GWR Class 800

[broadgage]

If it takes only just over 3 minutes to get to 100mph why would it take 4 more to gain only 25mph. There may be some physics here I don`t understand to be honest but that doesn`t sound right.

The power available is more or less fixed, except at very low speeds when adhesion sets a limit lower than the engine power.
As the speed increases, more and more of the available power is used up in fighting friction, leaving less to accelerate the train.
Or put another way, the net power available for acceleration AFTER friction, will be a lot more at 60 MPH than at 120 MPH.
If, in the absence of any speed limits, an HST was driven flat out, it might eventually reach more than 150MPH, but acceleration from 125 up to 150mph, would take even longer than from 100 up to 125.

In the case of an IET the position is considerably complicated by some fairly sophisticated engine management software that not only limits the engine power, but applies different limits at different speeds.

 

[bastien]

If it takes only just over 3 minutes to get to 100mph why would it take 4 more to gain only 25mph. There may be some physics here I don`t understand to be honest but that doesn`t sound right.

Kinetic energy goes up with the square of velocity, then drag goes up with (something like) the cube, then there's friction and I've no idea how that increases... So yes, the last 25mph takes more energy than the first 100mph.

 

[Billy A]

If it takes only just over 3 minutes to get to 100mph why would it take 4 more to gain only 25mph. There may be some physics here I don`t understand to be honest but that doesn`t sound right.

Here's the non-physicist's answer: a vehicle only has so much power available. The faster it goes, the more power it uses and the less it has available to accelerate. As it approaches its maximum speed acceleration will taper off as all the power available is now being used.

 

[Master29]

Thanks guys. All of you very insightful. Much like boiling point tailing off just before 99.6 c it slows down the closer it gets.

 

[hexagon789]

If it takes only just over 3 minutes to get to 100mph why would it take 4 more to gain only 25mph. There may be some physics here I don`t understand to be honest but that doesn`t sound right.

Acceleration tails off as speed increases.

 

[LeeLivery]

How about you actually state what else you think should have been done with the interiors instead?

Rather than treating us to nothing more than (completely unnecessary) foul language - how considerate of you to blank out the letter 'a' - makes all the difference.

Bloody hell, I didn't mean to cause offense. It's not even my personal opinion; I made it clear above I don't really dislike the interior apart from the seats which I personally find very uncomfortable. When I read the DfT wanted to avoid GWR ordering something better than the 800s, that says to me that they saw them as "the foul language" I said.

He’s right though.

Three things:
- proper catering facilities for standard class
- better seats with more padding
- proper high quality seat covers, not flat cloth or GWR grey “AstroTurf”.

Really shouldn’t be too much to ask given the cost of travelling on them.

Indeed, on the train the other day someone was annoyed with the (lack of) catering. It was rammed because of the Rugby. There was no trolley for us!

The * is probably on the assumption there may be a profanity filter on the forum that would otherwise censor the post, not for the benefit of any potentially fragile minds reading it. Frankly I wouldn't even think twice about seeing this word to describe something that popular opinion is, let's be honest, very divided on. There are other 4-letter words that could be used in its place that would justify your reaction, but as it stands I see nothing wrong with that post at all. Any time people do mention the issues they have with the 800s, they are treated with similar derision over the fact that it's the same discussion that's been had countless times before, so they can't win.

I thought I was rather tame, I wasn't even trying to insult the trains! It's just how it came across!

 

[jimm]

The * is probably on the assumption there may be a profanity filter on the forum that would otherwise censor the post, not for the benefit of any potentially fragile minds reading it. Frankly I wouldn't even think twice about seeing this word to describe something that popular opinion is, let's be honest, very divided on. There are other 4-letter words that could be used in its place that would justify your reaction, but as it stands I see nothing wrong with that post at all. Any time people do mention the issues they have with the 800s, they are treated with similar derision over the fact that it's the same discussion that's been had countless times before, so they can't win.

It's not about anyone being fragile. This is a public forum and such language is unnecessary - there are plenty of other words that could be used to express a view instead, without needing to worry about a profanity filter.

 

[Craig2601]

It's not about anyone being fragile. This is a public forum and such language is unnecessary - there are plenty of other words that could be used to express a view instead, without needing to worry about a profanity filter.

In my opinion, I don’t see that as “foul language”, rather just a way of expressing their view. Certainly is a lot worse that could’ve been said than that with 4 letters!

 

[Darandio]

It's not about anyone being fragile. This is a public forum and such language is unnecessary - there are plenty of other words that could be used to express a view instead, without needing to worry about a profanity filter.

In that case they could have just said the word 'crap' and not worried about any profanity filter. If anyone wishes to describe that word as "foul language" then they are fragile, it's as simple as that.

I don't really think it's your place to suggest they cannot use such a tame word.

 

[47271]

Bloody hell, I didn't mean to cause offense. It's not even my personal opinion; I made it clear above I don't really dislike the interior apart from the seats which I personally find very uncomfortable. When I read the DfT wanted to avoid GWR ordering something better than the 800s, that says to me that they saw them as "the foul language" I said.



Indeed, on the train the other day someone was annoyed with the (lack of) catering. It was rammed because of the Rugby. There was no trolley for us!



I thought I was rather tame, I wasn't even trying to insult the trains! It's just how it came across!

I've used the IETs a lot now. Your comments from a passenger point of view were entirely reasonable for something that cost so much to build and costs so much to use, so I thought that criticism of the use of the word in question betrayed a defensiveness.

Moving on from that, my personal view now, having travelled regularly to and from Bristol, Oxford, Taunton and Newton Abbot over the past nine months or so, is that an IET in Standard Class serves my purposes better than an HST or, heaven forbid, a Turbo. Having a table to work at is my top priority and GWR HSTs were - latterly - a total disaster from that point of view. So I find the seats more comfortable overall.

The lighting isn't great but is better than the horrible glare of the HSTs.

Catering is a shambles, missing more often than not, but I think that's as much to do with the way GWR operates the trains. In all honesty I never went along to the buffet that much anyway.

My loud raspberry, if I'm allowed to use the word, is for First Class. I used to use this most of the time because HST Standard was so wretched. Now I can hardly see any difference between the two classes, but there's no evidence of GWR pricing accordingly, and they've always been dopey with their First Class pricing anyway. So I suppose you could say that's another win for the IETs - they're saving me, or my company, money.

So all in all, if I rated IET on comfort on my previous HST usage in First Class then they're a marked decline. But rated on value for money overall then I'm perfectly happy with them.

Just my personal views after 30 or so journeys mind.

 

[Roger100]

I've made only one IET journey so far, and a short one, Paddington to Slough. Maybe when my LNER or GC ride to London from Durham or Hartlepool is replaced I'll form some opinions.
I avoid table seats anyway. 3 hours without moving my legs because the person opposite considers all the space under the table is his is painful.
I would be happy without any catering. I never use the buffet or the trolley - the food is rubbish, the coffee stewed and the tea not much better. I bring my own food and cold drink. I avoid drinking early in the journey as the toilets can be disgusting.
My ride in 802105 was nearly spoiled because the person in the seat ahead of me wanted the blind down (the weak winter sun was obviously too much) which affected me more than her. So I'd strip out the blinds too. I'm obviously not a good fellow traveller.

 

[Noddy]

I recorded 0 to 100mph (160 km/h) in 1 min 55 secs, and 0 to 125mph (201 kmh) in 3 min 12 seconds for a pair of Class 802 sets in electric mode. To compare- my fastest HST acceleration figures are from an ex Grand Central set comprised of two power cars and a short rake of 6 MK3 coaches. 0 to 100mph was an anazing 3 mins 11 seconds and 0 to 125mph was achieved in 4 mins 50 seconds! There is a difference in performance based on the amount of trailer coaches. East Coast LNER HST sets have 9 coaches and therefore more weight and a lower power to weight ratio.

Do we have any idea how long they’ll take to get to 140mph?

 

[ainsworth74]

Perhaps a quick refresher on the Forum Rules and in particular on "bad language" might be helpful here? The Forum Rules state:

• Please ensure your contributions are suitable for the wide age range we have as forum members. We have a duty to ensure that offensive material has no place on this forum, and that content remains family friendly.

I think that is fairly clear on our intent regarding content and bad language. To cover a specific example the word "crap" whilst considered to be mild and acceptable pre-watershed by OFCOM on this Forum we would prefer that it not be used in general . The Forum Staff would turn a blind eye to it used occasionally but certainly not if it was used regularly and equally if it was directed at another member rather than at a third-party such as a train (so don't think this means that you have free reign to start using it all the time!). The Forum does also have a swear filter and whilst some milder words aren't included that doesn't necessarily mean there is carte blanche to use them all the time nor is this an invitation to try and work out which ones are included and which aren't

I hope that provides a little bit of clarity on this issue and, as always, if anyone has any questions they're welcome to contact us using the "Contact Us" button at the bottom of every page or if they see a post that they think is concerning to use the "Report" button to bring it to our attention.

Thanks,
ainsworth74

 

[Railperf]

Do we have any idea how long they’ll take to get to 140mph?

Class 395 'Javelin' seems to reach 100mph in 1 min 45 sec, 125mph in 2 min 43 secs, and 140mph in 3 min 49. So the 802 is 10 sec slower to 100mph, almost 30 secs slower to 125mph, and most likely somewhere between 30 secs to 1 min slower to 140mph. So 0-140mph in 4.5 to 5 mins is my best guess!

 

[ainsworth74]

Class 395 'Javelin' seems to reach 100mph in 1 min 45 sec, 125mph in 2 min 43 secs, and 140mph in 3 min 49. So the 802 is 10 sec slower to 100mph, almost 30 secs slower to 125mph, and most likely somewhere between 30 secs to 1 min slower to 140mph. So 0-140mph in 4.5 to 5 mins is my best guess!

It will be interesting to see what the all electric 801s can do as they won't be lugging around the same weight of engines and fuel that the 800/802s do.

 

[Railperf]

It will be interesting to see what the all electric 801s can do as they won't be lugging around the same weight of engines and fuel that the 800/802s do.

The lighter weight of the 800/1s won't make any appreciable difference. That is because the rate of acceleration is regulated by software to a specification from the department of Transport. That is why the gwr ordered class 802 accelerates faster in electric mode than the identically powered class 800. The gwr class 802 do not have to comply with the department of Transport specification as they were not ordered as part of the Intercity Express programme.
In effect what that means is that the class 800/1s should Accelerate at the same rate as a standard class 800. But the lack of fuel tanks and engines to carry round mean that it will require less power and use less energy to accelerate to it's top speed compared to the bi-modes.

 

[anamyd]

Class 395 'Javelin' seems to reach 100mph in 1 min 45 sec, 125mph in 2 min 43 secs, and 140mph in 3 min 49. So the 802 is 10 sec slower to 100mph, almost 30 secs slower to 125mph, and most likely somewhere between 30 secs to 1 min slower to 140mph. So 0-140mph in 4.5 to 5 mins is my best guess!

it's only going to take 4.5 to 5 minutes to upgrade the signalling for 140mph...? wow!

 

[Railperf]

it's only going to take 4.5 to 5 minutes to upgrade the signalling for 140mph...? wow!

There was talk of 140mph being allowed once etcs has been installed..

 

[anamyd]

There was talk of 140mph being allowed once etcs has been installed..

a bit longer than 5 minutes then

 

[Wychwood93]

a bit longer than 5 minutes then

With the assorted resignalling that has happened does anyone know whether the signal spacing made allowance for the potential of 140 mph running?

 

[JN114]

With the assorted resignalling that has happened does anyone know whether the signal spacing made allowance for the potential of 140 mph running?

140mph would require in cab signalling. The spacing of fixed lineside signals is thus irrelevant.

 

[Wychwood93]

140mph would require in cab signalling. The spacing of fixed lineside signals is thus irrelevant.

Thank you!

 

[Railperf]

Took a return trip from Paddington to Bristol Parkway yesterday. The outbound trip suffers a 12 minute delay getting to Reading due to problems at Maidenhead. But after that I was impressed with the way the superior power of the 800 was able to clawback time en-route. We made a few minutes up two Bristol and real-time trains shows only a 1 minute late arrival at Cardiff Central. On my return journey we departed Bristol 6 minutes late but arrived at Reading 2 minutes early . On this evidence it might not be a bad thing to stick to the current timings rather than introducing a faster timetable. I'm sure a number of services arrived on time today that would definitely have been late on an accelerated timetable.

 

[Thunderer]

Does anyone know how Hitachi intend to meet the ORR's demand to remedy the 3 cable loops found between the IET carriages? ORR have now given LNER a year after introduction to get it sorted (according to RAIL) and GWR IET's will be retofitted, but what is the plan?

 

[spark001uk]

It's not about anyone being fragile. This is a public forum and such language is unnecessary - there are plenty of other words that could be used to express a view instead, without needing to worry about a profanity filter.

So your frequent vitriol towards others is perfectly ok then, is it?? Glass houses and all that.

 

[spark001uk]

Does anyone know how Hitachi intend to meet the ORR's demand to remedy the 3 cable loops found between the IET carriages? ORR have now given LNER a year after introduction to get it sorted (according to RAIL) and GWR IET's will be retofitted, but what is the plan?

I read somewhere else that Hitachi apparently made some 'modifications' to the GWR fleet already, and it was just the LNER ones needed similar doing. Doesn't mean that's accurate necessarily though, just what I've read.
However it is being discussed at some length in the LNER Azuma thread.
https://www.railforums.co.uk/threads/lner-azuma-class-800-801.170436/

 

[jimm]

So your frequent vitriol towards others is perfectly ok then, is it?? Glass houses and all that.

The moderators have made their position on the use of bad language on the forum clear - the point I made was no different from that.

If you don't like any of my posts, report me to the moderators.

 

[Phil G]

Noticed recently that the exterior of the 800s is getting filthy, I can hardly see out of the window of 035 I'm on at the moment. It's back to the bad old days of BR. GWR seemed able to keep the HSTs pretty clean, do Hitachi not wash them or is the washer not very good? Really spoiling the otherwise very smart green livery.

 

[dancan]

Noticed recently that the exterior of the 800s is getting filthy, I can hardly see out of the window of 035 I'm on at the moment. It's back to the bad old days of BR. GWR seemed able to keep the HSTs pretty clean, do Hitachi not wash them or is the washer not very good? Really spoiling the otherwise very smart green livery.

Yes, I'd noticed this the other day. I noticed (at PAD) that some IETs were clean and others, as you say, filthy, but I didn't clock if there was any difference in class or destination/working.

 

[Railperf]

Noticed recently that the exterior of the 800s is getting filthy, I can hardly see out of the window of 035 I'm on at the moment. It's back to the bad old days of BR. GWR seemed able to keep the HSTs pretty clean, do Hitachi not wash them or is the washer not very good? Really spoiling the otherwise very smart green livery.

I was out on Tuesday ...both my outbound and inbound services were so dirty the windows were almost obscure!