How much clearance needed for IEP?

[Leeds1970]

New Hitachi ICEP units for east coast/great western.

Under British Rail new designs of rolling stock were kept to a maximum length of 23 metres. The new inter city stock on order is 26 metres. So my question is will stations such as York, Newcastle, Bristol T.M and Junctions such as Leeds west have sufficient clearances without major rebuilding work?

 

[higthomas]

Yes, they have committed to having them in service within the next 5 years, with reguaging as part of the preparation works.
As they have not announced anything, I am pretty sure whatever they need to do will be minor enough not to cause any major hassle in those locations.

 

[swt_passenger]

There are a couple of projects in the CP5 enhancements plans about ECML IEP gauge clearance and station alterations (page 112/3) and power supply upgrade works (page 114). Similar activities are also shown for the GWML equivalent work.

Follow the link to the CP enhancements delivery plan on this page:

http://www.networkrail.co.uk/publications/delivery-plans/control-period-5/cp5-delivery-plan/

As pointed out in the previous reply, the overall IEP cost has always included all the £millions to be spent necessary alterations to the network.

 

[physics34]

...and they still can't get the seating lined up with the windows

 

[samuelmorris]

Surely it's not a lot different given there'll be fewer vehicles per train with IEP?

 

[Masbroughlad]

Just been in Germany. Pity the IEP won't have the same facilities, space, catering and ambience of DB intercity.

 

[asylumxl]

In reality I doubt many places require any significant work.

The length of a carriage is only really of concern when it is travelling around a curve. It "overhangs" the curve a certain distance and the infrastructure will be designed to accommodate this (among other factors). While you may already know this I feel it's worth explaining.

Imagine you have a 23m carriage rounding a curve, and as it went round you drew an imaginary box showing the maximum distances the carriage overhung. You then made the carriage slightly longer (26m in this case) and sent it round the same curve. Part of the end of this longer carriage would have extended beyond the box we drew earlier which is no good.

Now, if we added a taper of that same amount to the carriage end (as done on the IEP) the carriage would no longer exceed the box as the taper matches the amount needed to remain within the box.

And this is why it shouldn't need any real work. At least for the carriage length.

 

[ainsworth74]

Under British Rail new designs of rolling stock were kept to a maximum length of 23 metres.

Apart from the Mk5 which was going to be 26 metres also...

 

[Goldfish62]

Just been in Germany. Pity the IEP won't have the same facilities, space, catering and ambience of DB intercity.

I agree. A lost opportunity. Unfortunately that ICE ambience uses more space. DfT agenda is to cram as many seats in as possible.

 

[MCR247]

DfT agenda is to cram as many seats in as possible.

Something which I doubt regular passengers will complain about, as I'm sure just a few of them like getting seats!

 

[The Planner]

More seats = more passengers = satisfying growth and demand = ££££, simple as and we are never going to move from that even if it means you dont get to look outside.

 

[Rapidash]

Considering most people will have seen that view outside on their commute hundreds, if not thousands of times, its not that big an issue! One day you have a window, one day you don't. Not that horrible.

I've just been on a trip on HS1 - if the IEP's are anything like the 395's I will be a happy chappy. Leg room, a pretty decent chance at a window.... only slight issue were the seats being a smidge hard! I imagine the GW/EC ones will have better ones!

 

[ainsworth74]

If people think clearing an IEP cause issues why don't they same the same about an ICE which would be even more difficult to clear in the UK...

 

[Ash Bridge]

Looking at Wiki, it states the outer cars of a Class 390 are 25.1m. So if that is accurate then we are are not so far off 26m. vehicles already. Also BR considered a 26m. Body lenth for the mk4s.

Just looked at the latest version of the Siemens Velaro ICE 3, was surprised to find the vehicle lengths are the same as a 390.

 

[edwin_m]

Looking at Wiki, it states the outer cars of a Class 390 are 25.1m. So if that is accurate then we are are not so far off 26m. vehicles already. Also BR considered a 26m. Body lenth for the mk4s.

The cab ends are much more tapered than the other ends so overhang is less of a problem, assuming the bogie is further in from the cab than from the other end.

As well as end overhang there is the question of centre overhang on the inside of a curve. This can be reduced by making the body narrower or putting the bogies closer together to reduce centre overhang but increase end overhang. Not sure how the bogie spacing on the IEP compares with that on 23m stock!

 

[Ash Bridge]

The cab ends are much more tapered than the other ends so overhang is less of a problem, assuming the bogie is further in from the cab than from the other end.

As well as end overhang there is the question of centre overhang on the inside of a curve. This can be reduced by making the body narrower or putting the bogies closer together to reduce centre overhang but increase end overhang. Not sure how the bogie spacing on the IEP compares with that on 23m stock!

Ah yes. So that explains the slightly shorter lenth of the inner cars on a 390. I was wondering further up thread about the effect of the bogie centre spacing on the centre overhang on a 390 because of the tilt profile, presumably it would be slightly less of an issue than on the forth coming non tilt fuller width IEP?

 

[WatcherZero]

I think the bogies and doors are the same position as on 23m stock and the longer narrower area beyond the doors at carriage ends is used for toilets and other storage/equipment minimising seat loss.

 

[Bletchleyite]

Just looked at the latest version of the Siemens Velaro ICE 3, was surprised to find the vehicle lengths are the same as a 390.

That does surprise me, but that might be why they are able to be so wide - German UIC stock, while it is slab-sided and high-roofed so gives the impression of far greater width than UK stock, is only 2.825m wide (ref: Wikilies article about UIC-X stock, in German), just half a centimetre wider than the Class 323s which are 2.82. ICEs are over 2.9m wide.

To get an almost slab sided profile you have to go much narrower in UK stock - 2.68m for the Class 444 (and there's still a taper in at the bottom) and the Class 141 Pacer just 2.49m (and completely slab-sided).

Neil

 

[tbtc]

I think the bogies and doors are the same position as on 23m stock and the longer narrower area beyond the doors at carriage ends is used for toilets and other storage/equipment minimising seat loss.

That's my understanding. The tapered IEP ends will store the kind of things that don't need the full width, which seems sensible use of space.

I don't recall any significant disruption to accommodate the leading cars of 390s on the WCML, and the hype about the infrastructure costs of dealing with 26m IEP seem to be toward the "froth" end of the spectrum.

The "seats lining up with the window" argument is pretty tired now, given that we've not had seats fully lining up with windows for a decades - given that the generation who'll use IEP will spend much of their journeys using ipads/kindles etc.

The question that interests me is whether any other stock will follow the 26m design. For example, if IEP will run on the ECML from Newcastle to York, York to Leeds and from Leeds to Huddersfield, then could 26m coaches feature on the TPE franchise? Given the capacity requirements on that route, marginally longer coaches would give a larger increase in number of seats. Doesn't even have to be Hitachi - anyone could build 26m - so will it become the standard length for future long distance trains?

 

[Bletchleyite]

The "seats lining up with the window" argument is pretty tired now, given that we've not had seats fully lining up with windows for a decades - given that the generation who'll use IEP will spend much of their journeys using ipads/kindles etc.

And given that the first organisation (in the UK) to build a coach with misaligned windows was none other than BR with the Mk3 coach. Though they briefly went back to correct alignment in the Class 158.

There is quite a lot of modern stock with reasonable if not full alignment, in any case - Electrostars and Desiros being just two.

What I do half-wonder is if it might be time on long-distance trains for a third class - not quite as expensive as full First, but with full window alignment and improved legroom (but 2+2), and maybe basic complimentaries i.e. tea/coffee/water, for an upgrade of around £10 during the week and £5 at weekends. Something like the Voyager "hybrid" First/Standard coaches or the 2+2 First Class found in the South East (not that found on Southern/Southeastern which doesn't count), though perhaps with more (window-aligned) airline seating. Italo seem to have done that in their trains.

VT did sort-of try that with the Purple Zone thing, and there has been Silver Standard, but I don't think they quite got it right.

Neil

 

[Ash Bridge]

That does surprise me, but that might be why they are able to be so wide - German UIC stock, while it is slab-sided and high-roofed so gives the impression of far greater width than UK stock, is only 2.825m wide (ref: Wikilies article about UIC-X stock, in German), just half a centimetre wider than the Class 323s which are 2.82. ICEs are over 2.9m wide.

To get an almost slab sided profile you have to go much narrower in UK stock - 2.68m for the Class 444 (and there's still a taper in at the bottom) and the Class 141 Pacer just 2.49m (and completely slab-sided).

Neil

Don't want to take the thread to far of topic, but a Class 373 which is built to UK loading gauge seems to be indentical in width (internally)to a TGV-A. I do realise the powercars would be out of gauge, due to roof mounted equipment, not checked the dimensions of either train so is this a fact?

 

[Bletchleyite]

Don't want to take the thread to far of topic, but a Class 373 which is built to UK loading gauge seems to be indentical in width (internally)to a TGV-A. I do realise the powercars would be out of gauge, due to roof mounted equipment, not checked the dimensions of either train so is this a fact?

Many TGVs are 2.9m wide, but some (TGV Sud-Est) are 2.81, same as E*.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/TGV

Neil

 

[samuelmorris]

And given that the first organisation (in the UK) to build a coach with misaligned windows was none other than BR with the Mk3 coach. Though they briefly went back to correct alignment in the Class 158.

There is quite a lot of modern stock with reasonable if not full alignment, in any case - Electrostars and Desiros being just two.

What I do half-wonder is if it might be time on long-distance trains for a third class - not quite as expensive as full First, but with full window alignment and improved legroom (but 2+2), and maybe basic complimentaries i.e. tea/coffee/water, for an upgrade of around £10 during the week and £5 at weekends. Something like the Voyager "hybrid" First/Standard coaches or the 2+2 First Class found in the South East (not that found on Southern/Southeastern which doesn't count), though perhaps with more (window-aligned) airline seating. Italo seem to have done that in their trains.

VT did sort-of try that with the Purple Zone thing, and there has been Silver Standard, but I don't think they quite got it right.

Neil

So now at Kings Cross I have to walk past first class and premium economy to get to standard?

 

[sprinterguy]

DfT agenda is to cram as many seats in as possible.

The maximum seated capacity of an IEP vehicle will be no more than the standard class capacity of BRs’ proposed mark 5 carriage of just over twenty years ago. There is no malicious agenda here.

I think that the greatest increases in seating densities in recent years (the likes of the FGW and XC mark 3s) have been driven by TOC decisions, not the DfT.

 

[jimm]

The maximum seated capacity of an IEP vehicle will be no more than the standard class capacity of BRs’ proposed mark 5 carriage of just over twenty years ago. There is no malicious agenda here.

I think that the greatest increases in seating densities in recent years (the likes of the FGW and XC mark 3s) have been driven by TOC decisions, not the DfT.

Think you'll find they have been driven by the need to respond to the doubling of passenger traffic on the network over the past 20 years.

 

[The Ham]

Think you'll find they have been driven by the need to respond to the doubling of passenger traffic on the network over the past 20 years.

Which is best resolved (especially when running in to / out of London) by getting more seats per train, firstly by lengthening trains and then by trying to get more seats into the same length of train.

The alternative is building new lines which are too costly for a TOC to do on their own, even HS2 is currently planned to reuse existing London platform space to keep the costs down.

 

[Envoy]

The problem of seats not having windows seems to be mainly at the ends of the carriages and caused by the external doors sliding into a recess. You could get as many as six seats having no view at just one end of a coach. What is more, these seats are narrower than the others due to the 'wall' having to be thicker to accommodate the internally sliding external door(s).
I certainly would not like to be stuck in such at seat having paid the same fare as someone who not only has a view but a bigger seat as well! (Don't know how fat people will manage).

Clearly, the TOC's are going to lay out the interiors as they think fit but I think that the DfT should impose some 'rules' on this matter. Surely, these blanked off areas at the ends of the coaches could be used for toilets, luggage racks & bicycle storage areas?

Speaking of toilets - I would certainly hope that we have automatic soap dispensers & water flushing of hands rather than having to touch 'contaminated' handles.

 

[edwin_m]

I certainly would not like to be stuck in such at seat having paid the same fare as someone who not only has a view but a bigger seat as well! (Don't know how fat people will manage).

Clearly, the TOC's are going to lay out the interiors as they think fit but I think that the DfT should impose some 'rules' on this matter. Surely, these blanked off areas at the ends of the coaches could be used for toilets, luggage racks & bicycle storage areas?

I think the area between the door and the vehicle end, which is much more tapered than the Mk3 because of the longer coach, provides enough space for most of these facilities. It's unfortunate that Hitachi apparently refused to accept sliding plug doors for the SET but has subsequently adopted them for the AT200, presumably including the Scotrail build.

As a compromise it would be good if the TOCs didn't reserve the narrow seats. Then people couldn't complain that they'd booked a window, and there would always be a few unreserved seats near each door.

 

[AM9]

....I certainly would not like to be stuck in such at seat having paid the same fare as someone who not only has a view but a bigger seat as well! (Don't know how fat people will manage)....

I certainly would not like to be standing having paid the same fare as someone who has a seat, - but I know that my ticket only allows me to travel, there being no commitment for the TOC to provide a small seat, a 'normal' seat or a view of the countryside.

 

[Bletchleyite]

I think the area between the door and the vehicle end, which is much more tapered than the Mk3 because of the longer coach, provides enough space for most of these facilities. It's unfortunate that Hitachi apparently refused to accept sliding plug doors for the SET but has subsequently adopted them for the AT200, presumably including the Scotrail build.

As a compromise it would be good if the TOCs didn't reserve the narrow seats. Then people couldn't complain that they'd booked a window, and there would always be a few unreserved seats near each door.

Or we get a national choose your seat system. Then you can book the seat you actually want.

Neil