LNER Azuma (Class 800/801)

[hwl]

That seems a bit of a cop-out. It's clearly an infrastructure problem as they were able to resolve it trackside on the Great Western, but rather than deal with substandard infrastructure every train (which will include Transpennine & Hull Train's 802s, and potentially other new stock serving the line in future) needs to be modified. Presumably the taxpayer foots the bill in the case of the LNER units, but who's paying for the work to be done on the other operators' units?

If you read at last Month's Modern Railways you will come to different conclusion (both trains and infrastructure). The a 9car IET chucks out about 8 times (magnitude) more interference than Bombardiers traction electronics on a 12car 387 and the GWR IET units haven't got full type approval yet. DfT have told Hitachi that they shouldn't have to fund NR to make changes when competing manufacturers products haven't caused issues.

 

[samuelmorris]

I'm aware that's the case, but assuming the trains did actually meet the original specification provided (which I haven't heard anything to contradict yet) it's still at least partly on the DfT for supplying an incorrect specification. This also doesn't change the fact that the GWR network, for all the testing issues it experienced with that interference, didn't require such modifications. Are there comparisons that can be drawn between the 800 series and other similarly modern 125+mph capable multiple units? Even if the interference generated by the 800s is vast compared to previous EMUs, the point still stands if subsequent EMUs from other manufacturers also exhibit similar. I wonder how the 397s compare?

 

[superkev]

If you read at last Month's Modern Railways you will come to different conclusion (both trains and infrastructure). The a 9car IET chucks out about 8 times (magnitude) more interference than Bombardiers traction electronics on a 12car 387 and the GWR IET units haven't got full type approval yet. DfT have told Hitachi that they shouldn't have to fund NR to make changes when competing manufacturers products haven't caused issues.

A class 800 is presumably much not powerful than a 387 and it's more concentrated. I wonder how a 390 paddedcellino fairs.
K

 

[deltic08]

Is there any testing in York tomorrow afternoon? I have 2 hours to kill on the station waiting for my wife.

 

[nicolaboo]

On diesel or electric?

I can't detect the pantographs on my film of its arrival. Little noise heard as it coasted into the station, but here's a grab of the rear just prior to it stopping.

 

[a_c_skinner]

I was in Newcastle yesterday about 1700, an (all grey) 800/2 was in pl 4 with the pan down and engines running. There seemed to be a lot of LNER staff who found time to be shown round. Realtimetrains showed it as an LNER service. While I was waiting for my XC train I watched a 125 and a couple of 225 sets being dispatched and thought we'd not see such nice comfy trains again. Then my Voyager arrived...

 

[Railperf]

Here's an Azuma caught on test at Peterboro whilst i was on an outbound Class 90 hauled service.

 

[scotrail170407]

anyone know if these are class 800s on test?
http://www.realtimetrains.co.uk/sea...0?stp=WVS&show=non-passenger&order=wtt&toc=GR

 

[DanNCL]

anyone know if these are class 800s on test?
http://www.realtimetrains.co.uk/sea...0?stp=WVS&show=non-passenger&order=wtt&toc=GR

I think they are 800 workings.

 

[gavin]

LNER confirm the Azuma will be launched on the London to Leeds route in early 2019

The first Azuma train will make journeys from London to Leeds in early 2019. We'll be announcing dates for further rollouts throughout next year so keep checking back

A 24-second launch video is also out

https://www.lner.co.uk/azuma?utm_source=Twitter&utm_medium=social&utm_campaign=evergreen

 

[Grumbler]

I'm aware that's the case, but assuming the trains did actually meet the original specification provided (which I haven't heard anything to contradict yet) it's still at least partly on the DfT for supplying an incorrect specification. This also doesn't change the fact that the GWR network, for all the testing issues it experienced with that interference, didn't require such modifications. Are there comparisons that can be drawn between the 800 series and other similarly modern 125+mph capable multiple units? Even if the interference generated by the 800s is vast compared to previous EMUs, the point still stands if subsequent EMUs from other manufacturers also exhibit similar. I wonder how the 397s compare?

What's the point of NR specifying such technical limits if they can just change the specification retrospectively? If you are driving within the speed limit you don't expect to be prosecuted for speeding, do you?

 

[Grumbler]

LNER confirm the Azuma will be launched on the London to Leeds route in early 2019



A 24-second launch video is also out

https://www.lner.co.uk/azuma?utm_source=Twitter&utm_medium=social&utm_campaign=evergreen

Have they managed to solve the problem of preventing morons from climbing up onto the roof?

 

[Master29]

There`s another vid. This time a VR tour. Judging by the GWR reactions this might get a few reactions following the claims.

 

[Railperf]

I noticed from a performance perspective that LNER are selling the improved acceleration characteristics and future 140 miles per hour potential of these trains.

 

[samuelmorris]

What's the point of NR specifying such technical limits if they can just change the specification retrospectively? If you are driving within the speed limit you don't expect to be prosecuted for speeding, do you?

Not sure I understand this analogy? Are Hitachi having to bear the cost of these modifications?

 

[Grumbler]

Not sure I understand this analogy? Are Hitachi having to bear the cost of these modifications?

Sorry, I omitted to include the post you were replying to:-

DfT have told Hitachi that they shouldn't have to fund NR to make changes when competing manufacturers products haven't caused issues.

IMO DfT are completely out of order. The issues are not caused by Hitachi products, but by NR and DfT issuing an incorrect spec!

 

[ainsworth74]

IMO DfT are completely out of order. The issues are not caused by Hitachi products, but by NR and DfT issuing an incorrect spec!

I would tend to agree. Whilst the IETs do appear to be producing more interference than other trains (often considerably more!) as long as that is within the limits they were told to stick to when in the relevant operating conditions I don't see how it's any fault of Hitachi! Moving the goal posts springs to mind!!

 

[samuelmorris]

I would tend to agree. Whilst the IETs do appear to be producing more interference than other trains (often considerably more!) as long as that is within the limits they were told to stick to when in the relevant operating conditions I don't see how it's any fault of Hitachi! Moving the goal posts springs to mind!!

That's my view as well. While I can't say I agree with manufacturing a train that produces far more EM interference than other units that came before it, they have met the job brief. If they'd been asked to meet stricter EM emissions criteria I imagine they'd have built in a more elegant solution than what's being proposed.

There`s another vid. This time a VR tour. Judging by the GWR reactions this might get a few reactions following the claims.

That CGI host sure is creepy. Also entirely unnecessary! Imagine how much time it took to program and render that... Being a directly-operated route at the moment, is that potentially taxpayer's money spent on that?

The bizarre presentation aside, If I hadn't seen an 800 already I'd think these look excellent. The less sterile colour scheme helps give these a more appealing look inside, but there's no hiding those seats. Explicitly stating they're 'really comfy' knowing how controversial they've been seems willfully ignorant.

 

[GrimShady]

LNER confirm the Azuma will be launched on the London to Leeds route in early 2019



A 24-second launch video is also out

https://www.lner.co.uk/azuma?utm_source=Twitter&utm_medium=social&utm_campaign=evergreen

The Futures bright......The Futures S*"#@!

 

[swt_passenger]

I noticed from a performance perspective that LNER are selling the improved acceleration characteristics and future 140 miles per hour potential of these trains.

However apparently the recent NR briefing which was the source of the Rail Engineer magazine article quoted in this thread: https://www.railforums.co.uk/thread...ss-to-peterborough.173022/page-2#post-3737786
...all but ruled out 140 mph running.

 

[43096]

I would tend to agree. Whilst the IETs do appear to be producing more interference than other trains (often considerably more!) as long as that is within the limits they were told to stick to when in the relevant operating conditions I don't see how it's any fault of Hitachi! Moving the goal posts springs to mind!!

Interesting to note, then, both last month's coverage on this in "Informed Sources" in Modern Railways, and Roger Ford's e-preview of the next "Informed Sources" that includes the following:

Confronted with the Class 800 Electro Magnetic Compatibility (EMC) issues, analysed last month, Network Rail has insisted that to obtain Type Acceptance the EM emission levels have to be halved. That will still be significantly higher than the other new fleets entering service, but is tolerable.

However the fix won’t be cheap, quick, or even easy. According to Informed Sources the solution is to add the reactance that is missing from the Class 800 transformers. As explained last month this will involve fitting a choke (coils of copper wire on an iron core) between the transformer and the traction converter under each Driving Pantograph Transformer cars.

This raises a number of issues. Assuming space can be found in the under-frame area, and that strong enough mounting points are available, the next question is weight. I would expect a choke to weigh between one and two tonnes.
Meanwhile, Network Rail has ordered 270 Isolating Surge Protection Units (ISPU) to cover the known weakness in the Solid-State Interlocking (SSI)signalling on the ECML. These should be ready for fitting to start in January.

 

[samuelmorris]

So one wonders, if they're taking that action, why the modifications to the trains are still necessary. It can't be a cover-all in case they send them elsewhere as otherwise I'd expect the GWR units to be receiving the same modifications. A "we'll do it both ways so we'll have the problem fixed by the time whichever method finishes first is done" approach seems very unlikely. Are both measures needed?

 

[Railperf]

However apparently the recent NR briefing which was the source of the Rail Engineer magazine article quoted in this thread: https://www.railforums.co.uk/threads/£1-8-billion-etcs-kings-cross-to-peterborough.173022/page-2#post-3737786
...all but ruled out 140 mph running.

This seems to be typical marketing baloney. Advertise future 140mph running.. while no published plans exist to fulfill it.

 

[swt_passenger]

This seems to be typical marketing baloney. Advertise future 140mph running.. while no published plans exist to fulfill it.

Agree. Virgin have of course been spinning it for years on the WCML too. Probably still ex Virgin employees in the current PR department...

 

[gsnedders]

This seems to be typical marketing baloney. Advertise future 140mph running.. while no published plans exist to fulfill it.

I wonder if, like the 91s and the 390s, whether we'll look back in hindsight and say that specifying the 80x trains to be capable of 140mph just held them back. That said, given the acceleration curve is bounded not by train performance but by contracts, maybe it isn't such a problem with the 80x…

 

[ainsworth74]

I wonder if, like the 91s and the 390s, whether we'll look back in hindsight and say that specifying the 80x trains to be capable of 140mph just held them back. That said, given the acceleration curve is bounded not by train performance but by contracts, maybe it isn't such a problem with the 80x…

The damn things accelerate right quick to 125mph as it is. Might be uncomfortable for them do it any quicker

Explicitly stating they're 'really comfy' knowing how controversial they've been seems willfully ignorant.

Yes that's felt quite, er, brave I'd have to say when I first saw them making a big thing of it. Initially in the material I saw it was referred to as "ergonomically designed" which is fair enough as they are but in the breath it went on to go about how their more comfortable. Which feels a somewhat risky statement to make...

On a wider point on the interiors I see we're going to have the same problem in first class (though perhaps not quite so dramatic) of the IETs feeling less "premium" compared to what went before.

 

[Railperf]

I wonder if, like the 91s and the 390s, whether we'll look back in hindsight and say that specifying the 80x trains to be capable of 140mph just held them back. That said, given the acceleration curve is bounded not by train performance but by contracts, maybe it isn't such a problem with the 80x…

i doubt that acceleration would have been much improved even if the design maximum was 125mph instead of 140mph. Top and tail 91's would have been interesting though - as much power as a TGV! Didn't BR present a pair of 91's marshalling a set of coaches as their Transmanche Super Train alternative to Alstom's TGV?
Seriously though - 140mph or 150mph capability is probably built in to the standard reference design. Virgin's 140mph Pendolino's were based on the trains running in Italy at a service speed of 155mph. A 200km/h version - ETR470 - was built for the Swiss 'Cisalipno' outfit, but once they were brought back into Trenitalia's hands for use within the Pendolino fleet - I understand they started running at 250km/h without any modification.
In years to come - there still may be an opportunity for 800's to run at 140mph, so it would be more of a shame of they were not capable of that.

 

[43096]

Didn't BR present a pair of 91's marshalling a set of coaches as their Transmanche Super Train alternative to Alstom's TGV?

Which if you think about it, was never going to happen. Class 91 was built by GEC-Alsthom. TGV built by GEC-Alsthom. Only going to be one winner in a joint-venture involving a French organisation.

 

[Railperf]

Which if you think about it, was never going to happen. Class 91 was built by GEC-Alsthom. TGV built by GEC-Alsthom. Only going to be one winner in a joint-venture involving a French organisation.

I can't remember if GEC and Alstom had merged at that point or not. And at this time of night..apologies that I am too tired to Google it Lol

 

[hwl]

I would tend to agree. Whilst the IETs do appear to be producing more interference than other trains (often considerably more!) as long as that is within the limits they were told to stick to when in the relevant operating conditions I don't see how it's any fault of Hitachi! Moving the goal posts springs to mind!!

Bombardier (as Adtranz) and Porterbrook (ROSCO - see Ian W's comments on dealing with it as the project engineer) went through exactly the same issues with the original electrostars the 357 and got a low EMC design which everyone apart for Hitachi for the IET have copied the thinking of since.

Hitachi will have done the EMC testing statically in factory conditions and the reality in that real world conditions and measurements are different.

They are also now causing issues with newer equipment that is fully compliant not just older equipment on the East Coast as originally through.

Hitachi tried to be clever with weight saving by using new traction electronics with a reduced the IGBT switching frequency (to reduce weight through lower electronics cooling requirements (lower total switching losses) etc) and ditching a few other interference reducing features (e.g. choke) to hit the weight target, the end result is far higher emissions than if they had just used the same equipment off the 395s (Javelins). Chosing a lower IGBT switching frequency means a bigger heavier choke "If" you fit one - Opps. "if" only in the case of Hitachi as everyone else does...


One of Hitachi's senior staff has previous jobs reputations for always fighting their corner even when completely in the wrong which didn't make them popular then especially as they managed the PR element well to claim they were right, it looks like the same has happened again.