Jump to content
 

Class 800 - Updates


Recommended Posts

  • RMweb Premium

I do hope this excet person has left the room? Totally unnecessary comments. I never worked on the real railways but I do have a Senior Rail Pass (that I pay for of course) and that gives me a discount on most travel. Maybe the excocet person would enjoy having a go at me about this and also my Union Life Membership?

Phil

Edited by Mallard60022
  • Like 1
  • Agree 1
Link to post
Share on other sites

  • RMweb Premium

Just a short comment on concessionary items that go along with employment and then I'll shut up. They are most certainly not tax free. Those working for the railway who get concessionary travel pay tax on the deemd benefit as calculated by HMRC. That has come from staff I know who were in receipt of the benefit.

 

When I worked for a major bank I got concessionary loan rates and was taxed on the benefit albeit with a de-minimis threshhold. In due course I had to redeem my staff mortgage and take out another one. By then my borrowing was on the same terms as the man in the street BUT because I was borrowing from my employer I still got stung for beneficial loan tax so my mortgage cost me MORE than a customer walking off the street. Needless to say I went elsewhere.

 

As people who have made a contribution to our railways through long, often hard, work under conditions which many of us would not tolerate why shouldn't they have something in return whilst they enjoy a well earned retirement.

 

End of subject from me, let's get back to railways.

  • Like 2
  • Craftsmanship/clever 1
Link to post
Share on other sites

  • Moderators
1 hour ago, Mallard60022 said:

I do hope this excet person has left the room?

 

He replied to say he was still here and again tried to bait others. I've removed access to the topic for him now.

  • Like 4
  • Thanks 5
Link to post
Share on other sites

  • RMweb Gold
1 hour ago, Richard E said:

Just a short comment on concessionary items that go along with employment and then I'll shut up. They are most certainly not tax free. Those working for the railway who get concessionary travel pay tax on the deemd benefit as calculated by HMRC. That has come from staff I know who were in receipt of the benefit.

 

When I worked for a major bank I got concessionary loan rates and was taxed on the benefit albeit with a de-minimis threshhold. In due course I had to redeem my staff mortgage and take out another one. By then my borrowing was on the same terms as the man in the street BUT because I was borrowing from my employer I still got stung for beneficial loan tax so my mortgage cost me MORE than a customer walking off the street. Needless to say I went elsewhere.

 

As people who have made a contribution to our railways through long, often hard, work under conditions which many of us would not tolerate why shouldn't they have something in return whilst they enjoy a well earned retirement.

 

End of subject from me, let's get back to railways.

Thankyou for a balanced and informed view. However, I have to point out that while for the first 25 or so years of my railway service travel facilities were indeed taxed, all that changed circa 1992, when, following a ruling in the House of Lords, the tax was removed. Apparently their Lordships concluded that since the travel perks cost nothing for the employer to provide, in contrast, to say, a company car, there was nothing to tax. Since the taxation level was a bit nominal - typically less than 50 quid p.a. - this hardly made railwaymen feel affluent, but it all helped. 

 

Permit me to thank Andy Y for his intervention. Mike the Stationmaster adds enormous value to this forum by his willingness to contribute substantial knowledge on operating matters. Of all the railwaymen to rail (sorry) against, he really was the wrong target. And no, we did not know each other before I joined RMweb. 

  • Like 11
  • Agree 4
  • Thanks 1
  • Friendly/supportive 1
Link to post
Share on other sites

  • RMweb Premium
4 hours ago, Coryton said:

 

Yes I'd like the seats to be less hard but I think they really are softening up.

 

 

Generally speaking seats tend to get harder, not softer as time goes on due to the 'suspension' components (be they springs of foam) to lose their elastic properties. Its also true that the less 'suspension' component there is at the start the sooner hardness will manifest itself. Yes choosing a top notch material can help - but a thin mattress is still a thin mattress and unlikely to endure.....

 

My personal view is than train seats have gone too far these days - the offering on the initial batch of Electrostars as specified by the much maligned Connex being the right level of compromise between the very comfortable Mk1 slammers and the Ironing board 700s (and the Southern procured Electrostars).

  • Agree 1
Link to post
Share on other sites

13 minutes ago, Oldddudders said:

Thankyou for a balanced and informed view. However, I have to point out that while for the first 25 or so years of my railway service travel facilities were indeed taxed, all that changed circa 1992, when, following a ruling in the House of Lords, the tax was removed. Apparently their Lordships concluded that since the travel perks cost nothing for the employer to provide, in contrast, to say, a company car, there was nothing to tax. Since the taxation level was a bit nominal - typically less than 50 quid p.a. - this hardly made railwaymen feel affluent, but it all helped. 

 

Permit me to thank Andy Y for his intervention. Mike the Stationmaster adds enormous value to this forum by his willingness to contribute substantial knowledge on operating matters. Of all the railwaymen to rail (sorry) against, he really was the wrong target. And no, we did not know each other before I joined RMweb. 

 

Alas it is not true for those of us now working for Freight Companies as it is classed as a benefit in kind and we get taxed on it!

 

Mark Saunders

  • Agree 1
  • Friendly/supportive 1
Link to post
Share on other sites

  • RMweb Premium
6 minutes ago, Mark Saunders said:

 

Alas it is not true for those of us now working for Freight Companies as it is classed as a benefit in kind and we get taxed on it!

 

Mark Saunders

 

Indeed so

 

Just to clarify, the only people form whom travel perks can be classed as non taxable are those employed by PASSENGER TOCs.

 

Those lucky enough to have travel benefits by virtue of being employed by the British Railways board before the 1st January 1996, but who are not employed by a Passenger TOC will therefore have to pay a hefty chunk of tax if they wish to keep such perks.

 

Also it should be noted that ATOC (or whatever they are called these days) still run a scheme to provide travel perks to those employed by Passenger TOCs after 1996. As with the Treasury, they take the view that such benefits must only be provided to ATOC members (based on the reciprocity principle) and thus Freight TOCs plus Infrastructure staff are excluded from participation.

 

It should also be noted that while some parts of the railway industry provide subsidised season ticket loans to staff, this is NOT specifically a railway benefit and ANY employer be they a City bank or a Care home can in theory offer such a tax free benefit should they wish.

 

 

  • Agree 2
  • Informative/Useful 1
Link to post
Share on other sites

  • RMweb Premium
1 hour ago, phil-b259 said:

 

Generally speaking seats tend to get harder, not softer as time goes on due to the 'suspension' components (be they springs of foam) to lose their elastic properties. Its also true that the less 'suspension' component there is at the start the sooner hardness will manifest itself. Yes choosing a top notch material can help - but a thin mattress is still a thin mattress and unlikely to endure.....

 

My personal view is than train seats have gone too far these days - the offering on the initial batch of Electrostars as specified by the much maligned Connex being the right level of compromise between the very comfortable Mk1 slammers and the Ironing board 700s (and the Southern procured Electrostars).

Also I believe that bums can, but not always, get less resistant to discomfort as  time goes on due to the 'suspension' components ………..:wacko:

  • Like 3
  • Funny 1
Link to post
Share on other sites

  • RMweb Gold
1 hour ago, phil-b259 said:

 

Indeed so

 

Just to clarify, the only people form whom travel perks can be classed as non taxable are those employed by PASSENGER TOCs.

 

Those lucky enough to have travel benefits by virtue of being employed by the British Railways board before the 1st January 1996, but who are not employed by a Passenger TOC will therefore have to pay a hefty chunk of tax if they wish to keep such perks.

 

Also it should be noted that ATOC (or whatever they are called these days) still run a scheme to provide travel perks to those employed by Passenger TOCs after 1996. As with the Treasury, they take the view that such benefits must only be provided to ATOC members (based on the reciprocity principle) and thus Freight TOCs plus Infrastructure staff are excluded from participation.

 

It should also be noted that while some parts of the railway industry provide subsidised season ticket loans to staff, this is NOT specifically a railway benefit and ANY employer be they a City bank or a Care home can in theory offer such a tax free benefit should they wish.

 

 

We're going some way off topic but to try round this out it all came about because of a tax relief claim made by a barrister back in, I think, the 1970s or '80s.  She apparently claimed tax relief on the purchase of black tights because she was required to wear black tights in court but did not wear them at any other time - therefore taking the view that they were in effect part of her 'uniform' and were a tax deductible expense.  The Inland Revenue disputed this, and won the consequent court case with a resultant impact on the whole question of taxable benefits and benefits in kind.  

 

The most immediate change on BR (and elsewhere) was the abolition of scale expenses (which were non-taxable) and the need henceforth to provide receipts for expense actually incurred on BR business and which would remain non-taxable.  As part of the ruling it was decided that if a benefit did not result in additional cost to an employer it would not be taxable but if it did impose an additional cost on the employer it would be treated as a benefit in kind and be taxed.  Hence at privatisation passenger train operators were not incurring any additional cost in providing staff travel facilities so their staff travel facilities were not a taxable benefit.  But non-passenger operators and the infrastructure companies were incurring an additional cost because they had to pay ATOC for travel facilities for their staff (who they had previously had BR travel facilities) so that became a taxable benefit.

 

Now back to IETs.

Link to post
Share on other sites

  • RMweb Premium
7 hours ago, adb968008 said:

Anyone know which LNER IET (and why) it was at North Pole depot on saturday amongst the GWR ones ?

 

Have seen photos of 800111 in Paddington on the Friday (17th) so presumably the same unit you saw at NP on the Saturday.

 

Not my pic but here’s one from Flickr (photo links to the photographer’s Flickr page, CJ Rich):

 

800111 Paddington 170519_1

 

Another pic (again not mine) of the Azuma in the platform next to a GWR IET, here on a post on RailForumsUK;

 

LNER Azuma (Class 800/801)

 

 

 

 

 

Edited by Banger Blue
  • Thanks 1
Link to post
Share on other sites

  • RMweb Premium
30 minutes ago, Zomboid said:

The yellow outline on the top light isn't really that obvious is it? If the idea is to tell passengers and staff before the train arrives then the old Southern style triangles would be much more effective.

 

They could remove all the yellow from the standard class end.

 

That would make it very obvious which way round the train was, and as a bonus it would make a nice controlled experiment on whether yellow ends are necessary or not.

 

(For the avoidance of doubt, this is not a serious suggestion).

  • Funny 1
Link to post
Share on other sites

  • RMweb Premium
18 hours ago, phil-b259 said:

 

Generally speaking seats tend to get harder, not softer as time goes on due to the 'suspension' components (be they springs of foam) to lose their elastic properties. Its also true that the less 'suspension' component there is at the start the sooner hardness will manifest itself. Yes choosing a top notch material can help - but a thin mattress is still a thin mattress and unlikely to endure.....

 

I take your point, though my (limited) experience is that old train seats go more 'soggy' than hard - they lose their give as you say, but I wouldn't describe them as hard.

 

If there is a uncomfortably hard layer over the suspension components, I could imagine that becoming softer as flexes over time. 

  • Like 1
Link to post
Share on other sites

5 minutes ago, Coryton said:

 

They could remove all the yellow from the standard class end.

 

That would make it very obvious which way round the train was, and as a bonus it would make a nice controlled experiment on whether yellow ends are necessary or not.

 

(For the avoidance of doubt, this is not a serious suggestion).

They'll be running exactly that experiment on the ECML, since the TPE 802s won't have yellow ends. Not sure about the HT ones.

  • Agree 1
Link to post
Share on other sites

  • RMweb Premium
1 hour ago, Zomboid said:

They'll be running exactly that experiment on the ECML, since the TPE 802s won't have yellow ends. Not sure about the HT ones.

 

Its not really a fair comparison though. If you look at the image of the Azuma above its obvious that the yellow panel is only part of the package. The white base colour makes the cab windscreen stand out and also helps the 'V' shaped red lines have a big visual impact much like the distinctive gangways do on Electrostars. All in all a perfect example of how to create a train livery that both looks good AND is highly viable.

 

Contrast this with the dark GWR Green (which does at least have a yellow nose cone) or the jet black TPE ones and ask yourself which is going to be the most visible to track workers.....

  • Agree 1
Link to post
Share on other sites

Let's not reopen that debate... But immediately contradicting myself, it will give a comparison between a train with yellow ends and another for all intents and purposes identical one without. As a scientific comparison goes it's pretty good - they're the same shape, should be very similar amount of sound generated (particularly for and trains which LNER run as 5 cars), same lighting, same tracks...

 

Time will tell if there's any meaningful difference. As a very infrequent visitor to the "on or near the line" (and then only in the southern 3rd rail environment, anywhere I go outside that has direct road access...) I wouldn't be able to form my own opinion.

  • Like 1
Link to post
Share on other sites

  • RMweb Gold

Yesterday, 10:00 Westbury - Paddington, air-con not working.  Today, 12:13 Bath Spa - Paddington, air-con not working.  What a pile of sh*te these things are - bring back HSTs!

 

 

Regards

 

Dan

  • Agree 1
Link to post
Share on other sites

  • RMweb Premium
11 minutes ago, Dan Randall said:

Yesterday, 10:00 Westbury - Paddington, air-con not working.  Today, 12:13 Bath Spa - Paddington, air-con not working.  What a pile of sh*te these things are - bring back HSTs!

 

 

Regards

 

Dan

 

The air-con on the Mk3s weren't perfect and also suffered from failures - particularly towards the end of the HST operation based on some members comments. As such having 800s running about minus air-con does not automatically make them 'piles of sh*te' as you put it.

Edited by phil-b259
  • Agree 1
  • Funny 1
Link to post
Share on other sites

  • RMweb Gold
15 hours ago, Banger Blue said:

 

Have seen photos of 800111 in Paddington on the Friday (17th) so presumably the same unit you saw at NP on the Saturday.

 

Not my pic but here’s one from Flickr (photo links to the photographer’s Flickr page, CJ Rich):

 

800111 Paddington 170519_1

 

Another pic (again not mine) of the Azuma in the platform next to a GWR IET, here on a post on RailForumsUK;

 

LNER Azuma (Class 800/801)

 

 

 

 

 

I wonder if it’s a repeat of the 1948 locomotive exchanges ?

  • Like 2
Link to post
Share on other sites

On 20/05/2019 at 14:55, adb968008 said:

Anyone know which LNER IET (and why) it was at North Pole depot on saturday amongst the GWR ones ?

As others have stated it was 800111, confirmed with my own eyeballs.

Link to post
Share on other sites

5 hours ago, phil-b259 said:

 

The air-con on the Mk3s weren't perfect and also suffered from failures - particularly towards the end of the HST operation based on some members comments. As such having 800s running about minus air-con does not automatically make them 'piles of sh*te' as you put it.

Agreed. I remember the state my father was in, after spending about 8hrs travelling in a vehicle with failed HVAC on a hot July day. The stock in question was a Cross-Country set, relatively new at the time (July 1983)

  • Friendly/supportive 2
Link to post
Share on other sites

On 20/05/2019 at 12:45, phil-b259 said:

 

Generally speaking seats tend to get harder, not softer as time goes on due to the 'suspension' components (be they springs of foam) to lose their elastic properties.

Not an issue with these as they dont have any springs or padding in the seats! ;)

  • Like 1
  • Agree 1
  • Funny 2
Link to post
Share on other sites

Was on an evening train (Sprinter DMU) from Kanchanaburi to Bangkok a few years ago. A hot sticky night, the aircon failed it was getting VERY uncomfortable. The train guard opened and stood by a door, then arranged for the train to stop at a level crossing and disappeared into the jungle. A few minutes later he reappeared, on a pick up truck with a bloke (presumably from a local shop) with boxes of bottles cold water distributed for free amongst us passengers !!!!!

 

Rot Fai Thai - 10/10 !!

 

Brit15

  • Like 7
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...