Amos390
Member
Could you also argue that there was an equipment failure on board that train, that has not necessarily pulled it from service but may have incurred a (hefty) delay? Would that not then be a failure of the train?
-
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 810 for East Midlands Railway Construction/Introduction Updates
- Thread starter Jozhua
- Start date
Sponsor Post - registered members do not see these adverts; click here to register, or click here to log in
R
RailUK Forums
Correct.
However there are various metrics for calculating the impact of fleet reliability on overall system perfromance. The obe used in the industry now, and also by Roger Ford for his “Golden Spanners” is Miles per 701D. ”701D“ is the code used in performance systems to collect delays caused by Fleet technical issues. This is regardless of how long the train was delayed by, or the number of other trains delayed. So an 810 that has doors not releasing for 3 minutes that delays nothing else counts the same as an 810 that sits down across the throat of Sheffield for an hour. In those cases the former would definitely not be a failure, and the latter need not be if it regained power and carried on its journey without assistance.
Last edited:
In 10 years working on railway I have only head failure used when train has been taken out of service due to faults or where train needed rescuing.
Never heard failure used where a train was delayed due to a fault and was able to continue its journey.
tram21
Established Member
Interesting quote from EMR in this Nottingham Post article about overcrowding: https://www.nottinghampost.com/news...n=continue_reading_button#amp-readmore-target
- Joined
- 13 Dec 2018
- Messages
- 4,575
Ok, thanks for info. I was of understanding definition in BR days was 10 minute delay or more, possibly I misunderstood or it's changed as that was quite a few years ago!
Amos390
Member
Just seen there is no 810011 in service today, hopefully meaning there is a shot at today being a fault-free day for the units (although not too optimistic…)
222001
Member
Unfortunately the 0700 SHF-STP was started at Derby today, due to a train fault of course. No 810s were pulled from service on Sunday (although only 4 out), which I believe is the first day in a fair few weeks.
Amos390
Member
Ah I wasn’t aware of this morning, oh well, could’ve been worse. At least there’s good news about the Sunday, however not sure if under a heavily reduced timetable counts much, still yet to see a day of normal full running for a while.
Merle Haggard
Established Member
My bold
1C30 cape Sunday because the empty stock from Etches Park was cancelled 'problem with the train' - was this a 222?
Amos390
Member
No 810006
Merle Haggard
Established Member
222001
Member
Didn’t know that was supposed to be an 810 - does anybody know the last date when all diagrams were successfully completed?
Amos390
Member
Not sure of the last time all diagrams were done, but I think the reason why that was an 810 is all the services had been skewed all over the place because of engineering works causing services to be diverted via Melton and Corby, so less services, different route timings so on so forth.
Merle Haggard
Established Member
There has been speculation about the root cause of the 810s' door problems. I wondered if I could get information from the horse's mouth so, travelling on one recently, I had a conversation with its Hitachi travelling fitter.
He didn't volunteer the information easily, but after a conversation he explained that there were two sensors at the door top (one each side) and if the door was slightly tilted then they wouldn't allow release. Thew problem of course is the number of MML stations on curves with super-elevation. It was a problem with 170 Turbo trains, from memory they had a lot more sensors, over 20.
He said that the door between the two classes in the composite is sometimes jammed by litter 9not the bexternal ones). Generally, the reason they rarely work and are left open is because they 'trip a circuit' somewhere.
He didn't volunteer the information easily, but after a conversation he explained that there were two sensors at the door top (one each side) and if the door was slightly tilted then they wouldn't allow release. Thew problem of course is the number of MML stations on curves with super-elevation. It was a problem with 170 Turbo trains, from memory they had a lot more sensors, over 20.
He said that the door between the two classes in the composite is sometimes jammed by litter 9not the bexternal ones). Generally, the reason they rarely work and are left open is because they 'trip a circuit' somewhere.
1D54
Established Member
- Joined
- 1 Jun 2019
- Messages
- 1,463
014 has a fault so 1B04 NOT - STP is this morning cancelled.
HST125Scorton
Member
I saw an 810 passing The Sidings Hotel last night (16th) working 5Q58 Merchant Park to Doncaster, would anyone know which 810 it was been tested?
Taken from the north east rail scene on Facebook, it was 810021 on test.
Screen grab from fb attached
== Doublepost prevention - post automatically merged: ==
So 810022 which has for the last nearly 3 weeks has been having work done to its doors in the yard at Merchant Park, seems to of had it completed.
810020 is now undergoing what ever work if is they are doing, I've attached a picture showing it with doors removed and sealed over. The 2 structures in front of it will be placed into the carriages which to me look like extractors.
I wonder if they are doing a fix to the continued door issues and that could be a reason why 810020 did not deliver to Etches Park as planned last week.
Ps this is a presumption on my part that it is work to the doors.
Attachments
Last edited:
HST125Scorton
Member
Thank you for this information, I've only seen a couple of these 810s so I'm not fully up to date with everything.
InTheEastMids
Established Member
- Joined
- 31 Jan 2016
- Messages
- 1,382
How many stations, that 810s frequently call at, are on a significant curve with super-elevation?
There aren't many calls anywhere between St Pancras and Kettering, Harborough was rebuilt.
The platforms at stations from Leicester northwards are mostly straight and/or low speed so don't think they have significant superelevation.
Whereas I get the impression door faults pop up anywhere and everywhere, so I'm wondering if this is really a factor?
Merle Haggard
Established Member
Yes, point taken. It was an issue with the 170s as Wellingborough, Kettering and - then - Harborough were all canted. I sometimes catch 1C74 the Up Sheffield booked to call at Wellingborough which is booked for an 810 and there hasn't been a door problem there on the 2 occasions I've used it (3rd recently was when a 222 replaced the diagrammed 810 - and the 222 had 'a problem with the doors' at Wigston, ironically).
1C17 with 810012 seemed to 'stagnate' at Loughborough and Leicester- at the latter for 30 minutes - this morning, which suggests some door problem but, as you say, both stations are straight and level.
022. Just passed me north of York.
== Doublepost prevention - post automatically merged: ==
Let’s see if all the work on the doors has paid off.
Thanks alm37
Well, it has a wheel flat when it arrived at Doncaster.
InTheEastMids
Established Member
- Joined
- 31 Jan 2016
- Messages
- 1,382
No new news in this, but shows the underperformance of Hitachi/EMR in getting the 810s into service is seen as having some political mileage.
Link is to a written question by Neil O'Brien (Con, Harborough) to DfT with response by Kier Mather (Transport Minister)
Link is to a written question by Neil O'Brien (Con, Harborough) to DfT with response by Kier Mather (Transport Minister)
You would have thought a MP would understand about leases and contracts, and therefore understand why the trains were moved away.
But I suppose he has to be seen to be asking the question.
Last edited:
Just Wellingboro’ and Kettering.
Trainman40083
Established Member
Perhaps, but equally terms could have been included to give EMR a veto on trains moving away, if it was deemed valuable at the time of the agreement being made.
Merle Haggard
Established Member
To elaborate; on the assumption that the door problem with the 810s is really down to the sensors at the top not always engaging correctly I was suggesting possible reasons for this to happen. 170s called routinely at stations with cant (including Harborough as well, in the days of their introduction) and had problems as a result.
The only station with a cant that 810s call at throughout the day is Kettering, and door problems there seem no more likely than elsewhere.
So perhaps that suggests that the door sensor problem is more basic than just tilting doors.
Five 222s have been transferred to Limo but, I think, more than 5 810s have been 'cleared' for regular service, so there should be no shortage - rather the opposite
The MP would have been better advised, imo, to ask why the 222s replacements didn't work as reliably as the trains they replaced, which seems to me to be the real problem.
The only station with a cant that 810s call at throughout the day is Kettering, and door problems there seem no more likely than elsewhere.
So perhaps that suggests that the door sensor problem is more basic than just tilting doors.
Five 222s have been transferred to Limo but, I think, more than 5 810s have been 'cleared' for regular service, so there should be no shortage - rather the opposite
The MP would have been better advised, imo, to ask why the 222s replacements didn't work as reliably as the trains they replaced, which seems to me to be the real problem.