444/450 ASDO introduction into passenger service

Juniper Driver · 11 Oct 2015

Actually I thought the test runs were being done without passengers on board.Similar to the test runs on the 459s.

Also another feature of ASDO is being able to release 10 instead of 8 @ Clapham Jn Down Main.Which is obviously much better.

RailUK Forums

HarleyDavidson · 11 Oct 2015

For clarification that's 10 cars of a 12 car 450 set or 9 cars of a 10 car 444 set.

ChampsRacing · 12 Oct 2015

The whole confusing thing is that there is two types of ASDO now. 459's operate by single antennas in each coach that passes over the beacon will be released. So if 6 pass over 6 will be released. However if a 444/450 just has 1 coach pass over the beacon, it will tell the train X amount of coaches are allowed to be opened here.
As far as the first problems went. I believe the initial testing was done on Ecs trains but the incident happened on a Shadow service where they was testing it out in service with managers and fitters onboard. There was a line in the software which remembered the previous station which shouldn't of been possible. This has since been corrected.

Juniper Driver · 12 Oct 2015

The 459 system is superior.

ChampsRacing · 12 Oct 2015

It is by far. I know as traincrew we are meant to check its accommodated, but, in case this didn't happen or if a train fails and grinds to a halt half way down the platform, it is far better.

HarleyDavidson · 12 Oct 2015

Juniper Driver said:
The 459 system is superior.

It might be, but the 459's are inferior to the 444/450 when it comes to reliability. So the Windsor side is a good place to keep them.

swt_passenger · 12 Oct 2015

Saw two examples of the train PIS fully working this afternoon.

Down Poole service, the front 4 cars of the 444 were announced by the onboard PIS for Shawford.

Same 12 car 450 service from Eastleigh to Fareham (as in last weeks post) sat in coach 10 of 12, and PIS advised "the next station is Hedge End/Botley/Fareham, passengers for this station must be in the front 8/6/8 coaches"...

(That was an attempt to summarise three separate announcements, of course...)

ChampsRacing · 12 Oct 2015

Today was the day that all PIS systems should've been working by with the updated system.

infobleep · 12 Oct 2015

On the 17.56 from Woking it said on the station CIS that of your alighting at Guildford you need to be in the front 11 coaches.

I thought Guildford could handle 12 coaches of a 450. The guard only mentioned Fratton when talking about coach numbers.

swt_passenger · 12 Oct 2015

infobleep said:
On the 17.56 from Woking it said on the station CIS that of your alighting at Guildford you need to be in the front 11 coaches.

It's probably for the same reason as I described in my post #34 about Eastleigh. The stations information system will be defaulting to the limitation of the platform in the opposite direction. The platform announcements for down direction trains, made at previous stations, state front 9 for a 12.450 at Eastleigh, but all 12 sets of doors open because the track mounted balise and the train system can cope with different directions.

HarleyDavidson · 12 Oct 2015

That's a CIS error, Woking is a 12 car platform and that train's booked through the down main at Guildford (Platform 4) another 12 car platform.

swt_passenger · 12 Oct 2015

HarleyDavidson said:
That's a CIS error, Woking is a 12 car platform and that train's booked through the down main at Guildford (Platform 4) another 12 car platform.

Fair enough, however the platform length at Woking isn't really relevant here, is it, as it would only have been announced at stops prior to Woking?

infobleep · 12 Oct 2015

swt_passenger said:
Fair enough, however the platform length at Woking isn't really relevant here, is it, as it would only have been announced at stops prior to Woking?

After I put up my post, I heard the guard comment to a member of Network Rail staff about it saying 11 when it's actually 12.

If is something that can be fixed I'm sure it will be eventually. I remember it taking a year or more to change Streatham to Waterlooville. That was on the train CIS, some years ago.

Pumbaa · 12 Oct 2015

swt_passenger said:
Thanks for entering the discussion, because although I felt sure a situation was being described that had never actually happened, only an insider would know for sure.

Am I right in thinking that a 100% change of the balises took place, clearly those fitted now are physically different (shorter and fatter) compared to those originally fitted?

When comparing the SWT and SN versions of the 'Tracklink' system, I feel the question of GPS vs Balise is a bit of a red herring, because on SN's version they also use a balise to override GPS wherever it is necessary to differentiate between different adjacent platform lengths, or whenever the GPS is 'shielded' - such as in a main terminus like Victoria. So in comparison, SWT's version is simply skipping the GPS location stage and going straight to the more specific track mounted balise.

Pretty much re the SWT/Southern.

No - there are several designs of balises. But they are largely dictated by track geometry and the accommodation that it may provide. Shorter balises = more difficult to install (in summary). The larger balises are still preferred as they more stable and less prone to being damaged by ballast/debris/stuff being dropped by NR.

Water ingress though...
--- old post above --- --- new post below ---

Juniper Driver said:
The 459 system is superior.

It is more failsafe, but the Desiro solution (integrated with PIS and TMS) is far superior for the customer. And at least you can tell which bit of the system has failed - with 458s you're left guessing!

Juniper Driver · 12 Oct 2015

Pumbaa said:
It is more failsafe, but the Desiro solution (integrated with PIS and TMS) is far superior for the customer. And at least you can tell which bit of the system has failed - with 458s you're left guessing!

Haven't really had a problem with the 459 system and I've been on them a year and a half.Even during the time there was one set out.(Touchwood)

Today I had some sort of asdo error when running up to a red signal outside Egg and Ham on a desiro.A beep then a flashing red door thingy on the TMS.Then an announcement in the train about it and then it cleared.Im sure there is a notice out about this.

Quite happy with the 459's and all the problems I have had has made me wiser to them.442's were the worst for faults and breakdowns in the time I drove them.Even so I still liked the units and learned a lot when driving them.

SpacePhoenix · 13 Oct 2015

Juniper Driver said:
Quite happy with the 459's and all the problems I have had has made me wiser to them.442's were the worst for faults and breakdowns in the time I drove them.Even so I still liked the units and learned a lot when driving them.

From both a driver's and fitter's point of view wouldn't the 442s have been better? Little if any electronics to go wrong?

Domh245 · 13 Oct 2015

No if said electronics are half a century old, and are frequently breaking down!

HarleyDavidson · 13 Oct 2015

They're not even 30 years old yet, they were introduced in '88. And they're still way better than any of the trash that the privatised railway has come up with.

Juniper Driver · 13 Oct 2015

SpacePhoenix said:
From both a driver's and fitter's point of view wouldn't the 442s have been better? Little if any electronics to go wrong?

They still hold the record for me for the most breakdowns and I haven't driven one since Feb 2007 my last breakdown being Jan 2007 @ Branksome.Even assisted by a class 73 once.Was on one traveling pass to Bournemouth once when it broke down in the leaf fall.Also assisted by a 73,motors burnt out.With tons of smoke coming out the train as we hit Basingstoke.Alas I didn't make it to Bournemouth to work a train.

D365 · 13 Oct 2015

SpacePhoenix said:
From both a driver's and fitter's point of view wouldn't the 442s have been better? Little if any electronics to go wrong?

If what you're saying is "less is more", why exactly are trains, cars etc. being built with fancy new vehicle management systems? Surely not so that more things can go wrong.

Indeed, I feel as if you're indirectly beginning to question my choice in undergraduate study :lol:

HarleyDavidson · 13 Oct 2015

Sometimes less is more. The one thing I liked about the 442's is the simple fact that you could notch them, the door mechanisms were simple and best of all you didn't get some poxy TMS to tell you that the bog in the TSW is blocked or door has jammed! :roll:

Only ever had three sets give me grief, 1x10 car & 1x5 car (2409), the 10 car had interlock issues (I won't expand on them) and 2409 gave up the ghost at Hinton Admiral when it had that poxy electronic camshaft, got it going after a 4 minute pause there and it was fine after tweaking it!

infobleep · 13 Oct 2015

Do all the trains tell you which coach your in regardless of whether there are short platforms? The 8.02 from Woking to Waterloo this morning was telling me which coach I was in but it doesn't have short platforms on route as far as I am aware.

I actually like knowing this fact. I believe Southern use to give the information out but noe it's only when the train splits or only certain coaches open at certain stations.

HarleyDavidson · 13 Oct 2015

infobleep said:
Do all the trains tell you which coach your in regardless of whether there are short platforms? The 8.02 from Woking to Waterloo this morning was telling me which coach I was in but it doesn't have short platforms on route as far as I am aware.

I actually like knowing this fact. I believe Southern use to give the information out but noe it's only when the train splits or only certain coaches open at certain stations.

I know what it will do and that's with all of the other unnecessary announcements, it will just cause passengers to switch off and ignore them! :roll:

swt_passenger · 13 Oct 2015

infobleep said:
Do all the trains tell you which coach your in regardless of whether there are short platforms? The 8.02 from Woking to Waterloo this morning was telling me which coach I was in but it doesn't have short platforms on route as far as I am aware.

Given the number of single 450s I've been on over the last week or so showing the coach number, then I'd say yes. I have not heard an SWT 'announcement' of the coach number on its own yet though - in the previous 'Southern' style.

I actually like knowing this fact. I believe Southern use to give the information out but now it's only when the train splits or only certain coaches open at certain stations.

That's right, Southern trains used to have an audio announcement "this is coach X of Y", which would be played regularly irrespective of train length, or any splitting/joining, but they have now limited the audio announcements to where they are needed. The coaches still display their number at times though without an announcement. They also usefully have the information shown externally, because the displays are fitted to far more (all?) coaches, and they have two line displays.

In an earlier thread someone highlighted that displaying the coach number without an announcement would be a problem w.r.t. RVAR rules, I think that question remains unanswered.

BestWestern · 13 Oct 2015

HarleyDavidson said:
They're not even 30 years old yet, they were introduced in '88. And they're still way better than any of the trash that the privatised railway has come up with.

The traction equipment is much, much older than the rest of the train however!

I'm still a fan though

infobleep · 13 Oct 2015

BestWestern said:
The traction equipment is much, much older than the rest of the train however!

I'm still a fan though

Don't know if it's my imagination but some or all of the older rolling stock that I've been on seem to have more comfortable seats.

Juniper Driver · 13 Oct 2015

Had trouble uncoupling a desiro tonight but managed to work it out before the train was due out.Mechanically coupled again.That's come up a lot recently but this is the first time under ASDO conditions.I forgot what the yellow fault on the TMS was but I haven't seen it before.I think it gave me a hint on how to fix it.

HarleyDavidson · 13 Oct 2015

LOL. So you got caught too.

Key on, Cancel, MS to R, Uncouple button, then acknowledge, then reverse (I think that's right!) and it should then come apart.

But why oh why make it so bleedin' complicated. Detaching should be able to be achieved in less than 20-30s, not nearly 60!

hassaanhc · 13 Oct 2015

BestWestern said:
The traction equipment is much, much older than the rest of the train however!

I'm still a fan though

As are the 455s, still going strong with the ancient EE507 motors! And still SWT's most reliable stock.

As for my favourite EMU, I'm afraid the 455s are tied with 319s :oops:

--- old post above --- --- new post below ---

DAB_Move said:
If what you're saying is "less is more", why exactly are trains, cars etc. being built with fancy new vehicle management systems? Surely not so that more things can go wrong.

Indeed, I feel as if you're indirectly beginning to question my choice in undergraduate study

IIRC, the 73ts and D78 still appear around the top of the LUL reliability list, although it has been about 2 years since I last saw any figures.

HarleyDavidson · 13 Oct 2015

The 455 fleet is still powered by the good old ee507 motors and air/oil camshafts, but not for much longer, the current system of camshaft control and line switches is being replaced by new modern IGBT traction systems, converters and AC motors.

The first two have been done and passed all the tests, so I don't think it'll be long before they start doing the rest.

444/450 ASDO introduction into passenger service

Established Member

RailUK Forums

Established Member

Member

Established Member

Member

Established Member

Veteran Member

Member

Veteran Member

Veteran Member

Established Member

Veteran Member

Veteran Member

Established Member

Established Member

Established Member

Established Member

Established Member

Established Member

Veteran Member

Established Member

Veteran Member

Established Member

Veteran Member

Established Member

Veteran Member

Established Member

Established Member

Established Member

Established Member