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

[43096]

To those who really hate the GWR ones, though, I do recommend a trip on a TPE, Hull Trains or LNER set (the latter of course also having a buffet). Just changing the colour scheme makes it feel like a totally different train - the red scheme on the LNER ones best of all in my view.

I have been on an LNER version. The red moquette seat covering makes them marginally better than DfT flat cloth/GWR astroturf seats. But only marginally. The fundamental flaws remain: the seats are still chronically uncomfortable and the ride is utterly appalling.

 

[43096]

I personally prefer the high floor coaches because the window height is better aligned for putting your arm on the sill and the overhead rack is easier to access. I'd have done them all like that.

I thought you preferred level boarding vehicles, like the FLIRTs? Make your mind up!

 

[Bletchleyite]

I have been on an LNER version. The red moquette seat covering makes them marginally better than DfT flat cloth/GWR astroturf seats. But only marginally. The fundamental flaws remain: the seats are still chronically uncomfortable and the ride is utterly appalling.

Interesting ride is mentioned. The only form of stock in the UK, yes, even Pacers, that made me genuinely think we were off the road and wonder if I should get up and pull the cord (subject to being able to get to it), was a Mk4 First Class coach between Edinburgh and Newcastle a couple of years ago. It was seriously awful. I can't think of a single other UK item of rolling stock that rides that badly. I also don't think the Mk3 ride is what people say it is - it's quite "exciting" with a pronounced side to side sway due to inadequate damping.

80x seem to me to ride like Desiros - a bit hard, but otherwise reasonable. Indeed, like the related Javelin sets, the whole travelling experience is very much like a Desiro.

 

[Bletchleyite]

I thought you preferred level boarding vehicles, like the FLIRTs? Make your mind up!

Low floor is worth doing if it's level boarding, i.e. the FLIRT.

As soon as you have to crack the ramp out for a wheelchair user, it makes little difference. Indeed, if you're going to have a step at all the Pacer arrangement with a wide step and handrail is probably preferable. There is little practical difference between a step up of 5" vs. 8", which is what we're talking about.

 

[43096]

Interesting ride is mentioned. The only form of stock in the UK, yes, even Pacers, that made me genuinely think we were off the road and wonder if I should get up and pull the cord (subject to being able to get to it), was a Mk4 First Class coach between Edinburgh and Newcastle a couple of years ago. It was seriously awful. I can't think of a single other UK item of rolling stock that rides that badly. I also don't think the Mk3 ride is what people say it is - it's quite "exciting" with a pronounced side to side sway due to inadequate damping.

80x seem to me to ride like Desiros - a bit hard, but otherwise reasonable. Indeed, like the related Javelin sets, the whole travelling experience is very much like a Desiro.

I had three different rides on the East Coast in just over a week last year: one HST (NL65), one Mark 4 and one Azuma, sat in a similar position in each. The 800 was by far the worst: any sort of track imperfection and the bogie started hunting. Pointwork at speed caused it to lose the plot completely with an uncomfortable ride. The Mark 4 was as you'd expect with a Mark 4, the Mark 3 was by far the best of the three. It is embarrassing that almost 50 years on we still can't get anything to ride as well as a BT10 at 125mph (although I'd like to try a T4 at that speed - they certainly ride well under a 158).

 

[Halish Railway]

I can't think of a single other UK item of rolling stock that rides that badly.

CAF Civities? VP 185 Mk3s? Personally I don’t mind the ride of the IETs, though they might have settled down a a bit since I first went on one (July 2019).

The main drawbacks in my opinion is the Fainsa interrogation seats that are used and the window/seat alignment which is a bit poor in places. By far the best example of these units is the TPE Nova 1s as the seat padding is much softer. Alongside the near doubling of capacity, they are far better than the 185s which they replace.

 

[InOban]

If I bought a new car and its ride and handling were no better than the car I bought 40 years ago did when I bought it, let alone how it would be after 40 years of use, I would be rejecting it outright.

The unanswerable question is, if the DfT had held a genuine competition, and if their only input had been to insist that all the TOCs and ROSCOs agreed on a long production run of a single basic design, what would we have got?

 

[jopsuk]

One area that's a definite step backwards is the provision for carrying bicycles- those pokey little cupboards hat only suit light weight road bikes are no substitute for bike compartments that ably took touring, hybrid and mountain bikes and on the East Coast electrics, could even accommodate some tandems and recumbent cycles. I know taking bikes on trains is a controversial issue (and I know eg David Horne of LNER would like to see them banned entirely- see piece in Modern Railways recently) but I'd argue that for serving leisure markets it is long distance trains that have the best case for providing decent cycle storage on board (commuters that need bikes at both end are better served by having two bikes and good secure bike parking)

 

[43096]

VP 185 Mk3s?

What's one of them then? Assuming you mean VP185 engine HSTs, what does the engine type have to do with the ride quality of the unpowered coaches?

 

[Halish Railway]

What's one of them then? Assuming you mean VP185 engine HSTs, what does the engine type have to do with the ride quality of the unpowered coaches?

No - I believe that the EMR Mk3s have a different suspension which have less ‘give‘ compared to the other Mk3s

 

[O8yityityit]

Pretty sure they are limited to 125mph like their predecessors....

Less comfortable. Less luggage space. Appalling ride. More expensive.

Sample quote from a senior railway manager, as quoted in Modern Railways: "It's just *#@%, *#@%! The ride is *#@%, the seats are *#@%, the train is *#@%".

We'll that sounds like a thoroughly professional article then...... it must be well balanced reporting

 

[MotCO]

Who actually even notices that? I bet hardly anyone does.

I personally prefer the high floor coaches because the window height is better aligned for putting your arm on the sill and the overhead rack is easier to access. I'd have done them all like that.

I never knew there was a ramp!

 

[Bletchleyite]

I never knew there was a ramp!

It's between the vestibule and the corridor connection (not in the saloon), and you can barely even notice it.

 

[MotCO]

I've always been struck by the replacement of a single HST with a 2 x 5 IET. Do the IETs have TMs/guards in each half of the train, in which case, does that not simpy increase the cost of running the train. Or did the HSTs used to have 2 x TMs/guards?

 

[Peter Sarf]

I believe they are (like the Javelins, to which they are very similar, being fellow AT300 series trains) capable of 140 on electricity.

.........

I saw that and amusing though it is I don't agree with it (other than the part about the seats - and indeed the only things I find wrong with the seats would be fixed by way of replacement cushions, as indeed it was on the GNER refurbished Mk4s).

If I remember correctly the intercity 225 (Mk4s) were designed for 140mph.

The seats, the seats. Well it may well be subjective. I have not experienced an 80x but if the new seats in the last 377s (which are not really 377s) and 700s are anything like them then I won't dare do a long journey on an 80x.

I've always been struck by the replacement of a single HST with a 2 x 5 IET. Do the IETs have TMs/guards in each half of the train, in which case, does that not simpy increase the cost of running the train. Or did the HSTs used to have 2 x TMs/guards?

Does seem counter productive having two short trains doing the job of one longer train. In the UK manpower is expensive so the operational flexibility is unlikely to be worth it. But don't worry - if Cross Country is anything to go by then there will be more shorter trains soon .

 

[43096]

We'll that sounds like a thoroughly professional article then...... it must be well balanced reporting

Rather than guessing, why not go and read it?

 

[Bletchleyite]

If I remember correctly the intercity 225 (Mk4s) were designed for 140mph.

The seats, the seats. Well it may well be subjective. I have not experienced an 80x but if the new seats in the last 377s (which are not really 377s) and 700s are anything like them then I won't dare do a long journey on an 80x.

They're not ironing boards, they're much more like the Grammer E3000 "Desiro seat" but with the issue of the base being too thin so some people can feel the supporting framework through it.

 

[Peter Sarf]

They're not ironing boards, they're much more like the Grammer E3000 "Desiro seat" but with the issue of the base being too thin so some people can feel the supporting framework through it.

That's my worry about the 80x seats. I have little of. shall we say, my own padding !. The parallel I draw is that new seats nowadays seem to have changed for the worse.

 

[O L Leigh]

I have no views on the trains themselves as I have never yet had the misfortune to use one as a passenger (although I have been in a few cabs). That they have hard seats, bright lighting and a poor match-up between windows and seats (not that the majority of passengers seem to care so much given that they barely look up from their mobile phone screens anyway) should hardly be a surprise, as in these regards it merely follows existing trends.

But to come back to the question actually posed, do I think that the IEP Programme has been a success? Well that depends on how you frame the criteria for success. It's a new train, which has been proven in the past to be popular with passengers, increases capacity on the routes over which it is being used and arguably is faster than the stock it replaces. In those regards I suppose it is a success. But is it a train for the future which will see us through the next 30-40 years? No, I don't believe so. At least not in it's current form.

I'll admit that this may be off-topic and that the issues I'm about to identify are not the fault of the Hitachi IET in it's many forms, but the very fact that we need to have a train like this for the UK network is symptomatic of the failings of the network and of the Governments of varying hue that have been in charge of it. I've long criticised bi-mode operation and the need to have bi-mode trains at all when we should have been getting on with electrification. The fact that we seem to need bi-mode at all just signals how badly we have done at addressing the future of our network and our rolling stock utilisation. I see how it can be used to reduce the instances of diesel running under the wires, and I do understand that.

But I am not sold on the idea that these trains are a useful stepping-stone for electrification. Back in March 2011 I predicted that bi-mode would remove the imperative to electrify further, and it seems that this has been borne out. Taken together this does nothing to help move the railways away from it's reliance on fossil fuels, something that is going to continue until at least the middle of the current century. Diesel will always have it's place, but not on long distance high capacity services like those that the Cl80X is being used for.

So do I think that the IEP Program has been a success? Yes, in that it seems like an adequate replacement for the HST, IC225 and other trains that it directly supersedes. But no, because I do not believe that it is the right train for the future.

 

[route:oxford]

It's far too early to define whether the introduction of these units has been a success or not.

If we are going to judge a coach on the basis of the seats installed at the start, then both the Mk2 & Mk3 were terrrible failures.

Take a look at the Mk2 (with thanks to "Mancunian"):-

Yup, BR actually installed seats with fixed headrests where anyone taller than 5'8" had to slouch because there was nowhere for their shoulders to go.

Then with Mk3 IC70 seats things got worse pic from Wiki:-

BR did away with head rests for anyone taller than a child, and put in fixed arm rests!

So, maybe wait 25 years and let the carriages go through a number of changes as they respond to operators and a change of public.

Perhaps the most important thing to ask right now is... Does the air conditioning system have robust HEPA filtering as good as a modern boeing or Airbus?

 

[InOban]

Rather than guessing, why not go and read it?

Precisely. IW is a recently retired senior railway professional. The focus of the article is the process by which the railway ended up with a product which should have been a quantum leap in ride dynamics and in the passenger experience, but which isn't according to many current pros.

 

[Purple Orange]

No, too expensive, too preparatory, too lower quality, and as a result of the usual DfT isms, not at all appropriate.

Compared to what exactly? From a passenger perspective these trains are far better than what we have had in the past. Better to travel on than a Voyager, a Pendolino, a 225, a HST or any loco hauled Mk2 train.

I’ll be open and say I couldn’t give two hoots about whether a train driver prefers the cab of one train over another, or whether a maintenance crew prefers one type of train over another. These trains are not for these people - they are for the people who pay to use them each day.

 

[Ashley Hill]

The unanswerable question is, if the DfT had held a genuine competition, and if their only input had been to insist that all the TOCs and ROSCOs agreed on a long production run of a single basic design, what would we have got?

A Camel.

I've always been struck by the replacement of a single HST with a 2 x 5 IET. Do the IETs have TMs/guards in each half of the train, in which case, does that not simpy increase the cost of running the train. Or did the HSTs used to have 2 x TMs/guards?

HSTs had one Guard. 5 and 9 car IETs have one Guard. A 10 car has 1 Guard who's normally in the rear set and what is called a Lead Host (upgraded customer host) in the front set. If there's no lead host available on a 10 car then the rear set is taken out of use.

 

[fgwrich]

No - I believe that the EMR Mk3s have a different suspension which have less ‘give‘ compared to the other Mk3s

The East Coast Mk3s have the different suspension - this being from Pegasus which has less give but a lot, and I mean a lot more vertical bouncing.

I cant say much more than what has already been said by others, the catering is a quite rightly a flop, as is the luggage issue. The idea of having the "Multi-use" spaces at the end of the coaches was always going to lead to conflict, and should have been designed as a dedicated Cycle Space while large luggage should have gone where the door pocket seats are. Slowly these faults are being rectified, but not before time. And a lot of them could easily have been designed out from the start.

Regarding the ride quality issue, they do ride fairly poorly, however the worst offenders are the intermediate vehicles with the lightweight bogies. I sat in one along the GWML last year and the horizontal swaying was absolutely appalling. This seems to be an issue with Hitachi's lightweight bogie however as I've noticed how badly the 385's ride on these too.

I do see semi regular comparisons with the 444 on here, but to me they don't cut it. The 444 feels like a modern take on a MK3, and feels like it has the same care and attention and quality as a Mk3. The IEP/IET/AT300 doesn't have that same feel. It feels cheaper (flimsy plastic side panels for example, the Desiro's are metal), the lighting is harsher, there's the silly little design touches that don't need to be there (The Voyager style window blinds or heavy toilet doors) and the ridiculous number of 5 car sets vs 8/9/10.

Probably the biggest issue here was allowing the civil servants in the DfT the free reign to deliver a train that they designed. The Great Western ones are the guinea pig for this, the slightly improved East Coast ones less so thanks to the arm twisting of VTEC and getting the better than nothing buffet counter installed. Though do still suffer over the now being addressed luggage issue.

 

[Energy]

So, maybe wait 25 years and let the carriages go through a number of changes as they respond to operators and a change of public.

Exactly, most of the complaints can be fixed with a refurbishment which won't happen yet but will certainly happen. Look at the 185s, they have certainly improved after their refurbishment although lots of that could be the lack of First's colours.

 

[Gaz55]

Hi all, first post on here.

As a semi regular passenger on the ECML, mainly from Doncaster to Leeds, I have found journeys on the IET's/Azuma's to be favourable, if not amazing.

Pros
. They are a step up in capacity, it is easier to find a seat than on HSTs/IC225s.
. The increase in tables is definitely welcome, there seems to more legroom when sat down.
. The carriages feel bright and modern.
. The quality of the seats seems to be hotly debated. Personally, I don't think they are that bad, perhaps a little too hard but not a torture rack, but I haven't been sat in one for more than 30-35 mins. A trip to London might change my opinion.

Cons
. The interior, particularly walking between carriages, does feel quite narrow and confined.
. Toilet floors that seem to be regularly flooded.
. The ride quality feels jerky at times.
. Overall build quality feels cheap in some areas.
. While I understand the reasoning behind the 5 car units, I believe that too many were ordered.

 

[Peter Sarf]

I have no views on the trains themselves as I have never yet had the misfortune to use one as a passenger (although I have been in a few cabs). That they have hard seats, bright lighting and a poor match-up between windows and seats (not that the majority of passengers seem to care so much given that they barely look up from their mobile phone screens anyway) should hardly be a surprise, as in these regards it merely follows existing trends.

But to come back to the question actually posed, do I think that the IEP Programme has been a success? Well that depends on how you frame the criteria for success. It's a new train, which has been proven in the past to be popular with passengers, increases capacity on the routes over which it is being used and arguably is faster than the stock it replaces. In those regards I suppose it is a success. But is it a train for the future which will see us through the next 30-40 years? No, I don't believe so. At least not in it's current form.

I'll admit that this may be off-topic and that the issues I'm about to identify are not the fault of the Hitachi IET in it's many forms, but the very fact that we need to have a train like this for the UK network is symptomatic of the failings of the network and of the Governments of varying hue that have been in charge of it. I've long criticised bi-mode operation and the need to have bi-mode trains at all when we should have been getting on with electrification. The fact that we seem to need bi-mode at all just signals how badly we have done at addressing the future of our network and our rolling stock utilisation. I see how it can be used to reduce the instances of diesel running under the wires, and I do understand that.

But I am not sold on the idea that these trains are a useful stepping-stone for electrification. Back in March 2011 I predicted that bi-mode would remove the imperative to electrify further, and it seems that this has been borne out. Taken together this does nothing to help move the railways away from it's reliance on fossil fuels, something that is going to continue until at least the middle of the current century. Diesel will always have it's place, but not on long distance high capacity services like those that the Cl80X is being used for.

So do I think that the IEP Program has been a success? Yes, in that it seems like an adequate replacement for the HST, IC225 and other trains that it directly supersedes. But no, because I do not believe that it is the right train for the future.

Very good answer. Hits the Bi-Mode nail on the head.

I would go further than lack of electrification to say the fact that we are only starting work on the UKs second High Speed line is another example of how backward we are. The government should have got Hitachi to quote for high speed services between points A and B via C(s) and the Japanese would probably have quoted for trains and a new line !.

We might have to start wondering why have windows at all !.

And it is true other issues will probably get altered out.

 

[uvarvu]

I’ve only seen one example but the driver’s seat was already showing wear. Are Grammer renowned for making good seats?

 

[RealTrains07]

Was the program successful? Yes I would say so.

In terms of providing a overall suitable replacement to the 125s and 225s?

Yes, the 800 are decent trains and are far more efficient than their predecessors


In terms of the government providing a train which has improvement comfort and on board service for passengers?

Yes and No. The no being GWR mainly. But these are things which will hopefully change/implemented overtime.

Overall, aside from the problems with electrification and the comfort. The IE programme did what was required of it. I think the DfT did fairly well with it.

 

[Bletchleyite]

Grammer generally have a good reputation, yes, though any seat can get a pull in the fabric if something catches the seam.