• 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!

Class 800/802 Compatability

Status
Not open for further replies.

coxy

Member
Joined
2 Apr 2011
Messages
181
So far I've never seen a 10 car GWR formation made up of an 800/0 coupled to an 802/0.

Is this due to incompatibility between the classes, or perhaps simply operational reasons ?
 
Sponsor Post - registered members do not see these adverts; click here to register, or click here to log in
R

RailUK Forums

swt_passenger

Veteran Member
Joined
7 Apr 2010
Messages
31,418
So far I've never seen a 10 car GWR formation made up of an 800/0 coupled to an 802/0.

Is this due to incompatibility between the classes, or perhaps simply operational reasons ?
I think this was answered in the original long running GWR 800 thread, but “Search” is proving fruitless. IIRC it was either something to do with the separate Hitachi contracted running hours, and keeping them on their own discrete diagrams; or it was to do with the software being at different modification states, and a precaution against communication problems. I guess one of the insiders will know the current thinking...
 

pdeaves

Established Member
Joined
14 Sep 2014
Messages
5,631
Location
Gateway to the South West
There was an incident where one variant (cannot remember which) failed and the other variant was nearby but it could not be used for rescue as Hitachi didn't know if they could 'talk' to each other. I would hope they know now...!
 

Nippy

Member
Joined
13 Aug 2013
Messages
648
I am pretty certain the GWR ones can't run in passenger service in mixed 800/802 formation. @JN114 will hopefully confirm either way.
 

swt_passenger

Veteran Member
Joined
7 Apr 2010
Messages
31,418
It could well still be “mod state” related on GW.

But I just found pics of a 14 car ECS arriving at Eastleigh which was formed of a TPE 802 and an LNER 800, so it seems likely that there’s no fundamental reason why it cannot ever happen once everything settles down...
 

tomglazed

Member
Joined
3 Apr 2018
Messages
38
My understanding and if memory serves correctly from the GWR thread is that it is (or was) due to the different train management software characteristics, namely I believe engine management software which means in most circumstances you are unable to run an 800 and 802 coupled in service. Emergency moves I’m sure are another thing.

800 and 801’s will likely also have differing Train Management Software so could run into issues there?
 

swt_passenger

Veteran Member
Joined
7 Apr 2010
Messages
31,418
My understanding and if memory serves correctly from the GWR thread is that it is (or was) due to the different train management software characteristics, namely I believe engine management software which means in most circumstances you are unable to run an 800 and 802 coupled in service. Emergency moves I’m sure are another thing.

800 and 801’s will likely also have differing Train Management Software so could run into issues there?
They shouldn’t, because in the original DfT spec multiple running of the two types of IEP spec units was an “essential requirement”.
 

Doomotron

Member
Joined
25 Jun 2018
Messages
1,180
Location
Kent
My understanding and if memory serves correctly from the GWR thread is that it is (or was) due to the different train management software characteristics, namely I believe engine management software which means in most circumstances you are unable to run an 800 and 802 coupled in service. Emergency moves I’m sure are another thing.

800 and 801’s will likely also have differing Train Management Software so could run into issues there?
The 800s are being uprated so they're just as powerful as 802s. Surely this will make them compatibility?
 

Energy

Established Member
Joined
29 Dec 2018
Messages
4,469
The 800s are being uprated so they're just as powerful as 802s. Surely this will make them compatibility?
I'm guessing they are just flashing the 802s engine management software onto the 800s and adding extra fuel tanks?
 

Doomotron

Member
Joined
25 Jun 2018
Messages
1,180
Location
Kent
I'm guessing they are just flashing the 802s engine management software onto the 800s and adding extra fuel tanks?
I know they're changing the power curves to make them more powerful (probably to be the same as 802s, but it could be different). I'm not sure about the extra fuel tanks though, but they probably are if they're doing it to get 800s on the Exeter routes.
 

Nick Ashwell

Member
Joined
20 Dec 2018
Messages
391
I'm guessing they are just flashing the 802s engine management software onto the 800s and adding extra fuel tanks?

I think there's no extra tanks but indeed the uprated engines. That uprating literally has nothing to do with compatibility, you cNlan run equivalent engine software without nessecarily making them compatible. For example LibreOffice can open the same files as Ms Office but to call the two fully compatible is way off
 

tomglazed

Member
Joined
3 Apr 2018
Messages
38
I know they're changing the power curves to make them more powerful (probably to be the same as 802s, but it could be different). I'm not sure about the extra fuel tanks though, but they probably are if they're doing it to get 800s on the Exeter routes.
Key differences at the point of delivery between 800’s & 802’s were:
- Uprated engines and power curve
- Larger fuel tanks
- Larger roof mounted resistor banks
- Seat upholstery
All but the resistor banks have or are being changed to be equivalent or close to. With the question of comparability regarding software, I think the queries came from the fact the different unit types had different power curves and overall output settings and I’m not sure if it was ever concluded that the software was yet capable (800’s with 802’s) to automatically match one another.

With 800’s to 801’s, I’d be interested to see if they can run on the 800’s diesel power: wouldn’t be surprised if that would be for emergency/out of service only. Would expect electric operation to be okay.
 

Clarence Yard

Established Member
Joined
18 Dec 2014
Messages
2,491
Right, i’m going to say this once again, hopefully for the very last time.

Both the GWR 800 and 802 sets all entered passenger service with the larger 1550L fuel tanks. The 1350L fuel tanks only appeared on the first four units and were changed out prior to entering service. Unit 4 was the first iirc, done for the fuel test runs in early 2017.

Both the 800 and 802 sets all entered passenger service set to 700kw, although this was heavily governed to reduce engine wear. The class 802 were initially set up with a different (more aggressive) initial acceleration curve. Both classes are to have the same traction software set up, in time for the December timetable.

The seat covers in the 800 sets were initially to the “Government” pattern. This was/is being changed out to match the GWR 802 pattern.

The large brake resistors are on the Cl.802 fleet. These are spray proof but not wave proof, the salt from which will short the resistor circuits and therefore the engine cuts out. There is a software mod being done to allow for repetitive resets, which usually allows the engines to restart.

There are contractual reasons why the two fleets cannot be fully interchangeable. They are on different maintenance regimes and the 800 sets are limited as to which depots they can see at night and in what quantity.
 
Joined
29 Nov 2016
Messages
290
I'm guessing they are just flashing the 802s engine management software onto the 800s and adding extra fuel tanks?
Both types have and have had for a while, the same engine software. There is an update, but that is being rolled across both fleets, so again, no difference.
 

JN114

Established Member
Joined
28 Jun 2005
Messages
3,354
I am pretty certain the GWR ones can't run in passenger service in mixed 800/802 formation. @JN114 will hopefully confirm either way.

Sorry only just saw this:-
As far as I’m aware - and to caveat I don’t have much professional interest in IETs these days; my day job is on the 16x/387s/332s side of the office so I might be a little out of date - mixed formations of 800s and 802s are not permitted in GWR service; and the units won’t get along if coupled. There’s certainly been some late night doubling of ECS moves where an Oxford or a Bedwyn has been 800 vice 802 and needs to couple to another 802 to go down to North Pole.
 

Nippy

Member
Joined
13 Aug 2013
Messages
648
Sorry only just saw this:-
As far as I’m aware - and to caveat I don’t have much professional interest in IETs these days; my day job is on the 16x/387s/332s side of the office so I might be a little out of date - mixed formations of 800s and 802s are not permitted in GWR service; and the units won’t get along if coupled. There’s certainly been some late night doubling of ECS moves where an Oxford or a Bedwyn has been 800 vice 802 and needs to couple to another 802 to go down to North Pole.
Thanks, we did have a shamozzle at Padd where an 800 and 802 were sent out on diagrams which attach. Unfortunately no one noticed until the driver had coupled them up and they wouldn't play ball. Fitters had to come from NP to detach them
 

coxy

Member
Joined
2 Apr 2011
Messages
181
Thanks for all the replies to my original question. Seems like GWR are having to manage two separate fleets at the moment, ensuring that the correct type of unit (ie 800/0 or 802/0) is allocated to a diagram to ensure compatibility later on in the day in the event of units having to couple up to form a 10 car formation.
 

Energy

Established Member
Joined
29 Dec 2018
Messages
4,469
Seems strange they aren't comparable, hopefully fixed in a software update after the mods
 

hexagon789

Veteran Member
Joined
2 Sep 2016
Messages
15,785
Location
Glasgow
Seems strange they aren't comparable, hopefully fixed in a software update after the mods

Shortsighted more like, but unsurprising.

While it's understandable having the 802s ordinarily diagrammed to their originally intended routes, the flexibility would surely come in very useful for passenger and ECS workings if needed.
 

Energy

Established Member
Joined
29 Dec 2018
Messages
4,469
Shortsighted more like, but unsurprising.

While it's understandable having the 802s ordinarily diagrammed to their originally intended routes, the flexibility would surely come in very useful for passenger and ECS workings if needed.
I'm blaming the 800s not the 802s, or more particularly the government, surely somebody should have thought "oh wait these trains can't get through the route" and that maybe they should go 125 on diesel...
 

hwl

Established Member
Joined
5 Feb 2012
Messages
7,396
I'm blaming the 800s not the 802s, or more particularly the government, surely somebody should have thought "oh wait these trains can't get through the route" and that maybe they should go 125 on diesel...
Virtually all the 105mph+ track the 800s (GW +EC) would have travelled on was due to be electrified... (and has largely been - just bit later than planned)
 
Last edited:

hexagon789

Veteran Member
Joined
2 Sep 2016
Messages
15,785
Location
Glasgow
I'm blaming the 800s not the 802s, or more particularly the government, surely somebody should have thought "oh wait these trains can't get through the route" and that maybe they should go 125 on diesel...

Well at least they are all having the software modified to have improved performance on diesel.
 
Status
Not open for further replies.

Top