Our source explains: “Certain design features which are increasingly common with modern rolling stock make this more complicated than it has been previously. In this instance, with the nosecone, the issue is how much the cone of the train sticks out when the train passes over a curved section of track. If long enough, you could theoretically be in a position where it could knock into something , as both the track and train are designed to a prescribed set of standards to start with.
“This is something we fully risk-assess before authorising a train to pass over any set of points. We follow the same process when any new train is introduced.”
NR has been working with Stadler over the past few months to rectify the issue. The source says: “This type of issue is easily resolved using a variety of existing asset data, photographs and (crucially) aerial imagery.”
Restrictions were placed on the Stadler trains, but a 12-car Class 745 visited the terminus in mid-May, so work has been progressing.
RAIL visited Bussnang (Switzerland), where Stadler was building the first trains, in May 2018. Technical Project Manager Martino Celeghini said of the GA trains: “The major challenge was the gauge, especially around the bogie - we need to shrink it for the UK. And these seats are adjusted for UK fire standards and safety. We are used to building a tailored design.”
Another major headache for the rail industry has been the compliance problem. From January 1 2020, all trains in traffic must meet disability access regulations. This requirement has been in place for many years, with the deadline well-known, and yet it still seems likely that derogations will be needed.
The matter has really come to a head on the Midland Main Line, where new electric trains were due in traffic before the end of the decade once the line had been electrified, enabling the withdrawal of High Speed Trains owned by Porterbrook.
However, those plans changed in 2017 when Secretary of State for Transport Chris Grayling announced that electrification would go no further than Kettering/Corby, and that bi-mode trains would be ordered and enter traffic from April 2022.
This presented a big problem. Compliance regulations dictated that the current HST fleet (99 vehicles) would have to be withdrawn by the end of 2019, creating a major shortfall in the main line fleet. Porterbrook had a plan in place for the modifications, but the capacity was taken up by CrossCountry, Great Western Railway and ScotRail HSTs being modified to meet the deadline.
Awarding the new East Midlands franchise to Abellio, the Government said the decision regarding rolling stock lay with the Dutch operator, although it told RAIL at the time: “The East Midlands will have a fully accessible fleet by the end of 2020. The bidder has, as part of its bid, included the use of Class 180s from the May 2020 timetable change. The base plan has a fully compliant fleet from December 2020.
“For the period before December 2020, we are also developing alternative short-term plans, including one or more of the following: the inward cascade of high-quality HSTs from LNER once the new Azuma trains allow for their release from this autumn; the earlier deployment of the bidder’s December 2020 fleet; the upgrade of some or all of EMT’s existing fleet via a procurement process that EMT is running on the Department’s behalf; and possible short- term, customer-facing mitigation measures which Abellio has committed to working with DfT to develop.”
The LNER HSTs are not due to start being returned by the operator until November and December this year. Nor do they meet Disability Discrimination Act requirements. Porterbrook has previously claimed it would cost some £50m to ready the HSTs to cover the period for which their careers would be extended.
Even cascades of older stock following the introduction of new trains can be problematic. Great Western Railway HSTs were to be withdrawn from spring 2017, to be cascaded to ScotRail, but this was affected by well-publicised delays to the Great Western Electrification Programme.
GWR Managing Director Mark Hopwood explains: “In terms of the introduction , they went in in October 2017, and it was hoped to be May 2017.
“The testing was a factor. Hitachi’s contract entitled it to use the test track that was Reading-Didcot. Because that was not ready, it had to use elsewhere.
“There were also a number of things on the trains that needed testing. And training also had a big impact. We had plans to phase the introduction of new trains. The plan was ‘387s’/‘365s’ a couple of years ahead of the IET. Instead, we ended up doing everything.
“The driver training was difficult, and we recruited extra drivers. We compacted it all to one place and we had no pre-planned cancellations, but there were a few issues here and there. One challenge was around Sundays, as per the terms and conditions of driver contracts, which meant they had to use a rest day.”
The final ScotRail-bound HSTs left GWR towards the end of last year, and subsequent withdrawals have entailed vehicles being sent for storage. GWR’s operation of long-distance HSTs finished on May 18.
The last of the new Hitachi Class 802s had only been in the UK for around six weeks when the last of the 43-year-old HSTs were withdrawn. At one stage, the popular veterans may even have soldiered on.
Says Hopwood: “There was an option for an HST in the Direct Award, and cascades were also an option - we looked at the ‘222s’ from East Midlands.
“There is no reason why the HST was not able to carry on, but the age and the money needed to upgrade them had to be considered. Also, there is the capacity. The East Coast sets are 2+9, but realistically that would affect our acceleration. Also, it would mix IET and HST, and each HST has effectively two IET paths to Reading.
“The closure of Old Oak Common meant there was no natural place for HSTs in London, as North Pole is not really configured for them and Reading has limited space.”
HSTs will remain with GWR, albeit in smaller form on different duties. The short-set ‘Castle’ Class features two power cars and four Mk 3 coaches. These vehicles are modified to meet DDA requirements, and allow GWR to meet capacity targets.
Hopwood explains that their introduction resulted from delays to the Great Western Electrification Programme in the Thames Valley area: “None of this is easy. It helped that ‘387s’ were running before, but nothing had been tested for compatibility with Series 1 overhead line electrification that Network Rail was installing on the Great Western.
“Lord Adonis originally said he wanted 2016 running for electrics, but we revised that and went for September 2017. We took it as far as Hayes initially, as no new wires had been switched on at that point. We didn’t have to make the trains compatible. Initially we launched the peak service to Hayes before extending that to all day as we needed units for other routes.
“That is where the short HST proposal came from. It was attractive because it didn’t rely on other operators, we had them already, and they took on the duties of Class 158s and ‘166s’ that have been cascaded to the west.”
The NR factor also became apparent as plans for the trains changed. Hopwood and his team were at the mercy of things completely out of their control. At the start of the GW Direct Award in March 2015, the initial plan was for 29 Class 387s and 21 Class 365s from Govia Thameslink Railway.
“It became apparent that it would not happen, and that was down to the Thameslink Programme delay. We spoke to both Porterbrook and Bombardier. Porterbrook had already bought 20 Electrostars speculatively, but we were speaking to them anyway.
“The DfT confirmed that the initial plan would not happen, and there was sufficient uncertainty that we had done some digging. We formally confirmed the plan on the Monday, and the order was made on the Friday.
“If GTR had been on time, then we wouldn’t have made the ‘387’ order. But it was also at the same time as the GWEP descoping, and when that was apparent we reviewed the plans anyway. We were always slightly unhappy about having two small fleets. The decision was made by the DfT to keep the ‘387s’ on Great Northern, and they have to sign off rolling stock leases. DfT will never leave a train operating company in a position where it has no trains. But with the plans for the ‘700s’, GN needed to retain the ‘387s’.
“That suited us as we learned that operators’ cascades relied on others. We did the thinking, which the DfT was happy with, and we took the decision to expand the order to 45 Class 387s.”
Subsequent scaling back of electrification led to Didcot Parkway-Oxford being cancelled. Hopwood explains: “The disappointing thing is Network Rail and DfT didn’t consider the stabling strategy, but actually in a way it was good because we ended up with a strategy in that area anyway.
“We had West Ealing initially, and then the original plan after Oxford was Didcot Parkway. But those sidings are landlocked - we wanted access, but it was busy and reversing wasn’t a good idea. We looked at other options, and while Swindon is further away the timings are not that different to the shunting at Didcot.”
This is another element seemingly overlooked when introducing new trains - the infrastructure required.
Says Hopwood: “Depots, stabling, upgrades and passenger train interface has to be considered. We go through route clearance, too. Network Rail has most systems in place, and to be fair the IETs were not that challenging.
“Generally, the issue is platform edge interface. Signage and signals are also things to consider. Network Rail has a challenge, and the scope needs to be easier. The process is the theoretical and the actual operations - for example, we were told Turbos wouldn’t fit through Southall Down platform, but they had done it for 26/27 years. In fairness, NR is working hard to fix this.”
This even affects older fleets that have been cascaded following the introduction of new trains. GWR has experienced challenges in getting its Class 16x Turbos cleared for various routes, and Hopwood explains: “We helped with a modification that raised the body slightly higher from the bogies.”
GWR sources suggest that more needs to be done regarding the performance of the bi-mode trains.
On May 22, there were 78 sets diagrammed in traffic, of which ten had diesel-only restrictions in place.
This follows a situation last year where (at its worst) GWR was forced to operate 30 services per day formed of five-car trains, rather than nine- or ten-car. That was caused by pollen intake (seeds/pollen get stuck on radiators, which requires unblocking), but that situation has been resolved and on May 22 there were only three short-formed trains.
An IET performance improvement plan has been created, which covers more than 100 items aimed at improving reliability. Network Rail and Hitachi are also involved in this process, because if the problems are not resolved then GWR cannot introduce its new timetable.
For 2019-20 Period 1, GWR sources revealed that the Class 800s recorded 762,789 miles for the month, with 74 Technical Incidents (TINs). The main issue was with the engines, specifically with the coolant.
GWR’s ‘802’ fleet covered 430,167 miles and recorded 44 TINs. The main issue was with the exterior doors, although this is expected to improve as the trains, which are mostly newer than the ‘800s’, settle into service.
For passengers north of the border, there remains a wait for refurbished HSTs cascaded from GWR. This follows the delayed introduction of new Hitachi Class 385 EMUs - caused initially by unavailable infrastructure and then by problems with the windscreens that necessitated a redesign.
ScotRail Operations Director David Simpson explains that delays with the HSTs were two-fold: “Firstly, later-than-expected delivery of vehicles from GWR, and then the level of work required on the coaches, primarily corrosion-related, to enable the power doors to be fitted.
“ScotRail should have had 26 refurbished HSTs in December 2018, and had received two at that point. That meant we had to have ‘Classic’ HSTs in to cover, and also meant we had to use ‘158s’ and ‘170s’ on diagrams originally planned for HSTs, resulting in delayed cascade of these units for strengthening on other routes such as Fife and Borders.”
Simpson says the operator became aware of the problems last year, at which point plans for the ‘Classic’ HSTs were developed. But was there a chance that the refurbished HST deal could have been scrapped? SR Alliance MD Alex Hynes told the Scottish Parliament earlier this year that this option had been investigated.
Says Simpson: “Given the scale of delay and impact on customers, it was right that alternative options to HSTs were explored. But it was concluded that delivering the planned fleet was the best option, and securing Classic HSTs as a stop-gap, given the requirement in December 2018 to hand 19 DMUs back to their owner for redeployment on other TOCs.”
He adds that a review of alternative options showed there was no practical alternative available, declaring: “There needs to be more realism around the challenges of refurbishing older vehicles, and a recognition that if this is dependent on other train introductions and resultant cascade there is risk.”
While there were no alternatives for the Inter7City sets, ScotRail was able to introduce a short-term fix while the ‘385s’ underwent a redesign.
Ten Class 365 EMUs were leased for a year to operate on the Edinburgh-Glasgow via Falkirk route, allowing ScotRail to introduce an electric-only timetable as planned. These commuter units had been made redundant by Govia Thameslink Railway, following the introduction of Class 700s.
Simpson explains: “This was identified as a solution to capacity problems due to the ‘385s’ being late - ScotRail needed a fleet of electric trains, and with ‘365s’ being off-lease they were the obvious option. A project team was formed, and some excellent teamwork by all involved meant they were introduced into service in record time.”
He describes this as “an outstanding example of industry collaboration”. As the ‘385s’ entered traffic on the E&G, so ScotRail used the ‘365s’ on newly electrified services to Stirling and Dunblane until enough of the Hitachi EMUs were available.
Is this the solution, perhaps? Could fleets bound for storage be used in this way in the future?
Simpson thinks so: “Given the known issues with delays to delivery of new fleets, whether new-build or refurbished, the example of ‘365s’ shows what can be done to put customer needs first - there must surely be scope for more short-term solutions like this if delays cause capacity issues affecting customers. The ‘365’ example shows what can be done with the right mindset and industry teamwork.”
How about authorisations? That’s the responsibility of the Office of Rail and Road, and made the headlines last year when Hitachi Azumas had their authorisation denied owing to the design of the inter-car connectors, following an incident in Manchester in December 2017 when a drunken man climbed similar fittings on a Class 390 Pendolino, came into contact with the overhead wires, and died.
ORR Deputy Director Steven Fletcher explains the processes: “We are driven by the TSI regulations, and inter-operational regulations do not touch all they need to. First and foremost, we must follow the due process. As the ORR, what we could do is sign off the trains and let others deal with it, but our bigger role is for health and safety and identifying things that we must be fully aware of and which could be a detrimental TSI risk.
“We are more informed, and that early engagement is beneficial. There is a focus on these products coming online, and some have long processes. We feel we are going to involve ourselves more fully and be much more robust.”
But while trying to do that, Fletcher says the ORR faces challenges. The Azuma authorisation highlighted this.
“One of the issues we must deal with is that the TSIs lack agility to change pace. In the UK we have recognised this, working with Hitachi. We had recognised there was a trend of surfing on trains and that this was becoming more prevalent, and because of the fatality and understanding of YouTube so the risk profile changed. We have a duty of care, and standards change.”
This meant that while GWR could use its Class 80x fleet, LNER was unable to do likewise until a plan was agreed. The trains have since entered traffic, albeit with restrictions that must be adhered to within 12 months. Hitachi IEP Director Andy Rogers says that work is ongoing, and that 38 designs are currently being evaluated. No date for the start of the work to modify the trains has yet been confirmed.
In May 2016, the Department for Transport published a Rolling Stock Strategy calling for standardisation across fleets. Just four days later, TransPennine Express ordered different kinds of trains, taking the number of fleets it would use to four.
Fletcher believes that standardisation would certainly help with authorisations, but is it achievable?
“I can’t say. There are extended factors - for example, in the procurement process trains come from around the world.
“All trains will have a problem being compatible with the British rail network. There is no one solution that fits all scenarios - clearances, stepping distances and so on must be considered when procuring, and you have to manufacture for a legacy infrastructure.
“I have sympathy with fleet and Network Rail teams, and understand that they have a million things to deal with. Will the trains be 100% compatible? For me, the rapid change in technology and the proven kit abroad doesn’t always mean they will work in the UK.
“Go to Madrid, Tokyo, Melbourne, and it will be different. There are exceptional things we’ll learn from, and there are processes to improve designs, but are you going to stop the technical processes?”
Fletcher suggests committing to a date is a problem: “The volume of refurbishments and new fleet introductions are not understood. It’s OK putting a date if you’re confident. What will happen years in advance is nigh-on an impossible task to predict.”
For actual authorisations, Fletcher explains that ORR legally has two months to preview and review the technical files submitted for the trains, but that it hopes to do this in a month.
“It would be nice to deliberate for two months. Early engagement is key - we meet with bodies early to see what’s needed, but we want to be more intrusive.”
Trains can run on the network without authorisation during testing, but authorisation is required for driver training and passenger service.
Karl Watts, chief executive of Rail Operations (UK) Ltd, runs a company that delivers and tests the new trains. He highlights the differences between trains that his company must contend with.
“The market has increased in recent times with more rolling stock owners, and we have a former BR word - standardisation - that has gone. The situation now is that there are eight different couplers. All trains have Dellners, but different ones.
