GWR Class 800

[Parallel]

I used to travel semi-regularly on the South Wales main line and think a 5 car IET would be adequate for most of the day (outside the peaks) - The issue is Cardiff Central. There is a large volume of trains that use all platforms 1-4 and extra dwell time of detatching a unit before sending it off to Canton/another platform isn’t really ideal. Might work if planned well but could cause issues as soon as there’s any kind of disruption. There isn’t anywhere else on the route that would be suitable to add/drop coaches either, so they are probably better staying in full formation to Swansea for the time being.

 

[HowardGWR]

It's a good job we have someone who really does have 'the facts' prepared to comment on this matter. Thanks CY !

 

[jimm]

The off peak between Cardiff and Swansea is far quieter in passenger numbers compared with off season passenger numbers in Cornwall. That is true , like it or not.
I object to downgrading of the quality of services. What is your problem with that Jimm? It may not be your livelihood, but it is mine and therefore I have a vested interest in trying to provide the best service possible .
Why do u obsess over settling, and doing everything to just about get by , rather than trying to provide excellence which is what the railway should be doing.

So you band about claims about loadings in various places on GWR (ignoring actual IET formations operating now and those planned for the future in certain of those places) and sling in vague expressions like downgrading - whatever that might mean - and seem to expect that these amount to a knockout case for running 650-seat trains west of Plymouth all day - as opposed to between London and Plymouth, where I don't think anyone would dispute that they are justified.

Clarence Yard has provided a detailed explanation of the process that led to the development of the service plan for Cornwall and the initial Class 802 order - which not surprisingly followed from studying actual passenger loadings.

Perhaps you might give it a rest now and wait for the new timetable to be implemented. To see what impact that has on how people actually use trains west of Plymouth and whether train lengthening for London-Penzance all year round may be justified in future - or not.

 

[irish_rail]

One other point my Train manager colleague makes is the scope for fare evasion on pairs of 5 sets. With the TM having to remain in the rear set almost all the time chances of ticket checks are greatly reduced if sat in the front set. The "front set leads" as far as I know are catering staff and thus have nothing to do with tickets.
Again, a cynic would say that by seemingly reducing journey numbers being made ( due to ticket less travel) the dft will use it as an excuse to use more 5 car trains where possible.

 

[Clarence Yard]

Well, the cynic would be wrong because the loadings are calculated from actuals on board, not tickets sold and the advantage with the 800 series sets is that train counts do not rely (once the software works properly!) on a man/woman going through the train with a counter.

 

[irish_rail]

Well, the cynic would be wrong because the loadings are calculated from actuals on board, not tickets sold and the advantage with the 800 series sets is that train counts do not rely (once the software works properly!) on a man/woman going through the train with a counter.

Ah that's good they are going to sort it out as currently I'd say they cannot be relied upon as first class is almost always full and standing apparently !

 

[Wychwood93]

Ah that's good they are going to sort it out as currently I'd say they cannot be relied upon as first class is almost always full and standing apparently !

How does the software manage it? I note the DfT document had 80kg for a passenger plus luggage.

 

[Charlie Smythe]

How does the software manage it? I note the DfT document had 80kg for a passenger plus luggage.

Is 80kg the accepted standard for a passenger and luggage all over the network? I was going to ask this a while back but never did. So lets say if a coach on a train takes 64 people and luggage at 80kg each then you could say that it is carrying 5120kg of people and luggage. Or is this 80kg figure from the DfT just for the 800's.

 

[Wychwood93]

Is 80kg the accepted standard for a passenger and luggage all over the network? I was going to ask this a while back but never did. So lets say if a coach on a train takes 64 people and luggage at 80kg each then you could say that it is carrying 5120kg of people and luggage. Or is this 80kg figure from the DfT just for the 800's.

The 80kg was in the DfT spec document for the 800's. It might be that it is the current accepted average figure - although I am sure someone out there will know!

 

[Thunderer]

I'm not in the least bit surprised. I've been following Roger Ford's take on the IEP since it's conception all those years ago and he said very early it would turn out to be the most expensive train in the world and most likely to be of mediocre performance at best.

I also know quite a few staff and would agree about their views. In fact the continual complaints from passengers about, as you say, the seats, poor 1st Class and lack of a buffet, are adding stress to the job of the guard. And as for the buffet staff who have to now push trolleys through cramped coaches instead, their views are somewhat unprintable!

I've also been told by one of my guard friends that a number of 1st Class season ticket holders are downgrading to Standard when renewing because of the marginal difference in comfort.

So, essentially, everything that industry experts and staff have been warning about for a long time is coming to fruition.

Yes indeed, its a fiscal disaster resulting in a half-arsed, unfinished Electrification project, leaving the poor passenger with extremely high priced fares and a very expensive, inadequate train to match! Its a sad day as I only travel by train now if I have really got to since the 800 took over down here. "Pleasure" trips for leisure are anything but on an 800 or the alternative here, an overcrowded 175. The once great railway we had in the UK is rapidly going down the pan, unless you like riding on the IET, Voyagers, Pendolinos and most other modern stock, that is basically cheap plastic crap.

 

[Charlie Smythe]

Yes indeed, its a fiscal disaster resulting in a half-arsed, unfinished Electrification project, leaving the poor passenger with extremely high priced fares and a very expensive, inadequate train to match! Its a sad day as I only travel by train now if I have really got to since the 800 took over down here. "Pleasure" trips for leisure are anything but on an 800 or the alternative here, an overcrowded 175. The once great railway we had in the UK is rapidly going down the pan, unless you like riding on the IET, Voyagers, Pendolinos and most other modern stock, that is basically cheap plastic crap.

I think the way forward top and tailed LHCS.

 

[samuelmorris]

It's really not, I'm afraid. That makes no odds to the 'cheap plastic crap' complaint, it only reduces the usable length of the train and to an extent its acceleration performance as well, certainly in wet/icy weather. EMUs like the 800 are definitely the right way to do things now that traction equipment is small enough to fit under passenger accommodation, we just wish that the inter-city EMUs on offer were a bit higher quality.

 

[Charlie Smythe]

It's really not, I'm afraid. That makes no odds to the 'cheap plastic crap' complaint, it only reduces the usable length of the train and to an extent its acceleration performance as well, certainly in wet/icy weather. EMUs like the 800 are definitely the right way to do things now that traction equipment is small enough to fit under passenger accommodation, we just wish that the inter-city EMUs on offer were a bit higher quality.

There is certainly a lot to be said for a Loco, 5-6 coaches and a DVT or a similar setup to the HST with a power car at each end. They are by far the most comfortable setup available, however, as you say, acceleration and is of course lower which is not good.

 

[samuelmorris]

There is certainly a lot to be said for a Loco, 5-6 coaches and a DVT or a similar setup to the HST with a power car at each end. They are by far the most comfortable setup available, however, as you say, acceleration and is of course lower which is not good.

Again though, the only reason for that is the Mk3s. There is no reason that you couldn't make a multiple unit to the same comfort standard as Mk3s, if it weren't for the fact that modern safety standards and rising costs prohibit it. That they're powered by a locomotive at one or both ends is immaterial. It's not as if having a loco at one end provides superior ride quality to a multiple unit, the ride quality of HSTs is nothing to write home about, they can be extremely bouncy on imperfect track. The loco-hauled services that still remain exist solely due to compromise and needs of the moment, not because they are considered in any way superior by anyone other than enthusiasts. Don't get me wrong, it'll be a shame for the practice to die out, but progress moves on.

 

[The Ham]

There is certainly a lot to be said for a Loco, 5-6 coaches and a DVT or a similar setup to the HST with a power car at each end. They are by far the most comfortable setup available, however, as you say, acceleration and is of course lower which is not good.

5 coaches with 70 seats in each is 350 seats on a train. You would then need to have broadly double the number of tracks to have the same capacity as the 80x's with (IIRC) 630 seats per train.

That's not too say that there's not a case for such trains on the less intensely used parts of the network. However in and out of London, almost at any time, is unlikely to be a good fit.

 

[Bikeman78]

Again though, the only reason for that is the Mk3s. There is no reason that you couldn't make a multiple unit to the same comfort standard as Mk3s, if it weren't for the fact that modern safety standards and rising costs prohibit it.

Can you elaborate on this? Are you saying that it's not possible to have a train that is both safe and comfortable?

 

[Railperf]

Again though, the only reason for that is the Mk3s. There is no reason that you couldn't make a multiple unit to the same comfort standard as Mk3s, if it weren't for the fact that modern safety standards and rising costs prohibit it. That they're powered by a locomotive at one or both ends is immaterial. It's not as if having a loco at one end provides superior ride quality to a multiple unit, the ride quality of HSTs is nothing to write home about, they can be extremely bouncy on imperfect track. The loco-hauled services that still remain exist solely due to compromise and needs of the moment, not because they are considered in any way superior by anyone other than enthusiasts. Don't get me wrong, it'll be a shame for the practice to die out, but progress moves on.

There is a reason we have moved from loco hauled trains , and HST trains with a power car at both ends. The reason is passenger capacity! You can sit more passengers within the same length of train - because the traction equipment is now under the train rather than at one for two ends! If we had the loading gauge to allow it, the next step would be double decker trains.
The Class 800 ride is acceptable and on a par with the current HST setup (remembering the original mk3 dampers have been replaced by a modern equivalent that does not provide the original ride quality).
Slightly off topic here - but are modern safety standards more stringent for new rolling stock as opposed to refurbishments? That seems to be the case when you look at Scotrails refurbished MK3's. I guess any new design of Mk5/6 coach would have seating on a par with the 800's?

 

[sprinterguy]

I guess any new design of Mk5/6 coach would have seating on a par with the 800's?

The new mark 5 coaches for Transpennine Express are, indeed, fitted with the same design of standard class seats as the class 800s. And the seats fitted to the Caledonian Sleeper mark 5 seated vehicles (Not the lounge cars, which are radically different) look to be the same design as those found in first class on the 800s.

Whether this is simply because Fainsa are a prevalent current supplier, or the field is limited as to what can be fitted to new stock I'm not sure: High backed table booths and individual (swivel?) stools don't seem to be an issue in the new Caledonian Sleeper lounge cars.

 

[samuelmorris]

Can you elaborate on this? Are you saying that it's not possible to have a train that is both safe and comfortable?

Essentially yes, as per the posts above, the issue is that current approved seat designs for use at 125+mph are dreadful. Having a loco at the end doesn't solve that, it just reduces the seating capacity by wasting some of the train's length.
Lighting, carpet, seating layout, buffet provision, all things people complain about on 800s, are completely unaffected by whether the train is hauled by a loco or not.

 

[cactustwirly]

There is certainly a lot to be said for a Loco, 5-6 coaches and a DVT or a similar setup to the HST with a power car at each end. They are by far the most comfortable setup available, however, as you say, acceleration and is of course lower which is not good.

But that's a huge drop in capacity vs a HST or IET!
Yes in an ideal world, we'd have a BiMode 88/68; hauling push pull rakes of Siemens Viaggio coaches, in 5 and 9 coach formations
This isn't an ideal world, especially compared to the more generous European loading gauge and platform lengths, so Multiple Units are the best all round solution.

 

[Master29]

Inter city multiple units are nothing new either. Classes 123 and electric 309 spring to mind.

 

[superalbs]

On an old seat cover 800030. Riddled with stains, extremely loud diesel engine (even from London), and to top it all off a window is broken too.

 

[Phil G]

Were there issues today with the cold? Both my trains (07:00 Paddington [PAD] - Bristol Temple Meads [BRI] and 17:00 BRI - PAD) were 5 car and rammed, particularly the morning one which was 30 late so had 2 trains worth on it!

 

[superalbs]

Having a quick look around when it emptied, 800030 was in an absolutely diabolical state. Take a look at all the stains and damage shown below:







And finally, this strange problem:

It seems most armrests were missing a chunk on this end, some worse than others. And this is the most expensive train in the world...? :/

 

[Thunderer]

Having a quick look around when it emptied, 800030 was in an absolutely diabolical state. Take a look at all the stains and damage shown below:
View attachment 58274
View attachment 58276
View attachment 58277
View attachment 58278
View attachment 58279
View attachment 58280

And finally, this strange problem:
View attachment 58275
It seems most armrests were missing a chunk on this end, some worse than others. And this is the most expensive train in the world...? :/

Nasty, tacky plastic interior, and a truly awful replacement for the HST from a paying passengers point of view. IEP, Value for money? Certainly not! These things will be lucky to last 40 months, yet alone 40+ years. I've noticed the chunk out of the armrest problem myself on another unit. I think it may be caused by the trolley bashing into them, as I noticed the trolley the other day when on an 800 kept clipping the seats as it went along, pushed by a disengaged member of staff who looked like they'd be far happier behind a Buffet counter, than pushing that pointless trolley up and down the train.

 

[Thunderer]

I used to travel semi-regularly on the South Wales main line and think a 5 car IET would be adequate for most of the day (outside the peaks) - The issue is Cardiff Central. There is a large volume of trains that use all platforms 1-4 and extra dwell time of detatching a unit before sending it off to Canton/another platform isn’t really ideal. Might work if planned well but could cause issues as soon as there’s any kind of disruption. There isn’t anywhere else on the route that would be suitable to add/drop coaches either, so they are probably better staying in full formation to Swansea for the time being.

Just to put pay to that idea, Early December 2017, I was booked on the 10:25 From Cardiff to Swindon on a Saturday (09:29 Swansea-Padd) booked a 2x5 car 800, just 800005 turns up, full to the rafters. Some people were left in Cardiff Central to catch the following service, as there was just no more room for anymore people. Back on one weekday in November 2018, I popped to Cardiff to get the 14:48 GWR service to Swansea (12:45 Padd-Swansea) and 800005 turns up again, on its own. The service was packed on arrival in Cardiff, half emptied, but soon filled up again when people boarded heading towards Swansea, again leaving some passengers standing. Neither examples were what you would call rush hour trains, yet the impact of just sending one 5 car IET (Inept Expensive Train) was plain for all to see, reduction in capacity leads to overccrowding now at nearly any time of day, as there are so many people using the railways now, even off peak.

 

[Goldfish62]

The new mark 5 coaches for Transpennine Express are, indeed, fitted with the same design of standard class seats as the class 800s. And the seats fitted to the Caledonian Sleeper mark 5 seated vehicles (Not the lounge cars, which are radically different) look to be the same design as those found in first class on the 800s.

Whether this is simply because Fainsa are a prevalent current supplier, or the field is limited as to what can be fitted to new stock I'm not sure: High backed table booths and individual (swivel?) stools don't seem to be an issue in the new Caledonian Sleeper lounge cars.

The issue is that the UK seat specification is so unique many manufacturers don't consider it worth adapting their designs that are acceptable elsewhere for such a relatively restricted market

 

[FGW_DID]

Has anybody actually got anything new and interesting to discuss about the 800s, or are we in for another 351 pages of the exact same posters telling us how much they hate them blah blah blah.

 

[yorksrob]

The issue is that the UK seat specification is so unique many manufacturers don't consider it worth adapting their designs that are acceptable elsewhere for such a relatively restricted market

That's the problem with outsourcing all of your train manufacturing to 'abroad'.

 

[43096]

That's the problem with outsourcing all of your train manufacturing to 'abroad'.

It isn’t. It’s a problem with the standards. Shouldn’t the seat standards here be the TSI standard as used elsewhere? In any case I just don’t believe it is down to the standard, but is primarily about cost - the operators don’t give a stuff about their passengers.