Future Merseyrail stock: Stadler selected as manufacturer

Discussion in 'Traction & Rolling Stock' started by gray1404, 29 May 2015.

Thread Status:
Not open for further replies.
  1. gray1404

    gray1404 Established Member

    Messages:
    2,860
    Joined:
    3 Mar 2014
    Location:
    Merseyside
    Any ideas of what Merseyrail are going to replace their current stock with? I believe their current fleet will only last so many more years right (although I can't recall the date)? I wonder if they will replace them with brand new stock or cast-offs from somewhere else? Any ideas as to what they'll replace them with?
     
    Last edited: 29 May 2015
  2. Bevan Price

    Bevan Price Established Member

    Messages:
    3,034
    Joined:
    22 Apr 2010
  3. gray1404

    gray1404 Established Member

    Messages:
    2,860
    Joined:
    3 Mar 2014
    Location:
    Merseyside
    Thanks! I'll give that post a read now :)
    the lease for the 507's was extended to 2027 and 508's 2030 if i recall, thats why there having a 'refresh' plus every 50000 miles a unit does it recivies a C6 overhaul (underneith) thats why you see shiny ones, plus constantly traction motors and bogies get swapped, and because of the way the network is the units are turned round constantly so wheel wear is rather even, but yeah there staying for a while yet! and we will probably have to have cast off's of some description because merseyrail haven't got enough money to replce the current stock, theyve barely got enough money to complete the station refurbs, thats why liverpool central was done in 2012, and where in 2015 and moorfields is yet to be done! its going to be 2016 once there all done! however because of the uniquity of the merseyrail network it will mean they will require a whole new design or something similar to that on london overground (378's) but because the DfT dont like the north they wont fund merseyrail dispite its the busiest commuter railway outside of london (in england) and the busiest underground network outside of london (in the UK) and at the moment theres no cast offs that can replace the 507/508's, because the stock has to be a certain length and adhear to tube tunnel regulations (with no walkway for the loop and burrowing junction at ham square) the only thing at present that could replace them are 319's however they cant as there 4 car and cant be made to 3 car without spending quite a bit of money, plus there going ellsewhere, so theres no cast offs that cna replace them anyway! which is why merseyrail has no option but to just keep extending the lease untill the DfT funds them, which they wont.
    they are just going to run the 507/8 into the ground until there are severe operational problems. ME will become one of the worst performing rail operators. 2027 and 2030 is just totally unrealistic and, quite frankly, passengers deserve better! At that point though (if not before) the DfT will have no option but to fund brand new trains of some description. I cannot thought for the life of me understand why ME has got no money. For the passenger numbers they pull in there should be enough revenue. Something does not up if its the most busy commuter railway outside of London yet no funds. What is the reasoning why we can't have 319s? I am thinking that although they are 4 cars, currently ME run 6 car services so a 4 car should be fine - although that might put a limitation on a double headed service.
     
  4. Taunton

    Taunton Established Member

    Messages:
    2,466
    Joined:
    1 Aug 2013
    I reckon they should just dust off the drawings of the 1938 Class 503 units built for the Wirral lines. They had a sight more comfortable seats, which all perfectly lined up with the windows unlike our late-1970s wonders, and I never, ever, in many years of usage, remember a single failure. They looked in such good condition right to the end, even the pictures of them being dismantled in the scrapyard show them looking clean and tidy.
     
  5. Topgun333

    Topgun333 Member

    Messages:
    165
    Joined:
    1 Aug 2013
    I'd imagine that with a bit of minor messing around surplus 319s would be a good fit.
     
  6. cjmillsnun

    cjmillsnun Established Member

    Messages:
    2,594
    Joined:
    13 Feb 2011
    Refurb the 313s when they come off the GN?

    And yes I know how old the 313s are. However in all fairness with a thorough refurb of the best along with the same on the 507/8s and the remainder used as Christmas trees for spares it would keep a fairly uniform fleet going for another 10 years or so hopefully allowing funds to be got together for new stock
     
    Last edited: 29 May 2015
  7. simonmpoulton

    simonmpoulton Member

    Messages:
    22
    Joined:
    25 Jun 2011
    Do Merseyrail actually need more units though?

    I'm sure i've read somewhere that the Mk3 based units wont fit in the tunnels so I don't see how 319's would work - feel free to correct me on this point though!
     
  8. Robbies

    Robbies Established Member

    Messages:
    1,997
    Joined:
    20 Sep 2009
    Location:
    Berkshire
    I don't think Electrostars or Desiro style trains work either. The nearest would be the class 313's, but I do not see those being the replacements either.

    I can see something similar to the S-Stock trains taking over from the class 507/508's by 2030, if not before 2025.
     
  9. Wavertreelad

    Wavertreelad Member

    Messages:
    691
    Joined:
    24 Feb 2013
    What is source of the extension to the leases? It has not appeared anywhere else as far as I know. The last I heard it was 2019 which is why Merseyrail have spent a long time pondering over how to replace the 507 & 508's.

    If the extension is true then yes bring up the 313's refurbish them and they could serve some of the planned new extensions as well as strengthening existing services.
     
  10. LNW-GW Joint

    LNW-GW Joint Established Member

    Messages:
    10,161
    Joined:
    22 Feb 2011
    Location:
    Mold, Clwyd
    Merseyrail is not a DfT franchise, it is the responsibility of Merseytravel to fund new trains.
    They decide the timetable and service quality, set the fares and take all the revenue (like TfL for London).
    No doubt there will be a DfT contribution, but the "concession" means that the future of Merseyrail is in local hands.
    If you choose to have low fares, it's no surprise there is no money for new trains.
     
  11. petersi

    petersi Member

    Messages:
    369
    Joined:
    24 Apr 2012
    People in the know say the ITT for 313 replacement has been issued
     
  12. Camden

    Camden Established Member

    Messages:
    1,252
    Joined:
    30 Dec 2014
    I don't know where the assumption of having no money has come from, there is money for new trains and a procurement process already in progress, a perfectly normal, practical budget for the replacement fleet having been specified previously.

    The logical choice for the network would be a modified S7. Perfect size in both width and length, perfect performance, perfect "fit" for the network type, with much of the work already done.
     
    Last edited: 29 May 2015
  13. cjmillsnun

    cjmillsnun Established Member

    Messages:
    2,594
    Joined:
    13 Feb 2011
    I wasn't thinking of extra units, just cherry picking the best of the combined fleet and using the others for spare parts.
     
  14. SpacePhoenix

    SpacePhoenix Established Member

    Messages:
    5,389
    Joined:
    18 Mar 2014
    If they do go for the Movia units they should have them built so that they have provision for conversion to dual-voltage or AC only (possibly all the internals in place with a pan well on top)
     
  15. 47802

    47802 Established Member

    Messages:
    2,737
    Joined:
    8 Oct 2013
    If the trains will fit then its likely to be the usual offerings from the main manufacturers, if not then it may be some form of movia train, either way there's already been an extensive discussion on this and any more seems fairly pointless.
     
  16. gray1404

    gray1404 Established Member

    Messages:
    2,860
    Joined:
    3 Mar 2014
    Location:
    Merseyside
    "If you choose to have low fares, it's no surprise there is no money for new trains."

    Are the fares on ME really that low though. Some of their Anytime Day fares are just like other TOCs if I'm honest for the distance involved.
     
  17. LNW-GW Joint

    LNW-GW Joint Established Member

    Messages:
    10,161
    Joined:
    22 Feb 2011
    Location:
    Mold, Clwyd
    Hooton-Southport (27 miles) is £6.35 SDR.
    Hooton-Wigan (28 miles) is £14.40 SDR.
    The difference is that Southport is within the Merseytravel area, Wigan isn't.
    There are also significant PTE concessions which aren't available outside the area, including free travel for residents over 60 (all modes).
    A Day Saver covers all Merseytravel zones for £4.90 (all modes £5.10).
    The best you can do for Hooton-Wigan, outside the PTE area, is a CDR at £12.00.
     
  18. Ianigsy

    Ianigsy Member

    Messages:
    243
    Joined:
    12 May 2015
    From personal experience of visiting family in the area, I'd say that fares policy on Merseyrail nowadays is geared particularly strongly towards regular users and tickets for unlimited travel. Point to point fares probably bear comparison with anywhere else- my particular gripe is that the cost of a Liverpool-Birkenhead North single at £3+ makes it uneconomical for me to buy anything but the cheapest Leeds-Liverpool advances if I'm thinking of going that way.
     
  19. Wavertreelad

    Wavertreelad Member

    Messages:
    691
    Joined:
    24 Feb 2013
    New Merseyrail stock update contained here.

    Agenda item


    Liverpool City Region Combined Authority Final Accounts 2014/15 (Pre-Audit)

    •Meeting of Liverpool City Region Combined Authority Audit Committee, Tuesday, 28th July, 2015 10.30 am (Item 7.)

    To consider a report of the Treasurer concerning the Liverpool City Region Combined Authority Final Accounts for 2014/15 (Pre-Audit).

    Minutes:

    The Committee considered a report of the Treasurer regarding the Pre-Audit Liverpool City Region Combined Authority Final Accounts for 2014/15.

    The Treasurer drew the Committee’s attention to the position of the reserves detailed in the Statement of Accounts. The Combined Authority reserves were inherited from the Integrated Transport Authority and remained high. The reserves were being built up for the Rolling Stock project to ensure the levy was not used and had no impact on tax payers. Reserves would also be used on transport infrastructure investment.

    Councillor Killen questioned the difference between the £127 million levy and the revenue grants received by Merseytravel from the Combined Authority. It was advised that the levy was for all Combined Authority and Merseytravel activity; however not all of it was given to Merseytravel. A portion remained with the Combined Authority to pay the loan and debt charges associated with the Mersey Tunnels and Merseytravel was paid a grant to carry out the activity requested by the Combined Authority.

    Councillor Moorhead enquired and received clarification that any unused money was added to the Combined Authority reserves, with the exception of the 10% contribution to the Growth Fund Scheme.

    Councillor Moorhead further referred to the Rolling Stock project and enquired as to when it was likely to be reported to the Combined Authority for a decision. The Treasurer reported that the delay was due to an issue regarding infrastructure. Discussions were currently on-going with Network Rail and other relevant bodies to ensure that the network had the capacity to accommodate the rolling stock. Once a resolution was reached, which was anticipated sooner rather than later, it would be submitted to the Combined Authority.

    Councillor Killen asked about the implementation timescale once a decision had been made and what changes the public could expect to see on the network. It was advised that, if agreed, the project was expected to be operational by the end of the current decade. The work undertaken to date suggested that a new fleet was needed on the network by the mid 2020s to avoid capacity and engineering issues. Improvements to the network would include better timetables, improved trains with smarter layout; including more standing room but with no reduction in the number of seats, and Wi-Fi.

    Councillor Killen further asked whether the project was at risk due to budget cuts and it was explained that there were no immediate risks and the financial package being developed was striving to include all necessary costs in order to protect the levy and ultimately the tax payer. The Merseyrail network was in good health financial health, which put the project in a good position, but it was difficult to guarantee that it would not be affected by cuts in the future.

    Councillor Polhill enquired whether a risk factor had been built in to the project to take in to account the increasing prices year on year to build the rolling stock using budgets that would decrease year on year. The Treasurer advised that elements of risk had been identified and would be included in the reports submitted to the Combined Authority. Contract prices was one of the risks that had been identified and when the current rail concession expired in 2028 the Combined Authority would set the terms for the new concession to make it more attractive for new bidders, which would be beneficial for the Authority. There was, however, risk in every element of the project but the risk of not replacing the rolling stock carried operational and financial risk.

    Councillor Carr enquired and was advised that if the decision was made to purchase the rolling stock Merseyrail Electrics could withdraw from the contract should they not agree with the terms that were being imposed. Merseyrail Electrics were a key partner and included in discussions regarding the project, as far as was appropriate, and to date were comfortable with the proposals.

    Councillor Carr also referred to the ‘assets held for sale’ detailed within the Statement of Accounts and enquired as to when the assets became a liability. It was reported that there was provision for losses relating to assets in the accounts, however, the assets referred to in the accounts were purchased as part of the now-cancelled Merseytram project and had since been sold.

    With regard to Global Smart Media Ltd and Accrington Technologies Ltd, which were currently dormant, Councillor Carr enquired as to when those Companies would be ‘tidied up’. It was advised that every effort was being made but as neither was incurring any costs it was not a corporate priority. There was currently an on-going issue that Merseytravel’s Legal Division was trying to resolve whilst ensuring financial protection for the organisation.

    Resolved that:-

    a) the pre-audit final accounts of the Liverpool City Region Combined Authority for 2014/15 be approved;

    b) the audited final accounts be received by the Combined Authority Audit Committee following completion of the audit work by the Combined Authority’s External Auditors; and

    c) the pre-audit final accounts of Merseytravel, included within the Liverpool City Region Combined Authority Group Accounts, be noted.

    http://moderngov.merseytravel.uk.net/mgAi.aspx?ID=8636
     
  20. Bletchleyite

    Bletchleyite Veteran Member

    Messages:
    20,778
    Joined:
    20 Oct 2014
    Location:
    Up and down the south WCML (mostly)
    They seem, rather inexplicably, to have replaced CDRs with rover tickets. Other than removing Railcard discounts I don't entirely understand why this was done - it's not even a particularly Dutch thing to do (I know they have copied certain things from NS). Except for short journeys I don't believe this has caused a significant fares increase.

    Aren't there any through Advances? Aughton Park always seemed to have some to London at least.
    --- old post above --- --- new post below ---
    Yes, I think a design based on the S-stock (but possibly physically smaller) would be a good approach. Possibly more transverse seating as well. I'd perhaps suggest going for something roughly 5x20m in length, and if additional peak capacity is needed operate a slightly increased frequency.
     
  21. D365

    D365 Established Member

    Messages:
    5,160
    Joined:
    29 Jun 2012
    As far as future rolling stock goes, if a fixed-formation fleet is decided upon, surely you'd just want to order an equivalent product to the Moorgate [Class 313 replacement] stock, and base the interior off that.

    5x20m seems a bit short-sighted imo, if passenger numbers are to increase within the mid-term lifespan of the stock then it's unlikely that the manufacturer will be prepared to supply additional carriages.
     
  22. Camden

    Camden Established Member

    Messages:
    1,252
    Joined:
    30 Dec 2014
    And Wigan to Stalybridge is £4.30 return for similar distance to Hooton to Southport. The PTEs all have their local fares designed to support the economy of the local area. That's the way it should be.

    The Merseytravel day saver is good value, and they are the ones who have got it right.

    Interestingly our newish S 7 stock trains are just the right length height and size to fill the platforms off the shelf I believe. Seven carriages rather than five.

    I agree that five carriages is the wrong formation and leaves the network stuck with unusable platform capacity. The Moorgate stock seems obvious because it is basically identical today but today's trains aren't ideal for the Merseyrail platforms or tight tunnels and also Moorgate routes and the Merseyrail routes have different operational requirements. The S 7 again though is spot on.
     
    Last edited: 20 Aug 2015
  23. Bletchleyite

    Bletchleyite Veteran Member

    Messages:
    20,778
    Joined:
    20 Oct 2014
    Location:
    Up and down the south WCML (mostly)
    I think Merseyrail would do well to be aiming long-term at a 10 rather than 15-minute frequency base (20 rather than 30 minutes on Sundays, though that said Sunday is increasingly a shopping day so maybe still the 10 for about a 6 hour period). That would handle the growth.
     
  24. WatcherZero

    WatcherZero Established Member

    Messages:
    8,459
    Joined:
    25 Feb 2010
    Some trade press been invited by Merseytravel for briefings on rolling stock replacement over the last week or so, however I fear that they aren't actually briefing on a deal but attempting to use the press to assist in lobbying the treasury. On 4th of September the Combined Authority are submitting their requests or 'asks' to government for further devolution ahead of the next Comprehensive Spending Review. There are three transport asks.

    1. For the Mersey Tunnels debt to be written off so that the authority can set its own charges and use the fare revenue to invest in other transport projects.
    2. For a long term capital grant to pay for replacement Merseyrail rolling stock for operation 'beyond the Northern and Wirral lines'.
    3. Bus reregulation, ability to franchise out bus routes.

    In regards the Tunnels debt it currently stands at £48m and is being paid off at around £10m a year from the £40m in annual revenues the tunnel generates (another £10m is taken as 'profit' for other transport projects while the upkeep of the tunnels is £20m a year), the loan was taken out ahead of their opening in 1971 (£8m equivalent to £110m in todays money) and runs until 2048 however in 2004 an act of parliament was passed forcing them to actually start tackling the debt rather than letting it grow (by linking toll to inflation, though local politicians have consistently abused their leeway to have below inflation annual rises) and at current repayment rate it will be paid off in the next five years anyway. The tunnels are owned by the Merseyside councils and not considered part of the national highway network, the debt on the tunnels is council debt not government debt.

    Don't know how much they are asking Government to give them to buy trains with but my gut would say in the order of a £300m grant over 30 years.
     
    Last edited: 29 Aug 2015
  25. Wavertreelad

    Wavertreelad Member

    Messages:
    691
    Joined:
    24 Feb 2013
    The full draft of the submission to the Treasury is here

    http://councillors.knowsley.gov.uk/...rmation.pdf?StyleType=standard&StyleSize=none


    The outcome as far as transport is concerned is

    "To work with government to enhance the core transport network across the LCR. This is to enhance connectivity and in turn, to ensure that transport serves the city region’s wider, social, economic and environmental needs."

    The LCR wishes to

    Reduce the financial risks associated with the planned replacement of the Merseyrail electric rolling stock, with long-term certainty from government in respect of the Special Rail Grant awarded to the LCR each year. 

    Share operating savings that come from this investment with Network Rail, and secure a long term lease on the Merseyrail stations so that we can better plan upgrades in and around stations.

    The LCR ask includes

    We want government to give us a long-term Special Rail Grant (SRG) to help secure a new fleet of Merseyrail trains. The new trains will have more capacity and will be able to serve additional places by being able to run
    beyond the existing Northern and Wirral lines, in support of economic growth.

    This would seem to indicate that Merseytravel wish to extend the present Merseyrail service or branding far beyond the existing Northern and Wirral Lines perhaps in a hub and spoke arrangement were Liverpool was the centre hub and the local services to the rim were operated under a single branding, in the same way that London has with it's tube and overrail services. Such an arrangement could see Merseyrail reaching Preston, Wigan, Warrington, Runcorn, Chester and Wrexham taking over these local services from Northern etc., whilst the later would continue to operate through services beyond these destinations.
     
  26. WatcherZero

    WatcherZero Established Member

    Messages:
    8,459
    Joined:
    25 Feb 2010
    No they arent looking to take over routes (though they were lobbying a couple of years ago for a merseyrail branded liverpool to Man Air service) they are just looking at continuing services beyond their area alongside Northern services, increasing line frequency or joining services which required interchange (e.g kirkby).
     
  27. Camden

    Camden Established Member

    Messages:
    1,252
    Joined:
    30 Dec 2014
    How do you know this?
     
  28. WatcherZero

    WatcherZero Established Member

    Messages:
    8,459
    Joined:
    25 Feb 2010
    Their submissions to Rail North and their 30 year rail strategy.

    Also remember its illegal for them to spend transport cash subsidising services outside their Transport Authority area or on projects which dont directly benefit their local residents.

    For example they couldn't say we want to refurbish Ormskirk Station as it doesn't directly benefit residents of Merseyside and they couldn't subsidise journeys between Burscough and Ormskirk, but they could say we in partnership with Transport for Lancashire wish to part fund electrification of Ormskirk to Burscough as it will be economically beneficial to employment in Merseyside by increasing the size of the potential labour pool- It will cost for example £200m and bring benefits to Merseyside of £10m per year so we feel it justifies an investment of £50m in assisting Transport for Lancashire.


    A real world example would be TfGM agreed to help subsidise the Greater Manchester portion of the Transport for Lancashire commissioned Blackburn to Manchester via Todmorden service including adding station calls north of Rochdale.
     
    Last edited: 30 Aug 2015
  29. WillPS

    WillPS Established Member

    Messages:
    2,306
    Joined:
    18 Nov 2008
    Location:
    Sheffield
    If that's illegal as you say, how did SYPTE get away with funding the Class 333s?
     
  30. WatcherZero

    WatcherZero Established Member

    Messages:
    8,459
    Joined:
    25 Feb 2010
    They funded strengthening to four car units for the benefit of Doncaster, the form in which those four car units was provided was up to northern.
     
    Last edited: 31 Aug 2015
Thread Status:
Not open for further replies.

Share This Page