Should the DfT/GWR have ordered more 9-car 800s and fewer 5-car 800s?

[irish_rail]

Mod Note: Split from main thread which can be found here.

For me it is the NUMBER of 5 car sets ordered that is the mistake. Some were needed for sure , I just fear the balance between 5 and 9 car sets isn't quite right but time will tell ....

 

[cactustwirly]

The Great Western isn't a rural route through the Cotswolds either. It is London to Bristol, Swansea and Penzance.

Stop trying to run 3tph off peak everywhere like West Coast and 700 seat trains look very sensible.

Outside the core London to Bristol/South Wales it definitely is!
The B&H in particular is very rural. I have actually been on most of the routes, 700 seats trains are a waste of capacity on parts of the network.

 

[absolutelymilk]

I fear I may have started an endless discussion on the Class 800 thread by asking whether the 9-car 800s could easily be extended to 10 cars, which developed into a debate on whether GWR had bought too many 5-cars. I think this should have its own dedicated thread to avoid clogging up the Class 800 thread.

The last post on this topic was:

Outside the core London to Bristol/South Wales it definitely is!
The B&H in particular is very rural. I have actually been on most of the routes, 700 seats trains are a waste of capacity on parts of the network.

 

[Dai Corner]

Has anybody got access to the traffic forecasts and proposed service patterns for the next thirty to forty years? Without those, I suggest any discussion on whether the mix of 9 car and 5 car trains ordered is correct is speculation.

Not that there's anything wrong with speculation as long as it's accepted that is all it is.

 

[JN114]

To put numbers into this thread - it’s 35 x 9 car sets and 58 x 5 car sets being procured across both fleets (800 and 802)

They are to effectively replace 50 HST sets (plus a handful of spare vehicles) and 5 x 5 car 180s.

***

If, worst/best (depending on your viewpoint) scenario you doubled up all the 5 cars as semi-permanent 10 cars you’re onto 64 HST+ length train sets. Even if you took 3 of those 10 cars, split them back into 6 x 5 cars to replace the 5 180s you still end up with 61 full length trains; with roughly a 50/50 split between 9s and 5+5s.

Before IET introduction HST utilisation hovered around the 48 diagram mark (actual numbers are complicated by some diagrams starting/ending between peaks). Even with the 6 dedicated Cotswold 5 car sets that leaves you 13 surplus full length trains. Take away 4 full length sets for the new hourly Bristol via Hullavington super-fast service you have 9 full length sets. Take away 2x 5+5s and split them to run Padd - Bedwyn service you’re still left with 7 full length sets...

My point is, you can almost do the entire proposed timetable as 9/10 car with the existing sets ordered. Making the fleet 2/3rds 5 car allows the flexibility for portion working Oxfords; Cotswolds; Cornish Winter services etc. Doing so keeps more units on the “core” routes; but also more units for maintenance between peaks to enable better reliability. You can capitalise on that flexibility in summer months by reducing spare quota and putting additional units out to strengthen holiday trains. It also gives a greater float of units you could - in the worst case - send out on their own as a 5 car vice 9 or 10 to run a train when you would otherwise have to cancel it.

I think the balance is right for great western route. There’s enough of a step change in demand between peak and off peak on intercity routes that it is justified. If/when capacity becomes an issue in future then the cheque book will have to be got out.

 

[YorkshireBear]

For all us experts on here the answer is simple. Time will tell whether they got it right. If they havent i would be very suprised if more are not ordered considering the plant in the NE that might need some orders in 5 years.

 

[47802]

Plus many of the Cornish Platforms are better suited to 5 car units, and for many services I suspect 5 coaches will be adequate beyond Plymouth so why send a 9 car down their when you can send a 5 car, and then send the other 5 car back to London.

 

[jimm]

To put numbers into this thread - it’s 35 x 9 car sets and 58 x 5 car sets being procured across both fleets (800 and 802)

They are to effectively replace 50 HST sets (plus a handful of spare vehicles) and 5 x 5 car 180s.

They are also replacing a number of Turbos on Oxford fasts, Cotswold Line workings and the Paddington-Bedwyn route - not sure how many Turbos it works out to in total - but again we are talking about services where a 330-seat IET should do very nicely as a replacement most of the day.

 

[Taunton]

Doubled up 5 car sets appear to be a good option for the sort of routes that are operated, where the passengers start dropping off quite quickly from Paddington. The Hereford trains will have lost well over half their passengers by the time Reading and Oxford have been served. I've gone to Swansea on a train that had standing passengers leaving Paddington but there were only two of us in the carriage getting into Swansea. And since the WofE trains started serving Castle Cary, the seats that are vacated there are never sat in again all the way to Penzance and back.

HOWEVER.

What I fear will happen is just what has been done on the Waterloo-Weymouth line. Those who don't know it will cheerfully write about how the 444s are doubled up to Bournemouth, and one unit only beyond. And indeed that is how it was done initially. But over time more and more of the services were reduced to just one 5-car unit throughout. I can't remember the last time I had a unit added at Bournemouth. And the replaced main line units now turn up on all sorts of other turns, including all stations stoppers.

And that is what I suspect will happen on the GWR once the accountants get to work. Initially only "off peak" of course. So standees on a 5-car set from Oxford, and crush loaded from Reading, certainly on Saturday and Sunday. And meanwhile, sets all sat in North Pole depot all weekend, not incurring mileage charges.

The worst is going west from Paddington. Now that the station staff there refuse to put platforms up on the board until 5 minutes before departure, and given that the Reading commuters are more fleet of foot than those heading to Cornwall with luggage, it's already common for those headed for the end of the line to have to stand as far as Reading. It used to work well, the train was on the board 20-30 minutes beforehand, long distance travellers could walk easily to the front and get comfortable, in the final 5-10 minutes when it became the Next Reading train passengers for there would come and fill in. Not now.

It's already difficult to get a seat in an HST at Taunton that has been a popular Penzance departure. The same issue has become an issue at Bristol Parkway on morning trains coming through from Swansea. Once HSTs start getting replaced by a SINGLE 5-car unit to suit the beancounters, who have off-leased the other 5-car unit to save money, it will cause all sorts of grief. And no, I don't trust the TOCs, especially any new franchise given to the highest premium bidder, to do otherwise.

 

[fairysdad]

What I fear will happen is just what has been done on the Waterloo-Weymouth line. Those who don't know it will cheerfully write about how the 444s are doubled up to Bournemouth, and one unit only beyond. And indeed that is how it was done initially. But over time more and more of the services were reduced to just one 5-car unit throughout. I can't remember the last time I had a unit added at Bournemouth. And the replaced main line units now turn up on all sorts of other turns, including all stations stoppers.

Admittedly, it has been a while since I last used the Bournemouth line regularly, but I used to travel it quite a bit getting on at Bournemouth (BMH) heading to London or vice-versa. And except for a handful of times, usually in disruption, it has been a 10-car train through with a unit added/removed at Bournemouth. Even during disruption, I have seen doubled-up units on it, occasionally a 450 attached to a 444. This was even as recently as this autumn and it happened.

Please don't think I am saying that it doesn't happen as you describe; I am simply saying that although you cannot remember the last time a unit was added at BMH, the opposite is also the case for other people - I cannot remember the last time a unit was not added at BMH!

 

[jimm]

Doubled up 5 car sets appear to be a good option for the sort of routes that are operated, where the passengers start dropping off quite quickly from Paddington. The Hereford trains will have lost well over half their passengers by the time Reading and Oxford have been served.

I can only assume you have never travelled on a Cotswold Line peak train to/from Oxford and beyond if you think that's how the loadings pan out. The full IET timetable will be five-car most of the time past Oxford but nine-car and 2x5 formations will also feature at the times they are needed. That's why having a flexible fleet is vital.

HOWEVER.

What I fear will happen is just what has been done on the Waterloo-Weymouth line. Those who don't know it will cheerfully write about how the 444s are doubled up to Bournemouth, and one unit only beyond. And indeed that is how it was done initially. But over time more and more of the services were reduced to just one 5-car unit throughout. I can't remember the last time I had a unit added at Bournemouth. And the replaced main line units now turn up on all sorts of other turns, including all stations stoppers.

And that is what I suspect will happen on the GWR once the accountants get to work. Initially only "off peak" of course. So standees on a 5-car set from Oxford, and crush loaded from Reading.

The worst is going west from Paddington. Now that the station staff there refuse to put platforms up on the board until 5 minutes before departure, and given that the Reading commuters are more fleet of foot than those heading to Cornwall with luggage, it's already common for those headed for the end of the line to have to stand as far as Reading. It used to work well, the train was on the board 20-30 minutes beforehand, long distance travellers could walk easily to the front and get comfortable, in the final 5-10 minutes when it became the Next Reading train passengers for there would come and fill in. Not now.

It's already difficult to get a seat in an HST at Taunton that has been a popular Penzance departure. The same issue has become an issue at Bristol Parkway on morning trains coming through from Swansea. Once HSTs start getting replaced by a SINGLE 5-car unit to suit the beancounters, who have off-leased the other 5-car unit to save money, it will cause all sorts of grief. And no, I don't trust the TOCs, especially any new franchise given to the highest premium bidder, to do otherwise.

However, there's always time for more doom-mongering and of course there's a secret plan to off-load lots of the IETs to somewhere else at the end of 2019...

 

[coppercapped]

Could I point out the thread title is incorrect? The GWR did not order the IETs; the size of the order and mix of the different train lengths was solely and entirely the work of the Department for Transport.

I suggest that the question is aimed at Stuart Baker of the DfT...

 

[jimm]

Could I point out the thread title is incorrect? The GWR did not order the IETs; the size of the order and mix of the different train lengths was solely and entirely the work of the Department for Transport.

I suggest that the question is aimed at Stuart Baker of the DfT...

Though of course when GWR went to Hitachi to order the 802s, it could have gone for all nine-car, or 10-car or anything else that took its fancy. But it didn't. I wonder why...?

 

[PHILIPE]

Procurement is controlled by the DFT not the TOCs

 

[coppercapped]

BIG SNIP
And that is what I suspect will happen on the GWR once the accountants get to work. Initially only "off peak" of course. So standees on a 5-car set from Oxford, and crush loaded from Reading, certainly on Saturday and Sunday. And meanwhile, sets all sat in North Pole depot all weekend, not incurring mileage charges.

The worst is going west from Paddington. Now that the station staff there refuse to put platforms up on the board until 5 minutes before departure, and given that the Reading commuters are more fleet of foot than those heading to Cornwall with luggage, it's already common for those headed for the end of the line to have to stand as far as Reading. It used to work well, the train was on the board 20-30 minutes beforehand, long distance travellers could walk easily to the front and get comfortable, in the final 5-10 minutes when it became the Next Reading train passengers for there would come and fill in. Not now.

It's already difficult to get a seat in an HST at Taunton that has been a popular Penzance departure. The same issue has become an issue at Bristol Parkway on morning trains coming through from Swansea. Once HSTs start getting replaced by a SINGLE 5-car unit to suit the beancounters, who have off-leased the other 5-car unit to save money, it will cause all sorts of grief. And no, I don't trust the TOCs, especially any new franchise given to the highest premium bidder, to do otherwise.

This argument is, at best, moot.

You have assumed that the trains are being sourced by a conventional leasing agreement. However this is not the case, the DfT has negotiated a Total Train Service Provision contract with Agility Trains and Agility Trains will be paid for each completed diagram. GWR pays the train service provision fee - the level of which was negotiated by, and guaranteed by, the DfT.

In view of the enormous cost of the initial stages of the contract - design, construction of the trains, testing, series manufacture and the construction and fitting out of the maintenance depots - it is certain that Agility has some 'minimum use' clauses written into the contract in order to protect its cash flow. The associated contracts certainly specify to which depot GWR has to deliver each train set at the end of its diagram - there is little flexibility in the use of the trains.

At an IMechE meeting in Swindon about a year ago a senior GWR person said words to the effect that 'Hitachi has built a very flexible train, but the DfT has written a very inflexible contract'.

 

[swt_passenger]

Admittedly, it has been a while since I last used the Bournemouth line regularly, but I used to travel it quite a bit getting on at Bournemouth (BMH) heading to London or vice-versa. And except for a handful of times, usually in disruption, it has been a 10-car train through with a unit added/removed at Bournemouth. Even during disruption, I have seen doubled-up units on it, occasionally a 450 attached to a 444. This was even as recently as this autumn and it happened.

Please don't think I am saying that it doesn't happen as you describe; I am simply saying that although you cannot remember the last time a unit was added at BMH, the opposite is also the case for other people - I cannot remember the last time a unit was not added at BMH!

It definitely varies peak or off peak, but SWR have said most services as far as Bournemouth will be ten car from next December following various internal cascades.

 

[jimm]

Procurement is controlled by the DFT not the TOCs

Ultimately, yes. But if GWR had decided what it wanted for the West Country services was an all-nine car order and put together a sound business case for that, it seems reasonable to assume that DfT would have approved it.

It appears that instead GWR thought a mix of five-car and nine-car sets was better suited to their needs in the West Country, which is what is being built.

I've certainly never seen any suggestion that the initial 802 order was shaped by instructions from the DfT - whereas the 800 order is clearly a case of the DfT having decided what it wanted and told the TOCs to get on with it.

 

[broadgage]

For me it is the NUMBER of 5 car sets ordered that is the mistake. Some were needed for sure , I just fear the balance between 5 and 9 car sets isn't quite right but time will tell ....

Agree, I can see the merit of some short trains for lightly used services, but feel that more 9 car and fewer 5 car trains should have procured.
Considering as an example the 19-03 from Paddington, this is often so crowded that a 9 car train would be justified throughout, and 10 car be better still. A 10 car train would have about 80 more seats than a 5+5 car train and I suspect that all would be used.

 

[NotATrainspott]

Agree, I can see the merit of some short trains for lightly used services, but feel that more 9 car and fewer 5 car trains should have procured.
Considering as an example the 19-03 from Paddington, this is often so crowded that a 9 car train would be justified throughout, and 10 car be better still. A 10 car train would have about 80 more seats than a 5+5 car train and I suspect that all would be used.

The IEPs aren't the only thing that will be happening though. There will be new 387 services running fast to soak up the commuter demand, plus the extra Bristol train.

 

[bramling]

Agree, I can see the merit of some short trains for lightly used services, but feel that more 9 car and fewer 5 car trains should have procured.
Considering as an example the 19-03 from Paddington, this is often so crowded that a 9 car train would be justified throughout, and 10 car be better still. A 10 car train would have about 80 more seats than a 5+5 car train and I suspect that all would be used.

This sums up my apprehension neatly. A single 5-car is likely to be overcrowded, whereas a double 5-car has reduced seating compared to a fixed 10-car - as well as a sub optimal layout because it's two single trains bolted together. So in both cases the passenger gets a raw deal.

Time will tell how it all pans out, however many of the current 5-car fleets don't offer a particularly positive passenger experience. XC and EMT for a start, and the same can be said for the 444s. Unfortunately it's too late once we are landed with a fleet which has too many driving vehicles - like with the Voyagers. It's much less of an issue on commuter units as the cabs don't take up so much space.

 

[Wilts Wanderer]

Worth noting regarding Cornwall; only one platform at Penzance can accommodate a 10-car 80x whereas 3 platforms can accommodate a 9-car set. However Long Rock TMD only has a single stabling road for a 9 car train and cannot cope with a 10 without splitting into a pair of 5s in the station first.

 

[superalbs]

For me it is the NUMBER of 5 car sets ordered that is the mistake. Some were needed for sure , I just fear the balance between 5 and 9 car sets isn't quite right but time will tell ....

I agree with everything you say in this post - lol.

 

[jimm]

Agree, I can see the merit of some short trains for lightly used services, but feel that more 9 car and fewer 5 car trains should have procured.
Considering as an example the 19-03 from Paddington, this is often so crowded that a 9 car train would be justified throughout, and 10 car be better still. A 10 car train would have about 80 more seats than a 5+5 car train and I suspect that all would be used.

And a nine-car train is most likely what will be used on that service and the 18.03, or whatever time the equivalent services run in future, being the Pullman services.

What do you mean by 'throughout'? The 19.03 from Paddington terminates at Plymouth four nights of the week - and Plymouth is the place where any splitting and joining of 2x5 formations would take place, so it will be a long formation of one sort or another throughout.

And whether a nine-car or a 2x5, there will be 120 to 130 more seats on an IET formation than on Laira's low-density HSTs - almost 24 per cent more seats per service, which might just help address the overcrowding.

 

[Taunton]

If the second 5-car unit is to be detached en route, Paddington will have to start opening trains up earlier than the 5 minutes or so before departure they regularly do at present, where the less fleet of foot for the far destinations (or even just have reservations in the front unit) may be still making their way down the platform at doors closed time. Currently there are regularly people still coming forward through the gangways passing West Drayton.

 

[takno]

Time will tell how it all pans out, however many of the current 5-car fleets don't offer a particularly positive passenger experience. XC and EMT for a start, and the same can be said for the 444s. Unfortunately it's too late once we are landed with a fleet which has too many driving vehicles - like with the Voyagers. It's much less of an issue on commuter units as the cabs don't take up so much space.

The Voyagers would still be horrible trains if they were 9 cars because of the vibration and the smell. The overcrowding is only an issue through the core when they are not doubled up. Even then it's worth bearing in mind, many of them are 4 coaches not 5, and the internal layout means a huge amount of space is wasted even on the non-driving coaches. A 5 coach IET will have significantly fewer problems in this respect.