Rolling Stock For Glasgow-Edinburgh

[SkinnyDave]

Anyone heard of what the plan is for rolling stock for electrification of Glasgow to Edinburgh?

380s?

 

[Chris125]

With platforms being built for 8x23m vehicles, and a relatively small number needed at least initially, 380's would indeed seem the likely choice.

Chris

 

[jw]

Friends from ScotRail have suggested that roughly 17-18 new build Class 380 units are being proposed for the service. 4 car composition and hopefully an interior layout similar to the current Turbostars.

 

[route:oxford]

Friends from ScotRail have suggested that roughly 17-18 new build Class 380 units are being proposed for the service. 4 car composition and hopefully an interior layout similar to the current Turbostars.

Given that the vast majority of time the units will be operating in a fixed 8 car formation...

Would it not be more sensible just to order a dozen 8 car units for Edinburgh-Glasgow?

 

[Old Hill Bank]

Given that the vast majority of time the units will be operating in a fixed 8 car formation...

Would it not be more sensible just to order a dozen 8 car units for Edinburgh-Glasgow?

I suggest not on the grounds of flexibility.

A fault on one vehicle of an eight car unit takes out eight vehicles.
Then there is the long term thinking (Whole life costs etc.), they might get cascaded to other routes/operators in the future.

 

[Eagle]

Same reason Crossrail stock will be 2x5 cars rather than fixed 10 cars.

 

[tbtc]

Given that the vast majority of time the units will be operating in a fixed 8 car formation...

Would it not be more sensible just to order a dozen 8 car units for Edinburgh-Glasgow?

I suggest not on the grounds of flexibility.

A fault on one vehicle of an eight car unit takes out eight vehicles.
Then there is the long term thinking (Whole life costs etc.), they might get cascaded to other routes/operators in the future.

Same reason Crossrail stock will be 2x5 cars rather than fixed 10 cars.

Especially as there's presumably going to be a number of four coach "380s" for the other central belt electrification - albeit a delay in wiring up the Stirling bits (as well as the Ayr line which has existing three/four coach 380s).

Maybe even more as a replacement for the 314/320s in a few years time?

 

[Eng274]

It would be nice and easy to just order a batch of 380s, but will design regs not have advanced by the time these units will need to be ordered? And AFAIK the 380 was mid way between the present design (350s et al) and the next generation family of EMUs?

 

[swt_passenger]

Same reason Crossrail stock will be 2x5 cars rather than fixed 10 cars.

Out of date, I'm afraid. Crossrail changed their spec between the initial description in the Crossrail Act, which allowed for single units running off-peak, and the eventual ITT.

It is now 10 car fixed formation, 200m long. http://www.crossrail.co.uk/news/art...r-rolling-stock-depot-facilities#.UWnUVMu9KSM

 

[Class377/5]

It would be nice and easy to just order a batch of 380s, but will design regs not have advanced by the time these units will need to be ordered? And AFAIK the 380 was mid way between the present design (350s et al) and the next generation family of EMUs?

380 used the next generation Desiro City body so no problems there.

 

[Eng274]

380 used the next generation Desiro City body so no problems there.

Maybe so, but the next generation desiro might not use exactly the same electrical architecture as the 380s have.

 

[Class377/5]

Maybe so, but the next generation desiro might not use exactly the same electrical architecture as the 380s have.

That's got nothing to do with the body tho. So my point stands.

 

[route:oxford]

Wouldn't it be sensible to simply specify the same units as Crossrail for E-G?

In an 8 car format.

Despite the claimed flexibility of operating twin-sets - I'm not convinced there is value in specifying 36 DSL coaches when 36 TSL would be satisfactory.

Indeed, given that "D" is likely to cost considerable more than a "T" it may well be possible to justify an additional "hot" set with the margin saved.

A well specified unit should be capable of having a faulty coach taken out rapidly at a depot to leave an immediately operational 7,6,5,4,3 car unit.

The extra benefit of the Crossrail units, for the politically minded in Scotland, is that it would bring the engineering expertise for the stock to the country - leaving an ambitious organisation in an advantageous position to tender for lucrative TfL contracts.

 

[HSTEd]

You really want to put what amounts to tube stock on Edinburgh-Glasgow?

 

[jopsuk]

You'd want a different interior certainly! With first class and either facilities for a trolley or some sort of café bar? Fixed formation would mean more efficient use of such facilities, and would also mean the drivers would get full width cabs with no potentially drafty connector!

 

[Kneedown]

and would also mean the drivers would get full width cabs with no potentially drafty connector!

Yes please!!!!

 

[LNW-GW Joint]

Won't the rolling stock deal have to be open tender?
Unless there is a reason for close compatibility with 380s (eg for maintenance) then the contract could go to anybody.
And Siemens might not bid a 380.
The London builds (Thameslink and Crossrail) will have a lot of special gear for automatic operation and tunnel working, so might not be suitable for E-G.
If new EMUs are bought for Great Western services that might be a more suitable starting point for Scotrail.
Currently nothing much is happening because of the Thameslink order problems and franchise renewal standoff.

 

[scotraildriver]

A well specified unit should be capable of having a faulty coach taken out rapidly at a depot to leave an immediately operational 7,6,5,4,3 car unit.

The extra benefit of the Crossrail units, for the politically minded in Scotland, is that it would bring the engineering expertise for the stock to the country - leaving an ambitious organisation in an advantageous position to tender for lucrative TfL contracts.[/QUOTE]

So you are suggesting every vehicle should have a pantograph, transformer, inverters, every one be powered, all have a compressor etc etc so you can just pull one out? Not only would it cost a fortune it would weigh so much it probably wouldn't move!

 

[jopsuk]

Yes please!!!!

Of course (and as you well know), your comfort generally comes further down the list than the operational flexibility of shorter units with fully useable gangway ends. But the E-G shuttle should be looked at like Crossrail and Thameslink, where it is quite clear that ideally all services will be full length, and the units specced as such.

 

[swt_passenger]

I think running 5 or 10 car trains on Crossrail dependent on the time of day was quickly found to be a problem for the central area platform edge door system.

Logically, the 5 car unit would have had to line up with the PEDs accurately when positioned at mid platform, because of the double ended station layouts, but then with two 5 car units there'd be two cabs at the mid point. All starts getting a bit complicated, and there's yet another potential area for delays and/or safety if the PEDs and trains don't match up properly.

IIRC LU found this issue of controlling PEDs differently 'train by train' to be a significant issue, which is apparently why the Jubilee line train extension was done in a 'big bang'.

 

[Photohunter71]

Pity,it would have been great to have had Traxx and 8 coach Formations.

 

[jopsuk]

the platforms at Queen Street need extended as it is to fit 8-coach EMUs. There's definitely not the space to fit 8 coaches plus a locomotive- and EMUs are very much the right choice on a technical level for this sort of service.

 

[route:oxford]

You really want to put what amounts to tube stock on Edinburgh-Glasgow?

Depends on your view...

How much will the journey differ in comparison to Reading-Liverpool Street?

In the evening people will pile on at Waverley (after the 3 minute 'til departure platform announcement), then again at Haymarket, then again at Edinburgh Park, Pile off at Linlithgow and at Queen Street...

Dwell times are still important aren't they?

You can still specify more "prestigious" seating arrangements on-board.
--- old post above --- --- new post below ---

So you are suggesting every vehicle should have a pantograph, transformer, inverters, every one be powered, all have a compressor etc etc so you can just pull one out? Not only would it cost a fortune it would weigh so much it probably wouldn't move!

Nope.

No more than any reasonable person would demand that a unit would throw a wobbly and sulk in the sidings until an engineer could successfully re-program it to work with a missing coach.

 

[Chris125]

Won't the rolling stock deal have to be open tender?
Unless there is a reason for close compatibility with 380s (eg for maintenance) then the contract could go to anybody.
And Siemens might not bid a 380.

There are various reasons to think 380's would be favoured - they are after a relatively small order, they already have two incompatible fleets of modern EMU and the platforms are being designed for 23m vehicles. With Siemens still building 350's for LM/TPE i see no reason why they couldn't knock out another batch of 380's.

How much will the journey differ in comparison to Reading-Liverpool Street?

Quite considerably - Crossrail is a combination of commuter and high capacity tube line, requiring the design and interior layout of the rolling stock to be a compromise between the two. Quite unsuitable for the E&G.

As for Reading-Liverpool St, even if Crossrail is extended that far very few people would use it for such a journey - most people would take a faster service and change at Paddington.

Chris

 

[158722]

A mix of 3 & 4 car EMUs is the right solution for the E&G services, not single 7 or 8 car sets, given that off peak service don't warrant carting around a load of fresh air. Plus, as wiring eventually extends to Stirling, Dunblane & Alloa, inter-working of E&G services will inevitably be diagrammed, so flexibility is the key.

The 17/18 units mentioned would seem logical as an initial batch of units, as the current E&G 15 min interval needs 16 units, assuming all peak hour services are formed of pairs of units.

The obvious outcome would probably be another batch of 380s, although the public tendering process might result in something else. Whoever wins the order will be looking for it to become quite a substantial one, something close to 40 units required for the whole E&G/central belt wiring schemes.

 

[route:oxford]

A mix of 3 & 4 car EMUs is the right solution for the E&G services, not single 7 or 8 car sets, given that off peak service don't warrant carting around a load of fresh air.

Between the pre-peak, peak, post peak off-peak peak, afternoon school peak, pre-peak off-peak peak, peak, post-peak off-peak peak and positioning moves...

How many services are fresh-air services?

 

[Chris125]

The obvious outcome would probably be another batch of 380s, although the public tendering process might result in something else.

Didn't Southern specify compatibility with their existing fleet for the 5-car 377's? It pretty much guaranteed a Bombardier order, so presumably ScotRail could do the same if they're happy with further 380's.

Chris

 

[route:oxford]

As for Reading-Liverpool St, even if Crossrail is extended that far very few people would use it for such a journey - most people would take a faster service and change at Paddington.

I'm not so sure.

Only once the services are operational will the time penalties be assessable, but I wouldn't be surprised if the time penalty of changing services at Paddington exceeded the time penalty of taking the technically slower service.

 

[transmanche]

A mix of 3 & 4 car EMUs...

Wouldn't it be easier to standardise on 4-car EMUs to make a uniform fleet - or are there a large number of stations that can only take 3 or 6 cars?

 

[Class377/5]

Didn't Southern specify compatibility with their existing fleet for the 5-car 377's? It pretty much guaranteed a Bombardier order, so presumably ScotRail could do the same if they're happy with further 380's.

Chris

Southern did indeed do that. Basically to help Derby get the work. Scotrail could get more 380's or it could get a Desiro City/700 off shoot.

Won't the rolling stock deal have to be open tender?
Unless there is a reason for close compatibility with 380s (eg for maintenance) then the contract could go to anybody.
And Siemens might not bid a 380.
The London builds (Thameslink and Crossrail) will have a lot of special gear for automatic operation and tunnel working, so might not be suitable for E-G.
If new EMUs are bought for Great Western services that might be a more suitable starting point for Scotrail.
Currently nothing much is happening because of the Thameslink order problems and franchise renewal standoff.

Rolling stock will have to go to an open tender but doesnt mean tender cant be done to push it in a certain direction. As for nothing happening for rolling stock, not true.

* Southern is tendering for 29x four car units with opitions for another 35.
* LO is getting 57 new carriages plus additional 378 units and possibly more 172 carriages

Also don't presume that the class 700 & 345 units can't be built for other units. Roger Ford has already confirmed that he's seen a mock up of a five car class 700 in SWT livery. The bits for Thameslink/Crossrail (ATO etc) don't have to be added in and the stock can be used for elsewhere. Fact that three TOCs are looking into the Desiro Cities for future orders shows that.

Wouldn't it be easier to standardise on 4-car EMUs to make a uniform fleet - or are there a large number of stations that can only take 3 or 6 cars?

Note as well the Scottish 380 are 23m carriages not the 20m that Thameslink/Crossrail and possibly future GW fleet are. So already they aren't standard.