in this country. This is clearly shown by the term "Backroom Boys" given to engineers by various levels of management.

 

If this country paid engineers what the legal profession and GPs get paid and vice versa, we wouldn't have the engineering problems we have. This was brought home to me as long ago as 1983 when I stayed with an Italian family in Naples. Their three children were adults, one still being at university, when they showed me the photographs of the two older ones it was obvious that they were very proud of the eldest one. When I asked what he did I was told, again with pride in their voices "He is an Electrical Engineer" on asking what the other one did I was told "Oh he's just a Doctor."

 My secondary school was called a "Technical High School".  We had engineering and woodworking workshops and learnt things like technical drawing.  Yet we had a head who distained such things.  When I, and others, wanted to leave after O Levels and take engineering apprenticeships, he was appalled and tried to insist (unsuccessfully) we stayed on for A levels and studied the "arts".  He even sent us all bus passes for the following term!

 

The year after we left, its name was changed to the John Hampden Grammar School and all the technical aspects of the school were banished.  This was despite the town already having a respected boys' grammar school.  But those who wanted to study technical subjects were left we no opportunity until further education.

 

Sadly, Bucks and High Wycombe are not unique and I suspect it might be even worse today given the risk adverse nature today - we had some spectacular "incidents" in the workshops in my time alone but nobody got hurt; apart from a singed ear from "Sir"!

[woodenhead]

My secondary school had a narrow boat in the lower school car park that pupils worked on.

 

It also had an outdoor pursuits centre in the Peak District so pupils could learn craft and outdoorsy stuff.

[The Stationmaster]

The 769 was a very good idea - but very badly excuted and it didn't help by giving the job to a company which not only lacked the right experience but hadn't built or maintained the 319s at any time in their existence.  What seems to have gone wrong, or was ignored, is that there wasn't a performance specification hence the trains couldn't achieve the required performance on GWR.  

 

It is a pretty DafT idea by any measure to replace a Turbo or an HST by something which can't even match, let alone improve on, the performance of the thing which is being replaced.

[Metr0Land]

We're not alone, you only have to look at nearby countries for similar fiascos.  Berlin Brandenburg airport and SNCF ordering 2,000 carriages that were too wide for platforms to name but 2........

Edited June 13, 2023 by Metr0Land

[Ron Ron Ron]

3 hours ago, woodenhead said:

……subsidy went from about £1bn under BR to £5bn (rising to 17bn as a result of Covid).  Some of that subsidy is going straight out of the door to shareholders of the various fingers in the public purse pie.

 

 

Prior to Covid, passenger services, aggregated across the whole network, were breaking even.

Almost all the government subsidy, effectively went on infrastructure.

The relatively small proportion of revenue taken out as profit on passenger services, by the TOCs did not come from the public purse.

A different story on infrastructure, where the private sector would obviously require a return on their involvement and individual investments.

 

When I pay a contractor to do work for me, whether it’s a plumber or any other trade, I expect that part of what I pay will be a fair profit for their efforts.

If NR are going to employ contractors, why shouldn’t it be any different?

 

.

[woodenhead]

@Ron Ron Ron I realised as I posted that it sounded like a rant about subsidies when all I was meaning was I wonder what BR might have done with a similar injection of cash - recognising that there were still slam door trains in use at privatisation and not everything could be updated with a bit of spit and polish.

 

There are still elements though that would not survive without subsidy.

 

BR though did wonders with very little.

[The Stationmaster]

14 hours ago, woodenhead said:

@Ron Ron Ron I realised as I posted that it sounded like a rant about subsidies when all I was meaning was I wonder what BR might have done with a similar injection of cash - recognising that there were still slam door trains in use at privatisation and not everything could be updated with a bit of spit and polish.

 

There are still elements though that would not survive without subsidy.

 

BR though did wonders with very little.

Without checking I thinkl we'll fimnd that agoodly percentage of the money being spent on the railway now is via NR on infrastruture improvements and remedial works/.  many of the latter should have been carried out decades ago but BR was starved of cash to do such things so extra money would have been invaluable there.

 

A good example is Chipping Sodbury Tunnel which always flooded when  it rained heavily.  Eventually, in the late 1980s, BR managed to get a small aqueduct which crosses the railway west of the tunnel raised and taht allowed som improvements in gradient prog fil which helped the tunnel to drain.  But it didn't cure the pron blem.  In NR times a major scheme has provided a greatly improved culvert between the tunnel and the site of Chipping Sodbury station and this culvert feeds into a large catch pond almost a mile from the tunnel.  Flooding problem as solved as it ever will be and heavy rain diversions off the Badminton road are basicallya thing of the past.

 

Similarly numerous long know slip sites that I camn remember as troublesome on the WR have been given major attention and ceased to be a nuisance.  Again money that BR didn't have but could have spent wisely if it did have it.