East Coast IEPs Ordered - Class 800

[ModernRailways]

To me as a passenger/tax payer I see these new IEPs bringing huge benefits. Reduced journey times/similar journey times with more stops. Increased acceleration. More trains able to run on the network. Bi-mode allowing for energy saving due to not wasting diesel engines running under wires. Not to mention a completely standardised fleet meaning last minute set swaps will be much easier.

My only gripes are some of things found on the Voyager/Pendolino which I dislike, but my gripes tend to just be personal things so it shouldn't really matter.

For all it may be a large cost, the overall picture seems to me that we are actually getting a good deal!

Jobs, potential for youngsters to get mechanical experience through Apprenticeships then potentially moving on to the depots.

 

[E&W Lucas]

To me as a passenger/tax payer I see these new IEPs bringing huge benefits. Reduced journey times/similar journey times with more stops. Increased acceleration. More trains able to run on the network. Bi-mode allowing for energy saving due to not wasting diesel engines running under wires. Not to mention a completely standardised fleet meaning last minute set swaps will be much easier.

My only gripes are some of things found on the Voyager/Pendolino which I dislike, but my gripes tend to just be personal things so it shouldn't really matter.

For all it may be a large cost, the overall picture seems to me that we are actually getting a good deal!

Jobs, potential for youngsters to get mechanical experience through Apprenticeships then potentially moving on to the depots.

TOC's pay for the electricity their trains use (at a flat rate), so the energy cost is still there. I'm not convinced that set swaps will be easier; in fact, the ability to run the set from terminus to depot, knock out a defective coach, and get the remainder of the rake back into service, will be lost. IEP has problems, then the whole set will be out.

Am I missing something though.... Isn't it prudent to evaluate a prototype, before signing up for a large, two stage order?
We don't know if this thing will actually work yet!

 

[Haydn1971]

Am I missing something though.... Isn't it prudent to evaluate a prototype, before signing up for a large, two stage order?
We don't know if this thing will actually work yet!

That was the Class 395

 

[Ironside]

I rather suspect that Hitachi were always going to get the deal on East Coast. The Department for Idiots would of given them the nod ages ago so that Hitachi could justify and would 'invest' (very loose term) in the flat-packed making factory at Newton wherever it is.

I read that the IEP deal was done at the same time as Japan ordered boeing 787s with Rolls Royce engines and therefore a trade deal was probably done. However I forget where I read this, so treat it as speculation.

 

[jon0844]

Who got the best deal there I wonder?!

 

[Photohunter71]

It may also mean that when the requirements exist for future electric freight loco's,Hitachi may well be better placed to bid on the construction of a fleet.

 

[joeykins82]

There's also the possibility that it's part of a strategic scheme to get the supply chain primed for the domestic design and construction of the HS2 CC and captive stock as well.

 

[YorkshireBear]

TOC's pay for the electricity their trains use (at a flat rate), so the energy cost is still there. I'm not convinced that set swaps will be easier; in fact, the ability to run the set from terminus to depot, knock out a defective coach, and get the remainder of the rake back into service, will be lost. IEP has problems, then the whole set will be out.

I can not think of one occasion in the last 10 years where I have heard/seen that happen.

 

[jon0844]

I picture them taking it to a depot, then having a big robotic machine just kick out the faulty coach and the rest is pushed together!!

 

[D365]

Am I missing something though.... Isn't it prudent to evaluate a prototype, before signing up for a large, two stage order?
We don't know if this thing will actually work yet!

On another thread here, I read prototypes are being shipped here from Japan which will be tested on electrified sections of GWML.

I can not think of one occasion in the last 10 years where I have heard/seen that happen.

The full train is pressed into service anyway

I picture them taking it to a depot, then having a big robotic machine just kick out the faulty coach and the rest is pushed together!!

I think that's what happened in Munich during the 2006 World Cup, where one of their fancy schmancy new C-Stock 6-car full underground units (which are a Siemens/Bombardier production, not prototyped and took a bit of time to get right!) had a defect in one car, but was so desperately needed they knocked it out and pushed it into service on the quieter U4!

 

[joeykins82]

I've been on a number of DMUs where one of the cars has developed a fault; it either had its doors locked and carried on with reduced capacity (usually these have been 2 car DMUs, naturally) or just ran at reduced speed.

 

[Dave1987]

The crucial thing now will be which (if any) companies bid for the East Coast franchise. Now the DFT has told the next franchisee you will use IEP at the costs we have agreed with Hitachi you might find no company wants it or the payments to the DFT will be minimal. Before this order was placed they clearly stated that they would let the next franchise holder decide which stock they would like to use. Like other posters have said I highly suspect that there are other motives behind this order and not just the 18% extra seats. At half the cost and if the current fleet was on its last legs it may well have been a good deal but at this cost its just ridiculous.

 

[AndyLandy]

I'm going to say this again...

The other thing to remember about IEP is that one of the prime political motivations for it is to help Britain get out of recession. This isn't just a "procure some trains" exercise, it's an attempt to seriously invest in British industry. We're funding the construction of new train building facilities in this country, designed to create jobs for British people.

If we can accept that the vast majority of our railways are subsidised because the socio-economic benefits outweigh the costs to the public purse, can we not see that the same might be true of spending extra money to invest in new train-manufacturing facilities in Britain?

 

[Yew]

I can not think of one occasion in the last 10 years where I have heard/seen that happen.

Thats odd, I'm sure a Lincoln - KGX service did that last year...

 

[Dave1987]

I'm going to say this again...



If we can accept that the vast majority of our railways are subsidised because the socio-economic benefits outweigh the costs to the public purse, can we not see that the same might be true of spending extra money to invest in new train-manufacturing facilities in Britain?

So why don't we just give Hitachi a couple of trillion pounds to replace the entire fleet on the entire network so they can then build hundreds of depots all around the country?

Why did the DFT say before this procurement that they would let the next franchise holder decide?

There is definitely others motives behind this decision.....

 

[YorkshireBear]

Thats odd, I'm sure a Lincoln - KGX service did that last year...

I hadn't heard of it. Doesn't mean it doesn't happen. But still that's one occasion (lets say there has been maybe 3!), I don't think that should set us a precedent for using loco hauled over MU.

 

[Yew]

I hadn't heard of it. Doesn't mean it doesn't happen. But still that's one occasion (lets say there has been maybe 3!), I don't think that should set us a precedent for using loco hauled over MU.

I agree there, generally it seems that sets are jsut pulled from service. But on the other hand, I think CL43's fail more often than mk3 coaches And anyway, it could be stupidly easy to remove a coach from an IEP is its done right.

 

[jon0844]

So why don't we just give Hitachi a couple of trillion pounds to replace the entire fleet on the entire network so they can then build hundreds of depots all around the country?

Because once built, you'd have mass unemployment. Far better to invest in infrastructure on a sensible, manageable, ongoing basis.

Would be nice though, unless Bombardier got the job. Still, I guess that would keep engineers in employment for years.

 

[ainsworth74]

Thats odd, I'm sure a Lincoln - KGX service did that last year...

It's possible that a HST set ran without a vehicle but that kind of change, I believe, only takes place overnight. I'm not aware of any sets being taken out of service during the day and then returned to service with a vehicle having been removed.

This is of course a moot point as if the design is even half sensible it'll be child's play to remove vehicles from a set and return it to service. 222s for instance are very easy to customise in terms of length.

 

[NotATrainspott]

Oh, it seems that the specification will allow for 12-car units as well:

TS223 IEP Units must be able to operate within the following length constraints:
• Maximum length – nominally 312m (this is the maximum design length of an IEP Unit); and
• Minimum length – nominally 130m, where two minimum length IEP Units coupled together form an IEP Train no longer than 260m.

This is from the technical specification available off the DfT's website: Intercity Express Programme technical specification and contracts

I can imagine they're planning on adding them when they need a political boost or if they'll need to keep Newton Aycliffe in work until the HS2 order will inevitably come in.

EDIT: The same document states:

TS1977 It must be possible to add Intermediate IEP Vehicles to an IEP Unit subject to the IEP Unit still being no greater than the maximum length identified in TS223.
TS1979 It must be possible to remove Intermediate IEP Vehicles from an IEP Unit from any intermediate position subject to the Intermediate IEP Vehicles being removed being of the correct Functional Vehicle Type and the IEP Unit remaining at least the minimum length.
TS1980 The design of the IEP Units must ensure the time to add or remove Intermediate IEP Vehicle is minimised and is in any event no greater than 8 hours.
TS1589 With regards to IEP Unit reconfiguration it must be possible to reconfigure software and control systems within 15 minutes when Intermediate IEP Vehicles have been added, removed or replaced.

So it's not going to be much different to the situation with HSTs then?

 

[Dave1987]

Because once built, you'd have mass unemployment. Far better to invest in infrastructure on a sensible, manageable, ongoing basis.

Would be nice though, unless Bombardier got the job. Still, I guess that would keep engineers in employment for years.

But there are already maintenance depots in existence. Also how many fitters will be made redundant by this order? Will Hitachi take on the fitters who currently maintain the 225 fleet?

 

[YorkshireBear]

Oh, it seems that the specification will allow for 12-car units as well:



This is from the technical specification available off the DfT's website: Intercity Express Programme technical specification and contracts

I can imagine they're planning on adding them when they need a political boost or if they'll need to keep Newton Aycliffe in work until the HS2 order will inevitably come in.

EDIT: The same document states:


So it's not going to be much different to the situation with HSTs then?

Very interesting thansk for sharing. And Ii think that last sentence says it all... There isn't really going to be any difference!

 

[tbtc]

I rather suspect that Hitachi were always going to get the deal on East Coast. The Department for Idiots would of given them the nod ages ago so that Hitachi could justify and would 'invest' (very loose term) in the flat-packed making factory at Newton wherever it is.

Newton Aycliffe.

And I don't know why people are so snobby about the assembly line planned there whilst I never hear the same criticism of places like Bombiardier at Derby (does anyone honestly think that they create all of the train parts in Derby? Why do people sneer at the fact that the County Durham plant will assemble different parts made elsewhere in the world when that's been the way that things have been at Bombardier etc for some time?).

In fact, with the New Bus For London/ Borismaster, a lot was made of the fact that the Wright factory in Ballymena was assembling components made elsewhere in the UK and internationally:

http://www.tfl.gov.uk/corporate/media/newscentre/archive/28022.aspx

a number of components for the new bus are made by companies from around the UK; including engines from Darlington, seats from Telford, seat moquette from Huddersfield, wheelchair ramps from Hoddesdon (Hertfordshire), destination blinds from Middleton near Manchester and flooring from Liskeard (Cornwall)

I'm not convinced that set swaps will be easier; in fact, the ability to run the set from terminus to depot, knock out a defective coach, and get the remainder of the rake back into service, will be lost. IEP has problems, then the whole set will be out

As has been explained, this is a very rare thing and IEP will be able to cope with it pretty quickly.

More common would be something like the ECML being blocked (wires going down, engineering, suicide...) and services having to run on an unelectrified line like through Lincoln - something which IEP could cope with better than a 225.

 

[NotATrainspott]

There's a whole breadth of interesting information about the IEPs in the specification document (here's the link again):

Intercity Express Programme technical specification and contracts

For example:

4.16 Passenger Counting System
Each IEP Vehicle must be installed with a system that automatically records the number of passengers boarding and alighting the IEP Train at each station. The system must record the individual journey, time and date for which this information applies. The system must provide data which shows for each IEP Vehicle:
• the number of passengers aboard the IEP Train on approach to each station;
• the number of passengers which alight the IEP Train at each station;
• the number of passengers which board the IEP Train at each station; and
• the number of passengers aboard the IEP Train on departure from each station.
TS1993 The passenger counting systems must, in addition to the requirements of TS299, automatically record the number of people moving between IEP Vehicles to facilitate the calculation of the number of passengers per IEP Vehicle.
TS1857 The system must be able to record the passenger numbers to within 5% or one person (whichever is the greater) of the actual number of people on board the IEP Train between each station stop.
TS1859 Recorded data for the entire IEP Train must be downloadable via the TMS
TS1860 All passenger count data must be accessible remotely and in real time from a control centre and operating depot.

The PA & PIS section states that it has to interface with this, along with having the ability to have different messages sent to each carriage, so the train itself will be able to tell people to move down aisles and into other carriages.

Another interesting idea is that IEP trains will have their own suite of New Measurement Train-style sensors and cameras to record track, signalling, catenary and lineside conditions. The specification makes it pretty clear it's unacceptable to have Voyager/Pendolino style toilet stinks too!

 

[YorkshireBear]

There's a whole breadth of interesting information about the IEPs in the specification document (here's the link again):

Intercity Express Programme technical specification and contracts

For example:

The PA & PIS section states that it has to interface with this, along with having the ability to have different messages sent to each carriage, so the train itself will be able to tell people to move down aisles and into other carriages.

Another interesting idea is that IEP trains will have their own suite of New Measurement Train-style sensors and cameras to record track, signalling, catenary and lineside conditions. The specification makes it pretty clear it's unacceptable to have Voyager/Pendolino style toilet stinks too!

Will delve into this further tonight. Wow... Very impressed actually. The more i read about IEP the more I believe it will be a very good train.

 

[tbtc]

As has been explained, this is a very rare thing and IEP will be able to cope with it pretty quickly.

More common would be something like the ECML being blocked (wires going down, engineering, suicide...) and services having to run on an unelectrified line like through Lincoln - something which IEP could cope with better than a 225.

In fact, today:

http://www.railforums.co.uk/showthread.php?t=89061

 

[NotATrainspott]

Here's the toilet odour bit:

TS1675 The toilet system shall limit the presence of odours within the toilet cubicle and prevent their escape into surrounding passenger areas including vestibules when the toilet door is closed. The passenger saloon must be free from toilet odours at all times.

Here's some of the NMT bits:

TS2002 IEP Trains must monitor the railway infrastructure as detailed in the subsections below, on a continuous basis during the time the IEP Trains are In Service. The data that is recorded shall be collected, stored and provided to the Relevant Operator and Network Rail at the intervals specified.
The system(s) provided must enable each item of infrastructure equipment being monitored/recorded to be identified. The recorded data shall, in addition to the data identified in the relevant subsections below, include:
• unique identities for each IEP Train;
• the journey/diagram;
• IEP Train position in real time;
• the route(s) travelled over including position and direction; and
• date, and timestamp data to the nearest second.

TS2003 Subject to the capabilities of the hardware and software of the GSM-R voice radio fitted to the IEP Trains, the GSM-R voice radio shall monitor the state of the GSM-R network as follows:
• the GSM-R system must allow the GSM-R voice radio in unoccupied cabs to be remotely instructed to generate call traffic in specific geographical areas to support GSM-R network performance monitoring; and
• The loss and re-establishment of GSM-R coverage shall be recorded by the TMS or on the train data recorder.

TS1907 To support incident management each IEP Train must be fitted with Forward Facing CCTV that shall record the following:
• the track;
• lineside signals;
• overhead catenary; and
• the lineside.
The camera must be positioned so that, so far as is practicable, the recording is representative of what is seen by the driver.

And it won't allow Voyager-style mobile reception impairment either:

TS1475 IEP Trains must be designed so as to allow mobile phones and other similar devices accessing GSM and 3G communications networks to operate without excessive impediment. In particular, such signals passing through the side windows perpendicular to the rail on straight track shall be attenuated by less than 3dB. This may be demonstrated by a test on the window material independently of the train.

And it's also mandatory to be able to change configuration quickly:

TS1536 IEP Vehicles must allow for a menu of customisation measures, for application at franchise change or redeployment. These measures are separate from the main building block interior Delements, although the configuration of the latter may influence the scope and nature of customisation.
TS1537 IEP Vehicles must allow the following minimum customisation:
• interior colours (including handrails, for contrast);
• trim materials;
• soft furnishings;
• seat types, quantities and pitch;
• toilet/passenger ratio;
• First Class/Standard Class ratio;
• luggage capacity ratio;
• replace a catering area with another of the other catering options of a lower catering level as per TS1630; and
• replace a catering area with seating.

TS1539 The above customisation must be possible without alteration to load bearing structures and must not dictate the need for bodyshell variations.

Overall I think it is clear that the DfT mandarins who came up with this specification are actually aware of what problems we've got with the other post-privatisation Inter City fleet. Mass data collection about the track is becoming more and more achievable with advances in computing power, storage and the software needed to analyse it so it's a great thing they're working to include it.

 

[tbtc]

There's a whole breadth of interesting information about the IEPs in the specification document (here's the link again):

Intercity Express Programme technical specification and contracts

For example:

The PA & PIS section states that it has to interface with this, along with having the ability to have different messages sent to each carriage, so the train itself will be able to tell people to move down aisles and into other carriages.

Another interesting idea is that IEP trains will have their own suite of New Measurement Train-style sensors and cameras to record track, signalling, catenary and lineside conditions. The specification makes it pretty clear it's unacceptable to have Voyager/Pendolino style toilet stinks too!

Oh, it seems that the specification will allow for 12-car units as well:

This is from the technical specification available off the DfT's website: Intercity Express Programme technical specification and contracts

I can imagine they're planning on adding them when they need a political boost or if they'll need to keep Newton Aycliffe in work until the HS2 order will inevitably come in.

EDIT: The same document states:

So it's not going to be much different to the situation with HSTs then?

Here's the toilet odour bit:

Here's some of the NMT bits:


And it won't allow Voyager-style mobile reception impairment either:


And it's also mandatory to be able to change configuration quickly:


Overall I think it is clear that the DfT mandarins who came up with this specification are actually aware of what problems we've got with the other post-privatisation Inter City fleet. Mass data collection about the track is becoming more and more achievable with advances in computing power, storage and the software needed to analyse it so it's a great thing they're working to include it.

The more I hear, the more I like - these new trains are going to tick a lot of boxes - we are learning lessons!

 

[AndyLandy]

So why don't we just give Hitachi a couple of trillion pounds to replace the entire fleet on the entire network so they can then build hundreds of depots all around the country?

For the same reason we don't spend trillions of pounds to hire enough drivers and guards to operate a train every 3 minutes along the Mid Cheshire line. (Much as I might wish that to happen!)

I'm also not saying that the level of investment is appropriate for this, because I don't know. I'm not saying whether what we're investing in is too much or too little, because I don't know that either. I don't even know if this will actually benefit the economy at all. I'm no economist.

But I am led to believe that this is (at least in-part) why the IEP order is that much more expensive than our traditional rolling stock procurements.

If there is a wider socio-economic benefit to investing extra money into delivering IEP in this way, and the numbers balance such that the level of additional investment is worthwhile, then surely IEP is a good thing, even if it costs a lot more than just getting an existing manufacturer to whack a pan on one of their existing DEMU designs.

Why did the DFT say before this procurement that they would let the next franchise holder decide?

There is definitely others motives behind this decision.....

That is an interesting question. I would suspect the simple and obvious answer is that there's no ulterior motive, they merely had a change of direction on what they wanted to do and simply ran with it, but you can never be entirely sure.

 

[Dave1987]

Well I gather I'm the only one on here who feels this order is stupidly expensive for what it is. I only hope that this order doesn't push up ticket prices or make one of the few really profitable lines in the country a line which has to be propped up by subsidies.