Reader Comments:

Views expressed in submitted comments are that of the author, and not necessarily shared by Railnews.

• Adam, Aberdeen, UK

  What is the point of a train only capable of doing 125mph? So no improvement on the current situation then. Would it not have been a better use of public money to build a high speed line and introduce new high speed trains, like the new AGV (which also looks much better) to match rather than limiting ourselves now. Once again it seems that long term thinking has left government. What actually happens north of Edinburgh towards Aberdeen and Inverness, given that these routes are not electrified. I assume we will not see these trains at all, but continue to use the good old HST or have to change to ScotRail (unfortunately). Once again Cheapo Britain strikes and public services suffer.

• John Grierson, Scarborough, UK

  Very disapointing. The money spent on this train could have been spent on something useful like making the kingross - glasgow line high speed or re-opening one of the lines closed after the beeching axe.

• Barrie Fairbairn, Leicester, UK

  Too little, ( speed) too late, ( since circa 1983 the SNCF have had the TGV) and wrong make, (Hitachi).
  
  I hang my head in shame when I drive past the old BR Technical Centre in Derby.
  
  Major and Hoon should join me in my lament for the Railway.
  
  But they would not understand.
  

• John Bowyer, North Battleford, Canada

  Although I'm a British Citizen, currently in Canada, I am a big pasenger rail enthusiast. I am bemused that there is no plan to include a High-Speed dedicated line, East and West to Northern England/Scotland. The announcement that the Hitachi train units can be modified for 140 mph - just 15mph over the initial service speed is rather humuous. The new Javelin 'commuter' service will rapidly accelerate up to 140 mph, right-off-the-bat on the dedicated HS1 line from 2009-great if you happen to live in this corridor in the South-East. But for 95% of the rest of the population, the new Intercity service will be slower than the Javelin 'Commuter' service. And Alstom in France have unveiled their new 220 mph (360kph) AGV. How very odd.

• Jon Porter, CALNE, UK

  So Bombardier/Siemens team would have built the trains at Derby? No. They may have been fitted out there, the trains would have been built in Germany and Belgium as all previous such "Express" offerings from these companies have been. Remember Virgin Voyagers from Bruges, SWT Trains EMUs from Austria and Germany. At least now the UK has more choice from where it gets its trains and Bombardier with Siemens and Alstom have some serious competition on price.

• David Myles, Chesterfield, England

  Graham Morgan asks about the Midland Mainline. An equally important question is what will happen to our most modern fast main line trains -the Class 91 and Mk 4's. These are good for another 20 years so why has ECML been chosen for the IEP sets? Can we cascade the 91s and Mk 4s on to an electrified MML? They are definitely superior to the present Meridians that provide Sheffield with its London service.

• Christopher Gillie, Brentford, Middlesex, UK

  I think that the Hybrid idea is actually quite clever, despite what naysayers might think.
  
  Only 40% is of the network is electrified, the question is what do you do about the other 60%, so the last comment from Charles from Finchampstead is most unhelpful. The real choice is do we use an "traditional" diesel while we oh so slowly electrify more of the network, or do we think outside the box.
  
  A Hybrid works a bit like the Toyota Prius (hence the name). The weight is about the same because instead of having a huge diesel engine that has to operate at a wide range of (sometimes inefficient) speeds, there is a smaller engine that powers a generator and can charge batteries.
  
  - At peak demand (acceleration) both directly generated power and stored battery power are used
  - When"cruising" at speed only the (smaller) diesel is needed.
  - When braking the batteries can be charged up again with regenerative power from the electric traction units (recovering about 80% of the otherwise wasted energy).
  
  As the diesel engine is smaller and operates only at the most efficient speeds it should also be more reliable and fuel efficient. Real world tests on a converted Train in the UK suggest a 12-20% fuel saving (depending of frequency of stops).
  
  www.railwaygazette.com/news_view/article/2007/05/4/hybrid-high-speed-train-unveiled.html
  
  I have to say it is a real shame no speed increases are planned, and that double decker trains are still non-existant on this Island despite mainland europe having used them for ages - Thats REAL capacity increase!!

• Anoop, Harrow

  If I believe the video, the Super Express seems to be an electrical unit train with a diesel power car on one end. There are no noisy diesel engines under the passenger saloons, and an engine in a dedicated power car is easier to maintain. However the electric motors are distributed along the train to give good adhesion and acceleration.
  
  The only extra weight on a dual-mode train compared to a diesel is the weight of the pantograph and transformer. This will probably not be too significant, and the energy saved by running on electricity where available will outweigh the weight of the transformer. On the other hand, the diesel engine will be useful in emergencies (e.g. if there are overhead line problems), and will make the railway more reliable.
  
  Versatility is also important. I think these trains should be able to split in the middle (with flat cabs and gangways) so that the two halves can go to different peripheral destinations at 100mph but join up for the 125mph journey to London. This will increase the number of destinations directly served from London without causing congestion on the main lines.
  
  I also think Bombardier should be involved (e.g. as a subcontractor) because they have a lot of expertise and UK experience to offer.

• Anthony Searcy, Derby, England

  Yet another kick in the teeth to the British manufacturing industry. What is it with this government and their policies? British trains should have and most definately could have been made by British workers! As a unite member and one of Bombardiers workforce I fully support the British trains campaign. But as with other industries they are NOT listening. Pure and simply another nail in the coffin lid of British manufacturing. A massive thank you to Mr Hoon and his cronies at the D.f.t. in their ivory towers and totally out of touch to plight of the ordinary British worker.

• Graham Morgan, Honiton, England

  There is no mention of the Midland Mainline in this announcement, are we to assume that they will have to keep using the HST's?

• Martin, Bristol, England

  This would of been great if it had arived 10 years ago to slow it will not do well as a replacement for the HST

• Charles, Finchampstead, uk

  All goverment spin - no increase in speed on the 30 year old HST. A distinct lack of clarity regarding electrification. Surely all that is offered here is the bare minimum to replace the HST - the cheap option.
  
  The way the goverment is promoting this as a British bid is all smoke and mirrors. The British bid was the other bid involving Bombardier
  
  A bio mode train ( containing two engines ) will also be heavier than a pure electric train - how can this be environmentally friendly

• Geoff Steel, Northampton, United Kingdom

  This is yet another example that the government still lacks a joined up strategy for the railway. They would rather go for a quick good news story to try and boost their poll ratings rather than linking the announcement to their longer term infrastructure plans such as main line and infill electrification schemes which would give a much clearer indication of how many of these new trains will be the more environmentally friendly electric version. Interestingly, there is also no mention of these trains going beyond Edinburgh towards Aberdeen so what will they get when the HST sets are withdrawn from service?