Class 800 - Updates

[Zomboid]

That's probably true, but the issue seems to be that they're being defeated by conditions which a HST would have survived.

 

Though the "Dawlish Proof" idea will have been turned into a bunch of more specific and measurable criteria which the trains were then designed and built to, which may well have been less onerous than those which have defeated them.

[woodenhead]

Strange light in the sky at Dawlish today, no pesky waves to stop  the 800s

 

[Titan]

54 minutes ago, Siberian Snooper said:

Surely the 8** are DEMU's!!

 

 

 

 

 

Well Tops numbering has gone to pot. Theoretically DEMU's should be in the 2XX number range, and a class 7X should be a DC electric locomotive. Having 8XX for 25kv/diesel bi-modes only might have been a good idea, but that does not look like it has happened either. 

[jim.snowdon]

59 minutes ago, Titan said:

 

Well Tops numbering has gone to pot. Theoretically DEMU's should be in the 2XX number range, and a class 7X should be a DC electric locomotive. Having 8XX for 25kv/diesel bi-modes only might have been a good idea, but that does not look like it has happened either. 

It certainly has. DC emus in 7xx series, seemingly picked at random. How did anyone come up with 769 or 777 when there are not even a dozen members of the 7xx group? Unless someone with more detailed knowledge of how TOPS works can explain that there are swathes of numbers that can't be used for technical reasons.

 

Jim 

[Zomboid]

It's clearly all about having a "cool" number for new trains. Not really that new either, there were loads of 300 numbers available when 390 was chosen for the pendolinos, and likewise unused 400 numbers are plentiful, so why 444 and 450? So far as I know there's nothing between them... In fact, why did BR start at 150 with sprinter units? Because it's a nicer sounding number than 130 would have been, I expect.

 

Strange how SWRs new Bombardier 701s sit in amongst a bunch of Siemens trains in the 700 area.

 

But since it's all about how the numbers themselves look there's no real point looking for any more depth.

Edited January 17, 2020 by Zomboid

[royaloak]

15 hours ago, Ramblin Rich said:

So much for them being 'Dawlish proof' as promised...

Point of order, the 80x were NEVER said to be Dawlish PROOF, only Dawlish RESISTANT.

 

My continued questioning of the difference remains unanswered although me adding that the difference is probably that one type gets through and the other one doesnt hasnt gone down very well.

[Gwiwer]

The remaining short-form HSTs continue to get through at Dawlish.  Nuff said?

[Ramblin Rich]

5 hours ago, royaloak said:

Point of order, the 80x were NEVER said to be Dawlish PROOF, only Dawlish RESISTANT.

 

My continued questioning of the difference remains unanswered although me adding that the difference is probably that one type gets through and the other one doesnt hasnt gone down very well.

Not that I believe anything the Torygraph prints, but:

https://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/2017/08/30/saltwater-proof-trains-run-brunels-storm-battered-great-western/

 

Rail magazine was similarly optimistic:

https://www.railmagazine.com/news/network/from-the-archives-how-the-class-802s-will-avoid-the-fate-of-voyagers-on-the-devon-sea-wall

 

So sadly a definite disconnect between what was suggested and reality. However given the ol' 143 got it's windows stoved in, it is a big ask for anything to get through.

[Oldddudders]

41 minutes ago, Ramblin Rich said:

So sadly a definite disconnect between what was suggested and reality. However given the ol' 143 got it's windows stoved in, it is a big ask for anything to get through.

My point. It is not always safe to run the gauntlet irrespective of the waterproofing of the power units.

[royaloak]

1 hour ago, Ramblin Rich said:

Not that I believe anything the Torygraph prints, but:

https://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/2017/08/30/saltwater-proof-trains-run-brunels-storm-battered-great-western/

 

Rail magazine was similarly optimistic:

https://www.railmagazine.com/news/network/from-the-archives-how-the-class-802s-will-avoid-the-fate-of-voyagers-on-the-devon-sea-wall

On any of our staff briefs we were always told Dawlish Resistant, of course its just a play on words and the facts are they are neither Dawlish proof nor Dawlish resistant!

[royaloak]

4 hours ago, Gwiwer said:

The remaining short-form HSTs continue to get through at Dawlish.  Nuff said?

Only as long as there isnt a water logged sHitachi broken down in front of it!

[Dunsignalling]

On ‎17‎/‎01‎/‎2020 at 08:21, Siberian Snooper said:

Surely the 8** are DEMU's!!

 

 

 

 

Sort of, but not as we know it. They are effectively electrics fitted with diesel generator sets, the nearest precedents to which are the SR Electro Diesel locos of Classes 73 and 74.

 

So maybe bi-modal units would be more accurately defined as EDMU's.

 

John

Edited January 18, 2020 by Dunsignalling

[corneliuslundie]

There are two other threads discussing Dawlish. One has a video of the trasin which was damaged. I don;t think I would want to be the beach there at the moment.

Jonathan

[Ron Ron Ron]

On 17/01/2020 at 08:21, Siberian Snooper said:

Surely the 8** are DEMU's!!

 

13 hours ago, Dunsignalling said:

Sort of, but not as we know it.

They are effectively electrics fitted with diesel generator sets, the nearest precedents to which are the SR Electro Diesel locos of Classes 73 and 74.

 

So maybe bi-modal units would be more accurately defined as EDMU's.

 

As the Bi-mode versions are both EMU and DEMU, would they not be EDEMU's ?

 

The all electric versions are EMU's

Except the 801's have an emergency gen-set , so they are secretly a little bit EDEMU on the side.

The 803's are pure EMU (no emergency gen-set).

The Class 395 Javelin EMU's are also part of the AT300 family, but not numbered in the 8** series.

 

 

Confused....you will be !

 

 

.

Edited January 19, 2020 by Ron Ron Ron

[Dunsignalling]

4 hours ago, Ron Ron Ron said:

 

 

As the Bi-mode versions are both EMU and DEMU, would they not be EDEMU's ?

 

The all electric versions are EMU's

Except the 801's have an emergency gen-set , so they are secretly a little bit EDEMU on the side.

The 803's are pure EMU (no emergency gen-set).

The Class 395 Javelin EMU's are also part of the AT300 family, but not numbered in the 8** series.

 

 

Confused....you will be !

 

 

.

Which suggests, and I tend to agree, that the straight electrics and the bi-modes should be class-numbered in different series.

 

John

[The Stationmaster]

Back to IET reality.  yesterday I travelled down to Cardiff for a model railway show.  Outward from Reading on the 08.47 Paddington - Swansea which I joined at Reading; good point - it was the right way round; bad points - it was 5 car vice 9 so no reservation system in operation (which didn't affect me) but the ride in the compo suggested to me that the secondary damping was as near non-existent as it could be without falling off completely - distinctly rough ride any time it found the slightest irregularity in the track so much so that I could only write when it was stationary.

 

I returned on the 13.24 Swansea and what a contrast - 9 car set as booked, right way round, ride exemplary, reservation system working, great staff, but we left Cardiff 6 late (which had the advantage of allowing me to catch it when I was aiming for the next train) and it arrived Reading 6 late having lost and then regained a bit in between.  The late arrival at Reading suited me as it happened because although it delayed my arrival time home by 30 minutes it meant I missed the booked connection into one of those appalling bloated UndergrounD trains (which have an even worse ride than I'd suffered on my outward trip) and instead got a ride on the proper train running 20 odd minutes behind it meaning also that I'd spent the entire day travelling on GWR trains instead of at least one leg on those (lack of civilised) Transport For London things.

 

Good on-train ticket checking on both the IET workings although the lass gave up after Parkway on the Down trip - probably out of fear on a very crowded train (I don't blame her).   Lots of sets noted at various times of day to be the wrong way round although platform information at Reading, Swindon, and Cardiff was well on the ball for the two trains I travelled.

[jim.snowdon]

I wouldn't defend TfL, but as far as Bombardier's engineers are concerned, the ride qualities of the 345s do not appear to be particularly deficient, or much different from those of the 387s. That, at least,has been my experience   between West Drayton and Paddington, both seated and standing (an occupational certainty on peak time Up journeys).

 

The ride qualities of 8xx units I shall get to discover next week.

 

Jim

[Gwiwer]

A meeting near to Kings Cross station today offered the opportunity to see what was on offer in that establishment.  

 

Major engineering works was what seemed to be on offer.  Platforms 7 and 8 entirely sealed off and the track undergoing some sort of very noisy repair.  Of the other platforms 0 was also out of use and 2-4 were vacant.  5 - 7 were occupied by a 700 on a Cambridge working and a couple of 717s hoping to go to Welwyn Garden City though the main departure indicator advised that all "Great Northern" services would be starting at Finsbury Park.  

 

On platform 1 there was an 800/1 set bound for Edinburgh and forming what was the hourly ECML operation with today's track works.  No Leeds, no Newcastle, no Hull Trains nor Grand Central.  Just an hourly Edinburgh.  There were no seat reservations "owing to a technical fault" and passengers with reserved seats were being advised to take what ever seats they could.  The crowd attempting to board looked as though it would far exceed the capacity of the train.

 

The train eventually left several minutes late after staff had shoe-horned as many passengers as they could inside the doors and finally persuaded those to close.  I'd guess that 100 folk were left behind.

 

Post-meeting I revisited to see if matters had improved.  They had not.  Another Edinburgh should have already left platform 1 and another 9-car set was still being hopelessly queued at by hordes of those who would be unsuccessful in getting aboard.  Once again departure was delayed by the sheer numbers and repeated attempts to close the doors.

 

Just what is the safe capacity of these sets?  I have experienced gross overcrowding on GWR several times where the on-board crew have considered it safe to proceed even though customers were standing in toilets, gangways, aisles and even sitting on the tables.  Today's experience at "The Cross" suggested the ECML might have had a day they would choose to forget thanks to those who plan the very necessary, but sometimes not (from a customer's viewpoint) best thought out, maintenance of our railways.

[eastwestdivide]

Sounds horrendous. What time of day was that? Sunday evening I guess?

I was on an 800 from KX the previous Saturday afternoon, when platforms 0-4 were being worked on. Same arrangment of one an hour LNER to Edinburgh, with others from the north terminating at Peterborough. Mine (1330) had the seat reservations working, and there were spare seats on departure.

I had a planned diversion via Cambridge as well: the only time I noticed the diesels under the floor was when they shut down with a rumble and a judder once back under the wires in Peterborough.

[Ken.W]

Part of the major upgrade / re-modelling at Kings X, which will also bring the east bore of Gasworks Tunnel back into use, increasing the tracks into the station from 4 to 6.

Last weekend was advertised as a partial closure.

This weekend there's a full closure of the station, with no services south of Peterborough, and do not travel notices. Wonder how many will ignore that

Edited January 20, 2020 by Ken.W

[The Stationmaster]

17 hours ago, jim.snowdon said:

I wouldn't defend TfL, but as far as Bombardier's engineers are concerned, the ride qualities of the 345s do not appear to be particularly deficient, or much different from those of the 387s. That, at least,has been my experience   between West Drayton and Paddington, both seated and standing (an occupational certainty on peak time Up journeys).

 

The ride qualities of 8xx units I shall get to discover next week.

 

Jim

I definitely find them so Jim.  The big differences are the 'harder' ride of the 345s and the much increased feedback through any sort of secondary suspension of the 'bumps and bangs' going through pointwork or poor sections of track.   Oddly the compo in the IET I travelled in down to Cardiff on Saturday was showing similar symptoms in respect of any secondary damping (or lack of) and the vehicles with an engine, sorry GU, underneath tend to be the best riding in an IET.

Edited January 20, 2020 by The Stationmaster

[class26]

5 hours ago, Ken.W said:

Part of the major upgrade / re-modelling at Kings X, which will also bring the east bore of Gasworks Tunnel back into use, increasing the tracks into the station from 4 to 6.

Last weekend was advertised as a partial closure.

This weekend there's a full closure of the station, with no services south of Peterborough, and do not travel notices. Wonder how many will ignore that

 

Not just 4 to 6 tracks  into the station but speeds into and out of the station will be raised significantly and given the 800`s acceleration on electric should clip a couple minutes off schedules 

[caradoc]

1422 Paddington-Oxford today, ridden from Reading; Set (5-car) in correct formation, riding not noticeably poor. Oddly however, in the compo at least the electronic displays were working but there were paper labels as well, but all rather pointless as there were 8 (eight) reserved seats unoccupied !

 

[jim.snowdon]

I had my first opportunity to sample an 8xx yesterday on the return leg of a trip from Kings Cross to Peterborough, having travelled out on a Mk4 set. The ride was decent, certainly no worse than that of the Mk4, and I was relatively close to the bogie. The seat wasn't at all uncomfortable, although it is a seat designed to be sat in, not slouched on, and again not really any different to the Mk4. If I had any gripes, they would only be that my elbow kept slipping of the window ledge and a wish that the designers of tables would fit lift up (or retractable) edges to them to make getting in and out of window seats easier. The latter was common practice on continental stock decades ago, yet in the UK only ever seems to have made it onto the Pendolinos and Voyagers.

 

Jim

[The Stationmaster]

1 hour ago, jim.snowdon said:

I had my first opportunity to sample an 8xx yesterday on the return leg of a trip from Kings Cross to Peterborough, having travelled out on a Mk4 set. The ride was decent, certainly no worse than that of the Mk4, and I was relatively close to the bogie. The seat wasn't at all uncomfortable, although it is a seat designed to be sat in, not slouched on, and again not really any different to the Mk4. If I had any gripes, they would only be that my elbow kept slipping of the window ledge and a wish that the designers of tables would fit lift up (or retractable) edges to them to make getting in and out of window seats easier. The latter was common practice on continental stock decades ago, yet in the UK only ever seems to have made it onto the Pendolinos and Voyagers.

 

Jim

And on some 16X tables Jim