GWR Class 800

[Haydn1971]

Is there some confusion here between Class 800 bi-modes and Class 801 electrics with a limp home diesel here ?

If a Class 801 is delivered and overhead wires are not in place for the whole route, it won't be working the route - limp home mode isn't for regular services.

 

[bnm]

Well I will go on facts I read in publications rather than someone on a forum saying they believe they should be fine to do the extra mileage in their opinion.

Of course, facts in publications are never wrong are they? Or they are never misunderstood by the reader. Could it be that the article you read was about the Class 801s limp home engine, rather than the Class 800s full bi-mode capabilities?

Are you seriously of the belief that Hitachi Rail Europe are building trains that are not going to be suitable for the diagrams they are set to to run under diesel power? Oxford-Hereford then ECS to Newport, Swindon-Gloucester, Newbury-Exeter, Swansea Carmarthen.

To say nothing of the testing and type acceptance they will undergo. A minimum of 30% of the 5000 miles the Class 800s each need to complete in testing must be under diesel power. Then 30% of 2000 miles type acceptance testing on the GW network must be fault free diesel running including runs at 125mph.

https://www.gov.uk/government/uploa...reat-western-iep-network-master-agreement.pdf

It's a big document, but it goes in to far more detail than an article in a rail publication.

The Class 800s are to be diagrammed for long distances on diesel power alone. They are being tested for long distances on diesel power alone. They will run in service for long distances on diesel power alone. But one rail publication says they will only run short distances and you blindly believe that?

 

[47802]

Isn't it the case that the 800 bi-modes have a reasonable range diesel wise but certainly not as great as HST's hence the bigger fuel tanks for South West AT300's. I think a suggested diagram on the original IEP spec suggested being able to do a return trip to Paignton from Newbury on Diesel plus 3 runs between Swindon and Cheltenham without a refuel.

I guess if they can get to Swindon on electric it wont be too much of a problem, but obviously the electric only versions are going to be somewhat useless without wires, and then there is the need to release 27 HST's for Scotrail. Which is another reason why I think the Dft will play its joker and ensure that the AT300 deal for the South West happens, that potentially gives another option to release HST's and if needed run some of these AT300 on the Bristol/Wales route until electrification is complete..

 

[Dave1987]

If it was the case that the bi-modes would be fine to run significantly more distance if not the entire route on the Diesel engines then why would to politicians have paused the other projects and gone gone hell for leather on GW? If it was simply a case of increasing the distance on the Diesel engines with no repercussions they would have kept all the projects going and simply stated that it would take longer to electrify and they would travel longer on the Diesel engines. They haven't and have shoved all resources into getting GW done which suggests you are wrong about just increasing the distance on the diesel engines and the Rail Mags are right in saying this because they are not designed for prolonged distances on the Diesels.

And yes I do tend to believe more what I read in the railway press than what people on a forum say.

 

[Haydn1971]

Rolls eyes... Because both 800's and 801's are being built by Hitachi as we speak - the cascades don't just rely on the bi-modes

 

[RobShipway]

Okay, lets step back a minute. The class 800 are being built first which are the electro diesel version of IEP and will go first to GWR, with others later going to VTEC.

I believe that the 801's electro version will be built alongside the 800's.

 

[Mintona]

If it was the case that the bi-modes would be fine to run significantly more distance if not the entire route on the Diesel engines then why would to politicians have paused the other projects and gone gone hell for leather on GW? If it was simply a case of increasing the distance on the Diesel engines with no repercussions they would have kept all the projects going and simply stated that it would take longer to electrify and they would travel longer on the Diesel engines. They haven't and have shoved all resources into getting GW done which suggests you are wrong about just increasing the distance on the diesel engines and the Rail Mags are right in saying this because they are not designed for prolonged distances on the Diesels.

And yes I do tend to believe more what I read in the railway press than what people on a forum say.

Because there are also class 801s being built, which will only have a small limp-home engine, not normally meant for passenger use. All of the IEPs will have diesel engines, the 5-car class 800s will be perfectly capable of running long distance on them, and will be diagrammed to every single day. However, not enough of them are being built to replace the entire HST fleet, and the 9-car Class 801 fleet won't be able to run on diesel power for long distances. I think you have a bit of confusion going on between the 'limp-home' engines on the 801s and the normal sized fully capable engines on the 800s.

 

[jimm]

Because there are also class 801s being built, which will only have a small limp-home engine, not normally meant for passenger use. All of the IEPs will have diesel engines, the 5-car class 800s will be perfectly capable of running long distance on them, and will be diagrammed to every single day. However, not enough of them are being built to replace the entire HST fleet, and the 9-car Class 801 fleet won't be able to run on diesel power for long distances. I think you have a bit of confusion going on between the 'limp-home' engines on the 801s and the normal sized fully capable engines on the 800s.

No he's not confused at all. He has always hated the idea of these trains from time immemorial and misses no opportunity to have a go at any and everything to do with them, hence today's tirade elsewhere about the temperature coffee might be served at on them, as well as this bit of nonsense.

More than enough has been said above about the performance of these trains on diesel power and the not very short distances they will be running on a daily basis to give the lie to what was a pretty odd statement made by Paul Clifton in Rail, unless he just doesn't appreciate the distances involved on those Hereford, Torbay and Scottish diagrams.

 

[Dave1987]

No he's not confused at all. He has always hated the idea of these trains from time immemorial and misses no opportunity to have a go at any and everything to do with them, hence today's tirade elsewhere about the temperature coffee might be served at on them, as well as this bit of nonsense.

More than enough has been said above about the performance of these trains on diesel power and the not very short distances they will be running on a daily basis to give the lie to what was a pretty odd statement made by Paul Clifton in Rail, unless he just doesn't appreciate the distances involved on those Hereford, Torbay and Scottish diagrams.

And you seem to view them as the best train ever designed in the history of man and won't have a single word against them said. If that was viable they would have already suggested it. Anyway moving on......

 

[WatcherZero]

Didn't Dft already reprofile the IEP deliveries to have the bi-modes manufacturing prioritised first in anticipation of GWML electrification late delivery.

 

[ainsworth74]

As is so often the case the Train Technical Specification tells us what we need to know in terms of range on Bi-Mode (I beg, again, of anyone who is commenting about IEP but has not yet read it to at least skim the document).

We are told in regards to range that:

3.11 Range

IEP Trains must be able to operate on any of the diagrams identified in Annex H without the replenishment of fuel.

Annex H then helpfully gives us three diagrams one for the East Coast (diagram a) and two for the Great Western (diagrams b and c). Diagram b is for a 208m bi-mode train and is made up of four legs:

1. Hereford to Paddington (self-powered between Hereford and Oxford and then electric to Paddington).
2. Paddington to Exeter St Davids (electric to Newbury and then self-powered to Exeter).
3. Exeter St Davids to Paddington (self-powered to Newbury and then electric to Paddington).
4. Paddington to Hereford (electric to Oxford and then self-powered to Hereford).

So quite clearly the specification that the DfT and Hitachi have agreed includes significant running in the self-powered (bi-mode) state so either Rail have go the wrong end of the stick or, Dave1987, respectfully you've misinterpreted them

 

[jimm]

And you seem to view them as the best train ever designed in the history of man and won't have a single word against them said. If that was viable they would have already suggested it. Anyway moving on......

I haven't said anything of the sort, as I haven't actually ridden on one yet - same as everyone else - so I've no idea of the merits or otherwise of the design. But I find owners of crystal balls, who just know everything will be terrible, immensely tedious.

There are a whole lot of things in the sorry saga that is the IEP project that could have been handled better and if someone could have waved a magic wand and electrified all over the place so we didn't need bi-modes that would have been lovely - and saved Network Rail a lot of grief - but I have no reason to suspect that Hitachi will not deliver a train that works, is reliable and will do a perfectly good job of transporting people from A to B.

Since you are moving on, I trust this means we will hear no more from you about the horrors of the IEP until 2017, when you have ridden on one, been served tepid dishwater coffee from a trolley while seated next to a wall panel and can proudly announce that you told us so.

 

[RobShipway]

As is so often the case the Train Technical Specification tells us what we need to know in terms of range on Bi-Mode (I beg, again, of anyone who is commenting about IEP but has not yet read it to at least skim the document).

We are told in regards to range that:



Annex H then helpfully gives us three diagrams one for the East Coast (diagram a) and two for the Great Western (diagrams b and c). Diagram b is for a 208m bi-mode train and is made up of four legs:

1. Hereford to Paddington (self-powered between Hereford and Oxford and then electric to Paddington).
2. Paddington to Exeter St Davids (electric to Newbury and then self-powered to Exeter).
3. Exeter St Davids to Paddington (self-powered to Newbury and then electric to Paddington).
4. Paddington to Hereford (electric to Oxford and then self-powered to Hereford).

So quite clearly the specification that the DfT and Hitachi have agreed includes significant running in the self-powered (bi-mode) state so either Rail have go the wrong end of the stick or, Dave1987, respectfully you've misinterpreted them

From what I read in wikipedia, which I know cannot always be trusted I think someone has the wrong end of the stick as to what was being said in Rail.

 

[Paul180]

A cab ride and report on a test run of the new Hitatchi train.

Also a nice trip down memory lane with the old BR Intercity 125 advert at the start of the report.

http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-33533467

Is it my self or does that radio phone handset looks alot like the GSM-R one.

 

[Clarence Yard]

The current planning criteria for the bi-modes fuel range is 600 miles, just over half of what an HST achieves. It is also slower on planned higher speed point to point timings on diesel, unless uprated.

So electrifying to Swindon is not much use if they to go to Bristol/South Wales. The wires need to go nearly to Bristol to make use of the 125mph electric capability and NR have been made well aware of this. The units have to fit into the existing timetable when they are introduced, almost on a set by set basis, so they cannot be slower than an existing HST.

The DfT have a decision to make about the electric sets if they don't want to see them stuffed into Didcot Power Station until the wires get into Bristol TM & West Wales. They haven't much time to make that decision.

The problem for them is that the Agility contract is not just a build contract, it is a train supply contract for GW with all sorts of interlinked provisions. For example, the TARA maintenance requirements for the operator are specific, onerous and potentially very costly, if altered. So just moving electric sets elsewhere may not be the most practical or cost effective way out of the problem.

 

[159220]

sorry but this is completely wrong. Rail Mag has pointed out the Bi-modes are only designed for short distances on diesel power. So there would be implications of using they for greater distances on the diesels than originally planned for. The contract with Hitachi will be for certain distances on the Diesel engines for planned wear and engine mileage. Not just a case of running them for longer on the diesel.

With respect Dave1987, I am not completely wrong and I do not expect to be told that I am so when contributing factual information for readers which is publicly available, when searched, and might prove useful to having a productive and informed discussion on the Class 800. You have clearly misunderstood the technical differences between the Class 800 and Class 801. Which have now either been explained or you have been directed to the relevant reading material.

The fact is, confirmed by the DfT, the Class 800 is capable of 125 MPH operation from the first two deliveries in June 2017.

The Class 800/3 (AT 300 for First) is provided with larger fuel tanks to allow Paddington - Penzance return, which the Class 800/0 shall not be diagrammed on.

The 'limp home/short distance' Class 801 you refer to is capable of 30 MPH under diesel operation for 'last mile' continuity during periods of disturbances to the overhead electrical supply and for depot operation.

You are welcome to disagree with my informed post, but with respect I am not wrong. I encourage you to research the Class 800 in detail. If you still hold doubts, please contact the relevant people at both the DfT and Hitachi.

Otherwise, for the benefit of doubt, come June 2017 I shall be proven categorically right.

 

[jimm]

From what I read in wikipedia, which I know cannot always be trusted I think someone has the wrong end of the stick as to what was being said in Rail.

To be fair to Dave1987, what Paul Clifton wrote in the current issue of Rail - assuming that is the piece he is referring to - is:

the diesel engines on the bi-modes are designed for shorter distances beyond the wires, such as to Gloucester, not for flat-out main line use to Cardiff - day in, day out

However, he offered no evidence to back up this line, which clearly flies in the face of the specification info provided above, or the distances that some 800 duties will involve working on diesel power day in, day out...

 

[RobShipway]

To be fair to Dave1987, what Paul Clifton wrote in the current issue of Rail - assuming that is the piece he is referring to - is:



However, he offered no evidence to back up this line, which clearly flies in the face of the specification info provided above, or the distances that some 800 duties will involve working on diesel power day in, day out...

I read both Rail and Modern Railways magazines, but take some of the things said with a little bit of pinch of salt.

Paul Clifton in the same article says that the testing of the Class 800's at 125mph between Reading and Didcot will not happen in September. A lot can happen in the next month and a half, but I think that test will still go ahead as it will be testing the diesel engine, not the electrics that have been tested up at the old Dalby test track.

 

[Noddy]

I read both Rail and Modern Railways magazines, but take some of the things said with a little bit of pinch of salt.

Obviously the first two are under test in the UK now but any word on the rest of the fleet? I thought there were (at least) three pre-production units? The first 10 were also being built in Japan. Have they started assembly of these yet?

 

[47802]

If the concentration is to get electrification to Swindon, then IEP can run on the Kemble route as planned, presumably running last 40 miles to Bristol on Diesel should be feasible, Cardiff/Swansea services probably stay HST worked. Cotswold Services could be Electric to Reading or maybe Didcot if they can change over on the move which I believe they can do. Possibly also some electric only units could work a Swindon-Paddington shuttle service.

 

[Stats]

The fact is, confirmed by the DfT, the Class 800 is capable of 125 MPH operation from the first two deliveries in June 2017.

Yet, Hitachi say Class 800s will have speeds of up to 100mph in bi-mode operation.

 

[jimm]

If the concentration is to get electrification to Swindon, then IEP can run on the Kemble route as planned, presumably running last 40 miles to Bristol on Diesel should be feasible, Cardiff/Swansea services probably stay HST worked. Cotswold Services could be Electric to Reading or maybe Didcot if they can change over on the move which I believe they can do. Possibly also some electric only units could work a Swindon-Paddington shuttle service.

The same much-cited Rail magazine article also quotes FGW managing director at some length on the absolute need to wire to Oxford as a matter of urgency as it is "an absolutely central part of the plan". Swindon or bust may sound like a brilliant idea to DafT but without Oxford wiring, the semi-fast service is bust, as Mr Hopwood told them point blank when they started muttering about sidelining Oxford.

 

[47802]

The same much-cited Rail magazine article also quotes FGW managing director at some length on the absolute need to wire to Oxford as a matter of urgency as it is "an absolutely central part of the plan". Swindon or bust may sound like a brilliant idea to DafT but without Oxford wiring, the semi-fast service is bust, as Mr Hopwood told them point blank when they started muttering about sidelining Oxford.

Well I can understand that I was a little surprised when they didn't say Oxford maybe Swindon and Oxford need to be jointly the highest priorities.

 

[Haydn1971]

Yet, Hitachi say Class 800s will have speeds of up to 100mph in bi-mode operation.

That is correct - my understanding is both the 800 & 801 will operate at 125mph under wires, the 800 will operate at 100mph under diesel power and the 801 has limp home last mile 30mph capability.

The AT300 bi-mode units (let's call them the 802's) will have fully rated diesel engines unlike the 800, where they have been derated to reduce wear and improve reliability I presume - I also presume they too will run at 100mph under diesel and the extra power is purely for gradients. Fuel tanks are larger on the "802" to accommodate the longer distances under diesel power.

The 800 & 801 are capable of 140mph, I'd hazard a guess this would be under wires, it's a fair assumption that if necessary, 125mph operation under diesel would be possible - but I'd expect Hitachi would charge a premium for the extra wear over and above the current contract.

Bi-mode 800's don't need to do 125mph on the non-electrified routes they are planned to operate on, but will need to do 125mph once they join the electrified GWML to maintain timings with the 801's

 

[RobShipway]

That is correct - my understanding is both the 800 & 801 will operate at 125mph under wires, the 800 will operate at 100mph under diesel power and the 801 has limp home last mile 30mph capability.

The AT300 bi-mode units (let's call them the 802's) will have fully rated diesel engines unlike the 800, where they have been derated to reduce wear and improve reliability I presume - I also presume they too will run at 100mph under diesel and the extra power is purely for gradients. Fuel tanks are larger on the "802" to accommodate the longer distances under diesel power.

The 800 & 801 are capable of 140mph, I'd hazard a guess this would be under wires, it's a fair assumption that if necessary, 125mph operation under diesel would be possible - but I'd expect Hitachi would charge a premium for the extra wear over and above the current contract.

Bi-mode 800's don't need to do 125mph on the non-electrified routes they are planned to operate on, but will need to do 125mph once they join the electrified GWML to maintain timings with the 801's

I thought the 802's are going to be rated to be able to do 125mph on diesel power as they are going to be having a larger power output as well as the larger tanks aren't they?

 

[61653 HTAFC]

I thought the 802's are going to be rated to be able to do 125mph on diesel power as they are going to be having a larger power output as well as the larger tanks aren't they?

Is 125mph possible (or even a realistic aspiration) on the routes where the "802"s will be running on Diesel power? I was under the impression that linespeeds West of Newbury/Westbury/Bristol would require many level-crossing closures if they were to be raised. Certainly South/West of Taunton the curves and gradients would seem to make 100+mph tricky.

 

[transmanche]

I thought the 802's are going to be rated to be able to do 125mph on diesel power as they are going to be having a larger power output as well as the larger tanks aren't they?

The fleet of AT300 trains will be closely related to the Class 800 bi-mode trains designed for the Department for Transport’s Intercity Express Programme, but will utilise higher engine operating power to cope with the gradients in Devon and Cornwall

There's nothing on the Hitachi website (that I can see) which suggests that the trains will run faster than 100mph when off the wires.

 

[upnorth71]

Obviously the first two are under test in the UK now but any word on the rest of the fleet? I thought there were (at least) three pre-production units? The first 10 were also being built in Japan. Have they started assembly of these yet?

According to an article from 21 July in the business daily Nihon Keizai Shinbun, the next trainset is scheduled to arrive in Teesside on Sept. 9. Hitachi has signed a contract with Japanese shipper Kawasaki Kisen to transport the remaining preliminary trainsets, which will be loaded directly at the dock at the Kasado Plant. Previously the trainsets had to be loaded unto barges and towed to Kobe Port via the Inland Sea, where they were transferred to a European carrier for final shipment to the UK. With this new arrangement, shipping costs will be reduced by 20% and the delivery rate will be increased to 1 trainset a month.

 

[SpacePhoenix]

Once they've achieved their 5,000 continuous fault free test miles, will they then have to have 5,000 continuous fault free miles on whichever part of the national network that they get tested on before they're allowed into public service?

 

[CardiffKid]

With respect Dave1987, I am not completely wrong and I do not expect to be told that I am so when contributing factual information for readers which is publicly available, when searched, and might prove useful to having a productive and informed discussion on the Class 800. You have clearly misunderstood the technical differences between the Class 800 and Class 801. Which have now either been explained or you have been directed to the relevant reading material.

The fact is, confirmed by the DfT, the Class 800 is capable of 125 MPH operation from the first two deliveries in June 2017.

The Class 800/3 (AT 300 for First) is provided with larger fuel tanks to allow Paddington - Penzance return, which the Class 800/0 shall not be diagrammed on.

The 'limp home/short distance' Class 801 you refer to is capable of 30 MPH under diesel operation for 'last mile' continuity during periods of disturbances to the overhead electrical supply and for depot operation.

You are welcome to disagree with my informed post, but with respect I am not wrong. I encourage you to research the Class 800 in detail. If you still hold doubts, please contact the relevant people at both the DfT and Hitachi.

Otherwise, for the benefit of doubt, come June 2017 I shall be proven categorically right.

New hybrid power trains may add to journey times on Welsh railways warns AM​

NEW trains being introduced to Welsh railway lines could deliver slower travel times for passengers, according to one Welsh AM.

The new hybrid trains, which are able to run using both electric and diesel power are currently arriving in the UK for testing, among hopes they will be operational by 2017.

But, according to the Welsh Liberal Democrat Shadow Minister for Transport, Eluned Parrott AM, the new trains are not capable of matching the InterCity trains' speed and performance when running on diesel.

This would mean the just over two-hour journey to get from Cardiff to London via train is likely to be longer should the trains be introduced before electrification is complete.

She said: "We could find ourselves in a situation where passengers in South Wales get brand new trains which take longer to get to London than the 40-year old trains that are currently being used. The timetable for trains will be thrown into chaos and journey times will increase.

"There is also a serious chance that this will cost both the taxpayer and passengers huge amounts extra because these new trains are not designed for long diesel runs at speed.

"The electrification of the rail network in South Wales is much needed and long overdue but if these new trains are put into service before electrification is finished, passengers will have their journey times extended before they get reduced, complicating timetables and pushing passengers away from rail travel."

A spokesman for Hiatchi Rail Europe, who created the hybrid trains, said: "The majority of the trains are being manufactured at the Hitachi Rail Vehicle Manufacturing Facility.

"The IEP bi-mode trains have the capability to run at 125mph.

"Network upgrades which underpin the InterCity Express Programme are a matter for Network Rail and the Department for Transport (DfT)."

http://www.southwales-eveningpost.c...tory-27458140-detail/story.html#ixzz3gbdsRYc9