Stagecoach tender for new rolling stock for franchise bids

[fgwrich]

Yes, here is how the CAF Civity UK could look.

http://www.caf.es/en/productos-servicios/familia/civity/descripcion/solucion-integral.php

Interesting that the UK Spec image seems to have an interior spec near to First Groups colours and a destination of Birmingham New Street - Could First be (or in the case of the failed FWC bid been) talking to CAF for some UK Spec Civity's I wonder? It actually looks rather good, and knowing how well the other UK & NI Spec CAFs are, would rather welcome a further fleet from CAF in this country. As an aside, you'd hardly feel claustrophobic in a UK CAF, the ceilings over the main compartments are surprisingly very very high!

 

[Class377/5]

For the SWT's one if Siemens do put a tender in will it likely be a mix of Desiro Cities and dc versions of class 380s?

You realise that the 380 is a Desiro City body with a Desiro UK traction package right?

 

[Mikey C]

Lot 5 — South Eastern Franchise.

Supply of a fleet of new build electric rolling stock for operation on commuter heavy rail passenger routes. The rolling stock will use the 750 V DC third rail system. Units will be in formations of 80-100 metres and the quantity will range between 50 and 100 units.

Checking Wikipedia, there are currently 147 sets of 4 car 465s and 43 sets of 2 car 466s.
There are also 36 5 car 376s.
I assume this would start to replace some 465s, maybe the GEC units?

 

[RobShipway]

http://www.caf.es/en/productos-servicios/familia/civity/descripcion/solucion-integral.php

Interesting that the UK Spec image seems to have an interior spec near to First Groups colours and a destination of Birmingham New Street - Could First be (or in the case of the failed FWC bid been) talking to CAF for some UK Spec Civity's I wonder? It actually looks rather good, and knowing how well the other UK & NI Spec CAFs are, would rather welcome a further fleet from CAF in this country. As an aside, you'd hardly feel claustrophobic in a UK CAF, the ceilings over the main compartments are surprisingly very very high!

Both the class 332's and Class 333 trains have been very good trains since they went into service. Even though the class 332's and 333's are CAF built Siemens trains, I expecting that the CAF Civity to be as good as these trains.

I suspect if a deal is signed with CAF for these trains to end up in the West Midlands, hence why I think that in the image of first class on these trains it is showing the destination of Birmingham New Street. I am also suspecting that the CAF trains will be 4 or 5 cars per train and replace the class 323's on the Cross City route with 3+2 seating.

 

[tbtc]

Why can't they be another manufacturer's 8 X 23m train? Is AT300 the automatic solution to every requirement suddenly?

Well, that or "a Penryn-style passing loop" / "what they do in the Netherlands/ Germany/ Switzerland" / "442s"

(saying that, I've not seen Penryn mentioned for a couple of weeks - has it fallen from grace so soon?)

But 184m is 8x 23m so everyone else has products too...

It seems a good length to build infrastructure to - roughly 9x20 / 8x 23/ 7x26 - and a nice vague thing to tender for (since it gives manufacturers some flexibility over what length of vehicle to offer).

Why? It's inconceivable that anyone's going to go for all-new loco+stock or power cars+stock for these operations

Agreed.

We need to accept that loco haulage isn't coming back.

For example, ScotRail managed to round up some locos/ coaches at fairly short notice - these had been "spare" for years - yet (despite the regular enthusiast mantra that "Chiltern love loco haulage") Chiltern preferred to take the nine TPE 170s - if they wanted carriages they could have had these redundant coaches years ago (without upsetting any existing TOCs).

:its back and waits for "solutions" that involve using 91s into the 2030s::

 

[Bletchleyite]

Interesting that the UK Spec image seems to have an interior spec near to First Groups colours and a destination of Birmingham New Street - Could First be (or in the case of the failed FWC bid been) talking to CAF for some UK Spec Civity's I wonder? It actually looks rather good, and knowing how well the other UK & NI Spec CAFs are, would rather welcome a further fleet from CAF in this country. As an aside, you'd hardly feel claustrophobic in a UK CAF, the ceilings over the main compartments are surprisingly very very high!

Possibly so - but equally given that the Civity Nordic is shown in DB Regio livery I wouldn't read too much into it!

The First Class interior does look nice, but that doesn't prove a lot - you can fit posh seats in any train, even a Pacer if you really wanted to.

 

[Peter Mugridge]

Lot 2 — Intercity West Coast Franchise.

Supply of a fleet of new build electric and self-powered rolling stock for operation on long distance heavy rail passenger routes. For operation on electrified routes, the rolling stock will use the 25 kV AC overhead line system. It is anticipated that there will be two sub-lots for rolling stock units in differing configurations appropriate to service requirements/routes. Units will be in formations of 120 metres and 255 metres in length and the quantity will range between 20 and 50 units.

Contract value anticipated to be between GBP 250 000 000 —GBP 1 250 000 000.

Up to 50 units of up to the same length as an 11 car 390? Interesting... 50 is not enough to replace the 390s and is far too many to simply supplement them.

It is also worded in such a way as to imply the use of bi-mode which suggests the 221s would be on the transfer list. 120 metres is pretty much equal to the length of a 221.

So I read this as saying the minimum order would be for 20 at 120m which would be bi-modes to replace the 221s; that's clearly a direct replacement as there are currently that many in the WCML fleet. Those 20 would be sorely needed to boost capacity on XC wouldn't they?

The remaining "up to 30" - well... the maths is interesting, is it not? Since it's too many to supplement the existing fleet and only half as many as needed to do a replacement, my thoughts are that part of this is to ease pressure on the fleet and part of it will allow Liverpool to be moved up to at least half hourly at last, a few more service boosts elsewhere and the rest for new destinations - and there's not a lot of places that could be thought of as likely to gain a WCML service are there?

Very interesting times ahead?

 

[TRAX]

You realise that the 380 is a Desiro City body with a Desiro UK traction package right?

In what sense ?

 

[The Ham]

Up to 50 units of up to the same length as an 11 car 390? Interesting... 50 is not enough to replace the 390s and is far too many to simply supplement them.

It is also worded in such a way as to imply the use of bi-mode which suggests the 221s would be on the transfer list. 120 metres is pretty much equal to the length of a 221.

So I read this as saying the minimum order would be for 20 at 120m which would be bi-modes to replace the 221s; that's clearly a direct replacement as there are currently that many in the WCML fleet. Those 20 would be sorely needed to boost capacity on XC wouldn't they?

The remaining "up to 30" - well... the maths is interesting, is it not? Since it's too many to supplement the existing fleet and only half as many as needed to do a replacement, my thoughts are that part of this is to ease pressure on the fleet and part of it will allow Liverpool to be moved up to at least half hourly at last, a few more service boosts elsewhere and the rest for new destinations - and there's not a lot of places that could be thought of as likely to gain a WCML service are there?

Very interesting times ahead?

Some (possibly) relevant questions.

By replacing some trains with non tilting trains are there any existing services which wouldn't suffer a time penalty? Just as Stagecoach could be thinking if there are why are we passing higher than needed track access charges and could we use trains which don't need to be smaller as we don't need to narrow then to allow for tilt.

Although there are limited extra places that they could serve, there is a question of "if they assume for every possible option what extra number of units could we do with (pluss a few for rounding up to the next 10)?"

Likewise there could be an element of what if we need to get all these extra units as the shorter unit lengths how many would we need? As if the new units are all 5 coach units, and there would be a need for mostly double running of all of them rather than using single (longer) units, then there would be need for more of them.

--- old post above --- --- new post below ---

On an aside on XC capacity could be significantly enhanced with some new EMU's and the ICWC 221's (note this is from the thread about scrapping units and I was assuming that a number of end coaches would need to be scrapped to achieve this, if no scrapping of end coaches were to happen then there could be more capacity):

http://www.railforums.co.uk/showthread.php?p=2385212&highlight=XC+EMU+ICWC#post2385212

If XC get 10 EMU's for south coast to Manchester and some 221's from ICWC then it would be possible to covert all the 4 coach 220's into a mixture of 6 and 7 coach trains (8 sets of 7 and 7 sets of 6 or 12 sets of 7 and 2 sets if 6). Although there could be a good case made for keeping some 220's with 4 coaches to be used as crowd busters in the core by being paired with other units.

A 7 coach set would (assuming that each end coach was first class, although it could be configured difficultly and still be the same) would result in a train with 95% of the capacity of a pair of 220's.

That would mean that XC could end up with:
12 x 6 or 7 coach EMU's (replacing 221's)
12 x 7 coach 220's (replacing 221's)
2 x 6 coach 220's (one spare and one which replaces a 220)
33 x 5 coach 221's (23 from XC and 10 from ICWC, replacing all bar one of the 220's)

The remaining 10 sets of 221's could then be reformed into 4 sets with 9 coaches (with one spare coach and one coach lengthening the one 4 coach 221 to be 5 coaches long. That would almost replace the XC HST's. Although with the much longer sets (bearing in mind that the rest of the XC fleet has more capacity so they are in less demand).

In summary, with just Voyagers and 12 new build EMU's XC could see a significant increase in capacity over the existing (without increasing the total number of units by many) including some sets which are running permanently with nearly the same capacity as a pair of 220's and with nearly enough 221's to replace every service run by 220's (bearing in mind less will need to run paired up) with the remaining 220 replaced by a 6 coach 220. That is without ANY 222's.

 

[Haydn1971]

Up to 50 units of up to the same length as an 11 car 390? Interesting... 50 is not enough to replace the 390s and is far too many to simply supplement them.

I'm reading the WCML requirement to be vague grouping phrase for the CrossCountry fleet, which by Nov 2019 when the franchise renews will be getting on for 20 years old.

We are often blinded by the continued deployment of the HST's, into thinking that 30+ years is normal, but look overseas to Japan in particular and they are quite happy to replace 20 year old trains. Looking back to when the Voyager fleet were introduced, most of us didn't have mobile data, we lugged around huge heavy laptops, talk of having an hours commute was insane in the north and the growth expectations were pretty grim. Fast forward to Nov 2019 and it's clear that a too small fleet of 4/5 carriage trains won't be good enough to carry forwards. Having said that, I'd like to see fleet expansion on CrossCountry well before a post franchise order, which could be 2021 by the time new trains hit routes - another five years of CrossCountry crush loading is a dreadful thought.

I've said this before, I'm expecting to see the 220/221/222 fleets repurposed, either as refurbished 7-10 car fleets or perhaps a bit out the box, re-engineered as 90/100mph capable 156/158 replacements (derated power, seats in the whole of the driving cars, fitted out for regional use) - however this is looking increasing less likely given the new fleet orders and notices buzzing around.

 

[SpacePhoenix]

What are Siemens tendering for? They'll be bidding for the contract, no?

The Desiro City (and Verve?) is a replacement for the Desiro 'UK' which is no longer compliant. Unlike Bombardier, who seem to always have another few batches of 'Electrostars' up their sleeve

You realise that the 380 is a Desiro City body with a Desiro UK traction package right?

I do realize that it's basically the same as the (apart from the open ends in the passenger saloons), not sure if DAB_Move realizes

 

[D365]

I do realize that it's basically the same as the (apart from the open ends in the passenger saloons), not sure if DAB_Move realizes

How do you mean, I don't realise? By 'Desiro UK' I was referring to Classes 350, 360, 380, 444 and 450, i.e. everything built before Class 700. Same story for the 'Electrostar' moniker; everything built before Class 345.

 

[swt_passenger]

Well, that or "a Penryn-style passing loop"

Must admit to having forgotten that one...

 

[northwichcat]

The word "tilting" is notably missing from the ICWC spec.
Some diesel working also seems to be anticipated, ie bi-modes, not hauled EMUs.
Early days, bids not due for 12 months or so.

First's bid last time was to use brand new non-tilting stock on Birmingham-Scotland services (they weren't proposing joining up London-Birmingham and Birmingham-Scotland) and really if LM can use 350s between Birmingham and Liverpool and TPE can use 350s between Wigan and Scotland, why not non-tilting stock on Birmingham to Scotland?
--- old post above --- --- new post below ---
The thing I find most interesting overall is they've kept the door open for both new DMUs and EMUs for most franchises which use both. However, for EMT they've not kept the door open for new DMUs. Does that mean EMT are expecting to get something modern released by another franchise - maybe the 185s?
--- old post above --- --- new post below ---

The option for EMU's in this franchise is interesting with Northerns 323's going off lease and potentially TPE 350/4's I would have thought that the West Midlands franchise EMU needs were sorted. The 70m units would be 3x23m DMU's or EMU's if Stagecoach are looking at 323 replacement.

I can't understand the LM one, especially considering the franchise prospectus mentions making the 350/2s 110mph compatible to improve journey times, suggesting they will stay on WCML services.

I would have thought the most sensible new electric order for LM would be longer more Intercity style trains for their long distance routes but the spec mentions 80m trains.

 

[Haydn1971]

However, for EMT they've not kept the door open for new DMUs. Does that mean EMT are expecting to get something modern released by another franchise - maybe the 185s?

185's would make sense on the Liverpool-Norwich service given their hill climb abilities. That would give some scope for cascading the 15x fleets initially, but surely the 15x fleet couldn't be expected to see the next franchise out (circa 2027 ?) which would make them nearly 40 years old.

The recent Arriva announcement of the 2/3 car DMU's highlights potential way forward, in that these could be cascaded into replacing the aged 15x fleets across the country as the Northern fleet gets to a point where 3/4 car units start becoming a necessity across the north towards the end of the 2020's

 

[Mikey C]

Lot 2 — Intercity West Coast Franchise.

Supply of a fleet of new build electric and self-powered rolling stock for operation on long distance heavy rail passenger routes. For operation on electrified routes, the rolling stock will use the 25 kV AC overhead line system. It is anticipated that there will be two sub-lots for rolling stock units in differing configurations appropriate to service requirements/routes. Units will be in formations of 120 metres and 255 metres in length and the quantity will range between 20 and 50 units.

Incidentally why are Stagecoach tendering for the WCML, when currently they are the minority party, owning 49% of Virgin Trains? For the next franchise, are they planning more of an ECML arrangement where they use the Virgin name, but have overall control?

 

[RobShipway]

I'm reading the WCML requirement to be vague grouping phrase for the CrossCountry fleet, which by Nov 2019 when the franchise renews will be getting on for 20 years old.

We are often blinded by the continued deployment of the HST's, into thinking that 30+ years is normal, but look overseas to Japan in particular and they are quite happy to replace 20 year old trains. Looking back to when the Voyager fleet were introduced, most of us didn't have mobile data, we lugged around huge heavy laptops, talk of having an hours commute was insane in the north and the growth expectations were pretty grim. Fast forward to Nov 2019 and it's clear that a too small fleet of 4/5 carriage trains won't be good enough to carry forwards. Having said that, I'd like to see fleet expansion on CrossCountry well before a post franchise order, which could be 2021 by the time new trains hit routes - another five years of CrossCountry crush loading is a dreadful thought.

I've said this before, I'm expecting to see the 220/221/222 fleets repurposed, either as refurbished 7-10 car fleets or perhaps a bit out the box, re-engineered as 90/100mph capable 156/158 replacements (derated power, seats in the whole of the driving cars, fitted out for regional use) - however this is looking increasing less likely given the new fleet orders and notices buzzing around.

I think that the WCML is meaning to be Cross Country as well and presuming that there is going to be some sort of IEP EDMU replacement for the XC class 220/221's in the near future, which could mean that the 220/221's replace class 156/158/159 trains if re - engineered to have a maximum speed of 110mph.

 

[ScotGG]

You could create a 2 car for quieter lines, like the Isle of Sheppey, Bromley North - Grove Park lines and the Medway valley via Maidstone West/Barracks which during the day is pretty quiet and not worthy of a 4 car set.

It also gives the flexibility to a 2 car set to an 8, where a 12 car isn't quite justified, but a 10 car is.

The Southeastern branch lines could retain some older stock which have 20 years life in them? The tender does also state 'commuter heavy rail passenger routes' which make me think of the lines to Gillingham, Dartford, Hayes and Sevenoaks, rather than branches.

10 cars are already inadequate for many services, hence much money spent the past 5 years by NR on extending platforms and upgrading power for 12-cars, yet hardly any 12-car services can run as SE lack stock. Given the trains will prbably serve for 30-40 years, and current and projected housing and population levels, 200m trains would surely be incredibly short sighted.

 

[swt_passenger]

Incidentally why are Stagecoach tendering for the WCML, when currently they are the minority party, owning 49% of Virgin Trains? For the next franchise, are they planning more of an ECML arrangement where they use the Virgin name, but have overall control?

Why would Virgin bother when they can delegate to Stagecoach? Exact percentages not withstanding, Stagecoach have always done the donkey work on the WCML, and Virgin do the PR and take the plaudits...

--- old post above --- --- new post below ---

I think that the WCML is meaning to be Cross Country as well ...

Why ever would you think that? They are completely separate franchises, I'm sure if Stagecoach were referring to XC they would say so explicitly.

 

[ScotGG]

But surely a frequency increase needs more trains?

There will be no frequency increase for Southeastern after London bridge works are finished. It only increases Thameslink frequencies. It's even possible SE will see a reduction.

 

[edwin_m]

185's would make sense on the Liverpool-Norwich service given their hill climb abilities.

However they aren't allowed to use the differential speed restrictions that 158s can, which means that despite their better performance the end-to-end timings on the Hope Valley are similar and they would lose out big time east of Ely where the non-Sprinter speeds are much lower. Also the lack of end gangways would be a problem as these will need to be 6-car in the future and possibly still split/join at Nottingham. This can obviously be sorted out - at a cost. It's actually difficult to think of anything that suits this route better than the 158s that are used today.

185s would be ideal for something like the Nottingham-Leeds service, where (I think) there are no Sprinter differentials. The quicker route via Wakefield Westgate should attract more passengers and the 100mph top speed and better acceleration would help with fitting between other trains on this busy section. However, without wading through dozens of pages of the Northern thread, I think this route is earmarked for new DMUs.

 

[RobShipway]

Why would Virgin bother when they can delegate to Stagecoach? Exact percentages not withstanding, Stagecoach have always done the donkey work on the WCML, and Virgin do the PR and take the plaudits...

--- old post above --- --- new post below ---



Why ever would you think that? They are completely separate franchises, I'm sure if Stagecoach were referring to XC they would say so explicitly.

Take note of the comment:

Supply of a fleet of new build electric and self-powered rolling stock for operation on long distance heavy rail passenger routes. For operation on electrified routes, the rolling stock will use the 25 kV AC overhead line system. It is anticipated that there will be two sub-lots for rolling stock units in differing configurations appropriate to service requirements/routes. Units will be in formations of 120 metres and 255 metres in length and the quantity will range between 20 and 50 units.
-----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
The majority of class 390's have only recently been extended and I cannot see those being replaced.

Virgin currently has 20 Class 221's, so if the order is for 20 units, then I can see 221's being replaced.

However if the order was for 50 units, then that is going some way to replacing 50% of the XC fleet of Voyagers plus the 20 units that Virgin currently use.

The only other requirement for the ICWC franchise to be ordering 50 units, is if they are going to be taking back doing the Birmingham - Scotland services from TPE.

 

[AndyW33]

Take note of the comment:
The only other requirement for the ICWC franchise to be ordering 50 units, is if they are going to be taking back doing the Birmingham - Scotland services from TPE.

Did you mean Manchester-Scotland? Birmingham - Scotland is already covered by ICWC.

 

[northwichcat]

However they aren't allowed to use the differential speed restrictions that 158s can, which means that despite their better performance the end-to-end timings on the Hope Valley are similar and they would lose out big time east of Ely where the non-Sprinter speeds are much lower. Also the lack of end gangways would be a problem as these will need to be 6-car in the future and possibly still split/join at Nottingham. This can obviously be sorted out - at a cost. It's actually difficult to think of anything that suits this route better than the 158s that are used today.

185s would be ideal for something like the Nottingham-Leeds service, where (I think) there are no Sprinter differentials. The quicker route via Wakefield Westgate should attract more passengers and the 100mph top speed and better acceleration would help with fitting between other trains on this busy section. However, without wading through dozens of pages of the Northern thread, I think this route is earmarked for new DMUs.

DfT looked at splitting Liverpool-Norwich at Nottingham and giving the western part to TPE to run but with objections and delays to North TPE wiring they decided to not take that forward 'at the current time.'

There's also been suggestions Liverpool-Norwich could be diverted to Cambridge or/and that Nottingham-Norwich could be tagged on to the Northern service to Nottingham to keep through services.

You are correct that Nottingham-Leeds will get new DMUs, it will also be re-routed via Wakefield Westgate and extended to Bradford. The Lincoln-Sheffield service will be extended to Leeds via Barnsley to plug the void.

 

[swt_passenger]

The only other requirement for the ICWC franchise to be ordering 50 units, is if they are going to be taking back doing the Birmingham - Scotland services from TPE.

They already run those services though, did you mean Manchester - Scotland? No, couldn't have been, it is clear already that they are staying with TPE.

Whatever reasoning you come up with, I don't you'll convince anyone that Stagecoach's list, neatly divided into those 5 sections for the 5 named franchise areas, has anything whatsoever to do with XC.

If you go back and look at any previous Stagecoach or SWT tenders for stock, the number ranges shown are nearly always on the high side - often twice what they actually end up ordering...

 

[Goldfish62]

The Wessex route study recommends the opposite though, with more 450 type stock running in 12 car formation to provide maximum capacity (with 2+3 seats too) on the main routes.

That's only a Network Rail suggestion for increasing capacity. It's not binding in any shape or form, unless it's mandatory in the the forthcoming ITT.

 

[Haydn1971]

Why ever would you think that? They are completely separate franchises, I'm sure if Stagecoach were referring to XC they would say so explicitly.

Because XC run on the WCML and lines linked to the WCML - The other four operate within a specific geographic area, XC does not

 

[RobShipway]

They already run those services though, did you mean Manchester - Scotland? No, couldn't have been, it is clear already that they are staying with TPE.

Whatever reasoning you come up with, I don't you'll convince anyone that Stagecoach's list, neatly divided into those 5 sections for the 5 named franchise areas, has anything whatsoever to do with XC.

If you go back and look at any previous Stagecoach or SWT tenders for stock, the number ranges shown are nearly always on the high side - often twice what they actually end up ordering...

Sorry, yes I did mean Manchester - Scotland.

 

[Haydn1971]

However they aren't allowed to use the differential speed restrictions that 158s can, which means that despite their better performance the end-to-end timings on the Hope Valley are similar and they would lose out big time east of Ely where the non-Sprinter speeds are much lower.

Could anything be done to "fix" the differential problem ?

Also the lack of end gangways would be a problem as these will need to be 6-car in the future and possibly still split/join at Nottingham. This can obviously be sorted out - at a cost. It's actually difficult to think of anything that suits this route better than the 158s that are used today.

Although I'm one of the biggest critics of the Northern fleet, including the 158's, the EMT 158's are a step change better - just goes to show what some new seats, improved lighting and a heating/ventilation system that sorta works can do. Is there anything actually better than a well refurbished 158 ?

185s would be ideal for something like the Nottingham-Leeds service, where (I think) there are no Sprinter differentials. The quicker route via Wakefield Westgate should attract more passengers and the 100mph top speed and better acceleration would help with fitting between other trains on this busy section. However, without wading through dozens of pages of the Northern thread, I think this route is earmarked for new DMUs.

I seem to recall the word "new" rather than "brand new" was used, which be 185's - however, hopefully not as a three car unit !

 

[Bletchleyite]

The EMT ones are good, but the ATW ones are even better - more tables (but not too many) and a better seat pitch. Otherwise very similar, same seats at least. It would surprise me if Arriva didn't do the Northern ones the same.