Trimode cl 769 to operate Reading to Oxford and Gatwick.

[whole diary]

[ellendune]

A 769 unit was moved South through Banbury yesterday by 50007 and 50049.

This is reported to be 769943 on its way to Reading as 5Z69 but I have not found it on Realtime trains.

Picture here on Facebook
https://www.facebook.com/photo.php?fbid=3356919184365881&set=gm.3159948040762940&type=3&theater&ifg=1

Double headed! - was it that heavy?

[bradshaw]

Video on Twitter

https://twitter.com/thesatnav89/status/1291791735979421701?s=21

[eightonedee]

Oh - will we get nicely refurbished class 50s to help them up and down all those pesky gradients on the North Downs line? - perhaps something to look forward to after all! It'll take me back to my days commuting from Tilehurst in the 1980s.......

[IndustryInsider]

Lovely engines...when not breaking down!

[grahame]

Double headed! - was it that heavy?

There's quite a recent history of running a train with 2 locomotives, perhaps where it's not needed.   Started in - what - the mid 1970s when the Westerns and Warships (occasionally used in 2-s) were replaced by single-ended locos on either end of a rake or 6 to 8 carriages.   It come down to removing the need to run round and, as these things get older and spare locos to help in the event of a failure become rare as hen's teeth.   The only problem with an 8 car rake running with one loco duff is "Does not stop at Totnes".

Nuclear flask trains have 2 locos, andI've noticed that steam specials seem to have a spare diesel loco on the back too ... much of it perhaps again relating to reliability, lack of thunderbirds, and all the extra money that Network Rail will charge you if you block the line until you manage to find someone to get you out of the way.   2nd loco every time probably cheaper than risking failure - insurance if you like.

Wish they would add a second loco on heavy freight up the Berks and Hants.   Those trains seem sit down all too often for a very long and leasurly break, flooding the TransWilts with trains that don't even stop ...

Sorry eightonedee - don't expect you'll see 2 times class 50 on the North Downs trains.   Would one be OK?

[eightonedee]

Grahame
I almost thought, yes I would, but then thought of the line between Reigate and Shalford junction or between Ash and Wokingham being blocked by a failed loco.....

[eightf48544]

Nuclear flask trains have 2 locos, andI've noticed that steam specials seem to have a spare diesel loco on the back too ... much of it perhaps again relating to reliability, lack of thunderbirds, and all the extra money that Network Rail will charge you if you block the line until you manage to find someone to get you out of the way.   2nd loco every time probably cheaper than risking failure - insurance if you like.

Re steam specials I thought the diesel was there to supply compressed air for the train brakes when the loco doesn't have a Westinghouse pump as well as backup. It will also be there to take the stock away if the journey finishes at a terminal station.

[paul7575]

Nuclear flask trains have 2 locos, andI've noticed that steam specials seem to have a spare diesel loco on the back too ... much of it perhaps again relating to reliability, lack of thunderbirds, and all the extra money that Network Rail will charge you if you block the line until you manage to find someone to get you out of the way.   2nd loco every time probably cheaper than risking failure - insurance if you like.

Re steam specials I thought the diesel was there to supply compressed air for the train brakes when the loco doesn't have a Westinghouse pump as well as backup. It will also be there to take the stock away if the journey finishes at a terminal station.

Isn’t it also usually providing the hotel services power for the coaching stock, especially as they move towards air conditioned stock etc?

Paul

[Electric train]

Often the reason for 2 loco's the second is there if the is a failure of the primary for some of the Freight Operating Company (FOC^▸ (Freight Operating Company)) they may only have one or two operating bases the delay costs incurred waiting for one of their locos to reach the failed train would be excessive as would paying another Train Operating Company (TOC^▸ (Train Operating Company)) to rescue the failed train.

Other reasons for topping and tailing can be operational there just are not the run round facilities now

Edit: VickiS - Clarifying acronyms

[stuving]

A 769 unit was moved South through Banbury yesterday by 50007 and 50049.

This is reported to be 769943 on its way to Reading as 5Z69 but I have not found it on Realtime trains.

Picture here on Facebook
https://www.facebook.com/photo.php?fbid=3356919184365881&set=gm.3159948040762940&type=3&theater&ifg=1

Double headed! - was it that heavy?

Well, maybe - if you want it to stop and it's not helping. I vaguely recall international train delivery consists having not just translator vehicles but a load of makeweight wagons too, specifically to provide brake force. So, is it custormary - or even compulsory - for new stock to be hauled with all brakes disabled? I can't find an explicit reference to that; NR^» (Network Rail - home page) and railway rules just say the operator (which is an FOC^▸ (Freight Operating Company)) will provide instructions.

I can understand it being needed when hauling old stock for scrap - you'd not want to certify its brakes as functional. But why that would apply to a brand new, just commissioned, ready-to-drive train is not clear. Still less for such an old new train.

[Electric train]

A 769 unit was moved South through Banbury yesterday by 50007 and 50049.

This is reported to be 769943 on its way to Reading as 5Z69 but I have not found it on Realtime trains.

Picture here on Facebook
https://www.facebook.com/photo.php?fbid=3356919184365881&set=gm.3159948040762940&type=3&theater&ifg=1

Double headed! - was it that heavy?

Well, maybe - if you want it to stop and it's not helping. I vaguely recall international train delivery consists having not just translator vehicles but a load of makeweight wagons too, specifically to provide brake force. So, is it custormary - or even compulsory - for new stock to be hauled with all brakes disabled? I can't find an explicit reference to that; NR^» (Network Rail - home page) and railway rules just say the operator (which is an FOC^▸ (Freight Operating Company)) will provide instructions.

I can understand it being needed when hauling old stock for scrap - you'd not want to certify its brakes as functional. But why that would apply to a brand new, just commissioned, ready-to-drive train is not clear. Still less for such an old new train.

The rolling stock needs to have a valid brake test, which can be done by some repair facilities but not all, the brake test would only allow the move to the depot.  Another method is to have the stock being move through piped only this allows the translator vehicles, which have a valid brake test, to provide the brake force.

 

[TonyN]

Rail Operations group who where the TOC^▸ (Train Operating Company) for the 769 move have some class 37 locomotives fitted with couplings to enable them to haul more modern units such as Electrostars. However these are not compatible with BR^▸ (British Rail(ways)) era units such as the 319/769.

[Thatcham Crossing]

GWR^▸ (Great Western Railway) have released the following to show what the 769's will look like inside....

https://twitter.com/GWRHelp/status/1296421240543027200?s=09

Does a good job of not mentioning it's a refurb of actually quite an old train.

Lots of debate over on RailUK Forum about where they will actually be able to operate on anything but diesel (remembering that primarily these are for the North Downs, Reading - Basingstoke and a few of the Thames Valley branches - I think?)

[onthecushions]

I think that the good news implicit in this announcement is that GWR^▸ (Great Western Railway) actually envisage that these units will finally enter service and operate as tri-mode.

While they are old in years, they are  modern in design, the Mark 3 being arguably a more balanced, economical concept than some of the post-privatisation offerings.

OTC

[IndustryInsider]

I think that the good news implicit in this announcement is that GWR^▸ (Great Western Railway) actually envisage that these units will finally enter service and operate as tri-mode.

We will see.  At least they can operate on Over-Head Line Equipment (OHLE) between Reading and the depot.   

There is an element of future proofing, so that even if initially they are confined to diesel, the option remains in the future to use the other two modes of power.  More important (at least before the pandemic) to the users of the North Downs Line, where the vast majority of workings will be confined to, is that an 80-metre long train is replacing a 46m or 69m long train, so there's a capacity boost.

My main concern remains the reliability of the engines and their ability to haul a 4-car train over the gradients of the North Downs Line without impacting on performance too much.

Edit: VickiS - Clarifying acronyms