East Coast IEP Electric Option

[SkinnyDave]

Just read the new issue of rail mag issue and IEP getting a bit of a hard time again.
Time is ticking on the option for East Coast to take on electric option in the summer.

Four options the mag advise are; IEP, Traxx and Mark 4 overhaul, Pendolino, Status Quo.

What does the forum think will be the result after the summer?

 

[LNW-GW Joint]

Just read the new issue of rail mag issue and IEP getting a bit of a hard time again.
Time is ticking on the option for East Coast to take on electric option in the summer.

Four options the mag advise are; IEP, Traxx and Mark 4 overhaul, Pendolino, Status Quo.

What does the forum think will be the result after the summer?

The IEP option will surely be extended until DfT can sign it. Hitachi has no other choice.
The only other people with power to choose are the future bidders for ICEC, and the DfT may well not allow them the scope.
We will know when the franchise spec is published around the end of the year.

 

[Aictos]

Personally I like to see the Mk4s and Traxx option taken up however I believe the 390 option is also a good choice but in reality, I guess IEP will be forced onto bidders by the DfT even if other options prove to be the better choice.

 

[YorkshireBear]

Personally I like to see the Mk4s and Traxx option taken up however I believe the 390 option is also a good choice but in reality, I guess IEP will be forced onto bidders by the DfT even if other options prove to be the better choice.

MK 4 Traxx for me too. Especially after reading their proposal in Modern Railways a few weeks back.

 

[NSEFAN]

Just read the new issue of rail mag issue and IEP getting a bit of a hard time again.
Time is ticking on the option for East Coast to take on electric option in the summer.

Four options the mag advise are; IEP, Traxx and Mark 4 overhaul, Pendolino, Status Quo.

What does the forum think will be the result after the summer?

Well, since East Coast is in the hands of the state, and the DfT has decided (rightly or wrongly) that IEP is the best option for the GWML, I can envisage that it will be found to be the best option for the ECML, too.

Next question; does the government have to put out an invitation to tender in the same way the ROSCOs do, or are they immune from this?

 

[swt_passenger]

Next question; does the government have to put out an invitation to tender in the same way the ROSCOs do, or are they immune from this?

Other way round. Any/all government orders on such a scale must use OJEU public tender procedures. It's actually the ROSCOs that could theoretically buy what they like, because they are not in the public sector.

The fact that they (ROSCOs) don't actually do their own ordering without involvement of the DfT and the sponsoring TOC is a separate issue.

 

[cjmillsnun]

Of those options, my favourite option would be status quo. There's no reason why the 91s couldn't go on for another 10-15 years with a refurb.

 

[TheWalrus]

I would have thought Pendolinos. Although IEP seems to be a fantastic project, I think really its too expensive. I would personally suggest more Pendolino-type trains for GW and EC.

I also don't understand investing in something that's going to cost more money than what we have now!

 

[The Ham]

Of those options, my favourite option would be status quo. There's no reason why the 91s couldn't go on for another 10-15 years with a refurb.

Given IEP (for replacing the IC125's) on ICEC will be being delivered by 2020 (7 years away), that doesn't leave much life left for the 91's beyond then. Given (as I understand it) that the replacements for the IC225's would be post 2020 it may only mean that they could be down to less than 5 years of life left

Of course that then raises the question what do you do once the 91's do need to be replaced? Do you replace with a new loco and then run them with coaches (which may not last as long as the new train), do you replace the loco early (and know that the loco is still will out last the coaches), do you keep the loco for as long as possible and replace the coaches with new coaches as needed (possibly replacing the loco again and scrapping it and the new coaches at about the same time) or do you just replace with a MU train now and run the 91's and mark 4 on an "easier" (slower?) route until they are scrapped?

 

[43074]

Just read the new issue of rail mag issue and IEP getting a bit of a hard time again.
Time is ticking on the option for East Coast to take on electric option in the summer.

Four options the mag advise are; IEP, Traxx and Mark 4 overhaul, Pendolino, Status Quo.

What does the forum think will be the result after the summer?

I think Traxx and Mark 4 overhaul seems likely - Bombardier do seem to be advertising this quite heavily at the moment, not only for ECML but also for London to Norwich.

 

[D365]

I think Traxx and Mark 4 overhaul seems likely - Bombardier do seem to be advertising this quite heavily at the moment, not only for ECML but also for London to Norwich.

That's a fair idea tbh, gets more use out of the Mk4 fleet whilst providing faster acceleration (although not up to MU timings) and superior locomotion. Plus more could be ordered to replace 90s on Mk3 rakes, with the possible option of matching passenger-carrying driving trailers. Although the government may just plump for further IEP to (in a loose sense of the word) justify Newton Ayrcliffe.

*But of course, you need to keep the existing passenger coaching stock going; the new locomotive fleet will likely last longer, and it may not be as simple as just moving them directly to freight...

 

[HSTEd]

New locomotives would cost £3m+.... and would probably last ten years in service at best before the rolling stock is decrepit and needs replacing.

When you look at the numbers I am afraid IEP comes out better than a bespoke order for electric locomotives that won't be able to keep to the same timings.

 

[RichmondCommu]

I think Traxx and Mark 4 overhaul seems likely - Bombardier do seem to be advertising this quite heavily at the moment, not only for ECML but also for London to Norwich.

But how long can the the mk3's last before you need to replace them?

 

[D365]

But how long can the the mk3's last before you need to replace them?

2035 if you throw enough money at them.

 

[asylumxl]

2035 if you throw enough money at them.

I'm sure they could go longer if you throw even more money at them.

Like you said, it's not economically viable. IEP ro Pendolinos definitely seem the most likely candidates.

 

[Yew]

The MK4's should last another 20-25 years if required. Especially considering mk3's have been cleared to 2030.

 

[DarloRich]

It is typical of the shiny, shiny magpie syndrome that seems to infect many of you on here that you would even consider replacing what are the most comfortable and pleasant trains on the network with plastic rubbish. I despair. As a constant user of the East Coast route I want no horrible plastic sweat boxes anywhere near the line.

From a passenger comfort point of view the MKIV is light years ahead of the cramped, dingy, cave like Pendo with its thin seats, horrible plasticness and the lingering smell of faeces. I guarantee you that the sub voyager clone IEP will be even worse. However I am sure all you experts know best, I mean god forbid that passenger requirements, like comfort or the ability to work on board might form any part of your thinking. No, you just want something shiny that you can paint a nice colour, preferably run by Virgin.

For all of your wonderful modernity and progress why can you not specify, design and build a train that is more comfortable than a 30 year old plus train?

 

[gordonthemoron]

surely Mk 4s are only just over 20 years old?

Whilst I generally agree with Rich, I did prefer the original Mk 4 seating as it wasn't so claustrophobic

 

[The Ham]

It is typical of the shiny, shiny magpie syndrome that seems to infect many of you on here that you would even consider replacing what are the most comfortable and pleasant trains on the network with plastic rubbish. I despair. As a constant user of the East Coast route I want no horrible plastic sweat boxes anywhere near the line.

From a passenger comfort point of view the MKIV is light years ahead of the cramped, dingy, cave like Pendo with its thin seats, horrible plasticness and the lingering smell of faeces. I guarantee you that the sub voyager clone IEP will be even worse. However I am sure all you experts know best, I mean god forbid that passenger requirements, like comfort or the ability to work on board might form any part of your thinking. No, you just want something shiny that you can paint a nice colour, preferably run by Virgin.

For all of your wonderful modernity and progress why can you not specify, design and build a train that is more comfortable than a 30 year old plus train?

One of the reasons for the cramped nature of the Pendo and the Voyagers is it's need for some or all of the class to tilt. As the Mark 4 and IEP's do not appear to tilt then it is more likely that the IEP's will be closer to the Mark 4's than the Penod's however only time will tell (remembering that the only confirmed load of IEP's will be primarily used to replace the mark 3's of the IC125's on EC).

Yes we have to be careful to not chase after shiny shiny new trains just for the sake of wanting new trains, but then we should be learning from what does work from our older trains when we do need to get new trains.

 

[DarloRich]

The IEP will be nothing like the MKIV. It will be more like a 350/1.

I realise that the window configuration on the Pendo is defined by the need to tilt, it doesn’t explain the interior being so uncomfortable.

 

[broadgage]

It is typical of the shiny, shiny magpie syndrome that seems to infect many of you on here that you would even consider replacing what are the most comfortable and pleasant trains on the network with plastic rubbish. I despair. As a constant user of the East Coast route I want no horrible plastic sweat boxes anywhere near the line.

From a passenger comfort point of view the MKIV is light years ahead of the cramped, dingy, cave like Pendo with its thin seats, horrible plasticness and the lingering smell of faeces. I guarantee you that the sub voyager clone IEP will be even worse. However I am sure all you experts know best, I mean god forbid that passenger requirements, like comfort or the ability to work on board might form any part of your thinking. No, you just want something shiny that you can paint a nice colour, preferably run by Virgin.

For all of your wonderful modernity and progress why can you not specify, design and build a train that is more comfortable than a 30 year old plus train?

Agree entirely.
And whilst the internal layout of the wretched IEPs has yet to be confirmed, I agree that it will probably be worse than a voyager, this is known as progress !
IIRC, a respected member of these forums stated that you "cant expect the new IEPs to have the same seat spacing as 40 year old trains" or words to that effect.
Others have stated that the new trains will have seat spacing/legroom "comparable to airlines" and this is progress ?

There seems to be a view in sections of the rail industry that HSTs and loco hauled stock are too good for todays railway and that the future is short, high density, multiple units with minimal catering and luggage space.

 

[DarloRich]

There seems to be a view in sections of the rail industry that HSTs and loco hauled stock are too good for todays railway and that the future is short, high density, multiple units with minimal catering and luggage space.

They are fine for short, high density routes, rather than long distance premier intercity services.

I simply can not see a way that the IEP will be allowed to be anything other than maximum density.

 

[philjo]

One of the reasons for the cramped nature of the Pendo and the Voyagers is it's need for some or all of the class to tilt. As the Mark 4 and IEP's do not appear to tilt then it is more likely that the IEP's will be closer to the Mark 4's than the Penod's however only time will tell (remembering that the only confirmed load of IEP's will be primarily used to replace the mark 3's of the IC125's on EC).

Yes we have to be careful to not chase after shiny shiny new trains just for the sake of wanting new trains, but then we should be learning from what does work from our older trains when we do need to get new trains.

I recall that the Mark 4 coaches were designed for tilting (so they would be able to run at 140mph on ECML), but the tilting mechanism was not fitted on construction. I think British Rail later abandoned upgrading to install the tilt mechanism as too expensive (given that the track/signalling would need upgrading for higher line speeds)

 

[The Ham]

There seems to be a view in sections of the rail industry that HSTs and loco hauled stock are too good for todays railway and that the future is short, high density, multiple units with minimal catering and luggage space.

I would suggest that the view is more along the lines of; a loco (or two in the case of the IC125's) takes up valuable platform space and given how busy train services have got of late then it is cheaper to build IC MU with more capacity than trying to increase platform lengths or fitting more trains onto the network, especial if the service runs into London.

Likewise, as journey times have fallen there has been less demand from passengers for complex meals on trains and so micro buffets have become more acceptable to the travelling public.

There is also the argument that as people become more used to airlines' restrictions on hand luggage and having to pay for hold luggage that compact wheeled suitcases have become more normal and passengers have become smarter at packing. This can have the effect that there are less large bags which need to be carried on IC services and anyway if capacity is kept high then more people could keep their cases with them rather than in racks some 10m away from them.

 

[broadgage]

Whilst there MIGHT be less bulky luggage than in the past, I have regularly observed the luggage space on the 18-03 from Paddington to be insufficient, so I cant forsee a modern DMU being very suitable for that, or other inter city services.

My oposition to downgrading West of England services to DMUs is not in fact the location of the power source, but the fact that DMUs will be short, nasty and cramped.

If the train had 10 coaches, a full restaurant, luggage racks, facing seats at tables, and with a proper intercity layout, then I dont mind underfloor engines if properly silenced and mounted so as to minimise vibration.

What we are likely to get will be a bit like a voyager, but a bit worse.

 

[LNW-GW Joint]

It is typical of the shiny, shiny magpie syndrome that seems to infect many of you on here that you would even consider replacing what are the most comfortable and pleasant trains on the network with plastic rubbish. I despair. As a constant user of the East Coast route I want no horrible plastic sweat boxes anywhere near the line.

From a passenger comfort point of view the MKIV is light years ahead of the cramped, dingy, cave like Pendo with its thin seats, horrible plasticness and the lingering smell of faeces. I guarantee you that the sub voyager clone IEP will be even worse. However I am sure all you experts know best, I mean god forbid that passenger requirements, like comfort or the ability to work on board might form any part of your thinking. No, you just want something shiny that you can paint a nice colour, preferably run by Virgin.

For all of your wonderful modernity and progress why can you not specify, design and build a train that is more comfortable than a 30 year old plus train?

I don't travel on the ECML much now, but when I did my main memory of Mk4 travel was the hard ride, the squeaky (hard metal) seat-back tables and my knees being jammed into the back of the seat in front, like being on a charter flight or a local 153.

Maybe the refurb has improved things...

 

[HSTEd]

If the train had 10 coaches, a full restaurant, luggage racks, facing seats at tables, and with a proper intercity layout,

I am not sure a 250m train (10 25m vehicles) would be able to fit into the platforms at Penzance.....
But ignoring that there are a reasons the full restaurant service was dispensed with on most services.... the rise of fast food outlets and the decreasing journey times on the modern railway make them largely unneccesary.
They cost too much to operate and cannot provide a wide range of food anyway.
This is not the era when you could be spending literally all day on the train.

Luggage Racks are increasingly unpopular with passengers as they do not permit them to keep watch on luggage, these days people prefer to have it with them at their seat so expensive things don't get stolen.

Facing seats at tables, that would reduce the capacity of a second class Mark 3 to 64 at best.... compared to ~80 on a typical XC example.... are you willing to see your fare inflate by 25% to pay for this?

What we are likely to get will be a bit like a voyager, but a bit worse.

The only problem with Voyagers is insufficient procurement of vehicles, the additional order options on the IEP project should prevent that scale of problem from recurring.

 

[DarloRich]

what is this "keeping luggage with them " mantra that seems to be parroted at every opportunity? :roll:

It might help if the overhead rack was bigger than a letter box but all that happens these days is that passengers simply leave their house sized case on the seat next to them therefore reducing the capacity of the train. Stick it in a rack at the end of the carriage and put your hand luggage in the rack over your head.
--- old post above --- --- new post below ---

The only problem with Voyagers is insufficient procurement of vehicles, the additional order options on the IEP project should prevent that scale of problem from recurring.

If only that were true............

( mind i am just some kind of old fashioned dinosaur interested in passenger comfort and a pleasant journey so what do i know?)
--- old post above --- --- new post below ---

I don't travel on the ECML much now, but when I did my main memory of Mk4 travel was the hard ride, the squeaky (hard metal) seat-back tables and my knees being jammed into the back of the seat in front, like being on a charter flight or a local 153.

Maybe the refurb has improved things...

it has.

 

[tbtc]

A lot of "comfort" comes down to the type of seat (and amount of padding) and is nothing to do with loco-hauled/ diesel/ EMU etc.

I feel sorry for those who see, to find any underfloor engine so noisy that they can't think - is it really so loud? Over the noise of everything else?

Restaurant space is going to be wasted space on the majority of journeys - twenty years ago we could afford to have space for power cars and restaurants - I doubt most people would notice they had gone.

 

[RichmondCommu]

I simply can not see a way that the IEP will be allowed to be anything other than maximum density.

But surely that gives customers (who have paid a kings ransom for their tickets) more chance of getting a seat which cannot be a bad thing.
--- old post above --- --- new post below ---

A lot of "comfort" comes down to the type of seat (and amount of padding) and is nothing to do with loco-hauled/ diesel/ EMU etc.

I feel sorry for those who see, to find any underfloor engine so noisy that they can't think - is it really so loud? Over the noise of everything else?

Restaurant space is going to be wasted space on the majority of journeys - twenty years ago we could afford to have space for power cars and restaurants - I doubt most people would notice they had gone.

I concur with all of what you've said but I wouldn't fancy a Class 350 on a two hour journey.