Tram Trains thread

[Phili Buster]

I would suggest the time is for the re-profiling of all the wheels.

Bear in mind they have to be removed to allow this to happen.

Hence the "days" timescale.

 

Do they actually 're-profile' the wheels which, as I understand, means effectively turning (or grinding) metal from the wheel to change its shape or do the remove the wheels/axles and replace them with those with the required profile?

 

 

I am sure I read somewhere that the tram-trains (with train type profile) could only run on restricted parts of the tram network from Cathedral (possibly to Shalesmoor?) to Meadowhall South and then onto the rail network.

[alexander874]

399 206 in service on TT route

[Guest busdriver1]

Do they actually 're-profile' the wheels which, as I understand, means effectively turning (or grinding) metal from the wheel to change its shape or do the remove the wheels/axles and replace them with those with the required profile?

 

 

I am sure I read somewhere that the tram-trains (with train type profile) could only run on restricted parts of the tram network from Cathedral (possibly to Shalesmoor?) to Meadowhall South and then onto the rail network.

 

As I understand it, the wheels, axles & traction motors are in fact one unit and changing them would be preferable to re-profiling them wich as you say will involve grinding them and effectively shortening the life of those tyres. Due to cost reasons it is not likely that a spare set is to hand. If the tram in the smash is being held for investigations they will not likely be allowed to remove parts from it as it could be deemed a crime scene. There was supposed to be a tramtrain that was being used as a tram on restricted parts of the network where the tramtrain wheel profile can be run but was a spare tramtrain to cover maintenance etc so I would imagine this has been utilised in the mean time.

[Hook]

As I understand it, the wheels, axles & traction motors are in fact one unit and changing them would be preferable to re-profiling them wich as you say will involve grinding them and effectively shortening the life of those tyres. Due to cost reasons it is not likely that a spare set is to hand. If the tram in the smash is being held for investigations they will not likely be allowed to remove parts from it as it could be deemed a crime scene. There was supposed to be a tramtrain that was being used as a tram on restricted parts of the network where the tramtrain wheel profile can be run but was a spare tramtrain to cover maintenance etc so I would imagine this has been utilised in the mean time.

 

It requires the changing of the entire bogie.

 

There is nowhere on the network where a citylink with a Tram Train wheelset on can be used as a tram, they can only run to Cathedral or Sheffield Station. In an emergency they can use the crossover at Shalesmoor, but only as a last resort.

 

---------- Post added 06-11-2018 at 06:53 ----------

 

yes I heard you but I am still waiting for you to provide evidence that it takes days to change the wheels

 

from what I understand first of all there is 4th tram already with the right profile that basically provides maintenance cover and given that at this stage of their life cycle it is likely that they would only be undergoing light maintenance one might have thought this would have provided cover. True if that is wrong and there is not a 4th tram already converted then that could not have been pressed into service on the friday when the line re- opened.

 

Secondly according to informed sources it should take about a shift to re profile the wheels (flanges) from one to the other profile

 

So when you say it takes days just what evidence do you have - of course there are other issues to take into account such as planned maintenance and fitting in the emergency re profiling into work schedules with the rest of the fleets maintenance and such like

 

of course I might have been wrongly informed that it is a shift for each bogie??

 

There WAS a fourth tram, but because 204 was in an incident there was no longer a fourth tram as this was used in service - hence there being no spare! (Again, I pointed this out already).

 

Maintenance includes exams, the trams have to have regular exams A, B, C, D, E depending on the mileage and these take a varying amount of time, from several hours to two weeks. These cannot be skipped and must be done at set milages.

 

As the vehicles are under warranty then these tasks can only be done by Stanley engineers and not Supertram engineers which reduces the staff available to carry these out. This is not Supertram’s choice but a requirement of the purchasing contract which was negotiated by SYPTE and Central Government.

 

In addition the wheels cannot be reprofiled to a TT profile. The entire bogie must be changed. As the tyres on the vehicle wear down the profile becomes more like a tram profile and then (as I understand it) the vehicle will become a tram rather than a tram train.

 

I know all this, because as I’ve previously told you I work on the public sector in transport.

[Vaati]

Post(s) have been removed because they could be considered to breach our Terms of Service or Forum Rules.

[BigAl1]

It requires the changing of the entire bogie.

 

There is nowhere on the network where a citylink with a Tram Train wheelset on can be used as a tram, they can only run to Cathedral or Sheffield Station. In an emergency they can use the crossover at Shalesmoor, but only as a last resort.

 

---------- Post added 06-11-2018 at 06:53 ----------

 

 

There WAS a fourth tram, but because 204 was in an incident there was no longer a fourth tram as this was used in service - hence there being no spare! (Again, I pointed this out already).

 

Maintenance includes exams, the trams have to have regular exams A, B, C, D, E depending on the mileage and these take a varying amount of time, from several hours to two weeks. These cannot be skipped and must be done at set milages.

 

As the vehicles are under warranty then these tasks can only be done by Stanley engineers and not Supertram engineers which reduces the staff available to carry these out. This is not Supertram’s choice but a requirement of the purchasing contract which was negotiated by SYPTE and Central Government.

 

In addition the wheels cannot be reprofiled to a TT profile. The entire bogie must be changed. As the tyres on the vehicle wear down the profile becomes more like a tram profile and then (as I understand it) the vehicle will become a tram rather than a tram train.

 

I know all this, because as I’ve previously told you I work on the public sector in transport.

 

Yes I know all about maintenance schedules thanks and at this stage of the life cycle then we are at the lower end of timescales.

 

It was you that said they were commissioning an extra Citylink tram to run with its tram trains wheels on. you said it was going to take day, night,day night,day to change / reprofiile the bogies but for this it would appear not to be the case. What you are now suggesting is not that this is the time it takes to change the bogies / re profile( which I was talking about)but more to do with the contractual arrangements made by the SYPTE and government that prevented the quick change over thus leaving only the 3 tram trains to operate but reduced to 2 when one was undergoing its scheduled maintenance.

 

Interesting that the train profiles will eventually wear down to that for the tram, that would that mean that that one of the existing tram trains would not need a new set of bogies and could revert to tram running once the crashed one is repaired and back in service or given that the leading bogie must have suffered a lot of damage it could be fitted with tram wheels when it comes back into service.

 

It is interesting that you imply that Stagecoach had no input into the maintenance part of the contract. Surpriseing that the operator was not heavily involved.

[Guest busdriver1]

It is interesting that you imply that Stagecoach had no input into the maintenance part of the contract. Surpriseing that the operator was not heavily involved.

 

Nothing unusual there. The hybrid buses that Stagecoach run in Sheffield had a similar arrangement put in place very early in their lives with all relevant maintenance being carried out by the supplier of the Hybrid system.

[GleadlessLad]

This evening:-

 

"Stagecoach Supertram

‏@SCSupertram

Follow Follow @SCSupertram

 

Due to Tram/train fault the 18:27 Cathedral to Parkgate and 18:59 Pargate to Cathedral will be cancelled."

 

(I wonder whether "Pargate" might be anywhere near to "Parkgate"?)

[choogling]

interesting article on wheel profiles

http://webarchive.nationalarchives.gov.uk/20170206160525/http://orr.gov.uk/__data/assets/pdf_file/0004/4387/sres-RTU-rep_90_3A_iss1.pdf

[BigAl1]

interesting article on wheel profiles

http://webarchive.nationalarchives.gov.uk/20170206160525/http://orr.gov.uk/__data/assets/pdf_file/0004/4387/sres-RTU-rep_90_3A_iss1.pdf

 

There are a number of more recent articles but I did not include links as they are quite technical but the University of huddersfield have produced a lot on this subject and by the looks of it part authored by the same guy

 

---------- Post added 07-11-2018 at 10:21 ----------

 

Nothing unusual there. The hybrid buses that Stagecoach run in Sheffield had a similar arrangement put in place very early in their lives with all relevant maintenance being carried out by the supplier of the Hybrid system.

 

There is nothing unusual in the maintenance being handled by the supplier of the equipment and this is also very common in the rail industry and they will typically specify a minimum %age of the fleet that should be available for service.

 

There are many benefits of such a contract but what was being suggested was that Stagecoach had not had any significant input into this vitally important part of the contract and therefore any problems were the fault of the PTE/Govt. and "not us gov"