• Our new ticketing site is now live! Using either this or the original site (both powered by TrainSplit) helps support the running of the forum with every ticket purchase! Find out more and ask any questions/give us feedback in this thread!

New TPE Train Discussion

Status
Not open for further replies.

Mordac

Established Member
Joined
5 Mar 2016
Messages
2,386
Location
Birmingham
What would you prefer the unions to do? behave like good little boys and not upset your morning grapefruit? The point is valid. 1000's of steel workers are at risk of being sacked yet we cant use some of their product to make trains in our own country. Does that not concern you? Many of the people in the affected group think no one is speaking for them and are angry, would you prefer if no one did and they simply slipped away quietly into an uncertain world?

Unions receive the many legal privileges they enjoy because they're a vehicle for workers to bargain collectively with their employers, and help them deal with workplace issues. Regardless of what you think about the technical merits of the issue itself, the current southern DOO strike is a perfect example of something that is clearly within their remit. This on the other hand has absolutely nothing to do with the condition of transport workers. Why doesn't the Steel Workers union say something instead?

Any understanding of the history of the TU or Labour movement would indicate that unions are based upon an overtly political position. That is the whole point - to represent their members and seek to influence those in power to provide better treatment for workers.

Are you that naive or brainwashed by the mainly convservative press?

BTW - utterly despise? really :roll:
I'm more than aware of that history. My father was very high up on a dockers union. Believe it or not, people can be aware of that and still disagree with it, without being "brainwashed." :roll:

How does getting British made trains (despite the fact that no one bid for them) improve the treatment of rail workers? It has nothing to do with that, and all with forwarding an extreme left political agenda, which is exactly why I don't join my union, although I probably would if they stuck to workplace advocating.
 
Last edited:
Sponsor Post - registered members do not see these adverts; click here to register, or click here to log in
R

RailUK Forums

YorkshireBear

Established Member
Joined
23 Jul 2010
Messages
9,665
What would you prefer the unions to do? behave like good little boys and not upset your morning grapefruit? The point is valid. 1000's of steel workers are at risk of being sacked yet we can't use some of their product to make trains in our own country. Does that not concern you? Many of the people in the affected group think no one is speaking for them and are angry, would you prefer if no one did and they simply slipped away quietly into an uncertain world?

Any understanding of the history of the TU or Labour movement would indicate that unions are based upon an overtly political position. That is the whole point - to represent their members and seek to influence those in power to provide better treatment for workers.

Are you that naive or brainwashed by the mainly conservative press?

BTW - utterly despise? really :roll:

Okay then.

I despise grapefruit, nearly as much as I despise patronising posts on here.

Are we actually going to pretend that this country's steel manufacturing would be fine if the minor steel components for our trains were constructed here?

What actually concerns me (as a Labour supporter and TU member with a reasonable (not perfect) "understanding of the history of the TU or Labour movement") is that their press releases seem to no longer have any impact. It is seen by many as just the random ramblings of a grumpy person Which is exactly how it comes across to me. Eventually if you just say the same things over and over again people do not listen. Very few of their press releases seem to actually have any sort of argument within them. Just the rehashing of british jobs, nationalisation etc. Especially seen as these are often attached to positive news stories, which again makes them across as the grumpy old cynics who never see the good in the world.

Note this is regardless of whether what they say is correct. Yes it isn't good that we have abandoned our manufacturing base, i agree with them. DOO I almost 100% agree with them, most things i agree with them. But it is the way they put their point across that frustrates me beyond measure.

And before you say anything, yes i have had lengthy discussions with my local TU rep on the subject and shared my views. In some form of fruitless attempt to change things. As with everything in the rail industry, people are quite content to sit and moan but are much less forthcoming with the actions. Expecting others to do it for them. Quite opposite to being "naive or brainwashed by the mainly conservative press".
 

Dave1987

On Moderation
Joined
20 Oct 2012
Messages
4,563
According to TPE no manufacturer with a British production line was interested in building the new EMUs. While for Northern Bombardier offered a new EMU but not a new DMU or DEMU, meaning the only manufacturers to offer both types of trains which Northern needed were CAF and Stadler.

Also have the RMT realised that Bombardier Derby build aluminium trains not steel trains?

With Newton Aycliffe full up with orders I'd like to know when Hitachi plan to fulfill their promise to build body shell fabrication facilities at Newton Aycliffe.
 

DarloRich

Veteran Member
Joined
12 Oct 2010
Messages
32,908
Location
Fenny Stratford
In my opinion the RMT are an embarrassment to Trade Unions as they do a very good job at making the general public anti-Trade Union.

their members may disagree. I am sorry the RMT don't meet with your definition of a "good" trade union. Is that one that doesn't rock the boat to much and gives in quietly?

The amount of steel in a new UK passenger train is much reduced and is falling since most new designs have Aluminium body shells and inside frame bogies that have reduced steel usage dramatically from the late BR era (the inside frame bogies have reduce the steel /cast iron requirement by a few tonnes /car on the Desiro City and Aventra designs).

Lucchini tend to use recycled steel for the wheel sets any way.

The steel requirement for UK rolling stock would keep them going for substantially less than a day.

We can't compete with the China on cost so our export markets (circa 30%+ of UK production) have largely evaporated and the significant volume of low quality re-bar is where the Chinese steel companies are doing well in the UK (the lowest of the lowest quality wise).

Yet the point on steel remains - other countries protected their steel industries while we did not. Supporting British industry should not be considered wrong or perverse.

Unions receive the many legal privileges they enjoy because they're a vehicle for workers to bargain collectively with their employers, and help them deal with workplace issues. Regardless of what you think about the technical merits of the issue itself, the current southern DOO strike is a perfect example of something that is clearly within their remit. This on the other hand has absolutely nothing to do with the condition of transport workers. Why doesn't the Steel Workers union say something instead?

The Community Union has been very active in this field. I assume RMT issued a press release as part of their solidarity support campaign with other unions. Solidarity being another central tenant of the Trades Union movement, as I am sure you are aware.

However you miss the point that without political organisation,campaigning and agitating there would be no collective rights to support. A union is, by definition, a political body and generally a left wing political body, which seeks to both protect and enhance the treatment received by their members.

I'm more than aware of that history. My father was very high up on a dockers union. Believe it or not, people can be aware of that and still disagree with it, without being "brainwashed." :roll:

How does getting British made trains (despite the fact that no one bid for them) improve the treatment of rail workers? It has nothing to do with that, and all with forwarding an extreme left political agenda, which is exactly why I don't join my union, although I probably would if they stuck to workplace advocating.

I am sure you would join - and it is odd how people with objections to the unions they profess to despise evaporate when they are in trouble!

Commenting on this subject ( unhappy as it makes you) fits in with the RMT political agenda ( being a political body they have a political agenda) which is , generally speaking, supportive of British workers and industry, against the transfer of British funds to foreign concerns, pro nationalisation and eurosceptic. It also fits within the wider scope of the TU position generally. Plus RMT know their quotes will be reported by the mainstream media whilst other unions will be ignored, especially those who are "reasonable". Perhaps thier media strategy is that any coverage is good coverage. perhaps their members like that approach.

Whilst I am sure you would prefer unions who knew their place that would kind of defeat the point of a union!

Okay then.

I despise grapefruit, nearly as much as I despise patronising posts on here.

Are we actually going to pretend that this country's steel manufacturing would be fine if the minor steel components for our trains were constructed here?

Of course not - however as part of a much wider campaign to "buy British" perhaps. And that is what the RMT are advocating, however cackhandedly

What actually concerns me (as a Labour supporter and TU member with a reasonable (not perfect) "understanding of the history of the TU or Labour movement") is that their press releases seem to no longer have any impact. It is seen by many as just the random ramblings of a grumpy person Which is exactly how it comes across to me. Eventually if you just say the same things over and over again people do not listen. Very few of their press releases seem to actually have any sort of argument within them. Just the rehashing of british jobs, nationalisation etc. Especially seen as these are often attached to positive news stories, which again makes them across as the grumpy old cynics who never see the good in the world.

Note this is regardless of whether what they say is correct. Yes it isn't good that we have abandoned our manufacturing base, i agree with them. DOO I almost 100% agree with them, most things i agree with them. But it is the way they put their point across that frustrates me beyond measure.

And before you say anything, yes i have had lengthy discussions with my local TU rep on the subject and shared my views. In some form of fruitless attempt to change things. As with everything in the rail industry, people are quite content to sit and moan but are much less forthcoming with the actions. Expecting others to do it for them. Quite opposite to being "naive or brainwashed by the mainly conservative press".


I agree. TU's need to radically rethink their communication strategy and style. I have said as much to senior people within my union ( which is not RMT) repeatedly. However, the RMT in particular seem keen to play up to the stereotype demanded by the press.

That said the central point that a TU is a political organisation and not one that should simply concern itself to local issues is important and to suggest that they are not political organisations is naive in the extreme. They only exist because of the political work done to secure better terms for their members.

EDIT: Anyway this is all off topic. New train - ain't they brilliant!
 
Last edited:

northwichcat

Veteran Member
Joined
23 Jan 2009
Messages
32,692
Location
Northwich
their members may disagree. I am sorry the RMT don't meet with your definition of a "good" trade union. Is that one that doesn't rock the boat to much and gives in quietly?

No. Just one that doesn't resort to distributing press releases full of lies and out-of-context claims. Most other unions seem to manage that, so are the other unions bad in your opinion?
 

gimmea50anyday

Established Member
Joined
8 Jan 2013
Messages
3,456
Location
Back Cab
If none of the manufacturers are offering a DMU at the moment that would explain why TPE have ordered loco hauled...
 

43074

Established Member
Joined
10 Oct 2012
Messages
2,253
If none of the manufacturers are offering a DMU at the moment that would explain why TPE have ordered loco hauled...

But that doesn't explain everything though, especially as Northern have just ordered 55 new DMUs from CAF... Presumably an end door version of the 195s would have been a possibility given TPE's new trains are from the same family, and presumably Hitachi can offer diesel AT300s?
 

northwichcat

Veteran Member
Joined
23 Jan 2009
Messages
32,692
Location
Northwich
If none of the manufacturers are offering a DMU at the moment that would explain why TPE have ordered loco hauled...

But that doesn't explain everything though, especially as Northern have just ordered 55 new DMUs from CAF... Presumably an end door version of the 195s would have been a possibility given TPE's new trains are from the same family, and presumably Hitachi can offer diesel AT300s?

The quote from TPE was "No UK manufacturer took part in the competitive tender process."

If CAF can produce a long distance version of the electric CIVITY then they must be able to do the same for the diesel but a diesel only version has no long future on TPE - bi-mode or loco-hauled could.
 

jimm

Established Member
Joined
6 Apr 2012
Messages
5,276
With Newton Aycliffe full up with orders I'd like to know when Hitachi plan to fulfill their promise to build body shell fabrication facilities at Newton Aycliffe.

And there you go again, putting words in other people's mouths - Hitachi has never made a promise to do any such thing.

The official position has always been that providing stir-welding fabrication equipment was a possibility, that's all.
 

Bletchleyite

Veteran Member
Joined
20 Oct 2014
Messages
113,158
Location
"Marston Vale mafia"
If CAF can produce a long distance version of the electric CIVITY then they must be able to do the same for the diesel but a diesel only version has no long future on TPE - bi-mode or loco-hauled could.

AIUI there isn't a bi-mode Civity available at present - hence the LHCS. A loco-hauled EMU would perhaps have been another option but might have been more complex.
 

Greybeard33

Established Member
Joined
18 Feb 2012
Messages
4,335
Location
Greater Manchester
urrently CLC trains diverted via the moss stop at NLW vice WAC with buses linking the two. There's also the link via WBQ to Chester as a connection. No reason why chat moss diversions via CLC won't use WAC...

Current (Northern) practice is for stops at Newton le Willows instead of Warrington Central, and vice versa.
TPE seems to prefer to terminate Chat Moss services in Manchester, but then there is still a CLC service.
Are there any rules regarding a TOC stopping a diverted service at a station that the TOC does not serve in normal operation?

When ATW diverts Chester - Manchester services via the Mid-Cheshire line, they do not stop at all - not even at Stockport, which is served by ATW's own South Wales service.
 

Dave1987

On Moderation
Joined
20 Oct 2012
Messages
4,563
And there you go again, putting words in other people's mouths - Hitachi has never made a promise to do any such thing.

The official position has always been that providing stir-welding fabrication equipment was a possibility, that's all.

I believe the wording was something like 'If we get enough orders we will build fabrication facilities at Newton Aycliffe' or words to that effect. Well the assembly plant is full until the early 2020's so exactly how many orders are they expecting before they fulfil that promise!
 

northwichcat

Veteran Member
Joined
23 Jan 2009
Messages
32,692
Location
Northwich
Are there any rules regarding a TOC stopping a diverted service at a station that the TOC does not serve in normal operation?

When ATW diverts Chester - Manchester services via the Mid-Cheshire line, they do not stop at all - not even at Stockport, which is served by ATW's own South Wales service.

The last TPE franchise have stopped at Newton-le-Willows (from where they ran a bus to Warrington Central) and Brighouse (from where they ran a bus to Huddersfield.)
 

Greybeard33

Established Member
Joined
18 Feb 2012
Messages
4,335
Location
Greater Manchester
AIUI there isn't a bi-mode Civity available at present - hence the LHCS. A loco-hauled EMU would perhaps have been another option but might have been more complex.
According to the CAF website:
The Civity trains are available with the following types of traction:
  • Electric
  • Mechanical diesel or hydraulic diesel
  • Diesel-electric
  • Dual
Civity can adapt to the traction requirements of each and every operator. This family of trains is designed for 4 different power supplies: 1500 VDC, 3000 VDC, 15 kVAC (16,6 Hz), 25 kVAC (50 Hz).
"Dual" being bi-mode.

Of course, having the option on offer does not mean that CAF would be able to develop a bi-mode, non-articulated variant for the UK loading gauge and deliver in the same time frame as the LHCS sets.
 

LNW-GW Joint

Veteran Member
Joined
22 Feb 2011
Messages
21,904
Location
Mold, Clwyd
I believe the wording was something like 'If we get enough orders we will build fabrication facilities at Newton Aycliffe' or words to that effect. Well the assembly plant is full until the early 2020's so exactly how many orders are they expecting before they fulfil that promise!

Since talking about the possibility of UK body-shell production, Hitachi has bought the Ansaldo plant in Italy (which will assemble some AT300s for the UK).
It remains to be seen how Hitachi builds its European capability.
The stated aim is to build trains for mainland Europe as well as the UK, but there is no sign yet of orders.
 

notlob.divad

Established Member
Joined
19 Jan 2016
Messages
1,609
Are there any rules regarding a TOC stopping a diverted service at a station that the TOC does not serve in normal operation?

When ATW diverts Chester - Manchester services via the Mid-Cheshire line, they do not stop at all - not even at Stockport, which is served by ATW's own South Wales service.

I got off an East Midlands train from Sheffield at St Helens Junction when it was diverted due to an evacuation of Warrington Central. People where encouraged to get off there and get the stopping service back to Warrington Bank Quay. I don't know if that is/was normal practice.
 
Last edited:

northwichcat

Veteran Member
Joined
23 Jan 2009
Messages
32,692
Location
Northwich
I got off an East Midlands train from Sheffield at St Helens Central when it was diverted due to an evacuation of Warrington Central. People where encouraged to get off there and get the stopping service back to Warrington Bank Quay. I don't know if that is/was normal practice.

I think you mean St Helens Junction.
 

61653 HTAFC

Veteran Member
Joined
18 Dec 2012
Messages
19,347
Location
Yorkshire
With regard to early top and tail use, wouldn't the ideal operation be for the lead loco to provide traction power alone, with the rear loco providing ETS?
 

jopsuk

Veteran Member
Joined
13 May 2008
Messages
12,774
With regard to early top and tail use, wouldn't the ideal operation be for the lead loco to provide traction power alone, with the rear loco providing ETS?

Most likely that they'll run with the rear loco shut down?
 

WatcherZero

Established Member
Joined
25 Feb 2010
Messages
10,272
Been confirmed by Tony that the Pretendolino in the form of two rakes of 5 will be going to TPE for driver training Class 68's and may remain afterwards in service.
 

dgl

Established Member
Joined
5 Oct 2014
Messages
3,048
Would have thought that if the rear loco was not required to propel the train then it would be shut down as I don't think it would be a good idea to leave the engine essentially idling, as was found when the 91's were used with the HST sets with the single power car providing ETS.
It would also needlessly increase the hours on the engine, esp. when the 68's should have enough power on their own to provide both traction and ETS.
 

Harbornite

Established Member
Joined
7 May 2016
Messages
3,627
At this point I should work on a plan for a newbuild class of 125mph CoCo electrics that will be justified by the TPE order and can then be used to retraction the entire MArk 3 and Mark 4 fleet into a huge uniform supply of trains.

And it will have both 415V and 1000V ETS available to avoid the necessity of rewiring, just having to make sure that rolling stock groupings are homogenous.


Why not go for a BO-BO wheel arrangement? Even better, just buy some UK Traxx.
 

Shaw S Hunter

Established Member
Joined
21 Apr 2016
Messages
3,486
Location
Over The Hill
I wonder what the financials are that have dictated top and tail operation. Consider this; Liverpool to Newcastle is, near enough, 3 hours each way, so allowing for turn round time 7 trains are required for an hourly service. That means 14 locos for top and tail. But at Newcastle trains can reverse by either arriving or departing via the High Level Bridge so top and tail is not actually needed for that reversal. That just leaves Lime Street: if trains run with just a lead loco that needs 7 locos plus an additional turnover loco at Lime Street with the additional driving/shunting staff to go with it. Is it cheaper to lease 6 extra locos, with the additional track access charges, not to mention degraded performance, than employ those bodies at Lime Street? Or am I missing something?
 

LNW-GW Joint

Veteran Member
Joined
22 Feb 2011
Messages
21,904
Location
Mold, Clwyd
I wonder what the financials are that have dictated top and tail operation. Consider this; Liverpool to Newcastle is, near enough, 3 hours each way, so allowing for turn round time 7 trains are required for an hourly service. That means 14 locos for top and tail. But at Newcastle trains can reverse by either arriving or departing via the High Level Bridge so top and tail is not actually needed for that reversal. That just leaves Lime Street: if trains run with just a lead loco that needs 7 locos plus an additional turnover loco at Lime Street with the additional driving/shunting staff to go with it. Is it cheaper to lease 6 extra locos, with the additional track access charges, not to mention degraded performance, than employ those bodies at Lime Street? Or am I missing something?

I shouldn't think NR will want TPE shunting locos at Lime St while they are running on a reduced number of platforms during the rebuild.
The track remodelling will also probably remove the current steam-age layout which allowed such moves, and places to park a loco.
Two locos per train is screamingly inefficient, though.
 

CosherB

Established Member
Joined
23 Feb 2007
Messages
3,041
Location
Northwich
Since talking about the possibility of UK body-shell production, Hitachi has bought the Ansaldo plant in Italy (which will assemble some AT300s for the UK).
It remains to be seen how Hitachi builds its European capability.
The stated aim is to build trains for mainland Europe as well as the UK, but there is no sign yet of orders.

Exactly. Whilst not wishing to side track into a Brexit debate, we need to take a pan-European view of Hitachi's manufacturing plans. We should be thankful that a manufacturing company of the scale of Hitachi is investing in the UK and sourcing a significant percentage of the train components within this country as well.
 

Iskra

Established Member
Joined
11 Jun 2014
Messages
10,684
Location
West Riding
I shouldn't think NR will want TPE shunting locos at Lime St while they are running on a reduced number of platforms during the rebuild.
The track remodelling will also probably remove the current steam-age layout which allowed such moves, and places to park a loco.
Two locos per train is screamingly inefficient, though.

Perhaps it's a useful arrangement to provide redundancy and self-recovery if one fails since some will be new-builds. As the 68's become more reliable, then the DBSO/DVT's will be delivered and subsequently replace one loco just as they have bedded-in.

Although turning sets on the bridges at Newcastle seems much more efficient and economic...
 

jimm

Established Member
Joined
6 Apr 2012
Messages
5,276
I believe the wording was something like 'If we get enough orders we will build fabrication facilities at Newton Aycliffe' or words to that effect. Well the assembly plant is full until the early 2020's so exactly how many orders are they expecting before they fulfil that promise!

They never used the word promise or anything like it - no matter how many times you use it.

There were umpteen stories in late 2014 using phrasing similar to this:

In the longer-term, Hitachi is keen to expand Newton Aycliffe's capabilities to include friction stir welding, although this will be dependent on securing further orders for the facility.

http://www.railjournal.com/index.ph...sh-inter-city-fleet-renewal-gathers-pace.html

They did make any stronger commitment than that, nor specify what level of orders and over what period - what is on the books now only gets them to about 2020 - and as noted above, the purchase of plants in Italy has added another dimension to Hitachi's operations in Europe.

And they might want to make some inroads into paying back the initial investment at Newton Aycliffe before they put in more money.
 

Haydn1971

Established Member
Joined
11 Dec 2012
Messages
2,101
Location
Sheffield
I shouldn't think NR will want TPE shunting locos at Lime St while they are running on a reduced number of platforms during the rebuild.


Well it's not really shunting is it, train heads out of Liverpool, 68 at the front, heads up to Newcastle and back to Liverpool, pulls into station, second 68 pulls in behind, hooks up, then pulls out on next trip to Newcastle and back... First 68 then goes to depot until it's next needed
 

fowler9

Established Member
Joined
29 Oct 2013
Messages
8,380
Location
Liverpool
Well it's not really shunting is it, train heads out of Liverpool, 68 at the front, heads up to Newcastle and back to Liverpool, pulls into station, second 68 pulls in behind, hooks up, then pulls out on next trip to Newcastle and back... First 68 then goes to depot until it's next needed

I wish it was possible but I don't think it is. Where would they stable the 68 backing on to the train? They would also take up a path in to and out of Lime Street (As the one against the buffers is released and needs to get to the depot). Don't get me wrong I would love to see just like when I were a lad it but there were stabling roads all over the shop at Lime Street then.
 
Last edited:
Status
Not open for further replies.

Top