Class 345 progress

[AM9]

According to rtt all the 345 core tunnel testing is happening overnight, is there any reason why this is not happening during socialable hours given the tracks are completely segregated and the tunnel is not in public use,

Probably because there is a lot of constructin/fitting out going on at the core stations. It's cheaper to pay a driver plus a few support staff to work overnight than stop a lot of engineering work that in some areas is running behind programme.

 

[Kite159]

Silly question, does anybody have a list at which 345s have entered service on the Liverpool Street - Shenfields?

 

[JW16]

First example of a 345 with the wrong PIS code entered this evening. Suppose you can kind of forgive it under the circumstances, but unhelpful given tempers are already frayed. Driver has made no announcement to correct the fact that the train is stating it runs fast from Stratford to Ilford.
On opening the doors at each intermediate station it wasn't programmed for it announced Stratford again. I suppose this is one occasion when extreme brevity in the announcements pays off - very little incorrect information as there's very little information to begin with. Slightly unimpressed that the situation has occurred though!

The "special timetable" this evening meant all trains called at all stations. This was announced on platforms verbally and on station screens but could probably not be transposed to the onboard PIS in time.

 

[Robert Carroll]

According to rtt all the 345 core tunnel testing is happening overnight, is there any reason why this is not happening during socialable hours given the tracks are completely segregated and the tunnel is not in public use,

Possibly because of work going on at the stations which cannot be done whilst trains are running, even on test?

 

[gwr4090]

Another 345 delivered this afternoon/evening from Old Dalby to Hayes And Harlington Loop. According to Realtime Trains going to carry out test runs between Paddington and Reading, then stabling at Maidenhead. I assume all this is weather dependent.

So which Class 345s are now running on the GWML ? I presume these are full 9-car units.

 

[Aventra]

So which Class 345s are now running on the GWML ? I presume these are full 9-car units.

345029 is currently running overnight between Maidenhead and Paddington. This will then be stabled at Old Oak Common depot from Friday morning. Currently at Old Oak Common is 345020 & 345023. A reduced length unit will be delivered Friday evening 345002 from Crewe. Driver training runs will start from next week out of Old Oak along the GWML.

 

[Julian G]

So which Class 345s are now running on the GWML ? I presume these are full 9-car units.

Currently it’s 345029 (9 car) that’s testing on the GWML.

 

[coxy]

Another 345 delivered this afternoon/evening from Old Dalby to Hayes And Harlington Loop. According to Realtime Trains going to carry out test runs between Paddington and Reading, then stabling at Maidenhead. I assume all this is weather dependent.

Heading to Reading earlier this morning, and noticed 345029 was in the stabling point to the west of Maidenhead station. First time I've seen a 345 to the west of London.

It was still there on my way back, around 3pm.

 

[samuelmorris]

The "special timetable" this evening meant all trains called at all stations. This was announced on platforms verbally and on station screens but could probably not be transposed to the onboard PIS in time.

So it's no longer possible to manually program in an all-stations config?

 

[iphone76]

So it's no longer possible to manually program in an all-stations config?

Not really, no. You program the headcode into the train and all being well the stopping pattern is programmed in correctly. It is possible to remove stops but I don’t believe there is a way to add them in. Even if you did put in an all stations headcode you had previously used, it may confuse the train. (I haven’t used it so can’t confirm).

There are some manual codes we used when training, however, I believe they have no stations assigned to them. So just indicate the final destination.

 

[Wivenswold]

Silly question, does anybody have a list at which 345s have entered service on the Liverpool Street - Shenfields?

I have 345005 - 012 & 345014 - 17 on my list. 001 last seen at Old Dalby, 002 last seen at Crewe and 013 returned to Ilford last month but I'm not aware it's in service yet. 003 & 004 still at Crewe and I don't know whether they will be 7 or 9 car on initial delivery.

 

[Kite159]

I have 345005 - 012 & 345014 - 17 on my list. 001 last seen at Old Dalby, 002 last seen at Crewe and 013 returned to Ilford last month but I'm not aware it's in service yet. 003 & 004 still at Crewe and I don't know whether they will be 7 or 9 car on initial delivery.

Ta, I just need 14-16. Might be a job for a Friday evening to try and grab them.

 

[Aventra]

Ta, I just need 14-16. Might be a job for a Friday evening to try and grab them.

345013 should be in service soon, it’s currently at Ilford but requires some mods prior to entering service.

 

[samuelmorris]

There are some manual codes we used when training, however, I believe they have no stations assigned to them. So just indicate the final destination.

That's kind of what I was getting at, I understand the complication about it using headcodes rather than generic PIS codes, but there should at least be a manual set program that shuts up the incorrect information, even if you can't manually program in your own calling pattern.

345013 should be in service soon, it’s currently at Ilford but requires some mods prior to entering service.

Are you able to elaborate on what those issues were and why that particular unit is so far behind the others?

 

[Aventra]

Are you able to elaborate on what those issues were and why that particular unit is so far behind the others?

It requires a pitted road to carry out the mods, but shed space at Ilford is at a premium and they’re currently focusing on the units in service and their commitments to other operators. The unit may move over to Old Oak Common for its mods.

 

[iphone76]

That's kind of what I was getting at, I understand the complication about it using headcodes rather than generic PIS codes, but there should at least be a manual set program that shuts up the incorrect information, even if you can't manually program in your own calling pattern.

It would be good to have a screen which lists of all the stations so we could select or deselect them as needed when the normal service pattern changes. There is a screen which does show this information, but it just doesn't allow for changes to be made. (As far as I know) - perhaps it is something they may look into for the future.

 

[700007]

It would be good to have a screen which lists of all the stations so we could select or deselect them as needed when the normal service pattern changes. There is a screen which does show this information, but it just doesn't allow for changes to be made. (As far as I know) - perhaps it is something they may look into for the future.

A few years ago I used to always believe this was the case! I used to think that there was a list of stations that you can select and deselect in times of disruption with a few pre-programmed generic calling patterns (like all stations or Stratford, Ilford and all stations).

 

[railfanatic]

Not really, no. You program the headcode into the train and all being well the stopping pattern is programmed in correctly. It is possible to remove stops but I don’t believe there is a way to add them in. Even if you did put in an all stations headcode you had previously used, it may confuse the train. (I haven’t used it so can’t confirm).

There are some manual codes we used when training, however, I believe they have no stations assigned to them. So just indicate the final destination.

It is possible for the driver to add stations in using the HMI screen.

There are manual codes the driver can enter for "all stopper" services in case of disruptions. These do show the correct stopping pattern.

There are no "final destination only" headcodes.

 

[iphone76]

It is possible for the driver to add stations in using the HMI screen.

There are manual codes the driver can enter for "all stopper" services in case of disruptions. These do show the correct stopping pattern.

There are no "final destination only" headcodes.

Thanks for that. I will have a play with it tonight and see what I can find.

That’s interesting as I’m sure we used 8A07 and 8A03 when we ran up and down whilst testing and in training but I stand to be corrected.

 

[railfanatic]

Thanks for that. I will have a play with it tonight and see what I can find.

That’s interesting as I’m sure we used 8A07 and 8A03 when we ran up and down whilst testing and in training but I stand to be corrected.

You're absolutely right! I created those headcodes. They are both all stoppers. 8A03 LST - SNF and 8A07 SNF - LAST.

If you're using a "real" headcode, if there are any non-stop stations, they are greyed out on the stopping pattern screen. Select that station, click "Add Station" to the bottom of the screen and it will be added to the stopping pattern. It won't make an announcement for that though, passengers will have to be manually informed that a station has been added.

Automatic announcements will include that station

 

[iphone76]

You're absolutely right! I created those headcodes. They are both all stoppers. 8A03 LST - SNF and 8A07 SNF - LAST.

If you're using a "real" headcode, if there are any non-stop stations, they are greyed out on the stopping pattern screen. Select that station, click "Add Station" to the bottom of the screen and it will be added to the stopping pattern. It won't make an announcement for that though, passengers will have to be manually informed that a station has been added.

Automatic announcements will include that station

Thank you very much for that. I will have a look the next time I work a semi-fast service. Unfortunately I was all stops tonight.

Quick question. I did look tonight whilst working an all stops Shenfield to London service and when I checked that screen all the 14 stations just had the code SNF rather than the correct station shown - and obviously the "Add Station" button was greyed out. I will check next week on a semi-fast service to see if the correct stations are listed so I can easily see which station is which.

I'll have to ask if there are codes to display Not in Service or Empty to Depot as the 315s have. I'd also like the manual message about a trolley service coming through!

Cheers for the insight.

 

[railfanatic]

Thank you very much for that. I will have a look the next time I work a semi-fast service. Unfortunately I was all stops tonight.

Quick question. I did look tonight whilst working an all stops Shenfield to London service and when I checked that screen all the 14 stations just had the code SNF rather than the correct station shown - and obviously the "Add Station" button was greyed out. I will check next week on a semi-fast service to see if the correct stations are listed so I can easily see which station is which.

I'll have to ask if there are codes to display Not in Service or Empty to Depot as the 315s have. I'd also like the manual message about a trolley service coming through!

Cheers for the insight.

That should have been a list of all stations, looks like a bug Would be much appreciated if you can report via an official reporting process.

 

[iphone76]

That should have been a list of all stations, looks like a bug Would be much appreciated if you can report via an official reporting process.

No trouble at all - I will contact the correct people when I return to work next week.

 

[samuelmorris]

Quick question - this may be more a 'general railway' query than one specific to the 345s, but since it concerns one - during one of my journeys home this week, not a particularly late running one, the driver of the 345 I was on was for a few seconds, unquestionably speeding. As I understand it the line speed between Harold Wood and Brentwood is 70 which, by and large, the 345s run at for the majority of it due to their much higher power output, so I'm used to what that sounds like. In this case, we must have reached over 75, possibly approaching 80. Shortly following this, the brakes appeared to be fully applied but only until the speed dropped below the limit. If the driver genuinely exceeded the speed limit, I would have expected, particularly on a modern unit, for safety protocol to stop the train outright.

Could someone advise what the expected behaviour is for this scenario? I'm sure I remember hearing that what constitutes speeding on the railway is near zero-tolerance, as well it should be, so I'm kind of surprised that this sort of speed was attained in the first place, I can only assume perhaps that there's a time interval controlling it?
The only time I can recall this happening before was a few years ago on a 315, the same stretch but this time in the downhill direction, on the odd diagram Greater Anglia ran on the fast lines non-stop from Shenfield to Stratford in the morning peak using a 315. Much the same happened there, we reached what I estimated to be the low 80s before the brakes were abruptly applied, but only to continue the rest of the journey at 75. Although I realise that would be exceeding the unit max speed rather than the line, I assume policy would be fairly similar.

 

[Domh245]

Unless running on ETCS or CBTC, the train would have no way of knowing what the speed limit is, and if it were exceeding it, it is therefore up to the driver to realise that they are speeding and bring the train back down to the correct speed. I can't see why the train should have to stop outright though, that strikes me as slightly overzealous.

 

[rd749249]

If I was speeding in either unit, I would immediately put the brake in; they are not automatically applied on lines controlled by TPWS unless the OSS is triggered. Management are more interested in seeing a correction on a download than anything else. If very over the limit, I’d let my manager know.

Line speed in that section of the mainline is 80 for an EMU and 90 for a DMU so at low 80’s, the 315 would have been speeding too.

 

[AlexNL]

If the driver genuinely exceeded the speed limit, I would have expected, particularly on a modern unit, for safety protocol to stop the train outright.

Could someone advise what the expected behaviour is for this scenario? I'm sure I remember hearing that what constitutes speeding on the railway is near zero-tolerance, as well it should be, so I'm kind of surprised that this sort of speed was attained in the first place, I can only assume perhaps that there's a time interval controlling it?

The majority of the British railways does not have continuous speed monitoring systems,with the exception of High Speed 1 (TVM-430), the GWML (+Heathrow Branch, ATP) and the Cumbrian coast line (ETCS). On the rest of the network you will find TPWS OSS (Overspeed) loops, but they only provide protection when a train passes over them.

A part of the fleet has "Speedset" systems (a bit like cruise control in a car) which can help the driver to maintain the right speed, but in the end it's always the driver's responsibility to adhere to the speed limits.

 

[Agent_Squash]

The majority of the British railways does not have continuous speed monitoring systems,with the exception of High Speed 1 (TVM-430), the GWML (+Heathrow Branch, ATP) and the Cumbrian coast line (ETCS). On the rest of the network you will find TPWS OSS (Overspeed) loops, but they only provide protection when a train passes over them.

A part of the fleet has "Speedset" systems (a bit like cruise control in a car) which can help the driver to maintain the right speed, but in the end it's always the driver's responsibility to adhere to the speed limits.

The Cumbrian Coast doesn’t even have colour light signalling; it’s the Cambrian with ETCS.

 

[Mordac]

The majority of the British railways does not have continuous speed monitoring systems,with the exception of High Speed 1 (TVM-430), the GWML (+Heathrow Branch, ATP) and the Cumbrian coast line (ETCS). On the rest of the network you will find TPWS OSS (Overspeed) loops, but they only provide protection when a train passes over them.

A part of the fleet has "Speedset" systems (a bit like cruise control in a car) which can help the driver to maintain the right speed, but in the end it's always the driver's responsibility to adhere to the speed limits.

Don't forget TASS (Tilt Authorisation and Speed Supervision) in the WCML (only fitted to 390s and 221s, of course).

 

[samuelmorris]

Thanks for the responses, makes sense, and yes bringing the train to a stand would be very draconian but it would be in keeping with how other safety systems currently operate.