Intercity Express Programme (IEP) - ongoing discussion

[whole diary]

[4064ReadingAbbey]

From a description Roger Ford gave in Modern Railways i believe the floor slopes down to the doors at each end of the carriage.

Which I had in mind when the presenter at the IMechE meeting showed his slide. I really hope that Roger Ford is correct and I have mis-interpreted the image. We shall see. (But there really were only two 'slope-y floor' pictograms...!)

[grahame]

From the Railway Gazette

UK^▸ (United Kingdom): Hitachi announced on December 22 that the AT300 trainsets ordered for Great Western Railway are to be manufactured at Hitachi Rail Italy^s plant at Pistoia in Italy.

[JayMac]

It would seem Hitachi Rail Europe are making a serious attempt at muscling into the European train building market.

[81F]

Is this the rolling stock manufacturing plant in Italy that produced rolling stock for the Dutch-Belgian Fyra high-speed service that was of such quality that the trains were rejected and sent back?

[JayMac]

Same plant, new owners. Hitachi Rail Europe purchased AnsaldoBreda from Finmechanica in early November 2015.

http://italy.hitachirail.com/en/sale-of-ansaldobreda-and-ansaldo-sts_472.html

Japanese management and production techniques should see a better end product. The AT300s are a close relation to the Class 800/801s rather than a whole new design, so teething problems should also be less of an issue. Provided they are put together properly. Build quality was one of the major issues with the Fyra trains.

[Bmblbzzz]

I'm a bit confused with all these class names and numbers. AFAIUI: 800 = fully electric high-speed train, 801 = same with additional diesel engine ^ the "bimode"; so what's an AT300?

[bradshaw]

My understanding is that they are basically the same thing, both bimodes.

However in normal service the 801s will have had their Diesel engines down rated. The AT300s are on full rating to give them the power they need for the South West.

Theoretically the 801s could be up rated to keep to the 125 mph if it is decided to go with them if the wires do not reach as far as they hoped in the time.

Roger Ford's " Informed Sources" in Modern Railways over the past few months provides more detail.

[DidcotPunter]

I'm a bit confused with all these class names and numbers. AFAIUI: 800 = fully electric high-speed train, 801 = same with additional diesel engine ^ the "bimode"; so what's an AT300?

I'll try to explain though this is a layman's understanding. Hitachi has a number of train "platforms" or families - basically AT100 are inner suburban units, AT200 outer suburban/inter-urban (as being bought for Edinburgh-Glasgow) and AT300 inter-city (http://www.hitachirail-eu.com/at-300-high-speed_47.html). The IEP^▸ (Intercity Express Program / Project.) class 800s (bi-mode) and 801 (straight electric) are based on the AT300 platform as is the class 802 for GWR^▸ (Great Western Railway) West Country services which will also be bi-mode. The main differences between the class 800 and 802s being different software control of engine output when running on diesel and different interior layouts.

[Bmblbzzz]

Thanks, DP, very clear.

[Rhydgaled]

I'm a bit confused with all these class names and numbers. AFAIUI: 800 = fully electric high-speed train, 801 = same with additional diesel engine ^ the "bimode"; so what's an AT300?

As DidcotPunter has said, AT300 is Hitachi's Intercity train family. The Great Western is/was planned to have three variants of the AT300, which include the class 800 and 801 units built under the Intercity Express Programme (IEP^▸ (Intercity Express Program / Project.)). The third variant some are calling class 802, but some have confusingly used the family name AT300 to refer to only the class 802s (before the class 802 name was known, even now I'm not sure it has been explictly confirmed). The class 802s have been procured in a more conventional maner than the IEP fleet.

I don't think Bradshaw is entirely correct, although on the right lines that some engines will be down rated. I believe it is as follows:

• Class 802 - 3 diesel engines per 5-car set, engine software set to full power
• Class 800 - 3 diesel engines per 5-car set, engine software set to down rate engines, unless one fails in which case the remaining two will go full-power
• Class 801 - 1 diesel engine per 5-car set (GW^▸ (Great Western) ones planned would be 9-car, which may have 2 engines or 1 I'm not sure), possibly down-rated by the engine software but I don't know

There are no "fully electric high-speed train" units for the Great Western, the class 801s which some call an electric (because, operationally, it might as well be) will have at least one diesel engine per set but these will only be able to move very slowly without electricity from the overhead wires.

[stuving]

...
I don't think Bradshaw is entirely correct, although on the right lines that some engines will be down rated. I believe it is as follows:

• Class 802 - 3 diesel engines per 5-car set, engine software set to full power
• Class 800 - 3 diesel engines per 5-car set, engine software set to down rate engines, unless one fails in which case the remaining two will go full-power
• Class 801 - 1 diesel engine per 5-car set (GW^▸ (Great Western) ones planned would be 9-car, which may have 2 engines or 1 I'm not sure), possibly down-rated by the engine software but I don't know

There are no "fully electric high-speed train" units for the Great Western, the class 801s which some call an electric (because, operationally, it might as well be) will have at least one diesel engine per set but these will only be able to move very slowly without electricity from the overhead wires.

There were some written questions in the Commons about this 100 mi/hr speed limit issue:

Asked on: 04 June 2015
Department for Transport
Rolling Stock: Procurement

To ask the Secretary of State for Transport, pursuant to the Answer of 2 June 2015 to Question 395, what the maximum permitted line speed of the bi-modal IEP^▸ (Intercity Express Program / Project.) train in regular service will be when that train is running on (a) diesel and (b) electric power.

Answered by: Claire Perry Answered on: 09 June 2015

The current maximum permitted line speed of a bi-modal IEP train in regular service when running on (a) diesel and (b) electric power is 125 miles per hour.

Asked by Lilian Greenwood (Nottingham South)
Asked on: 12 June 2015
Department for Transport
Rolling Stock: Procurement

To ask the Secretary of State for Transport, pursuant to the Answer of 9 June 2015 to Question 1261, whether bi-modal IEP trains running on diesel power will be capable of running at the maximum permitted linespeed of 125 miles per hour.

Answered by: Claire Perry Answered on: 17 June 2015

The testing programme has demonstrated that the IEP train is capable of running at 125 miles per hour on diesel. Passengers can expect journey time improvements of circa 15 minutes on the routes served.

Asked by Lilian Greenwood (Nottingham South)
Asked on: 23 June 2015
Department for Transport
Rolling Stock: Procurement

To ask the Secretary of State for Transport, how long it will take for (a) electric IEP trains and (b) other bi-mode IEP trains running on diesel to reach 125 mph on flat and straight track in (i) five and (ii) nine car formations.

Answered by: Claire Perry Answered on: 29 June 2015

The maximum speed of the bi-mode and electric IEP trains in regular service will be the maximum permitted line speed.

The information relating to electric and bi-mode IEP trains in 5 and 9 car formations can be found in the Train Technical Specification available on the Department of Transport website.

Asked by Lilian Greenwood (Nottingham South)

The answers were given under Claire Perry's name, but I expect she had help from someone more closely involved with IEP. Persistent, that Lilian Greenwood, isn't she?

While some answers are evasive, the main point (emboldened) is exactly what I had always suspected - there is no technical reason to put an extra speed limit into the control software specifically for operation off diesel power.

The train controller may need to consult other bits of software before raising the speed, whether its power comes off 25 kV or from the on-board generator. For example a temperature reading may tell it that something can't run at higher power. The generator controllers will report whether they can provide more power, which will depend on the auxiliary load among other things, and that is the issue here. If more power is available, why would the train controller apply a lower speed of 100 mi/hr if it can go faster?

Roger Ford says these 750700 kW engines are limited in ordinary running to 560 kW, but can go to full power if an engine is lost. That confirms it's just software. The power level should not be part of the contract, though. That should reflect the requirement, which had a timing - 141 minutes - for the run from Paddington to Hereford (and also Edinburgh to Aberdeen and Inverness).

If it can't do the timing, presumably they have to turn that power limit up. It is, after all, only software. It may even be just a single constant value.

Oh, and there is one generator per 801 unit up to 9-car, and two for longer ones if that happens.

[Corrected typo in power.]

[broadgage]

I thought that the 5 car nominally electric sets were to have one diesel engine, and the 9 car sets were to have two engines.
The above suggests that the 9 car sets are to have but a single engine. Presumably run at full power when called upon, but 750KW does not seem much to move a 9 car train AND supply hotel power.
I appreciate that the diesel power unit(s) fitted to the nominally electric unit are intended only for limited operation at low speeds, but only 750KW still seems very little. Does anyone know what speed is to be attained on diesel ? hopefully at least 25MPH ? even on a hot day with the air conditioning running flat out on a crowded train.

[ChrisB]

I'd heard 5mph and only local movement - ie to enable pax to disembark at the next station, or for movement within depots

[broadgage]

If in an area with significant distances between stations, 5MPH would be very restrictive indeed. And obviously no realistic option for even short diversions via non electrified routes.
25 or 30 MPH would probably have compared favourably with attaching a loco, or a bus transfer, but 5 MPH! no way.

[ChrisB]

Would still be quicker than detraining pax in countryside & transporting them via bus from nearest road. Don't forget that wires down will mean no other loco can reach yours