Fault free introduction of new trains

[MotCO]

There have been several threads bemoaning the failure rate of new trains entering service - for example the 230s on the Borderline https://www.railforums.co.uk/thread...-borderlands-line.191986/page-71#post-6233739

Growing up, I remember the introduction of the 508s on the Waterloo - Kingston - Waterloo loop replacing slam door stock, but do not remember widespread cancellations etc due to faults emerging in service. Likewise, I recall the introduction of Networkers and 376s at Orpington, again with no on-going issues apart from the odd door sticking.

Was I looking at this through rose-tinted spectacles and there were problems with the introduction of these trains? Or are recent trains more complex with multiple signalling systems installed etc which causes them to often fail? Or were the testing regimes more stringent in the past, so any problems were resolved before entering service?

Any thoughts?

 

[hexagon789]

There have been several threads bemoaning the failure rate of new trains entering service - for example the 230s on the Borderline https://www.railforums.co.uk/thread...-borderlands-line.191986/page-71#post-6233739

Growing up, I remember the introduction of the 508s on the Waterloo - Kingston - Waterloo loop replacing slam door stock, but do not remember widespread cancellations etc due to faults emerging in service. Likewise, I recall the introduction of Networkers and 376s at Orpington, again with no on-going issues apart from the odd door sticking.

Was I looking at this through rose-tinted spectacles and there were problems with the introduction of these trains? Or are recent trains more complex with multiple signalling systems installed etc which causes them to often fail? Or were the testing regimes more stringent in the past, so any problems were resolved before entering service?

Any thoughts?

The 508s were notorious for sliding when new. I'm sure I read in Modern Railways of delays caused by drivers taking it 'easy' with them.

Not sure what modifications if any were done, but one unit famously overshot Shepperton station on 1982 and came close to 'colliding' with the Ian Allan Publishing HQ.

 

[Magdalia]

Growing up, I remember the introduction of the 508s on the Waterloo - Kingston - Waterloo loop replacing slam door stock, but do not remember widespread cancellations etc due to faults emerging in service.

The entire class 508 fleet was withdrawn from service in November 1981 because of problems with the disc brakes during autumn leaf fall.

 

[hexagon789]

The entire class 508 fleet was withdrawn from service in November 1981 because of problems with the disc brakes during autumn leaf fall.

There we go, case in point!

 

[CBlue]

The entire class 508 fleet was withdrawn from service in November 1981 because of problems with the disc brakes during autumn leaf fall.

158s had the same issue with some being coupled to half a tread-braked 156 so they could operate track circuits properly


Going back even further, plenty of the BR-sourced diesel locomotives had issues like exploding engines/turbochargers, or mass overheating issues. Class 31 springs to mind, practically the whole lot were re-engined as the original Mirrlees power units were hopeless.

HST's also had issues, overheating was a fairly large problem as I recall reading on here somewhere.

So.....nothing new!

 

[hexagon789]

158s had the same issue with some being coupled to half a tread-braked 156 so they could operate track circuits properly

The 508 issue was braking performance not operation of track circuits

 

[Magdalia]

Class 31 springs to mind, practically the whole lot were re-engined as the original Mirrlees power units were hopeless.

That is not correct. The Brush Type 2 re-engining programme came a long while after they were introduced. The first loco was delivered in 1957 and the first loco to be re-engined was in 1964. 7 years is a very long definition of introduction.

Elimination of steam in East Anglia and on the GN suburban happened because Brush Type 2s were delivered on time and worked out of the box. When new they often worked passenger trains on the day that they arrived at home depot after completing acceptance trials at Doncaster.

 

[XAM2175]

508s and 313s also had a lot of bother with their electrical coupling blocks.

303s had the exploding transformers.

I think we're probably seeing two overlapping things here - trains are becoming more and more technologically complex, yes, and therefore a bit more prone to failures that are difficult to track down and fix, but moreso the major factor is that it's just a hell of a lot easier for us to find out and blether about these failures now than it used to be!

 

[LiftFan]

HST's also had issues, overheating was a fairly large problem as I recall reading on here somewhere.

I heard somewhere that the Mk3s actually had issues with cracking too when they were new?

 

[twpsaesneg]

Class 155 were introduced with much fanfare and then all rapidly withdrawn due to door issues. Soon after the decision was made to rebuild the whole fleet apart from the West Yorks PTE units into Class 153.

 

[The exile]

The electrification of the “Jazz” services out of Liverpool Street was hardly crowned with glory either. Both then and now - the idea of the prototype seems to be beyond us. Germany’s 103 and 120 electrics had prototypes running for several years before the series locomotives were ordered (admittedly in the latter case it didn’t seem to help much!) - and as for the 628 dmus…..

 

[Spartacus]

...the idea of the prototype seems to be beyond us. Germany’s 103 and 120 electrics had prototypes running for several years before the series locomotives were ordered (admittedly in the latter case it didn’t seem to help much!) - and as for the 628 dmus…..

The trouble is that you'll build a prototype then almost always realise there's a load of things that you want to do differently on the production model, then you could have trouble with the production model that you didn't with the prototype, DP2 vs Class 50 for example. The alternative is to either build a number of slightly different prototypes, or after the first one build a second prototype with the new features you want. The first is potentially outrageously expensive and a maintenance nightmare, especially if the production ones get cancelled, the second is less expensive (but still inevitably more than a single prototype) but heavily delays the build and introduction of the production model.

 

[MotCO]

Thanks for all the comments about issues on newly introduced trains. But did they lead to widespread cancellations and bustitutions as we are seeing on the Borderline with the 230s? Were the slam door trains scrapped when the new 508s and Networkers were introduced, so were not available to stand in? Indeed, there probably were not any sidings available to keep them locally, so were there widescale cancellations, short formations etc, or were the issues only minor and could be attended to later whilst still allowing the trains to run?

 

[Welly]

I recall back many years ago, my mate and I deciding to bail out of a Class 377 at Clapham Junction after it had sat down for 10 minutes doors opening and closing while re-booting several times!

 

[hexagon789]

I heard somewhere that the Mk3s actually had issues with cracking too when they were new?

I'm not aware of any structural cracking, but certainly there were issues with thermal cracking of the brake discs on the power cars.

 

[Spartacus]

Thanks for all the comments about issues on newly introduced trains. But did they lead to widespread cancellations and bustitutions as we are seeing on the Borderline with the 230s? Were the slam door trains scrapped when the new 508s and Networkers were introduced, so were not available to stand in? Indeed, there probably were not any sidings available to keep them locally, so were there widescale cancellations, short formations etc, or were the issues only minor and could be attended to later whilst still allowing the trains to run?

More loco hauled slam doors replacing things than bustitution, although there probably were cases of buses being used. Of course it was much harder to find out exactly what was going on in other areas of the country then.

 

[Southsider]

More loco hauled slam doors replacing things than bustitution, although there probably were cases of buses being used. Of course it was much harder to find out exactly what was going on in other areas of the country then.

North Clyde services had to revert to steam when the 303s were withdrawn for modification.

 

[Spartacus]

North Clyde services had to revert to steam when the 303s were withdrawn for modification.

Reminds me of the early years of the Class 40s, and other early diesels, often to be found with a steam loco between them and the train during winter months because the boilers had packed up.

 

[Mzzzs]

MK4 suspension had to be modded.
Class 91 had fine snow going into the air intake.

 

[ComUtoR]

Likewise, I recall the introduction of Networkers

Rather infamously known as Notworkers. They also used to split between coaches and motors were known to fall off in tunnels...

 

[Russel]

Trains are large, complex pieces of kit where testing and real world use can be very different, so it's not surprising that issues don't always become apparent until introduction into service.

 

[hooverboy]

The other bee in the bonnet is lack of production volume.
Typically an order for some type of stock will be in the region of several tens or hundreds of units,so it's not like a car production line that will be rolling off hundreds per week.

The lack of quantity generally means that iterations of mechanical/electrical/control systems is done by much smaller teams of staff,costs more,takes longer,and finds fewer bugs when troubleshooting,and also taking said bugs longer to rectify.
Even more so,now a lot of the unit has software elements running the whole show.

Years ago it would have been in the realms of mechanical(of various persuasions,not just physical, but things like metallurgy as well, and electrical engineers to sort out).These days you also need IT specialists who can be conversant in several different languages and write/re-write scripts in order to communicate the instructions to the electrical and mechanical gear.Not an easy job at all if you have ever tried your hand at automation.

 

[Henffordd]

How long ago was "the wrong sort of snow"?

 

[hexagon789]

How long ago was "the wrong sort of snow"?

1987?

 

[stuu]

Early 90s, it was in relation to the networkers

 

[bramling]

There have been several threads bemoaning the failure rate of new trains entering service - for example the 230s on the Borderline https://www.railforums.co.uk/thread...-borderlands-line.191986/page-71#post-6233739

Growing up, I remember the introduction of the 508s on the Waterloo - Kingston - Waterloo loop replacing slam door stock, but do not remember widespread cancellations etc due to faults emerging in service. Likewise, I recall the introduction of Networkers and 376s at Orpington, again with no on-going issues apart from the odd door sticking.

Was I looking at this through rose-tinted spectacles and there were problems with the introduction of these trains? Or are recent trains more complex with multiple signalling systems installed etc which causes them to often fail? Or were the testing regimes more stringent in the past, so any problems were resolved before entering service?

Any thoughts?

I’d say most new fleets go through the issue to a greater or lesser extent. The only real exception seems to be where someone has ordered something which is at the tail end of an established production line, and where the staff and depot already have experience with similar units - Southern’s repeat Electrostar orders spring to mind, though even the FCC 377/5s had a bit of a troubled introduction which culminated in the Kentish Town incident.

LU is no different; indeed the 92 stock has never really settled down. The 09 stock seemed reasonable untroubled as far as the passenger was concerned, though at the cost of the two pre-production trains ultimately being scrapped and replaced due to the amount of modifications. S stock was very troubled for a time but did quickly settle down.

 

[BanburyBlue]

508s and 313s also had a lot of bother with their electrical coupling blocks.

303s had the exploding transformers.

I think we're probably seeing two overlapping things here - trains are becoming more and more technologically complex, yes, and therefore a bit more prone to failures that are difficult to track down and fix, but moreso the major factor is that it's just a hell of a lot easier for us to find out and blether about these failures now than it used to be!

There's probably a lot more (commercial) pressure to get these things into service these days.

 

[Magdalia]

How long ago was "the wrong sort of snow"?

1991.

Early 90s, it was in relation to the networkers

Before Networkers.

It definitely affected GN services which were class 317s at the time.

Were the slam door trains scrapped when the new 508s and Networkers were introduced, so were not available to stand in? Indeed, there probably were not any sidings available to keep them locally, so were there widescale cancellations, short formations etc, or were the issues only minor and could be attended to later whilst still allowing the trains to run?

The class 508s were withdrawn from traffic all through November 1981. There were very few cancellations but some short forms and a small number of peak hour loco hauled trains with class 73s.

 

[Fincra5]

Everything works fine in a Simulated/ Factory environment. Its only when you let the trains out there in the wide world, with all the other Railway Quirks, that "Real-World" issues are discovered.

700s were a shambles when they were introduced! The more tech we put on a train, the more there is to go wrong.

 

[TurboMan]

Southern’s repeat Electrostar orders spring to mind, though even the FCC 377/5s had a bit of a troubled introduction which culminated in the Kentish Town incident.

GWR's 387 introduction was pretty painless, as a result of the fleet being the last Electrostars off the production line at Derby. Any problems had been ironed out on the previous iterations of Electrostar prior to the 387s being built.

The only issues I can really recall were to do with ADD activations and some strange VCB behaviour around Acton, but neither was anything to do with the train as such. The former was down to an incorrect maintenance procedure, and the latter turned out to be due to an AWS magnet on an adjacent line - it had a particularly strong magnetic field that was being picked up by the train's APC receiver causing the VCB to open as though the train was passing through a neutral section.