Hitachi trains grounded

[DY444]

51 minutes ago, rodent279 said:

What are the revisions? Just a different aluminium spec, or physical size & shape of parts?

 

No idea tbh.  The problems are at the car ends and affect the yaw damper mounts, roll-bar mounts, lifting plates and bolster.  The shape and size of a component and the material from which it is made are factors in its propensity to crack so revisions to one or more of those characteristics seems to me to be highly probable.

Edited November 15, 2022 by DY444

[adb968008]

How much salt does a unit need to be exposed to, to become corrosive ?

 

Japan is an island surrounded by water, including the pacific ocean.

London isnt exactly “salty”, and except a few miles of Cornwall, and Scottish borders the mainlines are not either.

 

As side of Barry scrapyard, which had stuff near to the sea for decades, Ive not heard Salt corrosion damaging rolling stock to such a damaging extent, and never on brand new equipment.

[Dunsignalling]

5 minutes ago, adb968008 said:

How much salt does a unit need to be exposed to, to become corrosive ?

 

Japan is an island surrounded by water, including the pacific ocean.

London isnt exactly “salty”, and except a few miles of Cornwall, and Scottish borders the mainlines are not either.

 

As side of Barry scrapyard, which had stuff near to the sea for decades, Ive not heard Salt corrosion damaging rolling stock to such a damaging extent, and never on brand new equipment.

Though modern trains incorporate rather more varied, chemically complex and sophisticated materials than was the case in the past, when the menu consisted of steel, cast iron, copper, brass and not much else. 

 

John

Edited November 15, 2022 by Dunsignalling

[adb968008]

19 minutes ago, Dunsignalling said:

Though modern trains incorporate rather more varied, chemically complex and sophisticated materials than was the case in the past, when the menu consisted of steel, cast iron, copper, brass and not much else. 

 

John

So is my car, my last one lasted 20 years.

it died of compression, not rust.

it went to the beach too, one wonders what was wrong with that technology.

 

I havent seen the engineering experts crying “I told you so” as is usual in these events, and a media feast.

so is it over engineered ? Have wez abandoned 190 years of railway knowledge for “intergalatic technical wizz” thats imploding, or perhaps just gone cheap with money on managment fees and savings at the production line ?

 

it doesnt seem right to me… we had some locos running exclusively in salty dock environments for several decades.. if anything I could understand the electrics going pop, but not the metal.

 

As no one is saying anything, it smells cover up, when really if there is a lesson to be learned, it should be to the benefit of the industry (ie DeHavailand Comet). As anything, I guess the answer will be in which way the cash flows for this… if its from the dft though, one expects the books to be opened with explanations.

Edited November 15, 2022 by adb968008

[Reorte]

13 minutes ago, adb968008 said:

So is my car, my last one lasted 20 years.

it died of compression, not rust.

 

I havent seen the engineering experts crying “I told you so” as is usual in these events, and a media feast.

so is it over engineered ? Have wez abandoned 190 years of railway knowledge for “intergalatic technical wizz” thats imploding, or perhaps just gone cheap with money on managment fees and savings at the production line ?

 

it doesnt seem right to me.

Far be it for me to defend the new (considering my generally curmudgeonly outlook on life), but hearing about new models of cars having faults and recalls isn't unprecedented. With far more cars than trains they probably get picked up more rapidly (and have less impact on the overall number of cars out and about, since there are a lot more varieties of new cars than new trains). And a solution that works in one place perfectly fine might not in another, which some of the comments suggest might be part of the issue.

 

A lot of that 190 years of knowledge isn't particularly relevant, I don't think a good understanding of a boiler or valve gear mechanics would be all that useful for example.

[adb968008]

6 minutes ago, Reorte said:

Far be it for me to defend the new (considering my generally curmudgeonly outlook on life), but hearing about new models of cars having faults and recalls isn't unprecedented. With far more cars than trains they probably get picked up more rapidly (and have less impact on the overall number of cars out and about, since there are a lot more varieties of new cars than new trains). And a solution that works in one place perfectly fine might not in another, which some of the comments suggest might be part of the issue.

 

A lot of that 190 years of knowledge isn't particularly relevant, I don't think a good understanding of a boiler or valve gear mechanics would be all that useful for example.

Are you serious ?

 

No one is suggesting boiler or valve gear mechanics…. I would have thought, given how much our experts earn and proclaim of their various high esteemed status, that obvious things like operating environment would be quite high on the list… I assume it was ?

 

I’m not sure this is as bad as the Euro 4000 spec diesels sent to South Africa, but then the bill hasnt been seen yet.

Edited November 15, 2022 by adb968008

[Mike_Walker]

DY444 has pretty well summed up the situation.  There are currently two GWR sets at Eastleigh, 802003 is under repair and 800026 is awaiting final sign off of the repair method.  802003 may be out in December.  As mentioned above these two will take longer as the processes required are worked out then there's the signing off to be done before the main fleet can be treated.

 

Hitachi are a very secretive organisation so it's not clear whether or not the more recent builds and those currently in build are to a modified design and/or incorporate different, correct, grades of aluminium.  One would hope so but only time will tell.  If they too start visiting Eastleigh or Newton Aycliffe...

[Reorte]

35 minutes ago, adb968008 said:

Are you serious ?

 

No one is suggesting boiler or valve gear mechanics…. I would have thought, given how much our experts earn and proclaim of their various high esteemed status, that obvious things like operating environment would be quite high on the list… I assume it was ?

 

I’m not sure this is as bad as the Euro 4000 spec diesels sent to South Africa, but then the bill hasnt been seen yet.

The point about boilers was just that that years of experience wasn't all relevant.

 

From other posts in this thread it seems that yes, the operating environment was considered, and not properly taken on board, and something was produced that would've probably been fine in a different operating environment. If that's the case then it's not a failure of railway expertise and engineering but of company management and process.

[woodenhead]

Do we think the Hornby IEPs will all have built in Mazak rot to replicate this fault at some point in the future.

[TomScrut]

@adb968008 there are loads of reasons why new materials and processes are being introduced vs the last 190 years. I expect weight reduction (efficiency) and crash test requirements will mean that aluminium monocoque (?) is a good way to go with these (for example).

 

I find a paragraph on this page particularly interesting.

 

https://www.orr.gov.uk/search-news/rail-regulator-publishes-class-800-series-safety-report

 

The industry should conduct further work to identify the reasons for the higher levels of fatigue loading experienced by rolling stock. Since the Hitachi Rail design complied with the applicable industry standards, the industry as a whole should evaluate whether the applicable standards take into account the loads arising from operation on the rail network in Great Britain. This industry collaboration will require the involvement of those parties responsible for design, manufacture and maintenance of rolling stock including, but not limited to, Hitachi Rail. 

 

Reading between the lines that means to me that there is a possibility of the specification not being correct, with the trains encountering greater loads than what was required of them in the tender.

 

Obviously the other points on there do suggest consideration should be taken for corrosion when using 7000 series aluminium etc. (and aluminium corroding with salt is not a new phenomenon) but I do think this is not 100% an engineering issue.

[adb968008]

1 hour ago, Reorte said:

The point about boilers was just that that years of experience wasn't all relevant.

 

From other posts in this thread it seems that yes, the operating environment was considered, and not properly taken on board, and something was produced that would've probably been fine in a different operating environment. If that's the case then it's not a failure of railway expertise and engineering but of company management and process.

 

50 minutes ago, TomScrut said:

 

https://www.orr.gov.uk/search-news/rail-regulator-publishes-class-800-series-safety-report

 

The industry should conduct further work to identify the reasons for the higher levels of fatigue loading experienced by rolling stock. Since the Hitachi Rail design complied with the applicable industry standards, the industry as a whole should evaluate whether the applicable standards take into account the loads arising from operation on the rail network in Great Britain. This industry collaboration will require the involvement of those parties responsible for design, manufacture and maintenance of rolling stock including, but not limited to, Hitachi Rail. 

 

Reading between the lines that means to me that there is a possibility of the specification not being correct, with the trains encountering greater loads than what was required of them in the tender.

 

The two points I highlight are not in alignment.

Whilst err towards Retortes opinion, the statement below suggests joint responsibility.

 

However, ok if we ignore 190 years of railways and focus on the last 20…. A good 50% of the passenger rolling stock is brand new… only one* Manufacturers stock seems to be afflicted. 
 

*The issue on the 68’s seems unrelated.

 

So what is everyone else doing right ?

[TomScrut]

6 minutes ago, adb968008 said:

Whilst err towards Retortes opinion, the statement below suggests joint responsibility.

 

Exactly. It is probably a symptom of the whole process to be honest.

 

7 minutes ago, adb968008 said:

A good 50% of the passenger rolling stock is brand new… only one* Manufacturers stock seems to be afflicted. 

 

Afflicted with that issue perhaps. The CAF stock doesn't seem to be short of issues IIRC (yaw damper brackets and bearings overheating).

 

Ultimately anything sold nowadays is built to a price, with input from all over the place leading to compromise.

[Dunsignalling]

1 minute ago, TomScrut said:

 

Exactly. It is probably a symptom of the whole process to be honest.

 

 

Afflicted with that issue perhaps. The CAF stock doesn't seem to be short of issues IIRC (yaw damper brackets and bearings overheating).

 

Ultimately anything sold nowadays is built to a price, with input from all over the place leading to compromise.

Money saving and weight saving, the twin destroyers of reliability.

 

John

[adb968008]

1 hour ago, Dunsignalling said:

Money saving and weight saving, the twin destroyers of reliability.

 

John

You have to wonder how much is being saved, if the cost of rectification is high.

Also, will these things survive now to 40 years, or is this job a case of getting the initial problem solved, but leaving an underlying issue for the future.

And we make fun of the Russian army, at least theyve got unlimited amounts of spares, made in bulk at a cheap price to last forever. This conflict is a test of hitech and skills vs low tech and volume.

 

But on railway infrastructure i’m far from convinced hitech beats lower tech… indeed I think the industry lost that battle, and first reinvented itself via “lifestyle” requirements upto 2019, and is now reinventing itself via “Green” tech  to attempt to resell cheap stuff to replace ageing tech that still works and does the job it should.

 

I just hope we dont end up in a similar place when Battery tech fails to deliver, at taxpayer cost, and leads to mass electrification, but of course needs new investment in rolling stock as the mid-life AC/DC stuff was prematurely scrapped at this current time.

 

All in the name of shuffling dried beans in an empty can around the treasury.

 

 

 

 

 

Edited November 15, 2022 by adb968008

[TomScrut]

Just now, adb968008 said:

Also, will these things survive now to 40 years

 

Were they specced for 40 years?

[Dunsignalling]

3 minutes ago, TomScrut said:

 

Were they specced for 40 years?

It's probably not wise to assume that anything else will ever rival the longevity in front-line service of the HST.

[adb968008]

4 minutes ago, Dunsignalling said:

It's probably not wise to assume that anything else will ever rival the longevity in front-line service of the HST.

Or 47/37’s, or castles, kings, saints…

 

If design life isnt 40 years, then 66’s are doomed as we speak, and 59’s are almost passed it…. Even pacers made 35 years !

Edited November 15, 2022 by adb968008

[TomScrut]

30 minutes ago, adb968008 said:

Or 47/37’s, or castles, kings, saints…

 

If design life isnt 40 years, then 66’s are doomed as we speak, and 59’s are almost passed it…. Even pacers made 35 years !

 

Design life and actual life are two completely different things. Most stuff can last forever if you pour enough resource into keeping it going. And what aspects of the train/whatever are meant to last that long, what is expected to be replaced before?

 

36 minutes ago, Dunsignalling said:

It's probably not wise to assume that anything else will ever rival the longevity in front-line service of the HST.

 

All I meant by my comment was that they may not be supposed to last 40 years.

[Dunsignalling]

19 minutes ago, TomScrut said:

 

Design life and actual life are two completely different things. Most stuff can last forever if you pour enough resource into keeping it going. And what aspects of the train/whatever are meant to last that long, what is expected to be replaced before?

 

 

All I meant by my comment was that they may not be supposed to last 40 years.

 

I think we'd already worked that out for ourselves!

[phil-b259]

1 hour ago, adb968008 said:

Or 47/37’s, or castles, kings, saints…

 

If design life isnt 40 years, then 66’s are doomed as we speak, and 59’s are almost passed it…. Even pacers made 35 years !

 

I think you need to be careful here - the fundamentals of the 59s/ 66s (massive underframe, engine, etc) are very much in the 'last forever' category.

 

What is suffering is the lightweight bodyshell - but due to the locos simplistic design it should be esay-ish to scrap it and build a new body around the underframe/ engine.

 

Edited November 15, 2022 by phil-b259

[Mike_Walker]

1 hour ago, TomScrut said:

 

Were they specced for 40 years?

The contract with Hitachi is for 27 years.  How long they will last beyond that is anyone's guess.  If left to the operators the answer is probably not long.

[Dunsignalling]

18 minutes ago, Mike_Walker said:

The contract with Hitachi is for 27 years.  How long they will last beyond that is anyone's guess.  If left to the operators the answer is probably not long.

On current form, six months at best!

[roythebus1]

There was a problem with bearings overheating and failing on the southern's DMU fleet. The same units didn't have problems elsewhere in the country. IIRC part of the problem was the earth return current of the 750v DC electric system was going through the bearings and causing premature failure. Simple answer was to fit carbon brush in the bearing caps to carry stray return currents from the bogie frame to the axle end. Could this be the same for new units running under 25kv AC?

 

[boxbrownie]

10 hours ago, rodent279 said:

What are the revisions? Just a different aluminium spec, or physical size & shape of parts?

From the pictures it looked like it was the base body which cracked around the damper mount, so presumably they will beef up the material in that area, whether they will brace it or increase material spec is up to testing.

 

But then I don’t think it’s ever been made public exactly what the issue was.

[TomScrut]

1 hour ago, roythebus1 said:

Could this be the same for new units running under 25kv AC?

 

Whilst I am far from an expert on this, I expect this to be less of an issue on 25kV due to the current being far less for any given power use. Whilst 25kV stuff tends to be more powerful, the voltage is massive in comparison so the current will be less.

 

That said, if the design makes no allowance for it, then perhaps?