Why are the IEP "trains" going to GWR First......

[tgrb]

....when they could be better utilised under the wires on VTEC, and that's where most the successful testing is going on?

I'm a more regular GWR user so I'm not complaining about this (yet) but reading hear and other places I can't work out why GWR are getting the priority? Cascades? First to order? And being they've had to change the order for more bi-modes I can't get my head round it. And also I think VTEC don't get there's until some considerable time after?

Thanks - apologies if stupid question

 

[Roast Veg]

Cascades is the key issue as far as I can make out - VTEC have usable stock that can last into the near future, whereas the HSTs on GWR are being asked for right now to replace and cascade sprinter stock and the 180s are on the way out as well.

 

[JN114]

Also don't forget when the procurement plan was written and agreed, the GW electrification was due to be a lot further along than it is. Changing 9 figure rolling stock procurement contracts isn't easy.

 

[LNW-GW Joint]

The IEP procurement was started well before the GW electrification was authorised.
In fact it was originally an "HST2" project.
FGW/GWR is totally dependent on HSTs.
EC with a much newer IC225 fleet isn't, and its remaining HSTs are not as old as most of those on the GW (though there has been some mixing of vehicles over the years).

The IEP orders were in 3 sections, and placed at different times:
(a) GW Bristol/South Wales
(b) EC HST replacement
(c) EC IC225 replacement

The HSTs were close to life expiry.
The last of these orders could easily have gone to another supplier, or continued with IC225s, but the DfT chose to exercise the IEP option.
Other AT300 orders (not under the IEP contracts) have since been made by First Group (for GWR, TPE and Hull Trains).

 

[DarloRich]

From what I understand contractual terms dictate they go west first - despite the supporting infrastructure being less advanced

 

[tgrb]

Thanks guys - thank kinda makes sense of the nonsense!

 

[a_c_skinner]

Thanks guys - thank kinda makes sense of the nonsense!

It explains it. It doesn't make sense of it.

 

[tgrb]

It explains it. It doesn't make sense of it.

That's what I meant

 

[Bertie the bus]

Cascades is the key issue as far as I can make out - VTEC have usable stock that can last into the near future, whereas the HSTs on GWR are being asked for right now to replace and cascade sprinter stock and the 180s are on the way out as well.

That’s not the reason. The IEP project pre-dates the HSTs going to ScotRail. ScotRail are taking HSTs because they are being released by GWR, not the other way round. The 180s to Grand Central is also irrelevant as the government isn’t interested in the rolling stock requirements of an open access operator.

 

[43096]

EC with a much newer IC225 fleet isn't, and its remaining HSTs are not as old as most of those on the GW (though there has been some mixing of vehicles over the years).

Given that the youngest HSTs are 35 years old this year, I don't think age is really that much of a factor given the huge mileages they've done.

You might also want to check who has which power cars if it is, because GW has the majority of both the youngest and oldest vehicles.

 

[Mikey C]

It's unfortunate, as replacement of the EC HSTs would be the perfect place to introduce IEPs, as they'd remove at a stroke vast amounts of diesel under the wires operating, rather than operating on the hotch potch of late running electrified line out of Paddington, where they'd have to operate far more in diesel mode...