Any chance you could just remind us what MTIN stands for?
Miles per Technical Incident Number
Any chance you could just remind us what MTIN stands for?
Miles per Technical Incident Number
In that case that’s absolutely jaw dropping that it’s gone from 180,000 to just 35,000 in just 2 years.
In that case that’s absolutely jaw dropping that it’s gone from 180,000 to just 35,000 in just 2 years.
From my personal experience, regularly using services on the South Western Mainline from Weymouth to Waterloo, it felt that shortly after the franchise announcement in March 2017, the condition of the 444s did decrease. The external doors got stuck a lot more or wouldn't lock, more threadbare seats than before, things like this.
I did expect it because the view I saw it as for Stagecoach- what's the point of spending money to keep them in top condition for the remaining 5 months?
The reliability of the 444s has heavily decreased, with 180,000 MTIN score in 2016 down to 100,000 in 2017 and finally 35,000 in 2018. They haven't got better since then, that is for sure!
Units were not in that bad of a state, the corrision was rectified relatively quickly. Delays caused by sub contractors dropping the ball during the refurbishment and modifications to the traction interlock system taking longer than expected. Doesn't help NR have taken forever and a day to get route clearance on the Portsmouth direct.
With any luck NR won’t give them their clearance on the direct. Sounds to me like either:
(a) Someone in SWR made a big mistake in accepting them, or
(b) Someone elsewhere knew what a state they were in, and wanted them shifted to someone else’s cost base à la sharpish.
Maybe both
Incidentally, what’s going to happen when there are operational or engineering diverts for example via the new line or Staines? Are they supposed to be cleared for those too? The bay platform at Fareham?
2017 to 2018 of course covers the first full year since the switch to WorstGroup control. There is plenty of evidence of SWR having cut stock holding and maintenance budgets, but they have also predictably clouded the issue by saying they have changed the way the data is reported.All classes with SWR, from 2017 to 2018, have had a heavy decrease in reliabilty (except 707s).
158s are down by 62%
159s are down by 59%
444s are down by 64%
450s are down by 53%
455s are down by 52%
456s are down by 35%
458s are down by 47%
(To correct myself, 444s score in 2016 was actually 171,000 but as you say, it is jaw dropping)
2017 to 2018 of course covers the first full year since the switch to WorstGroup control. There is plenty of evidence of SWR having cut stock holding and maintenance budgets, but they have also predictably clouded the issue by saying they have changed the way the data is reported.
I was using the 458s daily for several years after they made their return, with SWT eventually getting reliability (as reported) to over 100,000 MTIN. Do I believe those numbers? Well, given the mileage I was doing it would equate to one failure every two years on the trains I was actually on. That absolutely tallies with my recollection of faults down to the sets.Can’t really answer on that but SWT did end up reporting quite a lot of what would be fleet issues in other TOCs as unexplained traincrew, hence never winning anything at the golden whistles despite certainly on the main lines having the most respected guards of any for the former Southern Regions - a bit smoke and mirrors but how much that accounts for the change I don’t know.
As someone in Swindon Control once said the 158 that was hired on a daily basis to FGW did perform better than their own 158s but wasn’t twice as reliable as theirs which is what performance figures showed it should be, I suspect the answer was somewhere in the middle.
It will be interesting to see how 442s fare compared to previous SWR existence and their later southern existence, they have always a bit like the 458s been a bit of a problem child.
Yes, it was widely suspected in the industry, and by Roger Ford and Michael Holden, that SWT were cooking the books.Can’t really answer on that but SWT did end up reporting quite a lot of what would be fleet issues in other TOCs as unexplained traincrew, hence never winning anything at the golden whistles despite certainly on the main lines having the most respected guards of any for the former Southern Regions - a bit smoke and mirrors but how much that accounts for the change I don’t know.
As someone in Swindon Control once said the 158 that was hired on a daily basis to FGW did perform better than their own 158s but wasn’t twice as reliable as theirs which is what performance figures showed it should be, I suspect the answer was somewhere in the middle.
It will be interesting to see how 442s fare compared to previous SWR existence and their later southern existence, they have always a bit like the 458s been a bit of a problem child.
It will be interesting to see how 442s fare compared to previous SWR existence and their later southern existence,
It will be interesting to see how well they fit in with the SWR timetable. I expect they wont be THAT bad taking into account the slow door operation on the Desirio's, where as comparing them to something like an Electrostar would be significantly worse with regards to stock performance.Pretty badly on overall performance at Southern, with the London Bridge rebuild performance issues NR started having a very good look and it wasn't good. The 442s electrical systems caused a huge number of track circuit and other electrical issues! (As can bee seen with the late addition of the need to replace the auxiliary power equipment as well as the traction equipment.)
The dwell time issues on GatEx were getting progressively worse.
Much more to rolling stock performance than just MTIN alone.
They should be better post retractioning too as acceleration isn't great in their current condition.It will be interesting to see how well they fit in with the SWR timetable. I expect they wont be THAT bad taking into account the slow door operation on the Desirio's, where as comparing them to something like an Electrostar would be significantly worse with regards to stock performance.
I still think that the narrow doorway and large step will cause dwell time issues. Shouldn't be too much of a problem off peak, but can see some long dwells in the peak. Any calls at stations with short platforms will likely see dwell time increases too as 442s will only be able to front 5 SDO, with Desiros passengers have been used to being able to use more coaches for several years now.It will be interesting to see how well they fit in with the SWR timetable. I expect they wont be THAT bad taking into account the slow door operation on the Desirio's, where as comparing them to something like an Electrostar would be significantly worse with regards to stock performance.
It will be interesting to see how well they fit in with the SWR timetable. I expect they wont be THAT bad taking into account the slow door operation on the Desirio's, where as comparing them to something like an Electrostar would be significantly worse with regards to stock performance.
I still think that the narrow doorway and large step will cause dwell time issues. Shouldn't be too much of a problem off peak, but can see some long dwells in the peak. Any calls at stations with short platforms will likely see dwell time increases too as 442s will only be able to front 5 SDO, with Desiros passengers have been used to being able to use more coaches for several years now.
The theoretical 442 diagrams for December 2018 had them on the 1815 Waterloo to Portsmouth & Southsea which calls at quite a few shorter stations. Who knows what will happen in May, but wouldn't be surprised to see them on some services which do call at more stations.I guess that the sdo issue only applies to Fratton when being used on the Pompey direct, if they stick to the plan to use them on 'fast'.
The theoretical 442 diagrams for December 2018 had them on the 1815 Waterloo to Portsmouth & Southsea which calls at quite a few shorter stations. Who knows what will happen in May, but wouldn't be surprised to see them on some services which do call at more stations.
"Banished"?Hearing the 442s have been banished due to severe corrosion. Training set at fratton moved to Bournemouth at very slow speed over the weekend.
Hearing the 442s have been banished due to severe corrosion. Training set at fratton moved to Bournemouth at very slow speed over the weekend.
I am suggesting nothing. Purely stating what I have heard from a few people and have also seen at Fratton that there is no 442 lurking there today.Are you suggesting that the 442 restoration is going to be stopped? When do the 350/2s (or something else) become available, (notwithstanding the need for a DC conversion)? Is there really work for 127 450s in SWR's long term plan (allowing for 442s and 701s)?
Yes of course there is. They are needed for the full increased timetable.Is there really work for 127 450s in SWR's long term plan (allowing for 442s and 701s)?
The corrosion has already been addressed. It could be there was another fault or the sets at Fratton were due some kind of exam which necessitated them going to Bomo.Hearing the 442s have been banished due to severe corrosion. Training set at fratton moved to Bournemouth at very slow speed over the weekend.
So the usual “in the absence of anything official let’s guess/make something up”, as we have seen so many times.I believe NR will not clear the refurbished 442s as the change in weight has messed the ride height and profile, and using the sets that haven’t yet been modified for training runs would be now be counter productive. Nothing official just speculation FYI.