Kingfisher200262
Member
Could there not be more than one "stand by" unit at Liverpool Street, so that empty seats don't get carted around quite so much through the day?
-
Our new ticketing site is now live! Using either this or the original site (both powered by TrainSplit) helps support the running of the forum with every ticket purchase! Find out more and ask any questions/give us feedback in this thread!
Class 379 Miscellanea
- Thread starter Kingfisher200262
- Start date
- Status
Could there not be more than one "stand by" unit at Liverpool Street, so that empty seats don't get carted around quite so much through the day?
Sponsor Post - registered members do not see these adverts; click here to register, or click here to log in
R
RailUK Forums
O L Leigh
Established Member
I don't see the problem with running longer trains outside the peak. It's not like there's a massive penalty for running a lightly loaded train. But to answer the question, if we knocked all the 8 cars down to 4 cars outside the peak Liv St would be full of empty trains and there'd be endless complaints that all the trains in service are right up at the signal.
Besides, combining and dividing is a good way of introducing faults.
O L Leigh
Besides, combining and dividing is a good way of introducing faults.
O L Leigh
STN commuter
Member
- Joined
- 2 Feb 2011
- Messages
- 57
About 10 years ago the way the timetable was configured at the time, the Stansted Express's used to couple 2x4 to make an 8 at Liverpool St in the evening peak.
It was a disaster!
Frequently they would not couple, they would have to make several attempts, and if that didn't work the station fitter got called. It wasn't unusual to take five minutes or more to couple.
The staff would go through the train and throw everyone that had got on the train off whilst they coupled (Elf 'n Safety). Try explaining that to an Italian with bad English....
It slowed down the turnround time drastically and made late trains even later.
It meant the trains would not be platformed until coupled so hundreds of air passengers and their luggage would be held back on the concourse, causing congestion, and all trying to get through the barriers together, and delaying trains further when there were disruptions.
Can we bin this idea right here!
It was a disaster!
Frequently they would not couple, they would have to make several attempts, and if that didn't work the station fitter got called. It wasn't unusual to take five minutes or more to couple.
The staff would go through the train and throw everyone that had got on the train off whilst they coupled (Elf 'n Safety). Try explaining that to an Italian with bad English....
It slowed down the turnround time drastically and made late trains even later.
It meant the trains would not be platformed until coupled so hundreds of air passengers and their luggage would be held back on the concourse, causing congestion, and all trying to get through the barriers together, and delaying trains further when there were disruptions.
Can we bin this idea right here!
Last edited:
Tottenham Flyer
Member
About 10 years ago the way the timetable was configured at the time, the Stansted Express's used to couple 2x4 to make an 8 at Liverpool St in the evening peak.
It was a disaster!
Frequently they would not couple, they would have to make several attempts, and if that didn't work the station fitter got called. It wasn't unusual to take five minutes or more to couple.
The staff would go through the train and throw everyone that had got on the train off whilst they coupled (Elf 'n Safety). Try explaining that to an Italian with bad English....
It slowed down the turnround time drastically and made late trains even later.
It meant the trains would not be platformed until coupled so hundreds of air passengers and their luggage would be held back on the concourse, causing congestion, and all trying to get through the barriers together, and delaying trains further when there were disruptions.
Can we bin this idea right here!
10 years ago? We had that scenario last year, and it was a nightmare. Airport trains splitting after the peak and attaching for the peak, and it was creating all sorts of faults and delays and cancellations.
Kingfisher200262
Member
Thanks guys, interesting comments.
STN commuter
Member
- Joined
- 2 Feb 2011
- Messages
- 57
I didn't realise they were doing it again! What, NXEA not learning from the errors of the past, surely not
:cry:
Tottenham Flyer
Member
I didn't realise they were doing it again! What, NXEA not learning from the errors of the past, surely not
It did happen again, 2008-2010 I think. Stopped last year just before all the bad weather, and never happened again because the snow damaged so many motors on the 317's and then followed the introduction of the 379's. I don't think (I sincerely hope!) there are no plans for it to happen again as it was a complete nightmare. I think the only people that liked it was fleet as it cut the mileage down.
Another bit of fun on the 06:15 ex SSD this morning.....
Driver arrives at the pointy end.
Driver - Computer, open the doors please...
Computer - I'm sorry Dave, I can't do that.....
Driver - I'll go in through the saloon door then.
Computer - I'm sorry Dave, I can't allow that.
Driver gets down on the tracks and climbs in offside door.
Driver - start up sequence please Computer.
Computer - I'm sorry Dave, I can't do that either....
Driver phones for help.
Help suggests powering computer down and restarting.
Computer - I'm afraid. I'm afraid, Dave. Dave, my mind is going. I can feel it. I can feel it. My mind is going. There is no question about it. I can feel it. I can feel it. I can feel it. I'm a... fraid.
Train shuts down.
We are now stuck on a dead train with emergency power only, so the doors are locked shut, and it's approaching the time the 06:30 is going to go without us, as it's clear the 06:15 is going nowhere.......
Driver manages to get enough working to open the doors and let us off.
We jump on the 06:30 and as it pulls out the driver of the 06:15 is still sitting there arguing with the computer.....I did get the impression that the computer age had passed the poor fellow by
(With apologies to Stanley Kubrick)
If I ever fail whilst driving a 379, I dont think ill EVER forget this post
STN commuter
Member
- Joined
- 2 Feb 2011
- Messages
- 57
Ah, the snow damaged motors......
Did they ever get around to ducting the fans on the traction motors?
I remember the famous "wrong type of snow" when around 2/3rds of the motors had to be changed by Hornsey, (around 1991 IIRC), and nothing had been learned from the past again because there had been a previous rash of similar snow related failures when the 317's were originally on the BedPan line in the 80's
O L Leigh
Established Member
I didn't realise they were doing it again! What, NXEA not learning from the errors of the past, surely not
We all knew it, but of course no-one wants to hear from a driver reminding them of all the problems that were caused in the past. We just follow the diagrams, and if it says split the train we split it.
The current idea on mileage reduction is to treat the Cl317s as one fleet without making any distinction between the sub-classes, which is why you often see StanEx units on suburban trips. A unit diagram typically averages 400-600 miles of daily running, but some StanEx diagrams exceed 1000 miles a day. By not making a distinction between StanEx and NatEx units these mileages are spread evenly across the entire fleet making the need to divide and combine units unneccesary.
Ah, the snow damaged motors......
Did they ever get around to ducting the fans on the traction motors?
I remember the famous "wrong type of snow" when around 2/3rds of the motors had to be changed by Hornsey, (around 1991 IIRC), and nothing had been learned from the past again because there had been a previous rash of similar snow related failures when the 317's were originally on the BedPan line in the 80's
Fans...? Ducting...?
There are so many rumours about why Cl317s blow their motors in the snow, some more fantastic than others, that I wouldn't be adding any real knowledge to the topic. Needless to say we usually operate with a blanket 60mph speed restriction for Cl317s when snow is falling or being disturbed by the passage of trains. I've had other cold weather-related failures but only one directly attributable to the motors, and that was almost immediately after relieving another driver. Quite what he'd done to the train I never did establish, but I've never had a Cl317 blow-up en route due to snow ingress.
O L Leigh
STN commuter
Member
- Joined
- 2 Feb 2011
- Messages
- 57
As you say, there are many rumours re the 317 GEC traction motors and snow.
As I recall it, the rumours I heard were that it was known shortly after they were introduced in 1983 there were problems with powder snow ingress into the traction motors - I believe the motors have an internal fan to draw cooling air through the motors, and the snow was entering, turning to water, and this was arcing across the brushes/commutator and causing failure.
There was a cure for this (shrouding the motors, and picking the cooling air up away from the track where the snow lay) but these weren't initially fitted due to cost.
Eventually they were fitted, but did not have drainage holes in the bottom of the housings so water sat in there and they still pulled water into the motors and burnt them out.
This could all be just crap rumours, although I expect Ilford or Hornsey maintenance staff would know.
--- old post above --- --- new post below ---
And today's rogue unit is......379029. It's early yet though, there could be more
It came in to the airport fine at 0600, but when the drivers tried to take it out again it burst into tears, had a stamping tantrum, and ran home to Mummy
One complete power down later, the drivers at least managed to get this one going again.
Last edited:
Kingfisher200262
Member
Currently at a stand on a StEx 379 at Cheshunt (09.39 off B-S), following an announcement by the driver that he needed to stop to "check one of the health & safety systems on the train.... hoping to be on the move soon".
09.59.... back on the move.... computer says YES, apparently!
09.59.... back on the move.... computer says YES, apparently!
Tottenham Flyer
Member
Ah were you on that one that was clogging up my platform? Stopped at Tottenham for about 10 mins? Units 379018 & 028
asylumxl
Established Member
Many people I know have described the 379s as the best units to come from Derby for a while, when you consider the reliability as of recently, that isn't really saying much .
.Interesting that by being 11 down at Tottenham Hale, it arrived at LST 11 minutes down too. Either it crawled, or NXEA forgot to pad out the timetable at the end by about 10 minutes so it arrived just a minute late!!
Well, they LOOK good. Which is good given people may spend longer on them than they expected. Perhaps they'll become a favourite for bashers who can spend more time on them, while spotters can benefit from more time to ensure they get the number down.
Many people I know have described the 379s as the best units to come from Derby for a while, when you consider the reliability as of recently, that isn't really saying much
Well, they LOOK good. Which is good given people may spend longer on them than they expected. Perhaps they'll become a favourite for bashers who can spend more time on them, while spotters can benefit from more time to ensure they get the number down.
STN commuter
Member
- Joined
- 2 Feb 2011
- Messages
- 57
And today's rogue unit is......379029. It's early yet though, there could be more
It came in to the airport fine at 0600, but when the drivers tried to take it out again it burst into tears, had a stamping tantrum, and ran home to Mummy
One complete power down later, the drivers at least managed to get this one going again.
I was right
--- old post above --- --- new post below ---
Ah, dear old 028.....I have not so fond memories of being thrown off that last Monday morning at the airport when the computer from Del Monte he say no.......
Last edited:
O L Leigh
Established Member
You lot aren't exactly inspiring confidence in me. I've got my first encounter with one of these things later today.
O L Leigh
O L Leigh
STN commuter
Member
- Joined
- 2 Feb 2011
- Messages
- 57
You lot aren't exactly inspiring confidence in me. I've got my first encounter with one of these things later today.
O L Leigh
Just remember the computer is called HAL, you'll be fine
asylumxl
Established Member
If your 379 fails, I suggest reformatting and reinstalling Windows..
Tottenham Flyer
Member
You lot aren't exactly inspiring confidence in me. I've got my first encounter with one of these things later today.
O L Leigh
Good luck sir. I'm on my way home
STN commuter
Member
- Joined
- 2 Feb 2011
- Messages
- 57
Kingfisher200262
Member
On the return journey from T-Hale to B-S now, sat in vehicle 61919 (presumably part of 379019 - or is that too simple an assumption to make?!?). Every time we go over a bump the bi-parting doors open spontaneously - very annoying!
People have said to me that they worry CSR's products may be like some other, poor quality products that have come out of China in recent years.... looks like a train, smells like a train, but performs like a dog. I'm beginning to get that impression about the 379, having been extremely praising and complimentary about them at first, are they starting to show their true colours?
--- old post above --- --- new post below ---
It's OK unless you've got places to be. Having just spent almost a year allowing extra time for my journey into town due to the crappy reliability of the new Bombardier Victoria line stock, I'm now finding myself adding half an hour to my journey time in case my 379 breaks down, and almost praying for a 317 to come along instead.
Well, as I've said before - they LOOK nice. But when I boarded one to try it out and noticed a lot of the internal screens weren't working (I walked through the entire 8 car set) I did think to myself one thing; 'Bombardier'!
I also noticed a few things that looked like they'd raided the spares bin for parts - hence different types of buttons for internal doors, in different places.
The one thing I did like, but Bombardier don't actually make themselves - they merely buy off the shelf, is the disabled toilet door controls with a physical 'lever' to activate the door lock. It's a clever way to give reassurance to Joe Public, even if it is just operating a switch! But, impressed as I was with that - I then discovered that the door didn't fully close making it possible (albeit unlikely) for someone to see in to the toilet by putting their eyes up to the gap.
Still, at least the door did almost close, unlike a 377/5 that was probably a week or two old and got stuck half way open/closed. Come on Bombardier; these trains are going to need to last 20-30 years, or more, and a door is failing after a fortnight?!
I also noticed a few things that looked like they'd raided the spares bin for parts - hence different types of buttons for internal doors, in different places.
The one thing I did like, but Bombardier don't actually make themselves - they merely buy off the shelf, is the disabled toilet door controls with a physical 'lever' to activate the door lock. It's a clever way to give reassurance to Joe Public, even if it is just operating a switch! But, impressed as I was with that - I then discovered that the door didn't fully close making it possible (albeit unlikely) for someone to see in to the toilet by putting their eyes up to the gap.
Still, at least the door did almost close, unlike a 377/5 that was probably a week or two old and got stuck half way open/closed. Come on Bombardier; these trains are going to need to last 20-30 years, or more, and a door is failing after a fortnight?!
Tottenham Flyer
Member
On a 379?
Nope. 317 then another quality Bombardier train.... the 357!
STN commuter
Member
- Joined
- 2 Feb 2011
- Messages
- 57
That is too simple an assumption to make - if it were true, you would have four vehicles numbered 61919 making up unit 379019, whereas all the vehicles are individually numbered
--- old post above --- --- new post below ---
Apart from the computer running home sobbing to mummy, I've also had units with failed internal doors, one with a really high pitched whine internally when it is moving, and one with a really bad harmonic vibration on deceleration where all the seats start wobbling in unison - it's actually quite unpleasant, like someone has chucked your insides in a tumble drier :cry:
Last edited:
317666
Established Member
Saw 379003 on the 1258 LST - CBG and 1432 return today.
STN commuter
Member
- Joined
- 2 Feb 2011
- Messages
- 57
That is too simple an assumption to make - if it were true, you would have four vehicles numbered 61919 making up unit 379019, whereas all the vehicles are individually numbered
Actually, you are partly right. I was on good old 028 this morning (which threw a wobbly at the airport AGAIN today - a DOO CCTV camera out).
Looking as I walked down the train, 028 vehicle numbers are something along the lines of 61 228, 61 528, 61728 and 61 928 (or something similar, the same principle applies), so yes the last two digits of the vehicle number ARE linked to the unit number.
Lastly, a cautionary note to 379 drivers - the cab to vehicle doors are not at all soundproof, so when passengers are sitting in the front of the vehicle immediately behind the cab and the unit is stationary and failed, the closest passengers to you can hear all the effing and blinding coming from the pointy end
Last edited:
Kingfisher200262
Member
Thanks, thought so. I knew this was the case with the even bigger basket case running around on our network, the Adelante Class 180, so assumed that it applies to all recent classes.
--- old post above --- --- new post below ---
Further to my note from yesterday regarding the Victoria Line, I've received the following e-mail from TfL this morning: -
Dear Mr Shipley,
I'm writing to let you know that as part of the Tube upgrade plan, all trains running on the Victoria line are now new. They are more spacious and have wider aisles, as well as improved customer information, CCTV and better ventilation.
We are also in the final stages of completing upgrade work on the line. Over the past two years, old and new signalling systems have been running alongside each other. We are now removing sections of the old signalling, meaning closures to parts of the line over the next year. However, once complete in 2012, we will be able to run even more trains with increased capacity on the line.
To keep up with the Tube upgrade plan and how it might affect the Victoria line, please click here.
Oh, what joy! Another year of mirth and merriment getting from North West Essex to central London!
.
.
Last edited:
Tottenham Flyer
Member
379001 has ventured into service today. It can be found on Stansted Express services coupled to 379021.
Only 002 & 030 to enter service now.
Only 002 & 030 to enter service now.
- Status