Class 484 replacing class 483 on the island line: progress updates

[A0]

The issue here is the desire of engineers across the world to use computers to control everything because they can not because they need to and the stupidity of the people running these companies be it Boeing, Bombardier or VivaRail to be seduced by technology.

SWR kept in simple with the class 455 conversion just change out the traction package and minimise the interface with other systems.

Sadly i suspect VivaRail will get no further in the UK now.

It's not about what engineers do or don't desire. It's usually driven by safety, reliability and economy requirements.

Technology usually ensures lower running costs and better reliability. If you look at cars for example the reason for many of the electronics is to minimise fuel consumption and manage the emissions systems. You can't do that with a mechanical carburettor. The last Ladas imported into the UK had carburettors and catalytic converters, the latter being required as a result of emissions legislation. The problem was carburettors were unreliable and inconsistent with the result that the catalytic convertors were damaged and the cars failed their first MOTs at 3 years old.

On the rails, many of the early AC electric locos had appalling reliability with not a computer in sight. But a mercury arc rectifier instead - effectively a mechanical solution.

 

[Domh245]

The issue here is the desire of engineers across the world to use computers to control everything because they can not because they need to and the stupidity of the people running these companies be it Boeing, Bombardier or VivaRail to be seduced by technology.

If it made sense to use mechanical/electromechanical/pneumatic (etc) control systems from the last century, they would. Could it be that computers allow more reliable, and generally superior control, making any teething issues with initial introduction worth it (though I'm sure the first camshaft required some fairly extensive testing to make it work) - or perhaps it really is just a conspiracy by 'big chip' to sell more silicon.

Sadly i suspect VivaRail will get no further in the UK now.

Whilst I agree, it's more because there's not really anywhere else to sell their product, rather than the difficulties they've had with introduction

 

[Journeyman]

It's worth pointing out that the 1938 Stock was pretty space-age when first introduced, and featured a number of firsts - when new, they suffered a lot of teething troubles.

 

[Bletchleyite]

I am afraid that I agree. Even if it is shown to be someone else’s fault, the damage to VivaRail’s image is probably too great. And then they have the problem that if they can’t sell their products at home, potential buyers elsewhere are liable to ask why and end up going elsewhere.

Agreed.

It was a great idea, but as far as I'm concerned the utter unreliability of the units (and other basic faults like the slow doors) on the Marston Vale has killed off the concept entirely, and that has been compounded by them being unable to retraction a third rail EMU, paint it up and change the seat covers without major issues. I hope TfW's order does better, but a follow-on order of 3 more 2-car 197s wouldn't be hard if it didn't, so I doubt they will have much patience.

== Doublepost prevention - post automatically merged: 30 Apr 2021 ==

Whilst I agree, it's more because there's not really anywhere else to sell their product, rather than the difficulties they've had with introduction

If they had been really reliable I could have seen them being bought for Northern to replace 150s directly on branches due to the more modern engines. But they haven't.

 

[43096]

Agreed.

It was a great idea, but as far as I'm concerned the utter unreliability of the units (and other basic faults like the slow doors) on the Marston Vale has killed off the concept entirely, and that has been compounded by them being unable to retraction a third rail EMU, paint it up and change the seat covers without major issues.

Getting acceptance on DC isn't the easiest task - if you remember back the Electrostars and Junipers struggled similarly.

I hope TfW's order does better, but a follow-on order of 3 more 2-car 197s wouldn't be hard if it didn't, so I doubt they will have much patience.

TfW have bought theirs, so they can't send them back.

 

[3141]

The problems Vivarail has encountered, and the delays to the class 319 to class 769 project, have shown that converting an electric train to another form of traction is likely to be much more difficult than might have been thought at first. And SWR has found that upgrading and retractioning 442s was in the end not worth completing. Even the lengthening of class 458 to five cars and incorporating class 460 vehicles turned out to be more difficult than expected, though the project had a successful outcome. The only major scheme involving older trains that worked well was the retractioning of SWT's class 455s. I should think that any organisation contemplating a major adaptation of an existing train in the future will be much more cautious.

 

[Journeyman]

Unfortunately, many of these projects have been promised as quick solutions too. In particular, TOCs relying on the optimistic delivery schedules of the 769s have been really dropped in it. Getting a bit OT, perhaps, but yes, upgrading and rebuilding old stock is looking increasingly unattractive, and more often than not a false economy.

That said, Island Line's economics have always been pretty dreadful, and only a cheap solution was ever going to work.

 

[Bletchleyite]

Unfortunately, many of these projects have been promised as quick solutions too. In particular, TOCs relying on the optimistic delivery schedules of the 769s have been really dropped in it. Getting a bit OT, perhaps, but yes, upgrading and rebuilding old stock is looking increasingly unattractive, and more often than not a false economy.

To be fair, there is a thread at the moment about yaw dampers falling off Class 195s, so new hasn't been that good either!

That said, Island Line's economics have always been pretty dreadful, and only a cheap solution was ever going to work.

Yes, true, though I'd be interested to know (though no doubt will never find out) exactly how much cheaper these were than, say, 3 2x20m third rail Aventras added to the existing SWR order.

The Marston Vale was a very special case in requiring 2x20m (at most due to platform lengths, signal positions and level crossings) units for about 10 years until EWR replaces the service entirely - short of adding 3 units to the Northern Class 195 order and moving 3 150s down (an expensive solution) there was genuinely no other practical option. 153s would have worked but in single formation were inadequate for the school runs so would have resulted in a very messy "flighted" timetable with some 2 hour gaps.

 

[Chris125]

SWR kept in simple with the class 455 conversion just change out the traction package and minimise the interface with other systems.

Aren't Vivarail keeping it simple too? I'd have thought the software in question here controls the traction package - something any modern AC-motored unit will surely have, even a re-tractioned 455 or 442.

 

[WarrenTManager]

The issue here is the desire of engineers across the world to use computers to control everything because they can not because they need to and the stupidity of the people running these companies be it Boeing, Bombardier or VivaRail to be seduced by technology.

SWR kept in simple with the class 455 conversion just change out the traction package and minimise the interface with other systems.

Sadly i suspect VivaRail will get no further in the UK now.

But the 455 Kiepe traction gear is reliant on software. It is in its 8th iteration. It wasn’t perfect out of the box and anything that is would be miraculous.

 

[D365]

... and the stupidity of the people running these companies be it Boeing, Bombardier or VivaRail to be seduced by technology.

No matter what your opinions are on the use of computer technology in modern rolling stock, that’s a very brash and disparaging comment. There is absolutely no need to direct such comments at engineers and managers.

As pointed out above, teething troubles on brand new rolling stock are nothing new.

 

[CBlue]

The issue here is the desire of engineers across the world to use computers to control everything because they can not because they need to and the stupidity of the people running these companies be it Boeing, Bombardier or VivaRail to be seduced by technology.

SWR kept in simple with the class 455 conversion just change out the traction package and minimise the interface with other systems.

Sadly i suspect VivaRail will get no further in the UK now.

I imagine similar things were said about the first internal combustion engines.

"All those moving parts just to do what steam does? What a overcomplicated mess" was doubtless an opinion levelled at such inventions.

Maybe we should just get rid of anything electronic altogether, although it might make the computer you typed that on a bit heavy for your desk.

 

[D365]

I imagine similar things were said about the first internal combustion engines.

"All those moving parts just to do what steam does? What a overcomplicated mess" was doubtless an opinion levelled at such inventions.

Maybe we should just get rid of anything electronic altogether, although it might make the computer you typed that on a bit heavy for your desk.

Don't forget the fear of travelling at speeds above 30mph.

 

[Wyrleybart]

Yes, and for the last twenty or so years, that stock was only kept in service by progressively reducing the size of the fleet and stripping it for spares. You do realise what an incredible struggle it's been keeping the service running, don't you? Quite often in the last few years it didn't run at all.

So are you saying that parts for DC traction motors are not available - period ?
What is under the 1973 stock ?

I get the must modernise - if it is better and cheaper overall. In this case it theoreticaly would be if the project were on time. It isn't though and I suppose we can blame it on Covid that Vivarail have been months late in converting testing and delivering. Or actually, was the shutdown and rebuild window inappropriate ?

There are a few ponderables aren't there.

 

[Journeyman]

So are you saying that parts for DC traction motors are not available - period ?
What is under the 1973 stock ?

Motors and equipment that will shortly stop being supported and get increasingly difficult to support, hence why replacement trains have been ordered.

The DC equipment on the 92 Stock is about to be replaced too.

I get the must modernise - if it is better and cheaper overall. In this case it theoreticaly would be if the project were on time. It isn't though and I suppose we can blame it on Covid that Vivarail have been months late in converting testing and delivering. Or actually, was the shutdown and rebuild window inappropriate ?

There are a few ponderables aren't there.

There are, but the idea wasn't a bad one. Island Line has been stuck with very old-fashioned and hard to maintain rolling stock for over 50 years. Reliability of both generations of tube stock was extremely bad after only a few years, and finally someone has made a decent effort to try and prevent that happening again.

It feels a bit "damned if you do, damned if you don't". If the 484s went over with existing LU motors, in ten or so years time you'll see reliability nosedive, and everyone would be asking why they weren't modernised.

 

[adc82140]

I wonder in hindsight (that being a wonderful thing) if the D stock should have initially had minimal changes to allow it to work on the island, with the full traction package change coming later, one unit at a time. It would at least have allowed a service to run, and unrefurbed D stock would still have been a different world to 38 stock.

 

[A0]

Agreed.

It was a great idea, but as far as I'm concerned the utter unreliability of the units (and other basic faults like the slow doors) on the Marston Vale has killed off the concept entirely, and that has been compounded by them being unable to retraction a third rail EMU, paint it up and change the seat covers without major issues. I hope TfW's order does better, but a follow-on order of 3 more 2-car 197s wouldn't be hard if it didn't, so I doubt they will have much patience.

== Doublepost prevention - post automatically merged: 30 Apr 2021 ==

Ffs - you're still banging on about non issues like "slow doors".

The biggest (probably only) main issue with the 230s was around the cooling of the engine which caused reliability issues compounded by a hot summer, but I think they were getting better, then Covid hit, so all bets are off now. Let's not forget supposedly "reliable" and "well built" BR rolling stock wasn't beyond such problems - wrong type of snow, anyone?

You sit there pontificating about what's wrong and how Vivarail are incompetent, so time to get off the fence - what are your qualifications for making such statements? Are you a mechanical or electrical engineer? Have you ever built a vehicle (Lego and Airfix kits don't count).

I genuinely can't think of any item of rolling stock introduced in the last 40 years which didn't have some teething troubles.

And on the CAF yaw dampers - I can remember not that many years ago the *whole* class 321 fleet being withdrawn due to as I recall, cracked bogies? That was supposedly well made, well engineered BR stock.

== Doublepost prevention - post automatically merged: 1 May 2021 ==

Motors and equipment that will shortly stop being supported and get increasingly difficult to support, hence why replacement trains have been ordered.

The DC equipment on the 92 Stock is about to be replaced too.


There are, but the idea wasn't a bad one. Island Line has been stuck with very old-fashioned and hard to maintain rolling stock for over 50 years. Reliability of both generations of tube stock was extremely bad after only a few years, and finally someone has made a decent effort to try and prevent that happening again.

It feels a bit "damned if you do, damned if you don't". If the 484s went over with existing LU motors, in ten or so years time you'll see reliability nosedive, and everyone would be asking why they weren't modernised.

Absolutely.

In fact the only point I would make is we don't know whether or not the 484s are reliable - an issue has been found during pre use testing. That's why things are tested. It may be a straightforward fix - certainly Vivarail appear to have identified the problem and are working to fix it. I'd be very surprised if this is unfixable.

 

[43096]

I wonder in hindsight (that being a wonderful thing) if the D stock should have initially had minimal changes to allow it to work on the island, with the full traction package change coming later, one unit at a time. It would at least have allowed a service to run, and unrefurbed D stock would still have been a different world to 38 stock.

Is the Island Line infrastructure work on track for completion on time? The cynic in me would suggest that such strong blame was aimed at Vivarail by SWR precisely because the infrastructure is late and they have a convenient scapegoat.

 

[XAM2175]

Maybe we should just get rid of anything electronic altogether, although it might make the computer you typed that on a bit heavy for your desk.

Best typewriter I ever used was an IBM Selectric from the late '80s - because it had microprocessor control and onboard memory, so you could type ahead and the carriage would catch up to you. It could also do single-key backspace and erase because it remembered the last hundred-odd characters you'd typed, and hold five form letters in memory (complete with programmed pauses for entry of variable details), and it even had an optional spell-checker (with an additional memory for user-defined words!) that would beep at you if you hit space after a word it didn't recognise. Science fiction, I tell you!
(and I still have it, and it still works perfectly!)

Closer to topic, I've been working in various software design fields for quite a few years now (mainly the databases side of things) and have seen more than a few projects come in late and/or over-budget. Almost all of them, however, came to be stable and reliable and efficient systems once their initial problems were worked out. One in particular took seven weeks to build from scratch to beta, then three weeks to introduce to production, then three months of close supervision and much tinkering before it was accepted as stable and functionally complete. In the six months following that period, the new system consistently ran at more than double the speed of the old one, and with better reliability, better accuracy, and half the operating staff cost, and it processed and integrated an additional set of data that had been completely ignored by the old system.

Yes it was a pain to get it to that point - but it was totally and completely worth it. Have patience!

 

[A0]

Yes, true, though I'd be interested to know (though no doubt will never find out) exactly how much cheaper these were than, say, 3 2x20m third rail Aventras added to the existing SWR order.

But will 20m EMUs fit through the tunnel? Car lengths are a problem due to the tunnel curvature. All previous stock was 18m or less.

If it doesn't fit, then it's academic.

If 20m units would fit, then the obvious solution would have been 456s which are being replaced by 701s.

== Doublepost prevention - post automatically merged: 1 May 2021 ==

Is the Island Line infrastructure work on track for completion on time? The cynic in me would suggest that such strong blame was aimed at Vivarail by SWR precisely because the infrastructure is late and they have a convenient scapegoat.

Well in that case the message hasn't reached Vivarail's social media team.

https://mobile.twitter.com/Vivarail/status/1387054124114616320

They're quite openly saying the problem is the rolling stock and is their problem.

 

[Gloster]

Don't forget the fear of travelling at speeds above 30mph.

30mph! More than 4mph is risky.

Amongst all the technical discussion and disagreement one thing seems to have been forgotten. A line that already has a very poor economy is going to be closed for most or all of the part of the year when it does have tolerable passenger numbers. This will further worsen passenger numbers and risk putting it on the edge: one more problem and it becomes a case of, ‘cut your losses, stop throwing good money after bad and close it’.

 

[43096]

Well in that case the message hasn't reached Vivarail's social media team.

https://mobile.twitter.com/Vivarail/status/1387054124114616320

They're quite openly saying the problem is the rolling stock and is their problem.

I wasn’t disputing the 484s being late. More is the infrastructure also late - with the former giving an opportunity to deflect attention from the latter.

 

[Nicholas Lewis]

I imagine similar things were said about the first internal combustion engines.

"All those moving parts just to do what steam does? What a overcomplicated mess" was doubtless an opinion levelled at such inventions.

Maybe we should just get rid of anything electronic altogether, although it might make the computer you typed that on a bit heavy for your desk.

Computers themselves aren't the issue they are a paradigm of utter reliability its the software that has to written to make them useful that is causing the issues and the more complex you make it the harder and longer it takes to get it running stable. My initial view, from reading earlier thread entries, was that systems integration was the issue but having read Shooters feedback looks like running up and down on the juice has thrown up some fundamental issues which suggests that the core of the problem lies with the traction converters. As to what the problem is isn't made clear but potential EMF issues with signalling kit seems a possibility. The converters come from a Dutch company Strukton that hasn't made anything for UK market before looking at their project list. All pure speculation on my behalf and im sure the likes of Roger Ford and co will get an answer in due course.

 

[Chris125]

[

If 20m units would fit, then the obvious solution would have been 456s which are being replaced by 701s.

If conventional 20m carriage designs were a practical option they'd have arrived on the island decades ago, back in the steam era probably - D78s were really the only practical heavy-rail option.

Is the Island Line infrastructure work on track for completion on time? The cynic in me would suggest that such strong blame was aimed at Vivarail by SWR precisely because the infrastructure is late and they have a convenient scapegoat.

The infrastructure is weeks late - not great - but the trains are months behind. I think they were aiming to have 3 units ready before the line closed...

I wonder in hindsight (that being a wonderful thing) if the D stock should have initially had minimal changes to allow it to work on the island, with the full traction package change coming later, one unit at a time. It would at least have allowed a service to run, and unrefurbed D stock would still have been a different world to 38 stock.

An attractive idea now, but I can't imagine the extra costs of operating a part-modified interim fleet for a relatively short period would be hard to justify even today.

 

[paul1609]

[

If conventional 20m carriage designs were a practical option they'd have arrived on the island decades ago, back in the steam era probably - D78s were really the only practical heavy-rail option.



The infrastructure is weeks late - not great - but the trains are months behind. I think they were aiming to have 3 units ready before the line closed...

The infrastructure is late as well I know a couple of people working on it. They live in the Portsmouth area. All the contractors come from the mainland when the project was planned that shouldnt have been a problem but the Covid timetables on the ferry and cancelations mean they have often been late on site and some days havent made it to the island at all.

 

[Goldfish62]

The infrastructure is late as well I know a couple of people working on it. They live in the Portsmouth area. All the contractors come from the mainland when the project was planned that shouldnt have been a problem but the Covid timetables on the ferry and cancelations mean they have often been late on site and some days havent made it to the island at all.

We already know that - it was supposed to be finished in March.

 

[Peter Sarf]

The infrastructure is late as well I know a couple of people working on it. They live in the Portsmouth area. All the contractors come from the mainland when the project was planned that shouldnt have been a problem but the Covid timetables on the ferry and cancelations mean they have often been late on site and some days havent made it to the island at all.

Thanks for the info. Well I suppose it is inevitable that contractors for the job will come from the mainland and will not drive !. With hindsight I could have guessed the ferries could be the culprit .

 

[Chris125]

At least some of the guys doing the trackwork and stations are from South Wales and are staying in local hotels.

 

[Davester50]

No matter what your opinions are on the use of computer technology in modern rolling stock, that’s a very brash and disparaging comment. There is absolutely no need to direct such comments at engineers and managers.

As pointed out above, teething troubles on brand new rolling stock are nothing new.

Over promising and under-delivering is fair game for criticism.

 

[birchesgreen]

I don't understand why people are discussing any vaguely available trains as alternatives, I was under the impression the 484s would be delayed for a couple of months not years.