Greater Anglia Class 755s (Regional Trains)

[Pete_uk]

I have seen some pictures of the inside of these units and they seem cluttered.

 

[MrPIC]

Won't FLIRTs to Stansted give added flexibility? Aren't there restrictions on using diesels in the two main platforms? Running as electrics, won't FLIRTs be able to use any of Stansted's three platforms?

Yes, Platform's 1&3 aren't suitable for diesels unless the diesel unit only uses the country end section of 3 as its in the open. Platform 2 I think is only 4 car so whether a 4 car BMU will fit, I don't know. One would assume that the NRW-SSD services would pan up at Ely or Cambridge and thus be able to use any of the platforms.

 

[chubs]

I have seen some pictures of the inside of these units and they seem cluttered.

How so?

It doesn't look that different to a 170 to me (in terms of passenger saloon area) - aisle in the middle, 2x2 seating, luggage racks at the end.

 

[chubs]

Yes, Platform's 1&3 aren't suitable for diesels unless the diesel unit only uses the country end section of 3 as its in the open. Platform 2 I think is only 4 car so whether a 4 car BMU will fit, I don't know. One would assume that the NRW-SSD services would pan up at Ely or Cambridge and thus be able to use any of the platforms.

It's been said on here before they'll be able to use platforms 1 & 3, presumably they'll be using the wires from Ely onwards.

The XC 170's usually have a power nap in platform 2 so potentially no room for GA - the current GA Cambridge service uses platform 3. Whenever I've use it I've had to explain to at least a few people that it most definitely is not going to Liverpool St despite the big platform sign.

 

[dk1]

To be fair, after instructing and spending more time on the Liverpool side, I can probably count my trips to Norwich this year on one hand, and most of them on a Sunday, but I honestly cannot recall having greens through Harling Rd.
I believe the Croxton restriction is due to the road surface being prone to lifting? If so then it is strange that a solution has not been implemented after all this time

Nothing to do with the road surface now. It once raised causing a derailment over 10yrs ago but that was all sorted. Problem now is due to a total overreaction by the DfT who on inspecting the crossing found road vehicles approaching at over 70mph. There appears nothing can be done about this so we penalise the rail users.

 

[dk1]

Won't FLIRTs to Stansted give added flexibility? Aren't there restrictions on using diesels in the two main platforms? Running as electrics, won't FLIRTs be able to use any of Stansted's three platforms?

Exactly the reason 170s couldn't be extended from Norwich. Why XC are allowed to hog platform 3 for 40mins in every hour I'll never know.

 

[jopsuk]

Presumably XC's long layover at Stansted is because the timetabling is based on the busier Birmingham end?

 

[dk1]

Presumably XC's long layover at Stansted is because the timetabling is based on the busier Birmingham end?

It's gone on for too many years. It really eats into diesel train capacity at the airport but that could be the intention. GA who own the extra paths started electric services a few years ago from Cambridge but obviously BMUs are a whole new ball game for future direct services. The same I suppose can be said as to why a platform 4 has never been added now the throughput of the airport has grown so much.

 

[jopsuk]

veering into Diagramming territory rather the new trains, but I've always felt it a pity that the GA service doesn't serve all stops, giving a half hourly service into Cambridge from all the South Cambs/north Essex stations and allowing local (commuting- workers) access

 

[Alfie1014]

veering into Diagramming territory rather the new trains, but I've always felt it a pity that the GA service doesn't serve all stops, giving a half hourly service into Cambridge from all the South Cambs/north Essex stations and allowing local (commuting- workers) access

But the London services run half hourly in the peaks (in both directions) allowing the commuting you suggest. The fast London and XC services combine to make 5 trains an hour from Audley End and Whittlesford Parkway. Assuming the Norwich’s will run in the peak (as the Cambs shuttles don’t at the moment) there will be 6 tph on the corridor.

 

[Midnight Sun]

There is a video of the inside on the Cambridge News website.
https://www.cambridge-news.co.uk/news/cambridge-news/greater-anglia-new-trains-cambridge-15183855

 

[Railperf]

In terms of performance the FLIRT units are a step ahead of most UK EMU's. Here is a video of the NSB Type 74. 100mph in less than 2 minutes, 110 in 2 mins 12, and 125 in 3 mins 12. Probably the only UK EMU to come close is a Class 395 Javelin.

 

[oliMw]

There is a video of the inside on the Cambridge News website.
https://www.cambridge-news.co.uk/news/cambridge-news/greater-anglia-new-trains-cambridge-15183855

During the video the person filming opens the setback table and there are two grooves running along from the cup storage. They look a little like they could be used to put your phone so it stands when watching a video. If this is the case Kudos to GA for that.

 

[Ethano92]

During the video the person filming opens the setback table and there are two grooves running along from the cup storage. They look a little like they could be used to put your phone so it stands when watching a video. If this is the case Kudos to GA for that.

I think it is. I remember hearing it somewhere.

Greater Anglia seem to have taken care into choosing the right seat, I really hope that they have good padding or will at least soften after a few months use. I really like the trains. They've got a little mainland European feel to them in my opinion (eg, raised seats in some sections) but I guess that's because of who they've been built by. Im probably most looking forward to these trains out of all the new stock that's been coming out and I will hardly be using these but I think they're going to be liked quite a lot, they seem comfortable.

 

[Kneedown]

Nothing to do with the road surface now. It once raised causing a derailment over 10yrs ago but that was all sorted. Problem now is due to a total overreaction by the DfT who on inspecting the crossing found road vehicles approaching at over 70mph. There appears nothing can be done about this so we penalise the rail users.

A couple of speed cameras either side of the crossing would sort that problem, but I imagine the council would be rather reluctant to fund these, or indeed any other traffic calming measures.

 

[Geoff DC]

They could make a profit from the speed cameras with ANPR

 

[306024]

I have seen some pictures of the inside of these units and they seem cluttered.

Compared to, say, the new Crossrail 345 they are indeed cluttered - cluttered with seats.

No they are fine in the flesh, personal preference would have been for a few less airline seats and more 4 seats together plus table, but that’s rather unfashionable these days. Walking through the unit the differences in height take a bit of getting used to for a UK train, but are not as pronounced as the Stadler being built for Swiss Südostbahn, which isn’t so easy to navigate standing still, never mind on the move.

 

[jamesontheroad]

Yes, Platform's 1&3 aren't suitable for diesels unless the diesel unit only uses the country end section of 3 as its in the open. Platform 2 I think is only 4 car so whether a 4 car BMU will fit, I don't know. One would assume that the NRW-SSD services would pan up at Ely or Cambridge and thus be able to use any of the platforms.

A 4-car BMU might overhang SSD platform 2, but passenger doors are mid-way down the carriage so could be ok for boarding. Question is whether a signal would have to be moved back for the driver to have sight of it?

 

[eastdyke]

The BMU4 will be fine at Stansted P2, 80.7m v 106m platform.
As mentioned upthread, a bigger issue will be occupancy of the platform by the XC between duties.

See data sheets posted by @Martin222002 at post 39.

 

[Railperf]

Travelled on a Norwegian FLIRT unit. More grunt than a class 800 in electric mode, obviously more spacious - even a coffee machine. From a passenger point of view the NSB specification offers a good passenger experience - not quite as minimal as Class 800 or 700 interiors. A surprisingly good train, as the video here might demonstrate ..

 

[Railperf]

Here is a video on the making of the NSB FLIRT units too. I guess the GA process is similar.

 

[F Great Eastern]

I have seen some pictures of the inside of these units and they seem cluttered.

They've spent the last year or so avoiding answering the seat pitch figure of the standard seats in airline layout and have been using a lot of normal photos of airline seats at the end of the carriage, near the doors, near the buffet, near the wheelchair space and other non standard areas that would have bigger spaces than your regular airline seats. The two photos I have seen of normal airline seats are from diagonal angles to give a misleading impression of space.

The fact they're using a seat marketed for being ultra high density, have failed to give any details for the seat pitch for standard airline seats and have given every excuse and response under the sun to questioning about it other than the answer, suggests it can't be good news, which I assume is the same reason they will not deny that services that are currently 8 car commuter EMUs will be downgraded to a 5 car service that can carry less.

 

[samuelmorris]

There is now ample evidence to show what the seat pitch is of the entire train. The seat pitch is never going to be wonderful due to how many passengers the trains are being tasked with seating but it looks acceptable to me. I agree re: 5 cars vs 8, that's bound to happen, I think that's a foregone conclusion by this point. It's just a question of how often.

 

[Bletchleyite]

There is now ample evidence to show what the seat pitch is of the entire train. The seat pitch is never going to be wonderful due to how many passengers the trains are being tasked with seating but it looks acceptable to me. I agree re: 5 cars vs 8, that's bound to happen, I think that's a foregone conclusion by this point. It's just a question of how often.

Remember though that it's really the equivalent of 6 vs 8, not 5 vs 8, as the new stock is 24m rather than 20m.

To be fair in LNR-land there are a reasonable number of trains for which 12.350 is excessive but 8.350 too short, or where 8.350 is excessive but 4.350 too short. The interim length might actually prove very useful.

 

[Clip]

They've spent the last year or so avoiding answering the seat pitch figure of the standard seats in airline layout and have been using a lot of normal photos of airline seats at the end of the carriage, near the doors, near the buffet, near the wheelchair space and other non standard areas that would have bigger spaces than your regular airline seats. The two photos I have seen of normal airline seats are from diagonal angles to give a misleading impression of space.

The fact they're using a seat marketed for being ultra high density, have failed to give any details for the seat pitch for standard airline seats and have given every excuse and response under the sun to questioning about it other than the answer, suggests it can't be good news, which I assume is the same reason they will not deny that services that are currently 8 car commuter EMUs will be downgraded to a 5 car service that can carry less.

Did you read the story posted above and the video of the interior? Whilst I understand your bizarre quest for the actual numbers of the pitch i think its pretty obvious from the story about how the seats will be - unless they magically change them before entering service.

I must say those trains do look very smart indeed.

 

[47421]

Remember though that it's really the equivalent of 6 vs 8, not 5 vs 8, as the new stock is 24m rather than 20m.

To be fair in LNR-land there are a reasonable number of trains for which 12.350 is excessive but 8.350 too short, or where 8.350 is excessive but 4.350 too short. The interim length might actually prove very useful.

Going to 5 x 24m (equivalent to 6 x 20m) and 10 x 24m (equivalent to 12 x 20m), all standard, all 3 + 2 seating, is in theory very sensible as it maximises seating capacity by reducing the dead space of the cabs. But the problem is that West Anglia is mostly 8 car max. The Franchise Agreement took this into account with a requirement for platform lengthening in various places, deadline for completion 1 Sept 2018. Work has not been done and is not scheduled as far as I can tell. I *think* they can SDO on Cambridge / Lea Valley, although at Enfield Lock and Elsenham that will involve overhanging busy road crossings, which is a big problem at Enfield Lock where in the peak the barriers are already down 40mins and hour.

But Hertford East is max 8 car cus of position of signal and points at HE, also Ware has busy road crossing at end of platform. So it is looking like Hertford East will be 5 car max, which will result in a very significant and very unwelcome reduction in capacity in the peak, as running extra services is basically impossible given the congestion on the Lea Valley and through Clapton.

Others have described issues elsewhere, eg the bay at Wickford? So the scheme for maximising seating capacity may yet come badly undone.

 

[jopsuk]

The Stadlers of course have shorter carriages than current trains, but are either 3 or 4 carriage replacing 1, 2 and 3 car trains or 12 carriages replacing loco+8 or 9+DVT or 8 carriage trains

 

[Railperf]

How many seats will the 12-car intercity have compared to the 8,9 and 10 coach MKIII rakes? Much as I do love the MKIII's the Anglia ones are looking very tired, and too much time is lost through the narrow door entry and exit at each end of the coach, and people having to traverse the long aisle to find a seat. The EMU style configuration - despite appearing a step down - will improve overall customer comfort levels.

 

[trebor79]

They only look tired because they are allowed to. I'm sure they are leaving cosmetic faults now the new stock is only a year or so away.
They were in a terrible state when they arrived from the west coast, I guess Virgin had also allowed them to deteriorate cosmetically.
I mean they are what, 30 or 40 years old now? They would have looked tired decades ago had they been allowed to fall into cosmetic disrepair.

Lots of them have freshly overhauled bogies so I'm not alleging any safety related maintenance isn't taking place.

There's a degree of logic in not shelling out on cosmetic repairs, but it does display a lack of customer focus. And it might be an uphill battle to change the culture once the new stock arrives. That will quickly look tired too if the same attitude prevails.

 

[Railperf]

They only look tired because they are allowed to. I'm sure they are leaving cosmetic faults now the new stock is only a year or so away.
They were in a terrible state when they arrived from the west coast, I guess Virgin had also allowed them to deteriorate cosmetically.
I mean they are what, 30 or 40 years old now? They would have looked tired decades ago had they been allowed to fall into cosmetic disrepair.

Lots of them have freshly overhauled bogies so I'm not alleging any safety related maintenance isn't taking place.

There's a degree of logic in not shelling out on cosmetic repairs, but it does display a lack of customer focus. And it might be an uphill battle to change the culture once the new stock arrives. That will quickly look tired too if the same attitude prevails.

Yes, that is true. The 'mallard' style interiors fitted to HST's prove that point. But the Anglia MKIII's only ever had a few new seat covers fitted. The rest of the interior -lighting etc was almost the same as the day they were built. But then again look at the money being spent on Renatus 321's that will all be displaced once the Aventras finally arrive!