Greater Anglia's Stadler Flirt - Class 745 & 755

[nightstar.train]

3 hours ago, tgk300 said:

16 tonne is light, that cannot include the bogies at that weight. The numbers on this unit just don't add up, and again, thank you for taking the time to help. 

 

Presumably these weight plates just aren’t designed for a train with Jacobs bogies, as these are very very rare in the u.k. Would you assign all the bogie weight to one vehicle or split it between 2? So it seems they’ve gone for listing the vehicle weights entirely without bogies, and then the whole train weight including them. 

[Zomboid]

3 hours ago, tgk300 said:

So according to a Railway Magazine article, the 755/4 has 202 standard class seats as stated on the vehicle plate, and then an additional 27 tip up seats. The standing capacity is not stated. Don't forget that this unit is only 80m, and 7 of that is taken up by the powercar. It does seem quite low though. 

It's a low density unit. If needed I'm sure it could have more seats fitted.

[tgk300]

1 hour ago, nightstar.train said:

 

Presumably these weight plates just aren’t designed for a train with Jacobs bogies, as these are very very rare in the u.k. Would you assign all the bogie weight to one vehicle or split it between 2? So it seems they’ve gone for listing the vehicle weights entirely without bogies, and then the whole train weight including them. 

So It seems as though my theory of 36 tonne on all four driven axles is incorrect seeing as that excludes bogies weight on the driving wheels. Still 27 tonnes of DMS coach on three axles, but without knowing the weight of the powerbogies exactly as well as the weight of the jacobs, it's impossible to estimate with any level or accuracy. 

Is a jacob bogie heavier than the powerbogies, or about the same. Either way, that means that on average each bogie weighs 8.5 tonnes, a fair weight I will say. If you said that tehy powerbogies do weigh 8.5 tonne then you 18 tonnes of car weight on the two axles plus 8.5 tonnes of bogies weight giving 26.5 tonnes, Multiplied by two gives 53 tonne out of 163.4 on powered axles, or 32.5%. 

[tgk300]

1 hour ago, Zomboid said:

It's a low density unit. If needed I'm sure it could have more seats fitted.

Of course, its just not as big of an increase as some were expecting. 

[s182ggu]

Hi.
I had understood, perhaps wrongly, that all 755 services were now back up & running fully. 
Having just spent 2 days in Sheringham, whilst I’ve seen several Sanders coaches in the Station approach, I have not seen any trains!

Considering that the service should be hourly I cannot help but think things are still not right.

Would welcome any information as to when the full Sheringham service is likely to be fully restored, please?

Regards

Graham

[Chris116]

I have just looked at Realtime Trains for Sheringham and it shows all services running today although some have been running late.

[russ p]

There are still restrictions, 20 from worsted to wroxham so train missed London connection today

Worse though,  going all the way back to sheringham,  how uncomfortable are these things. 

No lower back support whatsoever and backrest far to upright! 

Is there a plan to get passengers off trains by making them unbearable?  Going to London on one will be hell, can't even go via cambridge as those units on Lynn line are even worse 

[s182ggu]

2 hours ago, Chris116 said:

I have just looked at Realtime Trains for Sheringham and it shows all services running today although some have been running late.

 

Thanks Chris. I didn't think to look at RTT as there seemed to be a continuous coach replacement service and I guess that I must have just missed the trains as they came in and left - as we know, the turnround time at Sheringham is very short.

 

Thanks again.

 

[tgk300]

If these units were ordered for another operator that required an increase in length, do we reckon it would be possible to have a 13m powercar with 8 engines and then 8 passenger coaches giving a 160m length?  Would this be pheasible or would a TOC be better of ordering a more "conventional" train. 

[black and decker boy]

The government PRM derogation table reproduced here:

 

https://www.railwaygazette.com/uk/non-prm-compliant-trains-get-last-minute-derogation/55433.article

 

 

 

Edited December 31, 2019 by black and decker boy
Festive foul up. Post intended for Pacer thread

[tgk300]

Everyone could see this was going to happen, It's no suprise to anyone that they have been given an extension beyond the initial date. 

[Zomboid]

2 hours ago, tgk300 said:

If these units were ordered for another operator that required an increase in length, do we reckon it would be possible to have a 13m powercar with 8 engines and then 8 passenger coaches giving a 160m length?  Would this be pheasible or would a TOC be better of ordering a more "conventional" train. 

They'd probably do one with two power packs to distribute the weight a bit more. Possibly in the form of two single ended half sets.

[corneliuslundie]

What about the nonsense about compliant road vehicles? What kind of alternative universe does the Department live in?

And I note that 153s also have another year. 

It seems to be mostly "covering backside" speak - surprise, surprise.

Jonathan

[Satan's Goldfish]

3 hours ago, tgk300 said:

If these units were ordered for another operator that required an increase in length, do we reckon it would be possible to have a 13m powercar with 8 engines and then 8 passenger coaches giving a 160m length?  Would this be pheasible or would a TOC be better of ordering a more "conventional" train. 

 

There's a FLIRT wikipedia page which covers the format these trains take. Up until the GA order for the London sets, their longest was 6 coaches long with a powered bogie at each end (all Jacobs in the middle). The GA London/Norwich/Stanstead sets are a departure from this but still follow a similar style, just with no cabs on what would be the inner ends of units working in multiple. The diesel units do also work in multiple, so you're essentially describing 2x 755/4 joined together. If an operator really wanted to then I suppose there's no reasons why the 2 formats couldn't be combined to create a longer 8 coach bi-mode, but I suspect it would have 2x power packs. If making it 1 big power pack then you're nearly back to having a loco on 8 coaches, just with less wheels.

[tgk300]

1 hour ago, Zomboid said:

They'd probably do one with two power packs to distribute the weight a bit more. Possibly in the form of two single ended half sets.

That is a good point, two single ended half sets would allow more powerbogies as have just two on an 8 car train is not good. 

 

1 hour ago, corneliuslundie said:

What about the nonsense about compliant road vehicles?

I am confused as to what this means, are they suggesting that vehicles used for rail replacement bus services will need to be "accessible", if so, are there actually "accessible" buses around? I cannot see how a double decker can be made accessible, nor a traditional coach. So does that mean that only certain single deckers can be used? 

 

20 minutes ago, Satan's Goldfish said:

 

There's a FLIRT wikipedia page which covers the format these trains take. Up until the GA order for the London sets, their longest was 6 coaches long with a powered bogie at each end (all Jacobs in the middle). The GA London/Norwich/Stanstead sets are a departure from this but still follow a similar style, just with no cabs on what would be the inner ends of units working in multiple. The diesel units do also work in multiple, so you're essentially describing 2x 755/4 joined together. If an operator really wanted to then I suppose there's no reasons why the 2 formats couldn't be combined to create a longer 8 coach bi-mode, but I suspect it would have 2x power packs. If making it 1 big power pack then you're nearly back to having a loco on 8 coaches, just with less wheels.

So an 8 car Bi-Mode FLIRT would essentially be two 755/4's coupled togther with the cabs on the inner ends removed all the while leaving the powerbogies in place? 

[Satan's Goldfish]

11 minutes ago, tgk300 said:

So an 8 car Bi-Mode FLIRT would essentially be two 755/4's coupled togther with the cabs on the inner ends removed all the while leaving the powerbogies in place? 

 

Potentially. From a UK perspective it would require very little difference from a platform they know already works* so very little to none R&D or retooling is involved.

 

*opinions may very

 

Edit for clarrification: for the 'cabs removed on inner ends' of 2x 755/4 joined together, use the centre coaches from a 745 instead as they have powered bogies.

Edited December 31, 2019 by Satan's Goldfish

[black and decker boy]

Details of the GA PRM derogations here:

https://www.gov.uk/government/publications/abellio-east-anglia-accessibility-compliance-dispensation

 

Best get those 745s in squadron service quick!!

[russ p]

52 minutes ago, black and decker boy said:

Details of the GA PRM derogations here:

https://www.gov.uk/government/publications/abellio-east-anglia-accessibility-compliance-dispensation

 

Best get those 745s in squadron service quick!!

 

Best get that idiot Wilkinson out of office as quick as possible, he's signed those 

Bloke hasn't a clue about railways,  lives in Austria and it was him that was behind the hard seating and other passenger discomfort extras to be brought in

I thought the renatus 321s were compliant or is it now that any train  designed by BR is a death trap for disabled passengers? 

[tgk300]

3 hours ago, Satan's Goldfish said:

 

Potentially. From a UK perspective it would require very little difference from a platform they know already works* so very little to none R&D or retooling is involved.

 

*opinions may very

 

Edit for clarrification: for the 'cabs removed on inner ends' of 2x 755/4 joined together, use the centre coaches from a 745 instead as they have powered bogies.

That would give far more weight on driven axles, something which I think the 755/4's will struggle with if ordered for steeper routes. 

[tgk300]

5 minutes ago, russ p said:

 

Best get that idiot Wilkinson out of office as quick as possible, he's signed those 

Bloke hasn't a clue about railways,  lives in Austria and it was him that was behind the hard seating and other passenger discomfort extras to be brought in

I thought the renatus 321s were compliant or is it now that any train  designed by BR is a death trap for disabled passengers? 

What gets me is the fact that they push for trains to be "accessible", but all but the latest new build stations have stairs and only major stations have lifts. Its all very well and good having disabled friendly trains, but if they can't get too me whats the point? 

[The Stationmaster]

29 minutes ago, tgk300 said:

What gets me is the fact that they push for trains to be "accessible", but all but the latest new build stations have stairs and only major stations have lifts. Its all very well and good having disabled friendly trains, but if they can't get too me whats the point? 

Quite a number of smaller stations on the Thames Valley have had 'accessibility' added by the addition of passenger lifts but not all.

[Satan's Goldfish]

1 hour ago, tgk300 said:

That would give far more weight on driven axles, something which I think the 755/4's will struggle with if ordered for steeper routes. 

 

Not really, same axle load as a 755 has now. Remember, 6 car versions of these with only 2x powered bogies work from Belinzona on the old gotthard route, the UK has little to compare.

[tgk300]

2 hours ago, Satan's Goldfish said:

 

Not really, same axle load as a 755 has now. Remember, 6 car versions of these with only 2x powered bogies work from Belinzona on the old gotthard route, the UK has little to compare.

Although saying that, now we know that the unit is actually 163.4 tonne with what I think will be 53 tonne on powered axles, they actually look like they're in a much better situation in terms of adhesive weight. 

Edited January 1, 2020 by tgk300
Poor word choice

[dvdlcs]

20 hours ago, tgk300 said:

If these units were ordered for another operator that required an increase in length, do we reckon it would be possible to have a 13m powercar with 8 engines and then 8 passenger coaches giving a 160m length?  Would this be pheasible or would a TOC be better of ordering a more "conventional" train. 

 

2 power cars may take more space than one, and increase the cost of the unit, but as has been mentioned previously the diesel fuel capacity may be a consideration too.

 

[I'm assuming the fuel tanks are in the power cars. If not, then ignore the above comment.]

[caradoc]

17 hours ago, tgk300 said:

I am confused as to what this means, are they suggesting that vehicles used for rail replacement bus services will need to be "accessible", if so, are there actually "accessible" buses around? I cannot see how a double decker can be made accessible, nor a traditional coach. So does that mean that only certain single deckers can be used? 

 

 

The double-decker buses I use in Oxford are fully accessible to wheelchairs, prams etc, having fold out ramps, designated spaces and tip-up seats to provide more space.

 

13 hours ago, tgk300 said:

What gets me is the fact that they push for trains to be "accessible", but all but the latest new build stations have stairs and only major stations have lifts. Its all very well and good having disabled friendly trains, but if they can't get too me whats the point? 

 

I was under the impression that all new-build stations had (by law) to be fully accessible; That is certainly the case for the examples I know of in Scotland. Can you provide examples please of new-build stations which are only accessible by stairs ?