First D-Trains ready for sale

[pete_mcfarlane]

Sometimes we see horror stories about the hideous rip off of leasing because people compare a total service package including all maintenance, spare part provision, management etc with a simple purchase price which has no costs added for through life operation and support. 

And (getting slightly political) often the 'buying' option will be funded using borrowed money, and the costs of this borrowing not made clear. 

[jjb1970]

And (getting slightly political) often the 'buying' option will be funded using borrowed money, and the costs of this borrowing not made clear. 

 

Indeed, the cost of finance is often completely ignored in these comparisons, which is odd given that anybody who has ever bought a house or car using a mortgage or finance, or has a credit card, understands the significance of the cost of borrowing money. Made worse by the fact that many do not appreciate just how much difference a seemingly minor variation in interest rate makes in terms of the cost of borrowing.

[Mike Storey]

In the short term, finance costs don't really play a big part in modern train leasing. Most involved these days borrow internationally for the best rates, and then hedge them. Just look at Hitachi, Siemens and Stadler - they all have finance houses within their corporate parent or major stockholder. Even Bombardier can currently rely on Canadian state funding at lower rates than a purely private operation (despite the hiatus over their aero division). No purely British operation would stand a chance against these, given the massive short-termism demanded by UK investors.

 

It is the entry of competition to the previously staid ROSCO dominance of UK train leasing, plus the advent of planned modular replacement of the parts of trains that cause most whole life cost impact, that have made new trains cheaper than old ones.

 

A certain ex-EE employee, in the trade press, continually castigates DaFT for the problems in UK train procurement. He has a point historically. But now, the UK market is behaving extraordinarily better, in VFM terms (bar IEP), than its continental cousins, and most certainly better than its US and Chinese equivalents. For sure, humungous amounts are being spent across Europe and China on new rolling stock, but on comparatively little (per passenger Km carried) in reality. Entire fleet replacement within a seven year period, for example in Anglia, is something other countries can only dream about. Why? Not sure I know. But the above is some clue. For the rest, see the economic model that advocates regular, high intensity services, adopted by UK rail, against most of the rest (bar Switzerland, RATP and regional operations in parts of Italy, Germany, Belgium and Austria). Even the Netherlands, once espoused as the pinnacle of such operations, seem to be backtracking markedly after some recent poor experiences with suppliers. It suggests a naivety elsewhere which, for once, the UK seems to have overcome. Any suggestion that nationalism is to blame elsewhere is not borne out by the facts.

[jjb1970]

Unfortunately the whole IEP affair has cast a large shadow. Hitachi have played a good game and will do well out of it, not sure about anybody else though. I suspect the trains themselves will be very good given the provenance of Hitachi rail but it has been a lesson in how not to manage a major procurement program. I think that there are many areas where UK railways do a lot better than we like to think in terms of international comparisons but recognising that the current UK rail system does many things very well doesn't fit a certain political narrative which wants us to believe that the modern railway is terrible. I travel a lot internationally and I am not just being contrarian when I say there is only one country that I'd really rate above British trains overall although a few others do outdo us in high speed inter-city services.

 

The access to finance of companies like Siemens and Bombardier is why I have doubts about the viability of the D Train. If Siemens have access to cheap finance and offer a new build train with attractive financing and also a good future asset value which avoids them having to amortise the whole cost of the train over an initial short lease then it could well work out cheaper to buy new rather than go for the D train. That said, I'd think finance would have to be a significant factor in lease costs as even companies like Siemens borrow money to build the trains and finance their lease packages, these costs will be built into their proposals. I don't know about trains, but at one point one of the reasons Alstom were really struggling in some markets was that their costs of borrowing were so much higher than some rivals they couldn't compete. But then again, given that Alstom lurch from financial crises to financial crises and next state bailout it's not surprising that their borrowing costs can be high.

[Talltim]

Slightly off topic, but I read that the best way to buy a new car if you have the cash up front is to agree a lease, cancel the finance during the cooling off period and pay off the remainder of the loan (all of it basically).

This works because the dealers get a discount from the manufacturers for setting up the lease and they can pass part of this this onto the customer. They don't get this discount for a customer buying up front.

[cheesysmith]

There is the other side of this argument, in that the new trains could soon work out very expensive. We have a situation where the 455 & 321 were having a re traction of the motor equipment and have been replaced by new trains. This cost will have to be passed onto somebody. Then all these brand new EMUs that are comming will have to be paid for. If anything, this latest franchising has shown that you cannot get your money back over the whole life of the asset. Without more wires to run them on, the payback will be over the contract period because if they are going to be replaced, or there is a chance of that, the second hand value (or residual value) will be zero. Having a guarantee of only the franchise period to pay back the costs of the new trains would increase the costs massively. The D trains have already paid off their initial costs so only have to pay off the conversions costs plus the scrap value they paid for them. Also, they can be got into service quickly, where as these new trains will require commissioning, testing, type approval and with so many new trains comming in a short period of time they have a window to get them out and paying off there costs. Once the conversion costs are paid off they could then be offered on very cheap rates that new builds could not match.

 

We are in the situation now because when the ROSCOs were sold off by the DaFT the costs of old trains and new ones was almost identical (DaFT thinking that old BR was useless and the ROSCOs would rip them off). Now with cheap finance new trains are cheaper that the old ones to lease. Luckily the ex BR fleets are near the end of their book life and so will have paid off their costs. But if the new trains have no guarantee to pay off their costs over their book life then the costs of new trains will rise.

[jjb1970]

Slightly off topic, but I read that the best way to buy a new car if you have the cash up front is to agree a lease, cancel the finance during the cooling off period and pay off the remainder of the loan (all of it basically).

This works because the dealers get a discount from the manufacturers for setting up the lease and they can pass part of this this onto the customer. They don't get this discount for a customer buying up front.

PCP, not lease. With a lease you genarally cannot buy the car however taking advantage of the manufacturer and dealer incentives on PCPs and then settling the loan can indeed work out a lot better than a straight cash buy.

['CHARD]

Well we know what will happen in the North West don't we.everybody else's cast off will be sent here till it's life expired ! Well it's what usually happens .

 

Not what's happening in the new franchise, of course.

Edited May 30, 2017 by 'CHARD

[Talltim]

Not sure where you get your information from, but that is basically uninformed rubbish.

Yeah. Brand new Pendolinos and Voyagers a while ago, more recently brand new 185s and 350s. Brand new TPE push pull sets and brand new CAF EMU and DMUs for Northern coming soon Edited May 30, 2017 by Talltim

['CHARD]

Yeah. Brand new Pendolinos and Voyagers a while ago, more recently brand new 185s and 350s. Brand new TPE push pull sets and whatever the Northern Pacer replacements are coming soon

 

Cheers Tim for the substantive detail !!! , apologies for editing my original post - from its knee-jerk reaction version!

[Talltim]

PCP, not lease. With a lease you genarally cannot buy the car however taking advantage of the manufacturer and dealer incentives on PCPs and then settling the loan can indeed work out a lot better than a straight cash buy.

Thanks. As you can see I should have been asleep when I wrote that!

Cheers Tim for the substantive detail !!! , apologies for editing my original post - from its knee-jerk reaction version!

It's ok, I edited mine after I looked up the Notthern unit details!

[D854_Tiger]

New trains are always going to be ordered most where there is the greatest traffic growth and that's always going to be London and the South East.

 

It's inevitable that any displaced stock, not yet beyond its shelf life, will then find its way to other lower growth areas.

 

Just like with kids and certain hand me down clothes, not particularly fair and hopefully not always the case, but it's just the way it is.

[Reorte]

Yeah. Brand new Pendolinos and Voyagers a while ago, more recently brand new 185s and 350s. Brand new TPE push pull sets and brand new CAF EMU and DMUs for Northern coming soon

Backs up the view that we get all the junk, none of those are particularly pleasant for non-commuter travel (although the Voyagers wouldn't have been that bad if they weren't overloaded, and the 350s at least appear to be a bit of an improvement on the 185s). That said I'm looking forward to seeing what the push pull sets are like.

[Talltim]

if you are looking at it like that, not sure anywhere is gettting non junk stock

[jjb1970]

The Class 350 is a good example of how people tend to judge trains by the cabin fit out, which is a variable and down to the operator to specify. The Class 350 has been my ride to/from work for a fair few years now and I find the Class 350/1 units to be very pleasant. The interior colours feel light and the seating is fine. Legroom could probably be better but it is adequate and 2+2 seating means that two people can sit side by side and occupy the seats rather than the aisle seat person overspilling into the aisle as the outside person is crushed into the bulkhead. The Class 350/2 units I can't stand, in these the 2+3 seating means that it is very uncomfortable as whether you sit in the aisle seat or outside seat you end up feeling uncomfortable whilst the centre seat of the three seat sections is for children and midgets. The trains feel much more overcrowded too as the fact that people end up half occupying the aisle means there is no room in the already narrower aisles so it is painful to move up/down the train and there is far less useful standing room. Personally I'd rather accept the lower seat count of the 350/1 as at least if you get a seat it feels comfortable and if you don't get a seat it is a much nicer standing environment. I find the green decor of the 350/2 a bit dingy too. The 350/3units combine the 2+2 seating of the 350/1 with the less inviting colours and feel of the 350/2, they're a vast improvement over the 350/2 but I prefer the 350/1.

Something to keep in mind is that "new" is not a synonym for "improvement", whether new is improved depends on what properties of the train you're considering. In some ways a new train should be an improvement in terms of energy efficiency and crash worthiness but if considering the passenger environment it most certainly isn't. The passenger environment tends to be what the operator specifies and an old train with a cabin fitted out to a high standard will be a lot nicer to travel in than a high density commuter train. There is one area where you'd reasonably expect new trains to be better but which is not always the case, ride quality. I find the ride quality of some of the 350s (particularly the 350/2 units for some reason) to be very poor. I sometimes use the Southern Electrostar units on the WCML and find that the Electrostar has a much smoother ride than the 350.

[Reorte]

The Class 350 is a good example of how people tend to judge trains by the cabin fit out, which is a variable and down to the operator to specify. The Class 350 has been my ride to/from work for a fair few years now and I find the Class 350/1 units to be very pleasant. The interior colours feel light and the seating is fine.

I bring up the difference between the 350s because I'm comparing them with 185s, and superficially (to me at least) the initial impression is the same but with a pantograph somewhere up on the roof. Layouts are similar, but I don't end up feeling like I may as well have been sitting on a wooden bench with the 350s. I still find 1/3 2/3 doors pretty poor fare for long distance trains though, both have a rather bus-like ambience. Where the line between fundamentals of the train and cabin fit lies in that I'm not sure; I assumed that the seats were the same and it was something else about the train (maybe the suspension is smoother without engines and fuel tanks below the floor, although the direct effect of the noise and vibration isn't something that bothers me massively even if it's nicer without).

Edited May 30, 2017 by Reorte

[phil-b259]

Having suffered some pretty rough and terrible rides on the D Stock in District Line service the only place I would consider selling them to is the scrap man. Rather keep the Pacer's going!

I believe that is mostly due to the abysmal state of some of LUs trackwork - indeed the need to replace the bogies after barely 10 years service was due to cracking of the bogie frames.

 

So I reiterate that what forum members may have experenced while using the D stock on the Underground should not be used to stridently tells us the 320s will be awful if used by NR franchises

[Chris116]

I believe that is mostly due to the abysmal state of some of LUs trackwork - indeed the need to replace the bogies after barely 10 years service was due to cracking of the bogie frames.

So I reiterate that what forum members may have experenced while using the D stock on the Underground should not be used to stridently tells us the 320s will be awful if used by NR franchises

In the last couple of years with track improvements along the District line it was very noticeable how much better the ride was in areas where the work had been done.

[PM47079]

I always thought the vivarail units would work quite well on the Sudbury marks tey line. With a line speed of 50mph they would quite happily run up and down there each day

[number6]

Personally I'd rather accept the lower seat count of the 350/1 as at least if you get a seat it feels comfortable and if you don't get a seat it is a much nicer standing environment. I find the green decor of the 350/2 a bit dingy too. The 350/3units combine the 2+2 seating of the 350/1 with the less inviting colours and feel of the 350/2, they're a vast improvement over the 350/2 but I prefer the 350/1.

This is true of 319s which have wide aisles with narrow and low seats. Southern Electrostars can vary too - some feeling quite cramped mostly down to the 3+2 seating.

 

You also remind me of how I used to prefer earlier 4CIGs to the later versions - first batch had the black BR seat covering - upholstered padding up the side of the windows, headrests on the aisle seats and individual lamps overhead. The later versions of the CIGs had thin blue [and greasy brown] seats no padding against the walls and fluorescent lights. But every seat had a window and all 2+2...!

[Coryton]

Yeah. Brand new Pendolinos and Voyagers a while ago, more recently brand new 185s and 350s. Brand new TPE push pull sets and brand new CAF EMU and DMUs for Northern coming soon

 

Not many parts of the UK are getting brand new loco-hauled stock!

[Coryton]

So I reiterate that what forum members may have experenced while using the D stock on the Underground should not be used to stridently tells us the 320s will be awful if used by NR franchises

 

230s?

[phil-b259]

230s?

 

Yup, thats what I meant to write.

[jim.snowdon]

I believe that is mostly due to the abysmal state of some of LUs trackwork - indeed the need to replace the bogies after barely 10 years service was due to cracking of the bogie frames.

 

So I reiterate that what forum members may have experenced while using the D stock on the Underground should not be used to stridently tells us the 320s will be awful if used by NR franchises

By comparison with what was then BR main line trackwork, LU trackwork was abysmal, to the extent that when the track recording coach turned up at Amersham, it was reported at the time that LU track was worse than the good sidings on BR. As with many of these reports, there may have been a little embellishment with repeated telling, however, life on the District line certainly did prove the undoing of LU's welded H-frame bogies. They were simply too rigid for the equally stiff primary suspension, so instead of flexing as the older bogies did, they developed cracks in the transoms. The 1983 stock would probably have gone the same way, but ended up being withdrawn before it became a real problem. Even the prototype bogies that were under a 1973 tube stock set for a while cracked.

 

Nonethless, the ride when the D78s were new could be quite good. I can remember driving the first set at speeds in the high 50s on the Metropolitan line, we quite commonly had it into the low 60s doing test runs on the down grade from Amersham to Rickmansworth. The only time I had a really rough ride with one was coming off the Barking flyover heading westbound doing over 60, and that was down to the state of the track, which wasn't really up to it.

 

Used at the sort of speeds they were designed for, on decently maintained track, a rebuilt D78 should be capable of being quite a good train. Just because it is a 35 year old car body should not be held against it, not least as that is not the part that the customers get to see. So long as it is sound, they take it for granted - it is the internal layout that a train is judged by.

 

Jim

[surfsup]

I believe that is mostly due to the abysmal state of some of LUs trackwork - indeed the need to replace the bogies after barely 10 years service was due to cracking of the bogie frames.

 

So I reiterate that what forum members may have experenced while using the D stock on the Underground should not be used to stridently tells us the 320s will be awful if used by NR franchises

On a side note, Had Metro-Cammel won over BR at the time for what was then to become the first of the Sprinters, the Met-Cam 151 appeared to use a very similar in design bogie.