EMR Class 222’s - declining reliability

[Merle Haggard]

Off thread I know; but the Corby trains had even higher cancellations; in the afternoon two consecutive cancellations from St Pancras but then in the veining 5 consecutive ones. Nothing from the 20.15 departure until 23.55 (which departed late). These cancellations given as 'problem with the train' or 'late arrival of inward service'. The latter would be better described as 'no inwards service because of earlier problem with the train'.
There were also some very late departures.

 

[MikeT]

Off thread I know; but the Corby trains had even higher cancellations; in the afternoon two consecutive cancellations from St Pancras but then in the veining 5 consecutive ones. Nothing from the 20.15 departure until 23.55 (which departed late). These cancellations given as 'problem with the train' or 'late arrival of inward service'. The latter would be better described as 'no inwards service because of earlier problem with the train'.
There were also some very late departures.

The 23:55 miraculously gained 16 minutes by the time it got to Bedford. Try explaining the reason why, to fellow passengers.

 

[Teapot42]

Only one train between St Pancras and Sheffield between the 18:32 and the 21:32... Beyond shocking.

And that was a rather heroic 10-minute turnaround with 222020 which arrived 27 late in to STP and was back out again 10 minutes later.

== Doublepost prevention - post automatically merged: 30 Jul 2026 ==

This morning seemed to be carnage again. Apparently a passenger was taken ill, leading to a train blocking one of the lines in to London. Not sure if it was the 9T11 0646 Bedford to West Hampstead Thameslink, but everything before this seemed OK, but this was terminated at West Hampstead Thameslink.

Lots of delays of half an hour to an hour or more.

 

[Railperf]

Some interesting ideas suggested by Green Signals expert Richard Bowker to remedy the current situation with the 222's including:
1. Seek additional maintenance from Alstom Central Rivers
2. Separate maintenance for 810's and 222's
3. Try and get as many 222's into traffic - though arguably this is why they are falling apart - not getting enough down time for repairs.
4. Hire in some ex Virgin 221's in storage to cover for both 222's needing repair and the fragile Class 810 fleet.
5. Talk to Scotrail and try to agree a postponement of unit transfers until the 810's can be sorted out.

All of which he claims requires high level involvement from all parties concerned and needs to be led by the Rail minister.

Link to the podcast on youtube is here:

 

[Clarence Yard]

The first is the obvious one and will yield immediate results. Two units each night and one on repairs is what I would be aiming for.

From the experience of the GWR IET introduction, 5 will be very hard because the Scots may repeat their demand to take over NR Scotland entirely and have a substantial cash bung as well. (Grayling really flipped at that one!) However, the Scots might play nice if they think Burnham will give them NR Scotland anyway and they really don’t need all the units as they become due.

2 is not practical, given the likely resource levels at Etches Park. What really matters here is making sure Hitachi’s notoriously rigid way of maintenance & repair planning isn’t leading to some of the issues. They need headroom in their capability to deal with repairs arising, not bunging up that capacity with only pre-planned jobs.

3 relies on 1 and some proper support for resolving issues from the Central Rivers team. And just who heavy repairs the engines these days? That won’t be an EP job. Is it Crewe?

4 is likely to gum up the train crew department. Different types of units don’t help in the short term if they have to be crewed by EMR.

 

[Railperf]

The first is the obvious one and will yield immediate results. Two units each night and one on repairs is what I would be aiming for.

From the experience of the GWR IET introduction, 5 will be very hard because the Scots may repeat their demand to take over NR Scotland entirely and have a substantial cash bung as well. (Grayling really flipped at that one!) However, the Scots might play nice if they think Burnham will give them NR Scotland anyway and they really don’t need all the units as they become due.

2 is not practical, given the likely resource levels at Etches Park. What really matters here is making sure Hitachi’s notoriously rigid way of maintenance & repair planning isn’t leading to some of the issues. They need headroom in their capability to deal with repairs arising, not bunging up that capacity with only pre-planned jobs.

3 relies on 1 and some proper support for resolving issues from the Central Rivers team. And just who heavy repairs the engines these days? That won’t be an EP job. Is it Crewe?

4 is likely to gum up the train crew department. Different types of units don’t help in the short term if they have to be crewed by EMR.

How does Hitachi's maintenance and repair planning regime compare to what is done elsewhere and what issues does this lead to?
Would hiring in the 221's really be an issue for train crew? Are they that different? Would Class 221 reliability be great as seen by other types of unit struggling to work reliably after sitting around for a while - cue Class 175's 379's etc?

 

[43074]

Would hiring in the 221's really be an issue for train crew? Are they that different?

Yes - not only are the units themselves very different but they have a different method of working for door operation which would need to be agreed with unions. Also who would maintain them as the last thing Etches Park needs is a third unit type on the Intercity side, they are a can of worms in their own right

 

[TastyMaltesers]

You might have more luck recommissioning the 4 ex-EMR 180s that currently have no work than trying to bring in 221s. Though that too is unlikely to put it mildly...

 

[Spartacus]

Worth noting that it's not just the intercity fleets having availability problems. Lots of cancellations on their local services this morning and short forms on the Connects.

 

[Railperf]

You might have more luck recommissioning the 4 ex-EMR 180s that currently have no work than trying to bring in 221s. Though that too is unlikely to put it mildly...

Yes but the 180s are notoriously unreliable. You'd be lucky to have two of four units available for traffic, and they frequently suffered transmission issues.

 

[LowLevel]

Worth noting that it's not just the intercity fleets having availability problems. Lots of cancellations on their local services this morning and short forms on the Connects.

That's what happens when the majority of your fleet is class 170s and 360s which were years overdue major overhauls which haven't been bothered with by previous operators/the ROSCOs and you have no spare maintenance capability to make up the deficit. The short termism in the industry regarding fleets that clearly have future use is in my opinion borderline criminal. Obviously class 222 has the same issues. See also the farce of storing and reactivating class 379.

 

[Spartacus]

Yes but the 180s are notoriously unreliable. You'd be lucky to have two of four units available for traffic, and they frequently suffered transmission issues.

Even if 50% availability wasn't still above that of 810s EMR seemed to be getting a grip on things before they were withdrawn, sometimes even running them in pairs. What they'd be like now is another matter entirely. All pie in the sky anyway.

 

[Clarence Yard]

How does Hitachi's maintenance and repair planning regime compare to what is done elsewhere and what issues does this lead to?
Would hiring in the 221's really be an issue for train crew? Are they that different? Would Class 221 reliability be great as seen by other types of unit struggling to work reliably after sitting around for a while - cue Class 175's 379's etc?

It’s the very rigid way they “prior” book in maintenance and repairs. The headroom for dealing with repairs arising that day/night seems to be less than most TOCs would tolerate. Work arisings can have to wait for a future “slot”, more so than I have previously experienced in my days on depots.

You obviously can never fix everything overnight but the flexibility to be able to adjust the repairs workload seems to have been reduced. Add in the large fault finding element on new, unfamiliar, units and you can easily see how they have got themselves in a mess, even if the 222 situation was rosy, which it isn’t.

I wouldn’t play too much attention to the local fleet in all this. Maintaining 15x to 17x fleets brings its own set of challenges these days, some of which are completely outside of the TOCs control.

 

[Spartacus]

I wouldn’t play too much attention to the local fleet in all this. Maintaining 15x to 17x fleets brings its own set of challenges these days, some of which are completely outside of the TOCs control.

I wouldn't do normally but they seem to be following the 222s & 810s down the pan very quickly this week, even without extremes of weather.

 

[Harpo]

It’s the very rigid way they “prior” book in maintenance and repairs. The headroom for dealing with repairs arising that day/night seems to be less than most TOCs would tolerate. Work arisings can have to wait for a future “slot”, more so than I have previously experienced in my days on depots.

Is the Hitachi rigidity driven or worsened by overly prescriptive contracts? A bean-countery approach to outputs usually makes perversity more likely. And DfT have been involved….

 

[Strathclyder]

The first is the obvious one and will yield immediate results. Two units each night and one on repairs is what I would be aiming for.

From the experience of the GWR IET introduction, 5 will be very hard because the Scots may repeat their demand to take over NR Scotland entirely and have a substantial cash bung as well. (Grayling really flipped at that one!) However, the Scots might play nice if they think Burnham will give them NR Scotland anyway and they really don’t need all the units as they become due.

Indeed, ScotRail/Transport Scotland certainly wouldn't make any such negotiations easy and that's if they're willing to come to the negotiation table at all.

The main factor that ScR would be considering in any such negotiations would be if they think they'd be able to nurse the HSTs along until that time comes, however long that ends up being, without the fleet suffering a catastrophic and sustained drop in availabilty/reliablity during this time and there aren't enough 158s/170s available to fill in for the increased number of HST failures.

Part of me wonders whether or not it'd be worth ScR taking on any of the displaced TfW 158s as a short-term fix in such a scenerio if they feel they can't achieve this? This is all purely speculative/pie-in-the-sky thinking of course and that it would be yet more money the Scottish taxpayer would have to cough up for it, but there is fairly recent precedent for it, namely the 365s coming north in 2018 for about a year to fill the breach when the 385 testing/comissioning programme (oh look, Hitachi again) ran into multiple delays, the whole cab windscreen fisaco included.

You can fairly criticise Holyrood/Transport Scotland for many things and for making utterly cackhanded decisions (as a Scot, god knows I've laid into them more than once over the years) and you can fairly place the entire Inter7City HST saga in this category as it's been a cascading series of cock-ups more or less from the start. Even though the fleet's availabilty/reliabilty is much improved compared to the early days, it still ain't brilliant, nor are they getting any younger (corrosion in the Mk3s is a major issue iirc) and regardless of when the lease for the HSTs is up, the unions understandably want them gone asap.

But I'd also point out the obvious that the hole EMR now finds itself in with the 222s/810s especially has been years in the making, was entirely predictable and is primarily down to a near total lack of cohesive management, the ever-present and borderline supernatural incompetence and chronic short term-ism of the DfT with the eternal tight-fistedness fiscal conservatism of the Treasury backing them up. EMR ain't a company I'd want to be working in a public-facing or maintenance role for right now; to call it a dumpster fire would be the understatement of the decade.

 

[marshlinker]

The first is the obvious one and will yield immediate results. Two units each night and one on repairs is what I would be aiming for.

From the experience of the GWR IET introduction, 5 will be very hard because the Scots may repeat their demand to take over NR Scotland entirely and have a substantial cash bung as well. (Grayling really flipped at that one!) However, the Scots might play nice if they think Burnham will give them NR Scotland anyway and they really don’t need all the units as they become due.

2 is not practical, given the likely resource levels at Etches Park. What really matters here is making sure Hitachi’s notoriously rigid way of maintenance & repair planning isn’t leading to some of the issues. They need headroom in their capability to deal with repairs arising, not bunging up that capacity with only pre-planned jobs.

3 relies on 1 and some proper support for resolving issues from the Central Rivers team. And just who heavy repairs the engines these days? That won’t be an EP job. Is it Crewe?

4 is likely to gum up the train crew department. Different types of units don’t help in the short term if they have to be crewed by EMR.

Are Alstolm likely to have spare capacity for 2 EMR sets in terms of necessary personel, spares holdings etc? Id have thought not even if the depot is big enough.

 

[Teapot42]

The main factor that ScR would be considering in any such negotiations would be if they think they'd be able to nurse the HSTs along until that time comes

Indeed, the whole saga could just repeat. Just as EMR / Hitachi are struggling to keep the 222s going longer than planned, the same is just as likely to happen with the HSTs.

As you suggest, finding something which could be prepared to step in as a stop-gap would be a more sensible option. It's going to cost more, but would break the cycle of pushing things further and further past the point where they should have had a heavy overhaul.

Could, for example, the 180s or the spare 221s have a start made on them now, so they could enter service with Scotrail in 9-12 months time? Even if they only run them a year or 18 months that would give EMR breathing space and would allow the HSTs to be put out to pasture, or at least worked less hard.

 

[InTheEastMids]

Some interesting ideas suggested by Green Signals expert Richard Bowker to remedy the current situation with the 222's including:
1. Seek additional maintenance from Alstom Central Rivers
2. Separate maintenance for 810's and 222's
3. Try and get as many 222's into traffic - though arguably this is why they are falling apart - not getting enough down time for repairs.
4. Hire in some ex Virgin 221's in storage to cover for both 222's needing repair and the fragile Class 810 fleet.
5. Talk to Scotrail and try to agree a postponement of unit transfers until the 810's can be sorted out.

All of which he claims requires high level involvement from all parties concerned and needs to be led by the Rail minister.

It's a compliment to the many very well informed, thoughtful people on here (including @Railperf) that many of these ideas have been floating around on here significantly before the podcast was recorded.

Pretty sure there have been cases where journalists have scrolled through here and things people have said have turned up in the media, particularly after serious incidents. So it probably is fair to say that somebody could put together a half-decent podcast based purely on what gets posted here (To be clear, I'm not saying that's what Green Signals did).

Perhaps I should give it a go. Working title: "The Rest is Trainspotting". Is Rory Stewart available?

Back on topic, the Harborough MP has already sought answers from DfT around points 4 & 5, although not specifically referring to the Cl221s.

 

[Clarence Yard]

Is the Hitachi rigidity driven or worsened by overly prescriptive contracts? A bean-countery approach to outputs usually makes perversity more likely. And DfT have been involved….

No, it’s cultural. We are more used to things going wrong!

 

[Trainman40083]

I'd put up with 68s on Chiltern Mk3s right now. They seem to be stored at Nemesis at Burton

 

[Railperf]

It can be done, Lumo seem to be having great successes with their 222 fleet, often used at 100% availablity.

222604 spotted leaving Crewe leading vehicle engine idling, vehicle 4 no sound. Losing time northbound.

 

[Mark G]

Can anyone advise what the current status is with 222005 and 103 please, last two for haulage. I believe one has gone to Lumo?

 

[Trainman40083]

Can anyone advise what the current status is with 222005 and 103 please, last two for haulage. I believe one has gone to Lumo?

222005 went to Alstom (for Limo) a few weeks ago.

 

[liamf656]

Can anyone advise what the current status is with 222005 and 103 please, last two for haulage. I believe one has gone to Lumo?

103 seems to be in and out the depot quite frequently. Last seen in service on Sunday 5th July where it failed on 1B41

 

[Nicholas Lewis]

Only a few cancelled so far today so whilst the media berate EMR for the short term changes their former teams at Etches Park staff are just about holding their own currently so should be given some credit..

 

[voyagerdude220]

222604 spotted leaving Crewe leading vehicle engine idling, vehicle 4 no sound. Losing time northbound.

I'm surprised if running on 5/6 engines is causing it to lose much time, because I'm under the impression 1 engine out (on the admittedly shorter in length) 220/221 fleet doesn't have much affect at all on their running times and most Lumo trains have alot of slack in their paths.

 

[Railperf]

Only four of six engines appear to be providing traction power. Was 18 mins late at Greenfaulds before it's last stop at Stirling. Now 8 mins down on its return journey and it hasn't even reached Lockerbie yet. Fortunately quite a few minutes of pathing time towards the southern WCML.

 

[voyagerdude220]

Only four of six engines appear to be providing traction power. Was 18 mins late at Greenfaulds before it's last stop at Stirling. Now 8 mins down on its return journey and it hasn't even reached Lockerbie yet. Fortunately quite a few minutes of pathing time towards the southern WCML.

Thanks for that.

Hopefully the Lumo 222s aren't beginning to mirror their EMR sisters by having engine issues.

Back on topic.. I wonder what it is causing the EMR 222s to have so many engine issues (amongst other faults).

Am I right to be under the impression that XC 220/221s don't seem to have as many engine issues?

 

[Railperf]

Thanks for that.

Hopefully the Lumo 222s aren't beginning to mirror their EMR sisters by having engine issues.

Back on topic.. I wonder what it is causing the EMR 222s to have so many engine issues (amongst other faults).

Am I right to be under the impression that XC 220/221s don't seem to have as many engine issues?

It doesn't seem uncommon to see an XC set on one engine or a double set consist with one set on an engine out.
The evidence collected on EMR runs suggests later and harder braking for stops to recoup time lost with slower acceleration.