Class 800 - Updates

[Ron Ron Ron]

....And they're known as Satsumas

 

 

Is that because they look good....taste good .....and by golly, they do you good?

 

Errr Oops !

Sorry that was a Mackeson's.

 

Coat Hat............

 

 

.

[newbryford]

t I think the cab is well laid out, the interiors are okay if a little clinical,

 

Is that another way of saying clean......?

 

Cheers,

Mick

[royaloak]

Is that another way of saying clean......?

 

Cheers,

Mick

Yes they are clean (the one I was on hadnt been accepted into passenger service so it should have been clean), its just I think it is an acceptable interior, just a bit boring.

Edited January 16, 2018 by royaloak

[royaloak]

Is that because they look good....taste good .....and by golly, they do you good?

 

Errr Oops !

Sorry that was a Mackeson's.

 

Coat Hat............

 

 

.

Blimey, thats going back a bit!

[The Stationmaster]

Another example of a train that never worked (at least not for the original customer) was the Norwegian Di6 which ended up being sent back to Germany in disgrace. Also, the big 6000HP North American diesels of the mid 90's (GE AC60CW and SD90MAC) were a bit of a flop. Most do end up working though. I've seen one or two diesel engine designs put out of their misery when it was obvious they just weren't working but it is pretty rare.

 

The thing about some first generation BR mainline diesels was that they seemed to go directly from 'teething problems' to 'age related defects' with no useful bit in between.

[The Stationmaster]

Railway staff in general are quite well renowned for talking to each other. So a lot of us, even without having been on one, have information about them first-hand from some who actually have.

There's also quite a number of other operational reasons a driver may have been on one without actually driving it (eg the recent Inverness test run had a VTEC driver route conducting). To suggest someone would break the rules by driving something they shouldn't in the modern climate's nothing short of ridiculous.

 

Talking of talking... I've heard from two others who've been talking to GW staff they've met at KX, who've said on the IEP launch at Bristol their HST driver were instructed not to pull away in more that notch 2 so as not to show up the new trains.

 

And they're known as Satsumas

 

And there is of course a particular problem the Class 80X series faces is that they will be (as they should be) compared with HSTs.  And as HSTs are 40 years old there won't be a vast number of drivers around (any?) who worked on them when they were first introduced so impressions of HSTs are going to be very much based on the generally 'sorted' situation rather than the days of the early teething troubles.  But no doubt the grapevine will be well and trust buzzing and interestingly it got very International back in HST days when a group of Aussie Drivers were sent over to see HSTs in service to ease them into their own XPTs,  they went back knowing exactly what they were up against; it was just a shame their management weren't as well briefed (and somewhere I have a set of Aussie ASLEF cufflinks to prove it ).

[jamie92208]

Is that because they look good....taste good .....and by golly, they do you good?

 

Errr Oops !

Sorry that was a Mackeson's.

 

Coat Hat............

 

 

.

A bit off topic but Mackeson used to be prescribed to nursing mothers at Leeds Maternity Hospital. The brewery is now student flats.

 

Jamie

[jjb1970]

The thing about some first generation BR mainline diesels was that they seemed to go directly from 'teething problems' to 'age related defects' with no useful bit in between.

I think the BR modernisation plan demonstrates that even very good ideas (i.e. replacing steam) can be fraught with problems if implemented badly enough. The basic idea of building pilot designs to see whether they were any good was sound enough, but that good idea seemed to be immediately abandoned by jumping in to buying shed loads of designs pretty much off the drawing board and then finding out a lot of them were garbage.

[caradoc]

Perhaps the poor (compared to an HST) performance of the 800s on diesel power will provide some impetus to complete the GW electrification ?

[jim.snowdon]

I think the BR modernisation plan demonstrates that even very good ideas (i.e. replacing steam) can be fraught with problems if implemented badly enough. The basic idea of building pilot designs to see whether they were any good was sound enough, but that good idea seemed to be immediately abandoned by jumping in to buying shed loads of designs pretty much off the drawing board and then finding out a lot of them were garbage.

Left to the engineers, it's a fair probability that the Pilot Scheme would have delivered the goods. What went wrong can be summed up in one word - politicians. It wouldn't have prevented there being duds, but it would have allowed the deficient elements (mostly engines) to be weeded out.

 

Jim

[APOLLO]

Never forget the HST "saved" British Rail - well the non electrified "INTER CITY" part of it. A wonderful train (once the problems were sorted) in my opinion. Probably it will never be bettered.

 

I've never seen or rode on an 800 (yet) though I'm sure the teething problems will be solved. Basically the 800 is an electric train with diesel as a bolt on extra, designed originally for "end of electrified main lines" use, NOT sustained 125mph on existing main lines which WERE scheduled for electrification.

 

The biggest problem the 800's have is our pathetic government (all colours) dithering and back sliding on electrification etc. The current Carillion fiasco won't help either.

 

Any way, we have got em now, and more to come quickly, time to  knuckle down, chin up and MAKE them work !!

 

Brit15

[david.hill64]

Now sitting in Swindon station having just had my first 800 run. This was a Paddington to Swansea service. Although everything is shiny and new, travelling in first I could not see any advantage over the HST other than the doors.

 

The ride is no better, rolling noise worse (though the Diesel engine commendably quiet if my car had one), the seats less comfortable and despite seeing a notice for a power point I didn’t find it until I removed my coat from the hook as I was about to leave the train.

 

The water dispenser in the toilet wasn’t working, but that is probably a putting into service teething problem. At least the flush worked.

 

Acceleration out of Paddington was impressive.

 

Apologies if I have missed this before, but are these trains fitted with the GW ATP system?

[St. Simon]

Apologies if I have missed this before, but are these trains fitted with the GW ATP system?

 

Yes.

 

Simon

[The Stationmaster]

Perhaps the poor (compared to an HST) performance of the 800s on diesel power will provide some impetus to complete the GW electrification ?

 

Alas if the performance on diesel is seen as 'good enough' I seriously wonder if the opposite will be the case (as it has been up to now by allowing good excuse not to electrify and thus defer/cancel existing parts of the GWML scheme and its add-ons).

Left to the engineers, it's a fair probability that the Pilot Scheme would have delivered the goods. What went wrong can be summed up in one word - politicians. It wouldn't have prevented there being duds, but it would have allowed the deficient elements (mostly engines) to be weeded out.

 

Jim

 

To be honest I'm not so sure about that as there were some pretty poor technical decisions made for whatever reason when things came forward into mass-ordering.   And poor technical decisions, for whatever biased reasons, continued into the era of the second generation Type 4s (and the Type 1) with very expensive long term results.  Some of the decisions on mass ordering might have been down to manufacturing capacity or maybe down to ensuring certain BR workshops had a continuing workload but quite why large numbers of BR, Derby design, Type 2s were ordered with their known problems when there were very satisfactory BRCW designs performing far better and with better reliability alongside them (literally in some cases) must always remain open to question in my view.  Equally the decision to replicate - again in large numbers - the Brush type 2 design when its various shortcomings were already apparent and a far better alternative existed also raises questions.  Maybe the answer was that the engineers did not have any chance to influence such decisions, maybe it was down to manufacturing capacity.  And maybe some of it - with North British the prime example - was simply down to the need for an early version of the job creation scheme to provide continuing employment in what were otherwise outmoded companies that had run themselves out of business by failing to move with the times?

 

But all of that still leaves the question - why not concentrate on building certain designs which had proved their superiority (which has since been demonstrated by their longevity) and sharing the work out among various reliable factories?

 

But to get back to where we started BR engineers did a great job with the HST design, a few basic faults aside and again its longevity and high performance has proved that.

 

 

Now sitting in Swindon station having just had my first 800 run. This was a Paddington to Swansea service. Although everything is shiny and new, travelling in first I could not see any advantage over the HST other than the doors.

 

The ride is no better, rolling noise worse (though the Diesel engine commendably quiet if my car had one), the seats less comfortable and despite seeing a notice for a power point I didn’t find it until I removed my coat from the hook as I was about to leave the train.

 

The water dispenser in the toilet wasn’t working, but that is probably a putting into service teething problem. At least the flush worked.

 

Acceleration out of Paddington was impressive.

 

Apologies if I have missed this before, but are these trains fitted with the GW ATP system?

 

If you were travelling in the end 1st Class vehicle (which doesn't have an engine by the way) the ride did not strike me as good either although the man from DafT told me it was a lot better in other vehicles when they are fully loaded - which struck me as a daft thing to say as ride quality should not be that sensitive.  I think the seats are a bit of a subjective thing - I certainly prefer the Class 80X 1st Class seats to the leather ones now prevalent in GWR HSTs.  Interesting to note that fitments in the toilet are still giving problems - sounds like things might not have advanced very much in that area since Day 1, which is not a good sign.

[Ken.W]

Is that because they look good....taste good .....and by golly, they do you good?

 

Errr Oops !

Sorry that was a Mackeson's.

 

Coat Hat............

 

 

.

Or maybe rhymes with a silly jazzy name for them, and closely related to a lemon???

[JeffP]

I think the BR modernisation plan demonstrates that even very good ideas (i.e. replacing steam) can be fraught with problems if implemented badly enough. The basic idea of building pilot designs to see whether they were any good was sound enough, but that good idea seemed to be immediately abandoned by jumping in to buying shed loads of designs pretty much off the drawing board and then finding out a lot of them were garbage.

Aye, but would you like to guess at the number of pockets that were lined at the time?

[JeffP]

Left to the engineers, it's a fair probability that the Pilot Scheme would have delivered the goods. What went wrong can be summed up in one word - politicians. It wouldn't have prevented there being duds, but it would have allowed the deficient elements (mostly engines) to be weeded out.

 

Jim

As my eldest says, "The easiest job in the world is spending someone else's money".

[woodenhead]

Or in this case, replacing a loved much older one

HSTs ceased to be HSTs when they stopped screaming - sound like a lorry since being re-engined - great for longevity but a very mundane sound now. 

 

Can you imagine if in the early 1970s BR had replaced all the Deltic engines with the EE units used in the 50.

[APOLLO]

Ahh The screaming Valenta !!

 

 

 

Brit15 (HST fan !!)

[The Stationmaster]

Aye, but would you like to guess at the number of pockets that were lined at the time?

 

Or the number of people who were kept in work instead of going on the dole (back to North British but also later at Beyer Peacock)

[Coryton]

If you were travelling in the end 1st Class vehicle (which doesn't have an engine by the way) the ride did not strike me as good either although the man from DafT told me it was a lot better in other vehicles when they are fully loaded - which struck me as a daft thing to say as ride quality should not be that sensitive.  I think the seats are a bit of a subjective thing - I certainly prefer the Class 80X 1st Class seats to the leather ones now prevalent in GWR HSTs.  Interesting to note that fitments in the toilet are still giving problems - sounds like things might not have advanced very much in that area since Day 1, which is not a good sign.

 

No but - at least at the cheaper end - the end coach seems to have something noisier under the floor than the ones that do have engines underneath.

 

There may not be much difference in first between an HST and an IET, but there certainly is in standard class (comparing to the current GWR HST offerings). 

I presume first glass on HSTs have the horrible heavily smoked glass in the windows which the IETs don't seem to have (and don't need as they have blinds).

 

(Typo above left in because it amused me).

[St. Simon]

No but - at least at the cheaper end - the end coach seems to have something noisier under the floor than the ones that do have engines underneath.

 

From my understanding in talking to the GWR Program Managers is that they have a 'Donkey' Engine to provide Hotel power in the event of loss of main engine power, this may well be that.

 

Simon

[jjb1970]

As my eldest says, "The easiest job in the world is spending someone else's money".

Quite, the four ways of spending money holds a lot of truth:

 

https://investorjunkie.com/13169/milton-friedman-ways-spend-money/

[Zomboid]

From my understanding in talking to the GWR Program Managers is that they have a 'Donkey' Engine to provide Hotel power in the event of loss of main engine power, this may well be that.

 

Simon

That doesn't sound particularly credible to me. For a train to lose hotel power it would need at least 3 engines to fail, that's probably enough redundancy to avert installing yet another engine with its attendant maintenance liability.

I recall uncle Roger saying something about what was under the driving cars meaning that the best place to sit from a quietness point of view would be the motor vehicles, but I don't recall what it was that's fitted. I'd hazard a guess at compressors and the like.

[jim.snowdon]

To be honest I'm not so sure about that as there were some pretty poor technical decisions made for whatever reason when things came forward into mass-ordering.   And poor technical decisions, for whatever biased reasons, continued into the era of the second generation Type 4s (and the Type 1) with very expensive long term results.  Some of the decisions on mass ordering might have been down to manufacturing capacity or maybe down to ensuring certain BR workshops had a continuing workload but quite why large numbers of BR, Derby design, Type 2s were ordered with their known problems when there were very satisfactory BRCW designs performing far better and with better reliability alongside them (literally in some cases) must always remain open to question in my view.  Equally the decision to replicate - again in large numbers - the Brush type 2 design when its various shortcomings were already apparent and a far better alternative existed also raises questions.  Maybe the answer was that the engineers did not have any chance to influence such decisions, maybe it was down to manufacturing capacity.  And maybe some of it - with North British the prime example - was simply down to the need for an early version of the job creation scheme to provide continuing employment in what were otherwise outmoded companies that had run themselves out of business by failing to move with the times?

 

But all of that still leaves the question - why not concentrate on building certain designs which had proved their superiority (which has since been demonstrated by their longevity) and sharing the work out among various reliable factories?

 

But to get back to where we started BR engineers did a great job with the HST design, a few basic faults aside and again its longevity and high performance has proved that.

 

Every thing I have seen points towards BR being told by its political masters (a) we need to modernise the railways now and here's lots of money to spend, and (b) steam is going to go - when acn you complete the job? The result is that locomotives got ordered from all and sundry, in a hurry, and with known problems. Even with the known good ones, the simple mechanics of manufacturing capacity would have dictated that orders had to be placed elsewhere and, in the absence of a war, you can't simply tell manufacturer X to build locomotives to a design by Y - not only has Y to be prepared to licence the design but it will push the cost up, as both X and Y will want to make a profit out of the exercise. It's not the way to run a railway, but then having government interference is an unfortunate side-effect of being a nationalised industry in the UK. The other European railways were also nationalised enterprises, and still are, but the governments of the rest of Western Europe have been much better at understanding the difference between what has to be delivered and allowing the railway authorities to get on with the job of doing the delivering. Probably the nearest we got to that, in railway terms, was the London Passenger Transport Board, but that is quite probably down to the fairly strong minded and very capable personalities at the top.

 

As for the HST, we should remember, as you have, that it was BR's engineers who created it, largely counter to policy, and succeeded in convincing their lords and masters that it was a saleable product at the time when APT was beginning to be clearly not the railway's salvation. Yes, it had its design faults, most notably the Paxman engine, but there may not have been much alternative at the time, given the severe constraints on the weight and the track forces generated by the power cars, which had to achieve 125mph without exceeding the track forces generated by the Deltics at 100mph. And like all engineers, whilst they may have saved BR's bacon in the inter-city market, they have remained largely hidden in the background.

 

Jim