Thameslink/ Class 700 Progress

[F Great Eastern]

The PIS manufacturers are working on a software update to fix a few things in relation to the PIS which should be seen in the wild in the next week or two from what I have heard, however it won't fix everything that has been posted on here because some of it is not down to the software as people have speculated.

As for codes not working and the talk about numerous documents, handed out or otherwise or contradictory information, changed codes, database errors etc, that sounds like bad organisation more than anything to me which causes confusion rather than just software issues, bad communication within the TOC and project team too.

 

[SpacePhoenix]

Should each depot of a TOC have someone whose job it is to ensure that all sheets of PIS codes are accurate?

 

[F Great Eastern]

Introducing rolling stock on the scale that Thameslink are doing is not an easy job, lets be fair about this, especially when it's a new product and such a leap forward in many ways technology wise. However people with experience of rolling out new rolling stock would be worth their wait in gold at this point.

One of the very good things FGE did when they launched the 360s is they often had a conference between senior staff, engineering and Siemens and management where they openly discussed things in a no-blame culture and had extremely good communications between all parties. There was no arguing or tension, people just worked together to get everything resolved with good attention to detail.

The communications were very well managed to ensure that there was a smooth and accurate flow of information and properly managed feedback channels where very little miscommunication occured. However you had experienced railwaymen in Bob Breakwell and at time of the stock arriving Dave Kaye, who learnt lessons from the 175 roll out at FNW, who had experience over what could go wrong and the experience was valuable.

Should each depot of a TOC have someone whose job it is to ensure that all sheets of PIS codes are accurate?

Different system but all this was planned for well in advance of the first service starting with other TOC's, they put all the different timetable/paths in a database before the rolling stock runs a single train in service and then check and verify/test the data on test runs or locally where possible

The fact that people are complaining that codes do not work anymore and they should be points to a sheer lack of attention to detail, lack of proper communication and testing, at the end of the day all this should have been properly bedded down before the first passenger revenue service ran.

 

[Class2ldn]

Should each depot of a TOC have someone whose job it is to ensure that all sheets of PIS codes are accurate?

It's not necessarily the code itself is wrong as it works on the other stock

 

[TheKnightWho]

700023 arrived this morning. Now have 31x 700.

What was the 30th?

 

[F Great Eastern]

It's not necessarily the code itself is wrong as it works on the other stock

Still lack of proper testing and validation from Thameslink on this. Codes should be tested and ensured that they are working before the stock is allocated to any revenue working service. There should be no surprises once the stock goes out on revenue service since these things should be checked before commissioning.

The fact that you're having a code to input that doesn't even exist on the train itself points to the fact that no testing was done and you're most likely the first person to have tried that code on the train, which is illogical because that is what should be done before the train even gets in your hand.

I know that someone sitting in a depot checking all the codes work and function for every unit is a boring job for someone, but this is the difference between a prepared TOC who have attention to detail and a unprepared one who will encounter lots of bugs and issues along the way.

Version updates should also be co-ordinated, there was one TOC which I won't name that had 12 different versions of a PIS system on less than 30 units at one point since they "fixed as they went" on an individual unit which created chaos with many different bugs on many different units.

Eventually a new manager came in and got the updates managed externally by people and prevented TOC staff from fiddling with them or setting manual over-rides and only gave access to two people in the company. The PIS systems were fine ever since.

 

[Class2ldn]

Well it's clear that the testing and commissioning drivers haven't been doing much testing that's for sure.
Seems that the rlu board at Blackfriars southbound is in the wrong position. Only been realised by us drivers not being able to get the doors open even though we've stopped bang on the mark.
Only have to look at twitter to see that the passengers are fed up with the reliability of them already and to be honest you can't really blame them.

 

[F Great Eastern]

Well it's clear that the testing and commissioning drivers haven't been doing much testing that's for sure.
Seems that the rlu board at Blackfriars southbound is in the wrong position. Only been realised by us drivers not being able to get the doors open even though we've stopped bang on the mark.

Can't just blame the drivers though, proper management of rolling stock introductions would ensure this would not happen, it seems that the whole management of the introduction of the rolling stock is at best very poor by Thameslink.

There is some stuff you cannot predict until you go out into an open environment and start running them in revenue service, but a lot of the stuff I read seems to be about poor testing structure and not enough attention to detail on things.

Considering the time that they have had to prepare for this rolling stock to arrive however, you would think that they should have been well ready for this.

 

[bramling]

Can't just blame the drivers though, proper management of rolling stock introductions would ensure this would not happen, it seems that the whole management of the introduction of the rolling stock is at best very poor by Thameslink.

There is some stuff you cannot predict until you go out into an open environment and start running them in revenue service, but a lot of the stuff I read seems to be about poor testing structure and not enough attention to detail on things.

Considering the time that they have had to prepare for this rolling stock to arrive however, you would think that they should have been well ready for this.

Agree with all of the above.

Given the shambolic introduction of the new trains (yes, shambolic - I don't think that's harsh as it's quite reasonable that many of these issues should easily have been picked up on testing), is this useless outfit really capable of implementing such a massive change to the timetable come 2018?

We've read a lot on here about how "it will work", and about extensive "modelling". We also read the same about the trains and their extensive testing, so forgive me for being cynical.

 

[F Great Eastern]

The trains themselves are not really the problem, mechanically they have been doing well, it's just they haven't tested the software side of things well enough and seemed to have overlooked that part of things.

 

[bramling]

The trains themselves are not really the problem, mechanically they have been doing well, it's just they haven't tested the software side of things well enough and seemed to have overlooked that part of things.

I don't doubt this may be true, however one way or the other the passenger doesn't really care. They rightly expect to be delivered to their destination on time.

Thameslink is already (inherently) unreliable. It's one thing tolerating delays where the incident is outside the industry's control, e.g. fatalities, but introduction of a fleet of trains is firmly *within* the industry's control.

I can't help but get the feeling this outfit simply doesn't know what it's doing.

Other rail providers have managed to introduce new trains, new signalling, new procedures etc without this amount of disruption.

 

[jon0844]

One of the very good things FGE did when they launched the 360s is they often had a conference between senior staff, engineering and Siemens and management where they openly discussed things in a no-blame culture and had extremely good communications between all parties. There was no arguing or tension, people just worked together to get everything resolved with good attention to detail.

The communications were very well managed to ensure that there was a smooth and accurate flow of information and properly managed feedback channels where very little miscommunication occured. However you had experienced railwaymen in Bob Breakwell and at time of the stock arriving Dave Kaye, who learnt lessons from the 175 roll out at FNW, who had experience over what could go wrong and the experience was valuable.

I left a job once when a new director came in, ex-accountant, who had the idea that everyone should have to log what they did so if anything went wrong, it would be clear who to blame.

And like that didn't just encourage people to do anything and everything to cover their tracks! Which is obviously what happened, so it became near unworkable and a total blame culture where people were too scared to do or say anything.

Being open is by far the best policy, and making sure that everyone can have their say without fear. That means you have the people who developed a system talking to those who have to use it, and a chance to discuss how things might be improved - or even how users can be better shown how to do something, or the basic idea of how something works so they can fault find on their own initiative.

I've just come home having been on a 317 that showed the time as 07:18 (so an improvement on 00:00) and crashed at Finsbury Park, meaning it neither announced the station when we got there, or changed the text as we went up to Potters Bar - just frozen on the text. As we approached Potters Bar, it came back to life. These have pretty new software (with all the new announcements, Twitter links etc) so, once again, a failure somewhere in the chain to make sure everything works.

Do they have emulators at depots to test out the software without having to load it on an actual train?

 

[D365]

Do they have emulators at depots to test out the software without having to load it on an actual train?

I imagine that there'll be a prototype rig for the PIS which will be used to test the system.

 

[jon0844]

I imagine that there'll be a prototype rig for the PIS which will be used to test the system.

I wonder if that works?

 

[F Great Eastern]

I imagine that there'll be a prototype rig for the PIS which will be used to test the system.

Prototypes are good and well, but there should still be some tests on actual trains with regards to codes before they are released for service, because sometimes you can't test everything in the same way if you are not in a real world environment.

The way test trains run isn't someone just drives the train for a an hour or so to see if it doesn't break down, they should be using them to test the PIS out in full on these runs as well, trying all the different codes, checking they work, checking the GPS triggers announcements etc.

 

[D365]

Some aspects of testing are likely often combined with driver training runs. However there is also a need to get the trains into revenue earning service as soon as possible as there is only limited siding space available, and deliveries are happening very quickly.

 

[TheKnightWho]

Prototypes are good and well, but there should still be some tests on actual trains with regards to codes before they are released for service, because sometimes you can't test everything in the same way if you are not in a real world environment.

The way test trains run isn't someone just drives the train for a an hour or so to see if it doesn't break down, they should be using them to test the PIS out in full on these runs as well, trying all the different codes, checking they work, checking the GPS triggers announcements etc.

Agreed. They should be doing test diagrams with full stops as they did with the night tube a weekend before it went operational.

 

[jon0844]

I'd love to hear a test mode to play all announcements, as happened on an in-service 378.

https://www.youtube.com/shared?ci=qdfKGNPFQzE

 

[F Great Eastern]

Some aspects of testing are likely often combined with driver training runs. However there is also a need to get the trains into revenue earning service as soon as possible

And that is what should be happening, and what happened with one particular type of rolling stock in Germany is they had a huge list of test cases of every possible stopping pattern and PIS codes and announcements and checked everything and ran through them all over the course of the test runs. It was simply detailed test runs with a tick or cross if it worked and if not what happened. A member of staff from the manufacturer was present and overnight they made some adjustments where possible.

The next day they did another test run and saw if the problems still existed and made further tweaks until they got it right, making sure that every train in testing got the newer software each time it was changed before it went on another test run to make sure that there could be no getting mixed up between what software was on which always happens if you have a random mix of versions across many different units from a fleet it becomes a muddle and a complete mess.

When they finally got everything sorted out, they copied the software over to the rest of the fleet as it was delivered and there were no more issues because that is how sensible testing is carried out. All of the issues were resolved before everything entered passenger service This did involve some out of hours depot work in the early days of the fleet but it saved them a huge amount of time afterwards.

Personally I remain to be convinced by the way TL are managing this.

as there is only limited siding space available, and deliveries are happening very quickly.

That's precisely why it's best to get the issues fixed and tested as soon as possible otherwise you end up with the problems that have happened in the past, not just in GB, where something that could have been nipped in the bud turns into a whole fleet plagued by problems that will require even longer amount of time to fix because there has been such a backlog built up.

I believe that there are improvements that Televic can make to the PIS, certainly however at the same time the fact is that the testing regime that has been put in place by ThamesLink seems to be very poor and the fact that someone has a code that they were told to use that doesn't work, suggests that the management of the roll out is poor.

 

[AM9]

Some aspects of testing are likely often combined with driver training runs. However there is also a need to get the trains into revenue earning service as soon as possible as there is only limited siding space available, and deliveries are happening very quickly.

Rather than keep digging itself into a deeper hole, GTR should have a moratorium on PIS software upgrades. It seems that the issues are not just PIS code problems. The software itself just wasn't complete in time for the big public launch. Just provide a single basic debugged version that allows safe operational running and introduce temporary paper/verbally announced stopping patterns for the passengers with a static caption that informs the customer of them. Take the customer complaints on the chin and set about creating a spec for a fully compliant in-service release.
Given that there isn't an option to remove all the new trains from diagrams and store them, (and even if there was it would be a PR disaster on a scale that even GTR couldn't shrug off), then discreetly, fully prove the new version in service.
The long-term message should be that all releases must be tightly controlled, and not rushed out because somebody says so. There's much to be learned from the aviation industry where virtually nothing is allowed onto an operational aircraft without certification. Of course, trains can't fall out of the sky, but modern stock such as the 700s, have many interconnected data systems where operational issues such as door release and safety information might rely on the same positional data (e.g. GPS) as safety critical crew and passenger comms. systems.
As FGE says, the trains themselves have performed well and probably more reliably than on any recent similarly sized roll-out. Pretty well all of the failures in service have been software related. The hardware has worked as designed.

 

[Dhassell]

Anyone able to post some Diagrams for this Saturday?

 

[Nic Robinson]

Not wanting to seem contrary but 4 lengthy trips this week (002/103/108/113) and pis worked perfectly!

 

[Alteran Ancient]

Just spotted 700114 sitting at Herne Hill on the outer platform, destined for Brighton. My slightly late running 2A32 CBW-VIC presumably got in the way.

This is probably why the London Bridge routes are to be the favourite for TL services.

 

[Bald Rick]

Not wanting to seem contrary but 4 lengthy trips this week (002/103/108/113) and pis worked perfectly!

I was going to say the same, as couldn't remember the last time I caught one with the PIS off (if you'll excuse the phrase); however 104 this morning had blank screens in the coach I was sat in. The Auto PA was working fine though.

 

[Goldfish62]

I'm currently on a 700 from Gatwick to Blackfriars. PIS not working at all and judging by the oven like temperature, nor is the aircon.

 

[SamanthaJ1989]

Does anyone have RTT data for the Weekend? Thanks in advance

 

[Supercoss]

But what if the P.I.S. 'problem' is not on the train at all ?
The fact traincrew (driver) diagrams have been published with the codes for the driver to input into the system missing so at train time the driver has to phone the service 'delivery' centre SDC to request a code, often to get the engaged tone so the trin is incorrectly set up on departure.
Service goes up the wall, terminating short, disruption and unplanned moves same happens no PIS code to enter

 

[AM9]

But what if the P.I.S. 'problem' is not on the train at all ?
The fact traincrew (driver) diagrams have been published with the codes for the driver to input into the system missing so at train time the driver has to phone the service 'delivery' centre SDC to request a code, often to get the engaged tone so the trin is incorrectly set up on departure.
Service goes up the wall, terminating short, disruption and unplanned moves same happens no PIS code to enter

And the chorus of dissenters on here announce 'yet another class 700 failure'!

 

[bramling]

And the chorus of dissenters on here announce 'yet another class 700 failure'!

Does is make any difference to the passenger?

One way of the other, a facility has failed to be provided. Whether it's the fault of the train, or Thameslink's management, either way it's a failure.

 

[carriageline]

From what I understand (which isn't very much at the moment!!) is in the future the PIS/CIS should update automatically when things are changed, and drivers suitably notified? So I imagine the trains have been designed around this.

I also believe that the "man in the know" on these forums posted about possible problems being with remote servers.

The problem with introducing a new technology be it signalling, trains whatever. Testing and simulating doesn't always pick up faults and quirks, as every driver/signaller/tester is different and can do things in a EVER so slightly order or in different places. I imagine the 700s are very new technology wise, with some previously unseen before technology? Trying to get a train to dial in to a remote server, while it's under central london in a tunnel can't be a small task. Unfortunately there was always going to be teething problems. It then takes time to find out what the problem is, what's causing is, and more importantly what can be done to rectify it? It might just be 2 lines of code, it might be a complete rewrite on how the system works! I am surprised it has taken this long though.

It's a shame our resident 700 guru can't say anymore, as I would be very interested!!


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk