Will the 810 involved in the Bedford crash be repaired or partly replaced?

[swt_passenger]

What would concern me here with the 810 is not the nose damage, but that the third carriage completely derailed and has made a significant sideways movement. In the case of the LNER incident, all the carriages stayed in line, so the impact forces remained along the strongest axis. With the amount of force demonstrated, I would also have concerns about vehicle twist.

Not quite, there were two carriages in the Neville Hill incident where the trailing bogie derailed, (second and third) and one where the trailing wheelset derailed, (fourth), by up to 1.25m to the right. There‘s a significant section of the RAIB report considering this (unexpected) aspect of the coupler design, I‘d be surprised if it didn’t come up again in the current investigation.

One of the actions placed on Hitachi in the report was to investigate why 3 carriages derailed at a relatively slow speed. In different circumstances they might leave a train foul of another running line.

 

[Purple Train]

From my perspective, 810015 held up pretty well. I appreciate I'm not the best at spotting twists or structural deformation, but the only twist I could obviously see was the sweep of the nose styling (which differs from that on other IETs). To me it didn't look much worse than the damage to 800109 at Neville Hill.

However, it depends what the RAIB want to do with it and how they store it: the undamaged power car 43030 from the Carmont derailment was written off, but then the undamaged 158762 from the Salisbury Tunnel Junction collision was put back into service.

 

[Acathater]

Looks like the Hitachi A trains are all built using extruded aluminium panels welded using "Friction stir welding".
I get the impression that repairs would be difficult, and also that checking the existing welds for fatigue / cracks would be very difficult. Replacement body shells would look to be the technically easier solution for the 810.

 

[Snow1964]

Will Hitachi have to build a replacement unit for the 810 involved at Bedford, or is it likely to get repaired?

Strictly Hitachi don't have to do anything, or could refuse to build a new bodyshell even if asked. If it interrupts a production line and delays smooth operation of different contract might not be too keen.

That obviously raises a different variation of the question, if (and don't know yet) is deemed unrepairable, and Hitachi don't do replacement, where does EMR get replacements. Presumably the quantity ordered is what was decided is required, so one unit short cannot be long term answer unless they axe a train.

In an extreme (although very unlikely) scenario if EMR want only one type of IEP, and if can't get a replacement 810, the only option is to reduce service due to having one less train or replace whole fleet with one new type.

 

[Amos390]

In an extreme (although very unlikely) scenario if EMR want only one type of IEP, and if can't get a replacement 810, the only option is to reduce service due to having one less train or replace whole fleet with one new type.

By how much would they actually have to reduce service though, would 32 instead of 33 sets make much the difference, I don’t actually know well what the future plans for 810 flows will be, especially once 10-car operation in implemented, and how having one less unit change that

 

[M60lad]

How long could we be looking at having 810015 out of service? Obviously it won't now se service again this year but if it is indeed fixable could we see it or maybe a replacement in service sometime next year or could it take longer?

 

[800001]

How long could we be looking at having 810015 out of service? Obviously it won't now se service again this year but if it is indeed fixable could we see it or maybe a replacement in service sometime next year or could it take longer?

For some time perspective, LNER 800109 after the Neville Hill crash was out for over 18 Months, and that was a 15mph collision.

That collision occurred 13/10/2019, the repaired front carriage arrived back at Hitachi Merchant Park after repairs in March 2021.

It then performed its first mainline test on the evening of 19/04/21.

Now, seeing the Bedford crash was a much higher speed impact, if they do repair I can see the train being out of action for 2 years or more.

 

[Peter Sarf]

By how much would they actually have to reduce service though, would 32 instead of 33 sets make much the difference, I don’t actually know well what the future plans for 810 flows will be, especially once 10-car operation in implemented, and how having one less unit change that

I recall suggestions years back that EMR will be short of 810s anyway.
I think it was because EMR were expecting to keep a small quantity of other units - 180s iirc ?.
Or was it just over optimistic promises and so planning

I also recall that when an extra 810 was suggested (on this forum) as compensation from Hitachi for Hitachi's delivery delays that it was unlikely as Derby Etches Park depot does not have the space for more 810s.

Comments on this thread do make me think that replacement of a damaged 810 vehicle would be more likely (and easier) if the vehicles were standard with all other 8xx vehicles.

The 360 is older stock so more likely to just be written off.

An interim solution is if 810015 and 810002 get formed into one unit - at least temporarily as might only need one end coach out of 810002 !. But I wonder how urgent getting 810015 back in traffic is as an easier and more important task is getting more of the other 810s working properly.

 

[Failed Unit]

If EMR are really already short of units this could be a blessing, order a sub-fleet of 9 car ”Standard IET” so they can cope with growth and find another solution about Derby. As we are now GBR - run to Leeds for example and replace the path of the Northern Fast Sheffield - Leeds service to provide an hourly London - Sheffield - Leeds services. The franchises are dead no reason that this can’t be done and the sub-fleet is maintained at Leeds. It is only abstraction from other GBR areas, which used to happen on BR between NSE and IC

 

[Peter Mugridge]

Also the class 350s involved in the Watford collision, I believe they were repaired and placed back into service after re certification

...and in an earlier accident in the same area, two brand new class 321 carriages were built - so again, precedent for partial replacement.

 

[Acathater]

....Comments on this thread do make me think that replacement of a damaged 810 vehicle would be more likely (and easier) if the vehicles were standard with all other 8xx vehicles.......

Just how standard are the class 8xx bodyshells?
They're obviously all built to the same welded aluminium extrusion technique, but are they interchangeable? Do they use the same jigs & tooling? That is going to be the limiting question as to what can be done. Anything else is relatively trivial and can be sourced from the spares supply line

 

[Strathclyder]

However, it depends what the RAIB want to do with it and how they store it: the undamaged power car 43030 from the Carmont derailment was written off, but then the undamaged 158762 from the Salisbury Tunnel Junction collision was put back into service.

43030's withdrawal after Carmont is something of a outlier in this respect, as the rear power cars from the sets involved in the other 3 major HST accidents (Southall, Ladbroke Grove & Ufton Nevert) were all returned to service (though I can't for the life of me remember their IDs now), as was 91023 after both Hatfield and Great Heck.

...and in an earlier accident in the same area, two brand new class 321 carriages were built - so again, precedent for partial replacement.

I seem to remember this accident happening in 1996, a few years after volume production of Mk3-based EMU vehicles had come to a end and the replacement vehicles ended up being built by Adtranz at Crewe iirc. But the wider point remains as you say, partial replacement by new-build vehicles has a lot of precident in the UK rail industry.

Whether or not this happens with 810015 though remains to be seen of course, once the RAIB release it back to EMR/Rock Rail/Hitachi and a full damage assessment can be carried out and what course of action to take from there. For all we know right now, the whole unit could end up being binned off.

 

[swt_passenger]

Just how standard are the class 8xx bodyshells?
They're obviously all built to the same welded aluminium extrusion technique, but are they interchangeable? Do they use the same jigs & tooling? That is going to be the limiting question as to what can be done. Anything else is relatively trivial and can be sourced from the spares supply line

The 810s are 24m, most other 80x are 26m, and as far as previous threads have got across the differences in ‘shape’ are the cabs, the carriage ends and the door areas. The areas badly damaged basically.

I’ve never thought reprovision of jigs would be the issue some people think, they are usually adaptable, despite the regular posts about jigs for such and such being ’thrown away’.

 

[sharpener]

I’ve never thought reprovision of jigs would be the issue some people think, they are usually adaptable, despite the regular posts about jigs for such and such being ’thrown away’.

For those with long memories this is perhaps a hangover from the cancellation of the TSR-2 fighter programme on 6 April 1965.

As well as what Wikipedia states "Ultimately, only the first prototype, XR219, ever took to the air. A week later, the Chancellor, James Callaghan, defended the decision in a debate in the House of Commons, saying that the F-111 would prove cheaper.[102] All airframes were then ordered to be destroyed and burned.", to poison the well the government of the day also ordered all jigs and tooling to be destroyed by putting them through bandsaws.

"The haste with which the project was scrapped has been the source of much argument and bitterness since..."

Back on topic I would have thought with the couplers having deformable energy-absorbing components behind them and the whole issue being shunted ~75m along the track there might be quite a lot of hidden damage making them unrepairable, or at least uncertifiable for renewed use. Even individual items such as motors or a/c compressors might have shock damage to the bearings needing replacement. Depends rather to what extent the mounting arrangements absorbed the g forces.

 

[Bald Rick]

I’d be surprised if it wasn’t beyond repair.

 

[JonathanH]

By how much would they actually have to reduce service though, would 32 instead of 33 sets make much the difference, I don’t actually know well what the future plans for 810 flows will be, especially once 10-car operation in implemented, and how having one less unit change that

Having 32 810s rather than 33 would appear to simply result in fewer 10-car formations rather than planned rather than fewer services overall. The timetable pattern of half-hourly alternate services from St Pancras to Sheffield and Nottingham is basically established now for the forseeable future.

I’d be surprised if it wasn’t beyond repair.

I think your double negatives indicate a view that it will be scrapped? Is that right?

 

[Bald Rick]

I think your double negatives indicate a view that it will be scrapped.

Yes!

Maybe the front vehicle will survive.

 

[Amos390]

Another point would be how damaged is the interior, realistically this shouldn’t be much an issue as you can just order in a fresh batch of chairs and tables if needed, but maybe if the interior is completely destroyed alongside other factors like structure, could that sway them against repairing,

 

[JonathanH]

Yes!

Maybe the front vehicle will survive.

Keeping the front coach, in the manner of the spare Mk5 driving trailer could at least go some way to substituting a vehicle in the future in the light of other mishaps.

 

[Acathater]

Another point would be how damaged is the interior, realistically this shouldn’t be much an issue as you can just order in a fresh batch of chairs and tables if needed, but maybe if the interior is completely destroyed alongside other factors like structure, could that sway them against repairing,

I think the real problem is going to be the type of welding used which makes weak spots, cracks and fractures almost impossible to detect. I doubt if anyone is going to be able to warrant its safety

 

[Strathclyder]

Yes!

Maybe the front vehicle will survive.

In a hypothetical scenerio where the whole unit ends up being a write-off, perhaps the cab from the front vehicle could be retained and repurposed as a driver/route training simulator. Didn't GBRF do something along these lines with one of the recovered cabs from the first 66734 that was written off after the Loch Treig derailment?

Similarly, it was the two of the rearmost vehicles from 390033 that ended up being re-used for crew/staff training at Crewe (the rear driving trailer and the rear pantograph coach that both didn't get flung all the way down the embankment at Grayrigg and thus didn't suffer as much structrual damage).

Keeping the front coach, in the manner of the spare Mk5 driving trailer could at least go some way to substituting a vehicle in the future in the light of other mishaps.

Indeed, this is also a possibilty. Vehicles from written-off units returning to frontline service replacing another withdrawn vehicle in other unit(s) of the same or a related class does have precedent.

Going back to the BR era and to pick out a specific example, 507022 is a good example of this.

It was badly damaged in a collision at Kirkdale TMD with 507004 in September 1991; 022 was written off as a result of the damage it sustained and Driving Trailer M64370 from 004 was scrapped.

As a result, 022's driving vehicles (M64388 & M64426) were both repaired and inserted into 004 and much later on, Strathclyde's 314203 respectively - the latter was renumbered 64558 and converted from DC to AC; 203's original 64588 vehicle was completely destroyed in the fatal Newton collision in July 1991 in what was, all things considered, the single most graphic illustration of the weaknesses of the PEP-derived family in terms of crashworthiness in a head-on collision (the 303 it collided with didn't fare much better to be fair).

 

[MrJeeves]

Technically 002 could be rebuilt and have same number, as Hitachi still had possession of the unit and it has never been registered/delivered to the operator.

Given it's been done for the 2024 Stock on LU, I'm sure it would be possible to do for mainline stock too.

 

[Helvellyn]

For those wanting precedent for an accident damaged vehicle being replaced by a new build due to accident damage, and taking the number of the original vehicle, you can go back to the early 1980s where an original 317 coach was written off. 77048 from 317301 was hit by a Peak and beyond economic repair, so a new 77048 was built to replace it. I've seen sources say it was built at Wolverton, but I'd have thought York would be logical because they were still building the Mk 3 EMU vehicles until the early 1990s. Unless York gave Wolverton a shell that they completed with as many parts from the original 77048 as could be recovered.

 

[Acathater]

It looks like the 810 units are still being built so adding a new one should be possible

 

[brad465]

If it is written off, where does this unit rank in terms of shortest unit lifespan? (Assuming 70012 is the winner for shortest)

 

[Royston Vasey]

If it is written off, where does this unit rank in terms of shortest unit lifespan? (Assuming 700012 is the winner for shortest)

I just spent multiple minutes Googling Desiro testing accidents at Krefeld and the whereabouts of the twelfth 700/0 before realising you meant 70012

 

[CR165022]

If it is written off, where does this unit rank in terms of shortest unit lifespan? (Assuming 700012 is the winner for shortest)

Assuming you mean 70012, not 700012, but 70012 technically wasn't written off as it is still in use in the US.

 

[Snow1964]

An interim solution is if 810015 and 810002 get formed into one unit - at least temporarily as might only need one end coach out of 810002 !. But I wonder how urgent getting 810015 back in traffic is as an easier and more important task is getting more of the other 810s working properly.

There is a date for final 222 to go to Scotrail, so presumably a date when EMR have to finish using 222s and off-lease them.

So that suggests need to have all 810s in place and in service by then, I can't find the end date at moment. But presumably 33 units was chosen for a reason and either a thinned timetable or short forms will happen if replacements not ready.

Realistically only got about 18 months to fix or replace it or be short of IETs

 

[800001]

It looks like the 810 units are still being built so adding a new one should be possible

They have finished the assembly of the shells several weeks ago and are
Into final fit of the final few carriages.

 

[Acathater]

They have finished the assembly of the shells several weeks ago and are
Into final fit of the final few carriages.

So have they yet switched to building any other shells?