Intercity Express Programme (IEP) - ongoing discussion

[whole diary]

[stuving]

I think that a big capital equipment order like this couldn't just start with a contract being signed. Anything other than a true repeat order (same product, same customer, same spec.) would involve some kind of design development phase. Whether that involves a contractual commitment, or payment, varies a lot between industries. It might just be a "heads of agreement", it might be a genuine paid contract to do design work. Only when you know what to build can you drag the lawyers out of their cupboard and crank out the contract itself. So the "is there an order?" question may have several answers.

[John R]

That's very true stuving.  I did wonder whether for such a small order Hull Trains are considering an add-on to the West of England order given they are both First Group companies. That would minimise the pre contract costs, and any increase in costs due to variation of spec for such a small order.  However the comment that they will be capable of 140mph tends to imply that won't be the case.

[paul7575]

Some of the general press (and Wikipedia) have named these as IEP^▸ (Intercity Express Program / Project.) or class 800, but presumably an AT300 variant is more likely.

Class 800 and 801 are already 'variants' of the Hitachi AT300 family surely?  There's a tendency to overcomplicate this stuff.  Pedantically they should never be referred to as IEPs anyway, as that was the programme to provide them...

The only significance of 800 and 801 are that they are the first use of the new UK^▸ (United Kingdom) rolling stock library class number range for fast fixed formation multiple units.   

So although it is likely that the 802, 803 and successors may well be used for future Hitachi products, if someone else had got there first (such as Grand Central's vapourware WCML^▸ (West Coast Main Line) open access stock) they could have been new Alstom Pendolinos or whatever.   

Paul

[ChrisB]

It will be interesting to see whether GWRs^▸ (Great Western Railway) AT300s will get a class 800 number or a number within the 8xx range....ditto anything ordered by Hull trains (whether they get the same 8xx as the GWR AT300s, or their own variant number 8xx)

[Rhydgaled]

It will be interesting to see whether GWRs^▸ (Great Western Railway) AT300s will get a class 800 number or a number within the 8xx range....ditto anything ordered by Hull trains (whether they get the same 8xx as the GWR AT300s, or their own variant number 8xx)

On WNXX^▸ (Stored Unserviceable, Mainline Locos HQ All Classes), the London-Plymouth/Penzance AT300s are now being refered to aas class 802 (the AT300s procured under IEP^▸ (Intercity Express Program / Project.) are of course classes 800 and 801).

[ChrisB]

How 'official' is WNXX^▸ (Stored Unserviceable, Mainline Locos HQ All Classes), or is it just populated by even more 'enthusiasts'? i.e is it anymore reflective of officialdom that here?

[paul7575]

How 'official' is WNXX^▸ (Stored Unserviceable, Mainline Locos HQ All Classes), or is it just populated by even more 'enthusiasts'? i.e is it anymore reflective of officialdom that here?

It always seems like there are more staff involved, but at the same time it's often just like here.  For instance a recent post in their IEP^▸ (Intercity Express Program / Project.) thread has someone accusing Rhydgaled of splitting hairs...

Paul

[JayMac]

There's a lot of people across at lot of forums for whom the Class 800/801/802s are the end of the world as we know it.

Not one of them will let me have a go in their time machine or on their crystal ball though.

[Richard Fairhurst]

Hitachi themselves are calling them Class 802s: http://jobhopnow.co.uk/jobs/project-manager--class-802-e2aea1ce56b011e5943b00259065139f

(unless they have another build of high-speed MUs^▸ (Multiple Unit) for Britain underway, of course...)

[ChrisB]

That's more like it....

[paul7575]

There's a lot of people across at lot of forums for whom the Class 800/801/802s are the end of the world as we know it.

There's definitely a heck of a lot of posts like that.   But if you could filter out one or two named individuals, then the criticism would drop by about 90%...

Paul

[ChrisB]

RAIL is reporting that 801001 reached 137.5mph....

Nine-car Intercity Express Programme 801001 reached 137.5mph during [testing] on October 28. The speeds were reached at the Rail Innovation and Development Centre (RIDC) at Old Dalby.The speeds were reached during 'overspeed' tests that must be carried out by all new trains

[stuving]

[...] Intercity Express Programme 801001 reached 137.5mph [...]

And I'd always thought that the programme was pretty slow.

[4064ReadingAbbey]

A couple of data points on the Class 800s et seq.

I attended an IMechE presentation yesterday given by a gentleman from Hitachi who is trying to get all the approvals needed for the train to be allowed to carry passengers. (As an aside - you wouldn't believe just how complicated this has become as Network Rail is being taken out of the loop and the European approvals regulations take over...)

Because of the high floor in all the coaches, except in the end pantograph coaches, Hitachi has worked to a minimum ceiling height of 1.9 metres - obviously in the constrained areas such as gangways. Even so this struck me as being a bit low for many western males.

The  external width of the 20 metre long Class 395 coaches on the South Eastern is 2.81 metres overall. The 26 metre long Class 800 is 2.74 metres wide which is the same as a Mark 3 coach (8ft 11 7/8 inch over the panels at the waist to be precise)! However the sides of both the Hitachi trains are made from double skinned extruded aluminium so the wall thickness is greater than the steel skinning on a 'tophat' section framing used in the Mark 3. In fact Hitachi's construction is exactly the same as that used in the Class 165 and 166 trains as can be seen by an exhibit in the National Railway Museum in York - with the exception of the method of welding the extruded planks together. So I suspect that they will be slightly narrower internally than the Mark 3.

It is possible to convert bi-mode trains to electric trains by removing the diesel power packs and auxiliaries, but the reverse is not possible as the diesel powered trains have to have extra brackets and fittings added to the structure during manufacture.

So if the DfT^» (Department for Transport - about) were to convert the electric order to bi-modes it will have to make its collective mind up pretty quickly or it will be too late to change the production programme.

Last month Hitachi demonstrated the changeover from diesel operation to full electric operation and back again at 125mph - much to, it was reported, the surprise of observers from third parties.

There are no standards, group, national or European, for the design, construction and approval of kitchen equipment on a train! So Hitachi took as many of the requirements as they could from specifications applying to the restaurant business. However as modern trains are no longer an engineering exercise but a way of introducing paperwork into a bureaucratic maze, getting approvals when there are no standards is giving the Notified Bodies and others nightmares.

My impression was that this is a pretty standard modern train with all the bells and whistles that modern power, supervisory and remote monitoring can manage. However the original specification has led to some odd design compromises - especially the high floor. Did I mention the small windows?

[stuving]

...
Because of the high floor in all the coaches, except in the end pantograph coaches, Hitachi has worked to a minimum ceiling height of 1.9 metres - obviously in the constrained areas such as gangways. Even so this struck me as being a bit low for many western males.
...

I thought the high floors were specifically to put these new eco-friendly diesel engines under, so would not appear in 801s. Or is that not the way they have done it?