The 95 do have a tendency to give off a smell of overheating not metal
bordering on burning from - i presume - either the drive electronics or the
motors under the cars since it doesn't smell like brakes, which can be a bit
disconcerting when its a packed train. This isn't exhibited by the 96 stock on
the jubilee but then they have a different setup.

Anyone know why the 95s are prone to do this? Perhaps the cooling system isn't
quite up to the job?

--
Spud

Anyone know why the 95s are prone to do this? Perhaps the cooling system isn't
quite up to the job?

--
Spud

Maybe the smell is the heat from the resistor grids being dissipated when using rheostatic braking? I don't know if the Northern line can accept regenerative braking. (i.e sending the energy collected back to the supply source)

I was on the Northern Line the other day but didn't notice any peculiar smells, you can definitely tell the 95TS performance has been upgraded since the introduction of TBTC on the Northern Line.

The Northern Line 95TS use newer AC traction motors and IGBT control despite being older, whilst the Jubilee Line 96TS use DC traction motors and GTO control despite being newer - this was because the design specs. for the JLE Extension were frozen back in the early '90s before widespread use of AC technology.

---
Schnuzelbug

Christopher Jolly wrote:
Anyone know why the 95s are prone to do this? Perhaps the cooling system isn't
quite up to the job?

--
Spud

Maybe the smell is the heat from the resistor grids being dissipated when
using rheostatic braking? I don't know if the Northern line can accept
regenerative braking. (i.e sending the energy collected back to the supply source)

I was on the Northern Line the other day but didn't notice any peculiar
smells, you can definitely tell the 95TS performance has been upgraded
since the introduction of TBTC on the Northern Line.

The Northern Line 95TS use newer AC traction motors and IGBT control
despite being older, whilst the Jubilee Line 96TS use DC traction motors
and GTO control despite being newer - this was because the design specs.
for the JLE Extension were frozen back in the early '90s before
widespread use of AC technology.

I'm pretty sure the 95 TS is actually newer than the 96 TS. The newer
sounding number was chosen for the newer Jubilee line to sound better, but
the trains are older, with older technology.

In article ,
(Christopher Jolly) wrote:

Anyone know why the 95s are prone to do this? Perhaps the cooling
system isn't quite up to the job?

Maybe the smell is the heat from the resistor grids being dissipated
when using rheostatic braking? I don't know if the Northern line can
accept regenerative braking. (i.e sending the energy collected back
to the supply source)

I would suspect the smell is from friction braking when regen/rheo braking
isn't able to be used?

I was on the Northern Line the other day but didn't notice any
peculiar smells, you can definitely tell the 95TS performance has
been upgraded since the introduction of TBTC on the Northern Line.

The Northern Line 95TS use newer AC traction motors and IGBT control
despite being older, whilst the Jubilee Line 96TS use DC traction
motors and GTO control despite being newer - this was because the
design specs. for the JLE Extension were frozen back in the early
'90s before widespread use of AC technology.

Although the 96TS uses GTO controls it still has 3-phase AC traction motors.
IGBT was a later 3-phase drive technology which has replaced GTO in practice
for all subsequent builds but apart from a few class 465s GTO-equipped stock
has retained the earlier system.

--
Colin Rosenstiel

Seems I made a mistake.

Both 95TS and 96TS use AC motors - the traction drive system is correct, however.

"1995 and 1996 stocks have similar body shells but they use different AC traction control systems. The 1995 stock system is more modern, since the 1996 stock design specification was frozen in 1991.

1996 stock uses three-phase induction motors fed from a single-source inverter using a GTO (gate-turn-off) thyristor derived from those on Class 465 Networker trains. The 1995 stock uses Alstom's "Onix" three-phase Insulated Gate Bipolar Transistor (IGBT) drive."

apart from a few class 465s

Without going off-topic, I notice only the Eversholt-owned 465/0 and 465/1 have had their original GTO drives replaced by new Hitachi IGBT drives.

The Angel-owned 465/2, 465/9 and 466 retain their original GTO drives.

It's strange when you're at a Southeastern station and hear a new IGBT unit coupled to an older GTO unit depart in multiple.

Do Angel have any plans to upgrade their Networker fleet to Hitachi IGBTs?

---
Schnuzelbug

In article ,
(Christopher Jolly) wrote:

apart from a few class 465s

Without going off-topic, I notice only the Eversholt-owned 465/0 and
465/1 have had their original GTO drives replaced by new Hitachi IGBT
drives.

The Angel-owned 465/2, 465/9 and 466 retain their original GTO drives.

It's strange when you're at a Southeastern station and hear a new
IGBT unit coupled to an older GTO unit depart in multiple.

Do Angel have any plans to upgrade their Networker fleet to Hitachi
IGBTs?

Who owns the 365s? They're GTO-controlled too.

--
Colin Rosenstiel

On Thu, 21 Apr 2016 17:51:58 -0500
wrote:
In article ,
(Christopher Jolly) wrote:

Anyone know why the 95s are prone to do this? Perhaps the cooling
system isn't quite up to the job?

Maybe the smell is the heat from the resistor grids being dissipated
when using rheostatic braking? I don't know if the Northern line can
accept regenerative braking. (i.e sending the energy collected back
to the supply source)

I would suspect the smell is from friction braking when regen/rheo braking
isn't able to be used?

Its definately not a brakes smell, its a distinctive hot metal burning smell.
Hot brakes smell completely different. It could be the resistor grids I suppose
but it seems to occur even when the train hasn't been going very fast before
the station. Whatever it is, its a bit disconcerting as a passenger.

--
Spud

Who owns the 365s? They're GTO-controlled too.

The 365s are owned by Eversholt Rail.

https://www.eversholtrail.co.uk/upload/class-365.pdf

After a quick Google search I can't see any reference to re-equipping them with IGBTs like their 465 counterparts, the only big news in the press is the fleet getting ETCS Level 2 for the ECML.

http://www.railwaygazette.com/news/t...-contract.html

---
Schnuzelbug

In article ,
(Christopher Jolly) wrote:

Who owns the 365s? They're GTO-controlled too.

The 365s are owned by Eversholt Rail.

https://www.eversholtrail.co.uk/upload/class-365.pdf

After a quick Google search I can't see any reference to re-equipping
them with IGBTs like their 465 counterparts, the only big news in the
press is the fleet getting ETCS Level 2 for the ECML.


http://www.railwaygazette.com/news/t...e-view/view/ev
ersholt-awards-etcs-first-in-class-contract.html

Some of the fleet maybe. Most are going to Great Western when the 700s are
in service.

--
Colin Rosenstiel