New trains not being commissioned?

foggy_lad · 04-01-2012 4:40am #1

From the article on rail users Ireland it seems irishnrail have taken delivery of dozens of intercity trains which are lying idle around the country even though there are serious shortages of rolling stock on some services.

Trains delivered upwards of 31 weeks ago which should undergo 12 weeks testing and commissioning for service are still not ready for use on the network. Is this incompetence by Irish rail maintenance or by the Hyundai Rotem staff? Why are 12carriages delivered last may still not ready for use?

More importantly how can Irish rail state that there is no delay??

http://www.railusers.ie/news/news.php?year=2012&no=1.html

Fares Up, Passengers Standing, 100 million euro worth of new trains lying idle

January 3rd 2012

Rail Users Ireland can reveal that a delivery of 51 new intercity coaches lie idle dumped in Heuston station Dublin and Portlaoise, despite continued overcrowding on trains and use of commuter trains on 3 hour intercity journeys. The first 12 coaches were delivered in May 2011 and should have entered service in good time for Christmas 2011.

While Irish Rail claims that testing is continuing and that there is no delay, this is completely contradicted by a statement made by a senior Irish Rail project manager:

"Hyundai Rotem and Iarnród Éireann have dedicated teams in place for the commissioning and testing of each train which now takes approximately 12 weeks from arrival in the port to entering passenger service." [1]

Which raises the question "Why, 31 weeks later, are none of these trains in service, when they are so desperately needed?"

Mark Gleeson, spokesperson Rail Users Ireland said, "This unacceptable delay in entering service has left many passengers standing or travelling on trains unsuited to three- and four-hour journeys"

Examples of services effected:

Passengers travelling to and from Sligo and Rosslare are regularly forced to spend up to 3 hours on uncomfortable commuter trains ill-suited to such long journeys.
Westport - Dublin services are frequently only 3 coaches in length when in the past they were 8 coaches, with resultant overcrowding on a near 4 hour journey to Dublin.
18:05 Heuston - Portlaoise is frequently only 3 coaches despite being amongst the busiest commuter services from Dublin Heuston.
On Monday mornings a Waterford - Dublin service is mysteriously downgraded to 3 coaches from 6.
All the evidence points to a failure on Irish Rail to manage the delivery and commissioning process to ensure the trains enter service promptly. Despite Irish Rails supposedly thorough testing process the on-board power sockets frequently don't work and the electronic reservation displays have never worked reliably on this fleet of trains.

It is an absolute disgrace to enforce a sweeping range of fare increases while passengers continue to travel in sub-standard conditions. Making matters worse a further round of increases targeting intercity single and return fares is expected shortly.

Cookie_Monster · 04-01-2012 4:52am

there are no (new) coaches lying idle, only railcar(t)s
If they can't even get something basic like that correct...

I'm sure there's some crazy union agreement or other behind it

gsxr1 · 04-01-2012 4:53am

What is the problem. Is it financial or mechanical?

foggy_lad · 04-01-2012 4:57am

Cookie_Monster wrote: »

there are no (new) coaches lying idle, only railcar(t)s
If they can't even get something basic like that correct...

I'm sure there's some crazy union agreement or other behind it

They are the new fleet of 22000 DMU railcar coaches, would you not call each carriage a coach?

Either way it could be lack of funds to pay for the commissioning of the batteries etc or just more union nonsense, they probably didn't get a big enough Christmas bonus?

Marcusm · 04-01-2012 5:42am

foggy_lad wrote: »

They are the new fleet of 22000 DMU railcar coaches, would you not call each carriage a coach?

Either way it could be lack of funds to pay for the commissioning of the batteries etc or just more union nonsense, they probably didn't get a big enough Christmas bonus?

I think I'd just refer to them as railcars; coaches I think of as being pushed or pulled rather than part f an integrated unit. Sophistry, all the same. Pity for the lack of utilisation.

Victor · 04-01-2012 5:57am

Cookie_Monster wrote: »

there are no (new) coaches lying idle, only railcar(t)s
If they can't even get something basic like that correct...

Do you think the average person left standing on an intercity train cares about such niceties?

dowlingm · 04-01-2012 6:47am

Is there a final stage payment due when commissioned?

Cookie_Monster · 04-01-2012 7:49am

Victor wrote: »

Cookie_Monster wrote: »

there are no (new) coaches lying idle, only railcar(t)s
If they can't even get something basic like that correct...

Do you think the average person left standing on an intercity train cares about such niceties?

Coach= type of bus to most ppl, so yeah I think it matters

Victor · 04-01-2012 8:23am

Cookie_Monster wrote: »

Coach= type of bus to most ppl, so yeah I think it matters

For the general population:

...new trains lying idle

...

rail Users Ireland ... new intercity coaches ...Heuston station ...overcrowding on trains ...commuter trains ...intercity journeys. ...12 coaches ...

...Irish rail claims ...senior Irish rail project manager:

"...Iarnród Éireann ...testing of each train ..." ...

...none of these trains in service ...

...rail Users Ireland ...travelling on trains ...

...

...3 hours on uncomfortable commuter trains ...

...only 3 coaches in length ...they were 8 coaches...

...Heuston - Portlaoise ...only 3 coaches ...Dublin Heuston.

...downgraded to 3 coaches from 6.

... failure on Irish rail ...the trains ...Irish rails ...this fleet of trains.

... increases targeting intercity single and return fares ...

For the nerds: Ever hear of technical terms like "empty coaching stock" http://www.google.ie/search?q=empty+coaching+stock+definition&ie=utf-8&oe=utf-8&aq=t&rls=org.mozilla:en-GB:official&client=firefox-a

Cookie_Monster · 04-01-2012 10:46am

^
Irish Rail

:pac:

I would just expect a lobby group for rail to term the things properly, it's not like you can just slot those "coaches" into the existing 22000s or anything to increase single train capacity (apart from full extra units)

corktina · 04-01-2012 11:00am

Marcusm wrote: »

I think I'd just refer to them as railcars; coaches I think of as being pushed or pulled rather than part f an integrated unit. Sophistry, all the same. Pity for the lack of utilisation.

in that case the Mk4s are railcars too.

pedantry, who needs it!

goingnowhere · 04-01-2012 11:40am

"This is coach A" is scrolling over and over on the train I'm on right now...

AngryLips · 04-01-2012 12:43pm

Isn't the terminology just a distraction from the discussion? Reads like a lot of trolling to me.

Have RUI posed the question to the minister?

devnull · 04-01-2012 6:20pm

Jesus does it really matter what we call them? In the UK and some countries abroad they are called coaches regardless if they are push and pull loco sets or not, whilst in the UK I don't think I've ever heard the term railcar when I've been over there.

How about we get this back on topic, do we know why they are sitting idle?

Marcusm · 04-01-2012 6:46pm

devnull wrote: »

Jesus does it really matter what we call them? In the UK and some countries abroad they are called coaches regardless if they are push and pull loco sets or not, whilst in the UK I don't think I've ever heard the term railcar when I've been over there.

How about we get this back on topic, do we know why they are sitting idle?

I'd agree with your sentiment and was only responding to someone else's point. In the UK, I think a strong distinction would be made between coaching stoch and the constituent railcars in a multiple unit. (you're right that I can be a bit pedantic and am not a rolling stock specialist although I was a director of one of the UK's 3 ROSCOs for what that's worth.)

foggy_lad · 04-01-2012 8:00pm

Irish Rail are saying that testing is continuing but that should not last beyond approximately 12 weeks so if there are 12 individual carriages in Heuston and Portlaoise for the last 31 weeks and 39 carriages there for more than 12 weeks one would have to ask what has gone seriously wrong??

Are there issues with the electrics or with the over-sensitive smoke detectors in the toilets or is it some kind of coupling issue between the 3 car sets?

Judgement Day · 04-01-2012 8:06pm

Given the wasteful way IE operate, it means that almost 1/20th of the lives of these new coaches/railcars will have passed before they turn a wheel in revenue earning service. :rolleyes:

GerardKeating · 04-01-2012 8:21pm

foggy_lad wrote: »

Irish Rail are saying that testing is continuing but that should not last beyond approximately 12 weeks so if there are 12 individual carriages in Heuston and Portlaoise for the last 31 weeks and 39 carriages there for more than 12 weeks one would have to ask what has gone seriously wrong??

Actually this might make sense, each coach take 12 weeks to test.

So 12 coaches (aka rail cars) to test, so 12x12 is 144 weeks of testing (approx 2.75 years)..

See, I knew there was a perfectly "normal" reason for the delay.

LXFlyer · 04-01-2012 8:27pm

Well perhaps there have been mechanical or other problems with them?

Remember they still belong to Rotem until they are commissioned.

It is surely not in Rotem's interests to keep them from being commissioned.

foggy_lad · 04-01-2012 8:48pm

GerardKeating wrote: »

Actually this might make sense, each coach take 12 weeks to test.

So 12 coaches (aka rail cars) to test, so 12x12 is 144 weeks of testing (approx 2.75 years)..

See, I knew there was a perfectly "normal" reason for the delay.

One hopes Irish Rail are competent enough to deal with more than one carriage at a time?

kc56 · 04-01-2012 9:03pm

From the Journal.ie today http://www.thejournal.ie/faults-mean-51-new-train-coaches-remain-out-of-action-319376-Jan2012/

An Iarnród Éireann spokesperson, however, said it was “absolutely not true to say we’re deliberately withholding” rail carriages.
“During the course of the commissioning process, technical issues arose, and they are currently being ironed out with the manufacturers of the rail cars, Hyundai Rotem,” she said.
Though it was intended that the coaches be put into service before Christmas, this date was an “approximate” one, the spokesperson said.
“We wanted to ensure that every issue was ironed out before these rail cars entered service, in order to ensure reliability for our customers.”

Marcusm · 04-01-2012 9:12pm

foggy_lad wrote: »

Irish Rail are saying that testing is continuing but that should not last beyond approximately 12 weeks so if there are 12 individual carriages in Heuston and Portlaoise for the last 31 weeks and 39 carriages there for more than 12 weeks one would have to ask what has gone seriously wrong??

Are there issues with the electrics or with the over-sensitive smoke detectors in the toilets or is it some kind of coupling issue between the 3 car sets?

It's generally referred to as acceptance testing as if the train sets are regarded as up to contract spec they are "accepted" as delivered under the contract and thereafter defects are dealt with by way of warranty claim which will often have a higher threshold. IIRC, the first delivery of this type was rejected due to corrosion. Who knows what sort of issues will have arisen. If the issues are significant, a further complication arises as they were constructed in Korea meaning remedial work needs to be assessed at some distance (albeit Hyundai Rotem will have engineers here and presumably IE had some staff in Korea during the build period).

Marcusm · 04-01-2012 9:15pm

GerardKeating wrote: »

Actually this might make sense, each coach take 12 weeks to test.

So 12 coaches (aka rail cars) to test, so 12x12 is 144 weeks of testing (approx 2.75 years)..

See, I knew there was a perfectly "normal" reason for the delay.

The 3 cars form a unit which would be difficult to test sequentially as they woud only operate together. EMUs and DMUs (and indeed DEMUs - think of them like a Prius) are not like the loco hauled coaches of old. They are engineered to operate together and each car may involve some element of motive force.

kc56 · 04-01-2012 9:26pm

Marcusm wrote: »

It's generally referred to as acceptance testing as if the train sets are regarded as up to contract spec they are "accepted" as delivered under the contract and thereafter defects are dealt with by way of warranty claim which will often have a higher threshold. IIRC, the first delivery of this type was rejected due to corrosion. Who knows what sort of issues will have arisen. If the issues are significant, a further complication arises as they were constructed in Korea meaning remedial work needs to be assessed at some distance (albeit Hyundai Rotem will have engineers here and presumably IE had some staff in Korea during the build period).

Only 2 of the initial delivery of 22K, units 10 and 11, were affected by corrosion which was caused while being shipped due to leakage of corrosive gasses on the ship. They were return to Rotem and their replacements are part of the new shipment.

kildarecommuter · 05-01-2012 9:06pm

There is no Trade Union issue involved with this despite what some people might like to think!
Spoke to an irish rail shop steward on my way through this evening.

foggy_lad · 05-01-2012 9:08pm

kildarecommuter wrote: »

There is no Trade Union issue involved with this despite what some people might like to think!
Spoke to an irish rail shop steward on my way through this evening.

Good, at least that excuse is ruled out!

Drimnagh Road · 05-01-2012 11:43pm

I'm intrigued about what the technical issues are.

the trains are the exact same as the first batch delivered in 2007, so surely they would have been built the exact same and should work out of the box.

Any technical problems encountered when the first batch were delivered surely would have had their subsequent solutions noted so that the new batch wouldn't suffer the same.

The "unfavourable" 201 class locos fared a bit better than the units that are replacing them in terms of the lenght of time it's taking to get the sodding things into traffic. The first loco arrived in Dublin on 9th of June 1994, and was pulling freight trains five days later.

No nine month prolonged technical problems there, but then again I wouldn't expect there be either with a GM.

Jehuty42 · 06-01-2012 12:09am

Drimnagh Road wrote: »

I'm intrigued about what the technical issues are.

the trains are the exact same as the first batch delivered in 2007, so surely they would have been built the exact same and should work out of the box.

Any technical problems encountered when the first batch were delivered surely would have had their subsequent solutions noted so that the new batch wouldn't suffer the same.

The "unfavourable" 201 class locos fared a bit better than the units that are replacing them in terms of the lenght of time it's taking to get the sodding things into traffic. The first loco arrived in Dublin on 9th of June 1994, and was pulling freight trains five days later.

No nine month prolonged technical problems there, but then again I wouldn't expect there be either with a GM.

A 201 is just an engine on wheels. Can't carry any passengers on it, except maybe for the Inchicore taxi

The 22000s are three separate engines with 3 powered axles, air conditioning, electrics, lighting, heating, external and internal doors, CCTV, computers to monitor everything, power sockets, automatic couplers and fixed couplings between carriages, suspension designed to soften the impact for passengers, toilets and associated plumbing, PAs and internal and external passenger information displays. There's a lot more in them that can potentially go wrong, but that is how you get safety and comfort these days. Passengers seem happy enough with the new units. Perhaps a more reasonable comparison would be to add the time take to get a 201 into traffic plus the time to get some MkIIIs tested and out of Inchicore after construction.

Cookie_Monster · 06-01-2012 12:17am

Jehuty42 wrote: »

A 201 is just an engine on wheels.

with 6 motors, an engine, turbocharger, generator, associated misc equipment, computer controlled, lots of electronics, complicated braking systems, cab interface and so on and so on. it's not just an engine on wheels you know....

Hyundai seem to have demonstrated they build their trains like their cars: ugly, cheap, uncomfortable, gutless and liable to fall apart in short order :pac:

Losty Dublin · 06-01-2012 12:24am

Jehuty42 wrote: »

A 201 is just an engine on wheels. Can't carry any passengers on it, except maybe for the Inchicore taxi The 22000s are three separate engines with 3 powered axles, air conditioning, electrics, lighting, heating, external and internal doors, CCTV, computers to monitor everything, power sockets, automatic couplers and fixed couplings between carriages, suspension designed to soften the impact for passengers, toilets and associated plumbing, PAs and internal and external passenger information displays. There's a lot more in them that can potentially go wrong, but that is how you get safety and comfort these days. Passengers seem happy enough with the new units. Perhaps a more reasonable comparison would be to add the time take to get a 201 into traffic plus the time to get some MkIIIs tested and out of Inchicore after construction.

You beat me to it! The 201's had a lot of issues and failures upon delivery, even though they were a proven design, powerhead, bogie and on board computer from EMD. The Mark 3's were a good 4 years on the road before the door issues were finally resolved and came with no help from the BREL guys who fitted them badly that. Incidentally, the Mark 3's built in Inchicore worked with few problems; you gotta wonder who were the experts there

Given the safety critical functions of the railcars, the costs of the units and the many systems on board to check out, it's going to be a slow job getting them ready for traffic.

Jehuty42 · 06-01-2012 12:28am

Cookie_Monster wrote: »

with 6 motors, an engine, turbocharger, generator, associated misc equipment, computer controlled, lots of electronics, complicated braking systems, cab interface and so on and so on. it's not just an engine on wheels you know....

All of which a DMU has as well, or equivalents of. The 22000 class is a totally different animal to a GM loco and is a lot more complex and thus prone to problems

Cookie_Monster wrote: »

Hyundai seem to have demonstrated they build their trains like their cars: ugly, cheap, uncomfortable, gutless and liable to fall apart in short order :pac:

Opinions, I happen to really like the look of them and found them nothing but comfortable. I'd be a lot more ready to blame IE's maintenance than the build quality for issues that arise with them.

New trains not being commissioned?

Comments