Northern Class 195: Construction/Introduction Updates

[Andrew Holland]

Then as a software engineer, I wouldn't look up! Because over your head are hundreds if not thousands of vehicles with much more software controlling pretty much ever facet of their vehicles as they fly above you.

Seriously though, there are good reasons for have more software for trains. For a start like planes, the more software they have monitoring or controlling software, the more data on performance the maintenance teams can have. Mechanical & electrical systems will go bang at some point, but as software engineers & mechanics learn more about the reasons, the more they can learn to spot the signs of failure, and thus build the software to anticipate the failures before they happen. Its maybe not so critical in trains as it in planes, but nonetheless these software systems can, and will have valuable benefits in future. Yes there are going to be issues and bugs at the beginning, you yourself will know that, but as these are ironed out then operators will be better able to maximise their units and better plan for regular & irregular maintenance.

Yup that makes sense to me. The software systems in modern passenger planes are clearly there for very good reasons and - mostly - make the planes much safer than they otherwise would be (the 737MAX being an obvious and tragic exception). I've always felt totally comfortable flying on an airbus knowing that its absolute reliance on proven and well-tested fly by wire software and control systems makes it a plane with an impressive safety record overall.

As for trains, I guess then it's early days for this technology and so failures should be expected. Not sure most most passengers will like the idea that they are inadvertantly taking part in a "beta" program as these trains are run in and bugs ironed out though...

 

[superkev]

Has my first ride on 195s down the Calder Valley this aft Sowerby bridge Man vic return.
Nice trains apart from the truly awfull ride over junctions and rough track. Was sat over the front boogie and the banging and lurching when crossing the bridge over the M62 as well as Castleton juncs was quite alarming.
195 104 coming back had the centre car engine stopped and the toilet non operational. Noted a lady looking everywhere for the minuscule litter bin.
Impressed overall but needs some serious tweaking of the bogies to stop the banging noises and poor ride.
I don't remember the seats other than having plenty legroom for a traditionally cramped Northern train so cant have been that bad. People seemed to appreciate the tables which where occupied first.
K

 

[northernchris]

People seemed to appreciate the tables which where occupied first.
K

The tables seem to have sparked a bit of a debate. I've seen a lot of comments on Facebook and Twitter from commuters loathing them stating they could have added more seating in and they aren't necessary. However the leisure travellers seem to appreciate them, although one service I saw last weekend was left in a disgusting state with litter piled on every table

 

[realaledrinker]

Bit of premature excitement tonight as I approached Platform 6 at Chester to catch the 1801 Mid Cheshire trundler only to see the platform occupied by a shiny 195! As the hourly direct Leeds doesn't run at 18xx not sure what that was all about as I trudged round to 5 where a shop-soiled 150 awaited. As our guard (un)helpfully pointed out, a three coach train won't fit on many of the Mid Cheshire stations!

 

[Greybeard33]

4-car formations regularly operate on the Mid Cheshire.

 

[LOL The Irony]

As our guard (un)helpfully pointed out, a three coach train won't fit on many of the Mid Cheshire stations!

The only station that can't fit a 3 car (or a 2 car for that matter) is Mouldsworth.

 

[Bovverboy]

Bit of premature excitement tonight as I approached Platform 6 at Chester to catch the 1801 Mid Cheshire trundler only to see the platform occupied by a shiny 195! As the hourly direct Leeds doesn't run at 18xx not sure what that was all about as I trudged round to 5 where a shop-soiled 150 awaited. As our guard (un)helpfully pointed out, a three coach train won't fit on many of the Mid Cheshire stations!

The 195 in platform 6 would have arrived as the 1238 ex-Leeds, due Chester at 1505. It didn't actually arrive until 1538, having stood at Earlestown for 33 minutes. The return 1517 to Leeds was cancelled and the 195 instead used for the 1920 Leeds. The intervening 1614 and 1716 departures ran pretty much as normal.
I don't know the reason for the wait at Earlestown (nothing else appears to have been late), neither am I able to explain why, having been so late, the train wasn't turned short at Warrington Bank Quay (unless the underlying problem was staff shortage).

 

[Bletchleyite]

Yup that makes sense to me. The software systems in modern passenger planes are clearly there for very good reasons and - mostly - make the planes much safer than they otherwise would be (the 737MAX being an obvious and tragic exception). I've always felt totally comfortable flying on an airbus knowing that its absolute reliance on proven and well-tested fly by wire software and control systems makes it a plane with an impressive safety record overall.

Yeah, never mind "if it's not Boeing I'm not going"...if it's not Airbus I'll make a fuss

The trouble with safety critical software is that it's really expensive, and people aren't willing to pay the costs of that level of testing for non-safety-critical applications.

 

[PomWombat]

As a software engineer too, I'd imagine that some of the reasons for more software control comes down to something seriously physical like the wiring loom.

Is there something similar to a CAN bus used in the rail world? That would be the kind of thing to help simplify wiring, while keeping control of hardware and simultaneously providing a means for monitoring through telemetry.

If CAF are reusing equipment from the truck/coach world, then I would have thought it would nowadays demand a CAN-like environment.

 

[61653 HTAFC]

Trouble with Calder Valley is that for a good part of their route they’re not in it, clear on the West side, but even on the East the Calder turns off down through Brighouse, Mirfield and Wakefield, whereas they trains go through Halifax, Bradford and Leeds.

Which is why the route historically known as the Calder Valley route is the former Lancashire & Yorkshire Railway line from Leeds to Manchester via Normanton, Wakefield Kirkgate, Healey Mills, Mirfield and Hebden Bridge. No services actually run along the whole route between the two cities these days, with only GC services (and freight) staying on L&Y metals either side of Mirfield.

 

[Bantamzen]

Yup that makes sense to me. The software systems in modern passenger planes are clearly there for very good reasons and - mostly - make the planes much safer than they otherwise would be (the 737MAX being an obvious and tragic exception). I've always felt totally comfortable flying on an airbus knowing that its absolute reliance on proven and well-tested fly by wire software and control systems makes it a plane with an impressive safety record overall.

Indeed, I'm a keen follower of a commercial pilot who regularly produces videos / vlogs on his job, and listening to him talking about the safety systems is actually very reassuring. And its also worth noting that in commercial planes, the software doesn't just feedback to the flight crew, but back to the operations teams of the airlines. I don't know if this will be the case with the 195s, but the potential is there which would mean more efficient use of maintenance schedules along with the obvious live fault management.

As for trains, I guess then it's early days for this technology and so failures should be expected. Not sure most most passengers will like the idea that they are inadvertantly taking part in a "beta" program as these trains are run in and bugs ironed out though...

It is as you say effectively a beta, but there really isn't any other way on our crowded network to test trains in live environments. The key will be the engineers & operators working together effectively to work & roll out solutions.

Yeah, never mind "if it's not Boeing I'm not going"...if it's not Airbus I'll make a fuss

The trouble with safety critical software is that it's really expensive, and people aren't willing to pay the costs of that level of testing for non-safety-critical applications.

Well when the people figure out a way to test in live conditions without being in revenue service, on a network that can't support that level of testing, I'm sure CAF & Northern would love to hear from them. Alternatively the 195 fleet could be mothballed, and Pacers upgraded to accessibility standards & kept running for the next 40 years. I'm sure people would love that...

 

[TRAX]

In my line of work I get a few customers that say the gear I supply is good but too expensive.

I've also got quite a few who (after saying the above previously), ask me to come back and remove the pile of poo they brought that does not work and put in the stuff I quoted originally.

End result = good reliable kit but at 175%+ of the original quoted cost when you factor in the scrap they brought first, (and several years hassle with duff equipment in the meantime).

Buy cheap, buy twice.

 

[mrcaa]

Doors have just tripped a woman up boarding 195115 at Warrington Bank Quay. Luckily she tripped into the carriage but she seems a bit shaken up. I’m gonna make a complaint to Northern because enough is enough with this. I don’t care what the excuses are it’s totally unacceptable, especially after three months in service and 8 days on this line. We’re now late setting off because of the stupid brake test issue.

 

[Andrew Holland]

Bantamzen, I'm with you there. On Saturday I did try to reason with a cross passenger (like me he was waiting for the 9:29am to Euston) and explained that it just takes time for *any* new rolling stock to bed in and problems are just to be expected for the first year or so. Though it pre-dates the internet for researching such things, I recall when the 465/466 classes were introduced in South East London (I'm a Londoner originally), as I remember they were beset with issues for the first couple of years or so and recall passenger voxpops on local TV news bemoaning how the old slammers were more reliable though the new trains were at least more comfortable...

In the years just before that I used to travel several times a year to Bournemouth so saw the introduction of the class 442 and again, they were hardly a paragon of reliability in their early years either.

Nothing much has really changed it seems, perhaps it's more that Northern folk are not used to seeing new trains and thus are not conditioned to just expect problems as many of us otherwise are?...

 

[Andrew Holland]

Buy cheap, buy twice.

Utterly off topic but yup, agree 100% as anyone who recalls Arriva's disasterous (and short lived) tenure as franchised bus operator in Malta will know - for mainly cost reasons they opted to buy a fleet of King Long buses (about half the cost of equivalent British-made buses) and the reliability of those was, and still is, pretty shocking. Every day (when I lived there) I'd see several broken down on the way to work and others on the way back. Still I suppose with their regular breakdowns they at least had lower emissions!...

 

[Bletchleyite]

Doors have just tripped a woman up boarding 195115 at Warrington Bank Quay. Luckily she tripped into the carriage but she seems a bit shaken up. I’m gonna make a complaint to Northern because enough is enough with this. I don’t care what the excuses are it’s totally unacceptable, especially after three months in service and 8 days on this line. We’re now late setting off because of the stupid brake test issue.

This is a serious PTI safety issue and I am really, really surprised that (a) it's still going on and (b) the Unions have not refused to work them until it is fixed.

 

[Bletchleyite]

Bantamzen, I'm with you there. On Saturday I did try to reason with a cross passenger (like me he was waiting for the 9:29am to Euston) and explained that it just takes time for *any* new rolling stock to bed in and problems are just to be expected for the first year or so.

The thing is that that is fundamentally not the passenger's problem. The service needs to operate per the timetable without attempting to knock people down the gap. If it doesn't for reasons that are not totally external to the railway (e.g. weather conditions), he has a totally valid complaint.

This (like the 230s) is more than bedding in.

 

[NoMorePacers]

Can someone summarise exactly what is going wrong with the 195s at present, just for reference? Cheers.

 

[Bletchleyite]

Nothing much has really changed it seems, perhaps it's more that Northern folk are not used to seeing new trains and thus are not conditioned to just expect problems as many of us otherwise are?...

Well, the 350s have gone into service with very few problems indeed. Why do we consider this unreliability OK? I don't at all. The industry needs to change its approach to the introduction of new rolling stock.

 

[mrcaa]

This is a serious PTI safety issue and I am really, really surprised that (a) it's still going on and (b) the Unions have not refused to work them until it is fixed.

The first attempt at the brake test failed too. It took another full shut down and reboot to resolve it. Passengers were trying to get off when the TfW service turned up but they obviously couldn't open the doors and we ended up at Victoria 42 minutes late where it was finally cancelled.

https://www.realtimetrains.co.uk/train/Y67119/2019-10-30/detailed

 

[Bletchleyite]

It is as you say effectively a beta, but there really isn't any other way on our crowded network to test trains in live environments.

Well, perhaps if we stopped running short trains round at high frequencies there would be capacity. There are always ways. This situation is unacceptable.

 

[Red Devil]

The first attempt at the brake test failed too. It took another full shut down and reboot to resolve it. Passengers were trying to get off when the TfW service turned up but they obviously couldn't open the doors and we ended up at Victoria 42 minutes late where it was finally cancelled.

https://www.realtimetrains.co.uk/train/Y67119/2019-10-30/detailed

When a brake test is required it doesn't need one carrying out immediately, I've run it with one being required and done it when I changed ends.

 

[mrcaa]

When a brake test is required it doesn't need one carrying out immediately, I've run it with one being required and done it when I changed ends.

Seems like that message needs to get out to all the drivers then. Does Northern have any way of doing this? It feels like for things like this a crib sheet needs to go round to the existing drivers saying do this, don't do that etc (like never take the key out when passengers are boarding or whatever it was that triggers the doors to shut) then incorporate it into the formal training for the new drivers. It just seems that people are thrown onto these as if they aren't new units and expected to find their own solutions to all the quirks when someone else such as yourself has already done it.

 

[Red Devil]

In training all scenarios can't be replicated a lot are talked through.
And unfortunately you learn the hard way out in traffic but stands you in good stead for later.

 

[mrcaa]

In training all scenarios can't be replicated a lot are talked through.
And unfortunately you learn the hard way out in traffic but stands you in good stead for later.

Yeah I get that. It’s not like this is a rare edge case or a one-off incident though. It seems to be happening fairly regularly. It seems more like Northern are acting like if they don’t officially acknowledge the problem then they can’t be held responsible for it.

 

[Llama]

Doors have just tripped a woman up boarding 195115 at Warrington Bank Quay. Luckily she tripped into the carriage but she seems a bit shaken up. I’m gonna make a complaint to Northern because enough is enough with this. I don’t care what the excuses are it’s totally unacceptable, especially after three months in service and 8 days on this line. We’re now late setting off because of the stupid brake test issue.

How exactly did they trip her up?

Edit, as in, did the doors shut unexpectedly? Did the 'hustle alarm' sound?

 

[geoffk]

The tables seem to have sparked a bit of a debate. I've seen a lot of comments on Facebook and Twitter from commuters loathing them stating they could have added more seating in and they aren't necessary. However the leisure travellers seem to appreciate them

Trouble is they are trying to be two different things - commuter trains at peak hours while providing inter-urban leisure journeys at other times. I've just had a return trip Rochdale - Man Vic and back, both on a 195. Both would have been on time but for being behind the "stopper".

 

[mrcaa]

How exactly did they trip her up?

Edit, as in, did the doors shut unexpectedly? Did the 'hustle alarm' sound?

I didn't hear the alarm but I must admit I wasn't paying attention. I only turned round when I heard her stumble. If there was an alarm the doors must have shut quite quickly rather than the 3 or so seconds you usually seem to get as it obviously caught her unawares. Her bag got caught in the door so she stumbled then it opened again after a second or so. Could have been much worse if someone was getting off the train instead. Especially if there's a "gap between the train and the platform edge".

 

[quantinghome]

Nothing much has really changed it seems, perhaps it's more that Northern folk are not used to seeing new trains and thus are not conditioned to just expect problems as many of us otherwise are?...

Since 2000 'Northern folk' have seen the following new trains introduced: Voyagers, Pendolinos, Class 333s, Class 185s, Class 350s and Azumas. I don't recall any of these introductions causing the same level of problems we're seeing with Northern (Cross-country's Operation Princess was a disaster but that was down to timetabling rather than train reliability afaik).

 

[Llama]

I didn't hear the alarm but I must admit I wasn't paying attention. I only turned round when I heard her stumble. If there was an alarm the doors must have shut quite quickly rather than the 3 or so seconds you usually seem to get as it obviously caught her unawares. Her bag got caught in the door so she stumbled then it opened again after a second or so. Could have been much worse if someone was getting off the train instead. Especially if there's a "gap between the train and the platform edge".

The doors closing prematurely issue is a software issue, for which instructions have been issued to both drivers and guards to perform certain actions in a certain way to prevent it happening. I'm not saying the crew were to blame as the only way to know for sure would be to interrogate the data recorder on the train. In short, every action or command carried out on these trains takes quite a few seconds for one computer system to communicate with the other systems.