Was the InterCity Express Programme (IEP) a success or not?

[northernbelle]

I've never read such a lot of drivel in my life.

Bombardier/Siemens basically walked away because they felt the constraints of what were being asked to do were too much - only Hitachi were willing to the take the risk on a complex set of circumstances.

And as for 'Firstgroup won't develop its own product because of its financial state' - you'll find most leasing companies purchase trains from an 'off the shelf' platform - CAF Civity, Siemens Desiro, Stadler FLIRT, Hitachi A-Train ... they're all tweaked from a basic design. Of course it *could* be that Firstgroup (and EMR, Scotrail, East Coast) lease AT200/300 because they are the product that best-met the needs of the business at the time.

 

[InOban]

It would have been better if some TOC had ordered more, and longer, 397s, so that there was some competition over price and performance. But eg Avanti needed some bimodes for North Wales, and EMR ditto, and I guess that First wanted a train which could be maintained somewhere along the ECML.

 

[fgwrich]

It would have been better if some TOC had ordered more, and longer, 397s, so that there was some competition over price and performance. But eg Avanti needed some bimodes for North Wales, and EMR ditto, and I guess that First wanted a train which could be maintained somewhere along the ECML.

I can understand the bi-modes for North Wales, but it certainly hasn't stopped First Group ordering a mixed fleet for other operations (Eg TPE). I do wonder about this low cost East Cost operation, where a 397 would have equally worked.

As for other posters comments about Siemens & Hitachi walking away, yes, because the specifications as mentioned in mine and others comments were aimed squarely for Hitachi. So surprise surprise, they would have had no choice to walk away. So perhaps the twaddle may be in their comments as you've essentially backed up part of what I said while rubbishing my comment!

 

[gsnedders]

Well, here's my take: the IEP programme was a success insofar as it delivered stock that fit the brief. The NAO report goes into details of much of the financial side, and there are definitely parts of the procurement that could've gone better (the end result being significantly different to the winning bid is a potential warning sign!). On the downside, the GWR fleet likely has the wrong split of 5-car v. 9-car, the interiors were done to a strict budget (more extreme than we've seen for other intercity stock in the UK!), and follow-on orders of the design have been largely constrained to have the same poor interior by the DfT.

 

[Purple Orange]

And because it is a variant of a Government programme it’s a considerable way short of being acceptable. I’ll take the car going forward whenever possible rather than use these contraptions.

Well that is just plain silly. What type of car do you drive? Nobody will serve a full English breakfast to you in your car!

 

[mmh]

And because it is a variant of a Government programme it’s a considerable way short of being acceptable. I’ll take the car going forward whenever possible rather than use these contraptions.

It's a variant of an existing high speed train, another variant of which had already been in use in Britain for years - the class 395. I don't recall much complaint on their introduction, the difference being they weren't replacing HSTs.

I really don't understand what's "unacceptable" about them. Get any manufacturer to make a high speed, doors at end, long distance multiple unit and you'll get something that looks exactly the same. All the ones before it were more or less identical too, the Pendolino the only significantly different one. Really the only notable thing about them is having pocket doors.

 

[Bletchleyite]

And pocket doors aren't the huge problem people say they are. Yes, there's the blank space, but there is on most plug door units as well - for instance, Desiros have deadlights, the door doesn't open back over the window (though it does on some units e.g. 323s). Just put a luggage rack there instead of seats. You probably need about that much provision in each coach anyway.

Fundamentally it's a tube with windows and doors, a cab on each end and various forms of propulsion bolted underneath. What mostly matters is how you fit out the interior, and if that's rubbish (and I'd agree it is, at least on GWR's units) that can be changed, and often is changed several times in a unit's service life of about 30-50 years.

 

[Ianno87]

And because it is a variant of a Government programme it’s a considerable way short of being acceptable. I’ll take the car going forward whenever possible rather than use these contraptions.

Basically because the seats are a bit hard for your taste and you've got a nostalgia complex for slam doors and droplight windowas?

 

[Purple Orange]

It's a variant of an existing high speed train, another variant of which had already been in use in Britain for years - the class 395. I don't recall much complaint on their introduction, the difference being they weren't replacing HSTs.

I really don't understand what's "unacceptable" about them. Get any manufacturer to make a high speed, doors at end, long distance multiple unit and you'll get something that looks exactly the same. All the ones before it were more or less identical too, the Pendolino the only significantly different one. Really the only notable thing about them is having pocket doors.

This.

I find it a really strange obsession, the negativity towards IETs. I read this as purely a nostalgia junkie problem, or by people who must have things organised and arranged in a set way (I.e. it can only ever be a HST regardless). If it was just about the seats, it needs to be recognised that these trains will have about 4 or 5 different interiors during its lifetime.

 

[superjohn]

Rail enthusiast syndrome, old is good and new is bad. When the HST was new it was universally hated by enthusiasts because it displaced loco hauled trains. When the Voyagers/Pendolinos/IET’s are replaced the same process will repeat, trust me on this!

 

[Purple Orange]

Rail enthusiast syndrome, old is good and new is bad. When the HST was new it was universally hated by enthusiasts because it displaced loco hauled trains. When the Voyagers/Pendolinos/IET’s are replaced the same process will repeat, trust me on this!

Nobody will miss the Voyagers. They are the worst train to experience long distance rail in the UK, but that is simply due to them being too small. Therefore, aside from being diesel, their immediate shortcomings could be solved if the Meridians and Avanti 22X's are transferred to XC.

 

[Ianno87]

Nobody will miss the Voyagers. They are the worst train to experience long distance rail in the UK, but that is simply due to them being too small. Therefore, aside from being diesel, their immediate shortcomings could be solved if the Meridians and Avanti 22X's are transferred to XC.

So the train itself is fine (e.g. huge windows) - the XC fleet in particular is just too stretched.

 

[Purple Orange]

So the train itself is fine (e.g. huge windows) - the XC fleet in particular is just too stretched.

Well yeah I suppose so. If it was somehow possible to ensure all XC voyager services were a minimum of 8 or 9 carriages in length, then aside from the pollution they cause, I'd not have a problem with those particular trains. The only issue would then be the awful seat reservation system but that is a fault of XC. This is a topic for another thread, but I guess it all depends on the likelihood of the meridians and Avanti voyagers moving to XC.

 

[northernbelle]

Basically because the seats are a bit hard for your taste and you've got a nostalgia complex for slam doors and droplight windowas?

This.

I find it a really strange obsession, the negativity towards IETs. I read this as purely a nostalgia junkie problem, or by people who must have things organised and arranged in a set way (I.e. it can only ever be a HST regardless). If it was just about the seats, it needs to be recognised that these trains will have about 4 or 5 different interiors during its lifetime.

Rail enthusiast syndrome, old is good and new is bad. When the HST was new it was universally hated by enthusiasts because it displaced loco hauled trains. When the Voyagers/Pendolinos/IET’s are replaced the same process will repeat, trust me on this!

Can't agree more with all of this. It must be remembered that IEP trains were hated years before anybody had actually clapped eyes on one - it's the human condition to look for things that back up one's opinion rather than allow yourself to be challenged by anything.

The debate is all a bit trivial anyway really - the trains are here to stay, they have settled into traffic and their arrival doesn't appear to have had an impact on passenger usage or satisfaction. Pre-Covid, the early signs were quite the reverse, even if the odd enthusiast would prefer to double their journey time to make a point.

 

[mmh]

Nobody will miss the Voyagers. They are the worst train to experience long distance rail in the UK, but that is simply due to them being too small. Therefore, aside from being diesel, their immediate shortcomings could be solved if the Meridians and Avanti 22X's are transferred to XC.

This has been done to death on here, but it's just not true that they're universally disliked. Nobody likes an overcrowded train whatever sort it is. A 10 car Voyager on Holyhead to Euston is a different story. Passengers still like them, the main fault is some of the interior is getting a bit worn (seats and wall paint, mainly). When they go it'll be the first replacement of them by IETs, so it'll be interesting to see what (if any!) the reaction to the change is.

 

[fgwrich]

Rail enthusiast syndrome, old is good and new is bad. When the HST was new it was universally hated by enthusiasts because it displaced loco hauled trains. When the Voyagers/Pendolinos/IET’s are replaced the same process will repeat, trust me on this!

Not from me, New can be very good. But if new is done properly and sensibly, and not on the cheap ala IET. For example, I welcomed the 180s when they arrived in the Thames Valley, and I welcomed their return back to the Thames Valley as internally, apart from the oddly placed FC, they are better than a HST & an IET. But, I would still rather take the 180 over the IET because it is a better unit. The same can be said for when the Desiros took over from the slam door sets on my local line, and to some degree the 444s from 442s. Again, if it's designed properly and fit for it's purpose, new can be better. But, for the reasons outlined before, the IET does not cut it for me.

 

[Ianno87]

Not from me, New can be very good. But if new is done properly and sensibly, and not on the cheap ala IET.

Schroedinger's procurement: Simultaneously on the cheap and the most expensive train ever.

 

[fgwrich]

Schroedinger's procurement: Simultaneously on the cheap and the most expensive train ever.

Well yes, the most expensive procurement ever resulting in a train that both looks and feels compressively compromised and cheap.

 

[Purple Orange]

Well yes, the most expensive procurement ever resulting in a train that both looks and feels compressively compromised and cheap.

What new train looks comparatively better quality and not cheap?

When I'm on board the train, I don't feel either of those elements you highlight.

 

[Ianno87]

What new train looks comparatively better quality and not cheap?

When I'm on board the train, I don't feel either of those elements you highlight.

Agree. They are a quality product, and don't half shift. Beats the squeaking draftiness of a Mk3.

 

[43096]

Well that is just plain silly. What type of car do you drive? Nobody will serve a full English breakfast to you in your car!

It's a variant of an existing high speed train, another variant of which had already been in use in Britain for years - the class 395. I don't recall much complaint on their introduction, the difference being they weren't replacing HSTs.

I really don't understand what's "unacceptable" about them. Get any manufacturer to make a high speed, doors at end, long distance multiple unit and you'll get something that looks exactly the same. All the ones before it were more or less identical too, the Pendolino the only significantly different one. Really the only notable thing about them is having pocket doors.

Basically because the seats are a bit hard for your taste and you've got a nostalgia complex for slam doors and droplight windowas?

This.

I find it a really strange obsession, the negativity towards IETs. I read this as purely a nostalgia junkie problem, or by people who must have things organised and arranged in a set way (I.e. it can only ever be a HST regardless). If it was just about the seats, it needs to be recognised that these trains will have about 4 or 5 different interiors during its lifetime.

Well that has kept me amused. You all suppose to know what lies behind my decisions, yet you don't know me.

It's really simple and it's nothing to do with slam doors or droplight windows - if that was it then I wouldn't prefer Junipers, Desiros and Electrostar to all those lovely slam doors on a VEP, would I? Simply put, why would I want to pay to travel on something that causes me physical discomfort when I have an alternative. The seats are **** and the ride is ****.

Or maybe it's just I have expectations when I pay for a service rather than just accepting whatever dross is provided.

As for asking what car I drive.... it has four wheels and an engine.

 

[swissrailpassion]

Schroedinger's procurement: Simultaneously on the cheap and the most expensive train ever.

Brilliant.

 

[mmh]

Well yes, the most expensive procurement ever resulting in a train that both looks and feels compressively compromised and cheap.

And yet these same trains were being called "bullet" and "javelin" in Kent. Confusing.

 

[LNW-GW Joint]

The 180s may be nice trains to ride in (I agree), but nobody would call them "successful" in a business sense.
They have been very unreliable, and the fleet size is too small to get economies of scale in operation and servicing.
The design did not succeed because there were no repeat orders.
It's doubtful they would have been selected by other TOCs when FirstGroup released them from service initially, if another design of 125mph DMU had been available.

By comparison, I dislike Merseyrail's 507/508 units and all PEP trains, but there's no doubt they are excellent at what they do and have done 40-odd years sterling service on the routes they ply (and their interiors have been improved).

 

[mmh]

I do recall much "I'll never travel by train again" on uk.railway when the Pendolinos were introduced. Twenty years later we need HS2 because the route is full. It's a funny old world.

 

[Bletchleyite]

PEPs are reliable, but it must have taken considerable effort to design a train in which no seats - not a single one - have an acceptable window view.

 

[mmh]

PEPs are reliable, but it must have taken considerable effort to design a train in which no seats - not a single one - have an acceptable window view.

And yet there are plenty who'll insist bad window positioning is a modern problem!

 

[fgwrich]

What new train looks comparatively better quality and not cheap?

When I'm on board the train, I don't feel either of those elements you highlight.

And this is where both personal preference and opinion comes in again. They (in particular the GW) do look cheap inside. Or perhaps you enjoy the lighting experience of a dental surgery?

They may lack the squealing of a Mk3 corridor, but I find the wind noise far more annoying on an IET - particularly the constant droning if you sit in the leading cars. Something I don't experience on any other modern EMU.

The 180s may be nice trains to ride in (I agree), but nobody would call them "successful" in a business sense.
They have been very unreliable, and the fleet size is too small to get economies of scale in operation and servicing.
The design did not succeed because there were no repeat orders.
It's doubtful they would have been selected by other TOCs when FirstGroup released them from service initially, if another design of 125mph DMU had been available.

By comparison, I dislike Merseyrail's 507/508 units and all PEP trains, but there's no doubt they are excellent at what they do and have done 40-odd years sterling service on the routes they ply (and their interiors have been improved).

The 180 was only being used as a point of "All enthusiasts rubbish the new and long for the old". They are, somewhat unfortunately, not as successful as their far more disliked contemporary of the time.

 

[Purple Orange]

Well that has kept me amused. You all suppose to know what lies behind my decisions, yet you don't know me.

It's really simple and it's nothing to do with slam doors or droplight windows - if that was it then I wouldn't prefer Junipers, Desiros and Electrostar to all those lovely slam doors on a VEP, would I? Simply put, why would I want to pay to travel on something that causes me physical discomfort when I have an alternative. The seats are **** and the ride is ****.

Or maybe it's just I have expectations when I pay for a service rather than just accepting whatever dross is provided.

As for asking what car I drive.... it has four wheels and an engine.

Which if they do cause you pain is a reason to not travel on one. Yet as someone who does not find that to be the case, I don't see it as a reason to consider the trains cheap or unsuccessful. I'd consider it a reason to go to the GP perhaps...

 

[northernbelle]

The 180s may be nice trains to ride in (I agree), but nobody would call them "successful" in a business sense.
They have been very unreliable, and the fleet size is too small to get economies of scale in operation and servicing.
The design did not succeed because there were no repeat orders.
It's doubtful they would have been selected by other TOCs when FirstGroup released them from service initially, if another design of 125mph DMU had been available.

By comparison, I dislike Merseyrail's 507/508 units and all PEP trains, but there's no doubt they are excellent at what they do and have done 40-odd years sterling service on the routes they ply (and their interiors have been improved).

Absolutely. The 180s were reasonable trains to ride on but a mechanical nightmare - I agree they can't really be described as 'successful'. Some sets are about to arrive at their fourth or fifth home having been put to one side by successive operators.

They were roughly 18 months late going into service and even then full service introduction was prolonged and beset with problems. There were several issues with underfloor fires leading to full train evacuations and eventually they were handed back to the leasing company in favour of more HSTs. Their second stint on GW was ended as soon as was possible and they were among the first trains to go off lease having been replaced by new IETs.

I'm surprised nobody has bemoaned the fact they were only 5 cars or run as 2x5 cars as the IETs seem to attract such criticism for that.