Why did TPE go for three different Nova fleets?

[Mikey C]

I've never heard of someone who prefers airline seats to tables!

I'm happy with airline seats too, if the seats opposite you are occupied, it avoids foot tennis!

 

[YorksLad12]

I've never heard of someone who prefers airline seats to tables!

I'm happy with airline seats too, if the seats opposite you are occupied, it avoids foot tennis!

When travelling solo I tend to prefer the airline seats if they have seatback tables. Gives me somewhere to put my coffee and you don't end up getting squeezed out by travelling groups!

It does depend on the seats, true. I tried working on a laptop while in an airline seat which had no-one in the seat in front. It was bouncing around so much I couldn't focus on the screen (Mk4 coach). Mk3 seat backs were the best, biggest and sturdiest!

Airline seats also mean you don't run the risk of sitting in a seat that someone's had their feet on for the last 2 hours. Although, with TPE trains coming back from the airport in the evening you do often find people sleeping across airline seats...

Generally, commuters prefer airline seats and leisure travellers tables so they can sit together (they are much more likely to be in groups e.g. families). Though this is shifting as tables ease using a laptop.

I'd rather have a table when travelling alone if, and only if, there is no more than 1 other person at it, sitting diagonally opposite. Otherwise, provided the legroom is adequate, I'd rather airline.

I'd take a table if travelling today as the trains are so empty and no-one could sit next (or near) to me. But I find there's way more legroom in airlines than tables; modern designs make it easier to stretch out so that your feet are under the seat in front, although there are awkward pillars just where I'd put my feet in LNER's 802s. Plus I'm quite anti-social really!

 

[irish_rail]

This thread does amuse me...

Not only is the answer to the question posed presumably now tattooed onto the inside of every forum members eyelids by now, but the near universal consensus is that more 802s would have been a better option. These being the same design of trains that are almost universally hated everywhere apart from TPE.

The TPE 802s are far far nicer inside than the GWR ones, could be why they are less hated up there.

 

[43 302]

The TPE 802s are far far nicer inside than the GWR ones, could be why they are less hated up there.

And outside.

 

[Bletchleyite]

The TPE 802s are far far nicer inside than the GWR ones, could be why they are less hated up there.

Interestingly, the only way in which that is actually the case is the colour of the seat moquette and carpet and some sticky backed fake wood panelling (sorry, the GWR ones also have that). Shows how perception is important.

(I agree the GWR ones are drab, but it would be very easily fixed! )

 

[TT-ONR-NRN]

The TPE 802s are far far nicer inside than the GWR ones, could be why they are less hated up there.

Indeed they may seem nicer than their GWR cousins, but they still seem to lack the warm lighting, DB ICEsque fake wood panelling and classy leather of the other Nova fleet. I find them to have a somewhat bleak and unfinished feel to them in comparison, particularly in first class. You could easily alight from the first class carriage of a Nova 2 and rejoin in a Nova 1’s first carriage, only to think you were in standard!

 

[BayPaul]

I do think that the solution for the Mk5a stock could be the same as the 707s. If their lease expires in 2023, then the next operator of TPE (however franchising works at that point) could just ditch them, and replace them with more 802s. And whilst lots of people have said that this requires more capital, it really doesn't - as the fleets are leased, the payments are presumably treated as opex costs, and I would assume that the cost for leasing 13 additional 802s would be roughly similar to the cost of leasing 14 locos and 66 carriages. Assuming that the fuel and track access cost would be lower for the 802s, especially as electrification increases, and there would be a long-term saving in training with the reduction in fleet numbers, plus probably the ability to reduce manning levels slightly due to increased flexibility, I would imagine that it could be quite a significant cost saving to simply ditch the fleet entirely. As others have mentionned, the issue of what to do with the Mk5As is one for the ROSCO, not for TPE or even the DfT, so there does not need to be a home for them to go to. Who knows, they could even become charter stock if the ROSCO dropped the price low enough if no TOC wanted them.

 

[Mikey C]

I'd take a table if travelling today as the trains are so empty and no-one could sit next (or near) to me. But I find there's way more legroom in airlines than tables; modern designs make it easier to stretch out so that your feet are under the seat in front, although there are awkward pillars just where I'd put my feet in LNER's 802s. Plus I'm quite anti-social really!

Agreed, the IET seat design is lousy as leaving aside the lack of comfort, the seat legs near the window is very annoying, especially if you have wide feet or walking shoes on!

IET - First Impression

www.mmpa.org.uk

 

[Bletchleyite]

Agreed. The best way to fix seats is one side to the wall, one side on a pillar near the aisle. I find any other arrangement has more downsides than upsides.

 

[73128]

Wonder how difficult it would be to make 800s and 802s able to work together? Presumably it's a software issue?

I heard that its more an ownership issue (physical coupling in an emergency is possible) - just in case there's an operating problem which could result in a lengthy argument about whose set caused the problem down the wires to the other...