What should GWR do about severe conditions on Dawlish?

[Bletchleyite]

The obvious bodge, as mentioned earlier, is to have a Thunderbird in the area (provided by Hitachi if they can't sneak through a wave vs spray loophole). Faster rescues and if its really bad reduce the service and tow them through.

Or do it like you would as a pedestrian - dont stop at Dawlish and fettle the line so they can run through faster!!

Are there enough HSTs to terminate the 80x at Exeter and run an HST and 15x only service west of there, say hourly all stations with as much capacity as possible, on those days with a poor forecast?

Add in a 57 and the Penzance based Riviera seated coaches for one more if needed? Though I guess that would have to operate local door only due to the slamdoors.

 

[najaB]

Best idea is to just not stop at Dawlish. They can even shut down and coast through if the issue is the electrics getting wet while powered.

 

[Annetts key]

The questions now, given that three Hitachi trains failed, are:
Is GWR (First) going to withdraw 80X trains during similar weather conditions in the future?
Are Hitachi going to make improvements to the 80X fleet so that they are more able to cope with these weather conditions?

== Doublepost prevention - post automatically merged: 9 Dec 2021 ==

Best idea is to just not stop at Dawlish. They can even shut down and coast through if the issue is the electrics getting wet while powered.

I’m not sure that will help if the problem is the electrical fault protection systems (earth leakage detection) shutting the engines down.

 

[najaB]

I’m not sure that will help if the problem is the electrical fault protection systems (earth leakage detection) shutting the engines down.

That's why I suggested shutting systems down - if there's no current flowing then there's nothing leaking to trip the earth leakage detection. If the problem is salt water being more conductive, a wash system at either end of the sea wall might help.

 

[Annetts key]

That's why I suggested shutting systems down - if there's no current flowing then there's nothing leaking to trip the earth leakage detection. If the problem is salt water being more conductive, a wash system at either end of the sea wall might help.

But are these trains designed to coast with ALL the engines shut down?

Yes, if the electrics that are being affected by the salt water are powered down, then there can not be an earth leakage fault.

It may be that given enough time, the water will drain away. But if this time period is too long, if you try to restart the power systems, as soon as the electrics are powered on, the earth leakage systems may immediately trip.

The idea of washing them with clean water is an interesting one. Not sure how it would be done in practice on a main line though.

 

[najaB]

The idea of washing them with clean water is an interesting one. Not sure how it would be done in practice on a main line though.

It wouldn't have to be a proper wash with scrubbing brushes, so it could likely be done with the train passing through at a reasonable speed (e.g. 20-30mph). I'm imagining something like a low bridge over the railway with basically large rainfall showerheads across it.

 

[Meerkat]

Would a switched off engine be likely to be affected - ie if you turned off some of the engines (AIUI they dont go that fast along the wall so must have spare power) would they be likely to work if you needed them when working ones failed?

 

[pdeaves]

Are there enough HSTs to terminate the 80x at Exeter and run an HST and 15x only service west of there, say hourly all stations with as much capacity as possible, on those days with a poor forecast?

Add in a 57 and the Penzance based Riviera seated coaches for one more if needed? Though I guess that would have to operate local door only due to the slamdoors.

Interesting thought but only a short term solution. The ex-BR stock cannot run forever. When it is replaced it needs to be at least as resilient. Contracting to the correct specification is the thing that needs particular care.

 

[Annetts key]

Would a switched off engine be likely to be affected - ie if you turned off some of the engines (AIUI they dont go that fast along the wall so must have spare power) would they be likely to work if you needed them when working ones failed?

As I understand it, the minimum is one engine/generator unit per five car or nine car set is required to be running in order for there to be power for traction. Although this will only be enough power for low speed operation.

I assume that each engine/generator unit feeds it’s electrical power to a common electrical distribution system. And power is then taken from this to supply the electric traction motors.

So to answer the question, we need to know the failure mode that is causing the problem. If the problem is salt water affecting the electrical systems, and it is effecting the common electrical distribution system, then it makes coming up with a work around far more difficult.

 

[AM9]

As I understand it, the minimum is one engine/generator unit per five car or nine car set is required to be running in order for there to be power for traction. Although this will only be enough power for low speed operation.

I assume that each engine/generator unit feeds it’s electrical power to a common electrical distribution system. And power is then taken from this to supply the electric traction motors.

So to answer the question, we need to know the failure mode that is causing the problem. If the problem is salt water affecting the electrical systems, and it is effecting the common electrical distribution system, then it makes coming up with a work around far more difficult.

Well if the Ardrossan line at Saltburn can run with 25Kv live whilst being lashed with seawater, why isn't it possible to provide trains that can occasionally do the same for Dawlish? The class 318s were just bog standard MKIII EMUs and the 380s are just a modern commercial EMU from the same manufacturer as the 80xs.

 

[Wolfie]

Well if the Ardrossan line at Saltburn can run with 25Kv live whilst being lashed with seawater, why isn't it possible to provide trains that can occasionally do the same for Dawlish? The class 318s were just bog standard MKIII EMUs and the 380s are just a modern commercial EMU from the same manufacturer as the 80xs.

Since when did Siemens build the 80xs???

 

[WelshBluebird]

Didn't the original contract specify they had to be Dawlish proof? Granted it doesn't fix the issue for services right now but surely there must be some scope for pushing the problem onto Hitachi?

 

[swt_passenger]

Didn't the original contract specify they had to be Dawlish proof? Granted it doesn't fix the issue for services right now but surely there must be some scope for pushing the problem onto Hitachi?

Yes, the exact wording has been posted a few times over the years, I searched and it was posted by @jimm a couple of years ago:

Class 800 upgrades to address performance and reliability issues

The issues months back involved 800s which are not Dawlish proof unlike 802s. Which units were involved yesterday? What makes the 802 Dawlish 'resistant' ?(I'm going to say, tentatively. - Mother nature is, well Erm is, Mother Nature).

www.railforums.co.uk

 

[Annetts key]

As I understand it, the fitter that was at Dawlish that boarded 1A77 tried multiple times to get each engine/generator unit (GU) restarted (there are multiple GU per set). Including full power down/off and power up/on of the systems. And yes, ‘special’ mode was tried as well.

As each GU uses a starter battery, the number of restart attempts has to be limited, as a flat battery isn’t going to help.

After the storm died down, the fitter was able to get two GU working on 1A77 and three GU working on the rescue train (1Z99). Hence they were then able to move under their own power.

It’s likely that 1C70 had similar problems. It looks like another fitter was sent to help it. It may have got further, but the attempt for it to run fast and non-stop through Dawlish appears to have been partially thwarted because there was a local stopping service ahead of it. It still failed and came to a halt. But it appears it stopped in an area clear of the worst of the sea spray.

 

[High Dyke]

If we're talking full bi-mode units, then how about about wiring up the section from Exeter - Newton Abbot, with the section along the sea wall using solid contact bar rather than wire catenary? It may need replacing periodically, but it may prevent sea spray issues.

However, first and foremost manufacturers need to make a product robust enough to tolerate the weather conditions.

 

[Annetts key]

RealTime Trains lists all the failed trains as 802 types:

1A77 0835 Plymouth to London Paddington. Set 802109 (9 car). Became 5Z74 1445 Exeter St Davids to Stoke Gifford (ECS).

1C70 0704 London Paddington to Paignton. Set 802104 (9 car).

1C72 0804 London Paddington to Penzance. Set 802101 (9 car). Became 1Z99, the rescue train.

But I don’t know how accurate this information is.

 

[geoffk]

I hope the conclusion is not that all the sea wall works have been a waste of money.

 

[Bletchleyite]

I hope the conclusion is not that all the sea wall works have been a waste of money.

They clearly have not, as their purpose is to stop the line washing away, and they seem to have done that.

 

[snowball]

If we're talking full bi-mode units, then how about about wiring up the section from Exeter - Newton Abbot, with the section along the sea wall using solid contact bar rather than wire catenary? It may need replacing periodically, but it may prevent sea spray issues.

The south Ayrshire coast seems to work with wires, albeit with supports at closer intervals than usual.

 

[MotCO]

A few ideas, other than for Hitachi to meet the original specifications?:

1. Do we know where the water affected the trains? If it was the electrical equipment on the roofs, could they be covered over either permanently, or temporarily if they are on the roof for heat dissipation?
2. Can Dawlish station be fully covered so that when the trains are in the station, the trains are protected?
3. Would the risk be minimised if all trains ran on the track furthest from the sea in times of high tides?

 

[Meerkat]

Would the risk be minimised if all trains ran on the track furthest from the sea in times of high tides?

I thought this was already a thing when the weather was bad, and so was quite surprised to see the train trundling along the worst affected track.

 

[Annetts key]

Although I believe this video of the affected trains at Dawlish has been linked to on the other topic, if you have not seen it, here is the link.

The other topic is here.

 

[AM9]

Since when did Siemens build the 80xs???

Ooops, yes of course, I was thinking class 385. Still, If Siemens can do it why can't Hitachi? They have rain and storms in Japan.
The problem with salt spray is far more important than what type of seat is installed, - it's not as if there weren't any rough seas at Dawlish before the IETs were ordered.

 

[Class172]

If we're talking full bi-mode units, then how about about wiring up the section from Exeter - Newton Abbot, with the section along the sea wall using solid contact bar rather than wire catenary? It may need replacing periodically, but it may prevent sea spray issues.

Given IETs have the ability to change power source whilst in motion such a scheme could be made even cheaper by wiring only the bits that really are exposed to the coast, for example Starcross to Teignmouth. I suppose the cost of such a scheme would have to be weighed up against the cost of the impacts of broken-down trains on the line.

 

[superalbs]

Given IETs have the ability to change power source whilst in motion such a scheme could be made even cheaper by wiring only the bits that really are exposed to the coast, for example Starcross to Teignmouth. I suppose the cost of such a scheme would have to be weighed up against the cost of the impacts of broken-down trains on the line.

Which would be a bit annoying if the engines got flooded anyway, then you are just stuck at Starcross or Teignmouth instead.

 

[najaB]

Which would be a bit annoying if the engines got flooded anyway, then you are just stuck at Starcross or Teignmouth instead.

I'd suggest then building loops at either end of the electrified section so that other, unaffected units, can still get through.

 

[MotCO]

But if the train breaks down in the electrified sections...........?

 

[Falcon1200]

Well if the Ardrossan line at Saltburn can run with 25Kv live whilst being lashed with seawater,

The south Ayrshire coast seems to work with wires, albeit with supports at closer intervals than usual.

The Ardrossan line does not run with 25kV live whilst being lashed with seawater ! When strong winds are forecast and coincide with high tide the service through, not Saltburn but Saltcoats (and Craigendoran too) is withdrawn in advance. And if the OLE trips out 3 times it will not be re-energised until inspected. Apart from the risk of waves damaging and possibly stranding trains in a dangerous situation, sea-borne debris can be washed up and strike trains. Running trains in such conditions is neither sensible or safe.

 

[najaB]

But if the train breaks down in the electrified sections...........?

Based on the posts above the issue is due to earth leakage causing the GUs to shut down. If they're on OHLE power then the GUs won't be running.

And, even if it does break down in the electrified section then you're no worse off than you are today.

 

[HSTEd]

If this really is going to be a common event I have to question the wisdom of spending so much money clinging to such an exposed alignment.