Train Graphic
Great Western Passengers' Forum
.
Great Western Coffee Shop - [home] and [about]
Read about the forum [here].
Register and contribute [here] - it's free.
article index - [here]
 today - Santa on train - from WESTBURY
12/12/2019 - UK General Election
15/12/2019 - Santa Special - Melksham
15/12/2019 - GWR Timetable recast
16/12/2019 - Network Rail Surgery, BWT
24/12/2019 - No GWR trains, Paddington
Random Image
Train Running @GWR Twitter Acronyms/Abbreviations Station Comparator Rail news GWR co. site Site Style 1 2 3 4 Chat on off
Next departures • Bristol Temple MeadsBath SpaChippenhamSwindonDidcot ParkwayReadingLondon PaddingtonMelksham
Exeter St DavidsTauntonWestburyTrowbridgeBristol ParkwayCardiff CentralOxfordCheltenham SpaBirmingham New Street
December 08, 2019, 03:31:08 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
[86] Heading home for Christmas
[82] The Grove, Watford
[49] Detraining at St James Park
[39] Cotswold Line - 2019 cancellation and amendments log
[38] Carmarthen to Aberystwyth railway
[28] Confirmation of facilities on Crossrail trains
News: A forum for passengers ... with input from rail professionals welcomed too
 
   Home   Help Search Calendar Login Register  
Pages: 1 ... 142 143 [144] 145 146
  Print  
Author Topic: IETs into passenger service from 16 Oct 2017 and subsequent performance issues  (Read 225478 times)
IndustryInsider
Hero Member
*****
Posts: 7693


View Profile
« Reply #2145 on: November 18, 2019, 01:27:44 pm »

They’re much better - especially when accelerating which was always a big negative in Autumn with HST’s as simply too much power was going to the driven wheels even in the lower power notches.  2+4 would likely be less of a problem than 2+8 of course.

As I said though, better vegetation management has also improved things, as has the slack in the timetable on many of the IET services still operating to HST schedules.
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/
broadgage
Transport Scholar
Hero Member
******
Posts: 2929



View Profile
« Reply #2146 on: November 18, 2019, 05:23:37 pm »

An IET should perform better than an HST in leaf fall or otherwise slippery conditions, because a greater proportion of the total weight is on powered wheels.
My concern is that the great complexity of the IETs and the (over?)reliance on computers might lead to a "computer says no" situation when the train could otherwise have proceeded.
Logged

A proper intercity train has a minimum of 8 coaches, gangwayed throughout, with first at one end, and a full sized buffet car between first and standard.
It has space for cycles, surfboards,luggage etc.
A 5 car DMU is not a proper inter-city train. The 5+5 and 9 car DMUs are almost as bad.
PhilWakely
Transport Scholar
Hero Member
******
Posts: 1191



View Profile
« Reply #2147 on: November 18, 2019, 07:25:17 pm »

Whilst waiting at Castle Cary for the Down Cornishman (15:03 ex-PAD), I thought for a millisecond that a 15-car formation was going to turn up!

The automated announcement said "Please join the correct portion of the train - the front 10 coaches for Liskeard, Bodmin Parkway,...., Penzance. The rear 5 coaches will detach and terminate at Plymouth."   Grin Cheesy Wink
Logged
IndustryInsider
Hero Member
*****
Posts: 7693


View Profile
« Reply #2148 on: November 18, 2019, 08:37:18 pm »

An IET should perform better than an HST in leaf fall or otherwise slippery conditions, because a greater proportion of the total weight is on powered wheels.
My concern is that the great complexity of the IETs and the (over?)reliance on computers might lead to a "computer says no" situation when the train could otherwise have proceeded.

Yes indeed, a clear benefit of MU working over loco and coaches.  The HST also had ‘computer says no’ moments when dealing with wheel slide in the form of a ‘locked axle’ warning.  You had to reset the system and do a rotation test every time which was a pain.
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/
Incider
Transport Scholar
Full Member
******
Posts: 78


View Profile
« Reply #2149 on: November 19, 2019, 07:05:12 pm »

An IET should perform better than an HST in leaf fall or otherwise slippery conditions, because a greater proportion of the total weight is on powered wheels.
My concern is that the great complexity of the IETs and the (over?)reliance on computers might lead to a "computer says no" situation when the train could otherwise have proceeded.

Yes indeed, a clear benefit of MU working over loco and coaches.  The HST also had ‘computer says no’ moments when dealing with wheel slide in the form of a ‘locked axle’ warning.  You had to reset the system and do a rotation test every time which was a pain.

Blimey, that’s stretching it a bit 😀.  Computer!!!  The locked axle detection was a bolt on to the BR MKII wheelslide rack fitted to power cars some years after build.  The ones for ECML had an upgrade when they were refurbed, but GWR didn’t have the full refurb, they didn’t take the Brush Traction Control system, which included wheelslide equipment.  Two of the GWR powers did have it, when they took them 43053 &43056.  They also had an improved wheelslip control system, the Driver could leave the power handle open instead of notching offf and the traction control would compensate.
Logged
phile
Hero Member
*****
Posts: 1289

Language spoken Welsh as well as English


View Profile Email
« Reply #2150 on: November 21, 2019, 01:00:36 pm »

There seem to be 4 Diagrams today being worked with 5 vice 9/10
Logged
SandTEngineer
Transport Scholar
Hero Member
******
Posts: 3071


Retired in an S&T hut in the far Southwest


View Profile
« Reply #2151 on: November 25, 2019, 05:17:48 pm »

Interesting comment on the WNXX Forum concerning IET Introduction, from Tony Miles of Modern Railways:

Quote
The general view is that Hitachi focused heavily on building the new trains and not enough on the day to day delivery of sets in fully working state (and the right sets on the right diagrams). Odd as this is the lucrative part of the various contracts.. 30+ years of income... so much so that there is a significant change of senior management at Hitachi UK and a big push.to get things reorganised... both GWR and LNER are politely saying they have confidence in Hitachi (openly) but behind the scenes the three TOCs currently using 80x sets are understood to have reminded Hitachi they want operational trains as promised and not compensation... compensation doesn't carry passengers...
Logged

Out of this nettle, Danger, we pluck this flower, Safety.
[Henry IV, Part 1, Act 2, Scene 3]
broadgage
Transport Scholar
Hero Member
******
Posts: 2929



View Profile
« Reply #2152 on: November 25, 2019, 07:26:02 pm »

Perhaps Hitachi should have borrowed my crystal ball Smiley

Or put more seriously, I based my very negative forecasts on actual experience of at least three other major train fleet renewals, ALL of which ended up with shorter trains than used before the renewals. As I said at the time, "why should this one be different"
Experts on these forums who studied the matter in more detail said it would be different this time, and that my negative experiences with other new fleets were no guide to the future.

Cynical experience trumps optimistic forecasts.

I wonder what Hitachi will do to improve reliability/availability?
Build a few more units perhaps so as to allow for a few spares ?
Or perhaps lengthen a few 5 car sets into 9 car sets ? Which would have a similar effect.

Logged

A proper intercity train has a minimum of 8 coaches, gangwayed throughout, with first at one end, and a full sized buffet car between first and standard.
It has space for cycles, surfboards,luggage etc.
A 5 car DMU is not a proper inter-city train. The 5+5 and 9 car DMUs are almost as bad.
SandTEngineer
Transport Scholar
Hero Member
******
Posts: 3071


Retired in an S&T hut in the far Southwest


View Profile
« Reply #2153 on: November 25, 2019, 07:40:07 pm »

Perhaps Hitachi should have borrowed my crystal ball Smiley

Or put more seriously, I based my very negative forecasts on actual experience of at least three other major train fleet renewals, ALL of which ended up with shorter trains than used before the renewals. As I said at the time, "why should this one be different"
Experts on these forums who studied the matter in more detail said it would be different this time, and that my negative experiences with other new fleets were no guide to the future.

Cynical experience trumps optimistic forecasts.

I wonder what Hitachi will do to improve reliability/availability?
Build a few more units perhaps so as to allow for a few spares ?
Or perhaps lengthen a few 5 car sets into 9 car sets ? Which would have a similar effect.

I think you have unfairly interpreted that quote.  The correct trains are there as ordered by the customer, but its the way the implementation has been handled that's failed.  Not ordering the correct number of trains, or car formation in the first place, is not Hitachi's fault.  Don't think I need to remind you who did the specifying and ordering......
Logged

Out of this nettle, Danger, we pluck this flower, Safety.
[Henry IV, Part 1, Act 2, Scene 3]
broadgage
Transport Scholar
Hero Member
******
Posts: 2929



View Profile
« Reply #2154 on: November 25, 2019, 07:59:09 pm »

But did the customer ever specify the number of trains to be built ? My understanding was that the customer specified the number of trains to be available each day for service, and that it was up to Hitachi how many trains to build in order to meet this requirement.

79 trains available for service was the requirement IIRC. Up to Hitachi to decide if they need to build 83 trains, or 85, or some other number was my understanding.

As the expected reliability/availability has not been achieved, building a few extras would seem to be one way of meeting the contracted availability.

Likewise lengthening a few 5 car sets to 9 cars, would help reduce short formations when failures occur.
Logged

A proper intercity train has a minimum of 8 coaches, gangwayed throughout, with first at one end, and a full sized buffet car between first and standard.
It has space for cycles, surfboards,luggage etc.
A 5 car DMU is not a proper inter-city train. The 5+5 and 9 car DMUs are almost as bad.
stuving
Transport Scholar
Hero Member
******
Posts: 4296


View Profile
« Reply #2155 on: November 25, 2019, 08:20:14 pm »

But did the customer ever specify the number of trains to be built ? My understanding was that the customer specified the number of trains to be available each day for service, and that it was up to Hitachi how many trains to build in order to meet this requirement.

79 trains available for service was the requirement IIRC. Up to Hitachi to decide if they need to build 83 trains, or 85, or some other number was my understanding.

As the expected reliability/availability has not been achieved, building a few extras would seem to be one way of meeting the contracted availability.

Likewise lengthening a few 5 car sets to 9 cars, would help reduce short formations when failures occur.

There was an agreed fleet size in the contracts, visible in the delivery schedule. But the logic of the way the procurement was done is indeed that the agreed fleet was a minimum. The idea was that the whole fleet should be big enough to provide the specified number of units in service. Making that contract with the manufacturer, and setting the penalties high enough to hurt, only makes sense if they would add to the fleet if their initial plans turned out optimistic.

I imagine the trouble with that is the need to make a decision for such an extra build in advance of doing it. "We will have to built another couple of units - at our own cost - in case we can't fix the serviceability issues within a year at most." Doesn't look good as a pitch to the boss does it? And a request for that much money out of the bottom line is going to your boss's boss's boss (at least). Plus, of course, it would be more that a year if building form scratch, and "borrowing" off production only works if the later orders are for nearly identical designs.
Logged
1st fan
Sr. Member
****
Posts: 266


View Profile
« Reply #2156 on: November 25, 2019, 11:43:07 pm »

Perhaps Hitachi should have borrowed my crystal ball Smiley

Or put more seriously, I based my very negative forecasts on actual experience of at least three other major train fleet renewals, ALL of which ended up with shorter trains than used before the renewals. As I said at the time, "why should this one be different"
Experts on these forums who studied the matter in more detail said it would be different this time, and that my negative experiences with other new fleets were no guide to the future.

Cynical experience trumps optimistic forecasts.

I wonder what Hitachi will do to improve reliability/availability?
Build a few more units perhaps so as to allow for a few spares ?
Or perhaps lengthen a few 5 car sets into 9 car sets ? Which would have a similar effect.

I think you have unfairly interpreted that quote.  The correct trains are there as ordered by the customer, but its the way the implementation has been handled that's failed.  Not ordering the correct number of trains, or car formation in the first place, is not Hitachi's fault.  Don't think I need to remind you who did the specifying and ordering......

My dad was of the opinion that it didn't matter the voyagers were short because there was a more frequent service of them. That was until he traveled on one and then asked what idiot ordered and specified them. I don't blame Hitachi for building what they were asked to. That's because the blame lies with the DfT and DCA design.
Logged
broadgage
Transport Scholar
Hero Member
******
Posts: 2929



View Profile
« Reply #2157 on: November 25, 2019, 11:56:51 pm »

I do not blame hitachi for building what was ordered.
But I DO BLAME Hitachi for the trains not working reliably. If the customer wants a suburban DMU I cant blame Hitachi for supplying them. BUT they should still work with sufficient reliability to provide the advertised service.
After over two years this has not been achieved.
Logged

A proper intercity train has a minimum of 8 coaches, gangwayed throughout, with first at one end, and a full sized buffet car between first and standard.
It has space for cycles, surfboards,luggage etc.
A 5 car DMU is not a proper inter-city train. The 5+5 and 9 car DMUs are almost as bad.
IndustryInsider
Hero Member
*****
Posts: 7693


View Profile
« Reply #2158 on: November 26, 2019, 12:05:39 am »

Interesting comment on the WNXX Forum concerning IET Introduction, from Tony Miles of Modern Railways:

Quote
The general view is that Hitachi focused heavily on building the new trains and not enough on the day to day delivery of sets in fully working state (and the right sets on the right diagrams). Odd as this is the lucrative part of the various contracts.. 30+ years of income... so much so that there is a significant change of senior management at Hitachi UK and a big push.to get things reorganised... both GWR and LNER are politely saying they have confidence in Hitachi (openly) but behind the scenes the three TOCs currently using 80x sets are understood to have reminded Hitachi they want operational trains as promised and not compensation... compensation doesn't carry passengers...

Good to hear, if true, that the TOCs are not simply going to lied down and accept some shortforms and instead rake in lots of compensation.  I'd seem to recollect some cynics predicting that?
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/
nickswift99
Full Member
***
Posts: 40


View Profile
« Reply #2159 on: November 26, 2019, 07:28:59 am »

Can someone explain how GWR propose to introduce a reliable new timetable in December given that rolling stock availability isn’t meeting their existing service needs?

With less than 3 weeks to go is Hitachi able to step up in time?
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 ... 142 143 [144] 145 146
  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