PEP replacement - Merseyrail/GN

[D365]

As many of you may be aware of, the late 1970s 'PEP' trains of Classes 313, 314, 315, 507 and 508 are over 30 years old, and will soon be coming to the end of their effective working lives. Merseyrail have recently begun planning to replace their 507 and 508 fleet, but I was thinking that since the 313s are effectively the same (aside from current pickup), that a combined order to replace the Merseyrail and Great Northern inner suburban units would make the process a whole lot more efficient.

Furthermore, the timing of the announcement is great for Bombardier in Derby, due to the lack of contracts after 2014, when the S Stock and 377/6 orders will have been completed. My reasoning for signing them is that, alongside the obvious shortage in work, is that the Classes 376 and 378 are the only inner suburban configuration units to have been introduced to Britain recently. I have heard on the forums that 378s have been run to Moorgate, but I'm not sure if this is true.

In short, the points that I will make in the email are listed below. Please let me know about your thoughts, criticisms, suggestions and such. I will post the email transcript when I send it, along with any replies.

• Introduction: greeting, "Please forward this to the relevant department or persons" and making my initial point
• Benefits of a combined order: efficiency, cost-saving. Should I suggest the Class 378? If so, work for Litchurch Lane. A proven design, service around London. Mostly 2+2 seating, some inward-facing?

• Conclusion

 

[paul1609]

As many of you may be aware of, the late 1970s 'PEP' trains of Classes 313, 314, 315, 507 and 508 are over 30 years old, and will soon be coming to the end of their effective working lives. Merseyrail have recently begun planning to replace their 507 and 508 fleet, but I was thinking that since the 313s are effectively the same (aside from current pickup), that a combined order to replace the Merseyrail and Great Northern inner suburban units would make the process a whole lot more efficient.

Furthermore, the timing of the announcement is great for Bombardier in Derby, due to the lack of contracts after 2014, when the S Stock and 377/6 orders will have been completed. My reasoning for signing them is that, alongside the obvious shortage in work, is that the Classes 376 and 378 are the only inner suburban configuration units to have been introduced to Britain recently. I have heard on the forums that 378s have been run to Moorgate, but I'm not sure if this is true.

In short, the points that I will make in the email are listed below. Please let me know about your thoughts, criticisms, suggestions and such. I will post the email transcript when I send it, along with any replies.

• Introduction: greeting, "Please forward this to the relevant department or persons" and making my initial point
• Benefits of a combined order for Bombardier [Class 378]: efficiency, cost-saving, work for Litchurch Lane. Proven design, service in Kent (Class 376) and London
• Conclusion

I reckon its the beginning of negotiations for a cheaper lease deal!
After all these trains have only just be introduced on the South Coast "Inter city" services

 

[317666]

If you want Litchurch Lane to build it, you watch how it will be delivered late and be falling apart within a year...

On a more constructive note, hasn't the Electrostar come out of production? If so then a new design will be needed, which isn't proven.

 

[mallard]

If all Bombardier can do is keep trotting out new variants of their 15+ year-old "star" designs, then I don't hold out much hope for Derby.

Even BR refreshed their designs more often then that! Still a NR-spec version of the "S" stock might be an interesting thing.

Although, I think the "PEP"s still have some life left in them, some of the SR slam-door EMUs managed well over 40 years in service.

 

[anthony263]

The class 315's must have some life in them if they are being considered as possible stock to use on the electrified Cardiff Valley Lines network.

Personally I would prefer some new units especially if say a joint order could be done with Merseyrail

 

[D365]

I forgot to mention that the 313s could be re-used on the Cardiff Valleys, but I'm not sure if 44 x 3 cars would be enough. A number of 315s will definitely be available from 2019, when Crossrail takes over Shenfield Metro. Further orders could eventually take over newly electrified suburbans, along with further 379s to cascade and eventually replace 317s in West Anglia.

I haven't heard of or experienced any issues with recent-build Electro/Turbostar trains. "If it ain't broke, don't fix it."

 

[anthony263]

I was told by someone that it was being talked about that the class 313 presently being operated by Southern could also make their way to wales.

If Bombardier are desperate for work fro Derby maybe we could get some new units at a cheaper price. Then leave the class 315's etc for someone else, maybe electrify the Severn Beach branch and stick them on that I am sure certain members based close to Bristol would be very pleased

 

[HSTEd]

The Class 315s might be a little low powered for hte current Cardiff Valley lines timings, but if you take the trains and scrap that TSO that has no traction related equipment in it (like with the Class 308s for the Leeds suburban electrification) you improve the power to weight ratio to be comparable to a Class 150 type multiple unit.

As to how many Class 315s are available, will the residual Liverpool Street inner suburban trains be operated by them or by additional Class 345 sets ordered for the purpose to give all inner suburban operations on the Crossrail corridor uniform characteristics?

And the valley lines don't need that many sets, since the Valley Lines TOC (I know it didn't operate all of them but the majority of the services are on the lines it did serveright?) only had 35 sets (29 of them Pacers), and 3 20m cars (shortened Class 315s) would be a similar length and probably greater capacity than a double Pacer.

That also converts them into what amount to Class 314s, and since ScotRail will likely want to be shot of them at some point soon, that increases the available fleet by 16 sets to 77 sets.

The class 313s that are not used on the Hertford Loop will be rendered surplus anyway by the Thameslink programme and would be available as well, and I assume that the examples of the 313 currently used on the Coastway lines by Southern would be relieved by the Class 377 complement displaced from FCC by the same programme. (Will there be any Southern units rendered surplus by the programme thanks to more routes being routed into the core?)

 

[D365]

I was thinking that could happen, once enough 377s are available. Where would a deep clean and refurbishment of any PEP units being re-used be done, if at all? I was thinking Litchurch Lane but can rolling stock refurbishments be done there?

However, I have just realised that replacing the GN units would leave 313121, which is being used for ERTMS, stranded. I don't know whether that is a good idea. Speaking of which, although off-topic, can the section of the Hertford Loop that has been being bi-directionally signalled for this testing (with the other for regular service) still be used in passenger service, i.e. during ECML diversions?

 

[317666]

"If it ain't broke, don't fix it."

And that is exactly why, if you ask me, the PEPs shouldn't be replaced in the first place

 

[Aictos]

I was thinking that could happen, once enough 377s are available. Where would a deep clean and refurbishment of any PEP units being re-used be done, if at all? I was thinking Litchurch Lane but can rolling stock refurbishments be done there?

However, I have just realised that replacing the GN units would leave 313121, which is being used for ERTMS, stranded. I don't know whether that is a good idea. Speaking of which, although off-topic, can the section of the Hertford Loop that has been being bi-directionally signalled for this testing (with the other for regular service) still be used in passenger service, i.e. during ECML diversions?

To answer your question, Yes the section of the Hertford Loop will still be in use by regular passenger services in the peak as it will only be used for testing trains in the off peak.

 

[LNW-GW Joint]

And that is exactly why, if you ask me, the PEPs shouldn't be replaced in the first place

The GN 313s will have to be off this route by the time ETCS is rolled out on ECML South (2018).
I can't see any of the PEP varieties being upgraded for cab signalling.

 

[sprinterguy]

I was thinking that could happen, once enough 377s are available. Where would a deep clean and refurbishment of any PEP units being re-used be done, if at all? I was thinking Litchurch Lane but can rolling stock refurbishments be done there?

Wabtec Doncaster and Wolverton are the usual destinations for refurbishment work. The Southern 313s were refurbished at Doncaster.

 

[ainsworth74]

Furthermore, the timing of the announcement is great for Bombardier in Derby, due to the lack of contracts after 2014, when the S Stock and 377/6 orders will have been completed.

• Benefits of a combined order for Bombardier

Big problem with all of that? Giving an order to Bombardier to build trains at Derby would be illegal. If you want to procure a new fleet of trains (so not an obvious follow on order such as the LM 350s) then it has to go out to competitive tender EU wide meaning that Siemens and their ilk have to have the opportunity to bid on the contract. Also don't forget that Bombardier are done with the 377 type design, the Southern one's were an anomaly and not something that they really wanted to do (in part shown by the fact they're 379s with a 377 bolted on top). The future from Bombardier is the Aventra.

Also why do you assume Bombardier won't win the Crossrail order? Further why do you assume Bombardier will build the trains in Derby at all?

I was thinking Litchurch Lane but can rolling stock refurbishments be done there?

Bombardier have never really shown much interest in trying capture a slice of the refurbishment market. It's something that makes me wonder about their dedication to the plant at Derby.

 

[fgwrich]

I was thinking that could happen, once enough 377s are available. Where would a deep clean and refurbishment of any PEP units being re-used be done, if at all? I was thinking Litchurch Lane but can rolling stock refurbishments be done there?

However, I have just realised that replacing the GN units would leave 313121, which is being used for ERTMS, stranded. I don't know whether that is a good idea. Speaking of which, although off-topic, can the section of the Hertford Loop that has been being bi-directionally signalled for this testing (with the other for regular service) still be used in passenger service, i.e. during ECML diversions?

Wabtec Doncaster and Wolverton are the usual destinations for refurbishment work. The Southern 313s were refurbished at Doncaster.

They are now - For some reason, and showing complete and utter comitment to this country, Bombardier shut down the refurbishment side of Litchurch Lane and Chart Leacon. Which is rather odd, considering how many potential refurbishments are likely to occur in the future. Afterall, it's not as if they were doing poorly considering almost all of First Great Westerns Mk3s were refurbished there, along with 'ONE's Class 315s.

Also, Brush Loughborough and Wabtec's (Same owner as Doncaster and Loughborough) Killmarnock plants are also now regularly used for fleet refurbishment work.

 

[D365]

I wonder how it worked with BREL and rolling stock procurement, or were the regulations different then? The only other source then was Metro-Cammell, Washwood Heath. I have noticed that Bombardier don't seem to be that dedicated to the UK (for want of better wording), so I perhaps should make the email a little less pro-Bombardier.

But anyway, by combining the [potential] two orders, the whole process will be more efficient, regardless of the manufacturer. Furthermore, the new fleet would have time to be "run in" on the ECML before ETCS is activated.

 

[ainsworth74]

They are now - For some reason, and showing complete and utter comitment to this country, Bombardier shut down the refurbishment side of Litchurch Lane and Chart Leacon. Which is rather odd, considering how many potential refurbishments are likely to occur in the future.

This is exactly why I'm wondering about their commitment to the UK (at least in terms of having a manufacturing plant here). Plenty of work for refurbishment will be available over the next ten years or so and yet they've removed themselves from the market? Why do that?

I wonder how it worked with BREL and rolling stock procurement, or were the regulations different then?

I imagine it was indeed different back then, I'm not actually sure when the current rules regarding procurement arrived but I'd assume it was sometime in the 90s. Either way the rules of today are that contracts have to go to competitive tender.

 

[Skimble19]

What would be to happen, for instance, if DOR kept East Coast, then purchased a stake in Bombardier (Think BREL).. Highly unlikely I know, but would they be allowed to build their own stock through that company if they part owned it, without going out to tender?

 

[anthony263]

The Class 315s might be a little low powered for hte current Cardiff Valley lines timings, but if you take the trains and scrap that TSO that has no traction related equipment in it (like with the Class 308s for the Leeds suburban electrification) you improve the power to weight ratio to be comparable to a Class 150 type multiple unit.

As to how many Class 315s are available, will the residual Liverpool Street inner suburban trains be operated by them or by additional Class 345 sets ordered for the purpose to give all inner suburban operations on the Crossrail corridor uniform characteristics?

And the valley lines don't need that many sets, since the Valley Lines TOC (I know it didn't operate all of them but the majority of the services are on the lines it did serveright?) only had 35 sets (29 of them Pacers), and 3 20m cars (shortened Class 315s) would be a similar length and probably greater capacity than a double Pacer.

That also converts them into what amount to Class 314s, and since ScotRail will likely want to be shot of them at some point soon, that increases the available fleet by 16 sets to 77 sets.

The class 313s that are not used on the Hertford Loop will be rendered surplus anyway by the Thameslink programme and would be available as well, and I assume that the examples of the 313 currently used on the Coastway lines by Southern would be relieved by the Class 377 complement displaced from FCC by the same programme. (Will there be any Southern units rendered surplus by the programme thanks to more routes being routed into the core?)

The class 315's could be fitted with new equipment to give them faster acceleration but it might be a good idea to reduce them to 3 carriage sets with some running in pairs during the peaks on certains routes such as the Treherbert & Rhymney which have had platform extensions to accomodate 6 carriage trains.

The question does need to be asked though can the class 315's be reduced to 3 carriage units? especially since something similar was asked about the class 319's and the answer to that was no.

 

[HSTEd]

The question does need to be asked though can the class 315's be reduced to 3 carriage units? especially since something similar was asked about the class 319's and the answer to that was no.

As I understand it Class 319s have traction equipment distributed across all four carriages, whereas I believe that Class 315s only have traction equipment distributed across four carriages, presumably to keep maximum compatibility with the Class 314s which are three carriages and apparently have identical traction equipment.

There aer enough 314s/315s available to replace all the 75mph services under wire on the Valley lines and to do a tonne of extra stuff in the Manchester suburban area, (eliminate some Pacer under wire services or similar).

I suppose a retention toilet module is out of the question? Even with the income derived from scrapping the fourth carriage to partially pay for it?

 

[tbtc]

Bombardier have never really shown much interest in trying capture a slice of the refurbishment market. It's something that makes me wonder about their dedication to the plant at Derby.

Bombardier didn't even shown much interest in trying to "complain" about the loss of the Thameslink bid - they accepted that they were beaten on quality *and* price. They seem to have given up on UK manufacturing in the long term.

The OP seems to have decided on his answer (give Bombardier a nice big order of new EMUs) and worked backwards to try to justify it. Really, with lots of new electrification on its way there's less chance of these old EMUs getting withdrawn, they'll be needed to cover the newly electrified routes (or to cover for other units cascaded to do so).

A more pressing order would be new "basic" DMUs for the lines that aren't getting electrified, sorry.

 

[D365]

I have edited the initial post to make it less Bombardier-centric, but it would be sad if England were to be left without any rolling stock manufacturing...

 

[fgwrich]

I have edited the initial post to make it less Bombardier-centric, but it would be sad if England were to be left without any rolling stock manufacturing...[/QUOTE]

The irony of the state of affairs being that we'll still be manufacturing the parts for the rolling stock - through the various Siemens and Alstom plants throught the UK, just not actually assembling the trains - and i mean assembling like Siemens, not the Airfix set up of Derby.

 

[HSTEd]

Unfortunately the only company that produces trains with Sprinter type couplings and multiple working equipment is Bombardier.

This effectively gives them a monopoly.
Simply selling off BREL's intellectual property to a single manufacturer may turn out to be a major mistake in the long term.

 

[D365]

If only the Alstom Junipers/Coradias hadn't had such a troubled introduction, then Washwood Heath might still be open. One of my dreams might be to run a [nearly] all-in-one UK rolling stock factory.

 

[tbtc]

Unfortunately the only company that produces trains with Sprinter type couplings and multiple working equipment is Bombardier.

This effectively gives them a monopoly.
Simply selling off BREL's intellectual property to a single manufacturer may turn out to be a major mistake in the long term.

Is there anything stopping you making a train that is Sprinter compatible?

For example, Apple have patented their technology but I can make a set of speakers that an iPod can plug into and play through (plenty of firms make "compatible" products, like Tamron making lenses that happen to work on Cannon/ Nikon etc cameras).

Oh for a universal coupler!

 

[Chris125]

Do they all need to be replaced? If some have bodies and bogies with enough life in them then the same life-extension work currently proposed for a 317 would suffice - strip them out, give them a new traction package and interior, and bobs your uncle.

Chris

 

[D365]

There's going to be a life extension for the 317s? Sounds like a good idea though, life-extending 313s and 315s for Cardiff Valley etc. New stock for Merseyrail and GN Inner Suburban should still be ordered. 90mph stock on the latter, along with signalling upgrades on the ECML and the Hertford Loop would allow for more paths, I assume.
--- old post above --- --- new post below ---
Maybe the different coupling [and software] configurations are so add-on batches have to be ordered from the same manufacturer. Saying that, I have heard that the merged Alstom 458/460 fleet will have the same cab design as the Siemens 444/450 units.

 

[swt_passenger]

...and I assume that the examples of the 313 currently used on the Coastway lines by Southern would be relieved by the Class 377 complement displaced from FCC by the same programme. (Will there be any Southern units rendered surplus by the programme thanks to more routes being routed into the core?)

Yes. There ought to be plenty of 377s available for internal reallocation within Southern, because a fairly significant number of routes transfer to Thameslink.

I don't see any 377s leaving the franchise area though, and if there's enough stock they may as well lose the 442s as well as the Coastway 313s.

The problem in trying to calculate what is needed is that in parallel to route transfers to Thameslink you also have existing proposals for strengthening to 10 or 12 cars all over the place, or to 8 car in the case of the WLL services.

(I've intentionally not mentioned the forthcoming franchise merger, but it mnakes no difference because the fleet will still divide into 'stock for the core route's and 'stock for the rest' along similar lines to today...)

--- old post above --- --- new post below ---

Unfortunately the only company that produces trains with Sprinter type couplings and multiple working equipment is Bombardier.

What you refer to as 'Sprinter type' couplings are a German design (BSI), not BREL, can't really see how they can be proprietary to Bombardier.

 

[ainsworth74]

Is there anything stopping you making a train that is Sprinter compatible?

I was thinking that. What's to stop me building a train that doesn't have a BSI coupler but instead has an ainsworth74 coupler that just happens to be compatible with BSI couplers?