Bombardier AVENTRA relaunched

[WatcherZero]

So Bombardier have revealed in RAIL they are relaunching their successor to the ELECTROSTAR the AVENTRA model (competed for Thameslink contract, didnt win any orders) after having listened to what ROSCO's, TOC's and other stakeholders want and making changes. They are currently at the stage of having completed the initial design and say they will be in a position to be able to offer it to customers in 18 months time, they are targeting winning orders during franchising next year.

Changes seem to be available in four commuter models including a 125mph under the wires 75mph battery powered version, length 4-7 carriages reformable (i.e. not permanent formations), speed options 75, 100, 110, 125mph. Weight 1.5t per metre, seating options longitudal, 2+2 and 2+2 first class door option of 2 or 3 per side. The design will also feature remote diagnostics and troubleshooting, identifying potential tehnical problems before they manifest and talking the driver through rectifying them without having to return to the depot.

Seems to me Bombardier have been heavily influenced by Hitachis IEP.

 

[anthony263]

Seems Hitachi's arrival to the UK rail market has really caused Bombardier's managment to wake up. I do wonder if the 125mph version could be seen as a challenge to the desiro express unit which can do up to 118mph put forward by Seimens recently.

I do think Seimens have also been influenced by this new rival as will have Alstom.

 

[YorkshireBear]

Seems odd surely they should offer 75mph 100 118 and 125mph units?

Need them to design an DMU!

 

[CP165]

Promotional video:

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=vZqsdOEdUuA

[youtube]vZqsdOEdUuA[/youtube]

 

[bronzeonion]

Hopefully at least the 75mph commuter one will have more than 2 doorways per side unlike the Desiro City

 

[Class377/5]

Anyone else find it ironic that Bombardier slated Siemens for talking up the Desiro City design when they didn't give a lot of details and are now talking the same approach after losing Thameslink.

Although we mustn't forget the Aventra had so far has 30x 379, 34x 377 development designs using its bodyshell and now the 387 fleet will contain the upgraded comms package from the Aventra design.

So rather than no orders is had 93 units or 406 carriages to develop its design work.

Unless of course they've drop the bodyshell and going for and new design again.

Seems Hitachi's arrival to the UK rail market has really caused Bombardier's managment to wake up. I do wonder if the 125mph version could be seen as a challenge to the desiro express unit which can do up to 118mph put forward by Seimens recently.

I do think Seimens have also been influenced by this new rival as will have Alstom.

What makes you think Siemens is reacting to Hitachi? They're Desiro City offering was in development when they got the 395 order so Siemens hasn't don't anything to react.

This is Bombardier dealing with the aftermath of losing Thameslink due to technical side coming second to Siemens as well as the financial side.

Seems odd surely they should offer 75mph 100 118 and 125mph units?

Need them to design an DMU!

What Watcher didn'nt state is the design comes in electric, diesel, bi mode and battery power opinions if requested.

 

[asylumxl]

The front end is too flat for my liking, and looks sort of hobbled together.

 

[Class377/5]

The front end is too flat for my liking, and looks sort of hobbled together.

Looks just like the Thameslink offering but I'm different livery.

Would have thought the drivers windows having metal either side would interfer with sighting for the driver.

 

[Nym]

Looks just like the Thameslink offering but I'm different livery.

Would have thought the drivers windows having metal either side would interfer with sighting for the driver.

You mean like on the Bombardier 2009TS where the radio and PDP block the view of all left mounted signals and platform edges?

 

[WatcherZero]

Didnt mention it as it didnt mention in the article, didnt know whether what they offered four years ago was still available or not, in fact at the moment theres very little promotional information on the new design as opposed to the old design.

110mph would be for 3rd rail, they arent offering Siemens 118mph (or 115mph they will actually be limited to under rational number) because they dont need to, they can offer a 125mph commuter version built for it without having to modify an existing design limited by its crashworthiness only being designed for 100/110mph max speed.

Interesting also in the article it mentions Bombardier wernt initially offering the option of carriage end gangways but the potential customers requested it.

 

[Domh245]

Those little metal (or possibly a GRP type material) protrusions look similar to those on the 458s (slightly more noticeable on the /5s)

I quite like the look of them, although If I'm honest, the Traction Motor controller noise (the dull whine which is similar in function to the alien noise on the Desiros) is rather annoying, so I'd hope that the noise can be quietened down a bit

 

[WatcherZero]

Should say one of the interesting things in the Bombardier approach is they believe the future is in 125mph commuter trains that would trundle up a branch line then give it some welly on a main line.

It seems they are already thinking longterm about a HS2/upgraded branch line speeds future over the next 30 years.

 

[Class377/5]

Didnt mention it as it didnt mention in the article, didnt know whether what they offered four years ago was still available or not, in fact at the moment theres very little promotional information on the new design as opposed to the old design.

110mph would be for 3rd rail, they arent offering Siemens 118mph (or 115mph they will actually be limited to under rational number) because they dont need to, they can offer a 125mph commuter version built for it without having to modify an existing design limited by its crashworthiness only being designed for 100/110mph max speed.

Interesting also in the article it mentions Bombardier wernt initially offering the option of carriage end gangways but the potential customers requested it.

It's in the current issue of Rail, guessing you've only read the online introduction article then. The original Aventra was a Electrostar replacement so wouldn't have offered diesel version as it's the electric range.

You can't do 110mph on third rail, it's limited to 100mph due to issues with ramps and gaps.

Still the issue of extra weight with a single basic model meaning the 75mph units will be over protected and all the problems that brings with it (more damaging to track etc). Does suggest they are dumping the 379/Aventra Mark I bodyshell tho.

Gangways are popular as one staff member can access whole train then.

One thing I've just realised it's that this version of the Aventra is far more significant than the original as it seems to be replacing not only the Electrostar model but the Turbostar as well. And if Bombardier is busy designing units of 4-7 cars, what does that say for the future need for 2/3 car DMUs offering from them?

 

[WatcherZero]

I seriously doubt (and the ATOC research seems to agree) there would be another order for DMU's that short, they believed there would be demand for something like 200-300 new units but they would be high speed Voyager analogues for cross country style routes. The Turbostars should suffice for cascading to lines that are impactical to electrify long after Pacers/Sprinters are gone.

 

[asylumxl]

Looks just like the Thameslink offering but I'm different livery.

Would have thought the drivers windows having metal either side would interfer with sighting for the driver.

Not from the renderings I saw of the older offering. It had a slightly more curved front end. Who really knows how it will actually look anyway.

 

[Nym]

Not from the renderings I saw of the older offering. It had a slightly more curved front end. Who really knows how it will actually look anyway.

Like this?

 

[the sniper]

The older and newer versions are both shown in the promotional video linked on the last page:

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=vZqsdOEdUuA

The 'old' design is shown at 2:02, the newer one is shown at various points with the grey front end, including at 2:10.

 

[bronzeonion]

Promotional video:

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=vZqsdOEdUuA

The front end certainly looks alot better than the previous version of 'Aventra' but why only 2 doors still?! I wish I could take the people who make those decisions to Shepherds Bush WLL in the peaks! They look like plug doors too in the promo vid, hopefully the 75mph commuter one will have pockets rather than plugs.

What is it with the pointy/rounded front ends being proposed for new commuter trains nowadays? It's not needed for aerodynamics (Okay maybe the 125mph one) and just reduces visibility by just having solid walls either side of the driver.

 

[asylumxl]

Like this?

Nope. But I'm sure it will be equally as unreliable when built .

Pretty sure the old renderings had a more raked and curved front end, especially looking at the video again.

 

[Nym]

Nope. But I'm sure it will be equally as unreliable when built .

Pretty sure the old renderings had a more raked and curved front end, especially looking at the video again.

Having experienced first hand the products and services of BT Derby, I can safely say I currently agree with you...

 

[the sniper]

The front end certainly looks alot better than the previous version of 'Aventra' but why only 2 doors still?! I wish I could take the people who make those decisions to Shepherds Bush WLL in the peaks! They look like plug doors too in the promo vid, hopefully the 75mph commuter one will have pockets rather than plugs.

What is it with the pointy/rounded front ends being proposed for new commuter trains nowadays? It's not needed for aerodynamics (Okay maybe the 125mph one) and just reduces visibility by just having solid walls either side of the driver.

Large cab ends are for impact protection requirements I believe, just like Class 70s and forthcoming Class 68 have extra bodywork up front.

Got to agree too that this new version looks better than the original. The headlights look better placed, I think.

 

[Starmill]

110mph would be for 3rd rail, they arent offering Siemens 118mph (or 115mph they will actually be limited to under rational number) because they dont need to, they can offer a 125mph commuter version built for it without having to modify an existing design limited by its crashworthiness only being designed for 100/110mph max speed.

Interesting also in the article it mentions Bombardier wernt initially offering the option of carriage end gangways but the potential customers requested it.

Have I understood this correctly please Watcher?

They are proposing to build a normal commuter train but rather than offering a 100mph version and then upgrading it they can offer the same type of train all the way to 125mph, as long as its kitted out for the higher speed? As such the lower speed versions will have the crashworthiness required for 125 so the bodyshells can all be the same? And it will be something with a front flat enough to facilitate a corridor connection that will still be capable of 125? That would be interesting!

 

[jopsuk]

the 118mph- is 190km/h some sort of euro-standard cut off for a particular set of regulations?
--- old post above --- --- new post below ---
Certainly looks a bit better than the cab used for the Gautrain export Electrostars

 

[WatcherZero]

Have I understood this correctly please Watcher?

They are proposing to build a normal commuter train but rather than offering a 100mph version and then upgrading it they can offer the same type of train all the way to 125mph, as long as its kitted out for the higher speed? As such the lower speed versions will have the crashworthiness required for 125 so the bodyshells can all be the same? And it will be something with a front flat enough to facilitate a corridor connection that will still be capable of 125? That would be interesting!

No I mean rather than taking an existing train and raising its max speed after its built like the 350 (or making minor alterations to a existing design) they would be designing in that crashworthiness from the start for the higher speed versions. It doesnt neccesarily follow that the lower speed versions would have to have the same worthiness, they could perhaps be built to the same basic design but without a internal bulkhead fitted lowering cost and maximising available passenger space.

 

[bronzeonion]

Large cab ends are for impact protection requirements I believe, just like Class 70s and forthcoming Class 68 have extra bodywork up front.

Got to agree too that this new version looks better than the original. The headlights look better placed, I think.

Apart from level crossing accidents, I really don't agree with the EU's obsession with crash worthiness

 

[fgwrich]

Promotional video:

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=vZqsdOEdUuA

Oh dear. A nice and flashy video for Bombardier which I think 'conveniently' forgets the past and flashes about the future.

As for the design, I'd certainly agree with the comments about Bombardier having looked at the Siemens and Hitachi offerings before suddenly reassessing its own. Not so keen on those odd looking new lights though and the top and sides of the unit look very Siemens Desiro City style - the original Aventra essentially having a new front grafted onto the body of a 376. Whether or not it comes to fruition I don't know, but at least it seems in the video that Bombardier have finally started to learn recurring problem - the supply of parts before the train is ordered.

As for that video though... a train designed for Britain built in Britain... Yeah, with or without parts assembled from just about every other Bombardier factory in the world ala S Stock?

 

[YorkshireBear]

125mph EMUs for TPE? For their Newcastle services

 

[GatwickDepress]

Does the design come with the adorable cruise liner style captain's cap as seen at 1:45?

I'll be interested to see the interior specifications and whether they've worked out that constant vibrating of the furniture in the Electrostars is very, very irritating.

 

[Kneedown]

Gangways are popular as one staff member can access whole train then.

I wouldn't say they are popular.
A Driver can easily access the whole train without gangways. We just walk down the cess to the rear unit. Gangways are more trouble than they're worth as they constantly leak, let draughts in, and severely restrict the Drivers view.......

Would have thought the drivers windows having metal either side would interfer with sighting for the driver.

Not nearly as much as a gangway would.

I think the design looks pretty good as it is, i'd hate to see it spoiled by having a huge, useless rectangular lump of metal and rubber stuck on the cab front as an afterthought.

 

[HSTEd]

I wouldn't say they are popular.
A Driver can easily access the whole train without gangways. We just walk down the cess to the rear unit. Gangways are more trouble than they're worth as they constantly leak, let draughts in, and severely restrict the Drivers view.......

A driver is not the staff member that is normally referred to when they talk about "one staff member".
Drivers are normally engaged in driving the train.

I wasn't aware that Guards are capable of running down the side of the 'cess at 100mph and then jumping into the train while it is still moving. But maybe they just don't like to talk about being the fastest runners in the world.

As to leaking and letting draughts in, if it doesn't inconvenience the passengers (and I have never known this to be an inconvenience in the passenger saloon?) does it really matter?
Drivers can be issued with GoreTex coats and suchlike if it is really such a problem.
And visibility is not the issue it once was, especially with cab signalling rollout starting rather soon, which will make signal sighting issues rather moot.