• Our booking engine at tickets.railforums.co.uk (powered by TrainSplit) helps support the running of the forum with every ticket purchase! Find out more and ask any questions/give us feedback in this thread!

East Anglia MK 3's look grubby

Status
Not open for further replies.

ginger

Member
Joined
20 Oct 2011
Messages
276
once the new Ipswich chord is completed in 2014-15 then a large proportion of the Felixstowe box trains will go East-West.....

It will free up much needed capacity.......and a new franchisee in place with at least a 15 year deal......which hopefully will include very much needed investment to put the great back into the Great Eastern Mainline!
 
Sponsor Post - registered members do not see these adverts; click here to register, or click here to log in
R

RailUK Forums

Essexman

Established Member
Joined
15 Mar 2011
Messages
1,380
They might need clean but these are nice trains. I hope they keep them going as long as possible as any modern replacements are likely to be inferior.
 

jopsuk

Veteran Member
Joined
13 May 2008
Messages
12,771
6 tracks to Shenfield? I bet the residents of east London who's houses back onto the tracks would be mighty pleased!

In the fantasy version, it's all underground. Snow and leaf proof! More of a challenge for cable thieves/trespassers! Rather more complicated for maintainence! Vastly expensive to build!
 

Martin nx

Member
Joined
15 Jun 2011
Messages
77
Location
North Walsham, Norfolk.
Apart from the Mk3's, I had to travel home from Stansted last week passenger to Norwich on a 1 way diagram (coaches, not trains.) and got on a XC 170 from Stansted [SSD] to Cambridge [CBG] that was in really good nick all round. Then got on a NX Turbostar 3 car set from Cambridge [CBG] - Norwich [NRW] that was tatty in the extreme! Filthy carpets, grubby seats, and vibrated and droned all the way to Norwich! I know we are losing the franchise but no excuse for this state of the rolling stock. :(
 
Last edited by a moderator:

DarloRich

Veteran Member
Joined
12 Oct 2010
Messages
29,182
Location
Fenny Stratford
I find it surprising that people find these so uncomfortable. I think they're the most comfortable seats around and should be retained where possible. Is it so difficult to design a modern seat which actually has some padding and isn't too high backed?

Not at all - however they take up a bit more space which mean a few less passengers which means a bit less money for the TOC which means they wont use them.

Much better to cram in as many seats as possible ala FGW and take it from there, sod pass... sorry customer comfort!

Wabtec did ( and do!) a really good job on refurb work. Very good quality
 

Royston Vasey

Established Member
Joined
14 May 2008
Messages
2,167
Location
Cambridge
Apart from the Mk3's, I had to travel home from Stansted last week passenger to Norwich on a 1 way diagram (coaches, not trains.) and got on a XC 170 from STN to Cambridge that was in really good nick all round. Then got on a NX Turbostar 3 car set from Cam-Nch that was tatty in the extreme! Filthy carpets, grubby seats, and vibrated and droned all the way to Norwich! I know we are losing the franchise but no excuse for this state of the rolling stock. :(

The irony in your post being of course that the pseudo-intercity service gets a 2 car 170 while the local service of barely an hour gets a 3 car 170, I think you should count your blessings!
 

bnm

Established Member
Joined
12 Oct 2009
Messages
4,996
Much better to cram in as many seats as possible ala FGW and take it from there, sod pass... sorry customer comfort!

Pray tell, how would you have addressed FGW's passenger capacity problems on their HST fleet? They couldn't magic up more rolling stock, so increased seating was the way to go. Done, by the way, with better legroom than on more modern stock.

The Grammer seats are perfectly comfortable and promote good posture.

FGW could've refurbished 'Mallard' style but that wouldn't have addressed passenger capacity issues. So as for 'customer comfort', better a seat than standing all the way to Exeter.

(Waits for the comeback about lack of tables.....:roll:)
 

ginger

Member
Joined
20 Oct 2011
Messages
276
I recently travelled to Bristol on a refurb HST and could not agree more......it was like a new train and so comfortable.....

When I got back to Liverpool St to jump on my 321, I looked at a MKIII next me and my heart sank.....when you compare the 2 you realise just how shabby and penny pinching NXEA have been!

And the irony? The FGW trailers were refurbed to a very high standard at Ilford.....the poor old, tired, knackered, rusty NXEA MKIIIs travelling past all the time......
 

Bald Rick

Veteran Member
Joined
28 Sep 2010
Messages
29,070
once the new Ipswich chord is completed in 2014-15 then a large proportion of the Felixstowe box trains will go East-West.....

A slightly larger proportion than today, granted, but there will still be 2 freight paths an hour up the GEML and most will be used. The extra capacity created cross country is for growth.
 

neodoughnut

Member
Joined
7 Oct 2011
Messages
28
Having spent the past 18 months travelling up and down the GEML from Ipswich to London, the best thing that could be done to speed up InterCity journey times would be to replace the 90+MK3s with a modern EMU with vastly improved acceleration and station dwell times and cutting out some stops. The 91+MK3s currently take about 1h50 from Norwich, with a minimum of 4 stops with dwell times of 5 mins a station, and the abysmal acceleration of the 90s themselves.

Ideally they should be replaced with 125mph EPS units similar to the Pendolinos, but more realistically something similar to the 444 units with SWT should replace them. Also a fast service serving only Colchester, Ipswich and Norwich should be created, and I reckon we with all these points, we could have London to Norwich times of about 1h30.

I read that NXEA reckon that 110mph is possible without any modifications to the current infrastructure. I believe everything north of Colchester could be 125mph with the exception of the Ipswich approach and tunnel.

I agree with the previous poster than double decker trains should be used for the InterCity and outer commuter services, and with the additional capacity on each train, services could be joined and split and colchester, for example with the Clacton and Ipswich stopper services. Implementing this would not be as difficult as it seems as the only tunnel on the route is in Ipswich and its not very long.

There are also major issues south of Colchester which will be very expensive to resolve, such as Chelmsford. The best thing that could be done at the moment is to bring the platforms out a bit further so that there is enough space for a platform loop on each side of the tracks, so that through trains can run fast through Chelmsford.
 

ginger

Member
Joined
20 Oct 2011
Messages
276
Having spent the past 18 months travelling up and down the GEML from Ipswich to London, the best thing that could be done to speed up InterCity journey times would be to replace the 90+MK3s with a modern EMU with vastly improved acceleration and station dwell times and cutting out some stops. The 91+MK3s currently take about 1h50 from Norwich, with a minimum of 4 stops with dwell times of 5 mins a station, and the abysmal acceleration of the 90s themselves.

Ideally they should be replaced with 125mph EPS units similar to the Pendolinos, but more realistically something similar to the 444 units with SWT should replace them. Also a fast service serving only Colchester, Ipswich and Norwich should be created, and I reckon we with all these points, we could have London to Norwich times of about 1h30.

I read that NXEA reckon that 110mph is possible without any modifications to the current infrastructure. I believe everything north of Colchester could be 125mph with the exception of the Ipswich approach and tunnel.

I agree with the previous poster than double decker trains should be used for the InterCity and outer commuter services, and with the additional capacity on each train, services could be joined and split and colchester, for example with the Clacton and Ipswich stopper services. Implementing this would not be as difficult as it seems as the only tunnel on the route is in Ipswich and its not very long.

There are also major issues south of Colchester which will be very expensive to resolve, such as Chelmsford. The best thing that could be done at the moment is to bring the platforms out a bit further so that there is enough space for a platform loop on each side of the tracks, so that through trains can run fast through Chelmsford.

On the subject of replacing the 90s and the MKIIIs the Network Rail RUS back in 2007 has already proposed this very idea of replacing them with 444s as a quick fix to add extra capacity.....see below page 5

http://www.networkrail.co.uk/browse...trategies/greater anglia/great anglia rus.pdf

Your other points have all been looked at by the Norwich in 90 campaign.....but whats the point? All the level crossings north of Ipswich will need to be changed at considerable expense and for what? 4 trains an hour? And the route is already over congested.... Hardly worth it.....the money needs to be spent getting either new rolling stock or the existing rubbish into the 21st century!

I have an issue as a GE Outer commuter with the Norwich in 90 campaign....pampered Norwich commuters have always been given priority oover the majority of people who travel - Norwich trains make up less than 5% of the revenue of the commuters who pay for the railway.....GE Outers about 30%....any proposal south of colchester to give Norwich trains even more priority will just cause more outrage!

In any event those horrible people at DAFT know all of this but are cynically using the East of England as a cash cow and are simply foisting knackered old pooring or unrefurbished rolling stock upon us whilst sucking in excess of £100m a year out of the line in subsidy. All over the country investment in either new stock or properly refurbished stock is being made.....but not in the East!!!!

Write to your MP!!!! Not that it will do much good......
 

Bungle73

On Moderation
Joined
19 Aug 2011
Messages
3,040
Location
Kent
I agree with the previous poster than double decker trains should be used for the InterCity and outer commuter services, and with the additional capacity on each train, services could be joined and split and colchester, for example with the Clacton and Ipswich stopper services.
It's not just about the tunnel (which would be major job in itself), it's about the road and foot bridges and everything else that crosses the line. And what about the catenary system? I doubt that's high enough to accommodate double decker trains.
 

dk1

Veteran Member
Joined
2 Oct 2009
Messages
15,827
Location
East Anglia
Having spent the past 18 months travelling up and down the GEML from Ipswich to London, the best thing that could be done to speed up InterCity journey times would be to replace the 90+MK3s with a modern EMU with vastly improved acceleration and station dwell times and cutting out some stops. The 91+MK3s currently take about 1h50 from Norwich, with a minimum of 4 stops with dwell times of 5 mins a station, and the abysmal acceleration of the 90s themselves.

Class 90 accelertation isnt too bad. Dwell times are only 1 minute at Diss, Stowmarket & Manningtree. Only reason they are up to 4/5 minutes at Ipswich & Colchester are due to performance issues. These only need to be 2 minutes but we are obsessed with PPM these days. Modify MK3s with power doors & any problems with door on catch/delays will be instantly resoved.
 

ginger

Member
Joined
20 Oct 2011
Messages
276
Class 90 accelertation isnt too bad. Dwell times are only 1 minute at Diss, Stowmarket & Manningtree. Only reason they are up to 4/5 minutes at Ipswich & Colchester are due to performance issues. These only need to be 2 minutes but we are obsessed with PPM these days. Modify MK3s with power doors & any problems with door on catch/delays will be instantly resoved.

back on topic......will the C4X scheduled for next year include the modifications like powered doors?

Let's face it 2020 is looming and all the stock (except the 360s) will need to be completely rebuilt to comply.....I think it is fair to say that GE has the largest amount of old stock in the country.....

No one at DAFT appears to be grasping this nettle.....just limping along with old tat!
 

MCR247

Established Member
Joined
7 Nov 2008
Messages
9,566
back on topic......will the C4X scheduled for next year include the modifications like powered doors?

Let's face it 2020 is looming and all the stock (except the 360s) will need to be completely rebuilt to comply.....I think it is fair to say that GE has the largest amount of old stock in the country.....

No one at DAFT appears to be grasping this nettle.....just limping along with old tat!

Evidently you've never been further north than Norwich then...
 

dk1

Veteran Member
Joined
2 Oct 2009
Messages
15,827
Location
East Anglia
back on topic......will the C4X scheduled for next year include the modifications like powered doors?

No decision has been made yet. Crown Point are watching Chiltern with intrest but will no doubt hear more from February.
 

ginger

Member
Joined
20 Oct 2011
Messages
276
No decision has been made yet. Crown Point are watching Chiltern with intrest but will no doubt hear more from February.

The Dutch has been very quiet about any improvements to rolling stock (apart from some new seat covers for the disgusting ex LM 321/4s)

Their approach and response on the reduction of the train fleet smacks of farce already......I am guessing that any work done to any trains will be minimal.....given that they have undertaken to give even more premium payments / stealth taxes back to those wonderful people at the Dft!
 

ainsworth74

Forum Staff
Staff Member
Global Moderator
Joined
16 Nov 2009
Messages
27,542
Location
Redcar
Let's face it 2020 is looming and all the stock (except the 360s) will need to be completely rebuilt to comply.....I think it is fair to say that GE has the largest amount of old stock in the country.

Riiight...

NXEA average age of rolling stock Q4 2010-11: 25.78

FGW average age of rolling stock Q4 2010-11: 28.70

Merseyrail average age of rolling stock Q4 2010-11: 32.25

East Coast average age of rolling stock Q4 2010-11: 24.97

FCC average age of rolling stock Q4 2010-11: 24.37

Northern average age of rolling stock Q4 2010-11: 22.03

Source
 

ginger

Member
Joined
20 Oct 2011
Messages
276
Riiight...

NXEA average age of rolling stock Q4 2010-11: 25.78

FGW average age of rolling stock Q4 2010-11: 28.70

Merseyrail average age of rolling stock Q4 2010-11: 32.25

East Coast average age of rolling stock Q4 2010-11: 24.97

FCC average age of rolling stock Q4 2010-11: 24.37

Northern average age of rolling stock Q4 2010-11: 22.03

Source

FGW / East Coast - IEP on the horizon - existing fleets refurbed to modern standards

Merseyrail - ITT issued for new fleet - existing fleet heavily refurbed to modern standards

FCC / Northern / NXEA - clearly poor relations to other franchises in the country!
 

jopsuk

Veteran Member
Joined
13 May 2008
Messages
12,771
Which TOCs have no post-privitisation built stock whatsoever?

NXEA has relatively small fleets (compared to the mainstays) of 170, 360 and 379

East Coast is all BR

Merseyrail is all BR, all from a very short period of time.

Northern (barring the 180s that they really shouldn't have)

FGW (did have 180s, may do again)

FCC- only their small fleet of 377/5

Only Hull Trains is entirely post privitisation- Virgin have their Pretendolino mark 3 set, XC have HSTs, SWT have 455, 158 and 159
 

driver9000

Established Member
Joined
13 Jan 2008
Messages
4,230
Which TOCs have no post-privitisation built stock whatsoever?

Northern (barring the 180s that they really shouldn't have)

Northern has 333s which are post privatisation.
--- old post above --- --- new post below ---
The Dutch has been very quiet about any improvements to rolling stock (apart from some new seat covers for the disgusting ex LM 321/4s)

Given that Abellio only has the franchise for around 2 years I doubt you'll see anything spectacular (if anything) until the 'proper' franchise is agreed. I believe the reduction in fleet is a DfT requirement rather than Abellio dumping stock.
 
Last edited:

IanXC

Emeritus Moderator
Joined
18 Dec 2009
Messages
6,331
FGW / East Coast - IEP on the horizon - existing fleets refurbed to modern standards

Merseyrail - ITT issued for new fleet - existing fleet heavily refurbed to modern standards

FCC / Northern / NXEA - clearly poor relations to other franchises in the country!

FCC can hardly be said to not have new stock on the horizon!

 

ainsworth74

Forum Staff
Staff Member
Global Moderator
Joined
16 Nov 2009
Messages
27,542
Location
Redcar
FCC can hardly be said to not have new stock on the horizon!

Similarly whilst NXEA itself probably won't have the rolling stock some of their routes certainly will in the form of Crossrail.
 

Sleepy

Established Member
Joined
15 Feb 2009
Messages
1,537
Location
East Anglia
<( GE mainline : overcrowded dirty late trains, Abellio may wonder what they have taken on when East Anglia MP`s start clucking for the TV cameras in the spring of 2012 !! At least everyone knows NX did not give a sh*t.
 

talltim

Established Member
Joined
17 Jan 2010
Messages
2,454
ginger said:
Let's face it 2020 is looming and all the stock (except the 360s) will need to be completely rebuilt to comply.....I think it is fair to say that GE has the largest amount of old stock in the country.

Riiight...

NXEA average age of rolling stock Q4 2010-11: 25.78

FGW average age of rolling stock Q4 2010-11: 28.70

Merseyrail average age of rolling stock Q4 2010-11: 32.25

East Coast average age of rolling stock Q4 2010-11: 24.97

FCC average age of rolling stock Q4 2010-11: 24.37

Northern average age of rolling stock Q4 2010-11: 22.03

Source

That's average age, not quantity.
 

ainsworth74

Forum Staff
Staff Member
Global Moderator
Joined
16 Nov 2009
Messages
27,542
Location
Redcar
That's average age, not quantity.

FGW: No post-privatisation rolling stock. (Will gain 5 180s in near future).

EC: No post-privatisation rolling stock.

Merseyrail: No post-privatisation rolling stock.

FCC: 23 377s out of a fleet of 215 units. Therefore 11% of fleet is post-privatisation.

Northern: 3 180s and 16 333s out of a fleet of 306 units. Therefore 6% of fleet is post-privatisation (3 180s will be leaving and additional pre-privatisation stock arriving making this ratio worse).

NXEA: 12 170s, 21 360s and 30 379s out of a fleet of 307 units (90+Mk3 sets counted as 15 units rather than individual locos and LHCS). Therefore 21% of fleet is post-privatisation.
 

junglejames

Established Member
Joined
8 Dec 2010
Messages
2,069
Pray tell, how would you have addressed FGW's passenger capacity problems on their HST fleet? They couldn't magic up more rolling stock, so increased seating was the way to go. Done, by the way, with better legroom than on more modern stock.

The Grammer seats are perfectly comfortable and promote good posture.

FGW could've refurbished 'Mallard' style but that wouldn't have addressed passenger capacity issues. So as for 'customer comfort', better a seat than standing all the way to Exeter.

(Waits for the comeback about lack of tables.....:roll:)

They couldnt magic up more rolling stock? yet amazingly thats exactly what they have now done. So yes, they could have come up with more rolling stock. Its down to the person in charge at the time.
If GNER can do it, so can FGW.
Oh, and the extra seats have come mainly from taking tables out of the coaches. The types of seats have a negligible impact. So yes, they could have done a Mallard just with fewer tables.

As for the seats being comfortable. Thats up to the individual in question. As for good posture. Basically, comfort is down to the individual in question. Dont add in clever words that mean little.
 
Status
Not open for further replies.

Top