• Our booking engine at tickets.railforums.co.uk (powered by TrainSplit) helps support the running of the forum with every ticket purchase! Find out more and ask any questions/give us feedback in this thread!

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

Status
Not open for further replies.

physics34

Established Member
Joined
1 Dec 2013
Messages
3,681
Usual stuff from me...

Decent trains but ****e seats, lighting too harsh, not enough loos.
 
Sponsor Post - registered members do not see these adverts; click here to register, or click here to log in
R

RailUK Forums

Purple Orange

On Moderation
Joined
26 Dec 2019
Messages
3,438
Location
The North
Indeed, while the vast majority of normal passengers wouldn't care enough to consider it.

Quite possibly true. But sometimes I do wonder if the opposite is true. People have a preference for particular airlines. Where I work, my team is equally split between Liverpool and Manchester, with lots of travelling to and from, while it is true to say people where I work have preferences between TPE & EMR for instance. People also discuss the best route to get from A to B on London Underground, but these issues are more based upon the most logical or efficient way to get to your destination. If I’m travelling to Reading, it is more often better and more comfortable to go via London, depending upon the time I reach Piccadilly station.
 

Peter Sarf

Established Member
Joined
12 Oct 2010
Messages
5,633
Location
Croydon
Why not? From my (limited) understanding it would be easier to install 25kv over LU 4 rail DC as the return currents are kept separate.
The discussion of Voyagers is interesting, as I feel that as a post-privatisation DEMU they are a better comparison with IEP and its derivative products. I feel it worth looking at what technical advances fifteen short years has brought by looking at what people complained about with Voyagers:
  • Inadequate accommodation - Great improvement :
    • longer coaches
    • Minimum length 5 cars vis 4 car for voyagers
    • less 'dead space' (crumple zones, etc)
    • No 'tilt profile'
  • Intrusive engine noises - Great improvement
    • Better soundproofing
    • Smoother V12 engine vis inline 6 of Voyager.
    • No engines in some cars
  • Toilet Smells - Fixed
  • Energy and Environment - Great improvement:
    • Factory fitted 'Project Thor' ('Thor' was a proposed bi-mode upgrade to voyager fleet)
    • Efficient modern diesel meeting current emissions controls.
    • Lighter car design
IMO, the scorecard shows a vast technical improvement has been made in the decade and a half that separates their service entry (2016 vis 2001), although many will disagree or feel my analysis misses various things.

I have to agree with the comparison. It is a step in the right direction from the Voyager. Just a pity the Voyager was inferior to the HST.

Back to the OP's question, it depends for whom.
If you ask Hitachi, they must be overjoyed at how many orders they have received (over 320 AT300s will exist within the next 2 years)
I find they look and feel like a hospital clinic - cold ambiance, over lit and uncomfortable. I speak for most people (enthusiasts, insiders, normal passengers) However they are achieving very decent MTIN figures and will continue to, and they are cheap.
ToCs clearly feel they are a success because they are cheap and reliable and the only viable intercity option. That said, I'm not sure why no one has ordered that 125mph bi-mode Aventra, or more class 397s, 745s or class 68 LHCS which are all far superior IC offerings. These are also competitive options.

In my view, the program is a failure for the UK rail industry because the point of privatization is to encourage a competition for the best rolling stock at the best price. The AT300s are, to the top brass that are placing these orders, unrivaled in competition on all fronts (price, regulatory approval), so what we have is a sub-par train dominating the IC segment.

Another thing that stuns me is that a selling point of Hitachi was that they promised to have a factory in the UK to build these things. Bad reason to choose a train in my book (ignoring all other potentials). But to then order so many of the things that they have to be built in Europe is a tragedy. It just brings forward the time when the UK factory will have no orders. This is especially true as the Hitachi UK factory will never export to Europe as we are no longer in Europe - so no point for Hitachi to keep it open. Boom and bust - here we go again.
 

fgwrich

Established Member
Joined
15 Apr 2009
Messages
9,250
Location
Between Edinburgh and Exeter
Another thing that stuns me is that a selling point of Hitachi was that they promised to have a factory in the UK to build these things. Bad reason to choose a train in my book (ignoring all other potentials). But to then order so many of the things that they have to be built in Europe is a tragedy. It just brings forward the time when the UK factory will have no orders. This is especially true as the Hitachi UK factory will never export to Europe as we are no longer in Europe - so no point for Hitachi to keep it open. Boom and bust - here we go again.

It can very easily draw similarities to that of the ill fated THRALL EUROPA at the not so far away York Works. Indeed it hasn't taken long for Hitachi to start shouting about the drying up of work at the Newton Aycliffe facility, despite building a large proportion of the GW 800/3, 802, HT 802 & TPE 802 Fleets at it's Italian Facility. More so now we have CAF, Bombardier, Siemens & Talgo all also planning to, or are assembling and building rolling stock in the UK too. Hitachi will either need to be flexible with Newton Aycliffe or face losing work to rival bidders (eg the Nexus fiasco whereby, even if Hitachi did win the order for the new Tyne and Wear stock, they still wouldn't have built it there!).
 

Bletchleyite

Veteran Member
Joined
20 Oct 2014
Messages
97,538
Location
"Marston Vale mafia"
If it was me, I’d attempt to do the journey the other way around and get on an IET over a Voyager.

As would I, at least I would be able to do the journey without getting DVT because of the ridiculously tight seat pitch, and the overhead rack will fit a 120l rucksack (yes, I've tried) rather than barely fitting your coat.
 

ashkeba

Established Member
Joined
13 May 2019
Messages
2,171
Is Alnmouth or Morpeth an Intercity stop?

If it acts like an Intercity service( I.e it connects two or more cities)
And it looks like an Intercity service
Then the chances are it is an Intercity service.
We probably disagree about what looks like an InterCity service.

Also the perpetual moaning about voyages , Pendos, IEP is getting rather stale.
It's really just people hankering for what went before, and specifically loco hauled trains.
That rather falls down when I am arguing that XC should be upgraded to InterCity and given access to the IEP bi-modes or equivalent, instead of the likely second and third hand DMU cast-offs and still forced to wait long in every regional city.
 

Purple Orange

On Moderation
Joined
26 Dec 2019
Messages
3,438
Location
The North
We probably disagree about what looks like an InterCity service.


That rather falls down when I am arguing that XC should be upgraded to InterCity and given access to the IEP bi-modes or equivalent, instead of the likely second and third hand DMU cast-offs and still forced to wait long in every regional city.

I find distinguishing between say Avanti and long distance XC as one being Intercity and the other not, to be a railway enthusiasts problem, which in my mind instantly relegates the issue as a non-issue to the travelling public. The real problem is that between both XC and the DfT, XC are crap at providing the service they have been tasked to deliver.
 
Last edited:

Energy

Established Member
Joined
29 Dec 2018
Messages
4,420
Another thing that stuns me is that a selling point of Hitachi was that they promised to have a factory in the UK to build these things. Bad reason to choose a train in my book (ignoring all other potentials). But to then order so many of the things that they have to be built in Europe is a tragedy. It just brings forward the time when the UK factory will have no orders. This is especially true as the Hitachi UK factory will never export to Europe as we are no longer in Europe - so no point for Hitachi to keep it open. Boom and bust - here we go again.
What I am liking about Talgo's factory is that they have planned it so it can export to other countries so it has a long term future, something lots of the others don't have. Talgo have said they will build the factory once they get a big order but because they plan to export from this factory along with the domestic UK market, this large order they have said doesn't even have to be from the UK.
 

Domh245

Established Member
Joined
6 Apr 2013
Messages
8,426
Location
nowhere
Another thing that stuns me is that a selling point of Hitachi was that they promised to have a factory in the UK to build these things. Bad reason to choose a train in my book (ignoring all other potentials). But to then order so many of the things that they have to be built in Europe is a tragedy. It just brings forward the time when the UK factory will have no orders. This is especially true as the Hitachi UK factory will never export to Europe as we are no longer in Europe - so no point for Hitachi to keep it open. Boom and bust - here we go again.

The European built trains weren't intended to be built at Newton Aycliffe, only the IEP units were guaranteed to be and that's what was done. Perhaps most importantly is the fact that if those units hadn't been built overseas they wouldn't all be in service yet.

The boom and bust nature of train manufacturing has been going on for a while, but that's a matter for another thread!
 

DannyMich2018

Member
Joined
19 Dec 2018
Messages
732
Usual stuff from me...

Decent trains but ****e seats, lighting too harsh, not enough loos.
There are enough loos, in most IETs virtually every carriage has a loo, much different to other classes such as 12 car Class 745 which I think has only 5 loos or Class 195 (2 or 3 car) or Class 331 (3 or 4 car) which only have ONE loo!!
 

Bletchleyite

Veteran Member
Joined
20 Oct 2014
Messages
97,538
Location
"Marston Vale mafia"
We probably disagree about what looks like an InterCity service.

Well, you appear to be using the Deutsche Bahn AG definition arbitrarily in the UK, a country which, while the rail system has many similarities (clockface timetabling and optional reservations, primarily), is also structurally quite different.
 

Bletchleyite

Veteran Member
Joined
20 Oct 2014
Messages
97,538
Location
"Marston Vale mafia"
The boom and bust nature of train manufacturing has been going on for a while, but that's a matter for another thread!

It is and it isn't - the idea of having a standard IC train (we could also have a standard regional one) is that you can order more trains and vehicles in dribs and drabs over a longer period as you need them, and that is a potential success as people are continuing to order them for now.

It's less important in that regard where they're built (though UK built woud be nice), the key is that there is a continuity of orders, even small ones, to keep the production lines moving.

It effectively did happen with the Electrostar (basically a standard commuter/regional EMU).
 

ashkeba

Established Member
Joined
13 May 2019
Messages
2,171
Well, you appear to be using the Deutsche Bahn AG definition arbitrarily in the UK, [...]
I was using what used to be the common definition across Germany and almost all its neighbours. I think it's a sensible definition. If a train is sitting for about 10 minutes at cities B, D and N, then it's not going to be as fast as it could from A to Z - which is fine and may be still a desirable service but it is not really express and even in the UK, InterCity was an express brand. The UK InterCity Express Program should improve both material and operation to be a success.
 

Bletchleyite

Veteran Member
Joined
20 Oct 2014
Messages
97,538
Location
"Marston Vale mafia"
I was using what used to be the common definition across Germany and almost all its neighbours. I think it's a sensible definition. If a train is sitting for about 10 minutes at cities B, D and N, then it's not going to be as fast as it could from A to Z - which is fine and may be still a desirable service but it is not really express and even in the UK, InterCity was an express brand. The UK InterCity Express Program should improve both material and operation to be a success.

Reliability and punctuality are far, far more important than simple journey time. A train scheduled for 2 hours that often takes 2h15 is of lower value than one scheduled for 2h15 that always arrives on time.

DB's network is relatively uncongested (most of their services operate on a two-hourly or hourly base, and almost no service outside of S-Bahnen has more than 2tph) so this is much easier to achieve than in the UK - but even with their uncongested network their punctuality is taking rather a battering at the moment.
 

supervc-10

Member
Joined
4 Mar 2012
Messages
701
I.e it connects two or more cities
I don't buy this definition. Plenty of commuter or regional rail services connect two or more cities but are definitely not 'Intercity'. Nobody would call a 150 on a Northern stopper from Liverpool to Manchester an intercity train!

There is a lot of good sense in having a 'standard' intercity train, which is what the IEP was supposed to do. From that regard, it's kind of worked. But I've not been on one as a passenger so I can't really judge on that regard.
 

Purple Orange

On Moderation
Joined
26 Dec 2019
Messages
3,438
Location
The North
I think it is pretty damn easy to identify an intercity service. Why people add complexity to it by creating sub categories of service or try to use German definitions is beyond me.

LNER, Avanti, GWR IET services, XC Voyager & HST services, EMT London to Sheffield & Nottingham, London to Norwich, TPE Nova 1,2 & 3, Scotrail HST, Hull Trains, Grand Central, East Coast. The common theme is that they use Intercity stock and connect our major cities.

Let’s say EMR used HST units on Liverpool to Norwich, I’d call it an intercity service. But they don’t and instead use commuter standard trains, so therefore are not intercity.
 

coppercapped

Established Member
Joined
13 Sep 2015
Messages
3,093
Location
Reading
I was using what used to be the common definition across Germany and almost all its neighbours. I think it's a sensible definition. If a train is sitting for about 10 minutes at cities B, D and N, then it's not going to be as fast as it could from A to Z - which is fine and may be still a desirable service but it is not really express and even in the UK, InterCity was an express brand. The UK InterCity Express Program should improve both material and operation to be a success.
It seems to me that you are still labouring under a misapprehension.
In my post 241 I explained the derivation of the term InterCity as used by BR. Part of my post read as follows:
When BR was re-organised into business sectors 'InterCity' became the name of the sector operating the long distance, high speed passenger services. As the Government of the day said it would not subsidise BR's commercial activities - and the long distance train services were classified as 'commercial' BR lopped off all those bits of the 'InterCity' operation that were not profitable.

So the only correct definition of 'InterCity' in the later BR period covers those long distance, high speed services that were profitable according to the accounting standards of the time.

It had nothing to do with average speeds, length of station stops or whether or not refreshments were offered or type of rolling stock.

A brand name was useful for a monolithic organisation to distinguish between the various groups of services and in BR's case 'InterCity' was also the name of the business sector which operated these trains.

With the advent of franchising such an all-embracing term became less useful for marketing purposes as the franchisees wanted to emphasise their business identity, so it was dropped.

There is absolutely no business or commercial need to try to force a rigid definition onto the train services offered. Speeds, frequencies, length of station stops and so on are defined by the franchise contract, track and station capacity, passenger volumes and so on and will vary from place to place and time to time. There are not, and never were, rigid types of train services; a continuum exists from short distance, all-stations metro type operations to longer distance services making few stops en route.

The Intercity Express Programme that you mention had, and has, no relevance to service offerings or anything else. It was the internal name of a project run by the Department of Transport to procure a replacement for the Class 43 power cars and Mark 3 coaches for the Great Western franchise. These eventually (after morphing from a diesel electric to an electric train with a sub-class also being fitted with diesel engines) emerged as the Class 80X.

Finally, what do you understand by 'success'?
 

LNW-GW Joint

Veteran Member
Joined
22 Feb 2011
Messages
19,555
Location
Mold, Clwyd
The European built trains weren't intended to be built at Newton Aycliffe, only the IEP units were guaranteed to be and that's what was done. Perhaps most importantly is the fact that if those units hadn't been built overseas they wouldn't all be in service yet.
The boom and bust nature of train manufacturing has been going on for a while, but that's a matter for another thread!

Wait till the "Alstom" sign goes up at Derby...
 

Thunderer

Member
Joined
29 Nov 2013
Messages
429
Location
South Wales
Well, that's just silly.

*Nowhere else* in the world are trains procured or run via Agility. It's exclusively a British Rosco and they only lease 80X series trains.

When people choose to use capitals to repeat content, instead of delivering some clear numerical evidence, it just makes me more suspicious that the claims are false.

So let's look at real numbers.

In today's money, the APTs worked out at £60M each.

Fourteen 21 metre coaches, of which two were power cars. So that's approximately same as Two x 5-car 80X series of 26 metre units. Passengers couldn't go between the front and back sets of the APT either.

As far as I can work out, a 10 Car 80X series works out at £40M - so the APT cost 50% more.

But it's worse. The APTs were so unreliable, it seemed to be policy to run a relief train behind them for when they broke down.

So as far as I can see, the APT was significantly more expensive to procure and operate than the 80X series.
APT's don't exist and never did in full service - prototype only. That comparison justifies nothing. In the present time i.e. Now, the IEP is the worlds most expensive train to procure and run - just accept a fact.
 

Thunderer

Member
Joined
29 Nov 2013
Messages
429
Location
South Wales
Does that claim still follow when you consider the number of follow-on orders for Class 80x variants beyond the original 800/801 GWML/ECML fleet. I.e.

Cornwall 802s
TPE 802s
Hull Trains
EMR
Etc...

I.e..for any new product you'd expect development costs to be sunk into production of the first series units?
I would have thought not because later 802's for the operators you have mentioned were not shackled to the IEP project, Agility Trains and operational restrictions like the GWR & LNER 800's. Hull, TPE, GWR 802's can choose how they fund,lease and operate their fleet with much more freedom than via the DFT Agility driven contracts.
 

Energy

Established Member
Joined
29 Dec 2018
Messages
4,420
APT's don't exist and never did in full service - prototype only. That comparison justifies nothing. In the present time i.e. Now, the IEP is the worlds most expensive train to procure and run - just accept a fact.
a) the APT did run a couple services I believe.
b) people aren't accepting that the "IEP is the worlds most expensive train to procure and run" because it is from a magazine, it may be a fairly reliable one but it will still aim to sell copies, does it say what its source is? I can't remember this being said by any source other than Modern Railways so because it is a quite a strong statement I, and probably others, would like to see another source.
 

Bletchleyite

Veteran Member
Joined
20 Oct 2014
Messages
97,538
Location
"Marston Vale mafia"
I would have thought not because later 802's for the operators you have mentioned were not shackled to the IEP project, Agility Trains and operational restrictions like the GWR & LNER 800's. Hull, TPE, GWR 802's can choose how they fund,lease and operate their fleet with much more freedom than via the DFT Agility driven contracts.

Though a potentially positive outcome of the Programme was to create that fairly reasonable train design that could then be ordered off the shelf at a reasonable price. There was not before an off the shelf universal UK gauge InterCity train. There now is.
 

43096

On Moderation
Joined
23 Nov 2015
Messages
15,162
There was not before an off the shelf universal UK gauge InterCity train. There now is.
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.
 

zn1

Member
Joined
3 Sep 2011
Messages
435
Newton Aycliffe is an assembly plant, its not a WORKS ..the shells are pre built, with all components fitted to the Body and Underframe...once the works have finished the assembly plant will close...unless it has the contract to complete all heavy overhauls, casualty repairs that is beyond a a Units home depot to complete...once the main contracts are completed no more than 100 employees will be needed to run the site.if it stays open... as for IEP being a success..well HST is only working out of St Pancras Now..the Squadrons are all run down to minimum requirements, Each vehicle will be operated until it becomes cheaper to scrap or flog than repair to main line standards...so has it been a success.....one can say YES..its working fine..
 

fgwrich

Established Member
Joined
15 Apr 2009
Messages
9,250
Location
Between Edinburgh and Exeter
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.

I'm now finding myself using SWR a lot more to get down to the West Country as well, changing at Exeter either for another 158 or funnily enough, a shortened HST Set.

Something else not exactly covered here is, perhaps the reason for the AT300 being so successful is the Japanese attitude to business. They are known for being fairly ruthless at selling their products to other countries, but will not allow anyone else's product in their country. It is known that during the IEP Procurement, a certain Mr Hammond (the then transport minister) was invited to several Tea parties held by the Japanese government, add in to the already mentioned "Hitachi or nothing else" written into the program by the DfT and things do start to stack up. First Group in their current state has probably got a good deal from Hitachi for further AT300s across 4 of it's operations, purely because little else exists to rival it and because First Group can hardly afford to design / develop little else in their current financial state.
 

43096

On Moderation
Joined
23 Nov 2015
Messages
15,162
I'm now finding myself using SWR a lot more to get down to the West Country as well, changing at Exeter either for another 158 or funnily enough, a shortened HST Set.

Something else not exactly covered here is, perhaps the reason for the AT300 being so successful is the Japanese attitude to business. They are known for being fairly ruthless at selling their products to other countries, but will not allow anyone else's product in their country. It is known that during the IEP Procurement, a certain Mr Hammond (the then transport minister) was invited to several Tea parties held by the Japanese government, add in to the already mentioned "Hitachi or nothing else" written into the program by the DfT and things do start to stack up. First Group in their current state has probably got a good deal from Hitachi for further AT300s across 4 of it's operations, purely because little else exists to rival it and because First Group can hardly afford to design / develop little else in their current financial state.
That’s one of my big objections to the whole thing. We’ve let Hitachi into the market here, yet there is no evidence of European manufacturers being given access to Japanese rolling stock markets. It should frankly never have been allowed to happen.
 

Bletchleyite

Veteran Member
Joined
20 Oct 2014
Messages
97,538
Location
"Marston Vale mafia"
Newton Aycliffe is an assembly plant, its not a WORKS ..the shells are pre built, with all components fitted to the Body and Underframe...once the works have finished the assembly plant will close...unless it has the contract to complete all heavy overhauls, casualty repairs that is beyond a a Units home depot to complete...once the main contracts are completed no more than 100 employees will be needed to run the site.if it stays open... as for IEP being a success..well HST is only working out of St Pancras Now..the Squadrons are all run down to minimum requirements, Each vehicle will be operated until it becomes cheaper to scrap or flog than repair to main line standards...so has it been a success.....one can say YES..its working fine..

It can of course be kept open by ordering more of them. There are many candidates - perhaps more for the WCML and ECML, a full fleet replacement at XC, ScotRail to replace the woefully unreliable HSTs, perhaps TPE could extend theirs to 7-car as will likely be needed at some point...I'm sure more can be found.
 

Bletchleyite

Veteran Member
Joined
20 Oct 2014
Messages
97,538
Location
"Marston Vale mafia"
That’s one of my big objections to the whole thing. We’ve let Hitachi into the market here, yet there is no evidence of European manufacturers being given access to Japanese rolling stock markets. It should frankly never have been allowed to happen.

But would the Programme, which is what this thread is about, have been much different if Bombardier or Siemens had built exactly the same thing? The spec was too tight for it to look much different - the only thing I'd have really expected different from a European manufacturer is that it'd have had plug doors because those manufacturers only do pocket doors if you *really really* insist (e.g. the Southeastern innersuburban Electrostar variant and TfL's similar one, the new Aventra-based version of which has plug doors).
 

fgwrich

Established Member
Joined
15 Apr 2009
Messages
9,250
Location
Between Edinburgh and Exeter
It can of course be kept open by ordering more of them. There are many candidates - perhaps more for the WCML and ECML, a full fleet replacement at XC, ScotRail to replace the woefully unreliable HSTs, perhaps TPE could extend theirs to 7-car as will likely be needed at some point...I'm sure more can be found.

But would they necessarily build them there though? They've had plenty of chances to give work to Newton Aycliffe, yet kept it turning over largely with the IEP Work (and laterally the 385). Only now are they changing it over to assembly of customer orders (First Group, Avanti and presumably EMR). All of the 802 Fleet has been constructed in Italy - that could have been shared with Newton Aycliffe, if they weren't in so much of a rush to please the TOCs and fill up their order books. I don't see why we should give in to the same attitude that Bombardier has had for Derby for many years - Give us the work or we'll close up for good, taken straight out of the book of the Highwayman.
 
Status
Not open for further replies.

Top