Northern Class 195: Construction/Introduction Updates

[driver_m]

Not the Manchester S-Bahn again! I'm sure the Magical Manchester Mayor Money Tree can be shaken to give them not only the most extensive light railway in the North, but an S, U and even Z Hahn if Greater Manchester so wishes. But in the meantime if you don't mind Northern can spread new units across all of its network, not just Manchester...

+1. Sick of that bloody bahn word as if it's the answer to all our problems. Even DB can't run a well organised railway at the moment. So maybe it's best to give it a rest and try and solve our problems our way.

 

[LittleAH]

Ta
I imagine that word had yet to make it to my contact by the time I spoke to them.

On the Northern front, did a bit of research on my lunch break. Their line is

You do realise Northern and TPE are separate entities?

 

[Mathew S]

You do realise Northern and TPE are separate entities?

Yes. I'm not sure what wasn't clear, but I spoke to a contact at TPE:

I've spoken to TPE this morning, who have said that they, "can confirm that [their] trains are still undergoing testing so this isn’t the case."
Still looking into the Northern side of things but will try to update as and when...

And then to another contact at Northern:

On the Northern front, did a bit of research on my lunch break. Their line is...

I even wrote a report on it for the radio... though oddly enough it was rather overshadowed by other events this afternoon

I don't think the duff information from TPE was in any way intended, by the way, just that at the time when I got in touch with my contact to ask the question they genuinely hadn't heard there was anything up.

 

[83G/84D]

195103, 195107, 195113 & 331107 are in the sidings at Blackpool North this afternoon.

 

[Shaw S Hunter]

195103, 195107, 195113 & 331107 are in the sidings at Blackpool North this afternoon.

At least 195103, 195113 and 331107 are still there today; it's quite possible I missed 195107 if it's behind the other 195s. Assuming they haven't moved in over a week it does rather suggest that with the ongoing problems both with the units themselves and the training programme that Northern is having to effectively store some of them "out of use" wherever there is suitable space. I'm sure the public will be delighted to learn of "shiny" new trains sitting around while the Pacers soldier on.

 

[PR1Berske]

I'm sure the public will be delighted to learn of "shiny" new trains sitting around while the Pacers soldier on

We're used to not getting what we're promises up here, it's reet.

 

[Eccles1983]

We're used to not getting what we're promises up here, it's reet.

It's out of northerns hands. Completely.

The intermediate couplers are causing a pretty bad problem, that left unattended to could have serious consequences.

 

[83G/84D]

At least 195103, 195113 and 331107 are still there today; it's quite possible I missed 195107 if it's behind the other 195s. Assuming they haven't moved in over a week it does rather suggest that with the ongoing problems both with the units themselves and the training programme that Northern is having to effectively store some of them "out of use" wherever there is suitable space. I'm sure the public will be delighted to learn of "shiny" new trains sitting around while the Pacers soldier on.

Several 195 units at Edge Hill last Monday.

 

[anamyd]

It's out of northerns hands. Completely.

The intermediate couplers are causing a pretty bad problem, that left unattended to could have serious consequences.

what is the exact problem with them...?

 

[Bletchleyite]

what is the exact problem with them...?

I'm going to hazard a guess that they may become uncoupled unexpectedly, that being the main issue one could have with a coupler.

 

[anamyd]

I'm going to hazard a guess that they may become uncoupled unexpectedly, that being the main issue one could have with a coupler.

ah yes, that wouldn't be ideal. Hopefully a fix is found soon!

 

[Mathew S]

what is the exact problem with them...?

The exact nature of the problem is not being talked about openly by Northern/CAF/TPE, or those who work for them. Given that it's been seriouss enough to stop testing altogether, though, I'd say @Bletchleyite is probably right.

 

[Llama]

The current Rail magazine has mentioned the issue, that the intermediate bar couplers make contact with the headstocks on the vehicle ends at the limits of their movement as the units negotiate tight rafius curves/crossovers etc. This would obviously put severe stress on the coupler mounts, and the fasteners at the outer ends of the couplers keeping the vehicles attached to each other. Units were found to have been at risk of dividing and of course it is possible that the lateral forces on the vehicles as the couplers foul them on tight radii could lead to derailment.

 

[Bletchleyite]

The current Rail magazine has mentioned the issue, that the intermediate bar couplers make contact with the headstocks on the vehicle ends at the limits of their movement as the units negotiate tight rafius curves/crossovers etc. This would obviously put severe stress on the coupler mounts, and the fasteners at the outer ends of the couplers keeping the vehicles attached to each other. Units were found to have been at risk of dividing and of course it is possible that the lateral forces on the vehicles as the couplers foul them on tight radii could lead to derailment.

Wow, even more serious than I thought. That'll cost a bob or two to fix.

 

[Mathew S]

The current Rail magazine has mentioned the issue, that the intermediate bar couplers make contact with the headstocks on the vehicle ends at the limits of their movement as the units negotiate tight rafius curves/crossovers etc. This would obviously put severe stress on the coupler mounts, and the fasteners at the outer ends of the couplers keeping the vehicles attached to each other. Units were found to have been at risk of dividing and of course it is possible that the lateral forces on the vehicles as the couplers foul them on tight radii could lead to derailment.

Yikes. That's one hell of a design screw up.

 

[Bletchleyite]

Yikes. That's one hell of a design screw up.

It's at the same sort of level as a certain aeroplane that's in the news at the minute...no scope to bodge it with a poorly-written piece of software, though.

(tuts) that's going to cost.

 

[Bantamzen]

It's at the same sort of level as a certain aeroplane that's in the news at the minute...no scope to bodge it with a poorly-written piece of software, though.

(tuts) that's going to cost.

As serious as the issue may be, I think it may be stretching it to compare it with the 737-Max where the computer system can literally get into a fight with the pilots & potentially send the plane into the ground at 500mph.

 

[Bletchleyite]

As serious as the issue may be, I think it may be stretching it to compare it with the 737-Max where the computer system can literally get into a fight with the pilots & potentially send the plane into the ground at 500mph.

I was referring more to having inadvertently designed something that physically doesn't do what it was meant to do - a coupler that doesn't work for the specified curve radius, or a plane that stalls when it isn't meant to due to not having the intended aerodynamics.

The botched piece of software, intended to solve the "stalling when it shouldn't" issue, which is what actually killed people, is indeed in a totally different league.

 

[Bantamzen]

I was referring more to having inadvertently designed something that physically doesn't do what it was meant to do - a coupler that doesn't work for the specified curve radius, or a plane that stalls when it isn't meant to due to not having the intended aerodynamics.

The botched piece of software, intended to solve the "stalling when it shouldn't" issue, which is what actually killed people, is indeed in a totally different league.

I agree that there is a serious issue in designing a coupler that can potentially fail in normal use. CAF will have their work cut out to solve that and get the units back into testing, I can see lengthy delays kicking in sadly. Its a shame, but at least has been caught before they got into revenue service. As for the 737-Max, as I understand it can still be flown so long as the pilots understand the different take-off profile due to the engines being mounted further forward & upwards compared to other 737s. The fact that Boeing decided to try and "patch" this with an automated system, then offer, well minimal sim training... Well that certainly is different league.

Anyway, don't want to stray OT for too long, so I've noticed on the Northern social media feeds the semi-regular posts about the 195 (& 331) have quietly been dropped. Another bad sign.

 

[anamyd]

not too bad then (!) ...so could we now be looking at 2020 for introduction into service...?

 

[Bletchleyite]

not too bad then (!) ...so could we now be looking at 2020 for introduction into service...?

As it also affects TPE's WCML units (not I believe the Mk5s), time for LNR to get more 319s in service as they won't be getting the 350/4s any time soon?

Possibly this could also kick Northern into taking the 323s and maybe 350/2s in the interim?

 

[bastien]

Yikes. That's one hell of a design screw up.

Unless they were designed for a larger minimum curve radius, of course. Has anyone seen the tender documents?

 

[LOL The Irony]

This also brings up the dilemma of who get's their trains first now - TPE or Northern?

 

[Bletchleyite]

This also brings up the dilemma of who get's their trains first now - TPE or Northern?

Sounds like TPE, as the Mk5s are not affected, nor are the 802s being from Hitachi and not CAF. Misery on the WCML though with a longer period of 4-car running, and down South with fewer 8-car sets on the Crewe stoppers and more 319s.

 

[LOL The Irony]

Sounds like TPE, as the Mk5s are not affected

Were the MK5's withdrawn as a precaution and the relevant checks found them ok?

 

[anamyd]

As it also affects TPE's WCML units (not I believe the Mk5s), time for LNR to get more 319s in service as they won't be getting the 350/4s any time soon?

Possibly this could also kick Northern into taking the 323s and maybe 350/2s in the interim?

Very good point, and something that hadn't occured to me. Yes, those TOCs should seriously look at leasing said units once they become available. Aren't the 350/4s meant to be replacing the 350/2s though...?

 

[LOL The Irony]

Aren't the 350/4s meant to be replacing the 350/2s though...?

No, the 730's will and they're not due until 2022(?).

 

[Bletchleyite]

Very good point, and something that hadn't occured to me. Yes, those TOCs should seriously look at leasing said units once they become available. Aren't the 350/4s meant to be replacing the 350/2s though...?

No, the /4s are coming in as additional stock to allow 8 car Trent Valley running. The /2s stay until the Aventras arrive.

 

[anamyd]

Oh right! Thanks guys

 

[js1000]

Sounds like at least another 6 months until operational service for the 195/331s based on the (rumoured) issue described here. If the component requires a re-design, manufacture, retrofit and retest then it isn't going to happen quickly.