Possible new stock

[Badger]

Why do I doubt the build quality of these trains.

The 19.2m trains are undoubtedly designed to be as cheap as possible per carriage (not even got saloon air conditioning as standard?) to enable marketing people and politicians to go on about how the number of carriages available for services has exploded.

Is this a bad thing? We desperately need such an explosion.

 

[spudfan]

Reviewing their options....
http://www.railwaygazette.com/nc/news/single-view/view/chinese-firm-fails-in-european-bid.html

 

[asylumxl]

Not just electronics, you see how many roads, viaducts and bridges are collapsing recently? There was even a report from the Chinese Government that while the average life of a new house built in the UK was 112 years and in the US was 80 years, in China it was just 30 years.

Apples and oranges.

I've not really seen such things TBH, but I would love some examples.

I also imagine that Chinese houses are far cheaper than here to reflect the lower average income of the people, where Chinas is $5185 and the UK is $39,604. Even allowing for high earners offsetting the average, it would still be a massive difference.

 

[swt_passenger]

What I find odd about the entire concept of buying Chinese passenger stock is that almost the entire media, and many rail enthusiasts, have been up in arms about Bombardier losing a contract to Siemens, despite it being a requirement of EU membership to allow Siemens to bid.

So wouldn't there be even more hassle if a bidding process that included Bombardier was won by the Chinese?

 

[DXMachina]

The other big risk with buying from China is that after it arrives (but before it falls apart, explodes, takes off or sinks) you then receive a very large invoice from each of the EU / legitimate / non-knockoff manufacturers for the use of their patents in your train you want to hire out...

The PRC exists outside the normal market for technology licencing & transfer. That adds extra risk to anything made there.

 

[northwichcat]

despite it being a requirement of EU membership to allow Siemens to bid.

After checking the government admitted they could have shown more favouritism towards bids that would have had trains built in Britain but had thought it was against EU law when it wasn't.

So wouldn't there be even more hassle if a bidding process that included Bombardier was won by the Chinese?

Depends on the circumstances.

If there are 3 bids for a new order of 120 trains as Pacer replacement and Siemens proposal costs £264m, Bombardiers costs £256m and CRSE's costs £180m then the government could justify awarding it to CRSE on the basis that it would allow another operator to get new carriages using the £75m saved.

Also CRSE may propose more jobs being created in the UK than Siemens.
--- old post above --- --- new post below ---

The other big risk with buying from China is that after it arrives (but before it falls apart, explodes, takes off or sinks) you then receive a very large invoice from each of the EU / legitimate / non-knockoff manufacturers for the use of their patents in your train you want to hire out...

The PRC exists outside the normal market for technology licencing & transfer. That adds extra risk to anything made there.

Presumably units would be purchased through CRSE Limited who are registered as a company in England and Wales company number 05732087 meaning they have to comply with UK legislation if things go wrong.

 

[DXMachina]

having a UK company number counts for precisely nothing. Can be obtained for a few hundred quid a year, from abroad...

Gives precisely no protection whatsoever from patent law.

 

[northwichcat]

The 19.2m trains are undoubtedly designed to be as cheap as possible per carriage (not even got saloon air conditioning as standard?) to enable marketing people and politicians to go on about how the number of carriages available for services has exploded.

It looks like they (the Pulsar) are intended as units for metro style services opposed to Pacer replacement based on this presentation:
http://www.csre.co.uk/files/Download/Passenger_Transport_2009_11_04.pdf

Either that or CRSE don't realise what kind of routes Northern are using Pacers on.

 

[Wolfie]

The ideal here is for the trains to be shipped over in component form / semi finished form in a way for them to be assembled here using UK / European quality standards and health and safety standards.

This is exactly the way MG cars are being made again in Birmingham so why can't it work for trains - maybe they could even buy Bombardier's UK operations (tongue in cheek but why not?)

This would represent the worst of all worlds.

For trains the clever bits (the design etc) would be done in China and the unskilled part done in UK at much greater expense than could be done in China. Maybe a fair few short-term semi-skilled jobs but effectively zero UK added value and increased cost (the biggest virtue of Chinese trains is likely to be the low cost, potentially allowing greater numbers to be bought - but more likely DaFT will just buy less and the Treasury pocket the difference).

The MG analogy is inappropriate - MG have retained a significant design presence in UK albeit your production comments are accurate.

 

[asylumxl]

The MG analogy is inappropriate - MG have retained a significant design presence in UK albeit your production comments are accurate.

And who is to say they don't design their stock here? Or is it an assumption?