RAGNARØKR;1344224 said:
You seem to be the best number-cruncher out there in this discussion group. With your skill (and patience), can you apply this to capital costs, as these are reflected in lease charges? You can make a few assumptions eg that the mark 3 fleet is retained and refurbished at say, £400k per vehicle, that there is some new build of hauled vehicles on top eg to provide driving trailers and DDA compliant vehicles, at say, £1.2 million per vehicle, and that traction is by electric and diesel locomotives at the going rate which seems to be about £3 million a unit. Assume a future life for the mark 3 stock on the basis that it will have to be replaced over the ten year period 2035 to 2045.
Put this together with the track access charges and fuel costs which you have carefully put together, and then a coherent picture will be visible.
There are a lot of variables that need to be thought about. For instance do I compare your suggestion against the length of time the the IEP's are programmed to run for (i.e. 27.5 years from 2017) in which case I would need to cost a whole new fleet of coaches just at the end of that time period?
What about if the period in question goes over the life span of the locos and they need replacing again?
How many locos do I provide, just enough of the number of services, enough for the number of services plus 10% for maintenance or enough for the services and maintenance and a miss match in the type of loco (i.e. do we need a few because there will be some which are not able to be fully utilised all the time and/or so services can run to different destinations)?
Are all the mark 3's able to be refitted and used for another 30 years or do we need to replace them on a rolling program, in which case do we bother to refit them all or just those that will last more than a few years?
Do I only replace the existing coaches or do we add new capacity to make the new stock of a comparable capacity to the IEP's?
Do I assume that (if we are lengthening trains to meet capacity) that these trains can fit within existing stations lengths or are you going to provide a list of all the stations which have more than a million passengers a year and their platform lengths so that a view can be taken as to which ones need lengthening? Alternatively do we just assume that every station (including stations where a lot of people change such as Reading) just rely on SDO?
Do I assume that we are only running one loco per train, or do we need two (like the existing HST's) to maintain and/or improve on the existing acceleration or do we accept a slowing of journey times?
If we accept slower journeys, how many extra trains would be needed to maintain the existing timetable frequencies in which case a recast of the timetable may well be required.
What assumptions do I make for track access charges, are the new carriages the same as the existing mark 3's or do we "upgrade" them to the mark 4's or do they end up costing somewhere between the two.
Can we just build new mark 3's or do they need to be tested to meet current standards?
What do I assume are the costs of new depots (even if they are just your suggested mini depot for refuelling and hitting the loco's with a big hammer when they don't work)?
Are the above costs including maintenance during their life cycle, if not is this comparable to IEP's and if it differs what assumptions should be made.
Depending on the answers and assumptions it is likely that whoever undertook such a task would be able to bend the answers to meet their own view and so the answers would not be overly helpful in providing an answer that proves that IEP is good or bad.
For instance set the lifespan the same as IEP and as all the coaches would basicly be brand new at the end of the period you are looking at and the costs would be a lot higher than IEP, conversely extend it to 40 years and people then start to question why you are comparing life cycles of a different length.
Compare the cost per coach and IEP will always look a lot worse, whilst if you compare the cost per 100 seats and the costs appear to look much more favourable.
In short I have much more interesting things to do with my life than crunch a lot of numbers for which there is no right answer and regardless what answer I come out with will be slated by virtually everyone.