GWR Class 800

[irish_rail]

Or maybe not...

From GWR Jounreycheck

Now upgraded to a 10 car with a resulting 30 minute delay and having to miss out various stations as a result. Still not exactly an improvement. About time they extended the majority of the fleet to 9s..........

 

[43096]

The key difference is in 1976 BR struggled to fill a 2+7 WR HST set - even in the peaks; with only an hourly Bristol and hourly Swansea service for most of the day. Nowadays so many more people are travelling - the nature of InterCity Rail has changed.

And what delivered the step-change in passenger numbers? HST. It was the HST service that enabled the growth of long distance commuting - it is not an exaggeration to say that HST changed the way we live and work.

 

[JN114]

And what delivered the step-change in passenger numbers? HST. It was the HST service that enabled the growth of long distance commuting - it is not an exaggeration to say that HST changed the way we live and work.

Not going to dispute that, but the pendulum has swung too far the other way. HST hasn’t been at 1970s comfort levels since the late 80s when most the tables were ripped out. Every refit and refurbishment since has been to add more capacity at the expense of comfort.There are more table seats per carriage on a GWR 387 than a GWR HST Trailer Standard.

IET was designed for today’s InterCity travellers - most people just want a seat so they can sit there headphones on typing up that report they were meant to finish last night. And it’s never been billed as anything else - despite outrage on here of “falling standards” it would seem that the vast majority of the travelling public are just content to get a seat for the first time in 10 years.

You can’t run trains with 256 standard class seats on busy long distance commuter trains anymore.

 

[43096]

Not going to dispute that, but the pendulum has swung too far the other way. HST hasn’t been at 1970s comfort levels since the late 80s when most the tables were ripped out. Every refit and refurbishment since has been to add more capacity at the expense of comfort.There are more table seats per carriage on a GWR 387 than a GWR HST Trailer Standard.

It was the 2006 refurbishment that was the real killer - the 76 seat InterCity refurb was actually quite good at providing a mixture of seating as it had 10 tables per vehicle but also plenty of airline seats - not everyone wants a table.

I still think the whole GWR setup is out of kilter - everything is geared to “Thames Valley Metro” and to hell with what is needed on the true long distance services.

 

[cactustwirly]

The key difference is in 1976 BR struggled to fill a 2+7 WR HST set - even in the peaks; with only an hourly Bristol and hourly Swansea service for most of the day. Nowadays so many more people are travelling - the nature of InterCity Rail has changed.

Compare it to the turn of the Jet age. In the 1950s everyone was flying on Constellations and Stratoliners with bars, couches, room to spread out. The jet age came along and with it a more modern sense of running airlines - bums on seats mattered more than comfort. The naysayers predicted doom for the airlines and their ubiquitous 3+3 seating, that everyone would go back to ocean liners that were more comfortable. 20 years later they were building widebodies that could seat 4x as many passengers as the 707s and DC8s that had replaced the super-comfortable Connies; and 60 years on Millions fly every day. Meanwhile on the ocean...

We’ve reached, and passed, that tipping point on rail. The GWML is bursting at the seams for passengers. Yes the seats could probably be padded better, and the proportion of 5 (and thus 5+5) and 9 car trains could have been better thought out - but one thing these new trains aren’t short of is capacity. That’s the problem they’re here to solve. And barely half the fleet is in service yet.

You got the nail on the head...
Those crying out for a 'proper buffet' and more tables clearly don't travel with GWR that often...
There isn't the capacity of the need for these, trains to Bristol/Cardiff are too busy, and there isn't a need for such short journeys.

 

[cactustwirly]

It was the 2006 refurbishment that was the real killer - the 76 seat InterCity refurb was actually quite good at providing a mixture of seating as it had 10 tables per vehicle but also plenty of airline seats - not everyone wants a table.

I still think the whole GWR setup is out of kilter - everything is geared to “Thames Valley Metro” and to hell with what is needed on the true long distance services.

That refurbishment was needed!
The 74 seat layout isn't suitable anymore, any journey from London to Bristol will tell you that...

 

[43096]

That refurbishment was needed!
The 74 seat layout isn't suitable anymore, any journey from London to Bristol will tell you that...

No, it wasn’t. It needed electrification and new trains, not applying a sticking plaster for 10 years.

 

[Railperf]

The Railway Performance Society has posted a document on their website demonstrating how the The 802's are demonstrating a clear performance improvement over the 800's - faster in both electric and diesel modes. Still not on a par with HST's at higher speeds in diesel mode, but the faster acceleration at lower speeds helps.
Document can be downloaded here ... http://railperf.org.uk/docs/802intro.pdf

 

[CC 72100]

I've seen a few posts lamenting how few tables the IET has in standard v. Airline seats.

At 8 tables per coach it actually has substantially more than 80% of the GWR Mark 3s currently in service?

I'm not a huge fan of the IET's travelling environment but even I would say that the layout is an improvement In that aspect.

 

[cactustwirly]

I agree. Few passengers consider under floor engines to be an improvement over a loco or power car at the end(s)
Few passengers think a shorter train is an improvement.
few consider two short units without through gangways to be better than a full length train.
Few passengers think that no buffet is better than having a buffet.

They should have built some new HSTs ! Not of course an exact copy of a 40 year old train, but similar in general design.
Locomotive or power car at each end.
10 or more passenger coaches in between.
First class one end, standard the other, with a buffet and kitchen in between.
Power doors, retention toilets, wifi, power sockets at seats.

Sounds awfully like this:

https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Railjet

Which would be ideal for WoE services instead of the 802s IMO (done the 6 hour journey from Munich to Budapest, in comfort in one of these)
But obviously this isn't an ideal world and we're stuck with the 802s

 

[ijmad]

How much more are these trains costing to run given they need two guards and two customer hosts in each 5x2 train formation?

As for the trolley service, I'm assuming at busy times when there are passengers standing in the aisles there won't be one. At least with a buffet car you can pick your moment and squeeze your way through to get a coffee! Does the trolley service offer any hot snacks at all?

 

[broadgage]

I've seen a few posts lamenting how few tables the IET has in standard v. Airline seats.
At 8 tables per coach it actually has substantially more than 80% of the GWR Mark 3s currently in service?
I'm not a huge fan of the IET's travelling environment but even I would say that the layout is an improvement In that aspect.

The HSTs used by FGW/GWR have been steadily downgraded over the years by removing a few a few tables in each refurbishment, until many became high density commuter trains.
A cynic like me would suspect that this was partly to manage expectations regarding the new DMUs.

I can remember when the HSTs were new, that they had 16 tables per second class coach giving 64 seats at tables and 8 without tables for a total capacity of 72.
The provision of tables on the new DMUs looks rather less impressive if compared to a proper HST rather than to a downgraded high density one.

 

[59CosG95]

Sounds awfully like this:

https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Railjet

Which would be ideal for WoE services instead of the 802s IMO (done the 6 hour journey from Munich to Budapest, in comfort in one of these)
But obviously this isn't an ideal world and we're stuck with the 802s

Indeed we are, but I would argue that such a train would be an ideal Voyager (and dare I say HST) replacement for the CrossCountry routes - obviously with some form of diesel or electric loco. Ahh, if only we had continental loading gauge.

 

[JN114]

How much more are these trains costing to run given they need two guards and two customer hosts in each 5x2 train formation?

As for the trolley service, I'm assuming at busy times when there are passengers standing in the aisles there won't be one. At least with a buffet car you can pick your moment and squeeze your way through to get a coffee! Does the trolley service offer any hot snacks at all?

1 Guard, not 2; and the 5 and 9 cars can operate DOO within certain geographical boundaries.

In practice a 10 car will have a Driver, Guard and 4 customer hosts; a net increase of 1 customer host over the majority of daytime weekday services.

 

[CC 72100]

The HSTs used by FGW/GWR have been steadily downgraded over the years by removing a few a few tables in each refurbishment, until many became high density commuter trains.
A cynic like me would suspect that this was partly to manage expectations regarding the new DMUs.

I can remember when the HSTs were new, that they had 16 tables per second class coach giving 64 seats at tables and 8 without tables for a total capacity of 72.
The provision of tables on the new DMUs looks rather less impressive if compared to a proper HST rather than to a downgraded high density one.

But as others have said a 'proper HST was 1976. That was a very different railway.

By all means compare a 2017 HST to a 2017 IET, as they both serve the same railway (service pattern / customer demand / customer flows) but to use a 1976 HST as a comparison - as much as it pains me to say so as a HST fan - is unfair.

 

[swaldman]

IET was designed for today’s InterCity travellers - most people just want a seat so they can sit there headphones on typing up that report they were meant to finish last night.

Except that most people (excepting the very small and/or flexible) cannot actually use a laptop in a standard class airline-style seat.
Std class rail travel for me, especially in GWR-land, is a gamble: If I get a table, I have (say) three productive hours. If I don't get a table, that time is unusable.

 

[jimm]

The HSTs used by FGW/GWR have been steadily downgraded over the years by removing a few a few tables in each refurbishment, until many became high density commuter trains.
A cynic like me would suspect that this was partly to manage expectations regarding the new DMUs.

Yes, it was all a sinister conspiracy and had nothing at all to do with the huge increase in passenger numbers on the network in the past 20 years...

Except that most people (excepting the very small and/or flexible) cannot actually use a laptop in a standard class airline-style seat.
Std class rail travel for me, especially in GWR-land, is a gamble: If I get a table, I have (say) three productive hours. If I don't get a table, that time is unusable.

But as pointed out above, your odds of getting a seat at a table on a GWR service are increasing at a rate of knots as more IETs enter service.

Giving more tables than in your average Pendolino standard class coach and the same as on East Coast formations

 

[Thunderer]

Great comparison there. 40 years of travelling on HST which you admit had teething troubles and roughly a handful on 800s which have been in service for just under a year!



Open mind

The points raised are based on personal experience and everyone will have varied opinions on trains old and new. Yes I have kept an open mind until now (after 12 months of travelling on the IET, 40+ different journeys ranging mainly between Swansea and Reading. For me there is no contest for passenger comfort and experience. It may be old, but I'm yet to ride on a train in this country built after the HST that ticks all the boxes from a passenger point of view, not an enthusiasts point of view (as I always preferred a loco and a rake of coaches back in the days when we had a real railway). Scotrail have played a blinder, ditching 170 DMU's for HST's and I have no doubt that ex GWR HST's not being sent to Scotland will eventually find use with another train operator. Its too good and too solid a train to consign to History just yet.

 

[swaldman]

But as pointed out above, your odds of getting a seat at a table on a GWR service are increasing at a rate of knots as more IETs enter service.

Giving more tables than in your average Pendolino standard class coach and the same as on East Coast formations

this is indeed a good thing!
(I don't live in GWR-land any more, so I guess I'd assumed that the "how many airline seats can we pack into this coach?" approach would have been carried over...)
Of course, in an ideal world the airline seats would have enough seat pitch that one could work in them - as one can in std class on TGVs or Shinkansen trains. But I don't see that happening any time soon

 

[Thunderer]

I agree. Few passengers consider under floor engines to be an improvement over a loco or power car at the end(s)
Few passengers think a shorter train is an improvement.
few consider two short units without through gangways to be better than a full length train.
Few passengers think that no buffet is better than having a buffet.

They should have built some new HSTs ! Not of course an exact copy of a 40 year old train, but similar in general design.
Locomotive or power car at each end.
10 or more passenger coaches in between.
First class one end, standard the other, with a buffet and kitchen in between.
Power doors, retention toilets, wifi, power sockets at seats.

Thank you for understanding my concept. To me it would have made perfect sense, cost billions less (which could have been used for NHS, Schools etc.) limited all the disruption caused by electrification work and eliminated the issue of short formed expresses on peak time trains. What we are left with now is a mess. A mix match of different sized trains and an electrification project fiscally spiralling out of control and not to be finished to Swansea and Bristol Temple Meads, a half-arsed Government plan with a half-arsed outcome.

 

[Thunderer]

It was the 2006 refurbishment that was the real killer - the 76 seat InterCity refurb was actually quite good at providing a mixture of seating as it had 10 tables per vehicle but also plenty of airline seats - not everyone wants a table.

I still think the whole GWR setup is out of kilter - everything is geared to “Thames Valley Metro” and to hell with what is needed on the true long distance services.

I couldn't agree more with that. Its all about Thames Valley commuters and long distance travellers to South Wales/Devon and Cornwall just have to grin and bear it.

 

[cactustwirly]

Thank you for understanding my concept. To me it would have made perfect sense, cost billions less (which could have been used for NHS, Schools etc.) limited all the disruption caused by electrification work and eliminated the issue of short formed expresses on peak time trains. What we are left with now is a mess. A mix match of different sized trains and an electrification project fiscally spiralling out of control and not to be finished to Swansea and Bristol Temple Meads, a half-arsed Government plan with a half-arsed outcome.

And do what exactly?
The HSTs are falling apart, and don't have enough capacity anymore

 

[Thunderer]

And do what exactly?
The HSTs are falling apart, and don't have enough capacity anymore

If you peruse my original post my alternative concept is there.

 

[Master29]

Yes, times have changed in the fact there are more people but nothing more than that. People keep saying it was a completely different world then. Not that much really. What`s wrong with wanting to enjoy a train journey I ask. For what is the purpose of this forum otherwise? Most people wanted to keep their heads down in 1976. It wasn`t like everyone acted like the famous 5 or the Railway children.

 

[jimm]

Thank you for understanding my concept. To me it would have made perfect sense, cost billions less (which could have been used for NHS, Schools etc.) limited all the disruption caused by electrification work and eliminated the issue of short formed expresses on peak time trains. What we are left with now is a mess. A mix match of different sized trains and an electrification project fiscally spiralling out of control and not to be finished to Swansea and Bristol Temple Meads, a half-arsed Government plan with a half-arsed outcome.

I am getting bit tired of the 'long trains all of the time' obsessives here, who time after time choose to ignore the basic fact that IETs are replacing plenty of short formations, in the shape of the 180s and Turbos operating to the likes of Oxford/the Cotswold Line and to Bedwyn. And replacing HSTs used for jobs like Paddington to Hereford or Cheltenham off-peak, where there has been nothing else better suited to the service available, due to the limited supply of 180s. And offering the ability to not send hundreds of empty seats into Cornwall all day round for large parts of the year.

All services where one of the 700-seat behemoths - complete with a buffet and lashings of hot food, of course - would be utterly inappropriate most of the time.

As for all those getting misty-eyed about October 1976, one of my abiding memories of my first encounters with an HST was a Swindon to Paddington run - off-peak - where people had to stand, as there simply weren't enough second class seats just a couple of weeks after the trains entered service. Those passengers affected probably couldn't have cared less that the formation included both a restaurant car and a buffet car. Nostalgia isn't all that it is cracked up to be.

 

[CMRail]

I am getting bit tired of the 'long trains all of the time' obsessives here, who time after time choose to ignore the basic fact that IETs are replacing plenty of short formations, in the shape of the 180s and Turbos operating to the likes of Oxford/the Cotswold Line and to Bedwyn. And replacing HSTs used for jobs like Paddington to Hereford or Cheltenham off-peak, where there has been nothing else better suited to the service available, due to the limited supply of 180s. And offering the ability to not send hundreds of empty seats into Cornwall all day round for large parts of the year.

All services where one of the 700-seat behemoths - complete with a buffet and lashings of hot food, of course - would be utterly inappropriate most of the time.

As for all those getting misty-eyed about October 1976, one of my abiding memories of my first encounters with an HST was a Swindon to Paddington run - off-peak - where people had to stand, as there simply weren't enough second class seats just a couple of weeks after the trains entered service. Those passengers affected probably couldn't have cared less that the formation included both a restaurant car and a buffet car. Nostalgia isn't all that it is cracked up to be.

Nothing is incorrect in this station, all facts.

 

[Geoff DC]

Bristol to London fair enough - basically a quick commuter run

BUT for those of us in Cornwall its 2 hrs to Plymouth & another 3hrs to London - High speed commuter stock is taking the Fiss on a 5hr run
Especially as Newquay/Gatwick can be as little as £30 with Flybe

 

[cactustwirly]

Bristol to London fair enough - basically a quick commuter run

BUT for those of us in Cornwall its 2 hrs to Plymouth & another 3hrs to London - High speed commuter stock is taking the Fiss on a 5hr run
Especially as Newquay/Gatwick can be as little as £30 with Flybe

Blame First group for that.
IMO the 802s should have had a different interior, to take into account the longer journey times.
Basically the 80x is a jack of all trades train, and because of that it is a compromise.

 

[Geoff DC]

Will be interesting to see what the new Labour Govt - or dread to think a Boris Govt - will do to improve things

 

[Clarence Yard]

If they had a different interior the DfT would not have approved the 802 sets for GWR.

They were totally obsessed about the interiors on the 802 sets being exactly the same as what they had specified for the 800 sets.