Traction system replacements - Classes 465/0 and 465/1

[Sky Rider]

Having skim read some parts of The Modern Railway Directory 2008
earlier, I am intrigued to see that a new traction system by Hitachi is
due to be installed in the HSBC Rail-owned 465s (/0 and /1) from 2009 -
try as I might I can't seem to find much information on it. Besides past
copies of Modern Railways (which I will look through if I can find
them), are there any other sources of information? I would be grateful
if anyone could provide me with some information on the actual works as
well.

[Paul Scott]

Having skim read some parts of The Modern Railway Directory 2008 earlier,
I am intrigued to see that a new traction system by Hitachi is due to be
installed in the HSBC Rail-owned 465s (/0 and /1) from 2009 - try as I
might I can't seem to find much information on it. Besides past copies of
Modern Railways (which I will look through if I can find them), are there
any other sources of information? I would be grateful if anyone could
provide me with some information on the actual works as well.

Quite a challenge! I could only find a very short article by googling on
terms such as HSBC or Networker.

http://www.railwaystrategies.co.uk/article-page.php?contentid=2193&issueid=103

in full, it states:

Hitachi and HSBC Rail (UK) have concluded a contract with Southeastern to
upgrade 97 Class 465 0 & 1 series Networker trains with a latest-generation
Hitachi traction system. The traction system will assimilate the
Hitachi/HSBC Verification Train traction system, which has was proven in
2005 on the UK rail network. The first unit will be fitted to commence test
running in 2008 and the full fleet will be fitted by Hitachi at the new
Ashford facility during 2009 and early 2010. The new class 465 traction
system will be maintained by Hitachi at existing Southeastern maintenance
facilities.

Not much help but might be a start...

Paul

[D7666]

Having skim read some parts of The Modern Railway Directory 2008 earlier,

http://www.railwaystrategies.co.uk/article-page.php?contentid=2193&is...

Chickens and eggs.

I suspect the latter is the source of the former gen.


--
Nick

[Sky Rider]

Post by Paul Scott
Quite a challenge! I could only find a very short article by googling on
terms such as HSBC or Networker.
http://www.railwaystrategies.co.uk/article-page.php?contentid=2193&issueid=103
Hitachi and HSBC Rail (UK) have concluded a contract with Southeastern to
upgrade 97 Class 465 0 & 1 series Networker trains with a latest-generation
Hitachi traction system. The traction system will assimilate the
Hitachi/HSBC Verification Train traction system, which has was proven in
2005 on the UK rail network. The first unit will be fitted to commence test
running in 2008 and the full fleet will be fitted by Hitachi at the new
Ashford facility during 2009 and early 2010. The new class 465 traction
system will be maintained by Hitachi at existing Southeastern maintenance
facilities.
Not much help but might be a start...

Thanks for the info. I've just searched Google Groups and it turns out
that this had been discussed in late March 2006 (albeit to a rather
limited extent) - http://tinyurl.com/2xq6yq

I've also discovered that Roger Ford covered this in the January 2007
issue of Modern Railways and as such the article is also available on
his website (http://tinyurl.com/2w7rfa) - the traction *inverters* will
be replaced by Hitachi, but the traction motors will remain (during the
discussion of 25/03/2006 it was suggested that the motors would be
replaced).

[Paul Harley]

Post by Sky Rider
I've also discovered that Roger Ford covered this in the January 2007
issue of Modern Railways and as such the article is also available on
his website (http://tinyurl.com/2w7rfa) - the traction *inverters* will
be replaced by Hitachi, but the traction motors will remain (during the
discussion of 25/03/2006 it was suggested that the motors would be
replaced).

Fascinating article - thanks for the link!

What it doesn't explain is whether the inverters are identical between
the BREL and Metro-Cammell units. The latter (which have GEC traction
motors, rather than Brush) are more reliable. Is it a case the GEC
motors are more tolerant of the inverters they currently work with?

Paul Harley

[John Tattersall]

Post by Paul Harley

Post by Sky Rider
I've also discovered that Roger Ford covered this in the January 2007
issue of Modern Railways and as such the article is also available on
his website (http://tinyurl.com/2w7rfa) - the traction *inverters* will
be replaced by Hitachi, but the traction motors will remain (during the
discussion of 25/03/2006 it was suggested that the motors would be
replaced).

Fascinating article - thanks for the link!
What it doesn't explain is whether the inverters are identical between
the BREL and Metro-Cammell units. The latter (which have GEC traction
motors, rather than Brush) are more reliable. Is it a case the GEC
motors are more tolerant of the inverters they currently work with?

AIUI the inverters are different - the Met-Camm units having GEC inverters.
A very similar traction system (inverters and motors) is used on the Jubilee
line tube stock, which was of course built by GEC-Alsthom.

[D7666]

Post by Sky Rider
be replaced by Hitachi, but the traction motors will remain (during the
discussion of 25/03/2006 it was suggested that the motors would be
replaced).

I think I commented before somewhere it would be highly odd to replace
such a motor.

A three phase ''squirrel cage'' motor is a really robust device. Its
only rotating part is a lump of metal (well ok two metals) and there
is no electrical contact between that and the stationary part other
than by induction. There would have to be some serious manufacturing
defect to warrant motor replacement - and - unlike invertors - such
motors have been in production for around 100 years so and are
pretty well known.

One of the problems with invertors of Networkers are is that very much
NSE was at the leading edge there, forcing it along. As an early
produuct, they may not be as robust. DB has the same problems with is
class 120 electric locos and, so I understand, with some of the
earlier class 401 ICE power cars.

Also, I'll re-confirm the invertors on the Brush batch are different
from those on the GEC batch. Although it was an NSE proecject, there
were still shades of the former BR dual sourcing policy around at the
time.

--
Nick

[Boltar]

Post by D7666
One of the problems with invertors of Networkers are is that very much
NSE was at the leading edge there, forcing it along. As an early
produuct, they may not be as robust.

They can't be that bad , they've been used since the early 90s. With
all the problems on the railways at the moment , spending money on
replacing working equipment doesn't seem the best use of finances.
Unless the 465s have been particularly unreliable?

B2003

[Paul Scott]

Post by Boltar

Post by D7666
One of the problems with invertors of Networkers are is that very much
NSE was at the leading edge there, forcing it along. As an early
produuct, they may not be as robust.

They can't be that bad , they've been used since the early 90s. With
all the problems on the railways at the moment , spending money on
replacing working equipment doesn't seem the best use of finances.
Unless the 465s have been particularly unreliable?

The second link in an earlier post takes you to Roger Ford's Modern Railways
article on the costs/benefits of the change - he seems to think it has to be
seen as a long term improvement...

http://tinyurl.com/2w7rfa

HTH Paul

[D7666]

Post by Boltar
They can't be that bad , they've been used since the early 90s.

When Connex ran the SE franchise, they added more 375s to one batch
than they actually needed purely to make up for 465/466 low
availability.

And that is not a cue to abuse Connex. That is what they inherited
from the BR shadow TOU, and NSE before that.

On the subject of money, if you have a fleet of say 100 units that
turn in say 85% availability compared to say 95% that you can get out
of something like a Desiro or Electrostar, then you have 10 more units
in your fleet leased over a long time. Lets say - pessimistically -
465/466 have 20 years to run, saving 10 units per year over 20 is big
money - and may well be offset by replacing the component of greatest
unreliability. SET/IKF then gets up to 10 more units for traffic
growth without buying more units, or buying a lower number. Or, what
may happen here, is release the remaining SET 508s to go off lease;
and dropping a whole non standard class improves matters all round.

--
Nick

[Arthur Figgis]

Post by Sky Rider
Having skim read some parts of The Modern Railway Directory 2008
earlier, I am intrigued to see that a new traction system by Hitachi is
due to be installed in the HSBC Rail-owned 465s (/0 and /1) from 2009 -
try as I might I can't seem to find much information on it. Besides past
copies of Modern Railways (which I will look through if I can find
them), are there any other sources of information? I would be grateful
if anyone could provide me with some information on the actual works as
well.

Railway Gazette International, January 2008.

The article doesn't seem to be on their website, but it might appear
next month.