Greater Anglia Rolling Stock Updates

[northwichcat]

The existing DMU fleet will be leaving the franchise between August and December 2019,

Except for 1 x 170 which will be retained until 31/01/2020.

Has it been noted Anglia are required to lease 319s starting this year 'to reduce overcrowding on Passenger Services on the line serving Hertford East Station' (Section 24)?

 

[43074]

Except for 1 x 170 which will be retained until 31/01/2020.

Has it been noted Anglia are required to lease 319s starting this year 'to reduce overcrowding on Passenger Services on the line serving Hertford East Station' (Section 24)?

Section 22.2 says Anglia are to use any additional units (i.e. the 317s or 321s) to reduce crowding on the Hertford East line, Section 24 seems to suggest the the 319s were insurance if the any of the "additional units" (including the new stock) were unavailable for any reason - it isn't a certainty that they will lease any 319s at all.

 

[jopsuk]

SDO on 27 317s is interesting (that's the 317/5 and "317/3"* fleets I'd guess, 15+13 -1?) - more 12 car WA services on services stopping at 8 car stations? There's no 4 car stations on the WA side from Cambridge southwards as far as I know?

*apparently still officially 317/1, but all numbered 3173xx

 

[chubs]

F Great Eastern You used to be quite an interesting and knowledgeable poster but pasting the same rant over and over again is getting a bit thin.

It is well noted that you think it will all fail and you will jump around with glee.

Personally I'm looking forward to some modernisation in the area.

 

[F Great Eastern]

F Great Eastern You used to be quite an interesting and knowledgeable poster but pasting the same rant over and over again is getting a bit thin.

It is well noted that you think it will all fail and you will jump around with glee.

Personally I'm looking forward to some modernisation in the area.

I'm looking forward to modernisation as well but at the end of the day and without doubt the 153/156/317s are way past their best and not fit for use in East Anglia anymore and must be replaced as soon as possible, no issue with that whatsoever,

I also see the reasons for replacing the 321s and the MK3s due to their age, despite the very good refurbishment they have recently been given or have about to be given, even if I do think that it's a huge waste of money refurbishing 30x321s for such a short time frame.

What I don't see the reason in is spending a lot of money on replacing 360 and 379 trains with less comfortable more squashed trains just because they are new, especially when the FLIRTS are being equipped with bargain basement seats presumably to save money to allow them to do a full fleet replacement.

If they didn't replace the 360s or 379s in this franchise, it would allow them to spend more per unit on the replacement stock for stuff which really did need replacing and allow them to spec a better seat on them and a better interior and that way everyone has either a mid-life comfortable train or a new comfortable train.

Essentially passenger comfort is being downgraded since it's seen as more important to have a new fleet than to have a fleet that offers adequate levels of comfort.

 

[D365]

You do realise that if the entire diesel fleet, and the BR electrics, are to be replaced, it makes sense economically to replace the smaller Class 360 and 379 fleets at the same time.

And I don't think the choice of seat adds up to a significant proportion of the unit cost. At this sort of quantity, any type of seat is going to be cheap.

 

[northwichcat]

The 379s have a very bad leasing arrangement. An Aussie bank is milking the TOC for every penny they can get to lease those trains. Abellio have done a sensible thing by arranging replacements which will be cheaper in the long term. Then hopefully the ROSCO will either sell or lower the leasing costs of the 379s with them no longer having a guarantee of a future use.

 

[F Great Eastern]

You do realise that if the entire diesel fleet, and the BR electrics, are to be replaced, it makes sense economically to replace the smaller Class 360 and 379 fleets at the same time.

It shouldn't be at the expense of an adequate level of comfort though and that is my problem with this train order. It's quantity over quality and whilst there always needs to be a balance, there's none whatsoever in this order.

I think you will find many franchise bidders, including some who were successful and some that were not, have often examined the benefits of a full fleet replacement and sometimes have been able to come to the same opinion and found it possible to do a full fleet replacement but ultimately decided against it on the basis that they felt the spec concessions needed to make it viable over the franchise would hamper it's revenue growth potential.

 

[F Great Eastern]

And I don't think the choice of seat adds up to a significant proportion of the unit cost. At this sort of quantity, any type of seat is going to be cheap.

You would be very wrong.

I know of an operator who had three options for a seat and the LEAN was by far the cheapest option, which makes sense considering it is also the lightest and thinnest and marketed as being the seat for the most highest density of trains.

 

[Kite159]

Are you just upset the new trains won't have 1st class, to force you to sit in standard class with other people?

 

[F Great Eastern]

Are you just upset the new trains won't have 1st class, to force you to sit in standard class with other people?

I have never commuted in First Class.

 

[Wivenswold]

I have never commuted in First Class.

I'm interested in your idea that 319s will be leased, considering that we'll have 30 Renatus units that are cleared for use and could have options for a lease extension, is your assumption based on information you have or a wild stab in the dark based on the worst-case scenario that you can think of?

Don't forget it's election time, have you spoken to your MP about this?

 

[swt_passenger]

I'm interested in your idea that 319s will be leased...

I think he's been misled by a couple of earlier posts that appear to have misinterpreted the relevant parts of the franchise agreement, it became available yesterday, but 319s appear to be there as an alternative if the 317s and 321s from GN were late.

Post 182 earlier was another attempt to clarify this.

 

[Wivenswold]

I think he's been misled by a couple of earlier posts that appear to have misinterpreted the relevant parts of the franchise agreement, it became available yesterday, but 319s appear to be there as an alternative if the 317s and 321s from GN were late.

Post 182 earlier was another attempt to clarify this.

Ah, thanks.

Does anyone know when the Renatus units are due to re-enter service? I think 304/321 are back down south now.

 

[Alfie1014]

Ah, thanks.

Does anyone know when the Renatus units are due to re-enter service? I think 304/321 are back down south now.

The Franchise Agreement commits to 10 in service by 31/01/18 and all by 30/11/18 just about a year from when they'll get replaced!

 

[lordbusiness]

Repeat from a few weeks ago. ..

Before the award the punters, DfT, local MP'S, the press, passenger groups, Local Enterprise Partnerships, Councils etc all wanted:

New Trains
More seats
Better reliability
More Services

Plus

New Trains
More Seats

They've got them.

Essentially the bid winner has delivered what people wanted. The Anglia Region will always be at capacity and short of bringing in double decker trains there will always be overcrowding. It's more of a socio-economic problem more than anything. Over population and migration from the capital, coupled with the wish to earn London wages will mean the capacity problems will get worse. People want to have their cake and eat it- they might find it doesn't taste as good as they thought it would.
Complete fleet replacement makes sense to achieve savings on maintenance, crew training and flexibility of use and also removes the mini fleets.
Short of ripping everything up and starting from scratch the only way to give people a better chance of seat is to pack them in, most journeys on the GE are relatively short anyway.
In summary, the Chelmsford and Southend crowd have got what they wanted....

New Trains
More Seats

Remember what I said 6 months ago......people munchers.

 

[Alfie1014]

The Franchise Agreement commits to 10 in service by 31/01/18 and all by 30/11/18 just about a year from when they'll get replaced!

304 seen this morning running ECS from Southend to Ilford Car Sheds passing a CR 345 at Goodmayes.

 

[Wivenswold]

Repeat from a few weeks ago. ..

Before the award the punters, DfT, local MP'S, the press, passenger groups, Local Enterprise Partnerships, Councils etc all wanted:

New Trains
More seats
Better reliability
More Services

Plus

New Trains
More Seats

They've got them.

Essentially the bid winner has delivered what people wanted. The Anglia Region will always be at capacity and short of bringing in double decker trains there will always be overcrowding. It's more of a socio-economic problem more than anything. Over population and migration from the capital, coupled with the wish to earn London wages will mean the capacity problems will get worse. People want to have their cake and eat it- they might find it doesn't taste as good as they thought it would.
Complete fleet replacement makes sense to achieve savings on maintenance, crew training and flexibility of use and also removes the mini fleets.
Short of ripping everything up and starting from scratch the only way to give people a better chance of seat is to pack them in, most journeys on the GE are relatively short anyway.
In summary, the Chelmsford and Southend crowd have got what they wanted....

New Trains
More Seats

Remember what I said 6 months ago......people munchers.

You are spot on. I'd love reclining armchairs for my commute but I live in EA for the same reasons as so many others, it's affordable and close to London.

Reliability and a seat, that's all we need. I just hope the seat is reasonably comfortable for an hour though.

 

[wls1]

The train service requirements are also interesting, with 2 southend peak services are to make the journey in under 50 mins. This coinciding with the ever worsening service that the Italians are creating means that a lot more people will start to use GA instead. After the events of Dec 2015 people have been swarming back to GA.

The good thing is that with the aventras having so much seats, with over 1000 seats on 10 carriage trains then you can completely get rid of all people standing on services. Better than on c2c, when the high peak fast train struggles to have any seats free after Southend Central.

 

[TT-ONR-NRN]

I say:

Class 153s and 156s - good trains, but to be honest a bit past it.

Class 170s - can't say, never been on one. Been on a 171 though, that was lovely. Went on a 172 for the first time yesterday, they're awful!

Class 317s - I like them, but they're too old for London - Cambridge, once again a bit past it.

Class 321s - Good riddance. They look nice on the outside but the interiors are dreadful!

Class 379s - WHAT?????? WHY ON EARTH ARE THEY BEING REPLACED! THEY'RE NOT EVEN TEN YEARS OLD PLUS THEY'RE REALLY COMFORTABLE AND EFFICIENT! Phew...calm down, calm down...

 

[mic505]

379s are being replaced because they're expensive to lease.

 

[Alfie1014]

Repeat from a few weeks ago. ..

Before the award the punters, DfT, local MP'S, the press, passenger groups, Local Enterprise Partnerships, Councils etc all wanted:

New Trains
More seats
Better reliability
More Services

Plus

New Trains
More Seats



They've got them.

Essentially the bid winner has delivered what people wanted. The Anglia Region will always be at capacity and short of bringing in double decker trains there will always be overcrowding. It's more of a socio-economic problem more than anything. Over population and migration from the capital, coupled with the wish to earn London wages will mean the capacity problems will get worse. People want to have their cake and eat it- they might find it doesn't taste as good as they thought it would.
Complete fleet replacement makes sense to achieve savings on maintenance, crew training and flexibility of use and also removes the mini fleets.
Short of ripping everything up and starting from scratch the only way to give people a better chance of seat is to pack them in, most journeys on the GE are relatively short anyway.
In summary, the Chelmsford and Southend crowd have got what they wanted....

New Trains
More Seats

Remember what I said 6 months ago......people munchers.

Whilst I agree with you to a certain extent that capacity is a prime driver on the route, not all journey times are as short as you allude to; Whittlesford Parkway and Marks Tey are around an hour from London and Thorpe-le-Soken and Ely are nearer 90 minutes. So what may suit Chelmsford or Billericay commuters is not ideal for longer journeys. I don't think many of the stakeholders really wanted more seats at the expense of overall comfort, quite the opposite they wanted better quality interiors to match the needs of the market.

The specification for the Aventras looks just awful 300 more seats than a 12 car 321 in a train of the same length. Even taking account of no First Class, cabs etc they are going to be very cramped and not an ideal train for off peak journeys. Whilst they will have wi-fi and power points there will be no tables or seat back tables, (just like the 700s were specified and now to be retro-fitted), so enjoy balancing your laptop (or coffee) on your knees! They are the only 2+3 seated trains being procured for anywhere on the network and whilst as I've said they may be suitable for journeys of 30-45 minutes for the longer journeys I think they are going to be far from suitable.

On the new SWT franchise the sucessful bidder is to provide 2+2 seated 442s to replace 450s on peak services on the Portsmouth direct primarily driven by passenger discontent.

 

[F Great Eastern]

Whilst I agree with you to a certain extent that capacity is a prime driver on the route, not all journey times are as short as you allude to; Whittlesford Parkway and Marks Tey are around an hour from London and Thorpe-le-Soken and Ely are nearer 90 minutes. So what may suit Chelmsford or Billericay commuters is not ideal for longer journeys. I don't think many of the stakeholders really wanted more seats at the expense of overall comfort, quite the opposite they wanted better quality interiors to match the needs of the market.

The specification for the Aventras looks just awful 300 more seats than a 12 car 321 in a train of the same length. Even taking account of no First Class, cabs etc they are going to be very cramped and not an ideal train for off peak journeys. Whilst they will have wi-fi and power points there will be no tables or seat back tables, (just like the 700s were specified and now to be retro-fitted), so enjoy balancing your laptop (or coffee) on your knees! They are the only 2+3 seated trains being procured for anywhere on the network and whilst as I've said they may be suitable for journeys of 30-45 minutes for the longer journeys I think they are going to be far from suitable.

Pretty much how I feel, and the FLIRT's are using a seat that is aimed at high density seating and not suitable for some of the journeys that it will be undertaking, it is a seat which is even thinner and less padding than the much maligned ironing board seats and much thinner seats, there is even a model of LEAN that allows two back to back seats to share the same thin body back to further save space.

Even it's own manufacturer triumphs the fact that the indent in the seat in front allows a lower seat pitch with the same amount of knee-room, however some people don't want to sit with their knees clenched together and taller or larger people are going to have issues with that since some of them may sit slightly cross legged, which is going to be hard when there is going to be even less room on the sides of the seats than in the middle.

I mean this says it all:
Thanks to its innovative design, LEAN seat allows to mount more seats in the carriage and to reduce the total weight of the train at the same time.
The niche at the back of the seat hosts the knees of the passenger

And the image as attached, it's laughable, it's a short hop regional seat on an intercity train. Everyone agrees the capacity needs to be increased, but there has to be a balance between comfort and capacity and simply saying, hey just put your knees hard against the seat in front is not a good thing, if it's like that for the average passenger, what about the tall or large?

 

[jopsuk]

in the second row of that image there's not space to get in and out of the seats.

 

[Trainfan344]

That second image, if the train is involved in an accident, it's going to threaten a lot of legs surely?

 

[F Great Eastern]

That's the publicity shot from the manufacturer of the seats that GA are using. It is from their own PDF, I know that is quite shocking but it's true.

I've sat on the seats and it is difficult getting in and out of them compared to what you would do, but it's still possible due to the recess, but if you're a large or tall passenger it's going to be hard,, the argument from the seat manufacturer is you don't need much room from one seat to another because your knees go into the back of the bigger indentin front, which creates the space to get in and out of the seat

However if the seat has a big indent, and it's already thinner than most other seats, that doesn't say much for the padding for the back of each seat, because if it's already thin before you take into account a lot of the seat thickness is going to be used for the knees of the person behind rather than padding, you end up with a very poor seat for the work it's going to do, but it provides excellent value for money.

This allows a far smaller space between the front of one seat and the back of the next, but the argument for those seats is that the only part of your body that needs the space is your knees, and by having a hole in the back of the seat in front, that issue is resolved, however it is very claustrophobic, because the seat in front of you is closer to your torso/head/neck than any other seat I've known.

 

[absolutelymilk]

in the second row of that image there's not space to get in and out of the seats.

I highly doubt that this is how they would actually look, I'm sure it has been exaggerated for effect.

 

[F Great Eastern]

Here is an example of what I mean in relation to seat padding needing to be very thin to allow for this large knee indent.

Notice how little padding there is going to be in the seat itself, notice how close the passengers knees are to the rear of the person in the seat in front and how little the resultant seat padding is going to have to be.

Nobody expected capacity not to be increased, but it's going to be like a sardine can on pretty much both types of train that GA are introducing and a substantial downgrade on comfort for passengers.

 

[F Great Eastern]

I highly doubt that this is how they would actually look, I'm sure it has been exaggerated for effect.

But doesn't that prove my point?

The seat is designed for high density seating, why else would they show extreme high density seating everywhere in the marketing material for it, and if the seat is marketed as a very high density seat why do you think Abellio decided to spec it?

Maybe because they wanted very high density seating? Why else would they pick a seat which is designed for ultra high density?

 

[Bletchleyite]

Must admit I don't like the niche thing, I prefer, being male, sitting with my knees apart. Vastly prefer the Class 175/180 seat which instead has a strong central support and "niches" at the outside edges where my knees actually do go. It seems like the Class 158 as-built seat which has a similar issue.

OTOH, a *thinner* seat back I don't mind. I quite like the new style seats used by easyJet etc, which as long as you avoid the rear section in the A320 where they've crammed an extra seat in does give a substantial increase in comfort at the same pitch.

So it depends, really. The artist's impressions of the FLIRTs, based on other FLIRTs I've been on, look decent - and remember the IC70 on the Mk3 is hardly a good start, being a seat that is *very* inefficient indeed on use of space.

Class 180 with side "niches":

Class 158 original seating with central, uncomfortable (for a big bloke) "niche":

New easyJet thin-backed seats (which I find much more comfortable than the old ones, except the back bit of the A320 with an extra row):