New fleet woes general reasons or excuses

[birchesgreen]

The problem is developing software and the time it needs often is underestimated or disregarded by product managers opposed to all the "proper" engineering stuff. This means that in many cases software development lags hardware, but this even happens with the most expensive warplane in history (the JSF) so its not a problem limited to the railway industry.

 

[Deepgreen]

Yet in signalling, another area now heavily dominated by software, it can be very common to have issues by the dozen. Granted not generally where safety is concerned (though not unheard of - for example the Cambrian speed restrictions, or the District Line at Monument), but certainly affecting performance where things don’t work as envisaged - often because those designing the software don’t understand what the end user needs.

Exactly - yet another example of fragmentation leading to poor communication and specification.

== Doublepost prevention - post automatically merged: 15 Apr 2023 ==

The problem is developing software and the time it needs often is underestimated or disregarded by product managers opposed to all the "proper" engineering stuff. This means that in many cases software development lags hardware, but this even happens with the most expensive warplane in history (the JSF) so its not a problem limited to the railway industry.

Yes, and that's one reason why I suspect it may be prudent for the railway not to try to be at the cutting edge of technology in some fields - just accepting tried and trusted technology and software could be advantageous in terms of reliability and availability. We had the same problem when those new-fangled EPBs were introduced and wouldn't work with SUBs !

 

[ComUtoR]

There is also no comparison between a PC and a train.

They both run windows...

 

[43066]

Lots of things can happen but the conversation should be about what should happen not what can happen, hence my comment about testing and that just saying trains are full of technology is no excuse for many of the problems encountered when they are introduced.

I disagree. Endless moans about what should happen, especially from someone who clearly lacks real insight into the issues, aren’t particularly illuminating or interesting.

 

[ComUtoR]

,especially from someone who clearly lacks real insight into the issues, aren’t particularly illuminating or interesting.

What, therefore, in your professional and much more insightful opinion. "Should" be happening with new fleets.

Both the new fleet units I've driven are far superior to the old junk I drive. Even our fitters prefer them. A fitter showed me how to change the DMI (Driver Machine Interface) on one of our new units. It took around 5 minutes and was done on the train, out on the mainline.

 

[Bertie the bus]

I disagree. Endless moans about what should happen, especially from someone who clearly lacks real insight into the issues, aren’t particularly illuminating or interesting.

Of course you disagree. The railway is special, can do no wrong and passengers are very fortunate to be allowed to hand over their money to use it in your viiew.

As for insight, have you ever posted anything except regarding how important and special both you and the railway are?

 

[43066]

What, therefore, in your professional and much more insightful opinion. "Should" be happening with new fleets.

I don’t pretend to be an expert. Ultimately most new fleets go through a period of teething problems. There are no doubt perfectly good reasons for this and elements of real world use that can’t be replicated in testing. I don’t see any evidence that the UK railway is somehow special or worse than any other in this respect.

That’s not to say lessons can’t be learned etc., but the poster I quoted isn’t interested in understanding why, only in complaining.

Both the new fleet units I've driven are far superior to the old junk I drive. Even our fitters prefer them. A fitter showed me how to change the DMI (Driver Machine Interface) on one of our new units. It took around 5 minutes and was done on the train, out on the mainline.

The 700s in particular were quite problematic, but lessons were learned and the subsequent sub fleets have (AIUI) performed better.

Of course you disagree. The railway is special, can do no wrong and passengers are very fortunate to be allowed to hand over their money to use it in your viiew.

A predictable and completely nonsensical misrepresentation of my position. Can you can quote a post where I’ve said anything like that?

I find it perplexing that so many enthusiasts seem to despise the railway and enjoy complaining about every aspect of it, seemingly without any interest in understanding why things can’t be perfect all the time; if you don’t like it, simply don’t use it! Why waste time complaining online!?

 

[Deepgreen]

They both run windows...

Yes, and many of them don't open!

== Doublepost prevention - post automatically merged: 15 Apr 2023 ==

A predictable and completely nonsensical misrepresentation of my position. Can you can quote a post where I’ve said anything like that?

I find it perplexing that so many enthusiasts seem to despise the railway and enjoy complaining about every aspect of it, seemingly without any interest in understanding why things can’t be perfect all the time; if you don’t like it, simply don’t use it! Why waste time complaining online!?

Perhaps Bertie the Bus's on-line moniker gives a clue...he's a rival trying to see the 'Thunderbolt' closed down!

 

[43066]

Yes, and many of them don't open!

Embedded windows CE on some of the stock I sign. It’s a little creaky .

Perhaps his on-line moniker gives a clue... He's a rival trying to see the 'Thunderbolt' closed down!

There are certainly some bus enthusiasts on here who appear to resent the railway.

 

[ComUtoR]

The 700s in particular were quite problematic, but lessons were learned and the subsequent sub fleets have (AIUI) performed better.

I don't believe they were as problematic as people report. Most issues were from the lack of good training. Sitting down in the core for a few hours because the EVC test wasn't done isn't a train problem. :/

I'd also say that because they can have the software updated (irrespective of how its done), put them above the old "air and amps" principles. New units tend to have a certain degree of forwards compatibility and the modular design concept allows for super quick hardware changes and upgrades. Gone are the days where you need to bolt on new kit and constantly 'mod' everything.

For me, all the new bells and whistles far outweigh a few teething problems that pretty much everything has when first released.

I like newer units. They feel special.

 

[D365]

I don't believe they were as problematic as people report. Most issues were from the lack of good training. Sitting down in the core for a few hours because the EVC test wasn't done isn't a train problem. :/

Managing the self-tests will be interesting when the freight diesels (and Tornado) start running around!

 

[Peter Sarf]

The impression I get is of a real proliferation of classes and sub classes. It feels this is setting up some real issues for 20 years down the line and there are dozens of micro fleets which are in need of a home. This seems particularly true given the supply and maintain type contracts manufacturers have - so for example, if a new life is found a long way from the new built facility of CAF/Hitachi/whoever, there are obvious additional costs in moving that skill, machinery, spares to the other end of the country.

By contrast, how many depots have handled one or more of the sprinter classes or HSTs etc. Finding a working model and applying it widely seems like it will be much more efficient long term than hundreds of orders for 10/20/30 trains which have subtle but significant differences to other members of their class/family, which feels like it can only add maintenance, training and operating costs going forward.

How many variations of essentially the same AT300 design are we on now ?

Half way through your post and I was thinking back to the late 1950s and all those different pilot project diesels. Then British Rail(ways) decided in a fit of urgency to order lots more of the unproven designs. I think at the time it was said that it was becoming obvious that the labour was no longer available for the steam engines that had years of life left in them. So there was a mad dash to build it all in too shorter space of time.

New models always have teething issues. For example class 80Xs, there were suspensions and recallings at first, but now they are the reliable workhorse for various operators.

Also, when the UK stopped designing our own rolling stocks and instead adopt the tendered approach in purchasing trains, it has become more difficult to pinpoint the exact specification which the train services required.

== Doublepost prevention - post automatically merged: 15 Apr 2023 ==


There's a huge difference between critical failures and incidental issues.
The red line is a critical failure that has gone undetected and led to (or potentially would have) a fetal accident.
And this is still very rare for the new trainsets because issues could be detected and managed before an accident occurs.
When on-train diagnostic tools discovered an issue and prevented the train from going, it is the failsafe system works as intended.

On train diagnostics - reminds of when cars started having oil pressure guages fitted and warning lights for oil pressure. There were more breakdowns due to a failure of the precautions than actual oil supply failures. I suppose the next parallel was the class 50s wich were more comlicated than EE envisaged due to bells and whistles requested by BR.

Also are we asking too much of the designs and the manufacturing capacity ?. I vaguely recall Siemens declined to bid for the Cross Rail (Elizabeth line) trains because they believed they could not meet the delivery timescales required. Meanwhile perhaps Bombardier might have bitten of a lot more than they can chew !.

 

[XAM2175]

Also are we asking too much of the designs and the manufacturing capacity ?. I vaguely recall Siemens declined to bid for the Cross Rail (Elizabeth line) trains because they believed they could not meet the delivery timescales required. Meanwhile perhaps Bombardier might have bitten of a lot more than they can chew !.

The rationale they gave publicly was that they didn't think they could do the Crossrail stock on top of Thameslink and a number of other orders they'd won since first bidding. Bob Crow had his own hypothesis, though.