Most Unreliable Multiple Unit

[Tracked]

Another vote for 180's, certainly in recent times (can remember 1st Gen units from the 80's, but personal experience would only have been of what was good enough to make it to that point I suppose). Many happy days a couple of years ago arriving into Doncaster from Sheffield to find the station in chaos because a Hull Trains 180 had decided to have a nice sit down and a burn somewhere along the ECML, I'm sure at one point it was happening nearly as often as the wires going down in the Retford area ... (incidentally, do we need a thread on Unluckiest TOC; I'll nominate Hull Trains for replacing their 180's for 802's just in time for the start of a pandemic). Seem to remember something on here about Hull Trains' problems, suggesting the Grand Centrals were more reliable but very high maintenance?


The other candidate: 141's, there's a lot on mentions of units upthread that had serious issues when first introduced/have specific faults in certain areas (Voyagers, and Dawlish. Other than that they seem very reliable units that smell of their toilets), but most of the others seem to have settled down into giving decent service (iirc though, the 141's reliability improved, but the passenger experience didn't).

 

[2192]

Sixty posts so far.... Has any class of British multiple unit NOT been mentioned?!

 

[hexagon789]

I do vaguely remember something about Class 308 transformers when they were in the West Mids.

I think it was the 308s

I think you mean West Yorkshire. Three different 308's (138/155/162) suffered fairly big explosions in the high-voltage cable joints linking the pantographs to the transformers in the late 1990s. The first two occurred in platform 2 at Leeds a couple of weeks apart; the one in 308 155 blew the brake van doors off and catapulted the guard's seat out onto the platform seconds after the guard had vacated the van. The explosion in 308 162 happened in Neville Hill depot a few years later and the unit never ran again.

Yes, that's it. I remember the one about the brake van now you've reminded me. I think I read of it in an old magazine from the time in question

 

[Mat17]

Class 114s aka the Lincoln sets were woefully underpowered when they entered service in 1956, I believe they had to modify the engines, before that though they had to be run as DMBS-DTC-DMBS sets to give them enough power to work through hilly Lincolnshire!

 

[superkev]

Class 114s aka the Lincoln sets were woefully underpowered when they entered service in 1956, I believe they had to modify the engines, before that though they had to be run as DMBS-DTC-DMBS sets to give them enough power to work through hilly Lincolnshire!

The original engines where the pair of standard 150 hp BUT engines in the power car. These were soon changed to the 230hp Leyland/Albions as fitted to the Trans Pennines and Bedpan units which gave decent performance. I used go enjoyvridinv on them.
K

 

[Mat17]

They were good trains the 114s, sorely missed!

 

[CJ]

Northern Class 319s.

When the May 2018 timetable came into effect, the unreliability of these trains were evidently noticeable, such as the Liverpool/Manchester - Crewe via Manchester Airport service.

 

[dgl]

Not really - the Pendolinos were assembled in the same factory around the same time and have proved extremely reliable. The 180s clearly have significant design and build issues.

Aren't the Pendolino's technically a FIAT design as I believe Alstom purchased/got shares in FIAT Ferroviaria after the contracts had been signed, which you would have though given FIAT's car heritage that they would be about as reliable as their cars, which is not very, but they seem much better than that.

As for the 180's it would seem pertinent to mention that most intercity DMU's use a Diesel-electric propulsion system rather than a mechanical one, though naturally that does not exclude the 175's, as for regional DMU's mechanical transmission seems to be the standard.

 

[D6130]

Aren't the Pendolino's technically a FIAT design as I believe Alstom purchased/got shares in FIAT Ferroviaria after the contracts had been signed, which you would have though given FIAT's car heritage that they would be about as reliable as their cars, which is not very, but they seem much better than that.

As for the 180's it would seem pertinent to mention that most intercity DMU's use a Diesel-electric propulsion system rather than a mechanical one, though naturally that does not exclude the 175's, as for regional DMU's mechanical transmission seems to be the standard.

For regional DMUs hydraulic transmission is the standard. The last units with mechanical transmission (albeit automatic, rather than manual) were the class 141-144 'Pacers' in their original form.

 

[Mordac]

Don't the 172s and the 195s have mechanical transmissions?

 

[DB]

As for the 180's it would seem pertinent to mention that most intercity DMU's use a Diesel-electric propulsion system rather than a mechanical one, though naturally that does not exclude the 175's, as for regional DMU's mechanical transmission seems to be the standard.

The only 'modern' DEMUs I can think of (prior to new build / adapted from EMU bi-modes, which are a recent phenomenon) are the 22x units, which are all variations of the same basic design.

That said, the 180 is unusual in that it's the only 125mph unit in this country with a hydraulic transmission.

Don't the 172s and the 195s have mechanical transmissions?

Hydraulic I believe, as nearly all DMUs prior to the bi-modes appearing tended to.

 

[Energy]

Hydraulic I believe, as nearly all DMUs prior to the bi-modes appearing tended to.

Mechanical I believe, it gives them better acceleration.

 

[londonmidland]

I can’t answer any of that, but what I can say is that they are much quieter when they go past at speed than the Meridians.

I think it depends on whether the engines are under power or simply just idling/coasting past.

Both sound the same to me whilst coasting past at speed but when powering, they both sound very different.

Personally, I find that the 180s are louder when they pass as it has that high pitched “woo” sound, whereas 22x have that bass heavy “whoosh”

 

[dgl]

For regional DMUs hydraulic transmission is the standard. The last units with mechanical transmission (albeit automatic, rather than manual) were the class 141-144 'Pacers' in their original form.

That's why I excluded the 175's, because that meant the blame for the reliability could not be solely down to the fact it has a hydraulic transmission in a high powered/high speed unit as their low speed units seem to have similar levels of reliability.

 

[TT-ONR-NRN]

I think Aventras have certainly proved a challenge to say the least

 

[Sprinter107]

The only 'modern' DEMUs I can think of (prior to new build / adapted from EMU bi-modes, which are a recent phenomenon) are the 22x units, which are all variations of the same basic design.

That said, the 180 is unusual in that it's the only 125mph unit in this country with a hydraulic transmission.



Hydraulic I believe, as nearly all DMUs prior to the bi-modes appearing tended to.

The 172s and 196s are mechanical.

 

[hexagon789]

Class 114s aka the Lincoln sets were woefully underpowered when they entered service in 1956, I believe they had to modify the engines, before that though they had to be run as DMBS-DTC-DMBS sets to give them enough power to work through hilly Lincolnshire!

They fitted new, more powerful engines. I believe the issue was that the units which much heavier than previous power-trailer sets but it seems nobody thought to calculate what the performance would be like without me power to match!

 

[Doctor Fegg]

180 by far. it surprises me if one hasn't been on fire within the past week. when they ran our line up the Cotswolds a good 40% of trains diagrammed for these sets were cancelled.

That certainly wasn't the case in their second incarnation with FGW, when cancellations were actually pretty rare. Old Oak Common had got the measure of them by then, though evidently not without a lot of effort!

I've always been puzzled by all the reported 180 woes. They have virtually the same engine and transmission as the 185s yet no one seems to be able to get them working properly.

It's the 180s' engine raft design, I believe, that's particularly troublesome - others will know more.

 

[southern442]

I think Aventras have certainly proved a challenge to say the least

As does every train when first introduced

 

[TT-ONR-NRN]

As does every train when first introduced

The 345s are approaching four years in service so unfortunately I’m not buying that they’re new anymore

 

[Energy]

As does every train when first introduced

They seem to have had more problems than others, enough that TfL have gone elsewhere for the NTfL and new DLR trains.

 

[southern442]

They seem to have had more problems than others, enough that TfL have gone elsewhere for the NTfL and new DLR trains.

Even so, that is not unprecedented. The 458s ended up being the most reliable trains in the UK for a time, and I haven't heard much negativity about the 377/5s in recent years.

 

[py_megapixel]

Weren't the 323's very troublesome when introduced? It's funny that some of the most unreliable units have come to settle down and provide an extremely good service (458s, 175s, 323s etc).

Yes they were awful. But they were the first AC unit to use GTO thyristor traction, and there were lots of concerns about interference. When the OLE got icy they just packed up. Took a while to get it sorted - first one built in ‘92, first in service in ‘94, but it was ‘97 before they were reliable enough to completely eradicate the slam door stock on the Cross City.

I do find that rather interesting, given that these days the 323s are considered very good for reliability and I believe are quite well liked by staff and passengers.

Sixty posts so far.... Has any class of British multiple unit NOT been mentioned?!

I don't think I've seen anyone criticising the reliability of a Desiro yet, but then those are well-known for being very reliable. The 350 is among the most reliable EMUs anywhere in the country! Slightly ironic then that TPE binned them in favour of the 397s, which are still experiencing issues at long time after they were supposed to be properly in service IIRC...

The answer begins with A, ends in M and has "LSTO" in the middle...

I thought you were talking about a coach designation code for a moment ("Lavatory Trailer Standard Open"??) until I realised you meant Alstom...

 

[Bald Rick]

I do find that rather interesting, given that these days the 323s are considered very good for reliability and I believe are quite well liked by staff and passengers.

BR was desperate for new entrants in the rolling stock market back then, to break the BREL / GEC / Met Camm duopoly. BR persuaded Hunslet TPL to bid for the 323, which they then won, partnering with Holec (?) for the traction kit. Unfortunately the new traction kit took a while to be fine tuned, the contract penalties came into play, and Hunslet went bust IIRC.

 

[61653 HTAFC]

BR was desperate for new entrants in the rolling stock market back then, to break the BREL / GEC / Met Camm duopoly. BR persuaded Hunslet TPL to bid for the 323, which they then won, partnering with Holec (?) for the traction kit. Unfortunately the new traction kit took a while to be fine tuned, the contract penalties came into play, and Hunslet went bust IIRC.

The decision to use redundant 308s rather than a further batch of 323s for Airedale and Wharfedale didn't help Hunslet either.

 

[LowLevel]

Got to be the 180s. As we speak, 180111 is causing a riot and has failed at East Midlands Parkway

 

[D365]

Sixty posts so far.... Has any class of British multiple unit NOT been mentioned?!

Electrostar, Desiro, Class 365, most PEP and Mk3-derived units...

 

[kevconnor]

Perhaps the thread should be renamed “Most Unreliable AnsaldoBreda Multiple Unit”?

On the light rail side they also manufactured the Manchester Metrolink T68/T68a which were fraught with difficulties. They also manufactured the T69 trams as well for the west midlands but I am unsure on how reliable they were.

 

[43096]

On the light rail side they also manufactured the Manchester Metrolink T68/T68a which were fraught with difficulties. They also manufactured the T69 trams as well for the west midlands but I am unsure on how reliable they were.

The T69s have also all gone, so maybe that's an indicator?

 

[mightyena]

Slightly ironic then that TPE binned them in favour of the 397s, which are still experiencing issues at long time after they were supposed to be properly in service IIRC...

I mean, they went from Siemens units to CAF ones. Not sure what else they could have been expecting to be honest...