SNCF unveils first TGV Océane

[Joseph_Pestell]

Correct me if I'm wrong, but… I always thought that the 'original French TGV trains' were the PSE units (the orange ones). The Atlantique fleet was a later build - from the outside, the most notable differences were the colour scheme and the roofs of the power cars which were faired into the fronts, rather than having the 'step' behind the cabs.

The rather odd first class seating arrangement in cars 2 or 12 and 3 or 13 (1 and 11 are usually ordinary opens) was there from the start in the Atlantiques (ie not the result of a makeover) and i would agree with you that it leaves much to be desired: I have never heard praise for it from any fellow traveller. As to the makeover of the fleets in general, SNCF spent what I presume must be vast amounts of money to get Christian Lacroix (who is what one these days calls 'a designer', I am told…) to redesign the seating, which is why, in second class, for example, we suffer these horrible purple and lime green seats, magazine racks that don't hold anything worth holding, elastic bits to hold tickets that don't (and in any case they were always a silly idea) and rubbish bins that are pretty useless, too (but better than those in first class, which are a challenge even to find! (Rant on design over)

But, as seems to be the standard in rail design, space for luggage, whilst vastly improved in second class in some but far from all of the units, is universally lamentable in first. When will interior designers realise that people travel with luggage?

 

The original PSE units were/are painted orange. But some were repainted silver as they were transferred to other services when replaced by TGV2N on PSE routes.

 

As to interior design, I don't blame the likes of Lacroix who should just be involved in the soft items such as colour. Practical aspects such as bins, luggage space, etc should have been specified by the SNCF management.

[olivegreen]

The original PSE units were/are painted orange. But some were repainted silver as they were transferred to other services when replaced by TGV2N on PSE routes.

 

As to interior design, I don't blame the likes of Lacroix who should just be involved in the soft items such as colour. Practical aspects such as bins, luggage space, etc should have been specified by the SNCF management.

 

I agree entirely. Hence if the management did, in fact, give the specifications, they weren't particularly good at it!  I do wonder, though, at Monsieur Lacroix's sense of colour …..

[JDW]

Coming back to this thread, the thought occurred to me: The latest French train is the "TGV Océane". It suggest class, elegance, serenity, it has a sense of journey, of destination. The British equivalent is an "Azuma". Or an "IEP", if you like. How do we always manage to get things so badly wrong...?

[DavidB-AU]

Promo video from SNCF.

 

 

Cheers

David

[Southernman46]

The original PSE units were/are painted orange. But some were repainted silver as they were transferred to other services when replaced by TGV2N on PSE routes.

 

As to interior design, I don't blame the likes of Lacroix who should just be involved in the soft items such as colour. Practical aspects such as bins, luggage space, etc should have been specified by the SNCF management.

Agreed - where am I going to put all that St-Emillion ??

[Mike Storey]

Coming back to this thread, the thought occurred to me: The latest French train is the "TGV Océane". It suggest class, elegance, serenity, it has a sense of journey, of destination. The British equivalent is an "Azuma". Or an "IEP", if you like. How do we always manage to get things so badly wrong...?

 

Interesting observation. How do you equate "badly wrong" when SNCF passenger totals have been falling, or rising very slowly, at the same time that British railway patronage has more than doubled in the last 20 years? But I take your point. SNCF, or whatever they call themselves this week, are champions of style over substance.

 

TGV Ocean, or Atlantique, is not very popular here. It has promised much but will deliver little, given the arcane accounting charges between different parts of SNCF. RFF, as was, have been told to make a profit, despite supposed re-integration into the mother ship, and used a form of PPI to build the new route, so SNCF cannot afford to run as many trains as they originally promised, hence the use of double deckers, to give a greater bang per buck of Hr/Km used. Sensible economics worthy of Milton Freedman, but absolutely nul points at growing the market. They have no belief in service frequency as a driver in itself, despite the evidence elsewhere. Quite how this advances the environmental, social and national economic aspirations of the national government remains unexplained. They appear to disbelieve the growth forecasts of the original business case, and will not intervene. This is a classic test case for anyone considering that re-nationalisation of Britain's railways would be a "good thing".

[JDW]

I was referring solely to the name, not the business models of SNCF or the UK rail industry, that "Oceane" is a much better, more meaningful, more useful, more memorable name than something clunky and either not thought through or over thought, as with "IEP" or "Azuma", neither of which have any kind of style or class, nor much of a descriptive value of the product.  

[olivegreen]

Interesting observation. How do you equate "badly wrong" when SNCF passenger totals have been falling, or rising very slowly, at the same time that British railway patronage has more than doubled in the last 20 years? But I take your point. SNCF, or whatever they call themselves this week, are champions of style over substance.

 

TGV Ocean, or Atlantique, is not very popular here. It has promised much but will deliver little, given the arcane accounting charges between different parts of SNCF. RFF, as was, have been told to make a profit, despite supposed re-integration into the mother ship, and used a form of PPI to build the new route, so SNCF cannot afford to run as many trains as they originally promised, hence the use of double deckers, to give a greater bang per buck of Hr/Km used. Sensible economics worthy of Milton Freedman, but absolutely nul points at growing the market. They have no belief in service frequency as a driver in itself, despite the evidence elsewhere. Quite how this advances the environmental, social and national economic aspirations of the national government remains unexplained. They appear to disbelieve the growth forecasts of the original business case, and will not intervene. This is a classic test case for anyone considering that re-nationalisation of Britain's railways would be a "good thing".

 

The blue bit: …but that is one of the malaises of the entire French mentality! (I declare an interest: I live in France, too!)

 

The red bit: I have also mentioned before in these threads that the regularity - lack of, rather - of French public transport in general is a killer to any enthusiasm to travel, especially outside what might be called 'commuting' hours, and even more so off the beaten tracks. (Edited to add: for those whose experience is of the long-distance services from and to Paris, it is worth remembering that some 80% of the population does not live in the Paris region.)

 

The cynic might well say that, for the government,  SNCF exists to employ thousands of people and to keep a number of French high-tech businesses in operation,  helping on one hand to keep the unemployment figures down and on the other to help exports. Both points are valid to some degree and are demonstrated, as you say, by the approach to TGV Océane, among other projects. But consideration for provision of a real, useful service to the people - and SNCF is supposed to be a public service?  Very little.

 

I agree that to make comparisons with the situation in the UK would be hazardous, to say the least.

[The Stationmaster]

Interesting observation. How do you equate "badly wrong" when SNCF passenger totals have been falling, or rising very slowly, at the same time that British railway patronage has more than doubled in the last 20 years? But I take your point. SNCF, or whatever they call themselves this week, are champions of style over substance.

 

TGV Ocean, or Atlantique, is not very popular here. It has promised much but will deliver little, given the arcane accounting charges between different parts of SNCF. RFF, as was, have been told to make a profit, despite supposed re-integration into the mother ship, and used a form of PPI to build the new route, so SNCF cannot afford to run as many trains as they originally promised, hence the use of double deckers, to give a greater bang per buck of Hr/Km used. Sensible economics worthy of Milton Freedman, but absolutely nul points at growing the market. They have no belief in service frequency as a driver in itself, despite the evidence elsewhere. Quite how this advances the environmental, social and national economic aspirations of the national government remains unexplained. They appear to disbelieve the growth forecasts of the original business case, and will not intervene. This is a classic test case for anyone considering that re-nationalisation of Britain's railways would be a "good thing".

 

So they haven't changed much since my days of dealing with them by the sound of things - and it looks like the good old 45% load factor syndrome still prevails  (according to SNCF Grande Lignes logic if a train achieves a 45% load factor it is making a profit, if it falls short of 45% then it is not making a profit.  This approach - which is totally divorced from any consideration of operating costs and efficient use of resources - helps to explain the somewhat peculiar (to a Brit) pattern of SNCF train services and the lack of regular interval services on longer distance routes; Rennes used to be an ideal spot in which to watch this logic at its most inefficient with such abysmal utilisation of TGV sets it would reduce a British operator or train planner to tears (or fits of laughter).

[olivegreen]

So they haven't changed much since my days of dealing with them by the sound of things - and it looks like the good old 45% load factor syndrome still prevails  (according to SNCF Grande Lignes logic if a train achieves a 45% load factor it is making a profit, if it falls short of 45% then it is not making a profit.  This approach - which is totally divorced from any consideration of operating costs and efficient use of resources - helps to explain the somewhat peculiar (to a Brit) pattern of SNCF train services and the lack of regular interval services on longer distance routes; Rennes used to be an ideal spot in which to watch this logic at its most inefficient with such abysmal utilisation of TGV sets it would reduce a British operator or train planner to tears (or fits of laughter).

 

Whilst I do not know the figures, speaking as a simple passenger who passes fairly often through Rennes, I have to say that on the face of it little has changed, as you suggest!

[Mike Storey]

So they haven't changed much since my days of dealing with them by the sound of things - and it looks like the good old 45% load factor syndrome still prevails  (according to SNCF Grande Lignes logic if a train achieves a 45% load factor it is making a profit, if it falls short of 45% then it is not making a profit.  This approach - which is totally divorced from any consideration of operating costs and efficient use of resources - helps to explain the somewhat peculiar (to a Brit) pattern of SNCF train services and the lack of regular interval services on longer distance routes; Rennes used to be an ideal spot in which to watch this logic at its most inefficient with such abysmal utilisation of TGV sets it would reduce a British operator or train planner to tears (or fits of laughter).

 

The logic may be the same but the load factors used for profitability have shot upwards dramatically, due to infrastructure usage charges. They adopted the revenue management system, based on, but not identical to, profit per fuselage used by the airlines, not long after BR InterCity, in the early 1990's, but have focussed on cost to the detriment of growth. This is mainly due to having taken the Railtrack model to an absurd degree, without any privatisation (bar some open access largely for freight, in which SNCF Fret, now called something else this week, has been losing custom hand over fist). This has not been helped by a government that suddenly de-regulated intercity coach travel (although most of the new entrants have quickly gone bust), major incentives for car sharing, far more than the UK, and to cap it all, lost their bottle when they were about to charge far more realistic taxes/tariffs to long distance lorry operators. This has killed, along with the migrant problem at Calais in the short term, the planned lorry-land-bridge services planned by SNCF. On top of that, the very many trades unions with which they have to deal show little sign of a willingness to compromise in order to help the industry, still claiming the state should simply pump more money in to preserve their lifestyles, which are, comparatively to any British railwayperson, quite undemanding.

 

So I would guess that SNCF planners and marketeers have virtually given up trying to second guess the political context in which they operate and have only snazzy names and imaginative liveries with which to fight. They do not appear to be allowed to take risks, and simply respond to overt demand. The new Super Regions of local government are now beginning to take over funding even for inter-regional services, as well as the locals, which will also lead to some peculiar decapitations of existing through services. They too blame central government.

 

20/25 year old TGV units are now being scrapped, in case some dirty privateer gets their hands on them, and also so that Alstom can be kept alive by being given more orders. When Eurostar ordered Siemens trains, there was nearly a lynching. Quite why therefore the state continues to fund further expansion of LGV routes remains a mystery to anyone but a politician. We do have an election next year, so go figure.

 

Meanwhile, lines mothballed continue to be ripped up, as no-one will fund RFF to maintain them, and regional routes are facing a backlog of maintenance and TSR's that make post-Hatfield look like a minor hiccough. 

 

But by goodness, the many, many new trains look good, in the event that you manage to spot one actually moving.

[Mike Storey]

I was referring solely to the name, not the business models of SNCF or the UK rail industry, that "Oceane" is a much better, more meaningful, more useful, more memorable name than something clunky and either not thought through or over thought, as with "IEP" or "Azuma", neither of which have any kind of style or class, nor much of a descriptive value of the product.  

 

I know, hence my remark that I take your point. Apologies if you thought I had not understood.

 

But my point is that it does not help them, in terms of carryings, for the various other reasons explained. No-one here refers to Ocean. They just say TGV. So one has to question why they put so much more effort into it.

[jjb1970]

On names, I quite like Azuma for the ECML IEP trains. The name is a bit different but it rolls of the tongue, is quite catchy and does capture the Japanese heritage of the train, I can imagine far worse.

[Fat Controller]

On names, I quite like Azuma for the ECML IEP trains. The name is a bit different but it rolls of the tongue, is quite catchy and does capture the Japanese heritage of the train, I can imagine far worse.

If Irish Rail buys any, and paints them in their usual colours, will they be Satsumas?

[Accurascale Fran]

If Irish Rail buys any, and paints them in their usual colours, will they be Satsumas?

Sadly our lovely orange is a thing of the past. It's all dull silver and green now.

[DavidB-AU]

First TGV Océane trains enter service

http://www.railjournal.com/index.php/high-speed/first-tgv-oceane-trains-enter-service.html