The new way of running the rails - what would you LIKE in the new system?

[whole diary]

[southwest]

• Standardisation of rolling stock across the network.
• Older diesels fitted with emission reducing technology where practical.
• Better and more realistic fares that offer a competitive advantage over driving.

• A better First Class product across all rail operators, no more rubbish hard seats, cheap & nasty fabric, little to no catering.

[/b]

• Standard Class to have minimum requirements for privacy, leg room, seat comfort.
• Basic amenity's for Intercity services, a small buffet (like LNER^» (London North Eastern Railway - about) OR Inter7City), Ability to walk through the entire train.

I think there's more chance of Concorde coming out of retirement and flying from Paddington to Penzance but I live in hope.

And yet ... there are elements where these are of have been worked towards

For longer distance expresses, new trains are pretty much A300 derivatives these days - whether you call them Javalins, Azumas^▸ (Brand name for Class 80x trains on LNER), IETs^▸ (Intercity Express Train), Paragons, Novas or Pip and Emma.  I would expect as the next generation of retirements comes - Adelantes, Castles, Voyagers, Pendelinos, and Meridians  - there to be builds to a new family, but consistent builds, bearing in mind progress made since the A300 was designed and the desire to balance up-to-date design against a single fleet.

We have seen retrofits over the years - re-engineering the Class 43 power cars away from Valenta engines, and we have also seen or are seeing refits of D76 and class 319 stock, and others may follow.

I believe there are already standards for seat pitch, etc;   part of the issue there is that some of the older, softer seats conform less to modern safety standards ... privacy (an in particular keeping one's breath to oneself) may be here sooner than we would have imagined.

Me might be closer to a standardised mainline stock but the suburban/regional stock is still quite messy. Excluding Southern/Gatwick Express. This is likely to change as the 150s are nearing 30 years old.

We might have seen the Class 43s have new engines, but what about the Class 150s? 165/166s especially are known for having knackered engines, surely now would be a good time to look a re-engine them with more modern diesel engines, hybrids or looking a fitting exhaust emission reduction technology.

Yet the modern rolling stock such as IETs, Electrostars are often complained for being too hard? We need a standard set across all services, minimum leg room, seat comfort, lighting brightness.

[Rhydgaled]

165/166s especially are known for having knackered engines, surely now would be a good time to look a re-engine them with more modern diesel engines, hybrids or looking a fitting exhaust emission reduction technology.

I believe Chiltern are to trial replacement of engines on a 165 soon (or it may have been a 168). If I recall correctly, the new engine raft would include batteries making it a hybrid similar to the batch of hybrid class 230s for Wrexham-Bidston. Something similar was proposed for the class 175s by the ROSCO^» (Rolling Stock Owning Company - about) who were keen to get them retained by the Wales & Borders franchise.

I believe there are already standards for seat pitch, etc;   part of the issue there is that some of the older, softer seats conform less to modern safety standards

Not sure about seat pitch (I believe that's coming in the next version) but the Rail Delivery Group's Key Train Requirements (KTR) document does offer standards for things like coupling to other units and provision of toilets. However, it is so often ignored that I wonder whether it's worth the paper it is written on. For example Northern's class 195 CAF Civity DMUs^▸ (Diesel Multiple Unit) apparently are unable to couple to anything else with the gangway-fitted class 196s requiring a different coupling due to the end gangways. I'm not sure if the TfW 197s will be able to couple to 196s or not. Also, the KTR spec for inter-urban and intercity services is a maximum of 85 seats per toilet, the 2-car TfW class 197s (which TfW intend to use on long-distance journeys, including some over 5hrs) will have 116 seats with just one toilet. We have some of the standards but they are ignored, which is why I said that they need to be mandatory standards rather than advisory as the KTR is.

Yet the modern rolling stock such as IETs^▸ (Intercity Express Train), Electrostars are often complained for being too hard? We need a standard set across all services, minimum leg room, seat comfort, lighting brightness.

I believe leg room is treated as a component of seat comfort in the new standard being developed which gives a single numeric score telling operators, politicians etc. exactly how comfortable the train is. At present, this new system is just a research paper, but it's findings are apparently going to be incorporated in version 6 of the KTR when it is published.