Intercity Express Programme (IEP) - ongoing discussion

[whole diary]

[paul7575]

I doubt there's anywhere else they could be - as they need air cooling.

Paul

I agree,  There isn't anywhere else obvious to put them.  I predict that there will be problems at high tide. 

But not every high tide.    They come round twice a day normally.   I expect you need some sort of increased sea state as well...

[stuving]

There is a requirement about sea spray, but it's not very specific as to how much there is nor how hard it's trying to get in:

TS1983 Full Functionality of the IEP^▸ (Intercity Express Program / Project.) Trains must be maintained during and after exposure to salt water spray and such exposure must not cause excessive cosmetic degradation of exposed surfaces, components and equipment.

And there are a couple of related bad weather requirements:

TS1844 The IEP Trains must maintain Full Functionality during and after running through floodwater up to a depth of 100mm above rail level although speed restrictions may be applied if necessary.
TS1845 The IEP Trains must maintain Full Functionality during and after running through snow up to a depth of (above rail level):

• 200mm; continuous operation with no speed restriction; and
  
• 300mm; continuous operation is required but reduced speeds are permitted.

[Tim]

Interesting thanks.  What a mine of information this forum is

[chrisr_75]

There is a requirement about sea spray, but it's not very specific as to how much there is nor how hard it's trying to get in:

TS1983 Full Functionality of the IEP^▸ (Intercity Express Program / Project.) Trains must be maintained during and after exposure to salt water spray and such exposure must not cause excessive cosmetic degradation of exposed surfaces, components and equipment.

And there are a couple of related bad weather requirements:

TS1844 The IEP Trains must maintain Full Functionality during and after running through floodwater up to a depth of 100mm above rail level although speed restrictions may be applied if necessary.
TS1845 The IEP Trains must maintain Full Functionality during and after running through snow up to a depth of (above rail level):

• 200mm; continuous operation with no speed restriction; and
  
• 300mm; continuous operation is required but reduced speeds are permitted.

I assume the snow specifications are aimed primarily at the units for the ECML^▸ (East Coast Main Line)? Sorry if it's been discussed earlier, but are they being built to the exact same specification (except perhaps the interior fit) as the GWML^▸ (Great Western Main Line) units?

[TonyK]

Interesting thanks.  What a mine of information this forum is

Some of it useful.

[stuving]

I assume the snow specifications are aimed primarily at the units for the ECML^▸ (East Coast Main Line)? Sorry if it's been discussed earlier, but are they being built to the exact same specification (except perhaps the interior fit) as the GWML^▸ (Great Western Main Line) units?

I think it's more that they might be moved to anywhere (where they would be suitable) later on. Put another way, the design brief didn't say "for use on the GWML/ECML plus a bit further, and will never be used elsewhere at any time in their working life."

[IndustryInsider]

Regarding the debate on journey times with IEP^▸ (Intercity Express Program / Project.)'s under predominantly diesel power, Barry Doe predicts up to an extra 10 minutes on existing journey times from London to Bristol and Cardiff.  I don't think he'll be correct on this one.  

The top end acceleration of an IEP on diesel will no doubt be worse than a HST^▸ (High Speed Train), but I expect the low speed acceleration to be better, the braking will be better (anyone who's driven a HST knows how long it takes to apply and release the brakes through the E70 unit!), but most importantly the dwell times at stations will be far better.  I think (as do others) that those factors will largely outweigh the lack of 125mph running on the sections of track where that currently happens.

My main concern is over engine reliability as it will be crucial that all engines are working OK - if a 5-car bi-mode is running on two engines, or a 9-car on four engines, you're looking at very slow acceleration and a maximum of around 70mph on level track (based on how a Class 180 performs on two engines).  That really would affect journey times.

[ChrisB]

Hitachi would have to replace any defective units during turn-rounds. They are contracted to have x number of properly working units in service each day, or they payca penalty

[John R]

Hitachi would have to replace any defective units during turn-rounds. They are contracted to have x number of properly working units in service each day, or they payca penalty

However the original contract would have been predicated on a much lower usage of the diesel engines, and you can bet that any variation on that contract will ensure that they don't get caught out by the units being used to a much greater extent.

[ChrisB]

Indeed, the contract nay be dearer for this, but the T&Cs re availability won't change. There will be a legal requirement for x fully working hnits every day

[chrisr_75]

I assume the snow specifications are aimed primarily at the units for the ECML^▸ (East Coast Main Line)? Sorry if it's been discussed earlier, but are they being built to the exact same specification (except perhaps the interior fit) as the GWML^▸ (Great Western Main Line) units?

I think it's more that they might be moved to anywhere (where they would be suitable) later on. Put another way, the design brief didn't say "for use on the GWML/ECML plus a bit further, and will never be used elsewhere at any time in their working life."

Thanks, that's pretty much what I had thought, it just came out in slightly different words! I guess this first production run of IEP^▸ (Intercity Express Program / Project.) is perhaps the pioneer of a 'standard' type of intercity rolling stock?

[IndustryInsider]

Indeed, the contract nay be dearer for this, but the T&Cs re availability won't change. There will be a legal requirement for x fully working hnits every day

That's as maybe, but if (and it's just an if) those engines are unreliable and were to fail during the day, then losing an engine would cause more problems than losing an engine on a 180 which is very common.

[ChrisB]

but only on the trip it was making at the time - my understanding is that Hitachi would be required to put another into service for its next service

[IndustryInsider]

Depending on location and time of day that won't often be practicable.  For example a train heading down to the Cotswolds.

[ChrisB]

Obviously in conjunction with the TOC^▸ (Train Operating Company) getting a driver to the replacement, but Hitachi are meant to have standbys ready to push into service for a failure. We'll have to see how this pans out.