Trimode cl 769 to operate Reading to Oxford and Gatwick.

[whole diary]

[PrestburyRoad]

How many years of active National Rail service do we think that the 15x and 16x units have left in them, and how many more years do we think it will be considered acceptable to continue to run diesel trains in general on the National Rail network, given how markedly attitudes have changed even over the past few years towards all things diesel from a Climate Emergency perspective?

I've been wondering: what's the relative carbon footprint between

• The energy used operating a unit over its lifetime of say 40 years - such as the diesel it burns
• The energy used in manufacturing the unit in the first place - such as getting the steel/aluminium from ore, minus any energy saved in recycling the materials from eventual scrapping

The balance between these can affect whether it's worth keeping old units running even if they are less fuel-efficient.

[IndustryInsider]

How many years of active National Rail service do we think that the 15x and 16x units have left in them, and how many more years do we think it will be considered acceptable to continue to run diesel trains in general on the National Rail network, given how markedly attitudes have changed even over the past few years towards all things diesel from a Climate Emergency perspective?

I would say around 20 years more service could be achieved with Turbos fairly easily.  The same with other units of a similar era - 158/9s specifically, perhaps a bit less for 150/3/5/6 units. 

Whether demand for diesel units will mean that happens is a whole other matter.  I would expect the change to battery/electric to be a more gradual one than with cars - but at exactly what pace will be deemed suitable and/or achievable I’d be much less confident in forecasting.

[grahame]

Working this out while others posted - what I think is a complete list of pure diesel passenger train (original build dates) running scheduled services on the national network these days that are pure diesel.

 47   1962-8 (converted to 57 - GWR^▸ (Great Western Railway) sleeper locos)
253   1975-82
D78   1978-? (converted to 230)
150   1984-7
155   1986-7 (most converted to 153)
156   1987-9
158   1989-92 (some converted to 159)
165   1990-2
166   1992-3
168   1998-2004
170   1998-2005
175   1999-2001
180   2000-1
220   2000-1
221   2001-2
171   2003-4
222   2003-5
185   2005-6
172   2010-1
195   2017-20
196   2019-
197   2021-
231   t.b.a.

[Rhydgaled]

I've been wondering: what's the relative carbon footprint between

• The energy used operating a unit over its lifetime of say 40 years - such as the diesel it burns
• The energy used in manufacturing the unit in the first place - such as getting the steel/aluminium from ore, minus any energy saved in recycling the materials from eventual scrapping

The balance between these can affect whether it's worth keeping old units running even if they are less fuel-efficient.

So have I. The least-fuel-efficient units appear to be the early-privatisation ones (170s, 175s and 185s) with Sprinters (150-159) and the latest diesels (195-197) both getting through less fuel per mile I think. I'm not sure there's much in it between a 195 and a 158, the different ratio of 3-car to 2-car units makes it hard to make a fair comparison.

I believe the energy used in manufacturing is quite significant, but how significant? Is it better to scrap a diesel train after 26yrs service in order to replace it with a new battery/hydrogen-electric bi-mode or to get the full 35-40 years life out of the diesel train before incuring the carbon cost of manufacturing the new fleet?

[ellendune]

I believe the energy used in manufacturing is quite significant, but how significant? Is it better to scrap a diesel train after 26yrs service in order to replace it with a new battery/hydrogen-electric bi-mode or to get the full 35-40 years life out of the diesel train before incuring the carbon cost of manufacturing the new fleet?

That is a really good question and also what is the feasibility and carbon implications of retractioning these diesel units to give them longer life?

[broadgage]

The best thing to do with old diesel units IMHO^▸ (in my humble opinion) is to store them as a reserve fleet for for breakdowns or exceptional passenger flows. The fuel consumption is of relatively little importance if used thus rather than than in intensive daily use.

New trains should preferably be either OHLE or for secondary routes perhaps battery powered. All new electric trains should include either a diesel engine or a battery for proceeding at much reduced performance to the next station when the wires come down, or for on board services if unable to proceed.

[Rhydgaled]

I believe the energy used in manufacturing is quite significant, but how significant? Is it better to scrap a diesel train after 26yrs service in order to replace it with a new battery/hydrogen-electric bi-mode or to get the full 35-40 years life out of the diesel train before incuring the carbon cost of manufacturing the new fleet?

That is a really good question and also what is the feasibility and carbon implications of retractioning these diesel units to give them longer life?

My gut feeling is that retractioning the diesel units is likely to be by far the best option in terms of greenhouse gas emissions. Unfortunately, I fear the feasibility of retractioning the recent diesel orders (classes 195, 196 and 197) is pretty much non-existant because the following would be required:

• Hacking a hole or two in the roof to install pantograph(s)
• Replacing the entire (mechancial) traction system with traction motors etc.
• Installing a traction power bus between vehicles so that current collected from the pantograph on one vehicle can reach the traction motors on other vehicles

This is likely to require all existing electrical systems to be stripped out while the work is ongoing partly due to the possibility of sensitive electrical equipment being fried during welding in the pantograph wells (I think these are aluminium bodied) and partly because there're going to have to find somewhere to put the traction power bus.

[RichT54]

Recent posts on RailUK forums have discussed rumours that the introduction of the 769s will be delayed another 12 months, although not all insiders seem to agree.

    800 Driver said:
    Hearing from multiple sources that the 769s have failed their fault free running and the project has been put back at least 12 months .....

Clarence Yard said
That doesn’t make any sense.

Fault free running is specific to the unit being accepted, not the class as a whole. The class authorisation is done through the NR^» (Network Rail - home page) type acceptance programme which, unless GWR^▸ (Great Western Railway) have recently discovered an EMC^▸ (ElectroMagnetic Compatibility) or another serious issue to effectively negate it, has already been completed.

Recent delays to the programme have been mainly around ASLEF^» (Associated Society of Locomotive Engineers and Firemen - about) not accepting the units as fit for their members. The cab seats and desks have been the latest areas of contention.

Can anyone here confirm the rumours?

[IndustryInsider]

I can confirm that Clarence Yard is an extremely reliable source of information.  However that doesn’t mean the 769s will be entering service any time soon!

[eightonedee]

Another month passes, and still no sign of progress. In the meantime the delay in bringing the 769s into service continues to feature in posts on other threads.

During my now weekly commute past Reading Traincare depot, I don't think I have seen more than 3 "on shed", of which (insofar as I can tell from fleeting views as I go past) only one seems to have its GWR^▸ (Great Western Railway) logos and markings applied to its green and grey livery.

Any news - has the ASLEF^» (Associated Society of Locomotive Engineers and Firemen - about) problem been resolved? Are those that have been delivered working properly? When will the rest arrive? Will they enter service before I finally retire in April? Any inside knowledge out there? 

[IndustryInsider]

There’s three more stabled at Oxford, others at Eastleigh I believe and more no doubt dotted around the countryside!

[onthecushions]

I wonder if GWR^▸ (Great Western Railway) is waiting sensibly and quietly for Northern and TfW to sort out the 769's, one way or another, before taking the plunge on (and expense of)  driver training and introduction into service.

OTC

[stuving]

I wonder if GWR^▸ (Great Western Railway) is waiting sensibly and quietly for Northern and TfW to sort out the 769's, one way or another, before taking the plunge on (and expense of)  driver training and introduction into service.

OTC

Driver training started early in September, but there hasn't been a great deal of it yet. I imagine that's because it calls for spare drivers - not needed to drive trains in service -  and they have been hard to find. Train failures on the runs that did happen have not been common, but a lot of trips have been cancelled throughout.

[onthecushions]

I was in Palmer Park, Reading about 1210 today and saw 3V11, 769 937 returning ecs to Reading from Gatwick on time. Looked very smart.

Try the Park's TuTu's Cafe, it's very good.

OTC

[TonyN]

Only one 769 at Oxford this morning so they do move.