Bletchleyite
Veteran Member
Is there an infrastructure reason (e.g. fouling a level crossing) why they could not make it front/rear 4 the same both ways? This is rather suboptimal and will confuse people.
-
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!
Merseyrail 777 introduction
- Thread starter karlbbb
- Start date
Sponsor Post - registered members do not see these adverts; click here to register, or click here to log in
R
RailUK Forums
pokemonsuper9
Established Member
The old extension under the bridge that isn't allowed to be used anymore aligns with where the rest of the train is.
Presumably a safety thing in case of a failure it's open to platform instead of a drop.
For those not familiar with Cressington railway station, it is Grade 2 listed and situated within a conservation area and a private estate.
This presents particular challenges and it appears to me that Merseyrail/travel have gone above and beyond, given these circumstances.
This presents particular challenges and it appears to me that Merseyrail/travel have gone above and beyond, given these circumstances.
Last edited:
Who's moaning? Certainly not me - on the contrary, I am delighted that this issue seems to have been resolved finally.
According to people "in the know" on the Mersey Railways FB group, this 8-car diagram is planned to run for the next few weeks at least.
Does this mean SDO is now enabled across the entire fleet, or is it still only working on some units?
Formby EMU Fan
Member
This poster is confusing, it took me a while to work it out, and I know the station in question. I would have expected the diagram of the train to be represented the other way round with the Front of the Train on the Right, as you expect a train to be running left to right. Also, IMO they could have just had the centre 4 cars (2 on each unit) opening as this would have allowed passengers from either unit to be able to get to doors that would open. Although I guess this would have been a real challenge for the people who wrote the SDO software. On a positive note, at least it allows 8 car running on the Hunt Cross line, signalling a potential return of the Hunts Cross-Southport service.
Liverpool 507
Member
777011 & 777021 have been operating the now booked 8 car diagram today on the Ormskirk - Hunts Cross line. However, as of 14:50, the service was terminated due to a door fault at Sandhills and replaced with 777016 operating alone on 2O39 from Walton.
MR-507508
Member
016 and 041 was also pulled from service yesterday afternoon due to an issue with the doors aswell.
Liverpool 507
Member
777029 operating alone today on the Ormskirk 8 car diagram. Only two 8 car diagrams currently on the Southport line, which is a poor show. 777012 entered service from Kirkdale Depot this morning, reached Southport and was sent as a VSTP class 5 back to Kirkdale. If the unit was due an exam, why bother putting it in to service to start.
Alan508
Member
It wasn't exam, it had an issue en route to Southport and had to go back ECS to Kirkdale.
Sam 76
Member
Something that worries me with the 777s is the fact that features that are supposed to stand them apart are being removed instead of fixed.
Firstly we had the Door Pre Release removed and now the timings have been removed from the PIS so the map is nowhere near as useful.
Is this a sign they can’t be fixed so by doing this it’s trying to make do with the software ?
Firstly we had the Door Pre Release removed and now the timings have been removed from the PIS so the map is nowhere near as useful.
Is this a sign they can’t be fixed so by doing this it’s trying to make do with the software ?
baldyman26
Member
- Joined
- 2 Aug 2012
- Messages
- 137
The PIS is just dreadful on these trains.
jamesst
Established Member
Pretty much. As a route code is being used to set up the pis rather than a headcode it considerably reduces the amount of codes the system needs to store.
Liverpool 507
Member
The new Ormskirk - Hunts Cross 8 car diagram is 4 coaches again today and was on Friday. Not a great start
baldyman26
Member
- Joined
- 2 Aug 2012
- Messages
- 137
Who's responsible for the PIS, do Merseyrail control it or Merseytravel. It's never really been right, some TV screens don't work, announcements are wrong. Although the times are there on the trains I get on, they seem to show red now.
Fundamentallly doesn't the issue lie with the train "builder"?
bahnause
Member
It all depends on the contract. Often, a customer wants to use a standard product that is compatible with other existing vehicles or internal systems. In that case, only the interface is specified—and possibly the hardware as well, if the manufacturer is responsible for installation.
baldyman26
Member
- Joined
- 2 Aug 2012
- Messages
- 137
Well given the state of the one on the 777s, someone has dropped a ball. Whoever is responsible looks to have given up.
The merry-go-round of the privatised balkanised railway. The buck never stops and whilst this is all going on the fat cats swoop down and grab their stash.
RichardAsh1981
Member
- Joined
- 28 Oct 2017
- Messages
- 251
Two coupled 777 units in platform 1 at Hooton just now - didn't get numbers as on train through. Between test runs or something gone wrong?
bahnause
Member
I don't think this has anything to do with it. As always, I'm drawing a comparison to Switzerland, specifically the SBB, since I'm familiar with the systems there. Historically, many trains were equipped with different passenger information systems. These were typically manufacturer-specific, featured different input devices for train staff, and had varying capabilities for displaying information.
Over the years, a new vehicle platform (APFZ) was created, which replaced all proprietary applications on the vehicles. One of these applications is the now-standardized software for passenger information. This makes it possible to display passenger information uniformly across all vehicles, without having to provide a separate dataset for each model, and without publishing inconsistent information due to the varying technical capabilities of the proprietary systems.
New trains are also designed to use this system, regardless of the manufacturer.
Sam 76
Member
It’s so disappointing to see. The dot matrix ones work well but the side bars are a farce at this point.
I don’t see how Stadler are responsible for this. I’ve been on other examples of their trains in the UK such as the 755s and 555s and their PIS works well and in the case of the 555 a similar concept. Also in Europe again all examples have had clear and working PIS
It feels like someone has contracted the cheapest people to do the PIS and royally messed it up
Last edited:
jamesst
Established Member
I cant actually remember the name of the company that fitted the pis but merseyrail provide the information ie route codes needed and stadler upload the information to the units
== Doublepost prevention - post automatically merged: ==
Most of the issues with the 777s is good money was spent on the units with the cheapest possible fit out.
For who was to blame for that look towards merseytravel and a certain person from there who used to post here saying how great everything would be but soon disappeared from these pages when the opposite became clear.
== Doublepost prevention - post automatically merged: ==
Asdo testing
RichardAsh1981
Member
- Joined
- 28 Oct 2017
- Messages
- 251
Still two this morning, 777 049 and 019, but I think they had moved since yesterday. Good to see testing happening.
The 777s are equipped with a version of Teleste's S-ARRIVE PIS. It's a software application that runs on a processing platform that also hosts the other Teleste-supplied software that runs the data recorder/telemetry system, PA system, CCTV (Teleste S-VMX) and Wifi networks and interfaces with the train's main computing platform and it's geolocation systems (see page 9 of Teleste's 2018 Annual Report). The route and announcement database data for S-ARRIVE is compiled offline using an application called PICS and uploaded into the units (here's Teleste's S-ARRIVE FAQ).
Teleste are one of Stadler's main PIS suppliers and S-ARRIVE is also in use in various Stadler-supplied metro and tram fleets in Scandinavia, Germany, Italy and Switzerland.
As I mentioned in a previous post (that got moderated off into another thread), I got on an 8-car at Moorfields heading to Southport during the last bank holiday weekend which had a complete PIS failure in both units - all the external matrix displays showed Not In Service, the internal scrolling matrix displays were all blank, the LCD route displays showed the Merseyrail logo and there were no announcements. At every stop there were confused-looking passengers trying to work out if they should board the train.
Last edited:
Sam 76
Member
So the question here is how come it works elsewhere on other units but not the 777s. It’s pretty weird to be honest
Early on they did have recurring problems with the trains not knowing where they were and the timestamps in the data recorder logs being incorrect, which points towards GPS issues (as well as position data, the time sync will come from GPS as well). It might be that the environment the 777s operate in is different to Stadler's other stock that uses the Teleste PIS, or it could just be that the customer wanted it to do more than the system they paid for could deliver, so now they are having to downgrade it to improve reliability.
It should also be notes that the entry into service of the GA Class 745 FLIRTs was delayed partially due to PIS issues, and I don't think theirs is supplied by Teleste.
What might that be? Is there any evidence for this?
MR-507508
Member
I thought it was bad how this was conducted last night. Very short notice cancellation of all trains on the Ormskirk line between Sandhills and Ormskirk, including the last train of the evening, to run a unit which has been out of action for over 2 years - run this out of service hours and avoid disrupting fee paying passengers.