Is this the worst introduction of new stock or about average?

modernrail · 5 Apr 2019

Lots of trains that should have had passengers sitting/sleeping in them by now. Lots of implications for passengers, builders, funders, operators etc.

How do we feel it compares to average previous performance with new fleets. It is obviously not possible to be precise in for instance percentage terms but it is interesting to contemplate whether the industry is getting materially better or worse at these things.

RailUK Forums

dgl · 5 Apr 2019

Well when you look at the Juniper/Coradia fiascos then that put's it in some sort of context. At least we are not putting unreliable stock into service before it is ready/reliable (well the 700's weren't the best in terms of reliability when first introduced but a 458 it is not) and the problems that causes.
I suppose part of the issue is companies wanting to either grab a piece of the British rolling stock market or try to maintain there relevance but unfortunately with products that are not fully developed really and that is what is causing these late deliveries.

A0wen · 5 Apr 2019

dgl said:
Well when you look at the Juniper/Coradia fiascos then that put's it in some sort of context. At least we are not putting unreliable stock into service before it is ready/reliable (well the 700's weren't the best in terms of reliability when first introduced but a 458 it is not) and the problems that causes.
I suppose part of the issue is companies wanting to either grab a piece of the British rolling stock market or try to maintain there relevance but unfortunately with products that are not fully developed really and that is what is causing these late deliveries.

A bit unfair on the 700s - most new stock starts with what seems like poor reliability but after a couple of years as they become run-in and the maintenance teams get used to them you tend to see marked improvements.

A good number of BR's introductions weren't exactly trouble-free. The 317s were stood down for a time and subbed with 313s, the 319s although a development of the 317s weren't perfect.

Probably the "best" in terms of reliability in BR days were things like the 312s, 321s or the last of the Southern slam doors - but all of those were developments of earlier units (the 312s were improved 310s, the 321s improved 317s) so they should have been reliable from day 1.

Highlandspring · 5 Apr 2019

The introduction of the 158s in 1990 was similarly troubled, and as for the 155 debacle...

hexagon789 · 5 Apr 2019

Highlandspring said:
The introduction of the 158s in 1990 was similarly troubled, and as for the 155 debacle...

Indeed, two-car 156s on Glasgow-Aberdeen (even the odd 150/156 combo!)/four and six-car 156s on Edinburgh-Glasgow. Though I don't think it lasted too long, May-September?

Mag_seven · 5 Apr 2019

A0wen said:
A good number of BR's introductions weren't exactly trouble-free. The 317s were stood down for a time and subbed with 313s, the 319s although a development of the 317s weren't perfect.

In the late 80' the entire Class 90 fleet (well those that had been built at that time) was grounded for a time due to issues with the brakes. And even earlier, in the 60s, the new fleet of Class 303 "Blue Trains" were temporarily withdrawn after their transformers kept blowing up.

kilonewton · 5 Apr 2019

If you want see bad, look at how Queensland in Australia has been going over the past few years. Problems here look minor in comparison!

tbtc · 5 Apr 2019

As well as the fact that it's easy to forget just how awkward the introduction of some classes were in the past (aforementioned references to brand new units all coming out of service, ancient trains temporarily reinstated to cover etc), it's also worth remembering the historical context that there are huge numbers of new carriages being built at the moment (so some problems expected) - it's not that long ago that we went over a thousand days with no new rolling stock orders (from the British Rail 365s to the first Privatised units), so having delays in introducing new trains is kind of a nice problem to have!

(I'm not trying to defend the delays - everything seems delayed these days - converting/upgrading older trains seems equally fraught though - witness the ScotRail HSTs or lack of!)

61653 HTAFC · 5 Apr 2019

Just be glad none of the large fleet renewals around the turn of the century were awarded to Ansaldo-Breda!

Islineclear3_1 · 5 Apr 2019

Don't forget when the 456's were first introduced in NSE days, they couldn't enter service until the drivers' seats were modified due to sighting issues with the platform CCTV (from memory). I remember Fratton Yard was full of them

GrimShady · 5 Apr 2019

Highlandspring said:
The introduction of the 158s in 1990 was similarly troubled, and as for the 155 debacle...

Oh yes, I remember the introduction of the "scuds". You'd set off and never know where you'd end up.

Even the HSTs had huge issues with cooling in the early 80s. There's a good video on YouTuber somewhere of a single PC hauling an HST set trailing a MK1 BG fitted with a generator. The same sets were also hauled by 47s.

Let's not forgot the amount of crap diesel and electric locos introduced by the modernization plan. 31s had to be re-engined as did the 47s imI sure?

EDIT: Details and videos of the HST trailers with Mk 1BG can be found here.

https://www.rmweb.co.uk/community/index.php?/topic/83483-br-ic125-barrier-coach-formations/

I was mistaken, the YouTube video shows on PC hauling a HST rake with a barrier coach on the rear. There are pics of 47s hauling sets with MK1 BG.

Journeyman · 5 Apr 2019

GrimShady said:
Oh yes, I remember the introduction of the "scuds". You'd set off and never know where you'd end up.

Even the HSTs had huge issues with cooling in the early 80s. There's a good video on YouTuber somewhere of a single PC hauling an HST set trailing a MK1 BG fitted with a generator. The same sets were also hauled by 47s.

Let's not forgot the amount of crap diesel and electric locos introduced by the modernization plan. 31s had to be re-engined as did the 47s imI sure?

The 47s have kept their original engines, although a few were initially 48s, trialling a more powerful engine. That didn't last long, before the standard engines were substituted. However, they weren't particularly reliable, and the "Duff" nickname has stuck!

A lot of kit that ended up being reliable and successful gave no end of trouble when it was new, including the London Underground 1938 Stock, some of which is still operating eighty years later! The Routemaster bus is similar - it may have lasted literally forever, but they were very complex compared to their predecessors, and ironing out all the bugs took a good few years.

GrimShady · 5 Apr 2019

Journeyman said:
The 47s have kept their original engines, although a few were initially 48s, trialling a more powerful engine. That didn't last long, before the standard engines were substituted. However, they weren't particularly reliable, and the "Duff" nickname has stuck!

A lot of kit that ended up being reliable and successful gave no end of trouble when it was new, including the London Underground 1938 Stock, some of which is still operating eighty years later! The Routemaster bus is similar - it may have lasted literally forever, but they were very complex compared to their predecessors, and ironing out all the bugs took a good few years.

I got it wrong, BR derated the 47 engines from 2750 to 2580 due to stress cracking.

I thought the "Duff" name came from the amount of 47s on the network as they were so common.

AC47461 · 5 Apr 2019

c2c's 357s didn't have a particularly good start. Maybe a coincidence but they were among the first Electrostars introduced and had all sorts of problems, and now the same is happening with the Aventra platform.

squizzler · 5 Apr 2019

Like most other engineers, train designers are struggling with diminishing returns. That is to say, there are fewer opportunities to improve what are already refined products as the low hanging fruit is already gone, and those improvements remaining are more troublesome to introduce. Still, I think there is more room for train improvement vis-a-vis other products. I think it is instructive to compare train builders with other businesses:

There is little need to elaborate on the Boeing 737 tragedy, except to remark that not many rolling stock engineers and safety regulators are likely to wish to be in the shoes of their equivalents there. There were burning batteries on the 787, and elsewhere Rolls are struggling to get their engines to give the sort of trouble free service associated with the brand.

In personal transportation, cars stopped getting more reliable years ago. Tesla took an age to release their midrange model, whatever it is called. Driverless cars are about 10 years away and probably always will be. Diesel emissions still cast a shadow over the industry's credibility. And I am still waiting for my jetpack.

Bletchleyite · 5 Apr 2019

squizzler said:
There is little need to elaborate on the Boeing 737 tragedy, except to remark that not many rolling stock engineers and safety regulators are likely to wish to be in the shoes of their equivalents there. There were burning batteries on the 787, and elsewhere Rolls are struggling to get their engines to give the sort of trouble free service associated with the brand.

The difference between trains and planes is that if in doubt with a train, you can and should just stop.

Bertie the bus · 5 Apr 2019

The question can't be answered until the stock has entered service. If all the CAF stuff in particular enters service and beds down fairly quickly then although the delays have been bad and frustrating they're not that out of the ordinary. If they enter service and continue to encounter significant issues and poor reliability then I think it can be safely concluded they have been an abject failure.

I haven't kept up that well with the 800s on GWR but they seem to have been not too bad once they entered service, the main (and over repeated) complaint being the seats are a bit firm.

nlogax · 5 Apr 2019

GrimShady said:
Even the HSTs had huge issues with cooling in the early 80s. There's a good video on YouTuber somewhere of a single PC hauling an HST set trailing a MK1 BG fitted with a generator. The same sets were also hauled by 47s.

That'd be interesting to see. Any chance you have the link for it? My YouTube searching-fu isn't what it could be..ta

Chris217 · 5 Apr 2019

66s have worked straight out of the box.

Passenger trains are probably under stricter guidelines for operation so to pass the 'pass test before introduction hence all
the delays.
It does seem nowadays the British built trains always grab the headlines for the wrong reasons,either that or we are genuinely poor at train building.
Another aspect could be we want 150 new trains....next week lol

The question should be...
Has anything ever worked straight out of the box from day one?

The answer is simple?
No!

Ha,don't get me started on class 155s lol.

physics34 · 5 Apr 2019

I think mechanical problems are understandable but software problems are a bit less so, considering intense testing shouldve taken place before and during construction..by means of computer models or test trains. No real excuses.

Bertie the bus · 5 Apr 2019

Chris217 said:
It does seem nowadays the British built trains always grab the headlines for the wrong reasons,either that or we are genuinely poor at train building.

It is nothing to do with British built trains. CAF are having huge problems. They are being built in Spain. The latest generation of Siemens trains have also encountered problems and delays. They weren't built in Britain either.

Chris217 · 5 Apr 2019

Trains run by computers are the main reason I suspect.
Never had computers in steam engines!
Not surprised they tried to replace the driver with computer operation like on the DLR.
Like driverless buses Stagecoach have shown off!
What's the point? You'll always need someone up front until a fail safe system is introduced.
Maybe that's the future?
One thing is for certain. The brain box who dreamt up the idea will become a millionaire whilst millions of drivers around the world will become unemployed!

Just like a self service till at Tesco.
Do away with an employee and replace with a machine and save on the wages bill at the same time.

GrimShady · 5 Apr 2019

nlogax said:
That'd be interesting to see. Any chance you have the link for it? My YouTube searching-fu isn't what it could be..ta

I've made an edit to the original post, see above. Interesting stuff.

modernrail · 5 Apr 2019

Chris217 said:
66s have worked straight out of the box.

Passenger trains are probably under stricter guidelines for operation so to pass the 'pass test before introduction hence all
the delays.
It does seem nowadays the British built trains always grab the headlines for the wrong reasons,either that or we are genuinely poor at train building.
Another aspect could be we want 150 new trains....next week lol

The question should be...
Has anything ever worked straight out of the box from day one?

The answer is simple?
No!

Ha,don't get me started on class 155s lol.

Agreed, maybe that is the better question!

samuelmorris · 5 Apr 2019

A0wen said:
A bit unfair on the 700s - most new stock starts with what seems like poor reliability but after a couple of years as they become run-in and the maintenance teams get used to them you tend to see marked improvements.

A good number of BR's introductions weren't exactly trouble-free. The 317s were stood down for a time and subbed with 313s, the 319s although a development of the 317s weren't perfect.

Probably the "best" in terms of reliability in BR days were things like the 312s, 321s or the last of the Southern slam doors - but all of those were developments of earlier units (the 312s were improved 310s, the 321s improved 317s) so they should have been reliable from day 1.

I'm sure I've heard of a fair few issues with the 321s' introduction.

nlogax · 5 Apr 2019

GrimShady said:
I've made an edit to the original post, see above. Interesting stuff.

Thank you. Really unique clip with that Mk2 gen coach on the rear.

F Great Eastern · 5 Apr 2019

The Bombardier debacle is pretty bad, I have to admit, it has the potential and is already heading towards the era of Alstom where they launched a few classes with delays and poor reliability. Considering the number of Aventras that have been ordered for many franchises and also more franchises still depending on stock replaced by Aventras becoming available, it has the prospect to cause issues for much of the industry.

Questions have also been raised about the quality of their work on other recent stock as well, note that DB are now refusing delivery of more ICE4s because of the fact the work that Siemens subcontracted Bombardier to do is apparently of a poor standard.

Iskra · 5 Apr 2019

Trains are more complicated than ever, and safety standards are more rigorous than ever, so it's logical really.

delt1c · 5 Apr 2019

kilonewton said:
If you want see bad, look at how Queensland in Australia has been going over the past few years. Problems here look minor in comparison!

Give us a link so we can compare

Iskra · 5 Apr 2019

A couple of international examples:

From Italy https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/V250_(train)
From India: https://www.railforums.co.uk/threads/indian-bullet-train-delayed.179773/ Then of course it broke down on its first day.

Is this the worst introduction of new stock or about average?

Member

RailUK Forums

Established Member

On Moderation

Established Member

Veteran Member

Forum Staff

Member

Veteran Member

Veteran Member

Established Member

Established Member

Established Member

Established Member

Member

Established Member

Veteran Member

Established Member

Established Member

Member

Established Member

Established Member

Member

Established Member

Member

Established Member

Established Member

Established Member

Established Member

Established Member

Established Member