• Our booking engine at tickets.railforums.co.uk (powered by TrainSplit) helps support the running of the forum with every ticket purchase! Find out more and ask any questions/give us feedback in this thread!

Scotrail Class 385 Discussion

Status
Not open for further replies.

Class 170101

Established Member
Joined
1 Mar 2014
Messages
7,908
So how many Class 385s are available for service now?

Looks like Scotrail need a a lot from May with EMU timing loads in operation between Glasgow Queen Street and Edinburgh via various routes from then.
 
Sponsor Post - registered members do not see these adverts; click here to register, or click here to log in
R

RailUK Forums

380101

Member
Joined
18 Feb 2015
Messages
997
I don't know the minimum number of drivers that need training before they can enter service or how many train at once but even just 15 drivers would take 45 days.
K

15 drivers wouldnt take 45 days to do the 3 day conversion course. ScotRail work on 8 trainees to 1 Driver trainer so it all depends on how many driver trainers are doing the conversion course. I know at least 2 Driver trainers, and know one personally, are heavily involved in the 385 implementation so it wont take very long to get the driver's through the course.
 

route101

Established Member
Joined
16 May 2010
Messages
10,595
So how many Class 385s are available for service now?

Looks like Scotrail need a a lot from May with EMU timing loads in operation between Glasgow Queen Street and Edinburgh via various routes from then.
The 1900 Edinburgh to Glasgow Queen St is timed at 44 minutes , surely thats the fastest
 

hexagon789

Veteran Member
Joined
2 Sep 2016
Messages
15,714
Location
Glasgow
The 1900 Edinburgh to Glasgow Queen St is timed at 44 minutes , surely thats the fastest

From what I can see that service is timed for 51 mins. I believe that about 5-7 years ago a few services were timed for 47-48 mins but the quickest at present seems to be 49 mins.
 

route101

Established Member
Joined
16 May 2010
Messages
10,595
From what I can see that service is timed for 51 mins. I believe that about 5-7 years ago a few services were timed for 47-48 mins but the quickest at present seems to be 49 mins.
I see when i took it last week it was 46 mins .
 

hexagon789

Veteran Member
Joined
2 Sep 2016
Messages
15,714
Location
Glasgow
Just checked, the 1900 EDB-GLQ is down as 19:44 arrival in ScotRail's timetable but 19:51 in the WTT. Going by ScotRail's timetable this is the quickest. A couple of GLQ-EDB take 48 mins, the 1900 GLQ-EDB takes 47. Several EDB-GLQ 'top of the hour' departures take 48 mins as well.
 

InOban

Established Member
Joined
12 Mar 2017
Messages
4,208
So how many Class 385s are available for service now?

Looks like Scotrail need a a lot from May with EMU timing loads in operation between Glasgow Queen Street and Edinburgh via various routes from then.
If they retain the borrowed 380s for the moment, then they only 7 3-car and 7 4-car to operate the direct E-G services. Then as more are available, they can take over the other diagrams.
 

cf111

Established Member
Joined
13 Nov 2012
Messages
1,346
ASLEF have released a statement about signal-sighting issues on the class 385s, saying that if they are not modified then "drivers will refuse to work them":

http://www.aslef.org.uk/article.php?group_id=6091

ASLEF, the train drivers’ union, has called on Humza Yousaf, Minister for Transport in the Scottish government, to ensure that ScotRail’s new trains are fit for purpose – and warned that unless modifications are made to ensure the trains are safe, drivers will refuse to work them.


Kevin Lindsay, ASLEF’s organiser in Scotland, said: ‘There’s a problem with the new Class 385 units that Transport Scotland and ScotRail have purchased. The windscreen is curved and, at night, is making drivers see two signals. It’s like looking through a fish bowl all the time. ScotRail is trying to get Hitachi to come up with a solution but, so far, I’m afraid, they have failed. I’ve informed ScotRail that we won’t allow these trains to come into service like this.’

The new Class 385 electric multiple unit is being built by Hitachi for ScotRail. The train company has ordered 70 (46 three-car and 24 four-car sets) to run from Glasgow to Edinburgh via Falkirk. They were due to come into service next month (March).

‘The effect of the squashed window means that the window is giving the impression that drivers are looking through a fish bowl to view signals,’ said Kevin. ‘I have advised the company that if this problem is not resolved to our satisfaction then we will inform our members that the trains are not safe to drive in the dark.’

Drivers on a recent test run travelling between Glasgow Central and Paisley Gilmour Street immediately became aware of problems viewing of signals from the driver’s cab while sitting at Glasgow Central waiting to leave. They reported: ‘We could see a reflection of the signals on the right hand side – showing two signals. This was even more noticeable when approaching signals travelling between Glasgow Central and Paisley when, on some occasions, we could view two or three signals when we should have been viewing only one.’

Kevin added: ‘The safety of passengers – and train crew – is absolutely paramount in the rail industry. ASLEF welcomes investment in new rolling stock and new infrastructure, but it has to be fit for purpose. That’s why I’m calling on the minister to ensure these trains are safe when they come into service.’
 

Macwomble

Member
Joined
15 Dec 2016
Messages
335
Location
Hamilton West
Also made the BBC News web site

http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-scotland-43031527

Aslef has warned that modifications must be made to ScotRail's new Class 385 electric trains - or its drivers will refuse to work them.

The train drivers' union is concerned that the curved windscreen is leading reflections of others signals at night.

Drivers identified the problem on a recent evening test run between Glasgow Central and Paisley Gilmour Street.

The units are due to come into service on the Edinburgh Waverly to Glasgow Queen Street service in March.

Drivers reported that they could "view two or three signals when we should have been viewing only one".

Kevin Lindsay from Aslef, said: "ScotRail is trying to get Hitachi to come up with a solution but, so far, I'm afraid, they have failed.

"I've informed ScotRail that we won't allow these trains to come into service like this."

'Fit for purpose'
The union has called on Transport Minister Humza Yousaf to intervene.

Mr Lindsay said: "ASLEF welcomes investment in new rolling stock and new infrastructure, but it has to be fit for purpose.

"That's why I'm calling on the minister to ensure these trains are safe when they come into service."

A spokesperson for Transport Scotland said: "The whole purpose of testing is to flush out potential issues.

"Drivers input‎ into that process is vital, having had that feedback it's imperative Hitachi and ScotRail work towards a solution.

"This means the Class 385s will only be brought into passenger service once this has been achieved and these trains are approved by the independent Office of Rail and Road (ORR)."

ScotRail has ordered 46 three-car and 24 four-car sets from rolling stock manufacturers Hitachi.

The trains are part of the Edinburgh Glasgow Improvement Programme (EGIP).

Initially, they will only run between the two cities, but there are future plans to introduce them on suburban routes south of Glasgow and to Dunblane, Stirling and Alloa.

A spokesperson for ScotRail Alliance said: "We test lots of elements of the train before it enters passenger service.

"The windscreen is just one element of our rigorous testing regime ahead the introduction of our brand new trains."
 

RJ21

Member
Joined
24 Apr 2016
Messages
125
With deliveries already happening why has an issue such as fisheye effect only just come to light (yes pun intended)? Was the design of the cab derived from something which worked with in cab signalling or is this likely a case of no plan survives first contact with reality?
 

mcmad

Member
Joined
11 Mar 2015
Messages
977
The issues with signal sighting were flagged up early on in the testing phase but heads appear to be firmly in the sand over the issue.
 

Southsider

Member
Joined
10 Aug 2015
Messages
750
The issues with signal sighting were flagged up early on in the testing phase but heads appear to be firmly in the sand over the issue.
Is there evidence the issue has been ignored? I rather suspect that Hitachi and others have been working towards a solution but haven't come up with one yet.
 

InOban

Established Member
Joined
12 Mar 2017
Messages
4,208
Are all drivers reporting this issue? Or only a few during training? It was first reported quite some time ago, and again in the past week. If it were a recurring problem, I would have thought that, at the very least, deliveries would have been suspended, but since they haven't, I wonder whether it's a big problem.
 

380101

Member
Joined
18 Feb 2015
Messages
997
Are all drivers reporting this issue? Or only a few during training? It was first reported quite some time ago, and again in the past week. If it were a recurring problem, I would have thought that, at the very least, deliveries would have been suspended, but since they haven't, I wonder whether it's a big problem.

I imagine all the very small number of drivers currently passed out to drive the 385s have experienced this issue. It is a big problem but ScotRail and Hitatchi seem to be dismissing it as a minor issue. They'll keep doing so until a driver has a SPAD and this problem is found to be a contributing factor i it then they'll make noises about resolving it.

The problem with this problem is that they are loathe to admit that the gangway is the major contributing factor causing this issue. The curved front end on the AT200 series trains worked well with a full front windscreen, but doesnt work at all with a gangway. The 380 works due to flat screens, no curves and a retracting gangway. Hitatchi failed with this and dont want to admit it. Its going to cost 10s of millions to resolve and Transport Scotland will come out of it smelling of roses whilst Abellio and Hitatchi take all the flack.
 

Bletchleyite

Veteran Member
Joined
20 Oct 2014
Messages
97,539
Location
"Marston Vale mafia"
The problem with this problem is that they are loathe to admit that the gangway is the major contributing factor causing this issue.

That's because it isn't. Poor design and inadequate testing of the gangwayed front end is what caused the issue, *not* the presence of a gangway. The issue does not occur on any other gangwayed MU in the UK, and there are tens of different designs.

As to who should take the flak, absolutely Hitachi should. They have produced a design as far as rollout with a serious design flaw. Specifying the gangway is NOT at fault. If Hitachi accepted an order for a gangwayed MU, they should either have declined the order or produced one that was not seriously flawed.

Blaming the organisation who specified the need for a gangway is equivalent for blaming me for purchasing a car with a heated windscreen if that windscreen was to obscure the view out (edited - this is probably a better example). All models of car on the market should be able to be driven safely, just as all models of EMU, whether gangway-fitted or not, should be able to be driven safely. If they can't, they should not be on the market, and if they are that is the designer/manufacturer's fault and nobody else's.

Transport Scotland is NOT at fault.
 
Last edited:

Wivenswold

Established Member
Joined
24 Jul 2012
Messages
1,478
Location
Essex
I would caution that if modifications are likely to run into the millions then all parties are being briefed by their solicitors to not admit to the existence of the fault and certainly not admit liability.

That's the downside of Privatisation in a nutshell. Private companies have private insurers and shareholders to protect. In the day, BREL would have met with BR Scottish Region, a solution found and effected without a single lawyer being involved.
 

AlexNL

Established Member
Joined
19 Dec 2014
Messages
1,682
As far as I've understood it, the gangway was a last-minute addition to the AT200 design. The following illustration briefly circulated on social media (and was deleted quickly thereafter):

rHX99ZZl.jpg
 

100andthirty

Member
Joined
5 Mar 2012
Messages
542
Location
Milton Keynes
The issue is not the gangway. It is the curved windscreen causing reflections or refraction after dark so that a single signal aspect might look like there's two or more. This is a windscreen curvature issue, not its size.

(My spell checker tried to change gangway to fantasy than to gangsta!)
 

GaryMcEwan

Established Member
Joined
20 Aug 2013
Messages
1,604
Location
Bridgeton, Glasgow
As far as I've understood it, the gangway was a last-minute addition to the AT200 design. The following illustration briefly circulated on social media (and was deleted quickly thereafter):

rHX99ZZl.jpg

So if the gangway was a last minute addition, was it a Hitachi, Scotrail or TS decision to get it added? Surely the party responsible that wanted the gangway should take responsibility in this latest cockup...
 

AlexNL

Established Member
Joined
19 Dec 2014
Messages
1,682
The issue is not the gangway. It is the curved windscreen causing reflections or refraction after dark so that a single signal aspect might look like there's two or more. This is a windscreen curvature issue, not its size.
If the gangway hadn't been there, the driver's position would have been different (probably sitting in the middle, like in the 700's). The addition of the gangway made a redesign of the cab necessary, and thus also a redesign of the windscreen.

It would not surprise me if the windscreen has been curved for aesthetic reasons, which are now backfiring.

(My spell checker tried to change gangway to fantasy than to gangsta!)
It could've been worse!
 

Highland37

Established Member
Joined
29 Jun 2012
Messages
1,259
That is true but the design Hitachi have come up with is very poor.

It's not the presence of a gangway, it's the design of it which is the manufacturer's responsibility.
 

Bletchleyite

Veteran Member
Joined
20 Oct 2014
Messages
97,539
Location
"Marston Vale mafia"
So if the gangway was a last minute addition, was it a Hitachi, Scotrail or TS decision to get it added? Surely the party responsible that wanted the gangway should take responsibility in this latest cockup...

No, whoever designed it is responsible. If they felt it was not possible to design a gangwayed front end without the problem, they should have refused.

FWIW that picture is fairly early...it doesn't even show plug doors.
 
Status
Not open for further replies.

Top