Mid-distance mainline electrics

[po8crg]

There are two mainlines out of London that are already or are about to become electric-hauled with 25kV OHLE - ie GEML (Liverpool Street-Norwich) and MML (St Pancras-Sheffield).

GEML is currently served by ex-WCML class 90s with mark 3 coaches, and MML is mostly class 222s, with some HSTs. The 222s are diesel, and I'm sure that XC is itching to get its hands on them when MML goes electric.

In the short term, GEML will probably continue as-is, with MML getting class 91s and mark 4s from ECML when it goes electric.

This loco-hauled stock is aging, and will need replacement.

The obvious approach would be mainline Desiros (like the 444s that serve SWML or the 350/4s on the TPE Manchester-Scotland routes) or a similar EMU design, but they do seem a bit small for these services.

I was wondering if there might be an order coming for a replacement mid-distance mainline electric trainset. Something like an electric equivalent to the 222?

 

[transmanche]

The obvious approach would be mainline Desiros (like the 444s that serve SWML or the 350/4s on the TPE Manchester-Scotland routes) or a similar EMU design, but they do seem a bit small for these services.

Well you can make the train longer.

A 5-car 444 is almost as long as a theoretical 6-car 350/450 (5x23m=115m v 6x20m=120m). So you could have 2x5-car units (allowing for splitting/joining en route, if appropriate). Or just one longer unit.

But yes, such units (i.e. a development of the 444 design) would be perfect for those services. (Although I suspect that the MML may get ISP/SET.)

 

[Yew]

Something like an electric equivalent to the 222?

An electric 222, with a few extra kinks worked out, would be a really good EMU.

However I expect that 225's in the short term, and then a shift to IEP is likely. (Although being honest, I think the IC225's should have stayed on the ECML, and an order for the MML put in)

 

[po8crg]

However I expect that 225's in the short term, and then a shift to IEP is likely. (Although being honest, I think the IC225's should have stayed on the ECML, and an order for the MML put in)

Will there be enough IEPs, or do you think the order will get expanded again?

I was thinking that the IEP was probably too expensive for these routes, but a 5 or 8 car trainset with end-doors and vestibules, a full car of FC, a buffet of some sort, but 125mph capable and without the designed-in hybrid capability of the IEP 800s would be a lot cheaper than more 801s, but still provide an inter-city quality service.

There are probably other places they could be used: they'd be great for TPE after electrification (much better than the 350/4s for Manchester-Glasgow, for instance).

 

[Yew]

Will there be enough IEPs, or do you think the order will get expanded again?

Personally I think there will be more IEP's made, but under a MML Competitive tender. If the IEP is sucsessfull (and so far it looks very promising) then if Hitachi bid to build some IEP's for the MML, that could have a high chance of success. (Especially if things like 'proven reliability' and 'compatibility with existing high speed rolling stock' are included in the tender). I suppose it is also possible Hitachi may have another improved design (similar to how the meridian is an improved voyager) to bring to the table.

I definitely think Hitachi will give Bombardier, Siemens and Alsthom a kick up the rear. And if their products are as good as they are hoping, should become a major player in the British rolling stock industry.
--- old post above --- --- new post below ---

I was thinking that the IEP was probably too expensive for these routes, but a 5 or 8 car trainset with end-doors and vestibules, a full car of FC, a buffet of some sort, but 125mph capable and without the designed-in hybrid capability of the IEP 800s would be a lot cheaper than more 801s, but still provide an inter-city quality service.

There are probably other places they could be used: they'd be great for TPE after electrification (much better than the 350/4s for Manchester-Glasgow, for instance).

Hmm, Sounds Like the new Bombardier design (Aventra?). That is an option I hadn't considered.

 

[po8crg]

GEML desperately needs new trains too. Mark 3 carriages really don't have much life left in them. That's one reason I was thinking about a joint bid.

I guess SWT will just install pantos on their 444s if more of SWML is converted to OHLE operation (AIUI, the electric spine only converts about 2 miles on the entry into Southampton, and that short stretch will probably be dual-powered like the bit between Farringdon and City Thameslink).

 

[swt_passenger]

GEML desperately needs new trains too. Mark 3 carriages really don't have much life left in them. That's one reason I was thinking about a joint bid.

I guess SWT will just install pantos on their 444s if more of SWML is converted to OHLE operation (AIUI, the electric spine only converts about 2 miles on the entry into Southampton, and that short stretch will probably be dual-powered like the bit between Farringdon and City Thameslink).

No, what's announced covers Basingstoke to Southampton Docks via Winchester & Eastleigh. That's a lot further than 2 miles

 

[po8crg]

No, what's announced covers Basingstoke to Southampton Docks via Winchester & Eastleigh. That's a lot further than 2 miles

Oooh, that's going to make life interesting for SWT rolling stock. Dual-current, dual-pickup stock. The 444s have that capability, but let's see how reliable they are if they're switching back and forth twice every journey.

 

[transmanche]

Oooh, that's going to make life interesting for SWT rolling stock. Dual-current, dual-pickup stock. The 444s have that capability, but let's see how reliable they are if they're switching back and forth twice every journey.

It's not unknown; on the NLL there used to be multiple changeovers between Richmond and Nth Woolwich. (IIRC, now there's only one changeover.)

 

[TheGrew]

I think IEPs are likely for MML. As for the GEML I can see another EMU order which might cover 321 replacement (allowing for a cacade), my money would be on a Desiro variant.

 

[AndyLandy]

If SET sets are competitive enough in the marketplace, I could see them appearing on the GEML as well. They may be somewhat overkill for that line, but their inter-compatibility with the rest of the SET fleet might be enough, so long as the price is right.

 

[po8crg]

Never having ridden a 444, I don't know what they're like, but they don't half look better than the 2/3-1/3 door trains. They might fit this role if they can be made 125mph capable.

PS, I'm being thick today: SET?

 

[swt_passenger]

PS, I'm being thick today: SET?

Super Express Train - Hitachi's given name for their train type that won the IEP competition. The one nearly everyone refers to as an 'IEP'

 

[po8crg]

Super Express Train - Hitachi's given name for their train type that won the IEP competition. The one nearly everyone refers to as an 'IEP'

Thanks.

I think I'll start calling them 800s/801s just to be different from everyone else.

 

[LexyBoy]

Never having ridden a 444, I don't know what they're like, but they don't half look better than the 2/3-1/3 door trains. They might fit this role if they can be made 125mph capable.

They are essentially outer suburban commuter trains. Very sparse interiors, 2+2 seating composed of decent but thin chairs, not much luggage space and no buffet. They're a big improvement from what operated the lines before, but not so impressive if replacing 222s or Mk 3s.

With more luggage space in the (large) vestibules, and more intercity-style interior fittings, a train based on the 444 would be perfectly adequate for lines such as the GEML and MML.

 

[AndyLandy]

PS, I'm being thick today: SET?

Oh, sorry about that. That's the given name for the IEP trains, the Hitachi "Super Express Train" -- I thought we were all calling it SET now. Maybe I should just stick to calling it IEP.

no buffet

That's not strictly true. They have micro-buffets in the TSRMB vehicle, however despite travelling on these units fairly regularly, I've never once seen one open...

 

[dosxuk]

With more luggage space in the (large) vestibules, and more intercity-style interior fittings, a train based on the 444 would be perfectly adequate for lines such as the GEML and MML.

With the apparent 125mph capability of the new Aventra I could imagine something like this being used on both

 

[NotATrainspott]

With the apparent 125mph capability of the new Aventra I could imagine something like this being used on both

That render raises the interesting possibility of double-doors at the end of carriages. Such a compromise might be ideal for some of the currently more controversial door positions on trains, such as 170s on the HML or 442s on the Gatwick Express.

 

[MCR247]

What benefit is there of double does at the end of carriage? Yes people can get into the train quicker, but the bottleneck will just be moved to inside the carriage

 

[NotATrainspott]

What benefit is there of double does at the end of carriage? Yes people can get into the train quicker, but the bottleneck will just be moved to inside the carriage

It means that you can still have a reasonably large seated passenger saloon with vestibule doors but you also have standing/crush space near the doors for the peak times when they have to take on short-distance commuters. At the moment the peak dwell times are more important than passenger comfort on the longer distance runs these units would have to do, most notably the TransPennine Express 185s. If the same wide interconnecting gangways are possible at mainline speed then you would have the whole area from one double door through to the double door in the next carriage for these peak times.

 

[cjmillsnun]

They are essentially outer suburban commuter trains. Very sparse interiors, 2+2 seating composed of decent but thin chairs, not much luggage space and no buffet. They're a big improvement from what operated the lines before, but not so impressive if replacing 222s or Mk 3s.

With more luggage space in the (large) vestibules, and more intercity-style interior fittings, a train based on the 444 would be perfectly adequate for lines such as the GEML and MML.

They're not an improvement over the 442s. Not in any shape or form. However I would argue that they are the best post privatisation EMU, and yes I am including Pendos and 395s

 

[The Ham]

They're not an improvement over the 442s. Not in any shape or form. However I would argue that they are the best post privatisation EMU, and yes I am including Pendos and 395s

Depends on who you are. If you are a cyclist or have some form of limit to your mobility then the 444's are a lot better.

 

[exdeus]

I don't think MML users would be happy with a 444 variant.

Good train for SWT to be fair but it's very utilitarian, seats are verging on uncomfortable (though not as bad as they look) and the ergonomics of the seat by the window (1 out of every 2 on the train) is an absolute disaster. The heating grid takes up so much room that your foot closest to the window is skewed over past the centreline of the seat (this goes for 450 too).

 

[transmanche]

I don't think MML users would be happy with a 444 variant.

Good train for SWT to be fair but it's very utilitarian, seats are verging on uncomfortable (though not as bad as they look) and the ergonomics of the seat by the window (1 out of every 2 on the train) is an absolute disaster

So the train is unsuitable, because of the seat layout? You do realise that the seats and the seat layout can be changed...

 

[A0]

It's not unknown; on the NLL there used to be multiple changeovers between Richmond and Nth Woolwich. (IIRC, now there's only one changeover.)

And some other changeovers - e.g. FCC at Drayton Park, must happen about literally a dozen times to a single unit in a day by the time it's shuttled from Moorgate up to Welwyn or Hertford and back. So the regularity of the voltage changeover probably isn't an issue.

 

[po8crg]

And some other changeovers - e.g. FCC at Drayton Park, must happen about literally a dozen times to a single unit in a day by the time it's shuttled from Moorgate up to Welwyn or Hertford and back. So the regularity of the voltage changeover probably isn't an issue.

Suspect I was just remembering the early days of Thameslink when the 319s had a bad habit of not switching occasionally and got sent to Moorgate if they were really bad.

 

[exdeus]

So the train is unsuitable, because of the seat layout? You do realise that the seats and the seat layout can be changed...

The heating system might be a little more tricky however...

 

[cjmillsnun]

The heating system might be a little more tricky however...

The HVAC works very well. It's a bit noisy, but if set correctly (TAKE NOTE SWT!) it can create a very pleasant environment.