Transilien
Member
So IETs are better?FLIRT sucks. Proper trains are better.
So IETs are better?FLIRT sucks. Proper trains are better.
What might be "proper trains" to you is just a fake train to someone else because the term is almost meaningless. Some people could just as well argue that any stock built from the first diesels aren't proper trains because they aren't big beautiful steam engines hauling coaches. For what it's worth I'm glad the industry doesn't operate with the same mindset or we'd have never progressed beyond cable-hauled wagons.i am just going to say it will be a mistake. I am done with this convo. FLIRT sucks. Proper trains are better.
So essentially, you have no good reason to smear these trains and have to resort to calling them ‘unproper’ or whatever else.i am just going to say it will be a mistake. I am done with this convo. FLIRT sucks. Proper trains are better.
CAF make the Mk5.Have Stadler categorically stated that they will accept no further orders and produce no further MK 5 stock for the UK market?
Seems to me Scotrail should be hiring some in right now, whilst they are off-lease, to test them for performance, staff feedback, and customer feedback.
As for 220/221/222 units, if a battery capable of delivering 700kW can be slung under an 802 unit, then there should be some consideration made to replacing a Voyager/Meridian engine with a battery too. Maybe under the DMS's on a 5 car unit to leave three diesel powered coaches? Would make a massive difference to the exit from Queen Street and Waverley with 40% fewer engines but all of the oomph.
Mk 5s are CAF.Have Stadler categorically stated that they will accept no further orders and produce no further MK 5 stock for the UK market?
Yes you can walk through the power pack, and they have power sliding doors at each end.The more I see and read of these "FLIRTs" the more I like them. I've never had a chance to travel on one as they are used well away from my usual stomping grounds. A 100mph capable version sounds like it would work well in Scotland.
Can passengers walk through the "power pack" in the centre of the train on the diesel powered 231s?
Yep, in common with the other power pack fitted Stadler units in the UK.Can passengers walk through the "power pack" in the centre of the train on the diesel powered 231s?
I would be very, very surprised if they decide to start tinkering with batteries in 20+ year old diesel units- especially if they can’t get Alstom on board (Bombardier, who made the 22Xs, have since been taken over). It has all the potential of a ‘we gave the HST a new engine as a cheaper stopgap’ situation all over again.Have Stadler categorically stated that they will accept no further orders and produce no further MK 5 stock for the UK market?
Seems to me Scotrail should be hiring some in right now, whilst they are off-lease, to test them for performance, staff feedback, and customer feedback.
As for 220/221/222 units, if a battery capable of delivering 700kW can be slung under an 802 unit, then there should be some consideration made to replacing a Voyager/Meridian engine with a battery too. Maybe under the DMS's on a 5 car unit to leave three diesel powered coaches? Would make a massive difference to the exit from Queen Street and Waverley with 40% fewer engines but all of the oomph.
Greater Anglia’s FLIRTs are already 100mph capable, so no issues there as far as ScotRail is concerned.The more I see and read of these "FLIRTs" the more I like them. I've never had a chance to travel on one as they are used well away from my usual stomping grounds. A 100mph capable version sounds like it would work well in Scotland.
Can passengers walk through the "power pack" in the centre of the train on the diesel powered 231s?
I can't see any further MK5 stock being used unless bi-mode locomotives were procured with them.Have Stadler categorically stated that they will accept no further orders and produce no further MK 5 stock for the UK market?
Seems to me Scotrail should be hiring some in right now, whilst they are off-lease, to test them for performance, staff feedback, and customer feedback.
But designed and built in Spain which is this side of the world. Based on a platform which is already in service in the UK.Those are from the literal other side of the world, so they’d essentially be buying a new design with the associated higher costs. Plus I imagine there’d be a substantial redesign needed to take into account the substantial differences between Scotland and Australia.
But designed and built in Spain which is this side of the world. Based on a platform which is already in service in the UK.
Doesn’t look too far off what is being asked for really. Bi-mode with buffet facilities and improved accessibility.
Out of interest what potential orders do you see for them? (Mods feel free to remove if off topic)If going CAF it'll probably just be the Class 897 which already seems to have a few potential orders.
I reckon boarding a 745 is quicker than for a Class 80x or 22xOk with one door per carriage you add some dwell time. But you also make loading and unloading wheelchairs, heavy luggage and bikes a lot quicker. And you virtually eliminate the risk of trips and falls when boarding/alighting. I'd say that's worth some extra dwell time.
Out of interest what potential orders do you see for them? (Mods feel free to remove if off topic)
The poster is real and has been on this forum for a while. Going by their previous use of “vote kicked”, I presume they are young.Is it possible you were on a bid team that lost to the 755?![]()
This being Scotland, it would be quite on-brand for a political demand for some unnecessary requirement to be incorporated as 100% essential in the design brief. Limiting options and increasing costs.Back on topic, I predict ScotRail will go out to tender, the usual suspects will submit bids, the range of in-production designs is obvious, and the cheapest compliant whole-life bid will win.
It is beyond me how you can say a FLIRT sucks when you have never ridden on one. This is laughable, pointless and worthless criticismi am just going to say it will be a mistake. I am done with this convo. FLIRT sucks. Proper trains are better.
To be fair, the overt trainspotter bias is at least honest. I can respect that.It is beyond me how you can say a FLIRT sucks when you have never ridden on one. This is laughable, pointless and worthless criticism
Does that apply to diesel mode?Greater Anglia’s FLIRTs are already 100mph capable, so no issues there as far as ScotRail is concerned.
Does that apply to diesel mode?
I note TfW's diesel-only 231s are 90mph units.
While nice trains, the 231s seem to me to be utilitarian internally (seat spacing etc), and not suitable for long-distance work.
Stadler will, obviouslyI wonder though with all recent publicity with Tanni Grey-Thompson and the issues at Kings Cross will push level boarding to the forefront of the bid.
How many suppliers would have level boarding models ready for uk production?
I'm sure CAF would be willing to build more, but I doubt any ROSCO would be willing to finance it.Have Stadler categorically stated that they will accept no further orders and produce no further MK 5 stock for the UK market?
not only are there already 100mph capable FLIRTs in service, the GA ones were reported to be upgradeable to 110mph if later required. The FLIRT platform is also available for up to 125mph in Europe.The more I see and read of these "FLIRTs" the more I like them. I've never had a chance to travel on one as they are used well away from my usual stomping grounds. A 100mph capable version sounds like it would work well in Scotland.
yes, the 100mph applies to diesel mode as well as electric.Does that apply to diesel mode?
I note TfW's diesel-only 231s are 90mph units.
While nice trains, the 231s seem to me to be utilitarian internally (seat spacing etc), and not suitable for long-distance work.
plus a related 250 km/h design in production.... the GA ones were reported to be upgradeable to 110mph if later required. The FLIRT platform is also available for up to 125mph in Europe.
I actually think the 385s are great, at least as a commuter train for journeys up to an hour. The standard class seats are more comfortable to me than those on the Azumas (especially with the latter starting to collapse). It's almost as if the A-train platform is better suited to the commuter rail products that it is mainly used for in Japan....I'm sitting on The Chieftain now and, while much has been said about the Azumas, I find it far more comfortable and pleasant than any 385 I've ever been on.
And after a delay because of a fallen tree near Blair Athol the catering team have done an extra couple of runs with both the hot and cold drinks.
I still believe that unless ScotRail manage to specify and obtain something of a reasonable standard, and provide a good service with it, many travellers from the North will continue to look to The Chieftain as the first choice.
I think the 385 suffers from an uninviting interior.I actually think the 385s are great, at least as a commuter train for journeys up to an hour. The standard class seats are more comfortable to me than those on the Azumas (especially with the latter starting to collapse). It's almost as if the A-train platform is better suited to the commuter rail products that it is mainly used for in Japan....
Agreed. A well equipped FLIRT would be excellent for Intercity, but their often lower capacity means they aren’t my first choice for a commuter train.But that is not an argument in favour of using a 385 derivative to replace the HSTs! Hopefully the budget allows for something genuinely suited to the task, ideally a FLIRT.