Can anybody please tell me why the recent-ish Alstom EMUs (Class 334,458, 
460) are referred to as "Junipers"?

AFAIK this is their official product name but I'm bushed to find out the 
reasoning behind this odd choice.

 Most modern train names do have a kind of logic behind them (even Adelante 
is Greek for Inter-City) but I cannot fathom the bush connection.

SWT refer to the 458 as a 4-JOP, officially "Juniper Open Plan" - 
unofically, "Jump Out and Push"...

-- 
Regards,
Adam Warr, Peterborough UK
Electra Railway Graphics
www.electrarailwaygraphics.co.uk
Fotopic Site:
http://www.adamsphotos.fotopic.net/

Adam wrote:


> AFAIK this is their official product name but I'm bushed to find out the
> reasoning behind this odd choice.


Not really a product name but a concept name - it just happened that
everything that got built under this concept [460 458 334] were similar
EMU.

Juniper is a tree, a renewable resource. The Juniper train concept is
an ever re-newable resource, upgradable, re-configurable, flexible,
re-leasable, over time, and to any user.


--
Nick

"Adam"  wrote in message 
news:jhMOe.265$n37.197@newsfe1-gui.ntli.net...

> Can anybody please tell me why the recent-ish Alstom EMUs (Class 334,458, 
> 460) are referred to as "Junipers"?
>
> AFAIK this is their official product name but I'm bushed to find out the 
> reasoning behind this odd choice.
>
> Most modern train names do have a kind of logic behind them (even Adelante 
> is Greek for Inter-City) but I cannot fathom the bush connection.
>
> SWT refer to the 458 as a 4-JOP, officially "Juniper Open Plan" - 
> unofically, "Jump Out and Push"...


I thought JOP stood for "Juniper Outer-Suburban Porterbrook". Anyone know 
which is correct?

In any case the 458s are much more reliable than they were (he says, 
tempting fate).

"D7666" wrote:

>
> Juniper is a tree...
>


Does this mean they will end up smelling like gin? After all it is made from 
Juniper berries.


>... a renewable resource...


Yes, but so is horse manure. Does this mean we will see the introduction of 
the .S.pecial .H.igh .I.ntensity .T.rain ? It could have AWS, TPWS and of 
course the new .A.utomated .R.ailway .S.ignalling .E.quipment.

When I first read about the "Juniper" it was on a blurred second generation 
fax and we all thought "Jumper" was a very odd name for a train.

-=# Amos E Wolfe #=-

John Tattersall wrote:

> "Adam"  wrote in message
> news:jhMOe.265$n37.197@newsfe1-gui.ntli.net...


(even Adelante

> > is Greek for Inter-City)


I didn't think so, so I checked on Babelfish, which gives no
translation out of Greek or Italian, but "it advanced" out of Spanish,
which fits with the brand name.  

Ken

Adam wrote:

> Can anybody please tell me why the recent-ish Alstom EMUs (Class 334,458,
> 460) are referred to as "Junipers"?
>
> AFAIK this is their official product name but I'm bushed to find out the
> reasoning behind this odd choice.
>
>  Most modern train names do have a kind of logic behind them (even Adelante
> is Greek for Inter-City) but I cannot fathom the bush connection.
>
> SWT refer to the 458 as a 4-JOP, officially "Juniper Open Plan" -
> unofically, "Jump Out and Push"...



I have a very hazy memory of first seeing the term "Juniper" years ago
in the context of a specific leasing or finance arrangement for new
stock come up with by Alstom or its predecessors.  But next thing I
know, it's just another name for a family of units.

>Not really a product name but a concept name - it just happened that
>everything that got built under this concept [460 458 334] were similar
>EMU.
>
>Juniper is a tree, a renewable resource. The Juniper train concept is
>an ever re-newable resource, upgradable, re-configurable, flexible,
>re-leasable, over time, and to any user.



Ah yeah, that's probably what I was thinking of.  Should have read this
first.

D7666 wrote:

> Adam wrote:
>
> > AFAIK this is their official product name but I'm bushed to find out the
> > reasoning behind this odd choice.
>
> Not really a product name but a concept name - it just happened that
> everything that got built under this concept [460 458 334] were similar
> EMU.
>
> Juniper is a tree, a renewable resource. The Juniper train concept is
> an ever re-newable resource, upgradable, re-configurable, flexible,
> re-leasable, over time, and to any user.
> 
> 
> --
> Nick

What does re-configurable mean?

Kevin

wrote


> What does re-configurable mean?
>

If you think the passengers have enough legroom you can squeeze another row
of seats in. ;-)

Peter

Peter Masson wrote:

>  wrote
>
> > What does re-configurable mean?
> >
> If you think the passengers have enough legroom you can squeeze another row
> of seats in. ;-)
>
> Peter

I was thinking that the train itself was re-configurable like some sort
of transformer or what ever the toy was called.

Kevin

On 24 Aug 2005 02:53:56 -0700, "Ken"  wrote:


>
>John Tattersall wrote:
>> "Adam"  wrote in message
>> news:jhMOe.265$n37.197@newsfe1-gui.ntli.net...
>
>(even Adelante
>> > is Greek for Inter-City)
>
>I didn't think so, so I checked on Babelfish, which gives no
>translation out of Greek or Italian, but "it advanced" out of Spanish,
>which fits with the brand name.  
>


I remember reading FGW's explanation of the name somewhere - possibly
on a panel on the train somewhere? I forget the exact wording, but the
gist was indeed along the lines of it being Spanish for something like
'advanced'.

In article , 1577+2260
<someone@somewhere.x> wrote:


> On 24 Aug 2005 02:53:56 -0700, "Ken"  wrote:
> 
> >
> >John Tattersall wrote:
> >> "Adam"  wrote in message
> >> news:jhMOe.265$n37.197@newsfe1-gui.ntli.net...
> >
> >(even Adelante
> >> > is Greek for Inter-City)
> >
> >I didn't think so, so I checked on Babelfish, which gives no
> >translation out of Greek or Italian, but "it advanced" out of Spanish,
> >which fits with the brand name.  
> >
> 
> I remember reading FGW's explanation of the name somewhere - possibly
> on a panel on the train somewhere? I forget the exact wording, but the
> gist was indeed along the lines of it being Spanish for something like
> 'advanced'.


It's "Coradia" (generic name that Alstom give to their family of MUs)
that means InterCity in ancient Greek.  Or something like that... 
Interestingly the Junipers are referred to by Alstom as "CORADIA
Juniper in UK" and the 175s and 180s as "CORADIA 1000 in UK" - there's
no mention of Adelante.  See
<http://www.transport.alstom.com:80/home/Products_and_Services/RAIL_VEHI
CLES/Passenger_trains/Main_line_Trains/intercity_trains/7660.EN.php?lang
uageId=EN&dir=/home/Products_and_Services/RAIL_VEHICLES/Passenger_trains
/Main_line_Trains/intercity_trains/> or
<http://makeashorterlink.com/?F2A842BAB> and check out the "Choose a
reference" drop down box.

Sam

Adelante means 'Progress' somewhere, maybe Spain which rings a bell. It is
on a sticker in the ends of the carriages.

>Juniper is a tree, a renewable resource. The >Juniper train concept is
>an ever re-newable resource, upgradable, >re-configurable, flexible,
>re-leasable, over time, and to any user.


You should try sending that in to "Pseuds' Corner" on Private Eye! :-)

Nick

"Sam Wilson"  wrote in message
news:240820051339062410%Sam.Wilson@ed.ac.uk...

> Interestingly the Junipers are referred to by Alstom as "CORADIA
> Juniper in UK" and the 175s and 180s as "CORADIA 1000 in UK" - there's
> no mention of Adelante.


I think that that is an error. The 175s were Coradia 1000, whilst the 180s
were Coradia 2000, IIRC.

Adam wrote:

>  Most modern train names do have a kind of logic behind them (even Adelante
> is Greek for Inter-City) but I cannot fathom the bush connection.


Slight error, Coradia (the Alstom product name for the Inter-City
version of Juniper) is Greek for Inter-City. Unfortunatly this must
have been too meaningful for the fGW, so they christened the trains
Adelante, or Spanish for "Come In".

Personally I prefer Coradia. Would have been good for Midland Mainline
- thats what people would say when they saw the old MML logo...

Andy E.

In article <qv%Oe.617$Ys5.496@newsfe7-gui.ntli.net>, Jack Taylor
 wrote:


> "Sam Wilson"  wrote in message
> news:240820051339062410%Sam.Wilson@ed.ac.uk...
> > Interestingly the Junipers are referred to by Alstom as "CORADIA
> > Juniper in UK" and the 175s and 180s as "CORADIA 1000 in UK" - there's
> > no mention of Adelante.
> 
> I think that that is an error. The 175s were Coradia 1000, whilst the 180s
> were Coradia 2000, IIRC.


Oooh - you'd better complain to Alstom, then!  The popup page for
Coradia 1000 in UK says that there are 40 5-car sets of the 180s.  I
think that's an error - more like 14 sets or even 40 vehicles (8 sets),
right?

Sam

> You should try sending that in to "Pseuds' Corner" on Private Eye! :-)
>
> Nick


LOL

That is abridged from some piffle I have here, the original author
would probably wish to remain anonymous as is a well known writer !!!


--
Nick

Pete_uk wrote:

> Adelante means 'Progress' somewhere, maybe Spain which rings a bell. It is
> on a sticker in the ends of the carriages.



I think it's more "forward".  Progress (noun) is more likely to be
"adelanto".

Jack Taylor wrote:


> "Sam Wilson"  wrote in message

> > Interestingly the Junipers are referred to by Alstom as "CORADIA
> > Juniper in UK" and the 175s and 180s as "CORADIA 1000 in UK" - there's
> > no mention of Adelante.
>
> I think that that is an error. The 175s were Coradia 1000, whilst the 180s
> were Coradia 2000, IIRC.


I don't know about the Coradia sub-versions, but it is true that the
original use of the Juniper name was the leasing concept while Coradia
was a type of train.

Coradias could be leased as Junipers. Think it is just a case that the
Juniper name had became more well known and associated with the EMU.

The Alstom web site today has all of 460 and 458 and 334 in the
reference list, which is right.

Adelante would probably not be mentioned by Alstom, since thats fGWs
own brand name.

I can see all this Coradia / Adelante / Juniper itself being an ever
renewable uk.railway subject, we've been throughit many times already.
 

--
Nick

"Sam Wilson"  wrote

>
> Oooh - you'd better complain to Alstom, then!  The popup page for
> Coradia 1000 in UK says that there are 40 5-car sets of the 180s.  I
> think that's an error - more like 14 sets or even 40 vehicles (8 sets),
> right?
>

It is 14 sets (70 vehicles).

Peter

On 24 Aug 2005 08:22:42 -0700, "MIG" 
wrote:

>Pete_uk wrote:

>> Adelante means 'Progress' somewhere, maybe Spain which rings a bell. It is
>> on a sticker in the ends of the carriages.
>
>I think it's more "forward".  Progress (noun) is more likely to be
>"adelanto".


Collins Spanish Gem Dictionary gives "adelante" as:
Forward!
Onward!
Come in!
-- 
Terry Harper
Website Coordinator, The Omnibus Society
http://www.omnibussoc.org

On Tue, 23 Aug 2005 22:26:33 +0100, "John Tattersall"
 wrote:


>
>>
>> Most modern train names do have a kind of logic behind them (even Adelante 
>> is Greek for Inter-City) but I cannot fathom the bush connection.
>>
>> SWT refer to the 458 as a 4-JOP, officially "Juniper Open Plan" - 
>> unofically, "Jump Out and Push"...
>
>I thought JOP stood for "Juniper Outer-Suburban Porterbrook". Anyone know 
>which is correct?
>
>In any case the 458s are much more reliable than they were (he says, 
>tempting fate).
>


Both versions are myths I'm afraid! 

The term "4-JOP" (and "5-DES" for Desiro 440/444) was invented by
enthusiasts (possibly SWT employees!) and are not SWT codes and are
never seen officially.

The designation "5-WES" for 442s was sometimes used internally in
their early years with NSE, but this died out years ago and only
"Class 442" is now used.

Even slammers were latterly referred to by class number, with the
obsolete "CIG", "VEP" etc. sometimes shown additionally in brackets.

oxo99@nospam.btinternet.com wrote:


>
> The term "4-JOP" (and "5-DES" for Desiro 440/444) was invented by
> enthusiasts (possibly SWT employees!) and are not SWT codes and are
> never seen officially.


The CWN has always used 458 for class 458 and so on, or at least all
the versions I have seen, so I am in agreement there ....

but .....


> Even slammers were latterly referred to by class number, with the
> obsolete "CIG", "VEP" etc. sometimes shown additionally in brackets.


Cig and Vep were in SWT use right up to the in, in CWN etc, are still
in use by SN, and Cep and Vep are still in use by SET. I don't think
the class numbers were ever used for that type of unit in the CWNs were
they ... and the reason that is important is the whole origin of SR (as
in the 1923-1947 SR) EMU codes *was* the CWN.


The definition that I use is whether or not the RSL recognises ther
term or not. AIUI Jop, Gat, are not RSL recognised, nor were some other
odd-balls like 4COM (4EPB with compos) that were used in CWN to assist
staff in differentiated specific needs.

I never understood where 5Des and 4Des came from, figment of
imaginations ?

--
Nick

In message  on Wed, 24 Aug 2005
22:28:07 +0000 (UTC) in uk.railway, oxo99@nospam.btinternet.com tapped out on
the keyboard:


> 
> The term "4-JOP" (and "5-DES" for Desiro 440/444) was invented by
> enthusiasts (possibly SWT employees!) and are not SWT codes and are
> never seen officially.
> 
> The designation "5-WES" for 442s was sometimes used internally in
> their early years with NSE, but this died out years ago and only
> "Class 442" is now used.
> 
> Even slammers were latterly referred to by class number, with the
> obsolete "CIG", "VEP" etc. sometimes shown additionally in brackets.
> 


It always surprises me that easily remembered acronyms (when I were a lad we had
"2-BIL", "4-LAV", "2-NOL" etc.) were dropped in favour of utterly forgettable
numeric class codes.  Bring back acronyms !

--
John Youles   Norwich   England   UK

On Wed, 24 Aug 2005 22:28:07 +0000 (UTC), oxo99@nospam.btinternet.com
wrote:


>Even slammers were latterly referred to by class number, with the
>obsolete "CIG", "VEP" etc. sometimes shown additionally in brackets.


The CIG or VEP designation was still painted on the vehicles, was it
not?
-- 
Terry Harper
Website Coordinator, The Omnibus Society
http://www.omnibussoc.org

In article <1124923851.122503.276980@g47g2000cwa.googlegr
oups.com>, D7666  writes

>
>oxo99@nospam.btinternet.com wrote:
>
>>
>> The term "4-JOP" (and "5-DES" for Desiro 440/444) was invented by
>> enthusiasts (possibly SWT employees!) and are not SWT codes and 
>are
>> never seen officially.
>
>The CWN has always used 458 for class 458 and so on, or at least all
>the versions I have seen, so I am in agreement there ....
>


It does say '4 JOP' on the panels on the carriage ends on the
458s, so while it might not be an official designation, it isn't just an
enthusiast invention.

Incidentally I seem to get 450s about one in every three journeys
on average on Waterloo-Reading, whereas it used to be 458s
almost all the time. Have some of the Junipers been withdrawn
from that service, or are the number of subsititutions for broken
down Junipers on the increase, or what?
-- 
Martin Ludgate

Martin Ludgate wrote:


> Incidentally I seem to get 450s about one in every three journeys
> on average on Waterloo-Reading, whereas it used to be 458s
> almost all the time. Have some of the Junipers been withdrawn
> from that service, or are the number of subsititutions for broken
> down Junipers on the increase, or what?



Being run down.

The basic off peak pattern to cover the whole route needs 14 units as
7x8 car. Since about late July onwards seems to be gradually going over
to 450s - seems to me at the moment to be about 4x 2x450 and 3x 2x458
out on all day off peaks, but there are variations of course especially
in the peaks.

This is not a reliability problem, they are simply becoming surplus as
450 availability ramps up.  Units 458001/2 seem to have been stopped
for some time, rumours suggest these are the ones going to GEx and it
would make sense but I've not seen anything official on that.

Further rumours suggest 458 planned use may cease in September.

There was some ranting in Modern Railways away putting 458s on
Portsmouth stoppers and cascading 444s to releive the 442 fleet - but
not sure what substantiated base that one had.

--
Nick

John Youles  writes:


> It always surprises me that easily remembered acronyms (when I were
> a lad we had "2-BIL", "4-LAV", "2-NOL" etc.) were dropped in favour
> of utterly forgettable numeric class codes.  Bring back acronyms !


Yes, the Southern Railway's obsession with the number of lavatories
conveyed in a unit :-)

"Graham Murray"  wrote in message
news:871x4eat6s.fsf@newton.gmurray.org.uk...

> John Youles  writes:
>
> > It always surprises me that easily remembered acronyms (when I were
> > a lad we had "2-BIL", "4-LAV", "2-NOL" etc.) were dropped in favour
> > of utterly forgettable numeric class codes.  Bring back acronyms !
>
> Yes, the Southern Railway's obsession with the number of lavatories
> conveyed in a unit :-)


Given the decline in standards in recent years, if the acronyms had
continued we would probably by now have 4-BOG (OOU).

Jack Taylor wrote:


> Given the decline in standards in recent years, if the acronyms had
> continued we would probably by now have 4-BOG (OOU).



I wanted to use 4Bog for the ex 4Big that got a Cep trailer to replace
the buffet to be 139x 4Cig.

Apart from the nicety of the Big / Bog name (like Vep Vop Vip) there
really were adjacent 4 bogs in one group in the 139x Cigs - 2 in Cig
DTC and 2 in adjacent ex Cep SO. I'm sure these were the only post-war
SR EMU to have 4 bogs in one group.

B did have to mean buffet either - e.g. 2Bil, - and it maintained the
SR lavatorial fixation too.

--
Nick

D7666 wrote:

> B did have to mean buffet either - e.g. 2Bil, - and it maintained the
> SR lavatorial fixation too.


ggrrrrr 

did not have to mean ....


--
Nick

Graham Murray wrote:


> John Youles  writes:
> 
> 
>>It always surprises me that easily remembered acronyms (when I were
>>a lad we had "2-BIL", "4-LAV", "2-NOL" etc.) were dropped in favour
>>of utterly forgettable numeric class codes.  Bring back acronyms !
> 
> 
> Yes, the Southern Railway's obsession with the number of lavatories
> conveyed in a unit :-)


I just remember the 4-LAVs; I have a horrbible feeling they only
had 1 lav :-(

Charlie

Charlie Hulme wrote:


> I just remember the 4-LAVs; I have a horrbible feeling they only
> had 1 lav :-(



4 car units with 2 lavs in 1 car. Car was a TC, one lav for first class
one lva for second class (or third as built) with no connection between
furst and third (as built). Maybe the division between the two classes
was knocked out at some point (after WW2 ?).



--
Nick

On 27 Aug 2005 12:00:53, "D7666"  wrote:

>>
>> Incidentally I seem to get 450s about one in every three journeys
>> on average on Waterloo-Reading, whereas it used to be 458s
>> almost all the time. Have some of the Junipers been withdrawn
>> from that service, or are the number of subsititutions for broken
>> down Junipers on the increase, or what?
>
>The basic off peak pattern to cover the whole route needs 14 units as
>7x8 car. Since about late July onwards seems to be gradually going over
>to 450s - seems to me at the moment to be about 4x 2x450 and 3x 2x458
>out on all day off peaks, but there are variations of course especially
>in the peaks.
>
>This is not a reliability problem, they are simply becoming surplus as
>450 availability ramps up.  Units 458001/2 seem to have been stopped
>for some time, rumours suggest these are the ones going to GEx and it
>would make sense but I've not seen anything official on that.
>
>Further rumours suggest 458 planned use may cease in September.


Another rumour I've heard is that 458011 may be converted to ac and
sent to Scotland for evaluation!

Paul Harley

-- 
Remove "eeek" to contact me!

Paul Harley wrote:


> Another rumour I've heard is that 458011 may be converted to ac and
> sent to Scotland for evaluation!



Been going around for a while that one, but 458011 is currently on a
normal exam at WD depot, nothing special - yet.


458001/02 moved WD to SL yesterday [Friday] so might be reasonable
*assume* these are GEx.


--
Nick

On 2 Sep 2005 17:39:10 -0700, "D7666"  wrote:

>
>458001/02 moved WD to SL yesterday [Friday] so might be reasonable
>*assume* these are GEx.


It would also be reasonable to assume they will undergo substantial
interior re-arrangement before being used.

The current 2+3 seating will not provide an aisle wide enough for some
of the large luggage on wheels one sees being taken to/from airports,
plus some seats will need to be replaced by luggage racks.

As the units will (presumably) be used in a fixed 8-car formation, one
might expect GatEx to move the first class seats from behind each cab
and place them all in the coach which will be at the London end.

Renumbering to 459001 might be a possibility.........

Paul Harley

-- 
Remove "eeek" to contact me!

Paul Harley wrote:


> As the units will (presumably) be used in a fixed 8-car formation,


Apparently not, I've seen nothing concrete but all the rumours are
suggesting they will use these as 2 4-cars at times of airport lower
demand allowing more maintenance time for the 460s.

I'd have to agree about internal re-arrangements though, more luggage
space, etc.

--
Nick

D7666 wrote:

Off a relevant yahoo group, 458 status this morning :

8001 S Lane T/TFR arr 11.00 2-9
8002 S Lane T/TFR arr 11.00 2-9
8003 Wim Park X/XAM arr 13.14 26-8
8004 'Intl Load' X/XAM
8005 Wim Park X/XAM arr 19.20 21-8
8006 Farnham arr 00.55 today (WM709 yesterday)
8007 In traffic, WM701 diagram
8008 Wim Park, spare (WM705 yesterday)
8009 In traffic, WM704 diagram
8010 Wim Park, spare (WM706 yesterday)
8011 Wim Park X/XAM arr 11.30 9-8
8012 In traffic WM712 diagram
8013 Wim Park X/XAM 19.20 21-8
8014 In traffic NT462 diagram
8015 In traffic WM709 diagram
8016 In traffic WM703 diagram
8017 In traffic WM702 diagram
8018 Clap Yard spare (WM703 yesterday)
8019 Wim Park spare arr 00.11 2-9
8020 Wim Park spare arr 00.11 today (WM701 yesterday)
8021 Wim Park spare arr 00.33 today (WM704 yesterday)
8022 In traffic, WM710 diagram
8023 Farnham arr 00.53 today (WM710 yesterday)
8024 Wim Park, arr 00.11 25-8
8025 Wim Park, arr 13.15 24-8
8026 In traffic, WM711 diagram
8027 In traffic NT463 diagram
8028 Wim Park, X/XAM arr 00.11 31-8
8029 Wim Park, arr 00.11 9-8
8030 Wim Park, arr 00.11 today (WM702 yesterday)

This does show most of them available or on an exam even if not in
traffic - except 8001/8002 at SL, 8011/8028 stopped since 09/08. 8011
was shown exam in a similar list earlier this week.