TPE franchise awarded to First

[87015]

That would not surprise me in the slightest if true. I'm sure the DFT would rather stick needles in their eyes than admit a deal they negotiated is way more expensive than one a private company has negotiated.

It's not exactly a surprise that a follow on order is cheaper than the main batch that effectively has prototype costs as well.

 

[coppercapped]

That would not surprise me in the slightest if true. I'm sure the DFT would rather stick needles in their eyes than admit a deal they negotiated is way more expensive than one a private company has negotiated.

Nonsense. fGW (aka 'GWR') has already ordered a batch of AT300s from Hitachi and financed by Eversholt with not a squawk from Horseferry Road. The conditions are different:

• the structure of the IEP was set up during the George Brown's emphasis on PFI/PPP programmes as a way for the state to acquire assets without having to stump up the capital
• the DfT's contract with Agility Trains is for Train Service Provision which is paid on a basis of fulfilled diagrams. It covers, among other things, those items listed below but excludes fuel and staffing costs
• it includes the cost of three maintenance depots
• it includes the cost of the capital borrowed to cover the costs of the programme until the first trains enter service
• the Eversholt deal covers the capital costs of the rolling stock only. Maintenance, cleaning, fuel and staffing are separately billed.

And I fail to understand why so many people who post on this forum see Machiavelian motives behind the decisions which the DfT - or any other body or organisation - makes. Institutions don't work like that, there is no such thing as 'corporate memory'. Grudges are carried by individuals and have little or no part to play in business relationships.

 

[Haydn1971]

And I fail to understand why so many people who post on this forum see Machiavelian motives behind the decisions which the DfT - or any other body or organisation - makes. Institutions don't work like that, there is no such thing as 'corporate memory'. Grudges are carried by individuals and have little or no part to play in business relationships.

Fully agree with your post, although I do have a feeling that the IEP programme bankrolled the AT300's introduction to a degree, which in my eyes is a good thing, we've now got a well developed long term solution to medium to long distance trains that's flexible enough to swap between diesel, electric and bi-mode with the quick trip to the depot, has limp home mode to help with some OHLE problems (not all), can be made locally and will be available for the next decade for TOC's to buy into - that's good news for passengers in the future, as more AT300's will hit the network over the next decade.

 

[43096]

Fully agree with your post, although I do have a feeling that the IEP programme bankrolled the AT300's introduction to a degree, which in my eyes is a good thing, we've now got a well developed long term solution to medium to long distance trains that's flexible enough to swap between diesel, electric and bi-mode with the quick trip to the depot, has limp home mode to help with some OHLE problems (not all), can be made locally and will be available for the next decade for TOC's to buy into - that's good news for passengers in the future, as more AT300's will hit the network over the next decade.

Really? InterCity trains should not have engines under the floor; they should be in a separate loco/power car. If you don't believe me, try comparing the interior noise in a Mark 3 and a Voyager.

 

[Bletchleyite]

Really? InterCity trains should not have engines under the floor; they should be in a separate loco/power car. If you don't believe me, try comparing the interior noise in a Mark 3 and a Voyager.

Voyager engine noise is no louder than Mk1 track noise. You could pick a far better example of a noisy DMU

 

[Class 170101]

Really? InterCity trains should not have engines under the floor; they should be in a separate loco/power car. If you don't believe me, try comparing the interior noise in a Mark 3 and a Voyager.

Engines under the floor are better though in terms of passenger carrying capacity as an extra carriage is created with the appropriate increase in seat numbers and dare I say it passenger stading space. The railway isn't run for loco bashers.

 

[Haydn1971]

Really? InterCity trains should not have engines under the floor; they should be in a separate loco/power car.

Oh, must have missed that dictate from the loco hauled appreciation society !

If you don't believe me, try comparing the interior noise in a Mark 3 and a Voyager.

Noise is just one aspect of a train, personally, distributed traction, plus a the gain of a carriage worth of seats kinda tilts the balance for me, plus the killer benefit of distributed traction, is that there is less strain on the track structure, which translates to less maintenance, which means lower network infrastructure costs and less rail worker risk exposure to danger whilst out maintaining track - simples !

 

[Dave1987]

Really? InterCity trains should not have engines under the floor; they should be in a separate loco/power car. If you don't believe me, try comparing the interior noise in a Mark 3 and a Voyager.

You are just trolling now. Who on earth mentioned about locos? The original comment was about the DFT being potentially embarrassed by the fact First have sourced very similar trains to IEP for much much cheaper. Well thanks to the DFT looks like GWR passengers will probably be paying for the development costs of the TPE stock. But of course the DFT aren't paying.
--- old post above --- --- new post below ---

Engines under the floor are better though in terms of passenger carrying capacity as an extra carriage is created with the appropriate increase in seat numbers and dare I say it passenger stading space. The railway isn't run for loco bashers.

Remember anyone who doesn't believe Voyagers or IEP are absolutely brilliant are "enthusiasts" :roll:

 

[NotATrainspott]

Originally, the IEP was going to be a much larger programme that would see new trains introduced on the MML and WCML, along with a possible order for ScotRail, as well as completely replacing the HSTs on ICEC and GW. Had this continued, then the unit cost per IEP would be lower, as Agility would have been able to spread the cost of developing the train across a larger initial contracted order. That's the big dilemma the rail industry faces: if you want to have the lowest possible cost per unit, you have to come together and order one type of train in bulk. That doesn't really mesh at all with the privatised and franchised railway, as the only one who can force this to happen is the government. Left to their own devices, each individual franchisee may well have picked entirely separate designs which individually could have saved them money at the expense of other operators. For instance, ICEC could have picked an electric train and new diesel locos to drag them off the wires, given that bi-mode capability isn't as vital (as almost all the major flows are already electrified) compared to GWR. Since bi-mode is more essential to GWR, it would still have needed to buy a train similar to the bi-mode AT300, but with a reduced order size it would have faced even larger unit costs.

 

[absolutelymilk]

Originally, the IEP was going to be a much larger programme that would see new trains introduced on the MML and WCML, along with a possible order for ScotRail

Was this going to include tilt for the WCML? And surely there will be plenty of spare HSTs for the MML and later IC225s?

 

[Starmill]

Voyager engine noise is no louder than Mk1 track noise. You could pick a far better example of a noisy DMU

That's why I want to travel on neither a Voyager or a Mk1? In what sense is this a helpful comparison?

I want little noise, no vibrations and smooth ride. Is that too much to ask for?

Was this going to include tilt for the WCML? And surely there will be plenty of spare HSTs for the MML and later IC225s?

Sorry I'm lost - how would a load of life-expired trains help?

 

[Haydn1971]

I want little noise, no vibrations and smooth ride. Is that too much to ask for?

Sounds like you need to stay at home instead

 

[Bletchleyite]

That's why I want to travel on neither a Voyager or a Mk1? In what sense is this a helpful comparison?

Because while you don't, many in here will sing the praises of the Mk1

 

[87015]

First said in December they would announce more details about their rolling stock in the New Year, so nothing too specific. Maybe they need the solicitors to return from holiday before the contracts can be signed?

Waiting for everyone to have their say in the "future of loco hauled stock" thread first

 

[IanXC]

Was this going to include tilt for the WCML? And surely there will be plenty of spare HSTs for the MML and later IC225s?

I think the WCML reference is probably a very early proposal in IEP for a version for use on high speed commuter services - a function currently performed by 350s.

 

[jayiscupid]

I think the WCML reference is probably a very early proposal in IEP for a version for use on high speed commuter services - a function currently performed by 350s.

Is there any news on who TPE have awarded the contracts to for the new trains?

 

[The Ham]

Is there any news on who TPE have awarded the contracts to for the new trains?

I would guess not, but possibly because First and Arriva want the maximum column inches rather than having to share newspaper stories. Likewise the DfT would like lots of days where there are good news stories about the railways.

There is only so much space that each edition of a paper will set aside for this. Given the large amount of overlap in the areas covered I would expect something next week so as to allow the local papers to report on this after they have covered Northern's new trains.

 

[Class 170101]

Is there any news on who TPE have awarded the contracts to for the new trains?

I thought Hitachi had already won the order for AT300s using FGW's follow on order for the Bi-mode trains. I would be surprised if they don't win / have already won the order for the remaining electric only trains.

 

[Haydn1971]

I thought Hitachi had already won the order for AT300s using FGW's follow on order for the Bi-mode trains. I would be surprised if they don't win / have already won the order for the remaining electric only trains.

Depends on if Hitachi have the resources to actually build more trains at the moment - the TPE timescales don't exactly fit that well with delivery of IEP

 

[Philip Phlopp]

Depends on if Hitachi have the resources to actually build more trains at the moment - the TPE timescales don't exactly fit that well with delivery of IEP

They've got three works capable of production though - Newton Aycliffe, Kasado and now the former AnsaldoBreda plant at Pistoia.

There's also the option of shuffling around IEP and AT300 production, so IEP delivery better suits GWep energisation dates.

 

[Solent&Wessex]

Internal communications state:

"First Group are still finalising contract negotiations
regarding our 221 brand new state of the art intercity carriages but we are
hopeful that these will be finalised in February,"

 

[northwichcat]

Internal communications state:

"First Group are still finalising contract negotiations
regarding our 221 brand new state of the art intercity carriages but we are
hopeful that these will be finalised in February,"

Is that a typo, or are they procuring a spare carriage?
--- old post above --- --- new post below ---

Likewise the DfT would like lots of days where there are good news stories about the railways.

True and I also imagine DfT wants the focus to be on new trains and not saying we're taking on cascaded trains from Scotrail and GWR for 2 reasons:
1. Cascaded doesn't sound as good as new trains, especially a story of "All remaining 150/1s to go to Northern by 2018" when those will likely be the oldest DMUs still in service other than 2 or 3 other trains.
2. Scotrail and GWR passengers may get concerned their trains will be taken before the operator is ready to release them if Arriva start publicising dates and electrification gets delayed further.

 

[Haydn1971]

Typo or a spare driving unit ?

 

[NotATrainspott]

Typo or a spare driving unit ?

If ICEC and GWR aren't taking on a spare driving unit, then I can't see it being sensible for TPE to get one. Even then, the IEP/AT300 is meant to be flexible enough that if a driving unit were damaged, they would just re-form a few trains and not end up significantly worse off.

 

[gimmea50anyday]

Internal memo says Early February. Edit:- as I have just noted KWVR45 has already posted the same above!

Hitachi are rumoured, but of course you know what the railway is like for rumour......

 

[Haydn1971]

Internal memo says Early February. Hitachi are rumoured, but of course you know what the railway is like for rumour......

Will be interesting to see if mid door bi-modes have been possible - smaller power racks with the interim development time since IEP/AT300 fleet design - I can see the forum going into meltdown otherwise

 

[northwichcat]

Will be interesting to see if mid door bi-modes have been possible

I don't see why the big fuss about mid door units for a few reasons:
1. The trains will only be used on the fast services - Stalybridge passengers will only be able to watch them go through their station, so the services will be less commuter like
2. They'll be more services with longer formations so unless we see huge growth as a result of the changes they'll be less passengers per set of doors at intermediate stations.
3. Once Manchester-York electrification is complete it's possible some of them will be replaced by electric trains and be cascaded to other partially electrified routes e.g. replacing Voyagers on Manchester to the South Coast services.

 

[Haydn1971]

I don't see why the big fuss about mid door units for a few reasons:

Had we got long enough trains to seat people in peaks, end doors wouldn't be a problem, as people wouldn't be so stressed about getting a seat. But in our modern world, crush loading means you effectively see push fights on platforms, this is made worse by the dozy passengers with bags waiting till the train comes to a halt before thinking about getting their stuff ready, then the strolling passengers looking at every seat reservation as they head in from the end, you can see the frustration on fellow passengers faces. The end vs mid door debate is rather confused by the overloading of services - I like end door units, but it's clear that on services that don't have long enough units, mid door units seem to reduce the dwell issues as they seem much more chaotic so people don't faff around, they just get on and sit in the first possible seat.

 

[158801]

I don't see why the big fuss about mid door units for a few reasons:
2. They'll be more services with longer formations so unless we see huge growth as a result of the changes they'll be less passengers per set of doors at intermediate stations.

After years of extensive training I can see that my train has 8 doors. Unfortunately those who have not endured the rigours of this training (passengers) may only see 1 door and, unfortunately, all congregate around it - even though there are others - just a few yards away

 

[Senex]

I don't see why the big fuss about mid door units ...

It's short-distance commuters trying once again to put their needs above those of the longer- and long-distance passengers. These trains are being ordered to operate long-distance services (the equivalent of London to Plymouth and more) and should offer long-distance standards.