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
*#@%".
Purely anecdotal:
I came ‘down’ from King’s Cross last year on an LNER ‘Azuma’ service, in First Class. The service was heavily loaded, but passengers were mostly working and it was rather peaceful. At York, there was a significant changeover of passengers.
Those newly embarking, judged by their lanyards, were LNER office staff commuting North. From then until I disembarked, the carriage was treated to a constant, top note, assassination of the seats, the tables, the sockets and the lights.
I’m therefore not in the least bit surprised that a ‘Senior Railway Manager’ might be bellowing in the same bubble.
Oddly, I noted, those who had occupied the same places prior to their embarkation and who had (presumably) paid for their travel had just sat down, opened their laptops, plugged them in, worked, and covered a distance that, by car, would have taken at least double the time.
And:
I went ‘down’ to Edinburgh and back ‘up’ again with my parents on a Transpennine Express iteration. In Standard Class. Both unilaterally commented that they found the seats firmer but more supportive than they were expecting. My father has Parkinson’s Disease, I should add.
I understand that staff don’t like the kitchens on the LNER stock. I can understand that. The design of the non-accessible washrooms is ludicrous. The door pockets deserve luggage stacks to augment the very capacious overhead racks.
As far as I can work out: the procurement was a shambles; some of the fittings are not fit for purpose; enthusiasts and potentially some staff who should know better are voluble in their criticism of things that, apparently, paying passengers are much less concerned about.
In terms of the things that paying passengers are bothered about, I suspect that some redesigned washrooms, possibly some plusher cushions and
much better on board service - however that’s achieved - would be more likely to meet their expectations based on the fares charged.
The scrutiny should therefore be mostly on the details of the procurement process and the ongoing costs, but as these are probably largely a function of the contemporaneous situation as far as British rail is concerned, I’d posit that IEP isn’t itself any kind of problem in context.
I do think that it’s quite a good train, however.