Abellio Greater Anglia Class 755s (Regional Trains)

[LAX54]

What are current views on the first IC one in service on a Norwich, out of interest? This year?

would have thought end Sept at the earliest, bearing in mind it's not here yet and 'untested' etc

 

[rdlover777]

would have thought end Sept at the earliest, bearing in mind it's not here yet and 'untested' etc

Wait...., the 745/0 is already here?

 

[LAX54]

Wait...., the 745/0 is already here?

There is the S. Express unit here at the mo, and that's all, First GA IC Set arrives (maybe) next week on the Q99 run

 

[AM9]

First things first, the Greater Anglia franchise is nothing like Thameslink so comparing it to that operator is folly.
There's nowhere near the crush loads that you will be getting on Thameslink for instance.

I didn't say that the GEML was like Thameslink, however, new trains are being procured for use on the line for 30 years. However you in the post to which I was relpying, did have a cynical view on GS's motives for specific aspects of the Flirts that had been selected.
As a prime commuter railway, the GEML could well be facing TL style crush loads at some point in that 30 years. The main line, including the Southend branch traffic has always been a juggling act in the peak, (I used to travel on it inthe '70s), and with the likely level of housing development in Essex alone, any paths that haven't already been filled soon will. Also with Crossrail tying up the electric lines out to Shenfield, the options for sharing the load isn't there any more. So GA looks like preparing at least the first stage of creating a high-density seating layout to avoid extending trains in the peak, - of course, there isn't a need for 8-10 car trains off-peak especially if high-density seating replaces the MKIII LHCS.

and a good number of 8 car EMUs are going to be replaced by 5 car EMUs that hold far less passengers, which GA haven't directly confirmed, but if you read between the lines from some of their answers it will happen that way. TL had good reason for doing what they did but I don't think it applies to same extent here.

TL, (along with SWR) are the extreme cases at the moment, but progressively, most of the main commuter lines out of London will be similarly confronted with the same problem of dealing with virtually zero options of creating more paths so having to transform the look and feel of passenger accommodation if current trends continue.

 

[Richard Ingram]

I didn't say that the GEML was like Thameslink, however, new trains are being procured for use on the line for 30 years. However you in the post to which I was relpying, did have a cynical view on GS's motives for specific aspects of the Flirts that had been selected.
As a prime commuter railway, the GEML could well be facing TL style crush loads at some point in that 30 years. The main line, including the Southend branch traffic has always been a juggling act in the peak, (I used to travel on it inthe '70s), and with the likely level of housing development in Essex alone, any paths that haven't already been filled soon will. Also with Crossrail tying up the electric lines out to Shenfield, the options for sharing the load isn't there any more. So GA looks like preparing at least the first stage of creating a high-density seating layout to avoid extending trains in the peak, - of course, there isn't a need for 8-10 car trains off-peak especially if high-density seating replaces the MKIII LHCS.

TL, (along with SWR) are the extreme cases at the moment, but progressively, most of the main commuter lines out of London will be similarly confronted with the same problem of dealing with virtually zero options of creating more paths so having to transform the look and feel of passenger accommodation if current trends continue.

The don't think the commuter services to Southend will be running the Flirts, so a lot of the services that might get crush loading will be using Aventras. Not defending the choices, I don't know what they will be like, and Colchester is going to be a commuter town, but I can see the logic of putting as many seats in the IC type services, and more standing room on the commuter services.

 

[Greg Read]

So are workers in London, who live in the likes of North Essex, Suffolk etc still generally 9 to 5 workers, or 8 to 4 ? Is it now time maybe to look at longer working days (not per person), but the availability to work say up to 2200 at night, and early starts of say 0700, and spread the loadings ?

 

[dk1]

There is the S. Express unit here at the mo, and that's all, First GA IC Set arrives (maybe) next week on the Q99 run

Yes that's what I've been told today mate. Looking good for the first 745/0 UK arrival next week.

Unfortunately no fault free running test has started on any unit yet as mileage accumulation & other onboard technical issues have prevented this. Hopefully not too far off though.

 

[rdlover777]

There is the S. Express unit here at the mo, and that's all, First GA IC Set arrives (maybe) next week on the Q99 run

Yes that's what I've been told today mate. Looking good for the first 745/0 UK arrival next week.

Unfortunately no fault free running test has started on any unit yet as mileage accumulation & other onboard technical issues have prevented this. Hopefully not too far off though.

Ooooh. Cant wait to see videos of that being dragged in

 

[chubs]

Presumably the IC set isn't the 'first of type', the StanEx set that is already here is so it wont have to go through as rigorous tests?

 

[306024]

Presumably the IC set isn't the 'first of type', the StanEx set that is already here is so it wont have to go through as rigorous tests?

Not unless the micro-wave in the buffet interferes with the signalling

Just ridden on a Polish flirt at 100 mph and have to say the ride was very smooth, but then
the Polish tracks seemed smoother than the GEML.

I didn't say that the GEML was like Thameslink, however, new trains are being procured for use on the line for 30 years. However you in the post to which I was relpying, did have a cynical view on GS's motives for specific aspects of the Flirts that had been selected.
As a prime commuter railway, the GEML could well be facing TL style crush loads at some point in that 30 years. The main line, including the Southend branch traffic has always been a juggling act in the peak, (I used to travel on it inthe '70s), and with the likely level of housing development in Essex alone, any paths that haven't already been filled soon will. Also with Crossrail tying up the electric lines out to Shenfield, the options for sharing the load isn't there any more. So GA looks like preparing at least the first stage of creating a high-density seating layout to avoid extending trains in the peak, - of course, there isn't a need for 8-10 car trains off-peak especially if high-density seating replaces the MKIII LHCS.

TL, (along with SWR) are the extreme cases at the moment, but progressively, most of the main commuter lines out of London will be similarly confronted with the same problem of dealing with virtually zero options of creating more paths so having to transform the look and feel of passenger accommodation if current trends continue.

That’s exactly the issue. The cost of providing more track capacity in Essex would be prohibitive so making maximum use of what’s there is the only option. That already happens with the existing timetable and trains, so increasing rolling stock capacity is the only option left.

 

[F Great Eastern]

Not unless the micro-wave in the buffet interferes with the signalling

Just ridden on a Polish flirt at 100 mph and have to say the ride was very smooth, but then
the Polish tracks seemed smoother than the GEML.

Depends on the part of Poland, some of the infrastructure is awful but some of the recently modernised bits are good. Been on a PKP Flirt about half a dozen times, almost always in first class and can't speak highly enough of them, excellent trains. Just wish that GA went for a similar spec interior.

 

[fat_boy_pete]

So are workers in London, who live in the likes of North Essex, Suffolk etc still generally 9 to 5 workers, or 8 to 4 ? Is it now time maybe to look at longer working days (not per person), but the availability to work say up to 2200 at night, and early starts of say 0700, and spread the loadings ?

You'll find that City commuters start in from he first 5am trains already and the 7pm - 11pm outbound trains are fairly well loaded too. The longer days are today!

 

[306024]

Depends on the part of Poland, some of the infrastructure is awful but some of the recently modernised bits are good. Been on a PKP Flirt about half a dozen times, almost always in first class and can't speak highly enough of them, excellent trains. Just wish that GA went for a similar spec interior.

Quite simply if GA had a similar spec loads of people would be standing.

 

[F Great Eastern]

Quite simply if GA had a similar spec loads of people would be standing.

So are GA turning away thousands of passengers? Because a PKP spec FLIRT (8 cars at 153m length = just over 19m per car) with a PKP style interior specification with a single door like GA at the same length as the MK3 rakes would provide over 100 seats extra per train than what is there now.

Remember the space you are gaining from two non passenger carrying vehicles (DVT and a loco) will now be freed up for passenger carrying purposes. The PKP FLIRT can seat up to 64 seats per carriage in a carriage (19m) shorter than an MK3 (23m)

Some maths
9 MK3 x 23m = 207m
11 PKP Flirt Cars x 19m = 209m

Lets say that 2 cars are first class in the FLIRT.

Whilst the PKP FLIRT can go up to 64 seats, some will have things like toilets or other things, so we'll call it 60 on average to be fair.

So at this point you're looking at 9 coaches with on average 60 standard class seats

9x 60 = 540 seats.

Now we add an extra 19m car to take the FLIRT up to 12 cars, using the space previously used by the DVT / Loco.

540 + 60 = 600 seats.

An MK3 can not get anywhere near that currently in standard class, so a PKP layout FLIRT at the same length of a 90 + MK3 rake will provide a large amount of seats more than currently are offered.

I agree that the spec Abellio have gone for will provide more capacity still, but the PKP style interior would still give a significant increase as to what is there now.

Of course, this is basing off the fact that GA FLIRT carriages are 19m long like PKPs if they are 20m long you could be looking at more seats still

 

[trebor79]

The GA Mk3 carriages have 78 seats in standard class. If you ratio the vehicle lengths, they both work out to about 3.3 seats per metre.
So the density of seating is exactly the same on a PKP FLIRT and GA Mk3. In fact the PKP FLIRT is likely to be a a bit higher density due to space taken up with doors, toilets etc being more or less fixed despite the shorter vehicle length.
It really is tiresome seeing the same whinge over and over again, especially when it appears to be based upon emotion and supposition.
Could I suggest we talk about something else until we've actually all been able to sit in one of the new trains.

 

[F Great Eastern]

The GA Mk3 carriages have 78 seats in standard class. If you ratio the vehicle lengths, they both work out to about 3.3 seats per metre.

Not all GA standard carriages have 78 seats. The ones with wheelchair spaces have less no? You will note I used the average number of seats for my PKP flirt calculations, for it to be a fair comparison you need to do the same for the MK3s, since comparing the maximum seats of one carriage in one train with the average seats of one carriage in another train is not comparing like with like.

So the density of seating is exactly the same on a PKP FLIRT and GA Mk3. In fact the PKP FLIRT is likely to be a a bit higher density due to space taken up with doors, toilets etc being more or less fixed despite the shorter vehicle length.

I'm not sure what point you were trying to make here, as I never mentioned density - my argument is a 10 x 19m FLIRT standard class carriages would seat a lot more standard class passengers than an 7x23m standard class MK3. We appear to be in agreement on that then?

My point was that a PKP interior spec Flirt at the length of a current MK3 rake would provide a significant number of extra seats than what we currently have now. A previous poster seemed to bizarrely suggest that this would not be the case which suggests they must have failed their maths exam at school as they cannot do simple calculations. Either that or they are upset that the track and platform space used for their beloved 90/DVT will be used for passenger capacity. Perish the thought.

I think everyone is in agreement that extra capacity is needed on the London to Norwich new stock. My point simply is that a PKP style FLIRT layout would be a half way house between the current capacity and the high density layout GA have gone for.

Originally the GA layout was to be similar to the PKP FLIRT layout before a change to the LEAN seat from the Grammar IC3000 which allowed them to fit more seats in per carriage. The early mock-ups after the order even showed the IC3000 seat in and it's hardly a secret. Pretty much most in the rolling stock trade know that is why GA went for the LEAN over the IC3000.

Anyway, I agree we've done it to death so let's just wait and see what they are like when they come into service as there's not much more to be said until then. I really hope I am wrong, but just for your information, my information comes from proper railway people but my views, as you might expect are very much of my own.

 

[Bletchleyite]

Depends on the part of Poland, some of the infrastructure is awful but some of the recently modernised bits are good. Been on a PKP Flirt about half a dozen times, almost always in first class and can't speak highly enough of them, excellent trains. Just wish that GA went for a similar spec interior.

As a big fan of the Grammer IC3000 seat used in those I have enjoyed a journey on one as well, but having also sat in a FISA LEAN seat (which seemed pretty comfortable, and don't forget they proved popular in the Northern surveys, too, just Northern decided to ignore the results) I'm not sure the spec is actually going to be any lower.

One key difference, though, which reduces layout flexibility, is that the PKP units are high-floor and the UK ones are low-floor which means there are some interior steps.

 

[F Great Eastern]

As a big fan of the Grammer IC3000 seat used in those I have enjoyed a journey on one as well, but having also sat in a FISA LEAN seat (which seemed pretty comfortable, and don't forget they proved popular in the Northern surveys, too, just Northern decided to ignore the results) I'm not sure the spec is actually going to be any lower.

The LEAN seat is nothing special for me, it's alright, but it's the density that worries me since the idea that you put your legs in the niche instead of having proper space is a backwards step.

Proof will be in the pudding though when we try them out in reality but the fact that they swapped from the IC3000 as originally proposed to the LEAN because it allowed them to fit a few more seats in tells you a lot.

The idea that your knees go in the niche to allow a higher density layout is the whole USP of the LEAN

 

[Bletchleyite]

The idea that your knees go in the niche to allow a higher density layout is the whole USP of the LEAN

It's *a* selling point of the seat. Not one that was relevant in the only other current application of the seat, namely SWR First Class.

It might simply have been cheaper.

 

[F Great Eastern]

It's *a* selling point of the seat. Not one that was relevant in the only other current application of the seat, namely SWR First Class.

There is also a First Class version of the LEAN with better support, padding and a slightly different structure, there's also a LEAN2 which is marketed as being narrower, shorter and thiner than it's predecessor and a LEAN BASIC, which takes those principles even further and shaves a bit more off.

It might simply have been cheaper.

It was certainly cheaper from what was discussed at Innotrans last year.

 

[rdlover777]

 

[rdlover777]

Presumably the IC set isn't the 'first of type', the StanEx set that is already here is so it wont have to go through as rigorous tests?

From what my uncle told me, different seating plans change the overall weight of a unit, he said that back during the Connex SE days, they trialed a new seating layout with the networkers using 465014, only for it to change the weight and CSE ended up scrapping the project and reverted the unit back.
The same thing might be the same principle here

 

[Bletchleyite]

There is also a First Class version of the LEAN with better support, padding and a slightly different structure, there's also a LEAN2 which is marketed as being narrower, shorter and thiner than it's predecessor and a LEAN BASIC, which takes those principles even further and shaves a bit more off.

It was certainly cheaper from what was discussed at Innotrans last year.

The SWR ones are 2+2 and appear to be exactly the same as GA are getting in Standard.

 

[306024]

.......A previous poster seemed to bizarrely suggest that this would not be the case which suggests they must have failed their maths exam at school as they cannot do simple calculations. Either that or they are upset that the track and platform space used for their beloved 90/DVT will be used for passenger capacity. Perish the thought......

Complete tosh, to be polite. It is not about comparing today with today. It is about comparing today with the future, which to be fair no one knows but GA have had to predict.

And for what it is worth I interpreted your post as refering to the first class provision, as you mentioned it. So less of the sarcasm thanks.

 

[TheEdge]

Sadly that particular poster seems to only see the negative, while comparing things like PKP with GA.

Maybe it's worth noting that according their own data PKP carried about 80m passengers last year across their entire network. Meanwhile Liverpool Street alone had 66m entries and exits alone. So PKP can no doubt comfortably have nice low capacity units that would be very quickly full and standing in the UK

 

[F Great Eastern]

Sadly that particular poster seems to only see the negative, while comparing things like PKP with GA.

PKP are not a good operator overall, they are a poor one, go and look at their awful sales website, poor information to passengers and hideous PESA Darts, but no operator is all good and no operator is all bad unless you are a fanboy or have an irrational hatred for them because you are bitter.

GA have excellent front line staff, good marketing and generally good with information and really did a good job between 2012-2016 and were a breath of fresh air following the disaster that was NXEA. However since then the number of short formations has been unacceptably, as has been the marked decline of the reliability of rolling stock overall and the bid they offered looks poorly thought out.

So PKP can no doubt comfortably have nice low capacity units that would be very quickly full and standing in the UK

So if the PKP FLIRT layout is low capacity, then the MK3 rake with all that wasted space for a LOCO and DVT must be ultra low capacity then because two vehicles are using platform space that can't even be used by pax which means they would carry less passengers than a same length PKP Interior style FLIRT with 9 Standard + 2 First.

A PKP spec FLIRT at the same length of train as an MK3+DVT+LOCO set can carry over 100 extra passengers seating alone. That's before you take into account the fact you now have the whole train where people can stand in whereas before you had the DVT and LOCO where people couldn't stand.

 

[LOL The Irony]

Don't take my word for it - take the seat manufacturers

It's Happening

Just because they can do that, doesn't mean they will.

 

[StephenHunter]

So, how close are we to having 755s in service? Especially London to Norwich?

 

[Owen]

Does GA do engineering work on the GMEL every single weekend? Seems like it.

Needs to stop!

 

[Rob F]

Does GA do engineering work on the GMEL every single weekend? Seems like it.

Needs to stop!

Engineering work will be done by Network Rail, and I think you can safely assume it is done for a very good reason.