SRA announce ECML bidders

[David Marsh]

[Forwarded for info]

begin quote from gwr4090 in uk.railway
about: SRA announce ECML bidders

The SRA today announced that four organisations have sucessfully
pre-qualified as bidders for the InterCity East Coast franschise from 1
(1) DSB (Danish Railways)
(2) First London, Scottish and North East Railways Ltd (First Group plc)
(3) great north eastern Railway Ltd (Sea Containers Ltd)
(4) InterCity Railways (Deutsche Bahn, Stagecoach and Virgin Group)
David

[David Marsh]

[Unreadable in Outlook, here's why: http://viewport.co.uk/outlook ]
begin quote from Neil Williams in uk.railway
about: Re: SRA announce ECML bidders

The SRA today announced that four organisations have sucessfully
pre-qualified as bidders for the InterCity East Coast franschise from 1
(1) DSB (Danish Railways)

Hmm...

Why the "Hmm"?
I'm sure they'd be capable of doing a very good job?

(2) First London, Scottish and North East Railways Ltd (First Group plc)

As long as it doesn't get a silly name.

Indeed.
What's the general feeling among, say, First Great Western passengers as
to how well First have done?

(3) great north eastern Railway Ltd (Sea Containers Ltd)

May have been a good choice, but Sherwood's latest outburst has put me
right off that one. SeaCo don't deserve *any* rail franchises now, IMO,
profitable or otherwise.

I don't know. I feel gNEr have done a very good job with ICEC up until
now, although admittedly a large part of that is because they had new
trains and new OHLE (although that's been problematic in itself,
sometimes) to start with.

There's also the fact, that I particularly appreciate, that gNEr are now
the only trainco which exclusively operate a fleet of "real" trains. I
wouldn't be comfortable with an EMU (unless very highly-specced) or (far
worse) a DMU on the long-distance journey between Scotland and London.

(4) InterCity Railways (Deutsche Bahn, Stagecoach and Virgin Group)

A most interesting combination. I wonder would it be marketed as VT or
would they actually get away with reintroducing the IC brand, and perhaps
DB ICE-style livery? I wonder what a 91+Mk4 set would look like in
Verkehrsrot?

Indeed, an interesting combination.
But Voyagers or Pendolinos on ECML, no thanks!
I want my real trains with table seats!
I wonder whether DB's involvement would extend to particular
decision-making regarding what rolling stock would be used?

[ANDREW ROBERT BREEN]

Post by David Marsh
There's also the fact, that I particularly appreciate, that gNEr are now
the only trainco which exclusively operate a fleet of "real" trains. I
wouldn't be comfortable with an EMU (unless very highly-specced) or (far
worse) a DMU on the long-distance journey between Scotland and London.

The EMU I recently travelled long-haul on (Paris-Nice) was a great deal
better than any hauled stock or push-pulls I've ever come across..

[David Marsh]

[Unreadable in Outlook, here's why: http://viewport.co.uk/outlook ]
begin quote from ANDREW ROBERT BREEN in scot.general
about: Re: SRA announce ECML bidders

Post by ANDREW ROBERT BREEN

Post by David Marsh
There's also the fact, that I particularly appreciate, that gNEr are now
the only trainco which exclusively operate a fleet of "real" trains. I
wouldn't be comfortable with an EMU (unless very highly-specced) or (far
worse) a DMU on the long-distance journey between Scotland and London.

The EMU I recently travelled long-haul on (Paris-Nice) was a great deal
better than any hauled stock or push-pulls I've ever come across..

Indeed. Which is why I added the "highly-specced" caveat.

A train with few table seats, lots of coach seating crammed in, seats
not aligning with windows, no proper buffet/restaurant car, and limited
bike space isn't adequate for long-distance services, but, unfortunately,
it seems to be all we're getting from new trains these days.. :-(

[ANDREW ROBERT BREEN]

Post by David Marsh
[Unreadable in Outlook, here's why: http://viewport.co.uk/outlook ]
begin quote from ANDREW ROBERT BREEN in scot.general
about: Re: SRA announce ECML bidders

Post by ANDREW ROBERT BREEN

Post by David Marsh
There's also the fact, that I particularly appreciate, that gNEr are now
the only trainco which exclusively operate a fleet of "real" trains. I
wouldn't be comfortable with an EMU (unless very highly-specced) or (far
worse) a DMU on the long-distance journey between Scotland and London.

The EMU I recently travelled long-haul on (Paris-Nice) was a great deal
better than any hauled stock or push-pulls I've ever come across..

Indeed. Which is why I added the "highly-specced" caveat.
A train with few table seats, lots of coach seating crammed in, seats
not aligning with windows, no proper buffet/restaurant car, and limited
bike space isn't adequate for long-distance services, but, unfortunately,
it seems to be all we're getting from new trains these days.. :-(

Hmm. The ones I was on (TGV-Duplex going out, TGV-R coming back)
had few table seats - most were airline-style, and very comfortable
too, iffy alignment of seats with windows (even in 1st), no
restaurant facilities at all (but a decent bistro-car) and
all bike-space (and most luggage space) taped out of use. And
I'd still say it - and particularly the Duplex - was head-and-
shoulders ahead of anything I've travelld on in .uk (Eurostar
comes closest - no suprise there - I've not travelled on gneR's
own EMU services yet). A restaurant would have been nice, but SNCF
obviously done't see any need for one.

[Ian G Batten]

Post by ANDREW ROBERT BREEN
Hmm. The ones I was on (TGV-Duplex going out, TGV-R coming back)
had few table seats - most were airline-style, and very comfortable
too, iffy alignment of seats with windows (even in 1st), no

What's the obsession with seat alignment? If I'm planning to work or
read on a train, I aim for a seat without a window aligned with it. I
find the flicker of the lineside scenery, especially under OLE,
incredibly distracting. It's out of focus (as my glasses don't wrap
around) but the movement is still enough to keep dragging my attention
to the side. Horrid. I can still see out by looking ahead (or behind:
I usually sit opposite to the direction of travel) or to the other
side. And if I'm in a laptop mood, the window is just glare on the
screen.

I've now done >100 mile journeys on Voyager (Birmingham--Reading and
return), Super Voyager (Birmingham--Edinburgh and return) and Pendolino
(London-Birmingham, but in weekend first). They all had nice seats, ran
to time, and accelerated impressively. Just because it renders a whole
generation of Ian Allan books obsolete is not sufficient reason to
scrap something that is delivering effective service.

ian

[ANDREW ROBERT BREEN]

Post by Ian G Batten

Post by ANDREW ROBERT BREEN
Hmm. The ones I was on (TGV-Duplex going out, TGV-R coming back)
had few table seats - most were airline-style, and very comfortable
too, iffy alignment of seats with windows (even in 1st), no

What's the obsession with seat alignment? If I'm planning to work or
read on a train, I aim for a seat without a window aligned with it. I
find the flicker of the lineside scenery, especially under OLE,
incredibly distracting. It's out of focus (as my glasses don't wrap
around) but the movement is still enough to keep dragging my attention
I usually sit opposite to the direction of travel) or to the other
side. And if I'm in a laptop mood, the window is just glare on the
screen.

In the TGV I didn't find it an issue at all - I could see out fine
when I wanted to. The fact that the window wasn't absolutely lined
up with the seat was a matter of no import (actually, isn't it
interesting that many - not all, but many - of those who lambast
modern coaches for not having seats lined up with windows also
trumpet the virtues of the compartment coach - in which *every*
seat lined up with a blank wall....)

The interesting thing is that the Duplex lacked almost all the
features that passengers are "supposed" to demand (or at least
are called for repeatedly in this group) - and it was quite,
quite superb. And well-loaded. Evidently the French don't understand
railways, as anyone can see {shrug}.

Post by Ian G Batten
I've now done >100 mile journeys on Voyager (Birmingham--Reading and
return), Super Voyager (Birmingham--Edinburgh and return) and Pendolino
(London-Birmingham, but in weekend first). They all had nice seats, ran
to time, and accelerated impressively. Just because it renders a whole
generation of Ian Allan books obsolete is not sufficient reason to
scrap something that is delivering effective service.

And more effective service than there's ever been on that axis.
There's the makings of a fine IC-EMU there, too - add a pantograph
and power electronics, leave out the diesels and there's the answer
for long-haul electrified routes (probably in 9-coach form, mind)

[Richard]

Post by ANDREW ROBERT BREEN
And more effective service than there's ever been on that axis.
There's the makings of a fine IC-EMU there, too - add a pantograph
and power electronics, leave out the diesels and there's the answer
for long-haul electrified routes (probably in 9-coach form, mind)

Maybe with a re-design of the bodyshell. The bodyshell is unnecessarily
small for non-tilting routes.

But I agree wholeheartedly that it is a quality product.

[ANDREW ROBERT BREEN]

Post by Richard

Post by ANDREW ROBERT BREEN
And more effective service than there's ever been on that axis.
There's the makings of a fine IC-EMU there, too - add a pantograph
and power electronics, leave out the diesels and there's the answer
for long-haul electrified routes (probably in 9-coach form, mind)

Maybe with a re-design of the bodyshell. The bodyshell is unnecessarily
small for non-tilting routes.

There's an old saying (IIRC from military or naval procurement) to the
effect that the best is the enemy of the good-enough. Going for a major
re-design would add (lots of) cost and (lots of delay), probably resulting
in missing opportunities to buy as many of the things as you might want.
It doesn't have to be perfect - just a significant advance on what has
gone before.
Besides, unless Westminster has a sudden attack of strategic regional
planning and decides we need an LGV(north) and an LGV(west), I find it
hard to think of any major route which wouldn't benefit from tilt
being available at some stage - the ECML gets pretty curvaceous
after Darlington and particularly north of Newcastle (and particularly
and especially north of Berwick) and tilt would be a very nice thing
for those sections.

Post by Richard
But I agree wholeheartedly that it is a quality product.

Seems to work well, exudes a feeling of quality ("not built - machined
from the solid")

[Tony Miles]

Post by Richard

Post by ANDREW ROBERT BREEN
And more effective service than there's ever been on that axis.
There's the makings of a fine IC-EMU there, too - add a pantograph
and power electronics, leave out the diesels and there's the answer
for long-haul electrified routes (probably in 9-coach form, mind)

Maybe with a re-design of the bodyshell. The bodyshell is unnecessarily
small for non-tilting routes.
But I agree wholeheartedly that it is a quality product.

Just a note here - AFAIK the SRA has told bidders not to consider new stock!

TM

[Richard]

Post by Tony Miles
Just a note here - AFAIK the SRA has told bidders not to consider new stock!

What great forward thinking. Lets spend tens of millions keeping an
unreliable fleet of life-expired HSTs rolling.

Ho-hum.

Richard

[ANDREW ROBERT BREEN]

Post by Tony Miles

Post by Richard

Post by ANDREW ROBERT BREEN
And more effective service than there's ever been on that axis.
There's the makings of a fine IC-EMU there, too - add a pantograph
and power electronics, leave out the diesels and there's the answer
for long-haul electrified routes (probably in 9-coach form, mind)

Maybe with a re-design of the bodyshell. The bodyshell is unnecessarily
small for non-tilting routes.
But I agree wholeheartedly that it is a quality product.

Just a note here - AFAIK the SRA has told bidders not to consider new stock!

Oh, I'm aware of that (I do read your articles too, y'know...) - simply
making that point that there is a decent long-haul EMU there for the
building if ordered. OTOH we'll probably have the usual .uk situation
and come around to wanting to order a year or so after the jigs were
scrapped. Shades of build-plans passim :(

[Neil Williams]

Post by ANDREW ROBERT BREEN
And more effective service than there's ever been on that axis.
There's the makings of a fine IC-EMU there, too - add a pantograph
and power electronics, leave out the diesels and there's the answer
for long-haul electrified routes (probably in 9-coach form, mind)

I think I'd be tempted to join you on that - I think I do slightly prefer
Voyagers to Pendolinos, as they feel less claustrophobic due to the huge
windows, and the build quality seems slightly better.

That said, I'm still getting over how impressed I was with both the build
quality and the comfort of the Siemens Desiro. If the long-distance
version is as good as the local version (and I have no reason to suggest
it won't be), any new non-tilt EMUs should be of this type.

Neil

[Richard]

Post by Neil Williams
I think I'd be tempted to join you on that - I think I do slightly prefer
Voyagers to Pendolinos, as they feel less claustrophobic due to the huge
windows, and the build quality seems slightly better.
That said, I'm still getting over how impressed I was with both the build
quality and the comfort of the Siemens Desiro. If the long-distance
version is as good as the local version (and I have no reason to suggest
it won't be), any new non-tilt EMUs should be of this type.

There is the issue of max speed.

Pendos would be the minimum for ECML, due to the 140+ mph capability (ERTMS
will be here relatively early in the life of the next batch of trains).

Voyagers are only designed for 125mph, while Desiros I believe are designed
for 100mph.

This doesn't say much for competition in high-speed stock!

Although Hitachi might have something to say soon on the subject.

[Jon Porter]

Post by Richard

Post by Neil Williams
I think I'd be tempted to join you on that - I think I do slightly
prefer Voyagers to Pendolinos, as they feel less claustrophobic due
to the huge windows, and the build quality seems slightly better.
That said, I'm still getting over how impressed I was with both the
build quality and the comfort of the Siemens Desiro. If the
long-distance version is as good as the local version (and I have no
reason to suggest it won't be), any new non-tilt EMUs should be of
this type.

There is the issue of max speed.
Pendos would be the minimum for ECML, due to the 140+ mph capability
(ERTMS will be here relatively early in the life of the next batch of
trains).
Voyagers are only designed for 125mph, while Desiros I believe are
designed for 100mph.

The HST 2 was based on 23m Desirio Coaches with new build 4000hp power
cars at each end of a nine car set. Design was ready to roll. However
forward thinking of a strategic nature, under pressure from the
mandarins in the treasury have decided the commoners will have to put up
with slam doors and flush onto track trains for the next 15 years or so.
What really makes me angry is that there are companies ready to invest
in his train because quite simply,
1. It makes sound commercial sense. The interior designs were far
superior to anything running in the UK today. Passenger numbers would
rise significantly going by historical precednce with other new
stock/electrified routes.
2. Good as it is the HST will only last so long. Reliability will become
a problem in not too many years without high levels of investment and
refurbishing, by which time the HST 2 may well have worked out cheaper.
3. The risk to the taxpayer was very small, and given the cost overruns
on other more costly projects it seems laughable that when private
companies wish to risk their cash on a dead cert project like this the
SRA says no.
4. The SRA claims to be still looking at the project, from what
distance? On the one hand they claim TOC's are best placed to specify
and order new rolling stock, then they claim it is difficult to satisfy
three different TOC's all wanting a HST replacement. Crap! Two of the
companies are in complete agreement and operate sufficient sets already
that an order for between 55 and 60 new trains could have been entering
service in 2006/07. The third would be foolish not to follow suit, of
course it could always order more 222s.
5. The maintenance costs for underfloor dmus are very high compared to
an HST. A Voyager / 180 engine/cooler group takes as long to service as
an HST engine/Cooler Group. Difference is the HST has only two of them.
Instead the dmu's work on module replacement. Quick but very costly
requiring large stocks of spares to be available at short notice.

[David Hansen]

On Sat, 15 May 2004 17:50:44 +0000 (UTC) someone who may be "Jon

Post by Jon Porter
5. The maintenance costs for underfloor dmus are very high compared to
an HST. A Voyager / 180 engine/cooler group takes as long to service as
an HST engine/Cooler Group. Difference is the HST has only two of them.
Instead the dmu's work on module replacement. Quick but very costly
requiring large stocks of spares to be available at short notice.

I agree with what you say. However, I am mildly amused to note that
the initial concept of HST maintenance was that a lot of it was to
be done by module replacement, especially on the coaches. This
lasted as long as there were spare modules. When these ran out staff
started fixing the modules directly, for which being able to pull
the module out was an advantage.

[Jon Porter]

Post by David Hansen
On Sat, 15 May 2004 17:50:44 +0000 (UTC) someone who may be "Jon

Post by Jon Porter
5. The maintenance costs for underfloor dmus are very high compared
to an HST. A Voyager / 180 engine/cooler group takes as long to
service as an HST engine/Cooler Group. Difference is the HST has
only two of them. Instead the dmu's work on module replacement.
Quick but very costly requiring large stocks of spares to be
available at short notice.

I agree with what you say. However, I am mildly amused to note that
the initial concept of HST maintenance was that a lot of it was to
be done by module replacement, especially on the coaches. This
lasted as long as there were spare modules. When these ran out staff
started fixing the modules directly, for which being able to pull
the module out was an advantage.

But HVAC modules, battery packs etc are far easier to slot in and out
and send off for repair/replacement than the almost daily checks
required on engines and cooler groups, and some class 222's have nine of
these in addition to all the HVAC, battery packs etc. Add in all those
extra traction motors and gearboxes, all of which require regular
checks, and you have one hell of an expensive Inter City Train to keep
going. That will be reflected in ticket prices amongst other things.

[David Hansen]

On Sun, 16 May 2004 11:03:13 +0000 (UTC) someone who may be "Jon

Post by Jon Porter
But HVAC modules, battery packs etc are far easier to slot in and out
and send off for repair/replacement than the almost daily checks
required on engines and cooler groups, and some class 222's have nine of
these in addition to all the HVAC, battery packs etc. Add in all those
extra traction motors and gearboxes, all of which require regular
checks, and you have one hell of an expensive Inter City Train to keep
going. That will be reflected in ticket prices amongst other things.

I agree as I am not a fan of large numbers of small engines. My
amusement was in considering the original plans for the HST
maintenance.

[Charlie Hulme]

Post by ANDREW ROBERT BREEN
In the TGV I didn't find it an issue at all - I could see out fine
when I wanted to. The fact that the window wasn't absolutely lined
up with the seat was a matter of no import (actually, isn't it
interesting that many - not all, but many - of those who lambast
modern coaches for not having seats lined up with windows also
trumpet the virtues of the compartment coach - in which *every*
seat lined up with a blank wall....)

Sorry? I have never been a fan of compartments, but as I remember
them, the seats were aligned with the windows in just the same way
as in open saloons.

Charlie

[David H Wild]

Post by Charlie Hulme
Sorry? I have never been a fan of compartments, but as I remember
them, the seats were aligned with the windows in just the same way
as in open saloons.

Only at one side, and then only if there were no trainspotters in the
window seats. (I was as guilty of obstructing the view for everyone else as
the rest of my schoolmates.)

[Stevie]

Post by David Marsh

(2) First London, Scottish and North East Railways Ltd (First Group plc)

As long as it doesn't get a silly name.

Indeed.
What's the general feeling among, say, First Great Western passengers as
to how well First have done?

Personally - I regular 'do' the Paddington -> Bristol TM trip and Kings
Cross -> Aberdeen trip and I always much prefer the service on the GNER.
I tend to get the impression that once you're on board a First train,
they tend to forget about you and don't really bother with on train
service whereas on GNER they do seem to have better facilities.

FGW trains also do seem to be more regularly delayed than GNER.
Although I do do more FGW trips than GNER ones so I may just be lucky on
those trips.

I would suspect that First Group might take extra special care of the
East Coast line seeing as they're based in Aberdeen - so if they did
screw it up they'll be pretty embarassed...

[Barry Salter]

On Mon, 10 May 2004 13:52:37 +0100, David Marsh

Post by David Marsh
There's also the fact, that I particularly appreciate, that gNEr are now
the only trainco which exclusively operate a fleet of "real" trains. I
wouldn't be comfortable with an EMU (unless very highly-specced) or (far
worse) a DMU on the long-distance journey between Scotland and London.

Erm...The NoL Eurostar (aka "White Rose") sets are 2xClass 373 EMUs back
to back...Admittedly, GNER won't be running them for much longer, but
they're still EMUs...

Cya,

Barry

[Jack Taylor]

Post by Barry Salter
On Mon, 10 May 2004 13:52:37 +0100, David Marsh

Post by David Marsh
There's also the fact, that I particularly appreciate, that gNEr are now
the only trainco which exclusively operate a fleet of "real" trains. I
wouldn't be comfortable with an EMU (unless very highly-specced) or (far
worse) a DMU on the long-distance journey between Scotland and London.

Erm...The NoL Eurostar (aka "White Rose") sets are 2xClass 373 EMUs back
to back...Admittedly, GNER won't be running them for much longer, but
they're still EMUs...

... as, indeed, they are identified on the GNER timetable headers
(www.gner.co.uk).

[Pete Fenelon]

Post by Barry Salter
Erm...The NoL Eurostar (aka "White Rose") sets are 2xClass 373 EMUs back
to back...Admittedly, GNER won't be running them for much longer, but
they're still EMUs...

...and should we mention that HSTS were originally classified as DEMUs? ;)

pete

[David Marsh]

[Unreadable in Outlook, here's why: http://viewport.co.uk/outlook ]
begin quote from Barry Salter in scot.general
about: Re: SRA announce ECML bidders

Post by Barry Salter
On Mon, 10 May 2004 13:52:37 +0100, David Marsh

Post by David Marsh
There's also the fact, that I particularly appreciate, that gNEr are now
the only trainco which exclusively operate a fleet of "real" trains. I
wouldn't be comfortable with an EMU (unless very highly-specced) or (far
worse) a DMU on the long-distance journey between Scotland and London.

Erm...The NoL Eurostar (aka "White Rose") sets are 2xClass 373 EMUs back
to back...Admittedly, GNER won't be running them for much longer, but
they're still EMUs...

OK, OK...
But the finer technical points aside, you knew what I _meant_ by EMU.

The crucial difference with IC125s, IC225s and eurostars is that they do
have separate powercars/locos rather than having engines whining and
vibrating away under your seat, which is one of the biggest irritations
with MUs on longdistance services.

[ANDREW ROBERT BREEN]

Post by David Marsh
The crucial difference with IC125s, IC225s and eurostars is that they do
have separate powercars/locos rather than having engines whining and
vibrating away under your seat, which is one of the biggest irritations
with MUs on longdistance services.

Eurostars have a power block in each of the end coaches, as well as
in the power cars.

[Ian G Batten]

Post by David Marsh
The crucial difference with IC125s, IC225s and eurostars is that they do
have separate powercars/locos rather than having engines whining and
vibrating away under your seat, which is one of the biggest irritations
with MUs on longdistance services.

Or so trainspotters claim. No one else appears to notice.

ian

[ANDREW ROBERT BREEN]

Post by Ian G Batten

Post by David Marsh
The crucial difference with IC125s, IC225s and eurostars is that they do
have separate powercars/locos rather than having engines whining and
vibrating away under your seat, which is one of the biggest irritations
with MUs on longdistance services.

Or so trainspotters claim. No one else appears to notice.

Probably because most of the population is now well-used to travel
by jet, in which engine noise is noticable but there isn't a
constant clatter/rattle of bogies, howl of wind from open windows
in the vestibules or all the other sources of noise in hauled stock
(the mk.4 is better, I'll admit - the closed vestibules are a great
improvement).
There have been claims in here (no names to be mentioned) that engine
or motor noise from under the vehicle is intrinsically BAD (unless, of
course, the motors are camshaft-controlled), but bogie noise, wind
noise and (once at least) noise through the windows from the engine
are GOOD. I suspect that amongst the wider public this is now very
much a minority view.
It'd be interesting to compare noise levels in a Voyager and a
HST trailer at the same speed on the same bit of line: My guess
is that there'd be very little in it overall, but the frequency
mix would be different - with the Voyager more closely approximating
to other modern transport modes.

[Graeme Wall]

In message <c7qrv4$4e9k$***@central.aber.ac.uk>
***@aber.ac.uk (ANDREW ROBERT BREEN) wrote:

[snip]

Post by ANDREW ROBERT BREEN
It'd be interesting to compare noise levels in a Voyager and a
HST trailer at the same speed on the same bit of line: My guess
is that there'd be very little in it overall, but the frequency
mix would be different - with the Voyager more closely approximating
to other modern transport modes.

I recently did a comparison between a 180 into Paddington and an HST back out
to Reading and the latter was noticeably quieter. I then changed to a
Voyager for the run down to Southampton and that was subjectively between the
two. All three were well within the comfort range however. Mind you I am a
bit deaf in one ear.

[Terry Harper]

Post by ANDREW ROBERT BREEN
It'd be interesting to compare noise levels in a Voyager and a
HST trailer at the same speed on the same bit of line: My guess
is that there'd be very little in it overall, but the frequency
mix would be different - with the Voyager more closely approximating
to other modern transport modes.

I've been along the Reading-Oxford stretch in both types and think that the
Voyager is a little smoother. There is a lot more furnishing in an HST car,
though, which may deaden some of the sound.

More analogous perhaps is the comparison between a 166 or 165 of FGWL and a
319. Even in the motor coach of the 319 the power sound is lower, but when
it's going at 90 with windows open and meets another train doing 90 in the
opposite direction, you know all about it. The 165/166 with its hydraulic
drive is noisier than the Voyager, until it reaches lock-up speed, after
which there seems to be little in it to me.

[Richard]

Post by Ian G Batten

Post by David Marsh
The crucial difference with IC125s, IC225s and eurostars is that they do
have separate powercars/locos rather than having engines whining and
vibrating away under your seat, which is one of the biggest irritations
with MUs on longdistance services.

Or so trainspotters claim. No one else appears to notice.

I think that while some of us may notice on a rattling Pacer, it is minimal
on a Voyager. Other benefits of the new stock are much more important to
most travellers.

On the other hand, to 'loco-spotters', it may be a major consideration, and
one they can conveniently claim to be a widespread gripe - widespread among
other loco-spotters, at least.

[Jon Porter]

Post by Ian G Batten

Post by David Marsh
The crucial difference with IC125s, IC225s and eurostars is that
they do have separate powercars/locos rather than having engines
whining and vibrating away under your seat, which is one of the
biggest irritations with MUs on longdistance services.

Or so trainspotters claim. No one else appears to notice.
ian

Yes they do.The most common complaint about our new trains is that the
interior is nice, but that they are too noisy when compared to the old
trains. (180 vs HST) The 220s and the 221s have similar noise levels in
the passenger cabins (yes there is a standard for this as well).
The 222 version is meant to have some additional foam insulation and
some box sections treated more effectively to combat the problem.

[Hans-Joachim Zierke]

Post by Jon Porter
Yes they do.The most common complaint about our new trains is that the
interior is nice, but that they are too noisy when compared to the old
trains.

While this is true in most cases, that's no DMU issue, as proven by DSB
and Scandia Randers almost 15 years ago. The Danish Intercity DMUs have a
very acceptable noise level.

Since they are also some of the lightest Intercity DMUs, there is no
excuse.


Hans-Joachim

[Neil Williams]

On Mon, 10 May 2004 13:52:37 +0100, David Marsh wrote:

[DSB]

Post by David Marsh
Why the "Hmm"?
I'm sure they'd be capable of doing a very good job?

I don't know - I have very little experience of them. What I do know is
that their IC3 DMUs are the most comfortable rail vehicle of any kind that
I have ever had the pleasure to ride - and they have a nice British feel
because a member of the BR design board had input on the interior. Superb.

I'm not sure, however, what their experience of longer-distance,
high(ish)-speed IC services is.

Post by David Marsh
I don't know. I feel gNEr have done a very good job with ICEC up until
now, although admittedly a large part of that is because they had new
trains and new OHLE (although that's been problematic in itself,
sometimes) to start with.

They have done very little compared with most other TOCs - IMO they've
largely been lucky. Customer service is said to be good, but my
(admittedly limited) experience of some of their on-train staff is not
favourable, and they waited far too long to do anything about the
appalling state of the Mk4 coaches.

Post by David Marsh
There's also the fact, that I particularly appreciate, that gNEr are now
the only trainco which exclusively operate a fleet of "real" trains. I
wouldn't be comfortable with an EMU (unless very highly-specced) or (far
worse) a DMU on the long-distance journey between Scotland and London.

Sherwood wants to take the knitting down...

I'd be interested to see what they'd choose if they did buy new stock.
DMUs are one thing (and I like Voyagers), but I see very little to choose
between LHCS and EMUs where electric stock is concerned. What counts in
that case is what you put inside.

Neil

[Jon Porter]

Post by Neil Williams

Post by David Marsh
There's also the fact, that I particularly appreciate, that gNEr are
now the only trainco which exclusively operate a fleet of "real"
trains. I wouldn't be comfortable with an EMU (unless very
highly-specced) or (far worse) a DMU on the long-distance journey
between Scotland and London.

Sherwood wants to take the knitting down...
I'd be interested to see what they'd choose if they did buy new stock.
DMUs are one thing (and I like Voyagers), but I see very little to
choose between LHCS and EMUs where electric stock is concerned. What
counts in that case is what you put inside.
Neil

Don't hold your breath, I have a strong indication SRA said No New
Trains to the bidders. it will therefore be other factors which decide.
A nice cheap bid would be those 312s currently stored for KX-Edinburgh.
I would dearly love the Scottish Parliament to insist this franchise
process is in the open, perhaps they could make the bit from Berwick
conditional!
When did Sherwood say take the "knitting" down? I believe it was Mr.
Garnett who said it was troublesome. Sherwood just wants only profitable
trains and believes others should "Go to Hell".

[ANDREW ROBERT BREEN]

Post by Neil Williams

Post by David Marsh
There's also the fact, that I particularly appreciate, that gNEr are now
the only trainco which exclusively operate a fleet of "real" trains. I

I assume that to you "real train" =/= EMU. However, GNER operate
several services with EMUs...

Post by Neil Williams

Post by David Marsh
wouldn't be comfortable with an EMU (unless very highly-specced) or (far
worse) a DMU on the long-distance journey between Scotland and London.

Sherwood wants to take the knitting down...

In which case it'll be DMUs or Shanks' pony.

[Mike Roebuck]

On Mon, 10 May 2004 21:27:06 +0100, Neil Williams

Post by Neil Williams
[DSB]

Post by David Marsh
Why the "Hmm"?
I'm sure they'd be capable of doing a very good job?

I don't know - I have very little experience of them. What I do know is
that their IC3 DMUs are the most comfortable rail vehicle of any kind that
I have ever had the pleasure to ride - and they have a nice British feel
because a member of the BR design board had input on the interior. Superb.
I'm not sure, however, what their experience of longer-distance,
high(ish)-speed IC services is.

"Lyntog" ("lightning train") InterCity dmu's between Copenhagen and
Jutland. They ran limited stop, were much faster than the normal
InterCity trains, and used the ferries between Nyborg and Korsoer. I
think there may have been a supplement payable for their use, too. I
believe they disappeared when the fixed link over the Great Belt
opened, and I'm not sure if I didn't read about at least one of the
units ending up in Poland.