Costs of developing tilting function for BR class 390 Pendolino?

[Chutiphon]

I am looking for the costs of developing the tilting system for BR class 390 Pendolino.
The information will be presented as a part of my dissertation concerning the development of kneeling train.

I would appreciate it if anyone could help share some information/links/database that include the information I am loonking for.

Thank you.

 

[rebmcr]

It was first developed by engineers from the aerospace sector (not BR's traditional R&D department) as part of the Class 370 APT, later sold to Italian company Fiat, who spent many years developing it across different designs of train, when it was finally licenced to French company Alstom and integrated into the Class 390 design by them.

There is nobody on the planet who could isolate the costs involved and total them for you.

 

[LNW-GW Joint]

Swiss company SIG (sold to Fiat in 1995) came into it somewhere.
Most Pendolinos produced by Fiat/Alstom use hydraulic actuation for tilt, but 390s use electric actuation developed by SIG.
The SIG tilt system is also used on SBB's ICN trains which have been running for much the same time as our 390s.
The Fiat/Alstom hydraulic system is also used in trains not normally thought of as Pendolinos, such as DB's ICE-T trains.

The tilting system on the WCML also required the development of TASS (Tilt Authorisation and Speed Supervision) because our smaller gauge does not allow "tilt at will" as used on the continent.
This required a form of cab signalling, and the installation of the linked balises in the infrastructure to control tilt operation.
That cost is specifically down to the 390 programme (it's also fitted to the Voyager class 221 fleet which also operated on XC routes).
The TASS system was developed by Alstom.

So the 390 tilt costs are a complex amalgam of SIG/Fiat/Alstom development on the generic design, plus specific localisation for the UK operation on the WCML.
Most of the cash was put up by private shareholders, and is reflected in the leasing and maintenance costs for the trains.

The 390 was not a "BR" train, it dates from after privatisation.
The main British element of the design was the traction package, developed at the ex-English Electric works at Preston.
There are also pure French aspects of the design, as you would expect from an Alstom product, but these are not related to the tilt function.
The initial (2002) tranche of trains was assembled at Washwood Heath, with major components like bodyshells and bogies coming from Italy and France.
The later (2012) supplementary order of 106 vehicles (4 complete trains and 62 vehicles to extend 9-car trains to 11-car) was assembled abroad.

Although this might seem a rather complicated history, you would find much the same kind of thing if you investigated the origins of most new trains today.
If Alstom succeeds in its bid to acquire Bombardier Transportation there will be another twist in the global supply chain for new trains.

 

[themiller]

If I remember correctly, the electric tilt system was developed from the tank gun stabilisation system.

 

[hwl]

Swiss company SIG (sold to Fiat in 1995) came into it somewhere.

Yep BR sold the technology to SIG (who developed the bogie for the mk4 coaches).

GEC (later Alstom) and Asea (later of ABB and that particular part was later sold to Bombardier transportation) were involved in the BR era cl. 370s

 

[Railperf]

Swiss company SIG (sold to Fiat in 1995) came into it somewhere.
Most Pendolinos produced by Fiat/Alstom use hydraulic actuation for tilt, but 390s use electric actuation developed by SIG.
The SIG tilt system is also used on SBB's ICN trains which have been running for much the same time as our 390s.
The Fiat/Alstom hydraulic system is also used in trains not normally thought of as Pendolinos, such as DB's ICE-T trains.

The tilting system on the WCML also required the development of TASS (Tilt Authorisation and Speed Supervision) because our smaller gauge does not allow "tilt at will" as used on the continent.
This required a form of cab signalling, and the installation of the linked balises in the infrastructure to control tilt operation.
That cost is specifically down to the 390 programme (it's also fitted to the Voyager class 221 fleet which also operated on XC routes).
The TASS system was developed by Alstom.

So the 390 tilt costs are a complex amalgam of SIG/Fiat/Alstom development on the generic design, plus specific localisation for the UK operation on the WCML.
Most of the cash was put up by private shareholders, and is reflected in the leasing and maintenance costs for the trains.

The 390 was not a "BR" train, it dates from after privatisation.
The main British element of the design was the traction package, developed at the ex-English Electric works at Preston.
There are also pure French aspects of the design, as you would expect from an Alstom product, but these are not related to the tilt function.
The initial (2002) tranche of trains was assembled at Washwood Heath, with major components like bodyshells and bogies coming from Italy and France.
The later (2012) supplementary order of 106 vehicles (4 complete trains and 62 vehicles to extend 9-car trains to 11-car) was assembled abroad.

Although this might seem a rather complicated history, you would find much the same kind of thing if you investigated the origins of most new trains today.
If Alstom succeeds in its bid to acquire Bombardier Transportation there will be another twist in the global supply chain for new trains.

Didn't Fiat buy the tilt system and develop it - before Fiat Ferrovia were later purchased by Alstom? Therefore i understood Alstom inherited this technology through the purchase of Fiat.
The Class 390 bogies look a development of the Fiat built ETR485s.

 

[Gag Halfrunt]

The 390 was not a "BR" train, it dates from after privatisation.

For some reason, Wikipedia insists on including "British Rail" before TOPS class numbers in article titles, even for post-privatisation classes. This might be a source of the confusion.

 

[ainsworth74]

For some reason, Wikipedia insists on including "British Rail" before TOPS class numbers in article titles, even for post-privatisation classes. This might be a source of the confusion.

To be fair I think it's just an accepted way of easily differentiating between classes which share the same number but are from completely different railways (or even continents in some cases!). For instance Class 101 is, to be sure, a British Rail DMU but it's also an Irish diesel locomotive, a Northern Irish diesel locomotive, a German electric locomotive and an Irish steam locomotive. So sticking British Rail in front of the class number helps, I'd argue, to avoid confusion!

 

[LOL The Irony]

Didn't Fiat buy the tilt system and develop it - before Fiat Ferrovia were later purchased by Alstom? Therefore i understood Alstom inherited this technology through the purchase of Fiat.

Correct, by the time the first 390 was being built, Alstom had already acquired Fiat Ferrovia.

 

[SansHache]

The contract was awarded to an Alstom-Fiat joint venture with the scope split 50:50 between the two companies. This led to a certain amount of trading between the two partners to get the right balance in the split. One example was the Auxiliary Power Supply Units where the UK planned to use the existing product developed at Preston but the politics deemed that they had to be part of the italian scope. Two years later Alstom bought out the Fiat business and the Italian supplier (Parizzi) became part of the Alstom group.
The arrangement of the Traction drive is identical to other Fiat Pendolino trains of the era with body-mounted Traction Motors driving the inner axle on the bogie via a cardan shaft and right-angle gearbox. The Traction equipment on earlier Pendolini was supplied by Parizzi or Siemens but this was replaced by Alstom equipment (mostly manufactured in the UK) for the Class 390. Later Pendolino variants have the Traction equipment supplied by Alstom sites in France and Italy.

 

[XAM2175]

Correct, by the time the first 390 was being built, Alstom had already acquired Fiat Ferrovia.

Please excuse the pedantry but it's Fiat Ferroviaria.

 

[coppercapped]

To be fair I think it's just an accepted way of easily differentiating between classes which share the same number but are from completely different railways (or even continents in some cases!). For instance Class 101 is, to be sure, a British Rail DMU but it's also an Irish diesel locomotive, a Northern Irish diesel locomotive, a German electric locomotive and an Irish steam locomotive. So sticking British Rail in front of the class number helps, I'd argue, to avoid confusion!

I entirely accept your point. Even then it can be a bit confusing as in German 'BR' is often taken to mean 'Baureihe' or 'Model Series' which in UK railway-speak would be translated as 'Class'. So in German 'BR 101' would definitely mean one of these <https://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/commons/3/3e/Baureihe_101_092-5.jpg> !