New Stock for Northern?

[IanXC]

Replying to a further question from Eagle [Maria Eagle, Shadow Transport Secretary], Transport Minister Theresa Villiers said the DfT was "not aware of companies bidding to provide additional rolling stock for the Northern franchise".

Northern is in discussions with a rolling stock leasing company about leasing trains currently operating elsewhere, Villiers added. It is "also negotiating with the Department about the commercial terms for operating such trains... an announcement will be made later this year".

Does anyone have any idea what this is all about?

 

[driver9000]

No new trains. Northern are to receive class 322s from ScotRail, class 150s from London Midland and to have their loaned out 142s returned from FGW.

 

[IanXC]

Ah so this is the "batch 2" LM 150 cascade?

 

[northwichcat]

Yes.

But as you mention Pacer replacements. CSRE have a specification drawn up for Pacer replacement train and they claim they are in dialogue with a number of train operators over it. Although the link to click for more details is broken - a bit like the toilet door on a Pacer: http://csre.co.uk/ But here's the datasheet: http://www.csre.co.uk/files/Download/2010_Pulsar_Data_Sheet_v2.pdf

 

[IanXC]

Anyone else noticed how CSRE and Grand Central both list the same registered address...

River House, 17 Museum Street, York, YO1 7DJ.

hmm

 

[Masbroughlad]

Anyone else noticed how CSRE and Grand Central both list the same registered address...

River House, 17 Museum Street, York, YO1 7DJ.

hmm

I would imagine its because they are large offices and is just a coincidence!

Loads of rail comapnies used to share the old HQ building at York and there wa snothing sinister with that!

 

[daikilo]

No new trains. Northern are to receive class 322s from ScotRail, class 150s from London Midland and to have their loaned out 142s returned from FGW.

Looks to me as though Northern will be happy to take on additional capacity from the leasecos provided the DfT agrees to amend the franchise agreement, presumably to protect their profit margin. Why would a private company spend money to provide more seats when the public currently pay to stand?

 

[Aictos]

I would imagine its because they are large offices and is just a coincidence!

Loads of rail comapnies used to share the old HQ building at York and there wa snothing sinister with that!

Don't East Coast and the DfT share the same building in London for their offices?

I know Thameslink and South West Trains used to be based at Friars Bridge Court near Blackfriars.

 

[Kingfisher200262]

Anyone else noticed how CSRE and Grand Central both list the same registered address...

River House, 17 Museum Street, York, YO1 7DJ.

hmm

Did... part of the "we're too busy talking to customers to update the web site" thread.

CSRE's new office address is 78 York Street, London, W1H 1DP.
--- old post above --- --- new post below ---

I would imagine its because they are large offices and is just a coincidence!

Loads of rail comapnies used to share the old HQ building at York and there wa snothing sinister with that!

It's no secret that until May of this year, CSRE and Grand Central shared common ownership.

 

[Nym]

Well, I was supposed to be hearing back from CSRE with some detailed specifications about the pacemaker design that where to be finalized, but they have completely dissapared off my radar now. Or, they have forgotten me...

I know there's a member of staff from CSRE on this site, not seem him/her in a while.

EDIT: Forgive the bad spelling but It's 3am...

 

[Kingfisher200262]

Well, I was supposed to be hearing back from CSRE with some detailed specifications about the pacemaker design that where to be finalized, but they have completely dissapared off my radar now. Or, they have forgotten me...

I know there's a member of staff from CSRE on this site, not seem him/her in a while.

EDIT: Forgive the bad spelling but It's 3am...

Here I am, in the post immediately above yours. The problem with pseudonyms is that it's hard to tie people to names. My name is David Shipley and I'm the Managing Director of CSRE Limited.

If you have made an enquiry about Pacesetter (we decided to change the name based on feedback - some on here - relating to the double sensitivity of Pacemaker in connection with Pacers and medical heart stabilisers) and we have failed to respond, I apologise. The most recent data sheet for Pacesetter can be downloaded HERE.

I know the web site is a mess and it is a matter for concern. However, we genuinely are focussed on satisfying prospective customers' needs in terms of providing them with detailed information, which they intend to use in developing their future rolling stock plans. Customers always come first in my mind, but I assure you we will tidy up the site in due course.

 

[RyanB]

Don't East Coast and the DfT share the same building in London for their offices?

Well that would make sense, the East Coast franchise is run by the government/DfT after all.

 

[150001]

Good looking trains those Pacemakers. Would be good replacements for the Pacers! Similar name.

 

[trentside]

It appears they're not just aimed at Pacer replacement either, as the specs mention that they can also be fitted with two cabs and run as a single car unit. Certainly better looking that a 153...

 

[Kingfisher200262]

Good looking trains those Pacemakers. Would be good replacements for the Pacers! Similar name.

True, but actually the product from our range that is targetted at Pacer, and eventually Sprinter replacement is Pulsar. You can download a data sheet for this product HERE.

For Pacer replacement, the product needs to have a low headline capital cost and a low life cycle cost, as well as being suitable operationally.

Pulsar has a headline capital price below a million pounds and the life cycle cost is driven down by the use of a modular platform (many components are shared with Pacesetter), low weight (19.6 m extruded aluminium car body), low energy consumption (recuperative braking, driver advisory system, intuitive engine management) and simplicity.

It's worth noting that both Pulsar and Pacesetter have the same modular front end, meaning that either can have a full width or gangwayed cab and that this can be changed mid-life, if the duty of the unit changes and the operator requires this.

Hope this helps.

Operationally, the use of modern electric pocket doors and wide stand-backs ensure good passenger through-flow, which should minimise dwell times.

 

[northwichcat]

True, but actually the product from our range that is targetted at Pacer, and eventually Sprinter replacement is Pulsar. You can download a data sheet for this product HERE.

For Pacer replacement, the product needs to have a low headline capital cost and a low life cycle cost, as well as being suitable operationally.

To be honest I can't see the Pulsar being of much use in 2 car formation. It would have less seats than a 142 and doesn't have corridor connectors. There's very few routes remaining where a 142 could be operated in single mode and not be overcrowded.

However, if we have a 3 car Pulsar with mainly 2+2 seating, a small amount of 3+2 seating (20-25 seats in total) and a small number of table seats (no more than 2-4 per carriage) then I can see it working well as a Pacer replacement.
The small amount of 3+2 seating would mean less people have to stand at peak time and if anyone making a longer journey found the only seats in the 3+2 area they could then move out of that area as people alight. However, average heights and weights of people have increased since 3+2 seating was invented.

 

[185]

I think it is excellent that someone from the private sector has taken the initiative to come up with a DMU product rather than wait for government to approach them.

Some time ago before her death, Gwynyth Dunwoody MP raised the point that the vulture leasing companies take the build price of a Pacer every 2 years in leasing costs which the taxpayer ultimately pays out for. That money could be used to obviously just buy a brand new train instead. Word was that as soon as one operator mentioned they were talking to the Chinese, they were frightened off with a big stick - the pathetic leasing company threated to hike all their costs to an unbearable level.

-- CSRE needs to get a couple of demonstrator units into the UK as soon as possible, get everything right with them, and come up with a realistic attractive price. For far too long we have been ripped off by other foreign companies.

 

[anthony263]

I think it is excellent that someone from the private sector has taken the initiative to come up with a DMU product rather than wait for government to approach them.

Some time ago before her death, Gwynyth Dunwoody MP raised the point that the vulture leasing companies take the build price of a Pacer every 2 years in leasing costs which the taxpayer ultimately pays out for. That money could be used to obviously just buy a brand new train instead. Word was that as soon as one operator mentioned they were talking to the Chinese, they were frightened off with a big stick - the pathetic leasing company threated to hike all their costs to an unbearable level.

-- CSRE needs to get a couple of demonstrator units into the UK as soon as possible, get everything right with them, and come up with a realistic attractive price. For far too long we have been ripped off by other foreign companies.

I think that CSRE were planning on doing just that well at least with the polaris trains. I think we will see some of their trains operating in the uk soon particulary if Alliance rail get their open acess proposals accepted

 

[northwichcat]

Word was that as soon as one operator mentioned they were talking to the Chinese, they were frightened off with a big stick - the pathetic leasing company threated to hike all their costs to an unbearable level.

So is that different to the Northern Rail proposal early on in the franchise, where DfT told them they couldn't approach the Chinese for 100 x 2 and 3 carriage trains as Pacer replacement as the jobs can't go outside the EU and claimed the Chinese can't build for the British railways. Northern pointed out it would Chinese order or nothing as EU prices are much higher - DfT concluded it would be nothing.

 

[Kingfisher200262]

So is that different to the Northern Rail proposal early on in the franchise, where DfT told them they couldn't approach the Chinese for 100 x 2 and 3 carriage trains as Pacer replacement as the jobs can't go outside the EU and claimed the Chinese can't build for the British railways. Northern pointed out it would Chinese order or nothing as EU prices are much higher - DfT concluded it would be nothing.

To be fair, at that time, the Chinese weren't ready for the European market and a meticulous due diligence exercise in early 2004 highlighted that the Chinese Ministry of Railways had nominated the wrong facility (CSR Ziyang, who, whilst being an excellent diesel locomotive builder, had never built a passenger vehicle and still haven't) to nominate as a future "Centre of Excellence" for underfloor diesel engined passenger vehicles.

Since that time, we have worked with MoR, CSR and CNR to select the best and most appropriate manufacturers for each type of product.

Now, underpinned by our UK developed products, the offer is ready to roll and we hope that the UK railway industry will be the beneficiary of our efforts.

 

[anthony263]

To be fair, at that time, the Chinese weren't ready for the European market and a meticulous due diligence exercise in early 2004 highlighted that the Chinese Ministry of Railways had nominated the wrong facility (CSR Ziyang, who, whilst being an excellent diesel locomotive builder, had never built a passenger vehicle and still haven't) to nominate as a future "Centre of Excellence" for underfloor diesel engined passenger vehicles.

Since that time, we have worked with MoR, CSR and CNR to select the best and most appropriate manufacturers for each type of product.

Now, underpinned by our UK developed products, the offer is ready to roll and we hope that the UK railway industry will be the beneficiary of our efforts.

I wish you well it is good to see some competition, considering apart form the small orders ,most of the new rolling stock is either from Alstom, Seimens or bombardier who need to sort themselves out.

Any chance of a bi-mode demu? i think something like that on the pacemaker design would be brilliant

 

[Nym]

I wish you well it is good to see some competition, considering apart form the small orders ,most of the new rolling stock is either from Alstom, Seimens or bombardier who need to sort themselves out.

Any chance of a bi-mode demu? i think something like that on the pacemaker design would be brilliant

Would drastically increase the price though, but it could be worth it with the price of Diesel recently...

 

[jon0844]

Anyone else noticed how CSRE and Grand Central both list the same registered address...

River House, 17 Museum Street, York, YO1 7DJ.

hmm

http://www.csre.co.uk/polaris

PLEASE NOTE: THE SITE IS CURRENTLY BEING REBUILT TO IMPROVE IT. HOPING TO HAVE IT ALL FINISHED BY APPROX. 10/01/11

Perhaps that's 1st October 2011?

 

[hmp455]

It would be cheaper to cascade some the 165/166s (as well as ordering new stock) to replace the Pacers once the GWML is electrified? Also, wouldn't Northern receive some of the 319s?

 

[Phil6219]

New trains for Northern? When that happens they would have brought back British Rail...

We will be getting "our" 158s back from Scotrail as well as "our" 142s from FGW and in return have to send EMT some 156s. Talk about a kick in the teeth. Northern should be getting some 150s ex LM and the 322s but I bet they (DaFT) make us trade them for 323s to LM or something similar.

As for the Pacesetter and Polaris? I think they are good designs, it is impressive to see an independent company designing new rolling stock. I like the Polaris design better but my only gripe with the interior is the table alignment, wouldn't it be better to have tables adjacent to each other rather than a table on one side and not the other?

Either way I really do hope to see them over here as I'm not looking forward to more Desirewoes or Electroturds. (Actually I don't mind Electrostars as long as they stay down south).

 

[driver9000]

The 158s that went to Scotrail "on loan" are now permanent fixtures in the Scotrail fleet.

 

[Phil6219]

That's a surprise... Not. Well actually I thought we were getting them back but evidently we are not so I stand corrected.

Fares are going up and once again we are still stuck with old trains and expect to rejoice in getting some 25 year old stock to go with the rest of our 25 year old fleets. If Northern somehow manage to get new trains by 2015 I'll personally throw them a parade.

I know it's not Northern's fault but the Dft already have enough sunshine blown into certain orifices

 

[northwichcat]

It would be cheaper to cascade some the 165/166s (as well as ordering new stock) to replace the Pacers once the GWML is electrified? Also, wouldn't Northern receive some of the 319s?

I imagine that will happen in FGW land, but in Northern/TPE land we are still overdue a large number of extra carriages so only around 30, at most, could be got rid of by EMU cascades so they'll still be at least 70 Pacers at Northern needing to be replaced by a new order.

 

[Xenophon PCDGS]

I imagine that will happen in FGW land, but in Northern/TPE land we are still overdue a large number of extra carriages so only around 30, at most, could be got rid of by EMU cascades so they'll still be at least 70 Pacers at Northern needing to be replaced by a new order.

I have it, on very good authority, that the ideal specification for the class 142 Pacer units, would be the CSRE Pulsar with unit end gangways.

I note on the Pulsar literature that "Sheffield" is shown on the destination board which should please tbtc, who feels that the Sheffield area is always starved of new units.

 

[junglejames]

http://www.csre.co.uk/polaris



Perhaps that's 1st October 2011?

Nope, head to the homepage, and this clearly says website improvement aimed to be completed by 10th January 2011!!!
The fact they havent changed this date yet, makes me think the website isnt even being touched yet. Otherwise the date would be changed during improvement works.

Anyway, lets just stick with Pacers. Me thinks its a much better option. I can just see these Chinese trains. Door opening controls too low, toilet seats too low, sinks that are too low. Ive seen it all before on ships, designed for European operators, but built in China. Everything ends up being fine for the average chinese person, but not much use for the average European.

Also yes, Bombardier may be more expensive, as may Siemens be. But it is also very true that you get what you pay for. The more expensive product will invariably be of better quality, and last longer.