Harbon 1
Member
I hate to be boring but my money is on the family/order name of IEPs :P
-
Our new ticketing site is now live! Using either this or the original site (both powered by TrainSplit) helps support the running of the forum with every ticket purchase! Find out more and ask any questions/give us feedback in this thread!
GWR Class 800
- Thread starter SpacePhoenix
- Start date
- Status
Sponsor Post - registered members do not see these adverts; click here to register, or click here to log in
R
RailUK Forums
TheKnightWho
Established Member
And a gooch is, ah, well...
Being pedantic, Azuma, Voyager and Pendolino are all brand names for the trains, adopted by Virgin and used in their official publicity material, not nicknames.
You may not be wrong in the case of GWR when it comes to an official description for these trains.
The brochure issued when 800004 made its Reading-Paddington run said in big letters on the cover Introducing the new INTERCITY EXPRESS TRAIN - and refers to them as IETs or uses their class numbers all the way through.
Also, the naming thing seems to be a Virgin Trains speciality, the Voyagers, Super Voyagers, Pendalino, Azuma... The Meridian was a bit of a copy cat thing by National Express to humanise new trains... I'm struggling to think of any other modern day train operator that has done the same marketing twist... Others use terms such as "new" or the class number and manufacturers branding only in a loose link.
jayiscupid
Member
When the Siemens 185 came out, First had the antimacassars printed with "Welcome on board the new Pennine Class" but it never caught on.
Philip Phlopp
Established Member
- Joined
- 31 May 2015
- Messages
- 3,003
British Rail really started it with Pacers, Skippers, Sprinters, Super Sprinters, Express Sprinters and South Western Turbos, and then the Networker, Networker Turbo, Networker Turbo Express and Networker Express.
The IEP and AT300 stock I think (and hope) are doomed to be forever known as IEPs or possibly IETs. I doubt Azuma will catch on when IEP is quicker to write and already more widely known.
Voyager and Pendolino were official names from the manufacturers though. Azuma isn't.
Harbornite
Established Member
- Joined
- 7 May 2016
- Messages
- 3,627
Other product names include Turbostar, Coradia, Juniper, Electrostar and Desiro. FGW and Grand Central decided to brand their 180 Coradias as Adelantes and Zephyrs respectively.
--- old post above --- --- new post below ---
As mentioned earlier, Azuma is a brand while Voyager /Super Voyager is a product name that Virgin was licensed to use. Pendolino is also a product name and is used in Italy and Poland.
LNW-GW Joint
Veteran Member
I don't think Voyager is a Bombardier name, I think it was Virgin's name, like Meridian was invented by National Express.
Unlike the Pendolino, class 22x was never an international "range" like Desiro or Coradia.
Hitachi calls (or used to call) the IEP trains its SET - Super Express Train.
The HST hasn't done too badly with intials for 40 years (although it did start out as the HSDT).
We'll know the official view when NR puts up stop signs on platforms.
There are still "VT 4/5" signs up on XC routes, originally put there for VT Voyagers.
In VT territory, with Pendolinos also operating, they have been mostly changed to say class 221 and 390.
We should also find a better name for TPE's LHCS stock than "Mk 5".
If they are unpowered Civity vehicles then we should use that CAF term.
In the TPE franchise agreement it is termed "IC100" (and their Hitachi bi-modes are termed "Bi125").
Azuma is Japanese for East, I'm led to believe the Japanese word for West was considered but was disregarded. Azuma is now also linked, by most people, with Virgin Trains.
After a chat this week with a colleague involved in the project, there is quite a sound proposal for a name which would link well with some of the name suggestions.
We shall have to wait and see!
After a chat this week with a colleague involved in the project, there is quite a sound proposal for a name which would link well with some of the name suggestions.
We shall have to wait and see!
reddragon
Established Member
Glad I started the debate!
leomartin125
Member
Well in other news....
A Class 800, most likely either 800001/800002 or 800101, will be operating a test service to test the OLE between Reading and Didcot.
RTT Link: http://www.realtimetrains.co.uk/train/K97549/2016/07/16/advanced
A Class 68 hauled (68005 & 68001) NR OLE inspection train will run with it overnight tonight into tomorrow morning.
A Class 800, most likely either 800001/800002 or 800101, will be operating a test service to test the OLE between Reading and Didcot.
RTT Link: http://www.realtimetrains.co.uk/train/K97549/2016/07/16/advanced
A Class 68 hauled (68005 & 68001) NR OLE inspection train will run with it overnight tonight into tomorrow morning.
Philip Phlopp
Established Member
- Joined
- 31 May 2015
- Messages
- 3,003
68005 + 975091 (mentor) + 72631 (plpr) + 977997 (rsc3) + 9523 + 68001
leomartin125
Member
I know this may shock some of you but I'm actually warming to these trains. Saw some footage from the inside of one the other day and the seats look far more comfortable than I expected, the legroom looks great and the windows look a lot bigger than I thought. The high floors don't look to be an issue either so yes I was wrong I admit it.
Still no fan of the whole bi-mode thing. They simply don't have enough power on diesel mode. Remains to be seen how the AT300 will cope with the gradients it will encounter even with the slight power increase.
But as far as passenger comfort is concerned I am impressed and happy to admit I think I was wrong.
One hopes they get the diagraming correct and have ample seats throughout the day for passengers.
Still no fan of the whole bi-mode thing. They simply don't have enough power on diesel mode. Remains to be seen how the AT300 will cope with the gradients it will encounter even with the slight power increase.
But as far as passenger comfort is concerned I am impressed and happy to admit I think I was wrong.
One hopes they get the diagraming correct and have ample seats throughout the day for passengers.
Harbornite
Established Member
- Joined
- 7 May 2016
- Messages
- 3,627
That's good to hear, people don't always like admitting they are wrong online. I think the horsepower on diesel of these machines should be ok and although it is a shame that they can't reach 125mph off the wires, there won't be much of a need for this.
samuelmorris
Established Member
Forgive me if it's posted somewhere obvious, I haven't seen it mentioned anywhere. Has it actually been stated what the power output of the traction motors is on electric mode? i.e. how much more powerful are these units under the wires?
I still think that with distributed traction, five powered vehicles on a 9-coach train rather than two for what would be an 11-vehicle formation in the equivalent 2+9, 3750hp vs. 4500 isn't likely to make much difference except in the early days of the Great Western routes, given how much of the ECML is already wired and how much of the GW will be. I'm not sure how much of the route that is 125mph capable will remain unelectrified beyond the early 2020s. In an ideal world I would sooner the electrification area be extended than have to specify additional or more powerful diesel units, but a man can dream :P
The interior comfort will always be subjective. The seats didn't 'look' comfortable but that isn't exactly a good indication. People routinely complain about the seating on the East Coast Mk IVs when I find them particularly comfortable so if similar people complain about the 800 seating, it doesn't necessarily mean that I would have any complaints, even with my back problems.
I still think that with distributed traction, five powered vehicles on a 9-coach train rather than two for what would be an 11-vehicle formation in the equivalent 2+9, 3750hp vs. 4500 isn't likely to make much difference except in the early days of the Great Western routes, given how much of the ECML is already wired and how much of the GW will be. I'm not sure how much of the route that is 125mph capable will remain unelectrified beyond the early 2020s. In an ideal world I would sooner the electrification area be extended than have to specify additional or more powerful diesel units, but a man can dream :P
The interior comfort will always be subjective. The seats didn't 'look' comfortable but that isn't exactly a good indication. People routinely complain about the seating on the East Coast Mk IVs when I find them particularly comfortable so if similar people complain about the 800 seating, it doesn't necessarily mean that I would have any complaints, even with my back problems.
As I said on a different thread I have heard from someone who is loosely involved in the whole project that the SRT's on diesel mode aren't good due to the drag coefficient at higher speeds. On the wires they will be very fast which is where the gains are going to be noticed. I believe the all electric versions are going to be a very nice train. Not really sure the point in them having one diesel engine unless NR expect dewirements to be a common thing. Maybe Philip can comment on that.
--- old post above --- --- new post below ---
Indeed I would rather we just concentrate on getting electrification done rather than investing money in bi-mode tech. But hey ho whats done is done. The seats looked sculpted in the clip I saw and the legroom was very very good.
Philip Phlopp
Established Member
- Joined
- 31 May 2015
- Messages
- 3,003
We don't expect de-wirements to be common, though they will be operating on the ECML, so manage your expectations down the way accordingly.
It's just a way to add some additional flexibility, not needing to use shunters, ability to work around isolated OLE where damage may have occurred or may be suspected, OLE power failures and isolations for safety purposes (lineside fires, that sort of thing), ability to use platforms which have had OLE removed for re-modelling, all sorts of things really.
The ability to get themselves out of a dewirement and work through a dewirement once the debris is cleared is going to be very useful but on a very, very, very infrequent basis.
Well there are many many things like that could happen on the railway in various different forms that are deemed to be used so rarely that they don't get implemented as the cost of maintaining them isn't worth it as the circumstances happen so rarely. Why aren't all EMU's being fitted with a diesel engine if it's such a vital thing to have?
Philip Phlopp
Established Member
- Joined
- 31 May 2015
- Messages
- 3,003
I've a scribbled down note of 577kW per bogie, but I've absolutely no idea if it's accurate, nor can I remember where I heard it from.
GWML electrification includes every mile of 125mph running on the GWML, the ECML has every mile of 125mph running electrified already.
The highest linespeeds where IEP will be operating on diesel are 110mph, and there's only a small number of route miles where this is the case, the vast majority of IEP's operation on diesel is on lines where the linespeed is 100mph. This applies for both GWML and ECML fleets.
The last unelectrified 125mph route mileage is on the CrossCountry route between Birmingham and Derby, from memory. Bristol to Derby electrification should eventually have every mile of track with 125mph linespeed electrified. 40 years late mind.
IEP does have enough installed power to reach 125mph on diesel, they have a slightly higher power to weight ratio to a 2+9 HST (and slightly lower than an 2+8 HST). There's just no need to actually do 125mph on diesel.
That's good to hear, proof of the pudding will be in the trying out. Always going to be reservations about the quality of a new product designed for such high use, but hopefully these trains will prove to be better than what we have as a whole.
Again, see how things pan out...
Philip Phlopp
Established Member
- Joined
- 31 May 2015
- Messages
- 3,003
I don't disagree. It is, as I say, a way to add some extra flexibility. If it wasn't specified to have a back-up engine, I wouldn't be suggesting we add one, but since it's there, well, it's not a bad thing.
What I would add is that commuter EMU stock tends to work on more rigidly defined and shorter routes, IEP is going to be travelling over a much wider area with more diversionary routes, it's going to be encountering rolling electrification works, and circumstances could well result in very unusual train configurations, such as 5 car bi-mode units having to haul 5 car electric units in passenger service - that only can happen because the electric unit has its back-up engine.
It's also quite possible that future generations of EMU have battery back up power when density, safety and mass issues resolve themselves. It's tricky to fit battery packs or diesel engines to 20m EMU stock right now - ThamesLink tried with the Class 700s and sort of ran into a brick wall.
Mordac
Established Member
I see what you did there.
Is it the same engine as used in the bi-modes? If so, then they are almost 'free' as the packaging will have been sorted out for the bi-modes, and they can form part of the common pool of engine modules.
NotATrainspott
Established Member
- Joined
- 2 Feb 2013
- Messages
- 3,260
Theoretically, could a bi-mode unit push an electric-only unit along a diversionary route? If the combined formation could reach 75mph or so it could do reasonably well at getting around any serious blockages.
:roll::roll::roll::roll::roll::roll::roll::roll::roll::roll::roll::roll::roll::roll: ad infinitum
Enough power for what on diesel mode?
There is a difference between being asked to keep up with an HST on diesel on a 125mph section of route - not what the 800s were actually being designed to do, no matter how many times you keep trying to make out this is some terrible flaw in the design - or on the routes where they are intended to work diesel on a regular basis, which are notable for the complete absence of 125mph running and near-complete absence of anything over 100mph...
Slight power increase?
Output on diesel of a Class 802 - 700 kW (940 hp) per engine
Output on diesel of a Class 800 - 560 kW (750 hp) per engine in normal engine-managed operation - capable of being upped to 940hp if required - which it might just be for an interim period to near enough keep up with a 125mph HST schedule until the wires reach the Bristol area...
It's a while since I did a maths exam, but I make 940hp versus 750hp to be a 25.4 per cent increase in output per engine. Which isn't my idea of a 'slight' increase.
What else do you think the people at GWR and Virgin are planning to do - ruin their passengers' day on a regular basis?
Link to GWR video about the IET launch and the trains
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=A_YJA_6IjY0
Pictures on Flickr by Derek Morgan of 800001 and 800002 at Reading station this morning
https://www.flickr.com/search/?text=800001 reading
Last edited:
- Status