Class 810 for East Midlands Railway Construction/Introduction Updates

[43066]

Not yet with IETs or derivetives of IETs (so 810s).

But does with the existing fleet. Why should 810s be more of a risk in this respect?!

 

[zwk500]

Not yet with IETs or derivetives of IETs (so 810s).

Why does this specific stock represent a greater risk than any other?

I agree that there's a risk to attaching/detaching but fundamentally they're all Dellner couplings on straight track.

 

[pokemonsuper9]

Yes, surely the reasoning behind the 810s as 5x24m units has surely been done to death?

Yes I've certainly heard it many times, it's probably on this thread itself at least 10 times.

 

[Peter Sarf]

But does with the existing fleet. Why should 810s be more of a risk in this respect?!

Why does this specific stock represent a greater risk than any other?

I agree that there's a risk to attaching/detaching but fundamentally they're all Dellner couplings on straight track.

Because GW are having problems splitting/joining their 800s & 802s I am assuming that EMRs new 810s are more likely to suffer the same problems rather than being as easy as EMRs existing 222s. The 810s are derivatives of the 800s. As per below post.

Given that GWR haven't been able to reliably do country end splits/joins why risk it at EMR? Also screws up the timetable in the event of disruption, occupying platforms and importing delays all over the place!

Granted I don't know if it might be more of a logistical/procedural challenge GW are having rather than a practical problem with the units themselves.

 

[Killingworth]

... remembering that a 5x810 has 12 more standard class seats than a 7x222 and 60 more than a 5x222, so with the exception of where a 5x810 replaces a 7x222, passengers are going to see a significant capacity increase (although of course the thinning out of the EMR intercity fleet means some of these may have been downgraded recently).


Yes, surely the reasoning behind the 810s as 5x24m units has surely been done to death?

The reality is that the alternative to a fleet of solely 5x24m units is a progressively smaller number of 10 car trains, but as you lose flexibility you need more carriages. e.g. running all EMR IC services as 10-car sets needs about 20 diagrams, so perhaps 24 units, which means 240 carriages need paying for, rather than 165. Good luck taking that proposal to Mark Harper.

Oh for the days when you had dozens of classes of locomotives capable of hauling a combination of many thousands of compatible coaches held in nearby sidings or central roads with a handy shunting loco to sort them into order. it was made to look simple but it wasn't and required a lot of organisation. Any length from one to 14 or 15 walk through coaches able to be assembled fairly quickly. All our modern electronic wizardry to no avail on this, defeated by lack of track and platform space and incompatibility of so much modern rolling stock.

 

[Snow1964]

Because GW are having problems splitting/joining their 800s & 802s I am assuming that EMRs new 810s are more likely to suffer the same problems rather than being as easy as EMRs existing 222s. The 810s are derivatives of the 800s. As per below post.

Granted I don't know if it might be more of a logistical/procedural challenge GW are having rather than a practical problem with the units themselves.

The GW units suffer from software delays, due to a poor integration of the automatic train protection system added to the IETs as an afterthought to be compatible with system installed after the Ladbroke Grove crash about 20 years ago.

Instead of system taking minute or two to confirm all is ok after splitting and joining, it takes more like 5-8 minutes whilst software churns through the process since ATC was added.

If got to allow upto 10 minutes to do a couple / uncouple before can carry on, instead of it happening within normal station dwell time then not very practical to use.

I do know how long a couple / uncouple and check ok to go will be on sets fitted with new ECTS electronic signalling.

 

[Energy]

The GW units suffer from software delays, due to a poor integration of the automatic train control system that was installed after the Ladbroke Grove crash about 20 years ago.

Instead of system taking minute or two to confirm all is ok after splitting and joining, it takes more like 5-8 minutes whilst software churns through the process since ATC was added.

If got to allow upto 10 minutes to do a couple / uncouple before can carry on, instead of it happening within normal station dwell time then not very practical to use.

I do know how long a couple / uncouple and check ok to go will be on sets fitted with new ECTS electronic signalling.

Bit of clarification. Originally the Great Western was to be upgraded to ETCS and ATP was to be removed. This didn't happen so ATP had to be added at a later date.

MML is TPWS so shouldn't have these issues.

 

[irish_rail]

One of the big issues on GWR is the extra staff needed to drive all the ECS moves to and from stabling points, or around the station. For example at plymouth , a set needs to run Empty from Laira depot to attach to the incoming train from Penzance. This has led to a big increase in traincrew expenditure, and is one (of several reasons) why GWR has drastically reduced the amount of splitting and joining on route. I fear for the MML frankly. It all looks good on paper, but I personally feel a fleet of 7 coach trains would have been better, though selfishly would prefer the amount of 5 cars running on GWR be sorted first!

 

[Benjwri]

One of the big issues on GWR is the extra staff needed to drive all the ECS moves to and from stabling points, or around the station. For example at plymouth , a set needs to run Empty from Laira depot to attach to the incoming train from Penzance. This has led to a big increase in traincrew expenditure, and is one (of several reasons) why GWR has drastically reduced the amount of splitting and joining on route. I fear for the MML frankly. It all looks good on paper, but I personally feel a fleet of 7 coach trains would have been better, though selfishly would prefer the amount of 5 cars running on GWR be sorted first!

GWR obviously doesn't see it as too much of an issue, the majority of 5 cars join or split at some point in the day in the new May timetable. I don't think the amount of 5 cars will ever be sorted while the IETs are around.

 

[Purple Train]

Does anyone else think that the shape of the headlight clusters is nauseatingly ugly?

I think it's a shame because I think silver and purple would look really good with the clean lines of the other 80xs, though maybe I'm just biased

 

[TT-ONR-NRN]

Does anyone else think that the shape of the headlight clusters is nauseatingly ugly?

I think it's a shame because I think silver and purple would look really good with the clean lines of the other 80xs, though maybe I'm just biased

Biased by what? Did you help to design the original 80x?
I think the unique look of the 810s is quite a well-needed change. All these 80x looking the same are quite boring.

 

[Purple Train]

Biased by what? Did you help to design the original 80x?
I think the unique look of the 810s is quite a well-needed change. All these 80x looking the same are quite boring.

If you read the block of blue writing that should appear to the left of all of my posts, you may get a hint as to why I'm biased towards purple, and hence towards the original 80x design. It didn't feel like that oblique a link when I wrote it, but I suppose that's what speed-reading library books does to the brain!

Even so, I think that the cluster design chosen really doesn't suit it at all.

 

[zwk500]

If you read the block of blue writing that should appear to the left of all of my posts, you may get a hint as to why I'm biased towards purple, and hence towards the original 80x design. It didn't feel like that oblique a link when I wrote it, but I suppose that's what speed-reading library books does to the brain!

Even so, I think that the cluster design chosen really doesn't suit it at all.

If you're viewing the forum on a phone, the location part of your profile doesn't show.

 

[LNW-GW Joint]

GWR obviously doesn't see it as too much of an issue, the majority of 5 cars join or split at some point in the day in the new May timetable. I don't think the amount of 5 cars will ever be sorted while the IETs are around.

Avanti will also be regularly splitting/joining their 805s when they arrive, at places like Chester and Euston, though they won't have GWR's ATC complications.

 

[irish_rail]

GWR obviously doesn't see it as too much of an issue, the majority of 5 cars join or split at some point in the day in the new May timetable. I don't think the amount of 5 cars will ever be sorted while the IETs are around.

Yes but my point is this isn't by choice. If GWR could wave a magic wand they'd rid themselves of a good proportion of the 5 car fleet. But the 5 cars have been recruited for and we have the extra drivers in place, and thankfully they are not prepared to make drivers redundant! The fact Avanti are going to be splitting and joining at Chester /Euston etc is why they are currently recruiting scores of trainee drivers. So next time you wander why your train ticket is so expensive , maybe this could be a part of the problem. DFT isn't as desperate to save money on railways as it likes to make out.

 

[QSK19]

DFT isn't as desperate to save money on railways as it likes to make out.

I’d love for that theory to translate to a getting few more 810s (as the idea of keeping the 180s seemed to suggest that some more stock was needed), an internal refurbishment of the 360s, full electrification to Sheffield & Nottingham and eventually brand new trains to replace the 158s, 170s and 360s. But hey ho - one can always dream

 

[43066]

The fact Avanti are going to be splitting and joining at Chester /Euston etc is why they are currently recruiting scores of trainee drivers.

Also future proofing, just as with all traincrew establishments, Avanti have a good number in their 50s/60s who will retire over the next few years.

 

[Purple Train]

If you're viewing the forum on a phone, the location part of your profile doesn't show.

How interesting. Thank you

 

[TT-ONR-NRN]

If you read the block of blue writing that should appear to the left of all of my posts, you may get a hint as to why I'm biased towards purple, and hence towards the original 80x design. It didn't feel like that oblique a link when I wrote it, but I suppose that's what speed-reading library books does to the brain!

Even so, I think that the cluster design chosen really doesn't suit it at all.

If you're viewing the forum on a phone, the location part of your profile doesn't show.

It does but only if the phone is held in landscape, and I’m normal, so it wasn’t

 

[Purple Train]

Back to the thread point (kind of) - what's the maximum speed these units will be able to reach in regular service?

 

[pokemonsuper9]

Back to the thread point (kind of) - what's the maximum speed these units will be able to reach in regular service?

125mph / 201.168 km/h

 

[Purple Train]

125mph / 201.168 km/h

Is that really the maximum speed on the MML?

 

[pokemonsuper9]

Is that really the maximum speed on the MML?

see https://www.openrailwaymap.org/
There's a stretch from Luton to a bit North of Bedford (Where it drops to 110)

 

[zwk500]

see https://www.openrailwaymap.org/
There's a stretch from Luton to a bit North of Bedford (Where it drops to 110)

There's a couple of other stretches of HST125 differentials as well (Elstree to south of St Albans and around Loughborough) but ORM can only display 1 speed on that layer so it's not always consistent with differential speeds.

 

[pokemonsuper9]

There's a couple of other stretches of HST125 differentials as well (Elstree to south of St Albans and around Loughborough) but ORM can only display 1 speed on that layer so it's not always consistent with differential speeds.

Yes it's annoying how the WCML doesn't show me where the tilt allows for 125 (or other higher speeds).
It's the best resource I have easy access to.
Is the differential MU vs Loco (except some that are practically MUs)?

 

[43066]

see https://www.openrailwaymap.org/
There's a stretch from Luton to a bit North of Bedford (Where it drops to 110)

I’d never come across that before - interesting!

 

[12LDA28C]

when are the 810s entering service and replacing the 222s and are the 222s going over to CrossCountry?

There are rumours that some 222s might be heading to Chiltern, that is one of the options being looked at to replace the 68s and LHCS

 

[zwk500]

Yes it's annoying how the WCML doesn't show me where the tilt allows for 125 (or other higher speeds).
It's the best resource I have easy access to.

I’d never come across that before - interesting!

I would also recommend having a peek at this site: https://railmap.azurewebsites.net/ although you have to click on the sections to see all the speeds. The maintainer of the site is on these forums, I can point you to him for a login in DMs if you need although I won't tag him directly for privacy sake.
The sectional appendix PDFs are freely available: https://www.networkrail.co.uk/indus...ators/national-electronic-sectional-appendix/ but are big and not easily searchable.

Is the differential MU vs Loco (except some that are practically MUs)?

Because of the MML's somewhat parsimoniously-scoped OLE there are actually 3 differentials: EMU100/110/HST125*. Most DMUs can take HST differentials (but not all, AIUI!) as it's to do with axle weights mainly, I think.

*edited for correction.

 

[Edvid]

^ You mean EMU100/110/HST125.

 

[zwk500]

^ You mean EMU100/110/HST125.

Apologies! Yes I do.