• Our booking engine at tickets.railforums.co.uk (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!

LNER Azuma (Class 800/801)

Status
Not open for further replies.

InOban

Established Member
Joined
12 Mar 2017
Messages
4,208
I'm sure the poster meant electric locos. And 67s drink fuel on full power. Not very green.
Fundamentally, interest rates are so low that it's cheaper to buy new.
 
Sponsor Post - registered members do not see these adverts; click here to register, or click here to log in
R

RailUK Forums

Roast Veg

Established Member
Joined
28 Oct 2016
Messages
2,200
The 67s also couldn't hope to reach 125 with anything more than 5 or 6 MK4s anyway.
 

ainsworth74

Forum Staff
Staff Member
Global Moderator
Joined
16 Nov 2009
Messages
27,542
Location
Redcar
I think we're starting to wander quite a ways off topic here! This thread is about Azuma's and their construction/introduction and whilst I don't see a reason why we can't mention LNER's possible plan to procure more I don't think a discussion about the poor performance of 67s hauling Mk4s or similar discussions are quite on topic! So let's get back to Azuma's please :)
 

jam&lob

New Member
Joined
26 May 2018
Messages
2
9-car Azuma: 101 First; 510 Standard
5-car Azuma: 45 First, 254 Standard

Mk4 set: 128 First; 402 Standard

Pretty good to see an additional 80 seats on each service, especially considering the extra legroom on the Azuma.
 

Failed Unit

Established Member
Joined
26 Jan 2009
Messages
8,857
Location
Central Belt
9-car Azuma: 101 First; 510 Standard
5-car Azuma: 45 First, 254 Standard

Mk4 set: 128 First; 402 Standard

So no advantage to running a 10 car set then.

First time I had seen these figures but had hoped that at least you would get the advantage of some extra seats, to compenstate for the double crewing.

I know 5 cars is all you need for Lincoln. I guess this is discussed to death elsewhere on the 71 pages ;)
 

hexagon789

Veteran Member
Joined
2 Sep 2016
Messages
15,715
Location
Glasgow
Pretty good to see an additional 80 seats on each service, especially considering the extra legroom on the Azuma.

Well as a further comparison the Azumas seat up to 88 in Standard; the Mk4s max out at 76, but yes the capacity increase will be very welcome.
 

hexagon789

Veteran Member
Joined
2 Sep 2016
Messages
15,715
Location
Glasgow
So no advantage to running a 10 car set then.

First time I had seen these figures but had hoped that at least you would get the advantage of some extra seats, to compenstate for the double crewing.

I know 5 cars is all you need for Lincoln. I guess this is discussed to death elsewhere on the 71 pages ;)

You lose a lot in 2×5 to having two cabs in the middle, 4 accessible toilets, 2 buffet counters and 2 kitchens.

If the proposed 10-car sets (assuming they are one proper 10-car), go ahead they would have an increase over a 9-car, by how much depends on the exact seating layout arrangements, there are two likely options in my view but I can think of at least four different ones.
 

Ryry

Member
Joined
17 Feb 2019
Messages
108
If any of these break down for What ever reason could a class 67 still drag them like they currently do with the class 91s and hsts
 

EE Andy b1

Established Member
Joined
12 Dec 2013
Messages
1,212
Location
CLC
If any of these break down for What ever reason could a class 67 still drag them like they currently do with the class 91s and hsts

Should imagine that these sets carry an emergency coupler so any locomotive can be coupled if required just like on a Class 390.
 

gsnedders

Established Member
Joined
6 Sep 2015
Messages
1,472
Should imagine that these sets carry an emergency coupler so any locomotive can be coupled if required just like on a Class 390.
Provided they meet the specification, yes they do. Obviously that doesn't give any electrical control (so it's unbraked), but it does get it moving.
 

EE Andy b1

Established Member
Joined
12 Dec 2013
Messages
1,212
Location
CLC
Provided they meet the specification, yes they do. Obviously that doesn't give any electrical control (so it's unbraked), but it does get it moving.

I would have thought that the Class 80x s had a through brake pipe like a Class 390 so if being dragged in an emergency or a fault with Dynamic brakes, there would be brakes (air) on the train, but maybe not.

The Class 390 can actually run in brake pipe mode without a locomotive and no Dynamic brakes (but they don't).
 

gsnedders

Established Member
Joined
6 Sep 2015
Messages
1,472
I would have thought that the Class 80x s had a through brake pipe like a Class 390 so if being dragged in an emergency or a fault with Dynamic brakes, there would be brakes (air) on the train, but maybe not.

The Class 390 can actually run in brake pipe mode without a locomotive and no Dynamic brakes (but they don't).
Ah, re-reading the specification and checking my memory, I'm wrong and you're right.
 

philjo

Established Member
Joined
9 Jun 2009
Messages
2,884
I saw the 1730 Kings Cross to Edinburgh Azuma boarding at Kings Cross this evening (I was on the 365 on the adjacent platform) I noticed that the displays on the outside of the coaches were scrolling the calling stations. After Dunbar, it listed calling at Abbeyhill Junction and Edinburgh Waverley !
 

westv

Established Member
Joined
29 Mar 2013
Messages
4,203
I saw the 1730 Kings Cross to Edinburgh Azuma boarding at Kings Cross this evening (I was on the 365 on the adjacent platform) I noticed that the displays on the outside of the coaches were scrolling the calling stations. After Dunbar, it listed calling at Abbeyhill Junction and Edinburgh Waverley !

Those displays are good because they tell you that RTT is correct and you can board knowing it's the right train. On the other hand LNER do sometimes seem to leave it until the last minute to get the display updated.
 

swt_passenger

Veteran Member
Joined
7 Apr 2010
Messages
31,267
Those displays are good because they tell you that RTT is correct and you can board knowing it's the right train. On the other hand LNER do sometimes seem to leave it until the last minute to get the display updated.
I think what was being pointed out is that “Abbeyhill Junction” is only a timing point, not a station call...
 

800001

Established Member
Joined
24 Oct 2015
Messages
3,492
I think what was being pointed out is that “Abbeyhill Junction” is only a timing point, not a station call...

It is a known glitch that they are aware off.....1E01 also lists Craigentinny and Craigentinny depot on the PIS.
 

modernrail

Member
Joined
26 Jul 2015
Messages
1,019
Wonderful all that wasted space in the middle of the train when two units are joined together. Really good use of platform and track capacity...
Isn't it!! Not to mention passengers paying for the cab equipment and maintenance of that cab equipment for the next 30 years for no obvious reason.
 

The Nomad

Member
Joined
9 Jun 2018
Messages
44
Isn't it!! Not to mention passengers paying for the cab equipment and maintenance of that cab equipment for the next 30 years for no obvious reason.
Aside from being able to divide and run to two smaller destinations such as splitting at Leeds to go to Bradford and Harrogate...

I presume you also complained that the Class 91s had two cabs as well for no obvious reason?
 

Mark62

Member
Joined
3 Apr 2014
Messages
312
I'm in first class at present on an azuma. Seats are definitely narrower and there's quite a bit less legroom. I'd say the suspension is worse giving a very bumpy ride
I spoke to lner staff in the first class lounge and they said they'd had lots of complaints about smaller seats and uncomfy journeys. They said they aren't any faster than the old stock.
Also she said that carrying bikes was an absolute nightmare as they didn't fit properly into their bays
I've no idea where the seats are larger. Second class maybe but judging from Complaints I'd say the claims of larger seats is complete hogwash
Now there's a surprise
 

EE Andy b1

Established Member
Joined
12 Dec 2013
Messages
1,212
Location
CLC
I was on my first LNER Azumas a couple of weeks back, they were ok better looking interior than GWRs that's for sure, seats felt a bit more comfortable.
The ride quality more akin to a non-tilt Class 390 i thought, but with air bags slightly deflated, the 390 still a better ride.

Was sat in First, which looks nothing special really.

20190816_095802.jpg



20190816_095425.jpg
 

IanXC

Emeritus Moderator
Joined
18 Dec 2009
Messages
6,331
I spoke to lner staff in the first class lounge and they said they'd had lots of complaints about smaller seats and uncomfy journeys. They said they aren't any faster than the old stock.

They clearly are faster than the old stock, recovery on late running services is significantly better than historically. Obviously until the timetable is rewritten this won't be seen in advertised times.

I've no idea where the seats are larger. Second class maybe but judging from Complaints I'd say the claims of larger seats is complete hogwash
Now there's a surprise

I've not had the pleasure of first class as yet, but the leg room in Standard is significantly better, better even than a 180.
 

Mark62

Member
Joined
3 Apr 2014
Messages
312
In first class the single seats have the table leg in an appalling position. As a very tall person I would be almost totally unable to sit in these seats doe to position of legs
At present we are accelerating heavily out of York towards darlington. Ride quality is appalling with massive vibration and windows creaking. I travelled last week on a voyager in first class on this stretch and the ride was better on the voyager. Seats are comfier on the azuma with better back support for tall people
Theres only two other passengers in coach l. Thought it would be busy
I only did a short run from donny to durham today. Overall, seats are too firm and are too shallow. Compared to mk 3 and 4. I got off with backache.
Lavatories are excellent but much fewer of them. Luggage space in first is almost non exsistant. Its going to be chaos when train is fully loaded.
Ride quality was poor in many parts of route esp when train is accelerating hard. They are much better when deceleratiing.
They are not a step forwards from existing stock. For me, the seats are too hard, too shallow and table legs are in a shocking position due to narrower seats. I am tall in height but I'm not a wide person. Anyone who is very wide will have significant issues with these trains.
 
Last edited:
Status
Not open for further replies.

Top