kabsonline
Best SSL Train: S Stock Best Tube Train: 92 Stock
Posts: 686
|
Post by kabsonline on Sept 4, 2011 20:09:19 GMT
Hi I managed to get onto two S Stocks today and although the journies were pleasurable I noticed faults on each of the trains. On the first train I went on the air con was making a noise that did not sound healthy. It was my uncle who highlighted this problem as he is an air con engineer. Secondly the voice announcements and information boards did not come on until past Chalfont and Latimer (I was travelling to Harrow from Amersham). On the train back I noticed a couple of further faults. However I did not get train numbers as I did not think of it as the time so am unsure if it was the same train. Firstly when we stopped as Rickmansworth several of the train doors refused to open which led to a couple of people having to run for other doors. Secondly after the train started to move there was an awful rattling sound from the light fitting and on further inspection it seemed that the fixture holding the bulb in had been broken. The noise was so bad we had to move seats. How is it with new trains there are so many faults? Is it just inital teething problems???  |
|
|
|
Post by tecchy on Sept 4, 2011 20:17:16 GMT
As with any new introduction of trains, there are always bug fixes. More importantly, its how the people responsible deal with these issues!
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Sept 4, 2011 20:20:02 GMT
If "several doors refused to open" then that is a matter of the train operator not stopping within the CSDE beacons, and having to use the override.
On S stock, when CSDE override is used, the front and rear 4 doors are cut out. It's probably not called CSDE on the S stock, but it's the system to the same effect.
|
|
kabsonline
Best SSL Train: S Stock Best Tube Train: 92 Stock
Posts: 686
|
Post by kabsonline on Sept 4, 2011 20:22:31 GMT
It was definatly some of the middle doors that refused to open.
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Sept 4, 2011 20:23:34 GMT
In which case, rather quite unusual. I've been on quite a few S stock now and have not once observed that - only stopping screwups.
|
|
|
|
Post by alfie on Sept 4, 2011 20:44:10 GMT
Never observed anything wrong on the S Stock at all. Except, like these newer trains, any water inside makes them look plain ugly.
|
|
metman
Global Moderator
5056 05/12/1961-23/04/2012 RIP
Posts: 7,421
|
Post by metman on Sept 4, 2011 21:46:11 GMT
There will always be teething troubles with new trains - look at the 09 stock ;D
I too have noticed the air con rattling. Perhaps it is the poor track in places shaking it loose!
|
|
|
|
Post by citysig on Sept 4, 2011 22:10:02 GMT
With all due respect, it doesn't sound as though any of the trains had "faults" - although as a passenger you can be forgiven for thinking they were. Not wishing to belittle each issue you raise, but to hopefully give a little insight, I will take each item you noticed in turn...
The air-con. Not sure which noises would make it sound unhealthy. It is after all a fan-driven system, and you may always get the occasional noisy fan. Was the car "comfortable" in terms of temperature.
The information screens. A number of drivers have had various issues with getting used to setting up the screens. This may have been the delay experienced. In conversation with drivers I have often advised "carrying on" to the next station. The majority of people won't be inconvenienced by an information delay, but they will be by a service delay.
The doors. Are you sure it was middle doors? As others have assumed, it could have been the train being stopped just shy of the correct stopping mark and the driver has had to over-ride the safety system to open doors. If the same doors opened at other stations, then the doors themselves are not at fault.
The light fitting- I'll give you this one ;D If it was indeed broken then I am sure that once the train gets back to Neasden this week then it will be dealt with ;D
At the end of the day, the S-stocks were pushed into service at the north end of the line this weekend, to enable some of our lesser experienced drivers a "bonus" couple of days to get used to the stock. It is a very steep learning curve, and the odd issue will sometimes arise.
|
|
|
|
Post by uzairjubilee on Sept 4, 2011 22:32:35 GMT
There will always be teething troubles with new trains - look at the 09 stock ;D I too have noticed the air con rattling. Perhaps it is the poor track in places shaking it loose! I too have noticed this rattling too. Don't knot what it is but it must be the condition of the track. |
|
|
|
Post by andypurk on Sept 4, 2011 22:57:57 GMT
It has to be said that the noise of the S-stock air conditioning units is nothing compared to the noisy ones heard on the class 350s. I've not heard any on the S-stock which seem particularly 'bad'.
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Sept 5, 2011 11:39:40 GMT
on sat night before I opened the doors at Ricky some one was pushing the door open button on the outside of the train then when I opened doors only one set of doors opened par car but the train made its own PA
|
|
metman
Global Moderator
5056 05/12/1961-23/04/2012 RIP
Posts: 7,421
|
Post by metman on Sept 5, 2011 18:25:47 GMT
My mate has just text me to say his Watford train this evening has door problems. He's had to push the odd door closed!!
The car involved is 22019
|
|
|
|
Post by jardine01 on Sept 5, 2011 18:52:10 GMT
What is it with Bombarider and Door faults? The 2009 stock had the same problem with oversensitve doors and the inident a few months ago when a 2009 stock departed with the doors open! The S stock is a great train but the door problems are letting the side down.
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Sept 5, 2011 18:54:38 GMT
Don't forget, Bombardier merely assemble the parts... a contractor will supply door fabrications, another contractor supplies the drive gubbins, another will supply the door runners, tracks, rollers etc etc etc....
|
|
|
|
Post by jardine01 on Sept 5, 2011 18:57:10 GMT
I suppose but really the doors should be intensly tested before being delivered to LU. Probally the reason why the 2009 stock was so unreliable when first intoducted as it was not tested and was only tested on the live railway in passanger service.
|
|
|
|
Post by tecchy on Sept 5, 2011 19:06:00 GMT
What is it with Bombarider and Door faults? The 2009 stock had the same problem with oversensitve doors and the inident a few months ago when a 2009 stock departed with the doors open! The S stock is a great train but the door problems are letting the side down. What about driver error? When we get a door irreg. It used to be hell with the 67's. There was no form of proper data logging. Drivers used to routinely open the doors on the wrong side and blame the wiring. Every wire on the train had to be checked. (there also was a phase where they wanted every single double chime door buzzer to be checked, can you imagine that?) 09's are far easier with regards to data logging and it makes our job so much easier. 67's had a silly rate of 'failure' with regards to doors. 09's are a step up. Whilst still not perfect, its getting there. Most of this stuff you read in the papers (mainly the standard) is bull and is never checked. The standard hate us anyway! Don't forget, Bombardier merely assemble the parts... a contractor will supply door fabrications, another contractor supplies the drive gubbins, another will supply the door runners, tracks, rollers etc etc etc.... True, very true, but this is the way it should be as it keeps loads of different firms going! |
|
|
|
Post by redsetter on Sept 5, 2011 19:56:02 GMT
didn't they build a prototype test train?.i remember seeing some picture of tube stock a while back for other lines.these have been around now for around twelve months with early trips to watford.
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Sept 5, 2011 20:05:36 GMT
didn't they build a prototype test train?.i remember seeing some picture of tube stock a while back for other lines.these have been around now for around twelve months with early trips to watford. More info on this please. |
|
|
|
Post by redsetter on Sept 5, 2011 20:13:10 GMT
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Sept 5, 2011 20:26:38 GMT
I suspect you're referring to the 1986 tube stock. There were three trains touted to the punters to see what they liked before the winner was developed into the 1992 stock currently on the Central Line. The 1986 stock ran in service on the Jubilee line for a short time. Check YouTube, there's some footage of it on there.
Don't recall it going to Watford though.
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Sept 5, 2011 20:29:57 GMT
Some older users will remember that the 1938 tube stock gave a lot of difficulties when they were new in 1938! My copy of the classic book "1938 tube stock" by Piers Connor explains the problems they initially had, including compressors and speedometers etc.
The S stock is a major innovation in London Underground surface type stock design engineering - you will expect initial operational issues whilst the new train's equipment beds itself in over the first few years!
|
|
|
|
Post by t697 on Sept 5, 2011 20:33:58 GMT
It was definatly some of the middle doors that refused to open. Not the usual 'just outside the CSDE zone' then. This can happen very occasionally. It's for an understood cause and a fix is due fairly soon. |
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Sept 5, 2011 20:47:08 GMT
It's also worth remembering that the 2009TS and S Stock are the first new Underground introductions since the internet got its teeth into everything. This allows every major, minor and even inconsequential fault to be discussed in more detail than ever before.
It also allows for the minor and inconsequential to be inflated into a crisis. A crisis, that, more often than not, fails to materialize.
|
|
|
|
Post by uzairjubilee on Sept 5, 2011 20:58:46 GMT
It's also worth remembering that the 2009TS and S Stock are the first new Underground introductions since the internet got its teeth into everything. This allows every major, minor and even inconsequential fault to be discussed in more detail than ever before. It also allows for the minor and inconsequential to be inflated into a crisis. A crisis, that, more often than not, fails to materialize. Too right you are. |
|
|
|
Post by abe on Sept 6, 2011 8:45:26 GMT
I suppose but really the doors should be intensly tested before being delivered to LU. Probally the reason why the 2009 stock was so unreliable when first intoducted as it was not tested and was only tested on the live railway in passanger service. I think that you'll find that they were intensely tested. They are made by a company specializing in transport system doors - Faiveley - and were tested on test rigs before the first prototype train was constructed. Once the design was finalized they are then manufactured and supplied to Bombardier for installation on the trains. Given the number of doors involved, the number of trains now being operated, and the number of door operations that will be taking place every day, it is unsurprising that the odd failure will occur. Others have often mentioned the bathtub curve - those criticising the new trains would do well to read up about this before commenting further. |
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Sept 6, 2011 9:42:39 GMT
What is it with Bombarider and Door faults? The 2009 stock had the same problem with oversensitve doors and the inident a few months ago when a 2009 stock departed with the doors open! The S stock is a great train but the door problems are letting the side down. The doors on 09 Stock have never been de-sensitised. They operate with the same sensitivity as when they were introduced. They operate to the requirements set for them. There was a large learning curve for Train Operators and passengers to get used to the door system (which is the reason for most of the improvement). They do still cause some issues, as I always thought they would on a busy metro system, but it is a tradeoff between operability and safety. The train departing with doors open has been discussed on the VL board. |
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Sept 6, 2011 10:34:15 GMT
It is interesting to remember that the 38TS, the RT bus and the RM bus all had major problems when the first production examples went into service. But they are all now remembered as London transport classics.
And, thinking of door problems, the "58 trailers" (standard stock modified to run with 38TS) initially had doors that would open of their own accord while the train was moving.
|
|
metman
Global Moderator
5056 05/12/1961-23/04/2012 RIP
Posts: 7,421
|
Post by metman on Sept 6, 2011 18:05:59 GMT
Yes, I think I read that it was found that a certain bracket on the 1927 cars would vibrate at speed causing the doors to pop open. There is a wonderful description in the 1938 stock story by Piers Conner, well worth a read.
|
|
|
|
Post by redsetter on Sept 6, 2011 18:53:39 GMT
with trains being replaced ever 40-50 years many people wont know the problems that occurred when the stock being withdrawn had teething problems when introduced,unless the history is analysed.
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Sept 6, 2011 19:16:04 GMT
with trains being replaced ever 40-50 years many people wont know the problems that occurred when the stock being withdrawn had teething problems when introduced,unless the history is analysed. Obviously, but as I said above, we have access to far more information than our forefathers did and, dare I say it, a free internet platform with far greater coverage than they enjoyed on which to vent our spleens, almost instantly a mistake or problem occurs. Considering the fact that these trains are still babies, maybe it would make more sense for us all to sit back and analyse it over a period of years (as you suggest above) instead of ravenously jumping on every reported fault as if it's the end of creation. Naysaying our own seems to be a peculiarly British trait, and not a particularly pleasant one. |
|
