LNER Azuma (Class 800/801)

snowball

Established Member
Joined
4 Mar 2013
Messages
4,706
Location
Leeds
Roger Ford has four pages (30-33) in the new (October) Modern Railways on electromagnetic compatibility issues with class 80x and signalling/telecoms equipment.
 
Sponsor Post - registered members do not see these adverts; click here to register, or click here to log in
R

RailUK Forums

LNW-GW Joint

Veteran Member
Joined
22 Feb 2011
Messages
14,130
Location
Mold, Clwyd
Someone added Class 802 without a source, I've reverted it
The necessary upgrades to the northern ECML to allow the desired number of LNER, TPE and First electric services have not been scheduled yet, so the start dates are also unconfirmed.
NR also has to sort out the signalling interference problem to allow Class 80x to operate on electric north of Doncaster.
 

Chuggington21

Member
Joined
18 Dec 2016
Messages
189
The necessary upgrades to the northern ECML to allow the desired number of LNER, TPE and First electric services have not been scheduled yet, so the start dates are also unconfirmed.
NR also has to sort out the signalling interference problem to allow Class 80x to operate on electric north of Doncaster.
I've heard there could be a major delay with the Azumas because of the interference. But surely for TPE and 802s going Edinburgh to York it shouldn't be an issue as they could just run as diesel??
 

59CosG95

Established Member
Joined
18 Aug 2013
Messages
4,680
Location
WIM/PBO
I've heard there could be a major delay with the Azumas because of the interference. But surely for TPE and 802s going Edinburgh to York it should be an issue as they could just run as diesel??
The interference is caused by the asynchronous motors on the units, which would be in operarion whether a unit was running on AC or diesel.
The problem is likely to be solved by Christmas (or so I've been told on't grapevine), as the problem lies with York IECC, which uses older solid-state interlockings that fall foul of the harmonics given off by the motors (and at Colton Jct, the traction return current). Over the Christmas Period, the IECC is due to transfer to the more modern ROC at York, where signals will be immunised against the specific 80x frequency.

So no - the issue won't apply to TPE as the problems will all hopefully be ironed out at the turn of the year.
 

Domh245

Established Member
Joined
6 Apr 2013
Messages
5,406
Location
Nottingham
The interference is caused by the asynchronous motors on the units, which would be in operarion whether a unit was running on AC or diesel.
The problem is likely to be solved by Christmas (or so I've been told on't grapevine), as the problem lies with York IECC, which uses older solid-state interlockings that fall foul of the harmonics given off by the motors (and at Colton Jct, the traction return current). Over the Christmas Period, the IECC is due to transfer to the more modern ROC at York, where signals will be immunised against the specific 80x frequency.

So no - the issue won't apply to TPE as the problems will all hopefully be ironed out at the turn of the year.
If that was the case then surely they'd be have been completely forbidden from running, rather than just a restriction that forces them to run on Diesel
 

cactustwirly

Established Member
Joined
10 Apr 2013
Messages
5,575
Location
UK
I've heard there could be a major delay with the Azumas because of the interference. But surely for TPE and 802s going Edinburgh to York it shouldn't be an issue as they could just run as diesel??
The initial diagrams in December are to Hull and Leeds anyway...
 

SansHache

Member
Joined
31 Mar 2015
Messages
70
If that was the case then surely they'd be have been completely forbidden from running, rather than just a restriction that forces them to run on Diesel
The issue is caused by the high frequency harmonics in the primary return current. This is a consequence of the switching of the input converters rather than the Traction 3-phase inverter. When opersting in diesel mode there is no return current through the rails so far less likely to be an issue.
Train performance in diesel and electric modes is a different matter though and could cause timetable issues.
 

59CosG95

Established Member
Joined
18 Aug 2013
Messages
4,680
Location
WIM/PBO
Aren't York IECC and ROC in the same building?
They are, yes, but the ECML north of York uses an older form of interlocking than that used on the line towards Leeds. Once the interlocking is replaced over Xmas, the IECC's control of the ECML north of York will move to the ROC, and the problems *should* sort themselves out.
 

LNW-GW Joint

Veteran Member
Joined
22 Feb 2011
Messages
14,130
Location
Mold, Clwyd
The interference is caused by the asynchronous motors on the units, which would be in operarion whether a unit was running on AC or diesel.
The problem is likely to be solved by Christmas (or so I've been told on't grapevine), as the problem lies with York IECC, which uses older solid-state interlockings that fall foul of the harmonics given off by the motors (and at Colton Jct, the traction return current). Over the Christmas Period, the IECC is due to transfer to the more modern ROC at York, where signals will be immunised against the specific 80x frequency.
So no - the issue won't apply to TPE as the problems will all hopefully be ironed out at the turn of the year.
That would be true if it was a full resignalling, but might well not apply if the change is simply a recontrol of existing interlockings.
Roger Ford seemed to think there were several places from Colton Jn up to Edinburgh which will need additional kit installed.
 
Last edited:

JN114

Established Member
Joined
28 Jun 2005
Messages
2,331
Aren't York IECC and ROC in the same building?
They are, yes, but the ECML north of York uses an older form of interlocking than that used on the line towards Leeds. Once the interlocking is replaced over Xmas, the IECC's control of the ECML north of York will move to the ROC, and the problems *should* sort themselves out.
No they’re not.

York IECC is the older (1990s) building behind/alongside Platform 11. Memory tells me it’s a blue corrugated metal building but I might be misremembering the colour... That contains the workstations for York (2), and the Leeds area (4).

York ROC was built in a new, adjacent compound further South; and signals various areas - I forget the full list but it definitely includes Sheffield. York ROC also houses the various “control” functions for LNE route.
 

59CosG95

Established Member
Joined
18 Aug 2013
Messages
4,680
Location
WIM/PBO
No they’re not.

York IECC is the older (1990s) building behind/alongside Platform 11. Memory tells me it’s a blue corrugated metal building but I might be misremembering the colour... That contains the workstations for York (2), and the Leeds area (4).

York ROC was built in a new, adjacent compound further South; and signals various areas - I forget the full list but it definitely includes Sheffield. York ROC also houses the various “control” functions for LNE route.
Ah, my apologies. I had no idea they were in distinctly separate buildings. Either way, the Leeds interlockings are unaffected by the 80x units, while the York ones are affected.
 

BowesRanger

Member
Joined
16 Jul 2018
Messages
100
A unit parked up to the west of the mainline at Hornsey this morning.

The plain Grey is a little dull right now, you'd have to say
 

samuelmorris

Established Member
Joined
18 Jul 2013
Messages
4,529
Location
Brentwood, Essex
A unit parked up to the west of the mainline at Hornsey this morning.

The plain Grey is a little dull right now, you'd have to say
It doesn't look as if it'll get much better in practice either. Unlike East Coast which had some sort of livery even if rather dull, LNER seems to be simply a placeholder graphic for when the private operator takes over a year later when presumably their livery gets applied. What's the betting that they won't want to waste time repainting units that age and we end up with white 800s on East Coast until that franchise inevitably goes down the pan as well gets renewed?
 

SPADTrap

Established Member
Joined
15 Oct 2012
Messages
2,344
I've heard there could be a major delay with the Azumas because of the interference. But surely for TPE and 802s going Edinburgh to York it shouldn't be an issue as they could just run as diesel??
And the problems with the brakes not applying. Top quality kit.
 

sprinterguy

Established Member
Joined
4 Mar 2010
Messages
10,521
Location
Macclesfield
. Unlike East Coast which had some sort of livery even if rather dull, LNER seems to be simply a placeholder graphic for when the private operator takes over a year later when presumably their livery gets applied.
Unlike persistent incorrect rumours with other TOC identities, the LNER brand has actually been stated by the DfT to be the intended identity of the East Coast operation for years to come, regardless of operator.
 

sprinterguy

Established Member
Joined
4 Mar 2010
Messages
10,521
Location
Macclesfield
I did suspect this was the case, but if that's true then the choice of using an 'interim' livery is even more strange. Budgetary constraint perhaps?
Pretty much. The reasoning was set out here:
https://assets.publishing.service.g...018-options-assessment-report-web-version.pdf
49 There are significant costs associated with changing a brand. OLR would incur these costs immediately, as it needs to replace the previous branding, logos and promotional materials of VTEC. However, because of the decision to immediately introduce a new railway brand that will apply for many decades to come, the OLR option will not incur further rebranding costs post-OLR. The VTEC option would keep current branding in the short term, but would require a rebranding exercise once VTEC ceased operation and the East Coast Partnership was in place.
 

SC43090

Member
Joined
7 Sep 2018
Messages
197
Does anyone know when the first one will be running with LNER?

As it stands it should be at the start of the December timetable change.... The service to go over is the Hull KX / KX Leeds / Leeds KX / KX Hull / Hull Doncaster.... Iv'e been told that it could go over to IET the week before the timetable change.....

SC43090
 

43094

Member
Joined
19 May 2010
Messages
710
Planned to be 1A12 0700 HUL - KGX on 4 December at the moment. Subject to change, etc etc
 
Last edited:

1179_Clee2

Member
Joined
4 Aug 2016
Messages
282
Location
North East Lincolnshire
New RAIL magazine 863 (headline on cover)

ORR suspends approval for LNER IEPs-
yet Great Western IEPs remain in use

ORR spokesman Simon Belgard told RAIL " We can confirm that we have paused the granting of further authorisations to place Hitachi IEPs in service. The reason for this is the inter-car connectors and the possibility they could be used as a ladder to climb on the vehicle roof "
No Class 800/801 can be used by LNER until newly identified safety issues have been addressed, potentially jeopardising the planned introduction of the fleet this December.
 

Top