HS2 Rolling Stock Procurement

[LNW-GW Joint]

Procurement of trains for HS2 Phase 1 (operated by West Coast Partnership from 2026) is about to start: https://www.gov.uk/government/news/...ins-in-275-billion-government-rail-investment
60 trains, 225mph, seating 1000 passengers.

The successful bidder will also maintain the fleet from the dedicated rolling stock depot planned for Washwood Heath in Birmingham.
The site will also be home to the HS2 Network Control Centre which will together create hundreds of skilled jobs.
Future contracts will add to this fleet, to provide trains for the second phase of the project, in 2033

It mentions a PIN (Prior Information Notice) with more details but I haven't found it yet.
It doesn't say "classic compatible" but presumably that is what is intended.
The route map excludes ICWC Voyager-operated routes (Chester, North Wales, Shrewsbury).

I've put this is the Rolling Stock section as it obviously covers classic routes too, as does the West Coast Partnership franchise.

 

[daikilo]

Procurement of trains for HS2 Phase 1 (operated by West Coast Partnership from 2026) is about to start: https://www.gov.uk/government/news/...ins-in-275-billion-government-rail-investment
60 trains, 225mph, seating 1000 passengers.

It mentions a PIN (Prior Information Notice) with more details but I haven't found it yet.
It doesn't say "classic compatible" but presumably that is what is intended.
The route map excludes ICWC Voyager-operated routes (Chester, North Wales, Shrewsbury).

I've put this is the Rolling Stock section as it obviously covers classic routes too, as does the West Coast Partnership franchise.

So the West Coast Partnership TOC will design the service level whilst the DFT will design and procure the trains? Hope they talk to each other!

 

[j.crocker355]

225mph wonder if Alstom will offer a "TGV UK" variant?

Sent from my Nexus 7 using Tapatalk

 

[TheDavibob]

Is there any hope of a classic compatible fully high-speed bi-mode (running to North Wales after running very fast to Crewe) or is it just not technically possible? (i.e. can it reach 225mph whilst lugging around diesel bits)

 

[WatcherZero]

So the West Coast Partnership TOC will design the service level whilst the DFT will design and procure the trains? Hope they talk to each other!

HS2 Ltd will do the procurement rather than the Dft.

 

[Mikey C]

http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/business-38684010

Some interesting comments from Chris Grayling.

"Hundreds of jobs will be created in building and maintaining these trains, representing a great opportunity for British-based businesses and suppliers.
"In total 25,000 jobs and 2,000 apprenticeships will be created during HS2 construction and we have held discussions with UK suppliers to make sure they are in the best possible position to win contracts," he added.

The BBC story then continues with a quote from Hitachi UK...

 

[rebmcr]

360kph is impressively close to what I believe the design speed for the trackwork tops out at -- 400kph?

 

[Suraggu]

Phase 1 trains of HS2 have to be compatible on the classic network.
Phase 2 trains on HS2 can and will be more than likely continental gauge Rolling stock.

 

[Roast Veg]

Seems largely like a 2 horse race between tilting AT300s or Zefiros from Derby, with "British built bias". As far as I can tell, there are only 4 different options available total for classic compatibles.

Alstom seem pretty set on an uprated AGV for their bid, as they can be made tilt capable as well. Siemens would also need to push the envelope on the top speed of their tilting stock to meet 225mph.

I would expect CRRC to be more interested in the non-classic stock along with CAF, but that's speculation on my part.

 

[The Planner]

They wont tilt and wont be bi-mode either.

 

[Roast Veg]

When the tilt issue was raised in the press, and the massive negative impact that could have had on current WCML pathing the DfT responded by pointing out the Italian Zefiros. Manufacturers would be very unwise to put a non tilting bid in, and it may be in the technical information that isn't available.

EDIT: although having said that, the official word was for the exact opposite. My bad.

 

[daikilo]

They wont tilt and wont be bi-mode either.

They may not need to tilt on HS2 but they certainly do on the northern part of the WCML and hopefully the connection to the ECML. Bi-mode for running off HS2 could mqke sense, but we need to see the final planned network first.

 

[WatcherZero]

Government has applied for a derogation from European standards, these classic compatible HS2 trains should have level boarding at (1105mm or 1115mm platform height, I forget which) or as close as possible (with platform heights adjusted to match). Rather than British or European standard classic or high speed standards. This is slightly taller than HS1 at 1100mm.

Possibly reflects the difficulty in engineering these trains to UK gauge.

 

[absolutelymilk]

Government has applied for a derogation from European standards, these classic compatible HS2 trains should have level boarding at (1105mm or 1115mm platform height, I forget which) or as close as possible (with platform heights adjusted to match). Rather than British or European standard classic or high speed standards. This is slightly taller than HS1 at 1100mm.

Possibly reflects the difficulty in engineering these trains to UK gauge.

So does this mean that platforms will be raised/lowered and set aside for these trains or will they simply not have level boarding from existing platforms?

 

[The Planner]

They may not need to tilt on HS2 but they certainly do on the northern part of the WCML and hopefully the connection to the ECML. Bi-mode for running off HS2 could mqke sense, but we need to see the final planned network first.

They will not be bi mode and they wont tilt. Timetable work is being done on that assumption.

 

[WatcherZero]

So does this mean that platforms will be raised/lowered and set aside for these trains or will they simply not have level boarding from existing platforms?

Some stations could have them set aside, others might have platforms raised to an intermediate height. I think the purpose in this is that if you set the classic compatible as a high speed height then the platforms in the HS2 stations can also be level for the captive stock (possibly shaving off some platform edge for wider trains).

If you compile a list of all classic compatible stations some may be more practical to have additional platforms than others and some have already been signalled as will be having HS2 related rebuilds:

Manchester Piccadilly (Phase 1 only, Also been signalled the dedicated platforms may be built for phase 1)
Glasgow
Edinburgh
Lockerbie
Carlisle
Penrith
Oxenholme
Lancaster
Preston
Wigan
Warrington
Liverpool
Runcorn
Crewe
Stafford
Chesterfield (phase 2 only)
Sheffield (phase 2 only)
York (phase 2 only)
Darlington (phase 2 only)
Durham (phase 2 only)
Newcastle (phase 2 only)

 

[The Planner]

HS2 won't pay for additional platforms, they will stop at existing altered ones, they won't spend the money on new.

 

[najaB]

They will not be bi mode and they wont tilt. Timetable work is being done on that assumption.

I'm sure they won't be bi-mode, but I wouldn't be so quick to rule out tilt. You'd lose a lot of the benefit for services heading up the north WCML.

 

[The Planner]

Willing to bet hard cash on it, speaking to various people about it that is the proposition.

 

[coppercapped]

Government has applied for a derogation from European standards, these classic compatible HS2 trains should have level boarding at (1105mm or 1115mm platform height, I forget which) or as close as possible (with platform heights adjusted to match). Rather than British or European standard classic or high speed standards. This is slightly taller than HS1 at 1100mm.

Possibly reflects the difficulty in engineering these trains to UK gauge.

At an IMechE meeting I attended a little while ago Andrew McNaughton, HS2's Technical Director, stated that this platform height was intended for the new-build HS2 stations so that passengers had a level access from the platform to the train. Having to step up to get into a train was no longer acceptable. At that time both 'captive' and 'classic compatible' stock were being considered.

The train floor height is the same as existing stock, within a few millimetres. So for passengers travelling off HS2 there will be no change from the current situation - a step up into the train.

 

[Grimsby town]

They may not need to tilt on HS2 but they certainly do on the northern part of the WCML and hopefully the connection to the ECML. Bi-mode for running off HS2 could mqke sense, but we need to see the final planned network first.

I think it would be a huge mistake to run HS2 trains off the planned core network (HS2 and the classic lines to Scotland and Newcastle). SNCF in past ran TGV services to every possible place but these services ran at a significant loss and the network, as far as I'm aware, is now being cut back to the core.

There's very little point running 225mph trains to small cities and towns when they are going to be no more than 25% full. It's just not cost effective. It will be much better to offer frequent connecting services with a more suitable capacity and rolling stock capabilities.

There may be a case to run a few peak time services to places like Chester, Hull and Aberdeen but outside that services need to stick to the core.

 

[deltic]

I think it would be a huge mistake to run HS2 trains off the planned core network (HS2 and the classic lines to Scotland and Newcastle). SNCF in past ran TGV services to every possible place but these services ran at a significant loss and the network, as far as I'm aware, is now being cut back to the core.

There's very little point running 225mph trains to small cities and towns when they are going to be no more than 25% full. It's just not cost effective. It will be much better to offer frequent connecting services with a more suitable capacity and rolling stock capabilities.

There may be a case to run a few peak time services to places like Chester, Hull and Aberdeen but outside that services need to stick to the core.

Not sure anyone is proposing running HS2 services off the core network - certainly dont expect to see any turning up at Chester, Hull or Aberdeen.

 

[Mikey C]

I think it would be a huge mistake to run HS2 trains off the planned core network (HS2 and the classic lines to Scotland and Newcastle). SNCF in past ran TGV services to every possible place but these services ran at a significant loss and the network, as far as I'm aware, is now being cut back to the core.

There's very little point running 225mph trains to small cities and towns when they are going to be no more than 25% full. It's just not cost effective. It will be much better to offer frequent connecting services with a more suitable capacity and rolling stock capabilities.

There may be a case to run a few peak time services to places like Chester, Hull and Aberdeen but outside that services need to stick to the core.

But then after Phase 1 these trains will have to use the Classic network to even reach Manchester, and after Phase 2 will still need to use the Classic Network to reach Edinburgh, Glasgow, Newcastle etc, all "core" destinations in the IC network

 

[Grimsby town]

But then after Phase 1 these trains will have to use the Classic network to even reach Manchester, and after Phase 2 will still need to use the Classic Network to reach Edinburgh, Glasgow, Newcastle etc, all "core" destinations in the IC network

Just to make myself clear I'm including destinations such as Newcastle, Glasgow and Liverpool as part of the core network even though they use the classic network. These stations are all major hubs and large cities so can generate enough traffic.

 

[Roast Veg]

If I were preparing a manufacturer's bid (and I most certainly am not) I would include tilt as part of the bid. Alstom have publicly said that a tilting AGV will probably be their submission, and I think it would be majorly remiss to gain all that time on HS2 up to north of Crewe, only to drop another half an hour between there and Glasgow. We know for a fact that it is not impossible, and the benefits are immediately apparent.

 

[Chris125]

If I were preparing a manufacturer's bid (and I most certainly am not) I would include tilt as part of the bid. Alstom have publicly said that a tilting AGV will probably be their submission, and I think it would be majorly remiss to gain all that time on HS2 up to north of Crewe, only to drop another half an hour between there and Glasgow. We know for a fact that it is not impossible, and the benefits are immediately apparent.

Tilt comes with a significant weight and cost penalty that can't be justified across a large fleet for a relatively insignificant journey time improvement for services north of Golbourne - it's not going to happen. It's far more likely IMO that the completion of HS2 will actually see the end of tilt in this country, as the Pendolino and Voyager fleets will be in their twilight years.

 

[daikilo]

I think it would be a huge mistake to run HS2 trains off the planned core network (HS2 and the classic lines to Scotland and Newcastle). SNCF in past ran TGV services to every possible place but these services ran at a significant loss and the network, as far as I'm aware, is now being cut back to the core.

It is true that SNCF have had issues with profitability of parts of the TGV network but I am not aware of any total withdrawal of TGV service to smaller destinations. It will be interesting to see what happens to the 15 additional double-deck sets just ordered to keep Belfort open yet ostensibly for non-TGV routes.

 

[MarkyT]

It is true that SNCF have had issues with profitability of parts of the TGV network but I am not aware of any total withdrawal of TGV service to smaller destinations. It will be interesting to see what happens to the 15 additional double-deck sets just ordered to keep Belfort open yet ostensibly for non-TGV routes.

All routes in France use their classic network to some extent at their extremities. Their is no 'captive' concept as there is no significant difference in loading gauge.

 

[Suraggu]

Thereilly is no point in a tilt fitted train for HS2. It makes no sense for the long term. Short term perhaps, but these trains are required for the long term.

 

[Grimsby town]

It is true that SNCF have had issues with profitability of parts of the TGV network but I am not aware of any total withdrawal of TGV service to smaller destinations. It will be interesting to see what happens to the 15 additional double-deck sets just ordered to keep Belfort open yet ostensibly for non-TGV routes.

Looking again on the internet it seems that there was a proposal around 2 years ago to reduce services to core 40 destinations from around 120 currently but it doesn't look like it has been implemented yet. Not really sure if there are still plans to cut services or not.