GEML franchise 2016

[samuelmorris]

Have we established the reason for the shortening of the 5-car units yet? I'm not looking forward to the reduction in peak capacity from only running 220m peak services vs. 240m. Yes two cab pairs are absent but that doesn't account for 20m less passenger carrying space. Sure, there will be more units in total but without line speed improvements there's only so many extra paths you'd be able to fit in - not making maximal use of said paths with full-length services is baffling in the days of SDO.

 

[SPADTrap]

From Abellio's statements previously:


Translation:

The Renatus project gets finished off and 27 317s get "bare minimum" toilet, door control and PIS work for 2020 compliance. 27, as it happens, would be the 317/5 plus the 317/1 fleet from GN.

What about the 317/6s?

 

[Wivenswold]

Have we established the reason for the shortening of the 5-car units yet? I'm not looking forward to the reduction in peak capacity from only running 220m peak services vs. 240m. Yes two cab pairs are absent but that doesn't account for 20m less passenger carrying space. Sure, there will be more units in total but without line speed improvements there's only so many extra paths you'd be able to fit in - not making maximal use of said paths with full-length services is baffling in the days of SDO.

The 10 car Aventras will be 240m so they will carry more passengers with the loss of 4 cabs within the unit. Estimates are that there are 13/14 12 car EMU sets used at the moment per peak, so 22 x 10 car units will be an increase, even if some are used for Norwich services. The 5 car Aventras are, I understand, shorter coaches but I can't imagine they will hold less, per unit, than a 4 car 321/360.

 

[jopsuk]

What about the 317/6s?

as far as I can work out, they need the Renatus 321s and the 27x317s because some, but not all, of the Aventra fleet will be in service. It appears they've calculated how many units gives them a 2020 safety margin

They've specifically said "27 other units". I'm entirely guessing at the /1 and /5 fleets because they're basically the same thing and there's 27 of them, versus 24 317/6

 

[samuelmorris]

The 10 car Aventras will be 240m so they will carry more passengers with the loss of 4 cabs within the unit. Estimates are that there are 13/14 12 car EMU sets used at the moment per peak, so 22 x 10 car units will be an increase, even if some are used for Norwich services. The 5 car Aventras are, I understand, shorter coaches but I can't imagine they will hold less, per unit, than a 4 car 321/360.

No that wasn't my point - sure, being 5-car and longer vehicles makes a single unit have significantly higher capacity than the current stock, making there far more occasions where sending a single unit out instead of two is viable. However, you can't triple-stack units of this size, so a lot of what should be 12-car services at 240m length have to be replaced with 10-car services at 220m length. Loss of the intermediate cabs I'd have thought might gain 10-12m of that back at most, they will still fundamentally be shorter trains. Given all the stock these units replace currently offers 3+2 seating, I can't see anything but zero capacity improvement on these units at peak time, extra capacity would have to be generated by extra paths, which seem unlikely.

I have no issue with using dedicated 10-car high-density stock for peak workings only, and 5-car unit pairs for the other services, that makes complete sense. What puzzles me is why the 10-car units are the correct length and the 5-car units are inexplicably short.

Also - I'm pretty confident that 13/14 12-car estimate is wildly inaccurate. Almost all the 360s seem to work 12-car diagrams in peaks so that's 6 or 7 - every Southend peak service from about 5:15 to 6:30 ish is a 12-car so that's another 7 or 8, then there are numerous other 12-car services to the likes of Braintree and Ipswich, as well as a 12-car southminster diagram. I'd hazard a guess that best-case the 22 10-car 240m units are replacing all the peak diagrams like-for-like, they may not even be sufficient to do that.

 

[87015]

Also - I'm pretty confident that 13/14 12-car estimate is wildly inaccurate. Almost all the 360s seem to work 12-car diagrams in peaks so that's 6 or 7 - every Southend peak service from about 5:15 to 6:30 ish is a 12-car so that's another 7 or 8, then there are numerous other 12-car services to the likes of Braintree and Ipswich, as well as a 12-car southminster diagram. I'd hazard a guess that best-case the 22 10-car 240m units are replacing all the peak diagrams like-for-like, they may not even be sufficient to do that.

24 12 cars on the GE side this morning between 0630 & 0900 (one set does two arrivals) plus the Norwichs.

 

[samuelmorris]

There you go then - to me that makes the role of the 22 10-car sets pretty obvious. Still though, I genuinely can't think of a reason to run the 5-car units 10m short...

 

[F Great Eastern]

The 5 cars being shorter is puzzling, it could be something that comes back to bite them.....

Maybe they couldn't afford full length and decided that rather than keep them all full length like the 10 car carriages, and ordering less to suffer the horror have operating trains as old as 7-8 years, it looked better to order everything new even if they were crippled?

Hope Abellio deliver everything they say they will because it they do it will be brilliant, still remain to be convinced the bid isn't style and headline grabbing over substance

 

[samuelmorris]

It's a real concern - especially as unlike with the Class 378 for example, you can't just insert an extra vehicle to fix it as 2x6x22m would be too long - perhaps they'd end up lengthening just half the units and running 11-car sets a la HEx. Either way, the mind boggles.

I'm almost certain the age of the 360 and 379 fleets was irrelevant, they simply ditched them to avoid having to manage maintenance requirements for multiple stock and have an easy way of every driver in the company be able to operate any train (route knowledge of course is another matter). It's a plan that, ordinarily I'd support, but in context, do actually disagree with because I know it will be difficult to find a home for all the displaced stock, and a lot of it will likely sit unused for several years, especially the Renatus 321s.

Personally I think the scale of this stock order is vastly ambitious to achieve in 18 months, I would hazard a guess that there'd be a small number of Renatus 321s and 317/6s sitting around until mid 2021 - early 2022. The 360s and 379s will likely be snapped up by others earlier, here's hoping.

Rumours have already suggested the switch from Alsthom to Stadler was for cost reasons, but given one of the arguments for all new stock is better leasing costs, I'm not sure how valid that is.

 

[YorkshireBear]

It's a real concern - especially as unlike with the Class 378 for example, you can't just insert an extra vehicle to fix it as 2x6x22m would be too long - perhaps they'd end up lengthening just half the units and running 11-car sets a la HEx. Either way, the mind boggles.

I'm almost certain the age of the 360 and 379 fleets was irrelevant, they simply ditched them to avoid having to manage maintenance requirements for multiple stock and have an easy way of every driver in the company be able to operate any train (route knowledge of course is another matter). It's a plan that, ordinarily I'd support, but in context, do actually disagree with because I know it will be difficult to find a home for all the displaced stock, and a lot of it will likely sit unused for several years, especially the Renatus 321s.

Personally I think the scale of this stock order is vastly ambitious to achieve in 18 months, I would hazard a guess that there'd be a small number of Renatus 321s and 317/6s sitting around until mid 2021 - early 2022. The 360s and 379s will likely be snapped up by others earlier, here's hoping.

Rumours have already suggested the switch from Alsthom to Stadler was for cost reasons, but given one of the arguments for all new stock is better leasing costs, I'm not sure how valid that is.

Lets hope it is offered to franchises at massively cut down prices and somewhere in the country sees some massive increase in capacity to stimulate demand.

 

[F Great Eastern]

Personally I think the scale of this stock order is vastly ambitious to achieve in 18 months, I would hazard a guess that there'd be a small number of Renatus 321s and 317/6s sitting around until mid 2021 - early 2022. The 360s and 379s will likely be snapped up by others earlier, here's hoping.

Too many different types of rolling stock in a short space of time across the whole network is very ambitious, especially when one of the types of rolling stock is not just the first time that rolling stock has been rolled out in the UK, but also the first time the company has ever built stock for the UK. I

As I said it is a big gamble and if it comes off the way they hope it will, it could work out really well and be one of the biggest transformations since privatization, if it goes wrong however it could cause an amount of disruption that has never been seen before in this region and really blacken the Abellio name.

There really will be nowhere to hide due to the tight time schedules that they have implemented for replacing all rolling stock and pretty much whatever happens Abellio will either get all the credit or will have to take all the blame. Personally I'd have stretched this out over a longer period of time to allow stock to bed in first.

Rumours have already suggested the switch from Alsthom to Stadler was for cost reasons, but given one of the arguments for all new stock is better leasing costs, I'm not sure how valid that is.

There is no way that Abellio could replace every single item of rolling stock without doing it the way that they did it. Other bidders did propose other types of rolling stock from what I have heard on the grapevine, but it did involve a higher cost per vehicle so therefore it was spread over three phases

Phase 1: MK3/317/153/156
Phase 2: 170/321
Phase 3: 360/379

 

[hwl]

1. The cost of the 379 leases was comparatively very high for financial reasons at the time of manufacture so the simplest way to reduce costs for the TOC is just not to renew then it is the ROSCOs problem to refinance (if they can and aren't tied in) so the leasing costs could be lower so they find a new home (and to help then find new home), this is effectively the only way some ROSCOs get the message (the 379 deal was that leasing companies one and only Rolling Stock deal so they might have been slow on the uptake).

2. The limiting factor on WAML (and to certain extent GEML fasts) train lightening is largely platform lengths at Liverpool Street which limits stuff to 10x 24m or 11x 22m so the suggestion of adding an extra car to half the units if Bombardier can might have some legs but given the 345 4motor car + 1 trailer + 4 motor car architecture and Bombardier sucking air through teeth when asked about 11car 345 may be not...

3. Bombardier Aventra stock maintenance costs (and time) are expected to be significantly lower than Electrostar (Ditto vs Siemsn Desiro) so ROSCO will need to keenly price the stock for it to find new home given the higher running costs. Even more true for ex BR stock.
--- old post above --- --- new post below ---

What about the 317/6s?

Don't they have slightly higher leasing costs hence more likely to get ditched first to keep costs down???

 

[Wivenswold]

No that wasn't my point - sure, being 5-car and longer vehicles makes a single unit have significantly higher capacity than the current stock, making there far more occasions where sending a single unit out instead of two is viable. However, you can't triple-stack units of this size, so a lot of what should be 12-car services at 240m length have to be replaced with 10-car services at 220m length. Loss of the intermediate cabs I'd have thought might gain 10-12m of that back at most, they will still fundamentally be shorter trains. Given all the stock these units replace currently offers 3+2 seating, I can't see anything but zero capacity improvement on these units at peak time, extra capacity would have to be generated by extra paths, which seem unlikely.

I have no issue with using dedicated 10-car high-density stock for peak workings only, and 5-car unit pairs for the other services, that makes complete sense. What puzzles me is why the 10-car units are the correct length and the 5-car units are inexplicably short.

Also - I'm pretty confident that 13/14 12-car estimate is wildly inaccurate. Almost all the 360s seem to work 12-car diagrams in peaks so that's 6 or 7 - every Southend peak service from about 5:15 to 6:30 ish is a 12-car so that's another 7 or 8, then there are numerous other 12-car services to the likes of Braintree and Ipswich, as well as a 12-car southminster diagram. I'd hazard a guess that best-case the 22 10-car 240m units are replacing all the peak diagrams like-for-like, they may not even be sufficient to do that.

Ah, yes, you're right. That is a serious concern. Perhaps it's time for me to get some info together and press DfT and AGA for details of changes in numbers of peak-time seats from each station. My last response from AGA nicely side-stepped my request for reassurances that 5 car trains won't replace 8 car ones.

 

[samuelmorris]

Unless there are strict commitments to get rid of the existing stock by a certain date (seems unlikely at present given how much of a sudden surplus there will be, what with almost all of it being AC only) I don't think there will be any major catastrophe with the existing stock - but I do think it's almost certain it won't all be introduced as quickly as the DfT has said - as I say, I would guess at it being 12-18 months later than that before there are no scheduled operations for any of the legacy stock - given the higher desirability of the more modern units, unless there is a deal to lease the old stock for pittance (I doubt that based on what's happened in the past), then I think there'll still be some tatty 321s and 317/6s running around in 2021, possibly 2022, long after the 360s and 379s are gone. The current Thameslink cascade is a prime example of this, though I realise there are other factors at play - Electrostar numbers dwindling with 700 arrivals, yet plenty of 319s still sticking around to the bitter end.

Where I do think things could go the most wrong is the rural route - the DMUs are desperately needed elsewhere and will be snapped up quickly. If the Stadler Bimodes, arguably the most unusual mainline rolling stock to have been introduced in the UK for a very long time, do not perform well out of the box, I can see a period where the old DMUs are with their new owners and we have periods of replacement buses due to insufficient fleet coverage until they get them bedded in. Hopefully I'll be wrong about that, of course.

Ah, yes, you're right. That is a serious concern. Perhaps it's time for me to get some info together and press DfT and AGA for details of changes in numbers of peak-time seats from each station. My last response from AGA nicely side-stepped my request for reassurances that 5 car trains won't replace 8 car ones.

Now why do you think that might be?
Replacing the lesser-used 8-car services with 5-car ones is one of the main reasons to choose units in that formation, providing more optimal capacity where 5 or 6 cars would do, but 4 would not. I think it's pretty likely that the majority of off-peak services currently run with 8 will drop to 5.

Just asking for numbers of seats (which is the most likely request to get an accurate response) doesn't tell all without knowing the configuration of the units (e.g. whether a 2x5x22 is used vs. 1x10x24, and what seating config will they use?)
Honestly I'd rather hope to see 2+2 seating throughout on at least the 5-car units, we can probably rule it out for the 10-cars.

There's also the fun gamble with stock numbers. If common sense was being applied, they'd probably be Class 600 for the rural units, 711/0 and 711/1 or 711 and 712 for the Aventras, and 715/0 and 715/1 or 720 and 721 for the StanEx/Norwich units, unless they qualify for an 8 designation.
In practice? Where's my 100-sided die....

 

[F Great Eastern]

That's my worry about the stock as well. as you have outlined Sam.

It's a very ambitious plan especially considering a large portion of the stock is from a manufacturer that has not had any experience in building trains for UK conditions. I know the units have been quite successful in other countries, but not having UK market experience really does count against them.

As I said Abellio will live and die by this, if they get it right it'll be great, but if not it will be a watershed moment for them since as a few people have told me, this bid contains a very high level of risk with the way it has been planned out and they need a good experienced management team at such projects to make sure it goes well.

Personally I'd have liked to see the Mireo which I believe that Siemens were pitching,, as whilst that is a new product as well, at least the company has a lot of experience and good test track facilities for reproducing UK conditions.

 

[samuelmorris]

As I said Abellio will live and die by this, if they get it right it'll be great, but if not it will be a watershed moment for them since as a few people have told me, this bid contains a very high level of risk with the way it has been planned out and they need a good experienced management team at such projects to make sure it goes well.

Rather like the one from Stagecoach they were going to bring on board?

As the saying goes, 'we shall see'. At present I'm rather concerned with how delayed the 321 Renatus project seems to have become - no word from anybody many months after the first units were due back into service - weren't there supposed to be 10 in active duty before the franchise renewal next weekend?

 

[Dave1987]

Last I heard it was heading back to where the mods were done for further mods and tweaking.

 

[Wivenswold]

There's a fair chance that they will be used for the launch of the new franchise I guess. I seem to recall that there are 3 or 4 units at Wabtec, so it could be that they are being prepared.

Alternatively, there could be issues with the mods of course.

 

[ginger]

Rather like the one from Stagecoach they were going to bring on board?

As the saying goes, 'we shall see'. At present I'm rather concerned with how delayed the 321 Renatus project seems to have become - no word from anybody many months after the first units were due back into service - weren't there supposed to be 10 in active duty before the franchise renewal next weekend?

10 units to be delivered and in service by the 15th October 2016 Sam.....you are correct! But as I have raised time and time again Renatus was doomed from the start......why? We will get on to that......again

At a meeting week before last I quizzed James Burles about the delay and he was, surprisingly honest about the current fiasco! Due to the lack of plug doors they cant get the aircon/heating (HVAC) units to work properly....he was very frustrated that his Engineers are having to spend so much time at WABTEC Donny trying to resolve numerous issues.....I recall he said there were over 100 faults in the first unit delivered (303) and he would not sanction it going into service.....

He did say it was "his biggest headache" in the whole current process.....

What a surprise! Doomed from the start

 

[Wivenswold]

Interesting, makes you wonder whether the problems with the Renatus units was the final straw in terms of replacing the entire fleet.

 

[ginger]

Interesting, makes you wonder whether the problems with the Renatus units was the final straw in terms of replacing the entire fleet.

Meetings this week with Eversholt to try and "resolve" the issues - again a direct quote. He was not amused.....

I did say that neither were his passengers!

They did say they were going to fit all current units with wifi - and it would be free.....and a minor interior refresh on the rest of the 321s would be carried out at Clacton.....again no timescales and pointless but at least we FINALLY get new reliable modern trains.....

I have been there biggest critic but at least they have been brave and ambitious and good luck to them!

 

[samuelmorris]

Interesting that their biggest design flaw in my opinion for passenger comfort (the doors) are also their downfall technically. I really don't see why they couldn't fit pocket doors that just sucked a bit less - those used on the likes of 378s and 700s are nowhere near as bad.

 

[grumblingalong]

Interesting that their biggest design flaw in my opinion for passenger comfort (the doors) are also their downfall technically. I really don't see why they couldn't fit pocket doors that just sucked a bit less - those used on the likes of 378s and 700s are nowhere near as bad.

Cost. What's the point (financially) of chopping each coach open at four points to install a new doors system on what are frankly life expired (despite some commenters on this forums opinion) units? For leasing company it's borderline justifiable, for AGA, well they just want their promised refurb units pretty sharpish!

 

[47802]

I think it shows how questionable doing major upgrades on old trains can be particularly EMU's when the manufacturers are falling over themselves to build new EMU's which are likely to be cheaper to run and more reliable than even significantly upgraded older trains.

 

[fgwrich]

I wonder if one of the problems causing the HVAC to fail is the location of the HVAC units themselves? Wabtec have taken the Bombardier approach and placed them by the doors, whereas Siemens approach is to have one single larger unit in the middle of the coach. I.e, if the HVAC and its sensors are having issues with the drafts from the doors, would they have desired better placed away from the doors in the middle of the coach? Just a thought anyway.

 

[HH]

Rather like the one from Stagecoach they were going to bring on board?

Knowing the Stagecoach approach to Project Management I hope that Abellio aren't relying solely on that...

 

[samuelmorris]

Cost. What's the point (financially) of chopping each coach open at four points to install a new doors system on what are frankly life expired (despite some commenters on this forums opinion) units? For leasing company it's borderline justifiable, for AGA, well they just want their promised refurb units pretty sharpish!

Agreed, it would be extremely expensive, but if it's a necessity to achieve what you want to do, and the biggest shortcoming of the existing product (I'd still argue, given the likely withdrawal of the units before too long, moreso than the original traction package), then it's surely deserving of some thought. Changing the transformer, traction motors etc. I'd expect to be more expensive than making alterations to the door mechanism.

Just looking up youtube footage of 321303, there are some pretty horrific wheel flats on the unit in most of them, not something I usually hear on 321s if i'm honest - was that one of the issues perhaps, or a result of emergency brake testing?

 

[HH]

Changing the transformer, traction motors etc. I'd expect to be more expensive than making alterations to the door mechanism.

But the former would extend the life of the unit by years and the latter...

 

[samuelmorris]

Would coincide with the interior refresh, which can also add years to the life of the unit, potentially. As things currently stand, the last of the pre-privatisation stock is unlikely to see its full lifetime in service due to being superceded with newer stock, let alone need it extending. Making it more attractive for passengers to use may help with that.

 

[F Great Eastern]

This doesn't bode well for an operate who is introducing over 1000 new carriages, some from a manufacturer who has never created trains for the UK before if they are having such problems managing an upgrade of well established rolling stock refurbished by someone who is well used to building for the UK market.