LNER Azuma (Class 800/801)

[ashkeba]

Interestingly this is exactly what Virgin did on the Mk2 LHCS on XC - removed one bay at the coach middle and replaced with a large luggage rack. The trouble with having it in the middle is that there are flow conflicts - people board, head to the middle to drop bags, then move back outwards to find seats against the flow of those still boarding. This slows boarding progress.

As such it's better, in an end-doored coach, to have such a rack at the ends but inside the vestibule doors so people can still see it and watch it.

It slows boarding but means people are in the train and doors close sooner, at least until there are enough people to queue all the way back - but unless it is clearly labelled, some people leave their large bags near the door or in the aisle and slow boarding.

I think TGV Lyria has large racks 1/3 in, opposite sides opposite ends, while some ICE have them next to doors, as a space with tip-up racks used for standing at peak. I remember it being curved so accessible toilet(s) may be one side.

 

[InOban]

But I thought that neither LNER nor their predecessors had any say in the fit out of these trains?

 

[ainsworth74]

But I thought that neither LNER nor their predecessors had any say in the fit out of these trains?

GWR had no say. VTEC were allowed to choose a small number of alterations, I believe if they could show then as being value for money, to their sets. This is why, for instance, LNERs have buffets. Whether one of the choices could include a van space or larger luggage racks I'm unsure. I'd imagine the DfT wouldn't have been keen to sign off on such an alteration considering they were already losing seats for the buffet.

 

[S N Barnes]

1) has anyone noted the RMT announcement? https://www.rmt.org.uk/news/members...NsGUuhZlkHQzEy4Mp5Teef3uIw9jkomUeqfYsgwq0e8-c

2) in 2014 I arranged for a group (CUK members mainly) to bring various bikes to try out the mock-up of the cycle space. We had a Blue Peter option, as the basic arrangement could not be changed, but we did press for increased height, and removal of the fold-down 'splitter' bar. What has been delivered - the splitter bar has not been removed, and the 'hook' design has been changed making it impossible to get many common tyre sizes on to the hook.

The lifting required can fall outside the limits defined by HSE Manual Handling Regulations, and many either require assistance or have to leave their cycles on the wheels projecting across the exterior doors by approx 40 cm.

CyclingUK has met with LNER and we understand that the matter has been taken up by LNER commissioning team and Hitachi, taking on board details provided on best practice systems, used on other trains, trams and buses for securing bikes, and avoiding the need to lift the bike completely off the floor, on a moving train, to engage with the hook.

I monitored and recorded the various systems for cycle stowage in trains, trams, buses and coaches for the past 35 years, and a lot is posted on my A V Lowe Flickr account. Current problems with Scotrail IC7 HST's (especially a bike smashing the emergency door release cover and setting off a full emergency brake application!) , Scotrail Class 156 (Interfleet conversion), Cross Country Voyagers (bending brackets pulling out of the ceiling), and the new CAF sleeper bike/baggage car.

Contact me directly via BCCletts on twitter or tales of problems, delays etc to CyclingUK contact address.

PS one cycle user noted at least 4 passengers attempting to slide the door on the locked cycle unit on an Azuma, believing that this was a toilet - despite the signs on the outside.

 

[800001]

Well i didn't realise that LNER used the DVT for such a use nowadays until @Failed Unit mentioned it above. So LNER knowing the amount of cases that could be carried still had the interior fit on the Azuma unfit for purpose with the lack of large case luggage racks.
I wonder if Mr Sharp will be there in the future when the Mk4s have all gone.

Lner were not allowed to change the spec of Interier, it is a dft spec train.

Lner are currently in active discussion with Dft about removal of the windowless seats in coaches to put additional luggage racks in.

They have had Dft people at Kings Cross counting cases onto trains to justify why they need action taking with regards to luggage storage.

 

[Speed43125]

1Z42 today Now heading to Edinburgh from Inverness. Just seen in at Dunblane, is a 9 car, 800109. about 2 and half carriages stick out beyond the platform end.

 

[EE Andy b1]

Lner were not allowed to change the spec of Interier, it is a dft spec train.

Lner are currently in active discussion with Dft about removal of the windowless seats in coaches to put additional luggage racks in.

They have had Dft people at Kings Cross counting cases onto trains to justify why they need action taking with regards to luggage storage.

Yes i did know that both LNER & GWR IETs were ordered by Dft at there cheaper spec and because nobody in the Dft properly understands the railways and passenger usage this is what we ended up with.
It's gone on for too long now the wrong people are speccing these new trains, just thinking about bums on seats (not for comfort) and how many people can we cram into our trains.

These are supposed to be Intercity trains but are in reality just glorified commuter trains that run at higher speeds.

I hope LNER get there way with the luggage racks at the very least.

 

[jimm]

Yes i did know that both LNER & GWR IETs were ordered by Dft at there cheaper spec and because nobody in the Dft properly understands the railways and passenger usage this is what we ended up with.
It's gone on for too long now the wrong people are speccing these new trains, just thinking about bums on seats (not for comfort) and how many people can we cram into our trains.

These are supposed to be Intercity trains but are in reality just glorified commuter trains that run at higher speeds.

I hope LNER get there way with the luggage racks at the very least.

One thing the DfT does understand is that number of passengers using long-distance trains in England, Wales and Scotland has grown from 77.2 million in 2002-3 to 146.7 million in 2018-19, which might have something to do with why they are keen to see as many seats as possible provided - as are passengers, who quite like having seats to sit in.

In a country where we can't adopt measures like the double-deck TGVs that the French can operate, then we have to do other things to handle extra passengers.

And one thing about IETs/Azumas that no one seems to complain about is the legroom - hardly suggestive of people being crammed in, is it?

Whether we should also be designing trains to handle unlimited amounts of the sort of suitcases that are the size and weight of a small house is another matter.

 

[Failed Unit]

One thing the DfT does understand is that number of passengers using long-distance trains in England, Wales and Scotland has grown from 77.2 million in 2002-3 to 146.7 million in 2018-19, which might have something to do with why they are keen to see as many seats as possible provided - as are passengers, who quite like having seats to sit in.

In a country where we can't adopt measures like the double-deck TGVs that the French can operate, then we have to do other things to handle extra passengers.

And one thing about IETs/Azumas that no one seems to complain about is the legroom - hardly suggestive of people being crammed in, is it?

Whether we should also be designing trains to handle unlimited amounts of the sort of suitcases that are the size and weight of a small house is another matter.

I don’t think the could cope with everyone taking a “cabin bag” size case to be honest. But if we need more seats make them 10 coach. The main line stations will cope.

Maybe in 2021 with the new timetable pattern all will be good.

 

[387star]

Well i didn't realise that LNER used the DVT for such a use nowadays until @Failed Unit mentioned it above. So LNER knowing the amount of cases that could be carried still had the interior fit on the Azuma unfit for purpose with the lack of large case luggage racks.
I wonder if Mr Sharp will be there in the future when the Mk4s have all gone.

In 2006 I went on a school trip on a GNER HST from Kings cross and we placed a load of bags in the power car. Talking lots of gear as we were headed to the Isle of Arran on a field trip. We lugged it from Kings Cross TL to Kings Cross those were the days

 

[themiller]

I don’t think the could cope with everyone taking a “cabin bag” size case to be honest.

I would have thought that passengers with one hold sized case and one cabin sized bag should be catered for on any train calling at an airport! (and connections).

 

[Bayum]

Coach K, Seat 73... Proper window seat or not?

 

[Southsider]

In 2006 I went on a school trip on a GNER HST from Kings cross and we placed a load of bags in the power car. Talking lots of gear as we were headed to the Isle of Arran on a field trip. We lugged it from Kings Cross TL to Kings Cross those were the days

To Kingscross on Arran (just north of Whiting Bay) by any chance?

 

[3973EXL]

5Q88 Merchant Park - Doncaster
5Q99 Doncaster - Acton
5X99 Acton - Eastleigh
800209

 

[Harbon 1]

Out of interest, the Lincoln services...

Once the HST peak time service gets taken over, will that run as 9/10 car 800, or will it stay as a 5 car?

I can see why they’re 5 car in the day given that the Newark trains carried fresh air, but the peak trains can be quite busy, especially with Newark being a commuter hub.

In my small mind, the peaks would need to be 10 to Newark at least, with probably only 5 required to/from Lincoln.

 

[Failed Unit]

Certainly be 9 until December as the diagram mixes with an Anglo Scottish service. Don’t know after that. 5 cars is all that fits at Lincoln. So if they do ever need to strengthen they can’t use 2x 5.

 

[sprinterguy]

So if they do ever need to strengthen they can’t use 2x 5.

Unless they split at Newark. Not sure how that would work in terms of platform occupancy for the detached set, though, depending on where it went next.

 

[ashkeba]

Unless they split at Newark. Not sure how that would work in terms of platform occupancy for the detached set, though, depending on where it went next.

If it is a bi-mode, could the split bit sit in the siding south of platform 3? It uses that platform for access to the Lincoln line anyway, I think. Or could 3 be split into 3A and 3B and just leave it at 3A while locals turn in 3B? Platform 3 seems long.

 

[Harbon 1]

Certainly be 9 until December as the diagram mixes with an Anglo Scottish service. Don’t know after that. 5 cars is all that fits at Lincoln. So if they do ever need to strengthen they can’t use 2x 5.

interesting to know, thanks.

Unless they split at Newark. Not sure how that would work in terms of platform occupancy for the detached set, though, depending on where it went next.

Surely it can’t be as simple as running an evening Newark - KGX or a Newark-Retford-Doncaster to get it back to shed?

 

[ainsworth74]

Surely it can’t be as simple as running an evening Newark - KGX or a Newark-Retford-Doncaster to get it back to shed?

Means an extra driver and TM travelling on the cushions between Kings Cross and Newark to then operate that detached set forward.

 

[Harbon 1]

Means an extra driver and TM travelling on the cushions between Kings Cross and Newark to then operate that detached set forward.

Would there not be a TM on the other unit who could act as inspector to Newark then it’s just the driver who gets cushioned about? Not a strange concept to me as we get cushioned about for the smallest jobs in the world on the freight side

 

[ainsworth74]

Would there not be a TM on the other unit who could act as inspector to Newark then it’s just the driver who gets cushioned about? Not a strange concept to me as we get cushioned about for the smallest jobs in the world on the freight side

Hmm actually yes that's a good point. I'd assumed that LNER weren't running with two TMs on their 10-car sets but I don't actually know whether they do or not!!

 

[800001]

Hmm actually yes that's a good point. I'd assumed that LNER weren't running with two TMs on their 10-car sets but I don't actually know whether they do or not!!

One TM in rear set, senior host in front set, if no senior Host, rear set locked out of use.

 

[43096]

One TM in rear set, senior host in front set, if no senior Host, rear set locked out of use.

So the same utter nonsense as GWR, then. Meanwhile we have hundreds of trains running every day with lots more people on either with no-one but a driver crewing them or with one guard over two or three sets with no gangways between them.

 

[quantinghome]

These are supposed to be Intercity trains but are in reality just glorified commuter trains that run at higher speeds.

Am I missing something here? End doors. Vestibules. Tables. First class. Buffet. All points to a standard intercity train, not a commuter train.

 

[Ethano92]

LNER does seem to be trying to adress the luggage issue publicly.

https://twitter.com/LNER/status/1187398348283596800?s=09
Apologies if there's a clearer way to link the video from twitter.

Having travelled on GWRs IETs multiple times I do believe there is enough luggage space in theory although it's tight, maybe slightly too little. All small/medium suitcases can easily go under and over seats, I was impressed with the size of the overhead racks. If the luggage racks were slightly wider to accommodate 2 large suitcases in the bottom section we would be in a better position however I see the only logical solution being removing the seats with no window. Another suggestion would've been cantilevered seats, would these have fitted more underneath?

One slight concern which has been brought up before is the fact that I've always been taught the overheads are for rucksacks and coats etc, not heavy items and so I'd like to hope these are very strong.

At the end of the day, Southern has I'd say similar problems with their 377s at Gatwick from experience. They've however managed for how long now?

Edit:FWIW I disagree with the comments about these being commuter trains, they're worthy replacements and I suspect 30 years down the line when we've gotten to know them and people will have grown up with these as their staple train for 'a day trip to London' etc, they'll gain as much love as the HSTs

 

[47271]

I think that the luggage issue may be getting blown out of proportion, except for one destination and at a particular time of year.

LNER is coining it on services between London and Edinburgh during the peak summer tourist period. As international travellers, the passengers in question will have a lot of very large suitcases which, in the mk4s, have been lined up on the platform for stowage in the DVT.

I don't know how they think this is going to work now?

 

[Bantamzen]

I had my first proper go on these on Wednesday, with a day run down to London from Leeds for a work's meeting. Overall I was reasonably happy, at least for the 2h20 or so each way. I can maybe understand why some folk might not find them comfortable, but for the purposes that they serve they have good leg room, a decent ambience, and are comfortable enough. The one thing that did make things a little awkward was some confusion on the morning service down, where it seems the car allocations changed after some people had boarded. As I arrived in Leeds for the 06:40 I noted that the front 5 cars had the higher letter allocations (F-M), but by the time I walked over to P9 the front 5 cars were now allocated as (A-E). I felt a little sorry for asking the lady who had boarded before & sat in my seat thinking it was unreserved, to move as the allocations had changed.

Still these small operational issues aside, I would certainly not hesitate to travel on them. They are not spectacular, more functional but more than adequate.

 

[thejuggler]

My first trip today. Leeds London.

First issue. Unit swap so 2 x 5 rather than a 9 coach.

People in our reserved seats, but no reservation lights. All reservations had been abandoned. They however were happy to move. At Wakefield extreme abuse given to train manager from someone who couldn't get in their booked seat. Car B was half empty, but he wasn't for moving carriage. Threats to eject at Doncaster appeared to work.

Arrived on time, coach nice and quiet, seats not too bad. Toilet was blocked by Stevenage.

Return journey arrived half an hour late due to earlier problems at Leeds. Train however turned round in 15 minutes. Coach B for the return and we were over the traction motor. Daughter described the constant motor noise perfectly, like sat next to a washing machine going into spin cycle! Lights in carriage are far too bright.

Delay at Peterborough due to software issue. Reset didn't work and we were told train was restricted to 60mph and all would be off at Doncaster. Ten minutes later we were told another driver was on board and we could now go 125mph, can anyone explain that? I really don't like the prison cell issue metal toilets and no hand towels, just a poor hand dryer.

At Retford told we would run through to Leeds. Arrived about 45 late. On board manager was excellent in providing onward service info. We had some passengers who had been caught up in the Euston problems and were going to Manchester and further in the north west.

 

[3973EXL]

801213 was hauled overnight Doncaster to Eastleigh 5Q99/5X99.