Entire Merseyrail fleet to be replaced

[notadriver]

Does anyone have the 0-30/60 mph times for a Desiro on third rail? 60 seconds to 60 mph is the approximate figure for an Electrostar 375 which I think are like 377s.

 

[Roughytuffy]

Without letting the cat out of the bag too much, the replacement stock is, or was planned to be more typical Urban "Metro" specification type rail units as opposed to current to "heavy rail" units. I expect Alsthom and similar will be amongst the runners....

 

[WatcherZero]

Saying its a self contained system and doesnt need dual voltage however that would be the big thing that could revolutionise the Merseyrail, through services to Manchester rather than Kirkby or further south in the Chester direction or north to Preston. Though I suppose you could hit limits of platform passenger capacity on the underground sections.

 

[Pumbaa]

Does anyone have the 0-30/60 mph times for a Desiro on third rail? 60 seconds to 60 mph is the approximate figure for an Electrostar 375 which I think are like 377s.

The only technical difference between the two classes is the coupler. Aside from that, different livery, interior job and operators, they are exactly the same. A lot of Southerns 377s started life as 375s.

So yes if that is the case for 375s, that will also be the case for the 377s.

'455driver' provided figures previously for 450/444, although of course these are the restricted figures. 350s are noticeably more spritely, even on 3rd rail.

 

[DXMachina]

I thought the first batch of 350s were built as 450s then given AC equipment - how can they be faster on DC when lugging a transformer ?

 

[Pumbaa]

450s/444s are restricted in how much power they can draw. The added weight pales compared to the greater tractive effort they can put down.

 

[Nym]

I thought the first batch of 350s were built as 450s then given AC equipment - how can they be faster on DC when lugging a transformer ?

Because they're not restricted on current draw outside of the Southern Region.

And to be honest, the transformers don't weigh THAT much compared to all the DC equipment it has to lug around in addition to the rest of the unit.

 

[Rhydgaled]

The only daft thing about the programme is how ridiculously fast it is - look at the Thameslink rolling stock programme as announced in 2008 (from RGI).

Thameslink rolling stock procurement timetable

Return of expressions of interest June 9 2008
...
Introduction complete December 2015

This was presumably after the DfT had produced the spec for the train!

A marked contrast to Southern's recent order for 377s, thanks to the Thameslink rolling stock delays, which have to be built in a much shorter timescale.

the Siemens units are heavier than the Class 377s

That's a plus point for Derby-built stock over the Siemens trains then.

Does the proposed Aventra come in different forms like the Electrostar/Turbostar family (eg. options of three different cab design (170-style, 377/LM172 style and Capitalstar-style, and a choice of neat & tidy plug doors or fast-opening, class150-style, metro doors)? Moving off-topic slightly, could they also produce a Turbostar/Electrostar/Aventra with a regional express (class 158/159/175/5-WES) door arrangment?

On the subject of whether any Mersyrail electrification extensions should be 3rd rail or OHLE, which would be cheaper (to build and/or operate) for Wrexham Central - Bidston?

 

[Nym]

Wrexham to Bisdon doesn't benifit from being able to make use of any other feeders (Unlike Kirkby to Wigan or Omskirk to Preston that can make use of the WCML power supplies) so it would purely be an installation opportunity thing, I get the feeling that DC would be better placed, as it is isolated.

But if Kirkby and Omskirk become through stations again and electrified, chances are it will be 25kV OHL from there to the WCML.

 

[John55]

Wrexham to Bisdon doesn't benifit from being able to make use of any other feeders (Unlike Kirkby to Wigan or Omskirk to Preston that can make use of the WCML power supplies) so it would purely be an installation opportunity thing, I get the feeling that DC would be better placed, as it is isolated.

But if Kirkby and Omskirk become through stations again and electrified, chances are it will be 25kV OHL from there to the WCML.

The only realistic possibility of electrification north/east of Ormskirk/Kirkby is if Merseytravel (and Lancashire CC) sponsor extensions from Ormskirk to Burscough and Kirkby to Headbolt Lane, Rainford and/or Skelmersdale. I cannot see isolated sections of overhead being installed for these kind of extensions so we can safely assume these routes will be electrified on the 3rd rail.

In the longer term if electrification was extended south from Preston or west from Wigan it would be different but who is going to sponsor that? If it did happen then Burscough and Rainford would be more likely places for the interface between systems.

In the absence of the Edge Hill spur from Central LL the only likely use of dual system EMUs on Merseyrail would be if Hunts Cross - Trafford Park was electrified and trains from Liverpool to Hunts Cross were extended eastwards to Warrington or beyond. That may be better understood in a few years time when the trains are ordered.

 

[jopsuk]

That's a plus point for Derby-built stock over the Siemens trains then.

But it might not be applicable to the Desiro City versus the Aventra- Siemens might have figutred out how to "add lightness" to their designs (borrowing from Colin Champman's design philosophy)

 

[Crimson_Quiff]

Who's going to plan the farewell tour then?

Strap me in if there'll be one!

 

[Bevan Price]

Some interesting points on Radio Merseyside today. They propose to purchase the new units, rather than hire them via one of the rolling stock companies. (They currently pay £12 million per year hire charges for the 507/508 units). It is hoped to have finance in place so that the new units can be in service by about 2019.

I would expect the trains to have similar internal layouts to the Merseytravel-specified 2+2 seating layouts on the 507 & 508 classes, and unless someone else pays for extra units, I would expect them to buy only enough units to cover the current Merseyrail Electric Network, plus the proposed extension from Kirkby to Headbolt Lane. I suspect that Merseytravel would expect a contribution from West Lancashire council if there is ever an extension of the current network to serve Skelmersdale or Burscough.

I can't see that Burscough to Preston will ever be electrified, and 3rd rail to Wigan Wallgate also seems unlikely - if we ever see electrification to Wigan Wallgate, (maybe in 15 to 25 years ?), this is more likely to be 25 kV overhead from Manchester & Bolton to Southport.

 

[Nym]

Well, I'd estimate the captial costs at somewhere between £230-£240mil, for the new fleet, plus about £10mil in depots and training. So lets say £250mil.

At £12mil/year you'd think thats a 21 year leaseback cost. But with intrest rates as they are, (Anywhere between 4% and 20% for leased assets) so that pushes it up to about 30 years payback. But if they look after their assets properly than it could be that they have a nice long 50 year life on merseyrail, or at the end of them 30 years, they still have a value, so that pushes it back down to about 25 years to include residual value.

So yeah, if you can get a financial case and backing, with Merseytravel as a collateral for the debt, it could be a good way to go.

 

[IanXC]

So yeah, if you can get a financial case and backing, with Merseytravel as a collateral for the debt, it could be a good way to go.

I'm not sure quite how one would take security over a PTE :?

You are of course right that Merseytravel would be likely to be able to obtain finance at a the same kind of attractive pricing as local government obtains. Making use of these historically low government borrowing interest rates could be a very wise move indeed.

 

[swt_passenger]

Some interesting points on Radio Merseyside today. They propose to purchase the new units, rather than hire them via one of the rolling stock companies. (They currently pay £12 million per year hire charges for the 507/508 units)...

So just like TfL said about buying the LO 378s originally. Except they eventually found that financially it wasn't such a good idea after all and went for conventional leasing but through a new Rosco...

 

[WatcherZero]

It is indeed a valid point to consider risk. If the Rosco fails theres very little knock on effect, if the PTE fails all transport across multiple froms and all investment projects are at risk from creditors.

 

[Stonesourscotty]

I noticed on page one that people mention extension to Wigan but Im one of many that is opposed to any extension of Merseyrail to Wigan via third rail anyway Dual Voltage Thirdrail/Overhead rail i support though with a Switch at Kirkby or Wigan?. this is on the basis that the numbers of people that travel Liverpool/Kirkby bound 4/5 normally seem the average number from Orrell/Pem/Wigan combined yet demand is so high for stations into Gm some times 40 plus from Orrell and Pem it would be a crying shame if the line lost direct trains to Manchester/Salford and Atherton. It would also mean alot of people would change back to the car on this route as Orrell/Pemberton have become big commuter stations for Salfoprd Central Crescent and Manchester Victoria also alot of students use the route for stations along the atherton line with Hindley and Daisy Hill and Atherton all getting decent shares of flows.

 

[507 001]

Strap me in if there'll be one!

Me Too!

 

[ert47]

The only technical difference between the two classes is the coupler. Aside from that, different livery, interior job and operators, they are exactly the same. A lot of Southerns 377s started life as 375s.

So yes if that is the case for 375s, that will also be the case for the 377s.

'455driver' provided figures previously for 450/444, although of course these are the restricted figures. 350s are noticeably more spritely, even on 3rd rail.

The 375s have had their Couplers changed, they now have Dellners like the 377s. Apart from the livery, the one most noticeable thing that makes the 2 classes noticeably different is the external cameras at the end of the carriages.

 

[notadriver]

The only technical difference between the two classes is the coupler. Aside from that, different livery, interior job and operators, they are exactly the same. A lot of Southerns 377s started life as 375s.

So yes if that is the case for 375s, that will also be the case for the 377s.

'455driver' provided figures previously for 450/444, although of course these are the restricted figures. 350s are noticeably more spritely, even on 3rd rail.

Where could I find the figures please ?

 

[Nym]

Both 350s, 450s and 444s have the same traction motors, with the same power output, the main difference between the 350s on AC and 450s on DC are that the 450s are current limited for power draw, takes a lot of current to get the motor started, then when it's rolling uses less and less. So the 350s can draw a massive surge of current to get going where the 450s cannot.

 

[507 001]

It would be interesting to see whether a 350/450 or "mainline" electrostar would actually fit through the tunnels.....

(and in the case of the Desiros, whether they would go through without taking the track with them!)

 

[Pumbaa]

Where could I find the figures please ?

Go back in time with the search function! I certainly don't have a direct link to the post. The topic was around the time of the active 350s on WLL duties and refitting of transformers to the /1s. So September 2009 ish I think. It may not have been 455driver, it could have been one of the other SWT drivers on here.

 

[Pumbaa]

It would be interesting to see whether a 350/450 or "mainline" electrostar would actually fit through the tunnels.....

(and in the case of the Desiros, whether they would go through without taking the track with them!)

Well 66s and Mk2s have definitely been through the tunnels. The last time this came up I think we debunked this myth - pretty much anything could fit down there.

 

[tbtc]

Well 66s and Mk2s have definitely been through the tunnels. The last time this came up I think we debunked this myth - pretty much anything could fit down there.

And 73s.

It's certainly not like the "Slim Jim" 33s on Southern Region

 

[John55]

Both 350s, 450s and 444s have the same traction motors, with the same power output, the main difference between the 350s on AC and 450s on DC are that the 450s are current limited for power draw, takes a lot of current to get the motor started, then when it's rolling uses less and less. So the 350s can draw a massive surge of current to get going where the 450s cannot.

I attended a lecture on the upgrade of the Southern power supply about 6 or 7 years ago and the information presented on the difference between old and new trains did not show the trains drawing a lot of current at start and low speed.

The lecturer showed a graph with the current drawn being quite low at a stand and only reached the limiting current at about ~10 mph. He made the point that the new generation of trains (Siemens and Bombardier) were actually slower off the mark than the VEP/CIGs and whatever until the train was actually up to ~5 mph after which they were much faster.

This was not a feature of the power supply but of the trains themselves. He also showed that the current draw did not fall with increasing speed but remained constant up to unit top speed. This was where he compared the current characteristics of the newer trains with those of the resistance control DC motors.

 

[DanJames93]

Toilets would not just add weight, they would add the need for servicing facilities at depots...

And they would get completely vandalised by local youths. Toilets on the Merseyrail network would be a very bad idea in my opinion.

Not really necessary anyway considering most of the journeys are short and the major stations have free customer toilets.

 

[John55]

And they would get completely vandalised by local youths. Toilets on the Merseyrail network would be a very bad idea in my opinion.

Not really necessary anyway considering most of the journeys are short and the major stations have free customer toilets.

The local trains running out of Lime St to Wigan, Manchester and Warrington all have toilets which seem to work whenever I try to use them. So why would the Merseyrail trains fare any worse?

 

[Chris125]

But it might not be applicable to the Desiro City versus the Aventra- Siemens might have figutred out how to "add lightness" to their designs (borrowing from Colin Champman's design philosophy)

Apparently the Desiro City is 25% lighter than the existing UK fleet, which i think would put it on a par with the Aventra.

Chris