GWR Class 800

[Goldfish62]

Open mind

I would respectively suggest that it's you who doesn't have the open mind if you can't accept that some people find the IET a poor train to travel on.

 

[jimm]

I was actually comparing with Mk II aircon coaches...

Were you? Then say so.

And the Mk2fs were basically a trial run for the Mk3 interior, complete with the IC70 seats, but precious few of those were built and lots of long-distance trains were, as I said, still being worked by Mk1s.

 

[jimm]

I would respectively suggest that it's you who doesn't have the open mind if you can't accept that some people find the IET a poor train to travel on.

And maybe some people quite like the IETs, but that doesn't seem to be allowed...

 

[FGW_DID]

I would respectively suggest that it's you who doesn't have the open mind if you can't accept that some people find the IET a poor train to travel on.

 

[Goldfish62]

Were you? Then say so.

Silly comment.

 

[Goldfish62]

And maybe some people quite like the IETs, but that doesn't seem to be allowed...

Why not? What's wrong with saying you like them?

 

[Darandio]

Why not? What's wrong with saying you like them?

Get reading, there is only 290 pages.

 

[Master29]

It wasn't that hard to have a wow factor in 1976 when much of the rest of the railway was being run using Mk1 coaches and first-generation dmus that hadn't seen anything more by way of updates since they were built than a new coat of paint or two.

Time have changed, the railway has to shift way more people about than it did in 1976, so the trains have had to change too.

That`s precisely the point though isn`t it. The iep compared to a mk 3 coach isn`t much of a wow at all but as you point out what a difference the HST was from a rake of corridor mk 1`s to the west country. Times may have changed in terms of number of people but innovations. No. The iep is a good train but not a wow by comparison for 40+ of technological advancement.

 

[3973EXL]

800319 5X81 Acton ML to Eastleigh at Reading today ( 5X80 Doncaster to Acton ML ).

 

[Bletchleyite]

And maybe some people quite like the IETs, but that doesn't seem to be allowed...

I don't think it's a bad train or technology, it's just got rubbish seats and overenthusiastic (though not as bad as the GWR HST) lighting. Fix those two elements and there'll be nothing significant wrong with it, barring being an old fashioned high floor design as most UK stock is.

It does have some particularly good features, e.g. excellent legroom.

 

[jimm]

Silly comment.

I've heard of reading between the lines, but the suggestion that anyone could work out from this

The HSTs have had their day, but I remember going on one for the first time in 1976 and it had the wow factor,

that you were comparing the HST to an air-conditioned Mk2 takes the biscuit.

Air-conditioned Mk2s weren't exactly that numerous to begin with, with plenty of earlier variants of Mk2s still in use on long-distance trains out of London (and Mk1 Met-Cammell Pullmans at Kings Cross) at that time until HST and loco-hauled Mk3 deliveries built up, and the XC services were dominated by Mk1s, so the HST did indeed have a wow factor by comparison with that lot, especially when the changes to journey times were added in.

Frankly, the 80x or anything else would have to be going some to achieve a similar impact now and I don't think anyone would suggest that the new DB ICE4 offers a wow factor when compared with the appearance on German tracks of the ICE1 in 1991, to borrow your example.

 

[CMRail]

And maybe some people quite like the IETs, but that doesn't seem to be allowed...

How would someone dare...

 

[Goldfish62]

I've heard of reading between the lines, but the suggestion that anyone could work out from this



that you were comparing the HST to an air-conditioned Mk2 takes the biscuit.

Air-conditioned Mk2s weren't exactly that numerous to begin with, with plenty of earlier variants of Mk2s still in use on long-distance trains out of London (and Mk1 Met-Cammell Pullmans at Kings Cross) at that time until HST and loco-hauled Mk3 deliveries built up, and the XC services were dominated by Mk1s, so the HST did indeed have a wow factor by comparison with that lot, especially when the changes to journey times were added in.

Frankly, the 80x or anything else would have to be going some to achieve a similar impact now and I don't think anyone would suggest that the new DB ICE4 offers a wow factor when compared with

I've heard of reading between the lines, but the suggestion that anyone could work out from this



that you were comparing the HST to an air-conditioned Mk2 takes the biscuit.

Air-conditioned Mk2s weren't exactly that numerous to begin with, with plenty of earlier variants of Mk2s still in use on long-distance trains out of London (and Mk1 Met-Cammell Pullmans at Kings Cross) at that time until HST and loco-hauled Mk3 deliveries built up, and the XC services were dominated by Mk1s, so the HST did indeed have a wow factor by comparison with that lot, especially when the changes to journey times were added in.

Frankly, the 80x or anything else would have to be going some to achieve a similar impact now and I don't think anyone would suggest that the new DB ICE4 offers a wow factor when compared with the appearance on German tracks of the ICE1 in 1991, to borrow your example.

Sorry, perhaps you don't mean to, but your comments such as "takes the biscuit" and "I've heard of reading between the lines..." come across as quite obnoxious and there's no need for that tone.

If you were around in 1976 and travelled out of Paddington on an HST for the first time you'd know exactly what I meant.

 

[ijmad]

I like that the trains have more seats overall.

I don't like the less comfortable seats.

I like that they're more environmentally friendly compared to the HSTs, since they are lighter, have more efficient traction and of course can run under wires.

I don't like that they seem to be having considerable teething problems and often seem to break down.

I like they have excellent aircon and a better ride in the carriages than many of the older HSTs.

I don't like how much space is wasted by not one, but two, first class kitchens on every 2x5 train, while everyone else gets downgraded to a trolley service.

 

[JN114]

In some actual news about GWR Class 800s; 800319 was spied working through Reading to Eastleigh for commissioning. By my count that would mean all the 800/3s are now built and either in service or testing/commissioning.

 

[jimm]

Sorry, perhaps you don't mean to, but your comments such as "takes the biscuit" and "I've heard of reading between the lines..." come across as quite obnoxious and there's no need for that tone.

If you were around in 1976 and travelled out of Paddington on an HST for the first time you'd know exactly what I meant.

Really? How about not claiming you were comparing x with y, when you didn't bother to mention y in the first place, or writing things like

Silly comment.

Then I might not take that tone.

I was around in 1976 and first travelled on HSTs a couple of weeks after they were introduced, and yes, they did offer a wow factor. I wouldn't dispute that for a moment, but as I have said, that really wasn't hard when an HST was compared with pretty much anything else that BR was operating at the time.

Exactly what is it that the 80xs lack that would create a wow factor now?

 

[broadgage]

The successful concept of just one train (not units joined together) of fixed formation with no under-floor engines with open and comfortable coaches. It was a government vanity project to embark on mass electrification, only to end up running vastly over budget, drastically late and to not finish the job as intended. Add into that a very expensive and complex Agility managed fleet of expensive,over complicated trains of various lengths and no wonder its not going smoothly. Should have stuck to diesel, built a new fleet closely based on the successful HST design with fuel efficient diesel engines with more capacity coaches, closely based on the mk III design with retention tanks and at seat sockets and wi-fi. Hey presto, a cheaper, ready to go modern train (with the minimum of distruption from unnecessary electrification work) that passengers would like, saving the tax payers billions of pounds that could be better spent elseshere, such as the NHS or education. After all, a fleet of 802's will be working Paddington to Penzance working just 52 miles under the wires to Newbury, so what is the point of having an expensive bi-mode train for this? Totally pointless.

I agree. Few passengers consider under floor engines to be an improvement over a loco or power car at the end(s)
Few passengers think a shorter train is an improvement.
few consider two short units without through gangways to be better than a full length train.
Few passengers think that no buffet is better than having a buffet.

They should have built some new HSTs ! Not of course an exact copy of a 40 year old train, but similar in general design.
Locomotive or power car at each end.
10 or more passenger coaches in between.
First class one end, standard the other, with a buffet and kitchen in between.
Power doors, retention toilets, wifi, power sockets at seats.

 

[Clarence Yard]

The DfT were offered that (minus the WiFi) over a decade ago by FG, at a fraction of the cost of the IEP scheme and they rejected it. We have discussed all this before in these 800 threads.

Like it or not, we are currently stuck with what the DfT allows us operators to have and it doesn’t have much of a wow factor.

It would also help if it would work as promised. I know from personal experience (on the ER) that the HST introduction wasn’t trouble free but Hitachi have, so far, been a tad disappointing, even allowing for the NR issues.

 

[ooo]

Few passengers consider under floor engines to be an improvement over a loco or power car at the end(s)

How many people actually find that a big problem? Most of the time the noise is just in the background and is easy to forget about.

 

[ijmad]

How many people actually find that a big problem? Most of the time the noise is just in the background and is easy to forget about.

This is a vague recollection, but wasn't one of the reasons that GWR didn't buy far more of the Class 180 Adelantes was because of passenger complaints about the noise of the underfloor engines?

 

[LMSDUCHESS]

Hi everybody, I'm sorry if I seem uneducated or stupid to you folk in the know. I've been a long admirer of this forum. However I'm catching the 16:29 GWR Service from Swansea this Friday (05/10/18) and and I'm also catching the 21:10 service from Bristol Parkway (07/10/18) on the Sunday, I'm just wondering if these services will be worked by HST's?
Any help is appreciated
Thank you

 

[JohnRegular]

Isn't it funny that in this thread the 800s are being criticised for both not being a big enough improvement on the HST, and also not being enough like an HST?

I realised a few weeks ago at Temple Meads waiting for a Paddington train, that whilst I had been telling myself I'd prefer to ride on an HST whilst they're still in service, I was really hoping for an 800 to turn up. They're definitely not perfect, but I prefer the airier atmosphere to the relatovely claustrophobic hihh density seating on the GWR HSTs.

 

[43096]

Yes, that's the point for me. The HSTs have had their day, but I remember going on one for the first time in 1976 and it had the wow factor, just as the first ICE I went on did. It's a real let down that the passenger facilities and internal decor on the IETs are so mediocre when this train is supposed to be the pride of the high speed fleet.

Truth. Absolutely spot on.

In 1976 HST was a leap forward in passenger facilities - it was ahead of contemporary car design. Now IEP is not only worse than HST, but it lags behind its competitor (the car) by a huge margin. The InterCity railway is dying - since privatisation every generation of IC train has been worse than what went before.

 

[jimm]

Truth. Absolutely spot on.

In 1976 HST was a leap forward in passenger facilities - it was ahead of contemporary car design. Now IEP is not only worse than HST, but it lags behind its competitor (the car) by a huge margin. The InterCity railway is dying - since privatisation every generation of IC train has been worse than what went before.

Ah yes, I always think how the railways are dying in front of my very eyes when I undertake my one-hour journey by IET or HST to and from work in Reading. Why on earth do I - and the several hundred other people on board - even bother with trains?

I could get in my car instead and undertake a drive that, even allowing for the AA's most optimistic journey time forecast, takes 90 minutes - a timing that makes no allowance for time lost to the morning and evening peak car park that is the A34 around Oxford, with the added possibility of a sting in the tail(back) on the M4 near Reading.

What could possibly be better than that...?

 

[JN114]

Truth. Absolutely spot on.

In 1976 HST was a leap forward in passenger facilities - it was ahead of contemporary car design. Now IEP is not only worse than HST, but it lags behind its competitor (the car) by a huge margin. The InterCity railway is dying - since privatisation every generation of IC train has been worse than what went before.

The key difference is in 1976 BR struggled to fill a 2+7 WR HST set - even in the peaks; with only an hourly Bristol and hourly Swansea service for most of the day. Nowadays so many more people are travelling - the nature of InterCity Rail has changed.

Compare it to the turn of the Jet age. In the 1950s everyone was flying on Constellations and Stratoliners with bars, couches, room to spread out. The jet age came along and with it a more modern sense of running airlines - bums on seats mattered more than comfort. The naysayers predicted doom for the airlines and their ubiquitous 3+3 seating, that everyone would go back to ocean liners that were more comfortable. 20 years later they were building widebodies that could seat 4x as many passengers as the 707s and DC8s that had replaced the super-comfortable Connies; and 60 years on Millions fly every day. Meanwhile on the ocean...

We’ve reached, and passed, that tipping point on rail. The GWML is bursting at the seams for passengers. Yes the seats could probably be padded better, and the proportion of 5 (and thus 5+5) and 9 car trains could have been better thought out - but one thing these new trains aren’t short of is capacity. That’s the problem they’re here to solve. And barely half the fleet is in service yet.

 

[800001]

In some actual news about GWR Class 800s; 800319 was spied working through Reading to Eastleigh for commissioning. By my count that would mean all the 800/3s are now built and either in service or testing/commissioning.

800301 is still in production at Newton Aycliffe.

311, 312, 320, 321 are all in test area.

 

[broadgage]

How many people actually find that a big problem? Most of the time the noise is just in the background and is easy to forget about.

The under floor engines may not be a big problem, but it is still a downgrade if compared to an HST or loco hauled train.
IMHO, a lot of passengers would accept the under floor engines if that was the only downgrade, however combined with all the other downgrades it is seen as a step too far.
Under floor engines,
AND no buffet
AND shorter trains
AND no through gangways when two short units are used.
AND largely airline seating,
Are in total seen as too many downgrades at once and results in what feels like a local or at best a regional DMU, and not a proper inter-city train.

I suspect that many passengers would forget, or forgive, or get used to the under floor engines, IF the trains were in other respects a "proper inter city train"
Make all the 9 car and some of the 5 car units into 10 car trains by the addition of a proper, full sized hot buffet car. Not a micro buffet, or a mini buffet or a glorified static trolley, but a proper hot buffet offering cooked to order hot snacks and real coffee.
Remove one row of four seats from each standard class coach in order to give several more tables. This loss of seats would be more than offset by the extra seating in the buffet car.
I would place the buffet in the middle of standard class such that no standard class passenger has to walk far to enjoy it.
The longer walk from first class being of no consequence since table service would be offered in first.

Even an old cynic like me might forget the under floor engines, or at least forgive them if the train was better in other respects.

The present poor reliability is most regrettable, but IMHO actually less of a problem than the fundamental design issues. Hitachi will presumably eventually get the wretched units to work reliably, they have a powerful financial incentive to do so.
But no matter how reliable the IETs eventually are, as presently implemented they still represent a downgrade from a proper inter-city train to a local DMU.

 

[Dai Corner]

The key difference is in 1976 BR struggled to fill a 2+7 WR HST set - even in the peaks; with only an hourly Bristol and hourly Swansea service for most of the day. Nowadays so many more people are travelling - the nature of InterCity Rail has changed.

Compare it to the turn of the Jet age. In the 1950s everyone was flying on Constellations and Stratoliners with bars, couches, room to spread out. The jet age came along and with it a more modern sense of running airlines - bums on seats mattered more than comfort. The naysayers predicted doom for the airlines and their ubiquitous 3+3 seating, that everyone would go back to ocean liners that were more comfortable. 20 years later they were building widebodies that could seat 4x as many passengers as the 707s and DC8s that had replaced the super-comfortable Connies; and 60 years on Millions fly every day. Meanwhile on the ocean...

We’ve reached, and passed, that tipping point on rail. The GWML is bursting at the seams for passengers. Yes the seats could probably be padded better, and the proportion of 5 (and thus 5+5) and 9 car trains could have been better thought out - but one thing these new trains aren’t short of is capacity. That’s the problem they’re here to solve. And barely half the fleet is in service yet.

I'd agree with all the above, except that Paddington-Bristol is more outer-suburban than InterCity these days. The new electric timetable with fast and semi-fast trains at almost metro frequencies will continue the trend.

 

[irish_rail]

7.30 Paddington to Penzance and 14.00 return will be formed of just a 5 car today. Should be fun. Full and standing I would wager from Plymouth to London.
Ah progress............

 

[jimm]

Or maybe not...

From GWR Jounreycheck

07:30 London Paddington to Penzance due 13:13

07:30 London Paddington to Penzance due 13:13 will be diverted between Reading and Taunton.
It will no longer call at Swindon, Chippenham, Bath Spa and Bristol Temple Meads.
It has been previously delayed but is expected to be 7 minutes late from Taunton.
This is due to this train being late from the depot.
This train will now be formed of the usual number of coaches.