Class 387

[westcoaster]

Not sure that's it. That's usually a one time deal. This kept cutting in and out at every stop south of Luton Airport Parkway

Sounds like something trapped in the door, affecting the infa red sensor, or the sensitive edges.

 

[asylumxl]

Sounds like something trapped in the door, affecting the infa red sensor, or the sensitive edges.

Does that cause some of the interior lighting to go on and off? If so that's bizarre.

 

[westcoaster]

Does that cause some of the interior lighting to go on and off? If so that's bizarre.

Are we talking passenger lights or the circle led's, by the doors.
--- old post above --- --- new post below ---
Also if the unit goes into full load shed it will shut down completely, and have to be re-booted, just like when we Aux off and Aux on to clear certain faults.

 

[asylumxl]

Are we talking passenger lights or the circle led's, by the doors.
--- old post above --- --- new post below ---
Also if the unit goes into full load shed it will shut down completely, and have to be re-booted, just like when we Aux off and Aux on to clear certain faults.

Passenger lights. The fluorescent tubes on the ceiling.

 

[Islineclear3_1]

Sorry if I've missed this but how long are 387.201 - 3 on loan to TL for and when does GatEx officially go over to 387/2's

 

[Class377/5]

Sorry if I've missed this but how long are 387.201 - 3 on loan to TL for and when does GatEx officially go over to 387/2's

387201-203 on loan until the 387/1 mods are completed in a few months. GatEx has already started to go over. Should be completely 387 by the summer.

 

[Islineclear3_1]

387201-203 on loan until the 387/1 mods are completed in a few months. GatEx has already started to go over. Should be completely 387 by the summer.

Thanks

 

[yorkie]

On twitter, GTR have claimed that the 387s are on their Thameslink route as a "fault prevention to make sure they are ready to enter service as Gatwick Express services"
https://twitter.com/TLRailUK/status/710191627017576448

@GatwickExpress And why are @TLRailUK using some of your units?? These could be used on Gatwick Express!!

@aeiou341281 @GatwickExpress These units are getting mileage on our network before they enter service as Gatwick Express. ^Joe

@TLRailUK @GatwickExpress Why is that at all necessary? When are they transferring to Gatwick Express?

This is fault prevention to make sure they are ready to enter service as Gatwick Express services. ^Joe

This seems unlikely. If anything, a failure on their Thameslink route would have a wider-ranging impact on other services than a failure on their Gatwick Express route.

Anyone know if there is any truth in this, and why they might be saying it?

Surely the 387s are on the Thameslink route because that's where it is deemed the extra capacity is needed right now?
--- old post above --- --- new post below ---

Sorry if I've missed this but how long are 387.201 - 3 on loan to TL for and when does GatEx officially go over to 387/2's

Technically there is no "loan" required; it's all within the same train company, so more of an allocation thing.

 

[postye]

The three units on thameslink services 387201-203 are there to provide cover whilst 387/1's are having modifications at Bletchley.

The fault free running is the test trains that run most days either on the WCML or Bletchley-Brighton to ensure they are fit for service and are then accepted into traffic.
There are also a pair at Tilgate that do staff training runs to Littlehampton.

Interesting that they couldn't even get the daytime gat-ex runs right. It is 1330 off GTW and 1415 off VIC

More will come into service when there are both sufficient units available and drivers trained

 

[Class377/5]

Fault prevention also includes upgrading the 387/1 and testing (in part already done) so they are correct, just misunderstood on here.

 

[asylumxl]

Fault prevention also includes upgrading the 387/1 and testing (in part already done) so they are correct, just misunderstood on here.

While their tweets are technically correct, it doesn't come across well to the public, as it makes it sound as if a failure on TL is far less of an issue.

 

[Class377/5]

While their tweets are technically correct, it doesn't come across well to the public, as it makes it sound as if a failure on TL is far less of an issue.

I'm not sure how a complex reply would be worded to avoid that issue. That's the limit of Twitter, not the TOC.

 

[swt_passenger]

Surely engineers would talk about making 'reliability improvements' or reliability modifications' rather than 'fault prevention'? It seems an odd description.

 

[asylumxl]

I'm not sure how a complex reply would be worded to avoid that issue. That's the limit of Twitter, not the TOC.

Hardly. I appreciate you work for or with them, but you surely can see the wording is far from ideal. For example, they could have said something like:

They are being used on TL while reliability mods are made to our other stock, which will improve reliability on the Brighton Main Line.

That's 135 characters. That's still not perfect but you get the idea.

 

[W230]

This has probably already been answered by the many posts but why have the 387/2s even got pantographs anyway if they're going to Gatwick Express? Everyday I do a Brighton job I seem to be on pair of new 387/2s. We have more than GatEx do!

 

[Class377/5]

Hardly. I appreciate you work for or with them, but you surely can see the wording is far from ideal. For example, they could have said something like:

That's 135 characters. That's still not perfect but you get the idea.

Not a bad way of writing it. It's a case of technical reasons being made simple then trying to make it complex again. It's like Chinese whispers and things don't quite come out right at the end.

This has probably already been answered by the many posts but why have the 387/2s even got pantographs anyway if they're going to Gatwick Express? Everyday I do a Brighton job I seem to be on pair of new 387/2s. We have more than GatEx do!

Because Govia ordered the 387s to be dual voltage at an agreed price. As the intension is/was to start wiring up the BML within the life time of the units it makes sense to the pans on them especially when you wouldn't save anything by having them removed from the planned build.

I'm curious if the GWR 8 387s will have shoes are not.

 

[adc82140]

I'm curious if the GWR 8 387s will have shoes are not.

It would allow, subject to clearances etc. a diversionary route into Waterloo via Wokingham

 

[leomartin125]

According to Realtime Trains, GWR's Class 387's will be commencing services on 16th May 2016 with the first service being:

http://www.realtimetrains.co.uk/train/C46519/2016/05/16/advanced

It's timed as ECS which is interesting, I would have thought this would be carrying passengers to Hayes & Harlington.

The Class 387's will initially only run at peak times to aid GWR's peak services between Paddington & Hayes & Harlington.

 

[postye]

According to Realtime Trains, GWR's Class 387's will be commencing services on 16th May 2016 with the first service being:

http://www.realtimetrains.co.uk/train/C46519/2016/05/16/advanced

It's timed as ECS which is interesting, I would have thought this would be carrying passengers to Hayes & Harlington.

The Class 387's will initially only run at peak times to aid GWR's peak services between Paddington & Hayes & Harlington.

That's the start of the timetable period, not necessarily when test runs will begin.

Drivers will need to be trained on the new stock first, and the first 387 isn't due to GW until after this date.

 

[swt_passenger]

That's the start of the timetable period, not necessarily when test runs will begin.

Drivers will need to be trained on the new stock first, and the first 387 isn't due to GW until after this date.

The first 6 x 387s are supposed to be due by the end of March. Unless the franchise agreement dates are wrong, or have been updated?

 

[postye]

The first 6 x 387s are supposed to be due by the end of March. Unless the franchise agreement dates are wrong, or have been updated?

That's not what I've heard, but I could have misunderstood what was said so stand to be corrected if 6 387's suddenly disappear next week

 

[Class377/5]

The first 6 x 387s are supposed to be due by the end of March. Unless the franchise agreement dates are wrong, or have been updated?

As I've said before it was a date written down and it isn't set ins stone as most franchise agreements get changed over the lifetime of the contract.

 

[tsr]

Passenger lights. The fluorescent tubes on the ceiling.

I think I may be getting to the bottom of what may have happened here. It looks like these are all symptoms of something having happened with the conductor panels. On 387s, the conductor panels have the usual Electrostar door close / interlock, signal bell, and "dim lights" buttons. An electrical fault with one or multiple panels could need the driver to override a conductor's key being incorrectly detected (a "phantom" detection), resulting more than one door close being initiated at specific doors. In addition, and this is something I have seen in practice, a fault with a panel can mean that the lights enter a dimmed setting without being commanded to do so. IIRC this lighting error can only happen if the train thinks the panel is active. Conductor panels do become active from time to time without this being commanded. Whilst the panel wiring on Electrostars is less complicated than on Turbostars (the functionality of which can really be quite "interesting"), it is still quite complicated. To give a handful of irrelevant but hopefully illuminating examples, the CACUs (Combined Audio Communications Units) in the cabs combine with the panel handsets to create a very useful internal telephone network, then there's the interaction of the PIS, the wiring of the key switch and the bell controls being linked, etc. etc. etc. In particular, if anything goes wrong with the key switch or any sort of failsafe device, it can have some very strange effects on panel performance.

(I once ended up on a 12 coach 377 which had unusually dimmed lighting despite nobody having asked the train to do that - it turned out that one of the 3 units somehow needed the "dim lights" button to be reset at one of the panels. After a lot of trial and error with different MCBs and buttons, the problem was eventually resolved!)

So it may well not have been anything too sinister, but I should imagine it was very annoying for the driver and would have been reported to Fleet ASAP!

 

[asylumxl]

I think I may be getting to the bottom of what may have happened here

Thanks for the thorough reply, greatly appreciated. Interesting information too.

 

[the sniper]

What's the purpose of the "dim lights" button? We don't have that on our Turbostars. To be fair I've never know of any regular faults to occur with the door panels on ours.

 

[tsr]

What's the purpose of the "dim lights" button? We don't have that on our Turbostars. To be fair I've never know of any regular faults to occur with the door panels on ours.

I'd say that serious panel issues on Electrostars are rare - the worst that usually happens is PA handset feedback or a door close button which doesn't work on every attempt. Mostly they're pretty reliable. The "dim lights" button is really for ECS moves but can also be used to flash the internal lights to try to wake up sleepy travellers at the end of a journey. You can use it whenever you want to, really! Turbostars indeed don't have it, and the reason is presumably because if it was activated then it could interfere with observing the lights in a coach to check that a unit is crossfeeding if an engine's out.

 

[SPADTrap]

I think I may be getting to the bottom of what may have happened here. It looks like these are all symptoms of something having happened with the conductor panels. On 387s, the conductor panels have the usual Electrostar door close / interlock, signal bell, and "dim lights" buttons. An electrical fault with one or multiple panels could need the driver to override a conductor's key being incorrectly detected (a "phantom" detection), resulting more than one door close being initiated at specific doors. In addition, and this is something I have seen in practice, a fault with a panel can mean that the lights enter a dimmed setting without being commanded to do so. IIRC this lighting error can only happen if the train thinks the panel is active. Conductor panels do become active from time to time without this being commanded. Whilst the panel wiring on Electrostars is less complicated than on Turbostars (the functionality of which can really be quite "interesting"), it is still quite complicated. To give a handful of irrelevant but hopefully illuminating examples, the CACUs (Combined Audio Communications Units) in the cabs combine with the panel handsets to create a very useful internal telephone network, then there's the interaction of the PIS, the wiring of the key switch and the bell controls being linked, etc. etc. etc. In particular, if anything goes wrong with the key switch or any sort of failsafe device, it can have some very strange effects on panel performance.

(I once ended up on a 12 coach 377 which had unusually dimmed lighting despite nobody having asked the train to do that - it turned out that one of the 3 units somehow needed the "dim lights" button to be reset at one of the panels. After a lot of trial and error with different MCBs and buttons, the problem was eventually resolved!)

So it may well not have been anything too sinister, but I should imagine it was very annoying for the driver and would have been reported to Fleet ASAP!

A live panel despite no key on? I'd be leaving that where it is out of service. I'd rather my passengers didn't have control of the doors, those locks aren't exactly secure.

 

[westcoaster]

387's are in DOO activated mode automatically, so doubt that will be the issue.

 

[tsr]

A live panel despite no key on? I'd be leaving that where it is out of service. I'd rather my passengers didn't have control of the doors, those locks aren't exactly secure.

To be honest it's a bit more complex than that. Depends on the stock but Bombardier trains in general do have quirks. Panels can be live on Turbostars with no key on, eg. adjacent panels in the same coach on a 171. On Electrostars the panel controls can definitely be live without a key on - obviously a fault but I've found it at least three times. In addition you can use the starter bell with the key off in the first few seconds after the associated local door has closed, which is a design feature not a fault.

I've never been told to take a train out of service due to a fault with a single panel. Multiple ones will be a different matter, and likewise if controls are live but insecure through lack of a lockable door. To the best of my knowledge there are no door release controls on Electrostars which can be left active without a key of some description, as the door panels don't have those, so you're unlikely to be able to break interlock without doing something else.

387's are in DOO activated mode automatically, so doubt that will be the issue.

Panels may be used by conductors by insertion of the relevant key. No provision has been made in the instructions for conductors about the panels on 387s not being able to be used at certain times. If conductors are to operate the train then they would have to be briefed if an active panel, in error or otherwise, could interfere with operation - DOO services can be picked up by conductors and worked from intermediate stops, eg. Gatwick / Dorking / Leatherhead / Selhurst / East Croydon. No traction knowledge requirements have changed from 377s, where an active panel can only interfere with operations when it selects a local door for dispatch. Therefore it is to be assumed that faults and failures can occur with the panels at any point.

 

[the sniper]

I'd say that serious panel issues on Electrostars are rare - the worst that usually happens is PA handset feedback or a door close button which doesn't work on every attempt. Mostly they're pretty reliable. The "dim lights" button is really for ECS moves but can also be used to flash the internal lights to try to wake up sleepy travellers at the end of a journey. You can use it whenever you want to, really! Turbostars indeed don't have it, and the reason is presumably because if it was activated then it could interfere with observing the lights in a coach to check that a unit is crossfeeding if an engine's out.

Ah gotcha, I assumed that'd be the case. I used to sometimes completely turn off the lights from the cab to stop people boarding stock I was attempting to lock up, but gave up on it as the downsides were that some people would just get on into the darkness anyway (:roll and having the lights off made it harder to check the train was empty.