Yet despite your optimism, there’s no evidence for an early replacement for XC Voyagers, and I suggest Arriva‘s decision will not set any precedent whatsoever. XC rolling stock will be DfT’s eventual problem to solve..
Hope to God they don't opt for IETs and Newton Aycliffe has shut shop by then. UK intercity trains should be setting new standards for quality and passenger comfort, not delivering cheap rattly tat with church pew seats and hospital ward lighting. I'm hoping for an Alstom, Siemens or Stadler product to replace the Voyagers in 15 years time.
So you want to see several hundred employees at Aycliffe out of a job?
it already is DFT problem, even if Arriva wanted to replace fleet it is dft who agree to it.
If that is the cost of excellence, so be it...
But they do seem to be more reclined and have the headrests Lumo have, no?
That's a very manipulative/guilt-tripping way to reply to someone saying they don't want Hitachi trains. It is not the responsibility of the customer to want poor quality trains of a certain manufacturer purely because said manufacturer has taken on staff.
Goodness me
And we know that the GC units are going to be bad quality?Goodness me
You can say the same for any train manufacturer. Why should an operator get bad quality trains just to keep people at work?
It looks to me that the orders are being placed at Aycliffe to keep the factory going, rather than actually because they make good trains, which is not a good enough reason.
I doubt that two private company’s, First Group and Arriva are placing multi million pound orders just to keep a factory open!
Agreed! I think they are getting what they feel meets their needs and offers the best value.
Very well then. But then they are not placing it to keep the factory open and jobs secure, which you alluded to in post #142.
The staff don't choose what trains they build. You can complain all you want about the trains themselves, but being willing to sacrifice their jobs to get 'better' trains is a bit crazy.
Also Avanti can't run all the Liverpool services that they bought the 807s for because there isn't enough power on the WCML north of Weaver.
Not only that, as mentioned previously, the IET is proven product on the ECML. They do not need to go through as many hoops as a new train to introduce them. It makes total business sense.
#SeatUKforums
As they should!
They are not, as I mentioned upthread, the renders use images of the FISA LEAN seat, as used in Evero first class, 810s, EMR/XC refurbished 170s, 196s, 231s, 458/4s, 745s, 755s and 756s.
It’s also one more step to remove diesel from Sunderland station (assuming they enter and exit on battery) having a subterranean station with diesel trains is not great no matter how many extractor fans are in use.
Yes but personally I don’t really find those seat that uncomfortable, I think some of the interior ambiance is more problematic than seating, Lumo interiors for example are far too bright, GWR has used awful colour scheme.
Which will not only be price, but speed and reliability of delivery. Which I suspect made Hitachi a slam dunk if the price quoted was sensible, which it probably was once the production line for Class 80x was continued for the First Group order.
Weren’t they going to wire Leeds to Bradford Interchange as part of the NPR cancellation bribe? Just crack on and wire Bradford - Halifax - Brighouse - onwards to Wakefield K, Pontefract and the ECML. Chuck in the Bradley Curve as well.………… I’ll get my coat
Would they serve Mirfield and Ravensthorpe, given the short distance between them? I mean, I know it’s GC, and they’d happily serve every station between Bradford and Doncaster if they could, but…
If GC were the only operator on the route then that would be an obvious choice. But there are only a limited number of paths out of Kings Cross that are available to share between Grand Central, Hull Trains, Lumo and LNER's oddball services like Middlesbrough and Hull, so whether they are able to get paths that would maximise the usage of their fleet is down to luck and how well it fits in with the rest of the timetable (even before you take into account questions of staffing and rest breaks). They have an option on further units if they gain additional routes.
The CAF units are 897 to fit in with the 397 that they are derived from. No reason to think that these will be numbered outside the low-800 range that is already being used for all other IETs.
How often does the traction switch fail on LNER, GWR, HT or TPX trains that run off the wires? Is there any more of a risk of it failing if it is at a station rather than on the move? At least if it does fail while sitting at a station then there's an easy option to de-train passengers if needed, which won't be the case if it has coasted a couple of miles towards Yarm before rolling to a halt.
Seats and lighting can be specified by the customer, they are not set in stone or intrinsic to the basic train platform (as Lumo have demonstrated).
I believe if anything fails in the switchover process the current 80x units default to diesel - I think this was mentioned in the report of the LNER Azuma hitting the HST ( IIRC the driver hadn't changed the headcode on the TMS/GSMR and as a result the train didn't know where it was going, the diesel starting up was one of the distractions)
I’d be willing to bet money on Class 900 being the HS2 stock.
