Jump to content
 

Class 800 - Updates


Recommended Posts

  • RMweb Premium

Seen my first IET of the day. Cardiff to Paddington - 2x5, both the right way round, coach letters also the right way round.

 

Filthy on the outside including the windows.

 

Does anyone know what's happening with IET cleaning? (Or rather what's not happening, by the look of things).

 

Either the contract permits a level of filth on the windows that I would consider unacceptable, or something's not being done properly.

 

I don't think it's giving the image that GWR would no doubt want for their new trains - though of course it may be beyond their direct control.

 

Edited to add:

 

Caught up with it at Newport and saw that the lights for the electronic reservation system were even working! And there was a trolley working through one of the units.

Edited by Coryton
Add info
  • Like 2
Link to post
Share on other sites

^ On a similar note regarding upkeep - I’m currently on a 5-car 800 Oxford-Paddington and being shaken to within an inch of my life. The vibration is really quite atrocious, to the point of feeling like there must be a flat or something at times (can’t actually be the case, as it occasionally abates, but it’s the closest comparison I can conjure). I’ve generally been a fan of these since their introduction but I’ve never experienced this before. Has anyone else?

Link to post
Share on other sites

  • RMweb Gold
7 hours ago, Coryton said:

Seen my first IET of the day. Cardiff to Paddington - 2x5, both the right way round, coach letters also the right way round.

 

Filthy on the outside including the windows.

 

Does anyone know what's happening with IET cleaning? (Or rather what's not happening, by the look of things).

 

Either the contract permits a level of filth on the windows that I would consider unacceptable, or something's not being done properly.

 

I don't think it's giving the image that GWR would no doubt want for their new trains - though of course it may be beyond their direct control.

 

Edited to add:

 

Caught up with it at Newport and saw that the lights for the electronic reservation system were even working! And there was a trolley working through one of the units.

I wonder if the external cleanliness issue has anything to do with Hitachi reported recruitment problems at North Pole or if it's simply down to a defective CWM?

Link to post
Share on other sites

  • RMweb Gold

Just read on Rail magazine (via Facebook) that LNER’s Azuma’s have been cleared for public service on the the Hull/Leeds - Kings Cross route but only the 800/1’s and 800/2’s for now.  Hitachi are still working on the inter carriage connectors.

 

I thought they must be getting close as I was at Peterborough station on Tuesday and a 800 stopped on platform 3, the door indicator lights came on and I also noticed that the carriage electrical destination signs were saying Kings Cross with Intermediate stations displayed.

Edited by jools1959
  • Informative/Useful 1
Link to post
Share on other sites

Did a journey up and back to London from Bath last Saturday. On both trips we travelled in filthy 9 car units. The retched thing had a continuous high frequency vibration, the suspension regularly felt as if it was bottoming out as well as having very little lateral damping and whenever the compressor stopped I thought it would tear itself out of its mounting it became so unbalanced.

 

Not a fan.

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

On 21/02/2019 at 10:44, jim.snowdon said:

Not only more prevalent but seemingly more incompatible. From what contact I had with these systems during the course of various platform lengthening projects, it seems that every train builder has their own solution to the problem and none of them are compatible with each other. Not only that, but when it comes to updates, the train operator is at the mercy of the carbuilder when it comes to doing and paying for the update.

in a sensible world, you would have thought that the railway industry, led by the infrastructure operator, could have come up with, if not a standard system, at least a common communications protocol that would allow any trainborne equipment to communicate with any trackside equipment.

 

Jim

 

In terms of systems that require on track infrastructure there seems to be only two systems (that I can find):

 

ETCS Packet 44 Data (used by Class 70x, 345 and 80x units) and Tracklink (either II or III, used by most of the modern electric and diesel multiple units built by Siemens, Bombardier, CAF and Stadler).  Okay, they have some different application codes, but what I gather is that the vast majority of units fitted with either ETCS or Tracklink can read any beacon for their respective systems, the difference being how the train interrupts that data.

 

But then again, if everything was completely and utterly standardized with no room for innovation (e.g. we've already got a good system, why do you want to try this one as well), then life would be boring. Even then, there's always going to be different systems in use to do the same thing as you changing from one standard system to another standard system.

 

Simon

  • Agree 2
  • Thanks 1
Link to post
Share on other sites

23 hours ago, Calidore said:

^ On a similar note regarding upkeep - I’m currently on a 5-car 800 Oxford-Paddington and being shaken to within an inch of my life. The vibration is really quite atrocious, to the point of feeling like there must be a flat or something at times (can’t actually be the case, as it occasionally abates, but it’s the closest comparison I can conjure). I’ve generally been a fan of these since their introduction but I’ve never experienced this before. Has anyone else?

 

I've had several rough rides on 800s and it seems to be getting worse. 2 x 5 Reading to Paddington yesterday and was very pleased to get off at Paddington.

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

8 hours ago, JJGraphics said:

 

I've had several rough rides on 800s and it seems to be getting worse. 2 x 5 Reading to Paddington yesterday and was very pleased to get off at Paddington.

Is there any correlation between the rough riders and the length of time/mileage they have done? 

 

Jim

Link to post
Share on other sites

  • RMweb Premium

Dreadful ride quality seems to be becoming the norm for modern trains, I thought it was a problem for the Desiro family but it is clearly a much wider issue. Even the new e320 Eurostar trains have a rubbish ride quality (including on the Belgian and French high speed lines). It's turned me right off rail travel except for commuting and going to Brussels (because as much as I dislike the new Eurostar trains I hate flying more).

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

On 05/02/2019 at 13:20, jim.snowdon said:

If a set is reversed by virtue of its diagramed routing, then it is reasonable to expect the train operator, which is FGW, to manage the situation by correcting the reversal at a later stage in that set's diagram. The bigger problem is when Network Rail cause a set to be reversed as a result of out of course routing to accommodate engineering works or infrastructure failures. Such events may or may not be expected, and I would be quite certain that Hitachi will have seen to it that it is not their liability to turn sets round for the Operators convenience. Turning a set round costs time and money, as well requiring a train crew.

 

FGW/GWR have doubtless had plenty experience of coping with reversed HST sets, and as the maintainer, had control over the process of getting a set sent out specially. What they have had no experience of is coping with 2-unit trains where either or both units could be wrong way round, or of trains whose units could arrive for coupling en route in either order. Hitachi simply provide trains against a contract specification; it's GWR who operate them.

 

Jim 

If GWR were responsible for the diagramming then fine, unfortunately (in the case of the 800s) they arent and any deviation from the booked diagram has to be agreed with HRE who will only agree it if the necessary funds are passed across.

 

Once again I am reading many many posts about things a joined up railway would do in a heart beat, unfortunately the railways are far from 'joined up' these days so these simple things are not possible to arrange in the timescales/budgets available, we now have the situation where trains are booked to arrive onto a depot at 03:00 and HRE are diagramming them to leave at 03:40 which is impossible, and despite there being 3 other sets sat spare in the sidings they refused to allow a set swap, end result train cancelled, but hey what do I know!

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

2 hours ago, royaloak said:

If GWR were responsible for the diagramming then fine, unfortunately (in the case of the 800s) they arent and any deviation from the booked diagram has to be agreed with HRE who will only agree it if the necessary funds are passed across.

 

Once again I am reading many many posts about things a joined up railway would do in a heart beat, unfortunately the railways are far from 'joined up' these days so these simple things are not possible to arrange in the timescales/budgets available, we now have the situation where trains are booked to arrive onto a depot at 03:00 and HRE are diagramming them to leave at 03:40 which is impossible, and despite there being 3 other sets sat spare in the sidings they refused to allow a set swap, end result train cancelled, but hey what do I know!

 

 

That was always going to happen when new fleet contract based allocation replaced the "old skool" approach.  Fortunately the TOC I work for has some degree of flexibility with the "fleet providor".  Being DfT led and tighrtly controlled the IEP was always going to be a logistical nightmare for the TOCs involved.

   

  • Agree 3
Link to post
Share on other sites

9 hours ago, Mark Saunders said:

 

Other factors add up too including tyre wear, track condition, ballast compaction and many more including how the train sounds!

 

Mark Saunders

Tyre wear is a function of mileage, although it may be modified by the routes a train has been used on, and affects each train individually. Track conditions affect all trains, but are generally location specific rather than route specific provided the track as a whole has not deteriorated too badly. Whilst how each train will react to any given set of circumstances is dependent on multiple factors being present at the same time. As a general rule, if all of the trains ride badly at some locations, the primary cause is likely to be the track; if some of the trains ride badly compared to others over the same sections of track, the primary cause is likely to be the trains.

Ultimately, it has to be remembered that track and train are inseparable parts of a system and the condition of one will affect the other. 

 

Jim

  • Agree 1
Link to post
Share on other sites

9 hours ago, royaloak said:

If GWR were responsible for the diagramming then fine, unfortunately (in the case of the 800s) they arent and any deviation from the booked diagram has to be agreed with HRE who will only agree it if the necessary funds are passed across.

 

Once again I am reading many many posts about things a joined up railway would do in a heart beat, unfortunately the railways are far from 'joined up' these days so these simple things are not possible to arrange in the timescales/budgets available, we now have the situation where trains are booked to arrive onto a depot at 03:00 and HRE are diagramming them to leave at 03:40 which is impossible, and despite there being 3 other sets sat spare in the sidings they refused to allow a set swap, end result train cancelled, but hey what do I know!

 

That is a bizarre and completely unrealistic (in the real railway world) of diagramming and allocating sets royaloak.  Surely it does not matter to GWR which individual set is presented on any diagram, merely that it is the correct type of set and in a fit condition to complete its booked work ?

 

  • Agree 1
Link to post
Share on other sites

3 minutes ago, jim.snowdon said:

Tyre wear is a function of mileage, although it may be modified by the routes a train has been used on, and affects each train individually. Track conditions affect all trains, but are generally location specific rather than route specific provided the track as a whole has not deteriorated too badly. Whilst how each train will react to any given set of circumstances is dependent on multiple factors being present at the same time. As a general rule, if all of the trains ride badly at some locations, the primary cause is likely to be the track; if some of the trains ride badly compared to others over the same sections of track, the primary cause is likely to be the trains.

Ultimately, it has to be remembered that track and train are inseparable parts of a system and the condition of one will affect the other. 

 

Jim

 

Whilst I don't disagree in general with what you say, the rough-riding of the IEPs I have travelled on does not seem to be consistent with any particular location, they just seem to choose to bounce and bang about almost anywhere. The unpleasant internal noise and floor vibration seems to be fairly consistent across most of the units when on diesel although the vibration transmitted through the floor and seats does seem a lot worse in some than others and is particularly annoying in many of the driving cars which of course don't have engines under the floor.

 

John

  • Agree 1
Link to post
Share on other sites

  • RMweb Premium
9 hours ago, royaloak said:

If GWR were responsible for the diagramming then fine, unfortunately (in the case of the 800s) they arent and any deviation from the booked diagram has to be agreed with HRE who will only agree it if the necessary funds are passed across.

 

I hope that doesn't mean that when there is disruption they can't change which diagram a unit is on.

 

Anyway if GWR are so constrained by the contract that it's not practical to sort out reversed units then ideally they would make sure there is a way of providing full formation information at every station they call at, including non-GWR controlled ones. They've made a start on this in Didcot...I hope there are plans to roll this out elsewhere.

 

Of course that all costs money, but one thing they could do that would be very cheap is to take down the posters describing train formations that imply there is a correct way round.

 

And I still find it a little hard to see why when there are two units the coach letters are still sometimes the wrong way round (i.e. coach A in the unit at the London end).

 

10 hours ago, royaloak said:

leave at 03:40 which is impossible, and despite there being 3 other sets sat spare in the sidings they refused to allow a set swap, end result train cancelled, but hey what do I know!

 

It might explain why they seem to have given up washing the trains.

  • Like 1
Link to post
Share on other sites

1 hour ago, caradoc said:

 

That is a bizarre and completely unrealistic (in the real railway world) of diagramming and allocating sets royaloak.  Surely it does not matter to GWR which individual set is presented on any diagram, merely that it is the correct type of set and in a fit condition to complete its booked work ?

 

It does matter when the set is still being fuelled and prepped when it should be leaving the depot.

Link to post
Share on other sites

29 minutes ago, Coryton said:

It might explain why they seem to have given up washing the trains.

At my depot the trains are cleaned internally and externally before arriving on depot.

Link to post
Share on other sites

  • RMweb Premium
59 minutes ago, royaloak said:

At my depot the trains are cleaned internally and externally before arriving on depot.

 

I'm glad to hear that.

 

However, the last few IETs I've travelled on and seen have been externally rather dirty, to the extent that it noticeably impedes the view through the windows. I don't know which depot they come out of.

 

It certainly looks as if they haven't been washed for a while...if they have been washed then I'm at a loss as to why they look the way they do.

  • Agree 2
Link to post
Share on other sites

5 hours ago, Coryton said:

Anyway if GWR are so constrained by the contract...

... then the contract needs rewriting and the people who agreed the original contract need a word in their ears?

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

  • RMweb Premium

An interesting effect caused by the Whiteball blockade has been that most of the services still running between London, Plymouth and Penzance are formed of HSTs

 

Most are normally booked for IET now. 

 

As I am currently aboard 1C82 which is HST vice booked IET I can confirm that seat-back labels are in use. While that is normal for an HST it presumes the train would be formed IET as the manager has advised Coach E reservations are in Coach L. I am in coach X which is a declassified composite. The formation is very much a scratch set.  

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...