Xtrapolis concept and articulation

[j0hn0]

Does anyone know more about the Bombardier Xtrapolis concept for E/DMU's?

I've seen a picture of it and it seems crude and over-complicated compared to TGV's. They say it will provide more capacity, but with the high floors, will this matter? Low slung regional Eurostars worked well on the ECML but is it all to do with what we can get rather than design trains ourselves like we used to?

APT had tilting articulated bogies, any reason why we haven't seen these since?

Any pro's and cons would be nice from people more in the know than me, Germany obviously don't share the same views as the french concerning the subject so I was wondering what your views were.

cheers

 

[GNERman]

apparently its to be used as the new thameslink replacement
seems to be over complicated and whats with the whole articulated front
seems to add more weight than ACTUALLY needed...

 

[Edvid]

It's currently a potential Thameslink train, we won't know who the successful bidder is for 11 months.

 

[j0hn0]

certainly looks over-engineered though for the negligable benefits

 

[Edvid]

Almost forgot - Xtrapolis is actually an Alstom product. Bombardier's latest EMU product is by and large an updated Electrostar.

 

[mackenzie_blu]

Alstom has gone to alot of effort with Xtrapolis to try and win the Thameslink and Crossrail order.

Time will tell who wins.

Bombarbier offering Electrostar mk2 may not be the best thing as both FCC and TfL aren't to happy with thier ability to deliver the current generation Electrostar.

 

[The Box Photter]

I really wish the train manufacturers would stop trying to re-invent the train every time a new batch of rolling stock is ordered.

Speaking as a current FCC "customer" I'd be quite happy to get to use the class 377s that have been trumpeted as a gigantic leap forward. They only seem to use them on northbound trains from Brighton in the morning peak and southbound trains to Brighton in the evening peak.

Would the powers-that-be please understand that we'd like:

1. A seat
2. Trains that are warm in the winter and cool in the summer
3. Seats designed with the comfort of the passenger in mind
4. Seat density of NO MORE THAN 2+2
5. Toilets in every other carriage that work and are vandal-proof
6. No on-train TV or other annoying electrical devices

The bogies beneath a Mk3 carriage seem to provide a good enough ride, just build more Plastic Pigs, with up to date traction equipment.

I've ridden on class 170s, 156s, 158s, 180s, 185s, 220s, 221s and 222s ....they're all awful for more than a 20 minute journey. Engine noise, cramped seats, hard seats, poor views from windows, toilets that don't work/overflow/smell and poor ride quality.

Loco+carriages should be the way forward. Not fixed formations.

There, rant over.

 

[asylumxl]

Bet Hitachi wins lol (ok I'm being a wee-bit pessimistic about the government and it's seeming love for Hitachi).

 

[LucaZone]

Articulated sets are only really advantageous on fixed formation lines in my view.

Both Thameslink and CrossRail would benefit from having sets that can be joined and split quickly and easily, and having articulated sets isnt going to be very pro in that respect.

I like the SWT operation of having 12 car formations out of Waterloo, slowly filtering down to 3, 4 or 5 car formationas as you reach the extremities of their network.

In this respect, an off the shelf upgraded Electrostar is a more favourable option in my view.

 

[mackenzie_blu]

Have a look here at an image of the Electrostar mk2.

The units won't be able to uncouple and couple in service like the current Electrostar it seems looking at the front. Then again both Thameslink and Crossrail are looking for trains that are fixed rather than, like currently, able to uncouple in off peak periods.

 

[jopsuk]

Eh? I'm not sure how you come to that conclusion? The presence (or lack of) of an end gangway hardly inhibits coupling/decoupling in service. I'm sure the 2nd generation Electrostar will end up with a wide range of front-ends, just like the 1st generation. Compare the 357 (which that looks most like- it has the same front as the 170) to the 375/377 (gangwayed), the 376 and the 378.

Though what that front looks MOST like is the 22x family.

 

[asylumxl]

Ok. Forgive me if i'm wrong, but i just realised something. How will either design work if there is no emergency door at the front? It won't be cleared for use in the tunnel.

 

[jopsuk]

Because neither design is specifically for Thameslink. The streamlined frontend looks better in the concept shots, but when they submit specific bids, I'm betting the design will be quite different.

 

[asylumxl]

E.g. An Electrostar MKI with new headlights?

 

[jopsuk]

E.g. An Electrostar MKI with new headlights?

Depends which Mk1 you mean- either the 375/377 design or the 378 (which has no gangway, but has an emergency door for tunnel work) would meet the criteria. Or, possibly, something more sloping?

 

[90019]

Or, possibly, something more sloping?

Like the Gautrain?

Which is an Electrostar, just with a different front.

 

[jopsuk]

Like the Gautrain?

Which is an Electrostar, just with a different front.

It is indeed- but I was thinking more a rounded version of a 319 front- to satisfy the "emergency doors" requirement.