IEP: Hitachi / Agility wins

[The_Rail_WAy]

Saw the preview of the train on BBC news yesterday - would I be right in presuming that the new train would be classed as loco-hauled?

 

[Royston Vasey]

It's an interesting decision to award it to Hitachi for sure. I have to say its one I support.

We can hardly have a procurement process that guarantees the job goes to Derby. All that would happen is the prices would go through the ceiling as Bombardier took advantage of their monopoly.

Let's remember Bombardier is a Canadian led global corporation with a train assembly plant in the UK. Hitachi is a Japanese led global corporation having just won an order planning to build a train factory in the UK.

Actually how much manufacturing is really done at Derby? A lot of it is just assembly same as Hitachi are saying they will do. True I'm sure Hitachi will use some different sub suppliers but if the 395 is an example then key UK specific equipment like shoe gear pans etc was procured from if not the UK then europe.

The Japanese are not daft, theres no way they are going to incur long term costs shipping stuff around the world if they don't need to. I think if they can get established and get a factory successfully churning out decent finished trains they will gradually move more and more over here.

Another interesting point is what Hitachi's long term objectives are? I know they have previously been invited to tender for european contracts. Bombardier is never going to build trains for Europe in Derby because they already have plants on the continent. Hitachi just might and is probably the UK's best chance of seeing British built trains carving out a peice of the European market.

Would anyone say we should have refused Honda, Nissan and Toyota access to manufacturing in the UK 15 years ago?

Very good point. Nissan were established in Sunderland at a time of recession and high unemployment in that area after the closure of much of the local heavy industry. This too started as a paint and assembly line and quickly became the most efficient car plant in Europe. This decision has remarkable parallels with that one.

 

[jav]

I've seen somewhere today that ERA's bodyshells were going to be built in Germany?

Can anyone confirm that because if it is the case it really a case of pot and kettle?

 

[The_Rail_WAy]

I've seen somewhere today that ERA's bodyshells were going to be built in Germany?

Can anyone confirm that because if it is the case it really a case of pot and kettle?

Erm I thought the body-shells were being built in Japan, but other parts (i think wheels) may be buil in Germany.

 

[jav]

I think it will be interesting at least to see what Hitachi can do with the reliability of these trains.

Can they really make it better than existing new stock on UK infrastructure?

Having looked at some more details I think the Hitachi bid creates a lot more short term construction jobs? from what i can glean ERA's bid was based around existing depots, I guess Bombardier siemens already have lots of sites to choose from.

The Hitachi bid mentions new sites in Doncaster, Bristol, Sheffield and West London. Anyone know where these sites are?

 

[Failed Unit]

Looks good.

Can be sure that the numbers purchased will only ever be "just enough" though... Someone with sense should already be doing the phone calls and calculations to get a dozen sets in for spot hire.

26 Metres... Isn't that going to be quite tight at some curves? For some reason the image of the bridge at Newcastle keeps coming to mind.

Good point, I was trying to find a link to it but 2x HST clipped each other on the King Edward bridge back in 1989 due to the overhang. I don't know if 26m will mean the end of parallel movements over the bridge.

It happened on the 30th November 1989, 15 injured. I am sure one of the trains involved was the 1730 London - Newcastle service.

 

[daccer]

My point was really a generic one. it is symptomatic of the way things are done in the UK that we dont have a strategy rather piecemeal decisions seemingly made with little regards to an overall blueprint. Also when you have politicians involved as we do now you find they are always looking for the headline and sound bite. Much better to make some vague announcement about trains that will be here in five years time than get involved in reopening lines that can happen in the short term and benefit people much more quickly. i doubt though that reopenng Skipton-Colne or any of the other schemes on the table will get much Tv or radio play especially in London. The price you pay for having politicians involved in any process is that self-interest is always at play - elections are always around the corner. If the govt was really interested in the economy or the ecological effects of greenhouse gasses they would be fast tracking even marginal rail schemes now. However the interminable investigation process means that most fall by the wayside.Funny but when we needed to find billions for Northern Rock it was done overnight. A couple of hundred million to open some lines in the North seems too big a hurdle. HS2 may never happen but surely any decisions made now should be done as part of an integrated strategy and not because it sounds good on the radio.

 

[jav]

Sorry Failed unit I've confused you, I've read somewhere ERA who were Hitachi's / Agility's opposition i.e Bombardier Siemens had planned to build the bodyshells in Germany and ship them over for ummmm assembly at Derby.

Which kind of makes all the outrage about Hitachi only opening an assembly plant a bit hypocritical.

26 mtrs certainly sounds interesting the pictures seem to show a big angle at the carriage ends with what looks like Hitachi's recesed 395 doors i.e sliding rather than plug. Wonder how thats going to work?

 

[flymo]

I remember when Newcastle had some platforms 2, 3 & 4, (was the old 8, 9 & 10) straightened and tracks slewed. Wasn't this for some sort of proposed 26m through trains to Europe? If that was the case I can't see why 2 x 23m HST's would hit on the approach to the KE Bridge. Living in Newcastle at the time I can't remember anything on TV.
--- old post above --- --- new post below ---

Of course the slewing could have happened after 1989 and that was only in the station not the approach. D'oh !

<Inserts foot into mouth>

 

[jopsuk]

Saw the preview of the train on BBC news yesterday - would I be right in presuming that the new train would be classed as loco-hauled?

Not as such- the concept with the Hybrid is to have a Diesel power unit supplying electric traction bogies the length of the train with a Pantograph (and transformer) supplying the motors when under the wires.

I would guess (based on the example of the electro-diesel locos) that they'll count in TOPS as an AC EMU.

 

[222001]

Not as such- the concept with the Hybrid is to have a Diesel power unit supplying electric traction bogies the length of the train with a Pantograph (and transformer) supplying the motors when under the wires.

I would guess (based on the example of the electro-diesel locos) that they'll count in TOPS as an AC EMU.

Perhaps in the DEMU section?

 

[Royston Vasey]

Perhaps in the DEMU section?

DEMU I reckon, or maybe because this is unprecedented, an AC DEMU, the 600 series anyone? Class 601 has a ring to it doesn't it??

I'm sure "Death" on here would propose some sort of 5000mph Class 666...

 

[jopsuk]

Perhaps in the DEMU section?

The Electric mode seems to be intended as the primary traction. The class 73s are the only currently comparable class in this regard- they're numbered as DC electric locos.

However, the suggestion of creating an entirely new classification is probably a good one- after all, I would reckon that if it's a success, it won't be the last hybrid. A third rail hybrid for Waterloo-Exeter runs anyone?

Having sadi that, I'm still not convinced it's a great idea, the hybrid. Happy to be proven wrong, but a new standard coach/DVT rake design with various Diesel, Electric and maybe even hybrid locos would I'd have thought pose less technical problems, and give an easy conversion route upon electrification.

 

[222001]

Perhaps the electric will have a different classification to the diesel etc.

I think a new series would be good, perhaps - Class 600 or Class 700 sounds good!.
Perhaps the power cars will be given numbers and the coaches different ones. Like the HSTs?

 

[Mojo]

I wonder how it'll work - looking at the video, is it an EMU with a diesel powercar at one end only?

 

[Phoenix]

Perhaps the electric will have a different classification to the diesel etc.

I think a new series would be good, perhaps - Class 600 or Class 700 sounds good!.
Perhaps the power cars will be given numbers and the coaches different ones. Like the HSTs?

Sadly 400 has been taken up otherwise I peronsally would have them designated as that but then again they could get EMU 300 numbers.

 

[222001]

I wonder how it'll work - looking at the video, is it an EMU with a diesel powercar at one end only?

Yep thats the idea. I wonder it will be able to go 125mph when using the diesel power car only! As it is only one power car it will have to be powerfull!

 

[route:oxford]

Yep thats the idea. I wonder it will be able to go 125mph when using the diesel power car only! As it is only one power car it will have to be powerfull!

Powerful, yes, just like the class 67.

In this case it's more a DVT Generator car(?) so should be lighter than a 67.

 

[222001]

Powerful, yes, just like the class 67.

In this case it's more a DVT Generator car(?) so should be lighter than a 67.

Hmm yes. Just looked up Class 67s and their absolute top speed is 143mph (of course the top speed is 125mph on our railways) ! Didn't know they were that powerful!

 

[TEW]

Hmm yes. Just looked up Class 67s and their absolute top speed is 143mph (of course the top speed is 125mph on our railways) ! Didn't know they were that powerful!

No 67s run at 125mph though, Network Rail don't want them to as they are rather heavy and wont do the track any favours running at 125mph. I think they are limited to 90 but it could be 110mph.

 

[Pumbaa]

No 67s run at 125mph though, Network Rail don't want them to as they are rather heavy and wont do the track any favours running at 125mph. I think they are limited to 90 but it could be 110mph.

What 222001 mean was that the 67s could if unlimited and whatever, with their current engines and body run safely up to 143mph, as tested by CAF. Obviously the top linespeed in UK is 125mph, so in theory that would be the maximum speed attained, but it's not because as you say Notwork Rail have limited them to 90 as they're Michelle MacManus weight.

 

[whoshotjimmi]

What 222001 mean was that the 67s could if unlimited and whatever, with their current engines and body run safely up to 143mph, as tested by CAF. Obviously the top linespeed in UK is 125mph, so in theory that would be the maximum speed attained, but it's not because as you say Notwork Rail have limited them to 90 as they're Michelle MacManus weight.

That was a bit uncalled for - surely a class 67 is nowhere near the weight of Michelle McManus.....

At any rate, if a diesel engined car is to be placed at one end of these sets that has to be as powerful as a class 67, would the axle load end up being similar to that of a 67? In which case would the new train have a similar problem - especially when not on the main line?

Also, I seem to remember 67's being limited on the highland routes due to brake issues - the original brakes were being replaced after every round trip so had more standard ones fitted which were more durable but limited top speed.

 

[Pumbaa]

That was a bit uncalled for - surely a class 67 is nowhere near the weight of Michelle McManus.....

At any rate, if a diesel engined car is to be placed at one end of these sets that has to be as powerful as a class 67, would the axle load end up being similar to that of a 67? In which case would the new train have a similar problem - especially when not on the main line?

Also, I seem to remember 67's being limited on the highland routes due to brake issues - the original brakes were being replaced after every round trip so had more standard ones fitted which were more durable but limited top speed.

Yes - the ones on the Inverness/Aberdeen runs were fine, but because of the constant braking required on the West Highland line for the low linespeeds in place to cope with the weight they replaced the brakes on one 67 (is 009?) to rectify the issue. Although standard 67s are used sometimes, the norm is for the dedicated 67 to work it.

 

[route:oxford]

That was a bit uncalled for - surely a class 67 is nowhere near the weight of Michelle McManus.....

At any rate, if a diesel engined car is to be placed at one end of these sets that has to be as powerful as a class 67, would the axle load end up being similar to that of a 67? In which case would the new train have a similar problem - especially when not on the main line?

How heavy are the traction units on a 67? The "power car" may simply be supplying power to the traction motors under the coaches and have no traction motors itself which would reduce the weight a fair bit.

 

[Chafford1]

I've read elsewhere that despite an announcement not being made - sources in the know say that the electric IEP will have 140mph capability. DfT may not want to announce this as it highlights shortcomings with the track infrastructure.

Anyway, I've emailed Agility Trains to see if they will confirm.

 

[Pumbaa]

How heavy are the traction units on a 67? The "power car" may simply be supplying power to the traction motors under the coaches and have no traction motors itself which would reduce the weight a fair bit.

It's not the weight of the 67 that's the issue - it's the axle loadings. If they had more wheels, so more weight spread over a greater area, they wouldn't be so bad.

 

[Royston Vasey]

That was a bit uncalled for - surely a class 67 is nowhere near the weight of Michelle McManus.....

And in fairness, you could sort the issues with a 67 out with some Co-Co bogies, not an option for Michelle McManus

 

[route:oxford]

And in fairness, you could sort the issues with a 67 out with some Co-Co bogies, not an option for Michelle McManus

Why haven't they?

If it would make the 67 as versatile as the 37...

 

[Pumbaa]

Why haven't they?

If it would make the 67 as versatile as the 37...

I think that one of the reasons given was the gearbox; a new bogie would require the removal of the current gearbox, which would then be unusable as it was so restrictive. A new bogie would require a smaller gearbox, which would be prohibitively expensive.

Although I agree, I think 67s would be great with new bogies, Mk3s and DVTs on XC network.

 

[whoshotjimmi]

I've read elsewhere that despite an announcement not being made - sources in the know say that the electric IEP will have 140mph capability. DfT may not want to announce this as it highlights shortcomings with the track infrastructure.

The initial proposal for tender stated that any new trains must be capable of 140mph to allow for future infrastructure upgrades. I have not seen or heard any changes to that by DafT. Anyway, I have found a link where statistics are shown compared to a 225, including weight.

http://nds.coi.gov.uk/environment/f...67&NewsAreaID=2&NavigatedFromDepartment=False

Is anyone concerned about 26m long carriages sagging over the 30 years they are expected to be in service? I know sagging has proved to be a problem on some sprinter units. I am also aware that they will be much better manufactured than a sprinter! But, surely a question mark has to exist?