GWR Class 800

[Dave1987]

Assuming I am one of the 'couple of members', which seems highly likely, I don't consider my views to be extreme in the slightest. Unless having the temerity to challenge repeatedly negative comments is extreme...

If it's unchangeable you want, then do look up some of Dave1987's comments about the IEP over the past few years - unchangeable negativity being the key feature.

Is he now going to share the 'some good' things he has been told, as well as the 'bad' ones, which I see he couldn't restrain himself from mentioning, all of an hour after saying he wouldn't? Let's see...

Well I've noticed that you pounce on anyone who has anything to say about IEP that isn't brilliant. For what it's worth I've been told in electric mode they are very good trains.

But they just haven't got the power in diesel mode at higher speeds. And I seem to remember I was lambasted for pointing out RF's comments to that effect a while ago with the IEP supporters claiming the RF was just biased against the whole thing.

Ow and by the way the reason I chose to post the point in the end is because why should I be put off posting something factual just because it doesn't sit well with others views of the project.

 

[jimm]

Well I've noticed that you pounce on anyone who has anything to say about IEP that isn't brilliant.

So people posting what is often nonsense, with zero supporting evidence, should just be allowed to get on with doing so, should they? There is a difference between picking people up over that sort of thing and being a cheerleader for the IEP, which you have accused me of on a number of occasions.

If the aim of this thread is, ultimately, to aid people's understanding, with points debated along the way, then letting wrong information or wibble about things like the slope in the floor go unchallenged is not going to help that process, is it?

For what it's worth I've been told in electric mode they are very good trains. But they just haven't got the power in diesel mode at higher speeds. And I seem to remember I was lambasted for pointing out RF's comments to that effect a while ago with the IEP supporters claiming the RF was just biased against the whole thing.

I'm sure they are fine and dandy running running fast on 25kv power - that was what they were designed to do, wasn't it?

But by higher speeds on diesel, could you expand a little on what you mean?

Are we talking speeds in the 100mph-125mph range or speeds below 100mph?

Given that the trains were never expected to be required to run day in, day out at 125mph on diesel, it's hardly surprising that they can't match a purpose-built 125mph diesel train. That the GW electrification is running late is not Hitachi's fault.

If it's a problem at 100mph or below, then that would be cause for concern, given that is the speed range of most of the routes where diesel running will be the regular mode of operation.

An IEP has yet to turn a wheel on any bit of the GWR network (or the ECML offshoots either) where this will be the case, so maybe let's wait and see how they actually get on with the likes of the Cotswold Line, with bursts of 90-100mph running interspersed with station stops at short intervals.

Also, what engine ratings are we talking about? The normal mode for Class 800, where the engine management system does not call for the full power rating as a matter of course, or the full-bore version, as per the AT300? Details of the testing programme seem scarce, so I've no idea. Does anyone else know?

Ow and by the way the reason I chose to post the point in the end is because why should I be put off posting something factual just because it doesn't sit well with others views of the project.

Well you could have posted both the 'bad' and 'good' points at the same time last night then, couldn't you? Instead of which we have to wait today for you to tell us what was said about performance in electric mode.

 

[Philip Phlopp]

So people posting what is often nonsense, with zero supporting evidence, should just be allowed to get on with doing so, should they? There is a difference between picking people up over that sort of thing and being a cheerleader for the IEP, which you have accused me of on a number of occasions.

If the aim of this thread is, ultimately, to aid people's understanding, with points debated along the way, then letting wrong information or wibble about things like the slope in the floor go unchallenged is not going to help that process, is it?



I'm sure they are fine and dandy running running fast on 25kv power - that was what they were designed to do, wasn't it?

But by higher speeds on diesel, could you expand a little on what you mean?

Are we talking speeds in the 100mph-125mph range or speeds below 100mph?

Given that the trains were never expected to be required to run day in, day out at 125mph on diesel, it's hardly surprising that they can't match a purpose-built 125mph diesel train. That the GW electrification is running late is not Hitachi's fault.

If it's a problem at 100mph or below, then that would be cause for concern, given that is the speed range of most of the routes where diesel running will be the regular mode of operation.

An IEP has yet to turn a wheel on any bit of the GWR network (or the ECML offshoots either) where this will be the case, so maybe let's wait and see how they actually get on with the likes of the Cotswold Line, with bursts of 90-100mph running interspersed with station stops at short intervals.

Also, what engine ratings are we talking about? The normal mode for Class 800, where the engine management system does not call for the full power rating as a matter of course, or the full-bore version, as per the AT300? Details of the testing programme seem scarce, so I've no idea. Does anyone else know?



Well you could have posted both the 'bad' and 'good' points at the same time last night then, couldn't you? Instead of which we have to wait today for you to tell us what was said about performance in electric mode.

I don't think Dave1987 has said anything that's much of a surprise.

We know they were designed ideally for 100mph running on diesel power, and have approximately the same power to weight ratio as an HST set, but that they're geared for 140mph, so in terms of raw performance, aren't going to really be any better than an HST.

There will be some gains through distributed traction and from AC traction motors, but it's perhaps being offset by the tall gearing to enable 140mph operation in future. The real time saving should arise from power doors and much reduced station dwell time.

They're definitely faster accelerating than an HST when operating on diesel, but I think they suffer from much the same issues as Turbostars, they start to run out of grunt close to 100mph, when drag becomes the limiting factor and they're a bit short of power to deal with it.

This shouldn't be an issue with IEP on the service patterns it's to be used on, particularly the East Coast sets which will be doing a lot of intermittent stop-start services on diesel power, the runs to Aberdeen and Inverness (and the Inverness runs should be on electric to Dunblane, and possibly by 2024, to Perth).

 

[Dave1987]

So people posting what is often nonsense, with zero supporting evidence, should just be allowed to get on with doing so, should they? There is a difference between picking people up over that sort of thing and being a cheerleader for the IEP, which you have accused me of on a number of occasions.

If the aim of this thread is, ultimately, to aid people's understanding, with points debated along the way, then letting wrong information or wibble about things like the slope in the floor go unchallenged is not going to help that process, is it?



I'm sure they are fine and dandy running running fast on 25kv power - that was what they were designed to do, wasn't it?

But by higher speeds on diesel, could you expand a little on what you mean?

Are we talking speeds in the 100mph-125mph range or speeds below 100mph?

Given that the trains were never expected to be required to run day in, day out at 125mph on diesel, it's hardly surprising that they can't match a purpose-built 125mph diesel train. That the GW electrification is running late is not Hitachi's fault.

If it's a problem at 100mph or below, then that would be cause for concern, given that is the speed range of most of the routes where diesel running will be the regular mode of operation.

An IEP has yet to turn a wheel on any bit of the GWR network (or the ECML offshoots either) where this will be the case, so maybe let's wait and see how they actually get on with the likes of the Cotswold Line, with bursts of 90-100mph running interspersed with station stops at short intervals.

Also, what engine ratings are we talking about? The normal mode for Class 800, where the engine management system does not call for the full power rating as a matter of course, or the full-bore version, as per the AT300? Details of the testing programme seem scarce, so I've no idea. Does anyone else know?



Well you could have posted both the 'bad' and 'good' points at the same time last night then, couldn't you? Instead of which we have to wait today for you to tell us what was said about performance in electric mode.

Well at least you didn't disappoint......

 

[jimm]

I don't think Dave1987 has said anything that's much of a surprise.

We know they were designed ideally for 100mph running on diesel power, and have approximately the same power to weight ratio as an HST set, but that they're geared for 140mph, so in terms of raw performance, aren't going to really be any better than an HST.

There will be some gains through distributed traction and from AC traction motors, but it's perhaps being offset by the tall gearing to enable 140mph operation in future. The real time saving should arise from power doors and much reduced station dwell time.

They're definitely faster accelerating than an HST when operating on diesel, but I think they suffer from much the same issues as Turbostars, they start to run out of grunt close to 100mph, when drag becomes the limiting factor and they're a bit short of power to deal with it.

This shouldn't be an issue with IEP on the service patterns it's to be used on, particularly the East Coast sets which will be doing a lot of intermittent stop-start services on diesel power, the runs to Aberdeen and Inverness (and the Inverness runs should be on electric to Dunblane, and possibly by 2024, to Perth).

I wasn't surprised either, as I thought I had indicated by what I said about the difference between what is needed on the GW and EC routes where the 800s will be running on diesel all the time for years to come, as opposed to being asked to try to keep up with HST schedules using diesel power west of Didcot for a short period while waiting for the overhead wiring to catch up.

Hence why I asked for some clarification - not forthcoming, it would seem - about what he meant by 'higher speeds' in diesel mode.

His intention, yet again, appears to be to be as negative as possible about these trains - with the mention of performance on 25kv provided only after a prompt from me - when all that he has done is describe what one might reasonably expect to hear about their performance in diesel mode above 100mph, given the factors you outline, none of which are exactly secret and have been discussed previously by yes, the sainted Roger Ford, and others.

Nor have I been expecting (or forecasting, despite my supposed cheerleader status) seismic journey time reductions, given they are (certainly for the time being) 125mph trains replacing 125mph trains. The timings indicated in the GWR brochure issued on Thursday have been in the public domain for quite some time. On the Cotswold Line, in particular, the power doors and improved initial acceleration clearly account for most of the projected journey time cuts.

Well at least you didn't disappoint......

Glad to hear it... but once again, when asked for a bit more information, all we get from you is silence.

 

[Dave1987]

Glad to hear it... but once again, when asked for a bit more information, all we get from you is silence.

What's the point? Last time I discussed this on the thread when RF pointed out this you lambasted it all and claimed RF was just biased against the whole project. Turns out he was right, who would of thought that eh?

And your comment about the "sainted Roger Ford" is just laughable to be honest. He is one of the most respected and knowledge railway journalists in the country. I know that the MPs have a healthy respect for him even though he does ask questions they don't want to be asked.

 

[jimm]

What's the point? Last time I discussed this on the thread when RF pointed out this you lambasted it all and claimed RF was just biased against the whole project. Turns out he was right, who would of thought that eh?

And your comment about the "sainted Roger Ford" is just laughable to be honest. He is one of the most respected and knowledge railway journalists in the country. I know that the MPs have a healthy respect for him even though he does ask questions they don't want to be asked.

I don't recall saying that Roger Ford was biased against the whole project - though I might have said it about you.

Maybe you could refresh my memory about when I supposedly slated Mr Ford? But as usual, I won't be holding my breath waiting for a response...

I agree with plenty of what he has had to say about the DfT's mishandling of the whole IEP procurement and the daft PFI contract - I certainly remember making those criticisms myself.

The 'sainted' bit was a touch of light sarcasm - for everyone posting on this forum citing him as some unimpeachable authority, there seems to be another person having a pop at him. I have a plenty of respect for him, as it happens, but that doesn't mean I regard him as some sort of divine authority either.

I know you're not a fan of DOO, so I doubt you'll be citing Roger if discussing that, given his comments to the Glasgow Herald last week on the subject. I'll leave you to find them, as there are more than enough DOO threads already.

 

[route:oxford]

This shouldn't be an issue with IEP on the service patterns it's to be used on, particularly the East Coast sets which will be doing a lot of intermittent stop-start services on diesel power, the runs to Aberdeen and Inverness (and the Inverness runs should be on electric to Dunblane, and possibly by 2024, to Perth).

That should be interesting. Cutting the electric power just as it hits the hills at Dunblane - hopefully having the momentum will help.

I'm looking forward to the step-change in performance of (local service) electric units when drawing out of Bridge of Allan heading to Dunblane. Going from 101 to 15x made a massive difference, smaller incremental benefit going from 15x to 170 but it should be a swift acceleration up to Kippenross for the coast into Dunblane.

 

[Dave1987]

I don't think Dave1987 has said anything that's much of a surprise.

We know they were designed ideally for 100mph running on diesel power, and have approximately the same power to weight ratio as an HST set, but that they're geared for 140mph, so in terms of raw performance, aren't going to really be any better than an HST.

There will be some gains through distributed traction and from AC traction motors, but it's perhaps being offset by the tall gearing to enable 140mph operation in future. The real time saving should arise from power doors and much reduced station dwell time.

They're definitely faster accelerating than an HST when operating on diesel, but I think they suffer from much the same issues as Turbostars, they start to run out of grunt close to 100mph, when drag becomes the limiting factor and they're a bit short of power to deal with it.

This shouldn't be an issue with IEP on the service patterns it's to be used on, particularly the East Coast sets which will be doing a lot of intermittent stop-start services on diesel power, the runs to Aberdeen and Inverness (and the Inverness runs should be on electric to Dunblane, and possibly by 2024, to Perth).

It's interesting you say that because the Aberdeen runs were cited as one of the services where the lack of power could be a real issue.

 

[Philip Phlopp]

It's interesting you say that because the Aberdeen runs were cited as one of the services where the lack of power could be a real issue.

It shouldn't be, the Aberdeen and Inverness services are 2+9 formations, which are really sluggish at accelerating, but the main issue is the slam doors holding despatch up at every station.

The Aberdeen services will also have to fit in with Class 158 and Class 170 units operating on Fife services, stoppers in and out of Dundee in both directions, and the additional services being planned out of Aberdeen down to Montrose.

The Inverness services are more of a concern, but they have to fit in to the windows for looping up and down. They should sooner rather than later benefit from further rolling electrification on Dunblane to Perth/Dundee, if the Transport Scotland CP6-7 plans are approved.

 

[Class 170101]

I understand that the Kings Cross to Inverness overall journey time will be the same but that it will be quicker than today south of Edinburgh but slower to the north.

In the videos was it just me or where the LED head and tail lights flickering? It was very off putting if so.

 

[swt_passenger]

In the videos was it just me or where the LED head and tail lights flickering? It was very off putting if so.

It's a common problem with videos, been remarked upon for years irrespective of the class of train. You can safely ignore it.

 

[samuelmorris]

Further to that, it's not actually an issue with the train - but similarly any source of light that's electronically controlled - you will see the same thing with video footage of PIS displays on trains or station platforms flickering when they clearly don't to the naked eye, because their refresh rate doesn't match that of the camera recording.

 

[asylumxl]

Further to that, it's not actually an issue with the train - but similarly any source of light that's electronically controlled - you will see the same thing with video footage of PIS displays on trains or station platforms flickering when they clearly don't to the naked eye, because their refresh rate doesn't match that of the camera recording.

Just wanted to add a bit more..

If the LED lights are powered directly by AC there will be strobing at the frequency of the supply.

If they are powered by DC and are dimmable, the strobing will likely be caused by the use of Pulse-width modulation..

For applications such as video lights, PWM usually isn't used and various methods of voltage control are used.

 

[Haydn1971]

There's the unresolved (as far as I'm aware) issue about the IEP sets being delivered in white to GWR under the terms of the train service agreements.

Wouldn't it be sensible to deliver all trains in a single colour (white) then add vinyl to suit the franchise rather than have them sprayed in franchise colours ? Eases repairs, makes branding changes easier, makes things easier at changes of franchises and also when units are cascaded mid franchise... Serious question, from someone outside of the industry

 

[Domh245]

Wouldn't it be sensible to deliver all trains in a single colour (white) then add vinyl to suit the franchise rather than have them sprayed in franchise colours ? Eases repairs, makes branding changes easier, makes things easier at changes of franchises and also when units are cascaded mid franchise... Serious question, from someone outside of the industry

Possibly although in this context, I think that delivered means "provided by Hitachi each morning". I also wouldn't be hugely surprised if we see that the future bidders for the GW franchise are strongly encouraged to "make use of the existing branding"

 

[najaB]

It's interesting you say that because the Aberdeen runs were cited as one of the services where the lack of power could be a real issue.

I can't see why - there's very little (none?) >100mph running north of Edinburgh and the gradients aren't exactly what I would describe as taxing.

 

[WatcherZero]

Its interesting that people cited the 'Javelin-style ride on 800 at about 80mph' and no one cited the accompanying tweet 'Diesel on IEP less obtrusive than on Meridian, as you'd hope'.

 

[dubscottie]

I can't see why - there's very little (none?) >100mph running north of Edinburgh and the gradients aren't exactly what I would describe as taxing.

Its not exactly a billiard table either. Fife has some long drags. Inverkeithing to Dalgety Box springs to mind as does the climb up to the Forth Bridge.

I think Dundee to Arbroath has some 100mph sections.

 

[Dave1987]

I can't see why - there's very little (none?) >100mph running north of Edinburgh and the gradients aren't exactly what I would describe as taxing.

I'm going to check but as Philip says from what I've been told it is the drag that is the issue. On the overheads they have way enough power, but operating on diesel they just don't when drag starts becoming an issue.

 

[Goldfish62]

Possibly although in this context, I think that delivered means "provided by Hitachi each morning". I also wouldn't be hugely surprised if we see that the future bidders for the GW franchise are strongly encouraged to "make use of the existing branding"

I had assumed that the whole point of the rebrand was that it would be continued irrespective of the franchisee. I don't know why the DFT would want to merely encourage use of the brand when it can simply mandate whatever brand it likes.

 

[najaB]

Its not exactly a billiard table either. Fife has some long drags. Inverkeithing to Dalgety Box springs to mind as does the climb up to the Forth Bridge.

Much of which is 60/70mph due to the curves. 170s don't seem to struggle much (my new standard for underpowered units), so I can't see why 800s would.

I think Dundee to Arbroath has some 100mph sections.

It does, indeed. But nothing over.

 

[jimm]

I had assumed that the whole point of the rebrand was that it would be continued irrespective of the franchisee. I don't know why the DFT would want to merely encourage use of the brand when it can simply mandate whatever brand it likes.

Though in the case of GWR the new look is a decision made by First Group, so it's their design, not a Scotrail-type situation, where the franchisee is told the trains must carry the livery decided by Transport Scotland.

 

[Bletchleyite]

Possibly although in this context, I think that delivered means "provided by Hitachi each morning". I also wouldn't be hugely surprised if we see that the future bidders for the GW franchise are strongly encouraged to "make use of the existing branding"

I agree. But in any case, you can stick vinyl on top of any colour, so the base coat doesn't matter so much (unless you do a quick half-job like this demo 800 and don't cover the whole body).

 

[leomartin125]

Just to let people know, two IEP's (No idea which ones as of yet) are running down from Old Dalby to North Pole IEP Depot on Tuesday 5th and Wednesday 6th July night. Their RTT pages are below:

Tuesday 5th July:
http://www.realtimetrains.co.uk/train/K97195/2016/07/04/advanced

Wednesday 6th July:
http://www.realtimetrains.co.uk/train/K97195/2016/07/05/advanced

They are due in the early hours of the morning on both nights so no chance to see them unless you were mad lets say. Could this be IEP's moving down for stabling before commencing testing on the GWML later this month?

 

[swt_passenger]

Just to let people know, two IEP's (No idea which ones as of yet) are running down from Old Dalby to North Pole IEP Depot on Tuesday 5th and Wednesday 6th July night. Their RTT pages are below:

It is just two paths booked, it doesn't guarantee either or even both will get used.

 

[leomartin125]

It is just two paths booked, it doesn't guarantee either or even both will get used.

Hmmmm I beg to differ. I have never seen, not once, a booked path from Old Dalby to North Pole (or vice versa) not get used yet, which explains why I'm telling people. If there are booked paths, it's because Hitachi and GBRf have made a decision to move a unit across the network, and as these are test trains, it's not one of these "Runs as Required" movements. So I bet top dollar both these trains run as planned.

Only chance one or both of these trains won't run is if one or both of these trains break down, or maybe something happens along the network that shuts the route down. Eiether way these are practically guaranteed to run.

 

[swt_passenger]

Hmmmm I beg to differ. I have never seen, not once, a booked path from Old Dalby to North Pole (or vice versa) not get used yet, which explains why I'm telling people.

Huh? Here's a post that you wrote about a booked path from Old Dalby to North Pole that didn't run, only a few months ago:

http://www.railforums.co.uk/showpost.php?p=2499060&postcount=19

 

[Harbornite]

There's nowt wrong with sharing the RTT links, even if the services don't run.

 

[swt_passenger]

There's nowt wrong with sharing the RTT links, even if the services don't run.

I didn't say there was a problem with posting the RTT paths. Just that there are no guarantees that they will run, until they start. During the long running 458/5 conversion programme there were numerous cases of STP paths appearing on a couple of days that only ran once, I think the same has occurred with 387s and 700s.