LNER Azuma (Class 800/801)

Discussion in 'Traction & Rolling Stock' started by snowball, 28 Sep 2018.

  1. cactustwirly

    cactustwirly Established Member

    Messages:
    5,062
    Joined:
    10 Apr 2013
    Location:
    UK
    The seating plan for the Sundays only 1845 LDS - KGX is completely wrong, shows a 9 car HST with coaches B - G & K, L, M, with a quiet coach.
    Should be an 8 coach HST, with coaches A - H an no quiet coach.
     
  2. absolutelymilk

    absolutelymilk Established Member

    Messages:
    1,141
    Joined:
    18 Jul 2015
    Richard Clinnick has reported that the Azumas will come into traffic next year at some point, rather than this December.

    https://twitter.com/Clinnick1/status/1055717951473676293
     
  3. AlexNL

    AlexNL Established Member

    Messages:
    1,228
    Joined:
    19 Dec 2014
  4. AverageTD

    AverageTD Member

    Messages:
    105
    Joined:
    13 Aug 2017
    Location:
    West London
    Maybe a bit off topic but have the diesel runnings north of York been sorted out or will they still be limited to Leeds, York and Newark services.
     
  5. Eric

    Eric On Moderation

    Messages:
    594
    Joined:
    21 Oct 2010
    Location:
    West Yorkshire
    No surprise to see the new Azumas will be diesel only mode north of York due to poor lineside infrastructure. Once again further proof that this Tory government doesn’t give a monkeys about the North.

    It’s embarrassing that this wicked government have spent £2.7 billion on these Hitachi trains and yet they can’t be used to their full potential because the government hasn’t invested money in line side signals.

    Embarrassing
     
  6. deltic08

    deltic08 On Moderation

    Messages:
    2,437
    Joined:
    26 Aug 2013
    Location:
    Ripon
    You mean there aren't going to be seats to allow more standing room?
     
  7. LNW-GW Joint

    LNW-GW Joint Veteran Member

    Messages:
    13,516
    Joined:
    22 Feb 2011
    Location:
    Mold, Clwyd
    You mean because Network Rail didn't know (or didn't realise) that its infrastructure north of York wouldn't support 80x in electric mode?
    Reading Roger Ford's article, it's not at all clear who is "at fault" here.
    In this particular case, I'm sure DfT would have funded the upgrade had it been part of the NR plan (and some other deserving project would have been canned).
     
  8. trebor79

    trebor79 Established Member

    Messages:
    1,038
    Joined:
    8 Mar 2018
    It's only temporary until the signalling issue is fixed surely?
     
  9. samuelmorris

    samuelmorris Established Member

    Messages:
    4,054
    Joined:
    18 Jul 2013
    Location:
    Brentwood, Essex
    I'm pretty sure that's only a temporary situation. Rather than have diesel mode only north of York, they're simply not running them at all until the issue is resolved. I haven't seen any official about a permanent diesel-only restriction north of York as if there is one that's going to add a fair hit to the journey times for the services that run fast to Darlington/Newcastle and from there to Edinburgh. If there is such a thing, I'm all ears. It'd be very disappointing.
     
  10. Class37.4

    Class37.4 Member

    Messages:
    125
    Joined:
    8 Oct 2018
    Haven’t these trains been tested on the ecml for a considerable period and hence you expect that these problems would have been identified and sorted by now.

    Similarly the alleged concern by the Rail regulator about people being able to climb on the cables given the length of time these trains have been running on GWR.

    It just smacks of complete incompetence by the rail industry who are now seem to be incapable of delivering just about anything on time or on budget.
     
  11. Grumbler

    Grumbler Member

    Messages:
    226
    Joined:
    27 Mar 2015
    A similar thing with the introduction of the Swiss built class 92s on the southern region. BR at first tried to pin the blame for the interference with the signalling system upon the manufacturer, but it emerged that the problem was down to BR who had not taken into account the susceptibility of their equipment to electrical noise.
     
  12. greyman42

    greyman42 On Moderation

    Messages:
    1,076
    Joined:
    14 Aug 2017
    Will the 800s be able to run the York - London stoppers on electric before the signalling issues are resolved?
     
  13. Eric

    Eric On Moderation

    Messages:
    594
    Joined:
    21 Oct 2010
    Location:
    West Yorkshire
    It was in the Financial Times earlier this week. Really good article about the lack of foresight and investment.

    Are the three trains that are here still going into service on December 4th or is the article right that it will now be next May ?
     
  14. samuelmorris

    samuelmorris Established Member

    Messages:
    4,054
    Joined:
    18 Jul 2013
    Location:
    Brentwood, Essex
    I'm pretty sure service date is no longer going to be this year but I don't know if it's as far away as May.

    Again re: that article, I heard about the interference issues weeks ago, but do we have an official source saying that situation is permanent? I find that a little hard to believe...
     
  15. Class37.4

    Class37.4 Member

    Messages:
    125
    Joined:
    8 Oct 2018
    I would think the idea of permanent diesel north of York is inconsevable remember the majority of east coast IET are electric only and in that situation there would be considerable cost in making them all bi mode not to mention political embarrassment
     
  16. superkev

    superkev Established Member

    Messages:
    1,728
    Joined:
    1 Mar 2015
    Location:
    west yorkshire
    It does seem that todays extended testing and proving times are not much value add. The Scottish 385s where on test for what seemed like years only to be sidelined with windscreen problems.
    K
     
  17. ainsworth74

    ainsworth74 Moderator Staff Member Moderator

    Messages:
    20,875
    Joined:
    16 Nov 2009
    Location:
    Redcar
    Roger Ford has tweeted recently that Network Rail are in the process of fitting around 200 suppressors to the affected data links. The situation is very much temporary.
     
  18. deltic08

    deltic08 On Moderation

    Messages:
    2,437
    Joined:
    26 Aug 2013
    Location:
    Ripon
    Another complete cock-up on Grayling's watch. How much longer can he continue?
     
  19. cactustwirly

    cactustwirly Established Member

    Messages:
    5,062
    Joined:
    10 Apr 2013
    Location:
    UK
    Mountains and molehills spring to mind, the IETs are being introduced into Hull & Leeds services first, so NR should fix it before they get introduced north of York..
     
  20. superkev

    superkev Established Member

    Messages:
    1,728
    Joined:
    1 Mar 2015
    Location:
    west yorkshire
    Ive no idea whats involved but assuming there available surley it shouldnt take long but I suppose it is network rail.
    K
     
  21. deltic08

    deltic08 On Moderation

    Messages:
    2,437
    Joined:
    26 Aug 2013
    Location:
    Ripon
    But we are told it stretches from Doncaster to Berwick. That is half the length of the ECML, a big fix.
     
  22. gingertom

    gingertom Member

    Messages:
    729
    Joined:
    19 Jun 2017
    Location:
    Kilsyth
    what happens north of Berwick? Is the signalling different north of the border?
     
  23. cactustwirly

    cactustwirly Established Member

    Messages:
    5,062
    Joined:
    10 Apr 2013
    Location:
    UK
    But they have plenty of time to do it, I don't anticipate anything north of York until about February/March time
     
  24. swt_passenger

    swt_passenger Veteran Member

    Messages:
    21,150
    Joined:
    7 Apr 2010
    There’s no mention of Berwick in Roger Ford’s latest analysis. He just writes “north of Colton Junction”.
     
  25. superkev

    superkev Established Member

    Messages:
    1,728
    Joined:
    1 Mar 2015
    Location:
    west yorkshire
    Tony miles put a picture in Modern Railways of the banned "ladder" that the safety nannys have taken issue with. Excellent article in this months.
    20181027_152544.jpg
    K
     
  26. The_Engineer

    The_Engineer Member

    Messages:
    524
    Joined:
    24 Mar 2018
    Untrue. Look again at Roger's article (second column)...… to quote him:

    I failed to report (in a previous MR issue) that although Class 800 emissions are greater than those of the Class 387, they are within the relevant Technical specification for interoperability (TSI) and also lower than the standard requested by Network Rail and published in draft. Hitachi have assured me that when running under electric traction, the Class 800 series is compliant with the relevant section of the TSI (EN50121) and also Network Rail's own standards.

    And I believe Hitachi. (and trust Roger). Hitachi would have given design calculations that show this, factory test results too. And finally demonstrated by actual measurements taken at lineside during initial on-line tests in the UK, BEFORE Network Rail gave clearance to run in passenger service.

    Given the Class 800 emissions are within limits defined in the original contract, then it directly follows the problem must lie in the fact that SOME of Network Rail's signalling equipment (in places) does NOT COMPLY with their own equipment interference susceptibility limits, at this time.

    Though it is Network Rail's problem, I can see that it is in Hitachi's best interest NOT to upset their cutomer, but work with them to identify that signalling issue and help them find the quickest implementable solution…… But it is CLEARLY NOT Hitachi's fault. They have done everything in providing a compliant train concerning inference issues.

    I think that's very clear. Wouldn't you agree?
     
    Last edited: 27 Oct 2018
  27. swt_passenger

    swt_passenger Veteran Member

    Messages:
    21,150
    Joined:
    7 Apr 2010
    I think the picture in post #50 of this thread (that someone uploaded when we were first discussing it a week or two back) is probably clearer...
     
  28. LNW-GW Joint

    LNW-GW Joint Veteran Member

    Messages:
    13,516
    Joined:
    22 Feb 2011
    Location:
    Mold, Clwyd

    Yes, I did read all that, and it's my interpretation too.
    I'm just cautious about blaming organisations until someone has allocated blame, or they have owned up.
    It's interesting that a third party has been needed to get to the bottom of the problem (the same one as for the 390s at Proof House).
     
  29. The_Engineer

    The_Engineer Member

    Messages:
    524
    Joined:
    24 Mar 2018
    If Hitachi have so eloquently stuck their peg in the ground with their statement to Roger, though, shortcomings in the NR signalling is all it logically can be. Since the signalling was installed, I wonder if the NR electro-magnetic compatibility(EMC) specification limits have changed to make their own signalling non-compliant (or it could be an aging effect)?

    The third party will be EMC expert engineers with respect to signalling, I should think. I don't think NR have those specialists in house, and Hitachi's experience is probably only with trains. It's probably the quickest route to identify the root cause of this problem and also design a solution (which is where I think Hitachi engineers can contribute).

    I can understand NR being to reluctant to hold their hands up and say - sorry folks! It's all our fault - because as a DfT controlled organisation the politicians would not allow that. So politicians prevents the truth becoming public. Standard practice , methinks!!
     
  30. deltic08

    deltic08 On Moderation

    Messages:
    2,437
    Joined:
    26 Aug 2013
    Location:
    Ripon
    I read somewhere it was the ECML under the control of York and Newcastle boxes.
     

Share This Page