TractiveEffort
Member
- Joined
- 29 Nov 2016
- Messages
- 290
It was the line closed last night, due to the railhead being underwater, so closed to all traffic, not just 800/802.
-
Our booking engine at tickets.railforums.co.uk (powered by TrainSplit) helps support the running of the forum with every ticket purchase! Find out more and ask any questions/give us feedback in this thread!
IETs (not) banned through Dawlish during rough seas
- Thread starter irish_rail
- Start date
- Status
Sponsor Post - registered members do not see these adverts; click here to register, or click here to log in
R
RailUK Forums
modernrail
Member
- Joined
- 26 Jul 2015
- Messages
- 1,048
Would this prevent damage to the engines? Does the engine need to be running for the problems that are being experienced to occur or is it just the general soaking that would cause the problem?I stand corrected! Something like that would do just the job. Though rather than coughing up money for the entire route to be electrified or for an avoidibg route to be built I can totally see this government paying to electrify between Exeter and Newton Abbot only.
As a contracts lawyer this is an interesting one. I would say the drafting is inadequate. Where exactly the line between spray and a wave is I am not sure but the drafting should have been much more comprehensive.
As GWR ordered the trains perhaps the DfT doesn't care much about the specification in the tender, it is more about a breach of franchise agreeement.
It looks like GWR might be the ones under pressure here unless they beefed up that drafting when they ordered the trains that run through Dawlish.
Failed Unit
Established Member
Hopefully they are working on a fix. Not the first time a train was got grounded a fixed. Look at the 91s and the wrong type of snow.
overheating HSTs, 158s disappearing from signalling systems.
I wonder why they never bothered fixing the voyagers. Surely it isn’t impossible.
overheating HSTs, 158s disappearing from signalling systems.
I wonder why they never bothered fixing the voyagers. Surely it isn’t impossible.
Last edited:
edwin_m
Veteran Member
I think they increased the fuel capacity on the 802s, so the original IETs might not be able to manage the West of England diagrams. I also think I there was also some mention of the 802s having better protection against salt water due to expected running via Dawlish - taking the thread title absolutely literally does this ban only apply to the original IET units or the 802s as well?
irish_rail
Established Member
Ok, seems that is probably more plausible than a total IET ban, I happily stand corrected. However, it is a fact that in past 2 days many IETS have lost multiple engines along dawlish, including the 1703 off London which lost 5 of 6, so something needs to be done.
I was lucky enough to be shown an extract from the control logs. Line was closed due to railhead being underwater, however, when the line was reopened the signaller was requested to run IETs on the up line only to prevent gensets being battered by freak waves and potentially being knocked out.
A train isn’t a boat or ship and snorkels on Land Rovers don’t make them immune from water ingress. They just improve wading capacity which is not the issue here.
Bletchleyite
Veteran Member
The point is that it is possible to design a train to withstand a dousing, at a cost of course.
plymothian
Member
802s aren't totally Dawlish proof.
We got through on 1 engine (all the others had shut down), but had to wait 15 minutes at Newton Abbot for them to be restarted so we could get over the Devon banks.
We got through on 1 engine (all the others had shut down), but had to wait 15 minutes at Newton Abbot for them to be restarted so we could get over the Devon banks.
Mitchell Hurd
On Moderation
- Joined
- 28 Oct 2017
- Messages
- 1,646
I'm not sure if it was in the contract but I remember it saying on Twitter (or reading it somewhere) ages ago that one was being tested for the rough weather.
I blimin hope the IET's won't be stopped at Dawlish like the Voyagers! If that's the case then I can see a lot of complaints being made to GWR.
samuelmorris
Established Member
This will be much more disruptive than the Voyagers as the 80x make up a much bigger proportion of the service in that area. Any details on work is necessary to rectify this?
Whilst the spec is badly written I would have thought there would be a good case in court for...
“Spray is undefined, but if they wanted it defined they should have asked. And anyway everybody knows why this was specified so if they weren’t covering Dawlish eventualities then they should have made that clear”
“Spray is undefined, but if they wanted it defined they should have asked. And anyway everybody knows why this was specified so if they weren’t covering Dawlish eventualities then they should have made that clear”
fgwrich
Established Member
Don't forget that GWR (and to some extent XC) will still have some use of the, ahem, good old HSTs down there too. If it comes to it, there could be a situation whereby passengers change onto a HST at Exeter St Davids to head west.
northernbelle
Member
- Joined
- 10 Oct 2018
- Messages
- 680
I have to say, this 'ban' has proven so far to be nothing but rumour. There's certainly been nothing official from GWR.
I understand the main problem is the engine management software being sensitive and shutting the engines down - I believe an attempt is being made to address this with the next software drop during November. Another are doors becoming sensitive to sea water ingress - I'd be curious to know how the 'new' power door fitted HSTs cope in similar conditions given that this isn't the most reliable aspect of the fleet.
It's rather premature to be discussing an outright 'ban' (i.e. a sectional appendix-style restriction) and turfing everyone off to 'good old HSTs' every time there's perturbed working due to sea conditions.
I understand the main problem is the engine management software being sensitive and shutting the engines down - I believe an attempt is being made to address this with the next software drop during November. Another are doors becoming sensitive to sea water ingress - I'd be curious to know how the 'new' power door fitted HSTs cope in similar conditions given that this isn't the most reliable aspect of the fleet.
It's rather premature to be discussing an outright 'ban' (i.e. a sectional appendix-style restriction) and turfing everyone off to 'good old HSTs' every time there's perturbed working due to sea conditions.
Was it not the 373s that were caught out with them wrong kind of snow’?
Failed Unit
Established Member
i think that was later. The 91s had snow ingress fairly new after introduction.
To underline with my GW controller’s hat on - there is no ban on IET operations over the sea wall in inclement conditions, nor has there been at any point up until now. Service was suspended for all trains briefly Tuesday due to very rough seas; and resumed when additional staff were secured to ride the trains through the affected section.
There was some concern after a series of trains had GUs cut out after being struck by waves - that is waves, not spray (which is what afflicts the 22x units and is the motivation behind their “ban”). This was however mitigated by running IETs reversibly over the up line between Dawlish Warren and Teignmouth.
Sprinters and HSTs have lost engines while traversing the sea wall in rough conditions and being struck by waves. It’s nothing new. I’m sure Hitachi are looking at ways of improving resilience - as @northernbelle points out they are already looking at software updates to de-sensitise the engines which are cutting out for seemingly silly reasons at present.
There was some concern after a series of trains had GUs cut out after being struck by waves - that is waves, not spray (which is what afflicts the 22x units and is the motivation behind their “ban”). This was however mitigated by running IETs reversibly over the up line between Dawlish Warren and Teignmouth.
Sprinters and HSTs have lost engines while traversing the sea wall in rough conditions and being struck by waves. It’s nothing new. I’m sure Hitachi are looking at ways of improving resilience - as @northernbelle points out they are already looking at software updates to de-sensitise the engines which are cutting out for seemingly silly reasons at present.
61653 HTAFC
Veteran Member
It's probably safe to say that whilst the IEP specifications demanded resilience from spray, at times the conditions along the sea wall can be so severe that all movements must stop for safety reasons.
They're supposed to cope better than Voyagers, sure... but they aren't designed to be amphibious!
They're supposed to cope better than Voyagers, sure... but they aren't designed to be amphibious!
The Prisoner
Member
- Joined
- 22 Aug 2012
- Messages
- 326
So this basically isn’t true and there’s been a load of speculation and guessing about all the trouble Hitachi are going to get into. Why post something that’s a bit of a guess?
Should’ve used VAR...
irish_rail
Established Member
Because I clearly stated it was something I'd heard from a colleague and that I wasn't certain it was completely true . I have since held my hands up it turned out to be false , but fact remains, IETs currently are not resilient enough to cope with dawlish, whether that will change is anyone's guess.
Hmm. Not sure that wouldn't make things worse.
what are the extra staff for?
fgwrich
Established Member
From what I've been informed this week, it will need more than a "plug a laptop in and download some software updates" type situation. However, Hitachi are aware of the issue and will be working on it. It isn't to do with the air intakes, but seemingly isn't so much software related either.
I have heard the same and would not be surprised if this were to be the case after Wednesday night’s debacle.
If it is not the case then fair enough but I believe more bad weather is forecast for Saturday so it will be interesting to see how things pan out over the weekend.
Last edited:
To start with trains we’re running along the reversible (up) line before conditions deteriorated and the tracks became flooded. The lines were then all closed until the situation improved.
To check for any obstructions on the line etc.
northernbelle
Member
- Joined
- 10 Oct 2018
- Messages
- 680
As you seem to know better than the industry folk on here, go on, tell us what the real problem is...?
irish_rail
Established Member
If you believe that this is fixable with a mere software fix, then you are probably the type of person who believes Boris Johnson will deliver on all his promises, haha.
Look at voyagers , been trying for years to fix them, and we are still none the wiser how to dawlish proof them. Why would IETs be solvable with just a software tweak?
Look at voyagers , been trying for years to fix them, and we are still none the wiser how to dawlish proof them. Why would IETs be solvable with just a software tweak?
northernbelle
Member
- Joined
- 10 Oct 2018
- Messages
- 680
Explain to me why it wouldn't?
If the engine management software is shutting GUs in certain scenarios, the software can be changed to change the scenario in which the engines are shut down.
- Status