GWR Class 800

[Bletchleyite]

The 802s are the best all round solution, they just bene to be fitted with a buffet and better seats.

And be long enough.

 

[FGW_DID]

Why don’t you write to the DFT and express your displeasure!

Department for Transport
Great Minster House
33 Horseferry Road
Westminster
London
SW1P 4DR

 

[Bletchleyite]

Why don’t you write to the DFT and express your displeasure!

Department for Transport
Great Minster House
33 Horseferry Road
Westminster
London
SW1P 4DR

You think they would read it?

 

[coppercapped]

You think they would read it?

Quite.

SNIPPED
As they don't care much for what TOCs or user groups think, ...

I wish you luck.

I wrote to my then MP about the forthcoming IEP debacle some 9 years ago. He passed my letter to the DfT and the then Minister, Theresa Villiers, signed a letter in reply that was, frankly, insulting.

I can't wait for the nationalised railway...

 

[northernbelle]

The original DfT plan in the DA was to consider retaining HST vs 222. The 800 series were out of favour because of the cost of extending the IEP contract. SDG had done an 800 timetable West Country cl.800 option for "The Great Cartographer" as part of the original IET contract discussions but the option didn't get to contract stage.

When the 222 proposal became a no-go (as everyone thought it would!), it became cl.802 vs HST and the 802 won hands down on cost and deliverability. The problem was a 9 car killed the Cornish half hourly scheme, the cost of going all 9 car was prohibitive and there wasn't the all year round demand to justify it. So to get the proposition to fly and preserve the Cornish half-hourly, portion working saved the day. You could always go from 5 to 9 at a later date, when the all year round demand justified it but you wouldn't be able to easily resurrect the Cornish half hourly.

The potential for a different interior design of the cl.802 caused the DfT a major panic. It is fair to say (and I was there) they would not have been authorized by the DfT if they differed internally from the 800 build. It was a very, very sensitive issue with them.

Going from 5 to 9 on the 802 fleet to make all the West Country workings 9 car isn't a big deal. You can do it with 48 more cars (24 x GU, 12 x motor only and 12 x Trailer) to do 12 sets but if you want some kind of bun truck you would probably do 14 sets (28 x Bun truck GU, 14 x motor only and 14 x Trailer). That would make all the 802 x 9 car fitted with a buffet. You then could keep 8 or 10 x 5 car 802 on the Bedwyns and ex 180 North Cots 5 car workings. Putting this stock on regional services to absorb 5 car sets is a possibility, Cardiff to Penzance is the most likely as 26m long vehicles on Pompey-Cardiff is not going to work, even if they could keep to time.

Altering 800 sets is currently seen as too difficult. The hoops of fire you have to go through to do even a minor change on the IEP TARA means that if you had to boost formations, you go to the 802 fleet first. Re-instating Ponsondane sidings at Penzance to enable 9 cars to be stabled down there is currently required if GWR went to all 9 car operation on the London-Plymouth/Penzance trains and that needs money. Is the DfT up for all of this? Frankly, no. A two year DA doesn't make it easy to finance and they are still nervous about the buffet issue. As they don't care much for what TOCs or user groups think, a lot of Tory MP's need to get on Grayling's (or his SPADs) case to make it all happen.

The most accurate description of the whole thing I've seen on here so far.

The protraction of the HST PRM rebuild project has really convinced me that GWR were correct not to continue HST use on long distance services - intricacies of the interior aside, the 802s have injected a lot of capacity in a relatively short space of time that could not have been achieved with HSTs.

 

[SamYeager]

I can't wait for the nationalised railway...

Quite. Would be interesting hypothetically to see how much an even more powerful DfT with the ability to specify everything in excruciating detail and make it stick could foul up railway travel even more. Personally the prospect appalls me.

 

[Bletchleyite]

Quite. Would be interesting hypothetically to see how much an even more powerful DfT with the ability to specify everything in excruciating detail and make it stick could foul up railway travel even more. Personally the prospect appalls me.

Depends how it was done. BR was given a lot of independence - a lot more, in some ways, than the present TOCs.

 

[coppercapped]

Depends how it was done. BR was given a lot of independence - a lot more, in some ways, than the present TOCs.

BR was set up seventy years ago in very different political, social and economic circumstances to those pertaining now.

Power tends to aggregate to the centre and Civil Servants are constitutionally unable to stop fiddling.

Do not for one moment think it will be easy to turn the clock back even twenty years. However if Grayling manages to use the Williams report to decouple the DfT from fiddling to focus on the job it should be doing, which is to set the ground rules and no more, he gets my vote as the best SoS since the Second World War.

Edit: Clarifying the last sentence.

 

[broadgage]

Why don’t you write to the DFT and express your displeasure!

Department for Transport
Great Minster House
33 Horseferry Road
Westminster
London
SW1P 4DR

I did write to the above regarding the prohibition on buffets for GWR services.
I received a standard reply that stated that "on board catering offers are a matter for the TOC, and not for this department, the new trains are a flexible design able to accommodate a variety of different catering offers"

 

[3973EXL]

802114 out on daylight test run, 5Z30 Royal Oak to Kemble.

 

[broadgage]

The 802s are the best all round solution, they just need to be fitted with a buffet and better seats.

I agree, my objections to the IETs are not primarily on technical, engineering, or performance grounds but are due to the downgraded facilities if compared to a proper inter-city train.
Fit better seats, a buffet, and a bit more luggage space and they would make acceptable inter-city trains.
Lengthen all the 9 car sets to 10 car by adding a full sized buffet.
Remove the "no window" seats and replace with luggage racks.
Remove one row of 4 seats from each full standard class vehicle so as to give 4 more tables per vehicle.
Net result, more luggage space, more tables, about 20 to 30 extra seats, AND useful extra capacity by voluntary standing in the buffet.

Then after a few years, review loadings and use of the 5 car sets and consider adding 5 intermediate vehicles to make more 10 sets as described above.

Once enough 10 car sets are available to reliably provide these on all longer distance services, Then the remaining 5 car units could reasonably have the kitchen area much reduced in size, with consequent extra seating.

 

[43096]

GWR have been well and truly stuffed with the 800s as they have very limited control over them thanks to the DFT who have left them at the mercy of Hitachi so far as allocation flexibility and any improvements can be made, for example the "Quiet Coach" signs mentioned up thread which have taken a year to do them and still counting. The main points about which passengers are complaining, seats and catering were done and dusted before they came out into the open so, by that time, it was past the point of no return so far as any modifications could be done. No prizes for guessing who has to take all the flak from customers, though. Not the DFT.

I don’t buy all of that. FGW/GWR have been trying for years to go trolley only: they took the buffets out of a proportion of the HST fleet back in 2007, only to have to expensively convert some standard vehicles to small buffets when the trolleys were found to be sub-standard. Later still they took the buffets they had previously got rid of and converted them to standard vehicles, in what overall was a superb exercise in ****ing money up the wall.

Yet here we are again with the same situation and it’s apparently all DfT’s fault, even though East Coast got a design change to include buffets and FGW have been operator since well before IEP was dreamt up. Either WorstGroup have zero influence (unlike East Coast, it seems) and/or they don’t give a stuff about the quality of their service.

 

[ainsworth74]

Yet here we are again with the same situation and it’s apparently all DfT’s fault, even though East Coast got a design change to include buffets and FGW have been operator since well before IEP was dreamt up.

Allegedly this is because the GWR ones were to far along in their production for it to be viable whilst the East Coast ones were not. I'm not entirely sure I believe this as they managed to go back and convert the EMU variants into bi-modes relatively quickly plus the interior is supposed to be modular and comparatively easy to fiddle with (contractual issues aside)...

 

[Bletchleyite]

Allegedly this is because the GWR ones were to far along in their production for it to be viable whilst the East Coast ones were not. I'm not entirely sure I believe this as they managed to go back and convert the EMU variants into bi-modes relatively quickly plus the interior is supposed to be modular and comparatively easy to fiddle with (contractual issues aside)...

Given how (relatively) cheap seat foams and covers are (those being by far the biggest issue), I think I have difficulty believing it too.

 

[The Ham]

Given how (relatively) cheap seat foams and covers are (those being by far the biggest issue), I think I have difficulty believing it too.

The way I read what happened was that GWR were getting a franchise extension of a few years so didn't have the opportunity to payback any changes that they would have liked to have made to the units so were limited to keeping to the base specifications.

Conversely with a longer franchise Virgin would have been able to offer more time to cover the costs of converting back.

Unfortunately events overtook the plans and we still have GWR as it has received a number of extensions, meaning it could be in existence until 2022 (probably about as long as if it had be relet in 2012), yet Virgin East Coast has been handed back already.

 

[irish_rail]

If ever there was an example of why the franchising system doesn't work it is with GWR being bullied by dft into making the 802s as poor as the 800s for fear of not getting an extension. Time for a big rethink methinks.

 

[irish_rail]

Wholeheartedly agree with what Clarence yard suggests regarding turning most of the 5 car 802s to 9cars and adding a buffet. Sadly it's just a pipe dream I fear .

 

[Clarence Yard]

The GWR/LNER variation had nothing to do with any payback period. GWR were not allowed to make any changes nor were any suggestions of change at all welcome. The attitude then was that the DfT knew best and the TOC was just the operator of “their” trains to run “their” timetable.

The interior design for the GW sets was closed down earlier than the East Coast ones. The bidders for the EC franchise could propose up to (iirc) 12 minor variations to the interior of the EC trains.

This caused some upset on as the same people at FG who were dealing with the GWR MARA/TARA were also dealing with IEP matters in the EC bid.

 

[43096]

The GWR/LNER variation had nothing to do with any payback period. GWR were not allowed to make any changes nor were any suggestions of change at all welcome. The attitude then was that the DfT knew best and the TOC was just the operator of “their” trains to run “their” timetable.

The interior design for the GW sets was closed down earlier than the East Coast ones. The bidders for the EC franchise could propose up to (iirc) 12 minor variations to the interior of the EC trains.

This caused some upset on as the same people at FG who were dealing with the GWR MARA/TARA were also dealing with IEP matters in the EC bid.

So putting a buffet in is a minor variation....

 

[northernbelle]

I don’t buy all of that. FGW/GWR have been trying for years to go trolley only: they took the buffets out of a proportion of the HST fleet back in 2007, only to have to expensively convert some standard vehicles to small buffets when the trolleys were found to be sub-standard. Later still they took the buffets they had previously got rid of and converted them to standard vehicles, in what overall was a superb exercise in ****ing money up the wall.

Yet here we are again with the same situation and it’s apparently all DfT’s fault, even though East Coast got a design change to include buffets and FGW have been operator since well before IEP was dreamt up. Either WorstGroup have zero influence (unlike East Coast, it seems) and/or they don’t give a stuff about the quality of their service.

The base spec, laid out by DfT, was for there to be no buffet car.

At the time the buffet debate began (2015), First was locked into a direct franchise award due to expire in September 2015. In March 2015, this was extended to April 2019 - on some sets (by the delivery programme of the day), this would give barely 6 months for First to recover the multi-million investment in buffet cars. Stagecoach/Virgin were awarded an 8 year franchise in March 2015, due to run until 2023 (4 years to recover the investment on its sets assuming all sets in service during 2019). Clearly these things need business cases - I can't imagine a pub landlord spending thousands on redecorating when he knew the brewery might kick him out a few months later.

Like it or loath it, this is what happens when you have short franchise awards.

 

[Clarence Yard]

I will say it again - the difference between GWR and LNER spec. had nothing to do with business cases as the TOC doesn’t “recoup” the investment on the 800 trains. The DfT effectively determine what your daily SAP payments will be in their contract negotiations. You, as TOC, are effectively a bystander.

So the DfT agrees the specification changes with Agility and the payments are set accordingly. This is what made FG so fed up because in the EC bid the DfT accepted ideas for change as part of your base bid but on GWR they were Stalinist.

The 800/801 trains are on a long DfT contract that lasts for 27.5 years so it really is irrelevant if you are on a long franchise, a short franchise or a DA - the payments will be adjusted for the remaining length of that 27.5 year contract, irrespective of operator. So long term changes should be relatively easy to justify, if they wanted to do them.

But they just didn’t want any change to the GWR sets.

 

[RPI]

Saw today that a 2x5 IET had to have all passengers in the front unit as the second 5 car 800 was closed off due to crew shortages.

This is something the DfT were warned would happen and it has. But they knew best didn't they. More 9 cars should have ordered and not the 2x5 combo they went with.

there's nothing in the rule book that specifies that a Front Set Lead (FSL) has to be present but GWR are reluctant to upset the applecart by insisting that a Train Manager operates a 10 car without one with passengers on board.

 

[Bletchleyite]

there's nothing in the rule book that specifies that a Front Set Lead (FSL) has to be present but GWR are reluctant to upset the applecart by insisting that a Train Manager operates a 10 car without one with passengers on board.

Why? Almost all other TOCs that operate trains in multiple with guards have one set with the driver in and one with the guard in. Some even allow completely unstaffed sets (i.e. the driver and guard in the same one), e.g. TPE. All DOO operations allow a set with no staff in (any rear set). All TOCs with 12-car (3x4) guarded operation have at least one set completely unstaffed.

Nobody dies or gets injured as a result.

There is absolutely no sensible reason for this whatsoever.

 

[Bikeman78]

I don’t buy all of that. FGW/GWR have been trying for years to go trolley only: they took the buffets out of a proportion of the HST fleet back in 2007, only to have to expensively convert some standard vehicles to small buffets when the trolleys were found to be sub-standard. Later still they took the buffets they had previously got rid of and converted them to standard vehicles, in what overall was a superb exercise in ****ing money up the wall.

I'd forgotten about all the messing about. Didn't the no buffet sets run as 2+7 for a while? Why didn't they put the off lease buffets back into traffic, swapping the first class seats for standard if required?

 

[Mordac]

Why? Almost all other TOCs that operate trains in multiple with guards have one set with the driver in and one with the guard in. Some even allow completely unstaffed sets (i.e. the driver and guard in the same one), e.g. TPE. All DOO operations allow a set with no staff in (any rear set). All TOCs with 12-car (3x4) guarded operation have at least one set completely unstaffed.

Nobody dies or gets injured as a result.

There is absolutely no sensible reason for this whatsoever.

You can tell that to Mick Cash. I bet he'll listen.

 

[Master29]

The base spec, laid out by DfT, was for there to be no buffet car.

At the time the buffet debate began (2015), First was locked into a direct franchise award due to expire in September 2015. In March 2015, this was extended to April 2019 - on some sets (by the delivery programme of the day), this would give barely 6 months for First to recover the multi-million investment in buffet cars. Stagecoach/Virgin were awarded an 8 year franchise in March 2015, due to run until 2023 (4 years to recover the investment on its sets assuming all sets in service during 2019). Clearly these things need business cases - I can't imagine a pub landlord spending thousands on redecorating when he knew the brewery might kick him out a few months later.

Like it or loath it, this is what happens when you have short franchise awards.

Why do they need a business case? What does this have to do with buffet cars on the Penzance route?

 

[43096]

I'd forgotten about all the messing about. Didn't the no buffet sets run as 2+7 for a while? Why didn't they put the off lease buffets back into traffic, swapping the first class seats for standard if required?

They did run as 2+7 until the original buffets were converted to TS to go back in the sets.

 

[northernbelle]

Why do they need a business case? What does this have to do with buffet cars on the Penzance route?

Why would a business spend money on something without a business case or a dictat from the DfT?

 

[irish_rail]

As expected several trains on the Penzance route reported as not being able to provide a trolley service in part or all of the train today. Great advert for the railway.....

 

[PHILIPE]

As expected several trains on the Penzance route reported as not being able to provide a trolley service in part or all of the train today. Great advert for the railway.....

GWR are saying to Tweeters that the poor catering service is under review in order to effect improvements, Whether anything happens or not is another matter.