GN Class 717

[Class315]

717010 is currently making it’s way to Hornsey as 5Y17 21:49 West Worthing Shed to Hornsey EMUD.

Carriage working HE65 is due to convert from tomorrow.

 

[choochoochoo]

That is true but there is something called After Sales Support which is lacking here, surely it shouldn't take much in the way of a update to be done remotely?

There is after sales support, but I suspect it's only given on what the client specified. If the client neglected to specify exact functionality of the PIS then that's tough luck.

They've made the trains and got the maintenance contracts, why would they try and offer them any further after sales ?

 

[rebmcr]

MTIN is 5048 so about ⅓ of the 313s they replace.

However, they are twice as long as a 313. Therefore, when normalised per-carriage, it's about ⅔.

Obviously some incidents are per-train not per-carriage, so it's not a clear-cut doubling, but certainly closer to ⅔ than your ⅓ figure.

 

[rebmcr]

There is after sales support, but I suspect it's only given on what the client specified. If the client neglected to specify exact functionality of the PIS then that's tough luck.

They've made the trains and got the maintenance contracts, why would they try and offer them any further after sales ?

To preserve Siemens' reputation as a supplier of quality.

 

[bramling]

I know it's still early days but are the Class 717 turning into a quite reliable unit now?
Siemens seem to build quite reliable rollingstock.

Is there a particular intensive diagram that they will have to cover, mileage/timewise?

Most of the diagrams are fairly intense, as has been the case for the 313s in their final years, with generally earlier starts and later finishes (it used to be the case that some trips at the extremes of the day were covered by calls on outer suburban unit trips), six-car working firstly in the evenings and subsequently through the midday as well, greater frequency since last May, and more weekend services compared to times past. Naturally there’s some diagrams which stable between the peaks - but the all-day diagrams do quite a bit of work. The only easement for the 717s is that there will be slightly more of them when the full fleet is in operation (naturally allowing for the fact that 1x717=2x313).

As an aside some of the Merseyrail 507/508 diagrams are also quite intense, in their case quite often with minimal turnaround times too. The ageing PEP fleets have done well to hold up in their geriatric years.

 

[Failed Unit]

However, they are twice as long as a 313. Therefore, when normalised per-carriage, it's about ⅔.

Obviously some incidents are per-train not per-carriage, so it's not a clear-cut doubling, but certainly closer to ⅔ than your ⅓ figure.

That argument has never made any sense. You never see it used to compare the 153 and 156. Neither do you see anyone trying to demonstrate a 3 car 158 is more reliable than a 2. But as you say even if you do believe this nonsense they are still less reliable then what they replace. (Surely they should be twice as reliable then a 12 car class 700).

Anyway tell me when was the last time a 153 got a golden spanner? Most of the winners in the EMU sector are 4 cars. Surely with that logic the 466 should be double the 465 and always win...

 

[BowesRanger]

The amount of cancellations due to shortage of train crew in the last couple of weeks is getting a bit OTT. Anyone know if there's an underlying reason?

 

[Failed Unit]

The amount of cancellations due to shortage of train crew in the last couple of weeks is getting a bit OTT. Anyone know if there's an underlying reason?

They rely on staff volunteering overtime. No one steps forward - no service.

We go through phases but something GTR have never managed to do. Keep their staff happy

 

[andystock22]

How many class 717s are planed to be in service this week?

The 19:55 Moorgate to Hertford North on Friday reverted back to x2 313s.

 

[Failed Unit]

How many class 717s are planed to be in service this week?

The 19:55 Moorgate to Hertford North on Friday reverted back to x2 313s.

9 from what I understand but with replacements by 313s to cover failures. The 1845 Moorgate- WGC was 313 operated tonight for us lucky passengers rather than the normal 717.

 

[andystock22]

The 19:30 Moorgate to WGC class 717 service was cancelled tonight, due to no driver!

 

[jon0844]

The amount of cancellations due to shortage of train crew in the last couple of weeks is getting a bit OTT. Anyone know if there's an underlying reason?

Is this something to do with the new pay deal and the enforced leave that was part of it? As much of it is in the summer, it will presumably lead to problems.

 

[samuelmorris]

That argument has never made any sense. You never see it used to compare the 153 and 156. Neither do you see anyone trying to demonstrate a 3 car 158 is more reliable than a 2. But as you say even if you do believe this nonsense they are still less reliable then what they replace. (Surely they should be twice as reliable then a 12 car class 700).

Anyway tell me when was the last time a 153 got a golden spanner? Most of the winners in the EMU sector are 4 cars. Surely with that logic the 466 should be double the 465 and always win...

I disagree, there may well be numerous faults that are 'per-train' rather than 'per-unit' e.g. cab equipment failures but if a fault occurs that causes delays, surely it's only a single incident that's recorded? The number of incidents divided by the number of units in the fleet will give a much better reading for individual units than fixed formation sets as there are twice as many units (or more in the case of 700/1s Vs what they replaced) to split the incident count between, ergo I fully expect the '6-car fixed units will post half the MTIN figure at the same reliability level as two 3-car units' to hold up.

The 153 Vs 156 counter-argument you made would only be applicable if the 153s never ran solo but that isn't the case. In the case of 313s I appreciate some run solo but I didn't think it was that many these days? Certainly not as a proportion of all services worked.

 

[Failed Unit]

I disagree, there may well be numerous faults that are 'per-train' rather than 'per-unit' e.g. cab equipment failures but if a fault occurs that causes delays, surely it's only a single incident that's recorded? The number of incidents divided by the number of units in the fleet will give a much better reading for individual units than fixed formation sets as there are twice as many units (or more in the case of 700/1s Vs what they replaced) to split the incident count between, ergo I fully expect the '6-car fixed units will post half the MTIN figure at the same reliability level as two 3-car units' to hold up.

The 153 Vs 156 counter-argument you made would only be applicable if the 153s never ran solo but that isn't the case. In the case of 313s I appreciate some run solo but I didn't think it was that many these days? Certainly not as a proportion of all services worked.

What about the 466 v 465. The 700s and 717s are performing poorly. Even if you try to manipulate the statistics they are worse than what they replace. Ie divide the 313s number by 2. But I would love to see you back up your view point with some scientific facts. Not opinions because you just can’t accept a 40 year old train is performing better than a new one

For example one are where you get MTIN on the 313s is coupling and interlock failures between units. (Same as the 317s and 700 comparison)

Another fact you won’t like is the 717s are the worse out off all new fleets including the 345s.

Remember Siemens make some of the best trains in the UK. Lots of golden spanner’s. this 707s are getting respectable MTINs. It is just the 700s and 717s that don’t perform. (Is this down to GTR as they are not exactly worked hard.)

 

[samuelmorris]

I'm not defending the reliability of the 700s and 717s, even with the argument I put forward above, below 10000 MTIN is a bit feeble.

The exact same applies to 466s, units working in multiple. Without knowing how much work they do solo I couldn't really comment but generally speaking I'd expect them to be posting similar figures to 465s, maybe slightly better since there's only half as much to go wrong.

I think you might have my motives wrong here, I am appalled as much as anyone by the poor reliability exhibited by new fleets and as a 345 user since their first introduction it has affected me personally and continues to affect me, my 31 minute delay yesterday from one failing, for example. I'm just simply stating that I don't ever expect full size fixed formation units to reach the figures of modern standalone units e.g. the 350s and 379s because a fault with any part of the consist comes back to the same unit. The lack of coupler failures mean the tangible reliability should be higher, but the MTIN figure will not necessarily reflect that higher reliability, if/when it happens. I totally accept that with the 717 it hasn't happened yet.

 

[Failed Unit]

The thing is the MTIN is industry accepted. No one has ever tried to compare a 390 to a 350 in the past. But now we have the poorly performing 700 and 717s it seems to be an issue. Should the 390s have some spanner’s as they are 11 car compared to their easy life 4 car line sharing opponents?

 

[samuelmorris]

The thing is the MTIN is industry accepted. No one has ever tried to compare a 390 to a 350 in the past. But now we have the poorly performing 700 and 717s it seems to be an issue. Should the 390s have some spanner’s as they are 11 car compared to their easy life 4 car line sharing opponents?

There's no reason why the 390 vs 350 comparison would not be valid though, and again, I think seeing an MTIN of 40% or so of what the 350s achieve would be reasonable. From what I recall, it's less than that in practice?

This data is much more readily available now than it used to be, and with so many new fleets being introduced, all with their own problems, it's not hard to see why these sorts of comparisons are much more common now than they used to be.

 

[Bayum]

Do the MTIN take into account the type of work the various units do, or is it solely based on casualties per x miles?

 

[Failed Unit]

Do the MTIN take into account the type of work the various units do, or is it solely based on casualties per x miles?

The MTIN is recorded the same. But they don’t actually generally compare a commuter EMU with an IC one.

 

[Bayum]

So basically, people need to not focus on the data too much because it doesn't allow for those sorts of variables.

 

[Failed Unit]

So basically, people need to not focus on the data too much because it doesn't allow for those sorts of variables.

No. But in my view the 717 is a fair comparison to the 313 as they are doing the same work. Door faults are going to hit a 717 more because they have more of them. Cab faults a 313 as they have more of them in the formation.

Likewise comparing a 700 to a 365, 321 and 317 is fine as they operate the same routes

Even the crude ppm is going south since the new fleets were introduced on GN.

 

[sprunt]

I caught one this morning from Hornsey, and the SDO is still in place. I thought all the signals had been moved now so that this isn't needed any more.

Also, to echo a point made above, why is it needed anyway? The rear doors are not clearly nearer to the rear of the platform than the rear doors of a 313 set. Is there greater clearance required with newer classes?

 

[Failed Unit]

I caught one this morning from Hornsey, and the SDO is still in place. I thought all the signals had been moved now so that this isn't needed any more.

Also, to echo a point made above, why is it needed anyway? The rear doors are not clearly nearer to the rear of the platform than the rear doors of a 313 set. Is there greater clearance required with newer classes?

They claim that the platforms are too narrow around the extreme ends. I can sort of see this at Drayton park going north. But apart from Brookmans park northbound i don’t see why it is needed.

 

[supervc-10]

You should see some of the platform clearances on the Chicago L trains... to get to the steps at some stops you have to walk down a section of platform that's maybe 2 feet wide between the barrier around the steps and the edge of the platform!

 

[jon0844]

So many 313s are running with reduced power that an already tight timetable in the week is struggling. Earlier today there was a 313 put on the fast due to an incident at Potters Bar and it allowed quite a nice queue to build up behind it as it couldn't get anywhere near its top speed (which is slow enough as it is!).

I don't know how the stats reflect 313s still in service but struggling to hit 50, which may not seem important when doing all station services but must make a big impact if skipping stops (either as part of the timetable or during disruption).

 

[samuelmorris]

So many 313s are running with reduced power that an already tight timetable in the week is struggling. Earlier today there was a 313 put on the fast due to an incident at Potters Bar and it allowed quite a nice queue to build up behind it as it couldn't get anywhere near its top speed (which is slow enough as it is!).

I don't know how the stats reflect 313s still in service but struggling to hit 50, which may not seem important when doing all station services but must make a big impact if skipping stops (either as part of the timetable or during disruption).

Even on a stopping service barely reaching 50 is woeful, 315s reach that speed on even the shortest gaps between stops over here and will still reach 65 or so on the longer ones without much issue. Are they running with several TMs isolated?

 

[andystock22]

I was on a class 313 last night and it only managed to get to 60mph between New Southgate and the tunnel before Oakleigh Park.

In comparison a class 717 will often do 73mph on the same stretch of track.

 

[samuelmorris]

That doesn't sound too bad, the 717s are bound to be faster. 50 though is a bit on the low side to say the least.

 

[jon0844]

I'm sure everyone can see how bad 313s are getting. Cabs blocked off in the middle of two units, GSM-R issues, Motors locked out, Door buttons no longer illuminated, Dead/flickering internal lighting, Seat covers missing. Oh and probably more issues with the PA system.

Plus with the upcoming wet weather warnings, the other problems will be water ingress in the next 24 hours I'm sure. Water in the cab, through the pan, through other vents...

Even the blinds showing the destination are unlit on many units now.

 

[samuelmorris]

I'm sure everyone can see how bad 313s are getting. Cabs blocked off in the middle of two units, GSM-R issues, Motors locked out, Door buttons no longer illuminated, Dead/flickering internal lighting, Seat covers missing. Oh and probably more issues with the PA system.

Plus with the upcoming wet weather warnings, the other problems will be water ingress in the next 24 hours I'm sure. Water in the cab, through the pan, through other vents...

Even the blinds showing the destination are unlit on many units now.

That and the fact they're basically down to bare metal on the exterior. Some TOCs at least maintain some sort of decorum with the state of their outgoing fleet, but certainly not Great Northern it seems...