Siemens' announces the Desiro Verve

[Class377/5]

Siemens showed off their new 125 electric train today at Railtex. The design is a 23m version of the Desiro City with improvements designed to better suit the intercity traveler.

Siemens Verve by Mackenzie Soley, on Flickr

Siemens Verve by Mackenzie Soley, on Flickr

Siemens Verve by Mackenzie Soley, on Flickr

 

[ash39]

Looks a good potential fit for north TPE when the wires go up. Being from the desiro family there should be an element of familiarity with crews and maintenence teams too.

 

[Haydn1971]

Interesting... Intercity, 125mph and 1/3 2/3 doors - I'm warming to these layouts over end doors lately, the end door units I use regular (158/220) are just painful at platforms, especially with people sat right next to the doors

 

[sprinterguy]

With the latest edition of Rail magazine reporting that Abellio are currently looking at placing an order for new rolling stock for the Norwich Intercity services next year if they win the next Greater Anglia franchise, I don't suppose that there's any coincidence with the displayed (predominantly white) livery and the colour of the branding.

 

[TheGrew]

Looks a good potential fit for north TPE when the wires go up. Being from the desiro family there should be an element of familiarity with crews and maintenence teams too.

Indeed, I was thinking that this might also suit some of the longer distance LM services. Or those on FGW that aren't going to Hitachi traction.

 

[Haydn1971]

Midland Main Line, CrossCountry, London Midland, TransPennine, Open Access under wires etc etc etc...

 

[Class377/5]

With the latest edition of Rail magazine reporting that Abellio are currently looking at placing an order for new rolling stock for the Norwich Intercity services next year if they win the next Greater Anglia franchise, I don't suppose that there's any coincidence with the displayed (predominantly white) livery and the colour of the branding.

Not really, they aren't too dissimilar from the Thameslink base branding. However in the video that came with the model a Class 700 transforms into a Desiro City explaining the colour scheme.

Looks a good potential fit for north TPE when the wires go up. Being from the desiro family there should be an element of familiarity with crews and maintenence teams too.

May not be offered for TransPennie. Aim is more at MML eletrics.

 

[Bletchleyite]

Interesting... Intercity, 125mph and 1/3 2/3 doors - I'm warming to these layouts over end doors lately, the end door units I use regular (158/220) are just painful at platforms, especially with people sat right next to the doors

I suppose Mk1s and early Mk2s had three doors, it's just returning to that. Provided the seating layout is sensible it probably works.

What is the vehicle length? They look very long - perhaps 26m?

Still got the "Desiro disease" of barely having a pair of windows the same size in each vehicle. Must be a nightmare for maintenance departments.

 

[Haydn1971]

What is the vehicle length? They look very long - perhaps 26m?

23m is quoted, but the proportions look like a longer carriage length

 

[D365]

Great to see a concept model from Siemens again. Wonder how the Aventra platform offering from Bombardier will compare as a competitor... and how many different varieties of either product may make it from the drawing board to our rails.

 

[WatcherZero]

With the latest edition of Rail magazine reporting that Abellio are currently looking at placing an order for new rolling stock for the Norwich Intercity services next year if they win the next Greater Anglia franchise, I don't suppose that there's any coincidence with the displayed (predominantly white) livery and the colour of the branding.

I think most bidders will have to wont they, trying to remember but wasn't the Governments brief to bidders that they wanted a high spec intercity service as one of the three service groups (along with London commuter and rural) but the current rolling stock at the franchise wasn't reliable or flexible enough (long in peaks meant a lot of empty air offpeak) and also that Class 90's and rakes were getting a bit long in the tooth.

 

[Bletchleyite]

I think most bidders will have to wont they, trying to remember but wasn't the Governments brief to bidders that they wanted a high spec intercity service as one of the three service groups (along with London commuter and rural) but the current rolling stock at the franchise wasn't reliable or flexible enough (long in peaks meant a lot of empty air offpeak) and also that Class 90's and rakes were getting a bit long in the tooth.

I have thought in the past a 5-car "Class 344" would be a good fit. Perhaps this is exactly that, though a 110mph version, if cheaper, would be fine, and could have a through gangway.

 

[ainsworth74]

Still got the "Desiro disease" of barely having a pair of windows the same size in each vehicle. Must be a nightmare for maintenance departments.

Siemens can't win can they? If they have windows all the same size they'll get beaten up for not having seats lining up with the windows. If they design the windows to fit the seating then they get beaten up for making things harder on maintenance!

 

[Bletchleyite]

Siemens can't win can they? If they have windows all the same size they'll get beaten up for not having seats lining up with the windows. If they design the windows to fit the seating then they get beaten up for making things harder on maintenance!

Erm, I refer you to the original Class 158 layout, which has full window alignment throughout and all windows the same size. The Desiro windows (particularly the Desiro City) aren't fully aligned with the seating. I have no idea what they *are* aligned to - I expect some kind of internal structure, but whatever it is it looks very silly.

 

[TheGrew]

Erm, I refer you to the original Class 158 layout, which has full window alignment throughout and all windows the same size. The Desiro windows (particularly the Desiro City) aren't aligned with the seating. I have no idea what they *are* aligned to - I expect some kind of internal structure, but whatever it is it looks very silly.

But would the class 158 adhere to modern crash safety standards?

 

[Bletchleyite]

But would the class 158 adhere to modern crash safety standards?

I doubt it, but an Electrostar does, and it manages to do so with, umm, all the windows the same size (OK, all but the end one, I suppose). It seems a curious Desiro thing.

It would be necessary to have a few seats per vehicle misaligned in order to provide priority seats, but that could be done by putting 3 rows of airline seats with extended legroom in the space of one table bay and 2 rows of airlines, only knackering the alignment on the middle row of the 3.

 

[Class377/5]

Erm, I refer you to the original Class 158 layout, which has full window alignment throughout and all windows the same size. The Desiro windows (particularly the Desiro City) aren't fully aligned with the seating. I have no idea what they *are* aligned to - I expect some kind of internal structure, but whatever it is it looks very silly.

Just remember its the seats on a Desiro City not the windows that aren't lined up not the other way around. And the customer can choose to have seats lined up if they wanted.

Of course comparing the 158 with end doors to a 1/3, 2/3 set up isn't quite the same thing.

I doubt it, but an Electrostar does, and it manages to do so with, umm, all the windows the same size (OK, all but the end one, I suppose). It seems a curious Desiro thing.

It would be necessary to have a few seats per vehicle misaligned in order to provide priority seats, but that could be done by putting 3 rows of airline seats with extended legroom in the space of one table bay and 2 rows of airlines, only knackering the alignment on the middle row of the 3.

Er the modern Electrostar doesn't line up the seats with windows either! And fails the windows all the same size in the of the for coaches on the 4 car versions.

 

[Bletchleyite]

Just remember its the seats on a Desiro City not the windows that aren't lined up not the other way around. And the customer can choose to have seats lined up if they wanted.

Much harder with all the bays different sizes, and the central 2 wide windows far wider than you'd want a Standard bay to be.

Er the modern Electrostar doesn't line up the seats with windows either!

All Electrostars have 1.5 windows at the cab end, 4 windows in the centre section, and 2 windows at the end, be they the older ribbon glazed style or the newer gasket glazed style. Most have them aligned, some don't - but whether they are or not has nothing to do with crashworthiness

 

[Class377/5]

Much harder with all the bays different sizes, and the central 2 wide windows far wider than you'd want a Standard bay to be.

All Electrostars have 1.5 windows at the cab end, 4 windows in the centre section, and 2 windows at the end. Most have them aligned, some don't - but whether they are or not has nothing to do with crashworthiness

No they don't. Standard loo had a half window so your example is worthless as it's competely incorrect. But they your own argument is just your opinion.

And let's not forget that your comparing the outside of train we have no pictures of the internals and your attacking the seats lining up with the windows, might be a tad early to start that line, unless your not interested in the facts?

 

[90sWereBetter]

Desiro Verve eh. I wonder if there'll be a storm in heaven if any go south? I guess the people will be singing urban hymns as the new trains take them forth to their work. And somewhere else, a northern soul will still be waiting for a pacer in the cold weather, singing a bittersweet symphony...

(I'm really sorry for that, carry on)

 

[Bletchleyite]

No they don't. Standard loo had a half window so your example is worthless as it's competely incorrect. But they your own argument is just your opinion.

Why does it always have to resort to vitriolic attacks in here? It would have been sufficient to point out my error (with regard to one window per 4-car unit) politely.

And let's not forget that your comparing the outside of train we have no pictures of the internals and your attacking the seats lining up with the windows, might be a tad early to start that line, unless your not interested in the facts?

Compare the model to the Scottish Desiro (380?) and its large central windows (the window layout of the middle section is the same). They are too wide to be fully aligned in Standard. So they, umm, aren't aligned in the 380, and so they won't likely be in this, either. They mostly are in the LM 350s except the central section airline seating, though the windows by the doors being narrower mean they are offset slightly, and they mostly are in the 185 central section. In the 444, they mostly are not.

I wonder will Bombardier come up with a superior product in this regard?

 

[Class377/5]

Why does it always have to resort to vitriolic attacks in here? It would have been sufficient to point out my error (with regard to one window per 4-car unit) politely.

Prehaps you should read what has been put rather than accuse others of actions? It may save you from making mistakes in future. Especially when you make absolute claims you later are required to retract when proven wrong.

Compare the model to the Scottish Desiro (380?) and its large central windows (the window layout of the middle section is the same). They are too wide to be fully aligned in Standard. So they, umm, aren't aligned in the 380, and so they won't likely be in this, either. They mostly are in the LM 350s except the central section airline seating, though the windows by the doors being narrower mean they are offset slightly, and they mostly are in the 185 central section. In the 444, they mostly are not.

I wonder will Bombardier come up with a superior product in this regard?

Seems to fill to understand a simple point, the seating can be placed any where, so it can be chosen to line up with windows. Not sure why you fail to grasps this concept.

Bombardier units don't match up so either you don't know the stock well or your ignoring it to make a false point. Either way you are wrong.

Not quite sure of the reason for the last sentence unless your trying to start a Siemens vs Bombardier debate as it's been shown that both manufacturers have products with seats not matching up with the windows. Not that means much when the customer can place the seats wherever they choose meaning Bombardier and Siemens would be on equal footing As they won't decide it.

 

[Bletchleyite]

Prehaps you should read what has been put rather than accuse others of actions? It may save you from making mistakes in future. Especially when you make absolute claims you later are required to retract when proven wrong.

Great that you never make mistakes. If people make mistakes, simply point them out and the discussion continues.

So we have now established that all the windows on Electrostars are the same size except 2 at each cab end and one by a bog in one coach of a 4-car unit, I guess. I think my point still basically stands.

Seems to fill to understand a simple point, the seating can be placed any where, so it can be chosen to line up with windows. Not sure why you fail to grasps this concept.

Because it can't. It would be all very nice if they were going to give us 2.5m bay widths in Standard to align fully with those huge middle windows, but they won't. It would be completely uneconomic.

Bombardier units don't match up so either you don't know the stock well or your ignoring it to make a false point. Either way you are wrong.

Southern's older 2+2 seated Electrostars do. Have you travelled on one recently? The centre section set of 4 windows have one aligned bay each, while the end sections get either two rows of airlines or a bay to each window. I forget what's at the cab end, I half-remember it's an aligned bay and a side-facing seat.

Not quite sure of the reason for the last sentence unless your trying to start a Siemens vs Bombardier debate as it's been shown that both manufacturers have products with seats not matching up with the windows. Not that means much when the customer can place the seats wherever they choose meaning Bombardier and Siemens would be on equal footing As they won't decide it.

See above. If the windows are not the width of a typical Standard bay, then the seats cannot be economically aligned to them. This is the case on the Class 380, and it appears that it is also the case on this unit. Typically Bombardier do not use such a large number of differently-sized windows as Siemens.

 

[Class377/5]

Great that you never make mistakes. If people make mistakes, simply point them out and the discussion continues.

Which is what happened until you starting accusing nastiness.

So we have now established that all the windows on Electrostars are the same size except 2 at each cab end and one by a bog in one coach of a 4-car unit, I guess. I think my point still basically stands.

How can all windows be the same when your confirming they aren't? Your point was Electrostar windows are all the same. Prehaps a better way is to put it mostly the same size in older models?

Because it can't. It would be all very nice if they were going to give us 2.5m bay widths in Standard to align fully with those huge middle windows, but they won't. It would be completely uneconomic.

But you can if you choose. You can't complain at the seat layout on an just announced train for seats not matching up with the windows when it's confirmed that the seat location is chosen by the customer not the manufacturer. This is especially true when no internally info exists publicly yet.

Your basic point is what you believe to be the case, is yet unproven. And may never be.

Southern's older 2+2 seated Electrostars do. Have you travelled on one recently? The centre section set of 4 windows have one aligned bay each, while the end sections get either two rows of airlines or a bay to each window. I forget what's at the cab end, I half-remember it's an aligned bay and a side-facing seat.

On the older units is two seats together (the 377/2 certainly are) on the smaller window panel with a bay next to it.

The inwards facing seats I believe started with the 377/5s.

I haven't been on a older 377 in about a week seeing as my line is 95% Electrostar now when I travel.

See above. If the windows are not the width of a typical Standard bay, then the seats cannot be economically aligned to them. This is the case on the Class 380, and it appears that it is also the case on this unit. Typically Bombardier do not use such a large number of differently-sized windows as Siemens.

There a difference between the justification of lining up seats and the ability to do so. Im talking about the latter which is unaffected by the former.

However Bombardier's more recent products (387) make use of more than one window size and they have mismatched seating alignments in the between the doors due to customer requirements for more airline than bay seating. So Bombardier products have actually got worse in that respect. Which is where your comment

I wonder will Bombardier come up with a superior product in this regard?

Its actually wide of the mark as it seems no is your answer from its most recent product.

 

[Blindtraveler]

I dont like the proposed door layout, unless the internal compartments are seperated by double or single leaf sliding doors. This is not just as an enthusiast but as a passenger who objects when the hot air escapes and the cold wind howls in, upsetting your nearly empty coffee cup (not to mention your Wife). I take on what is said about bording times etc but for a long distance service doors iether need seperating or locating at the ends. Anyone who thinks Im just having a moan should sample the 08:34 EDB>INV on a windy or cold or indeed wet or snowy day!

 

[61653 HTAFC]

I suppose Mk1s and early Mk2s had three doors, it's just returning to that. Provided the seating layout is sensible it probably works.

What is the vehicle length? They look very long - perhaps 26m?

Still got the "Desiro disease" of barely having a pair of windows the same size in each vehicle. Must be a nightmare for maintenance departments.

23m is quoted, but the proportions look like a longer carriage length

With regard to Desiro window sizes, I was on a 185 the other day and I took note of window sizes from inside and out. There appeared to the naked eye to be 2, perhaps 3 different sizes. I wouldn't have thought that would have an enormous impact on the cost of the vehicles, relatively speaking.

They appear from the model to have wider gangways as per 378s/700s. This seems to make the vehicles appear longer, the livery covering the flexible gangway does too. With proper bulkheads with doors either side of each vestibule, I could see an intercity style interior working better than it does on the 185s.

Desiro Verve eh. I wonder if there'll be a storm in heaven if any go south? I guess the people will be singing urban hymns as the new trains take them forth to their work. And somewhere else, a northern soul will still be waiting for a pacer in the cold weather, singing a bittersweet symphony...

(I'm really sorry for that, carry on)

Well done!

Perhaps on the MML and GEML they'll make Mk.3s History...

 

[andyb2706]

Looks a good potential fit for north TPE when the wires go up. Being from the desiro family there should be an element of familiarity with crews and maintenence teams too.

Not too sure it is a good fit for TPE as it is going to be up to ten years before the entire TPE network is electrified as it is only the core route across the Pennines that wil be done by the end of this decade and TPE regularly run the diversionary route through the Calder Valley on nights as well as the regular route through Hope valley route to Sheffield which is only on the wish list for electrifiaction.

The best product on the market that would fit TPE at the moment would be something on the line of the AT300 bi-mode trains as they are designed so that they can eventually be retro-fitted to be entirely electric trains once the entire TPE network is electrified.

The Siemen's Verve would be best suited to lines like the MML and Great Anglia Main Line.

 

[43074]

I wonder will Bombardier come up with a superior product in this regard?

They have already come up with the Aventra, which serves the same market pretty much, what seat or window configuration will be like is to early to say because that depends on the layout.

 

[jopsuk]

Let's hope that if they're ordered for the GEML, the order is for fixed formations. the route should be able to take 11-car formations; it's the current depot that means some of the GEML sets are limited to loco+8+DVT

 

[edwin_m]

The best product on the market that would fit TPE at the moment would be something on the line of the AT300 bi-mode trains as they are designed so that they can eventually be retro-fitted to be entirely electric trains once the entire TPE network is electrified.

The Siemen's Verve would be best suited to lines like the MML and Great Anglia Main Line.

The raised floor necessary to fit the diesel engines on the AT300 wouldn't work with doors at 1/3 and 2/3 because the floor would have to be "low" in these positions. Despite what some people suggest, I think this door layout is essential on Transpennine because of the frequent stops and the amount of short (on indeed long) distance standing.

As we are heading for a surplus of high-spec DMUs in a few years time, I would expect Transpennine to just order simpler and cheaper pure EMUs for the electric routes and keep some 185s for the Hope Valley where there is no firm plan for electrification. This may lead to an increase in bustitution when parts of the route are closed, although more bi-di signalling or even the ability to diesel haul in passenger service would be helpful.