A question about Class 800s/801s/802s

[Railperf]

Plenty of 800s have had the software update now and they’re flying around all over the place. Acceleration is just as good, if not slightly better, than an HST now.

Can you try and keep a note of the ones that you feel have had the upgrade and we can keep a log of them here please buddy.

 

[Mintona]

Can you try and keep a note of the ones that you feel have had the upgrade and we can keep a log of them here please buddy.

I can tell you 800003 has, as I had it last night. Coupled with 800025 which definitely hasn’t.

 

[Railperf]

I can tell you 800003 has, as I had it last night. Coupled with 800025 which definitely hasn’t.

Cheers

 

[class26]

Yes, station to station timings in Cornwall are not the tightest. The 800's surefooted handling, more driven wheels, and better initial starting acceleration to 40mph and better braking mean they seem to keep time in Cornwall very well.
In contrast - i've seen quite variable performance from the short 2+4 HST's - which are supposed to have as good an acceleration to 40mph and better beyond. But cautious handling of the power and brakes on my journeys aboard them saw us lose time way too easily. Station stops were tardy too! Some blame this on the fact they are being driven by 'unit drivers' where the driving style is different.

I went from St Austell to Penzance by a 802 an returned by 4 car HST. The difference in acceleration was incredible, the HST was so sluggish in comparison I was really surprised.

 

[Railperf]

I went from St Austell to Penzance by a 802 an returned by 4 car HST. The difference in acceleration was incredible, the HST was so sluggish in comparison I was really surprised.

Yes..we have been told that wheelslip is an issue with the short HST's. And braking with HST's - according to drivers - can vary from set to set.
In the early days, drivers were cautious as the new 2+4 stopping positions needed getting used to. And as these HSt's are being crewed by drivers who are used to Sprinters rather than former main-line drivers, there is a feeling that it will take a while for drivers to get a feel for the HST's. I know one Exeter based main line HST driver who said that he hoped to drive the short HST's but as they have taken over local stopping services, it seems that is unlikely to be the case. I'm told the biggest issues with brakes was the responsiveness as the brakes are activated each end of the train. With a long 2 +8 HST set it takes time for the brakes to respond through the train whereas a DMU can respond much quicker. The short HSt brakes respond a bit quicker than a 2+8, but still aren't as responsive as a DMU. From my experience MU brakes seem to release instantly, allowing full power to be applied very quickly. But HST's and loco hauled stock can sometimes take an age for all the brakes to be released on intermediate vehicles. Eurostar is a classic example. Watching a 373 set power away from Ashford, you could still hear the brakes squealing as they took time to release - hindering the acceleration of the train.

 

[Railperf]

I went from St Austell to Penzance by a 802 an returned by 4 car HST. The difference in acceleration was incredible, the HST was so sluggish in comparison I was really surprised.

I was very disappointed by the GWR HST 2+4 performance in general - even on late running services where the driver had good incentive to use the performance to make up time. Drivers seemed to delay applying full power until 30 to 40mph and there was some very cautious braking. But then the schedules don't demand full blooded running.
Where we were running late - we never made up any time - in spite of clear road ahead.
Scottish drivers seem to have take to them and i have had some good fast runs between Dundee and Aberdeen - good acceleration in particular. Braking does seem to be tardier than on an MU though.

 

[Railperf]

I am hearing the 60mph speed limit for electric traction through Steventon is to be abolished from Sunday 15th september. 110mph will be the new limit for electric traction for a short stretch under the bridge.

 

[swt_passenger]

I am hearing the 60mph speed limit for electric traction through Steventon is to be abolished from Sunday 15th september. 110mph will be the new limit for electric traction for a short stretch under the bridge.

It’s been covered a couple of times in the GW electrification thread...

 

[TractiveEffort]

Plenty of 800s have had the software update now and they’re flying around all over the place. Acceleration is just as good, if not slightly better, than an HST now.

Imagination is a wonderful thing......

 

[Mintona]

Imagination is a wonderful thing......

Where previously 800s would be doing 75-80 on departure from Didcot at the ‘pan up’ point at Steventon and they’re now topping 90, I’m fairly sure I’m not imagining it.

Or the speedo staying above 90 when exiting Box Tunnel on the up as opposed to dropping down to ~75 through the tunnel.

 

[hexagon789]

Probably because it is not the maximum output that is being changed. But it is what percentage of power is being delivered through the speed range. It is too complex for the average person to grasp. In the same way most people know their car has an xxhp engine - which is the maximum amount of power that it will produce at xxrpm. But the manufacturers won;t list the exact figures it produces at every point in the rev range. Even tuners will only tell you that they can deliver up to xx% more power. The exact figures will be given to you in the form of a print out should you take it to a rolling road. But that ain't gonna happen with these trains! Not unless you can borrow one and try and get it down to your local rolling road.

I understand you now - it's not simply a case of uprating the engines, it's far more intricate than that.

 

[hexagon789]

Braking does seem to be tardier than on an MU though.

Maybe because the release is so slow?

If drivers braked harder, then obviously the brakes will take longer to release and it's possibly easier to overbrake because of this.

The Haynes manual suggests that each Step of braking takes 5mph to release - if in Step 4 speed will drop another 20mph even with a full release just because of how long it takes to fully release them.

 

[Railperf]

Where previously 800s would be doing 75-80 on departure from Didcot at the ‘pan up’ point at Steventon and they’re now topping 90, I’m fairly sure I’m not imagining it.

Or the speedo staying above 90 when exiting Box Tunnel on the up as opposed to dropping down to ~75 through the tunnel.

We were recording exit speeds of between 83 and 85mph from Box tunnel toward Swindon with 800s back in late 2017

 

[Railperf]

Maybe because the release is so slow?

If drivers braked harder, then obviously the brakes will take longer to release and it's possibly easier to overbrake because of this.

The Haynes manual suggests that each Step of braking takes 5mph to release - if in Step 4 speed will drop another 20mph even with a full release just because of how long it takes to fully release them.

Slightly OT but i guess that's where experienced drivers knew at what speed to release the brske taking that sort of knowledge into account..and also getting a 'feel' for the set.
I.E when braking to 30mph..release at 50mph knowing the set will still be slowing down as brakes release. But if you realise that the set is a good/bad one..adjust the driving accordingly.
Clearly the 800s braking system is far more powerful and responsive than an HSTs.

 

[coppercapped]

SNIP
But HST's and loco hauled stock can sometimes take an age for all the brakes to be released on intermediate vehicles. Eurostar is a classic example. Watching a 373 set power away from Ashford, you could still hear the brakes squealing as they took time to release - hindering the acceleration of the train.

I have always understood that all French trains operating at speeds in excess of 160kph use electrically controlled brakes, including the Class 373s. Nobody in their right mind would even think of running trains at 300kph with just pneumatic control of the brakes.

Thirty or so years ago I lived in France and one of my neighbours, quite by chance, was English and worked for BR. He was BR's representative for the construction and acceptance of the Eurostar trains and we spoke occasionally about trains! A French-language website, found here, confirms this where it states:

On peut s’affranchir des inconvénients dus à la commande pneumatique en la remplaçant par une commande électrique qui permet de réaliser une simultanéité de remplissage et de vidange des cylindres de frein de l’ensemble d’une rame. Dans ces conditions, il n’y a plus d’efforts longitudinaux et la performance de freinage correspond aux possibilités potentielles des équipements de freins.

Tous les trains de la SNCF circulant à plus de 160km/h en sont équipés.

The important part is the last sentence: "All SNCF trains running at more than 160kph are so equipped", the "so equipped" referring to electrically controlled brakes.
French high speed trains use either metal sintered or composite brake pads. It is possible that in the case of the trains you heard at Ashford that if the brake calliper does not pull the pads clear of the discs when released then the pads may still be in contact with the discs when the train starts. Sintered pads tend to squeal so if they were still in contact with the discs, though not providing any braking force, they would squeal until vibration or the run-out of the disc threq them clear.

 

[TractiveEffort]

Where previously 800s would be doing 75-80 on departure from Didcot at the ‘pan up’ point at Steventon and they’re now topping 90, I’m fairly sure I’m not imagining it.

Or the speedo staying above 90 when exiting Box Tunnel on the up as opposed to dropping down to ~75 through the tunnel.

There is currently a software update going on, but none of the 5 cars have been done and not many of the 9’s completed yet, it was quite a while back that the 800’s were updated to700w, so any recent increases in power have nothing to do with software, my bet would be Drivers are learning how to get the best out of them.

 

[hexagon789]

Slightly OT but i guess that's where experienced drivers knew at what speed to release the brske taking that sort of knowledge into account..and also getting a 'feel' for the set.
I.E when braking to 30mph..release at 50mph knowing the set will still be slowing down as brakes release. But if you realise that the set is a good/bad one..adjust the driving accordingly.
Clearly the 800s braking system is far more powerful and responsive than an HSTs.

Yes, it's the full EP control throughout the train on each car which makes all the difference.

I have always understood that all French trains operating at speeds in excess of 160kph use electrically controlled brakes, including the Class 373s. Nobody in their right mind would even think of running trains at 300kph with just pneumatic control of the brakes.

Thirty or so years ago I lived in France and one of my neighbours, quite by chance, was English and worked for BR. He was BR's representative for the construction and acceptance of the Eurostar trains and we spoke occasionally about trains! A French-language website, found here, confirms this where it states:

The important part is the last sentence: "All SNCF trains running at more than 160kph are so equipped", the "so equipped" referring to electrically controlled brakes.
French high speed trains use either metal sintered or composite brake pads. It is possible that in the case of the trains you heard at Ashford that if the brake calliper does not pull the pads clear of the discs when released then the pads may still be in contact with the discs when the train starts. Sintered pads tend to squeal so if they were still in contact with the discs, though not providing any braking force, they would squeal until vibration or the run-out of the disc threq them clear.

Technically so do British ones - the HSTs and 225s have electric brake units, but they only work in application and only in sending a signal from the front cab to rear cab to apply the brakes, the coaches themselves are essentially conventionally air-braked.

 

[Mintona]

There is currently a software update going on, but none of the 5 cars have been done and not many of the 9’s completed yet, it was quite a while back that the 800’s were updated to700w, so any recent increases in power have nothing to do with software, my bet would be Drivers are learning how to get the best out of them.

It shows on the TMS screen how much power the GUs are providing on each unit. The other day with 800003 and 800025, the former was showing power at around 85-90%, which is much higher than normal, with one of the coaches providing around 95%. The latter was showing 70-75%, which is far more normal. Something has been done to them to make some of them more powerful and therefore faster. I’ve not had a pair of the uprated ones together just yet, always seems to be half and half, but a colleague of mine has and told me it was faster than an HST.

 

[coppercapped]

Yes, it's the full EP control throughout the train on each car which makes all the difference.



Technically so do British ones - the HSTs and 225s have electric brake units, but they only work in application and only in sending a signal from the front cab to rear cab to apply the brakes, the coaches themselves are essentially conventionally air-braked.

I know that, and have done since, ooh, 1974 or thereabouts. It was well publicised in the technical press at the time as being one of the reasons that 125mph operation was possible with signal spacings laid out for 100mph vacuum braked stock.
The TGVs have electric control to each bogie - and that includes the Class 373 which is a TGV variant. They are not like an HST or a Class 91 with DVT.

 

[Railperf]

Does the TMS display a power percentage for the unit or does it display power percentages for each GU? I ask because one day after travelling on an underpowered class 802 unit I asked the driver how many engines were down and he simply said the train was on 2/3 power. he further commented in that case that he could have tried to restart the engines manually but it would have lost more time than simply continuing with reduced power.

Also so if the TMS does show individual power levels for each GU, do you see the power levels for the remaining engines increase to compensate for the one lost?

 

[Railperf]

Examining some 2018 data on start to stop journey times between Reading and Swindon. Average unchecked run times for HST's were 24min 47 sec. Class 80x in electric mode with a short diesel stretch through Steventon averaged 24 min 16 sec start to stop.
800s in diesel mode only - more than 2 minutes slower at 26min 28 sec.
It does highlight why the 800s do need a greater spread of power than has historically been available in diesel mode. Especially if they are going to keep time from December 19.

 

[Clarence Yard]

There is currently a software update going on, but none of the 5 cars have been done and not many of the 9’s completed yet, it was quite a while back that the 800’s were updated to700w, so any recent increases in power have nothing to do with software, my bet would be Drivers are learning how to get the best out of them.

The modification to the traction power curve has everything to do with the software - that is how it is done. What has effectively happened is that the engines are being electronically "opened out" to perform to a higher power curve at various speeds. 700kw was done right from the start of passenger operations but how that was applied is now the subject of this modification, "v64" in Hitachi speak.

If you look at the TMS on one of the maintenance screens you can see the effect of the modification by looking at the torque percentage figures for each engine and you can see the variance "spread" will widen on acceleration and the absolute top limit achieved will also have increased.

Nearly all of the 9 car cl.800 have been modified but only a few of the 5 car cl.800 have so far been - it was about a third of the 57 units in total as at last weekend. They are currently being modified at the rate of 6 to 8 a week so all should be done in the next few weeks.

 

[II]

Does the TMS display a power percentage for the unit or does it display power percentages for each GU? I ask because one day after travelling on an underpowered class 802 unit I asked the driver how many engines were down and he simply said the train was on 2/3 power. he further commented in that case that he could have tried to restart the engines manually but it would have lost more time than simply continuing with reduced power.

Also so if the TMS does show individual power levels for each GU, do you see the power levels for the remaining engines increase to compensate for the one lost?

Yes and yes. Power output is shown for each GU as a percentage, and if one is lost you see the others uprate the percentage. With the previous power settings you would be in the 90+% bracket only at very low speeds or if a GU or two were out. It'll be interesting to see how any software modifications alter that.

 

[TractiveEffort]

The modification to the traction power curve has everything to do with the software - that is how it is done. What has effectively happened is that the engines are being electronically "opened out" to perform to a higher power curve at various speeds. 700kw was done right from the start of passenger operations but how that was applied is now the subject of this modification, "v64" in Hitachi speak.

If you look at the TMS on one of the maintenance screens you can see the effect of the modification by looking at the torque percentage figures for each engine and you can see the variance "spread" will widen on acceleration and the absolute top limit achieved will also have increased.

Nearly all of the 9 car cl.800 have been modified but only a few of the 5 car cl.800 have so far been - it was about a third of the 57 units in total as at last weekend. They are currently being modified at the rate of 6 to 8 a week so all should be done in the next few weeks.

When I said nothing to do with software, I meant recent changes, there are 2, 9 cars left to do, one 5 car has been done (and with reference to a post further back in the thread, it’s not 800003)

 

[hexagon789]

I know that, and have done since, ooh, 1974 or thereabouts. It was well publicised in the technical press at the time as being one of the reasons that 125mph operation was possible with signal spacings laid out for 100mph vacuum braked stock.
The TGVs have electric control to each bogie - and that includes the Class 373 which is a TGV variant. They are not like an HST or a Class 91 with DVT.

I know that as well, I was simply intending to point out that there aren't 125mph without any electric brake assistance, that was all.

I appreciate the HST/225 system is quite basic compared to the full EP system employed by TGVs and indeed many forms of loco-hauled trains across various countries on the continent.

 

[Railperf]

The modification to the traction power curve has everything to do with the software - that is how it is done. What has effectively happened is that the engines are being electronically "opened out" to perform to a higher power curve at various speeds. 700kw was done right from the start of passenger operations but how that was applied is now the subject of this modification, "v64" in Hitachi speak.

If you look at the TMS on one of the maintenance screens you can see the effect of the modification by looking at the torque percentage figures for each engine and you can see the variance "spread" will widen on acceleration and the absolute top limit achieved will also have increased.

Nearly all of the 9 car cl.800 have been modified but only a few of the 5 car cl.800 have so far been - it was about a third of the 57 units in total as at last weekend. They are currently being modified at the rate of 6 to 8 a week so all should be done in the next few weeks.

Are the 802s being modified too?

 

[Mintona]

800003, 800005 and 800028 are all producing much higher power and better acceleration/top speed than previously. I haven’t driven all of them so I can’t comment on exactly which have been done but those three have definitely had something changed. 800025, 800026 and 800027 definitely haven’t yet.

I’ve only had 800/3s today so haven’t had a chance to check any others.

 

[TractiveEffort]

800003, 800005 and 800028 are all producing much higher power and better acceleration/top speed than previously. I haven’t driven all of them so I can’t comment on exactly which have been done but those three have definitely had something changed. 800025, 800026 and 800027 definitely haven’t yet.

I’ve only had 800/3s today so haven’t had a chance to check any others.

They honestly haven’t had anything changed, but change is coming.

 

[TractiveEffort]

Are the 802s being modified too?

They are having engine and software updates.

 

[Clarence Yard]

They honestly haven’t had anything changed, but change is coming.

Correct. The 5 cars that have been done on my list (a few days old now) are only 10, 13, 17 and 22. Of the 9 cars only 301, 304, 305, 311, 315 and 321 remained to be modified. 305 is the black sheep of the fleet, having hardly turned a wheel since May due to a recurrent fault.

It’s being done at the rate of about one a day so when I return from leave in 10 days time, I expect around 50% of the 800 fleet to have had the software update.