Sorry to bring up IEP design again but....

RichW1 · 21 Feb 2015

http://paulbigland.zenfolio.com/p941445613/h5DC72C74#h5dc72c74

Are we really going to have huge great gaps between the carriage wheel sets like the model in the link? Jesus, the design looks like it's had half of its aesthetics and body forgotten about

Look at the mark4's or Pendolino's for examples of how it should look. No modern European train would have gaping holes in the train body like this. What happened to design? Making our trains look slick and stylish like on the continent? Or even Japan? Please, someone with design and build expertise tell me this awkward looking side view will not come into service like this?! It actually looks painfully unfinished and weak.

RailUK Forums

fowler9 · 21 Feb 2015

RWW said:
http://paulbigland.zenfolio.com/p941445613/h5DC72C74#h5dc72c74

Are we really going to have huge great gaps between carriages like the model in the link? Jesus, the design looks like it's had half of its aesthetics and body forgotten about

Look at the mark4's or Pendolino's for examples of how it should look. No modern European train would have gaping holes in the train body like this. What happened to design? Making our trains look slick and stylish like on the continent? Or even Japan? Please, someone with design and build expertise tell me this awkward looking side view will not come into service like this?! It actually looks painfully unfinished and weak.

I'm guessing it is just a bad model.

AM9 · 21 Feb 2015

RWW said:
http://paulbigland.zenfolio.com/p941445613/h5DC72C74#h5dc72c74

Are we really going to have huge great gaps between carriages like the model in the link? Jesus, the design looks like it's had half of its aesthetics and body forgotten about

Look at the mark4's or Pendolino's for examples of how it should look. No modern European train would have gaping holes in the train body like this. What happened to design? Making our trains look slick and stylish like on the continent? Or even Japan? Please, someone with design and build expertise tell me this awkward looking side view will not come into service like this?! It actually looks painfully unfinished and weak.

The 800s are 26m long to get the maximum passenger capacity per train length, but as a consequence, they have bogies at the same centres as current coaches to contain the centre overhang within current route gauge restrictions. A consequence of the larger end overhangs is that when going through reverse curves, the ends of each coach body will overhang more than with current 23m stock like MkIVs et al, so the gangway connections need more compliance when the ends yaw. Cosmetic visual design issues regarded by some as important rightly take second place to the primary function of the vehicles, i.e. to maximise passenger capacity at the required amenity level within the UK's restricted structure gauge.

RichW1 · 21 Feb 2015

I hear your point but the technical considerations there do not stop a body panel being applied for aesthetic purposes do they? Nothing would be affected on curves through some decent design. This really does look awful and very painful on the eye indeed. No match for a Pendolino in exterior design or even a markIV! They really should look at the APT for design cues. There body colouring went right to the underside of the train looking absolutely incredible; what went wrong now? This is lazy design in my opinion.

47802 · 21 Feb 2015

The real trains have some kind of grey or silver pair of boxes filling that gap on at least some of the coaches, it doesn't look as streamlined or as smart as a MK4 it has to be said

Domh245 · 21 Feb 2015

RWW said:
I hear your point but the technical considerations there do not stop a body panel being applied for aesthetic purposes do they? Nothing would be affected on curves through some decent design. This really does look awful and very painful on the eye indeed. No match for a Pendolino in exterior design or even a markIV! They really should look at the APT for design cues. There body colouring went right to the underside of the train looking absolutely incredible; what went wrong now? This is lazy design in my opinion.

The only way you would be able to put a vanity panel in that area would be if it were offset towards the middle by a considerable distance from the edge of the body, which would then make it look rather clumsy in my opinion. I don't see the problem with having this gap, it is justified to be there because of functional reasons (to not take out loads of platforms/other low infrastructure) and any alternatives are either function-inhibiting, expensive, ugly, or all of the above!

RichW1 · 21 Feb 2015

I don't see why any panel would have to be inwards of the end of the coaches. If the main body is within loading gauge, all we are talking about is extending the body panel down. It doesn't affect turning and nothing is 'sticking out' beyond the main body itself. We are guilty of being the only ones that would do this and finding some unique British reason when I cannot see one. Even the Silver Coronation Scot was it? was more streamlined. I thought the Japanese would come with a more impressive body shell than leaving a yes, clumsy gap between the train carriages. It depresses me I will have to look at this design for the next 40 years until I am old! Pendolinos are going to be our best looking train for decades to come now. I had pinned hope on IEP despite the negative comments but now I am joining them...poor design.

Domh245 · 21 Feb 2015

Loading gauge isnt just above the solebar! Platform edges jut out at the top before narrowing underneath. As the train moves around a reverse curve at a platform, if the end skirting was there, it would likely hit the platform edge as it went along and the ends of the carriage overthrow the platform.

RichW1 · 22 Feb 2015

If that's the case, it would suggest the sole bar will be over the platform edge at times which I can't see. I wish we had just developed a shorter carriage train if aesthetically this is the result. Such a wasted opportunity. Good looking doesn't seem to matter anymore. It will be the ugly duckling of the Intercity world; high-speed and non-high-speed.

samuelmorris · 22 Feb 2015

I disagree. Not only do I think exterior looks are unimportant by comparison, I also think the Class 800/801s look quite good. Seeing that exposed area underneath at the ends of each carriage really doesn't bother me in the slightest. As long as the section between the bogies is covered, which it is, then I'm fine with it. The longer coaches make a fair amount of sense as you can get the same length train that'd otherwise be 10 coaches into 9 - one fewer vestibule to worry about, thus more seating. It's obviously workable as they wouldn't have specified it for two intercity franchises otherwise.

AM9 · 22 Feb 2015

RWW said:
I hear your point but the technical considerations there do not stop a body panel being applied for aesthetic purposes do they? Nothing would be affected on curves through some decent design. This really does look awful and very painful on the eye indeed. No match for a Pendolino in exterior design or even a markIV! They really should look at the APT for design cues. There body colouring went right to the underside of the train looking absolutely incredible; what went wrong now? This is lazy design in my opinion.

The geometry of the coach ends during articulation just doesn't allow for the gap to be closed by "a body panel being applied for aesthetic purposes". Just imagine the design in plan view:
Don't forget that the distance between bogie centres on the 800s is the same as for current 23m coaches. This reduces the centre overhang. The payback is at the ends of the coaches that now have an additional 1.5m at each end causing a greater outside overhang. This is mitigated with the tapered coach ends.
The requirements for gangways between coaches is for them to be wide enough for full wheelchair access. Thus when the stock is traversing reverse curves, the gangway connection will need to accommodate the coach ends yawing in opposite directions from the track centreline. This is only achievable if there is sufficient length of flexible section with which to take up as smooth a curve as possible.
Don't forget that the distance between bogie centres on the 800s is the same as for current 23m coaches. This reduces the centre overhang. The payback is at the ends of the coaches that now have an additional 1.5m at each end causing a greater outside overhang. This is mitigated with the tapered coach ends.
I haven't seen this model shown in the picture, and know not whether it represents the the final production standard nor whether the gap on it is representative. The fact is though that the first coach is already in the UK for training purposes and the first full unit is on its way from Japan. It is probable that it represents the rest of the deliverables in physical dimensions.
I hope that the train performs as required and I'm sure that it will look the part.

WatcherZero · 22 Feb 2015

Seriously? Complaining about the lack of underfloor equipment making it look bad? 99% of the population will never see whats below the platform. Next people will be demanding the engines are chromed.

47802 · 22 Feb 2015

WatcherZero said:
Seriously? Complaining about the lack of underfloor equipment making it look bad? 99% of the population will never see whats below the platform. Next people will be demanding the engines are chromed.

Indeed plus if 'RWW' looks at the pictures of the actual unit rather than a model as I stated in a previous post you will see its not empty.

jimm · 22 Feb 2015

Getting back on topic, perhaps the original poster might care to look at the BBC report on the unveiling of the first train in Japan last November and freeze it at 27 or 28 seconds in, when there is a side view of the train, with underfloor equipment clearly visible between the bogies and the coach ends, for what it's worth. I can't see what the problem is anyway, it's not as if there is anything much under the door area of a Mk3 coach than some cable and brake pipe connectors.

Video is at https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=RCx7a-ERr6Q
--- old post above --- --- new post below ---

WatcherZero said:
Seriously? Complaining about the lack of underfloor equipment making it look bad? 99% of the population will never see whats below the platform. Next people will be demanding the engines are chromed.

Be careful what you wish for... this is the official picture of the engines being used in the Class 800 sets

http://www.railway-technology.com/p...ins-uk/-hitachi-super-express-trains-uk2.html

brianthegiant · 22 Feb 2015

If we're finding fault with the aesthetic detail of the area below the floor at carriage ends then there must be little to criticise about this stock. If only.

RobShipway · 22 Feb 2015

It maybe me, but other than the fact that it is longer by 3M the Class 800/801 carriages as per https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=RCx7a-ERr6Q at 27 seconds look no different than HST carriages as per http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/InterC...:British_Rail_Mk_3_M12043_at_Marylebone_A.jpg

D6975 · 23 Feb 2015

The shape of the bodyside and the shape of the windows is eerily similar to that of a 158.

route:oxford · 23 Feb 2015

RWW said:
http://paulbigland.zenfolio.com/p941445613/h5DC72C74#h5dc72c74

Are we really going to have huge great gaps between the carriage wheel sets like the model in the link? Jesus, the design looks like it's had half of its aesthetics and body forgotten about

Look at the mark4's or Pendolino's for examples of how it should look. No modern European train would have gaping holes in the train body like this. What happened to design? Making our trains look slick and stylish like on the continent? Or even Japan? Please, someone with design and build expertise tell me this awkward looking side view will not come into service like this?! It actually looks painfully unfinished and weak.

Complaining that there is room for someone to get themselves underneath the train and empty the tank for the cludgie?

Thoughtful design in my book.

AM9 · 23 Feb 2015

Robbies said:
It maybe me, but other than the fact that it is longer by 3M the Class 800/801 carriages as per https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=RCx7a-ERr6Q at 27 seconds look no different than HST carriages as per http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/InterC...:British_Rail_Mk_3_M12043_at_Marylebone_A.jpg

A subtle difference is that all of the additional 3 metre length is outside the bogies, i.e. whereas the outside end of the MKIII's bogies is about 1 metre from the end of the coach body, on the 800s it is over 2 metres. That space is being used both above floor level and below rather than absorbing it in a vestibule.
The space between the bogies is about the same on both coaches, except that none is used for retention tanks on the existing stock - oops, I forgot, the MKIIIs only need room for a sewer pipe! But Oh, those old seats are so much more comfortable - not!

Mark62 · 2 Mar 2015

I guarantee that these new trains will not be as comfortable as the current stock.

Bletchleyite · 2 Mar 2015

Mark62 said:
I guarantee that these new trains will not be as comfortable as the current stock.

Anything would be more comfortable than the torture seats used in Mk4s. I'd rather a wooden bench. Who on earth thought to design a seat where the base slopes forwards and so tries to tip you off?

Neil

sprinterguy · 2 Mar 2015

Neil Williams said:
Anything would be more comfortable than the torture seats used in Mk4s. I'd rather a wooden bench. Who on earth thought to design a seat where the base slopes forwards and so tries to tip you off?

Neil

A perfect example of how personal comfort is relative. I personally think that the Primarius seats fitted to the East Coast fleet are the most comfortable fitted to a British long distance train.

WatcherZero · 2 Mar 2015

That BBC documentary last week perfectly illustrates how people tend to rose tint old rolling stock and forget about things like smoke in eyes, smelly, dirty, hard seats, potential decapitation, getting wet if riding in first carriage with window open and there being Nurses in most stations to treat those injured by grit getting stuck in eyes.

Bletchleyite · 2 Mar 2015

sprinterguy said:
A perfect example of how personal comfort is relative. I personally think that the Primarius seats fitted to the East Coast fleet are the most comfortable fitted to a British long distance train.

Are you not very tall, or do you have a short lower leg? It's impossible for me to sit on those seats with any kind of under-thigh support, which is the issue. Everything goes on my tailbone.

Neil

sprinterguy · 2 Mar 2015

Neil Williams said:
Are you not very tall, or do you have a short lower leg? It's impossible for me to sit on those seats with any kind of under-thigh support, which is the issue. Everything goes on my tailbone.

Neil

I'm of fairly typical height for an adult male (5' 11''), and not at all short in the leg.

RobShipway · 2 Mar 2015

Not that I want to give anyone ideas, but the seats in the IEP's could be worse as they could be Pacer bus seats used instead.

Emyr · 2 Mar 2015

Would there not be a performance advantage to having a tapering aerodynamically designed cowling filling that gap?

upnorth71 · 3 Mar 2015

Re. seating- isn't the design of the rolling stock irrelevant (i.e. the nuts and bolts part) with regards to seating cushion dimensions, seat pitch, reclining and such? There are numerous vendors of seating, wouldn't the TOC be able to choose the product that best fits their operating philosophy and satisfies their customers, if the TOC's are truly customer oriented enterprises? Look at the airline industry- B737 or A320's (for example) have myriad levels of seating and density depending on the airline requirement.

samuelmorris · 3 Mar 2015

To add to this, while I'd stop short of calling them the most comfortable of all, I spent 3 hours on a Mk 4 yesterday and was perfectly comfortable in my seat

It'd surprise me if the new stock were uncomfortable as this is supposed to be the new UK benchmark standard for long distance services but even if many find them comfortable I'm sure there'll be plenty of people that don't...

hurricanemk1c · 3 Mar 2015

New UK benchmark that includes humps and seats next to the door pocket with no centre arm rest?

Sorry to bring up IEP design again but....

Member

RailUK Forums

Established Member

Veteran Member

Member

Established Member

Established Member

Member

Established Member

Member

Established Member

Veteran Member

Established Member

Established Member

Established Member

Member

Established Member

Established Member

Established Member

Veteran Member

Member

Veteran Member

Established Member

Established Member

Veteran Member

Established Member

Established Member

Member

Member

Established Member

Member