Bombardier £188m Order from Southern

[the sniper]

And if Siemens had bid for that do you think they'd have offered a 444?

I didn't say they wouldn't have done the same. But it disproves asylumxl's 'Bombardier only do Electostars and Turbostars'.

 

[Wyvern]

Presumably the LUL stock is a variant of Bombardier's other metro product.

The Electrostars and Turbostars fit readily with the British loading gauge without any unexpected problems.

They could offer a Voyager/Meridian variant but are there any restrictions to their use on the network?
--- old post above --- --- new post below ---

Other manufacturers seem more willing to do custom builds though. The Key is to use as many common components and systems as possible. Look at Stadler who specialise in short run custom builds

So you are going to use a variety of common components on the one hand and a custom creation on the other? I'm not sure what you are wanting.

THe major component is the body shell. You aren't going to have many different ones of them - especially since they are only likely to be useful in Britain. You can then of course fit a variety of body ends.

But I thought the ideal was compatibility and interchangeability not a hodge-podge of different kinds of train.

 

[Class377/5]

Presumably the LUL stock is a variant of Bombardier's other metro product.

S stock is from Bombardier's Movia family tho have a look at the Delhi Metro version. Very different.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Movia

Where as the 09 stock is actually a mini Electrostar!

 

[starrymarkb]

THe major component is the body shell. You aren't going to have many different ones of them - especially since they are only likely to be useful in Britain. You can then of course fit a variety of body ends.

Actually they do, for example they scale their designs for the different gauges (ie a SPATZ driving trailer is very similar to the GTW however the SPATZ is 2/3 size)

 

[WatcherZero]

The last batch of Docklands stock is just a Flexity Swift tram with a different bodyshell. Bombardier have been quite adaptable in the same way Siemens has but theyve not invested in the same way, Siemens spending £25m designing the Desiro City for the UK market before they even had any orders.

 

[Class377/5]

The last batch of Docklands stock is just a Flexity Swift tram with a different bodyshell. Bombardier have been quite adaptable in the same way Siemens has but theyve not invested in the same way, Siemens spending £25m designing the Desiro City for the UK market before they even had any orders.

Siemens have been fairly quiet about the Desiro City and have just tried to get on with the job. It's already produced the first bogies for the Thameslink trains and now is moving onto testing them, despite the contract not actually being signed yet.

I wonder if Bombardier would have been so prepared if they were preferred bidder?

 

[Nym]

Siemens have been fairly quiet about the Desiro City and have just tried to get on with the job. It's already produced the first bogies for the Thameslink trains and now is moving onto testing them, despite the contract not actually being signed yet.

I wonder if Bombardier would have been so prepared if they were preferred bidder?

They also have all the power control and systems, and train management system hardware tested, and running, in Scotland

 

[Wyvern]

They also have all the power control and systems, and train management system hardware tested, and running, in Scotland

And the problems ironed out hopefully.

 

[Nym]

And the problems ironed out hopefully.

The hint was at Class 380 units that are testing several new components for the Desiro City, I haven't heard any more issues surrounding them recently, so I'd think so.

Oh, and I think I'm the only one that believes it would be better for the country if the Thameslink rolling stock was classified as a 345 and just happened to be used on Crossrail too, you know, economies of scale and whatnot.

 

[Schnellzug]

The last batch of Docklands stock is just a Flexity Swift tram with a different bodyshell. Bombardier have been quite adaptable in the same way Siemens has but theyve not invested in the same way, Siemens spending £25m designing the Desiro City for the UK market before they even had any orders.

That's the sensible way to do it. It's like how GM invented the Class 59, by squeezing what was basically an SD40-2 in a new bodyshell. The body is probably the easiest part.

 

[Class377/5]

The hint was at Class 380 units that are testing several new components for the Desiro City, I haven't heard any more issues surrounding them recently, so I'd think so.

Oh, and I think I'm the only one that believes it would be better for the country if the Thameslink rolling stock was classified as a 345 and just happened to be used on Crossrail too, you know, economies of scale and whatnot.

There's no chance it's going to be called 345 as Crossrail has take that for its class of train. Fact that Thameslink trains will be started to be built before Crossrail's mean they will get a fleet number different.

So far rumour are of 381's, but nothing has been confirmed.

 

[Nym]

The point being that XR should use the same stock as TL for economies of scale, and using the likes of the Dudding Hill Line or WLL/NLL can transfer between the two, so one sodding big depot is needed, rather than two smaller ones.

 

[Class377/5]

The point being that XR should use the same stock as TL for economies of scale, and using the likes of the Dudding Hill Line or WLL/NLL can transfer between the two, so one sodding big depot is needed, rather than two smaller ones.

You forget Dulling Hill is diesel only?

There is nowhere you could put a site for Crossrail and Thameslink that would be close to both. That's besides the fact that operationally you never should put all your eggs in one basket. One incident and you screw two major commuter lines.

Yes the economies of scale would be better of you did one big bid but is that practical? You forget that when they starting the process to get the Thameslink stock, Crossrail was just getting started (in fact Crossrail has only just started this).

I can only imagination the kick off if Siemens had got Thameslink and Crossrail as a joint package. Bombardier would have pulled out the UK or got a order for the 377/6, and replacement fleet for Southern!

 

[ukrob]

There's no chance it's going to be called 345 as Crossrail has take that for its class of train. Fact that Thameslink trains will be started to be built before Crossrail's mean they will get a fleet number different.

As opposed to the 377's in your username which have just been ordered 10 years after the first ones?

They might be totally separate classes (we will have to wait and see) but your logic is majorly flawed.

 

[Class377/5]

As opposed to the 377's in your username which have just been ordered 10 years after the first ones?

They might be totally separate classes (we will have to wait and see) but your logic is majorly flawed.

The reason why 377/5 we called that is they are the same basic design from a 377 after the original 377's we built. Crossrail is going to be class 345, they have decided to go public with that so we know that for sure. You can't expect Siemens to build a fleet without a class just because they might end up with another contract just for the trains they already known the class number for. The contract for the Crossrail trains is going to be awarded in 2014. The first Thameslink train should (unless they scrap it all and start again) be running on the rails at least on the test track if not the UK network so they have to give it a fleet number by then.

 

[ukrob]

I think you missed my point to be honest .

 

[Class377/5]

I think you missed my point to be honest .

I think I have

All these long days (my excuse anyway).

 

[Wyvern]

That's the sensible way to do it. It's like how GM invented the Class 59, by squeezing what was basically an SD40-2 in a new bodyshell. The body is probably the easiest part.

For a freight loco maybe. For an EMU I'm not so sure

 

[tbtc]

The point being that XR should use the same stock as TL for economies of scale, and using the likes of the Dudding Hill Line or WLL/NLL can transfer between the two, so one sodding big depot is needed, rather than two smaller ones.

Both orders of stock will be big enough to have some decent economies of scale on their own (e.g. 60x Crossrail trains, over a hundred new Thameslink) - either would be significantly bigger than a lot of depots (around the size of some entire franchises - esp when you consider the length of these trains).

 

[Nym]

Quite, although I can see XR getting well past needing 60 trainsets, especially if HS2 pushes services from Euston onto XR (MKC / Trings)

 

[DownSouth]

That's the sensible way to do it. It's like how GM invented the Class 59, by squeezing what was basically an SD40-2 in a new bodyshell. The body is probably the easiest part.

It's actually a lot harder than you might think for a locomotive.

Here in Australia we have two locomotive manufacturers - United-Goninan Limited and DownerEDI Rail - who use GE and EMD drivetrain components respectively. Fitting the significantly larger components into a loading gauge which is similar to Britain's while also making it suitable for tougher Australian conditions is the toughest part of the whole process, which is why the expertise of UGL and DownerEDI is needed rather than ordering them directly from GE and EMD. When they engineer their drivetrains, they are thinking primarily about locos for the home market rather than reduced-gauge locos for Britain/Europe or licensed builders.

A good example of this is GE's Evolution Series drivetrain. It's a fantastic drivetrain (the AC version especially) but it is too tall to fit within an Australian gauged body, so UGL is still building locos using the older Dash 9 drivetrain.

The new PowerHaul drivetrain from GE will be a refreshing change to the normal way things go. Because it was first used in a double-cab British loco (the most restrictive configuration possible) there should be no challenge for European PowerHaul locomotives or license-built locos in places like Australia where you only need one cab.

For a freight loco maybe. For an EMU I'm not so sure

I would say it's actually the other way around, the challenge with the body of an EMU is only really to do with the design of the interior. What takes up the space in an EMU is the passenger accommodation space, the traction equipment being relatively simple to rework given the space required and the space available tend to stay pretty constant.

For a heavy freight locomotive the space is almost fully taken up by the traction equipment, so any change in the space available has a big impact.

 

[Wyvern]

I dont know about freight locos. My impression is they are basically a platform with the works built on and a shell put round. The 66 I heard mainly came within gauge by omitting the flexible engine mountings making them extremely noisy to work.

A DMU or an EMU however is a stressed skin body. Any change requires a complete redesign. ????

 

[Wolfie]

Problem is Bombardier needed to learn a lot where as Siemens don't. When your bidding for such a big contract things like this matter.

Even getting the 377/5's up to where they are now required a lot of effort on Bombardier's behalf that took months with specialists on site.

There is so much ironic about this post it is untrue.....

Just look at the situation in Germany where Bombardier routinely trouces Siemens for orders.....
--- old post above --- --- new post below ---

S stock is from Bombardier's Movia family tho have a look at the Delhi Metro version. Very different.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Movia

Where as the 09 stock is actually a mini Electrostar!

I am confused - the Wiki article you link to describes the 2009 stock as being part of the Movia family.....

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/London_Underground_2009_Stock

 

[WatcherZero]

There is so much ironic about this post it is untrue.....

Just look at the situation in Germany where Bombardier routinely trouces Siemens for orders.....

Which would suggest the labour and facilities at Derby is the route of Bombardiers problems.

 

[gordonthemoron]

I haven't noticed much new stuff from Bombardier in Germany recently. It all seems to be Siemens & Alstom. However, the new ICx is being made by Siemens & Bombardier

 

[Class377/5]

There is so much ironic about this post it is untrue.....

Just look at the situation in Germany where Bombardier routinely trouces Siemens for orders.....

I am confused - the Wiki article you link to describes the 2009 stock as being part of the Movia family.....

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/London_Underground_2009_Stock

I didn't actually see that. Was using it to show how different the S stock is different from the from the Indai version. As for the 09 stock, well Bombardier and Modern Railways have said its based on Electrostar who I'd trust more than the Wiki.

As for the German order, don't really know this area but the point is then Bombardier isn't struggling, Derby is. Siemens seems able to build trains and export them where Derby doesn't seem able/willing to.

 

[WatcherZero]

Mainly it comes down to logistics and gauging. You would have to do a lot of work to make it possible for a European gauge train to travel to a customer on the continent by rail, everything would have to broken down and delivered by flatbred truck, vice versa is not the same. A plant in Austria/Germany is also perfectly suited to deliver anywhere on the continent and enjoys larger economies of scale from higher current production output compared to Derby plant.

Hitachi's new plant is being built with ease of coastal access in mind.

As to minimum production, Modern Rail suggests that 3-4 S Stock deliveries a month would be the minimum required for the plant to continue, something its not achieving at the moment with all the production difficulties.

 

[fgwrich]

As to minimum production, Modern Rail suggests that 3-4 S Stock deliveries a month would be the minimum required for the plant to continue, something its not achieving at the moment with all the production difficulties.

http://railnews.co.uk/news/metro/2011/12/20-transport-for-london-refuses-to.html

So the test runs around Old Dalby not proving reliable enough?

 

[Class377/5]

http://railnews.co.uk/news/metro/2011/12/20-transport-for-london-refuses-to.html

So the test runs around Old Dalby not proving reliable enough?

Not test track can truely replicate the real thing. Met line is a mix of nearly 150 years of Underground development from running over part of the first ever Underground line to interacting with the new Jubilee Line control system you just cannot know for sure.

However that said some of the reports are of the units sitting down in service. As we don't actually know the root reasons we can't be sure which factors have affected this.

But it does seem the Bombardier curse is well and truely alive after moving on from the 09ts.

 

[junglejames]

I think it's a bit rich to say Bombardier has 'won' this contract as politically there's no way on earth that the government would have considered giving it to any other manufacturer after all the fuss over the Thameslink order... could you imagine the headlines if they had done so? The management at Bombardier must have been laughing, they could have bid any price they liked for this order. I wonder if any of the other manufacturers will kick up a fuss about an unfair tender arrangement? Not that I'm saying it was unfair, but they may well be able to suggest that if they knew they were never likely to win it?

Quite untrue. It was won be Bombardier because they are the manufacturers that built 377s.
Anyway, what if I said Siemens never really won the LM/ TPE contract? What if i suggested it was unfair and should be looked into? Afterall, Siemens were always going to win it as they were the ones that built the 350s.