Future of Class 707

[ExRes]

Paul Clifton (BBC South transport) has said on his twitter it's expected to cost £15m to make each unit AC able. That's a staggering amount!

Well it is April 1st

 

[Billy A]

Paul Clifton (BBC South transport) has said on his twitter it's expected to cost £15m to make each unit AC able. That's a staggering amount!

Per Rail Journal in 2013....

"Earlier this year, leasing company Porterbrook awarded Vossloh Kiepe a £40m contract to supply IGBT three-phase ac traction equipment for the fleet of 91 class 455 emus used by South West Trains on commuter services from London Waterloo."

 

[coppercapped]

Each unit would have cost less than £15m to build.

As I understood the quote, Clifton did not say £15 million for each unit, but £15 million to make each unit (implying 'in the fleet') AC capable. That's £500,000 per unit which seems about right - pantograph, transformer, rectifier group, fitting, any soft- or firmware changes and testing that line isn't connected to earth...

BillyA's post #212 yields a per unit cost of around £440,000 for the Class 455s. This includes three phase inverters and four new traction motors, so the 707 refit price seems a bit high but, on the other hand, the figure quoted might be adrift. In any event they are both in the same ballpark.

 

[hwl]

Each unit would have cost less than £15m to build.

Each 707 cost £7.0m.

As i wrote earlier in this thread the 707s are relatively underpowered (less of an issue given 3rd rail infrastructure and older stock is the limit on SWT) so proper AC conversion might involve adding at least an extra pair (or possibly 2) of traction motors or replacing the traction motors with the larger ones from the 700s, this would also involve lots of extra new wiring loom.

£15m to upgrade the whole fleet is 7.2% of the original 707 cost so seems fairly reasonable given how poorly and minimalist spec the units are.

 

[D365]

As i wrote earlier in this thread the 707s are relatively underpowered (less of an issue given 3rd rail infrastructure and older stock is the limit on SWT)...

Were they underspecced because of the power limitations?

 

[G0ORC]

Well, speaking as an East Midlander, I think this whole thing is is just scandalous.

Up here in the real world, where the only "new" stock we get for local services is about 30 years old, I can't believe this. You lot in the south live in some kind of parallel universe to the rest of us.

 

[Feathers44]

Well, speaking as an East Midlander, I think this whole thing is is just scandalous.

Up here in the real world, where the only "new" stock we get for local services is about 30 years old, I can't believe this. You lot in the south live in some kind of parallel universe to the rest of us.

Younger than the 455s then! Not that I'm disagreeing with you.

 

[pompeyfan]

It would appear I've made myself look silly. Perhaps if he had replaced the word 'each' with 'every' on that twitter post it would read properly. I did think £450m to put a coat hanger on 30 trains was a lot.

 

[SpacePhoenix]

Who wrote the spec for the 707s, the DfT, SWTs or both (and if both who wrote the lions share of the spec)?

 

[LNW-GW Joint]

Two of the new 707s are already fitted out for AC working and are under test now, for the ROSCO involved (to prove dual mode capability).
So the upgrade path is well known (and must be closely similar to the 700s).
It's probably a commercial option in the contract.

 

[HH]

Were they underspecced because of the power limitations?

One suspects it was cost driven, but only those few who would have sat in the meetings between DfT and Stagecoach will know for certain.

 

[HH]

Each 707 cost £7.0m.

£7.0m for a 5-car unit is pretty cheap, which kind of confirms that the low spec was cost-driven. That First/MTR can get a better deal on higher-specced stock rather suggests that the ROSCO was raking it in; or to put it another way; they had fully costed in the risk of not having a section 54.

 

[SpacePhoenix]

£7.0m for a 5-car unit is pretty cheap, which kind of confirms that the low spec was cost-driven. That First/MTR can get a better deal on higher-specced stock rather suggests that the ROSCO was raking it in; or to put it another way; they had fully costed in the risk of not having a section 54.

What's a section 54? Is some kind of "get out" clause?

 

[DerekC]

The 700 (Desiro City) architecture seems to be built round cars which have either all axles motored or none. So the 707 has two fully motored cars and three trailers. I doubt you could add an extra pair of traction motors. What might be possible as part of a deal with Siemens is to replace one of the trailer cars with a fully motored one, using the same motor sizes - you would then have a unit with 60% motored axles and 1.8MW at the wheel, which should up the performance to somewhere about the same as a 700. The cost would depend on how close to the bone the original design for cabling etc was. And of course it wouldn't be a 707 any more - so a new design of rolling stock as quoted. First has had a good relationship with Siemens in the past (Class 185; Class 380...). I am sure this will have been considered as one of the options. Whether it gets chosen depends on whether someone else has offered a better deal.

 

[dgl]

What's a section 54? Is some kind of "get out" clause?

A guarantee of the lease payments to the ROSCO should the operator/route they were purchased for no longer wants/needs them.
It was designed to encourage ROSCOS to buy new trains/reduce the cost to the franchisee as removing the risk of loss of income due to non-utilisation of the stock before the cost of purchase had been recouped.

 

[hwl]

£7.0m for a 5-car unit is pretty cheap, which kind of confirms that the low spec was cost-driven. That First/MTR can get a better deal on higher-specced stock rather suggests that the ROSCO was raking it in; or to put it another way; they had fully costed in the risk of not having a section 54.

£7.0m is £1.40m per car

For comparison recent (last 5 years) electrostar orders (377/6 & /7 and 387s with some aventra features) have been between between £1.34m and £1.45m per car.

Worth noting that order size has an effect on BT prices with small the 5car 377/6 & /7 @ £1.452m /car but the slightly larger 387 follow on orders (GatEx GWR Porterbrook (for GWR and C2C) at £1.34m.

So the 707 cost isn't too cheap overall but noticably cheaper than the similar spec 5car metro 377/6 & /7 when the 707 should with lots of new features (such as ETCS ready, C-DAS installed and the complex PIS) be a bit more expensive...

The Desiro City 700s are costing £1.2m per car but that is large order and they have comparatively few cabs transformers, pantographs, interunit couplers and computer racks which lowers the cost /car bit too but 2/3 of the price difference if probably due to huge order scale.

The Crossrail aventra order when adjusted for car length (22.4m intermediate car vs 20m), # bogies and other features comes in at £1.2m per 20m car equivalent so £1.2m appears to be the large order car price.

Now looking at new orders since the 707s i.e. Desiro City / Aventra only:

The Anglia Aventra order price if £1.353m / car but the order contains a large number of 24m cars which will increase the price per car...

The GTR 717 order (25x 6car) and higher spec than the 707 as it has 3 motor cars with 6 motor bogies and 12 driven axles (50%) but costs less at £1.33m (some element of lower cost due to fewer cabs? but lots of extra cost for R&D on the front ladder door?).

The LO 710 order 45x 4car @ £1.44m /car but again very high spec in terms of power and relaibility.

Hence the 707 order looks comparatively expensive for the spec vs other Siemens and Bombardier recent orders given the actual unit spec.

 

[hwl]

The 700 (Desiro City) architecture seems to be built round cars which have either all axles motored or none. So the 707 has two fully motored cars and three trailers. I doubt you could add an extra pair of traction motors. What might be possible as part of a deal with Siemens is to replace one of the trailer cars with a fully motored one, using the same motor sizes - you would then have a unit with 60% motored axles and 1.8MW at the wheel, which should up the performance to somewhere about the same as a 700. The cost would depend on how close to the bone the original design for cabling etc was. And of course it wouldn't be a 707 any more - so a new design of rolling stock as quoted. First has had a good relationship with Siemens in the past (Class 185; Class 380...). I am sure this will have been considered as one of the options. Whether it gets chosen depends on whether someone else has offered a better deal.

Not quite Siemens offers Desiro City 5car with 2 or 3 motor cars (but with just 1 bogie on the intermediate motor car to be motored - copying Bombardier type architecture) AND 2 sizes of motor (150kW or 207kW the former used in the 707 and the later in the other Desiro Cities)

Desiro City 5car options
a) B-B + 2-2 + 2-2 + 2-2 + B-B (707 with small traction motor option i.e. the cheapest lowest performance option)

b) B-B + 2-2 + B-2 + 2-2 + B-B

[Pantograph + transformer on 4th car]

Hence the AC conversion cost mentioned a few pages ago probably includes converting from a) to b) and replacing the small traction motors.

Siemens also offer 2 4car variants with either 3 or 4 motor bogies (all under driving cars)

The 6 car variant has 6 motor bogies (4 under the driving cars and 2 under one of the 3rd/4th intermediate cars depending on which way round the unit is).

BT have been quite happy to have 2 or 3 motored axles per car on the Electrostar designs and but the 345 motor cars will either have 1 or 2 motor bogies (all with 2 traction motors per bogie) so nothing unusual there. [345s will have 1 trailer, 6 motors car with just 1 motored bogie and 2 motor cars with 2 motored bogies. - helps distribute the weight more evenly for less track damage]

 

[D365]

I take it then that it's not excessively difficult to swap between the two traction motor types?

 

[physics34]

it would make perfect sense for these to replace Southerns 455s.

 

[hwl]

it would make perfect sense for these to replace Southerns 455s.

Apart from being too long for most via Tulse Hill service platforms...

Or lengthen the easy platforms and SDO on the rest

(or Palace, Gipsy Hill, Selhurst, , Thornton Heath, Norbury, Streatham Common passengers get a more comfortable journey to London Bridge!)

the internal cascade of more 3car 377/s should help increase the number of 10 car services on 10 car routes

 

[hwl]

I take it then that it's not excessively difficult to swap between the two traction motor types?

Indeed mostly the money.
The extra wiring and traction electronics for the extra motor bogie on the intermediate car is probably fairly labour intensive by comparison.

 

[southern442]

Apart from being too long for most via Tulse Hill service platforms...

Or lengthen the easy platforms and SDO on the rest

And the fact that there are only 30 of them.

 

[hwl]

And the fact that there are only 30 of them.

But post internal cascade with more 377s replacing 455s less than 30 units would be needed to replace 455s with new high utilisation stock - the GTR rolling stock plan is to use the 455s far less intensively as they are expected to decline in reliability. As few as 20 units might be required to replace 455s post 2018.

 

[southern442]

But post internal cascade with more 377s replacing 455s less than 30 units would be needed to replace 455s with new high utilisation stock - the GTR rolling stock plan is to use the 455s far less intensively as they are expected to decline in reliability. As few as 20 units might be required to replace 455s post 2018.

Is this going to be when they get the 377/5's back?

 

[hwl]

Is this going to be when they get the 377/5's back?

It originally relied on stock displaced by 700s to allow 4car 377s to displace 3car 377/3 from longer distance services so more 10 car metro services can be formed from 4+3+3 with the 4 car being any 4car 377 from Selhurst.

The extra 377/5s help as the CAT and TAT services aren't going to be Thameslink and use 700s anymore and the extra southern metro Blackfriars Wimbledon Loop London Bridge and vice-versa services.

[/2 returning as well]

 

[physics34]

Apart from being too long for most via Tulse Hill service platforms...

Or lengthen the easy platforms and SDO on the rest

(or Palace, Gipsy Hill, Selhurst, , Thornton Heath, Norbury, Streatham Common passengers get a more comfortable journey to London Bridge!)

the internal cascade of more 3car 377/s should help increase the number of 10 car services on 10 car routes

maybe 4 car 377s could switch to services via Tulse Hill.

 

[physics34]

Is this going to be when they get the 377/5's back?

latest is that the 377/5s are all going to Southeastern eventually but will be maintained at Selhurst.

More 4 car 377s will be avaliable when Thameslink take over London Bridge to Horsham, Littlehampton and Daytime Brighton services, and more 3 cars will be available when Thameslink take over peak East Grinsteads.

 

[D365]

I thought the issue with the Class 377/5s remaining at Southeastern in the long term, was that they aren't compatible with the Class 375s? Or is this no longer a hinderance?

I also assume that Southern aren't needing any more dual-voltage 377 units.

 

[jayiscupid]

The amount wouldn't be small. Firstly Siemens would have to produce more units in the short term to allow the units to be cycled through refurb while still achieving the required availability. Secondly, the refurb would not be cheap or quick: there's toilets, changes to layout, upgraded IT and it seems improvements to power are needed. And at the end their income would be lower than it is now! That looks a fairly hefty bath to me.

If Siemens win the tender I'd expect them to manufacture new motor and trailer coaches with toilets to add to the existing 30 x 5 car trains making 30 x 10 car trains now with toilets and 4 (or even 5) coaches powered. Hey presto - 10 car suburban, high-powered metro trains. This way they wouldn't need to change anything on the current 707s, just add what's missing from the SWT spec.

Copy and paste the above to make the rest of the fleet up to 750 vehicles.

 

[222ben]

If Siemens win the tender I'd expect them to manufacture new motor and trailer coaches with toilets to add to the existing 30 x 5 car trains making 30 x 10 car trains now with toilets and 4 (or even 5) coaches powered. Hey presto - 10 car suburban, high-powered metro trains. This way they wouldn't need to change anything on the current 707s, just add what's missing from the SWT spec.

Copy and paste the above to make the rest of the fleet up to 750 vehicles.

And where will you get these magical 10-car length depot facilities? I thought that the 707s were specced like that because 5-car was the absolute limit on stock length?