Class 710 LO

[87015]

Indeed, I just wondered if the 378 might have shaken up the schedule a bit, for better or worse. Is it running today or is it just the remaining 172s?

378 out all weekend as per earlier posts...

 

[31160]

378 out all weekend as per earlier posts...

Any idea what services it will be working tomorrow please

 

[87015]

Any idea what services it will be working tomorrow please

Yes see earlier. Don’t have it to hand now but I quoted it in the week from what the say was.

 

[Class 170101]

The Class 387s from either c2c or GN should be easy to get to / from their respective operators in track terms. The GW ones are more difficult though. They would need to run via North Pole Depot and the West London Line and Upper Holloway incurring three reversals along the way as the more direct route via the Poplar lines isn't wired.

However that being said can TfL actually use their Class 345s between Paddington and Reading releasing the shorter Class 387s for GOB work and be based ar Willesden for an extended period?

 

[greatkingrat]

There is a reduced timetable in operation at weekends with only 4 units needed (out of the 5x172 and 1x378 currently available). It is possible the 378 may be used at weekends at some point but there is certainly no guarantee it will be out at all depending on maintenance requirements.

 

[AlexNL]

However that being said can TfL actually use their Class 345s between Paddington and Reading releasing the shorter Class 387s for GOB work and be based ar Willesden for an extended period?

Technically it may be possible to do so, but getting this all to work would be quite an undertaking. It involves GWR, MTR, Arriva Rail London, and the respective TMDs and ROSCOs to all agree to it.

The GWR drivers would have to be trained on Aventra trains, the Arriva drivers have to be trained on the 387, and maintenance schedules have to be adjusted. Where are the 387's going to be maintained, and are the fitters trained for it yet? What impact will the increased use of 345's have on their maintenance regime?

Doable? Technically, yes.
Reasonably doable on a short term? No.

 

[liam456]

Why can't you poor forum people just accept that none of your harebrained rolling stock plans will work on the GOBLIN at all!

 

[AlexNL]

your harebrained rolling stock plans

Some could work... but not in the timescales required.

 

[liam456]

Some could work... but not in the timescales required.

Yes that's true, all depends on Bombardier's performance. I think fitting DOO cameras to these stock will probably take as long as the software problems on the 710s being sorted out.

 

[a_c_skinner]

The most harebrained scheme for rolling stock is the current one of prodigious numbers of small fleets each suited to and cleared for small parts of the network, each maintained at different places, needing retraining of staff to move from one to the other. The GOBLIN passengers are the current victims of this, but the inability to sub-lease any spare stock (Hull trains for eg, TPE after their 350 units were damaged) are other examples of this. Lucky Southern, almost all Electrostar 377s.

 

[Malcolmffc]

The most harebrained scheme for rolling stock is the current one of prodigious numbers of small fleets each suited to and cleared for small parts of the network, each maintained at different places, needing retraining of staff to move from one to the other. The GOBLIN passengers are the current victims of this, but the inability to sub-lease any spare stock (Hull trains for eg, TPE after their 350 units were damaged) are other examples of this. Lucky Southern, almost all Electrostar 377s.

Not sure what you are on about here given the 710s are cleared for the Liverpool St - Cheshunt services (and I suspect could be run anywhere on the LO network if needed). This is an improvement in the previous GOBLIN situation where the 172s could only run there.

 

[a_c_skinner]

Actually that is fairly fair, since 710s will be a reasonably large fleet. Mind you 378 cars (for lengthening I think) were still being built only a few years before the 710s were ordered.

 

[jopsuk]

The most harebrained scheme for rolling stock is the current one of prodigious numbers of small fleets each suited to and cleared for small parts of the network, each maintained at different places, needing retraining of staff to move from one to the other. The GOBLIN passengers are the current victims of this, but the inability to sub-lease any spare stock (Hull trains for eg, TPE after their 350 units were damaged) are other examples of this. Lucky Southern, almost all Electrostar 377s.

Most of the recent procurements are large fleets, admittedly for one specific route/area. The Class 720 fleet, for example, is roughly equivalent in length to almost 200 4-car Electrostars- there are 239 3, 4 and 5 car class 377. The class 345 order of 70 205m units is equivalent to 180 four car class 377. The Class 700 order would have been 285 four car units. If the class 701 are 20m carriages, then that's equivalent to 187.5 four car units.

There are some smaller orders, yes (the Anglia stadlers) but there's good reason for it. With (getting back on topic) the 710s, I'm fairly sure London Overground would happily have ordered class 378s if Bombardier were still offering them. But they weren't- as with any company, they're keen to update the product line and so had a final cut off for the previous technology generation; whilst it wasn't essential, for operational reasons, for the new Overground fleet to be compatible with the existing fleet.

 

[ijmad]

Anyone have an update on the curious case of the 710?

Any more testing going on?

BGO recent update:

BGORUG can see no end in sight for this intolerable situation. In spite of going through 27 versions of the Train Control Management System software, there is no sign that the Class 710 reliability is approaching anywhere near what is required for public service

Does not sound good.

 

[rebmcr]

Does not sound good.

27 versions is well within norms for a project like this.

 

[SteveOfTheStow]

If the software is the issue, then there may not be much testing until a new software version has been delivered, which takes time. Every delivered version is going to be hoped to be the right one, so after code changes it'll go through as much testing as possible (hopefully catching regressions and including testing for problems that are believed resolved) at Bombardier first before going out to the delivered trains.

 

[samuelmorris]

Anyone have an update on the curious case of the 710?

Any more testing going on?

BGO recent update:


Does not sound good.

A bit blustery but they do have a point. If the entry into service date for the 710s had been accurately forecast (very difficult to do I know), there would probably have been time to do the necessary to make use of off-lease 319s or 365s by this point. As it stands though, so far through the process, I imagine they will run the skeleton service with the three 378s indefinitely and bustitute the rest until the 710s are finally ready, whenever that may be. Theoretically speaking they could abandon the 710 entirely if they pass a certain point and draft in the aforementioned off-lease units on a semi-permanent basis, with a view to performing the other upgrades later on. It's only the 172s they absolutely have to replace, even if the 317s are in a pretty poor state.

Given the hassle of redoing the whole procurement process I can't see them doing that unless we hit 2020 with no firm service entry date, but it's not completely out of the question and would set an interesting, if rather unfortunate precedent.

 

[AlexNL]

27 versions is well within norms for a project like this.

"27 versions" does not say much. 1 "final" version with 26 changes made to it is definitely acceptable, 27 brand new versions are not.

 

[rebmcr]

"27 versions" does not say much. 1 "final" version with 26 changes made to it is definitely acceptable, 27 brand new versions are not.

Indeed, and I'll eat my hat if the quote was anything other than a layperson misinterpreting the former.

4 or 5 entirely distinct new versions "starting from scratch" would be the far extremes of plausibility, and indeed I would expect such a scenario to take much much longer than this.

 

[SteveOfTheStow]

It'll be one codebase released 27 times. The codebase will be large and low level - you don't throw something like that away and start over. That doesn't mean there have only been 27 'changes' though - there'll be many changes each rolled up into a version. Each release will go through intensive testing and review, because of the safety critical nature of its application, before it can go on a client train, so a release of a version will not be a process to do on a whim or after a single minor change because it'll be expensive, in time and money. Speaking as a software developer (not of safety critical applications, but I can guess from what I know).

 

[321over360]

Problem with the GOBLIN and given LO did away with the Guards on all their train services when they took on the Overground, as if they still had guards, then they could have retained several 315s that are coming off the GEML as a stop gap measure instead of working to the detriment of the ELL Core by using the 378s used on the New Cross terminators (yes people have other means of getting there, however it lowers the capacity on Surrey Quays to Dalston Jct core, as if they still had Guards on all London Metro trains then all EX BR stock would have been able to be used on the GOBLIN using the Guards Panel

 

[samuelmorris]

Problem with the GOBLIN and given LO did away with the Guards on all their train services when they took on the Overground, as if they still had guards, then they could have retained several 315s that are coming off the GEML as a stop gap measure instead of working to the detriment of the ELL Core by using the 378s used on the New Cross terminators (yes people have other means of getting there, however it lowers the capacity on Surrey Quays to Dalston Jct core, as if they still had Guards on all London Metro trains then all EX BR stock would have been able to be used on the GOBLIN using the Guards Panel

As far as I'm aware the guards' equipment on 315s is not in fit state to be used, a fair bit of work would be required to reinstate it.

 

[Railperf]

Bombardier are having problems in Switzerland too .....

"SBB and Bombardier regret the current situation and apologise to passengers for the fact that the stability of the trains does not yet live up to expectations. The current situation is not only difficult for passengers but also for the staff and project teams".

"
Faults relating to the doors, software/control technology, traction/motors and air compressor performance are at the roots of more than three quarters of all train disruptions and malfunctions.

As an immediate measure, Bombardier technicians and—in some cases—experienced SBB conductors have been present on trains since mid-December 2018 to improve availability. The number of passenger attendants has been increased due to door faults.

Experts from SBB and Bombardier are involved in daily discussions to analyse how the trains are functioning in operation. At the end of January 2019, new door-control software was installed. In addition, SBB and Bombardier have decided to carry out special maintenance by mid-March 2019 and to further optimise the vehicle software by April/May 2019."

 

[colchesterken]

Redirect a few 315s from scrap, overtime for 6 drivers to stand in as guards. operate doors from back cab, and use red and green flags.
when I was at work anything got done with a bit of overtime or a day off here or there

 

[samuelmorris]

In the BR days, quite possibly. Nowadays, the safety case of using drivers to perform a role they haven't been trained on would never be approved. A training course would have to be constructed. I'm not sure what unions would have to say about using flags either.

 

[delt1c]

Redirect a few 315s from scrap, overtime for 6 drivers to stand in as guards. operate doors from back cab, and use red and green flags.
when I was at work anything got done with a bit of overtime or a day off here or there

Those were the good old days when we always found a work around. Unfortunately
today is a different kettle of fish. Remember the harsh Winter of 1984 when 56's were hauling 4EPB's around because of the snow. But of course that was the "Bad" old days of BR when we had that ineficient joined up System

 

[87015]

Redirect a few 315s from scrap, overtime for 6 drivers to stand in as guards. operate doors from back cab, and use red and green flags.
when I was at work anything got done with a bit of overtime or a day off here or there

But things are being done. A 2tph 378 TT is exactly “getting the job done” despite the clueless wailing on Twitter. There are pages of reasons 315s aren’t being used. 3x378 will be able to operate more services than even 6x315 could AND provide more capacity than a 6x172 base.

Compare with GTR basically saying do one to inner passengers for six months!!

 

[samuelmorris]

Well, more capacity but at half the frequency isn't quite equivalent, but certainly better than nothing.

 

[Peter Sarf]

Well, more capacity but at half the frequency isn't quite equivalent, but certainly better than nothing.

I expect the priority for Bombardier is to carry out any required software updates and software testing on 345s. I expect any programmer etc resources used on the 710s will be to enable some but not all further mechanical testing. I always remember, when I was an Analyst/Programmer, that if there was too much going on then some projects (in this case class of train) would be prioritised over another. I think, at this stage, Bombardier would be focused on getting the almost complete fleet of 345s in action and paid for.

Lamentable that the delays are gradually dragging on leaving the user (Goblin route) with no forward planning ability. It would have been kinder for the supplier to be realistic about what they could achieve at an earlier stage. After all IIRC Siemens were not bidding for some contracts because they believed they could not deliver in the timescale required (OK that was on a mechanical front I suspect). It is what I always hated - having to keep quiet about an expected delay and watching parts of a company making unrealistic plans. I have seen unrealistic promises made just to get or retain the work.

Is the above what is happening here with the 710s ?.

It is not unusual. After all look at the timetable fiasco that everyone was too scared to admit might happen - and did happen. That is what happens when there is too much pressure to meet demands.

 

[plcd1]

I expect the priority for Bombardier is to carry out any required software updates and software testing on 345s. I expect any programmer etc resources used on the 710s will be to enable some but not all further mechanical testing. I always remember, when I was an Analyst/Programmer, that if there was too much going on then some projects (in this case class of train) would be prioritised over another. I think, at this stage, Bombardier would be focused on getting the almost complete fleet of 345s in action and paid for.

Lamentable that the delays are gradually dragging on leaving the user (Goblin route) with no forward planning ability. It would have been kinder for the supplier to be realistic about what they could achieve at an earlier stage. After all IIRC Siemens were not bidding for some contracts because they believed they could not deliver in the timescale required (OK that was on a mechanical front I suspect). It is what I always hated - having to keep quiet about an expected delay and watching parts of a company making unrealistic plans. I have seen unrealistic promises made just to get or retain the work.

Is the above what is happening here with the 710s ?.

It is not unusual. After all look at the timetable fiasco that everyone was too scared to admit might happen - and did happen. That is what happens when there is too much pressure to meet demands.

Let's be honest - not only is it Bombardier's priority to get the 345s working but it is also TfL's. They'd never say it publicly but it's evident that Crossrail has been the priority project for a long time. That priority was ratcheted up hugely when the delay was announced and then the huge cost overrun revealed. Obvously that's not all train related but TfL simply can't have work on the 345's software and signalling interface being delayed by anything else. That will have been made clear umpteen times in the "senior level" discussions between the two organisations.

The problem with the 710 fiasco is that no one will be honest, open and decent and admit what has gone wrong, why and how it will be fixed. I know I'm being ridiculously optimistic in expecting such an approach but passengers deserve an explanation and a realistic timescale for when the new trains might run. I note a remark above about the "4 car 378s" being an example of "getting stuff done". Well yes but extremely late in the day and a solution that is not sustainable. You simply can't flog the same three trains up and down the route for an average of 16 hours a day, 7 days a week with only a few overnight hours for "maintenance". Something around the service that passengers receive has to give at some point - be it the extent of hour operated or part or all of the weekend operation - to allow the trains to receive proper attention to keep them safe and operable. Even with 2 of the 378s now in use the service is extremely fragile. There have been train failures and points failures umpteen times lately causing the service to fall to bits. That fragility will be worse with only 3 trains.