Industry Insider

Prototypes are needed to iron out a succession of design problems

“The art of the interior designer seems to have gone missing as passengers struggle with poor aesthetics that include uncomfortable seating, a switch to airline rather than at-table seating, and poorly diffused lighting.”

When Transport for London ordered a fleet of 45 four-car Class 710 electric units from Bombardier in July 2015, the expectation was for the first deliveries to be made at the end of 2017 with the order completed by May 2018.

As a result, plans were made to disperse the existing rolling stock, which included the fleet of Class 172 diesel units in use on the Barking-Gospel Oak part of the London Overground network.

As the diesel units are owned by Angel Trains, the leasing company sought an alternative user, and a transfer to West Midlands Trains was negotiated. Because of the delay in the arrival of the replacement trains, the reallocation was put off for as long as possible, but now all eight members of the class need to be transferred to prevent service disruption elsewhere.

Transport for London has made contingency plans to draft in a number of London Overground units from the network, but even so insufficient trains are available to allow the timetable to be operated. The result is that service frequency has had to be reduced ( RAIL 874), with some substitute bus services provided.

No forecast service entry date has been offered by the train builder for the new rolling stock, and it is reported that as yet it has not been possible to commission new operational software.

Another new train order in difficulty is the supply of 25 six-car Class 717 electric units for use by Govia Thameslink Railway on services between Moorgate and Welwyn Garden City/Hertford North. The vehicles are being built by Siemens and have an appearance that is similar to the Class 700 sets used on the Thameslink network.

This has not turned out to be a straightforward follow- on build - a cab redesign was deemed necessary to allow emergency detraining in the route’s tunnel sections, which have limited clearance as the line was formerly operated by London Underground.

It was found that a combination of moving the seat position of the driver and providing a central cubicle to contain the emergency ladder (to allow exit to the track) has obscured the view of some signals and the platform edge.

It is likely that platform train despatch will need to be implemented, but until this is agreed there will be continued use of the elderly Class 313 fleet that entered service more than 40 years ago.

It will be recalled that driver sighting difficulties also occurred with the Hitachi Class 385 electric units ordered as part of the Edinburgh- Glasgow Improvement Programme, where testing of rolling stock started in 2018. In total, 70 trains of this type are being assembled in part at the Newton Aycliffe plant, with a mix of three-car and four-car sets making up 234 vehicles in total.

The operational and engineering design issues are a source of bewilderment to stakeholders, who could reasonably have expected that three separate rail vehicle manufacturers with a long history of train design would get the basics right. It is fundamental that trains are designed to be compatible with signalling equipment, and that train drivers are able to see signals and be satisfied about safe station departure.

An obvious question about current train design is the lack of providing a pre-production prototype to test in the operational environment where service use is intended. This is a different approach to past practice, where potential bugs were ironed out before millions of pounds were committed to fleet production.

Previously, when large- scale fleet replacement was planned, prototype vehicles were seen as essential - such as the construction of one two-car and two four-car PEP (prototype electro-pneumatic) electric units in 1971 to enable a ten- car formation to be tested.

These were the first BR-designed vehicles with sliding doors, and formed the basis for the production of Classes 313/4/5, and ‘507/8.’ Of interest was that three sets of sliding doors were provided in some of the initial vehicles, rather than the two used in later production versions.

Earlier prototypes based on Mk 1 rolling stock had been provided for the Kent Coast electrification in 1956, when six four- car units designated 4-BEP (later Class 410) and 4- CEP (later Class 411) were tested before a commitment was made to build a further 127 trainsets.

The purpose of building prototypes is to engage with stakeholders, including people who are going to travel on the trains, to gather feedback for detailed improvement.

However, the design approach for the Class 700 Siemens Desiro City units and Class 800 Hitachi Intercity Express Trains has been notable for the lack of any attempt to test prototypes from a passenger amenity viewpoint.

For the latter, this contrasts with the extensive testing of the pre-production High Speed Train, that allowed both technical and journey experience issues to be assessed before the eventual build of 95 sets with additional power cars.

In the case of both the new train types, the art of the interior designer seems to have gone missing as passengers struggle with a range of poor aesthetics that include uncomfortable seating (now universally described as ironing board seats), a switch to airline rather than at-table seating, and poorly diffused lighting in the initial Class 800 build.

The issues brought about by the lack of a buffet car would have been revealed in a programme of testing on long-distance routes. A trolley cannot operate through a crowded train, and it is noticeable that this form of mobile catering is now operating from a fixed point on some Great Western services - particularly on days when there are big sporting fixtures.

It is a current fad to promote ‘metroisation’, which has merit in busy urban areas with light rail conversion or the provision of high- density conventional services that can convey large numbers of people when standing is acceptable for short journeys. The question is: when does a short journey end and a longer one start with a need for different on-board amenity standards?

Short- distance journeys have been discouraged on many longer- distance routes by removing calling points, such as on the West Coast, East Coast and Midland Main Lines. It seems a mistake not to apply this to the Great Western route, which would allow an improved journey experience for passengers making longer journeys.

“The operational and engineering design issues are a source of bewilderment to stakeholders.”