Time to get new trains earning money.

Domh245 · 21 Sep 2016

RichmondCommu said:
In which case why bother having a test track?

A test track is for making sure that the all of the train's systems talk to each other, that the signalling infrastructure talks to it, validating expected behaviours, and noting and fixing unexpected issues (such as ride quality). It's not there to test for passengers doing stupid things, drivers failing to stop on the mark (as an aside, they'd have probably tested that the train failed safe in that situation!), an infrastructure niggle, etc.

Cowley said:
This is just a question, hopefully someone may know the answer.
Is a plane generally of far superior build quality to a train? Also, what is the price of a new 737 airliner compaired to say a new class 700 set?

Planes certainly have to stand up to more hostile conditions, and are generally pretty well built. A new 737-800 costs £73.9million, whereas a 12 car 700 set (based on the cost of a 707 rather than the TLP contract which also accounted for depots and was a slightly different kind of arrangement) costs £16.8million.

RailUK Forums

Cowley · 21 Sep 2016

Townsend Hook said:
I'm not sure that build quality is something you can compare between such different things as a plane and a train. Even if you could, I'm not quite sure how such a comparison would be relevant to this thread.

On the subject of price, prices for a 737 start at around $50m, which equates to around £38.5m. The Thameslink stock contract was worth £1.6b for 1160 carriages, so a bit less than £1.4m a carriage, £11m ish for an 8 car set or £16.5m ish for a 12 car set. Obviously those costings aren't directly comparable, given that the Thameslink contract also includes maintenance, etc.

Thanks for that, I was just curious really, don't know much about modern trains.
Only asked because there seems to be quite a lot of comparisons being made between the two on this thread.

infobleep · 22 Sep 2016

fredk said:
A 737 is pretty standard with so many produced and the design not changed much over a long period of time. Usually with rolling stock it's built up from the ground for that particular use. With so little standard type of stock of course there will be longer research, development, and testing compared with a massed produced jumbo jet.

Would it be possible to mass produce rolling stock and continue to produce it when someone needs some more elsewhere, rather than coming up with a brand new design? They cascade rolling stock so could they cascade previously used designs with just minor modifications?

Obviously the 707 will be similar to the 700 so may be it is being done.

May be unlike planes, every line is different so needs different rolling stock each time a new build is done.

Of course crash worthiness changes overtime and some rolling stock can't be rebuilt any more due it not meeting new standards.

Surely crash worthiness of planes would change overtime too though and therefore previous ones not suitable to be built now?

Sent from my SM-G925F using Tapatalk

edwin_m · 22 Sep 2016

Taunton said:
The whole idea of the Siemens test track or Old Dalby etc was surely that trains would be handed over ready to run, yet they seem to hang about at these facilities for months, and then start all over again taking for ever at the acceptance depot before coming in to service, and still fundamental faults are then found such as the current Class 700 issues at certain points on the network.

I think you've partly answered your own question here - the test track doesn't fully replicate all the situations the train might encounter on the network. This is partly because the network is so varied and partly because the knowledge of it isn't as good as it ideally would be.

Despite what some people might want to claim on here, an aircraft has a far simpler interface with its "infrastructure" than a train does. Rubber tyres on concrete are intrinsically much more straightforward dynamically than steel wheel on steel rail and there are only a few areas in airports where an aircraft is at risk of contacting the infrastructure whereas a train has to cope with a wide range of track geometry and condition. Once airborne an aircraft's interfaces are essentially radio systems and communications protocols, which are clearly specified and therefore relatively easily to demonstrate compliance.

The logistics of introducing a train can also be more difficult. Any crew training required for a new aircraft can often be done "offline" without affecting the daily service, whereas train crews aren't generally trained up on a test track so have to wait until at least one train has arrived in the operating area. There may then be constraints that prevent trains going into service until a certain number are available, in particular if two trains split and join during the day they must be compatible for multiple running.

Clip · 22 Sep 2016

infobleep said:
Would it be possible to mass produce rolling stock and continue to produce it when someone needs some more elsewhere, rather than coming up with a brand new design? They cascade rolling stock so could they cascade previously used designs with just minor modifications?

Obviously the 707 will be similar to the 700 so may be it is being done.

May be unlike planes, every line is different so needs different rolling stock each time a new build is done.

Of course crash worthiness changes overtime and some rolling stock can't be rebuilt any more due it not meeting new standards.

Surely crash worthiness of planes would change overtime too though and therefore previous ones not suitable to be built now?

Sent from my SM-G925F using Tapatalk

Im guessing here but seeing as planes dont generally have a tendency to crash nor a big opportunity for them to come into contact with another or suffer something akin a derailment then im guessing crash worthiness stays roughly the same whether its 20 years old or a new build.

swt_passenger · 22 Sep 2016

infobleep said:
Would it be possible to mass produce rolling stock and continue to produce it when someone needs some more elsewhere, rather than coming up with a brand new design? They cascade rolling stock so could they cascade previously used designs with just minor modifications?

Huh? That's exactly what they've been doing with the Electrostar/Turbostar series for about 16 or 17 years isn't it? If there are still 387s being delivered in late 2017 or 2018 there'll be nearly a 20 year lineage of the same basic design.

Eventually though, you have to have a step change, in Bombardier's case to the Aventra platform, and then you can do similar incremental modifications for another generation.

See also Desiro UK and the eventual step change to Desiro City.

infobleep · 22 Sep 2016

swt_passenger said:
Huh? That's exactly what they've been doing with the Electrostar/Turbostar series for about 16 or 17 years isn't it? If there are still 387s being delivered in late 2017 or 2018 there'll be nearly a 20 year lineage of the same basic design.

Eventually though, you have to have a step change, in Bombardier's case to the Aventra platform, and then you can do similar incremental modifications for another generation.

See also Desiro UK and the eventual step change to Desiro City.

If that is the case then it should be very easy to produce rolling stock and there shouldn't be problems, other than being able to pay for it to be built.

Sent from my SM-G925F using Tapatalk

Clip · 22 Sep 2016

infobleep said:
If that is the case then it should be very easy to produce rolling stock and there shouldn't be problems, other than being able to pay for it to be built.

Sent from my SM-G925F using Tapatalk

Thats a bit like saying we should all be still driving MK1 Ford Escorts with nothing of a new design being built

D365 · 22 Sep 2016

Have there been any problems with the Class 387s so far?

superkev · 22 Sep 2016

I say this tounge in cheek to perhaps stimulate son discussion.
Perhaps the railway needs an influx of low cost airline management which seem incredibly efficient in terms of assert utilisation.
For example when a jet 2 lands the crew tidy and prepare the cabin and its off again in no time.
K

D365 · 22 Sep 2016

superkev said:
For example when a jet 2 lands the crew tidy and prepare the cabin and its off again in no time.

TOCs are getting pretty good at turning around trains in 10 minutes or less at terminals.

najaB · 22 Sep 2016

superkev said:
Perhaps the railway needs an influx of low cost airline management which seem incredibly efficient in terms of assert utilisation.

I think you'll find most LDHS TOCs are good at sweating their assets. Commuter ones less so, but only because of the huge difference in demand between peak and off-peak.

edwin_m · 22 Sep 2016

infobleep said:
If that is the case then it should be very easy to produce rolling stock and there shouldn't be problems, other than being able to pay for it to be built.

Southern and Southeastern have ordered and brought into service new batches of Electrostars on several occasions since the original fleets came into use. These have been relatively trouble-free though I couldn't quote to you the time from delivery to entering service.

Earlier discussion on this thread focused particularly on the class 700, a new design being supplied to an operator who has never used any train from that supplier (Siemens) before. So it is rather like an airline that has only ever flown 737s taking on a fleet of A380s.

RobShipway · 22 Sep 2016

swt_passenger said:
Huh? That's exactly what they've been doing with the Electrostar/Turbostar series for about 16 or 17 years isn't it? If there are still 387s being delivered in late 2017 or 2018 there'll be nearly a 20 year lineage of the same basic design.

Eventually though, you have to have a step change, in Bombardier's case to the Aventra platform, and then you can do similar incremental modifications for another generation.

See also Desiro UK and the eventual step change to Desiro City.

Although, the class 387 has many components that are from the new Aventra platform so if you go on a class 357 Electrostar, then go on a class 387 and then go on a class 345 or class 710 when they are introduced you will notice the differences between the types of trains and how train building has progressed since 1999 when the first electrostar class 357 trains where built.

Class377/5 · 22 Sep 2016

RichmondCommu said:
In which case why bother having a test track?

Because you test the train. What some have forgotten on this thread is that there's also an element of ensuring the infrastructure with thetrains as well that accounts for why initially the testing process is so long. No plane has to prove it's capable of flying every route, just it can fly. A train has to be proven on every route.

Theres aslo the limited access that trains have to the network where as planes have far more capacity available if required!

swt_passenger · 22 Sep 2016

Robbies said:
Although, the class 387 has many components that are from the new Aventra platform so if you go on a class 357 Electrostar, then go on a class 387 and then go on a class 345 or class 710 when they are introduced you will notice the differences between the types of trains and how train building has progressed since 1999 when the first electrostar class 357 trains where built.

That is the result of cumulative 'minor modifications', which is what the post I was replying to was asking about. The sequence of minor modifications added together will fairly obviously mean that there are major differences between a 357 and a 387, but they still look like the same basic product.

Class377/5 · 23 Sep 2016

swt_passenger said:
That is the result of cumulative 'minor modifications', which is what the post I was replying to was asking about. The sequence of minor modifications added together will fairly obviously mean that there are major differences between a 357 and a 387, but they still look like the same basic product.

It's worth noting as well the reason the 377 and 387 cannot be used for service is the technology has had a step change in regards to CCTV, comms equipment. The basic 1996 type spec of a 377 is carried through to the 377/7. The 387 they jump to the Aventra era tech while using the Electrostar mkII/Aventra mkI bodyshell (worth noting the current Aventra offering from Bombardier is the mkII, aka 345/710).

PHILIPE · 23 Sep 2016

I recall the 334s being delivered to Scotrail from 1999 and didn't see service until towards the end of 2001 while a problem was being ironed out. They were all stabled in the Sidings opposite Polmadie Depot until they were accepted.

hulabaloo · 23 Sep 2016

zn1 said:
the electrostars are a proven fleet, train crew etc can be trained on southern metals, MML Steel etc so no real surprise how quick that Litchurch lane can get them in to traffic with the customer who has ordered the fleet.

I do remember (at least I think I do) the 375s causing all the lights to go out in SW1 whenever they left Victoria Station upon introduction. You can only really test trains in the environment they are to be used in to see how things will really go.

The blackout may be an exaggeration by the way but you know what I mean.

Class377/5 · 23 Sep 2016

Its worth noting when FCC introduced the 377/5 there was restrictions made of so many units on the BML at a time due to substations along the route that may of overheated (fear more than anything) which delayed introduction.

thejuggler · 23 Sep 2016

Domh245 said:
Boeing can churn out 737s at over 40 planes per month, and by this stage, they are a very proven design. This particular 737 (G-JZHJ) will have spent some time doing test flights (as N1787B) before being registered and delivered. Jet2 don't have to do much to it at all before pressing it into service, think fitting the antimacassars and filling up the seat pockets with magazines.

Similarly, trains (especially proven designs like the electrostars) can be churned out, get the fault free running under their belt, and then be in service. However, comparing the 737s with a class 700 is apples and oranges. The 700s are still very much in their early stages (approximately where the 737NG was in 1997). I expect that by the end of the 700 introduction and for the 707s, they will have comparatively short down times between arriving in the UK and entering service.

Jet2 have had lots of work done since delivery. Main job was actually putting some seats in it as Boeing only made the airframe, fit out was done in the UK.

Time to get new trains earning money.

Established Member

RailUK Forums

Forum Staff

Veteran Member

Veteran Member

Established Member

Veteran Member

Veteran Member

Established Member

Veteran Member

Established Member

Veteran Member

Veteran Member

Veteran Member

Established Member

Established Member

Veteran Member

Established Member

Veteran Member

Member

Established Member

Member