TPE Mark 5A coaching stock progress

Bantamzen · 5 Jun 2019

sjpowermac said:
Yes, of course things go wrong, but why can’t TPE be a bit more honest and open?

Regarding ‘getting away with it’, I was thinking of how TOCs used to be held to account over franchise commitments. When Virgin Cross Country didn’t instal wi-fi they had to cough up...

https://www.telegraph.co.uk/finance...rossCountry-fined-for-lack-of-train-WiFi.html

Now TOCs can fail to deliver and nothing (seemingly) happens..

As always, happy to be corrected

So what's your solution? Clearly you must have a solution so I look forward to reading it? How would you guarantee that brand new, untested stock lands exactly when you expect it?

RailUK Forums

The_Train · 5 Jun 2019

Bantamzen said:
So what's your solution? Clearly you must have a solution so I look forward to reading it? How would you guarantee that brand new, untested stock lands exactly when you expect it?

I think the point is that TPE have continually thrown dates around and have failed each time. If they had just quietly got on with things, got the testing done and then announced an introduction date once they had a set (or sets) ready for public use then it's unlikely that they would be looking as daft as they do.

Oh and I'm also struggling to see where @sjpowermac has said they have a solution. If you could point me towards that it would be most helpful

The_Train · 5 Jun 2019

sjpowermac said:
I’m no expert
But I’ve seen a few times the train booked to run to Bletchley but turn back at Crewe and it’s been for a variety of reasons such as crewing/already enough miles completed.

Happy for anyone to correct me on that

Those are the good reasons. I think a few were pulled up short at Crewe for other issues (I think some sort of brake defect was a key problem in the early days) and whenever it happens now I automatically fear the worst haha

LittleAH · 5 Jun 2019

The_Train said:
I think the point is that TPE have continually thrown dates around and have failed each time. If they had just quietly got on with things, got the testing done and then announced an introduction date once they had a set (or sets) ready for public use then it's unlikely that they would be looking as daft as they do.

Oh and I'm also struggling to see where @sjpowermac has said they have a solution. If you could point me towards that it would be most helpful

Again, CAF are the issue as they were with the Caledonian Sleeper and that's 2 years late. Probably why TPE's twitter doesn't give dates anymore.

tpjm · 5 Jun 2019

sjpowermac said:
There must be some element of a TOC managing their supplier.

...

I agree too about the importance of getting things right before the trains are introduced. It seems that with the Mk5 sleeper stock it was a daily battle for the CAF engineers to batter the trains into service each night. That certainly wouldn’t wash on a route with extensive utilisation such as the TransPennine services.

sjpowermac said:
Yes, of course things go wrong, but why can’t TPE be a bit more honest and open?

...

Now TOCs can fail to deliver and nothing (seemingly) happens..

The_Train said:
I think the point is that TPE have continually thrown dates around and have failed each time. If they had just quietly got on with things, got the testing done and then announced an introduction date once they had a set (or sets) ready for public use then it's unlikely that they would be looking as daft as they do.

I would be really interested to hear how you anticipate TPE could have better managed CAF into delivering a fault free set into traffic, short of hiring their own talent and sneaking into MID to build the units overnight?

The reality is that CAF vastly overestimated their abilities and subsequently underestimated the requirements of building stock for the UK. Quite honestly, when a TOC and leasing company approach a rolling stock manufacturer, the lowest expectation is that they are capable of managing the production of rolling stock.

Given that you have pointed out that the CS stock has been riddled with issues, and I’m quite confident readers of this forum will be familiar with Northern’s CAF fleets, I don’t see how much of a surprise it is to people that Mk5a is running behind schedule.

In terms of the DfT/RNP, I’m not sure how they could help expedite the situation? They could issue a fine to TPE so they can issue a further penalty to CAF? Given that TPE/Beacon are putting resource into this project like nobody’s business, all in aid of supporting CAF to get these trains across the line, I’m not sure what else could be done.

Regarding dates for introduction, there is always a perpetual challenge with projects like these to ensure that any marketing and comms are kept up to date. You have to remember that when the marketing was devised, this project had a robust plan and even had a contingency on every fleet for unforeseen delays. The delay to Mk5a is unprecedented.

I understand it seems to be going on for a long time, but there are some seriously talented people within TPE who are sweating to get these trains introduced and it’s always worth remembering that TPE aren’t building and won’t own the trains...

sjpowermac · 5 Jun 2019

Bantamzen said:
So what's your solution? Clearly you must have a solution so I look forward to reading it? How would you guarantee that brand new, untested stock lands exactly when you expect it?

At no point have I (or any one else on the thread) criticised any of the staff on the ground working to introduce the stock. Several of them have posted very helpful information and updates, even when test runs have been taking place, that have been greatly appreciated. I’m sure that those people are doing everything possible to sort out the problems.

I’ve already explained to you that I’m not an expert. So, no knowledge of engineering or contract management.

I’ve also explained to you my original comment of ‘TPE getting away with it’ in terms of previous franchises being held to account over quite minor points, but current franchises (and TPE are not alone in this) being able to over promise and under deliver.

It seems that what you are saying is that a company can win a franchise agreement in a competition with other companies, not then stick to that agreement, and you can see no reason why they should be held to account by TfN who are overseeing the franchise.

I found your original post typical of the attitude that’s becoming all too common on the forum and that’s one of wanting to mock and put other people down.

Feel free to continue the conversation but this is my last word.

Ben Bow · 5 Jun 2019

Bantamzen said:
So what's your solution? Clearly you must have a solution so I look forward to reading it? How would you guarantee that brand new, untested stock lands exactly when you expect it?

I remember class 66's being unloaded from the ship onto the quayside at Newport and within a few hours being driven straight into service. It can be done. And the mk.5's are hardly untested - what was Velim for otherwise?

sjpowermac · 5 Jun 2019

The_Train said:
Those are the good reasons. I think a few were pulled up short at Crewe for other issues (I think some sort of brake defect was a key problem in the early days) and whenever it happens now I automatically fear the worst haha

I think there have been times too when RTT showed Bletchley when Crewe was the intended destination anyhow.

Fingers crossed for TP04 being handed over soon

Be carful not to say anything negative about TPE or you’ll be in trouble

68011 · 5 Jun 2019

D6700 · 5 Jun 2019

It is worth noting that the Class 1's show as "Unadvertised Express", which means they shouldn't show up in "public" systems - at least not without manual intervention.

absolutelymilk · 5 Jun 2019

D6700 said:
It is worth noting that the Class 1's show as "Unadvertised Express", which means they shouldn't show up in "public" systems - at least not without manual intervention.

Just to clarify, people will be able to board them though? Looks like a Railforums outing is needed if so!

D6700 · 5 Jun 2019

absolutelymilk said:
Just to clarify, people will be able to board them though? Looks like a Railforums outing is needed if so!

I have no direct knowledge, but feel it would be prudent just to treat them as a placeholder for now.

_toommm_ · 5 Jun 2019

absolutelymilk said:
Just to clarify, people will be able to board them though? Looks like a Railforums outing is needed if so!

They won't be able to be boarded - they're test runs so are still often Class 1, but these won't be for public use as they're just being tested on the quiet bit of the network.

Ben Bow · 6 Jun 2019

68011 said:
some Saturday paths in from 22nd June to the 7th September....whether they will run or not is anyone's guess

http://www.realtimetrains.co.uk/train/Y03042/2019/06/22/advanced
http://www.realtimetrains.co.uk/train/Y03045/2019/06/22/advanced
http://www.realtimetrains.co.uk/train/Y03043/2019/06/22/advanced
http://www.realtimetrains.co.uk/train/Y03047/2019/06/22/advanced
http://www.realtimetrains.co.uk/train/Y03044/2019/06/22/advanced
http://www.realtimetrains.co.uk/train/Y03048/2019/06/22/advanced
http://www.realtimetrains.co.uk/train/Y03046/2019/06/22/advanced
http://www.realtimetrains.co.uk/train/Y03049/2019/06/22/advanced

TPE usually run extra services between York and Scarborough on Summer Saturdays. This year, as the 185 fleet is very stretched and train crews are expected to be undergoing training on new stock, TPE will run these only if resources allow each week, that's why they haven't been published in the timetable.

sjpowermac · 6 Jun 2019

tpjm said:
I would be really interested to hear how you anticipate TPE could have better managed CAF.

I think I’m correct in saying that TPE chose CAF in the first place.

tpjm said:
The reality is that CAF vastly overestimated their abilities and subsequently underestimated the requirements of building stock for the UK.

All in agreement there.

tpjm said:
Given that you have pointed out that the CS stock has been riddled with issues, and I’m quite confident readers of this forum will be familiar with Northern’s CAF fleets, I don’t see how much of a surprise it is to people that Mk5a is running behind schedule.

All in agreement again.

tpjm said:
In terms of the DfT/RNP, I’m not sure how they could help expedite the situation? They could issue a fine to TPE so they can issue a further penalty to CAF?

In the past, TOCs have had penalties imposed for not keeping their franchise commitments. I’m not sure if it’s a good idea or not, but that does seem to have gone out of the window.

tpjm said:
Given that TPE/Beacon are putting resource into this project like nobody’s business, all in aid of supporting CAF to get these trains across the line, I’m not sure what else could be done.

That’s good to hear

tpjm said:
Regarding dates for introduction, there is always a perpetual challenge with projects like these to ensure that any marketing and comms are kept up to date.

That does seem a little odd that the operations/technical people can’t keep comms up to date, but I’m happy to take your word for it.

tpjm said:
I understand it seems to be going on for a long time, but there are some seriously talented people within TPE who are sweating to get these trains introduced

I’ve already commented that I’m sure people are working very hard to get the trains in service.

tpjm said:
and it’s always worth remembering that TPE aren’t building and won’t own the trains...

I don’t think anyone has said otherwise.

Do you know if TPE are actively seeking compensation from CAF? It’s seems like a shoddy show all round from them CAF if TPE/Beacon are having to do their job for them. Happy to be corrected on that.

I think it’s worth mentioning that we aren’t just talking about some enthusiasts being a bit inconvenienced at not bagging some Class 68 haulage. The TPE trains are very full over much of the route and the new capacity is really needed.

BMIFlyer · 6 Jun 2019

sjpowermac said:
Do you know if TPE are actively seeking compensation from CAF? It’s seems like a shoddy show all round from them CAF if TPE/Beacon are having to do their job for them.

The answer to that question would certainly be confidential info that can’t be mentioned here for obvious reasons.

tpjm · 6 Jun 2019

sjpowermac said:
In the past, TOCs have had penalties imposed for not keeping their franchise commitments. I’m not sure if it’s a good idea or not, but that does seem to have gone out of the window.

I think even the DfT are able to understand that there isn’t a quick fix to this situation. With something like CIS or accessibility upgrades I can see how a fine might ensure that TOCs don’t take the biscuit, but this is a bit more of a challenge.

sjpowermac said:
That does seem a little odd that the operations/technical people can’t keep comms up to date, but I’m happy to take your word for it.

I think my point was to counter what was said about the dates continually shifting and TPE not being honest. Obviously when something is published, it can then be hard to “unpublish” and amend it. What we see here is a business not wanting to put out false information, hence going a little quiet, and then updating their comms when a “firm” date is known. (Then something goes wrong with X component on the train and the cycle repeats)

sjpowermac said:
Do you know if TPE are actively seeking compensation from CAF? It’s seems like a shoddy show all round from them CAF if TPE/Beacon are having to do their job for them. Happy to be corrected on that.

Usually commercial contracts of this sort have an agreement as you describe.

sjpowermac said:
I think it’s worth mentioning that we aren’t just talking about some enthusiasts being a bit inconvenienced at not bagging some Class 68 haulage. The TPE trains are very full over much of the route and the new capacity is really needed.

I commute the north TransPennine route every day. I know the struggles and empathise with everybody who has no choice but to catch those “honeypot” trains. Hopefully it won’t be much longer before we see three shiny new fleets in action.

Ben Bow · 6 Jun 2019

tpjm said:
...I think my point was to counter what was said about the dates continually shifting and TPE not being honest. Obviously when something is published, it can then be hard to “unpublish” and amend it. What we see here is a business not wanting to put out false information, hence going a little quiet, and then updating their comms when a “firm” date is known. (Then something goes wrong with X component on the train and the cycle repeats)....

I don't think most people expect a day-by-day timetable for the introduction of the new fleets. But specific dates have been mentioned, for example two Nova 3 sets in service from 29 July. The problem that I think many people see, both inside, and out, of TPE, is that the company is very quick to tell about the positive things (fair enough, why shouldn't they) but clam up when things aren't going so well. This leads to information leaking out, sometimes distorted through the "Chinese Whispers" process, and people become frustrated at yet more delay with no information from TPE themselves, just as you would be if your train was delayed during its journey. A simple update I'm sure would go down well, there's no need to go into minute detail, something like:

"unfortunately, further issues have cropped up with "xxx". At this moment in time our technicians are working with CAF to find a solution, until then we can not give a firm date for the new fleet to enter service, however we can say that we will not make the 29 July target previously advised, and apologise for this. We will provide a further update once we have progressed with a solution, and the situation becomes clearer"

Given the length of the delay, we are now into years, rather than weeks or months, the frustration felt by customers, and staff, is understandable.

sjpowermac · 6 Jun 2019

Ben Bow said:
"unfortunately, further issues have cropped up with "xxx". At this moment in time our technicians are working with CAF to find a solution, until then we can not give a firm date for the new fleet to enter service, however we can say that we will not make the 29 July target previously advised, and apologise for this. We will provide a further update once we have progressed with a solution, and the situation becomes clearer"

I hope that the TPE comms team make a note of what you’ve written there, use it, and pay you a fee for it

I’m sure most people would have some understanding or even sympathy with some honesty, and I’m talking customers here, not just enthusiasts!

It certainly makes a lot more sense than the video tweet with the weather forecaster that they actually used...

sjpowermac · 6 Jun 2019

tpjm said:
I think even the DfT are able to understand that there isn’t a quick fix to this situation. With something like CIS or accessibility upgrades I can see how a fine might ensure that TOCs don’t take the biscuit, but this is a bit more of a challenge.

Again, I agree with most of what you’ve written there. The situation does, however, seem to make something of a mockery of having a franchise agreement.

I do wonder if the fact TfN/DfT haven’t got involved might have at least something to do with the following:

FIRSTGROUP: ‘We have concerns with the current balance of risk and reward being offered’ by UK passenger rail franchises, warned FirstGroup Chief Executive Matthew Gregory when presenting the train and bus operator’s annual results on May 30.’

https://www.railwaygazette.com/news...erned-about-uk-franchise-risk-and-reward.html

sjpowermac · 6 Jun 2019

BMIFlyer said:
The answer to that question would certainly be confidential info that can’t be mentioned here for obvious reasons.

I can understand that. I just wondered if I had missed something. As always, best wishes for the introduction of what I’m sure are going to be excellent trains.

Muenchener · 6 Jun 2019

TPE Class 68 "Felix" on the tail end of the 314R working Carlisle to Bletchley as seen at Lancaster this morning.

keith1879 · 6 Jun 2019

Not replying to any specific posting here ....I just want to point out what TransPennine themselves have actually said in their press releases regarding the "Nova 3" (Class 68 plus Mk 5A coaches).
20 May 2016. (referring to both CAF fleets) To be delivered in 2018 and 2019 and to be in service "by 2019".
27 October 2016 First to be delivered in 2018. From 2019 will run to Middlesbrough.
13 March 2017 Will begin to see them running from 2018
4 December 2017 "From 2018" (not sure if this was in service but that is certainly the implication).
18 April 2018 In service towards the end of 2018.
12 November 2018. Nova 3 fleet service entry delayed until spring 2019.

We still don't know when the first Nova 3 service will run ..... but the earliest starting time ever promised was "late 2018". As things stand it looks as though that time will be missed by maybe 9 months (perhaps as much as 12 - depending on your definition of late 2018). Full service for all the fleets has never been promised earlier than some time during 2020 (with Nova 3 fully in service during 2019).

Ben Bow · 6 Jun 2019

I have posted this before, but for reference this was the originally envisaged timescale - Nova 3 into service Summer 2018, all in service by Winter 2018/19. Slippage is to be expected, certainly.

gimmea50anyday · 6 Jun 2019

sjpowermac said:
Yes, of course things go wrong, but why can’t TPE be a bit more honest and open?

Because TPE are getting new trains, new trains will solve everything!

keith1879 · 6 Jun 2019

Ben Bow said:
I have posted this before, but for reference this was the originally envisaged timescale - Nova 3 into service Summer 2018, all in service by Winter 2018/19. Slippage is to be expected, certainly.

If this was not a public document (not sure where it was published/displayed) then it suggests that the press releases were purposely slightly less ambitious right from the start ....certainly there has never been an explicit public promise in a press release of all Nova 3 in service by Winter 2018/19. I appreciate that some of the comment on here may stem from staff dissatisfaction with TP management - I'm just trying to point out as a passenger that although these trains are late into service they are not yet "years" late as someone suggested upthread. As a taxpayer I expect that the civil servants will be monitoring the performance against contractual agreements quite closely - but it would be foolish to determine punishments until the exact degree of failure is known.

keith1879 · 6 Jun 2019

To be fair - one of the early releases said that the trains would be in service "by 2019" ....which could mean by 1 January 2019 ....but equally it could mean 31 December 2019.

Jonny · 7 Jun 2019

Ben Bow said:
CAF are TPE's chosen manufacturer for their new stock so in that sense they are responsible. Personally speaking, the delays are disappointing, but not the end of the world, the CAF rolling stock isn't the first to encounter a delayed entry to service, and I doubt it will be the last. Better to sort out any issues now, than have problems when in service, especially since CAF have no future role in maintenance, unlike Hitachi, for example. Its TPE's blasé attitude (demonstrated in the Twitter advert) which grates, and the lack of transparency. Some openess and a bit of humility would perhaps help assuage those passengers still wedging themselves into rammed 3 car 185's over a year after new trains were expected to provide desperately needed extra capacity.

Ben Bow said:
I have posted this before, but for reference this was the originally envisaged timescale - Nova 3 into service Summer 2018, all in service by Winter 2018/19. Slippage is to be expected, certainly.

It is incorrect to say that TPE have a single rolling stock supplier; yes they are taking two products from CAF and one from Hitachi; whilst CAF provides the majority of carriages overall Hitachi are providing the most of a single product. It seems that CAF are on a steeper learning curve and they are paying the price.

There seems to be relatively little slippage on Hitachi's end compared to that of CAF; unfortunately this has been an industry-wide problem that is affecting pretty much every TOC that is ordering new stock. They would likely have had the same problem with any other manufacturer.

BeHereNow · 7 Jun 2019

keith1879 said:
...but the earliest starting time ever promised was "late 2018". As things stand it looks as though that time will be missed by maybe 9 months (perhaps as much as 12 - depending on your definition of late 2018). Full service for all the fleets has never been promised earlier than some time during 2020 (with Nova 3 fully in service during 2019).

The original press releases when franchise started said “new longer trains from 2017”.

https://www.visitnorthumberland.com...ranspennine-express-rail-franchise-until-2023

https://leeds.wnychamber.co.uk/the-new-transpennine-express-franchise/

LOL The Irony · 7 Jun 2019

BeHereNow said:
The original press releases when franchise started said “new longer trains from 2017”.

Well someone was a bit unrealistic in the PR department.

TPE Mark 5A coaching stock progress

Established Member

RailUK Forums

Established Member

Established Member

Member

Member

Established Member

Member

Established Member

Member

Member

Established Member

Member

Established Member

Member

Established Member

Member

Member

Member

Established Member

Established Member

Established Member

Member

Member

Member

Attachments

Established Member

Member

Member

Established Member

Guest

On Moderation