Should EMR cancel the Class 810 order?

[QSK19]

That will never happen! Not really possible for a start and then what would you do, design a new train and wait 10+ years for them to enter service, all with your current trains already destined for another operator with many already gone? And all the money already invested?
The issues aren't that bad, yes there are some teething issues but the severity of issues are reducing, and reliability is starting to improve.

I agree with you fully apart from saying that the issues aren’t that bad. The issues are terrible and absolutely unforgivable considering there has been all the time in the world to get these into service and bedded in fully - notwithstanding Covid, construction on them started 5 years ago.

I think that Hitachi was short-sighted when initially looking at the 810 programme, like it was simply a case of souping up an 802 and making them a little shorter. The sheer amount of liquidated damages is representative of this IMO.

== Doublepost prevention - post automatically merged: 12 Aug 2026 ==

No. But if we were doing something like that, it needs to be scoped to look GB wide to look at all the other problematic rolling stock projects that probably constitute about a third of all the messages that have ever been posted here!


It's something they should be paying attention to, given there are a lot of significant DMU replacement orders, plus HS2 rolling stock contracts at various phases of procurement, which the taxpayer will be on the hook for, for decades. Not sure on the scope of the National Audit Office, but as GBR is increasingly responsible for rolling stock procurement, perhaps they will take a look.

Although to be fair, we already know most of the answers
1. DfT policies of "anything but electrification" and "maximise seats at all costs" leading to more exotic technical solutions bringing more risk; especially considering restrictive GB loading gauges compared to RotW (and worse trains from a passenger perspective).
2. Boutique customisation to very specific operator requirements losing economies of scale and increasing development costs, often leading to inflexible non-standard fleets that make redeployment slow and costly
3. Manufacturers overwhelmed by complexity; particularly software and systems integration

Can't think of a single rolling stock project that is not a victim of at least one of these factors. Class 810 is probably all 3.

Part of me wishes that none of the manufacturers had expressed interest in the tender. Would have focussed minds on something more achievable and things could have played out completely differently.

 

[Teapot42]

Would it be fair to say that a significant number of problems appear to be to do with running on diesel at 125mph? I know there are door lock issues, but they should be fairly easy to resolve. If things are too tightly packaged to operate reliably at full load in high ambient temperatures then it's a lot more challenging to fix.

If this is the case, would they maybe suffer less with another operator? For example, how much running do XC do at 125 where there isn't OHLE? You could even add Transpennine in there, much of the faster stuff for them seem to be wired, so if you reduce top speed under diesel to say 100 or 110mph, are they likely to be more reliable once the other niggles are done away with?

And if that would be the case, could there be an argument for the next new order to be for EMR, with a view to the 810s being cascaded sooner rather than later? It would mean several years of a degraded timetable to allow them to run at reduced performance, but if the design issues are fundamental then that might be the easiest option.

Of course, reinstating the electrification program to at least Derby would also be a must.

 

[Zomboid]

Of course, reinstating the electrification program to at least Derby would also be a must

I assume you meant to say Sheffield?

Straight electric trains aren't immune from issues, but having multiple traction systems and the associated control can't be helping.

 

[HighlandStorm]

Would it be fair to say that a significant number of problems appear to be to do with running on diesel at 125mph? I know there are door lock issues, but they should be fairly easy to resolve. If things are too tightly packaged to operate reliably at full load in high ambient temperatures then it's a lot more challenging to fix.

If this is the case, would they maybe suffer less with another operator? For example, how much running do XC do at 125 where there isn't OHLE? You could even add Transpennine in there, much of the faster stuff for them seem to be wired, so if you reduce top speed under diesel to say 100 or 110mph, are they likely to be more reliable once the other niggles are done away with?

Ambient heat would be less of a factor on ScotRail and ScotRail services only operate up to 100mph...

 

[MargaretNoodle]

Would it be fair to say that a significant number of problems appear to be to do with running on diesel at 125mph? I know there are door lock issues, but they should be fairly easy to resolve. If things are too tightly packaged to operate reliably at full load in high ambient temperatures then it's a lot more challenging to fix.

I wonder if that was the case whether it is strictly necessary to run the 810s at 125mph on Diesel? As far as I can tell, and please correct me if I'm wrong but there appears to be no more than 17 miles in either direction on the non-electrified midland mainline that is above 110mph - and most of that apart from about 4 miles north of Loughborough isn't 125.

If we were to assume instant acceleration even if all 17 miles was 125mph (most is only 115/120mph by the looks of it) that's still only going to save an absolute maximum of 66 seconds. When we consider acceleration and deceleration, plus the fact most is at a lower speed limit it must surely be less than that, maybe a 30-40 seconds time saving by being able to go above 110mph. Is that significant?

 

[Teapot42]

I assume you meant to say Sheffield?

Well, to Sheffield and Nottingham would be ideal, indeed through via Wakefield to Leeds even better.

However, getting to Derby means the bulk of both routes is covered by wires, with the remainder hopefully less of an issue with bimode. I believe also some of the outstanding challenges to electrification are between Derby and Sheffield, Dronfield being one.

Straight electric trains aren't immune from issues, but having multiple traction systems and the associated control can't be helping.

Of course, but I would assume having to cram all this in to an already condensed space is likely to be a significant issue. I must say I prefer the alternative of having an intermediate motor car (not sure if there is a more accepted term) as this avoids having to cram things in to already congested spaces. Plus I'd assume makes pure electric and bimode/trimode options much easier, as the majority of the train is just pure electric.

 

[Johnnie2Sheds]

Cancelling them would be a wonderful opportunity for the MML to be reduced to a commuter service to Corby, with Leicester passengers being pointed towards Nuneaton, Derby towards Tamworth, Nottingham towards Grantham and Sheffield to Doncaster. I'd be careful you don't give the idiots in charge ideas.

 

[dosxuk]

Many people have already been pointed in those directions as the reliability and comfort has been so atrocious in recent years that the longer route becomes more appealing.