Progress on Avanti West Coast's 805/807s Hitachi AT300 sets

[AJDesiro]

I happened to be traveling on a West Midlands Day Ranger today and decided to take a trip from Birmingham-Shrewsbury and back, on my outward journey, passing Oxley, I noticed that the 805s were in a perfect position to try and film a video that would give me a rough indication of the interior layout, so when I passed Oxley on my return journey, I indeed filmed the 805s.

I managed to get a relatively accurate indication of the saloon layouts, as well as the coach letters displayed on the external DMIs, and can confidently say that the coaches are as follows:
Coach A - Driving standard class coach, with 6 bays of 4,
Coach B - Standard class coach with shop and 8 bays of 4,
Coach C - Standard class coach with 10 bays of 4,
Coach D - Standard class coach with 10 bays of 4,
Coach E - First class coach, layout was too difficult to decipher.

I realized that I would be able to create a broad seating plan, based on my recording, and managed to create something that happens to have 4 more seats in standard than an 805 is meant to have according to the Avanti contract, I found it quite difficult to decipher luggage racks, and I believe the seating, while it is very symmetrical for the most part, may not be fully symmetrical in coach A - which would explain the discrepancy.

I of course must mention that this is of course not the official seating plan, and I wouldn't be surprised myself if there were some slight differences!
Apologies for the banner, I want to try to avoid people claiming this as their own, it took me ages to create, it was certainly difficult. The footage wasn't easy to analyze, and I had to find several pictures of the interior to try to properly grasp the layout.

I hope that this is a useful resource, and while it's not 100% accurate, I can safely say that it's as accurate as we're going to get for the time being without an official seating plan, the tables are definitely correct, and the airline seating is about 90% correct.

 

[Bletchleyite]

That's extremely low density. 72 seats in a 26m vehicle basically means all of Standard will be like the well liked hybrid Voyager Coach D - a massive upgrade from a cramped regular Voyager coach!

By contrast a GWR layout full 80x vehicle has 88 seats, and they aren't exactly cramped.

These promise to really be quite good!

 

[AJDesiro]

That's extremely low density. 72 seats in a 26m vehicle basically means all of Standard will be like the well liked hybrid Voyager Coach D - a massive upgrade from a cramped regular Voyager coach!

By contrast a GWR layout full 80x vehicle has 88 seats, and they aren't exactly cramped.

These promise to really be quite good!

Indeed, I was quite shocked, and even with such a low density interior, coaches C and D have a vastly higher capacity than coach D on the voyagers, managing to cram in an additional 20 seats, even though they only have two less tables, it just shows how much more space efficient the 80X is as a platform - we know that there’s no compromise in legroom given that the seats at the bays of four span the entire length of the window, just like in coach D on the voyagers.

 

[GWVillager]

I happened to be traveling on a West Midlands Day Ranger today and decided to take a trip from Birmingham-Shrewsbury and back, on my outward journey, passing Oxley, I noticed that the 805s were in a perfect position to try and film a video that would give me a rough indication of the interior layout, so when I passed Oxley on my return journey, I indeed filmed the 805s.

I managed to get a relatively accurate indication of the saloon layouts, as well as the coach letters displayed on the external DMIs, and can confidently say that the coaches are as follows:
Coach A - Driving standard class coach, with 6 bays of 4,
Coach B - Standard class coach with shop and 8 bays of 4,
Coach C - Standard class coach with 10 bays of 4,
Coach D - Standard class coach with 10 bays of 4,
Coach E - First class coach, layout was too difficult to decipher.

I realized that I would be able to create a broad seating plan, based on my recording, and managed to create something that happens to have 4 more seats in standard than an 805 is meant to have according to the Avanti contract, I found it quite difficult to decipher luggage racks, and I believe the seating, while it is very symmetrical for the most part, may not be fully symmetrical in coach A - which would explain the discrepancy.

I of course must mention that this is of course not the official seating plan, and I wouldn't be surprised myself if there were some slight differences!
Apologies for the banner, I want to try to avoid people claiming this as their own, it took me ages to create, it was certainly difficult. The footage wasn't easy to analyze, and I had to find several pictures of the interior to try to properly grasp the layout.

I hope that this is a useful resource, and while it's not 100% accurate, I can safely say that it's as accurate as we're going to get for the time being without an official seating plan, the tables are definitely correct, and the airline seating is about 90% correct.

That’s an awful lot of tables - not that I’m complaining! However, the kitchen appears to be much smaller than full size, will this lead to a reduction in catering provision?

 

[AJDesiro]

That’s an awful lot of tables - not that I’m complaining! However, the kitchen appears to be much smaller than full size, will this lead to a reduction in catering provision?

There's certainly an abundance of tables, though I am happy that there are still plenty of airline-style seats, as I personally prefer these, and believe that a roughly 50/50 layout should be the norm on long-distance services. It's much better than the 397s in my opinion, which don't even have airline seating in certain carriages, this offers a very good choice.

It's worth noting that this diagram is not drawn to scale, the first class catering galley occupies two windows on the 805s, which is slightly smaller than the kitchens on the LNER/GWR IETs, though is the same size as the galley on the HT and TPE 802s. The voyagers that these units are replacing have a limited catering provision, so these will presumably have a similar provision, though the catering area on these actually looks larger, which is surprising!

 

[rdlover777]

I like it. I wonder if this could a pre production model as Hornsby were going to announce the 805 this year but it got pulled.

mildly off topic but it looks like it was repainted

 

[themiller]

I happened to be traveling on a West Midlands Day Ranger today and decided to take a trip from Birmingham-Shrewsbury and back, on my outward journey, passing Oxley, I noticed that the 805s were in a perfect position to try and film a video that would give me a rough indication of the interior layout, so when I passed Oxley on my return journey, I indeed filmed the 805s.

I managed to get a relatively accurate indication of the saloon layouts, as well as the coach letters displayed on the external DMIs, and can confidently say that the coaches are as follows:
Coach A - Driving standard class coach, with 6 bays of 4,
Coach B - Standard class coach with shop and 8 bays of 4,
Coach C - Standard class coach with 10 bays of 4,
Coach D - Standard class coach with 10 bays of 4,
Coach E - First class coach, layout was too difficult to decipher.

I realized that I would be able to create a broad seating plan, based on my recording, and managed to create something that happens to have 4 more seats in standard than an 805 is meant to have according to the Avanti contract, I found it quite difficult to decipher luggage racks, and I believe the seating, while it is very symmetrical for the most part, may not be fully symmetrical in coach A - which would explain the discrepancy.

I of course must mention that this is of course not the official seating plan, and I wouldn't be surprised myself if there were some slight differences!
Apologies for the banner, I want to try to avoid people claiming this as their own, it took me ages to create, it was certainly difficult. The footage wasn't easy to analyze, and I had to find several pictures of the interior to try to properly grasp the layout.

I hope that this is a useful resource, and while it's not 100% accurate, I can safely say that it's as accurate as we're going to get for the time being without an official seating plan, the tables are definitely correct, and the airline seating is about 90% correct.

Had a look in the windows of 805001 yesterday in Carlisle. When facing the cab, on the right are window aligned tables with the one nearest the corridor being for a wheelchair on the forward facing side. Forward of the table nearest the driver’s cab there may be a pair of seats facing away from the cab. On the left side are (working from corridor to cab) 5 airline seats then a table for 2 then a single seat with its back to the cab - this one isn’t beside a window the same as the suspected pair on the right. The table for 2 is aligned with the first window from the front but the remainder of the singles are equally spaced from there to the last window.

 

[connorwilsonwy]

5Q30 Oxley Car M.D. to Carlisle 09/08/23

 

[PlatformEdgeVT]

805 002 appeared at Crewe on the 5Q47 to Oxley Car. M.D.

805 003 at Crewe on its way to Oxley from Carlisle

 

[AJDesiro]

Had a look in the windows of 805001 yesterday in Carlisle. When facing the cab, on the right are window aligned tables with the one nearest the corridor being for a wheelchair on the forward facing side. Forward of the table nearest the driver’s cab there may be a pair of seats facing away from the cab. On the left side are (working from corridor to cab) 5 airline seats then a table for 2 then a single seat with its back to the cab - this one isn’t beside a window the same as the suspected pair on the right. The table for 2 is aligned with the first window from the front but the remainder of the singles are equally spaced from there to the last window.

Thanks! Presumably this is first class?

 

[themiller]

Thanks! Presumably this is first class?

That’s right, hence the single seats on the left side and pairs of seats on the right. Sorry if I wasn’t clear.

 

[william.martin]

Would anybody know which units have started testing/ mileage accumulation?

 

[pokemonsuper9]

Would anybody know which units have started testing/ mileage accumulation?

well 805001 and 3 have been running under freight, sometimes as a pair and 805002 has been running under Avanti from what I've seen

 

[DaveyJones]

well 805001 and 3 have been running under freight, sometimes as a pair and 805002 has been running under Avanti from what I've seen

And 805004 is at Oxley

 

[william.martin]

well 805001 and 3 have been running under freight, sometimes as a pair and 805002 has been running under Avanti from what I've seen

And 805004 is at Oxley

How about 807002?

 

[pokemonsuper9]

How about 807002?

I've not heard of it moving off Newton Aycliffe yet.

 

[stan claire]

does anyone know why the Avanti IETs are 805 and 807 instead of an 802 and 801 subclass? Or did they need their own number to feel special and because they have white side boards?

 

[pokemonsuper9]

does anyone know why the Avanti IETs are 805 and 807 instead of an 802 and 801 subclass? Or did they need their own number to feel special and because they have white side boards?

1. All the 80x seem to be annoying like that, if it were up to me I don't see why we couldn't just have an 800 and 801, there's enough subclasses.
2. 5 is for 5 car, 7 is for 7 car so it's easy to remember.

 

[MotCO]

2. 5 is for 5 car, 7 is for 7 car so it's easy to remember.

Until they decide to swap carriages around and make them all 6 cars . (But I think I have read somewhere that they have to have an odd number of carriages in each rake - no idea why.)

 

[pokemonsuper9]

Until they decide to swap carriages around and make them all 6 cars

Would that make sense to do (like platform length wise for double 805), also you'd still be left with 3 5 cars in that case.

 

[LNW-GW Joint]

does anyone know why the Avanti IETs are 805 and 807 instead of an 802 and 801 subclass? Or did they need their own number to feel special and because they have white side boards?

800 and 801 fleets were procured by DfT directly with long-term maintenance (27.5 years) by Hitachi included at their new depots, and have special contract terms.
The later 80x were procured via more normal routes by TOCs and Roscos (though they use the same depots as 800/801).
It's more about the maintenance contracts that the technical differences.
There's also no shortage of numbers in the 8xx range.

 

[800001]

How about 807002?

Still at Newton Aycliffe, spent weeks sat outside.
No sign yet of any other 807s.

805009 was seen last week.

 

[Energy]

Until they decide to swap carriages around and make them all 6 cars . (But I think I have read somewhere that they have to have an odd number of carriages in each rake - no idea why.)

Yes they have to have an odd number per unit.

 

[800001]

does anyone know why the Avanti IETs are 805 and 807 instead of an 802 and 801 subclass? Or did they need their own number to feel special and because they have white side boards?

White side boards?

 

[YorksLad12]

1. All the 80x seem to be annoying like that, if it were up to me I don't see why we couldn't just have an 800 and 801, there's enough subclasses.
2. 5 is for 5 car, 7 is for 7 car so it's easy to remember.

Easy to remember, but annoying, as up to that point the all-electric sets had odd numbers and the bi-modes even numbers. If they didn't want to reuse 804 they could have been 806...

 

[AJDesiro]

does anyone know why the Avanti IETs are 805 and 807 instead of an 802 and 801 subclass? Or did they need their own number to feel special and because they have white side boards?

I may be wrong, but I think the 805s have different engines to the 800s and 802s (I think they have the 810 engines), which would explain the different subclass there (yes, I know that the 158s have different engines within the same class, but TOPS is inconsistent).

I don’t really know why 807s are classified as such, I don’t know if they have backup diesel generators like the 801s, but if they do, then presumably the fact they weren’t procured under IEP would explain the classification (as stated by @LNW-GW Joint); otherwise, I don’t see any reason as to why they aren’t classified as 803s (I remember hearing somewhere that they need some sort of weight in place of the engines, so they went for batteries).

 

[pokemonsuper9]

(yes, I know that the 158s have different engines within the same class, but TOPS is inconsistent).

Isn't that the old way of doing things?
I feel like the whole 8xx classifications have just been done weird
I feel like the below is more reasonable.
Class 800 (Bi-Mode)
/0 - 5 car 800s
/1 - 9 car 800s
/2 - 5 car 802s
/3 - 9 car 802s
/4 - 805s
Class 801 (EMU)
/0 - 5 car 801s
/1 - 9 car 801s
/2 - 803s
/3 - 807s
Not sure if to put the 810s with the Bi-Modes or let them be on their own since they're shorter.

 

[stan claire]

Not sure if to put the 810s with the Bi-Modes or let them be on their own since they're shorter.

810s have a reason to be a different class, their coaches are shorter and a different designed front to fit the short platforms on the MML

 

[TT-ONR-NRN]

Not sure if to put the 810s with the Bi-Modes or let them be on their own since they're shorter.

When you finally decide, might I politely suggest you let us know in Speculative Discussion instead? A lot of the derailments to threads you make would fit very well into a thread there instead perhaps

 

[Chiltern006]

There are differences between the 800-803 class however

800 - bog standard
801 - less engines, designed to be an EMU
802 - bigger engines than standard 800 designed for longer operations on diesel
803 - pure electric, batteries onboard without the power to provide traction but to keep things such as lights etc going

i agree putting the 805s and 807s into a different class ie 805s are basically the same as 800s and 807s are basically 801s, but keeping the first 4 separate is key

off topic but oh well