GWR Class 800

[AnonymousUser1]

All of which demonstrates yet again that a decision to use locomotives and coaches would have the flexibility and robustness needed to provide against this kind of uncertainty.

And why has this happened? Because some civil servants went to Crewe, looked at the inefficient loco changing there, and concluded that what had previously been done regularly in under five minute at places like Rickmansworth, Crewe and Bournemouth for decades could not be done in less than twelve.

it does not demonstrate anything , as even if the IEP order had been fulfilled with locos and hauled stock there would still be issues with the ballance of traction if the electrification work and commissioning doesn;t match the presumed case for the stock at the point of delivery - the difference instead of bolting some extra powerpacks in is is an order for locos to cover the period in question or rental /lease of of existing locos (55? 57 ? 67? 68 ? ) or HST sets to cover the period of uncertainty ...

 

[Bletchleyite]

If locomotives and stock are wanted, anyone who wants them can order off the existing market. For UK gauge stock I would imagine once the Sleeper sets are built CAF wouldn't mind some follow on orders for day stock.

As for IEP I think it looks good (I already like Javelins, sort of a slightly classier Class 350/1 interior) and I look forward to travelling in one.

 

[47802]

If locomotives and stock are wanted, anyone who wants them can order off the existing market. For UK gauge stock I would imagine once the Sleeper sets are built CAF wouldn't mind some follow on orders for day stock.

As for IEP I think it looks good (I already like Javelins, sort of a slightly classier Class 350/1 interior) and I look forward to travelling in one.

I don't see lot of demand for loco hauled, anything that's purely an electric route is likely to be some form of EMU, off the wires there is potentially IPEMU for short distances, the AT300 for long distance and for regional services potentially whatever emerges from the new Northern and TPX franchises.

As far as AT300/IEP is concerned I prefer to wait and see before slagging it off, do the Japanese make bad trains I doubt it. A lot of people don't seem to like the Bi-mode concept yes there are + and - to it like most things but to me the 5 car Bi mode in particular is a revolution because it will make it viable to serve destinations that lost their through service because of the need to change traction or where dragging an 8 coach HST around was too costly.

 

[notadriver]

The seating style and comfort will be interesting but if the 395s are anything to go by, mechanically they wipe the floor off any current train in the UK in my opinion.

 

[Philip Phlopp]

If locomotives and stock are wanted, anyone who wants them can order off the existing market. For UK gauge stock I would imagine once the Sleeper sets are built CAF wouldn't mind some follow on orders for day stock.

As for IEP I think it looks good (I already like Javelins, sort of a slightly classier Class 350/1 interior) and I look forward to travelling in one.

The CAF stock are to be a non standard length - 22m, so the 16 coaches can fit within the signalling restrictions at Euston. There isn't a 23m or 26m coach currently on the market which has clearance to operate in the UK.

RAGNARØKR doesn't explain who will be manufacturing a 125mph capable locomotive that can haul 8 or 9 23m coaches - a Class 67 can't manage 125mph when hauling a Mark 4 rake, even without the dead Class 91, whilst the Class 68 is limited to 100mph with a rake of 8 coaches and will only equal a Class 67 in performance. The reality is around 4,500hp is needed with a lower ETS demand to achieve 125mph running with a sensible length of train.

 

[The Ham]

it does not demonstrate anything , as even if the IEP order had been fulfilled with locos and hauled stock there would still be issues with the ballance of traction if the electrification work and commissioning doesn;t match the presumed case for the stock at the point of delivery - the difference instead of bolting some extra powerpacks in is is an order for locos to cover the period in question or rental /lease of of existing locos (55? 57 ? 67? 68 ? ) or HST sets to cover the period of uncertainty ...

Indeed, so rather that is costing the government/NR/the TOC the cost of 4 extra engines and associated tanks per set which needs to be converted to bi-modal operation it would cost them 1 (or more likely from what others have said 2) locos per set which is being hauled away from the wires. Given that RAGNARØKR has in the past claimed that a loco costs £2.5 million, for every loco that would mean that you could convert 3 sets if it cost £200,000 per engine and tank set (which is likely to be significantly higher than it will be).

Given that (IIRC) the engines are leased and Hitachi's desire to expand into Europe (including possible future UK trains) and the number of engines the 800's/801's/AT300's will have going forward (even before this by my calculations over 350), I doubt there would be a problem (read small cost) with the need for up to 84 engines (assuming ALL the GW 801's go bimodal, in reality I would guess at less than all of them would need doing, even if there was no wires west of Bristol) being used for a short time and then becoming useful as replacements for units which go wrong (bearing in mind engines could be swapped in and out) and/or for new sets and/or training.

There is always the possibility that less than 4 extra engines per set are needed to provide a reasonably timed service between the end of the wires and the end of the route. It could well be that due to line speeds a reduction in the rate of acceleration and associated top speed could be lowered by using a total of 4 engines (or even 3 engines, although acceleration would likely be hit hard) per set rather than a total of 5.

 

[dmncf]

I received Roger Ford's excellent e-Preview email on Monday and noticed that it states "Next week I may get to see IEP in the metal at Old Oak Common".

Does anyone know if this unit has a train path booked to travel to Old Oak Common?

 

[najaB]

Does anyone know if this unit has a train path booked to travel to Old Oak Common?

There'll be some very surprised signallers if it doesn't!

 

[talldave]

The seating style and comfort will be interesting but if the 395s are anything to go by, mechanically they wipe the floor off any current train in the UK in my opinion.

I find the side to side wobbling of some 395s disconcerting. I've not worked out if it's down to particular trains or location within the train, or both!

 

[asylumxl]

I find the side to side wobbling of some 395s disconcerting. I've not worked out if it's down to particular trains or location within the train, or both!

The side to side motion was down to insufficient yaw damping on their bogies. I can't remember but they may not have had any in the beginning. They most definitely have been fitted with yaw dampers now.

 

[talldave]

The side to side motion was down to insufficient yaw damping on their bogies. I can't remember but they may not have had any in the beginning. They most definitely have been fitted with yaw dampers now.

Well they're not working!!!

 

[asylumxl]

Well they're not working!!!

Well it's impossible to completely get rid of the oscillation in any train. All you can do is tune the system to oscillate at a speed where it is less obvious.

 

[coppercapped]

The seating style and comfort will be interesting but if the 395s are anything to go by, mechanically they wipe the floor off any current train in the UK in my opinion.

You should check the reliability statistics as published by Mr. Ford in every January edition of Modern Railways. The Hitachi trains on the South Eastern are, at best, a good average for their type.

 

[Norwich317]

I received Roger Ford's excellent e-Preview email on Monday and noticed that it states "Next week I may get to see IEP in the metal at Old Oak Common".

Does anyone know if this unit has a train path booked to travel to Old Oak Common?

According to www.old-dalby.com GBRF should have moved at least one of the IEP's from Ashfordby to North Pole IEP depot last Friday 16th October (5X08),
but it was `cancelled throughout due to a request by the customer`. Keep an eye on the excellent old-dalby.com site for more information.


(Realtime Trains) STP in for Old Dalby to North Pole IEP depot Friday 23rd October (FRGT 2142)

 

[WatcherZero]

Theres talk ones about to do its 10% overspeed testing, a 137.5mph run.

 

[D365]

Theres talk ones about to do its 10% overspeed testing, a 137.5mph run.

Not being tested for 140mph top speed then?

 

[WatcherZero]

Network Rail have told them they are not allowed to exceed 138mph as the Overhead wont take it. Dont see why they couldnt do a run on HS1 for a speed record unless the software is limiting their max speed.

 

[RAGNARØKR]

I find the side to side wobbling of some 395s disconcerting. I've not worked out if it's down to particular trains or location within the train, or both!

I travelled on them in 2011. Wobbly between Ashford and Canterbury, rock steady at higher speed between Ramsgate and Ashford via Folkestone.

Not the same train throughout but speed and track must be factors. You could not fault the ride at the higher speed.

 

[61653 HTAFC]

Not being tested for 140mph top speed then?

Network Rail have told them they are not allowed to exceed 138mph as the Overhead wont take it. Dont see why they couldnt do a run on HS1 for a speed record unless the software is limiting their max speed.

I wouldn't have thought that there's any urgent need to test run at 154mph until the infrastructure (in-cab signalling, appropriately configured OHLE, etc,) is able to support regular 140mph running.

 

[Philip Phlopp]

Network Rail have told them they are not allowed to exceed 138mph as the Overhead wont take it. Dont see why they couldnt do a run on HS1 for a speed record unless the software is limiting their max speed.

There's not much point in doing so, as the OLE pantograph interface is different on HS1, so the 10% overspeed results won't be fully valid on 'classic' infrastructure.

AIUI, there's likely to be a repeat 10% overspeed test on the GWML Series 1 OLE when it's energised, because of the different tensioning and contact wire changes.

 

[WatcherZero]

I didn't say for testing, I said an attempt at a speed record.

 

[Philip Phlopp]

I didn't say for testing, I said an attempt at a speed record.

Ah right, gotcha. I'm guessing you want to see if they can take the diesel train speed record - definitely worth looking at with Hitachi.

 

[Noddy]

Ah right, gotcha. I'm guessing you want to see if they can take the diesel train speed record - definitely worth looking at with Hitachi.

And then do it again in a couple of years when the AT300s arrive with their uprated engines

 

[D365]

And then do it again in a couple of years when the AT300s arrive with their uprated engines

Not really, all they need is a software tweak on the Class 800

 

[Hophead]

Surely the signalling on HS1 prohibits any high-speed (or, indeed, low-speed) runs by units not equipped with TVM430 (if that's the kit)?

 

[dgl]

Could the units go at 140mph on the GWML from introduction (assuming the track is capable) using the ATP system already installed but changed to show the higher speeds on capable stock?

 

[welsharagorn]

Theoretically yes, but in reality who's gonna pay for a revisied speedo / Driver machine interface? Plus all the group standards approvals?

Also ATP is a very crude system (by modern standards) and, although the driver does input train caracteristics into the system, it basically times trains through track based loops (aka TPWS) so will limit the performance of IEP/AT300 until ERTMS is/can be installed

 

[Peter Mugridge]

Surely the signalling on HS1 prohibits any high-speed (or, indeed, low-speed) runs by units not equipped with TVM430 (if that's the kit)?

Yes - unless it's done under possession, which would mean at night in the case of HS1. Not ideal for doing a record for PR purposes when the media won't see anything more than a dark blur zooming past...




*Well, you could take a daytime possession, but the cost of doing that.......

 

[LNW-GW Joint]

Ah right, gotcha. I'm guessing you want to see if they can take the diesel train speed record - definitely worth looking at with Hitachi.

I thought IEP was limited to 100mph on diesel?

 

[Philip Phlopp]

I thought IEP was limited to 100mph on diesel?

It is, but it's an artificial limitation - the train, the traction motors etc, are all rated to 140mph. The question would be if the power packs can generate enough power to get the train upto 140mph and above.