Bombardier

[ainsworth74]

Not enough demand we're struggling to keep one factory in work let alone more (and of course that'll soon be two).

 

[fgwrich]

Not enough demand we're struggling to keep one factory in work let alone more (and of course that'll soon be two).

And linking this back to a Bombardier management thing again, They did have quite a sunstantial section of the works in use untill a few years ago. These being the section that handled the rolling stock refurbishments. Now, i find this a particually odd decision considering Bombardiers reccent involvement with the BREL EMU repowering, and surely they must have known about the potential life extention plans for the 319s et all once displaced from Thameslink. Now, alot of that work seems to be going to Wabtec's various plants (Doncaster, Kilmarnock,, Brush & Eastleigh Works), Smaller companies such as Arriva's LNWR, Railcare, Brodie Rail, Chrysallis Rail & In house - SWTs 455s down in Bournemouth. Surely, with the right attitude, Bombardier could have bothered to keep their eye on that ball & keep some of the works open, rather than just shutting the whole place down.

 

[Peter Sarf]

Aparently the trin service provision costs for a Hitachi SET coach are double that of a Alsthom 390 coach. Have to check in Modern Railways when it comes out. If its true then there should be plenty of money to sustain the plant at Newton Aylcliffe. Its only is tax payers paying for it. They are bound to pretty reliable arent they ?.

If I offered you a car that was clearely more reliable than anything else would you pay double for it ?.

I wonder how relatively cheap/expensive Bombardiers products are ?.

Bombardiers weakness was that they did not have the financial muscle behind them to support the Thameslink bid. What was required was a total train service provision which meant being able to borrow a lot of money at a REASONABLE interest rate. The winner then gets paid back monthly/yearly over the life of the trains not one payment on delivery/acceptance. Siemens could do it. Thats my understanding of it but then again thats probably more than the decision makers (DAfT) understood.

 

[ert47]

Which of course means it will go to someone like CAF Totally agree though, it seems totally logical for Siemens to provide the Crossrail fleet what with them having supplied the Thameslink fleet and the signalling.

I had only looked at the rolling stock side of things with Southern and Southeastern both having a high percentage of Bombardier units and nothing Siemens based.

As Southern have Bombardier personnel who work in the depots to help with maintanence, I thought it would have made sense having Bombardier win the TL stock order as it could save a bit not having two different teams only able to look after certain stock from a certain manufacture. But this could only make a minor cost savings in future, i guess.

And then as there are Siemens stock with both Heathrow Connect/Express and Greater Anglia (ignoring the 379s and 170s), that'll become part of the Crossrail franchise, Siemens would get that bid.

 

[ainsworth74]

As Southern have Bombardier personnel who work in the depots to help with maintanence, I thought it would have made sense having Bombardier win the TL stock order as it could save a bit not having two different teams only able to look after certain stock from a certain manufacture. But this could only make a minor cost savings in future, i guess.

Unless I'm very much mistaken the TL contract is a total service provision contract which includes the provision for brand new depots. Which means, of course, that the experience of current depot personnel is not really an issue as they'll be hiring new staff anyway.

 

[Wolfie]

Unless I'm very much mistaken the TL contract is a total service provision contract which includes the provision for brand new depots. Which means, of course, that the experience of current depot personnel is not really an issue as they'll be hiring new staff anyway.

Correct, exactly as is being done for IEP, which is costing twice as much as alternatives would. Modern Railways quote a direct analagy with PFI/PPP.....

That worked well in the NHS etc didn't it?

 

[The_Stig]

But it did then improve and they became one of the most reliable EMUs didn't they? I seem to remember reading that in a magazine

I think it was said they have the most reliable traction pack's?

 

[swt_passenger]

...SWTs 455s down in Bournemouth.

Interestingly, according to SWT's own PR, the overhauls at Bournemouth are to be done by about 40 newly recruited full time staff, and the contract also sees a £3m paint shop being newly built for the work.

It also seems SWT have been contracted to do this by Porterbrook - so it says quite a lot that SWT can undercut other potential overhaul specialists who are already familiar with the stock.

http://www.southwesttrains.co.uk/Mu...-create-jobs-and-boost-disability-travel.aspx

As you suggest, Bombardier might just not be interested...

 

[ert47]

Unless I'm very much mistaken the TL contract is a total service provision contract which includes the provision for brand new depots. Which means, of course, that the experience of current depot personnel is not really an issue as they'll be hiring new staff anyway.

Its 2 new depots, isnt it? One in Three Bridges and the other somewhere around Hornsey?

I guess Selhurst will only be used for stabling for the new stock. (if its used at all)

 

[RobShipway]

Its 2 new depots, isnt it? One in Three Bridges and the other somewhere around Hornsey?

I guess Selhurst will only be used for stabling for the new stock. (if its used at all)

Three Bridges is certainly correct as it is go nearby the site that was used and possibly still is used by Bombardier for the Voyagers when they were doing services from Brighton.

 

[Class377/5]

Three Bridges is certainly correct as it is go nearby the site that was used and possibly still is used by Bombardier for the Voyagers when they were doing services from Brighton.

Its 2 new depots, isnt it? One in Three Bridges and the other somewhere around Hornsey?

I guess Selhurst will only be used for stabling for the new stock. (if its used at all)

Unless I'm very much mistaken the TL contract is a total service provision contract which includes the provision for brand new depots. Which means, of course, that the experience of current depot personnel is not really an issue as they'll be hiring new staff anyway.

Three Bridges and Hornsey will be the only two depots working on the 700s. No other depot will be equipped to handle the fixed length units. They will however stable elsewhere.

Actually in part they will hire new staff but don't forget Bedford Cauldwell Walk depot will be in effect closed. So some staff will transfer to Siemns and other depots.

Three Bridges site is not being used by anyone as its currently a building site with Three Bridges Route Operating Center or TRCC almost finished and being fitted out and Three Bridges depot will be constructed once the new trains order is signed.

 

[asylumxl]

The problem with Bombardier is, as someone touched on briefly, they just regurgitate various permutations of the Electrostar and Turbostar design which are getting a bit long in the tooth. This is due to the management in my opinion.

They will not create anything new. it wouldn't make economic sense. They will continue to use the same designs until there is no longer a market, then abandone the Derby factory altogether. Anyone who thinks otherwise is absolutely deluded.

 

[Alteran Ancient]

I personally don't see anything wrong with Bombardier. Now, they technically inherited the Electrostar design from ADtranz, and while the fundamentals haven't changed, it's a sound design that works - very modular, and very flexible. If it ain't broke, then why fix it?

They have done things such as change the glued windows in favour of bolted-down ones - this makes it easier to replace any that get damaged. Looks less pleasing, in my opinion, but it makes sense.

Then we come to the Victoria '09 Stock. Loved by all, but unlike the tried-and-true Electrostar series, the new tube stock is very much a "new" venture. There were bound to be one or two teething problems at release, and in this case, it happened to be an over-sensitive safety feature. It cost them a bit to fix, but now they're not stopping in the tunnels every 5 minutes, they seem to be very good at what they do.

(I still believe, though, that the sensitive edges should be replaced by sharpened blades that threaten to slice anyone who dares hold the doors open - still a big problem for trains on Victoria Northbound.)

Now, for its time, take the 375 - that came into service nearly two years before Siemens' offering of the 450. To this date, out of the two classes, which one has proper SDO across working multiple-units, and which one has "SDO" such that you can only release the doors of a single unit? The WAT- WNR service really suffers from this affliction - at least, until they bother to lengthen Sunnymeads.

Which one also had memory limitations in regards to the CIS, resulting in passenger announcements being chopped-off half way?

It just feels like Siemens were trying to save money, and even to this date, while it feels like Bombardier aren't going anywhere by using the same body shell, they've kept their technical specs up to where they should be.

Don't get me wrong - I don't mind Siemens, but I definitely prefer what Bombardier (and Hitachi, for that matter) have to offer.

 

[Eagle]

They will not create anything new.

Ahem.

 

[swt_passenger]

Now, for its time, take the 375 - that came into service nearly two years before Siemens' offering of the 450. To this date, out of the two classes, which one has proper SDO across working multiple-units, and which one has "SDO" such that you can only release the doors of a single unit? The WAT- WNR service really suffers from this affliction - at least, until they bother to lengthen Sunnymeads.


It just feels like Siemens were trying to save money, and even to this date, while it feels like Bombardier aren't going anywhere by using the same body shell, they've kept their technical specs up to where they should be.

Siemens probably weren't saving money, it was more likely that it was SWT that didn't order or want carriage level SDO at the time. The savings across the entire Desiro fleet (about 700 carriages at tens of thousands per unit) probably ran into quite a few millions. The fact that SWT use guards on 100% of their services is also probably relevant to the decision.

They aren't lengthening Sunnymeads any time soon however, so the solution for that and some other stations that won't be extended is to use carriage level ASDO similar to the Electrostars. The 458/5s are being fitted during conversion, and the 444s and 450s will all be similarly modified over the next 18 months or so.

 

[317666]

Personally I'm not a fan of Bombardier at all. I find their trains to be very uncomfortable, and the rattling of loose panels and shoddy ride quality says it all about the build quality if you ask me. Electrostars and Turbostars are probably my least favourite trains in the UK, if not the world. However, I must admit that their trams are not bad at all. The new Blackpool Flexities, as much as I don't like the fact that they replaced the more interesting old fleet, are pretty good trams overall.

Edit: I'll also add that some of their continental units are pretty good too, it's largely the Electrostars and Turbostars that make me dislike them.

 

[RAGNARØKR]

Personally I'm not a fan of Bombardier at all. I find their trains to be very uncomfortable, and the rattling of loose panels and shoddy ride quality says it all about the build quality if you ask me. Electrostars and Turbostars are probably my least favourite trains in the UK, if not the world. However, I must admit that their trams are not bad at all. The new Blackpool Flexities, as much as I don't like the fact that they replaced the more interesting old fleet, are pretty good trams overall.

Edit: I'll also add that some of their continental units are pretty good too, it's largely the Electrostars and Turbostars that make me dislike them.

As a fusspot, I beg to disagree. Some versions of the Electrostar and Turbostar are excellent, though they could have been very much better. My main criticisms of these trains are the bouncy ride, the small radius lower bodyside curvature and the lack of an end-door version for longer-distance routes. The 375/377 is a very successful implementation of a front end with gangway connection.

 

[Jatos]

I travel on a Class 170 to Brum quite often, quite happy with the ride besides the noisy diesel engine, but hey, that's hardly unique to a class 170!

 

[LE Greys]

I quite like 'Stars, personally, especially the Scotrail version of the 170, because it has decent seats with more padding to them than (for instance) a 185. I like the ride as well, and the air moves about far more than any Desiro product. However, they're still not a patch on a good MkII. I've never been on a 175, so can't really compare, but from what I hear, they give a good account of themselves.

 

[Dumpton Park]

375 - pretty good, aside from the obviously awful 375/9 (whoever designed the minitables with a support bar right at shin height underneath should be forced to travel on them for a month and count the bruises).
377 - nicer decoration than 375s, I think, but 3+2 seating just as horrid as 375/9s.
378 - good for what they do. Aircon seems very reliable.
170 - don't like them much. Have only really used them in first class, and don't like how small and poky it is, but understand why. Don't seem to have much oomph.

Dp

 

[asylumxl]

Ahem.

It's a bit like the "New" cars they put out. CHange a few trims and it's apparently a new car.

Plus, besides the above, it's one thing making a visualisation and another actually bnuilding it.

 

[D365]

It's a bit like the "New" cars they put out. CHange a few trims and it's apparently a new car.

Plus, besides the above, it's one thing making a visualisation and another actually bnuilding it.

The Aventra, like the Desiro City, is a bit more than a change of body... They are brand new products, significantly different to their predecessors.

 

[Class377/5]

I personally don't see anything wrong with Bombardier. Now, they technically inherited the Electrostar design from ADtranz, and while the fundamentals haven't changed, it's a sound design that works - very modular, and very flexible. If it ain't broke, then why fix it?

Then we come to the Victoria '09 Stock. Loved by all, but unlike the tried-and-true Electrostar series, the new tube stock is very much a "new" venture. There were bound to be one or two teething problems at release, and in this case, it happened to be an over-sensitive safety feature. It cost them a bit to fix, but now they're not stopping in the tunnels every 5 minutes, they seem to be very good at what they do.

(I still believe, though, that the sensitive edges should be replaced by sharpened blades that threaten to slice anyone who dares hold the doors open - still a big problem for trains on Victoria Northbound.)

Now, for its time, take the 375 - that came into service nearly two years before Siemens' offering of the 450. To this date, out of the two classes, which one has proper SDO across working multiple-units, and which one has "SDO" such that you can only release the doors of a single unit? The WAT- WNR service really suffers from this affliction - at least, until they bother to lengthen Sunnymeads.

Which one also had memory limitations in regards to the CIS, resulting in passenger announcements being chopped-off half way?

It just feels like Siemens were trying to save money, and even to this date, while it feels like Bombardier aren't going anywhere by using the same body shell, they've kept their technical specs up to where they should be.

Don't get me wrong - I don't mind Siemens, but I definitely prefer what Bombardier (and Hitachi, for that matter) have to offer.

Annit broke? Maybe not but design for Thameslink requirements meant Electrostar just isn't good enough.

As for the Tube stock, sorry but your wrong. The 09TS for the Victoria Line is simply a mini Electrostar in a different body shell according to Bombardier where as the S stock which is actually based part on LUL designs (ironically for Victoria Line new fleet before Bombardier chicken out and came up with the 09TS) and part on its international Movia metro design. Hardly original expect body design.

You do realise the Desiro's weren't specified (god knows why) with SDO for some mad reason. And if your going to have a dig what about fact that Bombardier are going to charge so much to get a 6th car into the 378s that it's cheaper to buy a new train! Siemens is happy to insert more trains in and alter the software.

As for CIS, well they spent long enough getting the 377/5 CIS correct and that's based on a existing design.

Have Bombardier up dated thier specs? Until the 379 they didn't. Take for example the fact the 359/1 fleet was able I use DC years after introduction despite not being used on most of the nits. Compare that to the fear that the 375/6 pans might as well be scrapped as no-one dares uses them.

Long and short is neither are prefect and which manufacture you prefer is down to personal taste.

The Aventra, like the Desiro City, is a bit more than a change of body... They are brand new products, significantly different to their predecessors.

Very true. Step from Electrostar is same if not greater than step from Networkers to Electrostars.

If I offered you a car that was clearely more reliable than anything else would you pay double for it ?.

I wonder how relatively cheap/expensive Bombardiers products are ?.

Bombardiers weakness was that they did not have the financial muscle behind them to support the Thameslink bid. What was required was a total train service provision which meant being able to borrow a lot of money at a REASONABLE interest rate. The winner then gets paid back monthly/yearly over the life of the trains not one payment on delivery/acceptance. Siemens could do it. Thats my understanding of it but then again thats probably more than the decision makers (DAfT) understood.

The Siemens bid won not only on finance but also on technical specs. So it's cheaper overall and least likely to break down. That's why thy won, on two accounts, both being blind bids where those selecting didn't know who had presented what.

 

[bronzeonion]

Ride quality is very good overall on the 'Stars whilst Desiro ride quality is perfect on good track, encounter any bad track or some bad points and you get thrown from side to side, the ride on the 'Stars is much more conventional and overall it is is better.

The build quality I must admit is not as good as Siemens' but Bombardiers stock is far more comfortable and nice to ride on.

I'm not a driver and no way am I pretending to be one here but the cabs seem far more ergonomic on the 'Stars with the TBC down by your left hand in and easy to reach place and buttons laid out nicely and logically infront of you. The Desiro layout seems to just have everything on a small desk infront of you all quite crowded together.

 

[asylumxl]

The Aventra, like the Desiro City, is a bit more than a change of body... They are brand new products, significantly different to their predecessors.

How do you come to that conclusion on something that doesn't exist outside of a 3D model/technical drawings? I note you say products rather than anything else, which is a wise choice of words.

If you are in the know or can direct me to some more substantial information on the design, I will believe the spin Derby is spitting out. Until then, I keep my reservations.
--- old post above --- --- new post below ---

Ride quality is very good overall on the 'Stars whilst Desiro ride quality is perfect on good track, encounter any bad track or some bad points and you get thrown from side to side, the ride on the 'Stars is much more conventional and overall it is is better.

Please take a 377/5 operated Bedford bound train from St Pancras non-stop to St Albans, then tell me that .

 

[D365]

How do you come to that conclusion on something that doesn't exist outside of a 3D model/technical drawings? I note you say products rather than anything else, which is a wise choice of words.

If you are in the know or can direct me to some more substantial information on the design, I will believe the spin Derby is spitting out. Until then, I keep my reservations.

...Because even in its concept stage, the design is significantly different... Bombardier wouldn't invest in developing a train that won't meet the requirements for a high-performance EMU. That may also be why the Electrostar has been made for so long; if it meets the requirements for a suburban EMU, then why change it?

 

[asylumxl]

...Because even in its concept stage, the design is significantly different... Bombardier wouldn't invest in developing a train that won't meet the requirements for a high-performance EMU. That may also be why the Electrostar has been made for so long; if it meets the requirements for a suburban EMU, then why change it?

Which is why I asked if you know where I can find more in-depth information. I would like to know what is different if true.
al
I also think it's worth considering how different a concept can be from the actual end product e.g. Pendo...

 

[dubscottie]

Derby..
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=b_ZeJqNt4Hk

In fairness the last good thing that came out of Litchurch Lane was the 158/9.. Everything else since is....
--- old post above --- --- new post below ---

...Because even in its concept stage, the design is significantly different... Bombardier wouldn't invest in developing a train that won't meet the requirements for a high-performance EMU. That may also be why the Electrostar has been made for so long; if it meets the requirements for a suburban EMU, then why change it?

That would be why Irish Rail told them no chance.. Derby offered a 170 for the Irish Intercity units...

Irish Rail said no, we want something different..

Derby said its a 170 or nothing else..

Irish Rail went to Japan/Korea for their DMU's as they gave what the customer asked for..

Thats why they lost the ThamesLink contract.. Not willing to build something that has been asked for. And unwilling to change the production line..

 

[junglejames]

Derby..
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=b_ZeJqNt4Hk

In fairness the last good thing that came out of Litchurch Lane was the 158/9.. Everything else since is....
--- old post above --- --- new post below ---


That would be why Irish Rail told them no chance.. Derby offered a 170 for the Irish Intercity units...

Irish Rail said no, we want something different..

Derby said its a 170 or nothing else..

Irish Rail went to Japan/Korea for their DMU's as they gave what the customer asked for..

Thats why they lost the ThamesLink contract.. Not willing to build something that has been asked for. And unwilling to change the production line..

One things for sure. Siemens are a lot more customer orientated!

 

[dubscottie]

I agree.. SWT wanted a suburban unit and a long distance unit.. Siemens produced both.. (450/444)

Now would Derby have done that?

Nope. We will give you a 377.. And thats it..