Jump to content
 

Hornby announce Class 800 IEP

Andy Y

By Andy Y,
in Hornby

 Share

Recommended Posts

  • RMweb Gold
The Stationmaster

The Stationmaster

Posted
  • RMweb Gold
Posted

 

Ironically, 800004 'GWR' livery is also for a PR event - the 'first' passenger run on the 30th June 2016 to celebrate 175th anniversary of the GWR. Though it is likely all IEP Class 800 series trains for Agility West Ltd and operated by GWR (who now seem to call them IETs in First Group PR) shall wear vinyl wraps similar to those on 800004. But all Class 802s for Eversholt and operated by GWR shall be painted (thus making the livery subtlety different - especially around doors and cctv).

 

Looks like someone was running rather late - the 175th anniversary of the founding of the GWR occurred in 2010, not 2016; the 175th anniversary of the opening of the GWR to public traffic occurred in 2013.  The only 175th anniversary with a GWR connection occurring in 1841 was the opening of the last section of the original main line - between Chippenham and Bath despite the fact that various works were still not complete.  Thus the 175th anniversary occurring on 30 June 2016 was that of the running of the first through train from London to Bristol - something which a Class 800 will not be able to do on electric power for several years to come (if ever). 

  • Like 1
Link to post
Share on other sites
  • RMweb Gold
The Stationmaster

The Stationmaster

Posted
  • RMweb Gold
Posted

Well now I'm fascinated to know why the plural of Azuma is, according to you, Azumi?!

 

Paul

 

The nearest Japanese suffix for (a sort of) plural which I can find in a quick Google is '-tachi' which seems to potentially cover a group of similar things or people.  So presumably it might be azuma-tachi ?

 

Shame it isn't a Latin root as then it would be nice and simple and be azumae, although a Latin pluralised 'azumi' would be incorrect (unless of course we have been grossly misled and all along a single one has been an 'azumus').

Link to post
Share on other sites
  • RMweb Gold
Budgie

Budgie

Posted
  • RMweb Gold
Posted

Shame it isn't a Latin root as then it would be nice and simple and be azumae, although a Latin pluralised 'azumi' would be incorrect (unless of course we have been grossly misled and all along a single one has been an 'azumus').[/i]

Not necessarily. It could be a Latin neuter from a Greek root, in which case the plural would be azumata.

  • Like 1
Link to post
Share on other sites
Fenman

Fenman

Posted
Posted

Not necessarily. It could be a Latin neuter from a Greek root, in which case the plural would be azumata.

 

Except that, of course, we are speaking English (well, some of us are); and, even if a word takes a Latin plural to start off with, over time it gradually drifts into more Anglo-Saxon habits (the fury of some people at seeing references to referendums rather than, as they would have it, referenda, is always a delight to behold).

 

So, one Azuma, many Azumas, It's a made-up marketing word anyway. Or, at least, it is in England - doubtless chosen because some Mad Men-type was tickled pink that it sounded like "a zoomer".

 

Paul

  • Like 1
Link to post
Share on other sites
caradoc

caradoc

Posted
Posted

So, one Azuma, many Azumas, It's a made-up marketing word anyway. Or, at least, it is in England - doubtless chosen because some Mad Men-type was tickled pink that it sounded like "a zoomer".

 

Paul

 

Depends how it's pronounced.... maybe 'Azuma' actually rhymes with 'a bummer' ?

Link to post
Share on other sites
sammyboy

sammyboy

Posted
Posted

I'm disappointed that these will be replacing the legendary (And now very old I'll admit!) HST's, but the new trains look nice and boy, they can certainly move as I've driven one on the Train Simulator computer game.

 

One day, I'd like to see these come out for me and my fellow N Gauge modellers?

 

Sam 

Link to post
Share on other sites
caradoc

caradoc

Posted
Posted

I'm disappointed that these will be replacing the legendary (And now very old I'll admit!) HST's, but the new trains look nice and boy, they can certainly move as I've driven one on the Train Simulator computer game.

 

 

I'll be disappointed too, but remember the sentiments expressed when the HSTs replaced trains hauled by Westerns and Deltics, among others ?

Maybe in 40 years (or perhaps less) a new generation of enthusiasts will be regretting the scrapping of the 800s in favour of the new atomic-powered self-levitating Class 900s !

  • Like 1
Link to post
Share on other sites
frobisher

frobisher

Posted
Posted

I wonder who will be brave enough to try? Hornby-Arnold, Dapol or RevolutioN.

I wouldn't rule out Farish. This will be a bread and butter item for the next 20+ years so the normal rule of 00 and N need not apply. I'm not sure we'd see it anytime soon from Dapol given how far backed up they are (have they officially canned their Pendolino and Cl 92 yet?), it would make a lot of sense for a second model from Hornby-Arnold, but I can see RevolutioN swooping in if no one else stakes a claim soon.

Link to post
Share on other sites
Rhydgaled

Rhydgaled

Posted
Posted

Er...no.the word did not not pass my lips.Let's just say black is the new green.

The new GWR livery on 43005, 43187 and 43188 (not seen the other one) does look black to me from a distance on an overcast day.

 

That's the test train livery, not Azuma livery which is the Virgin East Coast one.

 

A bit puzzled at the limited edition 2 car set. It might appeal to collectors , but wouldn't you first want to know that intermediate cars will be available before taking the plunge here? Have I missed that? A 2 car unit by itself just looks ridiculous , not that I have any notion of what runs between them.

I was going to ask the same thing about that 2-car set. As 'Ron Ron Ron' has already posted, the driving vehicles on the real thing do not have motors in them. I don't know where Hornby are going to put the motor in the model, but if they are putting it in the intermediate coaches to be like the real thing then the limited edition test-train 2-car set will contain two non-motorised coaches at over £100 each! The real 800002 has three coaches in the standard grey base livery between the two driving vehicles that are included in the limited edition set. I suppose if you aren't picky about the vehicle numbers, if Hornby produce a pair of driving vehicles in plain grey livery and release the intermediate coaches for that seperately then the same three grey coaches could be used with the test train limited edition driving vehicles.

 

the Class 91 and MK 4's which although a long time ago now, were rushed out, [snip] today are ' railroad ' at best.

I'm actually mostly happy with the standard of my Hornby IC225, except the headlight clusters on the 91 and DVT which are dreadful and not even up to the standard of the Lima class 43 (IC125 power cars) which I believe Hornby used in the Railroad range with no changes other than a new motor (I don't have a Hornby one to compare to my Lima set).

 

Could we possibly see no train set version for what will be such an iconic front line train for many years to come? That would be a real break away from tradition for Hornby, without it is this its yet another close of the door to those youngsters in a hobby that's drifting towards the unaffordable to some. Maybe also a form of railroad version would suit the pockets of those modellers who just wont be able to face these kind of prices (or do they too increasingly face door of model railways being closed on them?).

 

Whilst most on this forum I would hazard a guess would position themselves at the more finer detail end of the market there is the wider market to consider also (especially going forward with increased affordability issues - only last week we hear more on incomes being squeezed).

If Hornby would re-release the Lima IC125 (coaches and power cars) in the Railroad range with coaches around £20 each and power cars about £40-45 for the pair (one motorised + one dummy, without DCC chip, working directional lights optional (would pay a bit more, perhaps £50-55 for that)) in liveries I'm after I would certainly be interested. The super detail power cars are far more expensive than I'm willing to pay given that I'm happy with the detail of the Lima model (it looks like an IC125 to me, so why pay more? except perhaps to get a more-reliable modern mechinisim). The class 800 doesn't belong in the era I hope to model, but if it did I might be interested in a Railroad version (provided the livery was well-done, the livery on the Railroad Flying Scotsman isn't up to the standard of mine (from the train set with three teak coaches, even though I only want the loco)) but not something at £75 per coach.

 

Personally I think the Class 800 looks superb, both the real thing and Hornby's new model. As to what they are like inside, perhaps we should wait until they're in service before passing judgement ?

In terms of the real thing, while we cannot pass judgement on the seating yet, we know some things about what they will be like inside. The GWR ones on Devon/Cornwall services will have an underfloor diesel engine running under some of the coaches for several hours and the majority of the fleet will be 5-car, suggesting that many services might well be full and standing inside.

 

A very good point, considering that the 5 car trains will be mostly seen running in pairs.

That remains to be seen. The diagrams the DfT published show pairs largely only being used for high peak services in and out of Paddington. For the rest of the day, the 5-car units were used alone. GWR may well do things differently though.

 

 

I suppose seeing these Hitachi trains coming in must be like seeing HSTs displace Deltics and Westerns. Some happy about the future, some seeing it as "wrong, just wrong" and most of the travelling public not caring about anything either way.

There are three aspects of IEP which I consider to be 'wrong, just wrong'. First, the fact GWR have ordered a similar train (with underfloor engines) despite the fact their MD was quoted in Modern Railways magazine several years earlier as having said class 222s were rejected for the Paddington-Devon/Cornwall services in favour of retaining IC125s because passengers (or, he may have said, stakeholders) did not like the underfloor engines and cramped interiors of those trains. Second:

I would certainly like a 9 car as these shall be more dominating on the ECML.

The ECML is getting a new 9-car unit to replace each of their existing 9-coach IC225/IC125 sets, plus a number of 5-car sets as an addition to the fleet. The GWML, on the other hand has 5-car units to replace 8-coach trains, not only as additional fleet. According to Wikipedia, there are only going to be 35 9-car sets for GWR, leaving 19 of the 54 8-coach trains to be replaced by shorter new units.

The third, is that single diesel engine on the so-called 'electric' class 801 sets. Operationally, they are an EMU, without the flexibility for diversionary routes offered by the 'bi-modes', but from a technical/engineering/maintainance perspective the class 801s must have all the complexity of a bi-mode for zero (or very little) gain.

 

9 car 801 series: DPTS - MS - MeS - TS - MeS - TS - MeC - MeF - DPTF.

Only one diesel engine on the 9-car class 801s then; they're going to move REALLY SLOWLY if they have to use the diesel.

 

I quite honestly don't know, some of the modifications are post testing, others are to make them more suited to a longer period running on diesel (larger adblue tanks, derestricting power packs, larger fuel tank)

Wait, are you saying the Agility IEP units will now have the software set to allow full power from the engines, like the Eversholt units?

 

 

There are companies out there that'd be bankrupted if their customers ever figure out how to write a good contractual specification so they avoid variation orders. Age old tactic, bid low and mug the client when the variation orders start.

Hmm appears you are not familiar with the Intercity Express Programme Train Technical Specification.

 

I do not blame anyone for not reading the full 86 pages to which Hitachi must design their Class 800 series trains to, but if you did, you would be assured everything is covered to the last detail.

I've not read through 86 pages either, but if it is that long perhaps DfT tried to cover themselves against variation orders; only the delayed electrification has forced variations (I wonder if Hitachi/Agility foresaw that, but IEP already stood for Inordinately Expense Procurement before the variation).
Link to post
Share on other sites
  • RMweb Premium
jjb1970

jjb1970

Posted
  • RMweb Premium
Posted

On specifications, I wouldn't equate length with quality, you can write hundreds of pages of contractual specification but it doesn't really matter if that spec is not appropriate. A lot depends on the commercial relationship, suppliers tend to understand that raping their clients to the last degree with variation orders is counter productive if they hope to win further orders, there is a balancing act. And in fairness to suppliers, quite often they do point out problems in the specification, if it is altered all well and good but if the client takes a "that's the spec, submit a proposal to supply what the spec asks for" then you can't really blame suppliers for taking advantage of the consequences. I worked for one company who often entered into major investment programs based on a spec that was not much more than 2 or 3 pages and it worked for them as they were the worlds biggest container shipping line and made it clear that future contracts would be heavily influenced by previous performance. Suppliers had a choice, they could make a profit on a single work package and blow any future work with one of the worlds biggest purchasers in their field or work collaboratively, make a fair profit and build a long term relationship. That worked far better than you might expect, even with suppliers in China.

  • Like 1
Link to post
Share on other sites
NickC

NickC

Posted
Posted

My class 43 power car can easily pull 5 coaches and a dummy car so it is highly unlikely that an 800 would require more than one motor. I suppose that to be more accurate both 800 driver cars should be dummy's and one (or more) coaches should have the motor

Link to post
Share on other sites
  • RMweb Premium
Hilux5972

Hilux5972

Posted
  • RMweb Premium
Posted

My class 43 power car can easily pull 5 coaches and a dummy car so it is highly unlikely that an 800 would require more than one motor. I suppose that to be more accurate both 800 driver cars should be dummy's and one (or more) coaches should have the motor

Mine pulls 8 coaches + the dummy. Do you just have the 5 or is that all it will pull?

Link to post
Share on other sites
MGR Hooper!

MGR Hooper!

Posted
Posted

Mine pulls 8 coaches + the dummy. Do you just have the 5 or is that all it will pull?

 

 

My class 43 power car can easily pull 5 coaches and a dummy car so it is highly unlikely that an 800 would require more than one motor. I suppose that to be more accurate both 800 driver cars should be dummy's and one (or more) coaches should have the motor

In the Class 87 thread I've posted links to videos of Hornby and Bachmann locos pulling 20+ wagons/coaches with ease. If the IEP Class 800 is designed with a centrally mounted motor with flywheels and dual bogie drive I see no issue with it. If like the Pendolino, Javelin etc with a single motor bogie I think it can handle 10-12 with ease.

 

Anyone with a Hornby Class 153, Class 47 etc can try it out.

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
Go to topic listing
×
×
  • Create New...