Entire 800/801/802 fleet stood down for safety checks

[hwl]

When I was doing my chartership one of my mentors was a very experienced, very well respected, fleet manager who went on to become a TOC ED before he retired.

He gave me three very sage, and in this case apposite, mantras by which to work - as a rolling stock engineer - by.

1. Don't go looking for a problem until you know what you are going to do when you find it.
2. Never assume you've got one problem.
3. Only ground a fleet if you know how you are going to put them back in to service, if you ground them without knowing how to get them back into service it'll be the end of your career in the railway.

Given he'd had to ground two large fleets in his career I took it that he knew of what he spoke....

I'm not sure 1 and 3 apply in this case unless the solution is to allow those with small cracks to be used with heavy monitoring or weld those with small early stage cracks (say less than 4-5mm) to reset the clock* to give time for a permanent fixed to be worked on and applied across the whole fleet. * the cracks will grow quicker next time post reweld so it is a short term solution.

2. I have a feeling it is going to be at least 5 or 6 problems (a couple being minor but enough to make the difference and accelerate crack growth given the other bigger issues.)

 

[LordCreed]

No don't follow that.

Your argument is that as most people wouldn't want such a facility, is is therefore correct to deny it to those few who do?

And then you argue that actually enough people would want to defer their trip to cause dangerous overcrowding (on trains that are supposed to be reservation compulsory).

Instead of twisting my words to fit your narrative, actually read what I said.

The only passengers likely to want to wait a week for a journey are leisure travellers. Encouraging them to travel on already busy trains is absolutely stupid given the current time.

 

[hwl]

Days?

Try months or even years.

This is almost to certain to drag into 2022

 

[AdamWW]

This is standard practice across many industries, and regardless of your thoughts on the practice, it is not just the railway at fault.

If I purchased a new TV, and the store had no other TVs, they'd offer you a refund and tell you to try and buy another one in the future.

I think a closer analogy to GWR saying "If you couldn't use your advance ticket yesterday, then you'll have to pay full price to travel today" would be someone taking back a TV they'd just bought on offer but didn't work when they got it home being told that they could have their money back and then buy a new one at full price because the offer isn't on any more.

 

[[email protected].]

Does anyone know where the cracks are?

 

[adc82140]

The IET groundings will make for a good episode of Paddington 24/7 next year.

Can't wait for all the false jeopardy they'll inject in to that:

"will the 7.30 from Little Snoring arrive before its bogies explode"

 

[hexagon789]

Does anyone know where the cracks are?

Yaw damper mountings isn't it? Rather like the CAF 195s on Northern.

 

[brad465]

This is almost to certain to drag into 2022

What sort of scale of disruption in terms of number of units out at any one time will this running into 2022 involve? If it's enough to make a notable dent in operations, then hiring other stock in, depending on what's available, would surely both be necessary and more feasible than if it was just a few weeks?

 

[LordCreed]

I think a closer analogy to GWR saying "If you couldn't use your advance ticket yesterday, then you'll have to pay full price to travel today" would be someone taking back a TV they'd just bought on offer but didn't work when they got it home being told that they could have their money back and then buy a new one at full price because the offer isn't on any more.

Once again, read what you're quoting.

If the TV wasn't in stock, that's exactly what the company would tell you. They certainly wouldn't be like "here, have a return receipt valid for this TV at any point in the future". You'd be given a refund and told to rebuy when in stock, even if the price went up between the refund and the purchase.

 

[Watershed]

Yaw damper mountings isn't it? Rather like the CAF 195s on Northern.

There seems to be some confusion. The issue is with the strengthened jacking points rather than the yaw dampers.

 

[AdamWW]

Once again, read what you're quoting.

If the TV wasn't in stock, that's exactly what the company would tell you. They certainly wouldn't be like "here, have a return receipt valid for this TV at any point in the future". You'd be given a refund and told to rebuy when in stock, even if the price went up between the refund and the purchase.

Fine.

We're not going to agree and we shoudn't waste any more space on this forum.

I think it's a poor way to treat passengers, you think they are being completely reasonable and let's leave it at that.

 

[hexagon789]

There seems to be some confusion. The issue is with the strengthened jacking points rather than the yaw dampers.

If it's the jacking points, how does that affect the ability if the train to run? Wouldn't the jacking points be simply for lifting the trains for maintenance, the running gear wouldn't be attached to those in wouldn't have thought?

 

[millemille]

I'm not sure 1 and 3 apply in this case unless the solution is to allow those with small cracks to be used with heavy monitoring or weld those with small early stage cracks (say less than 4-5mm) to reset the clock* to give time for a permanent fixed to be worked on and applied across the whole fleet. * the cracks will grow quicker next time post reweld so it is a short term solution.

2. I have a feeling it is going to be at least 5 or 6 problems (a couple being minor but enough to make the difference and accelerate crack growth given the other bigger issues.)

In this case.

1. Don't undertake a fleet check to look for cracks as a pure data gathering exercise, establish before starting the check what is to be done if any cracks are found. The cold hard impartial engineering must drive the operational decision making, not the results. If the criteria is, for example, any crack over 25mm long and 3mm deep then the train is stopped. If that means the whole fleet is stopped then so be it. The reason for this approach is to not be in a position where the data is gathered and then any decision about what is fit for service is potentially influenced by the operational consequence. I have seen fleet checks done in similar situations where the operational decisions were made once the results were gathered and operational imperative and pressure tried to over rule sound engineering.

3. This is exactly what has been done isn't it? Fleet grounded for checking, if check results allow individual units are back in service. Whole fleet no longer grounded, individual units OOS.

 

[Wallsendmag]

If it's the jacking points, how does that affect the ability if the train to run? Wouldn't the jacking points be simply for lifting the trains for maintenance, the running gear wouldn't be attached to those in wouldn't have thought?

If they fall off at 125mph it could affect several things.

 

[father_jack]

If it's the jacking points, how does that affect the ability if the train to run? Wouldn't the jacking points be simply for lifting the trains for maintenance, the running gear wouldn't be attached to those in wouldn't have thought?

Once the structural integrity is called into doubt it is game over until declared fit to run.

 

[syorksdeano]

If it's the jacking points, how does that affect the ability if the train to run? Wouldn't the jacking points be simply for lifting the trains for maintenance, the running gear wouldn't be attached to those in wouldn't have thought?

I was thinking that at first and then another thought crossed my mind, in that if it is cracking at those points then where else could it be cracking

 

[bengley]

If it's the jacking points, how does that affect the ability if the train to run? Wouldn't the jacking points be simply for lifting the trains for maintenance, the running gear wouldn't be attached to those in wouldn't have thought?

The jacking points make up part of the bolster which the suspension and bogies are attached to so it's very much more serious than just a problem for maintenance tasks

 

[swt_passenger]

Yaw damper mountings isn't it? Rather like the CAF 195s on Northern.

Lifting jack pockets. As per the Hitachi press release and numerous previous posts.

 

[millemille]

If it's the jacking points, how does that affect the ability if the train to run? Wouldn't the jacking points be simply for lifting the trains for maintenance, the running gear wouldn't be attached to those in wouldn't have thought?

Last month an NIR was issued by GWR for yaw damper bracket cracking on some of their higher mileage Hitachi 800 series trains. AFAIK no other Hitachi 800 series operator has, to date, found cracks in the same area.

In the last 48 hours cracks have been found in the jacking point/lifting pockets of Hitachi 800 series trains operated by GWR, LNER, TPE & Scotrail.

The Jacking points will, by their very nature, be in the same area of the vehicle structure as the yaw damper brackets. The lifting points are, in theory, only subject to significant structural load/forces, when the vehicles are lifted so for cracks to be found on a large number of vehicles of significantly different age and duty cycle is obviously of concern as it indicates that the vehicle structure is showing precursors to localised significant structural catastrophic failure.

Structural engineers have made a determination on what level of cracking is acceptable, in the short term, to allow individual units back into service.

 

[Class 170101]

I'd say - having been to the Hitachi factory in Japan and seen FSW first hand - that it is unlikely the welds in the areas where cracking is reported are FSW and more likely to be "traditional" MIG or TIG.

I assume MIG and TIG are welds but what is their full name please.

 

[robbeech]

Instead of twisting my words to fit your narrative, actually read what I said.

The only passengers likely to want to wait a week for a journey are leisure travellers. Encouraging them to travel on already busy trains is absolutely stupid given the current time.

But that is EXACTLY what they ARE doing. By telling passengers their £30 tickets must be used today or refunded and if they don’t use them today their journey will cost them £100. By being flexible and letting passengers travel at a later date you leave more capacity for those that simply must travel today. By acting as they are they are making it more difficult for passengers today and they’re making higher profits from everyone else.

 

[hexagon789]

If they fall off at 125mph it could affect several things.

Fair enough, I admit I overlooked that point. It was also all the mention of yaw dampers and running gear that added to the confusion.

Once the structural integrity is called into doubt it is game over until declared fit to run.

I can fully appreciate that point

 

[hwl]

If it's the jacking points, how does that affect the ability if the train to run? Wouldn't the jacking points be simply for lifting the trains for maintenance, the running gear wouldn't be attached to those in wouldn't have thought?

The jacking points are directly welded to the same bit of metal that have the cracks in just above yaw damper bracket mounting point and anti-roll bar attachment and very close to the suspension air bags.

The cracks are in the yaw damper brackets but what they are bolted too...

 

[hexagon789]

I was thinking that at first and then another thought crossed my mind, in that if it is cracking at those points then where else could it be cracking

Yeah, I was thinking the same initially but I can understand the implications now.

Last month an NIR was issued by GWR for yaw damper bracket cracking on some of their higher mileage Hitachi 800 series trains. AFAIK no other Hitachi 800 series operator has, to date, found cracks in the same area.

In the last 48 hours cracks have been found in the jacking point/lifting pockets of Hitachi 800 series trains operated by GWR, LNER, TPE & Scotrail.

The Jacking points will, by their very nature, be in the same area of the vehicle structure as the yaw damper brackets. The lifting points are, in theory, only subject to significant structural load/forces, when the vehicles are lifted so for cracks to be found on a large number of vehicles of significantly different age and duty cycle is obviously of concern as it indicates that the vehicle structure is showing precursors to localised significant structural catastrophic failure.

Structural engineers have made a determination on what level of cracking is acceptable, in the short term, to allow individual units back into service.

So there was an issue related to the yaw dampers previously on a unit?

Lifting jack pockets. As per the Hitachi press release and numerous previous posts.

Apologies, trying to keep up with this thread and sift out the correct information amid all the speculation is not always that straightforward. Previous mention of yaw dampers and the issues with the CAF units added to my misunderstanding

 

[millemille]

I assume MIG and TIG are welds but what is their full name please.

MIG - Metal Inert Gas.
TIG - Tungsten Inert Gas

 

[D365]

Last month an NIR was issued by GWR for yaw damper bracket cracking on some of their higher mileage Hitachi 800 series trains. AFAIK no other Hitachi 800 series operator has, to date, found cracks in the same area.

In the last 48 hours cracks have been found in the jacking point/lifting pockets of Hitachi 800 series trains operated by GWR, LNER, TPE & Scotrail.

The Jacking points will, by their very nature, be in the same area of the vehicle structure as the yaw damper brackets. The lifting points are, in theory, only subject to significant structural load/forces, when the vehicles are lifted so for cracks to be found on a large number of vehicles of significantly different age and duty cycle is obviously of concern as it indicates that the vehicle structure is showing precursors to localised significant structural catastrophic failure.

Structural engineers have made a determination on what level of cracking is acceptable, in the short term, to allow individual units back into service.

Thank you, a very useful summary.

Out of interest, why has an NIR not been raised for the jacking point cracks? Or has this issue been escalated far beyond NIR-online?

 

[hexagon789]

While I remember, is the issue affecting the ScotRail Hitachi's related to or different from the 80x issue?

 

[ScouserGirl]

While I remember, is the issue affecting the ScotRail Hitachi's related to or different from the 80x issue?

Same issue

 

[swt_passenger]

So there was an issue related to the yaw dampers previously on a unit?


Apologies, trying to keep up with this thread and sift out the correct information amid all the speculation is not always that straightforward. Previous mention of yaw dampers and the issues with the CAF units added to my misunderstanding

I understand, its not really been helped by yesterday’s media using images they already had from the earlier incident.

 

[hexagon789]

Same issue

Thank you

I understand, its not really been helped by yesterday’s media using images they already had from the earlier incident.

Thanks for the understanding, it's been so hectic on here it's difficult keeping up!