• 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!

IEP & Thameslink

Status
Not open for further replies.

Pumbaa

Established Member
Joined
19 Feb 2008
Messages
4,982
Confirmation in today's FT apparently that DfT will sign for the 600 vehicles by the end of the month. Quite a downsizing from the original c.1640
 
Sponsor Post - registered members do not see these adverts; click here to register, or click here to log in
R

RailUK Forums

anthony263

Established Member
Joined
19 Aug 2008
Messages
6,518
Location
South Wales
Yes it seems so and when things go wrong with these trains and fares rise we can say to people well the train operators didnt want them so blame the government.
 

WatcherZero

Established Member
Joined
25 Feb 2010
Messages
10,272
Confirmation in today's FT apparently that DfT will sign for the 600 vehicles by the end of the month. Quite a downsizing from the original c.1640

They split the Great Western and East Coast orders in too, first batch is just for Great Western. You can probably add another 10% too as the Governments only buying services while the manufacturer would have to keep spares for failure and maintenence rotations.
 

IanXC

Emeritus Moderator
Joined
18 Dec 2009
Messages
6,331
They split the Great Western and East Coast orders in too, first batch is just for Great Western. You can probably add another 10% too as the Governments only buying services while the manufacturer would have to keep spares for failure and maintenence rotations.

That probably explains the 'tight' diagramming we have been discussing, eg just 8 8car EMUs.

Heres a thought - what if Agility Trains conclude it would be cheaper and easier for them to deliver the program by electrifying the last few outposts and procuring spot hire locos for diversions, rather than continue with Bi Mode?

Now that would be embarrassing for the DfT!
 

anthony263

Established Member
Joined
19 Aug 2008
Messages
6,518
Location
South Wales
That probably explains the 'tight' diagramming we have been discussing, eg just 8 8car EMUs.

Heres a thought - what if Agility Trains conclude it would be cheaper and easier for them to deliver the program by electrifying the last few outposts and procuring spot hire locos for diversions, rather than continue with Bi Mode?

Now that would be embarrassing for the DfT!

Yes that would be great and I suspect the cost of the new trains would come down as you wont require little or no bi-mode units thus saving the costs of the diesel engines.

One problem though is that Hitachi have said they wont build a diesel locomotive, of course you could get someone else to build a diesel locomotive capable of attaching quickly to & hauling to the IEP units however I doubt Hitachi will want to allow othe's acess to the software etc for the IEP.
 

IanXC

Emeritus Moderator
Joined
18 Dec 2009
Messages
6,331
Confirmation in today's FT apparently that DfT will sign for the 600 vehicles by the end of the month. Quite a downsizing from the original c.1640

I've had the time scale described as "by the summer" by the department this week.
 

Pumbaa

Established Member
Joined
19 Feb 2008
Messages
4,982
Fairy nuff. I was going on the above. Last Thursday we were told Summer, whether or not that meant the end of the month wasn't said.
 

Bald Rick

Veteran Member
Joined
28 Sep 2010
Messages
29,070
Informed Sources 3rd law: Always distrust project timescales quoted by season
 

Bridge189

Member
Joined
19 Sep 2011
Messages
174
So has the pendolino based alternative defiantly been shelved then? What became of the clearance trails?

I still think there is time for it to be shelved.
 

TEW

Established Member
Joined
16 May 2008
Messages
5,841
Of course the date for financial close keeps slipping further and further, there's also then the fact the the Great Western franchise leaves open the possibility of using trains other than IEP, inviting bidders that they may suggest other options, which wouldn't work if the DfT had already signed the contract for IEP.
 

Aictos

Established Member
Joined
28 Apr 2009
Messages
10,403
Of course the date for financial close keeps slipping further and further, there's also then the fact the the Great Western franchise leaves open the possibility of using trains other than IEP, inviting bidders that they may suggest other options, which wouldn't work if the DfT had already signed the contract for IEP.

So what if IEP is allocated to the Great Western franchise but the successful bidder decides not to accept it but rather use the non tilt Class 390s instead as a example?
 

HSTEd

Veteran Member
Joined
14 Jul 2011
Messages
16,633
So what if IEP is allocated to the Great Western franchise but the successful bidder decides not to accept it but rather use the non tilt Class 390s instead as a example?

In that case I doubt the succesful bidder would be one who had decided not to accept them, unless all other bids refused to accept them.
 

LNW-GW Joint

Veteran Member
Joined
22 Feb 2011
Messages
19,555
Location
Mold, Clwyd
So has the pendolino based alternative defiantly been shelved then? What became of the clearance trails?

Pendolinos were never in the running for IEP. Alstom did not submit a bid.
The reserve bidder (if the deal with Hitachi breaks down) is the Siemens/Bombardier joint bid.
Otherwise, DfT have to cancel the whole procurement and start again from scratch.

So what if IEP is allocated to the Great Western franchise but the successful bidder decides not to accept it but rather use the non tilt Class 390s instead as a example?

Not a chance.
The GW franchise bids will have to take the contracted IEPs as part of the franchise spec (same applies to EC next year).
They might be able to top up with other new stock if the DfT allows this in the franchise spec (eg for Thames Valley services).
 

NXEA!

Member
Joined
22 Oct 2009
Messages
482
According to information posted on Wnxx we may hear something about IEP tommorow around midday
And it doesn't look good either - the poster on WNXX jokingly asked us all to yell in the direction of Parliament 'FARCE!' - seems to indicate that the project is going ahead. :-x What the hell is wrong with Norman Baker, complete and utter incompetent idiot in my eyes.
 

IanXC

Emeritus Moderator
Joined
18 Dec 2009
Messages
6,331
Thats Ominous - Government announce something, on a bank holiday, when the media's eye is on the Jubilee?!

Unless its being dealt with as a market sensitive announcement, and so being deslt with at a time when Hitachi's shares are not being traded maybe? My timezones might be out but a lunchtime announcement here would be after business hours in Tokyo wouldn't it?
 

anthony263

Established Member
Joined
19 Aug 2008
Messages
6,518
Location
South Wales
Yes although there is nothing so far.

I think some of us are hoping Alstom & Bombardier etc kick up a fuss over this and hopefully show the public the money being wasted on this white elephant.

I rather them just order something like the class 395's and perhaps cascade some class 220's from Crosscountry to work the London - Worcester/Hereford services with crosscountry gaining some additional hst's which will be refurbished/overhauled for use until they are replaced by newer stock
 

YorkshireBear

Established Member
Joined
23 Jul 2010
Messages
8,677
I think if the electric version is bought they will be good trains. But 8 cars does not seem long enough, surely with growth in mind we should be looking at 9 cars? I just hope they announce it soon so people know what is going on, must be frustrating for the GW bidders.
 

anthony263

Established Member
Joined
19 Aug 2008
Messages
6,518
Location
South Wales
You have to remember as well that the carriages will be 26m compared to 23m carriages on the mk3's
 

ainsworth74

Forum Staff
Staff Member
Global Moderator
Joined
16 Nov 2009
Messages
27,542
Location
Redcar
You have to remember as well that the carriages will be 26m compared to 23m carriages on the mk3's

I'd rather not remember that! Along with bi-mode this 26m business is ridiculous. What on earth is wrong with 23m, you know, that length that is pretty much go anywhere?
 

anthony263

Established Member
Joined
19 Aug 2008
Messages
6,518
Location
South Wales
I know and I dont know why they chose to extend the length of the carriages.

What was wrong with having a 6 carriage train with 23m carriages.

Expect trouble when these are in service
 

WatcherZero

Established Member
Joined
25 Feb 2010
Messages
10,272
I'd rather not remember that! Along with bi-mode this 26m business is ridiculous. What on earth is wrong with 23m, you know, that length that is pretty much go anywhere?

Because the program is to gradually make 26m the go anywhere length on the main routes while the secondary routes would be 23m capable.
 

Nym

Established Member
Joined
2 Mar 2007
Messages
9,098
Location
Somewhere, not in London
Why not just use the already go anywhere (nearly) 23m carriages rather than developing a whole new clearance envelope with narrow ends to fit within the C3 kind of gauge?
 

ainsworth74

Forum Staff
Staff Member
Global Moderator
Joined
16 Nov 2009
Messages
27,542
Location
Redcar
Because the program is to gradually make 26m the go anywhere length on the main routes while the secondary routes would be 23m capable.

As with Nym, what's the point? We already have a go anywhere length so why do we need another one?
 

WatcherZero

Established Member
Joined
25 Feb 2010
Messages
10,272
As with Nym, what's the point? We already have a go anywhere length so why do we need another one?

3m makes a huge difference on intercity services, it increases the usable space by about 10% without increasing length.
 

Nym

Established Member
Joined
2 Mar 2007
Messages
9,098
Location
Somewhere, not in London
Really?

I'd like to see the detailed designs on how this makes a difference compared to simply putting things under the carriages rather than at the ends, and when the ends need to be a lot thinner it doesn't really help that much.

Consider it over the whole length of the train and you might as well have one incredibly thin and incredibly long unit to run every service by that logic.

I'd be happy to look through some plans and do some proper analysis on it, but since no detailed plans or layouts have been published, this isn't possible.
 
Status
Not open for further replies.

Top