Train GraphicClick on the map to explore geographics
 
I need help
FAQ
Emergency
About
Waterloo Campaign
Travel & transport from BBC stories as at 21:35 04 Oct 2022
- Train strikes: What are the dates and where is affected?
- Shell boss says taxing energy firms to help the poor is 'inevitable'
- More rail disruption expected as 9,000 train drivers strike
- Supermarket push to cut waste hits food bank donations
Read about the forum [here].
Register [here] - it's free.
What do I gain from registering? [here]
 21/10/22 - TWSW General Meeting
02/11/22 - WWRUG / Trowbridge

On this day
4th Oct (1911)
First Escalator switched on, Earls Court (*)

Train RunningCancelled
22:00 Hereford to Worcester Shrub Hill
05/10/22 16:33 London Paddington to Bristol Temple Meads
Short Run
22:22 London Paddington to Bedwyn
05/10/22 08:32 Bristol Temple Meads to London Paddington
05/10/22 10:32 London Paddington to Bristol Temple Meads
05/10/22 13:30 Bristol Temple Meads to London Paddington
05/10/22 15:32 London Paddington to Bristol Temple Meads
Delayed
18:48 London Paddington to Swansea
18:58 London Paddington to Hereford
19:28 London Paddington to Worcester Shrub Hill
20:03 London Paddington to Westbury
An additional train service has been planned to operate as shown 05/10/22 08:32 London Paddington to Bristol Temple Meads
PollsOpen and recent polls
Closed 2022-10-04 Airport closure (Doncaster) - what to you think?
Abbreviation pageAcronymns and abbreviations
Stn ComparatorStation Comparator
Rail newsNews Now - live rail news feed
Site Style 1 2 3 4
Next departures • Bristol Temple MeadsBath SpaChippenhamSwindonDidcot ParkwayReadingLondon PaddingtonMelksham
Exeter St DavidsTauntonWestburyTrowbridgeBristol ParkwayCardiff CentralOxfordCheltenham SpaBirmingham New Street
October 04, 2022, 09:44:45 pm *
Welcome, Guest. Please login or register.

Login with username, password and session length
Forgotten your username or password? - get a reminder
Most recently liked subjects
[99] Eurostar - snapshot of current services
[80] Rail Strikes - Effects ?
[56] Bikes on trains - it is possiple
[49] Bristol Temple Meads Station redevelopment
[43] New PM and Transport Secretary - Liz Truss & Anne-Marie Trevel...
[30] Cotham Hill opening to non-motorists
News: the Great Western Coffee Shop ... keeping you up to date with travel around the South West
 
   Home   Help Search Calendar Login Register  
Pages: 1 2 [3] 4 5 ... 16
  Print  
Author Topic: Trimode cl 769 to operate Reading to Oxford and Gatwick.  (Read 90356 times)
devonexpress
Sr. Member
****
Posts: 294


View Profile
« Reply #30 on: April 21, 2018, 02:07:19 pm »

Right, so had a good look on the internet.  IPEMU (Independely Powered Electic Multiple Unit (train running on batteries)) Class 379, Test was successful in that the battery would allow for 60 mile running before becoming empty.  Enough to do the Oxford to Didcot shuttle 6 times, or to allow for running in between non electrified sections of the Reading to Gatwick line. However, as it was only a short trial funded by Network Rail (NR» (Network Rail - home page)), the batteries where removed after completion of the testing.  It now seems as has been posted Vivarail have taken on the technology. So if it proves to be successful in proper passenger service then who knows?

It just seems a shame that Bombarider, aren't using the trial as a benchmark for battery operated trains or if not haven't looked at retrofitting small diesel engines into the Class 387's for off wire power.


Edit: VickiS - Clarifying abbreviation
« Last Edit: March 30, 2021, 10:40:33 am by VickiS » Logged
ChrisB
Transport Scholar
Hero Member
******
Posts: 11174


View Profile Email
« Reply #31 on: April 21, 2018, 05:19:27 pm »

GWR (Great Western Railway) have only mewntioned BAN-RDG(resolve), and RDG to GTW. so no PAD» (Paddington (London) - next trains) runs at all. I could easily see BAN-GTW services, utilising the underpass east of RDG to access the Guildford route.

It could also cover the Cotswold stopper too, releasing yet another turbo.

That would just leave the TV branches needing the odd turbo.
Logged
didcotdean
Transport Scholar
Hero Member
******
Posts: 1367


View Profile
« Reply #32 on: April 21, 2018, 05:50:52 pm »

There is currently one residual through Oxford-Paddington stopper (fast from/to Maidenhead) in each direction, up early morning and back evening peak. Not clear what would happen with this in a 'no turbo' scenario, apart from being binned.
Logged
grahame
Administrator
Hero Member
*****
Posts: 36949



View Profile WWW Email
« Reply #33 on: April 21, 2018, 06:19:55 pm »

I could easily see BAN-GTW services, utilising the underpass east of RDG(resolve) to access the Guildford route.

Onward dreams towards extending from Banbury to Birmingham, and from Gatwick to Brighton? 
Logged

Coffee Shop Admin, Vice Chair of Melksham Rail User Group, and on the board of TravelWatch SouthWest.
grahame
Administrator
Hero Member
*****
Posts: 36949



View Profile WWW Email
« Reply #34 on: April 21, 2018, 06:33:49 pm »

There is currently one residual through Oxford-Paddington stopper (fast from/to Maidenhead) in each direction, up early morning and back evening peak. Not clear what would happen with this in a 'no turbo' scenario, apart from being binned.

GWR (Great Western Railway) has a history (old and new companies) of extra stops in expresses on peak routes at busy commuter times and very late at night - witness extra stops at stations like Severn Tunnel Junction and Dilton Marsh.  As well as binning the service, would there be an option of starting a first service on am 802 diagram from Oxford somewhat ahead of the normal clock face to still provide a direct link to London, and reversing the process in the evening?
Logged

Coffee Shop Admin, Vice Chair of Melksham Rail User Group, and on the board of TravelWatch SouthWest.
ChrisB
Transport Scholar
Hero Member
******
Posts: 11174


View Profile Email
« Reply #35 on: April 21, 2018, 06:39:09 pm »

I could easily see BAN-GTW services, utilising the underpass east of RDG(resolve) to access the Guildford route.

Onward dreams towards extending from Banbury to Birmingham, and from Gatwick to Brighton? 

Yep, definitely a dream. Why the need to mirror XC (Cross Country Trains (franchise)) on the former, and there line's full to Three Bridges at least, if not to Brighton. On an refreshed 319? That is likely to be the new 'pacer' in less than a decade.
Logged
didcotdean
Transport Scholar
Hero Member
******
Posts: 1367


View Profile
« Reply #36 on: April 21, 2018, 07:08:02 pm »

GWR (Great Western Railway) has a history (old and new companies) of extra stops in expresses on peak routes at busy commuter times and very late at night - witness extra stops at stations like Severn Tunnel Junction and Dilton Marsh.  As well as binning the service, would there be an option of starting a first service on am 802 diagram from Oxford somewhat ahead of the normal clock face to still provide a direct link to London, and reversing the process in the evening?
The up service stops at the rare trifecta of Radley, Culham and Appleford although the down Radley only. I guess only Radley would ever even come into consideration for warranting stopping of a fast Oxford.
Logged
Electric train
Transport Scholar
Hero Member
******
Posts: 3872


The future is 25000 Volts AC 750V DC has its place


View Profile
« Reply #37 on: April 21, 2018, 07:09:59 pm »

What happened to the battery powered 379 that was going about in Greater Anglia? Surely Didcot to Oxford would be enough on batteries, and it could be recharged back on electric overheads?   Also GWR (Great Western Railway) removed the 3rd rail, which could have been used on the Gatwick services. Either way, someone doesn't seem to have a lot of common sense here.
Battery 379 was converted back after the trial.  Do you mean 387 shoegear? I don’t believe GWR removed their 387 pickup shoes.  I’ve seen a few people questioning online why it is still there, but all the recent deliveries still have shoebeams visible, although the actual shoes will be retracted, and all did DC (Direct Current) testing on the Brighton line.

Paul

387 have retractable shoe gear, therefore it looks like it has been removed but it has not.  It is not in GWR gift to remove the shoe gear as they do not own the units, the trains would need modifying as there are interlocks on the shoe gear.

The DfT» (Department for Transport - about) want inter operable EMUs (Electric Multiple Unit) for redeployment etc.

Its unlikely 387 will be retrofitted with diesels, having batteries fitted to 3387 (and other units) is an option certainly on the DC network to capture the energy from regen braking to reduce the need for adding more traction substation capacity near stations ................ its a bit of work I have a loose involvement in at work
Logged

Neither a wise man nor a brave man lies down on the tracks of history to wait for the train of the future to run over him.     
Dwight D. Eisenhower
hassaanhc
Full Member
***
Posts: 79


View Profile
« Reply #38 on: April 21, 2018, 07:29:11 pm »

There is currently one residual through Oxford-Paddington stopper (fast from/to Maidenhead) in each direction, up early morning and back evening peak. Not clear what would happen with this in a 'no turbo' scenario, apart from being binned.
There is also the 2P99 2006 Banbury to London Paddington, which stops at most stations on the way.
Logged
didcotdean
Transport Scholar
Hero Member
******
Posts: 1367


View Profile
« Reply #39 on: April 21, 2018, 09:39:05 pm »

Yes that one has to be part of the consideration as well, although it is a bit different from the other two. It does mean the direct connection to London for the BAN-OXF» (Oxford - next trains) stations is a bit odd.
Logged
paul7575
Transport Scholar
Hero Member
******
Posts: 5170


View Profile
« Reply #40 on: April 22, 2018, 01:53:10 pm »

Do you mean 387 shoegear? I don’t believe GWR (Great Western Railway) removed their 387 pickup shoes.  I’ve seen a few people questioning online why it is still there, but all the recent deliveries still have shoebeams visible, although the actual shoes will be retracted, and all did DC (Direct Current) testing on the Brighton line.

387 have retractable shoe gear, therefore it looks like it has been removed but it has not.
The very point I was just making.  A similar situation exists with some of the LM (London Midland - recent franchise) 350/1s, the shoes are still there but almost impossible to see at first glance.
Logged
eightonedee
Transport Scholar
Hero Member
******
Posts: 1290



View Profile
« Reply #41 on: June 26, 2018, 09:46:51 pm »

Anyone on our network know what's happening about these trains?

In the light of recent correspondence here about air condition/cooling, cascading of Turbo trains etc, I have done some Googling to  find out what specification we can expect. I ended up on something called RailUK Forums (a pale imitation of our own!) where there was much conflicting information as to the comfort of the trains from which they are being converted, and the delightful suggestion we should follow the French and call them Bi-Bis (rather than trimodes).

More significantly is the suggestion that there are problems with developing the trains - it is suggested that there is not yet a working prototype, and there may be problems with the conversion.

Should we start worrying? 
Logged
IndustryInsider
Data Manager
Hero Member
******
Posts: 9414


View Profile
« Reply #42 on: June 27, 2018, 12:48:55 am »

I don’t think we should start worrying, but I do think we should keep a watchful eye as clearly the development programme is slipping.
Logged

To view my GWML (Great Western Main Line) Electrification cab video 'before and after' video comparison, as well as other videos of the new layout at Reading and 'before and after' comparisons of the Cotswold Line Redoubling scheme, see: http://www.dailymotion.com/user/IndustryInsider/
Noggin
Hero Member
*****
Posts: 414


View Profile
« Reply #43 on: August 13, 2018, 06:45:49 pm »

Anyone on our network know what's happening about these trains?

In the light of recent correspondence here about air condition/cooling, cascading of Turbo trains etc, I have done some Googling to  find out what specification we can expect. I ended up on something called RailUK Forums (a pale imitation of our own!) where there was much conflicting information as to the comfort of the trains from which they are being converted, and the delightful suggestion we should follow the French and call them Bi-Bis (rather than trimodes).

More significantly is the suggestion that there are problems with developing the trains - it is suggested that there is not yet a working prototype, and there may be problems with the conversion.

Should we start worrying? 

It depends on whether you are worried about them being introduced, or not being introduced ;-)

More seriously, the thread on WNXX (Stored Unserviceable, Mainline Locos HQ All Classes) has seen quite a lot of informed comment, including that of an ex-Alstom electrical engineer fairly well acquainted with them and a GWR (Great Western Railway) manager. There were suggestions that whilst the issues with the traction kit may have been resolved, there may be more fundamental issues with the ability of the underframes to carry the extra weight. Wouldn't hold your breath waiting for their introduction, put it that way.
Logged
eightonedee
Transport Scholar
Hero Member
******
Posts: 1290



View Profile
« Reply #44 on: August 16, 2018, 10:32:22 pm »

Noggin  - the answer to your question is - both! It is a shame that the short-sighted decision to halt electrification has led to what appears to be a looming rolling stock crisis as the Turbos are cascaded to replace trains that are not too much older which are being transferred elsewhere, but services which were (presumably) assumed to be electrified by now (Didcot - Oxford, the Henley and Windsor branches) now have to be served by something that does not need OHL (Over-Head Line) electicity. Recycled late 1980s stopgaps do not look an attractive substitute.

Does your source indicate if the problem is corrosion of these ageing trains, or simply that the weight of engines and generators is too much for the structure? Either way, it is not looking good.
Logged
Do you have something you would like to add to this thread, or would you like to raise a new question at the Coffee Shop? Please [register] (it is free) if you have not done so before, or login (at the top of this page) if you already have an account - we would love to read what you have to say!

You can find out more about how this forum works [here] - that will link you to a copy of the forum agreement that you can read before you join, and tell you very much more about how we operate. We are an independent forum, provided and run by customers of Great Western Railway, for customers of Great Western Railway and we welcome railway professionals as members too, in either a personal or official capacity. Views expressed in posts are not necessarily the views of the operators of the forum.

As well as posting messages onto existing threads, and starting new subjects, members can communicate with each other through personal messages if they wish. And once members have made a certain number of posts, they will automatically be admitted to the "frequent posters club", where subjects not-for-public-domain are discussed; anything from the occasional rant to meetups we may be having ...

 
Pages: 1 2 [3] 4 5 ... 16
  Print  
 
Jump to:  

Powered by MySQL Powered by PHP Powered by SMF 1.1.2 | SMF © 2006-2007, Simple Machines LLC Valid XHTML 1.0! Valid CSS!
This forum is provided by a customer of Great Western Railway (formerly First Great Western), and the views expressed are those of the individual posters concerned. Visit www.gwr.com for the official Great Western Railway website. Please contact the administrators of this site if you feel that the content provided by one of our posters contravenes our posting rules (email link). Forum hosted by Well House Consultants

Jump to top of pageJump to Forum Home Page