Class 800 - Updates

[Davexoc]

Interesting photo HERE of 800008 working 1W00 the 08:21 Paddington to Hereford service with coupler doors open. I've not seen that before.

Probably slowed acceleration on diesel a bit more and its not even that cold yet for them to freeze up. Saying that, are there not test facilities somewhere to check doors etc. in freezing conditions?

 

Dave

[Ken.W]

Indeed, the Government passed a bill a few months ago that ensured all current EU regulations became enshrined in domestic legislation and would thus still be effective post Brexit.

 

HOWEVER....

 

Once we leave the EU the UK government can do what it wants with said regulations* - its not legally bound to observe the rules of a body its no longer a member of! As such there is nothing to stop them removing or altering the regulations disability deadline which will have then become a purely domestic issue.

 

 

* Hence if the UK wanted to, it could quite easily change the rules and allow growth hormone stuffed Beef and chlorinated Chicken from the USA to end up on our dinner plates by amending the UK regulations accordingly so it can secure a trad deal with Trump.

Erm, no they can't. Not going to go into the politics of it all but...The PRM regulations come in during the 'Transition' period, so are still required to follow EU regulations - and still could have to do so indefinately with the 'Irish Backstop'

[Ken.W]

Interesting points Ken W but I have to disagree with the assertion that 'north of the border Scotrail always takes priority!' When I worked in Network Rail Scotland Route Control we received complaints from Scotrail that their trains had been held for other operators' late running services, and vice versa - We reckoned that if the proportion of complaints roughly balanced out we were treaing every operator as fairly as possible !

Sorry, but just stating what we actually see happening when working north of the border. I'm not just talking about on time Scotrail services not being held for other operators' late services, even when it's the other way around, it's still Scotrail first!

A few examples of regular working, that regulat passengers may well be familiar with even if they've not seen the cause...

An EC train ready to leave Waverley on time, and a late SR goes in front, which you then trail along behind at about 30 to Portobello where it turns off for the Borders through a 15 mph junction.

Approaching Drem Up direction, you get checked nearly to a stand for an Down SR crossing off the North Berwick - at line speed you'd be past before it got there!

Same happens Up at Dunbar for Down SR departing - the single Platform loop on Up side.

A Down EC approaching Edinburgh will be checked, sometimes actually stopped, at Portobello if there's an SR to cross in front onto the Borders - again through that 15 junction when you could have been through at 90. Or to let one off the Borders ahead to follow into Edinburgh.

Again, this is all common practice even when it's the EC train on time.

 

Last week, on a Down EC train slightly late, checked virtually to a stand a stand approaching Drem behind an SR which had just been let off the North Berwick branch in front. although we were a little late, at line speed of 115 could have been through without, or barely checking the SR - instead we lose a further 15 - 20 minutes following it as it stops all stations to Edinburgh.

 

If SR don't take priority then what about the latest that's started this month - at least two days running I've seen a late evening Up LNER leave Waverley on time to follow a late running SR ecs test train to Prestonpans losing 10 minutes in the process!

 

Even if numbers of complaints were similar, the effect on supposed high speed trains is out of proportion - ok most of the above may 'only' cost us 3 or 4 minutes, but, that can be enough to put us out of path further on and can easily end up as 30+ minutes at Kings X. Or a northbound train delayed going into Edinburgh by SR then gets to follow an SR stopping service on the way to Aberdeen.

 

And as for Glasgow, it was actually a relief when we stopped going through there and XC took those services over!

[royaloak]

Not sure what the outcome will be of the Inverness services on LNER but I don't think it is anything more serious than contractual issues between DfT and Agility (East). DfT have expensively resolved the issues on GWR and I believe all their class 800 and 802 have the same engines and fuel tanks. It is matter of the software settings which could be tweaked, apparently even remotely, although the rheo packs are only fitted to the 802s on the GWR.

 

Therefore it is probably possible for Hitachi to remotely upgrade the software of the 800xxx on the Highland Chieftain, whilst stood in Edinburgh Waverley. or even Stirling.  This would allow the train to perform to class 802 standards on it's journey to Inverness and back.   This would not be beneficial to Hitachi because every 24 hours a member of the class 800 fleet would be having it's engines pushed to a higher level, ultimately requiring servicing sooner. I doubt it is an insurmountable problem though.;

Wrong again!

 

I do wish people would post facts and not their opinions on this thread!

Edited December 15, 2018 by royaloak

[Yellowperil]

Not to get political, but after 2019, would an EU regulation really matter? Assuming we leave/on time...

It’s current RSSB policy afaik to continue to use all existing legislation, including the TSIs, after we’ve left, including sticking European lamp irons on wagons that will never leave the UK

 

However, knowing the RSSB, They may change their minds next week, anything is possible.

 

HSTs will continue to operate past the deadline with a derogation IMHO.

[caradoc]

Sorry, but just stating what we actually see happening when working north of the border. I'm not just talking about on time Scotrail services not being held for other operators' late services, even when it's the other way around, it's still Scotrail first!

A few examples of regular working, that regulat passengers may well be familiar with even if they've not seen the cause...

An EC train ready to leave Waverley on time, and a late SR goes in front, which you then trail along behind at about 30 to Portobello where it turns off for the Borders through a 15 mph junction.

Approaching Drem Up direction, you get checked nearly to a stand for an Down SR crossing off the North Berwick - at line speed you'd be past before it got there!

Same happens Up at Dunbar for Down SR departing - the single Platform loop on Up side.

A Down EC approaching Edinburgh will be checked, sometimes actually stopped, at Portobello if there's an SR to cross in front onto the Borders - again through that 15 junction when you could have been through at 90. Or to let one off the Borders ahead to follow into Edinburgh.

Again, this is all common practice even when it's the EC train on time.

 

Last week, on a Down EC train slightly late, checked virtually to a stand a stand approaching Drem behind an SR which had just been let off the North Berwick branch in front. although we were a little late, at line speed of 115 could have been through without, or barely checking the SR - instead we lose a further 15 - 20 minutes following it as it stops all stations to Edinburgh.

 

If SR don't take priority then what about the latest that's started this month - at least two days running I've seen a late evening Up LNER leave Waverley on time to follow a late running SR ecs test train to Prestonpans losing 10 minutes in the process!

 

Even if numbers of complaints were similar, the effect on supposed high speed trains is out of proportion - ok most of the above may 'only' cost us 3 or 4 minutes, but, that can be enough to put us out of path further on and can easily end up as 30+ minutes at Kings X. Or a northbound train delayed going into Edinburgh by SR then gets to follow an SR stopping service on the way to Aberdeen.

 

And as for Glasgow, it was actually a relief when we stopped going through there and XC took those services over!

 

I cannot comment on present day policy Ken as I retired two years ago, but I would point out that at that time Traffic Management Statements applied to the North Berwick services, which Signallers are obliged to adhere too. For example, off-peak Down

services off the branch are held at Drem Jc for late running Down ECML trains, as long as the Class 1 has passed a certain point, but during the peak they have equal priority. Also, regulating Scotrail services can equally cause delays out of all proprtion to the original incident. a particular example being Down trains booked through the Argyle Line in Glasgow where beyond Finnieston there are trains every 2 minutes at times; A 5 minute hold to let a Down express precede can end up causing Scotrail cancellations !

 

Finally, if any TOC believes their trains are not being regulated fairly or in accordance with agreed (between NR and TOCs) regulating policy there are official means of raising this, in real time between the relevant Control Offices and subsequently by the Performance Sections. I would certainly have to agree that mistakes can be made, but at then end of the day if trains are running out of course and one is having to be delayed for another somebody is always going to be unhappy !

[The Stationmaster]

Probably slowed acceleration on diesel a bit more and its not even that cold yet for them to freeze up. Saying that, are there not test facilities somewhere to check doors etc. in freezing conditions?

 

Dave

 

There are indeed such test facilities - in Vienna.  The old facility at Vienna Arsenal was used to test a number of BR vehicles and some of the climatic testing is, I believe, now done in a new facility at Vienna Floridsdorf.

 

There are some pictures of past and more recent (Class 700) testing on this page -

 

http://www.traintesting.com/Vienna.htm

Edited December 15, 2018 by The Stationmaster

[Christopher125]

Would a derogation to allow them to continue beyond 2019 even be possible? As I understand it, the PRM compliance is a statutory deadline, and possibly an EU regulation?

 

IIRC the 2020 cut-off date actually originated in the Disability Discrimination Act 2005 which pre-dates the PRM-TSI, so it's not an EU or Brexit issue - I gather the PRM-TSI merely applies to new or renewed/upgraded rolling stock and infrastructure.

 

Few (if any?) other EU countries have taken such a rigid approach.

Edited December 16, 2018 by Christopher125

[phil-b259]

 

IIRC the 2020 cut-off date actually originated in the Disability Discrimination Act 2005 which pre-dates the PRM-TSI, so it's not an EU or Brexit issue - I gather the PRM-TSI merely applies to new or renewed/upgraded rolling stock and infrastructure.

 

Few (if any?) other EU countries have taken such a rigid approach.

 

Aha so yet another example of Westminster gold plaiting an EU directive, and not the 'fault' of the EU at all!

Edited December 16, 2018 by phil-b259

[3rd Rail Exile]

 

IIRC the 2020 cut-off date actually originated in the Disability Discrimination Act 2005 which pre-dates the PRM-TSI, so it's not an EU or Brexit issue - I gather the PRM-TSI merely applies to new or renewed/upgraded rolling stock and infrastructure.

 

Few (if any?) other EU countries have taken such a rigid approach.

Without getting (too) political, it's widely accepted that Britain is the only country that applies EU directives and regulations rigidly/properly (something to do with our natural rule-obeying nature perhaps)

 

Maybe that's why a (small) majority voted as they did...

[caradoc]

I did a day trip from Oxford to Bristol and back today, and although there was no consistency regarding the formation and orientation of Class 80x services, whether 5, 9 or 10 car, the information provided at stations, both on screens and by announcements, was totally correct for the location of First Class sections, so well done to GWR for that. What was not so good however was seeing a Cardiff-Portsmouth service at Temple Meads formed by a 2-car Class 150, totally inadequate for the route in terms of both comfort and capacity - The train departed full and standing throughout both coaches.

[HillsideDepot]

Nine-car 800/2 number 802103 was out on 5Z21 testing/mileage accumulation this lunch time, whilst highest numbered, and previously noted on test 802/0, number 802022 is now in service. 

 

Meanwhile a list of GWR HST workings for today showed just 12 diagrams being thus worked, plus the GTi 4-car set. 

 

Edit to add:

I've just read elsewhere that 800320 has been noted on test/mileage accumulation while 800321 is in service.

Edited December 17, 2018 by HillsideDepot

[RJS1977]

 

 

Meanwhile a list of GWR HST workings for today showed just 12 diagrams being thus worked, plus the GTi 4-car set. 

 

 

 

That sounds about right. I've just changed desk at work and have a view of Vastern Road bridge again (almost the furthest point west all HST workings pass through) and I've only seen three HSTs all day (though obviously I wasn't staring out of the window *all* day!)

[royaloak]

The remaining diagrams have been posted on WNXXforum-

 

http://www.wnxxforum.co.uk/viewtopic.php?f=14&t=23109&p=555354#p555220

[The Stationmaster]

Interesting trips from Reading to Exeter and back yesterday.  Down with an HST that lost 11 minutes between Reading and Newbury due to problems with the B&H stoppers hence stuck behind one then only 1 minute regained to Heywood Road and what appeared to be a lost path led to a further 6 minute loss due 'waiting platform' at Taunton, so 16 late Exeter.

 

The return was on the 154.55 ex Exeter which was formed 2x5 80X, position of 1st Class vehicles (all in the middle) accurately advised at Exeter but then it got interesting.  The trains seemed incapable of running over much of the route without the engines on full power for a lot of the time and it's not particularly pleasant having to sit on top of one with continuous noise and occasional vibration but the riding is much better than in the driving trailers.  I hadn't bothered to get out the timings as I wasn't sure which train I'd be returning on and it would be dark at various key timing locations such as Savernake so any detail which follows is taken from RTT.  

 

We apparently had a largely punctual run to Taunton keeping more or less to the net running times (but on full power almost all the way in order to achieve it). We dropped a minute between Somerton and Castle Cary for no apparenet reason although I think there might be a 70mph TROS east of Somerton Tunnel although and loss due to that should really have been eaten up in running to Cary.  From Cary onwards time was lost, not in large amounts but still lost and any gash time was not properly recovered west of Heywood Road, where we were 2 minutes down.  None of that was really recovered on the climb eastwards to Savernake although there is one oddball in the RTT times (probably due to an incorrect offset?) and we made nothing back on net times east of Savernake.  The advantage came after the big wodge (total 8 minutes) of gash time approaching Newbury although it didn't actually take effect until Thatcham. - the time is possibly not shown in the correct place on RTT?) and we went from 2 late Newbury to 2 early at Aldermaston - effectively recovering 4 minutes of the 8 available although in reality we were then at the mercy of whatever was ahead but it wasn't too tight and we got back another minute by Southcote that was partially lost getting us into Reading 2.5 minutes early.  So actually from a passenger viewpoint a good run but, as ever, unable to maintain net running times on diesel power.

 

Had a good chat with the catering attendant who turned out to be leading training on these sets for catering staff with some interesting stories of what happens when the ovens are turned on and their ability to make circuit breakers jump out plus the difficulty of serving Pullman service in the driving trailer 1st with its seating arrangement and limitations, plus lack of space in the kitchen area.  Left wondering if Pullman service can survive on these trains?

[royaloak]

There are 2x70 EROS on the Up, one after Somerton Tunnel and one at East Somerset jn

[Gwiwer]

The remaining diagrams have been posted on WNXXforum-

 

http://www.wnxxforum.co.uk/viewtopic.php?f=14&t=23109&p=555354#p555220

For those with access. As I had not previously been a member I attempted to sign up. 24 hours later I have yet to receive an activation email.

 

  

Interesting trips from Reading to Exeter and back yesterday.  Down with an HST that lost 11 minutes between Reading and Newbury due to problems with the B&H stoppers hence stuck behind one then only 1 minute regained to Heywood Road and what appeared to be a lost path led to a further 6 minute loss due 'waiting platform' at Taunton, so 16 late Exeter.

 

The return was on the 154.55 ex Exeter which was formed 2x5 80X, position of 1st Class vehicles (all in the middle) accurately advised at Exeter but then it got interesting.  The trains seemed incapable of running over much of the route without the engines on full power for a lot of the time and it's not particularly pleasant having to sit on top of one with continuous noise and occasional vibration but the riding is much better than in the driving trailers.  I hadn't bothered to get out the timings as I wasn't sure which train I'd be returning on and it would be dark at various key timing locations such as Savernake so any detail which follows is taken from RTT.  

 

........

 

Had a good chat with the catering attendant who turned out to be leading training on these sets for catering staff with some interesting stories of what happens when the ovens are turned on and their ability to make circuit breakers jump out plus the difficulty of serving Pullman service in the driving trailer 1st with its seating arrangement and limitations, plus lack of space in the kitchen area.  Left wondering if Pullman service can survive on these trains?

Mike again highlights two aspects from this run.

 

One is the need to run on (or close to) full power at all times on diesel i.e. Reading to and from Penzance. Quite apart from being uncomfortable for the passengers these machines might not be designed and built for this. Most diesel engines are expected to be stressed to the maximum at start-up and perhaps very intermittently such as over the big Devon banks. Running these things full bore all the time will cause early wear, tear and failure and could result in a decimation of next summer’s services if sets are unavailable or fail on the line.

 

And catering. I will continue to argue that this is not an added luxury, not even a nice-to-have but an essential part of the service when end-to-end journeys can be six hours or more. The trolley is woefully inadequate and in my experience fails to get beyond a doorway and you can forget at-seat service. Also nothing more substantial than crisps or biscuits is quite simply not acceptable. Pullman dining is something GWR committed themselves to and whilst costly and labour-intensive to provide it remains popular. Replacing a full dining option with a trolley offering tea, coffee and nibbles would be a seriously retrograde move.

 

It would appear Pullman dining cannot be provided to the desired standards on 800s which is again a dactor of the TOC having no input into the fit-out if their trains

 

I remain of the opinion that something will have to give. Both in terms of powering the wretched things and on board facilities. It is only going to take one tipped cart to have the trolley service removed on safety grounds. Are we going back to the days of refreshment stops? Which if nothing else might allow over-worked engines to cool down.

[Joseph_Pestell]

That sounds about right. I've just changed desk at work and have a view of Vastern Road bridge again (almost the furthest point west all HST workings pass through) and I've only seen three HSTs all day (though obviously I wasn't staring out of the window *all* day!)

"Oh yes you were"

[jim.snowdon]

Mike again highlights two aspects from this run.

 

One is the need to run on (or close to) full power at all times on diesel i.e. Reading to and from Penzance. Quite apart from being uncomfortable for the passengers these machines might not be designed and built for this. Most diesel engines are expected to be stressed to the maximum at start-up and perhaps very intermittently such as over the big Devon banks. Running these things full bore all the time will cause early wear, tear and failure and could result in a decimation of next summer’s services if sets are unavailable or fail on the line.

 

 

As various manufacturers of otherwise well respected engines found out during the earlier days of diesel locomotives on BR, up to and including the HSTs, one thing that engines do not like is being frequently cycled between full power and idle, and various positions in between. The thermal cycling they go through as a consequence sets up undesirable stresses in the engine that, repeated enough times, lead to cracking in the major components. Put the same engines in a boat where they run for long periods at the same power setting and they are much happier.

One consequence is that diesel engines for traction use tend to be heavier and more solidly constructed. Whether Hitachi have fully appreciated that is another story; although Hitachi are experienced builders of electric locomotives, they have built relatively very little by way of diesel locomotives.

 

Jim

[Zomboid]

The engines are MTU aren't they? I'd be pretty confident that they know what they're doing.

 

Of course there's always the issue of the DfTs specification, but we already know that there are no flaws in that.

[royaloak]

As various manufacturers of otherwise well respected engines found out during the earlier days of diesel locomotives on BR, up to and including the HSTs, one thing that engines do not like is being frequently cycled between full power and idle, and various positions in between. The thermal cycling they go through as a consequence sets up undesirable stresses in the engine that, repeated enough times, lead to cracking in the major components. Put the same engines in a boat where they run for long periods at the same power setting and they are much happier.

One consequence is that diesel engines for traction use tend to be heavier and more solidly constructed. Whether Hitachi have fully appreciated that is another story; although Hitachi are experienced builders of electric locomotives, they have built relatively very little by way of diesel locomotives.

 

Jim

To be fair the IET engines spend most of their time on full power and only cycle down to idle when the train is approaching a station, unlike a HST which will cycle up and down many times over the same route due to being able to reach line-speed, so in one way it is good they are under-powered.

[phil-b259]

And catering. I will continue to argue that this is not an added luxury, not even a nice-to-have but an essential part of the service when end-to-end journeys can be six hours or more. The trolley is woefully inadequate and in my experience fails to get beyond a doorway and you can forget at-seat service. Also nothing more substantial than crisps or biscuits is quite simply not acceptable. Pullman dining is something GWR committed themselves to and whilst costly and labour-intensive to provide it remains popular. Replacing a full dining option with a trolley offering tea, coffee and nibbles would be a seriously retrograde move.

 

It would appear Pullman dining cannot be provided to the desired standards on 800s which is again a dactor of the TOC having no input into the fit-out if their trains

 

I remain of the opinion that something will have to give. Both in terms of powering the wretched things and on board facilities. It is only going to take one tipped cart to have the trolley service removed on safety grounds. Are we going back to the days of refreshment stops? Which if nothing else might allow over-worked engines to cool down.

 

You can argue all you like* - it makes no difference when the ultimate paymasters (which are NOT the TOCs or NR) have decreed decent on train  catering as 'unnecessary' and something that takes up valuable space that could be used for seats.

 

I suppose for true lovers of the 'free market' who inhabit certain sections of the current Governing party, the idea of restricting catering options to just one on board provider inhibits consumer choice and means you do not get the benefits of increased choice / lower prices / etc. Unfortunately trains do not have sufficient room to house a wide variety of retail outlets and the ticketing system rather prevents you selecting your train by food provider (i.e.having one train with a Yo Sushi being followed by another train with an on board with a Subway, or a Starbucks or a McDolnalds, or a Beefeater, etc) - so they make you buy at stations where it is possible to offer you plenty of 'consumer choice'

 

Forcing folk to purchase at stations also has the side effect of increasing the amount of revenues that station shops can generate which in turn no doubt means increased income to NR from property (though I'm sure the desire to flog off big stations and have NR rent back the tracks hasn't gone away from Whitehall - its just waiting for the right moment.....

 

 

* and I do tend to agree with the sentiment.

Edited December 18, 2018 by phil-b259

[APOLLO]

Oh for the good old days of train travel with a bag of jam butties, a penguin (chocolate variety !!) and a bottle of tizer !!!!!

 

Brit15

[HillsideDepot]

 

Forcing folk to purchase at stations also has the side effect of increasing the amount of revenues that station shops can generate which in turn no doubt means increased income to NR from property 

 

And its been realised for a good few years now (i.e. back to the early days of HST2 thinking) that developments such as on-line booking with print your own tickets, phone apps and the like mean less space is needed at stations to sell orange pieces of card, space which can be let to food and drink vendors. The Starbucks train followed by the McDonalds train, followed by the etc doesn't work, but the former parcels office can be one outlet, competing with another outlet in the now unused half of a re-vamped/reduced booking office. 

 

Lugging a heavy buffet car around, with its associated food hygiene issues, isn't attractive, and takes space which could be used for seating. It is perhaps surprising that the IETs are equipped with any sort of kitchen. 

 

I haven't done any actual counts, but on the GWML (not the WoE, I accept) I'd say that more people stop the trolley and purchase something than previously went to the catering car. I very much doubt GWR would release the figures, but I would be interested to know how sales compare between a HST and an IET on the same work, including on the WoE when IETs are sufficiently established for numbers to have settled.

[jjb1970]

I think that on catering the attractiveness of on-board services depends on whether you are considering restaurant or buffet service. A proper meal in the restaurant car is one of life's pleasures and something everyone should try. However if looking at buffet service I would rather buy before boarding from an M&S Food, Sainsbury's etc as there is far more choice and quality I think.