Trivia:Major design faults

[najaB]

Were they a similar design to the ones on mk1s? They were near impossible to use if not well maintained.

I suspect that there was some thought in that - if they were very easy to open when you wanted to they would also be very easy to open when you didn't. Lack of lubrication would only make that moreso.

 

[Marklund]

A replacement for the standard SL35 colour light signal incandescent lamp. Great idea, but barely tested due to the powers that be being over eager to replace the SL35 and allow maintenance to be reduced, therefore allowing costs to be cut.

The faults quickly became apparent to fault teams out in the field.

That they are. Caused more bother than they were worth. First Filament Failures occurred far less, SL35s caused much less delay than these things.

Still the mk3 is on its way....

Yipeee! :roll:
I wonder who is paying for all this...

 

[yorksrob]

Trains with non-passenger operated doors (I.e non-slam doors).

Been waiting like lemons stood on the platform at Victoria for five minutes, waiting for someone to open the doors. Never had this problem with a VEP.

 

[Cowley]

Trains with non-passenger operated doors (I.e non-slam doors).

Been waiting like lemons stood on the platform at Victoria for five minutes, waiting for someone to open the doors. Never had this problem with a VEP.

I just thought of the most glaring design fault of all infrastructure and trains (tongue firmly in cheek here) : Humans, and their ability to step out of moving trains, fall down platform gaps, order countless new items of rolling stock without understanding what they're buying, rationalise lines that at some point will become extremely busy again etc etc

 

[yorksrob]

I just thought of the most glaring design fault of all infrastructure and trains (tongue firmly in cheek here) : Humans, and their ability to step out of moving trains, fall down platform gaps, order countless new items of rolling stock without understanding what they're buying, rationalise lines that at some point will become extremely busy again etc etc

True, but the railway would be a dull place indeed without them

 

[LNW-GW Joint]

The DfT basically wrote the VHF timetable, so no blame on Virgin for that one.

I thought the idea was to concentrate 11-car Pendolinos on the hourly routes (Liverpool, Glasgow), and the 9-car for the 3tph routes?
It seems like that is how it works on the Liverpool services.
But the "9" services can be 5/10-car Voyagers (5-car sometimes doubled up at Wolverhampton) or 9/11-car 390s.

 

[Bletchleyite]

In reality it's much more mixed up dependent on actual demand on specific trains.

 

[fredk]

Trains with non-passenger operated doors (I.e non-slam doors).

Been waiting like lemons stood on the platform at Victoria for five minutes, waiting for someone to open the doors. Never had this problem with a VEP.

Although I like slam doors, you must admit that automatic doors are safer.

However, I would like to see a return to opening windows on doors, as often I find air conditioning is not comfortable to breathe.

 

[najaB]

However, I would like to see a return to opening windows on doors, as often I find air conditioning is not comfortable to breathe.

Not likely to happen, at least not on 'mainline' stock. Noise, pressure pulses from passing trains, sealing against rain/snow, control of temperature - all reasons you're unlikely to see anything other than air conditioned stock.

 

[krus_aragon]

In the same vein - not building a pantograph well and wiring ducts for cross feed cabling into the Voyagers when new.

Oh, come now. Designing Voyagers for potential OLE conversion, back in 2000, would have required outrageous optimism and foresight. Not making them longer in the first place, however, is a valid gripe.

 

[The Planner]

The DfT basically wrote the VHF timetable, so no blame on Virgin for that one.

Just catching up here, the DfT may have specced it but believe me, they didn't write it.....

 

[najaB]

Not making them longer in the first place, however, is a valid gripe.

Oh, I'm not disputing that. But given that even when new they were going to be spending a lot of their time under wires, it wouldn't have taken that much extra effort to leave space for potential conversion. Even if they didn't build them with a pantograph well.

 

[SpacePhoenix]

Could the installation of tilt ability and body profile to allow tilting be considered a design flaw for both Voyagers and Pendolinos? It's been mentioned somewhere in the forums that the time difference between tilt trains and non tilt trains isn't that great on the WCML

 

[D365]

Could the installation of tilt ability and body profile to allow tilting be considered a design flaw for both Voyagers and Pendolinos? It's been mentioned somewhere in the forums that the time difference between tilt trains and non tilt trains isn't that great on the WCML

I notice that you fail to mention the Mk4 coaching stock, which never ended up being fitted out for tilt at all.

 

[cjmillsnun]

All l can remember is that they were powered

APT-E doors were manual, but then again it was never in passenger service.

APT-P doors were sliding plug.

 

[Ploughman]

Doing away with a standard gauge profile for stock.

 

[Bletchleyite]

Where were the doors on APT-E? When you look at a picture you can't see them.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

 

[fredk]

Where were the doors on APT-E? When you look at a picture you can't see them.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

Slightly off topic but I've never seen the APT-E before. It looks incredibly advanced and futuristic even today. I would love to see a new version of it with a facelifted front end and current technology. BR was doing something right

 

[D365]

Doing away with a standard gauge profile for stock.

How is that a failure as such?

 

[syorksdeano]

The platform at Manchester Piccadilly (17? The one that continues to Liverpool). It's way to narrow in places

Sent from my SM-T555 using Tapatalk

 

[dgl]

How is that a failure as such?

I suppose the fact that not all units/carriages can go everywhere on the network and so reducing the versatility of some stock.

 

[The Box Photter]

I nominate:

- Beyer Peacock/Clayton Class 17s - two (fragile) engines to do the work of one
- Class 50 - Too much electronic wizardry (rheostatic braking, SSC etc) in the control system - Too small an oil leak tray beneath the engine - Poor air filtration for the engine room - Should have just ordered 50x DP2s (or more Class 47s)
- Nose-end doors on early diesel classes - made the cabs draughty
- BR ordering too many different types of early diesel locos - especially NBL-built ones
- Scrapping steam in 1968 - The 9Fs and many of the other Standard steam classes could have worked well into the 1970s in specific areas and would have given a financial return for BR
- Making "Kestrel" too heavy to run on most of BR at up to 125mph
- Class 67 - what are they for? (apart from dragging the Royal Family about)
- Not building a Co-Co electric locomotive (89001 aside) until the Class 92, and then the 92s have been woefully under-used
- Hydro-kinetic braking on the APT (and launching it into service in the winter)
- WCML "upgrade" - Redundant as trains don't run much faster
- Turning railway stations into shopping centres with trains - I'm looking at you Birmingham New Street
- Eurostar night stock
- Stratford International Station (where no International trains stop)
- 4-wheel passenger stock (Pacers/Skippers/Nodding Donkeys)
- Stock with seats that don't line up with windows on scenic routes
- Having trains with incompatible couplings operate on the same tracks
- Fragile OHLE on the East Coast and Midland Main Line
- Voyager toilet fragrance (and too few coaches)
- Allowing building development over former railway trackbeds
- Railway privatisation

 

[najaB]

I nominate...

A lot of those are mistakes, but they aren't *design* mistakes.

 

[Bletchleyite]

- Class 50 - Too much electronic wizardry (rheostatic braking, SSC etc) in the control system - Too small an oil leak tray beneath the engine - Poor air filtration for the engine room - Should have just ordered 50x DP2s (or more Class 47s)

Really, BR should have perfected a design then just ordered that in its thousands.

- BR ordering too many different types of early diesel locos - especially NBL-built ones

Yep

- Class 67 - what are they for? (apart from dragging the Royal Family about)

Royal Mail traffic...that they promptly lost.

- WCML "upgrade" - Redundant as trains don't run much faster

They do, substantially so, and the service is hugely better than it was (whether you happen to like Pendolinos or not). OOI, are you old enough to remember what the WCML was like pre-PUG1? (I know there is a wide range of ages on here and you can't always tell from the posts).

- Turning railway stations into shopping centres with trains - I'm looking at you Birmingham New Street

I like the new New St. It feels like a proper Hauptbahnhof.

 

[takno]

I like the new New St. It feels like a proper Hauptbahnhof.

I hated the new New Street when it first opened. Between the initial charging for toilets, still being halfway through sorting the platforms, not having installed benches and having had to shove in a last minute solution to the sudden requirement to gate the station it felt awful.

A year down the line though the platforms are pretty much done, and reflooring, removal of the subway ramps and waiting rooms etc has opened up a relatively pleasant underground area where you don't constantly feel like you're about to be forced off the platform onto the tracks. They also have plenty of benches, and while the gating problem still leads to the strange split-lounge thing at least all parts of the lounge have adequate catering in them and obvious access to the wider building if you can be bothered to find your ticket. Still needs an on-station pub though

 

[syorksdeano]

I hated the new New Street when it first opened. Between the initial charging for toilets, still being halfway through sorting the platforms, not having installed benches and having had to shove in a last minute solution to the sudden requirement to gate the station it felt awful.

A year down the line though the platforms are pretty much done, and reflooring, removal of the subway ramps and waiting rooms etc has opened up a relatively pleasant underground area where you don't constantly feel like you're about to be forced off the platform onto the tracks. They also have plenty of benches, and while the gating problem still leads to the strange split-lounge thing at least all parts of the lounge have adequate catering in them and obvious access to the wider building if you can be bothered to find your ticket. Still needs an on-station pub though

There is a pub but you need a bloody mortgage to go in

 

[507 001]

Where were the doors on APT-E? When you look at a picture you can't see them.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

The sides of the 'corridor connections' above the Articulated Bogies opened up.

 

[D365]

I suppose the fact that not all units/carriages can go everywhere on the network and so reducing the versatility of some stock.

If it has been anticipated that a certain design will continue to operate on a route for the duration of its lifespan, then I don't see why the design should be compromised in order to increase the versatility "just in case".

 

[QueensCurve]

On LHCS, the introduction of the Mk2d stock wasn't without incident. We lost a few out the door with those very short lived interior door handles. The auto announcements (a big tape machine!) didn't really work and soon went as well.

I thought that problem was with Mk3.

 

[AndrewE]

I nominate:

- BR ordering too many different types of early diesel locos - especially NBL-built ones

- Scrapping steam in 1968 - The 9Fs and many of the other Standard steam classes could have worked well into the 1970s in specific areas and would have given a financial return for BR

- Allowing building development over former railway trackbeds
- Railway privatisation

"BR" didn't have any choice. The government of the day thought that any entrepreneurial engineering company should be allowed to have a shot: The railway had to pay and then live with (and weed out) the consequences! And then work very hard to get up to speed to keep the best ones running.

I agree that steam was scrapped far too quickly, but with money available there was a determination to abandon the past as quickly as poss. Having seen the work involved in preparing and disposing of steam locos I can understand the reason, especially at a time of labour shortage.

Most of BR's bum decisions (seen with hindsight) are the consequences of trying the keep the network alive while being strangled by the treasury (who seem to have unlimited money for road schemes but nothing for congestion-busting rail.)

Selling off track bed and privatisation are the fault of politicians rather than design faults.