GWR Class 800

[swt_passenger]

Well we will have to wait and see. There's a massive amount of difference between a Javelin running on 25 kV AC and on 750 V DC and I expect the 800s to have a similar performance difference when running on Diesel engines. I just hope it isn't too different..

The Javelin performance difference (between AC and DC) will almost certainly be down to limitations of the DC power supply, rather than the trains themselves. The same points have been raised about 377s, 387s, and 350/1s in the past.

I suggest it is not directly relevant to the electric vs diesel comparison.

 

[notadriver]

The Javelin performance difference (between AC and DC) will almost certainly be down to limitations of the DC power supply, rather than the trains themselves. The same points have been raised about 377s, 387s, and 350/1s in the past.



I suggest it is not directly relevant to the electric vs diesel comparison.

Okay it's just that on the Javelins the performance difference is massive on DC - only half power is available due to current supply limitations and their DC performance might be an indicator of how the IEPs will perform on diesel power.

With the other units classes you mentioned the difference is nowhere near as obvious.

 

[RobShipway]

For me the only real comparison for IEP on diesel power would be either a 5 car class 221 or 8 car class 222, rather than an HST on the basis that the engines are below the carriages rather than in separate vehicles at the end of the train as in the HST.

I did originally presume that the class 800 would have similar power to the class 395 being from the same family on AC power.

I suppose to AC power to weight ratio another comparison that can be made is with a class 374 Velaro e320?

 

[LNW-GW Joint]

A piece in August Modern Railways (p6) basically says the initial FGW class 800 fleet is contracted for 100mph on diesel, and will require a Variation Order (ie £££) with Hitachi to operate at 125mph.

 

[Emblematic]

For me the only real comparison for IEP on diesel power would be either a 5 car class 221 or 8 car class 222, rather than an HST on the basis that the engines are below the carriages rather than in separate vehicles at the end of the train as in the HST.

I hope not! From a performance perspective, it shouldn't make much difference where the powerpacks are sited, indeed the earlier IEP proposals had the engines in each end car above the solebar. From an ambience perspective I will be hugely disappointed if the powerpacks on bi-modes make their presence felt. I hope they don't feel like Voyagers an any way at all!

I did originally presume that the class 800 would have similar power to the class 395 being from the same family on AC power.

395s have to fit in with other services on HS1 with higher speeds, so need good acceleration up to their 140mph maximum to keep clear of the Eurostar services. They have around 3.3MW for a six-car, 265 tonne train. The original Eurostars are around 12MW on AC for a 750 t 2+18 formation. Velaro is 16 MW for 16 carriages, don't know the weight though.
--- old post above --- --- new post below ---

A piece in August Modern Railways (p6) basically says the initial FGW class 800 fleet is contracted for 100mph on diesel, and will require a Variation Order (ie £££) with Hitachi to operate at 125mph.

No great surprise there, the DfT have a contract for daily diagrams, not trains. If the diagrams are made more severe, of course the price increases. DfT's choice, they could have bought the trains and paid for the extra maintenance themselves, they chose to pay for the service instead.

 

[RobShipway]

I hope not! From a performance perspective, it shouldn't make much difference where the powerpacks are sited, indeed the earlier IEP proposals had the engines in each end car above the solebar. From an ambience perspective I will be hugely disappointed if the powerpacks on bi-modes make their presence felt. I hope they don't feel like Voyagers an any way at all!



395s have to fit in with other services on HS1 with higher speeds, so need good acceleration up to their 140mph maximum to keep clear of the Eurostar services. They have around 3.3MW for a six-car, 265 tonne train. The original Eurostars are around 12MW on AC for a 750 t 2+18 formation. Velaro is 16 MW for 16 carriages, don't know the weight though.

But that is part of the point that I making because even Adelante's which to me are the quietest of the bunch of underfloor express diesel trains, the presence of the engine can be felt and it will be the same I am pretty sure with the Hybrid Class 800's.

Those people that have just used HST's when travelling will not notice a better ambience when under electrical power, but a harsher ambience under diesel power with the engines being below floor which with any design like this you cannot get away from, however much you sound proof and make the feeling softer.

For me, all that putting the engines under floor is doing is making the trains a less costly option that hybrid power both in the form of diesel and electric power at either end of the train in power units.

However, I must point out even though you can feel the engine under the train whether it is a Turbostar, Voyager, Meridian or Adelante train these trains are still very comfortable trains to travel on. It is just me there is more ambience within a Mk3 HST carriage.

 

[Emblematic]

But that is part of the point that I making because even Adelante's which to me are the quietest of the bunch of underfloor express diesel trains, the presence of the engine can be felt and it will be the same I am pretty sure with the Hybrid Class 800's.

Those people that have just used HST's when travelling will not notice a better ambience when under electrical power, but a harsher ambience under diesel power with the engines being below floor which with any design like this you cannot get away from, however much you sound proof and make the feeling softer.

For me, all that putting the engines under floor is doing is making the trains a less costly option that hybrid power both in the form of diesel and electric power at either end of the train in power units.

However, I must point out even though you can feel the engine under the train whether it is a Turbostar, Voyager, Meridian or Adelante train these trains are still very comfortable trains to travel on. It is just me there is more ambience within a Mk3 HST carriage.

I'm hoping for the best, but I think you'll turn out to be right. I rarely travel on Voyagers, Meridians and so on as I find them fatiguing, ok for an hour or so but anything longer, I'll either pick another time/route or drive. My fear is that the engineering compromises made to squeeze every bit of capacity into these trains will make them, and therefore train travel generally, less popular and the extra capacity will be wasted. These trains are much more expensive than they could have been, so anything short of excellence deserves criticism.

 

[sprinterguy]

395s have to fit in with other services on HS1 with higher speeds, so need good acceleration up to their 140mph maximum to keep clear of the Eurostar services. They have around 3.3MW for a six-car, 265 tonne train. The original Eurostars are around 12MW on AC for a 750 t 2+18 formation. Velaro is 16 MW for 16 carriages, don't know the weight though.

Note that, for comparison, an IEP train running on electric power is expected to have a power output of 2.6MW for a 5-car train (Three powered vehicles) and 4.5MW for a 9-car train (Five powered vehicles).

A 9-car Pendolino has a power output of 5.1MW (Six powered vehicles) and an 11-car one 5.95MW (Seven powered vehicles).

 

[notadriver]

Does that mean in theory they have roughly the same power to weight ratio as a Pendolino? They aren't the swiftest units off the line especially if a 350 is alongside.

 

[sprinterguy]

Does that mean in theory they have roughly the same power to weight ratio as a Pendolino? They aren't the swiftest units off the line especially if a 350 is alongside.

They’ll be in the same sort of ball park, yes (obviously there’ll be some variation between the lighter electric and heavier Bi-mode units). Personally I always think of the Pendolinos as being quite nippy for an Intercity train: They’re never going to beat a 350 off the blocks as they’re not geared for that regular stop-start sort of work.

 

[Thunderer]

All this money spent for what will basically be a Voyager that looks like a Javelin Standard class will be cramped in, no leg room, airline seats...a poor way to travel long distance. DFT is as short sighted as Mr Magoo as the answer is right in front of us all....the all conquering, all successful, British designed and made HST - Popular with staff and passengers. All it needed was "bringing up to date" in a re-design & re-build (HST2) the blue print is there and a proven success. All the DFT had to do was build new improved Mk III coaches with power operated doors and toilet retention tanks with a new improved HST power car each end (whether they be AC electric, Diesel or bi-mode) with 10 Mk III's in the middle as sets, plenty of room for all Why on earth are they building 5 car sets of IEP? These are too short with not enough capacity. I know they say they'll couple 2 together in busy periods, but what if the 2nd unit is not available for those busy periods? London to South Wales or the South West at 17:00 off Paddington on a Friday in a 5 car 800? People will be hanging off the sides :roll: - I'm afraid DFT have spent a lot of money for a train that is going to be nowhere near as popular and comfortable as the HST - The question is will passenger numbers decline on these major routes should they become as unpopular as the Voyagers???

 

[NotATrainspott]

All this money spent for what will basically be a Voyager that looks like a Javelin Standard class will be cramped in, no leg room, airline seats...a poor way to travel long distance. DFT is as short sighted as Mr Magoo as the answer is right in front of us all....the all conquering, all successful, British designed and made HST - Popular with staff and passengers. All it needed was "bringing up to date" in a re-design & re-build (HST2) the blue print is there and a proven success. All the DFT had to do was build new improved Mk III coaches with power operated doors and toilet retention tanks with a new improved HST power car each end (whether they be AC electric, Diesel or bi-mode) with 10 Mk III's in the middle as sets, plenty of room for all Why on earth are they building 5 car sets of IEP? These are too short with not enough capacity. I know they say they'll couple 2 together in busy periods, but what if the 2nd unit is not available for those busy periods? London to South Wales or the South West at 17:00 off Paddington on a Friday in a 5 car 800? People will be hanging off the sides :roll: - I'm afraid DFT have spent a lot of money for a train that is going to be nowhere near as popular and comfortable as the HST - The question is will passenger numbers decline on these major routes should they become as unpopular as the Voyagers???

Oh dear. We've had these arguments repeat again and again ever since the idea was originally mooted. If you really want to know what's driving the design, it's because it's not enough to replace the HSTs like-for-like. It's essential to replace the HSTs with trains which carry more passengers without being longer, since lots of HST services are already full to bursting and they cannot add enough extra services to compensate. If you don't have the high density airline seating you hate, then you're just making more passengers stand instead. Pretty simple stuff.

 

[sprinterguy]

Standard class will be cramped in, no leg room, airline seats...a poor way to travel long distance.

It's difficult to make a qualified judgement about the seat pitch before most of us have even seen the interior of the trains. I can however say that the total number of seats per carriage will be no greater than that proposed for BRs' Intercity 250 in the early nineties, and only four more than First Great Western currently fit into their "High Density" mark 3s.

All it needed was "bringing up to date" in a re-design & re-build (HST2) the blue print is there and a proven success. All the DFT had to do was build new improved Mk III coaches with power operated doors and toilet retention tanks with a new improved HST power car each end (whether they be AC electric, Diesel or bi-mode) with 10 Mk III's in the middle as sets, plenty of room for all

Distributed power, however, allows for improved acceleration and greater redundancy in the case of an engine failure or other traction fault.

Why on earth are they building 5 car sets of IEP? These are too short with not enough capacity.

The idea is that they can better match capacity by running shorter five carriage trains off peak on quieter services.

I know they say they'll couple 2 together in busy periods, but what if the 2nd unit is not available for those busy periods? London to South Wales or the South West at 17:00 off Paddington on a Friday in a 5 car 800? People will be hanging off the sides :roll:

In the example GWML SET diagrams, the 16:58 Paddington to Cardiff is a 9-car unit. Other peak hour trains have been allocated pairs of 5-car units, but Hitachi are required to provide trains according to a strict availability based contract. The new trains are expected to achieve reliability figures of 55,000MTIN (Miles per Technical Incident Number, resulting in a delay of 3 minutes or more), which is six to seven times greater than FGWs' HSTs achieve at present.

The question is will passenger numbers decline on these major routes should they become as unpopular as the Voyagers???

Passenger numbers have only increased on routes operated by the supposedly unpopular (outside of enthusiast circles?) Voyagers. This is primarily due to the increases in frequency that occurred following Virgin's "Operation Princess" and partly down to the general increase in passenger numbers in the past decade, but the increased reliability brought about by the new trains has no doubt also had a hand in encouraging repeat custom.

 

[61653 HTAFC]

Passenger numbers have only increased on routes operated by the supposedly unpopular (outside of enthusiast circles?) Voyagers. This is primarily due to the increases in frequency that occurred following Virgin's "Operation Princess" and partly down to the general increase in passenger numbers in the past decade, but the increased reliability brought about by the new trains has no doubt also had a hand in encouraging repeat custom.

I don't particularly like Voyagers, but I do think the engine noise issue is overstated by enthusiasts. For me, the problem is the interior ambience, the stinky toilets, and the fact like the 185s they're too short for the numbers of passengers attempting to ride them. I have no problem with long journeys (Birmingham to Aberystwyth or Manchester to Nottingham) on 158s: these also have underfloor engines but the seats, lighting and air quality is far superior to a Voyager. Engine noise is noticeable at first but I soon become acclimatised to it and only really notice it on departure from stations. If the toilets don't stink out the whole carriage, I'll be happy!

 

[SpacePhoenix]

From reading posts in multiple threads it sounds like the Voyagers could be greatly improved just by fixing the problem with the smelly bogs, could an extractor fan be added without compromising the crash structure?

 

[ainsworth74]

Will people please at least skim the Train Technical Specification it addresses an awful lot of the concerns that people have about these trains. I'm starting to think that if people that trot out the usual tired complaints without explaining how their concern isn't addressed by the TTS then I'm going to have ban them!

 

[BananaRepublic]

....All it needed was "bringing up to date" in a re-design & re-build (HST2) the blue print is there and a proven success....

This is the result of that "re-designed HST2".
The HST2 project evolved into the InterCity Express Programme to take in a wider remit.
The Bi-Mode version of the IEP procured train, has for various reasons, morphed from a rather different original power layout to that of Hitachi's original SET proposal..



--- old post above --- --- new post below ---

Will people please at least skim the Train Technical Specification it addresses an awful lot of the concerns that people have about these trains. I'm starting to think that if people that trot out the usual tired complaints without explaining how their concern isn't addressed by the TTS then I'm going to have ban them!

Here Here!




ll

 

[Dent]

Standard class will be cramped in, no leg room, airline seats...a poor way to travel long distance. DFT is as short sighted as Mr Magoo as the answer is right in front of us all....the all conquering, all successful, British designed and made HST :

Since your only reasoned criticism of the current design is the seating pitch, how does this necessitate scrapping the whole design and replacing it with an obsolete and demonstrably inferior means of propulsion?

Logic would dictate that the seating pitch and the means of propulsion are entirely separate considerations, and changing one can not possibly necessitate changing the other.

 

[CapitalStar378]

Will people please at least skim the Train Technical Specification it addresses an awful lot of the concerns that people have about these trains. I'm starting to think that if people that trot out the usual tired complaints without explaining how their concern isn't addressed by the TTS then I'm going to have ban them!

I'll take 8 tables per coach over the pathetic 2 that FGW currently offer any day!

 

[jimm]

I'll take 8 tables per coach over the pathetic 2 that FGW currently offer any day!

Really. Except that the low-density coaches from the initial FGW refresh programme on the Laira-based sets have always had four tables in standard and the latest batch of additional TSOs, spread across the fleet, have eight. Never mind that most passengers in the peaks would rather have a seat to sit on.

 

[RobShipway]

Really. Except that the low-density coaches from the initial FGW refresh programme on the Laira-based sets have always had four tables in standard and the latest batch of additional TSOs, spread across the fleet, have eight. Never mind that most passengers in the peaks would rather have a seat to sit on.

But that I believe is where the trains will come into their own, as they have to be able to cope with the peaks where most people travel on their own and there is not always a need for a table, but in off peaks and weekends when families would be travelling there is a need to have tables and I am sure that I read within the details of the class 800's that they can easily be converted between the two forms?

 

[Grumpy]

Will people please at least skim the Train Technical Specification

Page 16 mentions that where the trains pass under 1500v dc overhead lines the trains should not draw power from those lines(or words to that effect).

Where are they likely to be passing under 1500v dc overhead systems? Woodhead?

 

[ainsworth74]

Where are they likely to be passing under 1500v dc overhead systems? Woodhead?

Newcastle to Sunderland where they will share tracks with the Tyne & Wear Metro for part of the journey and that system is electrified with 1500v DC overheads.

 

[LNW-GW Joint]

Page 16 mentions that where the trains pass under 1500v dc overhead lines the trains should not draw power from those lines(or words to that effect).
Where are they likely to be passing under 1500v dc overhead systems? Woodhead?

Tyne & Wear Metro, between Pelaw and Sunderland.
Part of the intended VTEC IEP network.
A pity they will stay on diesel for that bit!
All the BR 1500V DC lines have been converted to 25kV AC or closed.

 

[Grumpy]

Newcastle to Sunderland where they will share tracks with the Tyne & Wear Metro for part of the journey and that system is electrified with 1500v DC overheads.

Thanks. I'd forgotten that.

 

[jimm]

But that I believe is where the trains will come into their own, as they have to be able to cope with the peaks where most people travel on their own and there is not always a need for a table, but in off peaks and weekends when families would be travelling there is a need to have tables and I am sure that I read within the details of the class 800's that they can easily be converted between the two forms?

You seem to have misunderstood the point I was making, which was about the supposed 'two tables in standard class' HSTs referred to by CapitalStar378.

The Laira sets, something like one third of the HST fleet, have always had four tables in standard since the refresh programme in the last decade and the recent batch of extra TSO conversions have eight tables.

The IEPs will come with eight tables in standard class as the normal configuration. The interior is supposed to be designed for fairly straightforward alteration by comparison with current trains but it doesn't mean you can carry out some sort of overnight reconfiguration for the weekend and than back again for Monday morning.

 

[RobShipway]

You seem to have misunderstood the point I was making, which was about the supposed 'two tables in standard class' HSTs referred to by CapitalStar378.

The Laira sets, something like one third of the HST fleet, have always had four tables in standard since the refresh programme in the last decade and the recent batch of extra TSO conversions have eight tables.

The IEPs will come with eight tables in standard class as the normal configuration. The interior is supposed to be designed for fairly straightforward alteration by comparison with current trains but it doesn't mean you can carry out some sort of overnight reconfiguration for the weekend and than back again for Monday morning.

I am sure that I either read an article or saw a program on the IEP trains where they were suppose to be able to be converted in minutes. But perhaps I am mistaken on that point.

 

[Kentish Paul]

Okay it's just that on the Javelins the performance difference is massive on DC - only half power is available due to current supply limitations and their DC performance might be an indicator of how the IEPs will perform on diesel power.

With the other units classes you mentioned the difference is nowhere near as obvious.

Very true. A 12 car javelin from Canterbury to Ashford on 750DC is incredibly tedious. The same train on leaving Ashford on 25kv AC is a different beast. Once clear of the pointwork and onto HS1 proper the acceleration through Ashford tunnel with the full 6.6mw (9000hp) is a real push in the back. It does help being downhill!

 

[ainsworth74]

I've moved some posts that were branching off into a discussion about the Tyne & Wear Metro on to a new thread which can be found here. Please continue discussion on those issues on that thread and leave this thread for discussion about Class 800s.

Thanks

 

[Emblematic]

Many thanks Ainsworth! Back to the on-topic rambling

I am sure that I either read an article or saw a program on the IEP trains where they were suppose to be able to be converted in minutes. But perhaps I am mistaken on that point.

I recall seeing a film about the Post Office overnight air freight operation, in which a small commuter aircraft had most (if not all) of it seats removed after it's last passenger flight of the day, flew mail bags up and down the country overnight, then had all the seats refitted ready for the next morning's passenger service. Even if the trains don't have this capability (and it sounds like they might) this sounds like a great idea, to be able to reconfigure from weekday business to weekend/bank holiday leisure travel configurations, or to optimise specific sets for different flows and journey lengths. That might make up for some of the other misgivings I have.