Could LNER Order Class 810s to replace 91s

[YourMum666]

As EMR has placed orders for new class 810 trains to replace ageing fleet on the mainline, to have enough trains to cope with the retiring of class 91s + Mk4s, would it make sense for LNER to place a bid for a few class 810 trains in 9 car formations to compliment the 800s currently on service and complement a few on the Inverness/ Aberdeen Services so LNER can run more frequent trains up north and where there’s no wires

 

[Bletchleyite]

As EMR has placed orders for new class 810 trains to replace ageing fleet on the mainline, to have enough trains to cope with the retiring of class 91s + Mk4s, would it make sense for LNER to place a bid for a few class 810 trains in 9 car formations to compliment the 800s currently on service and relive a few on the Inverness/ Aberdeen Services so LNER can run more frequent trains up north and where there’s no wires

There is a tender exercise underway for trains to replace the 91+Mk4s, but on the background of cuts I think it's more likely the 91s will go without replacement and LNER will be told to make do with the existing Hitachi fleet.

 

[YourMum666]

There is a tender exercise underway for trains to replace the 91+Mk4s, but on the background of cuts I think it's more likely the 91s will go without replacement and LNER will be told to make do with the existing Hitachi fleet.

Oh, okay because i feel like 810s in my opinion are the next most logical thing to replace 91s and it also means that more 800s can be converted to fully electric to deal with the lines that have heavier passenger numbers/ traffic.

 

[WizCastro197]

There is a tender exercise underway for trains to replace the 91+Mk4s, but on the background of cuts I think it's more likely the 91s will go without replacement and LNER will be told to make do with the existing Hitachi fleet.

Happened with Southern and 455s, I am sure you are aware, service cuts happen, the remaining services get busy and then people adapt because they are forced to do so, sadly.

Oh, okay because i feel like 810s in my opinion are the next most logical thing to replace 91s and it also means that more 800s can be converted to fully electric to deal with the lines that have heavier passenger numbers/ traffic.

Aren't more 800s and 801s the most logical option?

Say one day all 810's have to be taken out of service, say for another cracking issue, and the 80Xs have been converted to electric only, what will the routes with heavy traffic that are diesel only do?

 

[YourMum666]

Happened with Southern and 455s, I am sure you are aware, service cuts happen, the remaining services get busy and then people adapt because they are forced to sadly.


Aren't more 800s and 801s the most logical option?

810s more logical because of uprated diesel engines, so they can be used more frequently on services north of edinburgh waverley and on none electrified services

 

[WizCastro197]

810s more logical because of uprated diesel engines, so they can be used more frequently on services north of edinburgh waverley and on none electrified services

However 810s are only 5 coaches only, would you have them run in multiple?

 

[hexagon789]

810s more logical because of uprated diesel engines, so they can be used more frequently on services north of edinburgh waverley and on none electrified services

Though the 810s can't do 140mph, they are designed for 125, (if the ECML were ever finally upgraded to permit this) and will have poorer performance in electric mode than 800-803 as they only have two motor cars to five coaches vs three in 800-802.

Extended 805s would be better.

However 810s are only 5 coaches only, would you have them run in multiple?

I assume they could be stretched as per 800s and 801s but the design may be deficient in other ways - see above.

 

[YourMum666]

However 810s are only 5 coaches only, would you have them run in multiple?

Not at all, I would rather a 7/9 car service if they could be ordered in that variant, 15 trains (10 9 car 5 7 car units) the 9 car trains do the aberdeen/inverness service and 7 cars do harrogate/hull/lincoln and a few more 800s are converted to full emus

 

[WizCastro197]

Though the 810s can't do 140mph, they are designed for 125, (if the ECML were ever finally upgraded to permit this) and will have poorer performance in electric mode than 800-803 as they only have two motor cars to five coaches vs three in 800-802.

Extended 807s would be better.


I assume they could be stretched as per 800s and 801s but the design may be deficient in other ways - see above.

I assume you mean extended 805s? As 807s are electric only and 7 coaches, whereas 805s are bi-mode and 5 only.

 

[YourMum666]

Though the 810s can't do 140mph, they are designed for 125, (if the ECML were ever finally upgraded to permit this) and will have poorer performance in electric mode than 800-803 as they only have two motor cars to five coaches vs three in 800-802.

Extended 807s would be better.


I assume they could be stretched as per 800s and 801s but the design may be deficient in other ways - see above.

807s are bi-modal right? or is it 805s

 

[Halish Railway]

807s are bi-modal right? or is it 805s

Electric, without ‘limp mode’ engine found on 801s.

 

[YourMum666]

Electric, without ‘limp mode’ engine found on 801s.

thank you for the clarification

 

[hexagon789]

I assume you mean extended 805s? As 807s are electric only and 7 coaches, whereas 805s are bi-mode and 5 only.

Yes, sorry i was thinking that even 7-cars was too short and typed '807' when I meant '805'.

 

[Bletchleyite]

Happened with Southern and 455s, I am sure you are aware, service cuts happen, the remaining services get busy and then people adapt because they are forced to do so, sadly.

Even easier for LNER to do it because most tickets sold are Advances, so if they have to run a peak time 5 car they'll just price people off it.

 

[JonathanH]

810s more logical because of uprated diesel engines, so they can be used more frequently on services north of edinburgh waverley and on none electrified services

But class 800s are able to run the timetable on the Aberdeen / Inverness route without problems. Why is something with more powerful diesel engines needed?

Five car 800s are able to work with five car 801s on certain non-electrified routes.

There is nowhere that 800s need to operate at 125mph on diesel on the East Coast route.

 

[hexagon789]

There is nowhere that 800s need to operate at 125mph on diesel on the East Coast route.

Chathill to Prestonpans on Sundays...

 

[DanNCL]

As EMR has placed orders for new class 810 trains to replace ageing fleet on the mainline, to have enough trains to cope with the retiring of class 91s + Mk4s, would it make sense for LNER to place a bid for a few class 810 trains in 9 car formations to compliment the 800s currently on service and complement a few on the Inverness/ Aberdeen Services so LNER can run more frequent trains up north and where there’s no wires

LNER as a public sector company cannot go directly to Hitachi and are required to put it out to an open tender. They did this, and it’s believed CAF won, however the DFT aren’t approving the funding for it so it’s indefinitely on hold.

Happened with Southern and 455s, I am sure you are aware, service cuts happen, the remaining services get busy and then people adapt because they are forced to do so, sadly.


Aren't more 800s and 801s the most logical option?

Say one day all 810's have to be taken out of service, say for another cracking issue, and the 80Xs have been converted to electric only, what will the routes with heavy traffic that are diesel only do?

Not really the same as with Southern, as LNER are outperforming on pre covid passenger numbers, unlike Southern who are still some way short of it.

LNER doesn’t have any such diesel only routes that don’t have an alternative provided by another TOC. In any case, the 810s being a follow on from the 80xs, you’d expect the lessons to have been learned.

However 810s are only 5 coaches only, would you have them run in multiple?

Hitachi offer all versions of the AT300 with anywhere between 5 and 12 cars.

Electric, without ‘limp mode’ engine found on 801s.

In other words, they’re technically identical to the 803s. Still puzzles me why the 807s have been given their own class and route clearance profile when they should have been an 803 subclass.

Even easier for LNER to do it because most tickets sold are Advances, so if they have to run a peak time 5 car they'll just price people off it.

LNER already do this and it doesn’t work. If people really want to travel at that time they’ll buy an off peak or anytime ticket and travel on it anyway.

But class 800s are able to run the timetable on the Aberdeen / Inverness route without problems. Why is something with more powerful diesel engines needed?

Aberdeen yes, Inverness no. The HSTs actually outperformed the 800s on the Highland Main Line, the end to end journey time has only been able to stay the same as it was when it was HST operated because of the shorter dwell times of the 800s.

 

[QSK19]

Still puzzles me why the 807s have been given their own class […] when they should have been an 803 subclass.

I think it’s because the 803s have a battery for hotel power - the 807s don’t.

 

[YourMum666]

LNER as a public sector company cannot go directly to Hitachi and are required to put it out to an open tender. They did this, and it’s believed CAF won, however the DFT aren’t approving the funding for it so it’s indefinitely on hold.


Not really the same as with Southern, as LNER are outperforming on pre covid passenger numbers, unlike Southern who are still some way short of it.

LNER doesn’t have any such diesel only routes that don’t have an alternative provided by another TOC. In any case, the 810s being a follow on from the 80xs, you’d expect the lessons to have been learned.


Hitachi offer all versions of the AT300 with anywhere between 5 and 12 cars.


In other words, they’re technically identical to the 803s. Still puzzles me why the 807s have been given their own class and route clearance profile when they should have been an 803 subclass.


LNER already do this and it doesn’t work. If people really want to travel at that time they’ll buy an off peak or anytime ticket and travel on it anyway.


Aberdeen yes, Inverness no. The HSTs actually outperformed the 800s on the Highland Main Line, the end to end journey time has only been able to stay the same as it was when it was HST operated because of the shorter dwell times of the 800s.

That was why i raised the question, 810s have a more powerful engine, and i believe are capable of 125mph diesel operation(correct me if i am wrong) but doesn’t the 800-805 max out at 110mph on diesel , so a 9 car 810 should be seeing the same performance as say a HST

 

[RailWonderer]

I suggested the other day that Avanti's 807s could be diverted to LNER to replace the 91s, since Avanti won't be needing the extra capacity post Covid, they will have more than enough Pendolinos and 805s to cover everything.

 

[DanNCL]

That was why i raised the question, 810s have a more powerful engine, and i believe are capable of 125mph diesel operation(correct me if i am wrong) but doesn’t the 800-805 max out at 110mph on diesel , so a 9 car 810 should be seeing the same performance as say a HST

They do, but it’s outweighed by disadvantages, such as the inability to be modified for 140mph in the future.

I suggested the other day that Avanti's 807s could be diverted to LNER to replace the 91s, since Avanti won't be needing the extra capacity post Covid, they will have more than enough Pendolinos and 805s to cover everything.

Realistically that’s the only likely option for replacing the 91+Mark 4 sets. The other two likely options are a further life extension of the 91+Mark 4 sets or withdrawing them without replacement - there aren’t enough 9 car sets to see the Mark 4s off so if they did leave without replacement some services that are currently 9/10 car would have to be reduced to 5 car.

 

[RailWonderer]

They do, but it’s outweighed by disadvantages, such as the inability to be modified for 140mph in the future.

I think now with HS2 LNER and the DfT aren't concerned with 140mph operation compared to 20 years ago when the Pendolinos were ordered by Virgin with 140 mph capability when the WCRM plan was planned to raise lined speeds fully to 140mph. The only possiblity is the York Northallerton stretch which has been rumoured but any new rolling stock that is not 140mph capable will put that rumour to rest.

 

[DanNCL]

I think now with HS2 LNER and the DfT aren't concerned with 140mph operation compared to 20 years ago when the Pendolinos were ordered by Virgin with 140 mph capability when the WCRM plan was planned to raise lined speeds fully to 140mph. The only possiblity is the York Northallerton stretch which has been rumoured but any new rolling stock that is not 140mph capable will put that rumour to rest.

Actually the opposite, 140mph on the ECML south of Darlington was part of the so-called Integrated Rail Plan that came about when the eastern leg of HS2 was axed.

140mph could be achieved on large sections of the route between Peterborough and Retford, as well as the vast majority of the route between Doncaster and Colton Junction and the route between Skelton Junction and Darlington. It would also in theory be possible for much of Hitchin - Huntingdon but I suspect the use of 387s on the fasts there during the peaks would make that one unviable.

 

[Bletchleyite]

I suggested the other day that Avanti's 807s could be diverted to LNER to replace the 91s, since Avanti won't be needing the extra capacity post Covid, they will have more than enough Pendolinos and 805s to cover everything.

<checks we're in Speculative Ideas>

I'd more suggest 807s to take over TPE WCML services (to move to Avanti rather than the units to TPE; TPE clearly can't resource those services) and TPE 397s to LNER, which would allow them the length they wanted. The 807s are a bit short to replace the Mk4s; the tender was for much longer trains (9x26 or 10x24 if I recall).

My suspicion is that the second Liverpool and the third Birmingham on Avanti will never run, and those are what the 807s are needed for. If those services don't run, they are indeed totally surplus to requirements; there was never an intention to use them in a common pool. If we do want to add an hourly semifast Birmingham, with reduced commuting and lots of 730s on the way it's probably more sensible that LNR ran it as 8.350; passengers would prefer that as it'd be lots cheaper, and similarly a much cheaper second Liverpool an hour could be run by extending the LNR Crewe to call at Runcorn, South Parkway and Lime St in the path of the missing (and unlikely to return any time soon) Birmingham, and capacity elevated by running it as 10.730.

 

[RailWonderer]

Actually the opposite, 140mph on the ECML south of Darlington was part of the so-called Integrated Rail Plan that came about when the eastern leg of HS2 was axed.

140mph could be achieved on large sections of the route between Peterborough and Retford, as well as the vast majority of the route between Doncaster and Colton Junction and the route between Skelton Junction and Darlington. It would also in theory be possible for much of Hitchin - Huntingdon but I suspect the use of 387s on the fasts there during the peaks would make that one unviable.

I didn't know that, but the eastern leg was axed in 2021, way after the DfT placed the IET order. It's surprising they were not ordered with 140mph capability. Do they even have in cab signalling capability?

<checks we're in Speculative Ideas>

I'd more suggest 807s to take over TPE WCML services (to move to Avanti rather than the units to TPE; TPE clearly can't resource those services) and TPE 397s to LNER, which would allow them the length they wanted. The 807s are a bit short to replace the Mk4s; the tender was for much longer trains (9x26 or 10x24 if I recall).

Sounds like a good plan.

 

[DanNCL]

I didn't know that, but the eastern leg was axed in 2021, way after the DfT placed the IET order. It's surprising they were not ordered with 140mph capability. Do they even have in cab signalling capability?

The 800/801/802/803 units are 140mph capable and have ETCS signalling. 810s will only be 125mph.

All new rolling stock built in the last decade has had at least passive provision for ETCS equipment.

 

[YourMum666]

The 800/801/802/803 units are 140mph capable and have ETCS signalling. 810s will only be 125mph.

All new rolling stock built in the last decade has had at least passive provision for ETCS equipment.

If i may ask, what limits 810s from 140mph operation?

 

[Trainbike46]

If i may ask, what limits 810s from 140mph operation?

I'm not sure, but it is likely that the new nose design for the 810s is at least part of the answer

<checks we're in Speculative Ideas>

I'd more suggest 807s to take over TPE WCML services (to move to Avanti rather than the units to TPE; TPE clearly can't resource those services) and TPE 397s to LNER, which would allow them the length they wanted. The 807s are a bit short to replace the Mk4s; the tender was for much longer trains (9x26 or 10x24 if I recall).

I thought it was 10x26m they were asking for (but I may be wrong here!)

My suspicion is that the second Liverpool and the third Birmingham on Avanti will never run, and those are what the 807s are needed for.

Aren't the 807s for indirectly replacing voyagers on services other than North Wales too?

I suspect that, if/when avanti get their mess together, demand will increase similar to on LNER, and a second liverpool (and possibly third birmingham) will in fact be justified.

 

[YourMum666]

I'm not sure, but it is likely that the new nose design for the 810s is at least part of the answer


I thought it was 10x26m they were asking for (but I may be wrong here!)

Aren't the 807s for indirectly replacing voyagers on services other than North Wales too?

I suspect that, if/when avanti get their mess together, demand will increase similar to on LNER, and a second liverpool (and possibly third birmingham) will in fact be justified.

Ironic of you to think avanti will get themselves together, honestly i give it one or two more years before avanti lose the franchise and the intercity west coast franchise is government owned again, at least the government know how to run a railway properly. And yes they are replacing a few more services i think

 

[Bletchleyite]

I thought it was 10x26m they were asking for (but I may be wrong here!)

You might be right, but 10x24 is a lot closer to that than 7x26!

Aren't the 807s for indirectly replacing voyagers on services other than North Wales too?

Yes and no. The idea was that reducing the fast Birminghams to 2tph and speeding them up would mean there were enough Pendolinos to work everything other than North Wales - this has near enough already happened, there might be the odd Voyager diagram on a Birmingham but not many. The third service would then be added back as the semifast. If that service isn't added back, they aren't needed. The second Liverpool was entirely separate - as it happens the current one runs in that path and the Pendolino one doesn't run, but that's a bit moot.

I suspect that, if/when avanti get their mess together, demand will increase similar to on LNER, and a second liverpool (and possibly third birmingham) will in fact be justified.

I doubt it. A second Liverpool was always political, it's never really been justified, partly because of Liverpool's very small hinterland, and partly because a fair bit of traffic in that hinterland goes to Wigan NW, Warrington BQ and Chester instead, with capacity at the latter being increased significantly because 10.805 has a LOT more capacity than 10.221, it's something like half as much again, so people will be being priced into going that way.

And the political end could be satisfied by way of the much cheaper LNR service.

So my view remains, these two services will never run, and so the 807s are basically spare, and the cascade I mentioned (807 -> Manchester Airport to Scotland under Avanti, 397 -> LNER) would solve several problems at a very low cost.