800 vs 802 vs 805 and 801 vs 807

[Doomotron]

When built the main differences between the 800s and 802s were performance and fuel capacity, both of which were superior on the 802s. To my knowledge the 800s had their engines uprated to have the same horsepower as the 802s, but the fuel tanks weren't upgraded - do correct me if I got that wrong. My question is to do with the 805s and 807s. I assume that the latter are technically identical to the 801s, unless they have batteries like the 803s do. But are the 805s closer to 800s, in either their original or current state, or 802s? Or are there more technical differences with both the 805s and 807s that mean that they shouldn't be numbered with the existing 80x classes?

 

[800001]

When built the main differences between the 800s and 802s were performance and fuel capacity, both of which were superior on the 802s. To my knowledge the 800s had their engines uprated to have the same horsepower as the 802s, but the fuel tanks weren't upgraded - do correct me if I got that wrong. My question is to do with the 805s and 807s. I assume that the latter are technically identical to the 801s, unless they have batteries like the 803s do. But are the 805s closer to 800s, in either their original or current state, or 802s? Or are there more technical differences with both the 805s and 807s that mean that they shouldn't be numbered with the existing 80x classes?

807s are pure electric. They have no battery like the 803 as far as I’m aware.

 

[JN114]

but the fuel tanks weren't upgraded - do correct me if I got that wrong.

The fuel tanks were also changed to the 802 specification.

The only hardware difference between 800s and 802s is additional banks of braking resistors on the roofs of the 802s. There’s some minor software tweaks (which prevent the two working multiple in passenger service, ok ECS); but to all other practical intents and purposes they are identical and interchangeable.

 

[Clarence Yard]

When built the main differences between the 800s and 802s were performance and fuel capacity, both of which were superior on the 802s. To my knowledge the 800s had their engines uprated to have the same horsepower as the 802s, but the fuel tanks weren't upgraded - do correct me if I got that wrong.

The 800 sets were designed to have the smaller fuel tanks but from 800003 or 800004 they came out with the larger tanks. The others were retro fitted before they entered passenger service. I did the fuel test trials on ‘04 in early 2017 and it was the first one with the larger tanks that I saw.

The engines on the 800 sets weren’t physically altered in the uprating - it is just an adjustment in the software. The acceleration/power profile on the 800/802 sets has been altered a few times since - it is all done with a laptop by a Hitachi engineer. Even at 700kw the engines are governed not to exceed certain parameters at certain speeds.

All 800 units were put on the 700kw setting before they entered passenger service. Most were done on build.

 

[LNW-GW Joint]

It's 7 years since the first class 800 entered service.
Are the (presumably Japanese) electric traction packages on the AT300 types identical after all that time?
This is the prime mover of the whole fleet after all.
Did any of the types have ETCS fitted on delivery, or were they just "ETCS ready"?

 

[Snow1964]

It's 7 years since the first class 800 entered service.
Are the (presumably Japanese) electric traction packages on the AT300 types identical after all that time?
This is the prime mover of the whole fleet after all.
Did any of the types have ETCS fitted on delivery, or were they just "ETCS ready"?

I think I have read that the bogies are interchangeable because they are same between classes (obviously two types, motor bogies and trailer bogies)

From memory ETCS ready meant they had provision, and cable, but actual pick up sensors and control unit wasn't fitted. On a variation of this, I am not sure if IETs work any lines where only AWS is fitted, but no TPWS exists.

 

[DanNCL]

800/1s and 800/2s are bi-mode units built to the original IEP specification.
800/0s and 800/3s are bi-mode units with larger fuel tanks and updated engines compared to the IEP specification.
802s are the same as above but with additional roof resistor banks.
801s are electric units with one single diesel generator.
803s are electric units with a battery for extended auxiliary supply when the pantographs is down.
805s are the same as 802s but with a newer engine design to meet more stringent emissions criteria.
807s are the same as 803s but with a shorter auxiliary supply on battery power.
810s are bi-mode units with shorter vehicles, a different cab and engines under different vehicles vs the other bi-mode units.

As far as I know all units are ETCS equipped. The 800/0s, 800/3s, 802/0s and 802/1s also have GWML ATP, the rest of the units don’t.

In my opinion the differences between the units are small enough that only three classes should exist - 800, 801 and 810, the rest should all be sub-classes.

== Doublepost prevention - post automatically merged: 19 Nov 2024 ==

I think I have read that the bogies are interchangeable because they are same between classes (obviously two types, motor bogies and trailer bogies)

From memory ETCS ready meant they had provision, and cable, but actual pick up sensors and control unit wasn't fitted. On a variation of this, I am not sure if IETs work any lines where only AWS is fitted, but no TPWS exists.

Three types of bogies as the trailer bogies underneath the driving vehicles are outside framed whereas the trailer bogies underneath intermediate vehicles are inside framed.

On the TPWS point, Newquay possibly?

 

[Doomotron]

Thanks for all your responses. Seemingly the AT300s aren't as close as I imagined they were.