Separate names with a comma.
Discussion in 'Traction & Rolling Stock' started by richa2002, 16 Feb 2015.
There seems to have been a minimum of 1 diagram missing per day over the past few weeks.
9B92 has been cancelled at Woking this morning because it has tripped a number of conductor rail circuit breakers as it passed between Farnborough and Woking. Working well still.
At this rate, with the way these 442s are giving a number of hiccups, SWR should just get a hold of some SSL HST sets and use them instead!
Had a 442 stop at Bedhampton on Wednesday. That was an unexpected treat.
Luckily I don't have these trains dominating any of my normal routes, but I do have to get them occasionally depending on the time I leave work. So far this year I've experienced them six times: 3 times they have been cancelled due to faults, three times they've been delayed significantly due to faults.
Looking at twitter most fault-related delays seem to be 442s as well.
I've asked SWR if there is any known problem but they don't answer. So does anybody on the inside know if they are acrually faulty, or whether it is just bad luck / poor perception? And if the former, why are they in service?
Edit: although I've looked through a few pages and I'm still none the wiser - can someone give me a quick summary of what is up with them and how SWR think they are fit for service?
I doubt that anyone who really knows will be willing to make the details public. The main issue discussed on that thread is interference with signalling systems, but it seems unlikely that that's causing many of the current cancellations.
Problems may be a result of the traction equipment being around 53 - 54 years old (almost twice the age of the trains themselves). If so, the proposed replacement of that should resolve the issues. Of course it might introduce some new ones too, but I think the similar re-equipping of the 455s was generally successful.
I don't believe they were ever supposed to re-enter service on SWR with the original traction motors - the retractioning project has been delayed.
SWR could be down a 442 for a day or two, as one had an unfortunate meeting with a tree near a tunnel at Petersfield this morning.
It'll be fine, bit of filler and pinch a window from 2405.
Let’s hope the Driver is ok and not too shaken up.
Or the quicker option - reshunt them so the busted window is in centre of consist. (after taping it over obviously)
Driver was slightly shaken but unhurt, guard on the other hand was the same guard where the 442 caught fire at Petersfield
Glad the Driver is ok. Let’s hope the Guard is not a jinx!
I can't imagine what you mean!
Driver seemed ok but shaken up when they got back, the unit has had a quick fix by reversing the formation so that 2423 is now the London end set.
Indeed, good to hear everyone is ok if not a little shaken. A tree isn't the thing you expect to see approaching a tunnel mouth!
Kick out the screen and give the driver some goggles! It were fine when my pa were driving t’ steam trains with his head out the window etc etc
Glad the driver is ok
Depending on the weather the driver may also need an extra coat (also glad the driver was OK).
If a 442 is delayed by 11 minute, as the 7:54 from Guildford was today, how soon will someone know what the problem is?
Will it be after the journey when the driver and guard fill out anything they need to fill out on delays or will they be aware whilst the train is travelling?
If a train is this delayed, do Control try and contact the guard to find out why?
Most delays to 442s don't have a reason assigned to them it seems. Not even a currently investigating this delay as a reason. Perhaps that is because they aren't investigating at that time. Perhaps it's such a common occurrence they don't feel the need to do so.
Delayed today picking up passengers from the cancelled 0640 Havant (not 442). No need for control to ask the Guard. How it is explained to passengers is a separate matter but the delay was, as far as I can see, nothing to do with it being a 442. Happy to be corrected of course.
That is fair enough but when someone asked via Twitter they said they hadn't been given a reason for its delay.
I was onboard this morning and the train was not significantly busier than normal by Haslemere. I can’t see how loading can delay the train by 11 mins between Petersfield and Guildford. At Haslemere the dwell was short and many more than usual boarded
Control do sometimes contact guards to enquire about unexplained delays. If they don't, the crew are still required to do a report, but it probably won't be done until later in the day.
I see the 7:54 is also 11 minutes late today but given the 7:4ť departed on time, it can't be due to passengers boarding it, unless there was some unexpected hold up relating to a few passengers.
Rather interestingly it was delayed by the same amount of time as yesterday but yesterday the 7:45 was cancelled.
there is a 20mph just after Havant which could possibly cause the 3 minute delay by Rowlands due to the sluggish acceleration. Other than that I can only assume it’s passengers standing under the shelter then using 1 door.
looking at last nights down service, 9G53 1715 Waterloo - Ports S’Sea, it run right time the whole way, even though it calls all stations from Haslemere.
Perhaps it should be named The Reggie Perrin Express. “11 minutes late, staff difficulties at ....”.
I wonder whether staff familiarity is playing a part. Is this crew newly trained on 442s perhaps. Performance is very similar to the early introduction. Other 442 services seem to do a lot better although in any case of only being able to join the front 5 there is a risk of delay, especially in bad weather. Ok on the down evening peak as a rule as this is mainly egress.
there’s only a limited pool of crew trained on 442s, so the ones that do work them should be getting up to speed. Even the risks of SDO are a bit of a red herring. I genuinely think it’s because of passenger flow joining at short platforms. I wonder if investment in additional shelters and seating around where coaches 4 and 5 are would be beneficial and justified?
I think investment is a bit of a dirty word at the moment given how the franchise is seemingly on the verge of being handed back at any moment.
There are also some stations where there is a lack of destination dot matrix displays, so even if there is a scrolling message saying use front 5 cars, its often is not visible from parts of the platform, or from some seats or shelters. I am guessing these live departure in X minutes signs encourage people to stand where they can see the display (even if located in part of platform not being served) so they know when train is arriving
You don't have to search the network very hard to find stations where the platform entrance is near cars 7 or 8, but platforms not a full 10/12 car length, and the 10 car stop could result in front 5 cars being nowhere near where passengers wait. If doors on only 5 cars are being opened, should it stop at 5car or 10car stop ?
Since the desiros have had ASDO passengers have been used to all doors accommodated on the platform opening, its not been an issue needing consideration previously when boarding at least, so it’s unlikely to cross the minds of those waiting. I have heard new announcements at stations regarding the front door of the first carriage not opening but I’m unaware of how they warn passengers boarding at SDO stations about front 5 only.
On the 442’s usual fast stopping patterns only Fratton on the up has the issue that coaches in the busiest part of the platform by the entrance and footbridge don’t open forcing people to move forward. But as soon as they start adding stops at stations like Liphook, Bedhampton, Hilsea (down) and Liss, Witley and Milford (up) this issue becomes a major headache with a large numbers of passengers waiting on parts of the platform where doors won’t open. Of course one solution would be 442 only stop car marks at stations with short platforms, so the train doesn’t have to stop at the very end of the platform. This would be an unlikely scenario though as it would add operational risks.
We had such car marks fitted along certain SN routes when the 442s were used on GX and some Peak SN services to/from Eastbourne.