Class 810 on the Midland Mainline: are the timetables too tight, or should the trains have been of a higher spec?

[Railperf]

Moderator note: Split from

Class 810 for East Midlands Railway Construction/Introduction Updates

Looks like the new Hitachi AT300's based on the IET platforn for EMR are going to be called the Class 804. These are going to be bi-mode trains and should be capable of running at up to 140mph, even if 125 is all they see in service. We're looking at 33, 5-car long sets, with 23m long coaches...

www.railforums.co.uk

As for the 810's, there is a rumour that diesel performance does not match a healthy class 222 yet, but with only four engines on the train, the impact will be felt more when one of those engines derates or shuts down compared to a five- car 222 losing one of five engines.

 

[eastwestdivide]

With the line electrified most of the way to Leicester, I guess the real test of performance for the 810s on diesel will be the climb both ways to Bradway tunnel between Sheffield and Chesterfield, with stretches of around 1:100 in both directions

 

[Nottingham59]

With the line electrified most of the way to Leicester, I guess the real test of performance for the 810s on diesel will be the climb both ways to Bradway tunnel between Sheffield and Chesterfield, with stretches of around 1:100 in both directions

Should be easy for a 3MW train weighing 250-300t

 

[PG]

Should be easy for a 3MW train weighing 250-300t

If one engine is out won't it be a 2.25MW ((3MW/4)*3) train?

 

[eastwestdivide]

Should be easy for a 3MW train weighing 250-300t

Yes, but my comment was more referring to the post above that, saying that rumoured performance may not be up to that of a healthy 222, and the possibility of one or more engines being out or underperforming.
Will be interesting to compare performance over that stretch once they come into service.

 

[Railperf]

Yes, but my comment was more referring to the post above that, saying that rumoured performance may not be up to that of a healthy 222, and the possibility of one or more engines being out or underperforming.
Will be interesting to compare performance over that stretch once they come into service.

I'm not expecting miracles in the early days. The biggest issue will of course be engine reliability. The same engine fitted in the Avanti Class 805 fleet has had its fair share of teething troubles. But there are still reports of units running with an engine out there as reported in modern Railways.
It is the duty cycle that will determine reliability. I.e how long accelerating away from each station the engine runs at maximum power and then the power levels required en route.
Obviously losing an engine means that the remaining engines have to work for longer at maximum power for the driver to try and attain line speed which does run the risk of the engine reaching higher temperatures.
The problem with using these engines in a train application is that they're really designed for boats - an environment where they run for longer periods of time at a steady speed and therefore temperature, whereas the use on trains means that they are either at full power or idling every few minutes which means everything is heating up and then cooling down - So all of those metal components are expanding and contracting - which does not lengthen component life.
I'm pretty sure the engine rooms on boats have better cooling and more space for cooling. And there isn't anything being thrown up from the sea that can clog the cooling system down. In the same way, a trains radiators tend to get clogged up with debris from the tracks and surrounding countryside.

As with the gwr fleet, I guess the engines will be fine-tuned over time to give the best compromise between power and reliability.

If anything, the trains could have done with a full set of five engines with a higher power level that could have been run in a detuned mode.

 

[Clarence Yard]

The current main problem with the GWR fleet is because the fuel pumps are disintegrating internally. This is a manufacturing/overhaul issue, nothing to do with duty cycle.

This design of engine has a number of safety features where it will self isolate under certain fault conditions. Avanti is just learning all about this! Isolated engines with any 80x are therefore not uncommon but there have been a number of systemic faults with these engines since 2017, cooling being just one of them.

 

[QSK19]

As for the 810's, there is a rumour that diesel performance does not match a healthy class 222 yet, but with only four engines on the train, the impact will be felt more when one of those engines derates or shuts down compared to a five- car 222 losing one of five engines.

I thought that matching 222 performance on diesel power was a contractual requirement? If so, let’s hope that they do eventually get the performance up to their contractual obligations.

 

[Railperf]

I thought that matching 222 performance on diesel power was a contractual requirement? If so, let’s hope that they do eventually get the performance up to their contractual obligations.

I'm not familiar with the details of the contract, but would it not be similar to the contract that Hitachi has with gwr and agility trains in the sense that they need to provide a set that can deliver enough performance to meet the day's timetable requirements.

 

[Pete_uk]

I'm sure by the time the full fleet is in use any timetable reset will take actual performance into consideration

 

[38Cto15E]

When I departed Derby towards Leicester on Tuesday a couple of workmen were amending the "EMR Home of the Aurora" sign on the workshops.

I was travelling First Class and I realised why the new 810's do not need dishwashers, the First class food and drink offers are served with paper/cardboard cups and plates.

Lastly, regarding journey times between Kilby Bridge and everywhere North , will the 810's be able to keep to the same timings as the Meridian's?

 

[Bald Rick]

Lastly, regarding journey times between Kilby Bridge and everywhere North , will the 810's be able to keep to the same timings as the Meridian's?

That is the plan.

 

[Railperf]

Lastly, regarding journey times between Kilby Bridge and everywhere North , will the 810's be able to keep to the same timings as the Meridian's?

Without analysing recent data , The question I would ask is: are the 222's reliably able to keep their booked timings at present and if not why not?
I think we're all hoping that these new trains will be a runaway success, but the introduction of the 80x series elsewhere suggests We need to be prepared for some unreliability until the initial teething issues can be sorted out.

 

[QSK19]

Without analysing recent data , The question I would ask is: are the 222's reliably able to keep their booked timings at present and if not why not?
I think we're all hoping that these new trains will be a runaway success, but the introduction of the 80x series elsewhere suggests We need to be prepared for some unreliability until the initial teething issues can be sorted out.

I should think they’d be under massive pressure to iron out any teething issues promptly given the intricate diagramming along particularly the southern portion of the MML!

== Doublepost prevention - post automatically merged: 13 Nov 2025 ==

Thankfully no-one has yet claimed that the new trains will reduce journey times!!

Don’t give them any ideas!

 

[Trainman40083]

Without analysing recent data , The question I would ask is: are the 222's reliably able to keep their booked timings at present and if not why not?
I think we're all hoping that these new trains will be a runaway success, but the introduction of the 80x series elsewhere suggests We need to be prepared for some unreliability until the initial teething issues can be sorted out.

Every time I caught a 222, it got stuck behind a Thameslink or a Corby. So the same will happen with the 810s

 

[Railperf]

Every time I caught a 222, it got stuck behind a Thameslink or a Corby. So the same will happen with the 810s

Being stuck behind something isn't always a fault of the train. Some EMR services seem to have several minutes of pathing allowances. Some drivers will take that into account and dissipate the time. Others run purely to signals and line running speeds, which can mean running too early and catching up with an on-time service ahead.
To fit so many services on the tracks, most services do not demand flat out running to meet the timetable.

 

[Nottingham59]

Being stuck behind something isn't always a fault of the train. Some EMR services seem to have several minutes of pathing allowances. Some drivers will take that into account and dissipate the time. Others run purely to signals and line running speeds, which can mean running too early and catching up with an on-time service ahead.
To fit so many services on the tracks, most services do not demand flat out running to meet the timetable.

If I remember correctly, the EMR timetable was compromised to prioritise Thameslink services which need to present themselves into the core at the right time in the right sequence.

 

[Railperf]

If I remember correctly, the EMR timetable was compromised to prioritise Thameslink services which need to present themselves into the core at the right time in the right sequence.

Yes. But all along the route there are flat junctions that require careful planning to avoid conflicts with other services. Between Sheffield and Derby, EMR have to slot in between TPE, XC, Northern and its own regional services.

 

[BorderCollie]

Not to mention a fair amount of freight orginating from the Peak District between Sheffield Midland and Tapton on a two track unelectrified railway with a decent climb up to Bradway tunnel thrown into the mix.

 

[Kite159]

And signallers using Automatic route setting which gives priority for a late running stopping service over an on time fast service.

 

[dk1]

Every time I caught a 222, it got stuck behind a Thameslink or a Corby. So the same will happen with the 810s

As said that’s often due to pathing allowance. Also it’s more important for Thameslink services to get presented reliably onto the Southern region.

 

[Railperf]

Moderator note: Split from

Class 810 for East Midlands Railway Construction/Introduction Updates

Looks like the new Hitachi AT300's based on the IET platforn for EMR are going to be called the Class 804. These are going to be bi-mode trains and should be capable of running at up to 140mph, even if 125 is all they see in service. We're looking at 33, 5-car long sets, with 23m long coaches...

www.railforums.co.uk

Looking casually at Sheffield arrivals today, only one or two services arrived on time.

Most trains are a few minutes late, and there are some quite delayed arrivals. I'm not sure what has caused the worst delays, but based on today so far, the 810s cannot be too much worse. Only two out of 15 services have arrived within a minute of their booked arrival time. Ten services arrived so far within 5 mins, and three have been later than five mins.

This suggests to me that the booked timings are a few minutes too tight. But only someone with access to the detailed data can understand why so many need those few extra minutes. It could be due to dwell time issues, or a higher than usual amount of temporary speed restrictions (TSRs)?

 

[Trainman40083]

Not to mention a fair amount of freight orginating from the Peak District between Sheffield Midland and Tapton on a two track unelectrified railway with a decent climb up to Bradway tunnel thrown into the mix.

If only there was more capacity, we would see more trains. Not a prayer with the mix there is.

 

[MCR247]

Looking casually at Sheffield arrivals today, only one or two services arrived on time. Most a few minutes late and there are some quite delayed arrivals. Not sure what has caused the worst delays, but based on today so far, the 810's cannot be too much worse. So only two out of 15 services have arrived within a minute of their booked arrival time. Ten services arrived so far within 5 mins and three have been later than five mins.
This suggests to me that the booked timings are a few minutes too tight. But only someone with access to the detailed data can understand why so many need those few extra minutes. Could be dwell time issues, or a more than usual amount of TSRs.

I’ve always thought the MML north of Kettering was very tightly timed in my experience of using the Nottingham services. Especially noticeable on the xx12 stoppers, where you always seek to be a minute or two down arriving at East Midlands Parkway and maybe 3 or 4 down at Leicester.

 

[Trainman40083]

I’ve always thought the MML north of Kettering was very tightly timed in my experience of using the Nottingham services. Especially noticeable on the xx12 stoppers, where you always seek to be a minute or two down arriving at East Midlands Parkway and maybe 3 or 4 down at Leicester.

I'd like to think that the improved acceleration of the 810s might make a difference. In the next few years, I fully expect to see far more trains on the Nuneaton to Leicester section which joins at Wigston, on the flat.

 

[Bald Rick]

Looking casually at Sheffield arrivals today, only one or two services arrived on time. Most a few minutes late and there are some quite delayed arrivals. Not sure what has caused the worst delays, but based on today so far, the 810's cannot be too much worse. So only two out of 15 services have arrived within a minute of their booked arrival time. Ten services arrived so far within 5 mins and three have been later than five mins.
This suggests to me that the booked timings are a few minutes too tight. But only someone with access to the detailed data can understand why so many need those few extra minutes. Could be dwell time issues, or a more than usual amount of TSRs.

Essentially, it’s autumn and the last few days have been awful. There’s no TSRs to speak of.

The MML timetableis very tight throughout. I posted on another thread about how a few minutes delay can rack up lots more simply becasue of the nature of the service on the route. The Sheffields have to negotiate the Thameslinks to Harpenden (and further north in the peak), then are on minimum headway to the Corbys at Wellingboro or Kettering, then tight to Cross Country at Leicester and again at Sheet Stores, then tight to the Matlocks at Derby, and the Northern Leeds service at Clay Cross, and the Hope Valley Stopper at Dore. Any delay, anywhere, causes paths to be lost.

Such is life on a busy railway.

 

[Railperf]

I’ve always thought the MML north of Kettering was very tightly timed in my experience of using the Nottingham services. Especially noticeable on the xx12 stoppers, where you always seek to be a minute or two down arriving at East Midlands Parkway and maybe 3 or 4 down at Leicester.

The services seem tightly timed when you compare the fastest achieved times compared to the schedule. Sometimes no more than 30 seconds difference. The leicester to Derby section demands 19 minutes net, whereas the fastest recorded time is 19min 45 seconds. In 20 years, no one has recorded a train actually matching or beating the net time. Take St Pancras to Leicester though, and the net running time of 61.5 minutes has been beaten comprehensively by almost 2 minutes.
The fastest 2+8 HST recorded time is only 1 min slower than the current Class 222 schedule, with 2.5 mins of engineering and pathing time in the timetabe to eat in to.

A Stange anomoly that the RPS archive throws up is that XC Class 220/221s are consistently fastest between Derby and Chesterfield. breaching the 16 minute barrier - whereas the fastest Class 222 recorded run is only 12 seconds behind the 16.5 minute net running time. And there are no engineering allowances to eat in to along here.

 

[absolutelymilk]

I'd like to think that the improved acceleration of the 810s might make a difference.

Particularly with the ability to use the OHL at the southern end!

 

[Railperf]

Particularly with the ability to use the OHL at the southern end!

The 810s on electric are going to be superior to a 222. Although how much faster remains to be seen because the 222's are already a very fast and capable machine. It is the diesel sections that are going to be more variable particularly if an engine is out. I would hope they can't be much slower than a 2+8 HST in a derated state, and as the Leicester to Sheffield section is less than 70 miles they shouldn't lose more than 5 to 10 minutes.

 

[Paul472426]

The services seem tightly timed when you compare the fastest achieved times compared to the schedule. Sometimes no more than 30 seconds difference. The leicester to Derby section demands 19 minutes net, whereas the fastest recorded time is 19min 45 seconds. In 20 years, no one has recorded a train actually matching or beating the net time. Take St Pancras to Leicester though, and the net running time of 61.5 minutes has been beaten comprehensively by almost 2 minutes.
The fastest 2+8 HST recorded time is only 1 min slower than the current Class 222 schedule, with 2.5 mins of engineering and pathing time in the timetabe to eat in to.

A Stange anomoly that the RPS archive throws up is that XC Class 220/221s are consistently fastest between Derby and Chesterfield. breaching the 16 minute barrier - whereas the fastest Class 222 recorded run is only 12 seconds behind the 16.5 minute net running time. And there are no engineering allowances to eat in to along here.

Possibly because XC don't have to negotiate the 60 PSR and crossover at St Mary's Junction either way and as such have a cleaner run in/out of Derby