Tyne and Wear Metro

142094 · 16 Sep 2013

ModernRailways said:
One thing he also said is that it's DB who are doing the talking about new trains with the possibility of them stumping the money up.
If I remember correctly DB already tried that when they took the system over.
The new depot will apparently be in Pelaw/Wardley and will only be relatively small, will fit 20 metrocars inside with another 24 (space for 25) stabled outside.

Nexus has confirmed that DB never made an offer to purchase new rolling stock, and has not done so since. AFAIAA this was made up but has been going around for years.

Wardley would be an interesting site, although Pelaw sidings would be a lot better.

Stats said:
What about the feasibility study of the 9 potential corridors and type of rolling stock that will feed into the Metro Strategy? Hasthis finished?

The big project concerning the Metro at the minute of course is the modernisation programme. Very little has been said about extensions, and from what I can tell the last 'serious' work that was done on it was Project Orpheus. No doubt Nexus will start again using that as a basis, but not likely for a few more years.

RailUK Forums

Paul_10 · 16 Sep 2013

Got caught up in the delays this evening, from the looks of it the power supply problems affected trains heading to Newcastle. I wonder what the passengers on the train must be thinking of still being effectively in the station with no lights on but the doors closed so nobody could alight, frustrating I'm sure if you had to get somewhere!

Does bring me onto another point, is it me but since that 4 days closure to put up those new OHL, there has been countless problems with the power supply in the Felling area, just wondering if anyone else has noticed that and see what is the cause behind it.

Also interesting to read about the safety checks being carried out at Pelaw this morning. unfortunately for metro, the general public will mock them for saying low sunlight is now causing the system to go belly up. Hopefully plans are in place to deal with this if we have any more clear sunny mornings!

One last thing, the 4 cars not being refurbished, what exactly will be there usage in the future? Just seems a total waste if they are barely going to be used in the future.

142094 · 18 Sep 2013

Paul_10 said:
One last thing, the 4 cars not being refurbished, what exactly will be there usage in the future? Just seems a total waste if they are barely going to be used in the future.

From the sounds of it, spares for driver training, football/concert specials and extra services (such as the ones laid on at Christmas).

Stats · 23 Sep 2013

142094 said:
The big project concerning the Metro at the minute of course is the modernisation programme. Very little has been said about extensions, and from what I can tell the last 'serious' work that was done on it was Project Orpheus. No doubt Nexus will start again using that as a basis, but not likely for a few more years.

Nexus have been looking at extensions for the past two years. If I had waited a few days I would have got an answer to my question as a progress update is given in the papers for the ITA meeting later this week. http://www.twita.gov.uk/sites/defau...da 26 September 2013 Public Document Pack.pdf (from page 271 of the pdf)

142094 · 23 Sep 2013

Stats said:
Nexus have been looking at extensions for the past two years. If I had waited a few days I would have got an answer to my question as a progress update is given in the papers for the ITA meeting later this week. http://www.twita.gov.uk/sites/defau...da 26 September 2013 Public Document Pack.pdf (from page 271 of the pdf)

Will be interesting to see what the final document has to say. There is special mention to say that any funding will have to come from a variety of sources, so no more going to the DfT or Central Government for a large lump sum.

ModernRailways · 25 Sep 2013

The report by the RAIB for the train fire has been released.

Article

PDF of the full report

142094 · 25 Sep 2013

Interesting reading.

ModernRailways · 25 Sep 2013

Agreed!

I think the two recommendations, about the door handles being stiff as well as the CSR not working properly are the biggest points to have been raised.

The CSR has been raised by a number of drivers for a few years. I remember one instance where the driver came across the PA and said 'Sorry for the delay, but I am unable to contact my control as many other drivers are doing the same. Let's be glad this isn't an emergency call I'm trying to make otherwise it would be a disaster!

The door handles are extremely stiff, I remember when someone got trapped in the doors, someone pushed the emergency pole button, but couldn't use the lever a few others tried whilst also trying to pry the doors open the driver in the end the driver released the doors so they could open as normal.

These two key things should probably be checked and upgraded as often as need be. If these were faulty/didn't work properly and it was on the London Underground then there would be huge uproar from the press and passengers.

Paul_10 · 26 Sep 2013

Wonder if one of the reasons the door handles are stiff is so you don't get kids using it in an improper use way and with generally adults being stronger than kids then having it stiff would mean they can't pull down on it.

I think the main thing that caught my attention that there has been similar incidents and Nexus have not apparently investigated them properly, its just fortunate in this instance(which actually sounds more serious than I originally thought) that no one was injured or worse otherwise Nexus may have questions to answer why FIVE have not been investigated before.

142094 · 26 Sep 2013

Catch 22 situation - either have the door handles very easy to operate, and everyone can operate them, so trains will be stopped without reason all over the system, or have them harder to operate but of course certain types of passenger cannot operate them.

From what I gather this is an industry-wide issue and not just solely on the Metro.

cdonnigan · 29 Sep 2013

does anyone know anything about this crash or is it a load of dribble by this person yet again.

http://http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=KVL8yGjo3h4

ooops yep it happened makes a change found it on sky tyne and wear.

http://tyneandwear.sky.com/news/article/83118/is-anywhere-safe-from-metro-delays-carriage-crash-causes-hold

ModernRailways · 29 Sep 2013

Indeed it happened, although I don't recall seeing the actual Metrocar being damaged, just the low loader. I do wonder who will have to pay for any repairs to the Metrocar should it have been damaged. Will Allelys the low loader people, or will DBTW/Nexus have to fork out for it.

cdonnigan · 29 Sep 2013

ModernRailways said:
Indeed it happened, although I don't recall seeing the actual Metrocar being damaged, just the low loader. I do wonder who will have to pay for any repairs to the Metrocar should it have been damaged. Will Allelys the low loader people, or will DBTW/Nexus have to fork out for it.

surely it will be the responsibility of Allelys Haulage to pay for any damage as it was still in the possession at the time and not DBTW/Nexus. The Sky News article does suggest there was no damage to the Metrocar.

ModernRailways · 29 Sep 2013

rwilson said:
surely it will be the responsibility of Allelys Haulage to pay for any damage as it was still in the possession at the time and not DBTW/Nexus. The Sky News article does suggest there was no damage to the Metrocar.

I would have thought the same too! Something for someone to ask on the Nexus forums?

The Metro looked to high up to have any damage done to it, unless the damage to the trailer caused damage to the Metro but I don't seem to be able to tell if there was any significant damage to the actual lorry or whether it was just the barriers.

Also, is anyone going to the meeting tomorrow night? If so, could someone ask why a train isn't stabled at South Shields overnight to allow for an earlier first train towards Newcastle. Thanks in advance if you do! Sadly I can't make it as I have to go to the Doctor's!

Ze Random One · 30 Sep 2013

ModernRailways said:
...why a train isn't stabled at South Shields overnight to allow for an earlier first train towards Newcastle...

I'd imagine it's for three reasons:
1. Makes maintenance easier. You know every metrocar will end up in Gosforth at the end of every day, even if there's had to be a quick swap to replace a defective train in the evening.
2. Makes crewing easier. If you know every metrocar will (outwith engineering works) start and end at Gosforth depot, you can guarantee that every driver will be able to be taken from Gosforth to wherever s/he is due to pick up a train (if it isn't in Gosforth), and brought back there at the end of the day. If a driver turn starts and ends at South Shields instead, just one evening train failure or driver falling sick would make it difficult to guarantee every driver ended up with his/her car again, unless you want to start taxi-ing drivers around lots.
3. a single train stabled in Shields overnight would be a magnet for "artists" and other mischief-makers. Of course you could pay a (suitably track-safe trained) security guard to keep watch over the train. Of course if that security guard was at Gosforth, with the help of some CCTV s/he can keep an eye on 90 cars rather than 2.

If the system ever expands again, or the powers that be decide to increase frequencies, there would be value in putting in a depot south of the river, which could permit an earlier train to run.

Remember also that, for South Tyneside, the first 27 bus (0454 ex-Shields) does connect into the first Metro at Heworth (which runs 20 minutes earlier than the first train from Shields, at 0540). This kind of arrangement might be worth considering for improvement/expansion if the Quality Contracts Scheme is successful.

Nym · 30 Sep 2013

Ze Random One said:
I'd imagine it's for three reasons:
1. Makes maintenance easier. You know every metrocar will end up in Gosforth at the end of every day, even if there's had to be a quick swap to replace a defective train in the evening.
2. Makes crewing easier. If you know every metrocar will (outwith engineering works) start and end at Gosforth depot, you can guarantee that every driver will be able to be taken from Gosforth to wherever s/he is due to pick up a train (if it isn't in Gosforth), and brought back there at the end of the day. If a driver turn starts and ends at South Shields instead, just one evening train failure or driver falling sick would make it difficult to guarantee every driver ended up with his/her car again, unless you want to start taxi-ing drivers around lots.
3. a single train stabled in Shields overnight would be a magnet for "artists" and other mischief-makers. Of course you could pay a (suitably track-safe trained) security guard to keep watch over the train. Of course if that security guard was at Gosforth, with the help of some CCTV s/he can keep an eye on 90 cars rather than 2.

If the system ever expands again, or the powers that be decide to increase frequencies, there would be value in putting in a depot south of the river, which could permit an earlier train to run.

Remember also that, for South Tyneside, the first 27 bus (0454 ex-Shields) does connect into the first Metro at Heworth (which runs 20 minutes earlier than the first train from Shields, at 0540). This kind of arrangement might be worth considering for improvement/expansion if the Quality Contracts Scheme is successful.

Not critisising you here, but how to solve...

1) Use one of your after peak stablers to be sent to Sheilds in the evening at the end of the day empty, train to be prepped ready for service and not used in service until 1st train from Sheilds. No fitters required at Sheilds and flexable as any of the peak stablers can be sent.

2) Taxis aren't that expensive to get staff to and from Sheilds, especially if you have them sign on to duty at Gosforth and minibus / taxi four/five drivers to Sheilds as part of the rota.

3) Have security in place...

(Same goes basically for stabling at Pelaw overnight)

142094 · 30 Sep 2013

rwilson said:
surely it will be the responsibility of Allelys Haulage to pay for any damage as it was still in the possession at the time and not DBTW/Nexus. The Sky News article does suggest there was no damage to the Metrocar.

No damage to the Metrocar according to Sharon Kelly, Operations and Customer Service Director. As with most haulage operations, when something is on the back of a low loader or HGV, it is the haulier's responsibility for the load (for example, Tesco stores can reject a damaged load if it has been caused by say Stobart in the back of its trucks).

ModernRailways said:
Also, is anyone going to the meeting tomorrow night? If so, could someone ask why a train isn't stabled at South Shields overnight to allow for an earlier first train towards Newcastle.

Has basically been answered in the previous post by Ze Random One. All trains return to Gosforth every night for cleaning and to have daily checks and any required maintenance ready for the next day. The earliest signing on for a driver is around 0430 at the depot, so if there was an earlier train from South Shields, the rosters would need to be changed, and a taxi ordered. Add on security and the bill increases dramatically.

The other point is that Nexus sets the timetables, and therefore the decision would have to come from them. It could be suggested that a train is sent empty from Gosforth to South Shields around 0500 to form an earlier service train.

Ze Random One · 1 Oct 2013

Nym said:
Not critisising you here, but how to solve...

1) Use one of your after peak stablers to be sent to Sheilds in the evening at the end of the day empty, train to be prepped ready for service and not used in service until 1st train from Sheilds. No fitters required at Sheilds and flexable as any of the peak stablers can be sent.

2) Taxis aren't that expensive to get staff to and from Sheilds, especially if you have them sign on to duty at Gosforth and minibus / taxi four/five drivers to Sheilds as part of the rota.

3) Have security in place...

(Same goes basically for stabling at Pelaw overnight)

I agree, none of these things are insurmountable, but as things stand it would complicate the system for little benefit, and in my opinion the cost/benefit equation would be very finely balanced.
Sunderland gets a worse deal than does South Shields, for both first and last services, which is one of the reasons I believe a second depot / larger stabling yard in the Gateshead - Wardley area would make more sense if the desire is to get Northbound trains moving earlier in the morning (and potentially Southbound trains later in the evening).
Remember that T&W Metro is still in receipt of operational subsidy, which will encourage a risk-averse approach from Nexus, since the local councils can ill afford to prop up the Metro while they cut back on everything else.

ModernRailways · 1 Oct 2013

Ze Random One said:
I agree, none of these things are insurmountable, but as things stand it would complicate the system for little benefit, and in my opinion the cost/benefit equation would be very finely balanced.
Sunderland gets a worse deal than does South Shields, for both first and last services, which is one of the reasons I believe a second depot / larger stabling yard in the Gateshead - Wardley area would make more sense if the desire is to get Northbound trains moving earlier in the morning (and potentially Southbound trains later in the evening).
Remember that T&W Metro is still in receipt of operational subsidy, which will encourage a risk-averse approach from Nexus, since the local councils can ill afford to prop up the Metro while they cut back on everything else.

But Sunderland is on Network Rail metals, it also doesn't help that Sunderland is quite a bit further. Going to Sunderland in the morning is fine as there are multiple trains down there, in fact I think after the first train there is a train every 10-15 minutes or so. Plus there are more people heading to Sunderland than away from Sunderland, however going from Jarrow (in my case) most people go to Newcastle. A train at 0515/0530 from South Shields to meet with a South Hylton or Park Lane train at Pelaw at around 0545. I bet it would be quite a well used service as it would also reach Newcastle before 0600.

It may well be worth Metro storing trains at Pelaw instead this would allow for an earlier train from Sunderland to Newcastle and also an earlier train from South Shields.

142094 · 1 Oct 2013

ModernRailways said:
It may well be worth Metro storing trains at Pelaw instead this would allow for an earlier train from Sunderland to Newcastle and also an earlier train from South Shields.

The same would apply at Pelaw as would if stabling at South Shields sidings overnight.

ModernRailways · 1 Oct 2013

142094 said:
The same would apply at Pelaw as would if stabling at South Shields sidings overnight.

True, but it would be much more viable as it would also allow for more trains and would open the door for more trains in all directions including towards Newcastle from Pelaw. It may even be viable for some trains to run single car and then at a terminus/siding/station couple up. This could be difficult, but certainly would be possible if some sidings were used to couple them together later in their journey/day. In fact some could even run to Regent Centre/Monkseaton sidings were another metrocar would be waiting to couple up straight away, these trains would then become one of the morning peak trains.

I recall Pelaw/Wardley being earmarked for a new depot location as it would also be a great location should they re-open the leamside. Maybe Pelaw for now however could just have better fencing/security and then stable trains there. Whilst it may cost, it may be an idea for DB/Nexus to trial it and just see how it is.

142094 · 2 Oct 2013

Single car working is generally seen as a last resort, mainly due to the fact that if it fails, it requires rescuing by another set. When travelling as a two car set, in the vast majority of cases it can be removed fairly quickly if one of the two develops a fault.

Probably old news by now but passing Jesmond this morning and saw that the Volker Rail tamper that was being used on the Manors curve derailed last night.

ModernRailways · 4 Oct 2013

Was on the Metro today - surprise surprise :lol:

- and noticed that my iPod said there was WIFI when I looked I saw it said 'Nexus_061B'. It was a locked WIFI, but is it a sign that we may be getting WIFI on trains? Or is this WIFI for the drivers/staff only? I was on Metrocar 4061 and at the B end. Here is an image if it doesn't display below.

Ze Random One · 4 Oct 2013

I'm sure I've spotted that before too...
I always suspected it may have something to do with the new CIS/next stop screens. If there isn't sufficient data bandwidth available through the coupling, then WiFi would be a relatively cheap way of allowing the two sets to communicate with each other (since the frequencies don't require a licence, the use is not safety-critical, and the kit is not specialist). There's no reason the WiFi on-train has to be connected to the wider world, it can quite readily be used just as a local area network.
If this is indeed the use, it may provide other benefits, for example an ability to update the messages given out just by running each train past a depot-based antenna that communicates with the on-board kit via its WiFi connection to reprogram the unit.
I guess another possible use is to allow the train's telemetry data to be downloaded for fault-finding, driver monitoring, whatever, wirelessly. Again this could only be done at the depot, rather than out on the road, so there would be no need for it to function in any way other than as a local area network.

If Nexus or DB were planning to roll out public WiFi, you can bet that would most likely have to be public knowledge, as I'm sure any contract value for the provision of such services would top one or more of Nexus' contract procedure rules limits, and probably OJEU limits, meaning that the contract would be required to be advertised.

hacman · 4 Oct 2013

This has been present for a while, although in later years they seem to have hidden the SSID - something you'd think would have been done right away for a non-public network. :roll:

Possible uses are the CCTV DVRs, PA system and FASSI device (though the latter is likely cellular).

WiFi APs at either 2.4 or 5GHz can be used as an intercar link device, although your not totally correct in stating that the equipment doesn't have to be specialised. Any WiFi equipment used on trains has to meet strict standards regarding its operational specifications (frequency, power output, etc), as well as physical construction. Installation of antenna cabling and hardware is also usually far more challenging.

Metro are not currently planning passenger WiFi on trains, although I'm surprised CBS haven't considered a model similar to that used elsewhere, where WiFi is provided off the back of the communications infrastructure used to support digital signage for travel information and advertising.

The system used on the S-Tog in Copenhagen is a good example - nice 15" screens in each car that display adverts with a bar along the bottom giving out service status and transfer information, in addition to the trains normal PA system. There are also advertising blocks for news, weather and service information from DSB.

Jon

142094 · 5 Oct 2013

Certainly wouldn't be used for drivers seeing as having a mobile phone in the cab which is not turned off is a big no no.

Don't think it is for Fassi as they are normally in the A end cabs only.

hacman · 5 Oct 2013

142094 said:
Don't think it is for Fassi as they are normally in the A end cabs only.

That's a point!

Most likely is just DVR then, as if I recall there is kit for those in the B cars.

Jon

ModernRailways · 11 Oct 2013

142094 said:
Single car working is generally seen as a last resort, mainly due to the fact that if it fails, it requires rescuing by another set. When travelling as a two car set, in the vast majority of cases it can be removed fairly quickly if one of the two develops a fault.

Two car sets could be run then. It isn't like Pelaw doesn't have enough room for them, although can trains from Pelaw sidings actually go into Platform 1? I'm not sure if it's set up for bi-directional running.

Also, coming back from college today it would appear that 4089 - the train involved in the level crossing incident - is back out. The numbers at the front appear to be in a different font to their counterparts!

It must also be said that the refurbs are certainly starting to take over. Lately, most of my journeys have been on a refurb set.

Paul_10 · 11 Oct 2013

ModernRailways said:
Also, coming back from college today it would appear that 4089 - the train involved in the level crossing incident - is back out. The numbers at the front appear to be in a different font to their counterparts!
.

Yep I noticed that, 4089 has been back out for a couple of weeks now which is good too see.

Metrocars 4008 & 4060 are now out on the system, former was seen today and was doing the South Hylton-Airport duties , latter was first seen last week and managed to catch a ride on it this morning.

142094 · 11 Oct 2013

ModernRailways said:
although can trains from Pelaw sidings actually go into Platform 1? I'm not sure if it's set up for bi-directional running.

Yes, there is a limit of shunt board at the Heworth end of platform 1 which authorises movements from the sidings to the platform.

I still don't think that there is any real justification to having sets stabled at Pelaw overnight. It would be far easier and more practical to have earlier out of service trains running from the depot to South Shields or South Hylton.

Tyne and Wear Metro

Established Member

RailUK Forums

Member

Established Member

Member

Established Member

Established Member

Established Member

Established Member

Member

Established Member

Member

Established Member

Member

Established Member

Member

Established Member

Established Member

Member

Established Member

Established Member

Established Member

Established Member

Established Member

Member

Member

Established Member

Member

Established Member

Member

Established Member