Class 800 - Updates

[4630]

I admit that does worry me. The government in general doesn't have the best of track records when it comes to negotiating contracts.

Indeed. My late father worked for the 'Procurement Executive' of the Ministry of Defence during the 1970s and 80s on the development and purchase of night vision equipment for the army (electronic night sight equipment mounted on main battle tanks, not torches I hasten to add!).

 

I recall his views at the time were that, generally, industry would try to 'pull the wool over your eyes', particularly with regards to costs, if you weren't on the ball. The most effective civil service negotiators apparently were those that had worked in similar roles in industry previously and were now in the MoD; effectively poachers turned game-keepers. There weren't many of them because of the relative differences in remuneration between the public and private sectors at the time.

[The Stationmaster]

I admit that does worry me. The government in general doesn't have the best of track records when it comes to negotiating contracts.

 

It will be interesting to see the numbers resulting from variations and delays and to find out if cutting back GWML electrification 'in order to save money' and 'deliver the benefit of new trains without the need for electrification to be completed' has actually cost more or genuinely saved money.  Somehow I doubt we'll ever see the numbers but it would be nice if the National Audit Office found the gumption to ask for them and publish their further findings.

[jamie92208]

There is a long history of such negotiations. In the run up to WW1 when between 4 and 8 Battleships were being ordered every year from 4 shipyards and IIRC 2 or 3 suppliers of armour plate and two suppliers of big guns, there were some very poor contracts. The Admiralty micro managed the contracts and even though some of the hulls were built at a loss the armaments and steel firms, often the same, made huge profits from the supply of guns and armour plate. This was mainly due to the way that the Admiralty ran the contracts. The book "The Battleship Builders" has chapter and verse about the financial side.

 

Jamie

[4630]

It will be interesting to see the numbers resulting from variations and delays and to find out if cutting back GWML electrification 'in order to save money' and 'deliver the benefit of new trains without the need for electrification to be completed' has actually cost more or genuinely saved money.  Somehow I doubt we'll ever see the numbers but it would be nice if the National Audit Office found the gumption to ask for them and publish their further findings.

 

 

I wouldn't be too optimistic on that point and I doubt a definitive answer to your very pertinent question will ever make its way into the public domain.  A redacted version citing 'commercial confidentiality' is the best that can probably be expected.

 

Any answer given will use 'alternative facts' which mean that DafT can still present its chosen narrative of 'introducing new, modern, state-of-the-art trains that have reduced journey times for customers'.  Completely ignoring the substantial sum of taxpayer money that will be pi55ed away on leasing costs for the next 30 years.

Edited January 29, 2017 by 4630

[ess1uk]

It will be interesting to see the numbers resulting from variations and delays and to find out if cutting back GWML electrification 'in order to save money' and 'deliver the benefit of new trains without the need for electrification to be completed' has actually cost more or genuinely saved money.  Somehow I doubt we'll ever see the numbers but it would be nice if the National Audit Office found the gumption to ask for them and publish their further findings.

Freedom of Information request?

[ess1uk]

Just seen a 800 heading north through Peterborough.

all grey

no idea what number

[The Stationmaster]

I wouldn't be too optimistic on that point and I doubt a definitive answer to your very pertinent question will ever make its way into the public domain.  A redacted version citing 'commercial confidentiality' is the best that can probably be expected.

 

Any answer given will use 'alternative facts' which mean that DafT can still present its chosen narrative of 'introducing new, modern, state-of-the-art trains that have reduced journey times for customers'.  Completely ignoring the substantial sum of taxpayer money that will be pi55ed away on leasing costs for the next 30 years.

 

I think the $64,000 question will be whether they do in fact reduce journey times in view of the additional mileages being talked about for running on diesel power - time will tell but if they can't (as a test exercise) do Paddington to Reading start to stop in 22 minutes on diesel power they aren't up to HST level as some HSTs still do it in practice nowadays (assuming they've left Paddington on time).  And assuming also that things are still done using some of the 'old' financial criteria I do wonder if reduced journey times were in the financial case for electrification?  

To me there are potentially an awful lot of unresolved questions about the decision to curtail electrification as well as the extra things done on the trains.

[Christopher125]

It seems these are the HST comparison runs albeit the run out of Paddington initially had to follow a Heathrow Express and it appears to have caught one on the way back. If I understand correctly they are using the extra engine power, simulating a crush-load and calling at Reading.

 

http://www.realtimetrains.co.uk/train/K97189/2017/01/30/advanced

http://www.realtimetrains.co.uk/train/K97190/2017/01/30/advanced

Edited January 30, 2017 by Christopher125

[Richard E]

Just seen a 800 heading north through Peterborough.

all grey

no idea what number

 

That would have been 5X90, North Pole IEP to Doncaster IEP. Not sure which set it was though, if single colour I'd plump for 800001 or 800002 and probably end up being proved wrong!

 

Left NP at 05:34 and arrived Peterborough right time, following late running from Stevenage. Arrived Shaftholme Jn 11 early before running right time into Doncaster IEP. Timings are slacker than 125/225 timings by about 25%.

 

There appear to be daytime runs from Doncaster to Newcastle and back scheduled for most of this week.

[jamie92208]

It seems these are the HST comparison runs albeit the run out of Paddington initially had to follow a Heathrow Express and it appears to have caught one on the way back. If I understand correctly they are using the extra engine power, simulating a crush-load and calling at Reading.

 

http://www.realtimetrains.co.uk/train/K97189/2017/01/30/advanced

http://www.realtimetrains.co.uk/train/K97190/2017/01/30/advanced

 

Obviously not going full out with a 35 minute journey from Reading to Paddington on the return.

 

Jamie

[Banger Blue]

Just seen a 800 heading north through Peterborough.

all grey

no idea what number

 

 

That would have been 5X90, North Pole IEP to Doncaster IEP. Not sure which set it was though, if single colour I'd plump for 800001 or 800002 and probably end up being proved wrong!

 

Left NP at 05:34 and arrived Peterborough right time, following late running from Stevenage. Arrived Shaftholme Jn 11 early before running right time into Doncaster IEP. Timings are slacker than 125/225 timings by about 25%.

 

There appear to be daytime runs from Doncaster to Newcastle and back scheduled for most of this week.

 

 

 

800001 / 003 / 005(?) are in plain grey livery with Black Hitachi & Class 800 Branding 

800002 is grey with one end having red 'swirls & swooshes' and names of IEP stakeholders.

800004 is in GWR Green

800101 is in Virgin 'Azuma' livery

Edited January 30, 2017 by Banger Blue

[royaloak]

It seems these are the HST comparison runs albeit the run out of Paddington initially had to follow a Heathrow Express and it appears to have caught one on the way back. If I understand correctly they are using the extra engine power, simulating a crush-load and calling at Reading.

 

http://www.realtimetrains.co.uk/train/K97189/2017/01/30/advanced

http://www.realtimetrains.co.uk/train/K97190/2017/01/30/advanced

It didnt call at Reading on the return (up) run.

[The Stationmaster]

Obviously not going full out with a 35 minute journey from Reading to Paddington on the return.

 

Jamie

 

There are some peculiar/unexplained losses of time in both journeys - for example the Down journey between Maidenhead and Twyford (which ought to be 'flat out' 125 mph which gives just over 3 minutes running time).  However the problem with real Time Trains is that it is working off ATR systems and I somehow doubt the offsets (to account for the difference between the timing point and the recording point) are corrected to less than 15 seconds while at Paddington the difference between recorded time and actual arrival time is likely to be at least 1 minute.

 

Thus RTT can give some indication and does at least round to quarter minutes but it won't be as accurate as on train stopwatch timing to, near enough, the exact timing points and to the precise start and stop times.

 

When we did the Paddington - Bristol 'Top Of The Pops' 'record breaking' run back in 1985  Peter Semmens timed it for public consumption and I timed it for official internal purposes and our start to stop times were different because I timed it from actually starting to move to at a dead stand whereas he didn't.  As our intermediate passing times agreed within a second or two there was no doubt both watches we were using were accurate (and I say accurate because I was using a watch officially calibrated for speedo checks on traction units) so the difference on the end to end was down to different views on recording the times - and we weren't competing with ATR information.  

 

So the best record will be the official one which should also show where and why time was lost/gained.

[Zomboid]

By chance I saw it at Paddington this afternoon. There was no ballast weight inside, but the interior was mostly fitted out with seats & tables, and frankly it looked pretty grim in there. The seats might be OK to sit in, but the overwhelming feel was just a drab greyness - maybe better from the inside, I hope... No sign of anywhere to buy tea or anything like that.

From the outside the diesel engines were very quiet.

It was the grey one with the red splatter on thee first class driving car.

I was surprised that the 5 car has the same amount of first class accommodation as an FGW HST (1.5 carriages).

[Christopher125]

Apparently limited to 110 due to the ATP being isolated.

 

The seats might be OK to sit in, but the overwhelming feel was just a drab greyness - maybe better from the inside, I hope... No sign of anywhere to buy tea or anything like that.

The Chiltern Mainline interiors are overwhelming grey too, if anything more than the IEP, but I struggle to recall that ever being raised as an issue by enthusiasts.

Edited January 30, 2017 by Christopher125

[royaloak]

By chance I saw it at Paddington this afternoon. There was no ballast weight inside, but the interior was mostly fitted out with seats & tables, and frankly it looked pretty grim in there. The seats might be OK to sit in, but the overwhelming feel was just a drab greyness - maybe better from the inside, I hope... No sign of anywhere to buy tea or anything like that.

From the outside the diesel engines were very quiet.

It was the grey one with the red splatter on thee first class driving car.

I was surprised that the 5 car has the same amount of first class accommodation as an FGW HST (1.5 carriages).

um thats interesting, some IEP lovers on another forum stated it was a full weight simulation run with the weight being provided by 'dumpy' bags full of sand.

 

The engines were set at the full 940hp as well.

[jim.snowdon]

And this morning, there were a lot of bags of sand stacked alongside the country end headshunts at North Pole depot.

 

Jim

[Geoff Endacott]

And this morning, there were a lot of bags of sand stacked alongside the country end headshunts at North Pole depot.

 

That must be the new Third Class economy seating.

 

Geoff Endacott

[Zomboid]

Well all the seats were free and ready to be sat in, except the ones that weren't fitted. If they'd put the sand somewhere else in there I didn't see it.

[Richard E]

Set is ready for a run to Newcastle this morning. Sorry, didn't spot which set it is by number but it looks like it is 800002.

[Richard E]

Quick update on timings - it took 24 minutes from Doncaster station to York station, scheduled time for a 125 or 225 is 22 minutes if stopping at Doncaster.

[The Stationmaster]

And this morning, there were a lot of bags of sand stacked alongside the country end headshunts at North Pole depot.

 

Jim

 

Ah, my spy reported that there was an 800 set on the Bog Road at North Pole on Saturday evening so that could well be connected.

[Pete the Elaner]

Quick update on timings - it took 24 minutes from Doncaster station to York station, scheduled time for a 125 or 225 is 22 minutes if stopping at Doncaster.

I don't know how they are allowed to get away with calling it a 225 seeing as it has never been allowed to do 225kmh in service.

IC200 would be more accurate.

[St. Simon]

Apparently limited to 110 due to the ATP being isolated.

 

Not quite, the IEPs aren't fitted with ATP, only AWS/TPWS & ETCS.

 

The reason they are limited to 110mph is that the TPWS installed on the GWML* is only designed for 110mph, as 125mph running is protected by ATP, thus only ATP fitted trains are permitted to run at 125mph. This isn't signed out on the ground, but is covered in the sectional appendix I believe.

 

When ETCS is available on the GWML, then they will be allowed to run at 125mph, because ETCS is effectively an ATP system. I should think that there will be risk assessments and calculations etc to allow them to run at 125mph without ETCS, but I don't know for certain.

 

*TPWS is only designed for 110mph where ATP is fitted, areas where ATP isn't fitted, then the TPWS is designed for line speed.

 

Simon

[Zomboid]

The obvious question is why design the TPWS for 110 when the line speed is 125?