Could TPE ditch the Mk5 sets?

[Ben Bow]

I see from the latest New Trains Watch in Modern Railways magazine this month that the Nova 3 sets have hit a new low of just over 3,000 miles per casualty. In the same period GWR's class 143 pacers managed over 40,000 mpc. Recently there have been more problems with failures resulting in 185's covering. TPE must be getting close to pulling the plug, surely, the problems just seem to be never ending. It will soon be 5 years since the mk. 5's were ordered from CAF, and some sets have never worked a revenue earning service, I'm not even sure all sets have been accepted yet? Interesting that they are now largely confined to the York to Scarborough branch. Its a real shame that the rolling stock manufacturer has let down TPE so badly, the concept was certainly sound.

 

[darylyates17]

I see from the latest New Trains Watch in Modern Railways magazine this month that the Nova 3 sets have hit a new low of just over 3,000 miles per casualty. In the same period GWR's class 143 pacers managed over 40,000 mpc. Recently there have been more problems with failures resulting in 185's covering. TPE must be getting close to pulling the plug, surely, the problems just seem to be never ending. It will soon be 5 years since the mk. 5's were ordered from CAF, and some sets have never worked a revenue earning service, I'm not even sure all sets have been accepted yet? Interesting that they are now largely confined to the York to Scarborough branch. Its a real shame that the rolling stock manufacturer has let down TPE so badly, the concept was certainly sound.

If TPE was to abandon the Mk5 sets which I dont think will happen Im guessing they'd order additional 802s (which I think they should have done in the first place)

 

[Bletchleyite]

If TPE was to abandon the Mk5 sets which I dont think will happen Im guessing they'd order additional 802s (which I think they should have done in the first place)

Or seek to retain all the 185s? Wouldn't be a major problem to continue operating Liverpool-Nottingham with double 158s for at least another 5-10 years, they're reliable enough and passengers like them. And nobody else really wants 185s.

== Doublepost prevention - post automatically merged: 17 Dec 2020 ==

I see from the latest New Trains Watch in Modern Railways magazine this month that the Nova 3 sets have hit a new low of just over 3,000 miles per casualty

Seriously, how can something so simple as a rake of LHCS be that bad? CAF really have a lot to answer for here, they really should be superbly reliable because they're just "dumb" LHCS hauled by a proven, established design of locomotive.

Will be a shame if they are dumped, because the First Class really is very special even if Standard is a bit rubbish. But I would totally understand if they were. Cheap as...

 

[najaB]

CAF really have a lot to answer for here, they really should be superbly reliable because they're just "dumb" LHCS hauled by a proven, established design of locomotive.

Other than build issues, the most likely reason is that they aren't "dumb" but rather have buggy software that's causing then to go into fault mode too often.

 

[Bletchleyite]

Other than build issues, the most likely reason is that they aren't "dumb" but rather have buggy software that's causing then to go into fault mode too often.

Are they mostly software issues, then?

 

[najaB]

Are they mostly software issues, then?

I have no idea, just throwing the idea out there as it's surprising how many products (both big and small) have embedded systems, and bad software can cripple them as a result.

 

[Bletchleyite]

I have no idea, just throwing the idea out there as it's surprising how many products (both big and small) have embedded systems, and bad software can cripple them as a result.

True. I seem to recall that most of the Caledonian Sleeper Mk5 issues were related to poor build quality rather than software, though, so I guess these are likely the same?

 

[sjpowermac]

Or seek to retain all the 185s? Wouldn't be a major problem to continue operating Liverpool-Nottingham with double 158s for at least another 5-10 years, they're reliable enough and passengers like them. And nobody else really wants 185s.

== Doublepost prevention - post automatically merged: 17 Dec 2020 ==



Seriously, how can something so simple as a rake of LHCS be that bad? CAF really have a lot to answer for here, they really should be superbly reliable because they're just "dumb" LHCS hauled by a proven, established design of locomotive.

Will be a shame if they are dumped, because the First Class really is very special even if Standard is a bit rubbish. But I would totally understand if they were. Cheap as...

I made the mistake of thinking that early on in this thread but was quite rightly corrected.

There’s quite a bit of CAF kit in the cab of the Class 68 and as with all new trains the Train Management System is the thing that’s hard to get right. As I understand it, there have been other problems too.

I think a big part of the problem is that despite the length of time the stock has been in service, they have accrued a relatively low fleet mileage due to the small number of sets in daily service.

There are a small number of sets in daily service because training on Nova 1 and 2 was prioritised in Autumn/Winter 2019/20 in order to meet franchise commitments. Then we have had a global pandemic that I don’t think has helped with crew training.

As to some sets still not being accepted, as I understand it, acceptance trials were halted during the first lockdown. They restarted (I think) at the end of the summer. I’ve no idea what’s now holding things up but if I were running TPE and I already had 10 sets for 3 diagrams, then I wouldn’t be in a rush to accept more

== Doublepost prevention - post automatically merged: 17 Dec 2020 ==

If TPE was to abandon the Mk5 sets which I dont think will happen Im guessing they'd order additional 802s (which I think they should have done in the first place)

Something that’s often forgotten is that 802s are actually very expensive trains.

 

[BeHereNow]

It is almost as if Transpennine, after winning the bid, realised how complicated all this would be.... delayed the introduction of Mk5As... then refused to accept all of them... and were hoping that the Department would pay for more Hitachis as part of a new and extended franchise?

== Doublepost prevention - post automatically merged: 17 Dec 2020 ==

 

[Bletchleyite]

It is almost as if Transpennine, after winning the bid, realised how complicated all this would be.... delayed the introduction of Mk5As... then refused to accept all of them... and were hoping that the Department would pay for more Hitachis as part of a new and extended franchise?

More Hitachis would be great, but I can't see the DaFT splashing cash at the moment! If they get binned it'll be 185s or service cuts.

 

[Bletchleyite]

Something that’s often forgotten is that 802s are actually very expensive trains.

You get, as they say, what you pay for.

 

[43096]

You get, as they say, what you pay for.

Actually, you don't in the case of the Hitachi 80x. Pay a lot for a train with **** seats and appalling ride quality.

 

[Jamesrob637]

Or seek to retain all the 185s?

Can't do all promised 6-car on a full timetable. Could just get away with it on the current slightly reduced frequencies but the margin for failures would be virtually zero.

 

[Bletchleyite]

Actually, you don't in the case of the Hitachi 80x. Pay a lot for a train with **** seats and appalling ride quality.

A train is not defined by what seats you put in it; the Mk5s have the same ones (in Standard).

 

[43096]

A train is not defined by what seats you put in it; the Mk5s have the same ones (in Standard).

It is part of what defines a train, as they are a significant part of the customer experience.

I note you ignore the point about ride quality.

 

[Bald Rick]

If TPE was to abandon the Mk5 sets which I dont think will happen Im guessing they'd order additional 802s (which I think they should have done in the first place)

Or seek to retain all the 185s?

Or reduce services. I know where my money is.

 

[Bletchleyite]

It is part of what defines a train, as they are a significant part of the customer experience.

I note you ignore the point about ride quality.

CAF ride quality is rubbish as well, to be fair. Though I don't think they are actually that bad, they feel very much like a Desiro overall, which isn't exactly the king of good ride but isn't that bad either.

There are only really 3 things I don't like about them:
1. Window alignment in Standard (but the Mk5s are as bad if not worse)
2. Fainsa Sophias (but the Mk5s also have those)
3. Not being low floor (but only Stadler offer that, and they are not cheap either)

 

[YorksLad12]

Is it Thursday? We usually get a new thread about the Mk5a sets on Thursday.

 

[JonathanH]

Can't do all promised 6-car on a full timetable. Could just get away with it on the current slightly reduced frequencies but the margin for failures would be virtually zero.

Splitting Redcar trains at York with 3-car northwards might help save a unit or two as of course would ditching the Airport extensions.

 

[randyrippley]

Just wondering.....whats the chances the "faults" are actually creative art in a ploy to indulge in post-contract price renegotiation and a claim for liquidated damages?

 

[Bletchleyite]

Splitting Redcar trains at York with 3-car northwards might help save a unit or two as of course would ditching the Airport extensions.

Yep, do that, and ditch the Ordsall Chord service too, with Northern running it as part of a local service of some sort instead (given that digging the whole sorry thing up is unlikely to be considered as an option).

Flying is going to be considerably reduced for a period of time (possibly for good) anyway.

 

[samuelmorris]

Actually, you don't in the case of the Hitachi 80x. Pay a lot for a train with **** seats and appalling ride quality.

I'm not convinced the build quality of the 802s is all that wonderful either. Premium price, but average product. There's far worse out there but the AT300, at least not the European-manufactured examples, is not a benchmark of quality. The 395s felt considerably better made, as do most Siemens products to me, even if they aren't necessarily specified well (though that is a problem that also plagues the AT300). There'll be way too much sunk cost in the Mk5s, given how many years' grace other problematic fleets were given in the past, combine that with Covid as an adequate excuse, I expect they will persevere with the Mk5s for a while yet. 3000 MTIN may be terrible, but it's not too different from what most other new fleets are achieving, aside from the Desiro City family and the 385s.

 

[Bletchleyite]

The 395s felt considerably better made, as do most Siemens products to me, even if they aren't necessarily specified well (though that is a problem that also plagues the AT300)

I'm sure I recall reading somewhere that Siemens were quite taken aback by how basic the spec of the 185 was for a long distance unit when they were ordered. Though it hasn't taken much tarting up of the interior to make them look really quite posh.

 

[samuelmorris]

I'm sure I recall reading somewhere that Siemens were quite taken aback by how basic the spec of the 185 was for a long distance unit when they were ordered. Though it hasn't taken much tarting up of the interior to make them look really quite posh.

In all honesty, apart from that it's wasteful (and can potentially problematic for paths) to run them under the wires, I maintain the 185s post-refurbishment (and even beforehand they weren't terrible) are excellent units for TPE. There just needed to be more of them. from the start. I'm glad they're not going away as, other than perhaps the quietness of not sitting above an engine, it's hard to feel Mk5s, or even 802s are much of an upgrade.

 

[Purple Orange]

I’m not surprised this thread has descended into moaning about the 80X units.

They are a good train and are popular with passengers. The moaning is almost always linked to a desire to see Mk3s return, which was a **** train by modern standards. Old isn’t always best

 

[samuelmorris]

I’m not surprised this thread has descended into moaning about the 80X units.

They are a good train and are popular with passengers. The moaning is almost always linked to a desire to see Mk3s return, which was a **** train by modern standards. Old isn’t always best

Not in this case, and your point of view is just as much an opinion as anyone else's. I do happen to believe the 80x to offer a superior experience to the HST, just not by very much. In the case of TPE, the Mk3 argument is not relevant.

 

[Bald Rick]

I’ve just realised this is about the Nova 3s, which now completes the set of rumours: I’ve heard rumours over the past 6 months that each of the Nova 1, 2 and 3 sets were going to be ‘sent back’.

 

[Bletchleyite]

I’ve just realised this is about the Nova 3s, which now completes the set of rumours: I’ve heard rumours over the past 6 months that each of the Nova 1, 2 and 3 sets were going to be ‘sent back’.

Even if they are "sent back", they will be fixed and will see service again, I'd expect, even if that's not for TPE. They're too expensive to just scrap them. The ultimate "rubbish train", the NS Fyra EMUs (which were far more rubbish than the Mk5as will ever be), have entered service for FS now.

 

[Energy]

There's far worse out there but the AT300, at least not the European-manufactured examples, is not a benchmark of quality. The 395s felt considerably better made, as do most Siemens products to me, even if they aren't necessarily specified well (though that is a problem that also plagues the AT300)

A lot is to do from where they came from, Hitachi Italy has a reputation for questionable build quality, Newton Aycliffe (and Derby...) don't have a too great reputation either.

The ultimate "rubbish train", the NS Fyra EMUs, have entered service for FS now.

Interestingly these were built at Hitachi Italy (when owned by AnsaldoBreda)

 

[Bletchleyite]

A lot is to do from where they came from, Hitachi Italy has a reputation for questionable build quality, Newton Aycliffe (and Derby...) don't have a too great reputation either.

What's interesting there is that the build quality of the Class 170 is often criticised and always was, and they certainly have a lot of rattles and it took many years for the internal doors to be made to actually work, but they do seem to keep moving as reliably as a 158, and the aircon works most of the time.

I think there's a difference between slightly rough riding and a bit rattly and cheap (class 195/331 and 397) and plain not working reliably.

Though the superb build quality of the 185s does rather put the lot to shame even if ride quality isn't Siemens' best point. So good that even 750hp under each coach fails to rattle them to bits.