Class 800 - Updates

[Coryton]

In 1971 I used to watch the shunter splitting/joining 2 EPB's as Staines in what seemed like only a minute or two.  Similarly a little further along the line the 4 COR's split and joined in no time at all.

 

Tonight I was coming home by train and realised that the last leg from Poitiers to Niort would be on the rear set of a two set TGV from Paris.  On time the full train arrived and within 3minutes the front set had set off to Bordeaux via Angouleme. 3 minutes later we set off for Niort.   This happens all the time and usually works well.   As an aside we pulled into Niort on time and as I walked down the coach a sleepy Frenchman asked me if we were in Angouleme.   I had to inform him that the next stop was La Rochelle.  He had obviously got onto the wrong unit somewhere along the line.  He didn't appear to be bothered as the train pulled out.   Tant pis as they say over here.

 

Jamie

 

Many years ago on a boat train from Paris to Calais and Bolougne I saw an American tourist pick a very bad moment to go to the next carriage to go to the toilet (despite signs in various languages including English warning you not to).

 

When she found out that the train had split and she was now in the wrong half; her luggage was on its way to Bolougne to meet the fast ferry and she was on the way to Calais for the slow one, she did seem somewhat bothered.

 

More recently, I saw two S-bahn trains join in Munich. Unlike with the 377's on Southern I was used to at the time, it didn't seem to require anybody on the platform to help and was done incredibly quickly.

['CHARD]

 

All it would take is a bogie swap (a day at most I would of thought, including all the wiring for the motors), inserting a diesel engine and fuel tank (a couple of hours) and some reconfigure of the trains software (another couple of hours).

 

May I have some of what you're smoking, please? 

Edited November 10, 2018 by 'CHARD

[Gwiwer]

2EPB units had buckeye couplers but no through gangways. They could be split in seconds and joined in under a minute. 4Cor units were screw coupled and also had screw-connected gangways. They took a couple of minutes to split and three to four for a join.

 

It should be possible for 80x to be parted or joined in no more than a couple of minutes provided the on-board electronics work as intended. 387s should be no different to any other Electrostar and split in 1-2 minutes rejoining in 2-3 even when driver-only operated with said driver possibly having to open or close the gangway doors.

[royaloak]

It should be possible for 80x to be parted or joined in no more than a couple of minutes provided the on-board electronics work as intended.

Ah thats good, they must have found a cure for the delay while the ATP boots up, please explain how that is done because me as a mere IET driver am not aware of this shortcut.

 

If you could let me know what it is I will have a play with the new method on the depot in the morning while I uncouple them so the Hitachi staff can do their checks.

Edited November 10, 2018 by royaloak

[Peter Kazmierczak]

The usual sequence at Bournemouth for down trains is for the x2 5-car 444s to arrive from Waterloo in plat 3. The train is split, with the front 5 off to Weymouth and the rear 5 either going into the centre sidings at the west end of the station to stable, or sometimes going ECS to BM depot.

 

With up trains, a 5-car unit either comes ECS from BM depot or from the centre station sidings, drawing up at the far east end of plat 2. Doors are notopened until the 5-car from Weymouth arrives and joins up. Then passengers can entrain the front portion and depart as a 10-car for Waterloo.

[Fenman]

It really impressed me how quick and simple it was splitting the two 387 sets. The gangway end doors were closed when the units parted so presumably had already been done before the actual split took place

 

...

Units have also been split/joined for years at Cambridge. With the arrival of Electrostars about a year ago, theoretically after being joined the units should be interaccessible. But more often than not they don’t bother unlocking the connecting doors: the train runs as self-contained units. Those of us at the back then don’t get the option of walking through the train to be at the front for the terminus.

 

I suppose it’s no different from before, where joined 365s didn’t have through-connections. But it’s a bit disappointing that what should have been a small upgrade in service doesn’t happen - especially when the downside of the new Bombardiers is their violent lurching and jerking over the track.

 

On the plus side, the joining/splitting process is (still) very fast.

 

Paul

[uax6]

Units have also been split/joined for years at Cambridge. With the arrival of Electrostars about a year ago, theoretically after being joined the units should be interaccessible. But more often than not they don’t bother unlocking the connecting doors: the train runs as self-contained units. Those of us at the back then don’t get the option of walking through the train to be at the front for the terminus.

 

I suppose it’s no different from before, where joined 365s didn’t have through-connections. But it’s a bit disappointing that what should have been a small upgrade in service doesn’t happen - especially when the downside of the new Bombardiers is their violent lurching and jerking over the track.

 

On the plus side, the joining/splitting process is (still) very fast.

 

Paul

 

I was quite disturbed to find that its the same coming back from the cross, I'm lucky I had enough time to get back off the back four and make a dash for the front four, but only just!

 

As for the lurching, even Pway has noticed the ride differences (387's being harsher than the 379's even!), but the track quality is appalling at the minute, but that's the legacy of a railway built on peat!

 

Andy G

[royaloak]

Interesting, all the class 387's splitting and joining is taking in the 5 to 10 minute region, but I think that is partly due to all the doors between cabs having to be secured etc.

 

Coupling two class 80xs should be a fairly simple procedure; its just a case of opening the nose cone and extending the coupling (I think that's all done off one button), drive the trains together, and press the couple button (that's the simple version, obviously there are other procedures to carry out). I believe that the TMS reconfigure itself without driver intervention? 

 

Simon 

May I recommend you spend a bit of time researching the trains please, your posts are riddled with errors and I cannot be bothered to correct your assumptions, for example the couplers dont extend or retract at all.

[Zomboid]

When I was at SWT the driver who brought the train in didnt do the splitting, there was another driver waiting for the train to arrive and they jumped in the intermediate cab to do the splitting, a lot of the Guards would have already done the gangway doors on the Desiros so it was a quick split and away.

 

As stated above RE the GWR 387 splitting at Reading it was the same driver bringing the train in and doing the split so it would take quite a bit longer.

I suppose at places like Bournemouth, Salisbury, Haywards Heath etc they'll do it all the time and therefore have a well oiled efficient method. If they do it a couple of times a day at Reading you'd expect it to be a bit less slick. Perhaps Plymouth will become another hotbed of efficient joining and splitting as the 802s take over in force.

[jim.snowdon]

The Southern (Railway/Region) had down to a fine art, and it depended on two things, the staff to do it, and keeping the technology simple. It strikes me that with some modern trains, it is not that they can't be coupled and uncoupled in service, but that their designers, and probably the specification writers have not given much thought as to the need to do it efficiently and quickly.

Equally, the operators need to understand that it is a process that, whilst it can be done by one person (with a lot of running around between units) is better done by two. Inevitably that will have effects on the number of staff required, and on costs, but that has to be balanced against providing a service to their customers.

 

Jim

[Coryton]

The Southern (Railway/Region) had down to a fine art, and it depended on two things, the staff to do it, and keeping the technology simple. It strikes me that with some modern trains, it is not that they can't be coupled and uncoupled in service, but that their designers, and probably the specification writers have not given much thought as to the need to do it efficiently and quickly.

Equally, the operators need to understand that it is a process that, whilst it can be done by one person (with a lot of running around between units) is better done by two. Inevitably that will have effects on the number of staff required, and on costs, but that has to be balanced against providing a service to their customers.

 

Not dissimilar perhaps to the fact that it seems that ticket printing speed no longer seems to be considered when specifying portable ticket machines - we seem to have gone backwards in that respect.

 

(Or maybe quick printing is for some reason prohibitively expensive these days - perhaps because ticket machines are now made using standard parts?)

[jamie92208]

Some time back mention was made of how other countries cope in telling people where to stand on the platform.   This was the sign on Niort station on Friday morning. The letters are on the canopy supports.  The same software copes just as well with twin TGV's of a total of 24 vehicles.

At my next station (St Pierre de Corps) they did have twin unit's shown but I didn't get chance for a photo.

 

It all seemed to work fine.

Jamie

 

[Coryton]

Some time back mention was made of how other countries cope in telling people where to stand on the platform.   This was the sign on Niort station on Friday morning. The letters are on the canopy supports.  The same software copes just as well with twin TGV's of a total of 24 vehicles.

PB093737.JPG

At my next station (St Pierre de Corps) they did have twin unit's shown but I didn't get chance for a photo.

 

It all seemed to work fine.

Jamie

 

And some time back someone showed a photo rather like that one...

[St. Simon]

May I recommend you spend a bit of time researching the trains please, your posts are riddled with errors and I cannot be bothered to correct your assumptions, for example the couplers dont extend or retract at all.

All my information (that I can post) comes from Hitachi or GWR themselves and is correct when I post to the best of my knowledge, if you've been told different then fair enough.

 

Simon

Edited November 11, 2018 by St. Simon

[APOLLO]

How it was done years ago

 

 

 

HST - still current

 

 

Why don't they use super huge tension locks ? (!!!!!).

 

Brit15

[The Stationmaster]

Ah thats good, they must have found a cure for the delay while the ATP boots up, please explain how that is done because me as a mere IET driver am not aware of this shortcut.

 

If you could let me know what it is I will have a play with the new method on the depot in the morning while I uncouple them so the Hitachi staff can do their checks.

 

This is the big problem with modern 'computer heavy' trains - the amount of time is takes to 'open'  (using the SNCF expression) a driving cab/the sets's computer system.  The physical coupling/uncoupling is simple and shouldn't take much time at all but then it all depends how long it takes the computer to boot up/catch up.  But equally if a train is designed to work on services where sets are split and joined as part of the everyday timetable the time required for the computer)s) to do their thing should have been taken into account in their design as well as in the timetable.

 

I suspect that if the 80X series is anything like the Class 373s by the time the software has been through a number of versions the boot up time will be reduced but that might take a year or three. 

[Coryton]

This is the big problem with modern 'computer heavy' trains - the amount of time is takes to 'open'  (using the SNCF expression) a driving cab/the sets's computer system.  The physical coupling/uncoupling is simple and shouldn't take much time at all but then it all depends how long it takes the computer to boot up/catch up.  But equally if a train is designed to work on services where sets are split and joined as part of the everyday timetable the time required for the computer)s) to do their thing should have been taken into account in their design as well as in the timetable.

 

I suspect that if the 80X series is anything like the Class 373s by the time the software has been through a number of versions the boot up time will be reduced but that might take a year or three. 

 

And again aren't we back to how well the original specifications were thought through?

[Ron Ron Ron]

Sibling Class 395 Javelin

 

 

 

 

Is this a first attempt?

A few spectators getting in the way......

 

 

[Gwiwer]

The class 395 Javelin clip is a timely reminder that stock similar in many ways to the 80x already splits and attaches in a very short time on a daily basis.  While there might be an element of staff familiarity (or otherwise) about the time taken it should most definitely not take ten minutes and probably not five.  Again my point about the time taken for the on-board electronics to handshake and function correctly is probably greater than that required for the physical act of joining or splitting.  And again is probably a factor of having so much technology within the design specification.

 

None of which negates the point that five-car units should probably never have been ordered for main line use.  They are inadequate for even the Cotswold line services where they replaced 5-car class 180 sets (with a short interregnum of HSTs) which were themselves often overcrowded.  We have already discussed the operational costs and difficulties of having a twin-set train.

 

With reference to the European operations every country but the UK seems capable of presenting the correct train formation the right way round 99.5% of the time.  If that were addressed here and the operators could more or less guarantee the right train, right way round was unlikely to be a problem then seat reservations and short platforms might be less of an issue. It might also be possible to insert a question into the booking process about whether or not on-board refreshments might be required and to have seats assigned accordingly.  That might if nothing else reduce the need to double up on service provision.  Though a dedicated fixed catering area remains a safer and arguably customer-preferred option compared with a trolley.

[Coryton]

With reference to the European operations every country but the UK seems capable of presenting the correct train formation the right way round 99.5% of the time.  If that were addressed here and the operators could more or less guarantee the right train, right way round was unlikely to be a problem then seat reservations and short platforms might be less of an issue. It might also be possible to insert a question into the booking process about whether or not on-board refreshments might be required and to have seats assigned accordingly.  That might if nothing else reduce the need to double up on service provision.  Though a dedicated fixed catering area remains a safer and arguably customer-preferred option compared with a trolley.

 

Is this a general UK problem, or just with the IETs (which, one would hope, will be sorted out over time)?

 

With Cross-country, I don't think there is a right way round so by definition they can't be wrong.

 

Running trainsets with no corridor connection coupled together on long distance services is certainly not unique to the UK (although the IETs are making it more common).

[Gwiwer]

Cross Country trains often reverse during their travels so even if one accepts that there is a right and wrong way (for example if every departure from Reading or Bristol had the first class leading northbound / trailing southbound) then things will get mixed and matched.  There are also multiple routes available through the West Midlands, and to some extent elsewhere, which can also result in sets becoming turned on an unplanned basis.  There will be a "right" and "wrong" since seats are reserved on a "facing" or "back to" direction of travel basis even though this often changes during the journey.

 

The orientation of a unit is of little consequence in many cases.  Third-rail electrics have first class at the outer ends of leading cars whichever way around the unit faces except for the 377/3s which are normally confined to standard class-only services these days anyway.  The problem arises when designated seats are reserved as on HSTs, Mk3 and Mk4 fixed-formation sets and IETs.  

['CHARD]

There will be a "right" and "wrong" since seats are reserved on a "facing" or "back to" direction of travel basis even though this often changes during the journey.

 

This does make a mockery of the facing and back-to designations.  Mind you, the XC malpractice of en-route reservations getting existing pax turfed out of seats occupied in good faith is the real skulduggery at work on that franchise.

[royaloak]

 Perhaps Plymouth will become another hotbed of efficient joining and splitting as the 802s take over in force.

Or it will become a hotbed of delays when the computer says no, only time will tell.

[St. Simon]

May I have some of what you're smoking, please? 

It sounds silly, but when I visited North Pole Depot last winter, the Hitachi engineer we were with (who was very knowledgable on the units) did say that converting from a non-powered and to a powered trailer took about the times I mentioned because the design was modular

 

Simon

[Gwiwer]

Or it will become a hotbed of delays when the computer says no, only time will tell.

 

Plymouth was always pretty slick in the days of loco-hauled operation when they detached the catering portion from the London end, shunted it to the middle road and then added it to the London end of a subsequent up train.  It helped that locomotives were also often exchanged at Plymouth during the station stops back then but the whole operation seldom took more than 10 minutes.  That is, for the more complex up move, train arrives, detach engine which runs forward to clear signals, shunter draws forward from middle road and propels catering vehicles onto London end of train, coupling using screw or buckeye according to stock, shunter uncouples and runs forward before setting back into middle road or siding, replacement locomotive backs on and is coupled before completing a brake test and departing.  

 

That makes the 80x situation sound simple.  In reality it is the computers which are likely to be the difficulty.