-
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!
What is the cause of unreliability of Vivarail Class 230 trains?
- Thread starter ac6000cw
- 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
Here is an account of the operation of the Marston Vale line for the six days from Monday October 28 to Saturday November 2 (no Sunday service). I've tried to keep it free from comment and stuck to when and where problems occurred although perhaps our local correspondents can contribute to "why". I don't know the area well enough to comment.
Reliability. Out of 204 scheduled journeys 6 were cancelled (about 3 %) of which 4 were due to crew issues. 2 (1%) were ascribed to traction equipmemnt on RTT.
Punctuality. Of the 198 trains operated 84 (about 42%) recorded on-time arrivals. 41 (about 21%) were 5 minutes late or more. On 12 occasions this was primarily due to a late start. So approximately 14% of all trains operated lost 5 minutes or more en route.
The time lost en route was mostly lost at stations and for the most part was 30 seconds here and 45 seconds there. So far I can't see any evidence of the same train attracting delays each day but 2S13 spent three minutes at both Woburn Sands and Ridgmont on two successive days which might be suggestive.
A late start can cause a serious knock-on effect - on Friday 2S17 left Bedford 22 minutes late ...this one event caused (or at least contributed to) 10 of the 41 serious late arrivals.
I'll try and do this for four weeks to give us a bit of solid info.
Reliability. Out of 204 scheduled journeys 6 were cancelled (about 3 %) of which 4 were due to crew issues. 2 (1%) were ascribed to traction equipmemnt on RTT.
Punctuality. Of the 198 trains operated 84 (about 42%) recorded on-time arrivals. 41 (about 21%) were 5 minutes late or more. On 12 occasions this was primarily due to a late start. So approximately 14% of all trains operated lost 5 minutes or more en route.
The time lost en route was mostly lost at stations and for the most part was 30 seconds here and 45 seconds there. So far I can't see any evidence of the same train attracting delays each day but 2S13 spent three minutes at both Woburn Sands and Ridgmont on two successive days which might be suggestive.
A late start can cause a serious knock-on effect - on Friday 2S17 left Bedford 22 minutes late ...this one event caused (or at least contributed to) 10 of the 41 serious late arrivals.
I'll try and do this for four weeks to give us a bit of solid info.
Thanks for doing that. So, on the face of it, the 230's had a good week last week.
DarloRich
Veteran Member
interesting - thanks - this is something i really should have done by, frankly, couldn't be bothered to do!
May I add a couple of user comments?
- Train reliability issues have, anecdotally, fallen recently. ( I am unconvinced that the issue shave gone away but are being masked by cold weather)
- Cancellations recently have been staff related
- The week before an entire day service was lost due to the small fire discussed above ( that will really impact the figures for that week)
- Station dwell times can be an issue ( the doors speed is still an issue)
- There are still niggling door issues that eat up time
- The attitude of the guards can impact on the punctuality of the service ( i don't mean this in a bad way but they have to decide to prioritise doors or tickets)
- Woburn is one of the busier stations and there is a wheelchair user who is a regular from there
- Ridgmont has a cafe/visitors there so perhaps there was slow loading
- Signalling/ level crossing issues are a constant minor irritation that eat up seconds here and there
last week = not bad. Considering the state of the LNWR main line service it was absolutely rock solid! The week before............................
Having recently retired I now have the time to analyse things that interest me ....rather than what my clients want
With regard to the previous week I think that 15 services were cancelled on the Saturday of the fire so even if there were no other cancellations due to motive power that week you get a reliability figure of no better than 90%...unfortunately I didn't make any detailed notes.
Hope your journeys are acceptable for now anyway.
DarloRich
Veteran Member
Having recently retired I now have the time to analyse things that interest me ....rather than what my clients want
With regard to the previous week I think that 15 services were cancelled on the Saturday of the fire so even if there were no other cancellations due to motive power that week you get a reliability figure of no better than 90%...unfortunately I didn't make any detailed notes.
Hope your journeys are acceptable for now anyway.
The week of the fire was frustrating - i have simply decided to measure the services i use. My patience has snapped!
https://www.recenttraintimes.co.uk lets you do searches like this https://www.recenttraintimes.co.uk/...tSpr=RT&MxScDu=&MxSvAg=&MnScCt=&ArrGph=ArrGph
ashkeba
Established Member
- Joined
- 13 May 2019
- Messages
- 2,171
Is there a lot of PRM blaming on this website just now or am I unlucky what I'm reading today?
For information ...the delays at Woburn which I highlighted were trivial in the context of the late running over the whole week. They did seem to form a pattern of sorts.
That's a really useful addition to my bookmarks. Thankyou.
We could get quite a bit from this ....I have pulled out reliability (total trains run as percentage trains scheduled) for the 7 weeks preceding my figures above....so working backwards from the figures for the week ending Saturday 2 November we can see that the figures for each of 8 weeks are as follows.
98 (see above...4 of the 6 cancellations were train crew related)
89 (week of the fire)
100
95
91
93
91
94
I don't know to what extent these cancellations were train or crew related. Looking at the distribution of cancellations I think that the phrase " daily cancellations" was fair comment for the 4 oldest figures. There is the potential to get figures on lateness from this resource but I do have other things to do! For now I will stick to my ongoing analysis and I do have some ideas to look at lateness in more detail.
DarloRich
Veteran Member
Eh? What are you on about?
ashkeba
Established Member
- Joined
- 13 May 2019
- Messages
- 2,171
It did not seem like you had much reason to blame the wheelchair useing regular for all delays at Woburn.
DarloRich
Veteran Member
Chill out I wasnt blaming anyone!
Xenophon PCDGS
Veteran Member
Do you think that when next summer comes, with its now expected spells of hot weather, will the problems encountered by the Class 230 units on the Marston Vale line that were caused by that will have been solved by then?
DarloRich
Veteran Member
As set out above I am unconvinced that the issues are simply not just being masked by the cooler weather
Bletchleyite
Veteran Member
Given that the key ones were caused by overheating, I wouldn't be at all surprised were that the case.
Intuitively one would have to be cautious until we actually get to next summer. On the other hand I'm not sure that ambient temperature is a huge factor in the operating temperature of a diesel engine. We already know that there were serious problems in cooling the engines due to pollen clogging the air intakes which (hopefully) will have been addressed. The key issue I suspect is a clear air flow around the engine/genset/whatever.
(Editing in some figures. Typical operating temperature for a diesel engine is 180 to 190 Celsius, there is an ambient temperature difference between July and now of maybe 20 Celsius. Maybe a diesel expert could confirm if this is significant or not).
Last edited:
I had the impression that the (single?) comment that you were responding to was factual rather than finger-pointing.
Sleeperwaking
Member
- Joined
- 20 Oct 2018
- Messages
- 166
As others have said, there's a difference between pointing out a fact and pointing the finger of blame - AFAICT it was just presented plainly as a fact. It's a fact that deploying a ramp takes more time than not deploying a ramp. However, if doing so incurs delays, it's the TOC's fault for not building enough time / resources into their operations to accommodate it, seeing as they have a responsibility to provide access. I haven't read anything in the recent posts blaming the passenger.
Bletchleyite
Veteran Member
I completely agree, and I believe this was the nature of the comment. The delay was caused by loading a PRM passenger, the TOC is at fault for the fact that this causes the train to be late on an ongoing basis as it means the timetable does not contain enough slack. Which is entirely their fault, as on the MV there are very long layovers and almost nothing else affects it, so they can just add 5 minutes to the end to end running time (say) if this is necessary on a repeated basis.
Pity low-floor isn't mandatory - over on Greater Anglia there will be no such delays.
ashkeba
Established Member
- Joined
- 13 May 2019
- Messages
- 2,171
Do MV rail user groups include PRM group delegates like GA ones at least in Cambridge area?
DarloRich
Veteran Member
No idea. It is a group of volunteers so it would need someone who uses a wheelchair or has another mobility impairment to volunteer thier time.
Updated account of the operation of the Marston Vale line for the six days from Monday November 4 to Saturday November 9 (previous week figures in brackets).
Reliability. Out of 204 scheduled journeys 0(6) were cancelled although one working from Bletchley was turned back at Ridgmont due to passenger illness. Thus 0(2) were cancelled due to train problems.
Punctuality. Of the 202 completed journeys 77(84) or 38%(42%) recorded on-time arrivals, 142(126) or 70%(64%) were a maximum of 2 minutes late. 25(41) or 12% (21%) were 5 minutes late or more. On 5(12) occasions this was primarily due to a late start. So approximately 10%(14%) of all trains operated lost 5 minutes or more en route.
Again the time lost en route was mostly lost at stations and for the most part was 30 seconds here and 45 seconds there. There were one or two notable delays but still not much of a pattern.
Digging into the overall figures a bit - there has been a substantial reduction in total lateness across all trains so that on average each train was about 2 minutes late (in the previous week the average lateness was around 5 minutes - skewed by some extreme individual figures).
Reliability. Out of 204 scheduled journeys 0(6) were cancelled although one working from Bletchley was turned back at Ridgmont due to passenger illness. Thus 0(2) were cancelled due to train problems.
Punctuality. Of the 202 completed journeys 77(84) or 38%(42%) recorded on-time arrivals, 142(126) or 70%(64%) were a maximum of 2 minutes late. 25(41) or 12% (21%) were 5 minutes late or more. On 5(12) occasions this was primarily due to a late start. So approximately 10%(14%) of all trains operated lost 5 minutes or more en route.
Again the time lost en route was mostly lost at stations and for the most part was 30 seconds here and 45 seconds there. There were one or two notable delays but still not much of a pattern.
Digging into the overall figures a bit - there has been a substantial reduction in total lateness across all trains so that on average each train was about 2 minutes late (in the previous week the average lateness was around 5 minutes - skewed by some extreme individual figures).
hooverboy
On Moderation
- Joined
- 12 Oct 2017
- Messages
- 1,372
OK so it's within the bounds of acceptability then.90% or so within 5 mins of schedule is fairly decent.
I think bletchleyite/Darlo rich are probably correct when they say it's being masked by the weather.
Can we really be sure these things are reliable in either adverse heat or adverse cold?
We won't be sure until a few months time on the latter. Can't see Adrian Shooter doing nothing about the summer issues, wouldn't surprise me if a mod had been thought of and in the process of testing already.
0 trains cancelled is an excellent week. These units are turning the corner and lets hope they continue to remain reasonably reliable for both passengers and crew sake.
0 trains cancelled is an excellent week. These units are turning the corner and lets hope they continue to remain reasonably reliable for both passengers and crew sake.
Bletchleyite
Veteran Member
I'd call it "tolerable". The line is isolated from almost everything else and has very long layovers at the Bletchley end, which means as high as 99.5 or so (taking into account non-rail causes like the passenger taken ill) should be entirely achievable, and if there's a lucky day with no outside influences causing delays it should reach 100% on occasions. So some progress (or luck due to the weather), but much more to be done.
100% reliability (no cancellations) is good though, as it's cancellations that have been the real plague.
hooverboy
On Moderation
- Joined
- 12 Oct 2017
- Messages
- 1,372
nobody will achieve 100% reliability or punctuality, but 90% should be do-able even when you throw a couple of SHTF scenario's into the mix.
siganlling failures/hold ups at platforms and so on there should already be plenty of scope for in the timetable.ie 20 mins downtime at bletchley.
idiots at level crossings etc are the "known unknowns" and can't really be fully accounted for.it's more a question of when,where,and how bad that determines the severity of the delay.
shortage of train crew doesn't really wash as an excuse.it's inevitible that staff will be off sick/have accidents or family issues to attend to,so there should be sufficient provision with standby crews.
The rub seems to be who has been signed for what route/traction
OK I get some of it(ie route learning/stops etc),but an easyjet standby crew for instance will end up an any number of countries at very short notice,should cover be required.The flight will still depart.
the process becomes easier if the type of fleet traction deployed is smaller and they are already briefed on where safety equipment is/emergency evacuation procedures.....perhaps a benefit of NOT using a microfleet.
Last edited:
Bletchleyite
Veteran Member
You do occasionally get 100% but it can't be expected due to non-railway causes, but a simple line like that should routinely be achieving 99%. If it isn't and there aren't unit faults causing it the timetable needs changing.
hooverboy
On Moderation
- Joined
- 12 Oct 2017
- Messages
- 1,372
like I said,idiots at level crosings or an overzealous schoolkid going under because his/her "friends" have distracted them during embarkation or disembarking throws a few odd scenarios into the mix. there is enough slack in the timetable for the majority of incidents,but you will get the odd one to throw a curve-ball.
I think 99% is a bit optimistic
**** happens sometimes.
when I was 13 I nearly lost my leg because I slipped on some ice at a bus stop and the bus started pulling away.fortunately I managed to get my leg out of the way of the back wheel of the bus before it got flattened.
not my fault,not the buses fault,just bad luck....but could have been much,much worse...and for some people,sadly,it is.
Last edited:
DarloRich
Veteran Member
i suspect they will be fine in the cold. Snow i am not sure about if they have issues with pollen!
- Status