GWR Class 800

[fowler9]

Am a bit underwhelmed with them to be honest from what I have seen. Am trying to imagine being on one with the lawnmower engine droning underneath and pretending to myself this is the future.

 

[Mintona]

If you sit in one of the end coaches, there won't be an engine 'droning underneath'. And if you travel on the main spine of the services, there won't be an engine 'droning underneath'. And much effort has been spent to try and ensure that even when away from the wires and in one of the middle coaches, you'll hardly be able to hear the engine 'droning underneath'.

 

[Nippy]

Been reported elsewhere that 800s aren't permitted to run under AC yet so the move was diesel powered.

Yes, that and the route from NP isn't fully wired!

 

[leomartin125]

Been reported elsewhere that 800s aren't permitted to run under AC yet so the move was diesel powered.

That is correct. No Class 800's are permitted to run on the mainlines under electric power, and are confined to diesel motors instead. Once testing starts at night on the ECML in SPZ's under electric power, if successful, we might start seeing more operations and tests with the 800 under electric power.

 

[NotATrainspott]

If you sit in one of the end coaches, there won't be an engine 'droning underneath'. And if you travel on the main spine of the services, there won't be an engine 'droning underneath'. And much effort has been spent to try and ensure that even when away from the wires and in one of the middle coaches, you'll hardly be able to hear the engine 'droning underneath'.

And if you're on a 9 car set, two of the intermediate vehicles will lack a diesel engine. There's just under a 1-in-2 chance that whatever journey you go on away from the wires, the engine noise will not affect you whatsoever.

 

[SpacePhoenix]

That is correct. No Class 800's are permitted to run on the mainlines under electric power, and are confined to diesel motors instead. Once testing starts at night on the ECML in SPZ's under electric power, if successful, we might start seeing more operations and tests with the 800 under electric power.

Once they're cleared for running on mainlines under electric power, will they be able to test them during the daytime, dropping them onto any spare paths?

 

[leomartin125]

Once they're cleared for running on mainlines under electric power, will they be able to test them during the daytime, dropping them onto any spare paths?

None of this has been planned or confirmed yet as the GWR Class 800's would be more suited to testing on the GWML, the line it will serve, which as we all know is far from ready for any testing yet. Once completed however to Didcot Parkway by early 2017, I'm sure we could see testing of the Class 800 on the GWML, althought this will primarily be done at night due to the sheer amount of traffic during the day. Although saying that, Crossrail works will limit their night time paths for testing as lines will be closed some nights for engineering works, but despite this, the majority of testing will be completed at night.

In regards to testing on the ECML, I'm sure we could see testing starting of the VTEC Class 800's and 801's during the day where possible, although I wouldn't be suprised if these tests would occur at night also.

 

[Philip Phlopp]

None of this has been planned or confirmed yet as the GWR Class 800's would be more suited to testing on the GWML, the line it will serve, which as we all know is far from ready for any testing yet. Once completed however to Didcot Parkway by early 2017, I'm sure we could see testing of the Class 800 on the GWML, althought this will primarily be done at night due to the sheer amount of traffic during the day. Although saying that, Crossrail works will limit their night time paths for testing as lines will be closed some nights for engineering works, but despite this, the majority of testing will be completed at night.

In regards to testing on the ECML, I'm sure we could see testing starting of the VTEC Class 800's and 801's during the day where possible, although I wouldn't be suprised if these tests would occur at night also.

There's a chunk of testing which has to be done on the GWML, there's a chunk of testing which has to be done on the ECML, and there's testing that will take place in or around London, the location can be flexible, but will probably be at North Pole.

The tests can realistically use any unit, it doesn't matter where it's allocated or what the internal fit out is, it's traction package, pantograph, bogies etc that we'll be looking at, not the catering unit fitted.

 

[jayiscupid]

I'm a little confused, do both IEPs run on 'Conventional' bogies?

I'm asking as i've just come across this picture on Flickr which shows a car from presumably 800101 riding on something similar to the Bombardier BS Series / Siemens Desiro City type bogies with inside bearings. Its it just an accomadation bogie with outside disk brakes or something else? https://www.flickr.com/photos/steam60163/20332717409/in/album-72157651455837011/

Edit. Never mind, I've just noticed a few more pictures on Flickr. Seems the unit have a mix of bogies as seen in this photo (along with an extremely long overhang). https://www.flickr.com/photos/bristol-re/25606923341/in/photolist-F1Nbbi-F1NaZB

Are they missing fairings between the bogies and the vehicle ends to hide the coupler or is this the fully finished train? Seems odd for it not to be streamlined when the train is designed for 140mph.

 

[jimm]

None of this has been planned or confirmed yet as the GWR Class 800's would be more suited to testing on the GWML, the line it will serve, which as we all know is far from ready for any testing yet. Once completed however to Didcot Parkway by early 2017, I'm sure we could see testing of the Class 800 on the GWML, althought this will primarily be done at night due to the sheer amount of traffic during the day. Although saying that, Crossrail works will limit their night time paths for testing as lines will be closed some nights for engineering works, but despite this, the majority of testing will be completed at night.

In regards to testing on the ECML, I'm sure we could see testing starting of the VTEC Class 800's and 801's during the day where possible, although I wouldn't be suprised if these tests would occur at night also.

Do you actually take in things that other people post on this forum - like the point in time when GWML testing is likely to begin?

Tilehurst to Didcot will be electrified and ready for night-time testing of Class 800s this autumn - the Hendy Review update says the wires here will be ready by September. Seeing the current rate of progress in the area on a weekly basis, I see no reason to doubt this date, unless something goes badly wrong.

By early 2017, Airport Junction to Maidenhead should also be ready - and at an event I attended this week a very senior Network Rail manager said they are currently aiming to actually have this section completed by the end of this year.

From that point on, I would expect further night-time testing of 800s there as well, ahead of their phased entry into passenger service from early summer next year. Network Rail then aim to have the wires linking the two sections through Reading completed by the end of next year.

 

[leomartin125]

Anybody know whats next for eithe rof the two Class 800's currently inside North Pole Depot? Anymore testing planned?

 

[Philip Phlopp]

Anybody know whats next for eithe rof the two Class 800's currently inside North Pole Depot? Anymore testing planned?

Yes and Yes.

 

[D1009]

It's been mentioned in another thread (and possibly somewhere further back in this one) that the maximum speed of an 800 on diesel power is 100 mph. Does anyone know why this is? I'd have thought it ought to be able to reach at least 120 going downhill like an HST running on one power car can.

 

[Philip Phlopp]

It's been mentioned in another thread (and possibly somewhere further back in this one) that the maximum speed of an 800 on diesel power is 100 mph. Does anyone know why this is? I'd have thought it ought to be able to reach at least 120 going downhill like an HST running on one power car can.

It simply doesn't need to do 125mph on diesel - other than a short section south of Newbury (110mph IIRC - the drivers here can probably better elaborate) the line speeds where IEP will operate on diesel power never exceed 100mph.

125mph diesel operation on electrified track wasn't (and isn't) considered a massive priority - in the event of a dewirement, it'll be either chaos (GWML) or complete and utter chaos with some farce thrown in (ECML) and managing even 100mph will be utterly impossible, as the bi-mode sets slot around the electric sets shunting through the damaged section at 10mph (they have a single engine so they're not left stranded by a dewirement).

It'll be a bit of a pain in the bum for the first 18-24 months, after that, it'll not be an issue.

 

[D1009]

It simply doesn't need to do 125mph on diesel - other than a short section south of Newbury (110mph IIRC - the drivers here can probably better elaborate) the line speeds where IEP will operate on diesel power never exceed 100mph.

125mph diesel operation on electrified track wasn't (and isn't) considered a massive priority - in the event of a dewirement, it'll be either chaos (GWML) or complete and utter chaos with some farce thrown in (ECML) and managing even 100mph will be utterly impossible, as the bi-mode sets slot around the electric sets shunting through the damaged section at 10mph (they have a single engine so they're not left stranded by a dewirement).

It'll be a bit of a pain in the bum for the first 18-24 months, after that, it'll not be an issue.

But with respect you haven't answered my question. It looks as though when they start on GW they will need to operate on diesel power on 125 mph track. Given they are using the same traction motors as when running on electric, why is it necessary to restrict them to 100 mph for example between Wootton Bassett and Box Tunnel on the down road?

 

[Philip Phlopp]

But with respect you haven't answered my question. It looks as though when they start on GW they will need to operate on diesel power on 125 mph track. Given they are using the same traction motors as when running on electric, why is it necessary to restrict them to 100 mph for example between Wootton Bassett and Box Tunnel on the down road?

Contracts and money.

 

[najaB]

Given they are using the same traction motors as when running on electric, why is it necessary to restrict them to 100 mph for example between Wootton Bassett and Box Tunnel on the down road?

As I understand it, they are capable of achieving speeds greater than 100mph on diesel, but if GWML wiring was running to schedule there would be no need for it - so they have been derated to save on engine wear.

If the decision was made tomorrow they could be re-rated to a higher top speed, with corresponding increase in lease rates.

 

[Dave1987]

Contracts and money.

What calculations has your department done to make Claire Perry claim confidently that gWr won't have to raise ticket prices to pay the leasing cost of these trains? Seeing how expensive the leasing costs are you must have done some calculations or made certain assumptions for her to make that claim so confidently.

 

[LNW-GW Joint]

What calculations has your department done to make Claire Perry claim confidently that gWr won't have to raise ticket prices to pay the leasing cost of these trains? Seeing how expensive the leasing costs are you must have done some calculations or made certain assumptions for her to make that claim so confidently.

Philip doesn't work for the DfT.
Network Rail would have no part in the commercial contract between DfT and Hitachi/Agility, nor the Direct Award between DfT and FirstGroup for GWR.
Leasing costs are about 25% of the cost of running trains. We shall see if GWR can deliver the performance expected.
It will be the next ICGW franchise before the costs will have any real impact.

 

[Philip Phlopp]

What calculations has your department done to make Claire Perry claim confidently that gWr won't have to raise ticket prices to pay the leasing cost of these trains? Seeing how expensive the leasing costs are you must have done some calculations or made certain assumptions for her to make that claim so confidently.

I wish it was my department, changes would be made.

The full story on the IEP and AT300 diesel engines, from what I've been told.

The Class 800 (IEP) units have their diesel engines down-rated, they probably could reach 125mph, but they'll be slow. 100mph was chosen because that's the most common maximum linespeed they would routinely encounter on diesel power (away from electrified routes).

The engines are down-rated on the Class 800 fleet to improve reliability and to increase times between overhauls, both of which increases train availability, and as Agility Trains are ultimately paid based on trains used in service, it's in their interests to have exceptional train availability.

The engines need to be down-rated on the Class 800 fleet because they'll be switched on and off several times per day, based on the diagrams illustrated in the IEP TTS (Annex H) which including ECS moves, could see the engines started up 3 times and shut down 2 or 3 times per day. The de-rating will leave the engines less stressed and they should be running slightly cooler so won't suffer the same thermal cycling and stresses.

MTU engines are a little temperature sensitive and the engines will be kept at operating temperature when operating on electric, to reduce start up emissions and engine wear, but wear during start up is still an important consideration.

The Class 802 fleet have their engines uprated to the full 750kW. These units will operate the West of England services and should undergo fewer engine start up and shut downs per day. It could be just once per day (1 start up and 1 shut down) on diagrams like the current IW082.

Hitachi and MTU think that reliability will remain acceptable and overhaul periods won't be too different from the Class 800 fleet, but that will need to be carefully monitored initially. MTU know their engines well and there's no reason not to believe them.

 

[Dave1987]

I wish it was my department, changes would be made.

The full story on the IEP and AT300 diesel engines, from what I've been told.

The Class 800 (IEP) units have their diesel engines down-rated, they probably could reach 125mph, but they'll be slow. 100mph was chosen because that's the most common maximum linespeed they would routinely encounter on diesel power (away from electrified routes).

The engines are down-rated on the Class 800 fleet to improve reliability and to increase times between overhauls, both of which increases train availability, and as Agility Trains are ultimately paid based on trains used in service, it's in their interests to have exceptional train availability.

The engines need to be down-rated on the Class 800 fleet because they'll be switched on and off several times per day, based on the diagrams illustrated in the IEP TTS (Annex H) which including ECS moves, could see the engines started up 3 times and shut down 2 or 3 times per day. The de-rating will leave the engines less stressed and they should be running slightly cooler so won't suffer the same thermal cycling and stresses.

MTU engines are a little temperature sensitive and the engines will be kept at operating temperature when operating on electric, to reduce start up emissions and engine wear, but wear during start up is still an important consideration.

The Class 802 fleet have their engines uprated to the full 750kW. These units will operate the West of England services and should undergo fewer engine start up and shut downs per day. It could be just once per day (1 start up and 1 shut down) on diagrams like the current IW082.

Hitachi and MTU think that reliability will remain acceptable and overhaul periods won't be too different from the Class 800 fleet, but that will need to be carefully monitored initially. MTU know their engines well and there's no reason not to believe them.

Well I believe the reliability demands of the contract are part of the reason the leasing contracts are so expensive. For Claire Perry to so confidently claim that the gWr franchise will be able to pay the much higher leasing costs without raising ticket prices means they must have done some modelling work based on predictions they have for passenger growth or they are basing it on a high average loading percentage for trains in service. Or they could have no idea what so ever and merely be saying that to stave off the claim the deal they signed is too expensive.

It is curious though how MTU are going to have to monitor engine wear very closely. One engine failure in service would result in the other engines being uprated to compensate which would put additional wear on them and have a consequence on maintenance schedules of their engine pool.

 

[absolutelymilk]

It is curious though how MTU are going to have to monitor engine wear very closely. One engine failure in service would result in the other engines being uprated to compensate

I don't follow, why would an engine failure mean the other engines would be uprated? Surely it would just limp home on the other two at a reduced speed and then have the engine fixed?

Uprating is not something that can be done just at the push of a button, it requires a fair bit of work.

 

[Philip Phlopp]

It is curious though how MTU are going to have to monitor engine wear very closely.

I believe there's to be MTU engineers attached to the Agility Trains contract who will do things like boroscopic analysis of the engines.

They're all going to be fully 'wired for sound' with engine monitoring and remote telemetry/monitoring. Rolls-Royce plc now own MTU, so I'd guess they're doing something like TotalCare, their maintenance plan for their jet engines which looks for evidence of impending doom.

 

[The Ham]

Even if lease costs are significantly higher someone posted on here that GWR currently have one of the lowest lease costs of any TOC significantly below the average and the averge is well below the highest. Therefore even if lease costs do go up GWR would be closer to the average, admittedly possibly above, but probably not too much to worry about.

The lowest lease costs by TOC seemed to me to be related to those with the most pre privatisation rolling stock. As such whatever new stock they got it was going to push their costs up.

 

[Dave1987]

I don't follow, why would an engine failure mean the other engines would be uprated? Surely it would just limp home on the other two at a reduced speed and then have the engine fixed?

Uprating is not something that can be done just at the push of a button, it requires a fair bit of work.

Not really, F1 cars use several different engine maps throughout the course of a race its just a matter of how long the engine life will be at various different output levels. Same principle is used in BMW 'M' series cars where the engine is derated normally until the driver selects 'M' mode where the engine ECU automatically uprates the engine to full power.
--- old post above --- --- new post below ---

I believe there's to be MTU engineers attached to the Agility Trains contract who will do things like boroscopic analysis of the engines.

They're all going to be fully 'wired for sound' with engine monitoring and remote telemetry/monitoring. Rolls-Royce plc now own MTU, so I'd guess they're doing something like TotalCare, their maintenance plan for their jet engines which looks for evidence of impending doom.

Yes that is true, in modern day engineering they can attach vibration and sound monitoring devices to track excesses of either.
--- old post above --- --- new post below ---

Even if lease costs are significantly higher someone posted on here that GWR currently have one of the lowest lease costs of any TOC significantly below the average and the averge is well below the highest. Therefore even if lease costs do go up GWR would be closer to the average, admittedly possibly above, but probably not too much to worry about.

The lowest lease costs by TOC seemed to me to be related to those with the most pre privatisation rolling stock. As such whatever new stock they got it was going to push their costs up.

Well the point is is that the leasing costs are going up by so much, what modelling have the DFT done to be so sure the leasing costs won't have an impact on ticket prices.

 

[Clarence Yard]

Well the point is is that the leasing costs are going up by so much, what modelling have the DFT done to be so sure the leasing costs won't have an impact on ticket prices.

They won't have done any. They will have assumed the then current fares levels with the usual regulated annual uplifts. The swinger here is the annual premium/subsidy line, with passenger growth percentages associated with any capacity increases baked into the calculations. If they are wrong, fares won't increase (or decrease) to compensate - that isn't how the system works.

I would also be very careful about reading too much into the current GWR lease charges being low. This is because they do (mostly) their own L5 on the HST fleet, which consequently don't appear in the lease cost line.

 

[fowler9]

Who named the Azuma by the way? Am sure it sounds great in a Japanese accent, not sure about Doncaster, Leeds, York or Newcastle. Thank god they aren't operating to Liverpool, it would sound like a threat up here I reckon. Ha ha.

 

[D1009]

Since my last post, I still haven't had an answer to the question I asked, other than "contracts and money". Why is the difference between the train going at 100 mph and 125 mph on diesel so significant?

 

[Noddy]

They won't have done any. They will have assumed the then current fares levels with the usual regulated annual uplifts. The swinger here is the annual premium/subsidy line, with passenger growth percentages associated with any capacity increases baked into the calculations. If they are wrong, fares won't increase (or decrease) to compensate - that isn't how the system works.

I would also be very careful about reading too much into the current GWR lease charges being low. This is because they do (mostly) their own L5 on the HST fleet, which consequently don't appear in the lease cost line.

Yes and presumably although GWR will be paying higher 'leasing' cost they won't be paying any maintenance and other associated costs as these are baked into the 'leasing' cost.

 

[najaB]

Since my last post, I still haven't had an answer to the question I asked, other than "contracts and money". Why is the difference between the train going at 100 mph and 125 mph on diesel so significant?

You've had the answer twice: it's all due to contracts (the contract between Hitachi and the DfT is for trains that can run to 100mph diagrams) and money (to re-contract for 125mph capable trains would cost more).