IEP & Thameslink

Status
Not open for further replies.

RichmondCommu

Established Member
Joined
23 Feb 2010
Messages
6,912
Location
Richmond, London
G'day everyone,

A quick and simple question which hopefully someone will be able to answer. Has the government given the definite go-ahead for the IEP project and as we speak are Hitachi constructing the first train?

Secondly, what progress are Siemens making with their Thameslink trains and when are they due to arrive?

Thanks in advance,

Richmond Commuter
 
Sponsor Post - registered members do not see these adverts; click here to register, or click here to log in
R

RailUK Forums

anthony263

Established Member
Joined
19 Aug 2008
Messages
5,653
Location
South Wales
Nothing about IEP and hopefully it will be stopped dead in the water as the costs of it s very high £20,000 per carriage more expensive than say a pendolino.

I would reconmend reading Modern Railways which has a lot of update news on this who IEP sarga.

As for Thameslink I know Semiens have produced the 1st boggie but other than that it has gone a bit quiet.
 

RichmondCommu

Established Member
Joined
23 Feb 2010
Messages
6,912
Location
Richmond, London
Nothing about IEP and hopefully it will be stopped dead in the water as the costs of it s very high £20,000 per carriage more expensive than say a pendolino.

I would reconmend reading Modern Railways which has a lot of update news on this who IEP sarga.

As for Thameslink I know Semiens have produced the 1st boggie but other than that it has gone a bit quiet.
Thanks for this. Siemens really need to get a shift on given the rate of electrification work in Greater Manchester.

In terms of the IEP, HST's are not getting any older so they need to get their finger out!
 

Pumbaa

Established Member
Joined
19 Feb 2008
Messages
4,916
Everyone wants IEP dead, DafT is lobbying heavily to put MPs off the scent, everyone in the business doesn't like, we're stuffed.
--- old post above --- --- new post below ---
Thanks for this. Siemens really need to get a shift on given the rate of electrification work in Greater Manchester.

In terms of the IEP, HST's are not getting any older so they need to get their finger out!
Not Siemens fault - contract's still not signed. Blame DafT, as per usual... If anything, good on Siemens for getting on with the job before it's all officially signed off.
 
Last edited:

John55

Member
Joined
24 Jun 2011
Messages
800
Location
South East
Thanks for this. Siemens really need to get a shift on given the rate of electrification work in Greater Manchester.

In terms of the IEP, HST's are not getting any older so they need to get their finger out!
Siemens have not yet agreed a contract with the DfT etc for the supply of any Thameslink train. Until that happens one can safely assume no significant work is underway. The bogie shown at a exhibition earlier this year was a development prototype for testing of the new design.

Hitachi are in the same position re the IEP.
 

Pumbaa

Established Member
Joined
19 Feb 2008
Messages
4,916
One other spurious development in the IEP case is that the financial close is getting pushed back further and further towards Crossrail decision. The IEP factory and all built, sorry, assembled in the UK argument gets floored if they don't win Crossrail, which could lead to another round of negotiations.

Current shambolic state of IEP;

- Very few pure EMUs now, mostly bi-mode. DafT selling it by saying 'you get bi-mode and through services on the East Coast... or no bi-mode and no through services'.
- EC and GW now being negotiated seperately with different requirement and contracts. Even more piecemeal. GW close expected end of this month (pah) EC next year.
- And yes, most shambolic, £20k more per vehicle per month, equals £100k extra per 5 car IEP per year month, £1.2m extra per year to lease. JUST TO LEASE. Not to run, track access, nada.
 

RichmondCommu

Established Member
Joined
23 Feb 2010
Messages
6,912
Location
Richmond, London
Siemens have not yet agreed a contract with the DfT etc for the supply of any Thameslink train. Until that happens one can safely assume no significant work is underway. The bogie shown at a exhibition earlier this year was a development prototype for testing of the new design.

Hitachi are in the same position re the IEP.
Ok so why the delay? One can only assume that DfT have no idea about about overcrowding / outdated Intercity trains or the progress that is being made on Thameslink of electrification projects!
 

Nym

Established Member
Joined
2 Mar 2007
Messages
8,398
Location
Somewhere, not in London
Add onto this all the additional gauging clearance that would be needed, at great expense, compared to just using something that is C3 or C4 gauged.

And Alstom sitting there saying, "We can do it cheaper, and potentially better with all proven equipment, providing a long term maintenance contract for jobs in the UK"
 

Pumbaa

Established Member
Joined
19 Feb 2008
Messages
4,916
Don't worry - that's all going over to NR so it doesn't have to show up in the project cost... :-x
 

anthony263

Established Member
Joined
19 Aug 2008
Messages
5,653
Location
South Wales
Add onto this all the additional gauging clearance that would be needed, at great expense, compared to just using something that is C3 or C4 gauged.

And Alstom sitting there saying, "We can do it cheaper, and potentially better with all proven equipment, providing a long term maintenance contract for jobs in the UK"
Yes and the leasing companies and certain biddiers for the GW franchise have said which option they want.
 

Pumbaa

Established Member
Joined
19 Feb 2008
Messages
4,916
The only people who think it's a good idea are Greening and one loony in NR, who is pushing bi-mode now (FFS) as a cheaper alternative to full scale electrification.
 

anthony263

Established Member
Joined
19 Aug 2008
Messages
5,653
Location
South Wales
I wonder though if Greening personally thinks the current form of IEP is a good idea and you have the recent revalation that Hitachi could decide to build their factory in germany which would certainly blow one of the governments ecuses out of the water.

I think the government was having trouble raising the capital to fund IEP and that they are waiting for a decision on crossrail (although many of us would say it is really down to just Bombardier or semiens).

With the number of IEP units heavily reduced from what was originally proposed I wonder if the factory Hitachi were planning on building is really financially viable for them and with the whole EU economic crisis would Hitachi get any orders.
 

Pumbaa

Established Member
Joined
19 Feb 2008
Messages
4,916
MML is now not happening, been robbed to pay for TP electrification and Cardiff. Bi-modes instead beckon... :-x
 

anthony263

Established Member
Joined
19 Aug 2008
Messages
5,653
Location
South Wales
I wouldnt expect the midland mainline electrification to have completly been scrapped especially with them now considering more investment in infrastructure projects.

Although the DFT could perhapos use the excuse of partially extending the wires from say Bedford to Derby as an excuse to increase the number of bi-mode IEP. (This was flagged up on WNXX over the last day or two)
 

RichmondCommu

Established Member
Joined
23 Feb 2010
Messages
6,912
Location
Richmond, London
And Alstom sitting there saying, "We can do it cheaper, and potentially better with all proven equipment, providing a long term maintenance contract for jobs in the UK"
But ideally manufacturing jobs are surely preferable to a job checking that all the nut and bolts are tight? After all we need more manufacturing jobs in this country.
 

Pumbaa

Established Member
Joined
19 Feb 2008
Messages
4,916
Although the DFT could perhapos use the excuse of partially extending the wires from say Bedford to Derby as an excuse to increase the number of bi-mode IEP. (This was flagged up on WNXX over the last day or two)
Yes I was referring to Tony Miles' points from within the industry in my point above.
 

Pumbaa

Established Member
Joined
19 Feb 2008
Messages
4,916
But ideally manufacturing jobs are surely preferable to a job checking that all the nut and bolts are tight? After all we need more manufacturing jobs in this country.
IEP aren't offering manufacturing jobs either. Both are offering maintenance jobs, and arguably Alstom's offer would maintain higher skilled workers as they'd keep the traction package assembly in UK.

And for a lower cost. And deliver a train that's actually half decent.
 

Nym

Established Member
Joined
2 Mar 2007
Messages
8,398
Location
Somewhere, not in London
Also, Alstom tend to operate very good apprenticeship and graduate training scheme to bring people into the world of Manufacturing.

I've never seen Hitachi recruit out of Colleges or Universities to improve the skillbase of the UK.

Unlike, Bombardier, Alstom and Siemens who all recruit UK Engineers.
 

RichmondCommu

Established Member
Joined
23 Feb 2010
Messages
6,912
Location
Richmond, London
IEP aren't offering manufacturing jobs either. Both are offering maintenance jobs, and arguably Alstom's offer would maintain higher skilled workers as they'd keep the traction package assembly in UK.

And for a lower cost. And deliver a train that's actually half decent.
But aren't Hitachi planning to build a manufacturing plant in County Durham? I would have no problem with more orders for Pendolinos but a decision needs to be made soon!
 

anthony263

Established Member
Joined
19 Aug 2008
Messages
5,653
Location
South Wales
Then let's just hope they don't get Crossrail and we can all breathe a little easier...
I know and I and I supect others agree that if Hitachi dont get crossrail we could see them saying sorry to the government and withdrawing their offer of a uk factory due to it not being viable.

Of course we can all say well we told you so.

Of course I wish Alstom would put out more information on their proposed class 180/pendolino high speed emu.
 

Pumbaa

Established Member
Joined
19 Feb 2008
Messages
4,916
But aren't Hitachi planning to build a manufacturing plant in County Durham? I would have no problem with more orders for Pendolinos but a decision needs to be made soon!
It's not a manufacturing plant. It's a flatpack assembly plant that has been cleverly financially described to sound sustainable, but when you look at it (as several leading industry figures have);

a) they need either IEP to be upped in size to open it, or win Crossrail and to assemble it there
b) they also need to start winning in Europe, and one of the other pre-conditions to the plant is that they will build when they have won European tenders.

b) hasn't happened, a) part one hasn't and a) part two we are hoping very much won't either.
--- old post above --- --- new post below ---
Of course I wish Alstom would put out more information on their proposed class 180/pendolino high speed emu.
They can't. They approached the GW bidders but they all said 'sorry - no business here', at least in public anyway. Who knows what's being discussed behind closed doors...
 
Last edited:

WatcherZero

Established Member
Joined
25 Feb 2010
Messages
9,432
Hitachi have already given out the contracts for construction project management of the Durham facility and their depots as well as getting planning permission and buying the land.

Siemens despite not having the contract signed yet have already produced the bogies for static tests as well as built prototype bodyshells and bogies for running tests.
 

Rhydgaled

Established Member
Joined
25 Nov 2010
Messages
3,499
Current shambolic state of IEP
- Very few pure EMUs now, mostly bi-mode.
There haven't been any 'pure' EMUs in the IEP project for ages, even the so-called EMUs have a few tonnes of deadweight diesel in case of OHLE failure. DaFT!<(

DafT selling it by saying 'you get bi-mode and through services on the East Coast... or no bi-mode and no through services'.
If you ask me, East Coast's the easy one. There are only 4 services each way per day into the non-electrified parts of Scotland, one to Hull (which looks like being electrified as part of TPE anyway), one to Harrogate and one to Lincon. Who in their right mind would order 35 5-car DMUs (no idea what the current numbers are, but that was apparently the plan at one point) for 7 services each way when the haulage requirments beyond the wires could easily be met by the current fleet of class 67s?

Ok so why the delay? One can only assume that DfT have no idea about about overcrowding / outdated Intercity trains or the progress that is being made on Thameslink of electrification projects!
Intercity 125s may be old, but they are a dam sight better than IEP as currently planned. More Intercity DMUs, just NO!<(.


Add onto this all the additional gauging clearance that would be needed, at great expense, compared to just using something that is C3 or C4 gauged.
But how much money have NR thrown away already to provide IEP clearance, and how much is left to spend? On WNXX, it was suggested that the total cost of clearing everything DaFT have asked (which does not include Tenby) was in the order of £200m, but that most of that was in CP4. However, the person who said this didn't seem to think the work had been done. If anyone has a varifiable source for the full cost of the guage clearance, please post it as I'd like to use it as amunition to fire against DaFT.

According to Informed Sources in Modern Railways Augest 2011, each diesel engine for IEP would cost £250,000. If I use the old numbers of 35 5-car bi-modes each for GW and EC (no 'EMUs' at all at that point), thats 35 x 2 x 3 = 210 diesel engines. 210 x £250,000 is £52,500,000. That's only £10m short of wiring to Swansea if you simply don't put any diesel engines in IEP. Now if we can cut another £200m off by buying C3 guage stock rather than stock that requires gauge clearance and I've saved £252.5m on IEP. Hence can have Swansea - Cardiff and Swindon - Cheltenham wired (in fact, those two would probably come to less than £150m, leaving at least £100m change). Where my plans fall down is that £100m isn't enough to cover the many hundreds of millions needed to build extra Pendolinos and Voyager pantograph cars to put a fleet of bi-mode Voyagers on the Paddington - Cotswolds and Paddington - Westbury semi-fast services (GW's 5 class 180s would work the extensions of the semi-fast beyond Westbury, and IC125s would remain on all other services to Taunton/Devon/Cornwall).

And for the extra cost of the Diesel IEP one could proberbly electrify the Midland Mainline and HSTs will need life extending anyway...
MML is now not happening, been robbed to pay for TP electrification and Cardiff. Bi-modes instead beckon... :-x
Bi-modes on MML, now that might work. I would be right against it is it means buying bi-modes though, I'd only support it if it was using the existing class 222 units with pantograph cars added. Wire to Corby and Nottingham, order new EMUs for those routes and run the other routes using the bi-mode 222s (8x 8-car bi-mode and 19x 7-car bi-mode 222s, which is two pantograph cars apiece I think).
 

DownSouth

Established Member
Joined
10 Dec 2011
Messages
1,545
Bi-modes on MML, now that might work. I would be right against it is it means buying bi-modes though, I'd only support it if it was using the existing class 222 units with pantograph cars added. Wire to Corby and Nottingham, order new EMUs for those routes and run the other routes using the bi-mode 222s (8x 8-car bi-mode and 19x 7-car bi-mode 222s, which is two pantograph cars apiece I think).
It's been said in other threads that bi-mode conversions for the Voyager family are a good thing because they are an improvement compared to a DEMU. The problem is that they make an EMU worse.

A cheaper decision than bi-mode would be lots of pure EMUs using proven technology and a good-sized order of compatible diesel-electric locomotives using proven technology for rescues, diversions and extending services to locations beyond the electrified areas. A proven European locomotive like a Vossloh Eurolight, Bombardier TRAXX, Siemens Vectron or Alstom Prima adapted to fit a British loading gauge would be what is needed, there being no UK-based expertise and all passenger locomotive technology emanating from Europe these days, even for export US railroads.

Somebody could even be smart enough to group this rescue/diversion/extension/sleeper haulage business together as a single large contract. That would allow the current mishmash of each passenger operator drawing up their own contracts or having their own micro fleet of locos to be left in the past.
 

Rhydgaled

Established Member
Joined
25 Nov 2010
Messages
3,499
It's been said in other threads that bi-mode conversions for the Voyager family are a good thing because they are an improvement compared to a DEMU. The problem is that they make an EMU worse.
Exactly, that is what I'm always saying. Also, it means the vehicles you have to buy are basiclly EMU vehicles, you don't need to build anything new with diesel engines. And it lengthens the trains (which are mostly too short) to 5-car and 7-car sets (with some 8-car 222s).

A cheaper decision than bi-mode would be lots of pure EMUs using proven technology and a good-sized order of compatible diesel-electric locomotives using proven technology for rescues, diversions and extending services to locations beyond the electrified areas. A proven European locomotive like a Vossloh Eurolight, Bombardier TRAXX, Siemens Vectron or Alstom Prima adapted to fit a British loading gauge would be what is needed, there being no UK-based expertise and all passenger locomotive technology emanating from Europe these days, even for export US railroads.
Cheaper than ordering brand-new complete bi-mode trains almost certainly. Not sure how it compares to buying plain EMU vehicles to make the 22x series bi-mode though. On East Coast, the tiny number of off-wire services and huge amount of under-wires mileage mean loco haulage is obviously the way to go. In fact, on East Coast, you need so few locos that you don't even need to buy new diesel locos for the rescue/diversion/off-wire-extension work, there's enough slack in the existing class 67 fleet to cover it.

Somebody could even be smart enough to group this rescue/diversion/extension/sleeper haulage business together as a single large contract. That would allow the current mishmash of each passenger operator drawing up their own contracts or having their own micro fleet of locos to be left in the past.
Yeah, that makes sense. Order a whole bunch of locos for Great Western diversions, sleepers and off-wire-extensions (with EC and the Scotrail sleepers using class 67s, only GW really needs new locos, but if anyone else needs new locos order them some too while you're at it). My opinion is the Swansea services should be push-pull formations (Intercity 225s most likely), with the electric locomotive exchanged for a diesel loco at Swansea for the off-wire extensions. That means these diesel locos will need TDM, so you could perhaps order a few more for other operators to use with mark3 sets released from IC125s when the wires go up. Perhaps East Anglia could use a loco-swap on their trains that extend beyond Norwich.

In the same vein, I think ordering all 172 pantograph cars to convert the entire class 22x fleet to bi-mode makes more sense than just doing parts of it.

Come 2030, work can start on a new build of hauled coaches to replace any remaining mark3s, including those in Intercity 125s, but I wouldn't stop there, the later vehicles of the same order would replace the sleeper stock and finally the mark4 fleet.
 
Status
Not open for further replies.

Top