Specific laws regarding commissioning of new trains.

[Volvictof]

I recently stated to someone who was complaining about the length of time a new train is being tested for, that the testing is mandated by law.
I was then asked to back this up with links to the relevant laws, and specifically prove that the specific mileage of the fault free running is required by law.
Im presuming there is no specific legislation for this but that it will be something like “trains must be tested in line with ORR guidelines” or something and then it will be written into the guidelines.
can anyone point me to any relevant legislation or other documents on this?
Id happily be proven wrong.

 

[nick40uk]

I don't know about specific laws but there will be a set of standards that will come from the RSSB that the train must meet before it's released into passenger service. That might include a certain amount of mileage/hours without faults and any that are found must be remedied and retested to ensure it doesn't happen again. Some components can be tested in a laboratory before being put into the final design, others will be tested during on-track testing under realistic conditions.

So there is a certain amount of testing that has to happen in order to prove reliability, there's no set time frame for all this to happen. Once reliability and safety has been proven, then it's into driver training/service.

 

[DaveyJones]

Investing in the rail network: Authorising vehicles and infrastructure (Interoperability) | Office of Rail and Road

Interoperability authorisation has a direct relationship to safety, but has a wider purpose of ensuring technical compatibility, reliability, performance and accessibility of new or substantially modified rail vehicles or infrastructure.

www.orr.gov.uk

 

[themiller]

I think that gist of the wording is that rolling stock must be approved by the ORR to operate on the railway. This is not the same as the contractual requirement that a unit of rolling stock must cover ‘X’ fault-free miles before entering service. For example, 93001 has been passed by the ORR to operate on the main-line but the contract that Stadler have signed up to will say that it must cover “X” miles before acceptance by the owner. However, 93002 will not require separate approval from the ORR but will still need to cover “Y’ miles before acceptance by the owner. X may equal Y but that will be written into the contract. On a large order, once the first units have proved acceptable to the owner, the acceptance mileage may be reduced.

 

[Taunton]

The funny thing is that, compared to the old days when engineers just did what was sensible and worked together, ever since the paper pushers put out "Interoperability" and "Common Technical Standards", it has thereupon gone in completely the opposite direction, half the trains no longer couple to the other half, controls vary so much now that drivers are confronted with quite different approaches on each build of stock that needs complete retraining, and so on. The statement above about "ensuring technical compatibility" is surely a joke.

 

[D365]

The funny thing is that, compared to the old days when engineers just did what was sensible and worked together, ever since the paper pushers put out "Interoperability" and "Common Technical Standards", it has thereupon gone in completely the opposite direction, half the trains no longer couple to the other half, controls vary so much now that drivers are confronted with quite different approaches on each build of stock that needs complete retraining, and so on. The statement above about "ensuring technical compatibility" is surely a joke.

It’s compatibility of trains with the infrastructure that they shall [or in many cases, could] operate on. Not inter-vehicle compatibility.

Variation between fleets is often down to project stakeholders, which now more than ever seems to result in bespoke fleets for each route.

 

[Nym]

New trains come under the Railway Interoperability Regulations (RIR).
There’s a lot of words in it and it makes a lot of NTSNs mandatory, and then of course the “Pentagon Wars” type means of approvals where everyone wants their say.

 

[DaveyJones]

Compatibility - Does the Train Fit on the track, under the bridges, round the corner
Interworking - Does it play nicely with others
Type Testing - Is the first one made compatible, is it reliable, does it do everything it's supposed to
Fault Free Mileage - is it built properly / squeeze out any early life failures, loose fixings.

 

[edwin_m]

Compatibility - Does the Train Fit on the track, under the bridges, round the corner
Interworking - Does it play nicely with others
Type Testing - Is the first one made compatible, is it reliable, does it do everything it's supposed to
Fault Free Mileage - is it built properly / squeeze out any early life failures, loose fixings.

Not to mention Persons with Reduced Mobility, which adds a very large number of very specific requirements to be implemented and independently signed off.

https://assets.publishing.service.gov.uk/media/5fe0b85fd3bf7f3a3bdc8d01/NTSN_Persons_with_Reduced_Mobility__PRM_.odt

This Notice provides technical information on the features that are required to make it easier for persons with reduced mobility to use rolling stock, such as handholds, passenger infor-mation displays, priority seats and provision for wheelchairs. This Notice also sets accessibility standards for new stations or for stations where major work takes place.

And so on for 95 more pages.