Greater Anglia Rolling Stock Updates

[47802]

The Aventras are awful. No tables, no seat spacers, ironing board seats, dull and drab.

Most passengers won't even notice that it's a new train, it looks so uninspiring.

Well what did you expect? Apart for the 3+2 seating its similar to the Thameslink units and pretty much what you expect for London Commuter routes now. On the plus side you get new trains with Aircon compared to the old 317/321's

 

[43074]

The Aventras are a bit of a surprise to me, I thought 3+2 seating was outdated? I'd much rather they made these trains more nicer to stand in, and it's probably gonna be narrow on these, since these trains are longer, so narrower, but apart from that, it's not half bad.

Shenfield alone is 20 mins out from Liverpool Street, which is the distance from which the DfT aims to maximise seating capacity rather than standing room to meet the "PIXC" (Passengers in Excess of Capacity) targets for minimising the number of of standing passengers; 3+2 is the most effective way to maximise seating capacity which frankly I'd rather they tried to do on outer-suburban stock than going for a design with relatively few seats.

 

[chubs]

Standard trolley service only operates if there is no catering vehicle in a set these day.

Ah I thought some services still operated trolley and buffet in second class but now you emotion it it has been a long time since I saw a trolley. Moot point then, assuming the buffet in the new set is pretty fixed in the formation.

 

[Class 170101]

I see in both designs they have failed to align the seats with the windows. :roll:

 

[Bletchleyite]

I see in both designs they have failed to align the seats with the windows. :roll:

The FLIRT appears to have Standard mostly aligned, as the spacing is laid out for Standard bay sizes. This kind-of makes sense because of its regional EMU heritage.

Worth noting, though, that the FLIRT has very large windows with quite small pillars so the effect is not necessarily too bad.

I don't get the Aventra layout - the 3 side of the 3+2 is all bays. If you look at a Class 172 you can clearly see that too has 9 windows.

...which are at a spacing to align seats with them. So the misalignment shown in the rendering is only going to be possible if they cram an extra bay in (i.e. 6 bays in a 5 window section), which is going to make them *cramped*...

That or the rendering is an example not showing the actual layout.

 

[LAX54]

Of course if they don't build Manningtree in time, and do some resignalling and install some bi-di working there too, then the new trains will not be around to try anyway

 

[F Great Eastern]

The way that some seats are higher than others on the Flirt's reminds me of being on a bus rather than an intercity train. For the rest they look nice though.

As a critic of the initial renders and spec of the FLIRTS what I heard when they were first ordered and everything I read about them, rather than moaning here, I went and sampled some in other countries and they were very much good trains with decent seating, lighting and leg-room and I liked them.

Sadly the Greater Anglia ones look like they are with the bare minimum spec with horrible cheap looking thin seats, a lack of air and spacing and lots of walls, dividers, some seats higher than others which gives a claustrophobic feel and not the feeling of space that I felt on the FLIRTS in other countries.

Ventura - terrible layout, the legroom looks awful and the general layout looks horrible and the seating choice is awful as well, however as I am told that they got a very good price and it's going to be simple what I've been saying all along, Abellio are more interested in the press of a FULL FLEET REPLACEMENT, don't forget a FULL FLEET REPLACEMENT than actually providing suitable trains.

I guess that is what happens when you go for quantity of trains over quality of spec.

 

[Domh245]

As a critic of the initial renders and spec of the FLIRTS what I heard when they were first ordered and everything I read about them, rather than moaning here, I went and sampled some in other countries and they were very much good trains with decent seating, lighting and leg-room and I liked them.

Sadly the Greater Anglia ones look like they are with the bare minimum spec with horrible cheap looking thin seats, a lack of air and spacing and lots of walls, dividers, some seats higher than others which gives a claustrophobic feel and not the feeling of space that I felt on the FLIRTS in other countries.

I guess that is what happens when you go for quantity of trains over quality of spec.

Or just if you are building something that'll fit in the UK loading gauge rather than a continental loading gauge...

 

[F Great Eastern]

Or just if you are building something that'll fit in the UK loading gauge rather than a continental loading gauge...

I simply don't agree with what Abellio are doing, they are more interested in getting the whole fleet replaced and the publicity that it brings rather than actually ensuring that the fleet is of a high quality, the problem is that the DFT fell for it and awarded a contract to a bidder who I am genuinely fearful is all style and no substance , at first glance Abellio promised some good things, but underneath it all there is serious questions about the spec they have gone for which appears to be almost fully built to a price and the deliver-ability of the plan,

I know people working fairly senior for two different TOC's in the UK and every one of them is waiting for this to go tits-up. and the problems to mount and believe that Abellio are going to have to look for as much good press as possible over the coming years because once the stock starts to get delivered and the inevitable problems and negative reaction kicks in when someone finds out that their new EMU on the commuter run and new Stansted Express unit is worse than the old one, no doubt Abellio will be shouting they replaced the whole fleet over and over again.

Alternatively they could have kept on the 379s and maybe the 360s and stretched the budget just that little bit further and order a quality spec with no corners cut, but they didn't do that and not only is the spec of pretty much every train ordered going to suffer, but from everything I've seen some places are going to have stock that isn't even mid-life being replaced by inferior, yet newer stock. But as long as Abellio can shout from the roof tops FULL FLEET REPLACEMENT who cares seems to be their attitude.

As I said, when the whole thing goes tits-up, I told you so.

 

[LAX54]

within a few weeks people will shouting....."where are our Mk 3's" !!

 

[F Great Eastern]

within a few weeks people will shouting....."where are our Mk 3's" !!

The funny thing is that from the time they were introduced until the time Abellio refurbished them so make that about 10 years, I couldn't wait to be rid of the things, they were so run down in bad condition and generally unloved that I hated them with a passion.

However since Abellio have refurbished them they are not bad at all. However in true Abellio style, if something is refurbished it means it only has a short life left or will be out the door in a short while, vs the other extreme with National Express where you had trains that were going to stay for the long term barely touched.

As for the FLIRT's I live in hope that Abellio see sense and decide to go with the other option that STADLER apparently earlier proposed regarding interior layout which was more similar to other FLIRT's rather than this one which is custom build for GA which apparently is cheaper (or so I'm told)

 

[chubs]

As I said, when the whole thing goes tits-up, I told you so.

Yes yes we know, you've posted the exact same thing around 100 times now.

 

[47802]

I simply don't agree with what Abellio are doing, they are more interested in getting the whole fleet replaced and the publicity that it brings rather than actually ensuring that the fleet is of a high quality, the problem is that the DFT fell for it and awarded a contract to a bidder who I am genuinely fearful is all style and no substance , at first glance Abellio promised some good things, but underneath it all there is serious questions about the spec they have gone for which appears to be almost fully built to a price and the deliver-ability of the plan,

I know people working fairly senior for two different TOC's in the UK and every one of them is waiting for this to go tits-up. and the problems to mount and believe that Abellio are going to have to look for as much good press as possible over the coming years because once the stock starts to get delivered and the inevitable problems and negative reaction kicks in when someone finds out that their new EMU on the commuter run and new Stansted Express unit is worse than the old one, no doubt Abellio will be shouting they replaced the whole fleet over and over again.

Alternatively they could have kept on the 379s and maybe the 360s and stretched the budget just that little bit further and order a quality spec with no corners cut, but they didn't do that and not only is the spec of pretty much every train ordered going to suffer, but from everything I've seen some places are going to have stock that isn't even mid-life being replaced by inferior, yet newer stock. But as long as Abellio can shout from the roof tops FULL FLEET REPLACEMENT who cares seems to be their attitude.

As I said, when the whole thing goes tits-up, I told you so.

I don't see that makes a great deal of difference even if you keep the 379 and 360's your still introducing over 800 new carriages which still a big risk, and your not getting the benefit of reducing your fleet to 2 types of new EMU and probably paying a higher price per carriage for the smaller order.

 

[F Great Eastern]

I don't see that makes a great deal of difference even if you keep the 379 and 360's your still introducing over 800 new carriages which still a big risk, and your not getting the benefit of reducing your fleet to 2 types of new EMU and probably paying a higher price per carriage for the smaller order.

The fact you're saying that my suggestion to cut the order by 20% still leaves a big risk over the introduction of rolling stock underlines my point, there was far too much risk in the bid which is why the other bidders in the race were absolutely staggered when it was announced what Abellio were doing and they couldn't believe they could make it pay without some serious corner cutting and it appears that is what we are getting.

But it would allow the cost per train to increase a little resulting in a proper spec rather than what appears to be a watered down one which is simply built on being as cheap as possible from everything that I have heard. It's laughable compared to the European Flirts and the Aventura looks no better than a 321/360 with sockets added.

I'd rather have 800 new good quality carriages with a good spec and around 200 almost new / mid life ones of a good spec than over 1000 mediocre which is what we appear to be getting here. Sure they would lose the benefit of reducing the fleet types, but at the same time they'd still save money over replacing everything over the course of the franchise.

 

[Bletchleyite]

Sadly the Greater Anglia ones look like they are with the bare minimum spec with horrible cheap looking thin seats, a lack of air and spacing and lots of walls, dividers, some seats higher than others which gives a claustrophobic feel and not the feeling of space that I felt on the FLIRTS in other countries.

They clearly won't be as big, but I really don't see how they differ from others. The only flat-floor FLIRTs I've seen are the high-floor PKP ones - they are very nice, but level boarding with no gap is a much bigger benefit than a flat floor in my view - it removes the need for booked assistance, making the service vastly more accessible.

And I don't get what you mean by thin seats. They seem quite thick-backed, a bit like the usual Class 170/172 seat.

It looks like a good, modern European-style unit - much more so than the Class 800/801 which is decidedly old-fashioned and traditional in its design.

I guess that is what happens when you go for quantity of trains over quality of spec.

I don't agree with the proposed Aventra layout, but that doesn't make it poor quality, it's just lousy design. I don't think seating it 2+2 in bays would make it any more expensive. Indeed, it'd probably be cheaper as there would be fewer seats to purchase.

 

[F Great Eastern]

TAnd I don't get what you mean by thin seats. They seem quite thick-backed, a bit like the usual Class 170/172 seat.

Bear in mind they are going to replace MK3s, they are far less padded and far thinner than the seats that they are going to replace. I'm no massive lover of the MK3 seats, but they are basically going from an intercity seat to what is pretty much a rural/local seat. I'm also led to believe they are once again, the cheapest option.

It looks like a good, modern European-style unit - much more so than the Class 800/801 which is decidedly old-fashioned and traditional in its design.

It looks like a modern European style unit from the outside but from the inside they appear to be simply done to a price first and foremost, I agree they look more modern than the class 800 that looks too spartan and white but that realistically is not hard.

I don't agree with the proposed Aventra layout, but that doesn't make it poor quality, it's just lousy design.

But the spec will be reflected in the price, they also appear to have crammed the seats too close together and that is before that you even add the fact that they are using 3+2. The fact that these will replace the VASTLY superior in spec/design 379s in part is laughable, newer inferior train replaces better older one just so Abellio can get good PR about replacing the whole fleet.

It also remains to be seen if they are any better than the 360s but the jury is going to be out on that until they enter service. I certainly agree though that the 153/156/317/321 fleets needed to be replaced as soon as possible and they will be an upgrade on them and the MK3s will need replacing by 2020 it's obvious GA needs a lot of new stock, it's simply they've gone overboard on replacing everything rather than replacing life expired, out-dated and tired trains with good trains, they've decided to replace everything with mediocre trains.

As for the PKP Flirts, aside from the level seating and the high floor nature they appear to be of a higher spec than what Abellio have ordered and far less corners cut.

 

[Bletchleyite]

Bear in mind they are going to replace MK3s, they are far less padded and far thinner than the seats that they are going to replace. I'm no massive lover of the MK3 seats, but they are basically going from an intercity seat to what is pretty much a rural/local seat. I'm also led to believe they are once again, the cheapest option.

The IC70 is a very old-fashioned seat and one that many people don't find comfortable - I certainly don't. I don't think being as thick as the IC70 is a benefit.

it's simply they've gone overboard on replacing everything rather than replacing life expired, out-dated and tired trains with good trains, they've decided to replace everything with mediocre trains.

I don't agree. The only thing that's mediocre about any of it is the seating layout on the Aventras, and that is nothing to do with cost and everything to do with "seating capacity at the expense of comfort" which is the usual approach on commuter services, resulting in things like the nasty 350/2.

It's a lousy seating layout, but that isn't to save money. The finish looks decent enough.

As for the PKP Flirts, aside from the level seating and the high floor nature they appear to be of a higher spec than what Abellio have ordered and far less corners cut.

In what way? They aren't the same seats (PKP use the same as the GWR HSTs - a seat I really like but many people don't), but I fail to see any other significant differences in the finish. Indeed, the interior of the GA units looks much nicer, with richer colours and some wood effect panelling. I was actually positively impressed by the impression of quality, and I genuinely don't get why you are seeing it as you are.

FWIW I've done a 7 hour journey (in 1st, which is very similar) on a PKP unit and it was very comfortable.

 

[87015]

As for the PKP Flirts, aside from the level seating and the high floor nature they appear to be of a higher spec than what Abellio have ordered and far less corners cut.

The PKP ones being the 'high quality varient' that has daily trains replaced with other stock because of chronic unreliablity (maintained by Stadler, not PKP)? At least one of the small German operators are in the same boat (around Munster, the light blue ones)

 

[F Great Eastern]

The PKP ones being the 'high quality varient' that has daily trains replaced with other stock because of chronic unreliablity (maintained by Stadler, not PKP)? At least one of the small German operators are in the same boat (around Munster, the light blue ones)

I was talking about the interior, the mechanical side is going to be just as much as a problem for Greater Anglia I would suspect if not worse due to the fact that they are going to have to be engineered slightly differently due to the infrastructure is different in the UK, there is always bedding in problems with new types of rolling stock.

Hence my views that there is too much risk in the rolling stock replacement program.

 

[F Great Eastern]

The IC70 is a very old-fashioned seat and one that many people don't find comfortable - I certainly don't. I don't think being as thick as the IC70 is a benefit.

I don't find it comfortable either but the seats that I see in the GA FLIRT's look look the worse kind on the 170 fleet or on a lot of DMU's, they are not a patch on the ones on the other FLIRT's which are better padded and the GWR HST seats I really like so there is no surprise that I have this view.

I don't agree. The only thing that's mediocre about any of it is the seating layout on the Aventras, and that is nothing to do with cost and everything to do with "seating capacity at the expense of comfort" which is the usual approach on commuter services, resulting in things like the nasty 350/2. It's a lousy seating layout, but that isn't to save money. The finish looks decent enough.

For me it's not just the seat layout it's the spacing of them as well they look very tight add to the fact they are ironing board seats, 3+2 and the poor spacing and you are going to have something that is going to be a substantial downgrade in comfort from what it is replacing in a lot of cases, certainly I would class the 379 seats as better than those ironing board ones and the 360s for me are better too based on my experience on the ironing board ones.

In what way? They aren't the same seats (PKP use the same as the GWR HSTs - a seat I really like but many people don't), but I fail to see any other significant differences in the finish. Indeed, the interior of the GA units looks much nicer, with richer colours and some wood effect panelling. I was actually positively impressed by the impression of quality, and I genuinely don't get why you are seeing it as you are.

Seats on a train is a pretty important thing though, using what is basically a glorified short hop DMU seat from what I can see and from what I have heard from those in the industry, is a clear way of cutting costs, the finish I remain to be convinced on, it looks very cluttered and not very open and quite claustrophobic based on the photos I have seen so far, it reminds me of those awful PESA Darts that PKP operate, which is the worst modern unit I've ever been on.

 

[Bletchleyite]

I agree the PESA Darts are cheap rubbish, but the FLIRT is a much nicer unit.

 

[Bornin1980s]

I understand the seats on the FLIRTS will be by FISA, who's product won a passenger survey for Northern (but apparently wasn't taken up).

Regarding the bi-mode FLIRTS, I like the above floor engine module, but I am curious. A report in November's Modern Railways stated that the three car units would have two deisel power modules, the four car units four. Surely you don't need double the power for just one extra articulated section, less than a quarter of the full weight.

 

[Bletchleyite]

The latter could maybe use engines with a lower power output (or derated for cheaper maintenance)?

 

[F Great Eastern]

I understand the seats on the FLIRTS will be by FISA, who's product won a passenger survey for Northern (but apparently wasn't taken up).

Please don't tell me they are the LEAN model?

If they are I wish everyone good luck, they are the Urban 90 of train seats which are the thinnest, least padded and most uncomfortable seats I have seen, and were rejected by Northern for the same reason even if they won a survey I heard that many didn't like them.

They're normally taken up by an operator because they are light, made up of few parts, can be put closer together because of the indent with a reduction of comfort, have built in plug sockets which is cheaper than putting them in the carriage walls, they're also very cheap.

The problem was the indent at the back of the seat was indented so much that it impeded the amount of cushioning and at the bottom of the seat where the bottom of your back goes, is almost like the Irish Rail MK4s which feel like barely no padding at all.

Guess that's what you get when you go for quantity over quality, a regional lightweight cheap seat meant for short journeys, typical Abellio, cutting corners to scream FULL FLEET REPLACEMENT let me tell you FULL FLEET REPLACEMENT that's all that matters at the end of the day, instead it appears we're going to be left with brand new uncomfortable trains because Abellio cared more about the PR than the comfort of thei traints.

Can't wait for all this to roll-out if it is the LEAN seat, it's going to be such a disaster, great of Abellio to buy all the new trains, shame they ran out of money by buying too many and leave the passengers with bargain basement seats because they care more about their own ego than the comfort of their passengers.

 

[Bletchleyite]

It is indeed that seat, yes. If it won the survey, what's the problem?

 

[47802]

Bear in mind they are going to replace MK3s, they are far less padded and far thinner than the seats that they are going to replace. I'm no massive lover of the MK3 seats, but they are basically going from an intercity seat to what is pretty much a rural/local seat. I'm also led to believe they are once again, the cheapest option.



It looks like a modern European style unit from the outside but from the inside they appear to be simply done to a price first and foremost, I agree they look more modern than the class 800 that looks too spartan and white but that realistically is not hard.



But the spec will be reflected in the price, they also appear to have crammed the seats too close together and that is before that you even add the fact that they are using 3+2. The fact that these will replace the VASTLY superior in spec/design 379s in part is laughable, newer inferior train replaces better older one just so Abellio can get good PR about replacing the whole fleet.

It also remains to be seen if they are any better than the 360s but the jury is going to be out on that until they enter service. I certainly agree though that the 153/156/317/321 fleets needed to be replaced as soon as possible and they will be an upgrade on them and the MK3s will need replacing by 2020 it's obvious GA needs a lot of new stock, it's simply they've gone overboard on replacing everything rather than replacing life expired, out-dated and tired trains with good trains, they've decided to replace everything with mediocre trains.

As for the PKP Flirts, aside from the level seating and the high floor nature they appear to be of a higher spec than what Abellio have ordered and far less corners cut.

What's actually Mediocre about them the Interior layout and Seats would have likely been similar whether they bought Siemens/Hitachi etc. units instead of Bombardier. The Interiors of the Flirt units look quite nice, while firmer seats with less padding are clearly here to stay whether you like it of not and regardless of Train Manufacturer, TOC etc.

 

[F Great Eastern]

Look at page 4 of the PDF:
http://www.fisaitaly.com/download/4d62261cb114a0c5e260924b204edfde/

That diagram of their seats is supposed to be something to be proud of?

Basically their USP is they can cram more people in by making the seats tighter together in airline mode making it more claustrophobic?

Pile them in, squash them up, cram a few more seats in the same amount of space, make them light, cheap uncomfortable seats = less spending and more passengers per carriage.

Look behind the headline of the FULL FLEET REPLACEMENT and there is some very bad news indeed

 

[F Great Eastern]

It is indeed that seat, yes. If it won the survey, what's the problem?

It's crap, every place it's been used it's been used as an excuse to cram seats more together by counting the distance from the seat behind to the front of the indent rather than the actual distance between seats.

 

[F Great Eastern]

What's actually Mediocre about them the Interior layout and Seats would have likely been similar whether they bought Siemens/Hitachi etc. units instead of Bombardier. The Interiors of the Flirt units look quite nice, while firmer seats with less padding are clearly here to stay whether you like it of not and regardless of Train Manufacturer, TOC etc.

I agree that is the way seats were heading but there are many better models of seat apart from what is widely considered to be the most lightweight and one of the cheapest on the market, these seats USP basically is they can sacrafice actual leg room to allow for leg-room via the indents, which is not the same thing and it will make the seats actually closer together and a claustrophobic environment.

I'm not aware of Bombardier or Siemens ever going with FISA for their seats, they normally go with Grammer or FAINSA or someone like that. LEAN is not meant for the kind of journeys these stock will be undertaking, that's my issue, the Norwich passengers are going to have a fit. All of the seats they could have choosen and they chose the most bargain basement lightweight ones, nobody said they had to be heavyweight but this is heading in the other direction.

The only crumb of comfort is when the whole thing goes tits-up a new franchisee may well be able to refurbish them with better seats or palm them off somewhere else onto the kind of work they were designed for.

 

[Bornin1980s]

Sorry. I am aware that, while it is the same company who won the Northern survey, it is not the same seat. It is, indeed, the LEAN seats on the FLIRTS. I got information from FISA's own website. Guess it was just another futile search for good news.