Problems with IET trains from April 2021

[whole diary]

[eightonedee]

Dipping into the BBC^» (British Broadcasting Corporation - home page) Local News revealed the following-

https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-england-56902528

Perhaps some of our industry insiders have more information? It's just as well this has come to light (and hopefully will be resolved) in current circumstances when traffic is light.

[IndustryInsider]

It doesn't sound like anything more than you might expect from a new train.  A bit more detail here, with poster Clarence Yard explaining the situation very well (as always) on the second page...

https://www.railforums.co.uk/threads/gwr-withdraw-some-800s-due-to-cracks-in-yaw-damper-bolsters.216705/

[broadgage]

If this was an isolated problem,  I would be at least somewhat forgiving.
However taken together with all the other faults and failures, these are starting to look pretty rubbish.

Failure to couple and uncouple reliably, despite this being an "essential requirement"
Failure to cope with the waves at Dawlish, also an "essential requirement"
Overheating in hot weather.
Poor ride.
Unreliable toilets.
Unreliable reservations.
Poor quality trim and fittings.

And a general failure to meet the required levels of availability that resulted in frequent short formations, forgotten about  with the reduced passenger numbers in the pandemic. But no doubt to return.

The poor standards of passenger comfort and facilities are arguably due to the TOC^▸ (Train Operating Company) policy of "what downgrades can we get away with" and not Hitachi's fault, but still gives a poor impression.

[Celestial]

If this was an isolated problem,  I would be at least somewhat forgiving.
However taken together with all the other faults and failures, these are starting to look pretty rubbish.

Failure to couple and uncouple reliably, despite this being an "essential requirement"
Failure to cope with the waves at Dawlish, also an "essential requirement"
Overheating in hot weather.
Poor ride.
Unreliable toilets.
Unreliable reservations.
Poor quality trim and fittings.

And a general failure to meet the required levels of availability that resulted in frequent short formations, forgotten about  with the reduced passenger numbers in the pandemic. But no doubt to return.

The poor standards of passenger comfort and facilities are arguably due to the TOC^▸ (Train Operating Company) policy of "what...

For one moment I thought I was going to get through a broadgage post on IETs^▸ (Intercity Express Train) without the inevitable word appearing. You teased me until almost the end.

[TonyN]

It doesn't sound like anything more than you might expect from a new train.  A bit more detail here, with poster Clarence Yard explaining the situation very well (as always) on the second page...

https://www.railforums.co.uk/threads/gwr-withdraw-some-800s-due-to-cracks-in-yaw-damper-bolsters.216705/

Having read the posts on railforums I am reminded that every time I travel over the Cotswold line on an IET^▸ (Intercity Express Train) there are some loud thumping noises while traversing the Paxford curves between Campden tunnel and Moreton in Marsh.

[broadgage]

For one moment I thought I was going to get through a broadgage post on IETs^▸ (Intercity Express Train) without the inevitable word appearing. You teased me until almost the end.

Which word ? I avoided calling them DMUs^▸ (Diesel Multiple Unit), out of deference to those who state that they are not REALLY DMUs despite being powered by underfloor engines.
Neither did I mention buffets, as the lack thereof is not really Hitachi's fault.
Did not even mention the failed trolley service which IS PARTLY Hitachi's fault, since they designed the sloping floors, and they made the "greatly improved" trolleys. The steeply sloping floors, and "wonky wheels" on the trolleys were frequently given as reasons for no trolley/static trolley/hidden trolley. Such factors do not help, but I feel that GWR^▸ (Great Western Railway) are not serious about trolley provision, and regard this as a temporary or interim measure between a proper buffet and the longer term aim of nothing.(as on SWT^▸ (South West Trains), and others)
Did not even criticise the hard seats or lack of gangways.

[TaplowGreen]

For one moment I thought I was going to get through a broadgage post on IETs^▸ (Intercity Express Train) without the inevitable word appearing. You teased me until almost the end.

Which word ? I avoided calling them DMUs^▸ (Diesel Multiple Unit), out of deference to those who state that they are not REALLY DMUs despite being powered by underfloor engines.
Neither did I mention buffets, as the lack thereof is not really Hitachi's fault.
Did not even mention the failed trolley service which IS PARTLY Hitachi's fault, since they designed the sloping floors, and they made the "greatly improved" trolleys. The steeply sloping floors, and "wonky wheels" on the trolleys were frequently given as reasons for no trolley/static trolley/hidden trolley. Such factors do not help, but I feel that GWR^▸ (Great Western Railway) are not serious about trolley provision, and regard this as a temporary or interim measure between a proper buffet and the longer term aim of nothing.(as on SWT^▸ (South West Trains), and others)
Did not even criticise the hard seats or lack of gangways.

That's most of the broadgage bingo card ticked off and it's not yet 0700!  An omen for a productive day? 

[eightf48544]

As the wellknown quote goes:

" 'To lose one set of yaw dampers (CAF) may be regarded as a misfortune, to lose two
(Hitachi) looks like carelessness."

Possibly a combination of inadequate design to cope with poor track as mentioned by TonyM

[broadgage]

Also concerning in my view is that these failures have occurred on what are still relatively new trains.
Fatigue failures have two main causes, poor design and a certain inevitability after the planned service life.

Good design consists largely of avoiding "stress raisers" such as sudden changes of shape or cross section in highly stressed components. For this reason the windows in aircraft and ships are either circular, or rectangular with rounded corners. A rectangular design with sharp corners would be liable to stress fractures at the corners. Likewise highly stressed engine components are designed without sharp corners. A narrow piston rod is connected to the wide piston by a curved formation not a straight transition from rod to disc, which would be liable to stress fractures.
Hitachi engineers are no doubt aware of this, it is basic engineering.
The other part of good design is selection of the correct materials, strong but not too hard/brittle. This is a bit more complex, and it is possible that unsuitable material was used, either wrongly specified, or correctly specified but the actual material used was different, perhaps in some subtle way that was not obvious.
And of course good design includes designing for the stresses to which a component will be subjected in its life. That includes rather a lot of unknowns.

Eventual fatigue failure is almost inevitable in highly stressed components, that is why intensively used aircraft have a limited life, determined in either flight hours, or by number of take off cycles. Life could be extended almost indefinitely by stronger construction, but that would render the machine too heavy to fly economically.

Fatigue failure after say 35 years, on a train designed to last 27.5 years would be nothing remarkable.
Fatigue failure only about 10% into the design life is much more concerning.
It suggests either poor design, defective materials, or the stresses being so badly under estimated that failure occurred very early in the planned life.

[Lee]

Also concerning in my view is that these failures have occurred on what are still relatively new trains.
Fatigue failures have two main causes, poor design and a certain inevitability after the planned service life.

Good design consists largely of avoiding "stress raisers" such as sudden changes of shape or cross section in highly stressed components. For this reason the windows in aircraft and ships are either circular, or rectangular with rounded corners. A rectangular design with sharp corners would be liable to stress fractures at the corners. Likewise highly stressed engine components are designed without sharp corners. A narrow piston rod is connected to the wide piston by a curved formation not a straight transition from rod to disc, which would be liable to stress fractures.
Hitachi engineers are no doubt aware of this, it is basic engineering.
The other part of good design is selection of the correct materials, strong but not too hard/brittle. This is a bit more complex, and it is possible that unsuitable material was used, either wrongly specified, or correctly specified but the actual material used was different, perhaps in some subtle way that was not obvious.
And of course good design includes designing for the stresses to which a component will be subjected in its life. That includes rather a lot of unknowns.

Eventual fatigue failure is almost inevitable in highly stressed components, that is why intensively used aircraft have a limited life, determined in either flight hours, or by number of take off cycles. Life could be extended almost indefinitely by stronger construction, but that would render the machine too heavy to fly economically.

Fatigue failure after say 35 years, on a train designed to last 27.5 years would be nothing remarkable.
Fatigue failure only about 10% into the design life is much more concerning.
It suggests either poor design, defective materials, or the stresses being so badly under estimated that failure occurred very early in the planned life.

House!

[Electric train]

The much exulted Mark 3 coach (Mk3) and High Speed Train (HST^▸ (High Speed Train)) power cars suffered from cracks in bogie components right from the early days in the mid 1970's.  The worse failure was the brake disks on the power cars.

Nothing new, remember these trains many more miles in a week than almost any other form of land vehicle,

Edit: VickiS - Clarifying Acronyms

[IndustryInsider]

This sort of thing happens with most new train designs as I said.  In fact it was a similar problem on a new train from a different manufacturer which prompted the check that led to its discovery on a small number of units.

I expect regular inspections, maintenance and an eventual modification will mean this is soon forgotten about by everyone...except Broadgage.

[broadgage]

Even I will forgive and maybe forget, provided this does not become a frequently recurring or long ongoing problem.

[Incider]

For one moment I thought I was going to get through a broadgage post on IETs^▸ (Intercity Express Train) without the inevitable word appearing. You teased me until almost the end.

Which word ? I avoided calling them DMUs^▸ (Diesel Multiple Unit), out of deference to those who state that they are not REALLY DMUs despite being powered by underfloor engines.
Neither did I mention buffets, as the lack thereof is not really Hitachi's fault.
Did not even mention the failed trolley service which IS PARTLY Hitachi's fault, since they designed the sloping floors, and they made the "greatly improved" trolleys. The steeply sloping floors, and "wonky wheels" on the trolleys were frequently given as reasons for no trolley/static trolley/hidden trolley. Such factors do not help, but I feel that GWR^▸ (Great Western Railway) are not serious about trolley provision, and regard this as a temporary or interim measure between a proper buffet and the longer term aim of nothing.(as on SWT^▸ (South West Trains), and others)
Did not even criticise the hard seats or lack of gangways.

Hitachi don’t make the trolleys…..

[broadgage]

But presumably Hitachi specified or supplied the trolleys ? They have an Hitachi asset number affixed, or did when I last looked.