Stadler Flirt 'IC'

[NotATrainspott]

Not quite sure what the comparison is you are trying to make between Thameslink and Crossrail and GEML services between London and Norwich, it's not a very valid one if you ask me, the first two are totally different types of services to what the FLIRTS are for, the Crossrail and Thameslink argument would be a good one for the Bombardier units, but not valid for the FLIRTS.

You appear not to know the London to Norwich route very well. The current stock has 7-8 cars with two vehicles that don't carry passengers. The new stock will be 10 cars that all will carry passengers, so the argument that a cramped seat pitch was required to stop people standing shows a lack of knowledge of the loading patterns and the size of the trains compared to what they are replacing

London to Norwich is not just another commuter railway like services served by EMUs, it's not a full intercity either, but your suggestions that it should get the same interior as your average inner suburban train is laughable, if you had this kind of argument with almost all the people who use the MK3's right now and told them they should have a Desiro City style train you'd get an awful reaction.

Nobody is expecting anything like a very long distance intercity operation that crosses half the country, but they expect better than an inner suburban unit you seem to think is feasible.

What matters is the expected passenger loadings. When the current Norwich services are so busy that people will sit in the cleaning cupboards, it's quite reasonable to say that there's healthy demand on the route. Replacing the Mk3 rakes, with their inefficient use of a DVT and locomotive, will immediately mean that these passengers get spread out and have space to themselves. That's great, but you can't expect that to remain for long. People's behaviour will change when this new capacity becomes available. Some people who currently don't want to travel by train because it's too busy will choose to do so. The trains being less busy than on other similar distance routes into the capital will encourage people to move there - they won't up sticks from somewhere else the same distance from Charing Cross but if someone's heading out to long distance commuterland for the first time they'll certainly be looking at the Great Eastern corridor more intently. Any rail operator may also make the decision to add in an extra call on the service so that it can pick up more people. Adding extra calls is a decision of whether the increase in revenue by stopping will balance out the decrease in revenue for other passengers from a longer, busier journey. If there's excess capacity that could plausibly be filled up then these calculations will look favourably upon additional calls. The increase in revenue comes about from an increase in aggregate utility, as the benefits to passengers as a whole exceed the drawbacks. And so, inevitably these trains are just going to fill up once again. It is irrelevant that they might be intended or feted as InterCity services, just as it has been for Great Western with their Reading commuter HST calls.

 

[D365]

Of course I will! Happily! I get a lot of stick on here for holding managements feet to the fire...

No, you get a lot of stick because of your sometimes juvenile and unconstructive criticisms. Especially considering posts that you have made in the past.

 

[321over360]

What matters is the expected passenger loadings. When the current Norwich services are so busy that people will sit in the cleaning cupboards, it's quite reasonable to say that there's healthy demand on the route. Replacing the Mk3 rakes, with their inefficient use of a DVT and locomotive, will immediately mean that these passengers get spread out and have space to themselves. That's great, but you can't expect that to remain for long. People's behaviour will change when this new capacity becomes available. Some people who currently don't want to travel by train because it's too busy will choose to do so. The trains being less busy than on other similar distance routes into the capital will encourage people to move there - they won't up sticks from somewhere else the same distance from Charing Cross but if someone's heading out to long distance commuterland for the first time they'll certainly be looking at the Great Eastern corridor more intently. Any rail operator may also make the decision to add in an extra call on the service so that it can pick up more people. Adding extra calls is a decision of whether the increase in revenue by stopping will balance out the decrease in revenue for other passengers from a longer, busier journey. If there's excess capacity that could plausibly be filled up then these calculations will look favourably upon additional calls. The increase in revenue comes about from an increase in aggregate utility, as the benefits to passengers as a whole exceed the drawbacks. And so, inevitably these trains are just going to fill up once again. It is irrelevant that they might be intended or feted as InterCity services, just as it has been for Great Western with their Reading commuter HST calls.

I wish they would stop the Norwich to London services stopping at Chelmsford but make both trains each hour stop at Stratford.

 

[ginger]

No, you get a lot of stick because of your sometimes juvenile and unconstructive criticisms. Especially considering posts that you have made in the past.

and clearly you have a) no sense of humour and b) clearly dont give a dam about hard pressed over charged passengers who get treated like dirt and dont get the decent service they overpay for!

 

[AlterEgo]

and clearly you have a) no sense of humour and b) clearly dont give a dam about hard pressed over charged passengers who get treated like dirt and dont get the decent service they overpay for!

If there are passengers standing up then to my mind it makes sense for the new trains to have high density seating.

 

[D365]

and clearly you have a) no sense of humour and b) clearly dont give a dam about hard pressed over charged passengers who get treated like dirt and dont get the decent service they overpay for!

Your postings would be perfectly fine without 'nicknames' such as hellbellio and Notwork Fail. They're not funny and quite frankly it's taking the p*ss out of workers who genuinely want to make a difference.

 

[F Great Eastern]

If there are passengers standing up then to my mind it makes sense for the new trains to have high density seating.

Maybe we should have high density seating on every single train on the network, UK Wide, remove all tables and 3+2 seating for all then if it's simple as that.

There is already going to be a large uplift in capacity on the FLIRTS because of the fact all of the carriages are going to be carrying passengers, nobody expects the new trains not to carry more than the old ones, but it has to be sensible too.

The passengers in Norwich hate the 321/360 as it is and whenever trains go up there they avoid them or moan like the plague, how'd you think they will react to a train with even more high density seating. The vast majority from Norwich would have an option of a car.

 

[MCR247]

Maybe we should have high density seating on every single train on the network, UK Wide, remove all tables and 3+2 seating for all then if it's simple as that.



There is already going to be a large uplift in capacity on the FLIRTS because of the fact all of the carriages are going to be carrying passengers, nobody expects the new trains not to carry more than the old ones, but it has to be sensible too.

But the FLIRTs aren't going to be providing the uplift in peak capacity on the majority of the London Liverpool Street trains? A sense 2+3 was always inevitable for the stock replacing 317/321s

 

[F Great Eastern]

As far as I'm aware this thread is about FLIRT's so I stupidly assumed the poster was posting about them like everyone else in this thread was, apologies for being so naive about that.

Flirts are 12 carriages long all which carry passenger vehicles, right now we have 7/8 passenger carrying vehicles with much bigger vestibules than will be seen on the FLIRTS, if you can even call them that on the FLIRTS.

That provides quite a bit of extra space.

 

[43074]

The passengers in Norwich hate the 321/360 as it is and whenever trains go up there they avoid them or moan like the plague, how'd you think they will react to a train with even more high density seating. The vast majority from Norwich would have an option of a car.

Is it known how many Norwich services will be Aventras yet? Presumably at least 1 train per hour (tph) won't be the 'InterCity' spec Flirts, just based on the number of them which have been ordered and the number of diagrams which will likely be needed for the 3tph service, but does that completely rule out the balance being worked by (pairs or trios of) the 4-car regional units?

 

[332 > 444]

As far as I'm aware this thread is about FLIRT's so I stupidly assumed the poster was posting about them like everyone else in this thread was, apologies for being so naive about that.

Flirts are 10 carriages long all which carry passenger vehicles, right now we have 7/8 passenger carrying vehicles with much bigger vestibules than will be seen on the FLIRTS, if you can even call them that on the FLIRTS.

That provides quite a bit of extra space.

12 carriages long actually, can't remember the actual seating capacity for the Norwich sets but the STANex was touted at 708. Upon looking at the drawing, all carriages look the same length.

 

[Alfie1014]

IC and Stansted FLIRTS will be 12 x 20m, which presumably means all peak hour services into Liverpool Street could be formed of full length trains.

The TSR3 specification for introduction in December 2020 shows 3 tph to Norwich and 4 tph to Ipswich off peak on Mon-Sats. Whilst 4 of the Ipswich services will run through to the East Suffolk and will have to be bi-mode FLIRTS I would imagine that most of the others plus a good proportion of the 3rd Norwichs will have to be Aventras. Not in my view the ideal train for such journeys.

 

[F Great Eastern]

12 carriages long actually, can't remember the actual seating capacity for the Norwich sets but the STANex was touted at 708. Upon looking at the drawing, all carriages look the same length.

I meant to say 12, sorry for that error.

But my point remains, going from 7+8 MK3's to a 12 carriage train which carries passengers in each carriage with no lost space for non passenger carrying vehicles, is going to increase capacity even without reverting to high density seating on the FLIRTS, the FLIRTS should not have high density seating if you ask me but they've picked a high density seat for it.

 

[F Great Eastern]

For example
MK3 is 23m in length
7x23 = 161m
8x23 = 184m

FLIRT is 20m
12x20m = 240m

That means at the very worst the train is 25% longer than what it's replacing, that is before you take into account even the lack of large vestibules and other saved space without taking into consideration seating.

So you're probably looking at circa 30% in extra space with the same seating layout as the current MK3s, which is a big uplift in capacity, it doesn't seem to suggest that high density seating is needed to make a large capacity upgrade on the MK3s.

 

[Wivenswold]

The Norfolk commuters I've shown the presentation to seem happy with the changes. It's worth pointing out that 1 of the three trains per hour is an additional service for Norwich off-peak. Which is a good thing.

 

[MCR247]

There isn't much to suggest that the IC flirts will be high density apart from speculation. Can we not wait until we have more facts?

 

[Bletchleyite]

There isn't much to suggest that the IC flirts will be high density apart from speculation. Can we not wait until we have more facts?

And there is plenty to suggest, based on other FLIRTs, that they won't be high-density, indeed. The only thing that really suggests they will is the choice of seat, but there is no reason that seat (chosen for being cheap) could not be used to improve legroom rather than cram more seats in.

Because of the mixed floor heights of the FLIRT, like low floor buses there tends to be only one or at most two layouts that work anyway.

 

[F Great Eastern]

There isn't much to suggest that the IC flirts will be high density apart from speculation. Can we not wait until we have more facts?

Apart from the fact that the seat they are using is marketed as being for high density configurations and the fact that Abellio are refusing to answer direct questions about seat pitch and instead dressing it up in spin.

Also I'm starting to think that a discussion forum is not for you, because you have some high and mighty view that you are right and everyone else is wrong, everyone has a right to air their view.

Stop trying to moderate the forum when you are not a moderator.

 

[cjmillsnun]

Does anyone here seriously think the Stadler Flirt Greater Anglia 'Intercity's' are actually Intercity's at all? To me they are just regional trains with centrally located double commuter doors, with people pouring on in the middle of carriages, and a general lack of ambience for an Intercity. Then there's that 'power car' - what on Earth is that and why does no other train need one?

A regional express train at best, this certainly seal's the downgrade of London-Norwich as a regional route akin to Southwest Trains. Maybe this is the correct thing to do. Norwich is more of a large town than a true city, and is not many miles away from being part of London's city region, so may be it's the correct choice. After all, it's the only Intercity service that does not link two cities of 1million or more together outside the Great Western's poor southwest Britain Intercity's.

Ironically, King's Lynn will become an Intercity destination with the IEP's as I understand it, albeit a semi-fast service like Norwich is currently. How times change.

The only downgrade was to the Portsmouth line, when 444s were replaced by 450s. This has largely been undone and will be completely undone when the 442s return to the Pompey Direct.

 

[Bletchleyite]

Apart from the fact that the seat they are using is marketed as being for high density configurations and the fact that Abellio are refusing to answer direct questions about seat pitch and instead dressing it up in spin.

It's quite possible that the FLIRT will have a tighter pitch than the Mk3, but substantially more legroom, because the InterCity 70 seat is a terribly designed, inefficient and wasteful old-fashioned seat.

The pitch on a 350/1 is certainly tighter than an old VTWC Mk3, but the comfort level is higher because the seats are thinner backed and better designed.

 

[Pumbaa]

And there is plenty to suggest, based on other FLIRTs, that they won't be high-density, indeed. The only thing that really suggests they will is the choice of seat, but there is no reason that seat (chosen for being cheap) could not be used to improve legroom rather than cram more seats in.



Because of the mixed floor heights of the FLIRT, like low floor buses there tends to be only one or at most two layouts that work anyway.

Quite.

And the number of seats is the number of seats, regardless of manufacturer. The capacity was as bid, and if that was with the original Grammer seat as proposed, then shockingly the new seats will be laid out in the same way.

 

[Dave1987]

It's quite possible that the FLIRT will have a tighter pitch than the Mk3, but substantially more legroom, because the InterCity 70 seat is a terribly designed, inefficient and wasteful old-fashioned seat.

The pitch on a 350/1 is certainly tighter than an old VTWC Mk3, but the comfort level is higher because the seats are thinner backed and better designed.

Sorry but just because you find a seat comfortable doesn't make it so for everyone. The best seats on the entire railway network that I've travelled on are Chiltern 168. Many people have said they find Pendo seats comfortable, after 2 hours I find them extremely uncomfortable. The seats on the old mk3 coaches have plenty of padding so don't create pressure points, their biggest flaw is the centre armrest. New seats can be comfortable if they are well designed. Newer seats have nearly no padding, if they are not properly designed they create pressure points and become very uncomfortable after half an hour to an hour.

 

[MCR247]

Apart from the fact that the seat they are using is marketed as being for high density configurations and the fact that Abellio are refusing to answer direct questions about seat pitch and instead dressing it up in spin.

Also I'm starting to think that a discussion forum is not for you, because you have some high and mighty view that you are right and everyone else is wrong, everyone has a right to air their view.

Stop trying to moderate the forum when you are not a moderator.

But what has the marketing got to do with anything? Abellio are ordering trains with a capacity that they have stated, and as far we know the only change is the seat manufacturer? All I'm saying is you can't insist that they will high density just from marketing.

This isn't a discussion, this you stating the same thing over and over again. Yes we disagree, but I'm not saying I'm right and you're wrong. We have different views and I'm saying that we can't tell anything until more is released so what is the point in repeatedly complaining on here about it?

 

[dk1]

2+2 seating, 1st class accommodation (the only GA trains to offer this) & a full Buffet service make for a very nice train with tons of extra seating compared to today. Only let down I can see for INTERCITY passengers on the GEML is the reduction in on board toilets.

 

[F Great Eastern]

2+2 seating itself doesn't mean it will be comfortable itself if it's very high density, everything depends on the seat pitch and density and the comfort of the seats and the facts are the original seats being ordered were more heavyweight intercity seats that are used in premium services across Europe and the now spec'd seats are lightweight, regional ones intended for high density.

Unfortunately that is just the facts whether some people like them or not, if Abellio answered questions about the seat pitch we could know for sure that they are high density with smaller seat pitch, unfortunately Abellio to date have not wanted to answer that question directly, so rather than blame people for saying things that you don't like, why don't you simply get Abellio to stop avoiding the question and to answer it then we wouldn't need to debate about it because we would know.

If the seating wasn't high density with a poor seat pitch, why don't Abellio say what the seat pitch is? The only reason for them to keep shut is because it's going to generate negative PR and they'd rather avoid that. This is marketing for dummies stuff, if you can't answer a question positively, don't answer it at all and is used by the politicians every day of the week in the House of Commons.

 

[ginger]

2+2 seating itself doesn't mean it will be comfortable itself if it's very high density, everything depends on the seat pitch and density and the comfort of the seats and the facts are the original seats being ordered were more heavyweight intercity seats that are used in premium services across Europe and the now spec'd seats are lightweight, regional ones intended for high density.

Unfortunately that is just the facts whether some people like them or not, if Abellio answered questions about the seat pitch we could know for sure that they are high density with smaller seat pitch, unfortunately Abellio to date have not wanted to answer that question directly, so rather than blame people for saying things that you don't like, why don't you simply get Abellio to stop avoiding the question and to answer it then we wouldn't need to debate about it because we would know.

If the seating wasn't high density with a poor seat pitch, why don't Abellio say what the seat pitch is? The only reason for them to keep shut is because it's going to generate negative PR and they'd rather avoid that. This is marketing for dummies stuff, if you can't answer a question positively, don't answer it at all and is used by the politicians every day of the week in the House of Commons.

Would you like to join me for the informal meeting after work this week? You can ask them yourself! As Sam says I am happy to facilitate! Send me a message if you would like to.....

 

[F Great Eastern]

Would you like to join me for the informal meeting after work this week? You can ask them yourself! As Sam says I am happy to facilitate! Send me a message if you would like to.....

I'd love to normally but I'm down in Bristol for the next fortnight from Tuesday!

 

[Yew]

It's quite possible that the FLIRT will have a tighter pitch than the Mk3, but substantially more legroom, because the InterCity 70 seat is a terribly designed, inefficient and wasteful old-fashioned seat.

Indeed, we'll just have some metal frames with the meanest whiff of padding on them

 

[D365]

It's quite possible that the FLIRT will have a tighter pitch than the Mk3, but substantially more legroom, because the InterCity 70 seat is a terribly designed, inefficient and wasteful old-fashioned seat.

Indeed, we'll just have some metal frames with the meanest whiff of padding on them

Yet somehow that seat design is/was idolised on the Great Northern Class 317s and 321s...

 

[MCR247]

2+2 seating itself doesn't mean it will be comfortable itself if it's very high density, everything depends on the seat pitch and density and the comfort of the seats and the facts are the original seats being ordered were more heavyweight intercity seats that are used in premium services across Europe and the now spec'd seats are lightweight, regional ones intended for high density.

Unfortunately that is just the facts whether some people like them or not

All of the above, I will agree is factual. The rest of your post is pure speculation and seems to focus on what you want to believe will be true so you can have a good moan. As it has been pointed out, it seems likely that AGA aren't going to be able just squeeze as many seats as possible in as their design used mixed floor levels and doors aren't at carriage ends. I'm not trying to moderate but it's just getting boring to read over and over :roll: