Crossrail trains decision made Bombardier awarded contract

[47802]

I think its time to call it a day Bombardier bashing wise, lets look forward to the new trains and the new Crossrail line.

I'm sure that the Train chosen will be a good product, which keeps jobs in Manufacturing and Engineering in the UK, and opportunities for UK based suppliers.

 

[Whistlekiller]

I think its time to call it a day Bombardier bashing wise, lets look forward to the new trains and the new Crossrail line.

I'm sure that the Train chosen will be a good product, which keeps jobs in Manufacturing and Engineering in the UK, and opportunities for UK based suppliers.

Glass half full (and rising) thinking old son! Seriously, thank heavens real people like you still exist!

Otherwise we can just do ourselves into a grave double quick can't we?

 

[Nym]

I agree with your point about the 378s, however wasn't there issues with Victoria Line sensors on the doors?

You would hope that after all the mistakes they made with S Stocks on the Met Line, they should be able to finally produce trains that are ready to run for the Circle & Hammersmith lines. You've seem to have forgotten that they had to set the Met S Stocks Trains back up to Derby.

Ummm, there is a list that would stack above the height of my screen of mods that where needed to get 09TS working properly in service from the 1st two prorotype trains, to the point of only the traction packages, compressor and a couple of other bits where kept from the 1st two prototypes.

 

[jon0844]

I can't say I've ever been on a brand new Siemens train, so accept that I might have some rose tinted glasses when it comes to thinking of them as reliable, but I can remember a virtually brand-new 377/5 on FCC where the disabled toilet door opened, creaked, and stuck. And they were delivered very late too.

I can remember the door problems on the Victoria line trains (ironic given the old stock had such bad problems and everyone would have been dying to get rid of them to get rid of the problem, not get it happen just as bad) and the many times the trains were delayed - although fortunately, never on a train I was on, taken out of service. But certainly delayed - many times.

I can remember seeing on all the newly delivered trains the rubber seals around panels hanging out (still like this today) and all dirty from what has obviously been an awful lot of panels removed for some reason - and put back badly, by people with dirty hands. Any ideas why so many panels have been removed? My guess has to be to fix/replace something.

And then the dirt/dust throughout the train, when I believe the filters had to be removed because it was messing up the ventilation.

Then there were big problems on the S8s, including a clip of a TV documentary on the tube that showed the anger and frustration at TfL's end, and some problems on the 172s.

I'm fairly sure the 379s also had a fair few issues.. so that leaves the 378s - which I can't think of any problems? Maybe they got lucky!

And isn't there some fuss over a resignalling project that involves Bombardier in some way, where the contractor has walked away?

Let the media praise the support of a 'UK firm', but personally I have much more faith in the trains coming to Thameslink than Crossrail, and my concerns for Thameslink will be mostly down to the other infrastructure (track, signalling, overhead wires etc).

 

[Manchester77]

And isn't there some fuss over a resignalling project that involves Bombardier in some way, where the contractor has walked away?

Think you're talking about the SSL resignalling contract on LU. Bombardier won the contract to install their cityflo 650 ATO system across the highly complex SSL network which interfaces with other LU lines, network rail as well as the other SSLs in complex junctions. The cityflo 650 had only been used on simple A - B systems with none of the complexities that the SSLs and so the contract was terminated.

 

[47802]

I can't say I've ever been on a brand new Siemens train, so accept that I might have some rose tinted glasses when it comes to thinking of them as reliable, but I can remember a virtually brand-new 377/5 on FCC where the disabled toilet door opened, creaked, and stuck. And they were delivered very late too.

I can remember the door problems on the Victoria line trains (ironic given the old stock had such bad problems and everyone would have been dying to get rid of them to get rid of the problem, not get it happen just as bad) and the many times the trains were delayed - although fortunately, never on a train I was on, taken out of service. But certainly delayed - many times.

I can remember seeing on all the newly delivered trains the rubber seals around panels hanging out (still like this today) and all dirty from what has obviously been an awful lot of panels removed for some reason - and put back badly, by people with dirty hands. Any ideas why so many panels have been removed? My guess has to be to fix/replace something.

And then the dirt/dust throughout the train, when I believe the filters had to be removed because it was messing up the ventilation.

Then there were big problems on the S8s, including a clip of a TV documentary on the tube that showed the anger and frustration at TfL's end, and some problems on the 172s.

I'm fairly sure the 379s also had a fair few issues.. so that leaves the 378s - which I can't think of any problems? Maybe they got lucky!

And isn't there some fuss over a resignalling project that involves Bombardier in some way, where the contractor has walked away?

Let the media praise the support of a 'UK firm', but personally I have much more faith in the trains coming to Thameslink than Crossrail, and my concerns for Thameslink will be mostly down to the other infrastructure (track, signalling, overhead wires etc).

All new trains have problems I seem to recall the introduction of Siemens 380's wasn't exactly problem free but we will skip over that because as we all know Siemens units are faultless. I will agree that some Bombardier trains have had more issue's on their introduction than perhaps should have been the case and that's clearly something they need to improve on, most recent trains seem to have been delivered reasonably to schedule without too many issues.

 

[fgwrich]

Ummm, there is a list that would stack above the height of my screen of mods that where needed to get 09TS working properly in service from the 1st two prorotype trains, to the point of only the traction packages, compressor and a couple of other bits where kept from the 1st two prototypes.

I can't say I've ever been on a brand new Siemens train, so accept that I might have some rose tinted glasses when it comes to thinking of them as reliable, but I can remember a virtually brand-new 377/5 on FCC where the disabled toilet door opened, creaked, and stuck. And they were delivered very late too.

I can remember the door problems on the Victoria line trains (ironic given the old stock had such bad problems and everyone would have been dying to get rid of them to get rid of the problem, not get it happen just as bad) and the many times the trains were delayed - although fortunately, never on a train I was on, taken out of service. But certainly delayed - many times.

I can remember seeing on all the newly delivered trains the rubber seals around panels hanging out (still like this today) and all dirty from what has obviously been an awful lot of panels removed for some reason - and put back badly, by people with dirty hands. Any ideas why so many panels have been removed? My guess has to be to fix/replace something.

And then the dirt/dust throughout the train, when I believe the filters had to be removed because it was messing up the ventilation.

Then there were big problems on the S8s, including a clip of a TV documentary on the tube that showed the anger and frustration at TfL's end, and some problems on the 172s.

I'm fairly sure the 379s also had a fair few issues.. so that leaves the 378s - which I can't think of any problems? Maybe they got lucky!

And isn't there some fuss over a resignalling project that involves Bombardier in some way, where the contractor has walked away?

Let the media praise the support of a 'UK firm', but personally I have much more faith in the trains coming to Thameslink than Crossrail, and my concerns for Thameslink will be mostly down to the other infrastructure (track, signalling, overhead wires etc).

Ah yes, the infamous problems with the 172s and that strange exhaust system set up - a system that still mystifies me as to why it has been over complicatedly set up. And there was the splitting brake pipe air hoses incidents on the Vick Stock which caused the train to fail anywhere on the Victoria Line and completely screw up the services for the rest of the day. And then there's the S8s which several failed on entry to service, air con failures and lost there shoe gear in several places. And the units which had to go back to Derby for a total re-wiring :roll: .

It wasn't just TfL showing serious frustration with Bombardier too - then Chief Executive of Go-Ahead group Keith Ludeman also spoke publically about the frustrations of the late running Class 172 program, which like the FCC 377/5s had much more of a wider ranging impact in the form of releasing units to First Great Western and Northern.

Yes we could stop the 'Bombardier Bashing', but I'd only stop it if people actually opened there eyes and actually took a thorough look and comparison at the stock they produce - The constant late delivery and subsequent fault rectifying of their stock for example is another - When did you last see a problem with a Siemens Desiro and Siemens's answer was to send it back to the factory? I've not. Electrostars however. Yes Siemens have had some a few problems with their Desiro Introduction but have worked hard enough to bring us what are now some of the top reliable fleets in the country. The 380s I know had a few problems with panels but again, a problem since fixed. Whether or not it's true, but I also gather that along with the recycling of BREL and ABB designs (the Networker & Networker Turbo, ABB 1992 stock to 09 Stock, BR BS5000 Freight wagon bogie - now 'Flexx-Eco'), Bombardier is also using BREL & ABB Networker Jigs. Now that hardly strikes me as a company willing to show serious investment in Derby then.

So like you jonmorris0844, Nym & 377/5 I also have my doubts as to how successful the construction, entry to service and potential reliability of these units will be in comparison to the Siemens Desiro City on Thameslink. Especially given the timespan and preparation Siemens put's into their rolling stock than Bombardiers - Aventra version 2 already, a train that's failed to get off the ground after 3 years?

And the last S Stock I took - S8 on the Metropolitan Line a few weeks ago. Dirty stained panels already, occasional bit of panel vibration and a random strip of felt hanging down from the ceiling. The felt Bombardier uses to stop the panels vibrating and coming loose. And when the snow falls, which operators fleets are pulling in a steady day to day service even in the snow. South West Trains 444s & 450s. Southern and SouthEastern however just seem to collapse through a variety of issues around their Electrostar Fleets.

 

[59CosG95]

Now, let us stop Bombarding Bombardier, and think what could be positive about the Aventra. BBD have probably seen how their <Electro/Capital/Turbo>star range has reacted in adverse conditions, and will try and iron out those issues as a result. Personally, though I do myself prefer Siemens' Desiro range over BBD's Electrostars, I am very excited about what this has to offer. And again, let us be grateful that AnsalsoBreda wasn't chosen-that would have been as wise a move as shutting the diversionary line via Okehampton!

 

[transmanche]

And again, let us be grateful that AnsalsoBreda wasn't chosen

That would have been like jumping out of the frying pan into the Fyra...

I'll get me coat...

 

[Nym]

So like you jonmorris0844, Nym & 377/5 I also have my doubts as to how successful the construction, entry to service and potential reliability of these units will be in comparison to the Siemens Desiro City on Thameslink. Especially given the timespan and preparation Siemens put's into their rolling stock than Bombardiers - Aventra version 2 already, a train that's failed to get off the ground after 3 years?

Well considering I am aware of an S7+1 / S8 suffering a Main Line Air Burst on the 1st/2nd run after delivery due to the metalic sections of air line being loose (not tightened properly and not witness marked)... How many Siemens units havn't even been bolted together properly?

Other instances of abject stupidity have been found on other S Stock units and on several occations on 09TS, and it's not a Bombardier thing, I have seen similar issues of stupidity on 1992TS. Anyone spotted the link yet?

 

[Manchester77]

. Anyone spotted the link yet?

Derby?

 

[Nym]

Derby?

Well done.

PS; it's in not just in construction; it's the design, engineering and support provided that are quite lacking at BT Derby.

 

[Manchester77]

Is it a recent thing as some of the BR era stuff seems to have done fairly well (thinking of the sprinters in particular)

 

[samuelmorris]

IIRC the toilets on 360s didn't work properly when the units were new? There was also that transformer problem they had to be modified for...

 

[Nym]

Is it a recent thing as some of the BR era stuff seems to have done fairly well (thinking of the sprinters in particular)

I can't comment on BR Era stuff from Derby, I've only worked on BREL/ABB/AdTranz and Bombardier stuff from there. Eurorail (Bombardier) seemed to do a pretty nice job on 1973TS for refurb but this wasn't done at Derby.

But nothing I have worked on or been involved in is from Derby when it was in the public sector (nothing BREL, BR, MR etc.)

But I beleive the BREL sprinters where designed in York / Crewe rather than at Derby and the top managment came from York but I will stand corrected on that.
--- old post above --- --- new post below ---

IIRC the toilets on 360s didn't work properly when the units were new? There was also that transformer problem they had to be modified for...

But experience from Siemens is that they do want to fix the problem and send people over to fix it immediately, not b**** and moan about it then try and shrug the problem off like Bombardier at Derby seem to...

 

[cjmillsnun]

And the last S Stock I took - S8 on the Metropolitan Line a few weeks ago. Dirty stained panels already, occasional bit of panel vibration and a random strip of felt hanging down from the ceiling. The felt Bombardier uses to stop the panels vibrating and coming loose. And when the snow falls, which operators fleets are pulling in a steady day to day service even in the snow. South West Trains 444s & 450s. Southern and SouthEastern however just seem to collapse through a variety of issues around their Electrostar Fleets.

Oh FFS so it's Bombardier's fault that a panel is stained?

Also SWT are as likely as ANY 3rd rail fleet to be delayed or out of service in severe weather.

I do prefer Desiros though.

 

[jon0844]

Oh FFS so it's Bombardier's fault that a panel is stained?

Depends how or why it got stained. If the material to stop the panels squeaking or rubbing is getting to be filthy and hanging out, then it suggests those panels are a) being removed frequently (and if so, why?) or b) came out of the factory like that (and if so, why?).

Either way, it isn't good.

Of course that's only a visual thing and doesn't stop the train running - nor is the fine black dust that ended up all over the interior and had to be regularly cleaned away. I don't know if they now have new filters, but it wasn't nice having to breathe that dirt in, or seeing it all along the windows and knowing it's obviously on the seats too, even if it isn't as visible.

Oh, and a great choice of buttons used on the 379s too. Pick any 379 and walk through and count how many have broken. Obviously not made by Bombardier, but certainly ordered by them and built to their specification and quality control standards.

 

[Manchester77]

I can't comment on BR Era stuff from Derby, I've only worked on BREL/ABB/AdTranz and Bombardier stuff from there. Eurorail (Bombardier) seemed to do a pretty nice job on 1973TS for refurb but this wasn't done at Derby.

But nothing I have worked on or been involved in is from Derby when it was in the public sector (nothing BREL, BR, MR etc.)

But I beleive the BREL sprinters where designed in York / Crewe rather than at Derby and the top managment came from York but I will stand corrected on that.

Does seem to be a slip in standards as you had the HST and APT to come out of the railway technical centre in Derby and then you've got new LUL stock going back yo derby because they need rewiring.

 

[TheKnightWho]

Does seem to be a slip in standards as you had the HST and APT to come out of the railway technical centre in Derby and then you've got new LUL stock going back yo derby because they need rewiring.

Because a sample size of 3 is good statistical evidence, right?

 

[Nym]

Does seem to be a slip in standards as you had the HST and APT to come out of the railway technical centre in Derby and then you've got new LUL stock going back yo derby because they need rewiring.

The re-wiring is the tip of the iceberg of problems with LU stock from BT, it's just that that's the one that is noticed...

And to be honest;

Did the APT work properly?
Did the HST's doors work without issue?
Was using 415V 3p transmission a good idea in the end?
Just how much corrosion repair is needed on HSTs?

 

[jopsuk]

Does seem to be a slip in standards as you had the HST and APT to come out of the railway technical centre in Derby and then you've got new LUL stock going back yo derby because they need rewiring.

The APT units built were famously unreliable, especially with regards tilt faults.

 

[Manchester77]

The re-wiring is the tip of the iceberg of problems with LU stock from BT, it's just that that's the one that is noticed...

And to be honest;

Did the APT work properly?
Did the HST's doors work without issue?
Was using 415V 3p transmission a good idea in the end?
Just how much corrosion repair is needed on HSTs?

Point, guess you can't pin it down to any one organisation.

 

[fgwrich]

Oh FFS so it's Bombardier's fault that a panel is stained?

Also SWT are as likely as ANY 3rd rail fleet to be delayed or out of service in severe weather.

I do prefer Desiros though.

Depends how or why it got stained. If the material to stop the panels squeaking or rubbing is getting to be filthy and hanging out, then it suggests those panels are a) being removed frequently (and if so, why?) or b) came out of the factory like that (and if so, why?).

Either way, it isn't good.

Of course that's only a visual thing and doesn't stop the train running - nor is the fine black dust that ended up all over the interior and had to be regularly cleaned away. I don't know if they now have new filters, but it wasn't nice having to breathe that dirt in, or seeing it all along the windows and knowing it's obviously on the seats too, even if it isn't as visible.

Oh, and a great choice of buttons used on the 379s too. Pick any 379 and walk through and count how many have broken. Obviously not made by Bombardier, but certainly ordered by them and built to their specification and quality control standards.

Exactly. It might not be Bombardiers fault, but when I can travel on Desiros which have not seen much done to the insides of them since new and still see rather clean white panels, yet go in a 2 week old 172 or less than year old S Stock and notice how marked the panels are then you do have to wonder about the quality of the paint / panels. Again, BT Quality Control slips through again. Better cleaning regimes from LUL might help, but why has it stained so badly already? It's also noticeable that Southern's are on there first or second refurbishment yet none of the Desiro fleet has required as such yet (although SWT could do with some new seat cushions on some 450s! As for Southern's 'Astroturf'!).

As for the severe weather, Yes it's true that SWT is as likely to be affected by inclement weather as Southern and SE, but why is it that Siemens & SWT conducted some modifications to their Desiros and still be able to run a revised service in the snow, yet Southern and South Eastern fall apart with countless problems with their E*s? And it's interesting to see how proactive Siemens are on the maintenance side, including the innotive use of systems such as their RailBam technology. Again, the shrug it off attitude prevails from Derby again.

 

[Class377/5]

IIRC the toilets on 360s didn't work properly when the units were new? There was also that transformer problem they had to be modified for...

Reminds me of the 377/5 problems with both. 377509 on its first AC testing go as far as Norbury and failed due to fault transformer. Now for a unit barely a week off Derby, for the transformer to fail before its even needed, or indeed used, is shocking. And guess what, it wasn't the only unit with this.

But I'm of the belief Crossrail is Bombardier's change to show it can produce decent trains as most of the recent fleets are failing to live up to the hype.

The point of support from Siemens vs Bombardier is valid as Siemens prefers to keep a hand in looking after the units ensuring they are kept in best condition but also to apply best practice that its learnt from other units. In this sense the 350/4 are backed with years of experience with the 350, 360, 444, 450 & 380 fleets. Bombardier tends to build then leave the buyer to it with minimum support. Bombardier after care support is lacking at best.

Then there's the whole Siemens spends its own money on developing the Desiro City where as with the work to get the Electrostar model up to 110mph for the 387 order it had to borrow a 379 for testing. However its now developing Aventra with a development unit just like Siemens did several years ago showing maybe its learn a valuable lesson, it needs to spend its profits if it wants the orders to continue to roll in.

 

[cjmillsnun]

The re-wiring is the tip of the iceberg of problems with LU stock from BT, it's just that that's the one that is noticed...

And to be honest;

Did the APT work properly?
Did the HST's doors work without issue?
Was using 415V 3p transmission a good idea in the end?
Just how much corrosion repair is needed on HSTs?

Did the HST's doors work without issue? As designed (purely as a slam door) yes they did. After sloppy maintenance then they could have issues. Also the CDL system was an add on.

415V 3p has proven reliable enough and saved weight and fuel by removing the motor alternator from each coach. Funnily enough, guess what the MA on the Mk3a/b generates? 415V 3p! (source http://www.porterbrook.com/downloads/brochures/Mk3 Brochure.pdf p31)

Corrosion repair on vehicles built 30+ years ago (some - those used in the prototype HSTs - are over 40 years old) that by rights should be retired by now is hardly an issue.

Did the APT work properly? The technology was new and untried so it needed more work. However Derby did rush headlong into it (mainly because of orders from BR management to rush the trains).

Standards have slipped at Derby, however I don't think everything can be pinned down on them. SN's maintenance record as shown with their 455 fleet against SWT's and with the reliability of the 442s (again against the performance they had at SWT) could be improved upon.

 

[1018509]

I was a maintenance fitter on LU when the 1973 TS was introduced. The Metro Cammell product looked cheap and nasty without the advantage of being cheap. Upon refurbishment by Bombardier it looked cheap and nasty, again without the benefit of being cheap.

What got the 1973 TS to the high level of reliability it now has was the intensive maintenance programmes and modules which came about after Tube Lines took over the maintenance.

Nothing to do with Metro Cammell or Bombardier.

I suspect it is a similar story with other rolling stock, they are only as good as their respective maintenance programmes.

I was against the Tube Lines takeover at the time but it proved to be effective and, more importantly, got me a very good redundancy package.

 

[59CosG95]

SN's maintenance record as shown with their 455 fleet against SWT's and with the reliability of the 442s (again against the performance they had at SWT) could be improved upon.

I haven't seen SN's 442s but having taken a SN 455 makes me realise how lucky I am to be a SWT passenger, and realise that Stagecoach is the franchise we need to run TSGN. They keep all their trains in great nick, with a bright, eyecatching interior (white as opposed to Southern's off-yellow), they have experience with Desiros (two different types in fact), and still pull off the most intensive commuter service in Britain (perhaps even Europe?). They also have good BBD experience having had a Turbostar fleet in days of yore. So, I think they could make the Electrostar as great a train as the Canadians advertise.

 

[asylumxl]

I haven't seen SN's 442s but having taken a SN 455 makes me realise how lucky I am to be a SWT passenger, and realise that Stagecoach is the franchise we need to run TSGN.

Stagecoach also operate East Midlands Trains and Virgin Trains. VT is alright but EMT can be quite lacking at times...

 

[ModernRailways]

I haven't seen SN's 442s but having taken a SN 455 makes me realise how lucky I am to be a SWT passenger, and realise that Stagecoach is the franchise we need to run TSGN. They keep all their trains in great nick, with a bright, eyecatching interior (white as opposed to Southern's off-yellow), they have experience with Desiros (two different types in fact), and still pull off the most intensive commuter service in Britain (perhaps even Europe?). They also have good BBD experience having had a Turbostar fleet in days of yore. So, I think they could make the Electrostar as great a train as the Canadians advertise.

I'd rather Southern ran TSGN than Stagecoach. I know a lot of people bash Southern, but when you look at the problems that occur the majority of the time it is out of their hands. As for Stagecoach their East Midlands Trains operation is a complete joke, I have never ever had a train on time (within 15 minutes) with them. A few times it has been down to a train failure, mainly HSTs.

IIRC The desiro's are maintained by Siemens in conjunction with SWT, Southern on the other hand does it all in-house for the most part.

As for Southern's 455s, what is wrong with them? To me they appear very similar to SWTs 455s, only a bit grottier inside because of the Southern (SN) green and the lighting isn't as bright. The 3+2 seating layout is also a downside but for the journeys the SNs 455s make the layout is perfect.

The Electrostars are fine right now, the /6s are really nice with the exception of the seats but the seats to me are perfect for Commuter journeys which is what they are made for.

 

[Manchester77]

If stagecoach get TSGN it'd be good for identifying different services as I'd imagine they'll go for their white blue and red differentiating services, so white for the services which comprise the current southern franchise (excluding London metro routes), blue for Great Northern services and red for Thameslink and Metro routes?

(Edit: one thing about this is the 377s tend to turn up on any southern service so perhaps a general application of the outer suburban blue with red for the 455s and 700s would make more sense here)

I've found stagecoach to be ok with EMT, their Liverpool to Norwich services seem to be on time whenever I've used them. SWT however as far better, while I'm not a regular traveller I have used them on countless occasions from the days of slammers at Waterloo to the scene of desiros and never been significantly delayed. Trains also seem to be kept clean.