Irish rail - standing room only!

Judgement Day

As I'm sure I've said before, I still can't understand why substantial EU funding was allowed to be spent on propping up Far Eastern railway industry when the said vehicles (22000s) could have been obtained within the EU.

dowlingm

KC61 wrote: »

I understand that the overcrowding on the 1100 ex-Waterford has been addressed this week by an additional 3-coach set joining the train at Carlow

There's a 3h20m gap in services between 0740 and 1100 which probably isn't helping. KC61 - where is that 22 being dispatched from - Portlaoise or Heuston? If Heuston, will it run in service to Carlow?

lord lucan

foggy_lad wrote: »

Are the new Korean trains so bad that there is teams from Korea over here ironing out all the flaws?? What happens when the warranties run out?? WHAt genius foots the bill then?

It's a sad state of affairs that i'd be happy if that was the case.Fair play to Rotem if they are following up on any issues under warranty. I know the old carraige shed at Heuston carries the Rotem logo,not sure if it's just for regular TLC as the shed never carried any serious maintainance equipment.

dowlingm

foggy_lad wrote: »

Are the new Korean trains so bad that there is teams from Korea over here ironing out all the flaws?? What happens when the warranties run out?? WHAt genius foots the bill then?

The same geniuses who will foot the bill for the ride quality on the Spanish Mk4s when theirs expires? Unless that CAF are hoping to get some of the Interconnector order, I reckon IE have ROTEM more over a barrel as the optioned 22s are still on the production line, presumably not yet paid in full.

Judgement Day wrote: »

As I'm sure I've said before, I still can't understand why substantial EU funding was allowed to be spent on propping up Far Eastern railway industry when the said vehicles (22000s) could have been obtained within the EU.

That's free trade for you - although given that we're providing money borrowed at 5.48pc so that the Greeks can borrow it at 5 or less, I doubt you'll find too many Irish people worrying about EU solidarity these days.

KC61

dowlingm wrote: »

There's a 3h20m gap in services between 0740 and 1100 which probably isn't helping. KC61 - where is that 22 being dispatched from - Portlaoise or Heuston? If Heuston, will it run in service to Carlow?

Dowlingm if you try to sift through much of the nonsense in this thread, you will see that I did make that fundamental point somewhere above.

The trains that have been suffering overcrowding during August are (and it is a very limited number) on routes where there are long gaps in the timetable.

1315 ex-Westport
- A 1015 service ex-Westport is badly needed

1100 ex-Waterford
- A 0900 ex-Waterford is needed

0750 ex-Rosslare
- A 1030 ex-Wexford is needed along with a recast timetable

Most of the overcrowding issues have been down to summer holiday traffic during August, despite what has been posted, and will probably alleviate by the end of next week.

For that reason I doubt the extra 3 piece that is operating from Carlow will be required for the 1100 ex-Waterford after that. I'm not sure where it is coming from, but I think that given it is only a temporary solution, and that there is already a train operating in service from Dublin around the same time (1110) I don't think that there is much point in adding an extra train in service to the timetable in that direction.

KC61

Judgement Day wrote: »

As I'm sure I've said before, I still can't understand why substantial EU funding was allowed to be spent on propping up Far Eastern railway industry when the said vehicles (22000s) could have been obtained within the EU.

Possibly the free trade that EU legislation requires?

KC61

dowlingm wrote: »

Rubbish. There is no way a manufacturing firm is going to offer two or three units of a 1600m set with a non standard platform height and all the other IE specific stuff on spec. Even if the Koreans were mad enough to want the Irish market that much (perhaps with a view to the Brazilian one), we then end up with a subfleet like the Alstom DARTs or the De Dietrichs if the subsequent order falls through because the Koreans decided to forgo the business.

Even if I accept your point on the 22s, and ROTEM do seem to be beavering away at their warranty issues by taking over Heuston Valeting Plant, where a point can be made is on taking up the options on the original order which took the 22s to 234 cars.

If the Transport Committee could take its mind off people nicking sleepers for a sec I wouldn't mind IE being asked what was the status of warranty work on the 22s at the time those options were taken up and why they selected an end door train for a high density commuter order, when the CAF 4000s were selected by NIR over the 22s for that among other reasons. In any case even if CAF had been picked instead it's not like their vehicles haven't been criticised on this forum.

ROTEM have a contract to maintain the fleet at Heuston valeting plant where they carry out overhauls. Day to day maintenance is done in Portlaoise.

Nothing to do with warranties.

dowlingm

KC61 wrote: »

ROTEM have a contract to maintain the fleet at Heuston valeting plant where they carry out overhauls. Day to day maintenance is done in Portlaoise. Nothing to do with warranties.

Ah - didn't know about that contract. Thanks.

As for the early Waterford - at least they have made some effort with the afternoon service added. In the short term, the 2700 set from Rosslare could be sent up the line on its arrival but that would only help people looking to go to Carlow whereas the issue with the 1100 is clearly from Carlow on. However, IE would be unlikely to commit to such a service without being obliged to retain Rosslare through 2011, since the 2700 could disappear to elsewhere in the country rather being retained in the Waterford area.

tombliboo83

KC61 wrote: »

ROTEM have a contract to maintain the fleet at Heuston valeting plant where they carry out overhauls. Day to day maintenance is done in Portlaoise.

Nothing to do with warranties.

IE are maintaining the fleet long run (and alot of maintainance will need to be done cos they're a load of crap) Portlaoise are having to currently do alot of damage limitation.
Problems :
1, toilets smell of ****e
2. seat reservation system crap
3. air con not controllable by driver
4. smoke detectors
5.uncomfortable seats
6. very rough over points
7. cab air con crap
8. all engines rarely running
9. trains inexplicably failing
10. cctv not always working
11. software used is rubbish on mmi
12. not enough bins on trains
13. some cabs are non couplers
14. look dirty already
15. they aren't mark3, 2 or cravens

Captain Chaos

tombliboo83 wrote: »

IE are maintaining the fleet long run (and alot of maintainance will need to be done cos they're a load of crap) Portlaoise are having to currently do alot of damage limitation.
Problems :
1, toilets smell of ****e
2. seat reservation system crap
3. air con not controllable by driver
4. smoke detectors
5.uncomfortable seats
6. very rough over points
7. cab air con crap
8. all engines rarely running
9. trains inexplicably failing
10. cctv not always working
11. software used is rubbish on mmi
12. not enough bins on trains
13. some cabs are non couplers
14. look dirty already
15. they aren't mark3, 2 or cravens

All 22Ks have couplers at the cab ends. Some are missing the door covers from hitting objects on the tracks and they are not replaced.

Just looking for things to fault them cause you like loco hauled stock does not really help.

The Mk 2,3,4 and Cravens have/had just as many if not more problems. Failing doors, over heating brakes, noisy gangways connectors, failing air con, failing light and heat etc.

tombliboo83

Captain Chaos wrote: »

All 22Ks have couplers at the cab ends. .

Big woppee if you worked in ie youd know some cabs are non couplers and after travelling tens of thousands of miles youd know these trains are crap. The loco hauled stock was and woudve been much more reliable if properly maintained. Experienced opinion

Cookie_Monster

tombliboo83 wrote: »

3. air con not controllable by driver

15. they aren't mark3, 2 or cravens

3. ?? how is it controlled then? I've only been on these twice and the AC wasn't on and it was the stickiest most horrible trains journeys I've ever taken. And there's me blaming the driver for being a douchebag and not turning it on

15. Amen to that!

dowlingm

tombliboo83 - is any of this likely to be better in the Batch 2 sets, or is it going to be exactly the same equipment?

tombliboo83

The air con is switched on or off but is supposed to be always kept on to allow air into train, there is no way for driver to change temperature, hence, right now its like travelling in a fridge.
I would hope that the next batch will be better but that smell of ****e from toilets is unforgivable. These trains don't feel robust enough to last 20years, I feel that the mark3 was disposed of too quickly and that's a loss,, seeing them rot in yards and not even secured at gangway ends to protect from the elements is sad and indicative of our lust for shiny new toys.

mickydoomsux

tombliboo83 wrote: »

Big woppee if you worked in ie youd know some cabs are non couplers and after travelling tens of thousands of miles youd know these trains are crap. The loco hauled stock was and woudve been much more reliable if properly maintained. Experienced opinion

I work for IE and the general consensus amoung drivers is that these sets are much better than the MK3. No shunting, they accelerate and brake much quicker, they give a better view of the track, they're quieter overall.

As for reliability, the MK3s were utter rubbish. You couldn't go a fortnight without one failing somewhere. Since the new sets came in, i personally have experienced only 2 failures, a problem with the doors not interlocking and the engine on one carraige failing.

nanu nanu

KC61 wrote: »

ROTEM have a contract to maintain the fleet at Heuston valeting plant where they carry out overhauls. Day to day maintenance is done in Portlaoise.

Nothing to do with warranties.

What does that contract entail?
And what requires overhaul so soon?

Judgement Day

mickydoomsux wrote: »

I work for IE and the general consensus amoung drivers is that these sets are much better than the MK3. No shunting, they accelerate and brake much quicker, they give a better view of the track, they're quieter overall.

As for reliability, the MK3s were utter rubbish. You couldn't go a fortnight without one failing somewhere. Since the new sets came in, i personally have experienced only 2 failures, a problem with the doors not interlocking and the engine on one carraige failing.

Total tosh - the MkIIIs were fine. You must work on the South Wexford line or somewhere similar if you haven't noticed many 22000 failures. How does a 22000 give the driver a better view of the track than a locomotive? They are not quieter than a MkIII. As for shunting, this is management spin and even if it were true, it is doing your brother workers out of a job. Just what level do you work at ? You sound like somebody who never sets foot out of the ticket office in Heuston.

Transportuser09

In fairness replacing loco hauled trains with railcars does make sense in reducing overheads, and has been the way foward in the UK for years. All the same, it might make sense to put two mk3 sets into service until the extra 22000s arrive. Idealy you would have them work specific services on specific routes so you would only need shunting staff in a limited number of locations. This would release some 22000s to work other services.

Judgement Day

Transportuser09 wrote: »

In fairness replacing loco hauled trains with railcars does make sense in reducing overheads, and has been the way foward in the UK for years. All the same, it might make sense to put two mk3 sets into service until the extra 22000s arrive. Idealy you would have them work specific services on specific routes so you would only need shunting staff in a limited number of locations. This would release some 22000s to work other services.

No it doesn't make sense, if you want to reduce overheads you increase traffic, get rid of clerical and managerial staff and all their associated perks. If CIE/IE could dream up some way of running trains with wheels on one side only you would have somebody on here defending it as a money saving idea. Cut, cut, cut, until there is only Inchicore/Heuston left. :rolleyes:

Cookie_Monster

Judgement Day wrote: »

Total tosh - the MkIIIs were fine. You must work on the South Wexford line or somewhere similar if you haven't noticed many 22000 failures. How does a 22000 give the driver a better view of the track than a locomotive? They are not quieter than a MkIII. As for shunting, this is management spin and even if it were true, it is doing your brother workers out of a job. Just what level do you work at ? You sound like somebody who never sets foot out of the ticket office in Heuston.

I think he mentioned ticket office in a regional station at some point.

The shunting poibnt I agree is irrelevant if you simply run them in fixed formations, even better would be DVT and loco so the whole rake can remain fixed like the Mk4+201's are.
As for comfort search around C&T for constant opinion that mk3 are far superior to mk4 or DMUs.
I don't know about reliability though

Transportuser09 wrote: »

In fairness replacing loco hauled trains with railcars does make sense in reducing overheads, and has been the way foward in the UK for years. All the same, it might make sense to put two mk3 sets into service until the extra 22000s arrive. Idealy you would have them work specific services on specific routes so you would only need shunting staff in a limited number of locations. This would release some 22000s to work other services.

if it makes so much sense why are most mainline trains in Europe still loco powered? Even in the UK most non commuter are loco driven or top and tailed by power cars

foggy_lad

Transportuser09 wrote: »

In fairness replacing loco hauled trains with railcars does make sense in reducing overheads, and has been the way foward in the UK for years. All the same, it might make sense to put two mk3 sets into service until the extra 22000s arrive. Idealy you would have them work specific services on specific routes so you would only need shunting staff in a limited number of locations. This would release some 22000s to work other services.

the best route for the mk3 tains would be dublin-sligo and use their DMU's elsewhere but i cant see this happening as it would cost too much to put the carriages back into service after they were left to rot

mickydoomsux

Judgement Day wrote: »

Total tosh - the MkIIIs were fine. You must work on the South Wexford line or somewhere similar if you haven't noticed many 22000 failures.

In my own personal experience, as i already said, MK 3's were failing much more often than the 22000. They were easier to get out of a jam however because you could hook a light engine to them to get them moving again.

How does a 22000 give the driver a better view of the track than a locomotive?

Bigger window and lower down. I've been in the driving cab of both numerous times.

They are not quieter than a MkIII.

Yes they are. In a MK3 driving cab, you have to shout at each other to communicate over the sound of the engine, in a 22000 it's like being in a van.

As for shunting, this is management spin and even if it were true, it is doing your brother workers out of a job.

Most shunters have other jobs. Shunting was just a course you did along with gaurds courses etc. I only knew of one person who was exclusively a shunter and he's retired a few years ago.

Cookie_Monster

mickydoomsux wrote: »

Yes they are. In a MK3 driving cab, you have to shout at each other to communicate over the sound of the engine, in a 22000 it's like being in a van.

a position most passenger aren't ever going to be in...
from a passenger point of view mk3 will be quieter as no engines running under the floor

mickydoomsux

Fair point.

foggy_lad

mickydoomsux wrote: »

In my own personal experience, as i already said, MK 3's were failing much more often than the 22000. They were easier to get out of a jam however because you could hook a light engine to them to get them moving again.



Bigger window and lower down. I've been in the driving cab of both numerous times.



Yes they are. In a MK3 driving cab, you have to shout at each other to communicate over the sound of the engine, in a 22000 it's like being in a van.



Most shunters have other jobs. Shunting was just a course you did along with gaurds courses etc. I only knew of one person who was exclusively a shunter and he's retired a few years ago.

it seems all about the workera employees and managers with irish rail! the company is run into the ground to suit them over the paying passengers!

dowlingm

foggy_lad wrote: »

it seems all about the workera employees and managers with irish rail! the company is run into the ground to suit them over the paying passengers!

After the army deafness payouts I'm happy to let IE staff have hearing in their dotage rather than compo!

Judgement Day

mickydoomsux wrote: »

In my own personal experience, as i already said, MK 3's were failing much more often than the 22000. They were easier to get out of a jam however because you could hook a light engine to them to get them moving again.



Bigger window and lower down. I've been in the driving cab of both numerous times. So have I and I fail to see what you're driving at.



Yes they are. In a MK3 driving cab, you have to shout at each other to communicate over the sound of the engine, in a 22000 it's like being in a van.
What have MkIII driving trailers got to do with anything - I thought we were talking about loco hauled MkIII carriages not push-pulls.



Most shunters have other jobs. Shunting was just a course you did along with gaurds courses etc. I only knew of one person who was exclusively a shunter and he's retired a few years ago.

Ah so all those shunters that are no longer needed are redeployed rather than dispensed with - so where is the saving?

dowlingm

Joining and splitting is an upside for 22Ks though. We might even see a few 6+3 services one day!

foggy_lad

dowlingm wrote: »

After the army deafness payouts I'm happy to let IE staff have hearing in their dotage rather than compo!

if staff have concerns about health and safety it is in their own interest to bring such things to the attention of management and they can continue to work "under protest" which puts the company in the worst possible position in case of legal reprocussions health and safety audits compensation etc

Cookie_Monster

dowlingm wrote: »

Joining and splitting is an upside for 22Ks though. We might even see a few 6+3 services one day!

but that doesn't even happen properly. Mayny of the trains to Galway/Westport and using bus transfers rather than splitting, as reported on here.