Most Unreliable Multiple Unit

[Bald Rick]

The last entry for the Class 700 in Modern Railways 'Informed Sources' is for Period 12 of Financial Year 2020-21, that is for the 4 week period beginning on 7 February 2021. The Moving Annual Average for the Miles per Technical Incident (MTIN) at this point had reached 19,806.

The Class was promoted out of the monthly new train statistics in the following period when the MAA exceeded 20,000 MTIN.

For what it's worth, the whole class averages some 1.1 to 1.2 million miles in a four week period. That's some 400 miles per unit per day.

Not shabby...!

Also, worth pointing out that each Class 700 unit is effectively 2 x single ended units permanently coupled together. If they were counted as two units rather than one (as normal emus are) then their MTINs would be double...

 

[SolomonSouth]

Indeed it was, 4-5 years ago. Check the tables now.

Could you please link the tables now Rick? I can’t find them anywhere

 

[SolomonSouth]

What was the nature of their failures in 2016-7? Do you realise that they were only introduced in mid 2016? The are (by some accounts) among the most reliable EMUs in service at the moment.

In 2016-17 the ATO was faulty

 

[Wtloild]

If we’re including Europe, the Fyra was an unmitigated disaster:

Fyra - Wikipedia

en.m.wikipedia.org

"The Fyra had a poor reputation for reliability. After a month of operations more than 5% of all trains were cancelled and less than 45% of them ran on schedule."

Not too long ago, Northern & TPE would only dream of that sort of reliability.

 

[Energy]

"The Fyra had a poor reputation for reliability. After a month of operations more than 5% of all trains were cancelled and less than 45% of them ran on schedule."

Not too long ago, Northern & TPE would only dream of that sort of reliability.

I wonder how it compares to the 769s

 

[LNW-GW Joint]

I wonder how it compares to the 769s

Northern's 769 fleet is currently bottom (22nd) of the New Train Reliability table in Modern Railways (Sept) at 769 miles per incident (over last 12 months).
Top of the table is LNER's class 800 fleet at 17011 miles per incident, ie 22 times more reliable.
There is a big difference in fleet size, however, and daily mileage.
TfW's 769s (diesel only) are doing a bit better at 1233 miles, and TfLs 345 FLU Crossrail fleet sits between them at 1103.

 

[warwickshire]

Class 172 Chiltern Railways and now West Midlands railways.

Especially 172103 always on the yard at Tyseley Depot in Birmingham

 

[Bald Rick]

Could you please link the tables now Rick? I can’t find them anywhere

The latest Modern Railways always has the most up to date numbers for new rolling stock. The annual report for all rolling stock is published each year in the January edition. I’m afraid I don’t have them to hand.

 

[LOL The Irony]

Northern's 769 fleet is currently bottom (22nd) of the New Train Reliability table in Modern Railways (Sept) at 769 miles per incident (over last 12 months).

Nice symmetry . At least we know why they were called class 769s.

 

[Anonymous10]

Nice symmetry . At least we know why they were called class 769s.

why am i not surprised to see the 769s featuring here they are bad at tfw too

 

[SolomonSouth]

The latest Modern Railways always has the most up to date numbers for new rolling stock. The annual report for all rolling stock is published each year in the January edition. I’m afraid I don’t have them to hand.

Oh that's a shame. I believe the software was faulty so was upgraded as said here: https://www.thameslinkprogramme.co.uk/case-study/meeting-the-technical-targets-class-700s/
and so they are more reliable now

 

[brad465]

Can we say the 800/801/802s when it comes to structural integrity of the body shell?

 

[Tractor86]

I couldn’t tell you the MOST unreliable, but the only 2 trains I have been on which failed were a 319 and a 350. The former, being rather exciting as I was actually in the train behind the failed one and detonators had to be laid and such. Very interesting for me, not for all the rest when we all got booted off at Lostock Hall

 

[AM9]

In 2016-17 the ATO was faulty

I thought that the ATO wasn't even tested until nearly 3 years after they were introduced.

 

[Bald Rick]

I thought that the ATO wasn't even tested until nearly 3 years after they were introduced.

It was tested, but not used in passenger service. First one in passenger service was in 2018.

Nothing faulty about it though, the drivers simply hadn’t been trained.

 

[AM9]

It was tested, but not used in passenger service. First one in passenger service was in 2018.

Nothing faulty about it though, the drivers simply hadn’t been trained.

Isn't ATO a very small step up from full ETCS?

 

[Bald Rick]

Isn't ATO a very small step up from full ETCS?

Yes, in technology terms. Clearly ATO is much easier in training terms.

 

[Philip]

175112 was apparently breaking down a lot in the days when this fleet had lots of reliability problems.

 

[SolomonSouth]

What was the nature of their failures in 2016-7? Do you realise that they were only introduced in mid 2016? The are (by some accounts) among the most reliable EMUs in service at the moment.

I'm just basing it off of the fact that when the 387 was new, it already achieved around 10000 miles between failures which is a lot worse.
Also the Class 350 (very similar to 700) is 80000+ miles between failures. Strange how it is so much better than the 700 when the desiro city is an evolution of the desiro so in theory should be more reliable

 

[AM9]

I'm just basing it off of the fact that when the 387 was new, it already achieved around 10000 miles between failures which is a lot worse.
Also the Class 350 (very similar to 700) is 80000+ miles between failures. Strange how it is so much better than the 700 when the desiro city is an evolution of the desiro so in theory should be more reliable

But if comparing like for like, then a 700/0 needs to be half of a 350 and a 700/1, a third.to be equally reliable. So what are the latest figures for the 700s?

 

[SolomonSouth]

But if comparing like for like, then a 700/0 needs to be half of a 350 and a 700/1, a third.to be equally reliable. So what are the latest figures for the 700s?

I am actually not sure but @Bald Rick said 19806 miles between failures so I will go from that

 

[fgwrich]

Of specific units : 150002 Aka Scud2. Never the most reliable of the twosome, not helped by having tiny tanks that were only recently replaced (FGW Modifications). That said, I miss them down here in the south!

 

[61653 HTAFC]

Doesn't need it's own thread, but this one seems appropriate...

Just seen a Grand Central 180 near Mirfield as I passed on a 185, it appeared to be missing a vehicle and was running as a 4-car set. Anybody able to confirm this, or were my eyes playing tricks on me?

 

[coppercapped]

I am actually not sure but @Bald Rick said 19806 miles between failures so I will go from that

A minor point, but I posted the figures, not Bald Rick.

The next time MTIN figures for the Class 700 will be publicly available will be when the January 2022 Modern Railways is published. If you want to know - buy it.

 

[Jamesrob637]

323s seem to be having many faults right now i.e the 10:20 Stoke to Manchester meaning that some stations had an even worse than usual service today.

 

[James James]

Also, worth pointing out that each Class 700 unit is effectively 2 x single ended units permanently coupled together. If they were counted as two units rather than one (as normal emus are) then their MTINs would be double...

Why would their MTIN be double? Twice as many miles, over twice as many units - same number in the end.

The MTIN would likely be a little higher just because a single failure would have half the effect (averaged across the whole fleet) when counting each half separately, but it's not going to be anywhere near double.

 

[Bald Rick]

Why would their MTIN be double? Twice as many miles, over twice as many units - same number in the end.

The MTIN would likely be a little higher just because a single failure would have half the effect (averaged across the whole fleet) when counting each half separately, but it's not going to be anywhere near double.

It’s (roughly) miles per incident.

A fixed formation fleet of 8 car units, formed of two technically half units but counted just as one does, say, a million miles a period, and has 50 faults. Thats 20,000 miles per incident.

An almost identical fleet formed of 2x4 car units on exactly the same resource plan will do 2million miles a period, 50 faults, 40,000 miles per incident.

 

[py_megapixel]

It’s (roughly) miles per incident.

A fixed formation fleet of 8 car units, formed of two technically half units but counted just as one does, say, a million miles a period, and has 50 faults. Thats 20,000 miles per incident.

An almost identical fleet formed of 2x4 car units on exactly the same resource plan will do 2million miles a period, 50 faults, 40,000 miles per incident.

Still not sure it's a valid comparison though as you can't send out half a 700 on its own. A service diagrammed for 8 car 319 could run 4 car if needed; on a service diagrammed for 8 car 700 they have to either find a complete 700 or cancel it.

 

[Bald Rick]

Still not sure it's a valid comparison though as you can't send out half a 700 on its own.

That’s the point!

 

[Dougal2345]

Could the 484 be the most unreliable multiple unit?

Scheduled to come into service on 1-Apr, but five and a half months later, not a wheel turned in passenger service... 100% failure, complete line closure, RRBs...