LNER New Trains (2023-)

[TT-ONR-NRN]

Good morning,

Does anyone have any information on the new trains that LNER intend to purchase for replacing the ten retained Intercity 225 sets when they’re off leased in approximately 2023?

I know that they want approximately six but I wondered if there was any more details that had been given. Five cars? Nine cars? Hopefully the latter considering the length of the trains that they’ll be replacing.

Type of train is also a big question - Hitachi Class 80X - an identical or similar train to the Azuma would seem an obvious idea but of course we know how tied up Hitachi are with the 803, 805, 807 and 810 orders for East Coast Trains, Avanti West Coast and East Midlands Railway respectively, and if the 91s are to be replaced by 2023, Hitachi would have to work pretty fast to get those built and in service by then. Also, it might cost a lot of money as the existing Azumas were not ordered by LNER, but of course by the DfT as part of the IEP. A microfleet of Hitachi AT300s might come at a price.

Are we to see a new build altogether? Or perhaps a microfleet of 397s?

If anyone has any information on the new trains that LNER reportedly needs to facilitate the new December 2021 timetable post Intercity 225s, please do share here.

 

[Jorge Da Silva]

Good morning,

Does anyone have any information on the new trains that LNER intend to purchase for replacing the ten retained Intercity 225 sets when they’re off leased in approximately 2023?

I know that they want approximately six but I wondered if there was any more details that had been given. Five cars? Nine cars? Hopefully the latter considering the length of the trains that they’ll be replacing.

Type of train is also a big question - Hitachi Class 80X - an identical or similar train to the Azuma would seem an obvious idea but of course we know how tied up Hitachi are with the 803, 805, 807 and 810 orders for East Coast Trains, Avanti West Coast and East Midlands Railway respectively, and if the 91s are to be replaced by 2023, Hitachi would have to work pretty fast to get those built and in service by then. Also, it might cost a lot of money as the existing Azumas were not ordered by LNER, but of course by the DfT as part of the IEP. A microfleet of Hitachi AT300s might come at a price.

Are we to see a new build altogether? Or perhaps a microfleet of 397s?

If anyone has any information on the new trains that LNER reportedly needs to facilitate the new December 2021 timetable post Intercity 225s, please do share here.

Seen as no contract has been awarded yet but i think Hitachi would be a logical choice. They will probably be formed of either 9-cars, 2x5 car sets or a 10 car set as they are to run the Edinburgh to London fast service (stopping at York & Newcastle). I don't think 397's or any other train would make sense.

 

[Bletchleyite]

397s would do, but I'd suggest 80x would be the most sensible choice if at all possible.

 

[tpjm]

I’d love to see more 397s. Making more of what is essentially a small fleet sounds like no bad thing when you think of the future cascading opportunities.

However, obviously, for operational reasons it would make sense to go with Hitachi. They offer a “one stop shop” for the day-to-day, with their own travelling Technical Inspectors and Maintenance Controllers, not to mention simplicities of not retaining crew competency for what would otherwise be a very small fleet.

 

[TT-ONR-NRN]

I’m assuming any more Azumas would have to be Class 802s as non IEP procured

 

[hexagon789]

More 80x seems almost a given as their entire fleet would of course then consist purely of the same design of train.

There was that tender or something for 10-car 80x LNER had a while back, perhaps that gives an indication of their preferences in the respect?

 

[Andyh82]

Sitting down and working out exactly how many 5 car sets are required and then extending the reminder to 9 car would be a sensible start, so of course they won’t do this.

They will get a micro fleet of something I’d expect which will cause operational awkwardness for the next 30 years

 

[hexagon789]

Sitting down and working out exactly how many 5 car sets are required and then extending the reminder to 9 car would be a sensible start, so of course they won’t do this.

They will get a micro fleet of something I’d expect which will cause operational awkwardness for the next 30 years

Depends whether they order more 80x-style from Hitachi or something else entirely. The former seems more logical and likely

 

[route101]

Wouldnt 397s be bit small? Or why would you run them in double?

 

[hexagon789]

Wouldnt 397s be bit small? Or why would you run them in double?

Single 397s would be too small for LNER London-Edinburgh services, far too small

 

[jopsuk]

Wouldnt 397s be bit small? Or why would you run them in double?

You're rather assuming that that design can only be 5-car units?

 

[Neptune]

Single 397s would be too small for LNER London-Edinburgh services, far too small

Seeing as TPE can order extra intermediate cars for the 397’s I suspect they can order them up to any practical length required by the customer.

However it would make absolutely no sense to order an entirely different fleet when LNER could just order more 80x’s from Hitachi for a single fleet of near identical trains.

 

[hexagon789]

Seeing as TPE can order extra intermediate cars for the 397’s I suspect they can order them up to any practical length required by the customer.

However it would make absolutely no sense to order an entirely different fleet when LNER could just order more 80x’s from Hitachi for a single fleet of near identical trains.

I should've said 5-car 397s, that's what I really meant.

While of course a longer 397 would be a solution, I agree with your second point that it's not the logical or practical solution as I outlined above.

 

[route101]

You're rather assuming that that design can only be 5-car units?

I never even thought that they could extended

 

[Speed43125]

I never even thought that they could extended

I believe all of TPE orders were made with the option of extending any of them up to 7 car

 

[jopsuk]

of course, the reality is that should this go forward what we'll see is LNER place an invitation to tender (whether this will still be the OJEU or elsewhere is anyone's guess) requesting proposals from any interested manufacturers to put forward a solution to meet the requirements (which may be "a fleet of 10 car 125mph EMU" or "a fleet of 250m long 125mph trains with x capacity") and may or may not (depends on how they're feeling) be written in such a way as to favour Hitachi, or alternatively to make it an open competion. At which point if CAF feel they can meet the requirements at a competitive price they might offer a 397-esque train, Bombardier might offer something, etc.

 

[Speed43125]

of course, the reality is that should this go forward what we'll see is LNER place an invitation to tender (whether this will still be the OJEU or elsewhere is anyone's guess) requesting proposals from any interested manufacturers to put forward a solution to meet the requirements (which may be "a fleet of 10 car 125mph EMU" or "a fleet of 250m long 125mph trains with x capacity") and may or may not (depends on how they're feeling) be written in such a way as to favour Hitachi, or alternatively to make it an open competion. At which point if CAF feel they can meet the requirements at a competitive price they might offer a 397-esque train, Bombardier might offer something, etc.

I think their decision on whether to congregate IC225s on Captive Leeds service, or keep them on Edinburgh fasts will speak volumes on their willingness to buy from another manufacturer.

 

[Clansman]

You're rather assuming that that design can only be 5-car units?

It's a strangely common tendancy on this forum for members to somehow limit themselves to speculating within the tramlines of existing rolling stock designs.

I mind reading somewhere that it's not going be Azumas. Though perhaps this could have meant that any rolling stock procured will be outside the initial mass production line, which makes sense.

 

[DanNCL]

The new build sets for LNER are something to believe when they happen. A winning bidder was supposed to have been announced a while ago - nothing. Meanwhile the DFT are stopping the most basic of expenditures, never mind new trains, at literally every other TOC.

Unless there’s a change at the DFT (and it’ll take more than replacing Shapps), these new trains won’t happen no matter how much LNER prepare for them internally. Either the DFT will expect the remaining Mark 4 sets to continue for longer, or (more likely I suspect) they’ll simply make LNER axe the Mark 4 sets without replacement.

Northern are doing exactly the same as LNER when it comes to new trains, and will likely get exactly the same answer out of the DFT as LNER when it’s time to start signing contracts.

The last order of new passenger trains for the UK for a long time will likely be the new Tyne & Wear Metro fleet. We could easily be looking at a repeat of the 1990s no new train orders period.

 

[800001]

The new build sets for LNER are something to believe when they happen. A winning bidder was supposed to have been announced a while ago - nothing. Meanwhile the DFT are stopping the most basic of expenditures, never mind new trains, at literally every other TOC.

Unless there’s a change at the DFT (and it’ll take more than replacing Shapps), these new trains won’t happen no matter how much LNER prepare for them internally. Either the DFT will expect the remaining Mark 4 sets to continue for longer, or (more likely I suspect) they’ll simply make LNER axe the Mark 4 sets without replacement.

Northern are doing exactly the same as LNER when it comes to new trains, and will likely get exactly the same answer out of the DFT as LNER when it’s time to start signing contracts.

The last order of new passenger trains for the UK for a long time will likely be the new Tyne & Wear Metro fleet. We could easily be looking at a repeat of the 1990s no new train orders period.

LNER had selected the final bidder, then some legal appeals went in from other companies.

I’m lead to believe the bidders bids are now been reevaluated.

Also, LNER are advertising for a ‘

FLEET CUSTOMER EXPERIENCE INTERFACE MANAGER’

And

FLEET PROCUREMENT JOINT PROJECT MANAGER​

Both of these are jobs that will of had to be of signed off for approval from the DFT, so a very good sign that LNER are still progressing with the new fleet.

Also the depot where the fleet will be based, also has instructions to start planning and preparing for any works that will be needed to accommodate the new fleet.

 

[Watershed]

LNER had selected the final bidder, then some legal appeals went in from other companies.

I’m lead to believe the bidders bids are now been reevaluated.

Also, LNER are advertising for a ‘

FLEET CUSTOMER EXPERIENCE INTERFACE MANAGER’

And

FLEET PROCUREMENT JOINT PROJECT MANAGER​

Both of these are jobs that will of had to be of signed off for approval from the DFT, so a very good sign that LNER are still progressing with the new fleet.

Also the depot where the fleet will be based, also has instructions to start planning and preparing for any works that will be needed to accommodate the new fleet.

You keep on mentioning this, but ultimately the cost of employing such people is small change in comparison to the cost of actually signing a deal for more trains.

So it's eminently realistic that the DfT might be prepared to sign off on, say, £150k a year in extra personnel costs - but hasn't yet decided in earnest to agree to £20m a year for the new fleet.

 

[DanNCL]

LNER had selected the final bidder, then some legal appeals went in from other companies.

I’m lead to believe the bidders bids are now been reevaluated.

Also, LNER are advertising for a ‘

FLEET CUSTOMER EXPERIENCE INTERFACE MANAGER’

And

FLEET PROCUREMENT JOINT PROJECT MANAGER​

Both of these are jobs that will of had to be of signed off for approval from the DFT, so a very good sign that LNER are still progressing with the new fleet.

Also the depot where the fleet will be based, also has instructions to start planning and preparing for any works that will be needed to accommodate the new fleet.

LNER can select a final bidder, but if the DFT won’t allow any contracts to be signed then no new trains get ordered.

Exactly the same has happened at Northern where CAF have been selected to supply an additional 20 new DMUs but the DFT won’t allow any contracts to be signed.

 

[800001]

You keep on mentioning this, but ultimately the cost of employing such people is small change in comparison to the cost of actually signing a deal for more trains.

So it's eminently realistic that the DfT might be prepared to sign off on, say, £150k a year in extra personnel costs - but hasn't yet decided in earnest to agree to £20m a year for the new fleet.

Yes I do keep on mentioning this and will continue to do so!

When the dft won’t even authorise replacement stickers, posters, stationary, equipment to do the day to day jobs, but will sign of several thousands of pounds on new jobs, then it does make me feel like these new trains happen.

There is more I could write on here about what I’ve heard and seen about the new trains but I cant!

 

[TT-ONR-NRN]

LNER had selected the final bidder, then some legal appeals went in from other companies.

I’m lead to believe the bidders bids are now been reevaluated.

== Doublepost prevention - post automatically merged: 5 Sep 2022 ==

Quite frankly, if yet more of Britain’s high-speed trains are ordered from Hitachi, I really won’t be surprised if other manufacturers start to make a fuss.

 

[800001]

== Doublepost prevention - post automatically merged: 5 Sep 2022 ==

Quite frankly, if yet more of Britain’s high-speed trains are ordered from Hitachi, I really won’t be surprised if other manufacturers start to make a fuss.

Hitachi was not the selected final bidder!

And it wasn’t hitachi who opened the legal Avenue to dispute the choice!

 

[TT-ONR-NRN]

Hitachi was not the selected final bidder!

And it wasn’t hitachi who opened the legal Avenue to dispute the choice!

Ah… so Hitachi are completely uninvolved, for once! Very exciting. Would love to see a brand new Siemens or Alstom unit take to the ECML.

I’m very conscious of this being off topic here, so does anyone know of an ongoing thread that they can link to? It’s a discussion I’m very much interested in and would like to continue it in the relevant thread. If not, I’ll happily make one in Traction & Rolling Stock.

Edit: This has now been moved to the correct thread

 

[Bletchleyite]

Hitachi was not the selected final bidder!

And it wasn’t hitachi who opened the legal Avenue to dispute the choice!

And this is where the EU requirements for tendering make no sense at all. LNER need more Hitachi units, not a microfleet, least of all a "cheap as ****" one with a terrible ride and poor reliability. They should be permitted to order such units directly. I don't have to go out to tender for a new TV, and nor should a business have to, whether nationalised or not.

On the other hand this is perhaps LNER's failure as they could fairly easily have included things in the tender spec that only Hitachi would have easily met.

 

[Watershed]

Adding to this, I would assume the Birmingham semi remains with Voyager timings despite the superior acceleration of the Hitachi stock, and will only be tightened to acknowledge said acceleration after full replacement of the latter with the former.

The new Birmingham semifasts from December are using 80x timings. Voyagers generally beat those timings.

 

[800001]

And this is where the EU requirements for tendering make no sense at all. LNER need more Hitachi units, not a microfleet, least of all a "cheap as ****" one with a terrible ride and poor reliability. They should be permitted to order such units directly. I don't have to go out to tender for a new TV, and nor should a business have to, whether nationalised or not.

On the other hand this is perhaps LNER's failure as they could fairly easily have included things in the tender spec that only Hitachi would have easily met.

I 100% agree, but also makes you think who is actually stipulating what they should order.

 

[Trainbike46]

This might be an odd question, but if the new fleet would be a microfleet (so not a 80x), then why don't they just stick with the class 91+mark 4? They're not that old, seem to work perfectly fine, and I'd guess the only problem with them is that they're an odd microfleet. So if that isn't fixed anyway, why not just keep them long-term?