Nova1, Azuma, AT300, IEP, 800, 801, 802, 803, 804, 805, 807, 810. Is there not a common name we can use?

[London Trains]

This thread is about what 'we' should call them. I doubt that 'the general public' would know what thumpers, growlers, sheds, plastic pigs etc. are.

Those are relatively old though! A high proportion of people who travel long distance on trains will know what a HST or a Pendolino is, and some will know what a Voyager is - most long distance intercity fleets end up with some kind of a catchy name which some of the public will know.

 

[PG]

Looking at the thread title makes me wonder what are or where did the 806, 808 and 809 vanish?

 

[Ianno87]

What I don’t get is why every new order within the IEP has to have a completely different class number.

Back in the 80s umpteen varieties of 150 were all 150s, even in the privatisation era we had loads of different batches of 170s

Maybe we should have had 800/1 800/2 etc for the electric ones and 801/1, 801/2 etc for the bi-modes

800/802 does have logic - 802s are 800 with the software restriction on engine power rating removed.

 

[jopsuk]

What I don’t get is why every new order within the IEP has to have a completely different class number.

Back in the 80s umpteen varieties of 150 were all 150s, even in the privatisation era we had loads of different batches of 170s

Maybe we should have had 800/1 800/2 etc for the electric ones and 801/1, 801/2 etc for the bi-modes

but at the same time there's Class 507 & 508 which are as identical, if not more so, to one another than the two different builds of Class 465 (built by different manufacturers, with one type further modified later with completely different traction). Or Class 322, literally just a small batch of Class 321 built for Stansted Express.

The one horrifying issue I have with the class numbering is the subclasses. Who's responsible for the following nonsense on the ECML:
Class 800/1: 9 Car
Class 800/2: 5 Car
Class 801/1: 5 Car
Class 801/2: 9 Car

Could the /1 not be 9 car for both, and the /2 5 car?

Add to this that the GWML sets are
Class 800/0: 5 Car
Class 800/3: 9 car

 

[BlythPower]

Are the GWR ones Wazumas or Flying Cucumbers?

 

[AM9]

but at the same time there's Class 507 & 508 which are as identical, if not more so, to one another than the two different builds of Class 465 (built by different manufacturers, with one type further modified later with completely different traction). Or Class 322, literally just a small batch of Class 321 built for Stansted Express.

The one horrifying issue I have with the class numbering is the subclasses. Who's responsible for the following nonsense on the ECML:
Class 800/1: 9 Car
Class 800/2: 5 Car
Class 801/1: 5 Car
Class 801/2: 9 Car

Could the /1 not be 9 car for both, and the /2 5 car?

Add to this that the GWML sets are
Class 800/0: 5 Car
Class 800/3: 9 car

Whoever allows TOCs etc., to raid offical class numbers and destroy the credibility of the scheme needs to be seen to. It's almost as bad of OFCOM's handling of phone numbering, except that only those professionally involved with the railway really need to understand TOPS numbering. Oh yes, then there's the spotters to keep happy.

 

[jopsuk]

the LNER subclass numbering must surely cause operational headaches - unit 201, for example, is either a 5-car bimode or a 9 car electric. They've not even given them different ranges.

 

[py_megapixel]

Whoever allows TOCs etc., to raid offical class numbers and destroy the credibility of the scheme needs to be seen to. It's almost as bad of OFCOM's handling of phone numbering, except that only those professionally involved with the railway really need to understand TOPS numbering. Oh yes, then there's the spotters to keep happy.

What I don't understand is what happened to all trains from the same family having close-together numbers (in different ranges to denote different traction if needed)
PEP stock: 313, 314, 315
Mk3 based EMUs: 317. 318, 319, 320, 321, 322
Sprinters: 150, 153, 155, 156, 158
Networkers: 165, 166, 365, 465, 466
Voyagers/meridians: 220, 221, 222

But then...
Desiros - 350, 360, 380, 444, 450, 700, 707, 717
FLIRTs - 745, 755, 777
Aventras - 345, 701, 710, 720, 730
AT3000s/IETs/Azumas/Whatever you want to call them: 800, 801, 802 (goood....), 803 (well done!), 805 (what happened to 804?), 807 (what happened to 804 and 806?), 810 (what??)

It seems like a sensible logical numbering has gone out of the window and either TOCs or manufacturers are being allowed to just classify their trains wherever they like in the system. I know it's not the biggest problem in the world, but still. We had a good system and then we lost it. And that irritates me.

 

[Domh245]

What I don’t get is why every new order within the IEP has to have a completely different class number.
..
Maybe we should have had 800/1 800/2 etc for the electric ones and 801/1, 801/2 etc for the bi-modes

The actual IEP units are like that - IEP specifically refers to the DfT procured 800s and 801s - the subsequent fleets have all been order by ROSCOs/TOCs

Looking at the thread title makes me wonder what are or where did the 806, 808 and 809 vanish?

Never existed. There's no requirement for unit classes to be sequentially numbered...

Are the GWR ones Wazumas or Flying Cucumbers?

"IETs"

 

[Energy]

Desiros - 350, 360, 380, 444, 450, 700, 707, 717

Desiros aren't too bad, the classic ones (pre city) are fine, 444s were similar in specification to the 442s, the 450s they could pick many numbers as it was the first desiro in the UK. In the 300 range they aren't too bad, 350 is fine as they are a 450 with no 3rd rail and with the pantograph installed, 360 aren't too bad but I would rather 351, 380 feels like they wanted 370 but it had already been taken.

With Desiro city I would keep it 700-709, so 700 (as is), 701 (currently 707s) and 702 (currently 717s).

FLIRTs - 745, 755, 777

FLIRTs are fine, the 745 shouldn't be in the same thing as it isn't self powered while the self powered flirts are 755 (GA) and 756 (TfW) although I would rather the 231 (diesel electric flirts, no pantograph yet for TfW) were 757s. 777s aren't FLIRTs.

Aventras - 345, 701, 710, 720, 730

Aventras aren't great, adding 10 on each time uses a lot of numbers, I would go for 710 (currently 345s), 711 (currently 710s), 712 (currently 720s), 713 (currently 701s) and 714 (currently 730s). This is just based of the time they were ordered.

 

[Energy]

It seems like a sensible logical numbering has gone out of the window and either TOCs or manufacturers are being allowed to just classify their trains wherever they like in the system.

I think it was about the 777 and they said that they could pick a number in the 7XX range. Source

 

[Purple Orange]

I think it was about the 777 and they said that they could pick a number in the 7XX range. Source

I’m not in favour of trains being called 777 or 747 or 737 etc. Those need to be reserved for planes and when the planes are retired, the number retires with them like it should for a legendary footballer.

 

[Energy]

I’m surprised that


I’m not in favour of trains being called 777 or 747 or 737 etc. Those need to be reserved for planes and when the planes are retired, the number retires with them like it should for a legendary footballer.

I don't think whoever picks the number really cares about it also being a plane, if we numbered all aventras in the 710-719 range then it would be annoying to skip out 717 just because it also happens to be a plane. At the end of the day non-enthusiasts don't care about the number, class 701 or whatever means nothing to them.

 

[swt_passenger]

Looking at the thread title makes me wonder what are or where did the 806, 808 and 809 vanish?

They aren’t issued in order. There’s absolutely nothing to stop the next TOC using any other unused 8xx, whatever they prefer.

(Off topic, but compare with 700, 707, 717 - I’m sure similar questions arose then.)

 

[Purple Orange]

I don't think whoever picks the number really cares about it also being a plane, if we numbered all aventras in the 710-719 range then it would be annoying to skip out 717 just because it also happens to be a plane. At the end of the day non-enthusiasts don't care about the number, class 701 or whatever means nothing to them.

Yes I do gather that nobody really cares about the number or cares that it shares it with an aeroplane. To be honest, I couldn’t care too much myself about the numbers, or in fact I care much less about trains themselves actually! (I know I’ll duck the rotten tomatoes).

I am more interested in the infrastructure of the railway, the frequency and reliability of services and whether the train itself has enough capacity. But the IET train in my head has become a slight exception to that rule, as I think it looks like a beautiful design.

 

[Energy]

Yes I do gather that nobody really cares about the number or cares that it shares it with an aeroplane. To be honest, I couldn’t care too much myself about the numbers, or in fact I care much less about trains themselves actually! (I know I’ll duck the rotten tomatoes).

I am more interested in the infrastructure of the railway, the frequency and reliability of services and whether the train itself has enough capacity. But the IET train in my head has become a slight exception to that rule, as I think it looks like a beautiful design.

It does look nice, apart from the cab door which looks really out of place, I'm not a fan of the sliding doors and prefer plug doors but they look fine.

 

[Purple Orange]

It does look nice, apart from the cab door which looks really out of place, I'm not a fan of the sliding doors and prefer plug doors but they look fine.

I think the front including the cab door is the best part. It reminds me of the Mallard.

 

[gingertom]

I’m not in favour of trains being called 777 or 747 or 737 etc. Those need to be reserved for planes and when the planes are retired, the number retires with them like it should for a legendary footballer.

or even 320 or 380.

 

[tetudo boy]

Super Hitachi Intercity Train?

Don't you dare put that into an acronym!

 

[Western Lord]

What I don't understand is what happened to all trains from the same family having close-together numbers (in different ranges to denote different traction if needed)
PEP stock: 313, 314, 315, 317. 318, 319, 320, 321, 322

For the sake of accuracy, only 313 to 315 are PEP stock. 317 to 322 are completely different, being based on the Mk. 3 bodyshell

 

[py_megapixel]

For the sake of accuracy, only 313 to 315 are PEP stock. 317 to 322 are completely different, being based on the Mk. 3 bodyshell

Thanks, I have edited my post accordingly

 

[Starmill]

Intercity Express Train, or IET, is a name specifically for GWR's units, of different specifications and classifications. In the same way, Paragon is a name specifically for Hull Trains' units, and so on.

Before that name was given to them when they started in service, by far the most common name for them was Intercity Express Programme trains, or IEP trains, although this was confusingly often abbreviated to just calling the trains themselves 'IEPs'. Before that, earlier on, the Department tried to call them Super Express Trains for a bit, but that seemed to die a long time before they came into service.

 

[DarloRich]

I notice a poll has been added. I think there is a difference between what we enthusiasts here might call these trains and what real people will call these trains. It wont be IET or class anything in the real world. it will be something like 125 based on advertising. It might not be one national name due to the current nature of the UK railways.

 

[Energy]

I notice a poll has been added. I think there is a difference between what we enthusiasts here might call these trains and what real people will call these trains. It wont be IET or class anything in the real world. it will be something like 125 based on advertising. It might not be one national name due to the current nature of the UK railways.

The overall name is AT300, what the brand name which people call them by depends on the operator in that area.

 

[DarloRich]

The overall name is AT300, what the brand name which people call them by depends on the operator in that area.

AT300 isnt going to stick either. I doubt normal people will call them IET but yes i think the name will depend on the area unless someone creates a brand or name that lands. Azuma might especially as GWR don't have a brand name for their trains.

 

[Energy]

AT300 isnt going to stick either. I doubt normal people will call them IET but yes i think the name will depend on the area unless someone creates one that sticks. Azuma might.

AT300 is the best to be used when describing all of these units but the public will call them whatever the local operator calls them, someone in Plymouth will probably call them Intercity Express Trains while someone in Newcastle will probably call them Azumas. The confusing part comes when AT300s operate in the same area but are both called different names such as Novas and Azumas.

 

[DarloRich]

AT300 is the best to be used when describing all of these units but the public will call them whatever the local operator calls them, someone in Plymouth will probably call them Intercity Express Trains while someone in Newcastle will probably call them Azumas. The confusing part comes when AT300s operate in the same area but are both called different names such as Novas and Azumas.

If i described the new trains to my GF as an AT300 she would look blankly. It means nothing to normal people. Same as if I described the Transpennie units as a class 185. It's just a Transpennine. She did ask if the new Transpennine we went on pre lockdown (seems years ago) on was an Azuma mind! That will because of all the LNER branding local to her.

 

[Domh245]

If i described the new trains to my GF as an AT300 she would look blankly. It means nothing to normal people. Same as if I described the Transpennie units as a class 185. It's just a Transpennine. She did ask if the new Transpennine we went on pre lockdown (seems years ago) on was an Azuma mind! That will because of all the LNER branding local to her.

Normal people won't find themselves needing to describe all AT300 fleets simultaneously though (and if you're telling your GF about AT300s then you really need to find better conversation topics ) which is what the thread was started about! Obviously passengers are going to call them by whatever the TOCs branding departments have come up with, but if you're (eg) talking about them generally (as you might talk generally about Desiros being a bit on the heavy side or Electrostars being rattly), or in the speculative ideas section suggesting ordering more Hitachi 125mph capable units to operate some XC extensions to Liverpool and Brighton, then you call them AT300s.

Azuma might especially as GWR don't have a brand name for their trains.

Intercity Express Train (IET)

 

[harz99]

No, that breaks as soon as another manufacturer produces a train numbered 800-899.

Oh well in that case it has to be Azuma, simply because they can then be nicknamed Satsuma's...

 

[Starmill]

I think the (patronising) discussion of what so-called 'real people' call these trains is misguided.

Among the general public there's no need for recognition of specific types of rolling stock, and while there is some now with commuters (who were far more likely to call them 'the blue trains' or 'the white trains', as they did a bit with South West Trains) the terms of yesteryear like the Intercity 125 are almost gone, replaced whelmingly nothing more than 'the train' or 'a new train'.