Thameslink Rolling Stock Contract Finally Done!!

[F Great Eastern]

This video gives a clue as to what features were being touted as being included:
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=BVQYldQpeKY

 

[westcoaster]

Yet there's to images of them in FCC livery out there.

http://www.siemens.co.uk/en/news_pr...erred-bidder-for-thameslink-rolling-stock.htm

On the right hand side.

 

[fgwrich]

Obviously the Daily Mail will ignore select facts and conveniently recirculate the 1,400 jobs lost at Derby due at all costs to our goverment's sheer incompetence at not choosing a British manufacturer for this massive and future-defining undertaking like any other sane country would do and the likes of which will never happen again... (yes, I know where the business originates)

Because if Siemens or perhaps even an Asian manufacturer owned the works they would be just as British. A shame all this really, but funny because at least the company was founded in Britain!

Have just begun reading the Siemens article linked by 377/5, and wow, largest ever contract for Siemens plc..!

Wonder how well Siemens will fare with this publicity programme?

Hopefully quite well. I think that's why they've included quite a lot of technical writing into the press release including the last paragraph. Funny how this big bad nasty German company doesn't seem so German, or nasty really. I did notice a small hint of pass the buck in the DfTs press release though - blaming the previous government for the procurement process.

Established in the UK 170 years ago, Siemens is a very significant employer (13,520 UK employees) and supporter of British manufacturing. The company has sought to include locally sourced train components in the Desiro City design to further support the rail supply chain and offer additional employment opportunities. Siemens anticipates the creation of up to 2,000 jobs across the UK in component manufacturing and assembly, as well as in the construction of the new depots and subsequent train maintenance.

Siemens will be manufacturing hi-tech electrical components for the Desiro City train at its facility in Hebburn, South Tyneside – one of 13 manufacturing plants Siemens owns in the UK. This will help to develop a legacy of sustainable rail manufacturing skills in the North East. Further components sourced from the UK include, amongst others, train pantographs manufactured in Somerset; cab radios in Dorset; flooring in Hertfordshire; exterior lighting in the West Midlands; train protection and warning systems in Cheshire; and, CCTV in Tyne and Wear. The train bodyshells will be manufactured in Krefeld, Germany, with the trains tested to the latest standards at Siemens’ unique test track in Wildenrath, Germany, minimising disruption to the UK network.

 

[F Great Eastern]

Forget Thameslink, the Daily Mail is now worried about the High Speed 2 rolling stock.
http://www.dailymail.co.uk/money/ma...acts-unions-warn-repeat-Thameslink-chaos.html

 

[jon0844]

What a joke, especially mentioning the job losses that were happening with or without the contract.

And of course Bombardier is a fine British firm... Not.

 

[A-driver]

Glad to hear it. After having a quick browse on Siemens website, Interestingly they've produced a diagram of the a 700 with a guide to where most of the parts are produced.

http://www.siemens.co.uk/careers/pool/images/siemens-thameslink-infographic.jpg

Think that could do with more media circulation - would be nice to see some of the anit siemens / 'bombardier is british' journalists eat some of their words (especially if they saw a diagram of where Bombardiers S Stock comes from)

That's a clever bit of PR from Siemens!

First of all I don't count things like the pantograph, shoe gear, DRA switch or AWS/TPWS towards what will be manufactured in this country as they are systems required in Britian but not other countries so would be suprised if other countries manufactured them anyway! At a guess the TPWS manufacturing industry is a bit of a niche market! (with the pan and shoes I mean the specific type produced by BW are fairly unique to British trains and wires).

They don't mention the vast majority of materials which I'm sure wont be manufactured in Britian though, although saying that it would be interesting to see how bombardier would have compared with sourcing materials. I have a suspicion that exactly they same things would have been British made and everything else would have come from overseas (possibly the same place Siemens will buy things like the body materials, wheels, motor components, compressor systems etc from).

That picture does smell of Siemens rather scraping the barrel!

 

[Class377/5]

Forget Thameslink, the Daily Mail is now worried about the High Speed 2 rolling stock.
http://www.dailymail.co.uk/money/ma...acts-unions-warn-repeat-Thameslink-chaos.html

They've forgot Crossrail or fact the rules have been changed? Or have they just carted out the lies from the announcement that Siemens were preferred bidder to make the story?

That's a clever bit of PR from Siemens!

First of all I don't count things like the pantograph, shoe gear, DRA switch or AWS/TPWS towards what will be manufactured in this country as they are systems required in Britian but not other countries so would be suprised if other countries manufactured them anyway! At a guess the TPWS manufacturing industry is a bit of a niche market! (with the pan and shoes I mean the specific type produced by BW are fairly unique to British trains and wires).

They don't mention the vast majority of materials which I'm sure wont be manufactured in Britian though, although saying that it would be interesting to see how bombardier would have compared with sourcing materials. I have a suspicion that exactly they same things would have been British made and everything else would have come from overseas (possibly the same place Siemens will buy things like the body materials, wheels, motor components, compressor systems etc from).

That picture does smell of Siemens rather scraping the barrel!

A lot of the critics of the deal commons were over lack of UK work so this is a direct shot at them. Scraping the barrel is rather petty comment when there's been a lot of people asking for this information.

Truth is that Bombardier has moved on from this but the press and unions are still twisting it to bash the government to suit their own means. Note that Bombardier have been completely silent and not even tried to show why they should have been picked over Siemens. Fact is it was mentioned pervious that similar amounts of British parts in either the Siemens or Bombardier design.

BTW have a look at the broadcast quality area (user name and password are on page). Shows a Desiro City in a garage (seriously) showing a few destinations starting with Tattenham Corner.

 

[jon0844]

To be fair to Bombardier, and I slate the company a lot due to poor quality control, it is clearly aware that keeping quiet is the best way to potentially securing more work - of which there is plenty if it wants it. Can't say anything bad about that.

That potential work includes refurbishment jobs, which it seems not to want for some reason.

 

[D365]

To be fair to Bombardier, and I slate the company a lot due to poor quality control, it is clearly aware that keeping quiet is the best way to potentially securing more work - of which there is plenty if it wants it. Can't say anything bad about that.

That potential work includes refurbishment jobs, which it seems not to want for some reason.

They are involved with the 317 life-extension programme. Good on the management for keeping schtum now, there is opportunity enough for more work in the future. Squadron refurbishment for the aforementioned class and potentially other fleets is just some of that which Bombardier could compete for.

On the new-build side, which Derby is so famed for, S Stock and the latest 377 builds are in full flow. Derby is gearing up for production of 57 378 MSOs, presumably with several trains being added for the impending Goblin electrification and any service increase. There is the Southern-led 116+140 procurement - although I read a lower number of carriages somewhere here very recently? If these are still to displace 319s on Thameslink, there is little chance of it being anything other than a 377, as there is little point getting a non-standard type in service when Desiro City is looming and the units will need to be at work as quickly as possible. Isn't the 8-strong DV 377/7 build supposed to allow more 377/2s to Thameslink? [Haven't Bombardier been doing 110mph experiments with 379s?]

The 442s should ideally in the future be replaced with units capable of handling both the Gatwick Airport and Brighton/mainline expresses; little chance of them returning to SWT with the Bournemouth electrification conversion and all else, I suppose. And with no doubt will there be plenty more chance for our very own home-bred Bombardier in Derby to win plenty more work.

Oh, and I love how in the Daily Mail article linked by FGE, McLoughlin has pledged to make sure British firms benefit from HS2. Hitachi, the well-established British manufacturer of the "Bullet Train" so popular in Japan, should have a fair shot at rolling stock? Also, I'm liking how the Siemens 700 "infographic" linked earlier only details components made in England...

And yes of course, some companies specialise in parts developed for the British railways, but that hasn't hindered companies like Brecknell Willis from success abroad.

 

[starrymarkb]

Brecknal Willis (in chard) have an impressive export record. The Aclea express in the usa uses their pantos (a joint design with BR) Even the Berlin S-Bahn uses BW shoegear

 

[F Great Eastern]

What I've noticed is that some people are saying it should be ensured that in the next big rolling stock procurement that there is a level playing field to give Bombardier a better chance.

The irony being is what they are arguing for is the exact opposite of what they are saying, since they want a biased contest that is based purely on where the trains are built rather than quality.

Also in my experience some of the people who are moaning about Bombardier not getting the contract, are ones who like to moan about standards of rolling stock not being good enough in this country.

The same people who think we should give a contract to Bombardier no matter what they offer because they are supposedly British and nothing else should be considered.

Although as FCC has shown, no doubt they would blame the franchisee if it all went wrong.

 

[Class377/5]

They are involved with the 317 life-extension programme. Good on the management for keeping schtum now, there is opportunity enough for more work in the future. Squadron refurbishment for the aforementioned class and potentially other fleets is just some of that which Bombardier could compete for.

On the new-build side, which Derby is so famed for, S Stock and the latest 377 builds are in full flow. Derby is gearing up for production of 57 378 MSOs, presumably with several trains being added for the impending Goblin electrification and any service increase. There is the Southern-led 116+140 procurement - although I read a lower number of carriages somewhere here very recently? If these are still to displace 319s on Thameslink, there is little chance of it being anything other than a 377, as there is little point getting a non-standard type in service when Desiro City is looming and the units will need to be at work as quickly as possible. Isn't the 8-strong DV 377/7 build supposed to allow more 377/2s to Thameslink?

The 442s should ideally in the future be replaced with units capable of handling both the Gatwick Airport and Brighton/mainline expresses; little chance of them returning to SWT with the Bournemouth electrification conversion and all else, I suppose. And with no doubt will there be plenty more chance for our very own home-bred Bombardier in Derby to win plenty more work.

Oh, and I love how in the Daily Mail article linked by FGE, McLoughlin has pledged to make sure British firms benefit from HS2. Hitachi, the well-established British manufacturer of the "Bullet Train" so popular in Japan, should have a fair shot at rolling stock? Also, I'm liking how the Siemens 700 "infographic" linked earlier only details components made in England...

The Southern lead order wouldn't be deliveries until 2015. The rolling stock for Manchester is required in December 2014 so its not only a 377 that can release the 319 in time for the later phase. Phase 2 (Dec 14) should be dealt with by the cascade the delivery of the 377/7 cause.

Its still not clear if Southern will actually order the units now. That we may have to wait a few months for.

As for the replacements for the 442, it might make more sense for the Desiro Cities with 1140 DC carriages vs 962 377 carriages.

What the press and union forget is that once Hitachi open their factory, Bombardier's political pressure (not applied applied by itself) will be reduced. They need to step up and produce a better offering.

 

[F Great Eastern]

What the press and union forget is that once Hitachi open their factory, Bombardier's political pressure (not applied applied by itself) will be reduced. They need to step up and produce a better offering.

Completely - There's nothing I'd like to see more than Bombardier making a good competitive offering but recently they haven't done that and the recent stock I've seen by them has not been up to the standard of some of their earlier stuff, that's just my opinion but I honestly think Desiro's are better put together at the moment and that is what Bombardier need to compete with.

Nobody should be a shoe-in for any contract as that just attracts a manufacturer to be complacent, in the knowledge that, "Oh we can rest on our laurels" because of it. A good open tender where the best bidder that makes the best offer wins should keep everyone on their toes and drive innovation and improvements to their products. People seem to think where the trains are being built is the only factor that should be considered.

I'd have thought how well they suit the needs of the work they are going to carry out, the environment for a passenger, the capacity, cost and how durable they are going to be in what is going to be a very intensive environment is going to have to be important, because if any of these areas fell down, and I'm not saying they would with either manufacturer, your average Thameslink commuter would be the first to moan about getting delayed or having a journey from hell.

But with some people it seems, as long as they are made in Derby, they're willing to tolerate anything. Although I'm sure their attitude towards this will change once they are crossing the city. I want a good quality, reliable rail service with good passenger comfort and that serves the needs of the line and the customers that use it. If the trains need to be built in Germany to best achieve that so be it.

 

[Class377/5]

Completely - There's nothing I'd like to see more than Bombardier making a good competitive offering but recently they haven't done that and the recent stock I've seen by them has not been up to the standard of some of their earlier stuff, that's just my opinion but I honestly think Desiro's are better put together at the moment and that is what Bombardier need to compete with.

Nobody should be a shoe-in for any contract as that just attracts a manufacturer to be complacent, in the knowledge that, "Oh we can rest on our laurels" because of it. A good open tender where the best bidder that makes the best offer wins should keep everyone on their toes and drive innovation and improvements to their products. People seem to think where the trains are being built is the only factor that should be considered.

I'd have thought how well they suit the needs of the work they are going to carry out, the environment for a passenger, the capacity, cost and how durable they are going to be in what is going to be a very intensive environment is going to have to be important, because if any of these areas fell down, and I'm not saying they would with either manufacturer, your average Thameslink commuter would be the first to moan about getting delayed or having a journey from hell.

But with some people it seems, as long as they are made in Derby, they're willing to tolerate anything. Although I'm sure their attitude towards this will change once they are crossing the city. I want a good quality, reliable rail service with good passenger comfort and that serves the needs of the line and the customers that use it. If the trains need to be built in Germany to best achieve that so be it.

Very much so. Its less important about where the train is made than how well it performs. What the Derby mob have forgotten in an attempt to force the deal to go to the second choice is all this loss of money in UK and job losses is that by forcing a train that even the manufactures expect to be less reliable/perform worse is the effect on the UK with 1000's of people delayed on a regular basis because the, in this case, second choice Bombardier product did not match or exceed the required standards.

Not to forget they all jumped on financial side but strangely forgot the fact that's as well know that Siemens product won on a blind bid on the technical side too. And to be honest the financial side isn't as important as the technical.

 

[Darren R]

Why has the new stock been designated as Class 700? Apologies if this has already been addressed, but I can't find any reference to it anywhere!

 

[D365]

The Southern lead order wouldn't be deliveries until 2015. The rolling stock for Manchester is required in December 2014 so its not only a 377 that can release the 319 in time for the later phase. Phase 2 (Dec 14) should be dealt with by the cascade the delivery of the 377/7 cause.

What I mean is that, in short, adding another EMU class to the current Thameslink fleet wouldn't make operational sense.

It's still not clear if Southern will actually order the units now. That we may have to wait a few months for.

As for the replacements for the 442, it might make more sense for the Desiro Cities with 1140 DC carriages vs 962 377 carriages.

From what I understand the Thameslink 700 fleet will be operated almost entirely separately from the rest of the "Greater Thameslink" franchise stock with dedicated depots operated by Siemens at Three Bridges and Hornsey. 377 class EMUs will still form a large part of the Southern region non-Thameslink fleet. Still a lot to be finalised, I suppose.

What the press and union forget is that once Hitachi open their factory, Bombardier's political pressure (not applied applied by itself) will be reduced. They need to step up and produce a better offering.

But with some people it seems, as long as they are made in Derby, they're willing to tolerate anything. Although I'm sure their attitude towards this will change once they are crossing the city. I want a good quality, reliable rail service with good passenger comfort and that serves the needs of the line and the customers that use it. If the trains need to be built in Germany to best achieve that so be it.

But what is not so well known through the public (including me, it has seemed) is that although *Star (if we ever even see another Turbostar) and "Movia" underground trains are "assembled in Derby", many parts are sourced now from other countries even where there are British-based companies, sometimes former suppliers themselves, who still fabricate suitable components. I am not going to directly compare with sourcing for the Desiro UK 350/380 but within the industry it seems to be known that Siemens or even Alstom employ more people and do more for apprenticeships in the UK supply chain, both directly and indirectly. Those facts are what the media, and in particular the Daily Mail, conveniently seems to ignore.

 

[Class377/5]

What I mean is that, in short, adding another EMU class to the current Thameslink fleet wouldn't make operational sense.

Not really. Your replacing one completely different fleet (442) with a variant of the 700 which means spares are simpler to arrange.

From what I understand the Thameslink 700 fleet will be operated almost entirely separately from the rest of the "Greater Thameslink" franchise stock with dedicated depots operated by Siemens at Three Bridges and Hornsey. 377 class EMUs will still form a large part of the Southern region non-Thameslink fleet. Still a lot to be finalised, I suppose.

Fair point however Hornsey depot will service 313, 365 and 700 all in one depot (although arrangement aren't final). The 377 will be a big part of the TSGN franchise but don't forget they will be running three difrerent types of operations.

But what is not so well known through the public (including me, it has seemed) is that although *Star (if we ever even see another Turbostar) and "Movia" underground trains are "assembled in Derby", many parts are sourced now from other countries even where there are British-based companies, sometimes former suppliers themselves, who still fabricate suitable components. I am not going to directly compare with sourcing for the Desiro UK 350/380 but within the industry it seems to be known that Siemens or even Alstom employ more people and do more for apprenticeships in the UK supply chain, both directly and indirectly. Those facts are what the media, and in particular the Daily Mail, conveniently seems to ignore.

Very true. There is too much focus on temporary jobs where as long term parts creates long term jobs. Far better to create jobs over a 30 year span than jobs over a two-three year span. Part of Derby's problem is this all or nothing ordering the UK does. If Bombardier started to look at its fleet long term like Siemens does, then it will create long term jobs that I'd agree have more worth than a few years worth of work.

Personally the best way to end the Siemens vs Bombardier debate is for Bombardier to win the Crossrail fleet and we can compare the 24tph ATO in Core between the two and see what is truly better.

 

[D365]

Why has the new stock been designated as Class 700? Apologies if this has already been addressed, but I can't find any reference to it anywhere!

There have been several threads discussing it here.This is the first official document (P18) which I saw detailing the new designation, and this has now been written into the relevant Wikipedia article. Why, I believe it is because the Thameslink/Crossrail EMUs are the first mainline trains in the UK to feature ATO. Why is the Crossrail train still known as Class 345, this number was chosen before this new designation system was devised. Our fellow user 375/5 should know more.

 

[A-driver]

Fair point however Hornsey depot will service 313, 365 and 700 all in one depot (although arrangement aren't final). The 377 will be a big part of the TSGN franchise but don't forget they will be running three difrerent types of operations.

No, it won't. The Siemens depot at Hornsey will be a different facility. It won't touch non Siemens stock and the 'old' depot won't touch the newer stock, similar to Bedford which has dedicated facilities for 377s and sidings for 319s.

The only link between the 2 depots will be that they will (for now) be the same franchise and coincidentally the location is very close. If the non TL GN services go to another franchise then the old Hornsey depot would also move to the other company.

 

[D365]

Not really. Your replacing one completely different fleet (442) with a variant of the 700 which means spares are simpler to arrange.

So if and when the 442 'express' fleet is slated for replacement, DfT/TSGN could go to Siemens and ask them to provide rolling stock for BML express. They would build a 700/variant batch for this job and presumably base it at Three Bridges. Have I understood that correctly, and is that all possible?

Personally the best way to end the Siemens vs Bombardier debate is for Bombardier to win the Crossrail fleet and we can compare the 24tph ATO in Core between the two and see what is truly better.

Amen, I suppose!

No, it won't. The Siemens depot at Hornsey will be a different facility. It won't touch non-Siemens stock [700] and the 'old' depot won't touch the newer stock, similar to Bedford which has dedicated facilities for 377s and sidings for 319s.

The only link between the 2 depots will be that they will (for now) be the same franchise and coincidentally the location is very close. If the non TL GN services go to another franchise then the old Hornsey depot would also move to the other company.

Construction is well underway, although I haven't remembered whether it is north/south [country/city end] from the current depot.

 

[Class377/5]

No, it won't. The Siemens depot at Hornsey will be a different facility. It won't touch non Siemens stock and the 'old' depot won't touch the newer stock, similar to Bedford which has dedicated facilities for 377s and sidings for 319s.

The only link between the 2 depots will be that they will (for now) be the same franchise and coincidentally the location is very close. If the non TL GN services go to another franchise then the old Hornsey depot would also move to the other company.

The final decisions haven't been made over Hornsey, unless someone made a decision and not told ops.

So if and when the 442 'express' fleet is slated for replacement, DfT/TSGN could go to Siemens and ask them to provide rolling stock for BML express. They would build a 700/variant batch for this job and presumably base it at Three Bridges. Have I understood that correctly, and is that all possible?

Amen, I suppose!

Construction is well underway, although I haven't remembered whether it is north or south from the current depot.

Yes Siemens could build a new fleet for Gatwick if they wanted to. But that's a maybe but there are various ways it could go. Don't forget the Desiro City design is muted for SWT and one day could go to LM and TPE.

The new depot is to the north although some works at the country end of the depot.

 

[A-driver]

The final decisions haven't been made over Hornsey, unless someone made a decision and not told ops.

Why would ops be told? It dosnt concern them as they may not have the franchise when it opens.

Plus the depots are a long way apart. It is a purpose built depot for the new trains-designed to wash, tank and maintain them. They won't be putting old stock in there as its not big enough and the purpose built facilities won't be able to support other types of trains.

The existing depot with its shed will remain and serve the remainder of the fleet as it is configured to work with those trains. I think you have misunderstood the geography and layout of Hornsey. The new shed being built is a fair distance from the depot (I have walked it and its further than you think!) and certainly not an 'extension' of the current yard and as I say, apart from the location being next door to Hornsey (and this is coincidence more than anything as its a convenient location with land available and close to the core-there is no reason it wouldn't have been built at west Hampstead or somewhere like that if there was available land) it is completely unlinked to the existing Hornsey TMD. It will be managed and staffed separately and only serve the trains it is built to, exactly the same as three bridges won't have anything to do with 377, 442, 455 etc.

 

[A-driver]

The new depot is to the north although some works at the country end of the depot.

Again not quite true (sorry to keep picking up on what you say but you are presenting as hard facts things which arnt quite true or which you have read/heard and misunderstood).

The new depot is to the north, basically in the gap between Hornsey and bounds green. No works are going on to the south of the depot, the only work being down is the they have removed A,B&C roads from Hornsey depot to run a line over that ground with the wash plant on to provide access into the new depot. The head shunt and arrival roads to the south and the harringay reversal line will remain unchanged. The only difference will be that when you drive into Hornsey depot there will be a set of points by the entrance to arrival road 1 which will either take you into the original Hornsey yard or round to the new depot.

 

[Starmill]

Thank goodness for that! Now to get the damn things delivered...

 

[YorkshireBear]

Personally the best way to end the Siemens vs Bombardier debate is for Bombardier to win the Crossrail fleet and we can compare the 24tph ATO in Core between the two and see what is truly better.

Then bombardier will win because imho crossrail will be far more reliable from an infrastructure perspective.

 

[43074]

Personally the best way to end the Siemens vs Bombardier debate is for Bombardier to win the Crossrail fleet and we can compare the 24tph ATO in Core between the two and see what is truly better.

Would the Bombardier trains be compatible with the Crossrail ATO signalling equipment which is to be provided by a Siemens/Invensys consortium?

 

[gordonthemoron]

I presume the ATO is similar to that used on the Munich S-Bahn tunnel, I think some of the S-Bahn trains were built by Adtranz which was taken over by Bombardier so I would have thought they'd be OK

 

[D365]

I presume the ATO is similar to that used on the Munich S-Bahn tunnel, I think some of the S-Bahn trains were built by Adtranz which was taken over by Bombardier so I would have thought they'd be OK

I don't think you can draw many parallels, if any, with other systems such as that. The German equivalent to ATO is LZB, which is used throughout the Münich U-Bahn (underground) and the S-Bahn Stammstrecke (core, Pasing-Ostbahnhof). The DBAG 423 was built by a partnership of the companies which ended up being Bombardier and Alstom and can be considered a millenium version of the 420. Hardly related to any contemporary British products, if at all.

Surely that would be the most ridiculous thing, if at all permissible or even possible, to engineer it so that your signalling is only compatible with your rolling stock. The infrastructure and rolling stock businesses of a company, I think, typically operate separately though, as I remember Bombardier taking over SSL signalling after the collapse of Metronet and having to rewire the S8 stock despite it being signalling of the same company...

Someone (377/5, A-Driver and co) will come along and explain all better than me!

 

[Class377/5]

Why would ops be told? It dosnt concern them as they may not have the franchise when it opens.

Plus the depots are a long way apart. It is a purpose built depot for the new trains-designed to wash, tank and maintain them. They won't be putting old stock in there as its not big enough and the purpose built facilities won't be able to support other types of trains.

The existing depot with its shed will remain and serve the remainder of the fleet as it is configured to work with those trains. I think you have misunderstood the geography and layout of Hornsey. The new shed being built is a fair distance from the depot (I have walked it and its further than you think!) and certainly not an 'extension' of the current yard and as I say, apart from the location being next door to Hornsey (and this is coincidence more than anything as its a convenient location with land available and close to the core-there is no reason it wouldn't have been built at west Hampstead or somewhere like that if there was available land) it is completely unlinked to the existing Hornsey TMD. It will be managed and staffed separately and only serve the trains it is built to, exactly the same as three bridges won't have anything to do with 377, 442, 455 etc.

You do realise the ops side will be there post franchise just as much as fleet will be? You don't replace whole departments with franchise change you know. Don't think the distance between the depots isn't that far, especially they the areas of both touch.

Actually the location is not just coincidence but was chosen as there needs to be a depot on the GN side for the fleet with the newly expanded Cricklewood serving MML and Three Bridges servicing BML in case of a Core closure so you don't know the reasoning as well as seem to think you do.

As I've said before the final decisions over the future have yet to be made, Caldwell is a good example of this as the long term plan is closure but nothing been said about when or how. Quite frankly its too early to say for sure as there is still time for things to change.

Again not quite true (sorry to keep picking up on what you say but you are presenting as hard facts things which arnt quite true or which you have read/heard and misunderstood).

The new depot is to the north, basically in the gap between Hornsey and bounds green. No works are going on to the south of the depot, the only work being down is the they have removed A,B&C roads from Hornsey depot to run a line over that ground with the wash plant on to provide access into the new depot. The head shunt and arrival roads to the south and the harringay reversal line will remain unchanged. The only difference will be that when you drive into Hornsey depot there will be a set of points by the entrance to arrival road 1 which will either take you into the original Hornsey yard or round to the new depot.

I know where the works are, I was there last week. I just haven't been given the latest layout of it. Not a case of what I've misunderstood but what's been stated. I never said work south of Hornsey depot by the way, said county end of the current depot, seems you confused my comment yet talk about that location.

Then bombardier will win because imho crossrail will be far more reliable from an infrastructure perspective.

Why do you think that?

 

[W230]

Why has the new stock been designated as Class 700? Apologies if this has already been addressed, but I can't find any reference to it anywhere!

I'm wondering if it's because it will be capable of ATO?

Though I seem to think that Crossrail units will be ATO also and I'm sure someone said they will have a 3XX class number?

EDIT: Oops someone replied to that earlier.