The new Thameslink trains from Siemens look like a near-copy of the old and unloved class 319 Thameslink train from BREL, apart from the even uglier front end and the lower bodyside curvature which will reduce the width at floor level. The doors and windows appear to be in exactly the same place. Why on earth didn't they just order some more class 377 units from Bombardier and avoid the row over the loss of jobs at Derby? How much did it cost in consultancy to develop this specification?
I wrote to my MP on two entirely separate issues recently. The first was to do with the replacement for the Inter City 125 train, which at £2.6 million per vehicle, is twice as expensive as it ought to be. The second concerned the benefits of a switch from business rate and Council Tax to a tax based on site values. In both cases, the replies were full of spurious, unsubstantiated assertions and completely flawed arguments. This is typical. You will not get an iota of sense from the government on any area of public policy at all - finance, economics, trade and employment, agriculture, housing, health, transport, energy. All junk. If you write to your MP you will invariably receive answers that are an insult to your intelligence, no matter what subject you are writing about. Of course they cannot understand statistics. They are innumerate. Whitehall is staffed with idiots with a high IQ. Look at their IT projects. And mind your purse, they will have that too.
Kommentarer
One thing puzzles me. Do the 'bumps' on either side of the central coupling serve a purpose? Are they supposed to remind us of buffers? Do they have a purpose? I am Mystified.
On the subject of the contract this blog is interesting http://zelo-street.blogspot.co.uk/search?q=bombardier
In one post they claim that :
"DfT [..] went back to Bombardier – several times – to inform them of Siemens’ lower offer. This was clearly an effort to get Derby the contract, but Bombardier management did not show any interest in revising their bid."
I don't know if this is true.