IEP for beginners

[nickshanks]

Hi. I have been reading this forum daily for about a week since I found it, and I am curious why everyone hates the IEP. I have seen a picture of it and it looks all pointy and fast. So what gives?

 

[Wath Yard]

I have seen a picture of it and it looks all pointy and fast. So what gives?

Probably the best explanation for liking a train I've ever seen.

Not everybody does hate it. I'm old enough to remember BR Mk Is, and travel enough to have experienced every type of train on Britain's network, and I'm not a great fan of a lot of modern stuff. However, from what I've seen of the proposed IEP I'm quite looking forward to it.

What may have confused you is that the people that do hate it, hate it with a passion and will post their hatred on any and every thread whether the thread is related to IEP or not.

 

[rebmcr]

Hi. I have been reading this forum daily for about a week since I found it, and I am curious why everyone hates the IEP. I have seen a picture of it and it looks all pointy and fast. So what gives?

My take on it is no matter the option (Electrics, Diesels, and/or Bi-modes), there is no optimal solution, i.e. there are drawbacks with each one of them. Combine that with the cost of a large custom-order of British gauge vehicles, and it's very easy to criticise.

My personal opinion is that a fleet of Adelante-, Voyager- and Pendolino-style multiple units would be much better suited to operations than LHCS (locomotive hauled coaching stock), but that's got its drawbacks too. There's also the issue of nostalgic bias towards LHCS, but no matter what the solution, someone is going to be unhappy.

 

[LexyBoy]

The procurement process has been ridiculously protracted, with the DfT specifying far too many options resulting in a train that tries to do everything at once, at enormous cost. Because of the ever-rising costs, the order size has shrunk making it even worse value. Instead of opting for a UK-gauge variant of an existing IC design, we've gone for a small order of a custom, largely untested train, making the whole thing overcomplicated - procurement, design and (some think) operation. IEP is estimated to cost £449 million per year in leasing costs, roughly double the cost per carriage as a Pendolino.

Plus the usual dislike of anything new from some quarters - I've just tried to summarise the issues with IEP as distinct from other (realistic) HST replacements.

Personally I agree with a lot of the anti-IEP sentiment, and would rather have conventional EMUs with extra electrification, but I'm quite looking forward to seeing them. For the passenger it's really hard to say what they'll be like, so much depends on the ambience, seating etc. It's at the stage now where I'd rather see the DfT get their act together and push ahead than dither any more!

 

[455driver]

My personal opinion is that a fleet of Adelante-, Voyager- and Pendolino-style

Thgey would also be less than half the price to lease than the IEP!

multiple units would be much better suited to operations than LHCS (locomotive hauled coaching stock), but that's got its drawbacks too.

Up to a point MU operations are better but where LHCS has its place is running beyond the wires without carting around an extra 200 tonnes of dead weight and also strengthening the service, you can "adjust" the length of the train on a daily basis depending on anticipated demand.
How can it take 24 hours just to insert 2 extra coaches in a Pendolino?:roll:

 

[LexyBoy]

Up to a point MU operations are better but where LHCS has its place is running beyond the wires without carting around an extra 200 tonnes of dead weight and also strengthening the service, you can "adjust" the length of the train on a daily basis depending on anticipated demand.

This is why there are so many 5-car IEP ordered isn't it? MUs are much easier to adjust to demand than LHCS (especially now that there aren't the required carriage sidings and shunting locos or paths at major termini), although with IC MUs you lose a lot of space due to the crumple zone requirements.

Using a diesel loco to haul an EMU off the wires is another thing however, and preferable to carting around under-floor diesel engines IMO, but the DfT seem obsessed with having bi-mode to cope with those occassions when there's OHLE problems (but obviously only ones which don't affect the running lines at all, or signalling, or leave other trains blocking the line, etc etc). And Hitachi weren't interested.

 

[Wath Yard]

IEP is estimated to cost £449 million per year in leasing costs, roughly double the cost per carriage as a Pendolino.

IEP isn't a leasing deal, it's lease and supply. Virgin also pay Alstom a large amount of money to maintain the Pendolinos, on top of the leasing fees to the ROSCO, and from the figures I've seen the total cost of IEP is nowhere near double the total cost of Pedolinos.

 

[Dave1987]

I don't see the problem with having a diesel loco waiting in the platform to haul an electrostar at the end of the wires. That would def save hauling dead wait of bi-mode train.

 

[Temple Meads]

I think a lot of the hate stems from enthusiasts like myself, who love the HST, and will naturally hate any replacement, I however am going to try my best to embrace the IEP.

 

[LexyBoy]

IEP isn't a leasing deal, it's lease and supply. Virgin also pay Alstom a large amount of money to maintain the Pendolinos, on top of the leasing fees to the ROSCO, and from the figures I've seen the total cost of IEP is nowhere near double the total cost of Pedolinos.

I'm sure you've seen it already, but those figures come from the definitely reliable and not at all biased Railway Eye - but that article does link to a more reputable source (subscribers only) and claims to compare cost per diagrammed vehicle per month.

 

[Yew]

I think a lot of the hate stems from enthusiasts like myself, who love the HST, and will naturally hate any replacement, I however am going to try my best to embrace the IEP.

I too am hoping it can be the first really good IC MU, as so far everything has had a problem, Noisey engines, small windows, smelly toilets, poor reliability. However its also a shame the goal posts have been moved so much, from a Diesel power car, to Underfloor engines, and then the different order sizes (The diesel power car was a good idea, its a shame it has been dropped for a worse solution)

 

[455driver]

I however am going to try my best to embrace the IEP.

Good luck with that!

I reckon the IEP will just be an expensive, over complicated white elephant trying to be all things but succeeding at none of them.

Because the coaches are going to be 26 metres long either they will be very narrow or a lot of the network will have to be gauge cleared.

 

[LexyBoy]

Good luck with that!

I reckon the IEP will just be an expensive, over complicated white elephant trying to be all things but succeeding at none of them.

I fear you may be right but for those of us who will be regularly travelling on them I think it'll be better to convince ourselves of their merits rather than sulk about travelling on them! Fortunately I dislike FGW's HSTs so they'll have to be pretty bad for me to rate them lower...

Because the coaches are going to be 26 metres long either they will be very narrow or a lot of the network will have to be gauge cleared.

I don't think this is true. Certainly they'll not be significantly narrower than existing stock, and as they're not tilt-profiled shouldn't feel cramped like Voyagers or Pendos. The distance between bogies is roughly the same as a Mk 3 - the extra 3 metres is in a tapered vestibule area where the narrower body won't be a problem.

They will require gauge clearing but I don't think this will be a huge issue - doesn't any new stock have to go through this process (albeit usually with no actual infrastructure work being required)?

 

[tbtc]

I think a lot of the hate stems from enthusiasts like myself, who love the HST, and will naturally hate any replacement

I think that that's a fair chunk of the reason for the opposition (some of which is justified, some of which is pretty embarassing, like calling them "poo trains").

IEP is a bit of a "camel" - designed to be all things to all people (diesel, electric, 125mph etc). Not ideal, but we cannot electrify every bit of line with a London connection before we need to tackle HST withdrawal so there was always going to be a compromise.

The railway doesn't seem keen on loco hauled any more, but there'd be a huge fuss if places like Inverness lost their token service to London - what we have is a bit of a bodge but I can see the reasons behind it.

Just be careful when comparing costs as the IEP contract seems to be the price of everything like depots and maintenance (not just the basic lease costs).

 

[mr_jrt]

I dislike IEP because the alternative of a properly-specced and designed-in option with a diesel loco hauling an EMU is superior in every way bar one - power supply failure...but as another poster pointed out above, usually OHLE failures cause lines to be blocked anyway.

 

[swt_passenger]

... or a lot of the network will have to be gauge cleared.

It is being done. It's been in the public domain via the various CP4 enhancement plans for at least a couple of years.

Modern Railways have published detailed drawings of the layout, the necessary taper is all between the doors and the coach ends. There's little or no reason why the main part of the coach bodies will be any narrower than a Mk 3, because the bogies will be a similar distance apart.

 

[Gareth Marston]

The 26m length is an issue - it looks like the summer Saturdays services to Pembroke Dock will be lost - theirs a tunnel near Narberth that cant be adjusted to fit them and then theirs the amount of clearance work going on to accommodate them including making the freight branch form Margam to Tondu capable of having them in an emergency and then creating a turnback facility at Tondu so they can reverse to Bridgend.

 

[Wath Yard]

I'm sure you've seen it already, but those figures come from the definitely reliable and not at all biased Railway Eye - but that article does link to a more reputable source (subscribers only) and claims to compare cost per diagrammed vehicle per month.

The problem is there has been so much misinformation spread about IEP I don't think anybody, except possibly the DfT, knows the true costs of any of the options.

By my calculations for each IEP vehicle to cost £74,500 per month that would mean only 502 out of 596 (84% availability) are in service at any one time. Comparing this to the quoted 48 out of 52 (92.5% availability) 390s in service that doesn't seem likely and it doesn't state whether the alleged £37,000 per month per vehicle is the total cost.

 

[Manchester77]

What makes me chuckle about this project is that there have been people on here saying IEP is going to be a disaster. It's quite funny because there isn't even a prototype let alone production units so how anyone can judge the project is ridiculous. Let it play out and then judge, there is nothing to base this view on judge figures etc:roll:

People are too afraid of the new

 

[rebmcr]

What makes me chuckle about this project is that there have been people on here saying IEP is going to be a disaster. It's quite funny because there isn't even a prototype let alone production units so how anyone can judge the project is ridiculous. Let it play out and then judge, there is nothing to base this view on judge figures etc:roll:

People are too afraid of the new

People are afraid of change, but it's certainly possible to base some opinions on the published specs/features, in the absence of anything physical.

 

[Manchester77]

yes but how people can honestly say how bad they will be when operated is beyond me when they don't actually exist yet

 

[Dave1987]

I think the pendo's are a prime example why people are sceptical about these new trains. Instead of them being made for passenger comfort, they seem to be designed by accountants thinking how many seats can we cram into a coach etc. a prime example of this is the fact that on the pendo's a lot of the seats don't have a window. Hey need to make the IEP's as comfy if not mor comfortable than the HST's that will satisfy the critics. But I think the underfloor engines are a bad idea compared to power cars especially during wheel slip season.

 

[Gareth Marston]

basic issue is that the UK is generally a high frequency passenger railways with short formations - given the structural growth seen in the last 30 years it desperately needs a mechanism to add new carriages on all lines in a relatively cheap manner.

This is where IEP falls down flat, in development since 2006 and non even built yet, only a small run, very expensive plus infrastructure alterations for 26 carriageways, it might be the perfect HST replacement but it does feel like the cuckoo in the nest getting all the resources for new stock.

 

[Manchester77]

Didn't the APT project begin in 1969 and end in 1986 (not including IC225)?

 

[imagination]

I don't think they're bad - just that they're needlessly expensive.

On a side note, a couple of months back on an Adelante I overheard someone confidently stating that it was one of the new IEP trains that would (apparently) soon be running every long distance train in the country.

 

[RobShipway]

Didn't the APT project begin in 1969 and end in 1986 (not including IC225)?

The running prototypes of both HST and APT trains where running in 1972, but I think APT was actually started in 1970 which is the year after I was born.

What makes me laugh about this thread is that, if this forum had been around in 1975/76 when the HST's where first introduce on the GWML, then I think the same people that are saying that they dislike IEP would have been saying that they dislike HST.

Having lived in the outskirts of Brighton as a child, I know what it was like to travel on a Mk1 Electric train and when I had the chance at the age of about 9/10 years old to travel in a HST it felt like I was travelling on a train from a different planet.

With the like of the Class 91/mk4, Electrostars, Desiro's, Voyagers, Pendolino's etc....trains have moved on a far bit since those days and a lot has changed such that there is a lot more requirements from the trains that we use today than there was in the 1970's with the Mk1's.

In the 1970's trains where used just to get you from place to place no matter what the comfort of the seats, now the trains have for the most part more comfortable armchair like seats.

It is going to be very tough for IEP as it needs to come out and be better than the Voyagers, Adelante's and Pendolino's as well as being a good replacement for the HST. That is going to be tough shoes to fill, but I have no doubts that Hitachi are up for the job.

With regards do I like the IEP, well I am undedecided until I have been able to see one in the flesh running either in test or with passengers along the GWML.

 

[krus_aragon]

The IEP is trying to be a bit clever, and trying to be everything to everyone, and so it's managing to please no-one (or at least few people). It's no help that the procurement process is being run by politicians, and has been in the hands of two governments and six(?) transport ministers.

The design has changed a lot: at first there were going to be three types of unit: electric, diesel, and bi-mode (electro-diesel), coming in three different lengths. (I seem to recall that loco-hauled coaching stock was suggested by one of the initial bidders, but I'm not absolutely certain.) After electrification of the Great Western was placed on the table the diesel-only version was dropped. Then the idea was tabled to put one of the bi-mode under-floor diesel engine in each electric unit as well, in order for the unit to be moved in a depot or limp home if the overhead wires fail. There were plans to order IEPs for the East Coast mainline as well, but they haven't been finalised yet. The intended number of carriages in short and long sets has changed several times as well. The carriages are going to be longer than existing ones: 26m instead of 20-24m on today's network. These will overhang more on curves than shorter carriages, and some parts of the routes they'll be used on need to be modified to make sure they get through clearly. This has been done in the past for other new rolling stock over the decades.

The 26m length is an issue - it looks like the summer Saturdays services to Pembroke Dock will be lost - theirs a tunnel near Narberth that cant be adjusted to fit them and then theirs the amount of clearance work going on to accommodate them including making the freight branch form Margam to Tondu capable of having them in an emergency and then creating a turnback facility at Tondu so they can reverse to Bridgend.

There's an interesting FOI request document here that lists the routes that the IEP is planned for: core, non-core, diversionary and ECS. The only portion west of Carmarthen mentioned is "Carmarthen Bridge Junction to Carmarthen P&T Loop" (diversionary).

 

[tbtc]

I think the pendo's are a prime example why people are sceptical about these new trains. Instead of them being made for passenger comfort, they seem to be designed by accountants thinking how many seats can we cram into a coach etc. a prime example of this is the fact that on the pendo's a lot of the seats don't have a window

390s were designed to be able to run to 140mph and to tilt; any train built to those specifications was always going to have small-ish windows.

Most trains in the past thirty-something years don't have windows / seats all perfectly aligned though

basic issue is that the UK is generally a high frequency passenger railways with short formations - given the structural growth seen in the last 30 years it desperately needs a mechanism to add new carriages on all lines in a relatively cheap manner

Presumably you'll be able to build extra coaches for IEP trains - though they are already going to be pretty long

 

[Nym]

I think a lot of the hate stems from enthusiasts like myself, who love the HST, and will naturally hate any replacement, I however am going to try my best to embrace the IEP.

Quite a lot of Engineers dislike them too...

 

[RAGNARØKR]

Good luck with that!

I reckon the IEP will just be an expensive, over complicated white elephant trying to be all things but succeeding at none of them.

Because the coaches are going to be 26 metres long either they will be very narrow or a lot of the network will have to be gauge cleared.

They are actually 1 cm wider than mark 3 so that sounds like a lot of gauge clearance. I have asked my MP to obtain costs under Freedom of Information.
--- old post above --- --- new post below ---

It is being done. It's been in the public domain via the various CP4 enhancement plans for at least a couple of years.

Modern Railways have published detailed drawings of the layout, the necessary taper is all between the doors and the coach ends. There's little or no reason why the main part of the coach bodies will be any narrower than a Mk 3, because the bogies will be a similar distance apart.

The bogies on a mark 3 are 16 metres apart. They will have to be further apart on IEP as otherwise there is a of relative end movement. The iactual figures must be published somewhere.