IEP bandwagon of hate?

[superalbs]

The Class 800 is exactly what I expected before having ridden on one.

They perform well, they look nice, they're impressively quiet, and also spacious.

But!! The seats are completely unacceptable for use on these services! Those seats would be better used on the Class 700s in standard, not on our top InterCity fleet. Wouldn't even want to sit on those seats for five minutes, but I'll have to for much much longer.

Three steps forward, one step...off a cliff!

 

[Bletchleyite]

Those very seats (give or take an additional centre armrest) are First Class on the new ScotRail AT200s.

 

[EE Andy b1]

Class 800s.

Just been for my first little jolly on Class 800s yesterday (Mon 23 Oct 17).

I am a driver myself (390s nowadays), i am a railway enthusiast and i am frequently a passenger, because i think rail travel is still the best way to travel (Yes i do use my car a lot and fly).

I did several trips, 800008+800009 1145 London Paddington - Reading, 800005+800006 1234 Reading - Paddington then 1345 Paddington to Bristol Parkway.

As a driver having looked in the cab everything looked pretty good and the setup would be what you would expect of a modern multiple unit, but on entering the passenger compartment i was a bit disappointed with the plain look of the seating which is certainly firm but on the trips i did was surprisingly comfortable, no back ache, plenty of legroom and overhead storage and the cabin is bright and airy. Not sure if the green strips and grab handles go well either but thats just down to personal taste. So from my drivers view, these trains look ok for what they are intended but comfort and interior decor could have been a lot better but i guess everything has a price.

As the enthusiast, i think the worst and all is bad and everybody now wants rid of our beloved HSTs which have done sterling service for the last 41 years and plenty years to come for other TOCs. But looking at the Class 800 they do look the part from outside. The interior once again still looks drab but will serve its purpose but the seating (padding wise) in MK3s is much preferred having been updated several times over the years. So having now travelled as an enthusiast all but briefly on Class 800s in service i think yep they do a job and i've travelled on them and thats it really.

As a passenger i think these Class 800s bode well. i'm not bothered what they are, not really bothered (and probably wouldn't have a clue) if were running on electric or diesel, i'm bothered about can i get a seat, are they comfortable and clean are they reasonable quiet, can i see out of a window, is there good light to read or work, have we now got plug sockets, will we get there at the right time, and i think these new trains will do the job nicely. Far from perfect but what is.

I being a fan of everything English Electric would love to see Class 50s once again plying their trade up and down the Great Western mainline (sorry Hydraulic fans) but times a change and as with HSTs it is time for a change and sadly that time has now arrived. But hey ho i used to hate HSTs when they were taking over in the late 70s early 80s from my beloved Deltics, ECML and 50s GWML.

So time to move on!

The Intercity Express Programme (IEP) was a government led programme for replacing HSTs on both Great Western and East Coast franchises which was proposed way back in about 2005. Things have changed quite a bit since then and the Great Western mainline electrification farce has not helped one bit also i'm sure if these two TOCs (Train Operating Companies) would have been allowed to put out tenders for their own future Traction/Rolling stock requirements i'm sure we may have gone down a completely different route (No pun!).

The Class 800 and its derivatives are what weve got for the next 30 years or so, and so the love hate relationship will roll on for years i'm sure.

Anyway that was my quick two penneth.

Cheers,

andy

 

[61653 HTAFC]

Yes, get over it!

Or to counter that, how will the 800s compare to the continental equivalent- namely the ICE3 units of DB? Even with the caveat of our restricted loading-gauge (EDIT: also our rather less well-engineered infrastructure) I suspect the answer to that is, not very well. Oh, and they'll cost a lot more to ride on too most of the time.

But as they say in Germany, Das Leben stinkt!

 

[Bletchleyite]

To me they look an awful lot better than any rubbish SNCF have wheeled out any time recently or indeed are likely to. SNCF interiors tend to be quite stylish but in comfort terms (and window alignment) are quite poor.

Not quite as classy as ICEs, sadly.

 

[47802]

Of course at present things are focused on GWR it will be interesting to see the reaction when we get to other routes.

Virgin, well of course they will be replacing IC225 as well as HST's, Now the only Non Bi-mode route, higher proportion of 9 Car sets, should be less Diesel under the wires running, better and new services to such as Huddersfield, Bradford, Harrogate etc, allegedly more leeway from the Dft for a less dull interior and a Buffet.

Hull Trains, well replacing the 180's I think many will regard that as an improvement, and will be free to spec as they want, although one wonders how much they will decide to vary from their GWR 802's which now seems to be following the Dft GWR Spec.

TPE well of course they should been seen as an improvement over the 185's but enthusiast wise they are going to be compared massively to the CAF Loco Hauled, and how much will they decide to vary these units from the GWR 802's.

 

[squizzler]

Or to counter that, how will the 800s compare to the continental equivalent- namely the ICE3 units of DB? Even with the caveat of our restricted loading-gauge (EDIT: also our rather less well-engineered infrastructure) I suspect the answer to that is, not very well. Oh, and they'll cost a lot more to ride on too most of the time.

But as they say in Germany, Das Leben stinkt!

ICE 3? You mean ICE 4 (the new express train being slotted into intercity services below the ICE 3) surely.

 

[AnonymousUser1]

Also how fast would the IC125's be if they had 9,10 or 11 coaches? The more coaches you add the slower it will go. Meaning that some sections of 125mph may only see (for instance) 115mph running. You would also see trains having problems (especially on steep slopes) of one loco failed.

2+9 HST sets are common - the EC sets are 2+9

 

[AnonymousUser1]

But those engines have a use when under the wires - they are propelling the train. An IEP or AT300 is lugging the engines and fuel around for no use at all - it is just dead weight. Unless the wires fall down of course.....

But I suspect you knew what was meant and are just being an *&#@ about it.

so running beyond the extent of electrification is 'no use at all' is it ? as those sets working on entirely electrified diagramms are the ones with a signle self rescue / last mile / shunting diesel powerpack ...

the knots the dogmatic cranks are tying themselves in to justify their hate of units they haven;t even ridden on yet is remarkable

 

[AnonymousUser1]

Of course at present things are focused on GWR it will be interesting to see the reaction when we get to other routes.

Virgin, well of course they will be replacing IC225 as well as HST's, Now the only Non Bi-mode route, higher proportion of 9 Car sets, should be less Diesel under the wires running, better and new services to such as Huddersfield, Bradford, Harrogate etc, allegedly more leeway from the Dft for a less dull interior and a Buffet.

Hull Trains, well replacing the 180's I think many will regard that as an improvement, and will be free to spec as they want, although one wonders how much they will decide to vary from their GWR 802's which now seems to be following the Dft GWR Spec.

TPE well of course they should been seen as an improvement over the 185's but enthusiast wise they are going to be compared massively to the CAF Loco Hauled, and how much will they decide to vary these units from the GWR 802's.

exactly , but let's not let facts get in the way of the frothing and repeated small physical movements of the cranks , bashers and gricers ...

 

[AnonymousUser1]

What exactly it is that 40 years of progress should have brought? Or is this like your alternative to bi-modes? We'll never know...

the cranks and bashers want LHCS , with hugely time and labour consuming loco swaps between diesel and electric at change over points , all the better for getting 'haulage' in their little books ... just like blimming ' tickers' ruining a beer festival ( i wonder howe many tickers are also gricers / bashers as they both seem to display similar traits )

 

[61653 HTAFC]

ICE 3? You mean ICE 4 (the new express train being slotted into intercity services below the ICE 3) surely.

I meant what I typed, though chronologically the ICE4 would be a better comparison.
The ICE4 is a Siemens Velaro isn't it? In which case if the Eurostar 374s are anything to go by, the Germans are also going backwards now!

 

[LNW-GW Joint]

I meant what I typed, though chronologically the ICE4 would be a better comparison.
The ICE4 is a Siemens Velaro isn't it? In which case if the Eurostar 374s are anything to go by, the Germans are also going backwards now!

Bombardier are supplying the bodyshells and bogies for ICE4 as a major subcontractor.

 

[Dave1987]

What ever you may think about them, they are going to be around for at least the next 27 years. I think the Government and the RDG (whatever name they think up for themselves next week) are taking an extremely cavalier attitude towards growth on the railways. They seem to believe it is a given that more and more people will use the railways each year whatever they do. This is most definitely not the case. If people who are travelling long distance for a few hours on these are starting to get distinctly uncomfortable after an hour or so because they are sat on a seat that is very firm, or find they have no space to put that suitcase so end up shoving somewhere they really should not. Are they going to come away thinking the railways are a good way to travel? No they aren't and they will tell their friends and family about their experience and so the appeal of rail travel is diminished more and more.

And before I'm labelled as an IEP hater I will give some praise to Hitachi. Although I hate the whole notion of a bi-mode I believe they have done a very good job on noise levels by all accounts. I don't believe it was necessary for the high floors nor do I like them, neither do I think the length of the coaches was necessary either. On the whole I actually believe all that is negative about these is all to do with the DFT and what they specified. Hitachi just supplied what the ridiculous ITT specified.

 

[Dave1987]

I don't doubt that you see people with large cases day in day out (in that I also see such people) and I didn't say that people didn't. I even said that there could be need for more luggage space.

What I was getting at was that to provide the potential maximum luggage space that could be needed if a significant number of people where to need space for large luggage would result in those luggage racks being empty for a significant amount of time whilst forcing people to stand.

Even on trains where luggage racks are provide they are often under used as people are happier keeping their stuff close to them. Often at the expense of people being able to sit down.

Really? Most long distance trains I travel on the luggage racks are overflowing with baggage. If these are commuter trains then yes I would agree the provision of luggage storage is a less important one to number of seats, but for long distance trains (which these are supposed to be remember) you need plenty of large luggage storage. Looking at the internal pictures of them I see no luggage racks at all in the middle of the coach.

 

[WelshBluebird]

Really? Most long distance trains I travel on the luggage racks are overflowing with baggage

Have to agree with this. Especially on GWR HST's, 158's and XC Voyagers. Usually have to fight to get anything I've put in there out!

 

[Darandio]

Have to agree with this. Especially on GWR HST's, 158's and XC Voyagers. Usually have to fight to get anything I've put in there out!

Certainly my experience on VTEC as well. Luggage racks overflowing, the little bench opposite the toilet near the doorway full to bursting with luggage as well and often down the aisles if it's at the end of term.

The latter is often accompanied with an announcement to keep all luggage clear of the aisles to allow the trolley to move down the train. All well and good, but I haven't seen the trolley for 6 months! In fact, i'm pretty sure not many have!

 

[D1009]

Have to agree with this. Especially on GWR HST's, 158's and XC Voyagers. Usually have to fight to get anything I've put in there out!

You have a point with the voyagers and 158s*, but I would take issue with the criticism of HSTs. My experience is that the racks at the ends of the coach are full of luggage which would easily fit on the overhead racks, and as a result the overhead racks have plenty of space in them. I put this in part down to the HST overhead racks appearing to have less space than is the case, and in part down to passengers saving themselves the effort of lifting their overloaded cases. I will agree the 800 overhead racks have more space though.

*Is there an issue with 158 overhead racks not being very strong? Last time I travelled on a Northern example the guard was advising people against putting heavy luggage on the overhead racks, but to put it on an empty seat adjacent to them, the first time I'd ever heard this advice. Admittedly it was a quiet train.

 

[jimm]

I don't believe it was necessary for the high floors nor do I like them, neither do I think the length of the coaches was necessary either.

Without the high floors, the MTU diesels would not fit under the trains - they're a bit bigger than a bus engine.

And in case you haven't noticed, hardly anyone posting here has even mentioned the floor levels, or the slope which got some people so excited on this forum in the past.

When I travelled on them last week I had forgotten all about the supposed terrors posed by these features and didn't even give them a moment's thought at any stage of either journey - perhaps because they aren't a big deal at all... who would have thought it?

What people make of seats in trains (and cars, planes, sat in the office or living room, etc, etc....) is largely a matter of personal preference, as so many threads about so many trains on this forum prove time and again.

I found the IET standard class seats just fine thanks, not over long distances at this stage admittedly, but then I suppose I would, wouldn't I, as I can never see anything at all might be wrong with them anyway, can I?

As opposed to making mountains out of molehills (or 'high' floors or terrifying slopes in the floor)...