Serious problems joining 442s

[radamfi]

I've just experienced yet another cancellation due to a failure in joining together two 442s. Is this going to be a permanent issues with these units?

 

[BestWestern]

I'm curious, why a cancellation rather than a short-formed service?

I've no idea if this is a long standing issue, or indeed what causes it, but I would have thought that after 20-odd years if it was a design fault it would have been rectified by now!? Where was the location that the units were supposed to be joined? Curvature of the line can sometimes have this effect.

 

[RobShipway]

When I used the 442's when living in Bournemouth between 1991 - 1996, there was never a problem with coupling two class 442 units together, so I would be interested to know what is causing this issue? I am wondering if something was changed when they were refurbished to cause the problem?

 

[heart-of-wessex]

When I used the 442's when living in Bournemouth between 1991 - 1996, there was never a problem with coupling two class 442 units together, so I would be interested to know what is causing this issue? I am wondering if something was changed when they were refurbished to cause the problem?

Probably is a problem now, in the days of SWT when I was on a few joining at Bournemouth, it felt like they coupled up at 30mph! !!

 

[RobShipway]

Probably is a problem now, in the days of SWT when I was on a few joining at Bournemouth, it felt like they coupled up at 30mph! !!

That was my experience as well....

Maybe they are getting rusty couplings?

 

[bnm]

Maybe they are getting rusty couplings?

I think you can get a cream for that.

 

[lewisf]

Could they not fall back to the screw link and buffers if the buckeye won't work?

 

[bronzeonion]

Perhaps maybe it's an electrical or air problem rather than a mechanical problem with the buckeye.

 

[radamfi]

I'm curious, why a cancellation rather than a short-formed service?

Good question, that's what I was thinking myself yesterday evening. What normally happens is that the Gatwick Express arrives into the platform as 5 coaches not long before it is due out again and the staff then try to connect it to the 5 coaches on the platform. After a number of attempts to connect them, often so much time has elapsed that it is almost time for the next Gatwick Express so everyone just ends up on the next one.

 

[A-driver]

Not sure if this is what's happening here but it can happen that they couple the units together but can't complete the process for some reason. They then try splitting them again but can't get them apart. You then have a semi Coupled unit which you can't run as it may break apart in service.

 

[jopsuk]

Another (half baked) theory- perhaps during the attempted coupling the front unit developed a fault- and so the rear unit was blocked from continuing?

 

[RobShipway]

Another (half baked) theory- perhaps during the attempted coupling the front unit developed a fault- and so the rear unit was blocked from continuing?

So why did that not happen when they where doing the London Waterloo - Portsmouth/Bournemouth/Weymouth services as I would have said that it is actually warmer on the BML lines than on the Wessex lines?

 

[jopsuk]

They never ever had problems? Really? I doubt that. This thread is about a single incident- and the units are now rather older than they were.

 

[RobShipway]

Yes, I know that this is about a single incident but I witnessed the coupling of class 442's many times on Bournemouth station and never once was there an issue, so I was curious as to why there is an issue now. Is it, down too as you say that that they are rather older now and as my cheeky comment above that the couplings maybe a bit rustier now, than they where in the 1990's which is making it harder for them to do the coupling?

 

[A-driver]

Yes, I know that this is about a single incident but I witnessed the coupling of class 442's many times on Bournemouth station and never once was there an issue, so I was curious as to why there is an issue now. Is it, down too as you say that that they are rather older now and as my cheeky comment above that the couplings maybe a bit rustier now, than they where in the 1990's which is making it harder for them to do the coupling?

You witnessed every single coupling did you and they never ever ever ever had any problems?

How often do they couple units now at Victoria or Stewart's lane with no problems at all?!

 

[Max]

You witnessed every single coupling did you and they never ever ever ever had any problems?

How often do they couple units now at Victoria or Stewart's lane with no problems at all?!

I think it is fair to say that if it had been a frequent problem it probably would have been well known (like the problems coupling 180s for example). I get the impression from the OP that coupling problems are now more commonplace.

 

[RobShipway]

You witnessed every single coupling did you and they never ever ever ever had any problems?

How often do they couple units now at Victoria or Stewart's lane with no problems at all?!

I witnessed every single coupling for the period of time that I was standing on Bournemouth station yes, waiting for my IC train to go up to Birmingham and never once in over 5 years in travelling that route did the coupling of the prior London Waterloo train delay the IC train that I needed to travel on. This was in the time of BR/Network Southeast. There may have been other times when I was not at Bournemouth station when they had issues, but I was just curious to know what has changed in that time or whether it is down to the staff on the BML line not being used to coupling the 442's in the same way that the Wessex line staff used to do in my experience with ease.

 

[A-driver]

I witnessed every single coupling for the period of time that I was standing on Bournemouth station yes, waiting for my IC train to go up to Birmingham and never once in over 5 years in travelling that route did the coupling of the prior London Waterloo train delay the IC train that I needed to travel on. This was in the time of BR/Network Southeast. There may have been other times when I was not at Bournemouth station when they had issues, but I was just curious to know what has changed in that time or whether it is down to the staff on the BML line not being used to coupling the 442's in the same way that the Wessex line staff used to do in my experience with ease.

I don't understand what you mean-as I said, many times when 442s are banged together nowadays there are no problems-and you only watched the ones which attached whilst you were there-how many were attached without you being there?!

 

[jimm]

I think it is fair to say that if it had been a frequent problem it probably would have been well known (like the problems coupling 180s for example). I get the impression from the OP that coupling problems are now more commonplace.

And what problem coupling 180s would that be? I'm not aware of any. They've never been used in a way that called for fast in-service coupling and uncoupling. When they ran as 10-car formations during their first stint with FGW, the coupling and uncoupling was done on the depot, or while empty in a station or sidings between duties.

 

[455driver]

So 2 442s wouldnt/ couldnt couple up so therefore the whole fleet is knackered?

Its a good job you were not at Woking the other month as they had 3 separate incidents of Desiros not coupling (including 1 broken coupling) , you would have had a hissy fit. :roll:

It might surprise you to know that the tightlock/buckeye coupling needs a good shove to make sure the pin drops, if you go on too soft the pin wont drop and you will have to start again hence the "30mph :roll:" coupling up which is actually a bit of a bump but hey ho there you go.

 

[RobShipway]

So 2 442s wouldnt/ couldnt couple up so therefore the whole fleet is knackered?

Its a good job you were not at Woking the other month as they had 3 separate incidents of Desiros not coupling (including 1 broken coupling) , you would have had a hissy fit. :roll:

It might surprise you to know that the tightlock/buckeye coupling needs a good shove to make sure the pin drops, if you go on too soft the pin wont drop and you will have to start again hence the "30mph :roll:" coupling up which is actually a bit of a bump but hey ho there you go.

Well, not sure about anyone else that has commented in this thread, but I never said that the Class 442 are knackered and if my posts have implied then you have maybe misread them. As far as I am concerned the class 442's have another thirty years yet of life left in them even if there is class 377'/6's that may replace them in the near future I think that there is many routes that they could be used on.

The comment in the opening post in this thread is that coupling problems happen all the time with the class 442's, as has been mentioned they don't and from my experience never happened when I was at Bournemouth station many times to witness the coupling of the train from Weymouth to a unit that was within the sidings that had prior to the Weymouth train arriving had been brought into the station and stopped at the 10/8 Car mark.

 

[pendolino]

There has been an issue with attaching/detaching 442s for a while - so much so that I remember seeing a notice restricting attachments/detachments to Stewarts Lane and not while in service at Victoria. Presumably it was felt that the issue had been resolved and the restriction lifted.

I suppose it's inevitable that as stock ages, little idiosyncrasies like this develop. We get occasional problems with coupling 455s, but nothing that generally can't be resolved by splitting off and having another go.

 

[D365]

Well, not sure about anyone else that has commented in this thread, but I never said that the Class 442 are knackered and if my posts have implied then you have maybe misread them. As far as I am concerned the class 442's have another thirty years yet of life left in them even if there is class 377'/6's that may replace them in the near future I think that there is many routes that they could be used on.

377/6 will not replace 442, and in any case, the latter has 23m carriages nearly identical to Mk3, as opposed to 20m. I could see a number of Electrostars in 12-car formation replacing them, if these are ordered for the 116+140.

Alternatively, the currently 40 year old EE traction equipment could be replaced with Dellner couplers fitted and a proper refurbishment internally. Even so, I doubt 442 would last for 30 years, considering the 317722 trial is supposed to add only 20 years in comparison. 442 is not ideal for Gatwick Express in any case, never mind Brighton Express. Please excuse me if I've made any mistakes!

 

[MrC]

As someone who's coupled (and uncoupled) a good few 442s at a number of places including Bournemouth, Southampton and Waterloo I can say hand on heart that they certainly did have their problems. They did go through phases, and snow and ice occasionally caused problems (although in different ways to Desiros) although less likely to being damaged by being hit hard with a paddle or short circuiting bar! The types of problems were typically wear and tear, as well as constant issues with the sliding pipe covers (are they running around without them now?). Attaching and splitting on curves could be a bit of a nightmare sometimes as well.

 

[455driver]

as well as constant issues with the sliding pipe covers (are they running around without them now?).

Most are removed (again), some still have them fitted though.

 

[Crossover]

And what problem coupling 180s would that be? I'm not aware of any. They've never been used in a way that called for fast in-service coupling and uncoupling. When they ran as 10-car formations during their first stint with FGW, the coupling and uncoupling was done on the depot, or while empty in a station or sidings between duties.

I don't think they get doubled up very much now, but I seem to recall some problems when GC and HT were running them together during engineering work between London and Doncaster, as this meant they could run both services but only take up one valuable ECML path. I recall that they would sometimes refuse to join - not sure in this case if they ended up sending one half onward or if the whole lot was cancelled

 

[sprinterguy]

And what problem coupling 180s would that be? I'm not aware of any. They've never been used in a way that called for fast in-service coupling and uncoupling. When they ran as 10-car formations during their first stint with FGW, the coupling and uncoupling was done on the depot, or while empty in a station or sidings between duties.

The units suffered from electrical faults in the couplers that caused in-service failures irregardless of where they were coupled, as the units would not "talk to each other" correctly. As Crossover says as well, there were problems when Hull Trains and Grand Central units were expected to couple and uncouple at Doncaster during ECML engineering works.

 

[Waldgrun]

Uncoupling was always the problem I found! I am surprised that no-one has stated that Wessies/Pigs Buckeye were originally released by pulling a D shaped handle where as Mk 1 stock a lever was used! Many a-time at a Harbour side station with curved platforms, staff could be seen with both feet, on the units bodywork trying to pull the Handle, very rarely did this work, more often than not, both units ended up remaining coupled together to complete the days diagram, or the units where sent to the depot and a replacement provided!

 

[TMLB UK]

It's funny that people think couplers are getting old now! As if these aren't subject to heavy maintenance overhauls regularly.

Also the 180 fleet have problems with the pneumatic coupler doors. They have never worked and therefor all the coupling and associated pipework/wiring that's supposed be protected by the door is exposed to a constant battering, frequently at 125mph! Making many of them 'non-multi'

 

[34D]

Uncoupling was always the problem I found! I am surprised that no-one has stated that Wessies/Pigs Buckeye were originally released by pulling a D shaped handle where as Mk 1 stock a lever was used!

Wasn't it a chain on mark 1 coaches?