Problems with IET trains from April 2021

[whole diary]

[MVR S&T]

It is rumoured that a fix for the cracks is in place and will, for the GWR^▸ (Great Western Railway) units, be carried out at Eastleigh. Other units 'up north'

[broadgage]

It is rumoured that a fix for the cracks is in place and will, for the GWR^▸ (Great Western Railway) units, be carried out at Eastleigh. Other units 'up north'

I wonder what the timescale is ?

Until recently, the scale of cracked or otherwise not available trains has been largely hidden by the pandemic reducing demand, and by staff shortages. The long term timetable reduction also assists in covering up the problem.

I very much doubt that a reliable service of full length trains will return this calendar year, and have doubts about NEXT years holiday season.

I appreciate that IET^▸ (Intercity Express Train) supporters will point to recent days with very few short formations, but these seem to be days with dozens of cancellations.

The general poor quality of IETs suggests that even when the cracks are fixed, that something else will go wrong. They are still vulnerable to waves at Dawlish (an "essential requirement") and still fail to couple and uncouple reliably in the specified time (another "essential requirement")

At the beginning of this failed project I suggested that short formed trains/inadequate capacity  would be a problem. This forecast I based not on any detailed technical analysis but simply on first hand experience of other* major new train fleets that reduced capacity either permanently or least for many years.
IET supporters said that this fleet renewal would be different, would be ample, and with "Japanese levels of reliability" and in particular that all peak trains leaving London would be full length. This last has presumably become a future aspiration, or been ditched entirely.

For how many years of the planned 27.5 years service life are routine stock shortages acceptable, before admitting this to be a failed project.

*The three previous major stock renewals are
1) Networkers replaced older slam door DC^▸ (Direct Current) EMUs^▸ (Electric Multiple Unit). Mixed 4 car and 6 car trains in the rush hour replaced 8 car trains.
2) 4 car and 5 car Voyagers replaced HSTs^▸ (High Speed Train) and loco hauled trains on cross country, too short from day one, and still too short many years later.
3) Waterloo to Exeter service reduced from full length loco hauled trains to 3 car units. Badly overcrowded for many years until some trains were eventually lengthened to the same length as the old ones.

[IndustryInsider]

Off he goes again…

[broadgage]

Off he goes again…

Do you consider the project to have been a success then ?

[a-driver]

It is rumoured that a fix for the cracks is in place and will, for the GWR^▸ (Great Western Railway) units, be carried out at Eastleigh. Other units 'up north'

The general poor quality of IETs^▸ (Intercity Express Train) suggests that even when the cracks are fixed, that something else will go wrong. They are still vulnerable to waves at Dawlish (an "essential requirement") and still fail to couple and uncouple reliably in the specified time (another "essential requirement")

Uncoupling/coupling issues have largely been resolved.

[IndustryInsider]

Indeed.  I can’t remember the last time I heard of a coupling failure.

Do you consider the project to have been a success then ?

Some elements have been a success, others not so.

[bradshaw]

More trouble for Hitachi 800 Series vehicles

From Roger Ford's INFORMED SOURCES e-Preview September 2021
( http://live.ezezine.com/ezine/archives/759/759-2021.08.20.03.26.archive.txt)

In recent months, readers could have been forgiven for assuming that the name of this column had changed to ‘Fatigue cracking monthly (incorporating Informed Sources). And here we go again.
A further notification was issued in July, following the discovery of cracking in a third location in  Hitachi 800 Series vehicles.  These latest cracks are in the lower face of coupler support plates and confirmed to be another case of stress corrosion, similar to that found in the jacking points.

Auto-couplers on the end vehicles and the fixed couplers between intermediate vehicles are attached to the vehicle by four 30mm diameter bolts which pass through the support plate and the body-shell itself. Subsequent Finite Element Analysis (FEA) has demonstrated that the securing bolts, plus the welding of the support plate to the car body, would prevent detachment or catastrophic failure of the support plate. As a result trains can remain in service with defective support plates, pending a long-term proposal for repair and prevention of further cracking.

[ChrisB]

It is rumoured that a fix for the cracks is in place and will, for the GWR^▸ (Great Western Railway) units, be carried out at Eastleigh. Other units 'up north'

So just a rumour then, not born out by the post above

[broadgage]

I was not aware of the THIRD location affected by cracks when I described the IETs^▸ (Intercity Express Train) as a failed project.

I did however state that  "The general poor quality of IETs suggests that even when the cracks are fixed, that something else will go wrong."

That was perhaps overly optimistic since in fact something else HAS gone wrong wrong before even one existing crack has been fixed.

With three different areas affected by fatigue cracks already, what are the odds on these units lasting the planned 27.5 years without more faults ?

Hitachi SHOULD be paying significant compensation for the ongoing non-availability of these units. Does anyone know if such payments have actually been received ? Or as I cynically suspect, has some wiggle room been found by Hitachi.

[ChrisB]

They will be on a supply contract of set number per day.

Penalties apply if this isn’t achieved.

[stuving]

I was not aware of the THIRD location affected by cracks when I described the IETs^▸ (Intercity Express Train) as a failed project.

I did however state that  "The general poor quality of IETs suggests that even when the cracks are fixed, that something else will go wrong."

That was perhaps overly optimistic since in fact something else HAS gone wrong wrong before even one existing crack has been fixed.

With three different areas affected by fatigue cracks already, what are the odds on these units lasting the planned 27.5 years without more faults ?

Hitachi SHOULD be paying significant compensation for the ongoing non-availability of these units. Does anyone know if such payments have actually been received ? Or as I cynically suspect, has some wiggle room been found by Hitachi.

No, that's not what has happened. This wasn't a new occurrence, after repairs, so it can't tell us anything about what will happen once that is done.

The same kind of cracking has been found in other parts of the vehicle body made in the same way. That is not really surprising; one would expect similar behaviour under similar conditions. The investigation will include a review of the engineering processes involved in producing the trains, leading to a proposed remedy. And for each method considered, short of the most drastic ones, they will look at what can be done to stop the same processes continuing (or at least slow them enough to last a lifetime). I can't see much point in betting on the outcome of that.

Edit: to insert the sentence I forgot

[Clan Line]

I was not aware of the THIRD location affected by cracks .....................

No, that's not what has happened. The same kind of cracking has been found in other parts of the vehicle body made in the same way.

Broadgage says:  "THIRD Location"
Stuving says: "other parts of the vehicle body"

What exactly is different between these two statements ??      Except that Broadgage has used the singular whereas Stuving has used the plural.(Thinking ahead perhaps ?)

Having worked for a very large Government Dept for a number of years I can already see the way that this will shake out. The Govt will (as usual) totally fail to enforce its contractual rights. If they did Hitachi, and everyone else, would never bid for any work again, and everyone knows it - so the Govt is over a barrel. Eventually an "agreement" will be reached..........delays and disruption will be ignored and the extra costs will be "equally shared" - 80% to the taxpayer and 20% to the contractor.  Think .... Crossrail, HS2^▸ (The next High Speed line(s)), Hinkley Point, Aircraft carriers, Nuclear submarines, Nimrod.... et al.     Been there, seen it, done it !!..............

[stuving]

I was not aware of the THIRD location affected by cracks .....................

No, that's not what has happened. The same kind of cracking has been found in other parts of the vehicle body made in the same way.

Broadgage says:  "THIRD Location"
Stuving says: "other parts of the vehicle body"

What exactly is different between these two statements ??      Except that Broadgage has used the singular whereas Stuving has used the plural.(Thinking ahead perhaps ?)

Ah - one of my intended sentences seems to have gone missing, for which I must aplogise. I'll have to repair the original.

[TaplowGreen]

I was not aware of the THIRD location affected by cracks .....................

Broadgage says:  "THIRD Location"
Stuving says: "other parts of the vehicle body"

"Let's call the whole thing off" 

[grahame]

"Let's call the whole thing off" 

Almost tried that a couple of months ago ... found that rail travel was even harder with all the IETs^▸ (Intercity Express Train) parked up while the crack risk was fully evaluated ...