Class 800 - Updates

[Coryton]

Even if they are a bit slower say between Bristol and Chipenham, so what, once they reach the wires nearer to Swindon those trains are going to take off and more than enough to compensate for any slower bits.

 

Couple that with those automatic doors, which surely must be worth several valuable minutes, when compared to those slam doors on a HST and we still haven't seen yet what those uprated engines can do, on paper they will not be far short of HST power and they will benefit from forty years more worth of technology in delivering it.

 

 

Yes - the automatic doors should be a great help, although an HST doesn't suffer from people having to run up or down the platform to get into the half of the train their reservation is in. However, as the Stationmaster above pointed out, it's not as simple as just saying one bit is faster so it can make up for the other bit being slower.

 

 

A South Wales express is going to have wires all the way to Parkway eventually, a wonderful racing stretch, after that, through the tunnel, then the Newport stop and all shacks to Swansea I doubt it matters much whether you're on class 800, a HST or a sprinter for all the difference it makes to journey times.

 

Have they given up on electrifying between Parkway and Cardiff now?

 

It would be a shame if they had, given the massive disruption while the Severn Tunnel was closed to install the overhead 'wires'.

 

I thought that Cardiff to Swansea had been cancelled but the wires were still supposed to make it to Cardiff.

[D854_Tiger]

Yes - the automatic doors should be a great help, although an HST doesn't suffer from people having to run up or down the platform to get into the half of the train their reservation is in. However, as the Stationmaster above pointed out, it's not as simple as just saying one bit is faster so it can make up for the other bit being slower.

 

 

 

Have they given up on electrifying between Parkway and Cardiff now?

 

It would be a shame if they had, given the massive disruption while the Severn Tunnel was closed to install the overhead 'wires'.

 

I thought that Cardiff to Swansea had been cancelled but the wires were still supposed to make it to Cardiff.

 

 

The words used were indefinitely deferred for Parkway to Cardiff, Thingly Junction to Bristol and Didcot to Oxford.

 

So that could mean cancelled, it could mean we're just bowing to the inevitable and we've cancelled what we can't now possibly deliver or it could mean delayed but we don't know how long for.

 

Politicians hate funding things that just aren't going to happen so this could just be Grayling bowing to the inevitable and placing him later in a position to finally promise it, in a blaze of glory, and nearer to an election date.

 

I would be very surprised if Didcot to Oxford doesn't get completed eventually, this business of diesel shuttles feeding into the all electric service must be a costly alternative.

 

Grayling was on a hiding to nothing with GW electrification seeing as he had no choice but to concede the project was going to be hopelessly delayed, he probably thought he may as well be hung for a sheep as for a lamb with a consequent knock on delay to other projects.

 

Electrification projects unrelentingly follow the logic and consequences of a rolling program, whereas politicians just follow the logic of spin.

[Coryton]

The words used were indefinitely deferred for Parkway to Cardiff, Thingly Junction to Bristol and Didcot to Oxford.

 

So that could mean cancelled, it could mean we're just bowing to the inevitable and we've cancelled what we can't now possibly deliver or it could mean delayed but we don't know how long for.

 

 

Good grief I hadn't realised things were that bad. I knew about the other two but I hadn't realised Cardiff was now off the map as well.

 

We might be looking at half assembled bits of catenary for a while then. That's a bit embarrassing

.

[Reorte]

I've never noticed Voyagers to be particularly noisy either - maybe a bit of a whirr when the driver puts his or her foot down but certainly nothing obtrusive. Generally I've not found them any noisier inside than a Mk3 with one of the vestibule windows open!

I've noticed a lot of variety on Voyagers, some rather noisy, others pretty quiet. Is there an engine in every coach in them (and / or are they sometimes switched out in one)?

[96701]

If Cardiff is off the map, then why are structures going up and small part steel work fitted between Newport and Cardiff?

[Peter Kazmierczak]

I thought that wiring is still very much on the current agenda to Cardiff.

[phil-b259]

If Cardiff is off the map, then why are structures going up and small part steel work fitted between Newport and Cardiff?

Cardiff remains 'on the map' as you put it as regards electrification.

 

The elements of the original GWML plan that will not be going ahead are:-

 

The Thames Valley branch lines, Didcot - Oxford, Chippenham - Bath - Bristol Temple Meads, Bristol Parkway - Bristol Temple Meads, Cardiff -Swansea

[jjb1970]

Yes the interior is very pleasant and (in my opinion of course) far better than the current GWR Mk 3 offering. I think a lot of the negative comments were unjustified.

 

Just remember to bring your own cushion. Maybe they should sell them from the trolley.

 

I quite like firm seats, to me the key determinant of whether a seat is comfortable is more about its shape and how well it supports the body than softness, but that's just me and it is one of those things which is very personal.

[Mallard60022]

Just out of interest are these things let loose on the ECML every day now?

thanks

Phil

[royaloak]

Top speed is not as important as acceleration rate and above about 40mph on diesel these things accelerate like an asthmatic slug, that is where the time will be lost.

 

People are still not getting it are they!

Edited November 4, 2017 by royaloak

[RJS1977]

I quite like firm seats, to me the key determinant of whether a seat is comfortable is more about its shape and how well it supports the body than softness, but that's just me and it is one of those things which is very personal.

 

I've certainly been in modern cars with harder/less comfortable seats.

[jamie92208]

Just out of interest are these things let loose on the ECML every day now?

thanks

Phil

 

Yes I think they are ding regular mileage accumulation and driver training trips between Darlington and Doncaster.  Realtimetrains will show the paths I think they are class 5 trains but timed for 125mph.

 

Jamie

[The Stationmaster]

The article I mentioned makes the point that the real problem is the level crossing just beyond the bridge and that the height requirements for the bridge and the crossing would impose a gradient on the wire that would need a speed limit of 60 mph IIRC.   It's squaring that circle that makes a neutral section of wire a non starter.   However all this is because the problem of the bridge hasn't been solved.   I'm not going to get into that debate as I suspect that competent engineers have proposed several solutions but that what might be called 'political' influences have stalled the work.

 

Jamie

 

There is a very simple answer but unfortunately nobody in this age of 'stakeholders' seems to be prepared to take - raise the bl**dy bridge. And let's face that's exactly what Brunel would have done.  

 

Track lowering - as suggested by someone from Holland who was taken seriously by the Steventonians - is a complete non-starter due to the level crossings and even more so, but not said or realised it would seem (at least not in public) due to the reduction in resiience and strength of the formation which everybody seems to conveniently forget - or simply don't know - was deep ballasted with considerable track lifting, deep ballasting and blanketing over much of the high speed sections of the GWML in order to reduce the formation damage and consequent increase in maintenance costs.  And that was for high speed running - i.e. running at 100 mph, not for 125 mph running which came later and led in some places to even more deepening of ballast and higher ballast shoulders.

 

If you want the speed capability without increased track maintenance costs and even more potential wear of various suspension components in trains travelling at high speed you need the deep ballasting and depth of formation.  If you're happy to face increased maintenance costs, i.e. more frequent tamping and probably ballast cleaning, then reduce the formation and lower the track or lower the track and reduce line speed.  You cannot have the penny and the bun on this one and NR really ought to grow a pair and start running a railway instead of trying to be all things to all holders of stakes.  Sorry but the messing about over Steventon has bee all too good an example of poor management with a lack of commitment and helping to increase the cost of the scheme through wasting money on looking at 'options'.

 

The point is surely that, even with the cut down electrification plan, they won't have to, as all the GW 125 mph stretches will be covered by the overhead wires.

 

If you look at the bits of railway that won't (for the time being) they are all rather leisurely bits of railway where, in any case, the trains are making frequent stops.

 

Even if they are a bit slower say between Bristol and Chipenham, so what, once they reach the wires nearer to Swindon those trains are going to take off and more than enough to compensate for any slower bits.

 

Couple that with those automatic doors, which surely must be worth several valuable minutes, when compared to those slam doors on a HST and we still haven't seen yet what those uprated engines can do, on paper they will not be far short of HST power and they will benefit from forty years more worth of technology in delivering it.

 

Then, if you've ever experienced a HST over the Worcester route, watching the train manager (often with no platform staff to help) struggle with a busy train and those slam doors, at stop after stop, you will pretty quickly see how a class 800 (under powered or otherwise) is going to be a dramatic improvement over a HST.

 

A South Wales express is going to have wires all the way to Parkway eventually, a wonderful racing stretch, after that, through the tunnel, then the Newport stop and all shacks to Swansea I doubt it matters much whether you're on class 800, a HST or a sprinter for all the difference it makes to journey times.

 

Then don't forget the 15 minutes faster journey times that have been promised are based on the new limited stop trains, two of the Cardiff expresses (of the four per hour) are only going to be one stop after Parkway, something the current HST timetable cannot offer for all their power.

 

Similarly with the Bristol trains one (or maybe two) per hour will be via Parkway then just one stop to Paddington, total distance running on diesel will be about five miles.

 

In the meantime, even without the uprated engines, once the electrification reaches Didcot (imminently) matching those HST schedules should be doable, the class 800s are getting pretty close already.

I'm sorry to keep on repeating it but the 125mph stretches are almost an irrelevance.  What matters in order to keep consistently to HST timings within a total timetable is the ability to match HST SRTs on sections where mid range acceleration is needed and my experience on the train timing it showed me that there are places where that does not happen.  Albeit on a set which, according to Hitachi techs do not have up rated engines (which disagrees with what 'Royal Oak ' has posted but I could only go on what I was told by those who one would assume knew what they were talking about).

 

Now if what 'Royal Oak' has said is correct and those sets had been uprated the simple fact is that they cannot even achieve HST SRTs between Swindon and Reading on a virtually continuous falling gradient which according to one post above is likely to involve the ludicrous situation of converting to diesel power to go under bridge (be they going up hill or downhill).  But again I come back to the central point - even with the 125 mph sections electrified the maximum speed is irrelevant in performance terms elsewhere.  The need is for recovery at mid to high range speeds and several people, including myself, who have timed them have found them unable to manage it.

 

When you build a timetable you cannot, because of numerous constraints, necessarily recover in one place what you have lost or could not maintain in another place and it is a fallacy to think that you can - sometimes you might strike lucky but more frequently you'll strike unlucky.  East of Reading these trains will be mixing it with slower Class 387s on the Main Lines and with HEX trains east of Airport Jcn and depending on frequency and pathing it will be those slower trains which constrain the shape of the timetable.  Put in 4 tph (trains per hour) to Bristol, 2 to South Wales, 2 to Oxford/the OWW, 1 or 2 for the B&H plus the 2 or 3 (off peak per hour 387s, plus the 4 tph for HEX and that gives a minimum of 16 tph east of Hayes.  the existing signalling will theoretically cater for 20 paths, in practice 21 is achievable but that is at current HST/HEX running times as far as/in from Airport Jcn. Between there and Reading it really amounts to how long it takes a Class 8XX to catch a 387 and that sets your headway at the end of that section (in either direction) which of course means the headway will be longer at the entrance to that section.  It all boils down to simple headway and timetabling fact so there'll be no panacea there even if 8XXs can hit 140mph (which would make things even worse as it would open out the speed differentials).

Edited November 4, 2017 by The Stationmaster

[jamie92208]

The question of  'wires' to Cardiff is answered in the latest Railway Magazine that states (P80 in Sidelines) that Balfour Beatty have been awarded the contract to wire he section from Bristol Parkway to Cardiff with completion due in late 2018.  Rather worryingly it also states that this is the last such contract expected for some time.

 

In a separate piece on the same page there is a larger article about the power Supply upgrade on the ECML that has just been completed.  This is partially for the class 700's at the southern ends but also for the Class 800's which should now be seen on the southern sections more regularly.

 

Jamie

[Titan]

There is a very simple answer but unfortunately nobody in this age of 'stakeholders' seems to be prepared to take - raise the bl**dy bridge. And let's face that's exactly what Brunel would have done.  

 

 

Unfortunately it is very easy to get completely focused on the railway side of things in these situations. Highways also have standards which have to be complied with, which includes maximum permissible gradients on roads. The bridge in question appears already to have a grade up to it of some significance.  In order to lift the bridge it may also be necessary to regrade the road for 1/4 of a mile or more either side. When you have junctions close to the bridge then the junction and the roads joining it will have to be rebuilt and regraded too, and since they are often graded up to the junction they may also need regrading for some significant distance as well. If there are properties next to the road then you have further problems - you can't lift the road and put it on an embankment in front of someones front door!

 

Indeed the road is already on a low retaining wall outside the Cherry tree pub as it starts its climb to the bridge, so it has already been lifted here which would suggest that the road is already at the maximum allowable grade already, if not worse and a 1m lift (and possibly more) outside the pub to keep the road compliant would not only lift the road to somewhere near first floor level, it would completely screw up the access to the pub car park, not to mention Station yard and Pugsden Lane! It might even have been the case that Brunel built the bridge lower than he would have done otherwise because of this...

 

It can get to the point that in order to lift a bridge then half the surrounding area has to be lifted too, which can be totally impractical let alone affordable.

 

Looking at the layout of the roads and buildings near the bridge, it looks pretty close to falling in the above category...

Edited November 5, 2017 by Titan

[Coach bogie]

Redeployed due to the 800's on the western, a former GWR HST set now in Scotrail livery was in Aberdeen yesterday for a naming ceremony,  Shortened to four cars coaches/two powercars

 

Mike Wiltshire

 

 

Edited November 5, 2017 by Coach bogie

[frobisher]

Top speed is not as important as acceleration rate and above about 40mph on diesel these things accelerate like an asthmatic slug, that is where the time will be lost.

 

People are still not getting it are they!

Do you have evidence for that? This would seem to contradict other reports that say the issue with acceleration is around the ton plus.

[jamie92208]

There is a report from train timer John Heaton in this months Railway Magazine (Page 7) giving times and performance in both directions on both Electric and Diesel.  He states that "The acceleration did not continue through the middle speed ranges and spot speeds such as 90 mph into Box Tunnel and 83 mph coming out were around 10mph shy of an HST".  He continues, "This was worse at the top of the 1 in 100 climb from Dauntsey where an HST minimum speed would be around 110 mph and the class 800 units could manage only 91 mph."  Joh  Heaton writes the monthly Locomotive Practice and Performance articles in RM.

 

Jamie

[The Stationmaster]

There is a report from train timer John Heaton in this months Railway Magazine (Page 7) giving times and performance in both directions on both Electric and Diesel.  He states that "The acceleration did not continue through the middle speed ranges and spot speeds such as 90 mph into Box Tunnel and 83 mph coming out were around 10mph shy of an HST".  He continues, "This was worse at the top of the 1 in 100 climb from Dauntsey where an HST minimum speed would be around 110 mph and the class 800 units could manage only 91 mph."  Joh  Heaton writes the monthly Locomotive Practice and Performance articles in RM.

 

Jamie

 

Thanks Jamie.  And which is basically what others - such as me - have found (and which I some while ago reported in this thread but in terms of time losses on SRTs, actually far more important than just expressing inability to match HST achievable speeds).  Overall I continue to wonder quite what people seem to expect of these trains in the light of comments from experienced observers in this thread and elsewhere because the basic fact remains that they cannot match HST performance in places where it counts.  And don't forget - apart from whatever might be added by 'Royal Oak' - that the sort of figures reported by me in this thread and by John Heaton in the the RM reflect what these trains have been achieving in generally good operational conditions.  I think we have yet to see what they can do when things are against them.

Do you have evidence for that? This would seem to contradict other reports that say the issue with acceleration is around the ton plus.

 

It would be interesting to know where that impression has come from because it is clear to anyone to has timed the trains that when running on diesel power their performance falls short of HST performance - as many anticipated - on mid range and higher speed acceleration.

[The Stationmaster]

Unfortunately it is very easy to get completely focused on the railway side of things in these situations. Highways also have standards which have to be complied with, which includes maximum permissible gradients on roads. The bridge in question appears already to have a grade up to it of some significance.  In order to lift the bridge it may also be necessary to regrade the road for 1/4 of a mile or more either side. When you have junctions close to the bridge then the junction and the roads joining it will have to be rebuilt and regraded too, and since they are often graded up to the junction they may also need regrading for some significant distance as well. If there are properties next to the road then you have further problems - you can't lift the road and put it on an embankment in front of someones front door!

 

Indeed the road is already on a low retaining wall outside the Cherry tree pub as it starts its climb to the bridge, so it has already been lifted here which would suggest that the road is already at the maximum allowable grade already, if not worse and a 1m lift (and possibly more) outside the pub to keep the road compliant would not only lift the road to somewhere near first floor level, it would completely screw up the access to the pub car park, not to mention Station yard and Pugsden Lane! It might even have been the case that Brunel built the bridge lower than he would have done otherwise because of this...

 

It can get to the point that in order to lift a bridge then half the surrounding area has to be lifted too, which can be totally impractical let alone affordable.

 

Looking at the layout of the roads and buildings near the bridge, it looks pretty close to falling in the above category...

Don't forget that the road in any event is on a fairly steeply falling gradient northwards.  It falls through a vertical difference of 75 feet approaching and crossing the railway from the south and then falls a further 25 feet passing through the village so inevitably road improvements will have raised it through part of the village in any case.

 

But perhaps overall the best idea would simply be to close it completely - it is no longer the A34 as that bypassed the village quite a few years back and one side of the village can be reached from the other by either of the two level crossings and the villagers would no doubt be glad to see the back of any remaining through traffic (although the residents of Drayton might not be quite so happy of course).

[black and decker boy]

I think the key issues at Steventon are

1) vocal local opposition to the road closure needed to raise the bridge (with the highway authority agreeing with them)

2) the listed status of the bridge meaning additional consent is needed. This too has attracted great local opposition.

3) NR seemingly not seeing this coming in the early years of the GWML programme and thinking everyone would cede to their requests / bullying.

 

I travel through Steventon regularly and build roads for a living and I don’t see any highways design issues that should stop this moving forward.

 

NR do state in their press release about the speed limit & diesel option that it is short term whilst they sort out the legal to raise the bridge.

[Geoff Endacott]

How about taking it apart brick by brick and moving it to Didcot Railway Centre?

 

Geoff Endacott

[Reorte]

But perhaps overall the best idea would simply be to close it completely - it is no longer the A34 as that bypassed the village quite a few years back and one side of the village can be reached from the other by either of the two level crossings and the villagers would no doubt be glad to see the back of any remaining through traffic (although the residents of Drayton might not be quite so happy of course).

Closing bridges and expecting people to use level crossings instead isn't something I can see going down well in this day and age, being the opposite of what you usually get.

[D854_Tiger]

Closing bridges and expecting people to use level crossings instead isn't something I can see going down well in this day and age, being the opposite of what you usually get.

 

Close the level crossings they are hardly ideal on 125 mph railways.

 

When the WCML was upgraded to 125 mph most level crossing were replaced with new bridges.

[D854_Tiger]

I'm sorry to keep on repeating it but the 125mph stretches are almost an irrelevance.  What matters in order to keep consistently to HST timings within a total timetable is the ability to match HST SRTs on sections where mid range acceleration is needed and my experience on the train timing it showed me that there are places where that does not happen.  Albeit on a set which, according to Hitachi techs do not have up rated engines (which disagrees with what 'Royal Oak ' has posted but I could only go on what I was told by those who one would assume knew what they were talking about).

 

Now if what 'Royal Oak' has said is correct and those sets had been uprated the simple fact is that they cannot even achieve HST SRTs between Swindon and Reading on a virtually continuous falling gradient which according to one post above is likely to involve the ludicrous situation of converting to diesel power to go under bridge (be they going up hill or downhill).  But again I come back to the central point - even with the 125 mph sections electrified the maximum speed is irrelevant in performance terms elsewhere.  The need is for recovery at mid to high range speeds and several people, including myself, who have timed them have found them unable to manage it.

 

When you build a timetable you cannot, because of numerous constraints, necessarily recover in one place what you have lost or could not maintain in another place.

 

I don't believe anyone is doubting that the class 800, as originally specified, does not have the performance necessary (on diesel) to maintain HST timings but that's a consequence of the delayed electrification not the new trains.

 

But I believe this less than ideal situation, which after all is only temporary, can be addressed (or at least partially addressed) by uprating the engines and whilst I take your point about the timetable, timetables can be rejigged, they do so all the time and perhaps (just perhaps) mitigate some, or all, of the overall journey time problem.

 

Then, even more perhaps, would it really be such a hardship to extend the schedules of the GW expresses, in the meantime (albeit temporary), during the WCML upgrade virtually every train had an extra 7 minutes padding added.

 

At the end of the day, we are where we are, and it's not as if a solution isn't on the way, both the uprating and ultimately the electrification, when the trains will finally get to do what they were designed to do with those diesels mostly switched off.

 

The real test of IEP performance is going to come with those class 802s but at least, this time, the train designers know, up front, exactly what will be expected of them.