• 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!

GWR Class 800

Status
Not open for further replies.

Bikeman78

Established Member
Joined
26 Apr 2018
Messages
4,558
But operating on a far busier line, as you have already been told - and a route where automatic train protection is in use, unlike in 1980. Since the introduction of ATP, about the best time an HST could manage between Paddington and Reading was about 25 minutes, which an IET, operating using ATP, can beat.

No one is trying to recreate the 1980 timetable, an era when many HSTs sailed straight through the likes of Reading, Didcot and Swindon and there were far fewer GW expresses generally, making far fewer stops. The country has changed, people's travel habits have changed, the railway has changed...

The railway might be busier but there is little reason for a down train from Paddington to Reading not to get a clear run. One factor that didn't exist 20 years ago is the running brake test. When I moved to Cardiff in 1997, 22 minutes to Reading was still normal though often not achieved because another train was blocking the platform ahead. I saw on the TV recently there was an attempt to break the record time to Reading set by an HST using an IET. It failed. One wonders what top speed the HST must have reached!

With regard to the non stop runs, they were abolished a day or two after Hatfield. With so many trains cancelled, those that did run stopped everywhere. The faster schedules, e.g. non stop to Bristol Parkway, never returned.
 
Sponsor Post - registered members do not see these adverts; click here to register, or click here to log in
R

RailUK Forums

Bikeman78

Established Member
Joined
26 Apr 2018
Messages
4,558
The rear set locked out if use is as infrequent as trains stopping at Pilning: once a week if that.

Pre-training:
2xGuards
2xCustomer Hosts (4 if FC)

After training:
1xTM
2xCustomer Hosts (safety trains, 4FC)
and additionally
1xTicket Examiner

RMT however, do not like the fact that their isn’t a guard in the front of the train even though Customer Hosts would have been trained to deal with situations, mostly with 2 other additional members of staff to assist with them. Don’t know what the situation is now but RMT seem to think that GWR should hire more guards (lots) or lock out the rear 5 coaches.

I'm still none the wiser. By that logic a 10 car EPB in the 1980s would have needed 10 guards.
 

Dai Corner

Established Member
Joined
20 Jul 2015
Messages
6,351
I'm still none the wiser. By that logic a 10 car EPB in the 1980s would have needed 10 guards.

Different time, different place, different agreement.

Now we have 12 car trains with no guard at all, just a driver.

I believe a 5+5 IET can go from Paddington and call at Reading and Didcot without a guard if it's going on to Oxford but needs the above manning if it's going via Swindon.
 

jyte

Member
Joined
27 Oct 2016
Messages
670
Location
in me shed
The railway might be busier but there is little reason for a down train from Paddington to Reading not to get a clear run. One factor that didn't exist 20 years ago is the running brake test. When I moved to Cardiff in 1997, 22 minutes to Reading was still normal though often not achieved because another train was blocking the platform ahead. I saw on the TV recently there was an attempt to break the record time to Reading set by an HST using an IET. It failed. One wonders what top speed the HST must have reached!

With regard to the non stop runs, they were abolished a day or two after Hatfield. With so many trains cancelled, those that did run stopped everywhere. The faster schedules, e.g. non stop to Bristol Parkway, never returned.
I read that the Paddington approach/departure was designed for and most time optimally navigated at 50mph then 80mph in the down direction, but after Labroke Grove those speed limits are now 40mph and 50mph. As a result, Paddington now has a long (and slow...ish) throat. Shortening the approach to Paddington station has been something in the works for a little while.
 

JN114

Established Member
Joined
28 Jun 2005
Messages
3,354
Can someone explain to me what is the issue with regard to staffing the 800s? Numerous other TOCs run pairs or even triples of non gangwayed units. Some have a driver and a guard, many are DOO, e.g. 12 car 365s out of King's Cross, 321s or 360s out of Liverpool Street. Given that all 800s have a driver and guard on board, why do they sometimes lock the rear set out of use?

The rear set locked out if use is as infrequent as trains stopping at Pilning: once a week if that.

Pre-training:
2xGuards
2xCustomer Hosts (4 if FC)

After training:
1xTM
2xCustomer Hosts (safety trains, 4FC)
and additionally
1xTicket Examiner

RMT however, do not like the fact that their isn’t a guard in the front of the train even though Customer Hosts would have been trained to deal with situations, mostly with 2 other additional members of staff to assist with them. Don’t know what the situation is now but RMT seem to think that GWR should hire more guards (lots) or lock out the rear 5 coaches.

Not quite.

The original intention was for 5+5 IETs to run with just a Guard - ostensibly in the Rear 5 coaches but working from the front 5 of operationally required (short platforms, etc). At the 11th hour the powers that be (be it the union, management, or more likely some combination of both) got cold feet to the idea; so wrote into the safety case for 5+5s a number of competencies that must be present on each set - Train Evacuation being the principal requirement, but there’s also some IET systems knowledge, First Aid and so on.

At the initial time this course was decided on; the RMT refused to allow Customer Hosts (whom the company had in mind) undertake the role, so the company trained up some Ticket Examiners to do it instead. This presented other issues as they were managed by the revenue team; not control; so it took a while to drum into both the Ticket Examiners and their management they were critical to operation of the services. There were also issues where certain services couldn’t be caught within any of their shifts.

RMT then rejected the creation of a whole new staff grade and offering to promote x% of customer hosts to the new grade; but eventually agreed to a new “skill” for all customer hosts to learn - Front Set Lead.

So all 5+5 IETs must have a Train Manager and a Front Set Lead - one in each half of the train. All other staffing presently remains “optional” but ideally it will be 1 Train Manager and 4 FSL-competent Customer Hosts; to enable the Train Manager to roam either portion of the train as necessary.

5 and 9 cars only need a Train Manager.

Only 5 car sets can operate DOO under present safety case - none have done so on scheduled passenger services yet, but there have been some DOO driver training runs which have run in passenger service specifically to give the drivers of using the DOO equipment “in anger” where most drivers currently learning it don’t have much (if any) recent experience of DOO operations. These drivers are always accompanied by a DOO competent DI.
 

D2007wsm

Established Member
Joined
26 Jul 2015
Messages
1,311
Can someone explain to me what is the issue with regard to staffing the 800s? Numerous other TOCs run pairs or even triples of non gangwayed units. Some have a driver and a guard, many are DOO, e.g. 12 car 365s out of King's Cross, 321s or 360s out of Liverpool Street. Given that all 800s have a driver and guard on board, why do they sometimes lock the rear set out of use?
The rear set is locked on IET services between Bristol and Weston-super-Mare. This is Probabably due to the short platforms at Nailsea & Backwell, Yatton and Worle. When the train gets to Bristol Temple Meads is turned out of the rear unit into the front unit. Now if travelling from Bath on an IET I have to remember to wait at the Bristol end of the platform to save messing about in Bristol. Luckily 2 weeks ago, it was a 9 coach IET so I didn't have to worry.
 

Pete_uk

Established Member
Joined
28 Jan 2017
Messages
1,253
Location
Stroud, Glos
I noticed last week that the delay to a 800 service was because of the train being late from the depot over the automated system. Not heard that before, maybe letting people know where the fault may lie (not that most have any idea about these things anyway)
 

Mag_seven

Forum Staff
Staff Member
Global Moderator
Joined
1 Sep 2014
Messages
10,033
Location
here to eternity
I noticed last week that the delay to a 800 service was because of the train being late from the depot over the automated system. Not heard that before, maybe letting people know where the fault may lie (not that most have any idea about these things anyway)

No conspiracy there I'm afraid -that reason (excuse) is often given out both on announcements and on journeycheck.
 

Mikey C

Established Member
Joined
11 Feb 2013
Messages
6,853
Are the electronic seat reservation displays going to be used? There was a manual card indicator used when I travelled last week
 

Charlie M.

Member
Joined
4 Oct 2015
Messages
170
Location
Gloucester
Are the electronic seat reservation displays going to be used? There was a manual card indicator used when I travelled last week

Some units have software errors, others were supposed to be diagramed as HST. Most times I have been on one they have worked.
 
Joined
31 Jul 2010
Messages
360
Surely the way they are doing things at the moment is the best way though. Guard and a Ticket Examiner at least that way the tickets are being checked in both units and there is a member of staff in every unit dedicated to customer service and safety. I suppose that GWR do not want to bear the cost of the extra member of staff.
 

D2007wsm

Established Member
Joined
26 Jul 2015
Messages
1,311
Wasn't it due to difficulties detaching/attaching at Temple Meads?
Dunno, but on the 9 coach IET at Worle The first 4 coaches were opened as happens on a HST. Worle can just about take a 4 car Sprinter.

The platforms are all short other than Weston which can accommodate the whole train on Platform 2, don't know about Platform 1 as that is not used as frequently. Generally if there is a IET/HST in the station that uses Platfrom 2 and any Turbo/Sprinter in at the same time uses Platform 1.
 
Joined
29 Nov 2016
Messages
290
Some units have software errors, others were supposed to be diagramed as HST. Most times I have been on one they have worked.

All service units have the same level software, so there isn’t a difference, the SRS has various reasons if it’s not working, could be an incorrectly formatted file (HST swaps and some of the dedicated files have errors or discrepancies) a server issue, the head code being loaded in late or running on a generic head code.
 

Bletchleyite

Veteran Member
Joined
20 Oct 2014
Messages
97,873
Location
"Marston Vale mafia"
Surely the way they are doing things at the moment is the best way though. Guard and a Ticket Examiner at least that way the tickets are being checked in both units and there is a member of staff in every unit dedicated to customer service and safety. I suppose that GWR do not want to bear the cost of the extra member of staff.

I see no reason why they should not be operated with simply a driver and a guard (or just a driver if DOO) however many units are involved. GWR's Thames Valley DMU DOO is already like this. If this is not felt to be safe for IETs, it's not safe for DMUs either and needs changing - but I'm betting it won't be.
 

IanXC

Emeritus Moderator
Joined
18 Dec 2009
Messages
6,338
So all 5+5 IETs must have a Train Manager and a Front Set Lead - one in each half of the train. All other staffing presently remains “optional” but ideally it will be 1 Train Manager and 4 FSL-competent Customer Hosts; to enable the Train Manager to roam either portion of the train as necessary.

So a Front Set Lead, can equally be a Rear Set Lead?
 

wils180

Member
Joined
19 Sep 2016
Messages
73
So a Front Set Lead, can equally be a Rear Set Lead?

Can be, but moving forward would mean dispatching from the front 5 coaches, you’d have to really think about where you would want to do this. Competence managers I’ve spoken to urge against it. Some TMs like it though!
 

jimm

Established Member
Joined
6 Apr 2012
Messages
5,231
The railway might be busier but there is little reason for a down train from Paddington to Reading not to get a clear run. One factor that didn't exist 20 years ago is the running brake test. When I moved to Cardiff in 1997, 22 minutes to Reading was still normal though often not achieved because another train was blocking the platform ahead. I saw on the TV recently there was an attempt to break the record time to Reading set by an HST using an IET. It failed. One wonders what top speed the HST must have reached!

With regard to the non stop runs, they were abolished a day or two after Hatfield. With so many trains cancelled, those that did run stopped everywhere. The faster schedules, e.g. non stop to Bristol Parkway, never returned.

I can think of a few reasons - Airport junction - as Mintona noted - regular fast line calls at Slough for most of the day by Oxford services, 387s weaving from the fast to the relief line at Slough or Maidenhead East in the afternoon/early-evening peak - any of those can slow a following service if there is a slight delay, due to the tight headways.

Non-stops to Bristol Parkway are about to make a return and even if Hatfield had never happened, the number of services making a Reading stop was only ever going to increase, for a variety of reasons.
 

Doomotron

Member
Joined
25 Jun 2018
Messages
1,184
Location
Kent
Could it be worth it to extend the 5-coach 800s to 9, 10 or 11 coaches to fix the extra staff problem (that's if it would be cheaper long-term instead of training extra people). Also, if the 802s accelerate faster, would it make sense to modify the 800s into 802s if the fuel efficiency and CO2 emissions allow it?
 

jimm

Established Member
Joined
6 Apr 2012
Messages
5,231
Could it be worth it to extend the 5-coach 800s to 9, 10 or 11 coaches to fix the extra staff problem (that's if it would be cheaper long-term instead of training extra people). Also, if the 802s accelerate faster, would it make sense to modify the 800s into 802s if the fuel efficiency and CO2 emissions allow it?

It is not a 'problem' on the not inconsiderable number of GWR services that are already/will be in future operated by single five-car IETs.

At the moment, due to the nine-car deliveries being nowhere near complete in the case of the 800 fleet, never mind the 802s, there are 2x5 formations being used on services where a nine-car will be provided in the long-term - and nine-cars operating where where single five-cars will be the long-term preference in the case of a number of off-peak London-Cheltenham and Cotswold Line services.

The costs of buying coaches that cost £2m+ in the first place, never mind leasing fees over their lifetime, are likely to massively outweigh topping up the wages of staff who would be on the train anyway to perform their main duties and have undergone some extra training so they can assist the train manager if required.
 

superalbs

Established Member
Joined
3 Jul 2014
Messages
2,469
Location
Exeter
Understand a 9 car Class 800 unit to be working:
1C75 0818 London Paddington to Paignton

Shown below is a view of a CIS displaying the service, 'Formed of 9 Coaches'.

upload_2018-7-28_8-9-49.png

Am told it is 800309. This will be the first service past Taunton.
 
Status
Not open for further replies.

Top