IETs (not) banned through Dawlish during rough seas

[irish_rail]

As above, according to colleagues IETs will now be considered same as voyagers and will not run west of Exeter when dawlish gets a bit rough. Don't shoot the messenger if turns out to be wrong.

 

[pdeaves]

They were supposed to have been designed to cope with the sea. What happened?!

 

[irish_rail]

The sea has other ideas!!! Keeps knocking out multiple engines. Oh dear oh dear. Bring back HSTs!!!

 

[The_Train]

They were supposed to have been designed to cope with the sea. What happened?!

Wrong sort of water in the channel?

 

[irish_rail]

Wrong sort of water in the channel?

No doubt! Won't be Hitachis fault whatever happens.

 

[class26]

Ian`t it in the contract that they must be able to operate through Dawlish even with high waves? If so , could be expensive for Hitachi

 

[northernbelle]

As above, according to colleagues IETs will now be considered same as voyagers and will not run west of Exeter when dawlish gets a bit rough. Don't shoot the messenger if turns out to be wrong.

First I've heard of this - is this an official policy?

 

[Peter C]

Interesting.

Keeps knocking out multiple engines.

I hope this gets sorted, if it is the case (I assume you are right - I have no proof to the contrary). As much as I hate the IETs as well, they need to be able to run through Dawlish!

-Peter

 

[ainsworth74]

Ian`t it in the contract that they must be able to operate through Dawlish even with high waves?

As per the Train Technical Specification:

TS1983 Full Functionality of the IEP Trains must be maintained during and after exposure to salt water spray and such exposure must not cause excessive cosmetic degradation of exposed surfaces, components and equipment.

Now I'm not a contract specialist but that seems like a pretty explicit requirement that they should be able to run through Dawlish when there's salty water in the air without failing!

 

[irish_rail]

First I've heard of this - is this an official policy?

Just going on what I've heard from a colleague could be total BS , but I know there have been multiple incidents of losing engines in past two days and 1703 off padd I believe is down to 1 of 6 engines , time will tell I suppose

 

[irish_rail]

I imagine longer term the part of the wall that is normally worst affected (not the bit NR are currently working on) but the bit on Exeter side of dawlish station will have to be raised as well. I hope Hitachi will foot the bill and not taxpayers!!!!

 

[PHILIPE]

Trains now going through again

 

[Peter C]

1703 off padd I believe is down to 1 of 6 engines

Woah! That's quite some loss of power, isn't it? I don't know the ins-and-outs of the IETs, so I can't comment further really.

-Peter

 

[hexagon789]

Woah! That's quite some loss of power, isn't it? I don't know the ins-and-outs of the IETs, so I can't comment further really.

-Peter

I'd guess it's a 10-car from the number if engines, so with only one they won't be moving quickly but at least should be able to move

 

[30907]

From RTT: 1703 suffered serious problems, looks as if 1-2 others were held back until it was clear of the section and then ran at reduced speed through Dawlish.

 

[pdq]

As per the Train Technical Specification:

TS1983 Full Functionality of the IEP Trains must be maintained during and after exposure to salt water spray

Now I'm not a contract specialist but that seems like a pretty explicit requirement that they should be able to run through Dawlish when there's salty water in the air without failing!

I guess there's 'salt water spray' and there's tonnes of seawater being thrust onto a train.

 

[43096]

I'd guess it's a 10-car from the number if engines, so with only one they won't be moving quickly but at least should be able to move

And one half of the train will have no auxiliary power.

 

[swt_passenger]

I imagine longer term the part of the wall that is normally worst affected (not the bit NR are currently working on) but the bit on Exeter side of dawlish station will have to be raised as well. I hope Hitachi will foot the bill and not taxpayers!!!!

Network Rail have already published options for the entire stretch from Exeter to Dawlish. I suspect it falls under NR responsibility as do the stretches currently in hand or undergoing planning approvals.

 

[hexagon789]

And one half of the train will have no auxiliary power.

Eurgh, that's definitely not an ideal situation. Obviously no air-con, but I presume the lighting is designed to last a few hours without power - running off batteries?

 

[Bletchleyite]

I guess there's 'salt water spray' and there's tonnes of seawater being thrust onto a train.

I think someone just possibly missed a trick in that specification.

 

[TractiveEffort]

I guess there's 'salt water spray' and there's tonnes of seawater being thrust onto a train.

Was just going to post the same, salt water spray and a full on wave strike are two different things. I guess it’s all down to the interpretation of spray, but in no one’s book will a spray be a deluge.

 

[Pete_uk]

Any engine will be knocked out if you chuck enough water over it. I guess it's a air intake issue?

 

[ScottGallagher]

I always like watching the Dawlish beachcam on you tube, the humble pacers and 153's take a battering , built to last eh !

 

[Bletchleyite]

Any engine will be knocked out if you chuck enough water over it. I guess it's a air intake issue?

Intakes can be designed to avoid water ingress - think the likes of snorkels on Land Rovers. Or boats and ships!

It reads to me like someone missed a trick on the specification, as what happens there is clearly more than spray. Oops.

 

[SuspectUsual]

As per the Train Technical Specification:



Now I'm not a contract specialist but that seems like a pretty explicit requirement that they should be able to run through Dawlish when there's salty water in the air without failing!

That is a spectacularly badly drafted paragraph. Multiple people here have immediately and rightly seen it doesn’t reflect the reality of what can happen. I’d like to say I was amazed it could get into the specification like that, but this is the DfT so I’m totally unsurprised

 

[Failed Unit]

They could have possibly said can keep running along the sea walls in the same conditions as the exist stock. At least dft has some use for all the pacers. To run an emergency timetable between newton abbot and Exeter.

I am sure they are working on a fix and it will cost the taxpayer a fortune as it is a contact variation.

From history hasn’t it operators choice to order IEP for that route. Dft only wanted it for London - Bristol / Wales. FGW choose the IEP? (For sensible reasons of same fleet) if they had gone for another train builder they could still have the same problem.

 

[Peter C]

I'd guess it's a 10-car from the number if engines, so with only one they won't be moving quickly but at least should be able to move

Oh OK - thanks. There's still a lot I need to learn about the IETs!

-Peter

 

[Pacerman99]

Aren't the 802s modified, compared to the 800s, specifically to operate through Dawlish? Does this restriction apply to class 802s as well? If so then that seems a big failure from Hitachi.

 

[edwin_m]

As per the Train Technical Specification:

Now I'm not a contract specialist but that seems like a pretty explicit requirement that they should be able to run through Dawlish when there's salty water in the air without failing!

That document refers to the IEP but the 802 units were procured separately, so may have different clauses in the specification.

 

[AM9]

That document refers to the IEP but the 802 units were procured separately, so may have different clauses in the specification.

Then if the IET stock is more hardened, swap them in times of need. I'm sure that the GWML services can be run with 802s for a few days per year.