LO Class 172?

[Simon Poole]

Where the London Overground 172 at the moment? is it stored or still going through tests?

 

[Voyager 2093]

No Need for a new thread - But the new LOROL Class 172 (172 001) is undergoing tests on the WCML and MML more recently. It is currently based at Willesden Junction Depot.

 

[DjU]

No Need for a new thread - But the new LOROL Class 172 (172 001) is undergoing tests on the WCML and MML more recently. It is currently based at Willesden Junction Depot.

172 001 went back to Derby a good 10 days ago.

 

[313103]

Roumour has it that the exhaust fumes were being sucked into the air con unit therefore creating an unhealthy enviroment inside the train. The unit is now back at Bombardier.

 

[Voyager 2093]

Thats not good at all and thanks for the correction you guys!

 

[dan123]

do you know a date when the first one will be in service

 

[WatcherZero]

Sucking in Carbon Dioxide, dont know whether thats better or worse than sucking in the smells from waste disposal like a certain earlier class, At least you would die from a more pleasent smell :P

 

[dan123]

so how long could it take to fix the problem

 

[Voyager 2093]

It could take days or weeks. But then after the problem is fixed it would have to undergo testing again which could take a while.

 

[westcoaster]

there was a class 172 in wellingborough yard about 1300.

 

[thefab444]

Roumour has it that the exhaust fumes were being sucked into the air con unit therefore creating an unhealthy enviroment inside the train. The unit is now back at Bombardier.

And people really do complain when TOCs order from Siemens as the trains aren't built in the UK... With Bombardier it seems to be minor technical niggle after minor technical niggle, with a good few major problems thrown in for good measure.

 

[dan123]

did they fix the problem where they couldnt get near to top speed because i heard they couldnt get there

 

[ukrob]

It could take days or weeks. But then after the problem is fixed it would have to undergo testing again which could take a while.

Or five minutes during the design stages. But that would be far too easy.

 

[Voyager 2093]

Does anyone get the sense Trains are being made using more and more financial shortcuts?

 

[Wyvern]

And people really do complain when TOCs order from Siemens as the trains aren't built in the UK... With Bombardier it seems to be minor technical niggle after minor technical niggle, with a good few major problems thrown in for good measure.

I seem to remember Siemens had no end of trouble at the beginning.

Having said that, how different is a 172 from a 170?

 

[devon_metro]

Having said that, how different is a 172 from a 170?

Quite different actually; different bogies, transmissions, different exhaust layout, different windows etc

 

[ChrisCooper]

I think in some ways it would be easier to say how similar a 172 is to a 170. They have roughly the same shape, are pretty similar from the back of the cab door forwards, and are built by the same company. Oh and they are built to be compatable for multiple working. Other than that they really are as close to each other as a 170 and a 377.

 

[Drsatan]

And people really do complain when TOCs order from Siemens as the trains aren't built in the UK... With Bombardier it seems to be minor technical niggle after minor technical niggle, with a good few major problems thrown in for good measure.

The Voyagers built by Bombardier also had air conditioning problems. Fumes from the toilets entered the air conditioning units and were released into the passenger saloon, which is why the interiors always smelt of ****. That problem seems to have been fixed now though.

 

[Wyvern]

Quite different actually; different bogies, transmissions, different exhaust layout, different windows etc

So what was wrong with the 170/171?

 

[starrymarkb]

So what was wrong with the 170/171?

The early models had no end of problems... Certainly Scotrail's took a while to come on stream

Reliability was one reason why SWT swapped their units for 159/1s. Their 170s were getting about 7000mpc, the 159/0s were around 27000mpc (from Roger Ford's Golden Spanners 2006/2007 IIRC)

 

[Wyvern]

So having ironed out the teething problems, we have laid ourselves open to a whole new crop? :?

 

[jopsuk]

So what was wrong with the 170/171?

The 172s are I belive lighter and more efficient. Might as well say "What was wrong with the 168/1 & 2?".

 

[Drsatan]

Reliability was one reason why SWT swapped their units for 159/1s. Their 170s were getting about 7000mpc, the 159/0s were around 27000mpc (from Roger Ford's Golden Spanners 2006/2007 IIRC)

When I was on work experience with SWT in 2006 I got talking to someone who worked at Salisbury depot who told me that SWT wanted to hand back their 170s because of difficulties in maintaining them. The engines, traction motors and transmission are integrated into one module which spans 3/4 the length of each driving car. Whenever one of the components fails, the module has to be removed and a replacement ordered from a plant in Germany; until the replacement arrives the unit has to be taken out of service. Storing spare modules wasn't possible at Salisbury depot due to their size.

SWT ordered the 170s to operate Waterloo-Exeter services but because they were too wide to operate west of Salisbury they were used on Waterloo-Salisbury stoppers, Reading - Brighton trains (scrapped since 2007) and Romsey - Totton services.

The 172s use B5005 bogies - the same bogies Voyagers use. Consequently the 172s have a lower axle load than 170s

 

[starrymarkb]

SWT ordered the 170s to operate Waterloo-Exeter services but because they were too wide to operate west of Salisbury they were used on Waterloo-Salisbury stoppers, Reading - Brighton trains (scrapped since 2007) and Romsey - Totton services.

They did make it to Exeter on occasion so no clearence issues, presume their lack of gangways for the catering trolley (and possibly SDO) was a more likely cause

 

[tbtc]

Sorry for going off topic, but I'm sure having a "common" fleet was a reason for SWT getting some 158s to go with their "similar" 159s (certainly more similar than 170s, before we get into an argument about the differences)

 

[Old Hill Bank]

"Traction Motors" that's interesting, dont think they have any of those!!!

 

[Drsatan]

"Traction Motors" that's interesting, dont think they have any of those!!!

Dunno, could be generators instead.

 

[thefab444]

They did make it to Exeter on occasion so no clearence issues, presume their lack of gangways for the catering trolley (and possibly SDO) was a more likely cause

Yeah, that's the main reason they were quite rare west of Salisbury, although they were booked as far as Yeovil Junction.

 

[313103]

To bring us back to the subject matter 172 004 is on shed at Willesden. It is doing mileage accumulation at the moment.

 

[Voyager 2093]

Yeah I saw it today stabled with some 378s. I also saw a 378 in the Bay platforms at Willesden Junction. I'll upload the shots later.