Train GraphicClick on the map to explore geographics
 
End of through trains
Bristol to Waterloo - Why?

 
Please sign our petition
(more information)
 
Campaign links here
Travel & transport from BBC stories as at 17:35 05 Dec 2021
- Covid: Travel changes too late to halt potential new wave - scientist
Read about the forum [here].
Register [here] - it's free.
What do I gain from registering? [here]
 09/12/21 - Award Event - CRN
10/12/21 - Final day, service to Bristol
19/01/22 - MTUG - regular meeting
08/03/22 - WWRUG AGM - B-o-A
Random Image
Train RunningCancelled
14:18 Penzance to London Paddington
15:25 Cardiff Central to Southampton Central
17:58 Bristol Temple Meads to Severn Beach
18:41 Severn Beach to Bristol Temple Meads
20:20 Westbury to Swindon
21:13 Swindon to Westbury
22:02 Cheltenham Spa to Swindon
23:10 Swindon to Cheltenham Spa
23:13 Cardiff Central to Bristol Temple Meads
Short Run
16:21 Cardiff Central to Southampton Central
16:30 London Paddington to Exeter St Davids
17:25 Cardiff Central to Southampton Central
17:37 Worcester Foregate Street to Bristol Temple Meads
19:33 Southampton Central to Cardiff Central
20:30 Cardiff Central to Southampton Central
20:33 Southampton Central to Bristol Temple Meads
20:36 Bristol Temple Meads to Cheltenham Spa
Delayed
05/12/21 15:17 Swansea to London Paddington
05/12/21 15:42 London Paddington to Swansea
15:55 Cardiff Central to Taunton
05/12/21 16:22 Swansea to London Paddington
05/12/21 16:42 London Paddington to Swansea
05/12/21 17:20 Swansea to London Paddington
05/12/21 17:42 London Paddington to Swansea
05/12/21 18:20 Swansea to London Paddington
05/12/21 19:20 Swansea to London Paddington
05/12/21 19:42 London Paddington to Swansea
05/12/21 20:19 Swansea to London Paddington
05/12/21 20:42 London Paddington to Swansea
05/12/21 21:42 London Paddington to Swansea
PollsThere are no open or recent polls
Abbreviation pageAcronymns and abbreviations
Stn ComparatorStation Comparator
Rail newsNews Now - live rail news feed
Site Style 1 2 3 4
Next departures • Bristol Temple MeadsBath SpaChippenhamSwindonDidcot ParkwayReadingLondon PaddingtonMelksham
Exeter St DavidsTauntonWestburyTrowbridgeBristol ParkwayCardiff CentralOxfordCheltenham SpaBirmingham New Street
December 05, 2021, 05:50:36 pm *
Welcome, Guest. Please login or register.

Login with username, password and session length
Forgotten your username or password? - get a reminder
Most recently liked subjects
[127] Are the railways fit for their (future) purpose?
[79] Masks To Become Compulsory On Public Transport Again
[52] Through service - Bristol to London (Waterloo) via Trowbridge ...
[41] South Western Railways Waterloo - Bristol services axed
[28] Advent quiz - day 3 - unlabelled maps
[14] Overhead Electrification Plans
News: A forum for passengers ... with input from rail professionals welcomed too
 
   Home   Help Search Calendar Login Register  
Pages: 1 ... 31 32 [33] 34
  Print  
Author Topic: Problems with IET trains from April 2021  (Read 37164 times)
didcotdean
Transport Scholar
Hero Member
******
Posts: 1315


View Profile
« Reply #480 on: August 27, 2021, 02:05:20 pm »

On the original plan the Oxford terminating fasts would have been Electrostars (not necessarily 387s at the beginning) with only the services continuing up the North Cotts being bimode IETs (Intercity Express Train). These have ended up with the twists and turns of time on the Heathrow Express.

GWR (Great Western Railway) managed to neutralise an amount of the early wrong-thinking of the fleet balance with the 802 order but they couldn't do it all.
Logged
broadgage
Transport Scholar
Hero Member
******
Posts: 4501



View Profile
« Reply #481 on: August 27, 2021, 08:36:28 pm »

There's another factor for which Hitatchi cannot be blamed.

If the first phase of the GWM electrification had gone to plan, with wires to Oxford and Bristol Temple Meads, GW (Great Western) could have used all those colourful Electrostars that the other TOCs (Train Operating Company) have lent them to cover a larger proportion of IET (Intercity Express Train) services while (hopefully) they are being fixed.

Indeed, if we had had a sustained proper electrification campaign in the last 40 years any stock anywhere in the UK (United Kingdom) apart from 3rd rail only could have filled the gap.....

True, but I fail to see the relevance.
The IETs were ordered to fulfill certain specified needs, and have miserably failed to meet the contracted availability. The fact that electrification, if delivered in a timely fashion, could have reduced the need for IETs, is not really relevant.

I say again that our government need to say to Hitachi "You made them, you fix them" Or in more detail, make available for daily use the contracted number of trains. One means of achieving this would be supply extra or longer units so as to make up for the less than expected availability of the original build.
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 (Diesel Multiple Unit) is not a proper inter-city train. The 5+5 and 9 car DMUs are almost as bad.
stuving
Transport Scholar
Hero Member
******
Posts: 5949


View Profile
« Reply #482 on: September 09, 2021, 06:39:03 pm »

The ORR» (Office of Rail and Road formerly Office of Rail Regulation - about)'s interim report on the cracking problems has been published. Most of its content is about how the various bits of "the railway" coped with this, with safety the primary concern throughout. As such, the detailed technical descriptions of the cracking are background material. They are also incomplete, in the sense that the big question - how did Hitachi screw up so badly - is still being addressed. ORR will be concerned with that subject mainly in reviewing the processes involved in getting new trains accepted for use.

A lot of consultants have been involved in this, some of whom were also involved on the various train programmes. I was surprised to read this:
Quote
51. Hitachi and the TOC (Train Operating Company) engineers made use of independent technical advice, including The Welding Institute, Ricardo and Professor Rod Smith of Imperial College, London for Hitachi, SNC-L for LNER» (London North Eastern Railway - about) and First Group’s central engineering organisation that supports its individual TOCs. A factor in Hitachi’s selection of Ricardo was the absence of previous technical involvement with the introduction of AT300 rolling stock to service.

Ricardo worked for Hitachi to produce the safety case for IEP (Intercity Express Program / Project.). While this is essentially a (virtual) paperwork exercise, I think it still does count as "technical".

SNC-Lavalin, as LNER's main advisors for the safety of reintroducing the trains after the May withdrawal, seem to have been a bit more cautious than everyone else. As it happens Interfleet, now part of SNC-L, was the Notified Body that certified all the AT200 and AT300 fleets as meeting the relevant standard (EN126631:2010 Railway Applications – Structural Requirements of Railway Vehicle Bodies). Small, world, these days.

Of course these different functions are parts of much larger organisatons, so should be capaple of acting independently. And the evidence above does suggest that this has been the case.
Logged
broadgage
Transport Scholar
Hero Member
******
Posts: 4501



View Profile
« Reply #483 on: September 11, 2021, 10:54:43 am »

Indeed.  I can’t remember the last time I heard of a coupling failure.

Do you consider the project to have been a success then ?

Some elements have been a success, others not so.

Post #1653 in this thread http://www.firstgreatwestern.info/coffeeshop/index.php?topic=5508.1650 Suggests that coupling/uncoupling at Plymouth was causing time keeping issues and is therefore being avoided.
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 (Diesel Multiple Unit) is not a proper inter-city train. The 5+5 and 9 car DMUs are almost as bad.
PhilWakely
Transport Scholar
Hero Member
******
Posts: 1636



View Profile
« Reply #484 on: September 17, 2021, 11:10:15 am »

And the next one please?

Seats -> Catering -> Bicycles -> Surf Boards -> Cracks ............. now diesel pollution!
Logged
Bob_Blakey
Transport Scholar
Hero Member
******
Posts: 600


View Profile
« Reply #485 on: September 17, 2021, 02:21:28 pm »

SWTSMBO (She Who Thinks She Must Be Obeyed) was booked to travel on the 1558 WKF>KGX next Monday (20/09) but an email from LNER» (London North Eastern Railway - about) on Wednesday advised that the service had been cancelled because a number of Azuma (Brand name for Class 80x trains on LNER) units were being temporarily taken out of service for unspecified safety checks. Have they found the same issue as affected the GWR (Great Western Railway) IET (Intercity Express Train)'s or is this something different?

On the plus side the email carried a link via which any booking could be changed.
Logged
broadgage
Transport Scholar
Hero Member
******
Posts: 4501



View Profile
« Reply #486 on: September 17, 2021, 03:50:40 pm »

And the next one please?

Seats -> Catering -> Bicycles -> Surf Boards -> Cracks ............. now diesel pollution!

Not certain that I would hold diesel pollution against them since the proper trains that we had before the IETs (Intercity Express Train) also burnt diesel fuel and produced pollution.
The other problems though ARE due to a poorly specified and badly built train.
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 (Diesel Multiple Unit) is not a proper inter-city train. The 5+5 and 9 car DMUs are almost as bad.
TaplowGreen
Transport Scholar
Hero Member
******
Posts: 6078


View Profile
« Reply #487 on: September 17, 2021, 03:51:06 pm »

And the next one please?

Seats -> Catering -> Bicycles -> Surf Boards -> Cracks ............. now diesel pollution!

Blimey. That's not good...................I guess GWR (Great Western Railway) can say that by cancelling so many services due to staff shortages they are reducing pollution though?  Roll Eyes
Logged
broadgage
Transport Scholar
Hero Member
******
Posts: 4501



View Profile
« Reply #488 on: September 17, 2021, 05:50:43 pm »

Indeed, the least polluting train is the one that stays in the depot. Or perhaps even better one that is not built.
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 (Diesel Multiple Unit) is not a proper inter-city train. The 5+5 and 9 car DMUs are almost as bad.
stuving
Transport Scholar
Hero Member
******
Posts: 5949


View Profile
« Reply #489 on: September 17, 2021, 05:53:50 pm »

Indeed, the least polluting train is the one that stays in the depot. Or perhaps even better one that is not built.

Or, if you look at that Guardian article, a GWR (Great Western Railway) IET (Intercity Express Train)! Yesterday's DfT» (Department for Transport - about) news release described the RSSB (Rail Safety and Standards Board) report as "published" and provided a link to their site. I can't see it there, so all we have for now is press reports with limited content and headlines that don't even match that.
Logged
Timmer
Global Moderator
Hero Member
*****
Posts: 5748


View Profile
« Reply #490 on: September 17, 2021, 05:57:32 pm »

An IET (Intercity Express Train) shouldn’t have been producing ANY pollution between London and Bristol Temple Meads had Chris Grayling not cancelled the final stretches of electrification between Chippenham/Parkway-Temple Meads. What a crazy decision that was.
Logged
eightonedee
Transport Scholar
Hero Member
******
Posts: 1145



View Profile
« Reply #491 on: September 17, 2021, 07:39:25 pm »

There's a problem with the information as presented in the Guardian - no clue as to the measurement methodology was, the number of samples taken or similar.

Having said that, there does not seem to be any clear pattern. Second worse for NO2 and worse for particulates is the (surely) all electric Euston - Birmingham New Street. The reference to Voyagers toward the end is odd - as far as I am aware Avanti just have a few for the North Wales services. Yet the (as far as I am aware) almost identical Meridians on the Midland Main line seem to outperform the Avanti electrics. And Chiltern, an all diesel serive outperforms most of its rivals!  The GWR (Great Western Railway) particulate figures look good (all that ad-blue and the Dpfs doing their job well)?

Did they happen to take a measurement when the GWR IET (Intercity Express Train) opened its doors at Reading between idling Turbos and Voyagers?

Anyone know the answers?
Logged
stuving
Transport Scholar
Hero Member
******
Posts: 5949


View Profile
« Reply #492 on: September 17, 2021, 08:07:21 pm »

Anyone know the answers?

No, but I've found where they were hiding. RSSB (Rail Safety and Standards Board) research report T1188 "CLEAR: Analysis of Air Quality On Board Trains" is published in the sense that, provided you sign in to their site, it can be downloaded. I think anyone can still register to get access.

As to what it says, well that's a bit complicated. The report has 122 pages and it will take a while to dig out the relevant bits. For one thing, it uses positive matrix factorisation, boxplots, and Kruskal-Wallis test to present the data.

Feel free to get stuck in!
Logged
IndustryInsider
Data Manager
Hero Member
******
Posts: 8941


View Profile
« Reply #493 on: September 17, 2021, 10:11:55 pm »

Feel free to get stuck in!

After you, Stuving!  Wink
Logged

To view my GWML (Great Western Main Line) 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/
plymothian
Hero Member
*****
Posts: 701


View Profile
« Reply #494 on: October 11, 2021, 05:54:36 pm »

There is another problem begining to occur with wrong side door releases.  When the driver initiates a correct side door release, there have been a couple of instances when a door on the wrong side has been released in addition.
Logged

Please be aware that only the first 4 words of this post will be platformed on this message board.
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 ... 31 32 [33] 34
  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