Fresh hopes for Bombardier and XC

[bluenoxid]

This sounds like kite-flying from the dear old Grauniad, part of the Derby campaign. Take an idea that has been floated for a couple of years and build it up into a "possibility" which they hope will become a rod to beat the Governments back. All the article says really is that a feasibility study has been mooted - the rest is fantasy - and I doubt such a study would report true value for money. I would guess that a huge proportion of the Voyagers' mileage is away from wires, so that adds costs of transporting unused equipment for relatively little gain. Extra coaches, though less glamorous, would be better,

Sits on the front of the Sunday Times Business section too, the esteemed left wing paper that the dark lords empire owns.[/sarcasm]

57 carriages would do XC. The irony is that it misses Virgin's, and the MML 222's. Two squandered opportunities if I was to ever see some.

I hope the DfT number crunchers work harder or they'll get a D for effort from me.

 

[Nym]

And an F in effort from me, there is a chance here to make one project bigger and therefore better value for money, and another much simpler, and therefore also cheaper. When combined with another project that has much better CBR than anything else currently being done.

 

[Blindtraveler]

my thoughts on this, are, unsurprisingly do it and hope that it runs smoothly and maybe even under budget and then maybe west coasts fleat wil also be done!

Cant help wondering if the high cost includes some kind of internal refit of the sets to iron out some of the gremlins in what are essentially 10 year old trains now and appart from some very minor attention have seen no internal care and have as I say issues a plenty, smelly bogs being a major one and a problem virgins fleat seams to be less prone too now in my experience which is ironic as its the same depot! Would be more likely to use XC if the thump of engines was öt there for the first cupple of hours to york.

 

[Nym]

The £120mil will include the costs of slotting them into the current fleet, that isn't cheap...

 

[Lampshade]

Why can't they just give them the Pacer replacement contract now? It'd be a HUGE order that should keep them in business for a good few years.

 

[anthony263]

Why can't they just give them the Pacer replacement contract now? It'd be a HUGE order that should keep them in business for a good few years.

Dont other builders such as CSRE would be too pleased with that.

But yes i do think more class 172's could be build perhaps a different version which is Bi-mode which would be useful for some operaters such as FGW or ATW

 

[Nym]

*headdesks* I'm sure I've gone through before why a bi-mode 2 or 3 car long turbostar style design wouldn't work properly, or would need a major re-think.

 

[junglejames]

Dont other builders such as CSRE would be too pleased with that.

But yes i do think more class 172's could be build perhaps a different version which is Bi-mode which would be useful for some operaters such as FGW or ATW

Dont give two hoots what CSRE think. They shouldnt even be in the running for any contracts.
Only company that has reason to complain is Siemens.
Dont need any more Hitachi stuff either.

 

[Blindtraveler]

here here!

 

[bluenoxid]

Unfortunately the law doesn't care what you think either?

 

[jonhewes]

I think the addition of a trailer or pantograph/transformer car to the 220/221 fleet would be a brilliant idea, and in ideal world it'd be also nice to see the same done with the 222 fleet. However, I recall reading somewhere that the 222s are electrically incompatible with the 220s and 221s, due to the latter two types having an Alsthom control system in order to be compatible with Pendolini. This would presumably require additional design work to be completed for the scheme to be extended to the 222 fleet

 

[Nym]

They all use Alstom Oynx traction systems IIRC...

 

[jonhewes]

Dont give two hoots what CSRE think. They shouldnt even be in the running for any contracts.

I agree with that to a point. China does not generally allow foreign competition when it comes to the rail industry.

I also wonder how the economics of us off-shoring more and more of our economy actually work. Surely we'll get to a point (and probably already have), where the value of the goods and services we import actually exceeds the value of anything we produce.

 

[WatcherZero]

Thats called the Balance of Payments.

The US is currently running at -$561bn
UK at -$40bn

Net 1980-2008 per Capita

 

[route:oxford]

An extra carriage on XC services would be fantastic. Better still with the pantograph coach.

Now all we need is Transport Scotland to do a West Yorkshire and "sponsor", say, a dozen further diesel coaches - to ensure services continue north of Newcastle.

What would also be interesting would be if the ROSCO were to break the lease and order an additional 221 pantograph coach and a further 8 221 electric only coaches - to match up with the 2 "spare" lead coaches. Not sure if worthwhile to retain the 2 diesel engines for off-wire marshalling manouvres.

A "spare" reliable 11 coach train that is fit for 125mph operations on both the EC & WC mainlines built using standard components would probably be quite useful

 

[jones_bangor]

Good to see Government intervention to save the Derby plant - about time we did as the French and Germans do - not as they tell us to do!!

The extra capacity will be welcomed by all regular users of Voyagers.

Unclear as to whether the Virgin fleet is covered - I assume so?

 

[jon0844]

I wonder if Bombardier are currently thinking 'S**T' as they wanted to close the site down and move operations to mainland Europe.

If this was always the case, as I suspect, then as soon as this job is completed they'll say they're off again anyway. Or, they'll be clever and accept the work and then build the carriages abroad anyway!!

 

[jones_bangor]

I wonder if Bombardier are currently thinking 'S**T' as they wanted to close the site down and move operations to mainland Europe.

If this was always the case, as I suspect, then as soon as this job is completed they'll say they're off again anyway. Or, they'll be clever and accept the work and then build the carriages abroad anyway!!

Presumably there will be strings attached to the deal.

 

[Butts]

Presumably there will be strings attached to the deal.

Be almost unique if there were not - whether overt or covert is another matter

 

[WatcherZero]

Even IF this deal is struck it would only keep the plant going two years, if they didnt win Crossrail then it would shut down before any other major contract (e.g. Pacer replacement) was run anyway.

 

[159220]

I have a few thoughts.

Firstly, I warmly welcome panto car additions to 220/221s. Extra seating is very welcomed.

But...

Secondly, Surely these should be built in Belgium where the orginal 220/221s were manafactured, might the "jigs" still be lying around? I find the idea that 57 coaches shall keep Derby open is utterly over the top and no offence to Derby. Nearly a decade on...Electrostars are utter c*** compared to Siemens Desiros. Anyone with sence in Crossrail would order on the Desiro City. I just dont see the Derby plant being successful in winning Crossrail. The Cross rail team stated they wanted "proven" trains...the Aventura is only a concept! So please, as i first stated, i warmly welcome making the XC Voyager fleet bi-mode but please, make them in Belgium

Thirdly, It has been mentioned why are they not including Virgins 221s (and MML 222s) in the press release. Well, If you read the terms and conditions to the trains which should be made avaiable to the franchise holder of ICWC from 2012. The 221s only have to be used by the franchaise holder until 2015 (or 2017 - I shall check the specific fact - unless someone else has read the rolling stock contracts). Thus within the bidding process for the next ICWC franchaise, bidders can state what rolling stock they wish to use after this 221 date. If they can offer a different product (Pendolino) and find a new home for the 221s (XC) they can dispose of the fleet from the franchase after the 2015/2017 date.

The DfT know this, they know it is very unlikely 221s will be seen on ICWC in 5 yrs time and thus cannot justify the already expensive cost of employing a few people in Derby when other Bombarider workers in Europe build trains to a much higher quality.

 

[Flywaver]

As per usual.. Route 6 of XCs network has been forgotten about.
Birmingham - Stansted. How about Bi-Mode 170s... A massive fuel saving Ely-Stansted section. No more 2 cars either..

 

[sprinterguy]

As per usual.. Route 6 of XCs network has been forgotten about.
Birmingham - Stansted. How about Bi-Mode 170s... A massive fuel saving Ely-Stansted section. No more 2 cars either..

When Ely to Stansted is such a small proportion of the Birmingham to Stansted route, served by only an hourly XC train, then I wouldn't think that it would cause "a massive fuel saving". The route is ably suited to being served by diesel stock, as the vast majority of the route is diesel only.

Additionally, I don't think it would be possible to bi-mode the 170s because they have a hydraulic transmission rather than straight electric. I might be mistaken though.

 

[ainsworth74]

How about Bi-Mode 170s.

Well for one thing it would require an entirely new traction package for the units as they at present are hydraulic rather than electric like 22xs. Also I have a feeling that Nym has mentioned that there are other issues with converting short units perhaps they could go through them again for the benefit of those of us who didn't pay attention the first time round

 

[Flywaver]

Ok fair enough. I should know better as i drive them on that route...
But i feel we are the lost route of XC.... Since the franchise started we were getting the bay extended at Stansted....

 

[DjU]

The Cross rail team stated they wanted "proven" trains...the Aventura is only a concept!

In exactly the same way that the Desiro City is just a 'concept' at the moment.

 

[cle]

Surely London - Crewe on the Chester trains has to be one of the most wasteful stretches in terms of diesel under the wires?

I guess it will be beneficial for XC in terms of having more stopping trains - acceleration in between stops is much better and so journey times might be improved. Not that they'd remove the slack from the timetables!

Might this be a good opportunity to acquire some more, and merge the B'ham - Scotland and Manchester - Scotland fleets into one?

 

[Xenophon PCDGS]

Surely London - Crewe on the Chester trains has to be one of the most wasteful stretches in terms of diesel under the wires?

I am wandering how many postings to this effect were made on the "Crewe to Chester" Electrification thread?

 

[tbtc]

Surely London - Crewe on the Chester trains has to be one of the most wasteful stretches in terms of diesel under the wires?

It was one of the best contenders on this (locked) thread http://www.railforums.co.uk/showthread.php?t=46017

 

[AndrewP]

This sort of contract would make it easier for Bombardier to sell its UK operations if it wanted an easier 'get out'.

Would a Chinese company be potentially interested as a way of entering the European market and gaining design skills?