Jump to content
 

Hitachi trains grounded


Recommended Posts

  • RMweb Premium

"That passenger or us family will also have his lawyer sat behind him looking to sue me."

The root of the problem.

It seems to me a nonsense that staff who were competent to do something a year ago are no longer regarded as competent. Ditto stock that was running for 30 years but is suddenly unsuitable because it hasn't been used for a while. It is a crazy world,. but I am not blaming the railwaymen, I am blaming the blame culture. And as said above, it could destroy the railways in the current situation where they are not seen as essential. So much for "green" transport.

Jonathan

  • Like 2
  • Agree 2
  • Friendly/supportive 1
Link to post
Share on other sites

  • RMweb Gold
9 hours ago, fiftyfour fiftyfour said:

You expect some kind of blitz spirit where we just string together a few old trains out of scrapyards and get on with the job- the gulf between what you think is possible and what is actually possible is immeasurable. 

 

Please don't ascribe some giddy statement to me that I didnt make.

Ive never suggested anything of the sort.

 

Reading the posts a lot of waffles are getting excited by their own assumptions, and excitedly quoting their own why nots. This reveals their own wild imaginations in doing so.

 

I have said they do need to move the filing cabinet, but nothing about scrap, old or even preserved stock... i’ll leave it to the experts, not the “wannabe but denyers” on here.

 

i hope this clarifies the point.

 

fwiw I think the suggestion of XR class 345”s is probably the best one Ive seen, But 140 drivers on a 4 day week with 20 spare sets in the sidings sounds reasonable to me to getting 10 extra shifts a day out of them. Those shifts could achieve a 30 minute run to Reading in 90 minute rotations giving an every 10 minute service for 14+ hours a day... **Thats way more than is needed** so technically the capacity is there. just need to ask them to work a normal 5 day week. 

XR turning its long distance ECS into a service train is another positive move
 

However no doubt some rule book reader will tell me why this is completely impossible to do anything, and shutting down the system is the best response.

Edited by adb968008
  • Friendly/supportive 1
Link to post
Share on other sites

  • RMweb Premium

I would also point out that the reference to stock in scrapyards ignores the fact that much of it in recent years has not been life expired but there because the DfT demanded new trains. I am sure that the Mk4s fall into that category.

Jonathan

  • Like 1
Link to post
Share on other sites

  • RMweb Gold
7 hours ago, mdvle said:

 

Better example - when an airliner gets grounded for safety reasons, schedules go out the window - just as on the railway.  The airlines don't just go to a boneyard and grab anything and start flying it the next day...*

 

No they wet lease, or dry lease spare aircraft.

Very often then will substitute gauge and fly a different aircraft, and in extreme cases they might even change or combine routings.

The last option is to give up and cancel £100k of flight revenues.

 

* yet another one reveals his own imagination.

Edited by adb968008
Link to post
Share on other sites

  • RMweb Gold

The frustrations about what the railway can, and critically can't, do right now really stem from Clapham, which caused seismic changes in the whole way the railway was run. Prior to Clapham, anyone in an orange - not yellow in those days - jacket could step off a platform ramp and wander along the 6-foot or indeed 4-foot way at whim. Traincrew had route and traction competencies, but these were much less monitored, and helpful staff who liked overtime were embraced when needed. The ticket collector was probably competent to flag signals, and indeed wind points. Even before the legally-led privatisation had got under way, much of that had been regulated to an extent not known in the railway's first 150 years. 

 

With a zillion different firms now involved in the railway, unpicking the knitting and imposing something akin to martial law as people are now trying to suggest, is simply not going to happen. 

  • Like 11
  • Agree 2
  • Informative/Useful 1
  • Round of applause 3
Link to post
Share on other sites

  • RMweb Premium
9 hours ago, adb968008 said:

Are these units lifted up that often to cause cracks ?
 

or

is the crack representing itself in a location of a strong point as a result of  a greater than expected force being imposed at a weaker point that manifests itself at the point of greatest resistance  ?.. if that stress force is generated from motion.. that would be a problem to continued use wouldnt you agree ?


It might not fall apart whilst moving, but if you cant lift it at a strong point without considerable damage.. its equally a bit useless.

 

is it just a case of identifying an issue, benchmarking it across the fleet and the monitoring it going forwards for a future decision ..maybe its within a certain tolerance ?

 

Ironically 800109 only emerged last week for testing following its rather high impact low speed incident.

 

 

Whilst the number of times the units have been lifted to date, if ever, the same jacking points are used to support the vehicle when over a bogie-drop which is used fairly often - for motor or wheelset changes for example.  Therefore the cracks could lead to failure in such circumstances.

 

Should the worst happen then it would not lead to a catastrophic failure in itself.  Should the attachment of the yaw damper fail the damper could flail around and strike some lineside object which could in turn lead to a derailment.  Remember what happened to D1007 at Longfield Junction, Ealing back in 1973.  The same applies to the CAF units although the method of attachment is different on those units.

  • Like 2
  • Informative/Useful 2
Link to post
Share on other sites

19 minutes ago, corneliuslundie said:

It seems to me a nonsense that staff who were competent to do something a year ago are no longer regarded as competent

 

People forget things, and operating a train I don't think is something that should be refamiliarised by trial and error.

  • Like 1
  • Agree 2
Link to post
Share on other sites

  • RMweb Gold
17 minutes ago, Jonboy said:

Out of curiosity how difficult would in depot recovery be if it failed mid lift, and how would that knock onto other units maintenance schedules?

I’m not sure anyone would want that situation.

 

Not only would it be dangerous, but damage to the jacks/depot infrastructure could cause more issues, as without said infrastructure no other units could be lifted in the meantime, causing fleet attrition due to maintenance backlog.

 

A few years back 222103 had an indepot collapse, the unit was out of service for 2 years. They didnt quit and give up, nor did they pull Rocket out of the NRM.

 

The filing cabinet was moved, they were able to overcome the paperwork issues, objections etc, and operate a slam door HST in the interim.

 

Indeed the spirit of GC and HTs is the spirit we need, they more than any other operator have overcome unbelievable number of operational issues over the years...and with regard to safety andwith regards to who is allowed to press which button.

Edited by adb968008
  • Like 1
  • Thanks 1
Link to post
Share on other sites

  • RMweb Premium
9 minutes ago, Jonboy said:

Out of curiosity how difficult would in depot recovery be if it failed mid lift, and how would that knock onto other units maintenance schedules?

Modern units such as the IETs are semi-permanently coupled so the whole unit is lifted simultaneously.  It doesn't take much to imagine what the effect of the failure of a single jacking point would be.  It would take a serious amount of time to recover and each depot has only one road equipped with jacks.  Something like that happened to one of Hull Trains' Class 222s if you remember.

  • Agree 1
  • Thanks 1
Link to post
Share on other sites

The bracket looks substantial and acceptable. The attachment to the two rather lightweight longitudinal girders appears to be the problem - possibly via a welded-on pad.  There shouldn't be a problem with fatigue and welded joints if it is all done properly, but what are the materials?  Years ago I would have assumed mild steel but I wonder if these are aluminium alloy body-shells and longitudinal girders?   

Peterfgf

Link to post
Share on other sites

9 minutes ago, adb968008 said:

A few years back 222103 had an indepot collapse, the unit was out of service for 2 years. They didnt quit and give up, nor did they pull Rocket out of the NRM.

The filing cabinet was moved, they were able to overcome the paperwork issues, objections etc, and operate a slam door HST in the interim.

 

They were running those HSTs at the time so all the issues we've pointed out and you've dismissed out of hand such as traction knowledge, etc., were already current and they had a spare HST they could use. There were no short cuts taken. Things have changed since then, new stock has come in and old stock gone, people's competencies have changed. 

Edited by Hobby
  • Like 2
  • Agree 1
  • Round of applause 2
Link to post
Share on other sites

  • RMweb Gold
9 minutes ago, Hobby said:

 

They were running those HSTs at the time so all the issues we've pointed out and you've dismissed out of hand such as traction knowledge, etc., were already current and they had a spare HST they could use. There were no short cuts taken. Things have changed since then, new stock has come in and old stock gone, people's competencies have changed. 

Dont GWR operate HSTs any more then ? (I know they dont to London), but I thought a “Castle” in year  2021 was a HST power car in disguise ?

 

I think your wrong there, I think HSTs are very much part of the solution today in the South West..without them GWR really wouldnt have very much to offer.

 

Edited by adb968008
Link to post
Share on other sites

  • RMweb Premium
Just now, adb968008 said:

Dont GWR operate HSTs any more then ?

 

Yes, but they are confined to the WoE Class 2 services and have only 4 cars.  as already discussed there are issues of competency which prevent their wider use.

  • Like 1
  • Thanks 1
Link to post
Share on other sites

Just now, TomScrut said:

 

People forget things, and operating a train I don't think is something that should be refamiliarised by trial and error.

 

Rail staff are given individual responsibility for the safe operation of the railway, continued competence and adherence to the rules is regularly monitored, rightly so.

The consequences of stepping outside the rules can be catastrophic as I'm sure most people understand and has been amply demonstrated over the years.

I don't always agree with the rules I'm required to work under, as mentioned in a previous post something relatively minor related to a paperwork issue, but I follow them, knowing full well that if I don't I can at the very least lose my job. At the worst it could result in dire consequences for other people and I find myself in court for causing said consequences.

  • Like 5
  • Agree 2
  • Friendly/supportive 2
Link to post
Share on other sites

3 minutes ago, great central said:

 

Rail staff are given individual responsibility for the safe operation of the railway, continued competence and adherence to the rules is regularly monitored, rightly so.

The consequences of stepping outside the rules can be catastrophic as I'm sure most people understand and has been amply demonstrated over the years.

I don't always agree with the rules I'm required to work under, as mentioned in a previous post something relatively minor related to a paperwork issue, but I follow them, knowing full well that if I don't I can at the very least lose my job. At the worst it could result in dire consequences for other people and I find myself in court for causing said consequences.

 

Exactly, on top of my point that any refamiliarisation shouldn't be "on the job"

  • Agree 1
Link to post
Share on other sites

  • RMweb Gold

Rules are a box, which constrain behaviour.

Those constraints define safe working boundaries.

All rules are interpreted, some are more absolute (Yes/No) than others (Between A and E)

 

Theres a lot of extremist posts suggesting breaking the box, which it just doesnt have to be the case.

 

often by over laying two boxes, you get a degree of compromise, where by within both constraints, that overlap but exist in each others boundaries, allows a greater flexibility than as two separate boxes.

 

A good example of this is pilot man working, where a driver of one type can drive over an unfamiliar network with a guide who knows it.


Not everything is as black and white as being presented, there are always shades of grey, that are perfectly acceptable if implemented within the defined frameworks...

 

I hold up the case of a budget airline who’s plane went tech in spain, at an airport they didnt have a maintenance agreement with for an inspection issue. Facing a several hour delay, whilst an engineer was flown in, a greater solution presented itself. A passenger on that flight was a qualified mechanic for that aircraft type, but for a different airline. He presented himself, had his credentials verified, and sought approval from the budget airlines maintenance base, and 90 minutes later, they were in the air.

 

Edited by adb968008
  • Like 1
  • Interesting/Thought-provoking 1
Link to post
Share on other sites

adb968008, I am struggling to see where you are coming from. As many of us who work in the industry have pointed out the way the safety system works is that you have to be trained and signed off to work a particular class of trains over e set route, vary from that, either route or traction and we can't work the train. There are no "shades of grey", either you are signed off to work them, or you are not. Pilotman working is again not a fair comparison, it's in the rule book and is a safe way of working , same as if I had a traction or route conductor on my train. But we don't have lots of people like that just sitting round doing nothing, so if you brought these trains back who would be able to conduct on them.

 

So are you saying, that in this time of emergency we should forget all about such safety procedures and ignore them and just get out there are operate whatever we are given, regardless of how long ago it was since we last worked them?

 

Please enlighten us because from what I've seen so far the only "extremist" views are coming from you who seems to want to steamroller the rule book and everything it stands for.

  • Like 5
  • Agree 3
Link to post
Share on other sites

  • RMweb Gold
36 minutes ago, Hobby said:

adb968008, I am struggling to see where you are coming from. As many of us who work in the industry have pointed out the way the safety system works is that you have to be trained and signed off to work a particular class of trains over e set route, vary from that, either route or traction and we can't work the train. There are no "shades of grey", either you are signed off to work them, or you are not. Pilotman working is again not a fair comparison, it's in the rule book and is a safe way of working , same as if I had a traction or route conductor on my train. But we don't have lots of people like that just sitting round doing nothing, so if you brought these trains back who would be able to conduct on them.

 

So are you saying, that in this time of emergency we should forget all about such safety procedures and ignore them and just get out there are operate whatever we are given, regardless of how long ago it was since we last worked them?

 

Please enlighten us because from what I've seen so far the only "extremist" views are coming from you who seems to want to steamroller the rule book and everything it stands for.

No I am not saying this.

Please show me one statement where I have

1. advocated throwing out the rulebook,

2. suggested “brought back these trains”, which I assume you mean some form of classic traction...


or..just cease doing it please...its your imagination, not mine.

 

I am trying to saying to some running round with wild “can’t do’s” and others increasingly with “wild ideas” that really there should be some faith in the management come up with safe solutions.

 

I don't accept “surrender, nothing can be done and shut the whole thing down”... as long as the tracks exist, staff come to work and the juice is on, something is possible.

 

As I said I think XR with spare 345’s and drivers on a 4 day week, even if it was only a handful, is a great idea... tell me why it is isnt ? That then pushes GWRs london resources further west, thus giving extra capacity there... The only thing I can see here is the filing cabinet throwing up objections to stop it.
i’m sure those who are paid to do these things are thinking of equally similar ideas...


ive never at any point said a pair of 58’s will top and tail the sleeper nor that drivers should disregard signals etc...or any other wild ideas. I do think some objections being thrown up, are possible to overcome, safely, with the right attitude and approach.

 

I do think however, some in the industry quite often demonstrate more negative traits than positive ones, when it comes to responding to issues, however that could also just be a trait of the employees at a certain work level, where as more influential ones publically  say less, but make decisions.

 

Lets see what the next 24 hours brings, i’m confident some cooperation from with in the industry will emerge.

 

Edited by adb968008
  • Like 1
Link to post
Share on other sites

  • RMweb Gold
19 minutes ago, Mike_Walker said:

Yes, but they are confined to the WoE Class 2 services and have only 4 cars.  as already discussed there are issues of competency which prevent their wider use.

Also, the minimum HST permitted to run at 125mph is a 2+5 formation for reasons of brake force. The 2+4 "Castle" sets are therefore limited to 100mph. 

 

Even if they could be used, mixing them in with 800s that remain in traffic would play hell with the timetable. Their seating capacity is also well under half that of a 9-car 800 and social distancing remains in force so the number of passengers would be severely curtailed.

 

John  

  • Agree 2
Link to post
Share on other sites

  • RMweb Premium
11 hours ago, adb968008 said:

When fire services went on strike, Green goddesses appeared.

When covid came, private ambulances were commandeered.

When civil emergencies occurs the army can be called.

When volcanoes explode the navy was commandeered.

When war breaks out cruise ships were requisitioned.

When cars break, rentals cars can be called.

 

When trains break, everyone makes a brew and puts there feet up, quotes the rule book and becomes an expert on why not.

 

however,

 

I have hopes that those doing their job, will do it... the experts, who are probably too busy to be in this room, will gather something i’m sure, and the next 24 hours will reveal.

 

 

 

The private ambulances are always there, at massive additional cost to the nhs to cover gaps

Link to post
Share on other sites

56 minutes ago, Oldddudders said:

The frustrations about what the railway can, and critically can't, do right now really stem from Clapham, which caused seismic changes in the whole way the railway was run. Prior to Clapham, anyone in an orange - not yellow in those days - jacket could step off a platform ramp and wander along the 6-foot or indeed 4-foot way at whim. Traincrew had route and traction competencies, but these were much less monitored, and helpful staff who liked overtime were embraced when needed. The ticket collector was probably competent to flag signals, and indeed wind points. Even before the legally-led privatisation had got under way, much of that had been regulated to an extent not known in the railway's first 150 years. 

 

With a zillion different firms now involved in the railway, unpicking the knitting and imposing something akin to martial law as people are now trying to suggest, is simply not going to happen. 

 

A different world indeed back then - with all the frustrations the trains continued to roll (just !!). This is a bit of nostalgia

 

 

I'm sure the staff do there very best even today.

 

As to the photos, yes, whatever stock it is it's very concerning indeed.

 

Brit15

 

 

Link to post
Share on other sites

On 08/05/2021 at 06:32, great central said:

Apparently the whole fleet of Hitachi trains across the country have been pulled out of service for safety checks, that's LNER, GWR, TPE and Hull Trains services all down the pan.

Due to cracks in the body being found I understand.

Going to be an 'interesting' day for those of us still running:O

 

MAZAK?

  • Funny 3
Link to post
Share on other sites

Question. The IEPs have been in service on GwR longer than LNER. Therefore fatigue cycles (breaking, track jolts, lifts etc) will be higher on the original class 800 5 cars. Therefore why has the lner fleet been withdrawn? Surely like in aircraft, a problem can be foind and  highlighted for checking after x amount of time, miles, cycles etc. Similarly the newer class 802 in gwr should not yet have the same wear as the 800s.

Is my thought process/logic completely wrong?

 

Also having heard and felt the suspension bottoming out on many class 800 runs im not surprised there are now cracks.

 

Finally there should be a thunderbird fleet of warm stord 9 -car hst kept for emergency fleets across the network. They have a hogh RA, and are very robust and reliable. Its an insult that a serviceable hsts are being scrapped when their replacements are not fit for purpose day in day out. If I were commuting now and would have a paragraph of choice words for the tocs involved.

  • Like 5
  • Funny 1
Link to post
Share on other sites

Create an account or sign in to comment

You need to be a member in order to leave a comment

Create an account

Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!

Register a new account

Sign in

Already have an account? Sign in here.

Sign In Now
 Share

×
×
  • Create New...