Train Graphic
Great Western Passengers' Forum [home] and [about]
November lockdown advice
Forum in and beyond Coronavirus
DfT Covid Travel Advice
Read about the forum [here].
Register [here] - it's free.
What do I gain from registering? [here]
 01/12/20 - Tuesday Club - ONLINE
04/12/20 - TWSW AGM - ONLINE
09/12/20 - Community Rail Network Awards
13/01/21 - Melksham RUG - ONLINE
Random Image
Train Running Polls Acronyms/Abbreviations Station Comparator Rail news GWR co. site Site Style 1 2 3 4
Next departures • Bristol Temple MeadsBath SpaChippenhamSwindonDidcot ParkwayReadingLondon PaddingtonMelksham
Exeter St DavidsTauntonWestburyTrowbridgeBristol ParkwayCardiff CentralOxfordCheltenham SpaBirmingham New Street
November 29, 2020, 08:11:58 am *
Welcome, Guest. Please login or register.

Login with username, password and session length
Forgotten your username or password? - get a reminder
Most liked recent subjects
[119] Six new stations between Cardiff and Severn Tunnel - proposal
[75] Expansion of SWR services to Swindon and Okehampton?
[56] 2021 timetable changes - GWR Central Area
[54] Bristol Zoo on the move
[49] Cholsey Station: J J Hutt coal wagon
[25] Crossrail - further delay
News: A forum for passengers ... with input from rail professionals welcomed too
 
   Home   Help Search Calendar Login Register  
Pages: 1 ... 6 7 [8]
  Print  
Author Topic: Trimode cl 769 to operate Reading to Oxford and Gatwick.  (Read 28723 times)
eightf48544
Transport Scholar
Hero Member
******
Posts: 4452


View Profile Email
« Reply #105 on: August 21, 2020, 11:33:28 am »


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.

I would have thought 3rd rail operation would be essential between Guildford and Ash.
Logged
eightonedee
Transport Scholar
Hero Member
******
Posts: 830



View Profile
« Reply #106 on: August 21, 2020, 01:43:24 pm »

May be I ask for too much, but I noted 5 across seating, and that the top corners of the coaches had that kind of welded up/plated look that much HST stock and old 455s do - is that corrosion repair?

I may be back commuting for at least a day or two a week next month, but assume it will be a while before I can "road test" one from a passenger point of view.

It is a bit of a worry when some of the informed posters are concerned if the diesel engines will cope if they are introduced into service the leaf fall season.
Logged
IndustryInsider
Data Manager
Hero Member
******
Posts: 8371


View Profile
« Reply #107 on: August 21, 2020, 02:03:31 pm »

I doubt you'll see any in passenger service until the December timetable change, though hopefully they'll be able to get some serious testing in during leaf fall to check they cope OK.
Logged

To view my GWML 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/
Surrey 455
Hero Member
*****
Posts: 954


View Profile
« Reply #108 on: August 21, 2020, 07:35:11 pm »

3+2 seating? That's disappointing. I would have hoped that the configuration could have been changed to 2+2 in a similar way to what SWT did to their 455's, also introducing a width gap of about an inch or two between the seats for more comfort.

I can't remember much about the Thameslink 319 seats but I have a vague memory of them being lower than on other trains and not as comfortable.

Incidentally do any new trains come in a 3+2 layout any more? That's new as in brand new. Not refurbished or rebuilt.
Logged
IndustryInsider
Data Manager
Hero Member
******
Posts: 8371


View Profile
« Reply #109 on: August 22, 2020, 12:38:48 am »

I don’t think so.  In terms of old trains though it’s often difficult to just replace a 3+2 seating with 2+2 as there are often under seat equipment that can’t easily be (re)moved.
Logged

To view my GWML 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/
Electric train
Hero Member
*****
Posts: 3396


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


View Profile
« Reply #110 on: August 22, 2020, 07:48:26 am »

I don’t think so.  In terms of old trains though it’s often difficult to just replace a 3+2 seating with 2+2 as there are often under seat equipment that can’t easily be (re)moved.

Also if they were reduced to 2 + 2 seating a 4 car train would then only have the same seating capacity as a 3 car with 3 + 2 Assuming the 769's are 4 car  Roll Eyes
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
eightonedee
Transport Scholar
Hero Member
******
Posts: 830



View Profile
« Reply #111 on: August 22, 2020, 07:54:49 am »

Really Ii?

I will try to look under the seats if and when I get to use one. If they are anything like Turbos, the seat fixings heating paraphernalia etc seems all to be under the outer two seats.

Certainly there doesn't seem to have been much problem doing the quite radical shifting of seats in two car Turbos to replace the old first class seats and install the long cycle and luggage racks.

And if I recall correctly from the nicely refurbished 150 I rode on to St Ives two years ago that had been converted to 4 across with no problem.

Dare I suggest if this is right the wrong redundant stock has been used as the basis of this conversion?
Logged
eightonedee
Transport Scholar
Hero Member
******
Posts: 830



View Profile
« Reply #112 on: August 22, 2020, 08:15:04 am »

And in response to Electric Train, checking the seating diagrams GWR publish for 2 car 165s and 3 car 166s the three across seating actually only adds 14 and 19 extra seats respectively.  The additional coach should therefore still add considerable extra capacity if they were 4 across throughout. The discomfort of narrow packed seating doesn't seem justified in any stock these days- the Electrostars are all the better for being 4 across and they are in use on high density commuter services

A substantial part of the business ( or potential business) on the North Downs line is middle distance/ cross country travelers, including luggage laden  weary holiday makers returning from Gatwick looking to avoid the hassle of crossing London.  Surely something a little more suitable for them is in order too.
Logged
IndustryInsider
Data Manager
Hero Member
******
Posts: 8371


View Profile
« Reply #113 on: August 22, 2020, 09:47:32 am »

Really Ii?

I’m sure it could be done, but only at an extra cost that probably couldn’t be justified, and you might find that the project was authorised based on it providing a set percentage of seating uplift on the existing Turbo fleet - as well as providing the extra stock needed for the long proposed 3tph service.

Without seeing the specific numbers, I doubt a 4-car 80m train with 2+2 would have more seats than a 3-car 69m train with some 3+2.

I agree that 2+2 is a much more modern and sensible layout, but as with cascaded Turbos sometimes that isn’t the way it works out.  At least the North Downs route has had the same internal layouts for many years, so it’s just a like-for-like replacement.
Logged

To view my GWML 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/
Electric train
Hero Member
*****
Posts: 3396


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


View Profile
« Reply #114 on: August 22, 2020, 10:03:44 am »

Really Ii?

I’m sure it could be done, but only at an extra cost that probably couldn’t be justified, and you might find that the project was authorised based on it providing a set percentage of seating uplift on the existing Turbo fleet - as well as providing the extra stock needed for the long proposed 3tph service.

Without seeing the specific numbers, I doubt a 4-car 80m train with 2+2 would have more seats than a 3-car 69m train with some 3+2.

I agree that 2+2 is a much more modern and sensible layout, but as with cascaded Turbos sometimes that isn’t the way it works out.  At least the North Downs route has had the same internal layouts for many years, so it’s just a like-for-like replacement.

It could have been worse ................... could have gone for the 345 seating plan  Grin
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
IndustryInsider
Data Manager
Hero Member
******
Posts: 8371


View Profile
« Reply #115 on: August 23, 2020, 10:57:39 am »

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.

I would have thought 3rd rail operation would be essential between Guildford and Ash.

Just reading over on RailForums and Clarence Yard (a very reliable source of information) says that one of the three DC sections is looking OK to power the 769s, with the potential to use all three still being investigated.
Logged

To view my GWML 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/
Fourbee
Hero Member
*****
Posts: 598


View Profile
« Reply #116 on: September 16, 2020, 02:28:45 pm »

It'll be essentially 2+2, because people will put their suitcase on the third seat Smiley

To me 165s seem to have more room than 166s when everyone is doing that with their bags anyway and the luggage rack remains unused.
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 ... 6 7 [8]
  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