Is this good news

[whole diary]

[basset44]

Wow, this must be good

http://uk.news.yahoo.com/4/20090212/tuk-huge-train-order-to-provide-12-500-j-dba1618.html

[Tim]

On the face of it very good news.  Lots of questions though from big things like "how does it fit with electricifcation plans) to details like, "will they have buffets"

[eightf48544]

Depends on what they build.

Another Vomiter or high density HST^▸ (High Speed Train) will make long distance train travel unpleasant for another 30 years. We don't want 737 interiors.

Hopefully the hybrid will die a death.

Why DaFT^» (Department for Transport - critical sounding abbreviation I discourage - about) is obesessed with  fixed formation multi units for what are only 200 kph trains when Europe is tending to use loco and coaches for these services to give flexibility and possiblity of serving non wired destinations with a loco is a mystery.

The general opinion of the rolling stock world is that the IEP^▸ (Intercity Express Program / Project.) specification is impossible to meet as it defies the laws of physics. So it will be interesting to see how well Haitachi has met the spec.

Bombardier must be breathing a sigh of relief. Alstrom had already dropped out to concentrate on their AVG for High Speed lines.

[broadgage]

Well it is certainly good news for those employed on the project, at a time of rising unemployment.

As to whether it is good news for passengers on FGW^▸ (First Great Western) and elswhere, that remains to be seen.

In the past, many new trains have been a backward step for passengers, since new trains have generaly been shorter, with minimal catering, few tables, limited luggage space, and reduced legroom.

Also, in the past, new trains have been replacements, but what we need now in many cases is extra rolling stock, not replacements.
There will be no gain for passengers if say 40 HSTs^▸ (High Speed Train) are scrapped and 36 new trains introduced (new trains are often introduced in smaller numbers than the ones they replace, because it is hoped that will have higher availability. This is seldom achieved in practice)

There is no reason why refurbished HSTs cant remain in service for another 20 years or more.
With many services grossly overcrowded, what we need is a new build of full length inter-city trains, at least 12 coaches, with restaurant, hot buffet, facing seats with tables, luggage space etc.
These should be in addition to the HSTs which should be retained for less busy services and secondary main line routes.
Any spare HSTs that result should not be scrapped but should displace the unsuitable DMUs^▸ (Diesel Multiple Unit) used on many longer routes.
The resultant spare DMUs should of course not be scrapped but used to increase train lengths.

At a time when the rail network is increasingly congested, we need to move away from trying to provide more trains, and move towards longer trains.

Overcrowded HSTs should be replaced with new 12 coach trains
Overcrowded or unsuitable DMUs should be replaced with HSTs
Overcrowded, but otherwise suitable DMUs should be lengthened.

Only in very exceptional circumstances should anything be scrapped, better a seat on an old train than standing on a new one!
Older less efficient or less reliable trains should be kept in reserve and used for peak flows or in case of breakdown etc.

[Electric train]

Network Rail's aspiration is still electrification of the GWML^▸ (Great Western Main Line), it would appear that these new trains will be multi mode which will not detract from electrification argument. 

Electrification of the whole of the core GWML route London Bristol / South Wales is at least 10 years away, it is not part of the CP4^▸ (Control Period 4 - the five year period between 2009 and 2014) plan, hope is it will be part of CP5^▸ (Control Period 5 - the five year period between 2014 and 2019) but more than likely it will be part of CP6^▸ (Control Period 6 - The five year period between 2019 and 2024)

[grahame]

There is no reason why refurbished HSTs^▸ (High Speed Train) cant remain in service for another 20 years or more.

Only in very exceptional circumstances should anything be scrapped, better a seat on an old train than standing on a new one!

"Better a seat in an old train than standing in a new one" ... absolutely.  And may I add "better an old train than no train at all". Retaining older units would give stock availability for services such as Portishead (from where the TV featured a 90 minute journey into Bristol - 12 miles - by road), the TransWilts (six SSTCs^▸ (Strategically Significant Towns and Cities) in the RSS^▸ (Regional Spatial Strategy) in 40 miles - growth plans which are, I believe, unique in the country), and perhaps Radstock, Henbury loop, Tavistock, Minehead, and Swindon to Bedford.

I have heard that the HSTs "must" be withdrawn by December 2019 due to safety issues, and the 14x series too.  But I don't understand how they will become significantly more dangerous at that time, and would be grateful for an explanation.  I think I would rather ride in a 143 in my retirement than drive myself in a car ...

[r james]

Will Grand Central tag on tothis order do you think??

And Maybe XC^▸ (Cross Country Trains (franchise)) will benefit from it? r are they expected to benefit from the displaced voyagers once the WCML^▸ (West Coast Main Line) Pendos are built?

[inspector_blakey]

I have heard that the HSTs^▸ (High Speed Train) "must" be withdrawn by December 2019 due to safety issues, and the 14x series too.  But I don't understand how they will become significantly more dangerous at that time, and would be grateful for an explanation.  I think I would rather ride in a 143 in my retirement than drive myself in a car ...

I don't know what the safety argument is for withdrawing HSTs...the mark 3s are built like tanks, as the good crash protection they offered to passengers in the accidents at Southall, Ladbroke Grove and Ufton Nervett showed. However, the sooner the network is rid of the 14x series the better. These things consist in essence of bus bodies attached to wagon underframes by wire straps (I'm not making this up). Various safety experts such as Stanley Hall argue that they are considerably less crashworthy than the much-vilified mark I stock. This would appear to be born out by an accident at Winsford some years ago in which a four-car 142 empty stock (fortunately) working SPADed the signal at the end of a loop and ran onto the main line in front of a Virgin service hauled by a class 87 locomotive. The rear pacer unit was all but destroyed, with the body actually displaced from the underframe. The 87 didn't appear to suffer much more severe damage than a few scratches in the paintwork.

[Tim]

Depends on what they build.

Another Vomiter or high density HST^▸ (High Speed Train) will make long distance train travel unpleasant for another 30 years. We don't want 737 interiors.

Hopefully the hybrid will die a death.

Why DaFT^» (Department for Transport - critical sounding abbreviation I discourage - about) is obesessed with  fixed formation multi units for what are only 200 kph trains when Europe is tending to use loco and coaches for these services to give flexibility and possiblity of serving non wired destinations with a loco is a mystery.

The general opinion of the rolling stock world is that the IEP^▸ (Intercity Express Program / Project.) specification is impossible to meet as it defies the laws of physics. So it will be interesting to see how well Haitachi has met the spec.

Bombardier must be breathing a sigh of relief. Alstrom had already dropped out to concentrate on their AVG for High Speed lines.

They ought to be better than the vomiters because they will not (normally) be powered by underfloor engines.  

The plan is for higher acceleraton to be achieved by using powered axles along the length of the train (distributed power distribution).  The juice comes from a Pantograph or a diesel power car at the end.   As electrification expands you ought to be able to swap a powercar for a pantograph car, so there is some flexibility

However, the plans are for the rake to include a small DMU^▸ (Diesel Multiple Unit)-style underfloor engine for use in depot moves and for when the wires come down (by providing heating/lighting and possibly low speed traction).  Presumably this will be switched off in normal service?

Does anyone know if 26m long cars (as opposed to the HST 23m) will create route avliability/platforming problems?


But lets hope things like luggage space, catering, adequate toilets etc are not neglected as they have been on recent new trains

[RailCornwall]

DFT^▸ (Department for Transport)-Rail Press Release

Includes downloadable pack in zip form at the bottom of the page which contains High Res Images and also Hitachi Rail Promo Video (excepts of which were shown on BBC^» (British Broadcasting Corporation - home page) News Channel this morning).

The seating doesn't look on the surface to be very comfortable, I also have concerns about the buffet provision too.

[onthecushions]

I read this as a make-work, job creation announcement combined with a let-industry-sort-out-IEP^▸ (Intercity Express Program / Project.) decision.

The consortium is a Civil Engineering Consultant, (to cut the platforms back) a foreign, non-European manufacturer (to provide the technology that the UK^▸ (United Kingdom) is too lazy to work out) and a Bank to finance it all.

Hitachi, like any other manufacturer, will certainly eliminate DfT^» (Department for Transport - about) pipe-dreams, and with 26m cars, could build a UIC car-length competitor train for Europe. There is also a UK manufacturing requirement, just like a US defence purchase. How high-level these jobs will be is anyone's guess - possibly just flat-pack assembly.

There are bits of train making still left in the UK. Could these (or should they) be technically leading or at least collaborating ? Perhaps in 20 years time we shall have, as well as Toyota, Nissan and Honda UK car makers, Hitachi RC&WW plc.

OTC.

[broadgage]

Reading the above press release is a bit worrying!

1)the picture of cattle class appears to be mainly high density bus seats without tables, as on FGW^▸ (First Great Western) "improved" HSTs^▸ (High Speed Train).

2) They refer to 21% more seats, thats not much when looking at the overcrowding on todays services, I suggest that we need new trains with a substantialy increased capacity, 12 coachs instead of 7/8 (or pro rata if longer coaches are to be used)

3) they also refer to replacing the HSTs, what we need surely is new full length trains to suplement the HSTs which could still work less busy trains and/or secondary routes.

4) It will probably be discovered at the last minute, that the 26M long coaches wont fit some curved platforms without spending an extra few billion^ (meanwhile we can use a 2 car DMU^▸ (Diesel Multiple Unit))

If proper catering and luggage space was to be provided, we could spend a vast amount of public money to end up with less comfortable trains that only carry about 10% more passengers, hows that for progress!

[devon_metro]

It looks quite good and isn't a DMU^▸ (Diesel Multiple Unit) with cramped curved walls.

[Timmer]

I can almost guarantee they won't be better than the HSTs^▸ (High Speed Train) they replace in every way other than speed.

[r james]

How many carraiges will each train have?