Untrue. Look again at Roger' article (second column)...… to quote him:
I failed to report (in a previous MR) 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.
Totally clear! 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 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?