Class 800 - Updates

[Ken.W]

The Inverness line in particular has long single track sections. Clearing those in good time is essential for the timetable to work, and finding a path for the London train to plod along much slower than the short & powerful HSTs around it can manage may cause significant headaches, and will at least limit the ability to fully exploit the power they have on tap.

Maybe they should try again with an 802. It'll probably still be slower than the 2+5 HSTs, but maybe not quite so embarrassingly so.

 

Yes agreed, but the EC aren't getting any 802s

 

That problem was always going to exist, even with the HST operated London train.

 

The current Virgin EC Inverness train is a 2+9 set, the new Scotrail trains will only be 2+4, lightning quick by comparison.

 

Whichever way you could choose to look at it, the entire timetable is going to have to be recast north of Edinburgh, that's if the super power aspect of the new shorter HSTs is to be exploited.

 

Which makes it even more critical when the 800s performance is significantly slower than that of the HST, to the point where it can become unacceptable

 

There is a problem in the short term with class 800s having to run significant distances on diesel power, when they should rather be running under wires, but clearly someone at the DfT has decided GW are just going to have to live with it, then why not, similarly on the EC where the delays have even led to a complete franchise renegotiation.

 

It all comes down to the delays in the electrification, in the end, not the shortcomings (or otherwise) of the new trains.

 

Presumably the class 800 is working out of the box, as specified (I've read nothing to the contrary), and that does mean reduced power on diesel.

 

However, apart from the short term issue, I'm still struggling to understand how this is any kind of a problem or how, in the end, it is going to be a significant showstopper in providing what will surely be a massively improved service.

 

On the EC it is not a short term problem, and has absolutely nothing to do with the delays in electrification, all of the EC routes where they were planned to run on electric were already electrified.

Or again, perhaps you would care to inform us when Aberdeen / Inverness are being electrified?

 

There's been nothing said to suggest that the trains aren't performing as specified, however whatever the reasons for their shortcomings, how can you suggest otherwise when they're clearly not performing as required on routes they were always going to require to work on diesel and which, again, was the reason for there being bi-modes.

 

It's hardly a massively improved service for passengers expecting shiny new trains who may find themselves still on the same "clapped out" 40 year old ones, or on 'even more clapped out' 30 year old replacements, or even possibly, have no train at all and find they have to change trains at Edinburgh, and it's well known just how loathed the average potential passenger is to changing trains en-route particularly one where many have large amounts of luggage.

Edited January 19, 2018 by Ken.W

[Banger Blue]

Yes, it will need modifying slightly, which I'll be doing the design for in a few weeks, but until the line to Oxford is wired, the Change-Over will be at South Moreton.

 

Sorry, I can't reveal anymore, probably said too much already!

Simon

Last briefing note I saw, was that the change-over point is at Moreton, however Up trains are authorised, if stopping at Didcot, to raise pans once stationary at the platform.

 

‘Non Stopping’ Up trains and all Down trains are to make the transition at Moreton.

[jjb1970]

The elephant in the room here seems to be that the train would appear to be meeting its specification, somebody wrote that specification and if you write a specification then that is what the supplier will provide (or face a price for failure to deliver). This was a Daft program but presumably operators had some input or at least opportunity to comment on the performance aspects?

 

In terms of time, what is the expected difference on a route such as Edinburgh - Aberdeen?

[Ken.W]

The elephant in the room here seems to be that the train would appear to be meeting its specification, somebody wrote that specification and if you write a specification then that is what the supplier will provide (or face a price for failure to deliver). This was a Daft program but presumably operators had some input or at least opportunity to comment on the performance aspects?

 

In terms of time, what is the expected difference on a route such as Edinburgh - Aberdeen?

Otherwise known as DaFT

It was, as you say their program, so they'll have written the specification. What notice, if any, they've taken from any operator input's obviously debatable, they seem to have told the operators this is what you're getting.

That is what the supplier will have provided, and there's no evidence to suggest otherwise, they're not making modifications to correct the deficiencies themselves and their engineers on that Inverness run were, apparently, rather surprised and somewhat taken aback to be told their new trains are not as good as the HSTs. This spec is also what the supplier will charge a price for to alter for the it not coming up to scratch.

 

There's not yet been a test on the Aberdeen route, but the verdict on the Inverness run performance was something has to be done, and from NR apparently, a big no-no

Edited January 19, 2018 by Ken.W

[jjb1970]

If Hitachi have delivered the contracted performance then they will quite rightly require any modifications to be paid for. If the specification is inappropriate then that isn't Hitachi'problem or responsibility. I really hope that "lessons have been learned" at Daft (to use that cringe inducing phrase) but I'm not optimistic.

[jim.snowdon]

There's not yet been a test on the Aberdeen route, but the verdict on the Inverness run performance was something has to be done, and from NR apparently, a big no-no

Since NR has to provide an open access railway, as far as I am aware it cannot dictate the performance of a train to a TOC, nor can it veto operation unless the train is not compliant with Railway Group Standards, foul to gauge or inflicting damage to the network. If its performance is such as to inflict penalties on other TOCs' operations, that is an ORR matter.

 

Jim

[Zomboid]

Yes agreed, but the EC aren't getting any 802s

 

Doing some speculative imagineering for a moment - if an 802 can keep time, then it may be possible to set the 800s up so that they unlock the extra 200hp or engine on the Highland line. I assume they'll have GPS as that seems to be how SDO is done these days, and the engines can dynamically change their output to cover for another engine failing, so having the location as another trigger to get that response might be possible.

Of course such a plan would cost, and if an 802 can't keep time then it would be silly too. And you're in a hole if an engine fails, but then if a HST engine fails you're in a somewhat bigger hole...

[jamie92208]

We are discussing the 800 performance north of Edinburgh at the moment but two questions have sprung to mind.

 

1. Have the power supply upgrades between Newcastle and Edinburgh been completed yet to allow regular Azuma operation.

 

2. One the EGIP project is completed and the wires extend to Dunblane, will the 800's be able to use the juice as far as Stirling.

 

Jamie

[frobisher]

We don't know yet if it's planed to use 5 or 9 car sets (or any at all at that speed!)

 

At a quick calculation though, the difference is only about 33 hp per car so fairly insignificant, and probably less so than the fact that's comparing the performance of the 800 running empty to that of an in service HST

As you said though, we just have a single test run so far, so more data is required before leaping for a solution that is contrary to what DfT expected. Those 33 horsies might make a difference, we just don't know yet, probably not enough, but hey ho!

[frobisher]

There's not yet been a test on the Aberdeen route, but the verdict on the Inverness run performance was something has to be done, and from NR apparently, a big no-no

An Aberdeen run or two definitely should be under the belt before alternatives are considered. If Aberdeen falls short as well, then I'd say there's a very definite case for a variation on the orders (probably the only option is a build to partial or full 802 specs), as London-Aberdeen and London-Inverness are 90% of the reason for the bi-modes in the ECML order in the first place.

[Ron Ron Ron]

Posted on The IET & HST Appreciation Society facebook group (by someone who would know):

 

Tomorrow morning the 1045 Paddington - Swansea IET will attempt a record breaking run between Paddington and Reading. The aim is to do the 36 miles stop to stop in 20 minutes

 

 

 

According to RTT, the 1045 took 21 mins to reach Reading.

 

It seems to have slowed around Hayes & Harlington and Airport Junction.

That vital minute might have been lost there.

 

http://www.realtimetrains.co.uk/train/C55335/2018/01/19/advanced

 

 

 

..

Edited January 19, 2018 by Ron Ron Ron

[HillsideDepot]

From the man at NR Control:

A unconfirmed time of 21 minutes has been recorded on the high speed test run with an IET between Paddington and Reading. There was no media attention but This was filmed for the Paddington 24/7 documentary new series. Somebody may have confirmed timings by aid of a stop watch, but this is a great achievement bearing in mind that the line speed was not exceeded

[JeffP]

Does anyone else think that DaFT, based in London as it is, is NOT going to be too bothered about a slower service to either Aberdeen or Inverness?

 

After all, since when did much north of Watford have any bearing on what DaFT say?

[Coryton]

Well, in my line of work (IT), I tend to view problems as the things that keep me in work.

 

Plenty don't of course, despairing with their heads in their hands, but they always seem to be the kind of people that would prefer a job, where they don't have to do that much, and exist in some kind of delusion that someone will always be there to provide it.

 

As I said before, on the Highland Line, it's just one train a day, full of people that if they were in any kind of a rush would have already been at the airport.

 

Then the idea a whole new train fleet design should have revolved around that one service strikes me as ......

 

As with any service improvement, targeted at the majority of passengers, there are always going to be some losers (ideally small in number) but when has it ever been any different.

 

Put it this way, thus far, if the worst criticism of the class 800 that can be found to throw at it is the Highland line it can't be doing that bad.

 

But some problems don't have a solution no matter how clever you are.

 

Let's take a clever timetable planner who can find imaginative solutions to problems that would leave other people flummoxed. He or she is told to set up a clockface timetable between Edinburgh/Glasgow and Inverness with the new Scotrail shorty HSTs, plus fit in one 800 turn a day. Given the constraints (meeting up at single track passing places), fitting into other services in Edinburgh and Glasgow, it might be that either it's just not possible, or only possible by slowing down all the HST services. Not all problems have a clever solution. I would say that's a "nice" problem to have only for people who delight in giving bad news.

 

As for basing the fleet design on one service... Perhaps it shouldn't be. But so far as I know people have been told (or left to assume) that the Inverness through service to London will stay.  What are you suggesting? The DfT should have ignored Inverness (and Aberdeen?) in the planning, hoped for the best, and if it didn't work out just tell people that sorry, you lose your through trains, why would you have expected us to consider your services anyway?

 

There's also a political aspect to this. Services cancelled in Scotland because "London" didn't plan for them when ordering new trains....

 

In any case, while Inverness is one train a day and Aberdeen only a few, as frobisher said, these are primarily why there are going to be bi-modes on the ECML. So what should they have specced them for?

 

I totally accept that point but, as yet, no one here has explained, in terms I could ever hope to understand, why, once the wires are up, this is going to somehow prevent a massive improvement in the level (and yes speed) of the overall service.

 

I don't think people are doubting that things will get better when the wires get further. The problem is what happens until they do, and what happens where they won't go.

 

Have you seen the passenger loadings on these trains you're commenting on? They're often actually the busiest trains on the route (including 'peak' times) and do in fact carry significant numbers of through London passengers, especially at holiday times as they're very popular with tourists and often fully booked. So much so in fact, that the Aberdeen / Inverness services are, south of Edinburgh, the only one's that we're advised not to travel on on our passes, and at certain Holiday times they're actually restricted from carry passengers between any stations south of Edinburgh.

 

Although of course the Aberdeen/Inverness trains are carrying passengers from points north of Edinburgh and the usual load between Edinburgh and London so it's not too surprising that they're busy. I used to find the National Express/East Coast trains between Aberdeen and Edinburgh not too busy but they were south of Edinburgh. (And that's presumably why the plan is for only 5 coaches of a 10 coach train to run north of Edinburgh).

 

In terms of time, what is the expected difference on a route such as Edinburgh - Aberdeen?

 

Good question. Less hilly, I think, and also (apart from a short stretch near Montrose) double track throughout, which should make it easier to fit slow trains in if required.

 

Doing some speculative imagineering for a moment - if an 802 can keep time, then it may be possible to set the 800s up so that they unlock the extra 200hp or engine on the Highland line. I assume they'll have GPS as that seems to be how SDO is done these days, and the engines can dynamically change their output to cover for another engine failing, so having the location as another trigger to get that response might be possible.

Of course such a plan would cost, and if an 802 can't keep time then it would be silly too. And you're in a hole if an engine fails, but then if a HST engine fails you're in a somewhat bigger hole...

 

I was thinking about that too.

 

Or buy a "floating license" for one train a day to be uprated.

 

Of course both of these solutions probably mess up engine maintenance cycles.

 

Apart from the obvious (abolish the services or keep HSTs) maybe the answer is to hand the routes over to Scotrail who could strengthen some of their HST rakes suitably?

 

But if (and I know we are just speculating here) the 800's aren't up to the job and can't be made to, we're left with bi-modes without much to do. I suppose they can be fairly easily converted to all-electric, though I don't think this is why they were given that flexibility.

Does anyone else think that DaFT, based in London as it is, is NOT going to be too bothered about a slower service to either Aberdeen or Inverness?

 

After all, since when did much north of Watford have any bearing on what DaFT say?

 

I'm sure that's how many people in Scotland will view it.

[Zomboid]

DafT don't worry about Scotland though. Transport is devolved, so "London" has next to no direct impact on Scottish transport matters.

 

Though that doesn't excuse then from specifying a train that can't match what it's replacing.

[Coryton]

DafT don't worry about Scotland though. Transport is devolved, so "London" has next to no direct impact on Scottish transport matters.

 

Though that doesn't excuse then from specifying a train that can't match what it's replacing.

 

Scottish internal transport, perhaps, but given that the DfT awards the franchises for (most?) cross-border services, they certainly do have a direct impact on Scottish transport matters, including the current topic of conversation.

[royaloak]

If Hitachi have delivered the contracted performance then they will quite rightly require any modifications to be paid for. If the specification is inappropriate then that isn't Hitachi'problem or responsibility. I really hope that "lessons have been learned" at Daft (to use that cringe inducing phrase) but I'm not optimistic.

PMSL times 20.

 

DaFT know best when it comes to train procurement, they wouldnt want to leave it up to those 'self serving' TOCs to specify the trains would they?

[Zomboid]

To be fair, they would seem to have stayed away from making decisions on things like the Anglia fleet replacement, other than giving the contract to a bidder who promised to do it.

Maybe there's stuff behind the scenes, of course...

[Steadfast]

Only saw the one pair whilst out this afternoon near Hullavington (travelling in the Up direction), but it was going noticeably slower than the Up HSTs. Watching Open Train Times maps it had a clear run and the engines sounded like they were under a good load so I'm presuming this has to be down to the performance on diesel.

In fact the only train that appeared to be checked was a Down HST following 6B33 that virtually came to a stand waiting for the tanks to get in clear at Hullavington loop

 

Jo

[locoholic]

Back in the old days, of course, underpowered trains would be given a pilot locomotive on hilly routes. Perhaps someone has some spare locos that could lend the 800s a helping hand?

[Ken.W]

We are discussing the 800 performance north of Edinburgh at the moment but two questions have sprung to mind.

 

1. Have the power supply upgrades between Newcastle and Edinburgh been completed yet to allow regular Azuma operation.

 

2. One the EGIP project is completed and the wires extend to Dunblane, will the 800's be able to use the juice as far as Stirling.

 

Jamie

jamie,

 

1. As far as can be seen, not even started yet. It's also one of the upgrades not being delivered that's quoted by VTEC in ending the franchise. In fact, the power upgrade work in the Welwyn area, which you questioned over a year ago as having appeared abandoned for some time, has only recently re-commenced.

 

2. Don't know, but the real problems north of there anyway.

[Coach bogie]

Does anyone else think that DaFT, based in London as it is, is NOT going to be too bothered about a slower service to either Aberdeen or Inverness?

 

After all, since when did much north of Watford have any bearing on what DaFT say?

 That's if DaFT even considered Aberdeen/Inverness a long term option. When I lived in Aberdeen my neighbour, a senior manager at Scotrail, often spoke of the future plan for 'English' services to travel no farther north than Edinburgh/Glasgow and to run a Scotrail, through daytime service to London Euston from Aberdeen.

 

Mike Wiltshire

[The Stationmaster]

 

 

According to RTT, the 1045 took 21 mins to reach Reading.

 

It seems to have slowed around Hayes & Harlington and Airport Junction.

That vital minute might have been lost there.

 

http://www.realtimetrains.co.uk/train/C55335/2018/01/19/advanced

 

 

 

..tch timing is ibviously better)

 

Maybe someone remembered the Running Brake Test?  (incidentally there doesn't seem to have been anything in front on the Down Main).  It would be interesting to know the ATR offsets which ought to enable an accurate start-to-stop time to be established (stopwatch timing is obviously better of course).  

 

I see the HST which was ahead of it, by quite a distance, was 45 seconds slower from Paddington to Reading on the basis of its ATR times; the Class 800 in fact appears to have equalled early HST performance (booked time to Reading 22 minutes but often bettered).  However HSTs were given additional time after the requirement for the Running Brake Test came in although 22 minutes does still seem to be attained in daily operation by some trains.

[Peter Kazmierczak]

Anyone know the fastest Padd - Reading HST stop-to-start time?

 

OS Nock recorded 20m 33s with a 2+7 set in April 1979, though this was the passing time at Reading.

[The Stationmaster]

Anyone know the fastest Padd - Reading HST stop-to-start time?

 

OS Nock recorded 20m 33s with a 2+7 set in April 1979, though this was the passing time at Reading.

 

I'll try to delve out my record of the 'Tops If the Pops' trip but that was 2+5 and again was start-to-pass Padd to Reading.

 

Anyway today i again sampled the mixed delights of a Class 800 on a Cardiff - Reading run having go westwards on an HST.  total shambles as Cardiff & Newport (and even worse fake news at Swindon I noticed) because although it changed from an 8 coach to 10 ciach train on the displays at Cardiff the 1st Class remained steadfastly, and somewhat inaccurately at the front according to both displays and announcemnents whereas it very definitely wasn't at the front; Swindon triupmphreed by still showing it as an 8 coach train even as it was departing.

 

The internal display and announcement technology wasn't much better as it refused to allow the train crew to eliminate the Didcot stop however anyone who took a flying leap to join at Didcot as we passed at linespeed received a pleasant welcome from the taped announcement.  The Guard spent more time telling people it wasn't going to call at Didcot that doing anything else.  another oddity - I couldn't seem to find any sort of litter bin in the vicinity of Coach E - f there is one it seems to be well hidden.

 

Now to train performance and here an interesting comparison with the info on Real Time Trains - which is inaccurate.  Some of this is inevitably down to having incorrect (or nonexistent?) offsets for some of the timing points but to get station times wrong does seem extremely odd when they go the 'wrong' way on RTT - for example it shows the Newport departure as 45 seconds late (obviously rounded to the nearest quarter minute) whereas by both my watch and the station clock we were over 1 minute late departing, similarly at Parkway we were a minute late departing but RTT shows it as right time and it shows the Swindon departure as 1 early whereas it was right time (plus few seconds) by both my watch and the station clock.  More understandably it shows the Reading arrival as 30 seconds early whereas it was actually 10 seconds early by the station clock but that might be down to rounding of course.

 

What RTT doesn't reveal is the time loss in running against point-to-point times - where, once again, time was lost - albeit not in vast amounts - running uphill and it was almost identical to my previous experience in the Severn Tunnel although this time the loss was a few seconds less that 1 minute.  Similarly time was lost on the climb east of Chipping Sodbury - not much and not enough to make us late at Swindon (there's either some gash in the p-p times east of Wootton Bassett by the look of things or RTT doesn't show some Recovery Time).  More interesting was the less than sparkling running, with a clear road, east of Didcot where there was a boost from the overhead.  Passing Didcot on time to 10 seconds early into Reading with a downhill run was not exactly sparkling while the performance downhill east of Steventon was slower overall than the HST going uphill this morning!  (the HST gained 4 minutes on P-P times in a similar distance over which the Class 800 gained only half a minute).