Greater Anglia's Stadler Flirt - Class 745 & 755

[phil-b259]

8 hours ago, Trainshed Terry said:

Oh good grief. They did not think this through regarding fuel use age.

 

Terry.

 

IIRC it has been said that larger fuel tanks would have taken the axle loading over what is permitted on some of the lines they are intended to serve. Thats the downside of putting everything in what amounts to a short 'power car' rather than spread it out under each passenger car.

[admiles]

9 hours ago, phil-b259 said:

 

IIRC it has been said that larger fuel tanks would have taken the axle loading over what is permitted on some of the lines they are intended to serve. Thats the downside of putting everything in what amounts to a short 'power car' rather than spread it out under each passenger car.

 

The 755s have also being doing lots of miles under the wires on diesel which should being done with the pans up on electric. That can't be helping planning the fuel load.

[keefer]

Seems to be the worst of both worlds at the moment - can't use AC so they're running round most of the time on diesel without really having the fuel capacity to do so.

If it was the other way round, it perhaps wouldn't be so bad, except there wouldn't be any stock to work off the wires.

And that's quite apart from any of the other issues they're having

[DY444]

2 hours ago, admiles said:

 

The 755s have also being doing lots of miles under the wires on diesel which should being done with the pans up on electric. That can't be helping planning the fuel load.

 

It's hardly rocket science though is it?  They know the mileage in each diagram and they should know the diesel range of the units.  Latter greater than former equals good, anything else equals trouble.

[phil-b259]

5 hours ago, DY444 said:

 

It's hardly rocket science though is it?  They know the mileage in each diagram and they should know the diesel range of the units.  Latter greater than former equals good, anything else equals trouble.

 

The point is the units are NOT being diagramed as intended due to faults / restrictions.

 

That means lots of last minute alterations so as to try and keep the GA timetable going when you have got nits failing all over the place. Sticking rigidly to a certain plan is, given the current situation going to cause a lot more cancellations for long suffering GA customers.

 

IF the units ‘worked out of the box’ so to speak then their wouldn’t be an issue as the diagramming would match the plan envisaged when the things were ordered.

[DY444]

2 hours ago, phil-b259 said:

 

The point is the units are NOT being diagramed as intended due to faults / restrictions.

 

That means lots of last minute alterations so as to try and keep the GA timetable going when you have got nits failing all over the place. Sticking rigidly to a certain plan is, given the current situation going to cause a lot more cancellations for long suffering GA customers.

 

IF the units ‘worked out of the box’ so to speak then their wouldn’t be an issue as the diagramming would match the plan envisaged when the things were ordered.

 

Ok but allocating units to workings on the fly without knowing the mileage run since fuelling and/or range remaining is just plain daft imo. 

[beast66606]

On 26/02/2020 at 16:49, beast66606 said:

I believe they are prone to reporting fuel shortages when the fuel isn't actually short.

 

9 hours ago, DY444 said:

It's hardly rocket science though is it?  They know the mileage in each diagram and they should know the diesel range of the units.  Latter greater than former equals good, anything else equals trouble.

 

Not picking on DY444 but using this as an example - does anyone actually ready my posts which are sourced from staff working with the Basils every day

 

 

 

[DY444]

9 hours ago, beast66606 said:

 

Not picking on DY444 but using this as an example - does anyone actually ready my posts which are sourced from staff working with the Basils every day

 

 

 

Yes I did indeed read that and I took it literally.  They are reporting fuel shortages when fuel isn't short.  If you'd said they are shutting down due to fuel shortages when fuel isn't short then I probably wouldn't have posted it.

 

In other words I assumed it was the equivalent of my car reporting low fuel.  It doesn't just stop running until there actually is no fuel.

Edited February 29, 2020 by DY444

[richardw1970]

3 hours ago, DY444 said:

 

Yes I did indeed read that and I took it literally.  They are reporting fuel shortages when fuel isn't short.  If you'd said they are shutting down due to fuel shortages when fuel isn't short then I probably wouldn't have posted it.

 

In other words I assumed it was the equivalent of my car reporting low fuel.  It doesn't just stop running until there actually is no fuel.

This is a catch 22 situation though, if the unit reports low fuel and GA left it in traffic until it shut down it would block the line somewhere and cause huge delays so they avoid that risk by taking it out of traffic to fuel it causing cancellations. Neither situation is good but I'd rather be cancelled than stranded in the middle of nowhere. Hopefully this will all settle down as the teething troubles are resolved and the units can stick to their booked diagrams, also experience will be gained as to the actual mileage that can safely be achieved between fuelling which may give GA control more confidence to keep sets in traffic if the set reports low fuel? In my own experience I have had Pacers/Sprinters run out of fuel due to disruption taking them off booked diagrams and control loosing track of mileage since last fuelled, no low fuel alarms on those!

[The Stationmaster]

This fuel business sounds rather odd.  Surely the manufaturer ought to be able to give a milegage the sets will achieve when running on diesel power - that is hardly rocket science and is actually quite along established situation for railway use.  Folk on BR were diagamming locos and units 50 years ago on the basis of fuel consumption figures.  When new the Class 60s were given individual fuel consumption figures for every booked diagram and, and those figures were extremely accurate.

 

So there should be no difficulty at all having fuel mileage figures for these trains and the staff dealing with them should be aware of those figures - these numbers might even be more accurate than the fuel gauges!   To me it looks like something has been missed in the procurement, documentation, and test, phases and for some reason it has carried over into the service situation.  In reality it doesn't matter what the fuel capacity is as long as the mileage it will deliver on various types of work is known - you then diagram accordingly (and make a claim against whoever is responsible if the mileage that should be available on electric traction isn't available).

[russ p]

I think the big thing that was missed was the people who specified them should have actually known what a train was!

[The Stationmaster]

Just now, russ p said:

I think the big thing that was missed was the people who specified them should have actually known what a train was!

I suspect that might be a very important point

[beast66606]

7 minutes ago, russ p said:

I think the big thing that was missed was the people who specified them should have actually known what a train was!

 

Be careful what you wish for Russ, the MNR are taking delivery of 2 x Pacers - 9P90 may become a white knuckle ride !

[russ p]

Just now, beast66606 said:

 

Be careful what you wish for Russ, the MNR are taking delivery of 2 x Pacers - 9P90 may become a white knuckle ride !

 

As I lifelong British Leyland enthusiast I would quite like the chance to drive a BL train again now we don't get the 153s anymore! 

[uax6]

Do we know what unit numbers they are? I'm hoping that a 143/4 will come this way.... Also what spares are coming with these units, I'd like to think that a few scrappers are donating parts to keep the rest going for a few years...

 

Andy G

[Pete 75C]

6 hours ago, uax6 said:

Do we know what unit numbers they are?

 

From facebook:

 

Ex Northern Rail 142038

 

https://www.facebook.com/midnorfolkrailway/posts/3387678267925585

[beast66606]

7 hours ago, uax6 said:

Also what spares are coming with these units, I'd like to think that a few scrappers are donating parts to keep the rest going for a few years...

 

I believe they vehicles are packed with spares off other units but have no evidence either way.

[DY444]

On 29/02/2020 at 12:40, The Stationmaster said:

This fuel business sounds rather odd.  Surely the manufaturer ought to be able to give a milegage the sets will achieve when running on diesel power - that is hardly rocket science and is actually quite along established situation for railway use.  Folk on BR were diagamming locos and units 50 years ago on the basis of fuel consumption figures.  When new the Class 60s were given individual fuel consumption figures for every booked diagram and, and those figures were extremely accurate.

 

So there should be no difficulty at all having fuel mileage figures for these trains and the staff dealing with them should be aware of those figures - these numbers might even be more accurate than the fuel gauges!   To me it looks like something has been missed in the procurement, documentation, and test, phases and for some reason it has carried over into the service situation.  In reality it doesn't matter what the fuel capacity is as long as the mileage it will deliver on various types of work is known - you then diagram accordingly (and make a claim against whoever is responsible if the mileage that should be available on electric traction isn't available).

 

Indeed.  This is what I don't understand.  It all sounds like nobody has the slightest idea what the range of these things is on diesel.  

 

If this low fuel reporting issue is so bad that no-one knows whether any given diagram can be completed without the unit sitting down then maybe they shouldn't be in traffic until it's fixed.

Edited March 1, 2020 by DY444

[phil-b259]

17 minutes ago, DY444 said:

 

Indeed.  This is what I don't understand.  It all sounds like nobody has the slightest idea what the range of these things is on diesel.  

 

If this low fuel reporting issue is so bad that no-one knows whether any given diagram can be completed without the unit sitting down then maybe they shouldn't be in traffic until it's fixed.

 

All very well until you realise that ALL the Sprinters and Tubrostars have been transferred away.

 

GA had no say in the matter - the fleet cascade having been arranged by the all knowing DfT - and because the trains are all leased under commercial contracts, delaying the cascades would have been very expensive in terms of compensation being paid out.

 

As such it’s basically a choice of a flawed Sadler unit or no train!

[phil-b259]

 

On 29/02/2020 at 12:40, The Stationmaster said:

 

So there should be no difficulty at all having fuel mileage figures for these trains and the staff dealing with them should be aware of those figures - these numbers might even be more accurate than the fuel gauges!   To me it looks like something has been missed in the procurement, documentation, and test, phases and for some reason it has carried over into the service situation.  In reality it doesn't matter what the fuel capacity is as long as the mileage it will deliver on various types of work is known - you then diagram accordingly (and make a claim against whoever is responsible if the mileage that should be available on electric traction isn't available).

 

I wonder if part of 5he problem is an over-reliance on fancy computer based solutions rather than a bog standard fuel gauge.

 

Given the problems that can occur with computer based systems where the software writers have not been given a good enough spec / paid enough it wouldn’t surprise me that this is the issue here.

[The Stationmaster]

33 minutes ago, phil-b259 said:

 

 

I wonder if part of 5he problem is an over-reliance on fancy computer based solutions rather than a bog standard fuel gauge.

 

Given the problems that can occur with computer based systems where the software writers have not been given a good enough spec / paid enough it wouldn’t surprise me that this is the issue here.

I doubt if Phil - except possibly some sort of computerisation of the fuel gauge display.  But I would even discount that because fuel gauges on some BR diesel locos were notoriously misleading, especially for the unwary.  There was the well known case of a Class 60 on the empty Langley - Immingham tanks running out of fuel because the Driver looked at the fuel gauge at Langley and decided to have some extra comfy  time instead of running light engine to Old Oak to refuel as he was booked to do.   The most interesting part of it - apart from the Driver not going for fuel 'because ...  etc' was that the loco came to a stand out of fuel on the return working less than 2 miles from the spot where the Derby computer had predicted it would run out of fuel on that diagram if it was not refuelled at the Langley end of the working.

 

Or to put it another the train performance unit at Derby had by that date got so sophisticated with their traction performance programs that they could easily make calculations which were that accurate.  The original situation with Class 60s was that Derby used their 'fancy computer based solution' to calculate the fuel consumption for each Class 60 diagram - getting on for 30 years ago.   It was also used for load and coupling strength calculations as well as basic sectional running time calculations and we knew from experience, and various practical tests, that they were getting that as near spot-on as the everyday railway would ever need.  And by the late 1980s most of their work had moved on to using electronic computers instead of mechanical machines.

[russ p]

4 hours ago, The Stationmaster said:

I doubt if Phil - except possibly some sort of computerisation of the fuel gauge display.  But I would even discount that because fuel gauges on some BR diesel locos were notoriously misleading, especially for the unwary.  There was the well known case of a Class 60 on the empty Langley - Immingham tanks running out of fuel because the Driver looked at the fuel gauge at Langley and decided to have some extra comfy  time instead of running light engine to Old Oak to refuel as he was booked to do.   The most interesting part of it - apart from the Driver not going for fuel 'because ...  etc' was that the loco came to a stand out of fuel on the return working less than 2 miles from the spot where the Derby computer had predicted it would run out of fuel on that diagram if it was not refuelled at the Langley end of the working.

 

Or to put it another the train performance unit at Derby had by that date got so sophisticated with their traction performance programs that they could easily make calculations which were that accurate.  The original situation with Class 60s was that Derby used their 'fancy computer based solution' to calculate the fuel consumption for each Class 60 diagram - getting on for 30 years ago.   It was also used for load and coupling strength calculations as well as basic sectional running time calculations and we knew from experience, and various practical tests, that they were getting that as near spot-on as the everyday railway would ever need.  And by the late 1980s most of their work had moved on to using electronic computers instead of mechanical machines.

 

People in those days Mike were very experienced,  I was one of the first drivers to learn class 60s and although as you know we had problems i was pleasantly surprised that most people on both sides seemed to understand what was going on, I learned a lot from them that was useful few years later when I started instructing on them .

You mentioned derby research in some quarters they were known as toy town but I never had any problems with them they always seemed extremely knowledgeable and helpful.  I remember being involved with high speed braking trials on the east coast with the ill fated night stock and mentioned to an engineer that we had just bought a mk3 sleeper on the north Norfolk and were having difficulty inturpretating the wiring.  When I came to work the following evening at thornaby a full set of schematics were on my desk. The BR internal mail system could be very good. Shame it's gone and the BR tech centre 

I won't comment on a public forum about the situation with these trains 

Edited March 1, 2020 by russ p

[jjb1970]

Do they not have telemetry between a monitoring station and the onboard systems which allows real time monitoring of fuel tank level and fuel use? That's not a new or expensive technique. 

[caradoc]

Obviously, diesel units must be diagrammed to refuel at suitable intervals; For example, when I was responsible (in Control) for Corkerhill's 156 fleet, sets would not be booked to finish at, say, Stranraer, 5 days in a row; They would return to Corkerhill (or elsewhere) well before their fuel capacity was exhausted. Also, it was assumed, unless advised otherwise, that every set finishing at a depot with fuelling facilities would be fully fuelled. When sets were knocked off diagram by disruption it was part of my job to ensure that sets got back to a depot before running out of fuel (and also running out of miles before maintenance was due).

 

The situation in Anglia now is different in that sets working on diesel when booked electric are using more fuel than diagrammed, as well as the plan being disrupted when failures occur, and I feel for those who are having to deal with all this.

 

[beast66606]

Tempting those pesky fates a bit but things have been good for the last few days, a few problems which required reboots but aside from issues outside of their control the fleet has been running pretty well - he says as the service collapses ! (it hasn't I'm assuming the fates have been tempted)