TPE Mark 5A coaching stock progress (includes images)

Discussion in 'Traction & Rolling Stock' started by sprinterguy, 11 Mar 2017.

  1. Bletchleyite

    Bletchleyite Veteran Member

    Messages:
    42,443
    Joined:
    20 Oct 2014
    Location:
    Up and down the south WCML (mostly)
    I'm not sure, but I think it's a fault with business as a whole, aka "the race to the bottom". When you buy a car, do you look for the cheapest model, or do you spec it up a bit and choose a manufacturer you trust?

    Interestingly TPE didn't do that last time - the 185s are not a cheap design at all - 170s would have been the cheap option.
     
  2. CosherB

    CosherB On Moderation

    Messages:
    1,846
    Joined:
    5 Jun 2012
    Location:
    Cheshire
    They may well keep more 185 than originally planned, but not to replace any CAF stock. I'm afraid the CAF orders are here to stay!

    I don't envisage Mk4s at TPE - having a Mk4 DVT rather than a Mk5 DTS is one complication, added expense of getting the 68s to 'talk' to the DVT, route clearance for Mk4s ...........
     
  3. Ben Bow

    Ben Bow Member

    Messages:
    228
    Joined:
    20 Sep 2018
    Yes. And we are already past that point.
     
  4. hooverboy

    hooverboy Member

    Messages:
    817
    Joined:
    12 Oct 2017
    CAF units in spain seem fairly decent,so I don't necessarily think the company is that bad.
    it might be down to our rail network/loading gauge being a bit more brutal on the moving parts than continental tracks, it might be down to environmental conditions. lots of if's and but's.

    The 19x coupling bar seems case in point too. I would put that down to inexperience of our loading gauge,will get fixed.
    bogies and wheel flats etc....then I would guess that testing in spain in winter in 20C with a bit of rain is not sufficient for our needs.....even velim may not stress the units hard enough.
    we need proof of full operation from -20 to + 40C, with a bit of leaf mulch thrown into the mix to simulate our autumn.

    the ROSCO and TOC will be responsible for the dodgy fitting-out inside, but the shell and the running gear should be the same standard whoever decides to run or lease them out.

    for CAF, I would say a (rather expensive) learning curve, but they will improve.
     
  5. EE Andy b1

    EE Andy b1 Established Member

    Messages:
    1,031
    Joined:
    12 Dec 2013
    Location:
    CLC
    We all should know by now why TPE went down the MK5a route and 3 rolling stock types, the timescale of build and into service but that's not quite happening although the MK5a sets could still be in passenger service first.
     
  6. Bletchleyite

    Bletchleyite Veteran Member

    Messages:
    42,443
    Joined:
    20 Oct 2014
    Location:
    Up and down the south WCML (mostly)
    Oh, I know, but I'm thinking about what TPE management will be thinking now in reaction to the situation they find themselves in, rather than the hypothetical situation prior to the order being placed.
     
  7. hooverboy

    hooverboy Member

    Messages:
    817
    Joined:
    12 Oct 2017
    I thought you were referring to caledonian sleeper sets....they ARE in service..and have a few teething troubles to say the least.
    (wheel flats due to emergency braking already being the big one,but apparently there are also some faults with the plumbing in the cabins)
     
  8. EE Andy b1

    EE Andy b1 Established Member

    Messages:
    1,031
    Joined:
    12 Dec 2013
    Location:
    CLC
    I totally agree and as you said maybe the Hitachi route with extra Class 802s maybe the way to go if no upturn in fortune with the MK5as. Certainly would be the obvious choice now.
     
  9. EE Andy b1

    EE Andy b1 Established Member

    Messages:
    1,031
    Joined:
    12 Dec 2013
    Location:
    CLC
    No it was the MK5a sets, a different breed!!8-)
     
  10. hooverboy

    hooverboy Member

    Messages:
    817
    Joined:
    12 Oct 2017

    it depends on your needs and your budget.
    the bean counters in business always focus on initial outlay!

    it's not always the best deployment of capital.
    nice,new and shiny also looks good from a marketing perspective, but for a transportation company the primary focus MUST be reliability.
    capacity 2nd
    running costs 3rd
    comfort 4th
    presentation 5th

    you might pay a bit extra to start with, but you'll save on maintainance costs, and also save on bad PR for touting a service that doesn't do what it says on the tin.
    People are also quite tolerant of a not-too-suave taxi coming to pick them up as long as it gets them to where they want to go on time.......they would take it in preference to a chauffeur driven merc that's an hour late.
    Equally they would not particularly like to be dropped off to a business meeting/sales job in a skoda!, so there is a happy medium of car "ownership" that is deemed socially "normal".....somewhere between vauxhall and audi is the acceptable range for mainstream salesmen!

    in my neck of the woods we've got CL700's
    not keen on them at all comfort-wise.Horrid seats and very drab interiors,but they are in general very punctual.
    Much prefer the 377/378's, but the CL700 extra 4 cars per set is a godsend in rush hour.
     
    Last edited: 14 Jun 2019
  11. CosherB

    CosherB On Moderation

    Messages:
    1,846
    Joined:
    5 Jun 2012
    Location:
    Cheshire
    Sorry to keep banging on about contracts, but what penalties would be incurred by TPE if they tried to wriggle out of accepting CAF stock at the point where it's almost to be introduced into use? Is that a reasonable course of action to take at this late stage? And as for an alternative, how long would it take to procure an additional 25 sets of 802s from Hitachi? Do they have a production slot they could use? Would they even be interested in such an order (I'd assume yes!)? Are there facilities in place now to maintain the extra 802s further into the future, or would extra provisions be required?
     
  12. mikemcniven

    mikemcniven Member

    Messages:
    369
    Joined:
    13 Aug 2016
    Location:
    Manchester
  13. Ben Bow

    Ben Bow Member

    Messages:
    228
    Joined:
    20 Sep 2018
    TPE and the DfT had a public conversation, obviously a shot across the bows of CAF, about contractual termination rights which was reported by Roger Ford in his "Informed Sources" article in the February issue of 'Modern Railways' page 28 (I think forum rules forbid the posting of copies of documents).
    The problem is that TPE are in a difficult position, they desperately need the stock, and the alternative - more 802's - would take a long time to procure, so its probably the least worst option to press on, for now. But, having said that, the longer the delay goes on, the closer Newton Aycliffe gets to running out of work, and with the temporary option of retaining 185's available, then termination must become a more serious option.
     
  14. hooverboy

    hooverboy Member

    Messages:
    817
    Joined:
    12 Oct 2017
    I don't think they'd be ducking out of a contract per se,
    they would be stipulating that the ordered gear does not meet reliability/time in service requirements, and would seek deficient parts to be made good before introduction.

    not rocket science really....if you've had building work done on your house you'll usually get it checked by an inspector of QS before signing off the final deal.
    If you have any dodgy brickwork/plastering/wiring etc then you get the builder to put it right first before handing over the final cheque.
     
  15. Bletchleyite

    Bletchleyite Veteran Member

    Messages:
    42,443
    Joined:
    20 Oct 2014
    Location:
    Up and down the south WCML (mostly)
    And there does come a point, with building work, where it's done so badly/beyond schedule that a Court would see it as reasonable to withhold payment and get another builder in to fix it instead using the money withheld.
     
  16. hooverboy

    hooverboy Member

    Messages:
    817
    Joined:
    12 Oct 2017
    true....if the inspector comes the the conclusion that the work is potentially unsafe, that's immediate
    behind schedule...is more important for commercial operations than residential

    vis a vis rolling stock...yes,there would be an element of revenue generation involved.If the ToC in question cannot meet their mandate because stock is delayed/sub standard then there is cause for remittance of some description.

    I don't think it will be a toys-out-of-pram throwing session though, I would have thought more subtle options would be discussed..ie extra /alternative stock, reduced lease price etc, rather than pulling the plug straight away.
    unless it's SOOO bad that the PR takes such a pounding that it drives people off the railway altogether.
     
  17. superkev

    superkev Established Member

    Messages:
    1,610
    Joined:
    1 Mar 2015
    Location:
    west yorkshire
    Sorry meant 350/4
    K
     
  18. sjpowermac

    sjpowermac Member

    Messages:
    884
    Joined:
    26 May 2018
    68031 ‘Felix’ plus TP04 have run 2088 miles this week (give or take the odd chain!). That’s in addition to the 800 miles the previous week. Does anyone know if this was ‘test running’ or ‘fault free running’?

    Details below:
    68031 plus TP04

    Monday 10.06.2019
    11:00 MID-Crewe
    12:25 Crewe-Bletchley (VSTP)
    15:27 Bletchley-MID

    Tuesday 11.06.2019
    05:15 MID-Carlisle
    07:55 Carlisle-Bletchley
    15:27 Bletchley-MID

    Wednesday 12.06.2019
    05:15 MID-Carlisle
    07:55 Carlisle-Bletchley
    15:27 Bletchley-MID

    Thursday 13.06.2019
    05:15 MID-Carlisle
    07:55 Carlisle-Bletchley
    15:27 Bletchley-MID

    Friday 14.06.2019
    05:15 MID-Carlisle
    08:12 Carlisle-Crewe
    12:20 Crewe-MID
     
  19. sjpowermac

    sjpowermac Member

    Messages:
    884
    Joined:
    26 May 2018
    Yorkshire report
    68024 ‘Lord President’ York P SD
    68032 ‘Destroyer’ York Exam Road
    68024 ‘Centaur’ Scarborough

    There have been driver refresher/training trips each day between York and Scarborough, some days with locos working from each end of the line. Further paths are in for this weekend.

    Workings this week have been:
    Saturday 08.06.2019
    68024 0B60/61/62/63
    68028 0B65/66/67/68
    68032 0M68 10:17 York-Longsight

    Sunday 09.06.2019
    68024 0B62/63/64/65/66/67/68/69

    Monday 10.06.2019
    68024 0B60/61/62/63/64/65/66/67
    68028 0B81/82/83/84/85/86/87/88

    Tuesday 11.06.2019
    68024 0B60/61

    Wednesday 12.06.2019
    68024 0B60/61/62/63/64/65/66/67

    Thursday 13.06.2019
    68024 0B60/61/62/63/64/65/66/67
    68028 0B81/82/83/84/85/86/87/88

    Friday 14.06.2019
    68032 0P68 04:57 Longsight-York
    0B60/61/62/63/64/65/66/67
    68024 0B84
    68028 0B85

    Headcode details below.
    899CCDC5-D81B-48D8-9310-C0290378004D.jpeg 7FEE492A-D812-4E65-8941-54D8BC30063B.jpeg
     
    Last edited: 14 Jun 2019
  20. sjpowermac

    sjpowermac Member

    Messages:
    884
    Joined:
    26 May 2018
    Crewe
    Does anyone know the loco working off Crewe? I think it’s 68029 ‘Courageous’

    Workings between Crewe and Wavertree Junction this week have been:

    Crewe

    Monday 10.06.2019
    0F22/0K23 0F26/0K27

    Tuesday 11.06.2019
    0F22/0K23 0F26/0K27

    Wednesday 12.06.2019
    0F22/0K23 0F26/0K27

    Thursday 13.06.2019
    0F22/0K23 0F26/0K27

    Friday 14.06.2019
    0F26/0K27

    Headcodes below.
    99A979D8-DA75-4B36-9B28-B5CD3791A7B0.jpeg
     
  21. sjpowermac

    sjpowermac Member

    Messages:
    884
    Joined:
    26 May 2018
    I really hope all does turn out well with the Nova 3 contract, but if something were to go wrong I wonder where DRS would stand in this? As I understand it the locos are leased by DRS from Beacon Rail and then subleased by DRS to TPE.

    I think that the later Class 68 locos were built specifically for the TPE contract. Also, DRS own outright 68033/34 and have had them modified for TPE work.

    None of this is intended to contradict any earlier posts, just a genuine question. As far as I know, DRS have done exactly what they were supposed to and made Class 68s available to TPE. I’m sure they wouldn’t be overly happy at suddenly finding 16 rather expensive locos without diagrams. Presumably CAF would be liable for paying at least a portion of the leasing charges.

    Let’s hope the Nova 3 is soon in traffic and that the traveling public benefit rather than the lawyers;)
     
    Last edited: 14 Jun 2019
  22. InOban

    InOban Established Member

    Messages:
    2,228
    Joined:
    12 Mar 2017
    I thought that most recent contracts had the manufacturer responsible for maintenance for the life of the franchise, with a specified number of sets available each day. So buying cheap and paying later no longer applies.
     
  23. Ben Bow

    Ben Bow Member

    Messages:
    228
    Joined:
    20 Sep 2018
    Not with the mk.5a contract, CAF have no ongoing involvement once they've handed over the sets and been paid for them. Given the problems to date, it's got 180/Juniper written all over it...
     
  24. Erniescooper

    Erniescooper Member

    Messages:
    492
    Joined:
    27 Mar 2010
    Wrong, CAF have a technical support and spares supply agreement (TSSSA) with TPE till the end of their franchise and speaking as someone who spent 5 years working with Class 180 and now works with Mk5a you are having a laugh if you think they anything in common quality wise.
     
  25. CosherB

    CosherB On Moderation

    Messages:
    1,846
    Joined:
    5 Jun 2012
    Location:
    Cheshire
    Thank you for this intervention, it’s good to hear some substantive information from the ‘coal face’.
     
  26. sjpowermac

    sjpowermac Member

    Messages:
    884
    Joined:
    26 May 2018
    Would it be correct to say that maintenance is contracted out to Alstom at Longsight, and Siemens in York, with CAF responsible for supporting those companies? Thank you for the information in your earlier post, I for one certainly didn’t realise about the TSSSA.

    Best wishes for the introduction of the Mk5a:)
     
  27. Erniescooper

    Erniescooper Member

    Messages:
    492
    Joined:
    27 Mar 2010
    Thanks sjpowermac and hopefully it will be introduced soon. I wouldn’t normally post put comparing with a Class 180 is step too far me especially having spent such a long time rolling around under them. I’m genuinely sorry they aren’t in service yet as I’ve spoken to TPE staff who are desperate to get hold of them.
     
  28. Spartacus

    Spartacus Established Member

    Messages:
    1,326
    Joined:
    25 Aug 2009
    These look curious from the 29/06-07/09, unadvertised TPE expresses with stock off Longsight, looking very much like Nova3 York-Scarborough summer holiday reliefs.

    upload_2019-6-14_22-54-43.png
     
  29. Ben Bow

    Ben Bow Member

    Messages:
    228
    Joined:
    20 Sep 2018
    I apologise, my post was poorly worded as I was hurrying. Would you agree that CAF will not have the same level of ongoing daily involvement with the Nova 3 fleet that Hitachi will have with the Nova 1 fleet? I didn't mean to imply that the mk.5a coaches are of similar quality to the 180/Juniper fleet, only that if problems occur once the coaches are in service, then there may be a higher level of manufacturer support required, something that, as I understand was lacking when problems surfaced with the fleets mentioned. As I understand also part of the problem with commissioning and testing the mk.5's has been a difference in expectations between the level of support required and that which was expected to be given.
     
  30. sjpowermac

    sjpowermac Member

    Messages:
    884
    Joined:
    26 May 2018
    Looks like a plan:)

    Would it be possible to work the diagram with two drivers, one for the ‘morning’ shift 5T85 to 1T84, and one for the ‘afternoon’ 1T93-5H88 (I’m not sure of shift lengths for drivers)?

    Would onboard staff manage with one team 09:25 first train off York, 19:12 last back in?

    All ways round, this looks like a really neat way to provide some extra capacity and that it wouldn’t require all that many staff trained up on the sets.

    It looks like a nice easy diagram for enthusiasts too, if CAF/TPE need a volunteer for a shakedown run, drop me a line;)
     

Share This Page