Our new ticketing site is now live! Using either this or the original site (both powered by TrainSplit) helps support the running of the forum with every ticket purchase! Find out more and ask any questions/give us feedback in this thread!
That seat is not the Sophia. It's the Fainsa-Compin "ironing board" (I can't remember its actual name, but it's something nondescript). It's a completely different seat - it is quite hard and basic, but it doesn't have the metal bar problem. I personally don't dislike it like some do.
The Sophia is the squarer seat used on these and on other 80x bar the Avanti and Lumo units.
The Fainsa model ranges were renamed post merger with Complin (the merger was 2015, the renaming late 2016/2017), with four separate main options in the older Sophia family each receiving different names to avoid confusion:
Comrail
Comrail Plus (arm and fold down table options)
Sophia
Sophia Supra
The current equivalent model names may not match the model name at the time of of ordering, delivery and entry into service.
The 377/6 &/7 and 700 seats were Sophia at the time of ordering and delivery.
Post renaming the Comrail are narrower tops on the seat backs and Sophia wider tops on the seat backs. In terms of the structure the manufacturing techniques and materials are effectively identical, the differences are in soft materials hence why there were all part of the Sophia family in the Fainsa way of thinking for naming - but this didn't match the larger Compin's way of thinking with more individual product names. The shape of the back may have been different but the manufacturing techniques were the same.
Honestly as a regular northern user I actually quite like the CAF units they've got. I can't imagine anything worse than ordering more IETs given the issues that still continue to arise with them (and not just the seats). I'm interested to see how this works out.
Honestly as a regular northern user I actually quite like the CAF units they've got. I can't imagine anything worse than ordering more IETs given the issues that still continue to arise with them (and not just the seats). I'm interested to see how this works out.
Strongly agreed. The 397s are an unsung hero of modern stock. Sure, the seats are rubbish and the ride very CAF, but compared to their contemporaries (ie: any iteration of IET), they're a more user friendly train. There's a nice bit of attention to detail (like lower windows in the saloon for a better view) and they feel a bit wider and more spacious than the IETs.
Mind you, given what they're replacing, it's a bit of a tough pill to swallow.
Azuma is Japanese for "East", apparently. I seem to recall that it was chosen in reference both to the Eastern part of the world (Japan) that those trains originate from, as well as the East Coast Main Line on which they would be operating.
== Doublepost prevention - post automatically merged: ==
So, more than 2 years after we got exterior renders of the 897s, we now have interior mockups of them, but there still seems to be a worrying lack of information about (admittedly, not so "customer facing") the traction of these units. Yes, they're tri-mode (overhead electric, battery electric and diesel), but what traction motors will they have? What batteries will they have? What diesel engines will they have?
We know that the 331s (and therefore probably also the 397s, judging by the sound) have TSA traction motors, so does anyone in here know if the 897s will also have TSA traction motors, or ones from a different company? Also, does anyone in here know what batteries the 897s will have?
Does anyone in here know what diesel engines the 897s will have? The 195s, 196s and 197s have an MTU 1800 Series 12.8-litre inline-6 turbo-diesel engine under each vehicle, coupled to a ZF Ecolife 6-speed gearbox. Each engine is believed to output a maximum of 503-523hp depending on the class, but all three classes only have a 100mph top speed.
By comparison, the 897s will have to be capable of 125mph on diesel, right? Also, being tri-mode, they'll have electric transmission. So does anyone in here know if they'll have bigger MTU engines, like the MTU 1600 Series 21-litre V12 turbo-diesel engines fitted to the 800s (and 5 of them, so one under every other vehicle of the 10-car unit, rather than one under every vehicle). Or if they'll go with a different engine manufacturer?
Edit: By the way, I now see that London North Eastern Railway have officially stated an entry-to-service year of 2028, rather than the original "2027". Following the flooding in one of the 897 supplier's factories (with the resulting delays causing CAF Newport, Llanwern to have to assemble trains/trams for Israel alongside the last few 197s), I was expecting 2028/2029.
Azuma is Japanese for "East", apparently. I seem to recall that it was chosen in reference both to the Eastern part of the world (Japan) that those trains originate from, as well as the East Coast Main Line on which they would be operating.
Equally, given that the most critical headways on the ECML are electrified, the need for adequate acceleration can easily be served by current electric motors. That performance can also be tapped into when running on battery for short spells if necessary so the diesel prime movers should be selected for economy and environmental performance.
Why so? Everywhere they're likely to operate on diesel the line speed will probably 100mph at best. You're not getting above 100mph going to Harrogate, Hull, Lincoln or Middlesbrough. None of the diversionary routes like the Tyne Valley, Durham Coast or the Joint Line are going to be going over 100mph. Maybe a few stretches north of Edinburgh where you get 110mph? But I could be imagining that, either way it would only be very short stretches.
That is a matter of personal taste. You might like it, others will not. Leather done badly does look quite cheap, tacky and uninviting. The first class colour scheme in the pictures does look a little garish.
That is a matter of personal taste. You might like it, others will not. Leather done badly does look quite cheap, tacky and uninviting. The first class colour scheme in the pictures does look a little garish.
It's certainly a bit Virgin in nature - indeed it's basically the same colour scheme as economy in their aircraft. I wouldn't say it looks cheap, tacky or uninviting, though, and it isn't as bad as light coloured leather (as e.g. TPE have used) which very rapidly attracts ground in muck and looks tatty.
I'm 5'9", average build and find the original 2+3 150 seats to be built for midgets. They're tiny and it feels like you're sitting on the the floor. Awful things.
== Doublepost prevention - post automatically merged: ==
That is a matter of personal taste. You might like it, others will not. Leather done badly does look quite cheap, tacky and uninviting. The first class colour scheme in the pictures does look a little garish.
There were lots of "conspiracy theories" like this, but they almost always prove false. Generally speaking the reality is simply that that option (see also thicker cushions) comes at higher cost, e.g. in ensuring fireproofing meets standards.
The reason the Sophia appeared absolutely everywhere was that it was allegedly the only seat that had, at that time, been certified for modern fireproof standards and 125mph running, but there was nothing stopping a TOC paying to certify another seat, and indeed both EMR and FirstGroup have now done that. (Sadly Grammer appear now to have left the passenger seating business, and so the excellent IC3000 is no longer available whether you certify it or not - if you look at their website it no longer has rail passenger seats listed at all, just driver seats).
It seems very clear, like the 810, that this train has not been designed down to a price but up to a standard, and that is very welcome indeed. Sure, the Standard seats could be better than Sophias, but by UK standards it really does look very good indeed, particularly in First where the 80x are rather poor.
The reason the Sophia appeared absolutely everywhere was that it was allegedly the only seat that had, at that time, been certified for modern fireproof standards and 125mph running, but there was nothing stopping a TOC paying to certify another seat, and indeed both EMR and FirstGroup have now done that. (Sadly Grammer appear now to have left the passenger seating business, and so the excellent IC3000 is no longer available whether you certify it or not - if you look at their website it no longer has rail passenger seats listed at all, just driver seats).
Without venturing into the realms of "which seat is the best", I just wanted to point out that your view of Grammar and in particular the IC3000 isn't universal. I find Grammar seating as a whole very uncomfortable unless its brand new. The issue for me is the bases collapse near where your legs rest at the edge, leading to sliding down the seat and eventually being unintentionally very reclined (which leads to back ache for me after only short periods). The desiros are equally awful and this is a major part of my dislike of those units.
It seems very clear, like the 810, that this train has not been designed down to a price but up to a standard, and that is very welcome indeed. Sure, the Standard seats could be better than Sophias, but by UK standards it really does look very good indeed, particularly in First where the 80x are rather poor.
There aren't any of those either, so there isn't any need for the 897 to be capable of doing more than 100 mph on diesel. I don't know what was actually specified though!
There were lots of "conspiracy theories" like this, but they almost always prove false. Generally speaking the reality is simply that that option (see also thicker cushions) comes at higher cost, e.g. in ensuring fireproofing meets standards.
I don't do conspiracy theories. That's for the tin foil hat brigade. At the time the 80x started being rolled out the official quoted line on why 1st Class had reverted to fabric rather than "leather" was due to updated fire regulations
It seems very clear, like the 810, that this train has not been designed down to a price but up to a standard, and that is very welcome indeed. Sure, the Standard seats could be better than Sophias, but by UK standards it really does look very good indeed, particularly in First where the 80x are rather poor.
Fundamentally I agree. The first trains for a couple of decades that have been designed without contempt for the passenger! Just a pity they couldn't have gone for the FISA Lean in Standard Class, specifically the version developed for the 810s though.
Let's hope the ride quality is receiving the same attention so we can enjoy normal European levels of comfort like we used to!
So, more than 2 years after we got exterior renders of the 897s, we now have interior mockups of them, but there still seems to be a worrying lack of information about (admittedly, not so "customer facing") the traction of these units. Yes, they're tri-mode (overhead electric, battery electric and diesel), but what traction motors will they have? What batteries will they have? What diesel engines will they have?
We know that the 331s (and therefore probably also the 397s, judging by the sound) have TSA traction motors, so does anyone in here know if the 897s will also have TSA traction motors, or ones from a different company? Also, does anyone in here know what batteries the 897s will have?
Does anyone in here know what diesel engines the 897s will have? The 195s, 196s and 197s have an MTU 1800 Series 12.8-litre inline-6 turbo-diesel engine under each vehicle, coupled to a ZF Ecolife 6-speed gearbox. Each engine is believed to output a maximum of 503-523hp depending on the class, but all three classes only have a 100mph top speed.
By comparison, the 897s will have to be capable of 125mph on diesel, right?
Wrong, the speeds they need to do on the non electrified branches off the ECML are all sub 100mph and often much lower (Harrogate is 65mph max), hence installed diesel power can be much lower than 80x, because it doesn't need it be as high. This enable both capex and opex to be reduced though having fewer engines.
Also, being tri-mode, they'll have electric transmission. So does anyone in here know if they'll have bigger MTU engines, like the MTU 1600 Series 21-litre V12 turbo-diesel engines fitted to the 800s (and 5 of them, so one under every other vehicle of the 10-car unit, rather than one under every vehicle). Or if they'll go with a different engine manufacturer?
I don't do conspiracy theories. That's for the tin foil hat brigade. At the time the 80x started being rolled out the official quoted line on why 1st Class had reverted to fabric rather than "leather" was due to updated fire regulations
It was. Specifically, that updated fire regulations would have increased the cost of fireproofing and certifying leather/fake leather for that purpose, and because the 80x was built down to a price nobody was willing to pay that increased cost. Just like until FirstGroup came along and coughed up, nobody wanted to pay to certify a seat other than the Sophia.
If you want evidence of that, the later Class 397 has leather headrests in Standard and partial (but not quite full) leather in First.
Unless it has to do with the 80x being a 140mph design and the CAFs being 125mph, but I doubt that, as a bit of dead cow doesn't really affect crashworthiness.
By comparison, the 897s will have to be capable of 125mph on diesel, right? Also, being tri-mode, they'll have electric transmission. So does anyone in here know if they'll have bigger MTU engines, like the MTU 1600 Series 21-litre V12 turbo-diesel engines fitted to the 800s (and 5 of them, so one under every other vehicle of the 10-car unit, rather than one under every vehicle). Or if they'll go with a different engine manufacturer?
There is little point in them having high diesel hp because nearly all their routes have much lower speeds off the wires (typically 65-90mph, few miles at 100mph).
You only really need big power to accelerate fast or go uphill. Not to trundle along a secondary line. But they are electric drive and have batteries too. So alongside the diesel-alternator, can have a 3-4 minute burst from the battery, to cover the acceleration. And battery can be topped up again when decelerating or going downhill.
Don't think of battery as an alternative third power source, think of it as a booster used in short bursts, so don't need much diesel (perhaps only around 2500 hp for a 10 coach train), with another 1500-2500 hp top up available in short bursts from the battery.
Of course battery can also work on its own, but that is likely to be for slow speed moves in depots, or stations that are part underground where exhaust fumes or where noise are problems.
It was. Specifically, that updated fire regulations would have increased the cost of fireproofing and certifying leather/fake leather for that purpose, and because the 80x was built down to a price nobody was willing to pay that increased cost. Just like until FirstGroup came along and coughed up, nobody wanted to pay to certify a seat other than the Sophia.
There aren't any of those either, so there isn't any need for the 897 to be capable of doing more than 100 mph on diesel. I don't know what was actually specified though!
Why is it worrying? Everybody who needs to know will know. You don't need a press release telling everyone what engine is being used because passengers won't care.
Many thanks - do you know how many of them per unit, and what power output they'll be set to? Now I can't wait to hear the combination of "800" diesel engines with (presumably) "397" traction motors
We are aware of an issue with emails from the Forum to Microsoft-based email accounts (hotmail/outlook/live.com email addresses). This is being looked into currently, thanks for your patience meanwhile.
