Class 710 LO

[332 > 444]

And there's people that complain as to why trains build awards aren't simply given to Bombardier anymore and get given to overseas manufacturers.....

But, also Bombardier was still building 387s and still is building 345s.

 

[matthewmacleod]

While it's definitely frustrating for those of us that need to use the GOBLIN, some of the reactions seem a bit disproportionate. Ultimately, things do go wrong and schedules slip, and the focus should generally be on trying to solve those issues quickly and with a minimum fuss. That said, it would definitely be nice if public communication on this was a bit more frequent and open. All I'm aware of is that "some problems" have arisen and mileage accumulation is suspended – and even that took a lot of trawling to find out. Honest public communication would probably go a long way towards making people feel better.

 

[samuelmorris]

And there's people that complain as to why trains build awards aren't simply given to Bombardier anymore and get given to overseas manufacturers.....

But, also Bombardier was still building 387s and still is building 345s.

Given the difficulties with the introduction of the 800/802s, 385s and 700s, I'm not sure that argument has much merit to be honest. The real counterpoint to the 'Bombardier because UK' discussion is the fact that Bombardier is really a Canadian company assembling trains with European components (Germany and Sweden in many cases I think?). I'm sure I read somewhere that the proportion of UK components in 700s is actually larger than Electrostars. Likewise the 802s built in Italy are full of UK sourced components. It's a null argument, I wish it wouldn't keep coming up!

As far as the reactions go, the travelling public do like to over-react about things. Look at the twitter for any TOC during minor disruption like a singular cancellation from a missing driver. It's appalling what customer service staff have to read / put up with.

 

[superkev]

One does wonder why quality assurance is so bad for software on trains (as @samuelmorris mentioned, the Desiro Cities certainly weren't immune from this in the early days either), especially compared with what can be achieved by aeroplane manufacturers.

The world's most expensive warplane the f35 lightning2 has been dogged with software issues including a few groundings and at least one crash so it's not fair to say all's sweetness and light in the aerospace industry.
K

 

[87015]

While it's definitely frustrating for those of us that need to use the GOBLIN, some of the reactions seem a bit disproportionate. Ultimately, things do go wrong and schedules slip, and the focus should generally be on trying to solve those issues quickly and with a minimum fuss. That said, it would definitely be nice if public communication on this was a bit more frequent and open. All I'm aware of is that "some problems" have arisen and mileage accumulation is suspended – and even that took a lot of trawling to find out. Honest public communication would probably go a long way towards making people feel better.

Please stop listening to the guesswork. There’s been no sudden stop to “mileage accumulation”

 

[Darandio]

The world's most expensive warplane the f35 lightning2 has been dogged with software issues including a few groundings and at least one crash so it's not fair to say all's sweetness and light in the aerospace industry.
K

Wasn't the 737 crash earlier this week a brand new aeroplane as well? I'm not sure if the investigation has established any causes yet, but you are correct, it's not always a bed of roses in aviation.

 

[HLE]

And there's people that complain as to why trains build awards aren't simply given to Bombardier anymore and get given to overseas manufacturers.....

But, also Bombardier was still building 387s and still is building 345s.

The second part is the interesting bit for me. Why not build some more electrostars if (excuse the ignorance) they’re the same length and would be easy enough to clear over the route. Again, they’re a type of unit design that’s proved itself over the years, and still looks modern. If the interior layout needs to be different then so be it.

 

[AlexNL]

Why not build some more electrostars

The design is no longer compliant with the latest regulations. The last orders for 387s were placed before the new regulations came into force, so could be build.

Bombardier didn't want to adjust the Electrostar design to be compliant with the new regulations, as they already had the Aventra platform in the works.

 

[BlyRF]

What I can’t understand is if they are still having issues tailoring the new train software, then why can’t they just adapt to the electrostar software used in the 345 till the original new software is ready .

When i say this i mean, they could reserve one or two units for testing purposes while getting the rest in service on the Goblin ASAP.

 

[greatkingrat]

Please stop listening to the guesswork. There’s been no sudden stop to “mileage accumulation”

The last run was on the night of 27th October. Nothing has run since then.

 

[Bald Rick]

What I can’t understand is if they are still having issues tailoring the new train software, then why can’t they just adapt to the electrostar software used in the 345 till the original new software is ready .

Same reason that is you buy a new laptop, you won’t run Windows ‘95 on it.

 

[MCR247]

What I can’t understand is if they are still having issues tailoring the new train software, then why can’t they just adapt to the electrostar software used in the 345 till the original new software is ready .

When i say this i mean, they could reserve one or two units for testing purposes while getting the rest in service on the Goblin ASAP.

Well 345s and 710s are quite different. In fact I don't think 345s even have on board DOO cameras for a start (or at least I can't see any on pictures)

 

[swt_passenger]

Well 345s and 710s are quite different. In fact I don't think 345s even have on board DOO cameras for a start (or at least I can't see any on pictures)

They don’t, because of the platform edge doors. 345s have cab monitors for platform mounted cameras, like a few LU lines. Mentioned many times previously.

 

[samuelmorris]

But something they also had extensive trouble with, that really should be more difficult than an integrated camera system where they're built into the train.

 

[railfanatic]

A cheeky photo from some testing I did on the 710.

 

[TRAX]

Cheeky cheeky, I like that screen.

 

[700007]

A cheeky photo from some testing I did on the 710.

Don't tease us like that!

 

[K.o.R]

The design is no longer compliant with the latest regulations.

Clearly the answer is stop changing the bloody regulations!

Tell me that a Pendolino that managed to survive a derailment down a bank at nearly 100mph is no longer good enough and I would laugh if it wasn't so sad.

 

[Mikey C]

A cheeky photo from some testing I did on the 710.

Much nicer interior than the 378s, no window pockets blocking visibility or destination blind boxes intruding just where my head wants to go!

 

[AlexNL]

Clearly the answer is stop changing the bloody regulations!

Tell me that a Pendolino that managed to survive a derailment down a bank at nearly 100mph is no longer good enough and I would laugh if it wasn't so sad.

This is what was left of a Stadler GTW (built 2010-2012) after hitting a lorry on a level crossing:

The train driver died.

Similar crashes with FLIRT3 trains showed way less damage, because the FLIRT3 meets the tighter crash regulations while the GTW does not.

 

[K.o.R]

This is what was left of a Stadler GTW (built 2010-2012) after hitting a lorry on a level crossing:

The train driver died.

Similar crashes with FLIRT3 trains showed way less damage, because the FLIRT3 meets the tighter crash regulations while the GTW does not.

But presumably it met the crashworthiness regulations when it was built? Doesn't that include slamming them into various things? You may as well say that every train built to even recent standards is in fact a deathtrap.

Regarding the picture: I'm not a crash expert, but that train seems to be pretty much intact, except for the cab (which does, unfortunately, tend to be a crumple zone).

Changing the regulations to remove level crossings would probably make a difference.

 

[matthewmacleod]

Please stop listening to the guesswork. There’s been no sudden stop to “mileage accumulation”

Well, that's kind of the point – there'd be a lot less "listening to guesswork" if we did have a good source for finding out what was going on!

 

[Class37.4]

Clearly the answer is stop changing the bloody regulations!

Tell me that a Pendolino that managed to survive a derailment down a bank at nearly 100mph is no longer good enough and I would laugh if it wasn't so sad.

Ridiculous regulation need to evolve in the light of experience and development.

Perhaps you would also have liked road vehicles not to have developed safety wise from the 1960’s where the chance of serious injury in a car accident was much higher than today with all the modern safety design and equipment that’s been developed over the years.

In any case Bombardier needed to move on from Electrostar and offer a newer lightweight and more flexible design to compete with other manufacturers.

 

[Class37.4]

deleted

 

[NotATrainspott]

But presumably it met the crashworthiness regulations when it was built? Doesn't that include slamming them into various things? You may as well say that every train built to even recent standards is in fact a deathtrap.

Regarding the picture: I'm not a crash expert, but that train seems to be pretty much intact, except for the cab (which does, unfortunately, tend to be a crumple zone).

Changing the regulations to remove level crossings would probably make a difference.

The most recent regulations have been mostly about improving cab safety because it's now the most likely place for someone to die in a train crash. There's a long tail of rail fatalities which aren't trivially solvable by things like minimally enhanced signalling, or even getting rid of level crossings. For all the level crossing incidents you might solve by closing them, there will be other incidents like trees on the line or maintenance procedures gone wrong which could also easily be fatal if the cab isn't strong enough to survive them. Fix the cab and most of the on-train danger from all of these incident types goes away. As far as I'm aware the regulations cover things like glass strength - there have been driver fatalities caused by bricks or rocks being thrown at trains which no amount of safety regulation will ever really stop.

 

[K.o.R]

The most recent regulations have been mostly about improving cab safety because it's now the most likely place for someone to die in a train crash. There's a long tail of rail fatalities which aren't trivially solvable by things like minimally enhanced signalling, or even getting rid of level crossings. For all the level crossing incidents you might solve by closing them, there will be other incidents like trees on the line or maintenance procedures gone wrong which could also easily be fatal if the cab isn't strong enough to survive them. Fix the cab and most of the on-train danger from all of these incident types goes away. As far as I'm aware the regulations cover things like glass strength - there have been driver fatalities caused by bricks or rocks being thrown at trains which no amount of safety regulation will ever really stop.

Hmm, so if you change the cab so it is effectively not a crumple zone, that's good for the driver, but does that mean it's at the cost of more damage to the other party in the crash? Obviously you have to draw a line somewhere, and (other than another train) it is probably the thing that is in the wrong place.

 

[plcd1]

Please stop listening to the guesswork. There’s been no sudden stop to “mileage accumulation”

Are you able to say what has happened then? In the absence of any commentary, guesswork and speculation is all that is left. Given the huge delays to these trains it is no wonder people are, perhaps, a tad fed up.

 

[Peter Sarf]

Are you able to say what has happened then? In the absence of any commentary, guesswork and speculation is all that is left. Given the huge delays to these trains it is no wonder people are, perhaps, a tad fed up.

I have even watched morale in a company get destroyed by lack of information from the Directors above. People turned to guess work aka the rumor mill. Trouble is with so much effort going into rumours eventually some rumours will be found to be correct. That further undermines the upper management as they no longer are seen as a source of information. Communication is a must otherwise brace yourself for contempt. [/rant]

 

[700007]

Interestingly Abellio provide a rail replacement bus service every morning from St James's Street to Leytonstone High Road during the peak following the London Overground. These carry air about as they are unadvertised.

 

[superkev]

The most recent regulations have been mostly about improving cab safety because it's now the most likely place for someone to die in a train crash. There's a long tail of rail fatalities which aren't trivially solvable by things like minimally enhanced signalling, or even getting rid of level crossings. For all the level crossing incidents you might solve by closing them, there will be other incidents like trees on the line or maintenance procedures gone wrong which could also easily be fatal if the cab isn't strong enough to survive them. Fix the cab and most of the on-train danger from all of these incident types goes away. As far as I'm aware the regulations cover things like glass strength - there have been driver fatalities caused by bricks or rocks being thrown at trains which no amount of safety regulation will ever really stop.

Personal view is that the rail safety Taliban need there terms of reference rewriting to take into account the higher risk to passengers who move to other form of transport due to there actions.
To take things to extremes im sure armoured trains would be very safe but the public would take to there cars and be less safe.
K