Jump to content
 

Class 800 - Updates


Recommended Posts

  • RMweb Gold

The problem with the ECML is that the wires come down rather more often than they really should, the WCML wiring is far more substantial and the GW electrification looks like it's been designed to stay up in a hurricane on Jupiter.

 

Then if a train becomes entangled in the wires I'm not sure it's going anywhere until it has been untangled, neither are any trains stuck behind and I'm not sure how diesel engines change that situation.

 

Hotel power is useful but suggests the railway accepts there are just going to have to be long delays, whenever the wires come down, and I'm not sure if that's entirely acceptable.

 

I'm not sure of the output of the emergency genset but I somehow doubt it would be able to provide both 'get you home' (or back to the wires) power and meet the hotel load of even a five car train.  Probably  some traction capability plus enough to keep the batteries topped up and run some of the lighting.

Link to post
Share on other sites

AIUI, the deadweight gen set is the same as fitted to a bi-mode, just there's only one of them. Ought to have enough grunt to keep the auxiliaries on, though how much traction will be possible after that on a 9 car I wouldn't want to say. It'll "get you home" so long as that's downhill.

  • Like 1
Link to post
Share on other sites

  • RMweb Premium

There is nothing pointless about carrying the emergency generator .

It is there for "insurance" purposes in case of a loss of the overhead AC power supply, at the very least to provide hotel power and a limp home capability to allow trains to move to a safer location to disembark passengers..

 

If you think that pointless, then positioning "Thunderbird" rescue locos along the line would equally be pointless.

 

The already expensive cost to the network of a blocked line, is only going to increase over time, especially as the already busy lines are going to be pushed to maximum capacity by more train services.

Rescue loco's, by the very nature of how far away they are stationed, are already slower to get to the "scene of the crime".

With a more intensely used railway, their chances of getting through to the breakdown will only be reduced.

 

There are also the potential savings to be made from self shunting in depots.

 

I wouldn't be surprised if future stock will see more use of emergency battery and diesel power packs.

 

 

 

.

So in other words, the diesel

is an onboard Thunderbird

Link to post
Share on other sites

There are certain Northern routes, essentially the trans-Pennine ones, where a substantial part of the total electrification cost would be accrued over fairly short parts of the route. That has resulted in the obvious possibility being raised of using bi-mode electric/diesel trains to avoid having to electrify the difficult bits, using diesel power for them instead, and thus considerably reducing the total cost of the electrification. I'm not certain that I entirely go along with that, given that the most obvious areas of difficulty are the major tunnels, where the cleanliness of electric traction has obvious advantages over diesel. But, when the pennies have to be counted, there are going to be obvious attractions to the Treasury when it comes to handing over the money.

 

Jim

Link to post
Share on other sites

  • RMweb Gold

The major tunnels referred to are;

 

Standedge Tunnel, between Diggle and Marsden, which is 3 miles 66 yards in length and the highest point on this Trans-Pennine route from Manchester to Leeds

 

and, Morley Tunnel, between Morley and Batley to the west of Leeds, which is 1 mile, 1,609 yards in length.

 

Hopefully (!) the announcement about this section of the TransPennine route should be known in the next couple of months or so.  I understand that Network Rail submitted their options to DaFT at the end of 2017.

 

If the tunnels are not electrified, particularly Standedge, it will be interesting to see where the OHL finishes.  The worst case would be no wires at all between Manchester Piccadilly and Leeds.  Although the current class 185s are arguably over-powered, even for the climb to Standedge from the west, it will be interesting to see how TransPennine Expresses class 802s cope with the climb.  I must work out the hp per ton of the two types.

Edited by 4630
Link to post
Share on other sites

  • RMweb Premium

The major tunnels referred to are;

 

Standedge Tunnel, between Diggle and Marsden, which is 3 miles 66 yards in length and the highest point on this Trans-Pennine route from Manchester to Leeds

 

and, Morley Tunnel, between Morley and Batley to the west of Leeds, which is 1 mile, 1,609 yards in length.

 

Hopefully (!) the announcement about this section of the TransPennine route should be known in the next couple of months or so.  I understand that Network Rail submitted their options to DaFT at the end of 2017.

 

If the tunnels are not electrified, particularly Standedge, it will be interesting to see where the OHL finishes.  The worst case would be no wires at all between Manchester Piccadilly and Leeds.  Although the current class 185s are arguably over-powered, even for the climb to Standedge from the west, it will be interesting to see how TransPennine Expresses class 802s cope with the climb.  I must work out the hp per ton of the two types.

 

A few years ago when the Trans Pennine Project was first announced I went to a lecture by NR staff and they identified 6 difficult bits. The two long tunnels were not see as a problem. I can't remember them all but three of them were:-

a) The westbound exit from Huddersfield where there is a major sewer between the track and the roadway above.

b) The tunnel for the burrowing junction at Heaton Lodge junction which is tight.

c) The bridge that carries the Leeds Ring Road at the west end of Cross Gates station. It would be easy to extend the platforms and just put two tracks through but he shape of the arch doesn't allow them to put wires above where the existing tacks are. I think that there are plans to 4 track that section.   

 

I can't remember the other three pinch points but none of them were ones that I would have thought of initially.

 

Jamie

Link to post
Share on other sites

A few years ago when the Trans Pennine Project was first announced I went to a lecture by NR staff and they identified 6 difficult bits. The two long tunnels were not see as a problem. I can't remember them all but three of them were:-

a) The westbound exit from Huddersfield where there is a major sewer between the track and the roadway above.

b) The tunnel for the burrowing junction at Heaton Lodge junction which is tight.

c) The bridge that carries the Leeds Ring Road at the west end of Cross Gates station. It would be easy to extend the platforms and just put two tracks through but he shape of the arch doesn't allow them to put wires above where the existing tacks are. I think that there are plans to 4 track that section.   

 

I can't remember the other three pinch points but none of them were ones that I would have thought of initially.

 

Jamie

Stalybridge tunnel looks tight, but whether it is, I don't know

Link to post
Share on other sites

  • RMweb Gold

So in other words, the diesel

is an onboard Thunderbird

 

Not necessarily.  The Thunderbird can't provide hotel power but it will get the set home at a reasonable speed.  A single genset won't provide much in the way of traction oomph but it should be able to move the train to somewhere with some live overhead and at least it will keep (some of?) the lights on and keep a charge on the batteries.

Link to post
Share on other sites

  • RMweb Premium

I'm not sure of the output of the emergency genset but I somehow doubt it would be able to provide both 'get you home' (or back to the wires) power and meet the hotel load of even a five car train.  Probably  some traction capability plus enough to keep the batteries topped up and run some of the lighting.

 

So far as I know the single engine on the electric versions is the same one fitted to the bi-modes, so unless it's further derated, there should be a fair amount of power, i.e 1/3 the power of a bi-mode 5 car train. I would be very surprised if hotel power was as much as 1/3 the total power so at the least it should be able to cope while a train is sitting there off the power waiting to move.

 

Now, my experience of an HST on one power car is that while it won't get up to 125 mph or accelerate all that well, it can still keep the lights and air-conditioning on and do quite a lot more than 20 mph. OK that's 1/2 not 1/3 power, and full power is more than an 800, but it doesn't sound right to me that a train that can do over 100 mph including hotel power on three engines would end up at 20 mph and no hotel power on only one engine.

 

Or have I missed something? Are there two diesel engines under each coach and actually we're down to 1/6th power? 

Link to post
Share on other sites

  • RMweb Premium

So far as I know the single engine on the electric versions is the same one fitted to the bi-modes, so unless it's further derated, there should be a fair amount of power, i.e 1/3 the power of a bi-mode 5 car train. I would be very surprised if hotel power was as much as 1/3 the total power so at the least it should be able to cope while a train is sitting there off the power waiting to move.

 

Now, my experience of an HST on one power car is that while it won't get up to 125 mph or accelerate all that well, it can still keep the lights and air-conditioning on and do quite a lot more than 20 mph. OK that's 1/2 not 1/3 power, and full power is more than an 800, but it doesn't sound right to me that a train that can do over 100 mph including hotel power on three engines would end up at 20 mph and no hotel power on only one engine.

 

Or have I missed something? Are there two diesel engines under each coach and actually we're down to 1/6th power? 

 

I think that the 20 mph figure may be for the 9 car electric sets that Virgin will have quite a lot of..

Edit

Jamie

Edited by jamie92208
Link to post
Share on other sites

801s do have to pointlessly drag one gen set around, so they'll do about 20mph on diesel (guessing...). And have all the disadvantages of a DMU but without any of the benefits.

Remember your (incorrect) statement when you are stuck on one because the OHLE has come down and they fire up the diesel engine to keep the toilets, aircon and various other hotel services running and then when possible it limps through the affected area at 20mph before raising the pan and continuing with a delay, or would you rather sit there with no toilets or air con waiting for a loco to turn up and rescue your train?

20mph is better than 0mph.

 

Personally I think the 'donkey' engine is a fantastic idea, okay it might only get used once or twice a year (if that) but it will be worth its weight in gold on those few occasions it is used, oh it wont require much maintenance simply because it wont be used very much, and dragging 8ish tonnes of engine, alternator, radiator and fuel tank around wont cost much (in the grand scheme of things) because these trains are not exactly light to start with.

  • Like 3
Link to post
Share on other sites

Not necessarily.  The Thunderbird can't provide hotel power but it will get the set home at a reasonable speed.  A single genset won't provide much in the way of traction oomph but it should be able to move the train to somewhere with some live overhead and at least it will keep (some of?) the lights on and keep a charge on the batteries.

The single engine has been specified that the 801 must be able to self rescue, the DaFT got that right at least!

 

You have no idea how much it hurts me to compliment the DaFT when referring to the IET family of trains.

Edited by royaloak
  • Like 1
Link to post
Share on other sites

The Class 800 series are designed to be extended up to a maximum of 12 cars in length.

 

A 9 car electric Class 801 has one Diesel engine, for this emergency capability.

If extended to 10, 11 or 12 car, an additional vehicle will also have to be diesel equipped, therefore providing 2 emergency diesel equipped vehicles in the set.

 

A 5+5 pair of Class 801's (there's only 12 of these ordered for the ECML) would obviously have 2 diesels available.

However, I think it's more likely these will be used in tandem with Bi-Mode Class 800's, for splitting services where the Bi-Mode half continues on beyond the ECML wires.

 

 

The IEP train specification also had "essential" requirements for the rescue of a fully laden failed set, by another Class 800 series train.

 

 

.

Edited by Ron Ron Ron
  • Like 1
Link to post
Share on other sites

801s do have to pointlessly drag one gen set around, so they'll do about 20mph on diesel (guessing...). And have all the disadvantages of a DMU but without any of the benefits.

55mph we had on test. The pack is a get out of jail idea. It also can supply hotel power when the wires break.

  • Like 1
Link to post
Share on other sites

The idea of a emergency engine on a electric train is only a good idea when you have a fragmented rail system like ours where different groups pay each other for delays caused. Wen you have a single source paying for the delays, like BR, the eatra costs of such and the ongoing costs over the life of the train of carrying around a genset would be more than the delay repayment, and it would be cheaper to actually use the monies to maintain the wires so they stayed up in the first place.

 

This does raise the point of how much of the delay penatiles money go round that operates on the present railways does the customer actually receive ?

 

If you want to compair how much extra mass adds to running a train, compair 3 125mph trains operating now on the rails.

 

And I'm not using the XC timetable, a asthmatic donkey could keep time with the amount of stack/allowances in their timetable.

 

You have the 180s, the 220s and the 800s. Only one of these can keep time with one engine OOU, and that's because it is the lightest of the 3.

Edited by cheesysmith
Link to post
Share on other sites

Hotel power is useful but suggests the railway accepts there are just going to have to be long delays, whenever the wires come down, and I'm not sure if that's entirely acceptable.

No, it suggests that no "shunter" is required for depot moves in all circumstances...

Link to post
Share on other sites

Hull Trains has ordered uprated class 802 IETs, almost an extra 200 bhp per power car, for the short bit of their route requiring diesel that hardly has any 100 mph capability let alone anything faster.

 

The main problem Hull Trains will have with their new diesels is all that dead weight they will have to lug around between Doncaster and Kings Cross.

It should be noted that it has all been 802's that have been ordered by TOCs directly rather than 800's... It might suggest that Hitachi have a preferred format for the platform...

Link to post
Share on other sites

Or have I missed something? Are there two diesel engines under each coach and actually we're down to 1/6th power?

At a rough guess, the fuel tank on the 801 may be smaller than that on the 800's (can anyone confirm?) as it's "emergency" so you'd be keeping the fuel burn down by necessity - you wouldn't be trying to attain full line speed or even close to it.

Link to post
Share on other sites

It should be noted that it has all been 802's that have been ordered by TOCs directly rather than 800's... It might suggest that Hitachi have a preferred format for the platform...

It may not be coincidental that Hull Trains is also part of First Group, along with Great Western. It is probably easier to extend an order for more of the same than to place a new order.

 

Jim

Link to post
Share on other sites

  • RMweb Premium

It may not be coincidental that Hull Trains is also part of First Group, along with Great Western. It is probably easier to extend an order for more of the same than to place a new order.

 

Jim

 

Do we know what 802 actually means?

 

I.e. does it mean identical specifications to the ones that GWR ordered themselves, or could it just mean IET-type-train ordered by a TOC, with different sub-classes possibly having different configurations?

Link to post
Share on other sites

Do we know what 802 actually means?

 

I.e. does it mean identical specifications to the ones that GWR ordered themselves, or could it just mean IET-type-train ordered by a TOC, with different sub-classes possibly having different configurations?

 

 

 

Scant information has been released by both Hitachi and First Group ....and that which has, is rather ambiguous.

 

However, according to this article, the TPX 802's appear to have similar, if not identical spec. to the ones heading to GWR.

Note that the sentence in the article, "Similar vehicles have been ordered by Hull Trains", could mean absolutely anything.

 

http://www.railwaygazette.com/news/traction-rolling-stock/single-view/view/transpennine-express-trainsets-under-construction-in-japan.html

 

 

.

 

 

.

 

.

Link to post
Share on other sites

The hull trains versions will be the full fat type as that will reduce the risk to the owners when hull trains have finished leasing them. Don't be surprised if hull trains run theirs with the engines in derate mode.

 

 

Idle moment idea,

 

I wonder what speed a 88 on diesel would be able to do on the flat bit between Doncaster and hull with 5/6 mk5 on tow? Easy swap with TPX if hull trains need more and longer stock. I bet you could modify the 88 for 125mph electric running.

Link to post
Share on other sites

Create an account or sign in to comment

You need to be a member in order to leave a comment

Create an account

Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!

Register a new account

Sign in

Already have an account? Sign in here.

Sign In Now
 Share

×
×
  • Create New...