Short formations/failed trains

[whole diary]

[TaplowGreen]

All down to the DfT^» (Department for Transport - about) unfortunately, and their failed franchises....

..........what is? Reliability? Maintenance schedules? 

[ChrisB]

The maintenance schedules...the Delay in bringing in IEP^▸ (Intercity Express Program / Project.) means the HSTs^▸ (High Speed Train) are having to go through further exams...they were due for retirement around now

[eightf48544]

To add to ChrisB point about DfT^» (Department for Transport - about) and failed franchises, it's also their policy on rolling stock procurment which hass delayed the provision of obviously needed new DMUs^▸ (Diesel Multiple Unit) for most current franchises and to allow withdrawl of the very unreliable 14Xs over and above those cascaded form electrification schemes.

This has meant the current fleet is being worked to its maximum which obviously means they get to their maintenance exams quicker and as the HST^▸ (High Speed Train)/Turbo/180 fleets were delivered quite quickly units are coming up for their exams one after the other which means that with intensity of the diagrams any unit failing in service will inevitably mean that trains will be cancelled or short formed as there are no spare units to cover.

It would be an interesting statistical exercise to measure unit availability, realiabilty and utilisation against each other. We know from Hull Trains experience with their 222s when they started they had 5 units for 4 diagrams and were working up to a very good (for a diesel) mileage between failures. Then some one dropped a unit on the floor and wrote it off so they were down to to 4 for 4 and the following year their miles per failure decreased significantly but their utilisation increased.

[grahame]

Let's not forget that many of the problems can be traced back to the unexpected growth of passenger numbers.

The forecasts for the 2005 franchise in GW^▸ (Great Western) land, leading to the rolling stock requirements and SLC^▸ (Service Level Commitment), were based on 0.8% growth on the 2004 survey figures.    So a service with 100 passengers on in 2004 was expected to be carrying between 108.29 passengers (statistically) 10 years later.

What has happened in many parts is that growth has been 8.0% - all I have done is move the digits around from 0.8% but the effect of the compound growth is to bring 215.89 passengers after 10 years.

You could suggest the forecast growth was wrong ... but then people would have equally complained if there had been huge stock investments based on a need to carry 216 people, but only 108 routinely turned up.  It's probably fair to say that the forecasters and decisions were made on the low-growth, pessimistic side and that decisions have been very much risk-averse.

Cut 3 car trains to 2 cars, cut 4 car trains to 3 cars, cut 5 car trains to 3 or 4, pull a couple of carriages out of HSTs^▸ (High Speed Train) and cut passenger numbers by a half.  You'll have a much more comfortable journey, you'll have much more spare stock around (indeed, be able to withdraw some of the older stuff), and you'll have what was expected to happen 10 years ago.

[a-driver]

The one big huge problem with the FGW^▸ (First Great Western) Class 180 fleet is engine cooling issues.  There was a design flaw their from build which needs rectifying, as Hull Trains have done with some major investment of around ^1m to ^2m.  Problem there is no financial sense to do this under a short term franchise (remember Hull Trains is an 'open access' operator and are not held by such constraints).  Its also not worth investing in a fleet which is soon to be replaced by the IEPs^▸ (Intercity Express Program / Project.).

Turbo's don't fair well in the heat either (coolant pipes splitting seems to be a problem a present)  A Turbo engine provides more power with a cold air intake, so in high temperatures there is no noticable drop in engine performance.  On a 166 this is not helped with the air con using, I think its about 50hp, of a 350hp engine.  Class 166 radiators aren't the best of designs either.  They are positioned at virtually a 45 degree angle under the train which as result, sucks in a considerable amount of dirt and debris off the track which in turn blocks the radiators, the engine overheats and reverts to just idling.  Again, a lot of problems stem from the fact the Turbo fleet is so intensively used.  Ideally they would want to jet wash the radiators out overnight but there simply isn't the time to do this.  I would imagine as well, the engine running hot also affects the saloon temperature considerably as well. 

Growth has been unprecedented though.  When the franchise was initially let it was intended that FGW would give up 6 Turbos!!

[tom m]

I caught a 2 car turbo the other day that is normally a 3 or 5 car and was quite full as it was short formed, although it was not quite at crush load. The drop in performance was noticeable, leaving reading on time I think we were a few minutes late by the time I got to Langley, I dread to think what it was like once it got to Hayes & Southall.

It appears that the short formed 2 cars really struggle at high loads, noticeably more so than 3 or 5 cars thus compounding the problem.

[IndustryInsider]

The worst at the moment, as 'a-driver' mentioned is Class 166s when the temperature rises above 20 degrees.  Since the Air-Con was upgraded some of them would really struggle to pull the skin off of a rice pudding!  Regarding the Air-Con things seem a little better this year with more carriages working, but there have still been several failures to cool properly already and windows opened as a result, so if we have a couple of prolonged hot spells like last year I fear that come the latter part of the summer finding a carriage that is working will be a bit of a challenge!

Just a reminder as to what I've said before regarding the Air-Con on Class 166s though for the regular travellers:  If it's not working in one carriage, or even one part of a carriage, other areas on the train may well be nice and cool, so do walk through the train to check if you can.

[Richard Fairhurst]

Unless one of the two workings was booked for 2x ThamesTurbo (2-car + 3-car) and one has been uncoupled to cover the Adelante diagram?

Turbos don't have SDO^▸ (Selective Door Opening) and so can't work in multiple on the Cotswold Line - even two 2-car units would be too long for some platforms.

[ChrisB]

If this happens, the rear set will be locked out at Oxford or Worcester before proceeding

[Richard Fairhurst]

Indeed, as seen here at Kingham:

[Gordon the Blue Engine]

When this happens we get 2 problems we 've discussed before, which I've seen on the 1837 Oxford - Padd stopper which has 5 cars but stops at Appleford.  So back unit is locked out of use until Didcot.  Problems are:

1 - the CIS^▸ (Customer Information System) says it's a 5 car train, when in fact only the front 2 cars are in use as far as Didcot. 

2 - the yellow cant rail lights light up even on locked sets when the doors are released.  I know that these lights are not "doors unlocked" lights, but that is how all passengers perceive them. So at Oxford and Radley passengers are trying to get in the rear coaches when they can't. 

So we get passenger frustration/panic, and delays to trains.

[Thatcham Crossing]

Regarding the Air-Con things seem a little better this year with more carriages working

I was on a 166 taking the 1418 Paddington to Thatcham on Monday of this week (9th June), and it did seem to struggle, accelerating a lot more slowly than usual and taking a long time to get up to max. speed on the non-stop PAD^» (Paddington (London) - next trains) to RDG^‡(resolve) run.

Then, as we approached Thatcham, water starting pouring (like a shower!) out of the roof at the join between the passenger cabin and the vestibule near where I was sat. I assume this was an over-working/failing aircon unit. I told the driver, who said he would get it looked at.

[IndustryInsider]

Then, as we approached Thatcham, water starting pouring (like a shower!) out of the roof at the join between the passenger cabin and the vestibule near where I was sat. I assume this was an over-working/failing aircon unit. I told the driver, who said he would get it looked at.

Oh dear - that was a problem last year with a few of the few that were actually working!

[TaplowGreen]

Then, as we approached Thatcham, water starting pouring (like a shower!) out of the roof at the join between the passenger cabin and the vestibule near where I was sat. I assume this was an over-working/failing aircon unit. I told the driver, who said he would get it looked at.

Oh dear - that was a problem last year with a few of the few that were actually working!

Sounds like we're getting back to the situation where the kit works as long as the sun isn't shining/the rain isn't falling and it's not too hot or cold? So I'm thinking we should make the most of a semi reliable service in April/May, Sept/Oct but it's fingers crossed and pray to whatever God you hold dear for the rest of the time? Heaven help us if it starts snowing! 

[Southern Stag]

My experience of the 166s over the last couple of weeks is that the air conditioning is a vast improvement on the old system, but still far from perfect. The old system used to only work very rarely, the new system seems to work a bit more often than that.