SouthEastern fleet replacement updates

[Bletchleyite]

They've asked for a proven platform

That makes a lot of sense. Can we think of a platform that's not proven for 20m third rail vehicles at the moment?

It won't be that one, I suspect.

 

[Energy]

That makes a lot of sense. Can we think of a platform that's not proven for 20m third rail vehicles at the moment?

It won't be that one, I suspect.

Talgo have an EMU platform for the UK CAF and Hitachi are yet to produce a 20m 3rd rail train (at least in the UK) either.

Given the 701s current status I'd be surprised if Alstom got the contract for effectively more of them, both Hitachi and Alstom are busy anyway with HS2 rolling stock while Goole isn't too busy at the moment now that TfL is less well financially.

 

[Bletchleyite]

Given the 701s current status I'd be surprised if Alstom got the contract for effectively more of them

That was the one I was suggesting it wouldn't be.

The Desiro City looks like a good bet, and they've already got some so their microfleet(ish) would be unmicrofleeted.

 

[43066]

If Southeastern succeeds in their aim of finding new trains that are cheaper than the current networkers, I could see DfT approving it. Otherwise, not so much

With rising interest rates it seems very unlikely low leasing costs can be obtained for new stock?

For 30year old trains would the owners let them be leased for a song? No one else will have them.

This was my thinking. With interest rates rising the era of cheap money is at an end. Perhaps the rolling stock leasing market needs reform, with ROSCOs compelled to negotiate on more favourable terms having enjoyed far higher profit margins than TOCs since privatisation (tax payer subsidised).

As a very frequent user, the Networkers ARE worse than the 376s, 700s and just about anything else I use on the entire rail network in terms of ingrained dirt and general unkempt appearance. Everything about them embodies a lack of care for so many years.

The 376 have ripped seating but the general ambience/appearance is tired but not terrible like the Networkers.

It's not just last night's pee on the 465s, it's years of an operator never bothering to really clean them deeply. That in turn just encourages bad behaviour. As does a lack of on train staff and at stations. The whole network has long needed investment. Hell, some basic upkeep would be nice.

Certainly very unloved. I find them more pleasant to travel in than the 376s which were absolutely hellish in the summer. A lot of the issues you describe above would he dealt with by a deep clean/refresh - comparing to say SWR 455s shoes how effective this can be even for older stock than Networkers.

Can we think of a platform that's not proven for 20m third rail vehicles at the moment?

442s?

 

[JonathanH]

Perhaps the rolling stock leasing market needs reform, with ROSCOs compelled to negotiate on more favourable terms having enjoyed far higher profit margins than TOCs since privatisation (tax payer subsidised).

Huh? You can't compel the rolling stock companies to make a loss on their investments. Do we make the owners of office blocks lease their buildings out to the public sector on artificial terms?

 

[43066]

Huh? You can't compel the rolling stock companies to make a loss on their investments. Do we make the owners of office blocks lease their buildings out to the public sector on artificial terms?

The market could be reformed - they’ve had high returns for virtually zero risk for a long time.

 

[Stephen42]

A Networker refresh would also likely reduce the business case for a new fleet.

It would depend on the scope of the refresh. A deep clean and new seats would improve passenger experience but not add much additional revenue. Higher capacity interiors could reduce the business case for replacement, though there was a rumour not that simple due to a weight restriction. It still wouldn't solve issues like lack of replacement parts or cost implications from higher failure rates in service.

A new fleet business case could also claim fewer drivers from more 12-car services with SDO alongside the higher capacity, better availability and lower maintenance cost benefits.

 

[bramling]

The market could be reformed - they’ve had high returns for virtually zero risk for a long time.

I seem to remember it being speculated on here at times that the “new trains bonanza” of recent years might have been an attempt to do just that, by attempting to drive leasing costs downwards. However the ROSCOs have seemed very content to simply send the old fleets to scrap, rather than lower lease rates, which probably shouldn’t have been surprising, as getting the old fleets off the scene would help push lease rates back up.

What we do seem to have achieved is introduced a layer of significant risk, with the leasing companies having had their fingers burned in a number of cases.

 

[Bletchleyite]

A new fleet business case could also claim fewer drivers from more 12-car services with SDO alongside the higher capacity, better availability and lower maintenance cost benefits.

It's curious, mentioning this, that the new south WCML timetable almost entirely removes 12 car running (there appears to be one weekday 12 car diagram only, plus a couple Saturday late evening) in favour of a stack of peak extras - far more than before!

It's a strange world sometimes. Might be so every train fits every platform at Euston, but I don't know if SE have that sort of constraint at Victoria and Charing X?

 

[Timmyd]

I travel from Herne Hill where the trains are 50% Networkers 50% 700s. I’d prefer the Networkers any day of the week. Warmer, more comfortable seating, much nicer loos since PRM mods (has anyone seen the state of the 700s toilets lately?). They’ve not been maintained well and the interior is gloomy but the WMR 323s are basically identical but show that a better colour scheme and maintenance can make all the difference. You can’t blame a train (especially one with decent modern toilets) for poor behaviour by passengers, that’s separate problem which could be partially addressed if SE ever had any on train staff or ticket inspections, or gated some of its inner London stations

 

[Stephen42]

It's curious, mentioning this, that the new south WCML timetable almost entirely removes 12 car running (there appears to be one weekday 12 car diagram only, plus a couple Saturday late evening) in favour of a stack of peak extras - far more than before!

It's a strange world sometimes. Might be so every train fits every platform at Euston, but I don't know if SE have that sort of constraint at Victoria and Charing X?

For SE Metro Victoria is nearly all 8-car as many stations are only 8-car platforms. Charing X 12-car networkers can only use platforms 1-3 (12-car mainline electrostars can use all with SDO) and can't call at Woolwich Dockyard which scuppers 12-car running for many Cannon Street services.

There seems to have been a general shift on SE to fewer longer services including a few timetable tweaks to work around the current constraints.

 

[brad465]

For SE Metro Victoria is nearly all 8-car as many stations are only 8-car platforms. Charing X 12-car networkers can only use platforms 1-3 (12-car mainline electrostars can use all with SDO) and can't call at Woolwich Dockyard which scuppers 12-car running for many Cannon Street services.

There seems to have been a general shift on SE to fewer longer services including a few timetable tweaks to work around the current constraints.

12 car running on SE Metro services has also been scuppered by limited fleet size, at least pre-covid. During the peak the service frequency combined with available fleet meant only a handful of formations were 12 car, and increasing the overall fleet size was also limited by stabling capacity. Had no Networkers gone to storage when 707s came over (i.e. because stabling capacity was sufficient and demand making it necessary), then it's possible more Networker diagrams could have been 12 car.

 

[AzureOtsu]

Which makes me wonder if the battery option is to allow a few extra stabling sidings to be built without the cost and safety issues surrounding 3rd rail installation. Being able to have far more sidings where fitters, cleaners etc can work in safety with the power off will be a huge benefit in 3rd rail land.

Might as well lease out a few 08s to Marshall the stock around to cut even more costs

 

[Doomotron]

Hitachi are yet to produce a 20m 3rd rail train (at least in the UK) either.

The 395s have 20m coaches.

 

[Mikey C]

Maybe a few 465s could be reduced to 3 car units, so that 11 car trains (4+3+3) could run into all the Charing Cross platforms!

 

[4BEP]

For SE Metro Victoria is nearly all 8-car as many stations are only 8-car platforms. Charing X 12-car networkers can only use platforms 1-3 (12-car mainline electrostars can use all with SDO) and can't call at Woolwich Dockyard which scuppers 12-car running for many Cannon Street services.

There seems to have been a general shift on SE to fewer longer services including a few timetable tweaks to work around the current constraints.

Twelve car Networkers also use platform 6 as it can accomodate twelve 20m cars.

 

[WizCastro197]

Maybe a few 465s could be reduced to 3 car units, so that 11 car trains (4+3+3) could run into all the Charing Cross platforms!

#nomoney

They are getting replaced anyway, no point getting rid of a carriage and spending money on them


Also 10 coaches can easily be achieved with a 4-4-2 with a 466

 

[GEC465]

Thats mostly the RLUs... it's rough in South East London

Both FLU and RLUs have toilets mostly vandalised. FLUs seem to be in worse condition than the RLUs

 

[Bletchleyite]

Also 10 coaches can easily be achieved with a 4-4-2 with a 466

442s get everywhere!

One of their managers appears to be Tweeting about this - he is saying it isn't aiming at a full fleet replacement, just the Networkers.

 

[WizCastro197]

Both FLU and RLUs have toilets mostly vandalised. FLUs seem to be in worse condition than the RLUs

Can you write out the abbreviation if you don’t mind. I actually have no idea what that means.

 

[Bletchleyite]

Can you write out the abbreviation if you don’t mind. I actually have no idea what that means.

I suspect it is Full Length Units and Reduced Length Units, i.e. 12s and 8s.

 

[WizCastro197]

442s get everywhere!

One of their managers appears to be Tweeting about this - he is saying it isn't aiming at a full fleet replacement, just the Networkers.

Yeah
It be pretty pointless to throw away everything considering most was made within the last 20 years and can still go on for another 15.

== Doublepost prevention - post automatically merged: 19 Nov 2022 ==

I suspect it is Full Length Units and Reduced Length Units, i.e. 12s and 8s.

Thanks

 

[43096]

442s get everywhere!

One of their managers appears to be Tweeting about this - he is saying it isn't aiming at a full fleet replacement, just the Networkers.

Desiro City is the obvious choice, then, as it un-micro-fleets the 707s.

 

[43066]

Twelve car Networkers also use platform 6 as it can accomodate twelve 20m cars.

Unless something has changed in the last few years, it’s definitely 1-3 only for 12 car networkers at Ch+. The country end of p6 isn’t wide enough to be deemed safe (it’s just board extensions from memory).

 

[Mikey C]

#nomoney

They are getting replaced anyway, no point getting rid of a carriage and spending money on them


Also 10 coaches can easily be achieved with a 4-4-2 with a 466

11 is one better than 10. A bit Spinal Tap really

My attitude to the Networkers is that they've been left to degenerate, but that isn't the fault of the units themselves. After all there's no thread demanding the immediate replacement of the 165s or 1990s Underground stock. If they had been properly overhauled 2 years ago, there wouldn't be the need to replace them now. The BREL units have been retractioned, while the Metro-Cammell units have similar equipment to the Underground 1996 stock, which will be in service for another 20 years.

Desiro City is the obvious choice, then, as it un-micro-fleets the 707s.

This is a big order of trains, which shouldn't be driven by what units SE have already. And weren't there ceiling handrail/grabrail issues with the 707s which made them non compliant with the latest guidance? Plus they don't have toilets.

 

[XAM2175]

This is a big order of trains, which shouldn't be driven by what units SE have already. And weren't there ceiling handrail/grabrail issues with the 707s which made them non compliant with the latest guidance? Plus they don't have toilets.

Siemens moved a lot of the electrical gubbins that conventionally lives in end-of-vehicle cabinets into the roof of the Desiro City in order to provide extra floorspace and wider gangways for the 700 tender, and yes that does complicate the positioning of grabrails, but I've not seen anything suggesting that the exact layout couldn't be revised in a new production run. As to the lack of toilets, that's simply SWR's SWT's original choice - not a limitation of the design.

 

[Energy]

As to the lack of toilets, that's simply SWR's original choice - not a limitation of the design.

Yeah the 700s have toilets, the 717s have an obvious spot for where the toilet would be, not sure if the 707s do.

 

[WizCastro197]

11 is one better than 10. A bit Spinal Tap really

My attitude to the Networkers is that they've been left to degenerate, but that isn't the fault of the units themselves. After all there's no thread demanding the immediate replacement of the 165s or 1990s Underground stock. If they had been properly overhauled 2 years ago, there wouldn't be the need to replace them now. The BREL units have been retractioned, while the Metro-Cammell units have similar equipment to the Underground 1996 stock, which will be in service for another 20 years.


This is a big order of trains, which shouldn't be driven by what units SE have already. And weren't there ceiling handrail/grabrail issues with the 707s which made them non compliant with the latest guidance? Plus they don't have toilets.

4+3+3 is 10 coaches which is what you posted. Unless you meant 4-4-3?

In any scenario how much difference does 1 coach make?

 

[jackot]

This is a big order of trains, which shouldn't be driven by what units SE have already. And weren't there ceiling handrail/grabrail issues with the 707s which made them non compliant with the latest guidance? Plus they don't have toilets.

I would have thought that it would be useful ordering more 707s or similar Desiro Cities, simply because they already have staff trained to work with them, and they likely have experience on what they would change on the units if they were to order them again (as was SWTs original plan - order a small batch of 707s before commencing a huge order, to find improvements etc.)

I can't see much reason why they cannot fix the grabrail/handrail issue, as I would imagine Siemens would be willing to redesign/fix that for such a large order, and the toilet issue has already been solved in the form of the 700 - Is there any reason same can't be done for the 707? Nothing to stop them putting in more comfortable seats with tables either, though I doubt it will happen with the DfT involved.

 

[CFRAIL]

I'm sure I recall seeing reference that the 707s could be retrofitted with toilets and I imagine that's what might happen.