Intercity Express Programme (IEP) - ongoing discussion

[whole diary]

[stuving]

(And perhaps it would be best to take this short strand and re-spin back it into the IEP^▸ (Intercity Express Program / Project.) thread, please mods.)

Done! Even though I still find 'merging' scary. 

Thank you kindly, young man.

[Chris from Nailsea]

I'm coaching 'bignosemac' in the dark art of topic merging: splitting topics is the really scary one. 

[bobm]

Renaming them is a bit of a faff too!   

[Chris from Nailsea]

Our readers simply wouldn't believe the amount of angst I had to go through, just to rename a particular topic to bobm's satisfaction. 

[anthony215]

Tony Miles over on WNXX^▸ (Stored Unserviceable, Mainline Locos HQ All Classes) has  made a post saying that we could be seeing a mock up of the IEP^▸ (Intercity Express Program / Project.) with the seats displayed at Bristol TM^‡(resolve) at some point soon.

However those who have tried the new seats have not really given them good rating so I  wonder what we and the rest of the public will make of them

[anthony215]

Here are some photos taken of the IEP^▸ (Intercity Express Program / Project.) mock up including some interior photos.

http://s995.photobucket.com/user/800101/library/?sort=3&http%3A//s995.photobucket.com/user/800101/library/?#/user/800101/library/?sort=3&page=1&_suid=1391847009484029967021568293545

[Rhydgaled]

Where is the mock-up, for how long will it be there and is it going anywhere else?

[anthony215]

I have no idea and I suggested keeping an eye for updates over on wnxx. I will try and post updates on this forum as well

[ChrisB]

I guess this comes here, Mods, please n=move if necessary.

Modern Railways current issue, P15 reports that FGW^▸ (First Great Western), while requested n their Direct Award to procure EMUs^▸ (Electric Multiple Unit) to replace DMUs^▸ (Diesel Multiple Unit) under IEP^▸ (Intercity Express Program / Project.) and confirms that the displaced 319s were their option, this has now changed with the delay in delivery of the new Thameslink stock. Due for completion by 2015, this has now been put back to 2018, meaning the 319s would have to enter service of the GWML^▸ (Great Western Main Line) without refurbishment.

Instead, the DfT^» (Department for Transport - about) are likely to pick the 387s ordered by Southern....see attached for news cutting

[Electric train]

I guess this comes here, Mods, please n=move if necessary.

Modern Railways current issue, P15 reports that FGW^▸ (First Great Western), while requested n their Direct Award to procure EMUs^▸ (Electric Multiple Unit) to replace DMUs^▸ (Diesel Multiple Unit) under IEP^▸ (Intercity Express Program / Project.) and confirms that the displaced 319s were their option, this has now changed with the delay in delivery of the new Thameslink stock. Due for completion by 2015, this has now been put back to 2018, meaning the 319s would have to enter service of the GWML^▸ (Great Western Main Line) without refurbishment.

Instead, the DfT^» (Department for Transport - about) are likely to pick the 387s ordered by Southern....see attached for news cutting

We don't want the cascaded 319's without at least as refresh, I use them quite a bit between Blackfriars and St Pancras, the interiors are in a shocking state.

[Network SouthEast]

I've said it numerous times before, but once more the 387s are a very likely bet for electric Thames Valley services :-)

[DidcotPunter]

Some details published of the 387s together with layout drawings

http://sparkyscrum.wordpress.com/2014/03/04/class-3871-for-techincal-details/

On first glance seems eminently suitable for the Thames Valley outer-suburban services.

2+2 seating represents an improvement comfort-wise on the turbos, though, as someone on WNXX^▸ (Stored Unserviceable, Mainline Locos HQ All Classes) forum has pointed out, this represents a decrease in seating capacity between a cl387 4 car and 3 car cl165/166 - 224 seats in the cl387 against 256 in cl166 and 286 in the cl165. Given that Crossrail will be running the (Reading?) - Maidenhead - Paddington inner suburban services with high capacity cl345s, I'm not sure that this is an issue, particularly if the 387s are run in 8-12 car formations on the Oxford/Newbury - Paddington services in the rush hour. Between Reading and Paddington these units will be running on the main lines and, with 110mph capability combined with modern EMU^▸ (Electric Multiple Unit) acceleration, should be able to keep out of the way of the IEPs^▸ (Intercity Express Program / Project.).

[IndustryInsider]

Thanks for providing the link.

2+2 seating, and 104 seats at tables replacing 2+3 seating and no/very few tables?  What would 'Broadgage' think of that? 

Seriously though, that sounds a very suitable design for non-IEP^▸ (Intercity Express Program / Project.) workings out to Oxford and Newbury/Bedwyn, though 8-car operation (and maybe some 12-car formations) will be needed during the peaks to counter the reduction in seating.  There is a need to balance the lovely accommodation of the HST^▸ (High Speed Train)/180s with that of the Turbos which work the same route, so the likely future of the difference between IEP and these Class 387 interiors looks to close that gap considerably.

[ChrisB]

I've said it numerous times before, but once more the 387s are a very likely bet for electric Thames Valley services :-)

Modern Railways agrees, if you read what I posted - BUT they also confirm that it's only recently that the 319s have been turned down, and only because the Thameslink programme is running late & they wouldn't be available in time.

2+2 seating represents an improvement comfort-wise on the turbos, though, as someone on WNXX^▸ (Stored Unserviceable, Mainline Locos HQ All Classes) forum has pointed out, this represents a decrease in seating capacity between a cl387 4 car and 3 car cl165/166 - 224 seats in the cl387 against 256 in cl166 and 286 in the cl165. Given that Crossrail will be running the (Reading?) - Maidenhead - Paddington inner suburban services with high capacity cl345s, I'm not sure that this is an issue

I'm exactly on the opposing view, sorry! The lack of seats / toilets on Crossrail stock would, I think, give them the choice - see pax choose these 387s over Crossrail in chasing seating / toilets. So yes, the overall drop in seating levels for the inner Thames Valley will become more of a problem!

particularly if the 387s are run in 8-12 car formations on the Oxford/Newbury - Paddington services in the rush hour.

Point taken, but I still reckon there will be a drop in seating levels - and all seats are currently taken in the peaks! So even more standees than currently

[DidcotPunter]

2+2 seating represents an improvement comfort-wise on the turbos, though, as someone on WNXX^▸ (Stored Unserviceable, Mainline Locos HQ All Classes) forum has pointed out, this represents a decrease in seating capacity between a cl387 4 car and 3 car cl165/166 - 224 seats in the cl387 against 256 in cl166 and 286 in the cl165. Given that Crossrail will be running the (Reading?) - Maidenhead - Paddington inner suburban services with high capacity cl345s, I'm not sure that this is an issue

I'm exactly on the opposing view, sorry! The lack of seats / toilets on Crossrail stock would, I think, give them the choice - see pax choose these 387s over Crossrail in chasing seating / toilets. So yes, the overall drop in seating levels for the inner Thames Valley will become more of a problem!

particularly if the 387s are run in 8-12 car formations on the Oxford/Newbury - Paddington services in the rush hour.

Point taken, but I still reckon there will be a drop in seating levels - and all seats are currently taken in the peaks! So even more standees than currently

I think you can argue the toss either way on this.  Obviously pax from Reading, Twyford & Maidenhead will opt for the cl 387 outer suburban services (Reading ones will have the choice of IEP^▸ (Intercity Express Program / Project.) as well). Clearly an 8 car cl387 won't provide as much capacity as a 6 car turbo - though if they do (and I agree it's a big if) manage to run 12 cars on peak trains then capacity will be increased.

For pax from Slough I reckon it's less clear cut. They'll have the choice of either taking an outer suburban to Padd and changing (possibly to Crossrail) or taking Crossrail much closer to where they actually want to go (assuming they don't work near Padd but do work near a Crossrail station/interchange). Of course Crossrail will be all stations whereas the 387s will be non-stop from Slough so it will be interesting to see how the loadings balance out. Either way I suspect that rush hour trains will still be wedged on this section unless the 387s are run in 12 car formations.

Newbury/Oxford/Didcot pax should find the 387 passenger environment better than turbos - though maybe not as nice as HSTs^▸ (High Speed Train) or 180s. Outside the rush hour the 2+2 will provide a better passenger environment all round (my experience based on travelling in 350s on London Midland and 377s on Southern).