GWR Class 800

[Bikeman78]

Yes, they're running to HST timings until the new timetable comes in in January.

Have any draft timetables been published yet? I'm interested to know how they will cut out 14 minutes between London and Cardiff, especially with the speed restriction at Steventon for electric trains. On a non stop Reading to Swindon run, that will wipe out any advantage that an IET gains by accelerating faster. An IET on electric is one minute faster than an HST Reading to Didcot.

 

[Bikeman78]

I noticed on Journey Check earlier this morning of an IET service formed 5 vice 10 that it was due to "Withdrawn for Driver Training" instead of "more than usual needing repairs" . This is the first time I've seen the truth mentioned although perhaps not in all cases.

In other words "We've sent too many HSTs off lease before we've trained enough drivers on the replacements."

 

[Dai Corner]

Have any draft timetables been published yet? I'm interested to know how they will cut out 14 minutes between London and Cardiff, especially with the speed restriction at Steventon for electric trains. On a non stop Reading to Swindon run, that will wipe out any advantage that an IET gains by accelerating faster. An IET on electric is one minute faster than an HST Reading to Didcot.

Not that I'm aware.

I suspect a lot of the gain will be by cutting out stops. I think there will be some non-stop runs between Bristol Parkway and Paddington for example.

 

[swt_passenger]

I suspect a lot of the gain will be by cutting out stops. I think there will be some non-stop runs between Bristol Parkway and Paddington for example.

It was part of the franchise announcement service description in 2015 and has been mentioned numerous times in these forums.

 

[43096]

In other words "We've sent too many HSTs off lease before we've trained enough drivers on the replacements."

They have had no choice in that. Angel have committed contractual dates with ScotRail for the transfer of sets - it is only sets going to ScotRail that have been off-leased so far. In fact the ScotRail transfers are one set behind where the original plan was, which benefits GWR (IEP cover), Wabtec (lack of capacity) and ScotRail (not paying for it).

 

[Dai Corner]

It was part of the franchise announcement service description in 2015 and has been mentioned numerous times in these forums.

I meant I wasn't aware of any draft Jan 2019 timetables.

 

[swt_passenger]

I meant I wasn't aware of any draft Jan 2019 timetables.

Yes I understood that. I was just supporting your “thinking” that there would be some stops cut. Have edited the quote to clarify that.

 

[47802]

They have had no choice in that. Angel have committed contractual dates with ScotRail for the transfer of sets - it is only sets going to ScotRail that have been off-leased so far. In fact the ScotRail transfers are one set behind where the original plan was, which benefits GWR (IEP cover), Wabtec (lack of capacity) and ScotRail (not paying for it).

Indeed although I'm not sure what they are going to do with them given Webtec's ability to convert about one train per year

 

[Bikeman78]

They have had no choice in that. Angel have committed contractual dates with ScotRail for the transfer of sets - it is only sets going to ScotRail that have been off-leased so far. In fact the ScotRail transfers are one set behind where the original plan was, which benefits GWR (IEP cover), Wabtec (lack of capacity) and ScotRail (not paying for it).

I can't think of many new designs of train that have arrived on time. Specifying off lease dates to the nearest week based on new trains being available is very brave. What would have happened if there had been a major delay as with the 385s?

 

[Bikeman78]

It was part of the franchise announcement service description in 2015 and has been mentioned numerous times in these forums.

So a lot of the journey time improvements could be achieved with HSTs. Though I appreciate that there aren't enough for the increased frequency.

 

[43096]

I can't think of many new designs of train that have arrived on time. Specifying off lease dates to the nearest week based on new trains being available is very brave. What would have happened if there had been a major delay as with the 385s?

But there was a contingency of around 3-4 months on the original IEP in-service dates to HSTs starting to go off-lease. That Hitachi have used it up is not down to Angel - their responsibility is to get the HSTs on lease again.

How much contingency do you propose? 6 months? 12 months? 24 months? And who pays for it?

 

[Dai Corner]

So a lot of the journey time improvements could be achieved with HSTs. Though I appreciate that there aren't enough for the increased frequency.

I have a 1988 timetable to hand.

The 0637 Swansea to Paddington called at Bristol Parkway at 0802 and then non-stop to Paddington arriving 0913.

In 2018, the 0629 calls at Parkway at 0803 and arrives Paddington 0925, calling at Swindon and Reading.

 

[Bikeman78]

But there was a contingency of around 3-4 months on the original IEP in-service dates to HSTs starting to go off-lease. That Hitachi have used it up is not down to Angel - their responsibility is to get the HSTs on lease again.

How much contingency do you propose? 6 months? 12 months? 24 months? And who pays for it?

It's an impossible question to answer. But plenty of new designs have been a year late, e.g. 357 and 375. The 345s aren't great either. Clearly the answer is to have old stock that no one else wants. TFL would be stuffed if the 315s had gone off lease as per the original delivery schedule of the 345s. As it is, the ROSCO will be very happy to extract more money from TFL for units that would otherwise be stored or scrapped.

 

[James James]

It's an impossible question to answer. But plenty of new designs have been a year late, e.g. 357 and 375. The 345s aren't great either. Clearly the answer is to have old stock that no one else wants. TFL would be stuffed if the 315s had gone off lease as per the original delivery schedule of the 345s. As it is, the ROSCO will be very happy to extract more money from TFL for units that would otherwise be stored or scrapped.

In the only nationalised system I regularly observe, deliveries start happening about a year in advance of the unit being needed for a new timetable. In the meantime, such new stock can be tested on individual trains allowing for (A) sufficient training, (B) getting maintenance and reliability experience, (C) potentially removing worse stock earlier (although often the new stock is needed for increased capacity/new trains starting from a given timetable change).

Of course the equations look very different with a single operator who owns all their trains outright. But it seems to be worth it, given they don't have meltdowns like the UK is currently seeing (and that's despite one manufacturer being about 4 years late delivering their new trains).

 

[Bikeman78]

I have a 1988 timetable to hand.

The 0637 Swansea to Paddington called at Bristol Parkway at 0802 and then non-stop to Paddington arriving 0913.

In 2018, the 0629 calls at Parkway at 0803 and arrives Paddington 0925, calling at Swindon and Reading.

When I moved to Cardiff in 1997 the departure time from Swansea was xx32. It then moved to xx30, xx29, xx28 and then back to xx29. I remember the 0632 (0725 from Cardiff) running non stop to Paddington. The 1700 down ran non stop to Bristol Parkway in something like 68 minutes. That all finished the day after Hatfield and was never reinstated.

 

[jimm]

If people want to get all nostalgic about ye olden days when the number of trains using the GW fast lines between Paddington and Didcot and commuter numbers from Reading and places further west were not remotely what they are now and trains hurtled along without any intermediate stops, perhaps start another thread.

Same could be said for musings about how rolling stock introductions in other countries go just swimmingly - they don't. Not just almost anything built for export around Europe by Ansaldo-Breda for the past couple of decades, but all sorts of new rolling stock in Germany in the past few years, much of it ordered by DB. New Bombardier emus for RE services were four years late into service, to take but one example.

 

[AlexNL]

Siemens and Bombardier had enormous problems with the SLT fleet (99 train sets, 648 vehicles) for the Dutch railways, NS: the fleet entered service late, initially only units of the same subclass could be coupled, and when the first winter came round 2/3rds of the fleet broke down due to snow ending up in electrical components and wreaking havoc.

 

[James James]

If people want to get all nostalgic about ye olden days when the number of trains using the GW fast lines between Paddington and Didcot and commuter numbers from Reading and places further west were not remotely what they are now and trains hurtled along without any intermediate stops, perhaps start another thread.

Same could be said for musings about how rolling stock introductions in other countries go just swimmingly - they don't. Not just almost anything built for export around Europe by Ansaldo-Breda for the past couple of decades, but all sorts of new rolling stock in Germany in the past few years, much of it ordered by DB. New Bombardier emus for RE services were four years late into service, to take but one example.

How late stock is isn't really relevant, how the operators cope is much more important for passengers. Sure, Bombardier's new double deckers for Switzerland are 4 years late. But the casual observer wouldn't notice (the more formal obsever would note that trains which were intended to be 16 cars long by now are still operating with 14 cars - and that there are still a few trains with unairconditioned stock despite it being scheduled to retire a year or two ago).

Is that the case here? It sounds like plenty of passengers are being impacted (compared to a very few passengers either standing, or sweating a bit more in the summer).

 

[D1009]

I have a 1988 timetable to hand.

The 0637 Swansea to Paddington called at Bristol Parkway at 0802 and then non-stop to Paddington arriving 0913.

In 2018, the 0629 calls at Parkway at 0803 and arrives Paddington 0925, calling at Swindon and Reading.

In 2018, all the trains are on HST timings, and some speeds are different.

 

[Dai Corner]

In 2018, all the trains are on HST timings, and some speeds are different.

Yes I know. I was trying to illustrate the time penalty extra stops introduced (and the acceleration omitting stops may make possible in the Jan 2019 timetable).

 

[Bikeman78]

If people want to get all nostalgic about ye olden days when the number of trains using the GW fast lines between Paddington and Didcot and commuter numbers from Reading and places further west were not remotely what they are now and trains hurtled along without any intermediate stops, perhaps start another thread.

Same could be said for musings about how rolling stock introductions in other countries go just swimmingly - they don't. Not just almost anything built for export around Europe by Ansaldo-Breda for the past couple of decades, but all sorts of new rolling stock in Germany in the past few years, much of it ordered by DB. New Bombardier emus for RE services were four years late into service, to take but one example.

From the discussion so far it appears that running trains with fewer intermediate stops is precisely what they plan to do with the IET timetable. Judging by the ever growing car park at Bristol Parkway then faster trains to Reading and Paddington will be welcome. I doubt many people want to go to Swindon or Didcot.

Regarding your second point, the four year late trains, I bet DB haven't sent their existing trains away or scrapped them. That is the problem here. A complex series of cascades with optimistic timescales. Presumably the driving force behind it is the abolition of Pacers by the end of next year. I'm sure that an extension of a few months would be possible. They did it for the slam door units.

 

[swt_passenger]

Yes I know. I was trying to illustrate the time penalty extra stops introduced (and the acceleration omitting stops may make possible in the Jan 2019 timetable).

Problem is though, it’s all been done before during the just over 4 years this thread has been going.
I think nearly everyone knows that the 1980s timetable was vastly different, (and similar criticisms of other routes are regularly made) but much has changed in terms of normal operating practices, not just station calls.

 

[D1009]

Yes I know. I was trying to illustrate the time penalty extra stops introduced (and the acceleration omitting stops may make possible in the Jan 2019 timetable).

Also there is some time in the schedules to be saved as a result of the Reading remodelling, up to now it has been taken purely as a performance benefit, and as a result there are regularly HSTs waiting booked time, which was hardly ever the case before. I was at Reading last week when the 1912 Paddington to Bristol came through. This train has recently become non stop Paddington to Swindon, and passed through platform 9 at what looked like the line speed of 95 mph. The staff are clearly being prepared for this becoming a regular feature, as even passengers standing behind the yellow line were politely asked to move back!

 

[Dai Corner]

Problem is though, it’s all been done before during the just over 4 years this thread has been going.
I think nearly everyone knows that the 1980s timetable was vastly different, (and similar criticisms of other routes are regularly made) but much has changed in terms of normal operating practices, not just station calls.

Also there is some time in the schedules to be saved as a result of the Reading remodelling, up to now it has been taken purely as a performance benefit, and as a result there are regularly HSTs waiting booked time, which was hardly ever the case before. I was at Reading last week when the 1912 Paddington to Bristol came through. This train has recently become non stop Paddington to Swindon, and passed through platform 9 at what looked like the line speed of 95 mph. The staff are clearly being prepared for this becoming a regular feature, as even passengers standing behind the yellow line were politely asked to move back!

Agreed. If fewer stops can save, say, eleven minutes it will be interesting to see how the other changes save the remaining time.

 

[jimm]

From the discussion so far it appears that running trains with fewer intermediate stops is precisely what they plan to do with the IET timetable. Judging by the ever growing car park at Bristol Parkway then faster trains to Reading and Paddington will be welcome. I doubt many people want to go to Swindon or Didcot.

Regarding your second point, the four year late trains, I bet DB haven't sent their existing trains away or scrapped them. That is the problem here. A complex series of cascades with optimistic timescales. Presumably the driving force behind it is the abolition of Pacers by the end of next year. I'm sure that an extension of a few months would be possible. They did it for the slam door units.

There is a world of difference between IET deliveries being some weeks behind schedule and entire train fleets sitting in sidings doing nothing for four years, as was the case with the Bombardier emus in Germany.

You make it sound so easy - just keep the old stock going - I dread to think what DB has spent to do that and on warm storage for those emus and other new trains that have been sat around doing nothing at all long after they were meant to be in service.

I'm afraid that when it comes to late deliveries of 800s and 802s to GWR, you are busy trying to make a mountain out of a molehill.

Agreed. If fewer stops can save, say, eleven minutes it will be interesting to see how the other changes save the remaining time.

Maybe go out and time station stops on services worked by 800s and compare the dwell times with services worked by HSTs, especially where there are no platform dispatchers and the train mangers have to check slam doors by themselves.

 

[Wilts Wanderer]

Point regarding Steventon bridge - the 800s will not be hampered by the 60mph speed restriction. Trains will lower the pan on approach and raise it again afterwards, with the diesel engines filling in. Linespeed of 125mph can therefore be utilised. From a timetabling perspective, the impact is less than 1-minute in each direction.

 

[Dai Corner]

Maybe go out and time station stops on services worked by 800s and compare the dwell times with services worked by HSTs, especially where there are no platform dispatchers and the train mangers have to check slam doors by themselves.

I was talking about Bristol Parkway - Paddington non-stop, so maybe 30s or so saving on dispatch from Parkway? Some saving from the higher line speed through Reading, but that may be cancelled out by the restriction at Steventon.

 

[jimm]

30 seconds is 30 seconds - it all adds up.

 

[Dai Corner]

30 seconds is 30 seconds - it all adds up.

Exactly!

Bristol will become virtually an outer-suburban destination with four trains an hour, half fast and half semi-fast. For me, the timetabling and operations are at least as important and interesting as the new rolling stock.

 

[JN114]

Point regarding Steventon bridge - the 800s will not be hampered by the 60mph speed restriction. Trains will lower the pan on approach and raise it again afterwards, with the diesel engines filling in. Linespeed of 125mph can therefore be utilised. From a timetabling perspective, the impact is less than 1-minute in each direction.

There was some discussion around this - but the suggestion had originally been dismissed as the reinforced OLE for 125mph changeover wasn’t being installed at Wantage. If it’s been confirmed they’ve sorted it and signed off 125mph Diesel-only running that’s good news!

Or is the raise it shortly afterward during station duties at Swindon/Didcot/wherever or at the next reinforced OLE zone at Moreton Cutting on the Up?