Hitachi trains grounded

[Davexoc]

8 hours ago, Eddie R v2.0 said:

That’s true Kris, I’m sure if that a similar issue had happened, it would have caused a problem of the same proportions. Is it luck, good quality work on the HST, or poor spec/ workmanship on the 80x, or a combination? Not for me to say, but I’m glad it’s been identified early enough before bits of metal fly off units, which is horrifying. 
 

The way I see it, problem identified, units withdrawn till checked and once a fix is identified and implemented, then we can get back to normal and learn from it for future builds. 

 

There was an issue with the HST in the mid 80s, all staff at OC (HST and Factory) had to attend training on an updated Standing Order.

This was due to a change in the permissable length of cracks found in the brake discs, including moving the whole set to also inspect the parts hidden under the brake pads.

 

The reason, bits of metal were flying off. One time a section of brake disc narrowly missed a PW gang, and another incident took down a lineside post. IIRC at least one of those incidents was on the ECML.

 

The SO didn't call for squadron grounding, but it did make exam times quite a bit longer....

 

Various designs of disc were tried, but one piece variants meant that the wheel had to be removed from the axle, and that created scoring when pressed off, so compromised the integrity of the whole wheelset.

[fiftyfour fiftyfour]

4 hours ago, Ian Hargrave said:

And it’s the only full set (7) operational spare. We must doff our hats to the much unjustly  maligned XC and their main fleet of now venerable 220/1. They must be up to their proverbial necks in it right now. Compliments to their long suffering train crews and the maintenance engineers at Barton that keep what is now the proverbial Thin Red Line of extensive IC workings operational.Don’t scorn the Voyagers. We need them.....and of course the small fleet of 125’s

Whisper it quietly (because they are so awful to travel on) but the Voyagers are reliable, and super reliable if you don't ask too much of them like tilting or joining/splitting with sister units too often. Ironically the covid timetable could be tweaked to provide even greater capacity as most turns are double sets (or HSTs), it's just a shame that every other hour they don't go south of Bristol in the daytime...

 

[fiftyfour fiftyfour]

5 minutes ago, Davexoc said:

 

There was an issue with the HST in the mid 80s, all staff at OC (HST and Factory) had to attend training on an updated Standing Order.

This was due to a change in the permissable length of cracks found in the brake discs, including moving the whole set to also inspect the parts hidden under the brake pads.

 

The reason, bits of metal were flying off. One time a section of brake disc narrowly missed a PW gang, and another incident took down a lineside post. IIRC at least one of those incidents was on the ECML.

 

The SO didn't call for squadron grounding, but it did make exam times quite a bit longer....

 

Various designs of disc were tried, but one piece variants meant that the wheel had to be removed from the axle, and that created scoring when pressed off, so compromised the integrity of the whole wheelset.

For those that remember, we knocked on the door of a fleetwide stop of the HSTs as late as '95. Thankfully inspections over pits didn't find a fleetwide issue with the retaining bolts on the #3 fuel tanks and 43190's disaster at Maidenhead was a one-off...

[surfsup]

31 minutes ago, fiftyfour fiftyfour said:

For those that remember, we knocked on the door of a fleetwide stop of the HSTs as late as '95. Thankfully inspections over pits didn't find a fleetwide issue with the retaining bolts on the #3 fuel tanks and 43190's disaster at Maidenhead was a one-off...

 

An incident which 190 never really fully recovered from - It suffered a bent cab frame from that incident and was regular being booked for issues with the cab door not fully closing. If there's one Power Car I'd let go for spares, it would be that one. 

 

The ScotRail 385s seem to now be suffering from the same issues with 9 units now reported to be stopped (up from 2 this morning). I wonder if it could be a combination of issues with the metal (Hitachi were affected by the Kobe Steel scandal)  and a design issue that is causing the metal fatigue? 

 

Also reported that the 395s are being checked today as a precaution - although older, this has certainly rattled Hitachi. 

[Reorte]

49 minutes ago, fiftyfour fiftyfour said:

Whisper it quietly (because they are so awful to travel on) but the Voyagers are reliable, and super reliable if you don't ask too much of them like tilting or joining/splitting with sister units too often. Ironically the covid timetable could be tweaked to provide even greater capacity as most turns are double sets (or HSTs), it's just a shame that every other hour they don't go south of Bristol in the daytime...

 

A bit unfair on the Voyagers I think. Sure, I've had plenty of unpleasant journeys on them but it's been because of a lack of seat room (I'm 6'3" tall) and that they've usually been overcrowded. On the odd time I've been fortunate enough to have a table seat on a not so busy train they've been OK. Whilst I'm hardly a fan of them I think they've suffered mostly from being used on services they're too small for.

[TheSignalEngineer]

28 minutes ago, Reorte said:

A bit unfair on the Voyagers I think. Sure, I've had plenty of unpleasant journeys on them but it's been because of a lack of seat room (I'm 6'3" tall) and that they've usually been overcrowded. On the odd time I've been fortunate enough to have a table seat on a not so busy train they've been OK. Whilst I'm hardly a fan of them I think they've suffered mostly from being used on services they're too small for.

A lot of the problem was the bad press they got at the start by being too small at peak times and the unreliable toilet modules. My regular train home at the time was an 86 plus 6xMk2 starting at Birmingham. It was replaced by a 4-car 220 coming through from Reading and beyond.

[melmerby]

24 minutes ago, TheSignalEngineer said:

A lot of the problem was the bad press they got at the start by being too small at peak times and the unreliable toilet modules. My regular train home at the time was an 86 plus 6xMk2 starting at Birmingham. It was replaced by a 4-car 220 coming through from Reading and beyond.

Wasn't that due to beardy one's replacement of the loco plus carriages once an hour with a Voyager half the length twice an hour?

Same amount of capacity, but more frequent services meant more custom, ergo train too small.

Edited May 9, 2021 by melmerby

[Rivercider]

1 hour ago, fiftyfour fiftyfour said:

Whisper it quietly (because they are so awful to travel on) but the Voyagers are reliable, and super reliable if you don't ask too much of them like tilting or joining/splitting with sister units too often. Ironically the covid timetable could be tweaked to provide even greater capacity as most turns are double sets (or HSTs), it's just a shame that every other hour they don't go south of Bristol in the daytime...

 

Or west of Exeter when the tide is in!

 

(it is a shame, although I am not really fond of the Voyagers I was hoping that the originally planned timetable of a 2-hourly service calling at Weston would actually have been implemented, Operation Princess never quite happened here) 

 

cheers

[Reorte]

22 minutes ago, TheSignalEngineer said:

A lot of the problem was the bad press they got at the start by being too small at peak times and the unreliable toilet modules. My regular train home at the time was an 86 plus 6xMk2 starting at Birmingham. It was replaced by a 4-car 220 coming through from Reading and beyond.

I had a similar issue, I was travelling between Manchester and Penrith reasonably often at the time which went from a 47 plus however many (I don't recall, only remembered it was a 47 because the police liveried one turned up once). That was then replaced by a 4 car Voyager. Mind you worse was to come later when they in turn got replaced by 185s. They were doubled up as far as Preston but after that everyone was squeezed in to 3, so more crowded, harder seats, worse riding, and the weather blowing in at every stop.

[uax6]

Up here in the forgotten part of Norfolk, we have seen an influx of 387 units over the last week or so (Did the May timetable change happen somewhere else, as nothings changed here?). Trying to pin-point where these units have come from is tricky (theres a red 387 2xx running around, and some de-branded white with green doors ones), so I'm wondering if theres possibly going to be a shuffle of them back to GWR, with the 365's coming back on the KX-Peterborough workings (they were only stored in the last couple of weeks)...

 

Short forming our 12 car (8 vice 12) to Cambridge and the 8 car (4 vice 8) to Lynn wouldn't be an issue at the minute....

 

Andy G

Edited May 10, 2021 by uax6

[Dunsignalling]

If anyone on here is contemplating a journey from London to the West Country, please bear in mind that the SWR's Waterloo-Exeter service is still running to its Covid timetable.

 

That involves two separate journeys; the first stage gets you from Waterloo to Salisbury followed by a second leg, at a much-reduced frequency, from Salisbury to Exeter, and is booked to continue for another week yet.

 

Typical overall journey time is 4 hours and 9 minutes coming down, around half an hour less going up. 

 

John

Edited May 10, 2021 by Dunsignalling

[eastglosmog]

13 hours ago, Afroal05 said:

Snip..............................

 

Turbos on the North Cots running Oxford - Worcester shuttles.

...............................

They seem to be doing Reading - Worcester today, but not very often.

Edited to add:

Well they were first thing, but seem to have changed to Oxford after a few cancellations.

Edited May 10, 2021 by eastglosmog
Change in train detinations

[black and decker boy]

Railway Herald Magazine has posted on Facebook of a class 91 diagram starting Tuesday

Facebook post
 

Industry sources have confirmed one Class 91 and Mk4 set will return to LNER service on Tuesday, working:
1A09 0630 BFS-KGX
1D09 1003 KGX-LDS
1A30 1245 LDS-KGX
1D20 1533 KGX-LDS
1A46 1815 LDS-KGX
1D33 2125 KGX-LDS

A second set should be reintroduced from Thursday

[Supaned]

12 hours ago, Andrew Young said:

As for spare units, strange how there weren’t any spare when we were trying to get one for route knowledge retention... but nevertheless, good to see inter company cooperation.

 

He who pays the piper....

 

[Supaned]

Just expanding on this with a thought.

 

So far we have 80x & 385 (both Hitachi) and 19x (CAF) with similar issues re yaw dampers . I appreciate the current 80x situation is down to the jacking points, however , it did make me wonder.

 

Whilst the Hitachi units could well be impacted by the Kobe steel situation , surely the CAF ones aren't made of the same stuff, so I have to ask ,exactly what is causing these issues and how? As the units are from different manufacturers, that probably has to be ruled out, so is it the infrastructure they run on? Are the dampers themselves too stiff causing excessive forces on the mountings? 

 

I'm by no means an engineer , but to me it seems to be very coincidental - were it all Hitachi units I'd go with the Kobe Steel theory, but as CAF are also involved that is less likely.

[Dunsignalling]

1 minute ago, Supaned said:

Just expanding on this with a thought.

 

So far we have 80x & 385 (both Hitachi) and 19x (CAF) with similar issues re yaw dampers . I appreciate the current 80x situation is down to the jacking points, however , it did make me wonder.

 

Whilst the Hitachi units could well be impacted by the Kobe steel situation , surely the CAF ones aren't made of the same stuff, so I have to ask ,exactly what is causing these issues and how? As the units are from different manufacturers, that probably has to be ruled out, so is it the infrastructure they run on? Are the dampers themselves too stiff causing excessive forces on the mountings? 

 

I'm by no means an engineer , but to me it seems to be very coincidental - were it all Hitachi units I'd go with the Kobe Steel theory, but as CAF are also involved that is less likely.

They are made of aluminium.....

[uax6]

And interestingly when you look at the yaw damper bracket mounting on the 387's built by BREL, sorry Bombardier, they have ally bodies, but the area around the yaw bracket is massive, a thick plate reinforced with several gussets. Is it that with the years of UK experience that has come from the BREL legacy that Bombardier actually understands the forces that are at play from the yaw dampers?

 

Andy G    

 

 

 

[Bernard Lamb]

12 minutes ago, Dunsignalling said:

They are made of aluminium.....

Why let a simple fact get in the way of a good conspiracy theory.

Bernard

[Ian Hargrave]

57 minutes ago, black and decker boy said:

Railway Herald Magazine has posted on Facebook of a class 91 diagram starting Tuesday

Facebook post
 

Industry sources have confirmed one Class 91 and Mk4 set will return to LNER service on Tuesday, working:
1A09 0630 BFS-KGX
1D09 1003 KGX-LDS
1A30 1245 LDS-KGX
1D20 1533 KGX-LDS
1A46 1815 LDS-KGX
1D33 2125 KGX-LDS

A second set should be reintroduced from Thursday

From stock currently stabled at Neville Hill ?

[Dunsignalling]

GW seem to have a partial West of England 8xx service this morning.

 

First up that's running is: 08.15 Pz, 11.10 ExD. and has been reported off Penzance.

 

There are a couple on the down too.

 

John

 

 

Edited May 10, 2021 by Dunsignalling

[Siberian Snooper]

Ally is terrible in constant tension - compression situations, look at the type 21 frigates when they were sent to the Falklands in 82, the six that came back all had severe superstructure cracks and had RSJs welded to the deck in the high stress areas, the repair was to bolt huge butt straps to the hull.

 

 

[Ian Hargrave]

Quick check on LNER website indicated service cancellations continue at the same levels . Still no service to Aberdeen.

[InterCitySpud]

17 hours ago, Supaned said:

 

Yes and no. And I'll give an example.

 

I'm a train driver and have been for 21 years. I've signed a lot of route miles and a lot of different traction types.

 

My current TOC uses 3 different traction types , including HSTs , and I am qualified to drive and instruct on all 3 types. We only have limited HST work, it can be months between turns (although enough to retain that competency on paper) and often that HST turn may only be one way for 35 minutes in the seat with only one station stop. They are a very different beast to anything else, and even though I have been driving them from the outset , you still need to maintain that "feel" for them and they can and will catch out people if you aren't on the ball with them.

 

The same applies for other traction types - however much I may have been familiar with them and how many miles I may have driven them, that "feel" has now gone. Class 47s were my basic traction and if I got into one now , I can guarantee I'd be horrified by the braking performance compared to the trains I drive on a daily basis. Granted , I'd get used to it again in time , but a once every six months refresher isn't going to achieve that.

 

The logistics of traincrew knowledge are such that unique or unusual traction or routes is more of an issue than a solution, further compounded by the current pandemic where the majority of TOCs have strict agreements regarding training "bubbles" on a one-to-one basis - it would simply take too long to get enough people trained to be able to run a service, so unless the IETs are out for a long term period it's just not feasible.

 

And as for the "good old days" of BR steam, yes , traincrews were just expected to get on with it , so when V2s were sent to the Southern they did just that, however , times and standards have moved on, and anyone in charge of a large machine such as a train should be expected to be very familiar with it and it's operation rather than a quick once over and off you go.

Superbly explained, thank you.

 

Although I worked for the railway for a time and was even offered a traction trainee position at Bletchley in 1990 I had to very sadly turn it down due to my somewhat hedonistic ways! Reading some of these posts makes me realise however much it pains me to have turned down my dream job, it was probably the right decision, I may have been suited to 1980s BR but certainly not the modern private railway of today!

 

I did however drive many large road vehicles in my time including wide and oversized loads, many escorted, the ones that cause the motorway tailbacks! The "feel" you describe is very similar in new and old trucks and equipment. I spent many long hours driving and loving the ERF EC11 Eaton twin splitter, a world away to the fully automatic spaceships of today. A newly trained driver taken out of their modern vehicle today simply couldn't drive an old EC11.

 

Lots of analogies with busses too, but unlike trains you can buy your own double decker and drive it yourself around the festivals! (or used to)

 

Bus replacement service anyone?

[corneliuslundie]

A bit late but my thanks to all those railway professionals who corrected by assumptions about differences between driving older and newer trains.

The interesting comment to me was about braking of class 47s. I realise that different trains will have different braking characteristics (eg express passenger and unfitted mineral at the extreme) but I had assumed that after so many years of first vacuum brakes and more recently air brakes the responses on different locomotive types would have been pretty well identical. No more LNWR Coal Tanks.

And yes, I had forgotten how much computerisation has affected the driving process, for good or bad.

I'll stick to my bicycle.

Jonathan

[Supaned]

1 hour ago, Bernard Lamb said:

Why let a simple fact get in the way of a good conspiracy theory.

Bernard

 

It's not a conspiracy theory I'm spouting , just thinking aloud. Lots of fingers being pointed towards manufacturers, including from some quarters some downright xenophobic language , what if it actually isn't them at fault? Going back to the Boeing 737MAX , Boeing were adamant that the crashes were due to pilot error when in actual fact it was anything but, so the most obvious answer isn't necessarily the correct one.

 

Whatever the reason, I hope it's resolved in a safe and timely manner, and whatever lessons need to be learnt are done so.

Edited May 10, 2021 by Supaned