Great Western Coffee Shop

The AT300 / class 80x trains on the Midland Main Line will be known as "Aurora" - a sixth class name for trains in the same family.

Come the next year or two, will they be joined by "Cyflym rhwng dinasoedd" from Cardiff to Holyhead and "luath eadar-bhaile" from Glasgow and Edinburgh to Dundee, Aberdeen and Inverness?

I suspect that "IET" has become a somewhat toxic brand.
Hence other operators of what is indeed largely the same train wish to call it something else.

A comparison might be with HSTs when these were in more widespread use. They were generally liked and invariably known as HSTs, no matter where used or whom operated them.

IETs however have become linked in many peoples minds with a lower quality product, hence the desire to call them something else.

Possibly. Or perhaps just that when HSTs were introduced, there was only one operator with one identity, (and that HST name was well known to the travelling public by the time of privatisation) whereas now each operator seeks to stamp its own identity as much as possible.

A rather more likely answer I think! 

If you asked the "man in the street" what an IET was, or even the "woman on the platform" most would shrug their shoulders, let alone consider it a toxic brand.  After all, it's rarely referenced in train announcements, CIS displays, timetables, or other advertising.

According to Wikipedia the name Azuma was announced as a brand name before IET was anyway.

...or possibly the 'ble mae'r bwffe'?

We could ask that man in the street. Here are my guesses at the answers:

"The Train" - 89%
"AT300 / Class 80x" - 4%
"A zoomer/Javelin/Eisteddfod/Whatever" - Eh?
"High Speed Train" - 3%
"Intercity 125" - another 3%
"EMU with no buffet" - 1 (person, not %)

For the Spanish visitor, "Nova" will always sound like "Does not work".


Oooh, Gwiwerod coch!
 

I would question whether it's many people's minds, or some people's minds but they are the more vocal ones.  Oh - and I have to be careful what I write because it's coming to you through the WiFi system on an IET between Swindon and Bath, and I don't know what software filters the train has in place.  It might be listening to me  ;D

Good point. Better make that 2 (people, not %)

I did an informal survey amongst regular passengers in South Devon at the beginning of last year (about 50 pax) asking for their thoughts about the IETs without asking leading questions. You could count the number of positive responses regarding catering on the fingers of one hand. Probably 80% of responses referred to 'inferior catering' with a number adding 'if and when it is available'.

Also, the dozen or so First Class pax who were polled all suggested 'First Class isn't what it was'

I've always known them as (Inter City) 125s. It's only since I joined this forum that I've seen them called HST's instead.

I can't remember not using both names, and probably HST125 as well, ever since I first travelled on one (about 1978). So if one train can have multiple names even with one operator at one time, there's no chance of limiting the names with multiple operators!

Its Voyagers and Pendalinos that listen to you. Next time you are on one look at the grab handles on the seats. They look like ears

What happened to the steam-age way of naming?

With the predominantly grey interiors, and the prevailing economic climate at the time of introduction, surely the trains should be Austerities

That would complement the new home-built non-WTO car to replace the VW Golf GTi: the Leyland Brexit WTf.

At one point they were IEPs.

Was that not for  the Intercity Express Programme of which the IET was the train being resourced?

Yes, but the name did inevitably get applied to the train itself.

I've also heard them being referred to as HS125.

To those of us with an aviation background this is confusing as we had our own HS125 - a mid-sized bizjet, once designated the (ah!) de Havilland DH125, later the BAe125 and, finally (I think!) the Hawker 1000.

...and you thought the naming of trains was confusing.

Yes, although they were certainly referred to that in the early days quite regularly.  Then Hitachi branded them SETs (Super Express Train) and they were part of the AT300 series of trains, which are part of the wider Hitachi A-Train design.  Then along came the operator brand names mentioned on the thread title.   :-\

Is what Hitachi call them. Well, apart from the ones they call Javelin (which they also call AT395).
http://hitachirail-eu.com/products/our-trains/at300-intercity-high-speed

Ah! https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=cb2w2m1JmCY

Far from the case, it's just another pathetic marketing attempt by TOC's to make their trains sound special. It worked for LNER because there was only two operators of the type, now there is so many it's stupid. In 10 years time I expect they will all be known as IET's or something along that line.

I suspect that most passengers don't know or care that these trains are more or less the same. They may not even recognise the different brands and liveries; they do seem to change rather often.

Possibly the first time it even occurs to them that the trains might be the same is when they sit down with a thud, and think: Blimey, these seats are just as uncomfortable as an Azuma!

It?s a good IET conspiracy theory, but it doesn?t really explain why SWR need their own unnecessary name for what Bombardier call an Aventra.

There?s no reason as far as I can see why Aventra cannot be used by all the relevant operators, in the same way Electrostar was for the previous generation of EMU. 

(Although LO using Capitalstar for their version was a bit of a marketing thing; I don?t think it really caught on?)

Paul

I suspect that the term "IET" is more widely used and understood than some suggest. Much easier than saying "those new trains with hard seats and no* catering"
The GWR IETs in particular have had a lot of bad press regarding short formations, seating and no catering* Look on trip advisor and similar review sites it is not just me who considers them to be a backward step.
It is therefore understandable that other operators dont wish to admit that their new trains are similar.

*Yes I know that there is sometimes a trolley, but it is so often in the other portion, static, hiding in first, or entirely absent, that the general perception is that "IETs dont have catering"

There is a difference between "not admitting that your trains are similar" and "pretending that they're different."

Yes but it is rather a fine distinction for the average TOC publicity department. And of course sometimes they ARE (very slightly) different. "Our trains have a custom designed, cheerful interior" just don't mention seats, or catering.

That is totally the difference that publicity departments are about! "Travel in speed and comfort on an LNER Azuma" no need to mention GWR or any other operators or trains. Similarly, it's well known that VW, Skoda and Seat, or Renault and Nissan, or various other alliances, are basically the same cars with an array of different features. This is common enough knowledge that people talk of "VAG cars" but the advertisements don't say "This VW is just like a Skoda but made with teutonic precision" or "This Seat is just like a VW but cheaper and jollier". Instead they talk about the VW, the Seat, and its features.

So it is with these trains. When the publicity people talk of a "Paragon" they don't mean "an IET in different colours", they mean "our wonderful train, which we call Paragon". Ask an engineer "Isn't that the same as an IET?" and they'll say yes (unless they've been primed for interview!) but the marketing bods will reply along the lines of "It carries this many people in comfort from Trumpton to Chumpton in 1 hour 35 minutes, that's 16 minutes faster than the old train, we give you the newest, most up to date trains because we really want all our passengers to be the happiest".

Good points made there by Bmblbzzz. And of course its nothing new.

Mentioning the automotive industry I am reminded of the era of Badge Engineering (caps used because quotation marks just turn into bloody question marks!) when an Austin Calmbridge, a Morris Oxford and a Wolsely 1660 were exactly the same car but for the badge, the radiator grille and a few minor internal differences.

Hoping that I will not upset any forum member who is in marketing, this illustrates to me how sometimes a lot of time is spent on things which are ultimately pointless. I hope that non-one spent a lot of money on consultants when coming up with these names, because if they did it will largely be wasted.

Members of the public deciding whether to use a train will usually be faced with no choice as to the type of train. I cannot stand at Reading and wait for a 158 to Guildford because I will only get a Turbo. I doubt that anyone will decide that they will take a train to Newcastle because it is called an Azuma - a name that means nothing in the context of what the journey will be like. The HST125 branding was in the context of a national campaign to get us all back on the trains, and externally they were so different to what went before it worked in terms of making an impact on the public consciousness. Whatever the technical advances under the skin, and change from what is two locomotives at the ends to engines and motors under the floor, the IETs etc are still streamlined multiple units (and that comment is not intended to be disparaging).

It is not like a consumer product. Even then I suspect it is the product rather than the name that ultimately makes a product a success. Mini is no more distinctive than Imp, Golf no more than Allegro, Fiesta than Sunbeam, but once the product hits the spot, the name becomes synonymous with success and is used again and again.

If the rail industry as a whole really wanted to use the new generation of trains to leverage a further increase in rail travel they should have got together and had a combined their resources to promote the new generation of trains - HST2 might not have been a bad start but for the fact it may now be associated with the controversial new HS2 project. Travel on GWR/LNER/ whatever on our new HST2 trains seems to me more likely to have an impact if it was linked to an RDG campaign promoting a new generation of sustainable high speed express trains throughout the country.

Consignia anyone?

Quite possibly, though there must be some advantage as TOC?s keep doing it - as mentioned Voyager, Pendolino, Meridian, and Adelante are all examples of the same thing happening almost 20 years ago.  Sprinter, Turbo and Pacer from 30 years ago. 

All of those names would get the same blank stare when mentioned to most of the travelling public mind you.

Probably a good idea overall. Crucial difference: promoting rail travel rather than promoting the operator.

The High Speed Diesel Trains as they were officially known (shortened to HST) were branded a Intercity 125 by BR on their launch.  The Mk4's and class 91 on the ECML were branded by BR initially as Intercity 225 but was quietly dropped because the 140mph running was not economic.

Its interesting that GWR did not give the class 800 a name, although I don't the general traveling public care too much about a name

As the 800 class are spreading across operators, it makes no sense to give them different names. Just think of how changes in franchise holder would be handled. Would a Nova become a Zoomer if LNER ever took over Transpennine services?

Given LNER are run by the government, and TPE are also effectively run by the government, I don?t see it making a huge difference.  ;)