SWR Class 458 to be retained

[driverd]

Really? Are drivers that keen to be 'upgraded' to Enhanced TPWS?

Indeed, sounds like a first class case of nitpicking from the union - likely as part of the wider industrial dispute.

Enhanced TPWS offers nothing over basic TPWS in terms of safety, the only change is how information is displayed to the driver. Seems like a very, very weak arguement.

 

[swr444]

I think they mean a deep clean of the cab because they haven’t been touched in the refurb.

 

[Fincra5]

Indeed, sounds like a first class case of nitpicking from the union - likely as part of the wider industrial dispute.

Enhanced TPWS offers nothing over basic TPWS in terms of safety, the only change is how information is displayed to the driver. Seems like a very, very weak arguement.

Reduces the Reset-And-Go risk.

 

[Invincible]

Whispers are getting louder that the 458/4s WILL re enter service on Weybridge and Windsor services. Nothing officially confirmed yet though. Watch this space.

Will the gearing need to be changed back from 100MPH max, to be more suitable for shorter stop/start operation?

What's the "Reset-And-Go" risk?
From

Train Protection & Warning System - Wikipedia

en.wikipedia.org

"At around 400 high-risk locations, TPWS+ is installed with a third transmitter further in rear of the signal increasing the effectiveness to 100 mph (160 km/h)"
Is Enhanced TPWS the same as TPWS+ for high speed lines, although may not be needed for the Weybridge and Windsor service?

 

[Snow1964]

Will the gearing need to be changed back from 100MPH max, to be more suitable for shorter stop/start operation?

No, the 450s are also 100mph and also work stoppers

The only effect might be slightly slower acceleration, but most trains on SWR are capped power limit anyway, not at design max power.

 

[Invincible]

No, the 450s are also 100mph and also work stoppers

The only effect might be slightly slower acceleration, but most trains on SWR are capped power limit anyway, not at design max power.

Thanks, checked further and found when the 458s were first refurbished
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/British_Rail_Class_458 refering to https://www.railtechnologymagazine.com/Rail-Industry-Focus-/making-the-best-use-of-rolling-stock
"Additional modifications included re-gearing the traction motors to reduce the train's maximum speed from 100 mph (161 km/h) to 75 mph (121 km/h), both to reduce the likelihood of overheating when making frequent stops and starts and because the higher speed was unnecessary on suburban services in any case"
So the likelihood of overheating is now not so much of a risk with the latest regearing and capped power limit?

 

[43096]

Thanks, checked further and found when the 458s were first refurbished
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/British_Rail_Class_458 refering to https://www.railtechnologymagazine.com/Rail-Industry-Focus-/making-the-best-use-of-rolling-stock
"Additional modifications included re-gearing the traction motors to reduce the train's maximum speed from 100 mph (161 km/h) to 75 mph (121 km/h), both to reduce the likelihood of overheating when making frequent stops and starts and because the higher speed was unnecessary on suburban services in any case"
So the likelihood of overheating is now not so much of a risk with the latest regearing and capped power limit?

They are being re-geared back to what they were when new (i.e. as 4-car 458/0s), when they worked Reading line stopping services. It wasn't a problem then.

As they were intended to be used as 12-car formations on the Portsmouth line presumably the traction software reflects that and limits current draw on the basis of 12-car formations. The 5-car sets have/had three motor bogies per set, the same as the 4-car units, so when running as 10-cars current draw per motor was increased to improve performance - it was that which lead to the re-gearing. It was all explained at the time of the 458/5 conversions in an excellent article that Ian Walmsley did for Modern Railways about the project.

 

[wickham]

Is the attention to 458/4 cabs the reason that two of them have gone to Eastleigh Works ?

 

[fgwrich]

I would imagine it’s a deep clean, repaint and a new seat.

Hopefully there’s not an increase in station stop shorts.

And maybe an update to the cab stickers at long last

Though I wonder who will be disappointed more, Staff in the cabs or Passengers travelling in the units. I also hope they stay on the Reading line than the Weybridge jobs - it would be good to at least try and keep the refreshed interiors in reasonable condition, especially now that they've got 2+2 and tables.

Is the attention to 458/4 cabs the reason that two of them have gone to Eastleigh Works ?

No, that's just for storage as Bournemouth has been getting a little full of late. They are there for warm storage and sit on a road with the juice switched on.

 

[AndyD4]

Hi is 458533 out of service? I keep checking on real-time trains and it never seems to be working

 

[Notchapple]

Hi is 458533 out of service? I keep checking on real-time trains and it never seems to be working

Hasn't been seen since 28/01/22, I believe it has been waiting on new wheelsets but keeps having parts taken to be used on other units.

 

[AndyD4]

Hasn't been seen since 28/01/22, I believe it has been waiting on new wheelsets but keeps having parts taken to be used on other units.

Thank you

 

[abn444]

You’re welcome to your opinion but I think you’ll be eating your hat.

The level of details provided by @Benno and the fact their source isn’t a driver / guard at x depot leads me to believe this could be a genuine tip and is someone close to the project.

I can believe they'll be in service at some point. I saw one at New Milton the other day and it didn't just go straight through, it stopped for a bit before continuing as if it was on a test run rather than a standard ECS move

 

[boiledbeans2]

Claire Mann appointed TfL's Chief Operating Officer

Claire Mann appointed TfL's Chief Operating Officer

tfl.gov.uk

Thanks for the link. Quote from above link:

At SWR, she [...] oversaw the introduction of a £1bn fleet of new trains, which are being rolled out across the SWR suburban network, including the construction of a state-of-the-art train care facility, and led the £26m modernisation of the Island Line on the Isle of Wight.

She's done an excellent job on the rollout of new SWR trains! Next trains to rollout at TfL - Piccadilly Line 2024 stock - 2 return trips per day!

 

[Goldfish62]

Thanks for the link. Quote from above link:

She's done an excellent job on the rollout of new SWR trains! Next trains to rollout at TfL - Piccadilly Line 2024 stock - 2 return trips per day!

And as for the Island line!

 

[boiledbeans2]

And as for the Island line!

Of course! Claire has finally achieved 1tph on the Island line, the result of a successful modernisation from the previous poor 2tph service!

 

[OneTrackMinded]

Will her (temporary) replacement, the previous COO Stuart Meek, make any different I wonder?

 

[swr444]

Will her (temporary) replacement, the previous COO Stuart Meek, make any different I wonder?

Its pretty much all down to the DfT ever since Covid anyway

 

[WrongRoad]

Indeed, sounds like a first class case of nitpicking from the union - likely as part of the wider industrial dispute.

Enhanced TPWS offers nothing over basic TPWS in terms of safety, the only change is how information is displayed to the driver. Seems like a very, very weak arguement.

Yes it does, the enhanced TPWS unit in the cab gives a verbal indication that the system is working correctly when the driver opens up the cab with the EP key. Also if TPWS is activated it will also give a verbal warning to the driver if it’s for a SPAD or Overspeed. So not really a weak argument.

 

[JonathanH]

Though I wonder who will be disappointed more, Staff in the cabs or Passengers travelling in the units. I also hope they stay on the Reading line than the Weybridge jobs - it would be good to at least try and keep the refreshed interiors in reasonable condition, especially now that they've got 2+2 and tables.

2+2 and tables might be useful for those who get a seat but perhaps not ideal for the busiest trains.

 

[Nym]

Yes it does, the enhanced TPWS unit in the cab gives a verbal indication that the system is working correctly when the driver opens up the cab with the EP key. Also if TPWS is activated it will also give a verbal warning to the driver if it’s for a SPAD or Overspeed. So not really a weak argument.

Point of correction, it gives a verbal indication that it's passed it's POST, not that it is in fact operational.

You can have the AWS Isolation Switch (not to be confused with the AWS Isolation Switch pre Enhanced TPWS) in the isolated position and it will still annunciate that they are both "Operational".

 

[swt_passenger]

Point of correction, it gives a verbal indication that it's passed it's POST, not that it is in fact operational.

You can have the AWS Isolation Switch (not to be confused with the AWS Isolation Switch pre Enhanced TPWS) in the isolated position and it will still annunciate that they are both "Operational".

There seems to be two different usages developing for the term ‘enhanced TPWS’. In the recent thread about the various protection systems I thought the conclusion was that the cab equipment update to TPWS4, (the latest standard otherwise known as Mk4 TPWS - depending on manufacturer), was an MMI update as explained in recent posts, but Enhanced TPWS referred to changes to the trackside system, eg to allow Chiltern’s ATP switch off.

The point was also made that the update to the cab equipment was completely separate to any enhancement to the track equipment fit. So what is the cab update supposed to be called?

If anyone wants to refer to it, the discussion includes a link to a Rail Engineer article and starts here:

Differences between TPWS, ATP and ETCS

*used. ATP is no longer in use on the Chilterns. Is Chiltern stock now fully fitted with Enhanced TPWS?

www.railforums.co.uk

 

[driverd]

Yes it does, the enhanced TPWS unit in the cab gives a verbal indication that the system is working correctly when the driver opens up the cab with the EP key. Also if TPWS is activated it will also give a verbal warning to the driver if it’s for a SPAD or Overspeed.

Which is basically you explaining my point that:

Enhanced TPWS offers nothing over basic TPWS in terms of safety, the only change is how information is displayed to the driver.

You then claim:

So not really a weak argument.

Yet when the majority of trains around the country (including SWRs own 458/5 fleet) are operating safely with the original TPWS interface and being afforded all the protections of the enhanced TPWS interface, just with information displayed differently, I would reiterate that it...

Seems like a very, very weak arguement.

Why is the original TPWS perfectly acceptable for vast swathes of the UK network, but not acceptable on one specific fleet at one operator?

 

[SWT_USER]

Mixed news if they do enter service in my opinion. Good as SWR are clearly desperately short of units, but it does imply there are more problems with the introduction of the 701's. And ultimately this is just SWR reintroducing the same rolling stock previously used on the line but with a lower capacity - not great really.

 

[Goldfish62]

Mixed news if they do enter service in my opinion. Good as SWR are clearly desperately short of units, but it does imply there are more problems with the introduction of the 701's. And ultimately this is just SWR reintroducing the same rolling stock previously used on the line but with a lower capacity - not great really.

I think the fact training didn't start in January and still hasn't started was already a sign of further problems. Clearly SWR are now on the brink as regards rolling stock availability so something had to give.

 

[Nym]

There seems to be two different usages developing for the term ‘enhanced TPWS’. In the recent thread about the various protection systems I thought the conclusion was that the cab equipment update to TPWS4, (the latest standard otherwise known as Mk4 TPWS - depending on manufacturer), was an MMI update as explained in recent posts, but Enhanced TPWS referred to changes to the trackside system, eg to allow Chiltern’s ATP switch off.

The point was also made that the update to the cab equipment was completely separate to any enhancement to the track equipment fit. So what is the cab update supposed to be called?

If anyone wants to refer to it, the discussion includes a link to a Rail Engineer article and starts here:

Differences between TPWS, ATP and ETCS

*used. ATP is no longer in use on the Chilterns. Is Chiltern stock now fully fitted with Enhanced TPWS?

www.railforums.co.uk

Enhanced TPWS is defined from GE/RT8030 Issue 4 onwards (Now RIS-0775 and GE/RT8075).
This is defined by the RSSB as Enhanced TPWS.

The 4 comes from this being in force since Issue 4 of GE/RT8030. If you want a definition of Enhanced TPWS, check Appendix F of GE/RT8030 and later issues of the following standards, where the requirements are simply part of TPWS without the “enhanced” term.

I would not think that a “Rail Engineer” article is more of a source than the standard that defines the terms!

 

[swt_passenger]

Enhanced TPWS is defined from GE/RT8030 Issue 4 onwards (Now RIS-0775 and GE/RT8075).
This is defined by the RSSB as Enhanced TPWS.

The 4 comes from this being in force since Issue 4 of GE/RT8030. If you want a definition of Enhanced TPWS, check Appendix F of GE/RT8030 and later issues of the following standards, where the requirements are simply part of TPWS without the “enhanced” term.

I’ll take your word for it as I cannot access standards. It still seems to me that the term “enhanced” is being used in practice to describe two separate concepts.

 

[Nym]

For info, enhanced overlap protection for TPWS was termed TPWS+ by Network Rail in a press release back in 2004.

This term is carried on into RIS-0775-CCS Issue 3 as a “previously referred to” in the guidance notes. This is for when multiple OSS loops are provided

 

[DennisM]

If true about the reintroduction on the Windsor side I can’t wait to see how they spin this, the same trains you’ve had for the last 25 years, but with 2 less carriages!

 

[43096]

If true about the reintroduction on the Windsor side I can’t wait to see how they spin this, the same trains you’ve had for the last 25 years, but with 2 less carriages!

They have the same number of carriages as they had up to around 2015. But fewer seats.