Potential up to 2,000 job losses at Alstom Derby

[Mikey C]

I do not think the 345s will be lengthened. I think the 345s are formed of vehicles longer than the usual so 9-cars is probably equivalent to 12-cars of old style units. I suppose it depends on the length of platforms - I think the 345s are filling the full length of platforms on the core.

The Liz Line core stations are very long, at the moment the 9 car trains don't fill them.

There may be issues with the "classic" stations on the surface though?

 

[Omnishambles]

One possible Derby option is reworking spare 701 & 720's to Southeastern spec, you could give that to Alstom without to many complaints from the other manufacturer's.

Ooh, I absolutely doubt that at all given the SE procurement is in play, there would be absolute uproar.

 

[Invincible]

True, will Old Oak Common have extra platforms for terminating Elizabeth line trains ?.

Thinking about it the hope is there would be enough extra demand for services to Heathrow (soaking up those pesky connecting flight passengers).

It will be new though platforms on the existing Elizabeth line, planned for 2026.

Rishi Sunak says HS2 axe not to blame for Alstom job loss fears

The union Unite says delays to the HS2 project has directly impacted the uncertainty at Alstom.

www.bbc.co.uk

Sunak says the change in HS2 is not affecting Derby, but the Government will find ways of placing new orders, but no confirmation of orders or bids.
The Unite union is sceptical.

 

[Taunton]

The Liz Line core stations are very long, at the moment the 9 car trains don't fill them.

There may be issues with the "classic" stations on the surface though?

There are already significant 'short platforms' on the main line sections of the Elizabeth, down to 7 of the 9 cars. Although the Core itself has station platform provision for another two cars, I can't see them running further out with four cars at the back locked out.

However, there is seemingly plenty of potential capacity already.

- Even at peak periods there are quite a number of trains in the sidings at Old Oak depot.

- The station dwell times continue to be excessive, and even in the peaks are capable of considerable reduction, gaining several trains in the circuit. This especially applies in the 'contra peak' direction, which for trains running through from one side of London to the other always applies for one half of the journey.

 

[JonathanH]

More likely is the order of more 345s to help cover the extra demand from the TEMPORARY HS2 terminus at Old Oak Common to/from central London. How many I don't know but presumably enough to increase the frequency to the limit on the core so turning round beyond the core.

Five apparently, at a cost of £120 million.

Presumably a few weeks work.

https://www.standard.co.uk/news/tra...-fund-new-elizabeth-line-trains-b1121492.html

Government urged to fund new Elizabeth line trains

Manufacturer Alstom is consulting on potential redundancies at its train manufacturing site

Transport Secretary Mark Harper has been urged to fund new Elizabeth line trains to help save the UK’s largest rail assembly factory.

Alstom is consulting on potential redundancies believed to be around 550 at its train manufacturing site in Derby, while 780 contractors are also at risk.

This is due to a gap in its order book.

In a joint letter, bosses from Transport for London (TfL), Alstom and trade union Unite urged Mr Harper to agree to fund new trains for the Elizabeth line, which runs between Berkshire and Essex via central London.

They stressed the importance of a quick decision before Alstom demobilises its production facilities for the Aventra trains used on the route.

The letter warned that the Government’s decision for Old Oak Common – in the west London suburbs – to be the capital’s HS2 terminus for several years means more pressure will be put on Elizabeth line services at the station.

The letter stated: “The additional trains will enable TfL to operate a higher frequency of services to Old Oak Common to relieve wait times at the station, reduce crowding on trains and provide shorter journey times for more customers using Old Oak Common station.

“Relying on the existing services on the western route would undercut the benefits brought by introducing high speed rail travel between Birmingham and London; it would be detrimental to the local area, as it would fail to cater for the growing community around the station which has 26,000 homes and 56,000 new jobs in the pipeline; and the consequences would extend to the national economy.”

TfL believes the Government should pay for at least five additional trains at a total cost of around £120 million, because its HS2 policy will cause extra strain at Old Oak Common.

The letter added: “Given the small size of the order required, delaying it would require Alstom to mobilise a new production facility at a much higher cost.

“If we miss the opportunity with Alstom, it may be impossible to achieve elsewhere and HS2 will not achieve the programme aspirations for Old Oak Common.”

A Department for Transport spokesman said: “We have been engaging extensively with TfL and Alstom on this issue for months and are continuing to work with them.

“A dedicated cross-Government taskforce has also been set up to properly support workers during what will be a concerning time.

“The Transport Secretary will respond to the letter shortly.”

 

[Energy]

Five apparently, at a cost of £120 million.

Presumably a few weeks work.

https://www.standard.co.uk/news/tra...-fund-new-elizabeth-line-trains-b1121492.html

£120mil seems rather high for a tag on order on an EMU on a production line which is currently open.

 

[JonathanH]

£120mil seems rather high for a tag on order on an EMU on a production line which is currently open.

It also implies that TfL can't afford to pay lease prices for them.

 

[D365]

£120mil seems rather high for a tag on order on an EMU on a production line which is currently open.

The Class 345 production line isn't open - so the cost may [arguably] be taking that into account.

 

[Peter Sarf]

£120mil seems rather high for a tag on order on an EMU on a production line which is currently open.

Its an average of just under £2.2 per coach. How does this compare with the cost of a locomotive these days ?.

But it is going to cost more if we don't buy now. The production line for 345s has already moved on to similar EMUs which will be completed soon (allegedly). The skills and experience for that particular design are still there but won't last. Its not an Alstom product after all so would Alstom bother setting up a production line elsewhere for something I doubt Alstom think has a long term order future.

 

[Energy]

The Class 345 production line isn't open - so the cost may [arguably] be taking that into account.

Still open for Aventras, same bodyshell but different cab.

 

[Speed43125]

Its an average of just under £2.2 per coach. How does this compare with the cost of a locomotive these days ?.

But it is going to cost more if we don't buy now. The production line for 345s has already moved on to similar EMUs which will be completed soon (allegedly). The skills and experience for that particular design are still there but won't last. Its not an Alstom product after all so would Alstom bother setting up a production line elsewhere for something I doubt Alstom think has a long term order future.

The LNER CAF order was €500M for 100 vehicles, including the maintenance contract. But they're more complicated power supply wise and essentially a new design. Make of that what you will.

 

[swt_passenger]

True, will Old Oak Common have extra platforms for terminating Elizabeth line trains ?.

Thinking about it the hope is there would be enough extra demand for services to Heathrow (soaking up those pesky connecting flight passengers).

Yes. It’s been discussed and explained many times before. There will be 8 platforms on 4 islands for the GW, the 4 track relief side layout has the terminating platforms in the middle with up and down through lines outside of them. There are also 3 turnback sidings just west of the station, replicating Westbourne Park capacity. (Possibly drifting off topic for this thread now.)

 

[Bletchleyite]

The Class 345 production line isn't open - so the cost may [arguably] be taking that into account.

They are just modular Aventras.

 

[43096]

Its an average of just under £2.2 per coach. How does this compare with the cost of a locomotive these days ?.

A Vectron off the production line in Munich costs about €4-5 million depending on the specification.

 

[Taunton]

Even if the order was placed, would have to be extremely cautious that Alstom don't then build them in France.

What was Roger Ford's 6th "Law"? :

Sixth Law: ‘Don’t engage in joint ventures with the French’.

Already done once by Alstom to Metro-Cammell.

 

[Chester1]

Even if the order was placed, would have to be extremely cautious that Alstom don't then build them in France.

What was Roger Ford's 6th "Law"? :

Sixth Law: ‘Don’t engage in joint ventures with the French’.

Already done once by Alstom to Metro-Cammell.

The place of production could be stipulated in the contract directly or indirectly through a social benefit clause. 5 x 345s doesn't sound like much more than a few months work before we are back to square one.

 

[Bletchleyite]

Even if the order was placed, would have to be extremely cautious that Alstom don't then build them in France.

It's only five units, a spit in the ocean that will have no impact on Derby's fortunes.

 

[Horizon22]

There are already significant 'short platforms' on the main line sections of the Elizabeth, down to 7 of the 9 cars. Although the Core itself has station platform provision for another two cars, I can't see them running further out with four cars at the back locked out.

However, there is seemingly plenty of potential capacity already.

- Even at peak periods there are quite a number of trains in the sidings at Old Oak depot.

- The station dwell times continue to be excessive, and even in the peaks are capable of considerable reduction, gaining several trains in the circuit. This especially applies in the 'contra peak' direction, which for trains running through from one side of London to the other always applies for one half of the journey.

30tph of 11-car trains is the absoloute maximum the core (Paddington - Whitechapel) can take. 24tph is already intensive enough. There are not "quite a number of trains" in the sidings at Old Oak during the peak; they would be units cycling throughout the day and the fleet is intensively used.

9-cars to 11-cars would need to be considered probably within the next 5 cars if passenger demand projections continue, but you are right having 4 cars out of use is less than desirable (but slightly mitigated by walkthrough carriages). This may give Alstom some work.

 

[hwl]

30tph of 11-car trains is the absoloute maximum the core (Paddington - Whitechapel) can take. 24tph is already intensive enough. There are not "quite a number of trains" in the sidings at Old Oak during the peak; they would be units cycling throughout the day and the fleet is intensively used.

9-cars to 11-cars would need to be considered probably within the next 5 cars if passenger demand projections continue, but you are right having 4 cars out of use is less than desirable (but slightly mitigated by walkthrough carriages). This may give Alstom some work.

TfL thinking on upping Crossrail capacity was to go to 30tph first then lengthen as they are firm believers in service frequency driving growth by reducing waits and total journey times (this growth would then help justify 9-11car lengthening).
NR/TOC thinking would conversely point to lengthening first.

== Doublepost prevention - post automatically merged: 21 Nov 2023 ==

I think the 345s are formed of vehicles longer than the usual so 9-cars is probably equivalent to 12-cars of old style units. I suppose it depends on the length of platforms - I think the 345s are filling the full length of platforms on the core.

9 car 345 is equivalent to 10 car with traditional 20m car length
11 car 345 is equivalent to 12 car with traditional 20m car length

 

[Bletchleyite]

11 car 345 is equivalent to 12 car with traditional 20m car length

10.345 would be the same as 12.350 (or whatever), they are 24m vehicles.

 

[hwl]

10.345 would be the same as 12.350 (or whatever), they are 24m vehicles.

No they aren't 24m vehicles

End vehicles are 23.62m
Intermediate vehicles are 22.48m

The 345 intermediate vehicles have 1 window fewer than "24m" (24.21m intermediate) 720/730 and 1 more window than 20m 701/710.

So 11car 345 = 249.56m
12car 350 = 244.08m
12car 377 = 242.34m

 

[Peter Sarf]

It's only five units, a spit in the ocean that will have no impact on Derby's fortunes.

My thinking is maybe a bit negative - We need to order what 345 add-ons we will need in the future before the Derby facility becomes a retail park rather than striving to prevent it closing !.

30tph of 11-car trains is the absoloute maximum the core (Paddington - Whitechapel) can take. 24tph is already intensive enough. There are not "quite a number of trains" in the sidings at Old Oak during the peak; they would be units cycling throughout the day and the fleet is intensively used.

9-cars to 11-cars would need to be considered probably within the next 5 cars if passenger demand projections continue, but you are right having 4 cars out of use is less than desirable (but slightly mitigated by walkthrough carriages). This may give Alstom some work.

If 4 out of 11 coaches have doors out of use, then that is 37% of the length of the train. Not that you need a specific factory to lengthen a platform.

TfL thinking on upping Crossrail capacity was to go to 30tph first then lengthen as they are firm believers in service frequency driving growth by reducing waits and total journey times (this growth would then help justify 9-11car lengthening).
NR/TOC thinking would conversely point to lengthening first.

== Doublepost prevention - post automatically merged: 21 Nov 2023 ==

I can relate to that, frequency drives the growth and lengthening copes with it.
Until you hit the capacity limit !.

9 car 345 is equivalent to 10 car with traditional 20m car length
11 car 345 is equivalent to 12 car with traditional 20m car length

Thanks for that and I have tweaked my original post.

Begs a question.
Is adding trailers (motored ?) to 345s from another manufacturer/site going to be easier than building new 345s from another manufacturer/site.

---

Its the good old boom and bust roller coaster of demand for new trains to blame for the lack of work at Derby. I remember reading many decades ago (MR - Roger Ford most likely) that the Pacers were needed to replace a proportion of the first generation DMUs that were coming of age with something that would not last as long as Sprinters so that next time round there would be a smoother demand for new DMUs. Those first generation DMUs had been ordered all too close together in the dash to eradicate steam. We have barely replaced the Pacers before the Sprinters drop.

Is Derby's weakness that they chose to only build Electric Aventras ?.
At a time when the government (DfT ?) were mandating - No New DMUs.

A nice rolling program of electrification would give the Aventra EMU built at Derby more relevance - just sayin !.

 

[hwl]

My thinking is maybe a bit negative - We need to order what 345 add-ons we will need in the future before the Derby facility becomes a retail park rather than striving to prevent it closing !.

If 4 out of 11 coaches have doors out of use, then that is 37% of the length of the train. Not that you need a specific factory to lengthen a platform.

I can relate to that, frequency drives the growth and lengthening copes with it.
Until you hit the capacity limit !.

Thanks for that and I have tweaked my original post.

Begs a question.
Is adding trailers (motored ?) to 345s from another manufacturer/site going to be easier than building new 345s from another manufacturer/site.

---

Its the good old boom and bust roller coaster of demand for new trains to blame for the lack of work at Derby. I remember reading many decades ago (MR - Roger Ford most likely) that the Pacers were needed to replace a proportion of the first generation DMUs that were coming of age with something that would not last as long as Sprinters so that next time round there would be a smoother demand for new DMUs. Those first generation DMUs had been ordered all too close together in the dash to eradicate steam. We have barely replaced the Pacers before the Sprinters drop.

Is Derby's weakness that they chose to only build Electric Aventras ?.
At a time when the government (DfT ?) were mandating - No New DMUs.

A nice rolling program of electrification would give the Aventra EMU built at Derby more relevance - just sayin !.

Additional trailers would have 1 motor bogie each.

They have offered bi-mode and hydrogen.

There hasn't been been a proposal for diesel with mechanical/hydraulic transmission option as a direct turbostar replacement

 

[43096]

Is adding trailers (motored ?) to 345s

That’s an oxymoron! A trailer doesn’t have motors. That’s why it is called a trailer.

 

[Bletchleyite]

Is Derby's weakness that they chose to only build Electric Aventras ?.
At a time when the government (DfT ?) were mandating - No New DMUs.

The error there was in not understanding that the DaFT change their mind as often as they change their socks. And that cost them e.g. the possibility of the Northern DMU and EMU order (i.e. 195/331).

 

[Mikey C]

Even if the order was placed, would have to be extremely cautious that Alstom don't then build them in France.

What was Roger Ford's 6th "Law"? :

Sixth Law: ‘Don’t engage in joint ventures with the French’.

Already done once by Alstom to Metro-Cammell.

Have Alstom assembled ANY trains for the UK in France?

Indeed other than a few top up orders (for extra 390s and 96 tube trains), did they win any UK orders between the closure of Metro-Cammell and the purchase of Bombardier?

 

[Trainbike46]

Have Alstom assembled ANY trains for the UK in France?

Indeed other than a few top up orders (for extra 390s and 96 tube trains), did they win any UK orders between the closure of Metro-Cammell and the purchase of Bombardier?

the 373s were partially built in France (though no clue how that relates time-wise with Metro-Cammell closure)

 

[Energy]

The error there was in not understanding that the DaFT change their mind as often as they change their socks. And that cost them e.g. the possibility of the Northern DMU and EMU order (i.e. 195/331).

The number of 195/196/197 vehicles is actually quite low at 409.

For context there are 750 class 701 vehicles, 725 class 720 vehicles, 630 class 345 vehicles and 320 class 730 vehicles.

 

[Bletchleyite]

The number of 195/196/197 vehicles is actually quite low at 409.

Northern wanted a single vendor and commonality, so also the 141 Class 331 vehicles were a lost order. There are fewer than I thought though!

Having said that, might they also have got the 196 and 197 order?

 

[LNW-GW Joint]

Have Alstom assembled ANY trains for the UK in France?
Indeed other than a few top up orders (for extra 390s and 96 tube trains), did they win any UK orders between the closure of Metro-Cammell and the purchase of Bombardier?

373s were a mix of French and British technology, and were assembled on both sides of the channel.
There were probably Washwood Heath-built 373s running on domestic SNCF services at one point (with their British electrics).
390s had the added ingredient of Italian bodyshells and (I think) a Swiss electric tilt design, all eventually under the Alstom label.

Alstom were in pole position to win a Southeastern order in 2019 which would have replaced all the EMUs, and they were part of the Stagecoach bid.
But the Stagecoach bid was disqualified and the franchise competition terminated so no order was forthcoming.
Alstom also lost out/withdrew from other bids because their technology did not suit the operators involved, or the DfT.