GWR Tender for 30 x 4 car EMUs

[Royston Vasey]

30 - sheer coincidence obviously…

Obviously!

 

[Snow1964]

This is how the provision of rolling stock was envisioned when the railway was privatised, a competitive market where an Operator can choose which supplier offers best value

Basically got existing 387s vs 379s vs 350/2s

Sort of becomes a Dutch auction for the ROSCO, how low a price do they want to offer them with a potential alternative of sitting idle not bringing in any revenue.

Of course it may be that if a fleet exceeds 30 (say 37) then they get offered them all at a job lot price, very handy if you really need 33 as at now.

I do wonder if Porterbrook has got a better offer to take 30 387s so has told GWR they cannot extend. Otherwise why not issue tender for 33 (which is quantity they currently have)

 

[irish_rail]

The idea of replacing the existing modern fleet is madness. Why replace a fleet that crews are fully trained on and fully branded in GWR livery. Not in anyones interest surely to replace the 387s...

 

[JonathanH]

Why would they be tendering for 30 units when they currently have 33 (not including the Heathrow Express ones) if they're expecting to keep the 387s?

Probably because one potential bidder can offer 33 units and the other can offer 30. The bidder with 33 units (who also has another spare fleet with 37 units) could potentially offer a deal including the extra 3 units.

I think it's a lot more likely there is a potential future home lined up for the 387s, and this tender is looking into replacing them on GWR.

It is heavily speculated on this forum that there is another operator who would welcome additional 387s, one where allusions have been made to a restoration of capacity starting from September.

The outside option is GWR keep the 387s with batteries to bring the 769 experiment to an end but maybe that should be in a speculative thread.

The idea of replacing the existing modern fleet is madness.

At least it is another relatively modern fleet that is being considered. The interesting thing is whether some sort of refit would be needed to maintain capacity as part of the leasing company's proposal - eg removing the current first class.

Not in anyones interest surely to replace the 387s...

On the GWR side maybe but another operator may see it being in their interest.

 

[Melancholia]

The notice reads with my bold text:

"Great Western Railway (GWR) is seeking expressions of interest from suppliers for provision of a fleet of 30 x 4-car electric multiple units (EMUs) to deliver existing London Thames Valley services, to the current sectional running times (SRTs), with at least the same seated and crush laden capacity, from the 1st of April 2023 to the 29th May 2028."

Moreover, it goes on to say "Our current fleet is maintained in house at Reading Depot, supported by a TSSSA. It is our intention that maintenance provision continues in this manner."

It would seem very unlikely that Reading depot could accommodate another 30 units on top of its existing allocation.

Thank you. Didn't fully understand the bold bits. I assumed it meant that the EMUs that they want should be able to deliver a service that the present rolling stock can already.

 

[Mitchell Hurd]

Surely the GWR 387's aren't planning to be replaced, surely?

 

[AzureOtsu]

379s to gwr and 387s to southern???? they must still have their shoe gear equipment for a reason right?

 

[swt_passenger]

Surely the GWR 387's aren't planning to be replaced, surely?

It’s clearly a possibility having read the utilities contract notice, and it’s probably why it’s generated so much discussion in two separate threads.

 

[Energy]

Why would they be tendering for 30 units when they currently have 33 (not including the Heathrow Express ones) if they're expecting to keep the 387s?

I think it's a lot more likely there is a potential future home lined up for the 387s, and this tender is looking into replacing them on GWR.

It allows Akiem to bid the 379s which should bring the price down on what GWR choose.

 

[TrainTrackJack]

I doubt it'd be the 350/2s - as they are maintained at the purpose built Northampton depot operated by Siemens for a start, and IIRC Porterbrook wanted to convert them to Battery Bi Modes.

The 379s would make logical sense as they are of the Electrostar family, and if selected I wouldn't be surprised if they were renumbered into a new 387/x subclass.

 

[JonathanH]

The 379s would make logical sense as they are of the Electrostar family, and if selected I wouldn't be surprised if they were renumbered into a new 387/x subclass.

I'm not sure what would lead to renumbering. They aren't 387s. There is nothing magic which would change them into 387s.

IIRC Porterbrook wanted to convert them to Battery Bi Modes

Just an idea.

I doubt it'd be the 350/2s - as they are maintained at the purpose built Northampton depot operated by Siemens for a start

They are going to have a rather limited future use potential if they have to continue to be maintained at Northampton (although other Siemens depots are available). The main problem with the 350s is that they aren't yet available.

 

[Energy]

I doubt it'd be the 350/2s - as they are maintained at the purpose built Northampton depot operated by Siemens for a start, and IIRC Porterbrook wanted to convert them to Battery Bi Modes.

The 379s would make logical sense as they are of the Electrostar family, and if selected I wouldn't be surprised if they were renumbered into a new 387/x subclass.

Re numbering them isn't really needed, they are still slightly different since one is AC only and the other is AC/3rd Rail.

The main problem with the 350s is that they aren't yet available.

Agreed, I doubt they will be available for 1st April 2023 at the current rate.

 

[TrainTrackJack]

Re numbering them isn't really needed, they are still slightly different since one is AC only and the other is AC/3rd Rail.

Don't the GW 387s carry the Shoe gear, but aren't configured for 3rd rail? If so then it could probably be put right in a day by Reading.

 

[43096]

They are going to have a rather limited future use potential if they have to continue to be maintained at Northampton (although other Siemens depots are available). The main problem with the 350s is that they aren't yet available.

If I was Porterbrook and the inability to get the 730s into service meant missing an opportunity to re-lease them, I'd be furious. Presumably they're on short-term lease extensions now? If so, I'd be seriously considering terminating regardless if they were re-leased elsewhere unless there were guarantees from DfT that they would be used in future.

 

[YSTrains]

So deliveries are to begin next month? Is that correct?

 

[aleggatta]

How many units are required for the NDL? Could a case be made for all the 350/2's, with all/some of them fitted with batteries/shoegear to facilitate NDL running and having a single fleet of trains? If additional charging time was required could it be done with interworking diagrams? not the most outrageous idea, the core 30 could be transferred and the remaining 7 trialed/converted with some/the rest happening in time. The only limitation I can see of the 350 fleet is the lack of bodyside cameras, which I'm sure could be fitted.

 

[Wilts Wanderer]

How many units are required for the NDL? Could a case be made for all the 350/2's, with all/some of them fitted with batteries/shoegear to facilitate NDL running and having a single fleet of trains? If additional charging time was required could it be done with interworking diagrams? not the most outrageous idea, the core 30 could be transferred and the remaining 7 trialed/converted with some/the rest happening in time. The only limitation I can see of the 350 fleet is the lack of bodyside cameras, which I'm sure could be fitted.

If the full 3tph North Downs timetable was ever implemented, with the full peaks, I believe it requires 10 diagrams?

 

[apinnard]

There’s 30 class 321 renatus. Just to add something absurd into the mix

 

[JonathanH]

There’s 30 class 321 renatus. Just to add something absurd into the mix

One of those at 110mph would be an even more lively experience than a 387. Unfortunately they aren't compliant with the requirements of the tender.

 

[Domh245]

If I was Porterbrook and the inability to get the 730s into service meant missing an opportunity to re-lease them, I'd be furious. Presumably they're on short-term lease extensions now? If so, I'd be seriously considering terminating regardless if they were re-leased elsewhere unless there were guarantees from DfT that they would be used in future.

However, porterbrook also own the 387s, so can facilitate subleasing of the 350s from GWR back to WMT whilst backfilling at GWR with the 387s!

Said arrangement also mean it highly unlikely that the 350s would be offered in the first place!!

 

[43102EMR]

However, porterbrook also own the 387s, so can facilitate subleasing of the 350s from GWR back to WMT whilst backfilling at GWR with the 387s!

Said arrangement also mean it highly unlikely that the 350s would be offered in the first place!!

If there’s anything “new” that will be offered to GWR, it will be the 379s. That being said, I honestly think that GWR will just accept a renegotiated lease with their existing 387s and move on… provided it’s at the right price.

 

[apinnard]

One of those at 110mph would be an even more lively experience than a 387. Unfortunately they aren't compliant with the requirements of the tender.

Good point. Totally overlooked that.

 

[Mikey C]

The GWR passengers would certainly appreciate the more comfy seats of the 379s when compared to the ironing boards of the 387!

 

[TrainTrackJack]

The GWR passengers would certainly appreciate the more comfy seats of the 379s when compared to the ironing boards of the 387!

I presume the First Class 2+1 seating would be removed though.

 

[43102EMR]

I presume the First Class 2+1 seating would be removed though.

Why I personally think they’d be more suited for the Cambridge Cruiser, then again they could prove useful on Cardiff runs (should they be taken by GWR).

 

[Agent_Squash]

The 379s would presumably become de-facto 387s - so no more 2-1 seating if they did win the tender.

 

[Skimble19]

I’ve not heard anything concrete about these so this is just guess work, but 33x 387 to GTR, 30x 379 to GWR does make sense, especially if combined with the 6x 387s from c2c. I suspect 3 units wouldn’t be too major a loss for GWR, whereas an additional 33x 387s to GTR would come in very handy.. convenient timing too.

 

[507020]

I’ve not heard anything concrete about these so this is just guess work, but 33x 387 to GTR, 30x 379 to GWR does make sense, especially if combined with the 6x 387s from c2c. I suspect 3 units wouldn’t be too major a loss for GWR, whereas an additional 33x 387s to GTR would come in very handy.. convenient timing too.

I notice your profile picture is one of the 365s which GWR were supposed to have had… how many of those were there again?

 

[Skimble19]

I notice your profile picture is one of the 365s which GWR were supposed to have had… how many of those were there again?

40, now none though sadly. (Won’t say anymore on them though, as much as I liked them as units we’ve had more than enough 365 appreciation threads!)

 

[Class15]

I notice your profile picture is one of the 365s which GWR were supposed to have had… how many of those were there again?

40, and the reason why GWR didn’t take them is because of electrification delays *cough cough*

40, now none though sadly (won’t say anymore, as much as I liked them as units we’ve had more than enough 365 appreciation threads!)

Fantastic units, should have been saved.