Grand Central order Hitachi Tri-Modes - confirmed

[D365]

I’d be willing to bet money on Class 900 being the HS2 stock.

I can’t remember which recent thread reaffirmed this - but 9xx is departmental [and LUL] stock.

 

[357]

headintheHMI

It's easily done on any stock. I'm a strong supporter of the software developers making it easier to change the category of faults later in the stocks life and for the union to have more input.

The amount of times I've had an Electrostar start screaming at me approaching a red or while braking for a station for it just to be telling me the toilet is out of order is unreal...

 

[Travelmonkey]

I did a couple of runs over shap on a TPE and sampled both stocks in that use that section, the bumps certainlly are more noticable and rough riding on the 397 compared to the 802, Ultimatley the 180s have been living on borrowed time for a while now and this is the writing on the wall for them, but as a OAA GC are wise not to take the risk & go with a proven metric,

 

[Doomotron]

I can’t remember which recent thread reaffirmed this - but 9xx is departmental [and LUL] stock.

Yes, a 9xx classification will likely never be given to a revenue earning train.

 

[pokemonsuper9]

Yes, a 9xx classification will likely never be given to a revenue earning train.

Aren't the Tyne and Wear Metrocars technically 994s?

 

[jammmmmsssssss]

Aren't the Tyne and Wear Metrocars technically 994s?

I swear they're 599s

 

[Steddenm]

I swear they're 599s

It's weird with them they are listed as Class 599s but have unit numbers 994 on TOPS for some reason.

 

[swt_passenger]

Aren't the Tyne and Wear Metrocars technically 994s?

It’s been discussed a while back and it was thought to be to do with TOPS only accepting 6 digits, but the metro cars having 4 digit set numbers. So it’s sort of shortened version of (5)994xxx.

Although wildly off topic, I’ll try and find the posts:

Tyne & Wear Metro rolling stock TOPS classification.

Does anyone know what is the TOPS classification for the Metro Cammell current Tyne & Wear Metro units? I am not sure whether Class 599 or Class 994 is the correct TOPS number? Looking online half the sources seem to say Class 599 and half the sources seem to say Class 994 so it is difficult to...

www.railforums.co.uk

 

[43096]

It’s been discussed a while back and it was to do with TOPS only accepting 6 digits, but the metro cars having 4 digit set numbers. So it’s sort of shortened version of (5)994xxx.

(I’ll try and find the posts…)

No, it's the difference between set numbers and vehicle numbers.

They are classified as Class 599, with vehicle numbers 994001-090 (one number as it is articulated - which is not standard practice, although there are wagon pairs that have one number). They don't appear to have set numbers allocated, but presumably would be 599001-090 if they were.

 

[Peter Sarf]

It’s been discussed a while back and it was to do with TOPS only accepting 6 digits, but the metro cars having 4 digit set numbers. So it’s sort of shortened version of (5)994xxx.

Although wildly off topic, I’ll try and find the posts:

Tyne & Wear Metro rolling stock TOPS classification.

Does anyone know what is the TOPS classification for the Metro Cammell current Tyne & Wear Metro units? I am not sure whether Class 599 or Class 994 is the correct TOPS number? Looking online half the sources seem to say Class 599 and half the sources seem to say Class 994 so it is difficult to...

www.railforums.co.uk

It is a pity they were not just classed as 594s. Or Tyne and Wear could have numbered them 9001 upwards.

At least this sort of "problem" will not exist with the Grand Central Order. But I think we need to avoid trying to apply too much logic to class numbering as there are many cases in the past where it has not really been used in a logical manner anyway.

 

[QSK19]

In IT databases, you don't reuse older record numbers, you always increment. So I could see 820 as the class number, given that it's not quite an 80x train (being tri-mode) and longer than the 810s with which it is now in a race to be in passenger service first. Mind you, I'd have put the new LNER CAF units at 820. But whatever it turns out to be, it won't be logical

At this rate, I’m minded to stick a quid on the GC AT300s winning the race

 

[norbitonflyer]

I can’t remember which recent thread reaffirmed this - but 9xx is departmental [and LUL] stock.

LUL stock is 499.

 

[themiller]

Logically, 808, having skipped 804 (was that the original number given to the 810s?) and 806. All of the bi-modes are even numbered apart from the 805s. But class numbering is so weird now, they might be 802/3s, 370s or 140s. Who knows?

805s are 5-car and 807s are 7-car for some unknown reason, possibly someone at Avanti having a whizzy idea. There’s no reason not to use the vacant 804 and 806.

 

[DarloRich]

You can say the same for any train manufacturer. Why should an operator get bad quality trains just to keep people at work?

The trains aren't bad quality, at least from a passenger point of view. They just aren't liked by enthusiasts!

Hope to God they don't opt for IETs and Newton Aycliffe has shut shop by then. UK intercity trains should be setting new standards for quality and passenger comfort, not delivering cheap rattly tat with church pew seats and hospital ward lighting. I'm hoping for an Alstom, Siemens or Stadler product to replace the Voyagers in 15 years time.

Yeah! Lets transfer high skilled jobs from a poorer area of the UK to Europe or somewhere just to keep enthusiasts happy!

I hope XC DO go for more 800's as they are good trains.

It looks to me that the orders are being placed at Aycliffe to keep the factory going, rather than actually because they make good trains, which is not a good enough reason.

That smells like nonsense. There will be a tender and I doubt one of the criteria will be " how to keep a factory in newton aycliffe open"!

What will be part of the discussion is cost, speed of delivery, proven track record, proven product, interoperability, uk manufacture/assembly, safe and secure supply chains and on going aftersales support and servicing

A fair point could be that there may be some government pressure to make a political choice when the government buys ( looking at XC) but this is a third party procurement.

 

[Class15]

The trains aren't bad quality, at least from a passenger point of view. They just aren't liked by enthusiasts!

Apart from the fact that the ones I travel on (GWR) have awful seats, the fact that they started cracking which completely trashed GWML expresses for a few days and now have to be repaired, and the fact that they are years late on EMR.

Apart from all those things, maybe they’re not bad quality

 

[DarloRich]

Apart from the fact that the ones I travel on (GWR) have awful seats,

Anecdotal - the LNER ones seem ok. The avanti ones seem ok. That's my anecdotal view. Unlike many here i am not a seat obsessive.

the fact that they started cracking which completely trashed GWML expresses for a few days and now have to be repaired,

A few days is reasons to shut an entire factory? Really? The issue has been identified and is being repaired. It is not good but this happens during manufacturing.

and the fact that they are years late on EMR.

That isn't good - however the other fleets seem to have been delivered within acceptable timelines. You seem to be wishing to delete an entire business because one novel product is late.

Apart from all those things, maybe they’re not bad quality

I know the enthusiast doesn't like them - that isn't really an issue for me. Frankly I would happily wear that as a badge of honour!

 

[Class15]

Anecdotal - the LNER ones seem ok. The avanti ones seem ok. That's my anecdotal view. Unlike many here i am not a seat obsessive.

Haven’t travelled on either of those two, so I’ll concede this point. Hopefully the GC units can be more like what you see from the Avanti and LNER units.

A few days is reasons to shut an entire factory? Really? The issue has been identified and is being repaired. It is not good but this happens during manufacturing.

Which other trains have had cracks appear?

That isn't good - however the other fleets seem to have been delivered within acceptable timelines. You seem to be wishing to delete an entire business because one novel product is late.

Read the post I made - I am not ‘wishing to delete’ them, I am questioning why almost every order of intercity stock seems to be going to them.

LNER ordering from CAF definitely looked like a no confidence vote.

I know the enthusiast doesn't like them - that isn't really an issue for me. Frankly I would happily wear that as a badge of honour!

I’m utterly indifferent to the things as an enthusiast; I only really take much interest in freight stuff as I have up with the passenger scene a long time ago.

 

[AJDesiro]

Which other trains have had cracks appear?

HSTs had cracking issues, alongside 195s, 331s, and the 1996 TS. That's just a few off the top of my head.

 

[Bletchleyite]

LNER ordering from CAF definitely looked like a no confidence vote.

In the price I think. A bit like the 350/2s I suspect the bluff was called - Hitachi thought they were a dead certain so presumably priced high, CAF undercut them.

 

[Sorcerer]

If I had to take an early guess at the TOPS designation, I would say Grand Central's fleet will be the Class 804. With the Class 803 being a small order for an open-access operator on the East Coast Main Line, 804 seems like the next step. If not 804 then I think 811 is second most likely. Can't wait to look back on this in a few years time and see how close I was.

I am questioning why almost every order of intercity stock seems to be going to them.

I suspect it could be a very similar reason as to why Lumo ordered the Class 803s. It was a small order that would've needed to be based at an Hitachi depot as well as needing some non-electrical capabilities. I also suspect just having a streamlined fleet for intercity services would make life easier for the future GBR who could borrow units from elsewhere in an unlikely emergency, but that's a bit of a stretch to be fair. I'm not big on the 80x classes either, but it's not exactly a surprise they were the best option for Grand Central.

 

[TT-ONR-NRN]

Anecdotal - the LNER ones seem ok. The avanti ones seem ok. That's my anecdotal view. Unlike many here i am not a seat obsessive.

I always maintain that seat comfort is subjective (and as new Azuma seats are fine to me) but many of the LNER seats are actually broken now. You can feel the metal support through the cushion.

 

[Bletchleyite]

I always maintain that seat comfort is subjective (and as new Azuma seats are fine to me) but many of the LNER seats are actually broken now. You can feel the metal support through the cushion.

GWR 800s are worse. The design of seat base used on the initial set of Sophias is clearly flawed and faulty. The TfW ones don't seem to contain the bar at all - I've pushed down hard looking for it and not found it, so there's your fix.

Collapsed seat bases are not unusual (e.g. Class 323s are quite bad) but the supporting framework is not usually quite as bad to sit on!

 

[DarloRich]

but many of the LNER seats are actually broken now. You can feel the metal support through the cushion.

wow! I haven't seen that yet. Is that a train manufacturer issue or simply a result of specifying a poor quality seat? As I say I am not a seat obsessive. Have the same seat been used on all of the class 800?

I am questioning why almost every order of intercity stock seems to be going to them.

On the ECML because:
they won the main LNER contract,
will offer small number add ons to thier main production run,
have a proven product,
allow for interoperability throughout the ECML operators,
have existing servicing arrangements,
have a secure supply line,
have a factory ready to go with skilled staff recruited ( which means you aren't paying for it all!),
generally deliver when they say they will,
generally have decent passenger PR
AND must offer a competitive price.

Cynically/politically: they are based in the UK, in an area with limited economic performance, lacking in high skill, well paid jobs in a target constituency for governments of both colours

If it were up to me I would buy them. It just seems easiest. If I buy from elsewhere I assume a lot of risk that doesn't appear obvious with Hitachi

LNER ordering from CAF definitely looked like a no confidence vote.

It seems an outrider to me. However, I don't know anything about the procurement so cant judge.

 

[Bletchleyite]

wow! I haven't seen that yet. Is that a train manufacturer issue or simply a result of specifying a poor quality seat? As I say I am not a seat obsessive. Have the same seat been used on all of the class 800?

All currently in service 80x except Avanti and Lumo plus the 397, Mk5a LHCS and first class (!) on the 730/2. The 700 first class seat is a similar but not identical design and does have the metal bar issue to some extent. The 197 has the same frame but seems not to have the metal bar issue.

It appears from the pictures that GC have not specified these - they look like FISA LEANs as per the 810, FLIRT etc.

 

[Trainbike46]

wow! I haven't seen that yet. Is that a train manufacturer issue or simply a result of specifying a poor quality seat? As I say I am not a seat obsessive. Have the same seat been used on all of the class 800?

Personally I have experienced the issue described on GWR sets, but it appears to me to be a design error of the specific seats used on GWR and LNER 80x - Avanti, Lumo, and possibly others have used different seats.

On the ECML because:
they won the main LNER contract,
will offer small number add ons to thier main production run,
have a proven product,
allow for interoperability throughout the ECML operators,
have existing servicing arrangements,
have a secure supply line,
have a factory ready to go with skilled staff recruited ( which means you aren't paying for it all!),
generally deliver when they say they will,
generally have decent passenger PR
AND must offer a competitive price.

Cynically/politically: they are based in the UK, in an area with limited economic performance, lacking in high skill, well paid jobs in a target constituency for governments of both colours

If it were up to me I would buy them. It just seems easiest. If I buy from elsewhere I assume a lot of risk that doesn't appear obvious with Hitachi

It seems an outrider to me. However, I don't know anything about the procurement so cant judge.

The obvious other candidate of Grand Central would have been to get (a shorter version of) the 897s CAF is building for LNER.

I doubt open-access operators care at all about the points you raise under Cynically/Politically - they will choose what they believe suits their needs best, for the right price.
Even if you do consider that angle, Alstom, CAF, Siemens, and Hitachi all have UK manufacturing, so choosing any of those could be spun favourably politically.

 

[DarloRich]

The obvious other candidate of Grand Central would have been to get (a shorter version of) the 897s CAF is building for LNER.

But is that not an early life/unproven design which might bring more risk of delay/overruns/cost escalation etc?

I doubt open-access operators care at all about the points you raise under Cynically/Politically - they will choose what they believe suits their needs best, for the right price.

Agree for GC - may not be the case for DfT/GBR/New Rail orders


EDIT: OBVIOUSLY I would prefer if GC just used HST again!

 

[Trainbike46]

But is that not an early life/unproven design which might bring more risk of delay/overruns/cost escalation etc?

Definitely - and I'm sure that is one of the factors GC will have considered.

Agree for GC - may not be the case for DfT/GBR/New Rail orders

True, but still, with 4 UK manufacturers that is hardly limiting. The only major European manufacturers that don't have a UK factory are Talgo and Stadler.

EDIT: OBVIOUSLY I would prefer if GC just used HST again!

I did like the HSTs, but it is insane to run diesel trains, with outdated safety features, on a mostly electrified route when bimodes exist. They had a good 50-year run, but their time very much is coming to an end.

 

[DarloRich]

True, but still, with 4 UK manufacturers that is hardly limiting. The only major European manufacturers that don't have a UK factory are Talgo and Stadler.

I am biased - none of those are in the north east

 

[Class15]

I am biased - none of those are in the north east

Actually two of the four are!

 

[DarloRich]

Actually two of the four are!

Hitachi and ?

None of Derby, Newport or Goole are in North East. Aycliffe is only just in the area!