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

[Thunderer]

Dirty windows do not make a bad train! For the first 30 years of their lives people were allowed to smoke on the Mk3 and the windows were yellow.
The HST was designed with terrible seating too.
The MK3 coaches were absolutely stinking during breaking
For nearly 50 years HSTs have been dumping raw sewage onto the tracks and sending aerosol faeces into the faces of passengers waiting at stations. With Covid-19 found in faecal matter, goodness knows how many people a single flush of a non-retention Mk3 could kill as it passed thorugh a busy station.

As to:- "It has been confirmed through its complex procurement and running agreement (Agility) to be the most expensive train in the WORLD"

Which academic organisation undertook the study and was it peer reviewed? It must have taken a vast amount of effort to go through every single train procurement order since The Rocket and analyse the data.

Most expensive train was confirmed by Modern Railways magazine some time ago and ITV's Tonight Programme ran a whole programme devoted to the IEP and it was also confirmed on there with relevant documentation. When I pay for a 1st Class ticket, I expect to be able to see out of the window, not for it to be so filthy on the OUTSIDE that it looks like its travelling through constant fog. I'm sure a redesign as I suggested for the 21st century would have toilet retention tanks as it is now mandatory. The breaking smell issue was solved on the HST decades ago and as for the HST seating, you'd rather a nice ironing board in the IET would you? I know what seats I'd prefer - HST every time.

 

[fgwrich]

Dirty Windows might not make it a bad train, but it does aid a poor appearance. It’s a shame Hitachi decided to use inside fitted window’s, as the edges does seem to catch a fair bit of dirt. (The windows are fitted in a similar manor to the prototype Mk3s or HST PC Cab Windows, fitted from the inside hence the appearance of being frameless). However, the biggest dirt tracks seem to be the pocket door frames.

 

[ABB125]

IEP - The short answer is no. It has been confirmed through its complex procurement and running agreement (Agility) to be the most expensive train in the WORLD. Now, lets look at what we have for that large price tag from a Passenger point of view >> Poor quality seating (1st class is anything but premium), no buffet (GWR), inadequate luggage space, a poor quality ride (especially at speeds over 100 Mph - there is a lot of lateral movement), often dirty windows (GWR), underfloor vibration & noise in some coaches when running on diesel generators. I think that synopsis is fair having been a passenger on GWR many times. Now, lets look at what we have created with the IEP from an operational point of view >> GWR IEP, inflexable operating, as the 800 is restricted how far it can travel in 1 day and where it ends up at night. Fleet mismatch, a fleet of the same train, which is anything but - your 800's and 802's with very different operating abilities (802's are not restricted by movement and contract like the 800's) non standard fleet sizes (a mixture of 5 and 9 car) which as we know sometimes ends up with one 5 car deputising for a 9 or 10 car service with overcrowding (I've had that dubious experience) and coupling issues that still occasionally occur trying to add/split 10 car trains. Its a shambles really and an expensive one at that too. I understand the HST was life expired, but it was a fantastic train. The success by design template was there. All that was needed was to use that template to design a HST2 train, a diesel and electric train and bring it into the 21st century, it didn't need a completely brand new design, just a re-design. Since IEP was the brains of the DFT, are we really surprised at what the end product was?

Ah yes, had forgotten about that, and presumably the same applies to the LNER 800 and 801 fleets.

I suspect Hitachi would go into meltdown if LNER suggested the last resort move that GNER used to do occasionally if they were short of a set in London. The HST set arriving on the up "Highland Chieftain" would be turned straight round and work the 1600 to Aberdeen. No such flexibility now.

Correct, the same applies to LNER IEP. So "stepping up a diagram" as suggested would cause all sorts of contractual complications as sets would end up out of place at the end of their shift.

I'm told that although the class 802s can theoretically go anywhere at any time, in practice they are diagrammed to the same restrictions as the class 800s (on GWR), so that diagrams can be run by either class if required.
Also, I'm under the impression (but could be wrong) that it doesn't actually matter contractually where each unit ends up for maintenance, as long as it turns up at a Hitachi site less than 36 hours since leaving another Hitachi site (although operationally this is, of course, not necessarily ideal!). So theoretically, set swaps can occur, as long as all the units involved will be back at a depot in time, and not mess up the balance of units at each location.

 

[TommyJ]

The problem is that it creates conflict. Much of modern public transport design looks to avoid conflict, quite rightly, e.g. aircon instead of opening windows and no passenger control of light or heat. This is a rather silly exception.

I agree. It’s a thoughtless design which would be better if they were half-window blinds at least.

 

[GlitterUnicorn]

Hence the improved design as mentioned. Things have moved on from 1976, but the blueprint of success was in the overall design and concept. A car is constantly improved by design over time e.g. VW Golf, so why not a train?

A 1970s Mk1 Golf shares nothing in common with a 2019 model other than the general concept of being a small car, but even that has changed as people's perception of what a small car is has changed over time.

If you're talking about the concept - a train of eight or nine coaches between two powercars with a top speed of ~125mph - maybe that's transferrable. You could probably brand it as HST2 to keep some enthusiasts happy. The reality though is that design, engineering and the needs of passengers have changed a lot over the past 50 years. We need a train suited to the 2020s rather than some reheated design from the 70s.

 

[Horizon22]

I'm told that although the class 802s can theoretically go anywhere at any time, in practice they are diagrammed to the same restrictions as the class 800s (on GWR), so that diagrams can be run by either class if required.
Also, I'm under the impression (but could be wrong) that it doesn't actually matter contractually where each unit ends up for maintenance, as long as it turns up at a Hitachi site less than 36 hours since leaving another Hitachi site (although operationally this is, of course, not necessarily ideal!). So theoretically, set swaps can occur, as long as all the units involved will be back at a depot in time, and not mess up the balance of units at each location.

It seems to depend on circumstance and seriousness. Swaps do often occur and some imbalance can be tolerated to a certain degree. Part of the issue seems to be the contract complexity with Hitachi and the endless stipulations that has caused. 802s cater to Cornwall/Devon and Cotswold routes but can cross-cover (albeit as you say at a push)

 

[PG]

Since IEP was the brains of the DFT, are we really surprised at what the end product was?

I guess we shouldn't be, hopefully history can be learnt from when the time comes nearer for their replacement.

 

[johnw]

I’ve yet to travel on one, but the sliding doors, rather than plug doors, does nothing for the ethitics or the practicality of loosing seat space or an arm rest.

 

[route:oxford]

Most expensive train was confirmed by Modern Railways magazine some time ago and ITV's Tonight Programme ran a whole programme devoted to the IEP and it was also confirmed on there with relevant documentation. When I pay for a 1st Class ticket, I expect to be able to see out of the window, not for it to be so filthy on the OUTSIDE that it looks like its travelling through constant fog. I'm sure a redesign as I suggested for the 21st century would have toilet retention tanks as it is now mandatory. The breaking smell issue was solved on the HST decades ago and as for the HST seating, you'd rather a nice ironing board in the IET would you? I know what seats I'd prefer - HST every time.

"Modern Railways" is an enthusiast's rag that delivers content that they calculate the people who buy it want to read. It is not an academic peer reviewed journal.
An ITV Documenary? *Giggles* ITV haven't made a decent documentary since regional idents were dropped at the start of each programme.

I suspect that mile for mile, the APT was the most expensive train every built in the UK, probably followed closely by the Royal Trains, then Eurotunnel rescue diesel units.

So essentially, your entire argument rests on you don't like the seats and someimes having a mucky window. But seeing as you don't seem to care if standard class passengers have a mucky window - 80% of the train - then that doesn't seem to matter.

I detest the IC70 units with a passion - they are simply dangerous with low backs and plastics that shatter into deadly sharp fragments. I like a nice firm high backed seat.

 

[43096]

"Modern Railways" is an enthusiast's rag that delivers content that they calculate the people who buy it want to read. It is not an academic peer reviewed journal.
An ITV Documenary? *Giggles* ITV haven't made a decent documentary since regional idents were dropped at the start of each programme.

I suspect that mile for mile, the APT was the most expensive train every built in the UK, probably followed closely by the Royal Trains, then Eurotunnel rescue diesel units.

So essentially, your entire argument rests on you don't like the seats and someimes having a mucky window. But seeing as you don't seem to care if standard class passengers have a mucky window - 80% of the train - then that doesn't seem to matter.

I detest the IC70 units with a passion - they are simply dangerous with low backs and plastics that shatter into deadly sharp fragments. I like a nice firm high backed seat.

Modern Railways is an industry magazine; it’s not really aimed at enthusiasts as such. To dismiss it as a “rag” says rather more about your prejudices rather than contributing to any debate.

So you dislike Mark 3s because of the seats. Oh the irony.

 

[class26]

The problem is that it creates conflict. Much of modern public transport design looks to avoid conflict, quite rightly, e.g. aircon instead of opening windows and no passenger control of light or heat. This is a rather silly exception.

That`s exactly my point. Perhaps i am old fashioned in that i do not wish to spend my entire life glued to a screen and prefer to look out of the window on a train journey. whatever, it makes the assumption that all passengers in that particular area will ALL wish for the same outcome which isn`t the case. A

"Modern Railways" is an enthusiast's rag that delivers content that they calculate the people who buy it want to read. It is not an academic peer reviewed journal.
An ITV Documenary? *Giggles* ITV haven't made a decent documentary since regional idents were dropped at the start of each programme.

I suspect that mile for mile, the APT was the most expensive train every built in the UK, probably followed closely by the Royal Trains, then Eurotunnel rescue diesel units.

So essentially, your entire argument rests on you don't like the seats and someimes having a mucky window. But seeing as you don't seem to care if standard class passengers have a mucky window - 80% of the train - then that doesn't seem to matter.

I detest the IC70 units with a passion - they are simply dangerous with low backs and plastics that shatter into deadly sharp fragments. I like a nice firm high backed seat.

Modern Railways is most certainly NOT an enthusiasts rag. It is written by highly experiences railway men . If you want an enthusiasts rag then look to Rail magazine

 

[Bletchleyite]

I agree. It’s a thoughtless design which would be better if they were half-window blinds at least.

Agreed. Both half-blinds and "horizontal blinds" (curtains fixed at the top and bottom) would avoid the issue and so be better.

New thread: https://www.railforums.co.uk/thread...good-idea-what-should-be-done-instead.205294/

 

[LNW-GW Joint]

DfT didn't "design" the IEP, they specified it (mostly using "respected" industry consultants).
The ITT went to all the major manufacturers, who designed at least 3 solutions.
DfT chose the Hitachi solution - and then heavily modified the specification several times over the prolonged procurement period.
The contract was designed on a "power by the hour" basis quite common in the airline industry, to transfer maximum risk to the manufacturer.
Yes it's expensive, but you get 27.5 years of low-risk operation, and a platform for economical repeat orders from the same source.
You also get a second domestic manufacturer to keep Derby honest.
Yes, we could probably have had a better train, with the Alstom, Bombardier and Siemens designs all discarded.
But in terms of a government procurement it has achieved its goals (and exceeded them with new economical orders for MML/WCML).
We just have to ensure that HS2 rolling stock (procured in a similar way) is not a clone of the IEP, but it's entirely possible it will be!

 

[Bletchleyite]

We just have to ensure that HS2 rolling stock (procured in a similar way) is not a clone of the IEP, but it's entirely possible it will be!

I'm not sure I would see that as an issue, to be honest. Provided they use different seats!

 

[Energy]

Yes, we could probably have had a better train, with the Alstom, Bombardier and Siemens designs all discarded.

Alstom withdrew from the IEP to focus on other projects in the UK (Source), Bombardier and Siemens did a joint bid which we have a few photos of here could it have been better? Probably, they are more experienced in the UK and both have experience before building high speed DMUs with the voyagers and the class 185s (they have the same engines as the voyagers and are overpowered on a lot of routes).

 

[py_megapixel]

Oh dear, I hadn't heard about the "Most expensive" thing!

Overall, I like them. I really do. Possibly more than HSTs. But they have too many flaws:

• The seats. They aren't the worst seats I've sat on - that would have to go to the Merseytravel retrofitted ones in a Pacer - but they're far too hard and the headrest is in a stupid place which digs into my shoulders.
  
  
• The ride. Now I actually don't have a problem with the ride on an IEP (and I enjoy the fast acceleration out of stations) but enough people are complaining about it that it has to be a problem.
  
  
• The bright lighting. It's OK for a commuter train where it's expected that people will be on and off within a short space of time, but on an inter-city long distance service? No.
  
  
• The passenger information system. It had faults from day one (e.g. refusing to announce Didcot Parkway on a few services) and it's still not great, with small flickery dot matrix screens at the end of each carriage while virtually all other new stock deliveries at the moment have proper screens

So my verdict is, "They'll do."

Would I choose them over a Voyager or Pendolino? Definitely.
Would I choose them over an HST? Maybe.
Would I choose them over the 397s, Mk5 LHCS, or even a Desiro (which do operate some fairly long distance routes now)? No.

 

[py_megapixel]

Alstom withdrew from the IEP to focus on other projects in the UK (Source), Bombardier and Siemens did a joint bid which we have a few photos of here could it have been better? Probably, they are more experienced in the UK and both have experience before building high speed DMUs with the voyagers and the class 185s (they have the same engines as the voyagers and are overpowered on a lot of routes).

Looking at those renders it seems as though the Siemens-Bombardier bid would also have had plug doors (which apparantley are a source of failure on IEPs) and would have had a separate power car which may have made it unsuitable for routes where platform space is already at a premium. But that's just my speculation.

 

[Energy]

Looking at those renders it seems as though the Siemens-Bombardier bid would also have had plug doors (which apparantley are a source of failure on IEPs) and would have had a separate power car which may have made it unsuitable for routes where platform space is already at a premium. But that's just my speculation.

The render with a separate power car at the bottom of the article is a render from Hitachi not Bombardier/Siemens.

 

[py_megapixel]

The render with a separate power car at the bottom of the article is a render from Hitachi not Bombardier/Siemens.

Yes, although the Siemens-Bombardier one still shows a good half to two-thirds of the front carriage before the passenger saloon starts. The current IEP stock doesn't have this as far as I'm aware.

 

[Energy]

Yes, although the Siemens-Bombardier one still shows a good half to two-thirds of the front carriage before the passenger saloon starts. The current IEP stock doesn't have this as far as I'm aware.

Could also be luggage space, look at the pendolino.

 

[py_megapixel]

Could also be luggage space, look at the pendolino.

That makes sense. If anything the IEP would benefit from more luggage space so that may well actually have been a positive change!

 

[Energy]

That makes sense. If anything the IEP would benefit from more luggage space so that may well actually have been a positive change!

It looks too small to be engine space but if it is and no engines are needed underfloor then well done Bombardier/Siemens.

 

[CapitalStar378]

Anecdotal evidence from GWR travellers I know is that the lack of buffet is a big step backwards, the lighting is way too bright at night and the seats are uncomfortable.

I'm not a fan of the drab seat material or the hideous lime green grab handles and strip around the reservation screens. The carpets in the aisles look filthy, not the right colour choice. Not a nice interior design overall. LNER ones look a lot better plus they have a buffet.

Positives are better legroom and more tables (although that's not hard compared to GWR high density HSTs).

 

[Clansman]

In the sense of the Mk3 being a box with windows spaced at First Class seat spacing, how *isn't* the IET that? Though I think the Class 180 looks closest.

To be fair the 80Xs have windows segments of that same spacing, it's just that there's more wall involved than window as you'll well know that the windows don't come right up seat side.

I think the requirements of rolling stock nowadays make it impossible to have Mk3 dimensions and relative window specs due to crash regs, higher floors (meaning lower windows), and body tapering. Especially the last two, which plays a massive part in the Mk3s impression of spaciousness and why people use it as a benchmark for rolling stock design.

 

[Bletchleyite]

To be fair the 80Xs have windows of that same spacing, it's just that there's more wall involved than window.

I think the requirements of rolling stock nowadays make it impossible to have Mk3 dimensions and relative window specs due to crash regs, higher floors (meaning lower windows), and body tapering. Especially that last one, which plays a massive part in the Mk3s impression of spaciousness.

Erm, Class 397? They're a wall of glass - almost Pacer like. The closest comparison I can think of is the Mk1 - with their all table layout and window alignment as well as both high and wide windows, a modernised Mk1 is very much what they are.

I get the impression that the "small window" issue is primarily caused by speccing everything for 140mph even though it likely won't ever run at that speed. Though 80x don't have anything like the "small window" problem of Pendolinos.

That said, Mk5 and Mk5a are not specced for 140mph (crikey, they were designed for a Sleeper train that doesn't even do 90) and do have small windows.

 

[squizzler]

I get the impression that the "small window" issue is primarily caused by speccing everything for 140mph even though it likely won't ever run at that speed. Though 80x don't have anything like the "small window" problem of Pendolinos.

If you look at the Japanese Bullet Train types - whose lineage is proudly cited by Hitachi and all the AT300 operators - they all seem to have piston-era airliner style square windows rather than the landscape rectangular ones of European types. We got off lightly.

 

[Purple Orange]

I wonder, how much the complaints about IETs on this forum are shared by the general public? Aside from complaining about seats (which can be replaced) and no buffet on GWR (personally I prefer to take my own food or drink on a train if I’m on a long journey), much of the moaning seems to be about very detailed aspects.

The complaints appear to emanate more so from people’s experience of GWR units, but that could be because they have been in use longer and so appear to be greater in volume. Perhaps not everyone has not experienced IETs on TPE, LNER & GWR (I have only used TPE and although I may end up using LNER, it is more than likely that the next TOC I would use will be Avanti’s IETs).

Overall I sense that people are grieving the loss of HSTs.

 

[Bletchleyite]

Overall I sense that people are grieving the loss of HSTs.

Enthusiasts, I'd say.

I don't OTOH know why anyone would grieve Mk4s, they are cheap rubbish.

 

[InOban]

DfT didn't "design" the IEP, they specified it (mostly using "respected" industry consultants).
The ITT went to all the major manufacturers, who designed at least 3 solutions.
DfT chose the Hitachi solution - and then heavily modified the specification several times over the prolonged procurement period.
The contract was designed on a "power by the hour" basis quite common in the airline industry, to transfer maximum risk to the manufacturer.
Yes it's expensive, but you get 27.5 years of low-risk operation, and a platform for economical repeat orders from the same source.
You also get a second domestic manufacturer to keep Derby honest.
Yes, we could probably have had a better train, with the Alstom, Bombardier and Siemens designs all discarded.
But in terms of a government procurement it has achieved its goals (and exceeded them with new economical orders for MML/WCML).
We just have to ensure that HS2 rolling stock (procured in a similar way) is not a clone of the IEP, but it's entirely possible it will be!

According to MR, the DfT spec was such that only Hitachi would be chosen, and I think that the other potential suppliers knew that. It was a competition in name only.

 

[Halish Railway]

I wonder, how much the complaints about IETs on this forum are shared by the general public? Aside from complaining about seats (which can be replaced) and no buffet on GWR (personally I prefer to take my own food or drink on a train if I’m on a long journey), much of the moaning seems to be about very detailed aspects.

Judging from all of the 'normal' people I've spoken to, it seems to be mainly the same complaints that enthusiasts have - Horrid seats, no luggage space, terrible window to seat alignment and noisy air conditioning in some parts of the carriage.

I've also had the pleasure of taking an Azuma from Leeds to Doncaster where the prior train (09:45) was cancelled only for a 5 car set to role up from Harrogate to operate the 10:15 and everyone having to squeeze onto that. Now that really queued some complaints!