Class 810 for East Midlands Railway Construction/Introduction Updates

[hexagon789]

Won't the EMR trains also be cheaper because:

1. Shorter vehicles = slightly less materials
2. Only 125mph design which may mean lower permissible crash resistance =ing lower costs again?

 

[Snow1964]

Given that we seem to have gone quiet on the 810s, firstly does anybody have any updates on build progress? I half suspect that hearing nothing means there’ll be an inevitable delay - either that or no news means that things are progressing as planned and hence nothing major to report.

If I had to make a guess, I would suspect they were waiting for results of the GWR fleet cracking at lifting points. No point in assembling them if might have to take it apart again to strengthen a welded joint.

However any assembly delay is going to reduce chance of components being late, and the factory ought to be getting pretty slick at putting them together after all the similar IETs it has built.

 

[800001]

If I had to make a guess, I would suspect they were waiting for results of the GWR fleet cracking at lifting points. No point in assembling them if might have to take it apart again to strengthen a welded joint.

However any assembly delay is going to reduce chance of components being late, and the factory ought to be getting pretty slick at putting them together after all the similar IETs it has built.

They have continued building during the crack saga.

As a result Avanti sets will have to have the crack modifications, the same as the other fleets, as the shells were constructed over 2 years ago.

 

[Snow1964]

Won't the EMR trains also be cheaper because:

1. Shorter vehicles = slightly less materials
2. Only 125mph design which may mean lower permissible crash resistance =ing lower costs again?

1) will be very marginal, cutting price of metal slightly shorter is a tiny fraction of the all the parts that need to be included
2) not going to be cost effective to redesign and retool it, so probably easier to continue the overspec’d version

 

[hexagon789]

1) will be very marginal, cutting price of metal slightly shorter is a tiny fraction of the all the parts that need to be included
2) not going to be cost effective to redesign and retool it, so probably easier to continue the overspec’d version

Well that's fair enough, in which case is there really any scope to save costs or is an 810 really basically always going to be the same price as any other 80x give or take minor adjustments

 

[Domh245]

2) not going to be cost effective to redesign and retool it, so probably easier to continue the overspec’d version

Except that the front end is significantly different to the existing 80x, implying the existence of new tooling (for which it would have been silly to spec for 140mph!)

 

[hexagon789]

Except that the front end is significantly different to the existing 80x, implying the existence of new tooling (for which it would have been silly to spec for 140mph!)

Though there is the potential for any savings in any potential lesser crash regs for a 125 max design being spent on tooling the new front.

 

[Liverpool 507]

Apologies if it has already been mentioned, but once the Aurora fleet begin unit testing and fault free running, it would be interesting if one makes it up to Liverpool, for potential use in the future for certain events like the Grand National at Aintree.

 

[gingertom]

Well that's fair enough, in which case is there really any scope to save costs or is an 810 really basically always going to be the same price as any other 80x give or take minor adjustments

somebody on here pointed me to the traction spec for the 810s which will have a small effect on the costs.
Compared to a 5 car 80x there will be 4x diesel packs. Increased cost.
4x powered bogies instead of 6. Reduced cost.
Diesels more powerful. Increased cost (capital and maintenance).
Traction motors more powerful. Increased cost.
Traction electronics beefed up to cope with the higher powers. Increased cost.

Lots of swings and roundabouts here but I reckon it will costs will be similar.

 

[hexagon789]

somebody on here pointed me to the traction spec for the 810s which will have a small effect on the costs.
Compared to a 5 car 80x there will be 4x diesel packs. Increased cost.
4x powered bogies instead of 6. Reduced cost.
Diesels more powerful. Increased cost (capital and maintenance).
Traction motors more powerful. Increased cost.
Traction electronics beefed up to cope with the higher powers. Increased cost.

Lots of swings and roundabouts here but I reckon it will costs will be similar.

Again, all good points. I think without a proper part-by-part invoice it's difficult to say if there - 1. is any difference and 2. if that difference is justified.

 

[Snow1964]

deleted

 

[baz962]

deleted

I would bet they won't be in service in 22

 

[Andy Pacer]

Apologies if it has already been mentioned, but once the Aurora fleet begin unit testing and fault free running, it would be interesting if one makes it up to Liverpool, for potential use in the future for certain events like the Grand National at Aintree.

Indeed, or anywhere else that sees Meridians on occasion.

 

[DannyMich2018]

I would bet they won't be in service in 22

2024 most likely now I'd imagine.

 

[800001]

2024 most likely now I'd imagine.

Why 2024? They are being built now, testing starts soon at the factory. 2023 is a realistic entry date

 

[Killingworth]

Why 2024? They are being built now, testing starts soon at the factory. 2023 is a realistic entry date

Entry date for route training by late 2023 but 2024, even into 2025 before full introduction in service, seems more realistic. It would be wonderful if it was 2023 and using most of what we already know works should help.

 

[91108]

Apologies if it has already been mentioned, but once the Aurora fleet begin unit testing and fault free running, it would be interesting if one makes it up to Liverpool, for potential use in the future for certain events like the Grand National at Aintree.

I think it would make sense to order more 810s to operate Nottingham to Liverpool all the time with them instead of 158s.

 

[Bletchleyite]

I think it would make sense to order more 810s to operate Nottingham to Liverpool all the time with them instead of 158s.

Costly, but I can't argue with the benefits - more modern, simpler fleet plus the ability to "pan up" through some of the big cities and so reduce pollution where it does most harm.

Though is 5.810 enough capacity for the next 20-30 years? I'm not sure it is, I think you would want 7.

 

[Roast Veg]

And the obvious drawback - higher dwell times than the 170s, which ought to be up there asap.

 

[Bletchleyite]

And the obvious drawback - higher dwell times than the 170s, which ought to be up there

What 170s? Liverpool to Nottingham is and will presently remain 158 operated.

 

[91108]

There would be advantages such as using electric power where possible through Manchester and into Liverpool. It would be easier to put on longer trains to Liverpool and to strengthen other regional services for events.
There aren’t enough 170s whereas more 810s can actually be constructed.

 

[kevjs]

And the obvious drawback - higher dwell times than the 170s, which ought to be up there asap.

How does changing end door 158s to end door 810s increase dwell time? - Over the last few weeks when I've been travelling via Manchester the Picadilly dwell times on the 158 (and a Northern operated 156 subbing!) have all been in excess of 5mins due to the chronic overcrowding with people left behind on 3/4 of those trips too. 5+ coaches on all services vs 2-4 would surely reduce dwell times would it not?

Given the route connects four of the largest 10 cities in the country (Liverpool, Manchester, Sheffield, Nottingham) and has been pretty much full (IME) for over a decade giving some decent rolling stock is well overdue - if it stays with EMR that's either a microfleet (as currently seems to be the plan) or 810s.

(Would extending all the 810s to say 8 car units give enough diagrams (and capacity) for both London and Liverpool?)

 

[91108]

I believe the 5 car unit system allows them to easily double up to 10 cars at peak times (whatever they are now….)
If the Liverpool service is to be split and separate from the Norwich service I would think they could couple up units at Nottingham or Sheffield to make 10 cars for some Liverpool services.
I think it makes sense to run Nottingham and Sheffield to London, Manchester and Liverpool with 810s and have 170s and 158s on all the other regional services.

 

[Helvellyn]

I believe the 5 car unit system allows them to easily double up to 10 cars at peak times (whatever they are now….)
If the service is to be split and separate from the Norwich service I would think they could couple up units at Nottingham or Sheffield to make 10 cars for some Liverpool services.
I think it makes sense to run Nottingham and Sheffield to London, Manchester and Liverpool with 810s and have 170s and 158s on all the other regional services.

Not much opportunity for 125mph running though so a bit excessive purchasing 810s for this route.

 

[91108]

I don’t really understand that argument in this case. Sometimes they would work to London, and be 125 capable, sometimes to Liverpool and not need that capability. I guess, in fact, it would probably be better for the diesel engines to not have to go over 90mph when doing a Liverpool. An 810 could be diagrammed to work to Liverpool and London in the same day.

 

[QSK19]

Entry date for route training by late 2023 but 2024, even into 2025 before full introduction in service, seems more realistic. It would be wonderful if it was 2023 and using most of what we already know works should help.

One would have thought that the ongoing 196 debacle - the consequences of which are very relevant to EMR - would be a stark lesson for it not to take 5 years from construction to full introduction of the 810s!

The only upside to full introduction in 2025 would be the fact that the wires south of Bedford should have been upgraded by then - ie no diesel running under the wires.

 

[Bletchleyite]

Not much opportunity for 125mph running though so a bit excessive purchasing 810s for this route.

Not an awful lot of 125mph running on TPE either, but they bought 80x. The top speed isn't the only benefit of them.

 

[DanNCL]

Not an awful lot of 125mph running on TPE either, but they bought 80x. The top speed isn't the only benefit of them.

TPE needed the 125mph capability for York - Darlington, there was no provision 100mph paths in the May 22 (now May 23) timetable on the ECML. The same argument couldn’t be used in favour of 810s on Liverpool - Nottingham.

 

[LNW-GW Joint]

I believe the 5 car unit system allows them to easily double up to 10 cars at peak times (whatever they are now….)
If the Liverpool service is to be split and separate from the Norwich service I would think they could couple up units at Nottingham or Sheffield to make 10 cars for some Liverpool services.
I think it makes sense to run Nottingham and Sheffield to London, Manchester and Liverpool with 810s and have 170s and 158s on all the other regional services.

No chance of 10-car working through Manchester and Liverpool.
None of Oxford Road, Warrington Central or Liverpool South Parkway, or smaller stations like Widnes and Birchwood, could cope.

But logically, 810s on TP South is no different from 802s on TP North.

 

[Halish Railway]

But logically, 810s on TP South is no different from 802s on TP North.

Although there’s no planned piecemeal electrification scheme in which bi-mode trains can take advantage of the wires where they exist.