Should Class 800 be ordered for the Cross Country franchise?

[Energy]

The stretch concerned is, I believe, the platforms at St Pancras, which XC do not serve and are unlikely to ever serve.

Ahh ok, I still think that they should go for more 23/24m cars as there is bound to be another point where 26m cars can't pass

 

[toby_farman]

The stretch concerned is, I believe, the platforms at St Pancras, which XC do not serve and are unlikely to ever serve.

I may be wrong, but i think all platforms that CrossCountry serve could easily handle 5x26m 802s and even 9x26m 802s although perhaps some regional stations would require slight extension to handle those, but platform extensions are much cheaper than they used to be and the civil engineering required can be done in a short amount of time. Just look at the existing stations on the Crossrail project.

 

[toby_farman]

Ahh ok, I still think that they should go for more 23/24m cars as there is bound to be another point where 26m cars can't pass

Probably only the MML and we know XC only run between derby and sheffield, so it's not a major concern. Any new rolling stock should have 26m coaches for maximum capacity.

 

[coppercapped]

But that won't happen with 80x - they are proven and reliable.

Reliable?

The latest figures for Miles per Technical Incident (MTIN) and the Moving Annual Average MTIN (MAA MTIN) published in the October 2019 edition of Modern Railways show that for Accounting Period 4 of 2019-20 the figures were:

TOC............Class........MTIN.........MAA MTIN
SWR.............707..........209,133.......39,143
Northern......142 .............7,374..........9,585
LNER............800 .............9,735..........9.341
GWR.............800............10,355..........9,092
GWR.............802..............9,502..........8,375

So the 80Xs are about as reliable as a 30 year old Pacer and a quarter as reliable as the equally new Class 707. I should add that the Class 220/1/2 trains have MAA MTINs of around 30,000 and better.

The Hitachi trains have a very long way to go

 

[toby_farman]

Reliable?

The latest figures for Miles per Technical Incident (MTIN) and the Moving Annual Average MTIN (MAA MTIN) published in the October 2019 edition of Modern Railways show that for Accounting Period 4 of 2019-20 the figures were:

TOC Class MTIN MAA MTIN
SWR 707 209,133 39,143
Northern 142 7,374 9,585
LNER 800 9,735 9.341
GWR 800 10,355 9,092
GWR 802 9,502 8,375

So the 80Xs are about as reliable as a 30 year old Pacer and a quarter as reliable as the equally new Class 707. I should add that the Class 220/1/2 trains have MAA MTINs of around 30,000 and better.

The Hitachi trains have a very long way to go

They're still better than HSTs.
Those results were "teething-issues" which could be expected with any new trains.

 

[coppercapped]

They're still better than HSTs.
Those results were "teething-issues" which could be expected with any new trains.

Then explain why the equally new Class 707 is four times better.

 

[Monty]

They're still a 30 year old train reaching thr end of their useful life.

I don't deny that, the point I was making that the train's that will replace them aren't necessarily better just newer. Consider what trains the HST replaced and how much they changed rail travel, it kind of puts things into perspective.

 

[Energy]

Reliable?

The latest figures for Miles per Technical Incident (MTIN) and the Moving Annual Average MTIN (MAA MTIN) published in the October 2019 edition of Modern Railways show that for Accounting Period 4 of 2019-20 the figures were:

TOC............Class........MTIN.........MAA MTIN
SWR.............707..........209,133.......39,143
Northern......142 .............7,374..........9,585
LNER............800 .............9,735..........9.341
GWR.............800............10,355..........9,092
GWR.............802..............9,502..........8,375

So the 80Xs are about as reliable as a 30 year old Pacer and a quarter as reliable as the equally new Class 707. I should add that the Class 220/1/2 trains have MAA MTINs of around 30,000 and better.

The Hitachi trains have a very long way to go

I'll be interested in the 801s as they are electric only.

 

[toby_farman]

I don't deny that, the point I was making that the train's that will replace them aren't necessarily better just newer. Consider what trains the HST replaced and how much they changed rail travel, it kind of puts things into perspective.

i prefer the second one:

 

[toby_farman]

I'll be interested in the 801s as they are electric only.

Don't be fooled by those statistics they are just teething problems, as could be expected with any new trains...

 

[Monty]

They're still better than HSTs.
Those results were "teething-issues" which could be expected with any new trains.

Do you have a source for Miles per Technical Incident of a HST vs 800?

 

[toby_farman]

Do you have a source for Miles per Technical Incident of a HST vs 800?

No, but out of experience, i prefer travelling on an IET vs a HST, and i think the general public does....

 

[Monty]

i prefer the second one:
View attachment 69614View attachment 69613

Good for you, doesn't make your argument particularly objective though does it?

 

[Monty]

No, but out of experience, i prefer travelling on an IET vs a HST, and i think the general public does....

....

How do you work that one out? Even if you (or the public) prefer to travel on an IET doesn't mean it's more reliable.

 

[toby_farman]

....

How do you work that one out? Even if you (or the public) prefer to travel on an IET doesn't mean it's more reliable.

Newer trains, more comfortable....
https://www.gwr.com/about-us/modernising-gwr/iet

 

[Monty]

Newer trains, more comfortable....
https://www.gwr.com/about-us/modernising-gwr/iet

You take everything a TOC says about a train at face value? Hardly impartial is it? Still doesn't answer the question about what the public truly prefers, comfort or reliability..

 

[coppercapped]

Don't be fooled by those statistics they are just teething problems, as could be expected with any new trains...

You still haven't explained why the equally new Class 707 trains cover four times the distance before they cause a three minute delay.

If you want to convince people of the validity of your argument, try using numeracy and being factual rather than appealing to emotion. 'I think' or 'I believe' are religious, not engineering, statements.

 

[Bletchleyite]

I don't deny that, the point I was making that the train's that will replace them aren't necessarily better just newer. Consider what trains the HST replaced and how much they changed rail travel, it kind of puts things into perspective.

80x have many faults but they are absolutely, definitely, 100% better than Voyagers in just about every way other than the one that's the easiest thing to change in an afternoon using a spanner (I don't dare say it ).

 

[aar0]

No diesels to go wrong, no ATP to go wrong.

You still haven't explained why the equally new Class 707 trains cover four times the distance before they cause a three minute delay.

 

[coppercapped]

80x have many faults but they are absolutely, definitely, 100% better than Voyagers in just about every way other than the one that's the easiest thing to change in an afternoon using a spanner (I don't dare say it ).

But each Voyager goes three or four times as far as a Class 80x before it goes 'twang...'

Which do you think is better for the customer?

Your statement about 80Xs being 100% better than Voyager is, at my most charitable, disingenuous.

 

[Monty]

80x have many faults but they are absolutely, definitely, 100% better than Voyagers in just about every way other than the one that's the easiest thing to change in an afternoon using a spanner (I don't dare say it ).

One could argue that the bar has well and truly set low if you are trying to build a superior train to a Voyager.

 

[coppercapped]

No diesels to go wrong, no ATP to go wrong.

They why were so many running recently under diesel power only when there was a perfectly good 25kV supply right over their roofs?

ATP is common to both types of train so it would have the same effect on both sets of statistics. Or is the ATP so unreliable that it is the biggest single influence on the MTINs of each type of train?

 

[Bletchleyite]

But each Voyager goes three or four times as far as a Class 80x before it goes 'twang...'

Which do you think is better for the customer?

As long as the approach to operation is such that the customer doesn't see them going "twang" who cares? That the TOC needs more sets to deliver the same availability is fundamentally not my problem any more than it would be at a bus or taxi firm or any other similar service.

Your statement about 80Xs being 100% better than Voyager is, at my most charitable, disingenuous.

In your opinion.

 

[Bletchleyite]

They why were so many running recently under diesel power only when there was a perfectly good 25kV supply right over their roofs?

I must admit I've always found this odd given that an EMU is typically far, far more reliable than a DMU. A Voyager, of course, is basically an EMU with generators under each coach.

 

[coppercapped]

I must admit I've always found this odd given that an EMU is typically far, far more reliable than a DMU. A Voyager, of course, is basically an EMU with generators under each coach.

But the Voyagers also have diesel engines, exhaust pipes, fuel tanks and so on, not just generators. Similarly in the days of Christian Roth on South Western Trains the Salisbury maintained Class 158 and 159 trains were amongst the most reliable trains on the network - electrics included.

The train reliability is not the only consideration affecting the reliability of the train service offered to the customer. Electric trains bring the whole question of the reliability of the power feeding arrangements into the equation and that has been sadly lacking in the past.

'Wires down at <townname>' usually brings hours of delay.

It's the system reliability which is the important metric, not just the reliability of the train.

 

[Speedbird96]

Where do we begin... Whilst yes, the Cross Country is in desperate need of additional capacity, having to travel from Birmingham New Street to get back home to my parents from university, the majority of the time the Class 220/221s just cannot cope with the increasing passenger numbers.

Having said all that, it would be desirable for a new fleet of brand new trains to be introduced, however it is not going to happen given the DFT have continued to issue direct awards to Arriva for the most recent XC tender. Given the whole mess that is the rail franchising system and with the aftermath of the Williams Review, it will be a long way until XC sees any brand new stock. I personally see the WCML Class 221s and EMR Class 222s transferring in the next few years.

The Voyagers I would not count just yet as life-expired and compared to the majority of inter-city trains in operation, they are often the most reliable when looking at the Miles per Technical Incident figures. Voyagers are not bad trains but that's as far as I will go with that comment!

Not suggesting replacing the 68s (use them for freight) but replace the MK3 coaches with voyagers for faster acceleration and comfort on the Chiltern main line... Maybe that's what they're gonna do with the ex-EMR 222 meridians!

Its often been mentioned that refurbishing the Class 220/221s to a similar specification to the Class 68 and Mark 3 sets will not deliver the amount of capacity needed, and would be completely wasted considering the Chiltern Main Line tops at 100mph. More recently, Chiltern are modifying their Mark 3s in preparation for the PRM-TSI deadline at the end of the year. The Class 68s and Mark 3s are definitely not going anywhere just yet!

Yet, SWR can replace two-year old 707s with 701s.....

That was because of the higher leasing cost that First/MTR did not want to pay for the Class 707s compared to the Class 701s on order...

Not to get political, but it's the CONSERVATIVE'S fault.

Successive governments, not just the Conservatives but also Labour that have got the railways wrong. It was the Labour government that ensured that major rail franchises were let as zero-growth franchises and didn't announce any major electrification projects under their tenure

They're still better than HSTs.
Those results were "teething-issues" which could be expected with any new trains.

In your opinion! The Class 800s are now in the second year of service with GWR and are criticised for their poor comfort in comparison to the HSTs they have replaced. If you are saying its just "teething problems", 2 years is pretty damning.

i prefer the second one:
View attachment 69614View attachment 69613

So you comparing an image dating from the late 1970s/early 1980s to a Class 800 today??? Hardly a fair comparison...

But since you asked, I would take the HST.

No, but out of experience, i prefer travelling on an IET vs a HST, and i think the general public does....

Again, that is your opinion.

One could argue that the bar has well and truly set low if you are trying to build a superior train to a Voyager.

I cannot stop chuckling at this comment

 

[toby_farman]

In the days of Christian Roth on South Western Trains the Salisbury maintained Class 158 and 159 trains were among the most reliable on the network - electrics included.

The train reliability is not the only consideration affecting the reliability of the train service offered to the customer. Electric trains bring the whole question of the reliability of the power feeding arrangements into the equation and that has been sadly lacking in the past.

'Wires down at <townname>' usually brings hours of delay.

It's the system reliability which is the important metric.

That's why bi-modes are a good choice for XC

 

[toby_farman]

I must admit I've always found this odd given that an EMU is typically far, far more reliable than a DMU. A Voyager, of course, is basically an EMU with generators under each coach.

Why have diesel generators making electricity when there's already perfectly good electricity overhead?

 

[toby_farman]

One could argue that the bar has well and truly set low if you are trying to build a superior train to a Voyager.

I have an answer for you - the PACER

 

[coppercapped]

As long as the approach to operation is such that the customer doesn't see them going "twang" who cares? That the TOC needs more sets to deliver the same availability is fundamentally not my problem any more than it would be at a bus or taxi firm or any other similar service.



In your opinion.

You obviously don't understand the concept of the Miles between Technical Incidents.

The Technical INcidents are recorded by the TRUST system and are - by definition - failures/delays which occur in passenger service. Failures identified on depot don't count.