Intercity Express Programme (IEP) - ongoing discussion

[whole diary]

[grahame]

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.

How many of the Paddington platforms can handle 12 cars?   Wouldn't that be a problem, or am I getting mixed up between cars in a multiple unit and passenger cars with locos at each end a la HST^▸ (High Speed Train)?

[Southern Stag]

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.

The 319s still haven't been officially ruled out. It has looked unlikely that 319s will be used for a while now. Prior to this recent announcement FGW^▸ (First Great Western) were responsible for procuring EMUs^▸ (Electric Multiple Unit) for the Thames Valley which could have meant 319s, 387s or a new order just for the Thames Valley. As the DfT^» (Department for Transport - about) have halted the procurement exercise it looks very likely that the DfT will exercise the option for additional Class 387s and use those for Thames Valley services. The 319s might now have been available on time as the order of 387s for Thameslink frees up 319s earlier than expected, but it seems likely the freed up 319s will be cascaded to the North West.

[stuving]

How many of the Paddington platforms can handle 12 cars?   Wouldn't that be a problem, or am I getting mixed up between cars in a multiple unit and passenger cars with locos at each end a la HST^▸ (High Speed Train)?

Currently, 1,2,3 (almost) 11. But really, that's the wrong tense, as most of the others will need lengthening for 10-car IEPs^▸ (Intercity Express Program / Project.) anyway (260 m  vs 276). I'm not sure when that's scheduled to happen, though.
 

[Southern Stag]

As far as I know the 387s will only have 20m long coaches. That's the standard length for EMUs^▸ (Electric Multiple Unit) in this country. A 12-car train would therefore come in at 240m and would fit in Platforms 1-7 and 9-11 at Paddington.

[Electric train]

- 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.

The Thameslink Program is not running late, it is actually on schedule to be ready for the 24 trains per hour through the core by 2016 and London Bridge will be complete for the full introduction in 2018 (ETRMS and automatic train control is due in 2020) its DfT^» (Department for Transport - about) that is running late in their dithering over the contract award to Siemen.

The first 700 series units are due end of this year early next

[paul7575]

As far as I know the 387s will only have 20m long coaches. That's the standard length for EMUs^▸ (Electric Multiple Unit) in this country...

For accuracy though, it's one of the two standard lengths - Pendolinos, 380s and 444s are still EMUs at 23m - there may be others.   Crossrail 345s will also have 23m carriages, as we've recently discovered.

Likewise with DMUs^▸ (Diesel Multiple Unit), a majority are 23m, but some aren't.

Not disagreeing with the basic point though, that a 12 x 20m 387 will fit OK in most platforms...

Paul

[Network SouthEast]

I'd caution against making comparisons over number of seats against old rolling stock. It was a fixation over the pure number of seats per train that got comfortable class 444s replaced with 450s by SWT^▸ (South West Trains) on the Portsmouth Direct line. I think that may be why in recent times new train orders have very much underplayed the number of seats. Sure, everyone would like a seat, but 3+2 is loathed by many. I think 2+2 is the right decision for the class 387 order.

As far as I know the 387s will only have 20m long coaches. That's the standard length for EMUs^▸ (Electric Multiple Unit) in this country...

For accuracy though, it's one of the two standard lengths - Pendolinos, 380s and 444s are still EMUs at 23m - there may be others.   Crossrail 345s will also have 23m carriages, as we've recently discovered.

Likewise with DMUs^▸ (Diesel Multiple Unit), a majority are 23m, but some aren't.

Indeed. The class 323, 332 and 333 EMUs also have 23m long coaches. Although, I think all DMUs since the class 155 have had 23m long coaches.

[IndustryInsider]

I think 2+2 is the right decision for the class 387 order.

Certainly agree that for the Oxford/Bedwyn/Newbury to London fast and semi-fast market that 2+2 is the way forward, with a sensible number of tables and a small(ish) First Class section.

[broadgage]

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?  ----------

If it actualy happens, and if the trains are full length so as to provide enough seats, then I welcome it.

What I fear MIGHT happen is that single units will be used in the rush hour resulting in fewer (though more comfortable) seats.

The units will then be "improved" with high density bus seats so as to provide the famous "thousands of extra seats"
Hopefully we will see full length trains.

[Network SouthEast]

I don't think there is any precedent for converting a train from 2+2 to 2+3*, although conversion from 2+3 to 2+2 does happen.

Reseating of trains in recent years:

Class 143 used by Wessex Trains from 2+3 to 2+2
Class 150 used by Wessex Trains from 2+3 to 2+2
Class 313 used by Southern from 2+3 to 2+2
Class 455 used by South West Trains from 2+3 to 2+2
Class 507 used by Merseyrail from 2+3 to 2+2
Class 508 used by Merseyrail from 2+3 to 2+2
South West Trains also have a few "high capacity" class 450s that have had some (but not all) 3+2 seating changed to 2+2, as well as the removal of 1st class. 1st Class is going to be reinstated to these units when the 458/5 conversion programme is completed.

There may be other examples, although my knowledge of interior configurations of rolling stock fades the further from the south east you go!

At the current point in time the South West Trains class 458/5 conversion programme will see the 2+2 seating replace 2+3 as well as removal of 1st class seating. I believe that South West Trains will also be converting their newly acquired class 456 trains from Southern from 2+3 to 2+2.

* FCC^▸ (First Capital Connect) did convert the old bar area on the seven ex Connex Express 319s to 2+3 seating.

One must appreciate that all of this money isn't being spent on the GWML^▸ (Great Western Main Line) and it's branches just for things to stay the same. I'm sure post December 2016 we might see the odd short formed train as an alternative to a cancelled service, but these should be the exception, not the norm. Don't forget that the London & South East RUS^▸ (Route Utilisation Strategy) anticipates 8 car EMUs^▸ (Electric Multiple Unit) in peaks becoming the norm, and in the longer term 12 car EMUs! Project that Network Rail support in their RUS documents have a habit of becoming reality.

[4064ReadingAbbey]

One must appreciate that all of this money isn't being spent on the GWML^▸ (Great Western Main Line) and it's branches just for things to stay the same. I'm sure post December 2016 we might see the odd short formed train as an alternative to a cancelled service, but these should be the exception, not the norm. Don't forget that the London & South East RUS^▸ (Route Utilisation Strategy) anticipates 8 car EMUs^▸ (Electric Multiple Unit) in peaks becoming the norm, and in the longer term 12 car EMUs! Project that Network Rail support in their RUS documents have a habit of becoming reality.

This is a topic that puzzles me a bit. The platforms at Reading have been divided so that two trains, each five coaches long, can occupy a platform at the same time. I can understand this in the context of five coach long combinations of 165s and 166s or 5 coach long XC^▸ (Cross Country Trains (franchise)) Voyagers but how does this work for 8 coach long trains made up of 20 metre long coaches - assuming cascaded 319s or others of the same length. As 8 coach long trains are most likely to be used at peak periods it would seem that operating capacity at the station would be reduced as only one train could be in a platform at once.

Or is this not a significant issue?

[paul7575]

This is a topic that puzzles me a bit. The platforms at Reading have been divided so that two trains, each five coaches long, can occupy a platform at the same time. I can understand this in the context of five coach long combinations of 165s and 166s or 5 coach long XC^▸ (Cross Country Trains (franchise)) Voyagers but how does this work for 8 coach long trains made up of 20 metre long coaches - assuming cascaded 319s or others of the same length. As 8 coach long trains are most likely to be used at peak periods it would seem that operating capacity at the station would be reduced as only one train could be in a platform at once.

Or is this not a significant issue?

I suspect the present large 5 car markers would be removed once 5 car trains are no longer the norm.  As I've pointed out in the Reading thread before now, there are other methods of signing stop positions for split platforms, e.g. at Southampton, where there are separate stop markers for the A and B ends for anything from 2 to 8 car trains, many of them are different for EMU^▸ (Electric Multiple Unit) and DMU^▸ (Diesel Multiple Unit), and they get used all day in either direction.  If they need to run a 4 car train in behind an 8 car they do - in practice the drivers must not assume they necessarily have the marked 'half platform' all to themselves.

(For an example of how this works in practice, a short train terminating from the west, say an FGW^▸ (First Great Western) 2 car 150 or similar, might run to a specific platform 2B '2 car' stop marker, positioned well short of the marked mid point.  This would still leave an 8 car 'slot' available for a train to terminate at platform 2A.)

At the end of the day it is up to the signallers to keep track of the length of individual trains they are putting into part occupied platforms.

Paul

[Southern Stag]

South West Trains also have a few "high capacity" class 450s that have had some (but not all) 3+2 seating changed to 2+2, as well as the removal of 1st class. 1st Class is going to be reinstated to these units when the 458/5 conversion programme is completed.

The First Class has been back in all the 450/5s for a while now, but the units have not had the missing seats reinstated and still retain their 450/5 numbers.

[stuving]

This is a topic that puzzles me a bit. The platforms at Reading have been divided so that two trains, each five coaches long, can occupy a platform at the same time. I can understand this in the context of five coach long combinations of 165s and 166s or 5 coach long XC^▸ (Cross Country Trains (franchise)) Voyagers but how does this work for 8 coach long trains made up of 20 metre long coaches - assuming cascaded 319s or others of the same length. As 8 coach long trains are most likely to be used at peak periods it would seem that operating capacity at the station would be reduced as only one train could be in a platform at once.

Or is this not a significant issue?

No, I don't think it is. Look at it this way:

The use of split platforms is quite different for the Main and Relief Lines (and ignoring platforms 1-6 here). Note that the Reading through platforms have mid-point axle counters to provide train detection for each half, which fixes the lengths whenever that detection is a requirement.

The old station had two Relief Line platforms, plus two bays at the London end and one at the country end (which was mostly used by XC in preference to P3). The redesign does not need to increase Relief Line capacity for routine operations, though "7-day railway" calls for a full Sunday service to run without the Main Lines. So what you build is two through platforms plus two bays each end, only you join the bays so they can be also used as through platforms.

There is no real point in splitting a through platform used by through trains, only if both turn round or terminate and restart. The new station is designed to cope with as many trains as the Main Lines can carry, plus a margin for timing errors on up trains. Down trains are over-provided by three platforms, giving the capacity for XC turning. Even if that train is a short one, current operations have no way of using the other half platform.

So on the Main Lines, marking the platforms as split is almost never operationally useful. Of course there is the inverse "7-day railway" requirement which might occasionally call for it on a Relief Line service. Otherwise, it just helps passengers to find a short train on a long platform. (That's why the -A and -B do not normally appear in Realtimetrains for P7-11.) It would also be rather foolish to build a station that can only ever cope with XC trains that are short - they may be longer (I saw an 8-car in P8 last week).

That said, I do wonder if the need to turn an 8- or 12-car express EMU^▸ (Electric Multiple Unit) at Reading has been considered. There should not be many - most of these commuter service will run to/from further out (potentially Oxford/Swindon/Newbury/Basingstoke). Ideally it should set off from P10 or 11, but could you turn it quickly enough? (These are the two most heavily used platforms.) You could turn it in P9, but the pax would have to swap platforms for it. Or you can unload (e.g. in P7) and go off to turn round somewhere else, either in a siding (e.g. beside the Westbury Lines, but which would need to be built) or on a running line. The grade separation can then be used to run back into P10/11, though there are limits on what is possible (e.g. using the depot access line to turn does not allow direct access to the Up Main).

For the record, the Relief Lines platforms are nominally 282 m long, so can just about fit 6x23 m in each half. The Main Line platforms are nominally 303-306 m (current figures), though it looks as if they will end up a little longer in reality. The IEP^▸ (Intercity Express Program / Project.) spec. includes the figure of 312 m (i.e. 12x26 m) as the length that trains may be lengthened to, and above which ECS^▸ (Empty Coaching Stock) or rescue trains need not offer full passenger-carrying functionality. So, by implication, all major IEP stops should have platforms that long (or be easily extended).

[ChrisB]

Don't forget the 5car Bi-modes that are coming as part of the IEP^▸ (Intercity Express Program / Project.) programme