Atomic Systems

Well this is what the Hitachi IEP might look like.

http://www.hitachi-rail.com/rail_now/ho ... index.html

Very 395!

I think it's got a bit of 390 to it as well.

High Speed UK Expertise?? Hmmm - if we're experts in that field - why dont we have more High Speed Lines??

I like the way they referred to us as British Rail passengers

Can't really say much as its only in the first stages of design, on the plus side its not ugly. At least the two contenders will both offer a quality product, be it Agility Trains Ltd (Hitachi) or the Express Rail Alliance (Siemens and Bombardier). Sadly, being the DfT it will all come down to the cost per seat or something like that, I do hope it comes at least close to the same quality ride as a MK3.

Reading magazines it does come rather apparent that the DfT is looking for a cure all with the IEP, they want it to be able to cater for long distance intercity routes such as the ECML as well as work the Kings Lynn - London route which is essentially high density commuter stuff. I assume in the DfT's eyes this makes sense as they will be 125mph+ capable creating space on the ECML, but like many things which try to be a 'jack of all trades, master of none' I think it may not be good for either requirement. They should follow BR's tradition and develop a high quality Intercity train (such as the MK3's) and use the design as a base for other trains (such as 317's etc...), not try and build a 'one train fits all'.

Cheers,
Ali

I wonder if they've tried to incorporate a bit of nostalgia with the HST-esqe side grills aswell? I would have thought the optimum design for ventilation would be as per the Eurostar powercars.

My personal view is that IEP to Kings Lynn is doubtful. IEP is required to be formed of 130m half-sets forming a 260m full-length train (10*26m). None of the Fenline stations are anywhere near that length - Waterbeach, Littleport and Watlington are a mere 80m (4-car Class 317/365), Downham Market and Kings Lynn are only twice that length. Ely, on paper, will take a 240m set (12-car - but signal sighting issues means that you will never get that length). Cambridge has one 240m platform (Plat 1) and one 220m platform (Plat 4), but may receive another 240m platform for West Anglia route services. Royston will have one 240m platform within the timeframe in question. Platform length/Train Length is also constrained by the positioning of Driver-Only Operation mirrors (IEP is required to be able to use DOO equipment on routes where fitted), which will present problems, even for half-sets, at stations like Waterbeach, Littleport and Watlington, even if fitted with Selective Door Operation - simply due to the proximity of level crossings. You could shorten the formations of the IEPs, but then that loses the benefit (operational and financial) of having a common fleet with the ICEC franchise.

Then there are issues of operational flexibility - with the present operation, the Class 365 units are able to be inter-worked with other services - such as the back portion of a train to Kings Lynn, when detached at Cambridge, can form a London-bound stopping service. Or an arrival from Kings Lynn into Kings Cross can form a slow service to Peterborough if required. Then what happens when one, as it inevitably will, sits down surrounded by Thameslink 2015 trains, which will more likely than not be incompatible? And what of covering for failures in traffic - a fault coming to light whilst the train sits at Kings Cross: will a long-distance service to Leeds, Newcastle or Edinburgh be short-formed simply to get a spare IEP half-set to cover a train to Kings Lynn?

Would there be any benefit of the extra 25mph over the mere twenty or so miles between Alexandra Palace and Hitchin? And, as the maximum linespeed through to Kings Lynn is 90-100mph, is there any benefit in using trains designed for higher speeds (with all that extra traction package and higher gear ratios)? Since the IEPs will have to share tracks with the Thameslink 2015 sets (those running 'outer suburban' services - there is no room for these on the Slow Lines), with their 100mph maximum speed, then perhaps there is a case for slowing the East Coast between Kings Cross and Hitchin down to a 100mph maximum linespeed, and getting 2-minute headways in return (as opposed to the present 3-minutes). The faster speeds of the IEPs can then be used to make up the few minutes lost at the south end. I will note that a Class 365 takes the same time to reach Stevenage as an HST.

This may be sounding like an anti-Kings Lynn IEP rant, but would it not be better to adapt the Thameslink 2015 design to suit the needs of the Fenline (2 doors/side, comfortable 2+2 seating around tables, decent luggage racks), yet retaining a level of inter-workability, and commonality of components, operating procedures, etc.? Of course such a fleet could be used on other Thameslink 2015 routes, where the journey time and clientèle justify it.

The problem for Kings Lynn is that it's pretty much on it's own. You've got that and the KX - Peterborough route, and there's not really any thing else in the country like it. The most similar electrified routes that I can think of are Norwich & Weymouth, and both of those are a bit of a stretch. So when you try to apply a "1-size fits all" approach, those routes stand out as not really fitting with any of the options. So you try to shoe-horn IEP or Thameslink onto them - IEP is the HST replacement, Thameslink is more of an inner suburban operation (i.e. 455, 315, Underground stock...).

365s are ideal for the route, but if you must replace them then a 25kV 444 or a 350 type train is probably the best option.

Is the Thameslink franchise inner suburban? When you consider that it now encompasses Brighton, Bedford, Cambridge and possibly places like Ashford in the future it really does become a two-tier network. In that respect I would have thought the long-distance version of the new Thameslink stock would be better suited to serving a place like Kings Lynn.

I don't know why but I get this funny feeling that somebody within DfT Rail is pushing for IEP to go to Kings Lynn for personal reasons...

Regards,

Dan

the whole emphasis of thameslink is to get 24tph through the bit from Blackfriars to St Pancras. That's why 3doors/side and longitudinal seating is on the agenda. Such trains are inner suburban, and should not run beyond the edge of TfL Z6, not to Brighton, Littlehampton, Kings Lynn and Bedford.

BR7MT wrote:Is the Thameslink franchise inner suburban? When you consider that it now encompasses Brighton, Bedford, Cambridge and possibly places like Ashford in the future it really does become a two-tier network. In that respect I would have thought the long-distance version of the new Thameslink stock would be better suited to serving a place like Kings Lynn.

I don't know why but I get this funny feeling that somebody within DfT Rail is pushing for IEP to go to Kings Lynn for personal reasons...

Regards,

Dan

As far as I am aware, the stoppers ie Moorgate to Hertford North/Welwyn Garden City/Luton/Wimbledon etc... are all Inner Suburban services.
The semi fasts and the fasts ie Kings Cross to Kings Lynn/Cambridge/Bedford to Brighton etc... are all Outer Suburban services.

Personally, I wouldn't mind seeing some 350s as a replacement for the 317s, also one does wonder what the 313 replacement is going to be like especially when you consider how old they are!

ajax103 wrote: Personally, I wouldn't mind seeing some 350s as a replacement for the 317s, also one does wonder what the 313 replacement is going to be like especially when you consider how old they are!

319s I read somewhere. Though would the platforms on the tube section be long enough?

Would 319's fit? The 313s are profiled specially, whereas a 319 is a standard mk3...

“We are delighted to submit our tender for the IEP, offering British Rail Passengers the best of Japanese design combined with high speed UK rail expertise

I take that as being Hitachi's expertise in UK HSL which of course is HS-1, the reality being they don't' have any expertise in the rest of the UK High Speed network which is 100 -> 125 mph which is what this train would be for.

enotayokel wrote:Would 319's fit? The 313s are profiled specially, whereas a 319 is a standard mk3...

Might be a tight fit. The tunnels are 16ft in diameter and from rail level a Mk3 EMU is 12ft tall.