• Our booking engine at tickets.railforums.co.uk (powered by TrainSplit) helps support the running of the forum with every ticket purchase! Find out more and ask any questions/give us feedback in this thread!

Potential up to 2,000 job losses at Alstom Derby

Snow1964

Established Member
Joined
7 Oct 2019
Messages
6,244
Location
West Wiltshire
I wouldn't be surprised if govt do green light Aventras for SE in some respects.

Politically it saves the Derby plant. In Kent they can say they've secured new trains. In an election year that could be a factor in the decision.
There is also a potential Chiltern order,
And of course GWR and Northern have lots of 33+ year old diesel units without any replacements currently ordered.

Then there are class 159, 165, 166 fleet, which are 31-33 years old.

There may be a political fudge, something like mid life refurbishment of 170s or 379s, perhaps even an overhaul and conversion to battery EMUs of some of existing stock, to keep factory ticking over.
 
Sponsor Post - registered members do not see these adverts; click here to register, or click here to log in
R

RailUK Forums

43096

On Moderation
Joined
23 Nov 2015
Messages
15,308
I wouldn't be surprised if govt do green light Aventras for SE in some respects.

Politically it saves the Derby plant. In Kent they can say they've secured new trains. In an election year that could be a factor in the decision.
It would have to go to competitive tender with no guarantee that Alstom would win. Furthermore, any order now doesn’t help the immediate issue as a new build wouldn’t start for a further two years or more, given the need to agree funding, tender the requirement, agree contracts and only then procure materials.
 

Russel

Member
Joined
30 Jun 2022
Messages
1,169
Location
Lichfield
I wouldn't be surprised if govt do green light Aventras for SE in some respects.

Politically it saves the Derby plant. In Kent they can say they've secured new trains. In an election year that could be a factor in the decision.

It's a short term fix though, Alstom need to look at the plants long term future and consider what work they can move there, if they are serious about keeping it open.

If an order for SE is just going to keep the site going for another couple of years, just to end up back in this position when the SE order is complete then we're just kicking the can into the long grass.
 

3RDGEN

Member
Joined
6 Mar 2023
Messages
256
Location
Hull
What will Widnes do once the 390 refurbishment work is finished?
458 reforming and refurb is ongoing alongside 390 refurb and then there's the XC 22x refurb job which is Alstom's to lose.

If there's still design work happening in Derby where is the product?
Roger Ford did a piece on Derby in the November Modern Railways; he reported that there is a 500 strong design team working on overseas contracts and that Derby is now the centre for Alstom's Monorail contracts. So there is some work for design and small build contracts which could keep a reduced site ticking over until HS2 work commences.


You can't just give a company a significant contract without a tender process, unless it's a follow on build already included as an option, as the other manufactures will go legal and then also play the job losses card when they are short of work. Alstom need to actually win some work for once and even then it's a couple of years before production hits Derby shopfloor so in the meantime the site will have to be cut back/mothballed.

One possible Derby option is reworking spare 701 & 720's to Southeastern spec, you could give that to Alstom without to many complaints from the other manufacturer's.
 

Energy

Established Member
Joined
29 Dec 2018
Messages
4,481
They have chosen to specialise Derby on a problematic EMU platform that will receive no export orders. The mono rail units are a niche product.
Derby's got the issue with export orders that it isn't near a seaport or HS1 so European gauge trains would have to go by road for significant distances, the economics just don't make sense. Monorails as a sensible choice as they have to go by road regardless.
 

Taunton

Established Member
Joined
1 Aug 2013
Messages
10,093
Derby's got the issue with export orders that it isn't near a seaport or HS1 so European gauge trains would have to go by road for significant distances, the economics just don't make sense.
That never stopped Metro-Cammell building the huge vehicles for the Hong Kong Metro back in the 1970s-80s-90s. Used to regularly pass one on the motorway heading for Felixstowe.
 

ScotGG

Established Member
Joined
3 Apr 2013
Messages
1,375
The Southeastern tender has been out for 13 months. Very likely Alsthom would have submitted given the 701 order was going to end in 2024.

That could then fill the books until HS2 orders begin.

Snow1964 - there are many older diesel trains needing replacement. The mention of Networkers was in response to a comment stating no new EMUs were likely/planned.
The SE tender for third rail stock suggests otherwise.

Reworking any excess 720s and 701s would leave SE with five microfleets for suburban work alone, and wouldn't replace all Networkers.
 

Chester1

Established Member
Joined
25 Aug 2014
Messages
4,011
Southeastern put out a tender about 13 months ago.

They have about 150 Networkers which entered service about 31-32 years ago and were being built 35 years ago. Many are now in *very* tired condition.

It would have made sense to keep production going to replace Networkers as they get between 35-40 years since built. Same third rail stock as the 701s.

There is a need for new EMUs. The 701 mess though makes in unlikely coupled with a reluctance by government to invest.

I wouldn't be surprised if govt do green light Aventras for SE in some respects.

Politically it saves the Derby plant. In Kent they can say they've secured new trains. In an election year that could be a factor in the decision.

The South East order sounds like the best bet. 150 units over maybe 3-4 years + mono rail work would still mean majority of production staff losing their jobs.

There is also a potential Chiltern order,
And of course GWR and Northern have lots of 33+ year old diesel units without any replacements currently ordered.

Then there are class 159, 165, 166 fleet, which are 31-33 years old.

There may be a political fudge, something like mid life refurbishment of 170s or 379s, perhaps even an overhaul and conversion to battery EMUs of some of existing stock, to keep factory ticking over.

Based on what well informed members have said I don't think Alstom bid for the LNER order so I am not sure they will go for the northern tender. I would hope 450 units is sufficient to design a bi mode.

It's a short term fix though, Alstom need to look at the plants long term future and consider what work they can move there, if they are serious about keeping it open.

If an order for SE is just going to keep the site going for another couple of years, just to end up back in this position when the SE order is complete then we're just kicking the can into the long grass.

The plan was it would be the home of the Aventra platform and its been a failure. The new plan appears to be monorail but its a niche product.

Derby's got the issue with export orders that it isn't near a seaport or HS1 so European gauge trains would have to go by road for significant distances, the economics just don't make sense. Monorails as a sensible choice as they have to go by road regardless.

This is starting to become a major factor in the car industry. Train manufacturers won't be making their own batteries or moving large quanities though. Widnes is on the Mersey estuary....
 

Mikey C

Established Member
Joined
11 Feb 2013
Messages
6,854
If it wasn't for the job loss/closure threat, who would give anyone a follow up order for the 701s for Southeastern to replace the Networkers, when the 701s have been such a disaster, and are years late for one reason or another?
 

Thirteen

Member
Joined
3 Oct 2021
Messages
1,119
Location
London
Given the 701s are still not in service, I would not blame Southeastern for going for anyone but Alstom.
 

fgwrich

Established Member
Joined
15 Apr 2009
Messages
9,294
Location
Between Edinburgh and Exeter
If it wasn't for the job loss/closure threat, who would give anyone a follow up order for the 701s for Southeastern to replace the Networkers, when the 701s have been such a disaster, and are years late for one reason or another?
You’d also end up with the same problem as at SWR - new-ish fleet of 30 Desiro City’s alongside whatever is ordered as a Networker replacement.
 

Snow1964

Established Member
Joined
7 Oct 2019
Messages
6,244
Location
West Wiltshire
You’d also end up with the same problem as at SWR - new-ish fleet of 30 Desiro City’s alongside whatever is ordered as a Networker replacement.
Luckily first couple were tested on 25Kv ac too.

In a rational world would move them to some relatively self contained metro area, where being non-standard can be lived with, and not going to stray. Something like Leeds locals, or if the local lines around Bristol were electrified, suburban routes there, even south Wales if few gaps filled in.

What will Widnes do once the 390 refurbishment work is finished?
They have also got the 458 refurbishment.

Some of the early electrostars, class 357, 375 etc have now reached mid life, so must be close to being due a mid life overhaul. Many class 170 turbo stars are also needing similar
 
Last edited:

ScotGG

Established Member
Joined
3 Apr 2013
Messages
1,375
Given the 701s are still not in service, I would not blame Southeastern for going for anyone but Alstom.
I doubt SE would due to the 701 shambles if politics didn't come into it. They are of course wholly owned by the DfT under the OLR. Election year. Many jobs at stake.

Then again the 345, 710, 720 and finally the 730 are now in service. Apart from SWR (unique circumstances with driving cabs?) the other sister fleets eventually got there albeit not without some big issues.

You’d also end up with the same problem as at SWR - new-ish fleet of 30 Desiro City’s alongside whatever is ordered as a Networker replacement.
The 707s are a stop gap in all likelihood. Can see them going to Southern in time.

707s possibly won't stay with a comprehensive Networker replacement. Too many microfleets.

It's already getting silly. Right now alone SE have on suburban routes:

707s
376s
BREL 465s
Metro Cammel 465s

Different 465 sub classes have different traction equipment and are different internally too in some respects.

A Networker replacement at scale will slightly help with reducing that.

It'd just be the 376 and 465 replacements. Could even bin off the 376s.
 
Last edited:

Snow1964

Established Member
Joined
7 Oct 2019
Messages
6,244
Location
West Wiltshire
Seems the Railway Industry Association has made submissions ahead of next weeks (22 Nov) Government Autumn Statement.

If nothing comes of orders going forward, in that statement, then I would think Derbys future is looking even more grim.

“The UK rail sector faces unprecedented uncertainty, which left unchecked, will harm the businesses and skilled workforce that the UK relies on to deliver a cost-efficient railway that meets its customers’ needs and supports the wider economy.”

That is the message from Darren Caplan, the Chief Executive of the Railway Industry Association (RIA), in the submission to HM Treasury, as part of the 2023 Autumn Statement representations, from the trade association for UK-based suppliers to the UK and world-wide railways.

RIA, which has more than 350 companies in membership covering all aspects of rolling stock and infrastructure supply and a wide range of products and services, has said that many businesses are reporting downsizing and difficulties in securing investment.

Darren added: “We strongly support the Chancellor’s ambition to make this year’s Autumn Statement about increasing business investment in the UK economy as a share of GDP. Right now, there is a real risk that the exact opposite will happen in the rail sector, as companies look overseas for more definite plans.

“The government can still take actions as part of the Autumn Statement to address this, and we urge it to to send a clear and positive signal to investors and the supply chain more generally. Continued uncertainty will only increase the future costs of UK infrastructure, if capability is eroded and investors seek a risk premium that reflects the challenges they face.”

It in submission, RIA is calling on government to:

i. Safeguard the HS2 phase 2 route for future generations, pass the relevant Bill in the King’s speech next month and engage with industry to find a way forward;

ii. Publish a pipeline of rail enhancements with clear and specific funding and timescales for investments;

iii. Make decisions on rolling stock now– there are easy and no regrets decisions which will help avoid major job losses;

iv. Get on with rail reform, passing the relevant legislation swiftly or setting out a clear timeline to introduce a single ‘guiding mind’ and interim steps;

v. Make long-term funding commitments to Transport for London and other devolved transport authorities;

vi. Work with industry to develop a clear policy on how private investment can be used more extensively; and

vii. Demonstrate there is a clear plan for rail, that can endure political cycles, setting out a long-term strategy for the sector, including a rolling stock and decarbonisation strategy, a rolling programme of electrification, and a plan to grow rail revenues. This should be part of a long-term transport plan.

 

Nicholas Lewis

Established Member
Joined
9 Aug 2019
Messages
6,133
Location
Surrey
One possible Derby option is reworking spare 701 & 720's to Southeastern spec, you could give that to Alstom without to many complaints from the other manufacturer's.
Not forgetting 30 x 379's that could be easily converted to DC by Alstom as well
 

Snow1964

Established Member
Joined
7 Oct 2019
Messages
6,244
Location
West Wiltshire
Why ever were they ordered in the first place?
At the time was severe overcrowding and growth into Waterloo, and they could be delivered relatively quickly. It also fitted in with expanding most suburban services from 8car to 10car because frequency was maxed out at 24-28 tph on some parts
 

Mikey C

Established Member
Joined
11 Feb 2013
Messages
6,854
The 707s would fit in fine at Govia Thameslink Railway, seeing that they also operate the Thameslink 700s and GN 717s.
 

Bornin1980s

Member
Joined
4 Apr 2017
Messages
495
At the time was severe overcrowding and growth into Waterloo, and they could be delivered relatively quickly. It also fitted in with expanding most suburban services from 8car to 10car because frequency was maxed out at 24-28 tph on some parts
If their purpose was to work in pairs, forming 10 car trains, why don't they have end gangways?
 

BayPaul

Established Member
Joined
11 Jul 2019
Messages
1,226
The only order I could imagine making sense would be to extend the class 345s to 11(?) Carriages. Since the lizzy line seems to be even more popular than predicted, it is surely going to be needed eventually, and so might make sense to do early rather than suffer 9 carriages for the life of the fleet if Derby closes.
 

Peter Sarf

Established Member
Joined
12 Oct 2010
Messages
5,706
Location
Croydon
If their purpose was to work in pairs, forming 10 car trains, why don't they have end gangways?
For the same reason on SWT that the 455s had their unit end gangway connections disabled and the 2-car 456s did not even ever have unit end gangway connections. Also on South Eastern the 465s & 466s don't have unit end gangway connections. The GN 717s don't have unit end gangway connections. The 700s of course don't either so thats none of the 700 series siemens units with unit end gangway connections. A bit limiting but hey ho.
Presumably it wouldn't be too hard to retrofit pantographs?
Furthermore I think 707001 & 707002 even conducted tests on the OHLE before acceptance.

Of course the 707s are not even a Derby product.
The only order I could imagine making sense would be to extend the class 345s to 11(?) Carriages. Since the lizzy line seems to be even more popular than predicted, it is surely going to be needed eventually, and so might make sense to do early rather than suffer 9 carriages for the life of the fleet if Derby closes.
I do not think the 345s will be lengthened. I think the 345s are formed of vehicles longer than the usual so 9-cars is probably equivalent to 12-cars of old style units. I suppose it depends on the length of platforms - I think the 345s are filling the full length of platforms on the core.

EDIT 21/11/2023 :-
Apparently the core can take 11-car 345s, the rest of the routes 9 or only 7-cars of a 345 so up to 4-cars off the rear (37%)
endEDIT.

More likely is the order of more 345s to help cover the extra demand from the TEMPORARY HS2 terminus at Old Oak Common to/from central London. How many I don't know but presumably enough to increase the frequency to the limit on the core so turning round beyond the core. So Abbey Wood to Heathrow unless there are other turning points either side of Old Oak Comment-Central London ?.
 
Last edited:

Trainbike46

Established Member
Joined
18 Sep 2021
Messages
2,309
Location
belfast
For the same reason on SWT that the 455s had their unit end gangway connections disabled and the 2-car 456s did not even ever have unit end gangway connections. Also on South Eastern the 465s & 466s don't have unit end gangway connections. The GN 717s don't have unit end gangway connections. The 700s of course don't either so thats none of the 700 series siemens units with unit end gangway connections. A bit limiting but hey ho.

Furthermore I think 707001 & 707002 even conducted tests on the OHLE before acceptance.

Of course the 707s are not even a Derby product.

I do not think the 345s will be lengthened. I think the 345s are formed of vehicles longer than the usual so 9-cars is probably equivalent to 12-cars of old style units. I suppose it depends on the length of platforms - I think the 345s are filling the full length of platforms on the core.

More likely is the order of more 345s to help cover the extra demand from the TEMPORARY HS2 terminus at Old Oak Common to/from central London. How many I don't know but presumably enough to increase the frequency to the limit on the core so turning round beyond the core. So Abbey Wood to Heathrow unless there are other turning points either side of Old Oak Comment-Central London ?.
Old Oak Common itself will be a point to turn around services
 

Peter Sarf

Established Member
Joined
12 Oct 2010
Messages
5,706
Location
Croydon
Old Oak Common itself will be a point to turn around services
True, will Old Oak Common have extra platforms for terminating Elizabeth line trains ?.

Thinking about it the hope is there would be enough extra demand for services to Heathrow (soaking up those pesky connecting flight passengers).
 

Peter Sarf

Established Member
Joined
12 Oct 2010
Messages
5,706
Location
Croydon
But you wouldn't need extra trains for OOC until the HS2 opening date of 2030.
Yes. They would need to be ordered early - very very early.

Lets face it UK forward planning means we are going to see a micro fleet added (akin to c2c 357s + 720/6s). Or a load of spare units for the next class 230-esque project !.

I feel a new thread coming on - "Future uses for 345s" !.
 

Top