• Our booking engine at tickets.railforums.co.uk (powered by TrainSplit) helps support the running of the forum with every ticket purchase! Find out more and ask any questions/give us feedback in this thread!

Potential up to 2,000 job losses at Alstom Derby

RealTrains07

Established Member
Joined
28 Feb 2019
Messages
1,763
An obvious candidate for Derby is Class 465 replacement or refurbishment. They're over 30 years old and very tired. Even if the MetCams are to go there's still around 100 BREL 4-cars remaining. Over 30 years old. Either refurb to extend to 40+ years or replace with new stock.
If the remaining BREL stock is replaced too soon before it reaches end of life its just gonna bring the order gap forward even quicker

465s also have at least 8-9 years left in theory so they are getting close to end of life but replacement needs to be done at the right time if manufacturing jobs are gonna last
 
Sponsor Post - registered members do not see these adverts; click here to register, or click here to log in
R

RailUK Forums

Gag Halfrunt

Member
Joined
23 Jul 2019
Messages
579
There's the other Airbus anomaly of wings for the A220 being made for them by Spirit in Belfast (part of the ex-Bombardier setup).
Off-topic, but relevant to UK manufacturing policy.

For those who don't know, the A220 was originally the Bombardier C-Series. Airbus bought into the program in 2017 as a way for Bombardier to open a production line in the USA, after Boeing had complained that Bombardier were "dumping" the C-Series (selling below cost) in the US market and the US Department of Commerce imposed a punitive 292% import duty.

 

Chester1

Established Member
Joined
25 Aug 2014
Messages
4,011
I know it's been talked about, but it's not like they don't have other facilities outside the EU/EEA - at least Canada, USA, the UK and China as far as I know. Now it would be a real slap in the face if they left the UK but remained in China!

There's the other Airbus anomaly of wings for the A220 being made for them by Spirit in Belfast (part of the ex-Bombardier setup).
Off-topic, but relevant to UK manufacturing policy.

Airbus are already working flat out and struggling with an incredibly long order back-log, i doubt they want the upheaval of removing their UK production right now...

Airbus is a private company. Private companies don't move key factories AND development sites out of one country just on the whim of a few politicians.

Completely different to the situation with Derby, which has no work. It's not Alstom deliberately running down a busy factory to move production elsewhere.

That would undermine @Wolfie Argument that it would be an area of potential retaliation by the EU.

I disagree with @Mikey C, its effectively a choice to run down the factory. Few train factories have sufficient work to have a domestic order 100% of the time. Alstom don't seem to be willing to move small bits of European manufacture, even if our government meets them half way. If Alstom requires a constant unbroken stream of UK orders to keep Derby open then its not worth propping up and delaying the envitable. I suspect a 60% procurement law would make them reconsider closing it or at worst close it but start assembly work at Widnes.
 

Wolfie

Established Member
Joined
17 Aug 2010
Messages
6,159
Airbus is a private company. Private companies don't move key factories AND development sites out of one country just on the whim of a few politicians.

Completely different to the situation with Derby, which has no work. It's not Alstom deliberately running down a busy factory to move production elsewhere.
A significant part of Airbus is it's defence arm. It's owner is EADS. The French, German and Spanish governments own 25% between them and national governments keep the defence arm going....

I am no expert in trade law but would be surprised if the 60% proposal cited is compliant with the EU-UK Trade and Cooperation Agreement.
 
Last edited:

Chester1

Established Member
Joined
25 Aug 2014
Messages
4,011
A significant part of Airbus is it's defence arm. It's owner is EADS. The French, German and Spanish governments own 25% between them and national governments keep the defence arm going....

I am no expert in trade law but would be surprised if the 60% proposal cited is compliant with the EU-UK Trade and Cooperation Agreement.

If it was non compliant it would mean that in return the UK had secure access to an important part of the single market (public procurement) and I don’t think that is the case. The TCA is overwhelmingly about tarrifs and rules of origin of components. Copying the American law wouldn't effect them. Grand Union etc would be fine to order trains made in France, Spain or Germany tariff free. 60% could theoretically achieved through assembly outside of UK but with a very large proportion of British components.

There's the other Airbus anomaly of wings for the A220 being made for them by Spirit in Belfast (part of the ex-Bombardier setup).
Off-topic, but relevant to UK manufacturing policy.

Just realised that Airbus presence in Belfast wouldn't be effected by protective measures by EU because of the Windsor Framework. Belfast would be an excellent location if Talgo or Stadler want an UK factory....
 

wickham

Member
Joined
3 Feb 2021
Messages
183
Location
Knaphill
I don't think there is any chance of Alstom moving any European rolling stock construction to Derby, unless there is a proven cost saving (which is highly unlikely) as the finished products would be too inconvienient to despatch. They would not be able to despatch by rail as European loading gauge vehicles are far too big to fit within the UK loading gauge. The only option would be road to the docks (probably Immingham) and put to rail on arrival in mainland Europe. Just imagine the fuss and difficulties with emu sets for instance. There could be an option to construct parts for other Alstom plants, but construction costs are that much cheaper in places like Poland (and India).
 

Chester1

Established Member
Joined
25 Aug 2014
Messages
4,011
I don't think there is any chance of Alstom moving any European rolling stock construction to Derby, unless there is a proven cost saving (which is highly unlikely) as the finished products would be too inconvienient to despatch. They would not be able to despatch by rail as European loading gauge vehicles are far too big to fit within the UK loading gauge. The only option would be road to the docks (probably Immingham) and put to rail on arrival in mainland Europe. Just imagine the fuss and difficulties with emu sets for instance. There could be an option to construct parts for other Alstom plants, but construction costs are that much cheaper in places like Poland (and India).

The UK imports trains by sea. Why would the reverse be any different? The monorail units made in Derby must be exported by road and then sea.

If Alstom decide they don't need a UK production site then our public sector can decide they don't need Alstom either. We have three alternative manufacturers to pick between and apart from possibly Northern Ireland, we are not bound by EU procurement law. While Hitachi, CAF and Siemens are competitive why import?
 

LNW-GW Joint

Veteran Member
Joined
22 Feb 2011
Messages
19,699
Location
Mold, Clwyd
All the suppliers will import major components if their trains are assembled in the UK, and their supply chains are mainly EU-based.
CAF and Siemens don't build car bodies here, while Hitachi can (although only about half the 8xx cars for Avanti/EMR are being produced in Newton Aycliffe), as can Alstom.
 

43096

On Moderation
Joined
23 Nov 2015
Messages
15,307
The UK imports trains by sea. Why would the reverse be any different? The monorail units made in Derby must be exported by road and then sea.
Because the mainland European market is much bigger and all the major players have manufacturing capacity there already. Why export from the UK with all the hassle of not being able to properly test stock, transport problems (road/ferry) and the general encumberance that is Brexit. There is really very little to attract the manufacturers to UK assembly for overseas markets.
 

Wolfie

Established Member
Joined
17 Aug 2010
Messages
6,159
The UK imports trains by sea. Why would the reverse be any different? The monorail units made in Derby must be exported by road and then sea.

If Alstom decide they don't need a UK production site then our public sector can decide they don't need Alstom either. We have three alternative manufacturers to pick between and apart from possibly Northern Ireland, we are not bound by EU procurement law. While Hitachi, CAF and Siemens are competitive why import?
Hmmmm... Bet that you love Nigel....

Meanwhile back in the real world the EU could, if it wishes, destroy the UK economy.

Addressing the specific point that you make, products made to continental loading gauge cannot be moved by rail.in the UK. As such getting them to a port is non-trivial.
 
Last edited:

najaB

Veteran Member
Joined
28 Aug 2011
Messages
30,840
Location
Scotland
The UK imports trains by sea. Why would the reverse be any different?
Little thing fits through big hole. Big thing doesn't fit through little hole.

They would still need to get the trains to the port.
 

Mikey C

Established Member
Joined
11 Feb 2013
Messages
6,853
I disagree with @Mikey C, its effectively a choice to run down the factory. Few train factories have sufficient work to have a domestic order 100% of the time. Alstom don't seem to be willing to move small bits of European manufacture, even if our government meets them half way. If Alstom requires a constant unbroken stream of UK orders to keep Derby open then its not worth propping up and delaying the envitable. I suspect a 60% procurement law would make them reconsider closing it or at worst close it but start assembly work at Widnes.
Derby had always been a domestic producer, with the occasional export order to countries with a similar loading gauge to ourselves. It's completely unrealistic to expect Alstom (or any of the previous owners of the Derby works) to send European work there, with all the expense of getting it out by road as it won't fit on the rails.
 

Chester1

Established Member
Joined
25 Aug 2014
Messages
4,011
Hmmmm... Bet that you love Nigel....

Meanwhile back in the real world the EU could, if it wishes, destroy the UK economy.

Addressing the specific point that you make, products made to continental loading gauge cannot be moved by rail.in the UK. As such getting them to a port is non-trivial.

I voted remain. The EU has far bigger external problems and has developed a good working relationship with the UK government in the past year or so much to some peoples horror. The EU is not expecting the UK to align on all trade policy, let alone procurement policy which is part of the single market. Its likely considering measures to protect its own train manufacturering industry from China. Currently three of the four train manufacturers in the UK are European owned and would benefit as long as they keep manufacturering in the UK. The idea that the EU would try to "destroy" the UK economy over public sector procurement policy with a mixed effect on European business is ridiculous.

Little thing fits through big hole. Big thing doesn't fit through little hole.

They would still need to get the trains to the port.

Don't manufacturers on the continent move completed or semi completed rail vehicles by road some of the time?
 

Wolfie

Established Member
Joined
17 Aug 2010
Messages
6,159
I voted remain. The EU has far bigger external problems and has developed a good working relationship with the UK government in the past year or so much to some peoples horror. The EU is not expecting the UK to align on all trade policy, let alone procurement policy which is part of the single market. Its likely considering measures to protect its own train manufacturering industry from China. Currently three of the four train manufacturers in the UK are European owned and would benefit as long as they keep manufacturering in the UK. The idea that the EU would try to "destroy" the UK economy over public sector procurement policy with a mixed effect on European business is ridiculous.



Don't manufacturers on the continent move completed or semi completed rail vehicles by road some of the time?
The EU Commission view on the TCA. Note the mention of "public procurement" and avoidance of unfair subsidies.

The EU-UK Trade and Cooperation Agreement concluded between the EU and the UK sets out preferential arrangements in areas such as trade in goods and in services, digital trade, intellectual property, public procurement, aviation and road transport, energy, fisheries, social security coordination, law enforcement and judicial cooperation in criminal matters, thematic cooperation and participation in Union programmes. It is underpinned by provisions ensuring a level playing field and respect for fundamental rights.

This means that businesses in the EU and the UK compete on a level playing field and will avoid either party using its regulatory autonomy to grant unfair subsidies or distort competition. The agreement foresees the possibility of adopting rebalancing, remedial, compensatory and safeguard measures.

Both parties can engage in cross-sector retaliation in case of violations of the Trade and Cooperation Agreement. This cross-sector retaliation applies to all areas of the economic partnership.

 
Last edited:

Trainman40083

Member
Joined
29 Jan 2024
Messages
372
Location
Derby
Derby had always been a domestic producer, with the occasional export order to countries with a similar loading gauge to ourselves. It's completely unrealistic to expect Alstom (or any of the previous owners of the Derby works) to send European work there, with all the expense of getting it out by road as it won't fit on the rails.
I remember some export orders from Derby, probably Africa.. My those coaches looked huge. All went out by road, strangely often just after 4pm.
 

HSTEd

Veteran Member
Joined
14 Jul 2011
Messages
16,742
If Alstom decide they don't need a UK production site then our public sector can decide they don't need Alstom either. We have three alternative manufacturers to pick between and apart from possibly Northern Ireland, we are not bound by EU procurement law. While Hitachi, CAF and Siemens are competitive why import?
There simply is not enough demand to justify more than one factory in the UK, which means that we have precisely three choices:

1. Continue to pour vast sums of public money away ordering trains we don't need solely to keep factories open, likely getting rinsed all the time.
2. Abandon the idea of train manufacturing in the UK entirely, and simply accept that virtually everything will be imported
3. Abandon the idea of a free market in UK train manufacturing and recreate BREL, likely through the purchase of one of the existing facilities.

The status quo (option 1) is costing the taxpayer a lot of money and almost certainly is not sustainable.
 

Trainbike46

Established Member
Joined
18 Sep 2021
Messages
2,309
Location
belfast
There simply is not enough demand to justify more than one factory in the UK, which means that we have precisely three choices:

1. Continue to pour vast sums of public money away ordering trains we don't need solely to keep factories open, likely getting rinsed all the time.
2. Abandon the idea of train manufacturing in the UK entirely, and simply accept that virtually everything will be imported
3. Abandon the idea of a free market in UK train manufacturing and recreate BREL, likely through the purchase of one of the existing facilities.

The status quo (option 1) is costing the taxpayer a lot of money and almost certainly is not sustainable.
Never underestimate the ability of politicians to keep throwing money at something, even if on most fronts it is a bad idea... Train manufacturing policy is far from the only area where this happens, and certainly not the most extreme one
 

LNW-GW Joint

Veteran Member
Joined
22 Feb 2011
Messages
19,699
Location
Mold, Clwyd
Don't manufacturers on the continent move completed or semi completed rail vehicles by road some of the time?
The TGV line is a bit like Airbus, with major components coming from various French factories and transported, mostly by road I believe, to La Rochelle for final assembly.
10 of Alstom’s 16 sites in France are involved in the production of the new train: Belfort for the power cars, La Rochelle for the coaches (studies, procurement, manufacturing and testing), logistical and service support, and project management; Villeurbanne for the computerised control and command system, passenger information and onboard equipment; Ornans for the traction motors; Le Creusot for the bogies; Tarbes for traction equipment; Toulouse (COE electrical) for other electrical components; Petit Quevilly for the transformers; Saint-Ouen for design and onboard signalling equipment; and Valenciennes for e interior design.

This just shows how far behind the UK is in terms of total train manufacturing capability.
And this is only Alstom France.
 
Last edited:

Trainman40083

Member
Joined
29 Jan 2024
Messages
372
Location
Derby
Never underestimate the ability of politicians to keep throwing money at something, even if on most fronts it is a bad idea... Train manufacturing policy is far from the only area where this happens, and certainly not the most extreme one
I thought it was Government policy to choose the most expensive option over the longer term. Get the cost down, do the job twice. Build a new line (EWR) , connecting 5* electrified lines, make it diesel.
 

Snow1964

Established Member
Joined
7 Oct 2019
Messages
6,243
Location
West Wiltshire
Sunak was in Derbyshire today (at Trent Barton bus) but got asked questions about Alstom at Derby

It is understood that the Government has offered five trains immediately for production but that Alstom is saying that this is not enough and wants ten to bridge the production gap.
 

HSTEd

Veteran Member
Joined
14 Jul 2011
Messages
16,742
Ten trainsets is hardly going to delay the inevitable by very long is it?
 

Trainman40083

Member
Joined
29 Jan 2024
Messages
372
Location
Derby
Unless they know something we don't


And quite honestly I think we should find the money for 10, given how hard the Lizzy works these days and the fact that stock will need maintenance at some point
I thought there was talk of extra coaches for existing units at one point.
 

Chester1

Established Member
Joined
25 Aug 2014
Messages
4,011
"The EU-UK Trade and Cooperation Agreement concluded between the EU and the UK sets out preferential arrangements in areas such as trade in goods and in services, digital trade, intellectual property, public procurement, aviation and road transport, energy, fisheries, social security coordination, law enforcement and judicial cooperation in criminal matters, thematic cooperation and participation in Union programmes. It is underpinned by provisions ensuring a level playing field and respect for fundamental rights."

”This means that businesses in the EU and the UK compete on a level playing field and will avoid either party using its regulatory autonomy to grant unfair subsidies or distort competition. The agreement foresees the possibility of adopting rebalancing, remedial, compensatory and safeguard measures.

Both parties can engage in cross-sector retaliation in case of violations of the Trade and Cooperation Agreement. This cross-sector retaliation applies to all areas of the economic partnership."


There is plenty of flexibility within that. We have social benefit clauses within post brexit procurement and we are not counted as part of equivalent clauses in EU state government procurement since brexit. It would be hard to prove that British companies are being unfairly advantaged when the primary beneficiaries would be European and Japanese. The bare minimum our government should be doing is speaking to the EU and asking how do they think its best to handle the inevitable protectionism that will be necessary to protect train manufacture over the next decade. I find it hard to believe that if or when the EU moves to protect its industrial base from China and India that they would want the UK to be included as a defacto part of theirs or vice versa. Alstom is the issue now but within 5 years it will be CRRC.

There is an ongoing managed seperation of the UK and EU economies. The TCA is not designed to be a subsitute for the single market and its provisions (apart from on tarrifs) are deliberately very thin. The EU is not trying to use the TCA to prevent divergence, contary to Daily Express readers fears and The New European readers desires.

Going back to topic, if UK government aren't going to consider any protectionist measures and Alstom won't move any work then why spend several hundred million of taxpayers money delaying the envitable? If its going to close as soon as there is any gap in UK domestic orders then let it close now.

Derby had always been a domestic producer, with the occasional export order to countries with a similar loading gauge to ourselves. It's completely unrealistic to expect Alstom (or any of the previous owners of the Derby works) to send European work there, with all the expense of getting it out by road as it won't fit on the rails.

Hitachi assembled some of the Milan Metro units at Newton Aycliffe during a less busy period in 80X production. If a few extra 345 coaches are not sufficient and Alstom cannot meet the government half way then its a shame for Derby workers. Alstom cannot expect a foreign government to give a constant stream of work to a French company.
 

Energy

Established Member
Joined
29 Dec 2018
Messages
4,481
Only on this forum. The practicalities of running 11 coach units on the Elizabeth Line involve significant expenditure.
Core stations are big enough, just lacking platform screen doors. The issue is particularly Heathrow as well as other stations outside the core.
Ten trainsets is hardly going to delay the inevitable by very long is it?
I suspect part of this immediate order is getting some extra 345s or whatever else they might be built before it's too late.
Hitachi assembled some of the Milan Metro units at Newton Aycliffe during a less busy period in 80X production. If a few extra 345 coaches are not sufficient and Alstom cannot mert the government half way then its a shame for Derby workers. Alstom cannot expect a foreign government to give a constant stream of work to a French company.
Derby is in a poor position for export work, it isn't near a sea port so any trains built larger than the UK loading gauge have to go a fairly long distance by lorry. Whereas Alstom can drag them by rail if built in Poland (or anywhere else in Europe, or on HS1).

Building mono rails at Derby is a fairly smart choice as they already have to be transported by road but monorails aren't that popular. Perhaps expanding it into trams could also bring some work but transporting a tram from the UK to Europe is much further than from France.
This just shows how far behind the UK is in terms of total train manufacturing capability.
And this is only Alstom France.
Not really, most of the components are made at Derby or from subcontractors around the UK. The main exception is the traction motors, BREL used to buy these from other UK manufacturers like GEC-Alsthom at Preston. But when Derby became part of Adtranz it could draw them in-house from Sweden.
 

Trainman40083

Member
Joined
29 Jan 2024
Messages
372
Location
Derby
Core stations are big enough, just lacking platform screen doors. The issue is particularly Heathrow as well as other stations outside the core.

I suspect part of this immediate order is getting some extra 345s or whatever else they might be built before it's too late.

Derby is in a poor position for export work, it isn't near a sea port so any trains built larger than the UK loading gauge have to go a fairly long distance by lorry. Whereas Alstom can drag them by rail if built in Poland (or anywhere else in Europe, or on HS1).

Building mono rails at Derby is a fairly smart choice as they already have to be transported by road but monorails aren't that popular. Perhaps expanding it into trams could also bring some work but transporting a tram from the UK to Europe is much further than from France.

Not really, most of the components are made at Derby or from subcontractors around the UK. The main exception is the traction motors, BREL used to buy these from other UK manufacturers like GEC-Alsthom at Preston. But when Derby became part of Adtranz it could draw them in-house from Sweden.
And I'd imagine all trams get delivered by road, due to their line speed.
 

Nicholas Lewis

Established Member
Joined
9 Aug 2019
Messages
6,129
Location
Surrey
Unless they know something we don't


And quite honestly I think we should find the money for 10, given how hard the Lizzy works these days and the fact that stock will need maintenance at some point
345 reliability is atrocious according to data presented monthly in modern railways which is sourced from RDG so Alstom need to fix the underlying problems with the Aventra fleet before anymore are ordered.
 

Top