Class 810 for East Midlands Railway Construction/Introduction Updates

[43055]

What was the frequency of the HSTs? Shorter trains more often can provide more capacity overall.

It use to be generally:
2 per hour Nottingham 1xHST, 1x5 car 222
2 per hour Sheffield 1x7 car 222, 1x5 car 222
1 per hour Corby 1x5 car 222

Now is generally:
2 per hour Nottingham 2x5 car 222
2 per hour Sheffield 2x5 car 222
2 per hour Corby 2x8 car 360

So whilst up to Corby has had in increase everywhere else has had a decrease.

 

[InTheEastMids]

It use to be generally:
2 per hour Nottingham 1xHST, 1x5 car 222
2 per hour Sheffield 1x7 car 222, 1x5 car 222
1 per hour Corby 1x5 car 222

Now is generally:
2 per hour Nottingham 2x5 car 222
2 per hour Sheffield 2x5 car 222
2 per hour Corby 2x8 car 360

So whilst up to Corby has had in increase everywhere else has had a decrease.

Whilst true, it's also true that a lot of capacity was used by EMT to convey people from St Pancras to Kettering and points South.
My experience of rush-hour services is that peak hour capacity is not bad as it'll often be a 10 car 222, and actually it's overcrowding on weekend services and shoulder services which are normally only 5 cars that is currently the big challenge, and the extra 60 standard class seats on the 810s vs a 5x222 should make a real difference.

My experience is generally of the Nottingham services. Trains to and from Sheffield may be different as they probably also take >50% of the Leicester traffic, as they're a bit faster (although perhaps EMR use advance fare availability to balance passenger loads).

 

[BayPaul]

In perhaps the best days of the HST there were 2 services per hour, 1 to Nottingham and 1 to Sheffield. The introduction of the Turbostars meant that the HST followed a Turbostar into Leicester and then the HST departed. Passengers from the Turbostar were able to connect cross-platform to the HST to get a faster journey. That was perhaps my favourite timetable of the South MML and I oft thought it would be a good system to use elsewhere when slow and fast trains share the same lines.

i am not sure whether the fact that there were 2 8 car HSTs + 2 3 car Turbostars really means there were 20 cars per hour on the MML, but presumably that is what will be offered by 4 5-car 810s.

Though most of the 5 cars will be doubled up in the peaks, so its more like 35 cars per hour with the 810s.

 

[QSK19]

Though most of the 5 cars will be doubled up in the peaks, so its more like 35 cars per hour with the 810s.

I would set our expectations a bit lower in terms of doubling up in light of how many of the 33 units will need to be in service - as I and others have said before, the original intention requiring 31 of the 33 being in service is unsustainable. And in any case, we’ve seen so many letdowns in EMR’s life that I’ve set my expectations low.

Let’s assume that some peak services will be doubled up. If in reality it does end up being “most” (I’m not saying “most” won’t happen, I’m just urging caution), then we would see that as a pleasant bonus.

 

[dosxuk]

Wasn't the intention pre-covid for the 180s to stay long term after even EMR realised they needed to provide additional capacity? Obviously now knocked on the head as part of the DFT's cost savings and the Incredible unreliability of the Coradias.

 

[QSK19]

Wasn't the intention pre-covid for the 180s to stay long term after even EMR realised they needed to provide additional capacity? Obviously now knocked on the head as part of the DFT's cost savings and the Incredible unreliability of the Coradias.

I do believe that something was mentioned about the 4 180s staying to supplement the insufficient number of 810s ordered (as a cheaper alternative to ordering more 810s); but as you say, the DfT’s cost savings knocked the 180s on the head.

 

[DannyMich2018]

I would set our expectations a bit lower in terms of doubling up in light of how many of the 33 units will need to be in service - as I and others have said before, the original intention requiring 31 of the 33 being in service is unsustainable. And in any case, we’ve seen so many letdowns in EMR’s life that I’ve set my expectations low.

Let’s assume that some peak services will be doubled up. If in reality it does end up being “most” (I’m not saying “most” won’t happen, I’m just urging caution), then we would see that as a pleasant bonus.

33 vs 27 units should mean more doubled up services, not sure how many are used weekdays? 23 out of 27? Friday seems to be popular work from home day, 17.35 from St Pancras to Nott yesterday was very quiet, didn't need 10 coaches. Looking forward to seeing first 810 on test soon through Kettering whenever that will be.

 

[QSK19]

33 vs 27 units should mean more doubled up services, not sure how many are used weekdays? 23 out of 27? Friday seems to be popular work from home day, 17.35 from St Pancras to Nott yesterday was very quiet, didn't need 10 coaches. Looking forward to seeing first 810 on test soon through Kettering whenever that will be.

Yes, absolutely should be more doubled up services compared to now given there will be 6 extra units; however whether most peak services will be doubled up will have to be seen.

I’m looking forward to seeing pan up testing at some point

 

[TT-ONR-NRN]

I’m looking forward to seeing pan up testing at some point

It adds that little bit of excitement, doesn't it, knowing that these trains will be the first to actually use electric running on these services. LNER effectively brought in one electric train (801) to replace another (91) under existing wires, but like GWR London - Cardiff, this is something rather new and exciting.

 

[InTheEastMids]

33 vs 27 units should mean more doubled up services, not sure how many are used weekdays? 23 out of 27? Friday seems to be popular work from home day, 17.35 from St Pancras to Nott yesterday was very quiet, didn't need 10 coaches. Looking forward to seeing first 810 on test soon through Kettering whenever that will be.

Agreed, my most recent experience of the 1735 was that it was very lightly loaded for a peak time train. But previous trip on the 1505 and it was full and standing.

Anyhow, the thread linked below from mid-23 has a spreadsheet that indicates 24/27 trains were in use on Monday 26/06/2023 rather than 23.

EMR CLASS 222 DIAGRAMS-SX 26/06/23

Attached diagrams for EMR 222 diagrams.

www.railforums.co.uk

With 6 additional 810s, you'd like to think that 5 would be available for service. However, if you assume that any 7 car 222 will be doubled up, then that consumes 3 of the additional 810s, leaving only 2 additional units for 5 -> 10 car (although EMR will get more flexibility about when to provide 10 cars).

The picture below is a Real Time Trains screenshot showing yesterday evening's EMR IC departures from St Pancras.
Of the 15 actual departures between 4 and just after 7.30pm (one was cancelled), it would seem that with the 222s, 4 are 10 car, 3 are 7 car, 8 are 5 car
With the future 810 fleet, it seems plausible that 9 could be 10 car and 6 would still be 5-car.



Although, perusing the threads for LNER, GWR and TPE, it also seem completely possible that availability on the 810s will be worse than planned... in which case the capacity benefit will really will be all about the additional seats on each 5-car.

 

[Mugby]

Wouldn't the obvious answer to supplementing any shortfall in available 810s be to retain and refurbish a number of 222s? Let's say, perhaps, five or six sets, possibly reformed into 6 or 7 cars or the existing 7 car sets with a reduction in First capacity (making 5+2}

If such a thing was absolutely out of the question, what would the reasoning be?

 

[QSK19]

Wouldn't the obvious answer to supplementing any shortfall in available 810s be to retain and refurbish a number of 222s? Let's say, perhaps, five or six sets, possibly reformed into 6 or 7 cars or the existing 7 car sets with a reduction in First capacity (making 5+2}

If such a thing was absolutely out of the question, what would the reasoning be?

Two possible reasons that spring to mind are DfT not stumping up the money and the ROSCO’s unwillingness to lease out just a few of them unless a punitive lease rate is agreed to (on the basis that marketing the whole 27 as available is more attractive than splitting up the fleet).

 

[AndrewJM70]

Bear in mind that the 5-car 810s have more capacity in Std than a 7-car 222 (254 vs 236) so shouldn’t need more than one per hour to run a a double or two in pek times. When the HST plus 222 schedule was in operation I do not recall much overcrowding.

 

[Aspen90]

Wouldn't the obvious answer to supplementing any shortfall in available 810s be to retain and refurbish a number of 222s? Let's say, perhaps, five or six sets, possibly reformed into 6 or 7 cars or the existing 7 car sets with a reduction in First capacity (making 5+2}

If such a thing was absolutely out of the question, what would the reasoning be?

This would probably be difficult at Etches Park as Alstom obviously aren’t happy about being booted out for Hitachi and there would be competition for space in the sheds. Relations are cold so not sure how it would work. Just my 2 pence worth of course!

 

[Peter Sarf]

Is it not just as likely that there are now - post Covid19 - too many 810s for EMRs needs ?.

 

[baz962]

Is it not just as likely that there are now - post Covid19 - too many 810s for EMRs needs ?.

I think EMR are one of the operators that are as busy or busier than pre covid. But if not there are certainly many busy trains and plenty of people standing etc.

 

[Bald Rick]

I think EMR are one of the operators that are as busy or busier than pre covid. But if not there are certainly many busy trains and plenty of people standing etc.

They are busier than pre Covid, but thats because they are now picking up lots more Bedford and Luton / Airport passenegrs than pre Covid because of all the extra Corby trains.

As others have said, the 810s have similar capacity to a 7 car 222; when the 810s are in service every St Pancras to Leicester and beyond train will be the equivalent of at least 7 car 222 and around half will be the equivalent of a 14 car. If that’s not a significant uplift in capacity compared to anything that line has seen before, I don’t know what is.

 

[baz962]

They are busier than pre Covid, but thats because they are now picking up lots more Bedford and Luton / Airport passenegrs than pre Covid because of all the extra Corby trains.

As others have said, the 810s have similar capacity to a 7 car 222; when the 810s are in service every St Pancras to Leicester and beyond train will be the equivalent of at least 7 car 222 and around half will be the equivalent of a 14 car. If that’s not a significant uplift in capacity compared to anything that line has seen before, I don’t know what is.

I have no doubt. I was just responding to the above poster about the 810's now being too many. I don't think so and even if the uptick in passenger numbers is because of extra Corby services, there are still certainly very many busy IC services. So while the extra seats on an 810 will be welcome I can't see they would be too much. Of course as in everything it's balance. Some very quiet trains at certain times of the day and full and standing at others.

 

[STINT47]

Is it not just as likely that there are now - post Covid19 - too many 810s for EMRs needs ?.

A lot of trains are packed at the moment so an increase in capacity is welcome.

I also feel that there is suppressed demand on the MML as I don't travel to Lonfon as often as I used to due to the packed services and poor quality worn out trains. When the new stock comes I can see the extra capacity quickly being used up.

 

[LowLevel]

They are busier than pre Covid, but thats because they are now picking up lots more Bedford and Luton / Airport passenegrs than pre Covid because of all the extra Corby trains.

As others have said, the 810s have similar capacity to a 7 car 222; when the 810s are in service every St Pancras to Leicester and beyond train will be the equivalent of at least 7 car 222 and around half will be the equivalent of a 14 car. If that’s not a significant uplift in capacity compared to anything that line has seen before, I don’t know what is.

Albeit the 7 car 222s are a pretty poor indicator simply because of the imbalance of first class seating. They're barely better than a 5 car in reality with the on paper 2 extra coaches only giving you an extra 30 odd seats.

What will make the difference is how the sets are utilised and if doubles are kicked out that will indeed be a big help.

It doesn't however really leave much room for further growth in the future which is a bit concerning.

It's all splitting hairs really though as it feels like the real main concern is will we actually make it to full 810 rollout with the overstretched and worn out 222s, not to mention the constant Regional fleet headaches.

Trying to stay positive and see the light at the end of the tunnel is important, but it is proving hard, especially with the new DfT way of living one year to the next with no real overview if what is going on in the medium to long term available to either staff or customers, just vague murmurings about being "on it, promise!".

 

[Meerkat]

We’re there any options for more 810s?

 

[Aspen90]

Albeit the 7 car 222s are a pretty poor indicator simply because of the imbalance of first class seating. They're barely better than a 5 car in reality with the on paper 2 extra coaches only giving you an extra 30 odd seats.

What will make the difference is how the sets are utilised and if doubles are kicked out that will indeed be a big help.

It doesn't however really leave much room for further growth in the future which is a bit concerning.

It's all splitting hairs really though as it feels like the real main concern is will we actually make it to full 810 rollout with the overstretched and worn out 222s, not to mention the constant Regional fleet headaches.

Trying to stay positive and see the light at the end of the tunnel is important, but it is proving hard, especially with the new DfT way of living one year to the next with no real overview if what is going on in the medium to long term available to either staff or customers, just vague murmurings about being "on it, promise!".

Agree, and that tunnel is starting to feel like Totley… Never ending…

 

[Peter Sarf]

We’re there any options for more 810s?

The options on more 810s need to stay open for long enough that DfT cannot ignore the hopefully large uplift in demand.

 

[Merle Haggard]

How much will journey times be reduced when the 810s are introduced? If the answer is 'very little', isn't reduction of journey time the driver for increase in demand with electrification, not just that the train is electric for part of its journey rather than diesel?

 

[zwk500]

How much will journey times be reduced when the 810s are introduced? If the answer is 'very little', isn't reduction of journey time the driver for increase in demand with electrification, not just that the train is electric for part of its journey rather than diesel?

It's also about acceleration and lower running costs.

 

[Bald Rick]

How much will journey times be reduced when the 810s are introduced?

None!

 

[Nottingham59]

How much will journey times be reduced when the 810s are introduced? If the answer is 'very little', isn't reduction of journey time the driver for increase in demand with electrification, not just that the train is electric for part of its journey rather than diesel?

It won't make much difference. The 810s needed four 735kW diesel engines in each unit so they could keep to 222 timings.

I've not seen how much power they can apply on AC, but it won't be much more than 4x735kW=2.94MW. For comparison, Class 395 Javelins deliver 3.3MW under the wires.

 

[Merle Haggard]

My query - perhaps I was being opaque - was how electrification would result in higher passenger numbers, something which seems to be taken for granted without explanation.

It won't make much difference. The 810s needed four 735kW diesel engines in each unit so they could keep to 222 timings.

I've not seen how much power they can apply on AC, but it won't be much more than 4x735kW=2.94MW. For comparison, Class 395 Javelins deliver 3.3MW under the wires.

None!

Thanks for the responses. It suggests that there won't be an increase in passenger numbers based on improved journey times then.

It's also about acceleration and lower running costs.

Thanks. I realise that, but the connection between those factors and an increase in passenger numbers is tenuous to me; although I might expect better acceleration would result in shorter journey times which doesn't seem to one the case (see above). The 222s are, I think, very quick off the mark anyway. I find it difficult to see how the maintenance costs of a straight diesel train could be more than for a bi-mode with matching power on diesel as well as electric transmission, but presumably that's the case due to better technology and more seats per carriage.

I am not defending diesels, just intrigued.

 

[Nicholas Lewis]

It won't make much difference. The 810s needed four 735kW diesel engines in each unit so they could keep to 222 timings.

I've not seen how much power they can apply on AC, but it won't be much more than 4x735kW=2.94MW. For comparison, Class 395 Javelins deliver 3.3MW under the wires.

Thats the rating of the diesel engines the output from the alternators will be less. The continuous rating of earlier 8xx traction motors is 226kW and they will have the ability to be temporarily overloaded when accelerating on AC so will be able to better accelerate under the wires. Thus an all electrified MML (ha ha) will be able to deliver better timings.

 

[Nottingham59]

My query - perhaps I was being opaque - was how electrification would result in higher passenger numbers, something which seems to be taken for granted without explanation.

I suspect it won't.

The previous attempt to electrify the MML came with a detailed economic case showing a hugely positive Benefit/Cost Ratio (BCR). But that BCR compared fully electric against fully diesel, and ignored the possibility of bimodes.

This time around, they have chosen not to publish any BCR figures, which makes me suspect that the financial case is bad and that the BCR is less than 1. There's no way that allowing 810s to run pan up instead of pan down gives benefits worth a billion quid.

Remember that MML electrification was promised as a political gesture to the north for cutting HS2 to Leeds and replacing it with the IRP.