Whats the problem with ALSTOM ?

[EE Andy b1]

Just wondering why out of all rolling stock orders of late that there are none for Alstom.
I know they are joining up with/being taken over by Siemens and they have good order books and now getting the deep tube order.
Is it that just they don't have the right products anymore?
The class 390 EMU, love or hate them has turned into quite a reliable descent train doing a lot of mileage and shifting plenty of people around at speed.
The Class 175/180 DMUs have not been the most reliable.

Seems strange as there TGV product has done very well over the years.

Or is it a company hard to deal with and so ROSCO's / TOCs don't.

Now they are cutting upto 200 jobs at West Coast depots to stay as they say competitive but surely the Class 390 fleet as it gets older needs even more maintenance something i know they always said were never enough hours for.

I believe the maintenance contract is coming to an end for West Coast and i presume the competitive job cuts are to try and secure that.

Sorry if on a thread elsewhere!

 

[dgl]

Remember first that the 390 was designed by Fiat ferrovia and was only badged as Alstom as they had purchased Fiat ferrovia.

Also Alstom could have had a good chunk of the post privatisation new fleet but their offerings were shabbily built and horrendously un-reliable, the 458's and 180's especially so.
Meanwhile when companies that required more fleet looked elsewhere esp. where they had initially brought Alstom units and playing the made in UK card when Washwood Heath closed.

Also no other supplier in the UK has had the risk of it's trains being replaced so soon on reliability grounds.

 

[EE Andy b1]

Remember first that the 390 was designed by Fiat ferrovia and was only badged as Alstom as they had purchased Fiat ferrovia.

Of coarse they were a FIAT design, how did i forget that!! I blame the heat!
Only been driving them for 15 years.

Also no other supplier in the UK has had the risk of it's trains being replaced so soon on reliability grounds.

That probably does speak volumes.

 

[Domh245]

They were also supposedly not very helpful when it came to technical support as well, partially explaining why bulk of the HST re-engining went to MTU rather than Paxman (who were an Alstom company at the time) according to some.

 

[LNW-GW Joint]

Alstom offered an articulated design for Thameslink, which NR penalised on track wear grounds, so withdrew their bid.
There were several options for additional Pendolinos (eg for VT, GNWR, FirstGroup on the ECML), but all fell by the wayside with DfT/ORR procrastination started by the West Coast franchise fiasco in 2012.
The 10-day standstill in contract signature for new orders is because Alstom caused a stink when it lost the Eurostar class 374 order to Siemens.
But ultimately, they lost out in the UK EMU market with the poor build quality of its Coradia and Juniper models, after being in the lead c2000.
It caused the closure of Washwood Heath and the decline of the Preston (ex English Electric) traction package capability.
Siemens (and now Hitachi) was the clear winner of that competition.
Meanwhile, Alstom is taking on maintenance work for other manufacturers at their sites, notably CAF (Caledonian Sleeper, TPE).
They are still a powerhouse in France, with all sorts of designs including regional bi-modes, and of course all SNCF high speed trains.
It remains to be seen how the Siemens/Alstom merger will pan out in terms of design technology and manufacturing sites.

 

[urpert]

They have tied up with Stagecoach to bid for Southeastern so watch this space.

 

[EE Andy b1]

They have tied up with Stagecoach to bid for Southeastern so watch this space.

Well that should be interesting then, what with Stagecoach in the wars and losing one big franchise and now having another one taken from them.

 

[43096]

Well that should be interesting then, what with Stagecoach in the wars and losing one big franchise and now having another one taken from them.

Not to mention Stagecoach’s previous relationship with Alstom. SWT effectively finished Alstom in the UK new build market when they were so, so hacked off with Alstom’s inability to get the 458s to work that they went to Siemens for the 450s and 444s.

The Desiro fleets are effectively a monument to Alstom’s corporate incompetence - and a reminder to others as to what can happen.

 

[EE Andy b1]

Does seem strange then that they are now bidding partners!

If you had such problems with a new train build, would you go back to Alstom, or are they just putting money in as partners but hoping for train orders?

 

[47271]

...and bringing a Scottish perspective, remember how painful the introduction of the 334s was.

Mind you, based on what's happened with the 385s, maybe Hitachi is the new Alstom...

I totally agree on the 180s, they're horrible high speed rattleboxes that make Voyagers look clever.

Can I put a word in for the poor old 175 though, I've never had a bad experience on one in all the years, alongside the Pendolino I'd put it down as their most successful design.

 

[urpert]

Aren’t the 175s and 180s essentially the same train with a different fibreglass nose?

 

[6Gman]

Can I put a word in for the poor old 175 though, I've never had a bad experience on one in all the years, alongside the Pendolino I'd put it down as their most successful design.

I'm very fond of 175s, and they're superb when they're in good fettle.

BUT they do have some rather dodgy features reliability-wise (aside from their enthusiasm for colliding with farm machinery ) notably their hay fever!

 

[krus_aragon]

I'm very fond of 175s, and they're superb when they're in good fettle.

BUT they do have some rather dodgy features reliability-wise (aside from their enthusiasm for colliding with farm machinery ) notably their hay fever!

I'm sure they're not alone in enthusiastically embracing farm machinery: perhaps London Overground's Class 315 would like to do so if they ever got the chance!

 

[F Great Eastern]

Too many people were burnt by Alstom build quality all those years ago.

It wasn't just in the UK that operators were burnt, it was elsewhere in Europe, including the infamous class 8200 in Ireland that were built in 2000, saw very intermittent service over the next six years, spending long periods not running, before being withdrawn in 2007, returning in 2008 for a very short while and parked up for the last 10 years.

Reckon they got about a couple of years service out of them. In the end it was decided to refurbish the 8100 class which are now almost 40 years old and going well following their good refurbishment by Siemens.

 

[47271]

Aren’t the 175s and 180s essentially the same train with a different fibreglass nose?

That, and the fact that 180s do a very 'lively' and uncomfortable 125mph.

If they'd stuck a nose on a Turbostar and got it to do 125 then we'd have got a similar effect.

 

[EE Andy b1]

So is it just bad design or bad build quality or just done for a price to win orders?

For a firm like Alstom to continually get it wrong is alarming really.

 

[swt_passenger]

I think Alstom didn’t exactly improve their reputation with the merger of the 458 and 460 fleets. I think they had a design role with that, and it didn’t go very smoothly either.

 

[Rail Blues]

Because absolutely everything they built and designed in the late 90s and early 2000s was utter dog pump, 175 aside.

 

[ForTheLoveOf]

Why exactly did the 180 fail so badly? I mean, even now operators such as Hull Trains are having persistent problems with it, and it's almost expected for one or more engines not to be running on any given journey.

Why are other options - such as the Voyagers and the 350s/185s - so much more reliable?

Is Alstom fundamentally an incompetent train builder? The relative maintenance success of the 390 would suggest that they aren't that bad.

 

[whhistle]

I thought the problems with the 175s and 180s were pretty much resolved now?
Read elsewhere on the forum they'd become some of the most reliable units these days.

 

[craigybagel]

I'm not sure whether to be amused or annoyed by the common misconception on this forum (it's appeared on several threads in the last few months) that 175s are unreliable. They USED to be - but now they're pretty great. And whilst they do look tired inside, they're still pretty solid and rattle free after all these years (especially noticeable when compared to a 170). Although the terms of the new W&B franchise are a little vague on that area, hopefully they'll get a much needed refurb - and then they'll probably be for passengers the best regional DMU in the country.

A pity that's all too late for Alsthom though - and that they burned too many customers with teething problems. And I can also accept that whilst the 175s have settled down and become reliable workhorses (as have the 334s at Scotrail from what I've heard) some of their other fleets are still problematic - although I may be biased after being turfed off a failed GC 180 at Peterborough only yesterday!

 

[LNW-GW Joint]

The Alstom Coradia and Juniper were French designs for the UK market, and built at Washwood Heath which was dealing with unfamiliar components.
During their first tribulations I remember an engineer saying he thought they were the best designed but worst integrated trains he had ever seen.
The individual components worked fine, but did not work together with other subsystems.
FirstGroup and Stagecoach were therefore debugging the trains for Alstom.
Alstom themselves seem to lose interest just as it turned serious for new orders, and Siemens picked up the orders for SWT and TPE instead.
The diesel engines were common in the industry and the 180 version is the same one as in the much praised 22x and 185 trains (Bombardier and Siemens).
The 390s went through a similar crisis initially, but in this case Alstom persevered with Angel and Virgin on their backs, and they came through well in the end.
The 175s and 390s have always been maintained by Alstom themselves, while I think all the other Alstom products were maintained directly by the TOCs.
Splitting the already small 180 fleet into micro-fleets for different TOCs can't have helped.

 

[krus_aragon]

I thought the problems with the 175s and 180s were pretty much resolved now?
Read elsewhere on the forum they'd become some of the most reliable units these days.

The 175 are certainly much improved, but in their early days they were notoriously problematic. It took over two years to go from first unit testing to get the last of the fleet in service, and even then there were further issues (e.g. the hydro-dynamic brake was so unreliable it was isolated in favour of only using the disc brakes, but that then led to excessive brake wear). They've now been well tamed by their maintainers at Chester, but in the meantime other potential purchasers were scared off, hence the small fleet.

I can't speak for the 180s.

 

[ac6000cw]

Also in the early 2000s Alstom was in serious financial trouble, leading eventually to it being bailed out by the French government - from Wikipedia:

By 2003 Alstom was facing a financial crisis due to poor sales and over $5 billion of debt liabilities, with the potential to force the liquidation of the company. The crisis was in part due to $4 billion in costs from a design flaw in the turbines from the 2000 ABB Group acquisition, and from the collapse of customer Renaissance Cruises, and a downturn in the marine market. Alstom's share price had dropped 90% over two years.[18][19] European competition commission law required Alstom to sell several of its subsidiaries, including its shipbuilding and electrical transmission assets, when it accepted a €3.2 billion rescue plan involving the French state.[20]

In 2004 the French state took a 21% stake in Alstom and received an EU-approved French government bailout worth €2.5 billion.[21] The company sold its electrical transmission and distribution ("grid") activities to Areva, the diesel locomotive manufacturer Meinfesa to Vossloh AG, and Alstom Power Rentals to APR LLC. Alstom also delivered the Queen Mary 2, the world's largest ocean liner, to Cunard during 2004.

In 2005 the former Metro-Cammell rail vehicle works in Washwood Heath, Birmingham were closed.

I suspect senior management in France had much bigger problems to think about/deal with at the time than how their UK subsidiaries were doing...certainly how they treated the UK market back then smacks of a major lack of management attention and support (and France always comes first, of course).

It'll be interesting to see if the new Alstom-Siemens joint venture pans out to be an enlarged Siemens or enlarged Alstom transport division in terms of how it operates. If they don't get it right I can see the lean-and-nimble Stadler becoming a much bigger player in the market.

 

[fgwrich]

...and bringing a Scottish perspective, remember how painful the introduction of the 334s was.

Mind you, based on what's happened with the 385s, maybe Hitachi is the new Alstom...

It's not just the 385s giving operators the Hitachi Headache. I can see some of the other TOCs and operators who have ordered or have the 800s coming their way watching the introductions of their fleets rather closely. Indeed I was on a cancelled 5 car last night (vice 10) when it gave up in service and no Hitachi Engineer would come out for it. Mind you, given Hitachi's constant teaming up with Bombardier you do have to wonder if something is up.

I think Alstom didn’t exactly improve their reputation with the merger of the 458 and 460 fleets. I think they had a design role with that, and it didn’t go very smoothly either.

Did Alstom Alstom have much of a part in the merger of the fleets, I thought that was largely down to another one of Porterbrook's grand, and subsequent failure, ideas?

Incidentally the SWR Junipers are still in my opinion not the greatest of units. They really could do with a full and thorough refurbishment (the Porterbrook conversion saw mostly new flooring and seat covers) while the troublesome toilets still remain in poor condition. Something that has become noticeable to both passengers and staff is the jerking as the 458s now set off. Possibly not helped by either having the extra coach inserted or the de-gearing as part of the /5 project.

I'm not sure whether to be amused or annoyed by the common misconception on this forum (it's appeared on several threads in the last few months) that 175s are unreliable. They USED to be - but now they're pretty great. And whilst they do look tired inside, they're still pretty solid and rattle free after all these years (especially noticeable when compared to a 170). Although the terms of the new W&B franchise are a little vague on that area, hopefully they'll get a much needed refurb - and then they'll probably be for passengers the best regional DMU in the country.
A pity that's all too late for Alsthom though - and that they burned too many customers with teething problems.

I completely agree with you on both counts. Alstom's lack of support cost them the support of the HST operators through their ownership of Paxman - this could have given the VP185 engine a much better chance, although of course this wasn't helped by the continued lack of support through Paxmans new owner's MAN SE - ultimately costing them the HST life extension project who's engines were picked up by fellow German rival MTU Friedrichshafen GmbH.

For every bad product Alstom seemed to have churned out, they did manage something good. Yes, the Pendolino fleet still come in for criticism but more for their design than the train itself - I find them to be very comfortable and reliable, the 175s are similar. Shaky start, but thanks to some heavy overhauls and the isolating of some of the more temperamental pieces of kit - The Hydrodynamic brake? being one of them they have settled down to become very good if not a little shabby inter regional units. The 1995 & 1996 stock (Albeit delivered late) both seem to have settled down rather well on their respective Northern and Jubilee lines and like you say, the 334s seem to have settled down as well.

Im of the opposite opinion to some on here though, I rather like the 180. I like their ride quality and intercity feel - it's just a shame that their reliability has always been questionable. Unhelped of course by their design, with many mechanical components shoe-horned to fit. One of which I believe, used to be the cooling from the engines and radiator pipes being too close to the actual engines themselves (was it the radiators nearly on top of the engines?) causing the overheating.

 

[craigybagel]

One thing I think it's worth pointing out - all the issues that Alstom had are nothing compared to the litany of disasters that Ansaldo-Breda have achieved - and yet the latter company, under its new Hitachi ownership, is currently building lots of new trains for the UK. Interesting times are ahead....

 

[43096]

Did Alstom Alstom have much of a part in the merger of the fleets, I thought that was largely down to another one of Porterbrook's grand, and subsequent failure, ideas?

Incidentally the SWR Junipers are still in my opinion not the greatest of units. They really could do with a full and thorough refurbishment (the Porterbrook conversion saw mostly new flooring and seat covers) while the troublesome toilets still remain in poor condition.

Alstom were the prime contractor for the project. They had a big part in it, and screwed up. Again.

Agree about the toilets on the 458s, but disagree on everything else. They remain a superb unit, with excellent seat comfort that is superior to the 450s and 707s. Will be very sorry to see them go.

I completely agree with you on both counts. Alstom's lack of support cost them the support of the HST operators through their ownership of Paxman - this could have given the VP185 engine a much better chance, although of course this wasn't helped by the continued lack of support through Paxmans new owner's MAN SE - ultimately costing them the HST life extension project who's engines were picked up by fellow German rival MTU Friedrichshafen GmbH.

It was all down to Alstom. Like Stagecoach with the 458s, FGW were so hacked off with the lack of support that VP185 was never going to win out despite the ownership change. A shame, because the VP185 is the superior engine - see this month’s Modern Railways.

 

[gazthomas]

They were also supposedly not very helpful when it came to technical support as well, partially explaining why bulk of the HST re-engining went to MTU rather than Paxman (who were an Alstom company at the time) according to some.

Had Paxman been sold on to Man by the time of the re-engining programme?

 

[urpert]

Alstom were the prime contractor for the project. They had a big part in it, and screwed up. Again.

Agree about the toilets on the 458s, but disagree on everything else. They remain a superb unit, with excellent seat comfort that is superior to the 450s and 707s. Will be very sorry to see them go.


It was all down to Alstom. Like Stagecoach with the 458s, FGW were so hacked off with the lack of support that VP185 was never going to win out despite the ownership change. A shame, because the VP185 is the superior engine - see this month’s Modern Railways.

Another big fan of the 458s here. I’d love to see them come to Southeastern (though I accept that seems pretty unlikely now).

 

[fgwrich]

Agree about the toilets on the 458s, but disagree on everything else. They remain a superb unit, with excellent seat comfort that is superior to the 450s and 707s. Will be very sorry to see them go.

I think my problem with them stems from the lack of maintenance the SWT/SWR Fleet have had over the past few years. The (and in some cases here) 460s were fantastic units and were a joy to ride in. But over the years, the SWR Fleet have almost been allowed to become dirty unkempt, and I've found collapsed seat bases to be the norm. A Shame because as you point out, they can be comfortable units. Come to think of it, even the Scottish Junipers have been treated better over their time interior wise. Hopefully if they are chosen for the SE or Southern Franchise's they might actually receive the interior they deserve. And consider removing the ever dire toilets.