Capacity upgrade for SWT - 30 New Desiro City's

[surfsup]

Today SWT/Siemens announced that a further major capacity upgrade for the Windsor & Reading lines is underway, with Stagecoach & Angel Trains placing an order for 30 new 5 Car Desiro City EMUs for use on the Windsor side lines. These will in the future then recascade the refreshed 458s back to the Reading Lines and 450s back to the 'mainline'.

 

Siemens and Stagecoach press releases here - I'm already thinking how likely it'll be how well the SWT Spec Desiro City's will be over the DfT led Thameslink units.

 

http://www.siemens.co.uk/en/news_press/index/news_archive/2014/passengers-to-benefit-from-210m-train-order-for-uks-busiest-commuter-network.htm

 

http://www.stagecoach.com/media/news-releases/2014/2014-09-03.aspx

[phil-b259]

Today SWT/Siemens announced that a further major capacity upgrade for the Windsor & Reading lines is underway, with Stagecoach & Angel Trains placing an order for 30 new 5 Car Desiro City EMUs for use on the Windsor side lines. These will in the future then recascade the refreshed 458s back to the Reading Lines and 450s back to the 'mainline'.

 

Siemens and Stagecoach press releases here - I'm already thinking how likely it'll be how well the SWT Spec Desiro City's will be over the DfT led Thameslink units.

 

http://www.siemens.co.uk/en/news_press/index/news_archive/2014/passengers-to-benefit-from-210m-train-order-for-uks-busiest-commuter-network.htm

 

http://www.stagecoach.com/media/news-releases/2014/2014-09-03.aspx

 

I wouldn't get your hopes up because if what you have said is true the new Deserio units will be strictly inner suburban in their configuration - basically a 455 with air-con.

 

Thameslink units on the other hand will have things like toilets and first class as befitting their outer suburban role.

[Robert Shrives]

Hi , Not wishing to stoke a north /south divide but this throws it in the face of the North who are struggling with undersize and under speced units for TPE but good luck to SWT and hopefully it will openthe door to add on vehicles suitable to extend 185s/ 350s in the north !!  

Robert

[Guest 838rapid]

The 185's were meant to be getting a fourth car a while ago,however they wanted an unpowered. Vehicle to save fuel and that was what stopped it,as Siemens allegedly said it couldn't be built in that way.

 

185's were built to a budget,after a while it showed and they are the poor man's Seimens unit now, the first and only Diesel version built into the desire body,having had the pleasure of working on them from introduction until my health took over,I can see why no further Orders followed.

 

Back on topic,I can see why northern rail feels fed up at having to put up with no new trains,but London Village is all that seems to matter at the DFT.

[Xerces Fobe2]

Amazing more 5 car units  (10 coach) trains for SWT meanwhile on the other Reading FGW 2 and 3 car trains  are commonplace throughout the day. It will be interesting to see after the GWML is complete (whenever that will be!) what the stock provision will be by First. My guess is that First will go for 3/ 4 car EMU's using CrossRail capacity as an excuse. The big CrossRail reality is that these trains are stop at all stations and will be have longer journey times than First services. Most people including me will carry on boarding a First sardine can to Paddington and changing onto CrossRail there.

 

Back to the main topic maybe First could order some of these and have a common fleet with SWT  as all units could be 25KV /750DC now that would be privatisation working in a more positive way!

 

XF

[phil-b259]

Amazing more 5 car units  (10 coach) trains for SWT meanwhile on the other Reading FGW 2 and 3 car trains  are commonplace throughout the day. It will be interesting to see after the GWML is complete (whenever that will be!) what the stock provision will be by First. My guess is that First will go for 3/ 4 car EMU's using CrossRail capacity as an excuse. The big CrossRail reality is that these trains are stop at all stations and will be have longer journey times than First services. Most people including me will carry on boarding a First sardine can to Paddington and changing onto CrossRail there.

 

Back to the main topic maybe First could order some of these and have a common fleet with SWT  as all units could be 25KV /750DC now that would be privatisation working in a more positive way!

 

XF

 

Unless things have changed the plan was for the Thames Valley to get some refurbished 319s which should give more capacity, especially if they are used in 8 car configurations (and before you start complaining, given the correct level of refurbishment - i.e. as the leasing companies have done in the 317 & 321 demonstrator units the 319s could become very good replacements for the Turbos). Since then however new stock has been promised for Kings Lyn services so at least some of the 365s will be looking for a new home in the next few years and that could well include the GWML

 

I would also point out that the units SWT are ordering ARE FOR INNER SUBURBAN DUTIES, as such they will have no toilets or first class accommodation with the interiors designed to accommodate lots of standing passengers at peak times and be optimised for fast acceleration, not a high overall speed. In other words unsuitable for outer suburban GWML duties. Of course it would be perfectly possible to build a dedicated FGW batch with a specification similar to the Thameslink version which would address these issues.... or simply go for a refurbished 319 at a much cheaper price.

 

On a wider issue its worth noting that in some respects FGW is only aping their predecessor as the GWR was in reality more interested in long distance passengers and freight than commuter traffic. Although it is true that the LMS & LNER were much the same in this regard, on todays WCML, MML & ECML suburban and InterCity services are provided by separate franchises which might help things. SWT on the other hand are merely the latest in a long line of companies for whom outer suburban commuters are the lifeblood of their operation thanks to the lack of heavy industry in the south.

 

Finally while I know yo have got it in for FGW, please remember that regardless of what the DfT say, most things INCLUDING the total number of units any operator is allowed to lease are strictly controlled by the Government and cannot be increased in the lifetime of a franchise unless the Government themselves decides to sanction it. Thus when it comes to stock for the newly electrified GWML you will get what the DfT say you will get regardless of what you or the franchise operator may want (just look at the Gatwick express situation - new build, specifically designed for the route replaced by older unsuitable stock so the Government could say they were doing something about overcrowding on SWT)

[Talltim]

With regards to the 185s I thought First had wanted 4th cars (not sure whether powered or not) and the DfT said no

[Glorious NSE]

Back to the main topic maybe First could order some of these and have a common fleet with SWT  as all units could be 25KV /750DC now that would be privatisation working in a more positive way!

 

Not sure why that would be a useful thing, given the overlap between the two systems is just a handful of train lengths and they will be maintained in different places! (Not to mention that SWT doesn't even have a fleet that's common within itself!) 

 

If you were trying to buy something to create a usefully standardised wider fleet for Greater Western outer suburban services then the logical choice would be to pick whatever gets chosen as a Crossrail unit - given the Hertfordshire scheme suggests that whatever it is will need a 100mph+ outer suburban spec variant anyhow that shouldn't be a problem.

[Christopher125]

Unless things have changed the plan was for the Thames Valley to get some refurbished 319s which should give more capacity, especially if they are used in 8 car configurations

From what people are saying it would appear that some combination of cascaded 319s and 365s, with the possibility of 387s, looks likely to begin with, and IIRC provision is being made for up to 12-car/240m trains into Paddington.

 

Looking further ahead, the GWML will almost certainly receive one of the next generation 110-125mph suburban units now being touted by manufacturers - IMHO a Crossrail-type unit is very unlikely given the need for fewer (plug) doors and 110mph+ to maximise capacity.

 

Chris

[newbryford]

Unless things have changed the plan was for the Thames Valley to get some refurbished 319s which should give more capacity,

 

Oi! Hands of our Northern 319's.................

 

There must be some cockup at TfL mistake as a London area operator has a plan for someone else's cast-off cascaded stock................?

 

Cheers,

Mick

[phil-b259]

Oi! Hands of our Northern 319's................. There must be some cockup at TfL mistake as a London area operator has a plan for someone else's cast-off cascaded stock................? Cheers,Mick

Wrong body to blame

 

The original plan - as devised and published by the DfT was the entire 319 fleet would be split between the Thames Valley and the North West Triangle electrification schemes.

 

Since then however we have seen a significant delay to the procurement of new Thameslink stock, a national shortage of DMU stock, plus the prospect of the north west having nothing to run under the newly installed wires.

 

As a consiquence the DfT have had to revise their plans several times - hence the extra Electrostars Derby has been turning out - and the eventual destinations and size of the future 319 fleet allocations is all up in the air again.

[The Stationmaster]

Regrettably the Thames Valley folk are not going to be at all happy be fobbed off with secondhand hand-me-down units from elsewhere any more than some of them will put up with crawling eastwards on Crossrail trains calling at every station.  The service has already degenerated in timetable terms with the introduction of Heathrow Connect and the end of the Slough terminators which has led to extra stops, and slower journey times for those travelling from beyond Slough but, in some cases, east of Reading.  For thsoe travelling from west of Reading on some Thames Valley trains the situation is as bad.

 

If 319s go to the Thames Valley they will need an awful lot of interior work to make them acceptable.  If new trains for the outer area do not appear I can see the M4 and M40 becoming even more congested and the whole value of electrification being lost as regular passengers desert the railway or chose another route.  I realise that DafT are about as far divorced from ideas of 'service' as it is possible to be but the fact that they are making commercial and cascade decisions from a totally non disconnected base is a bad thing for the passenger.

 

Now I don't pay for my travel (I sweated enough blood,tears, and hours to earn that privilege in retirement) but the vast majority of people travelling on the Thames Valley do pay, and pay handsomely and they are expecting 'improvements' - for the information of the pen-pushers at DafT 'improvement' means - better trains, reliable trains, faster trains and reduced journey times, punctual trains, and a comfortable journey where they are not overcrowded; passengers, whatever you might call them, have long been pretty consistent in that view.  I would suggest that Xerces Fobe starts petitioning a well known Maidenhead MP and gets all the local passenger organisations to do the same - after all it was folk on teh Sou'West getting at Paddy Ashdown which secured them priority allocation of better fitted out Class 158s and I'm sure Theresa May has as much clout as Paddy.

[Ron Ron Ron]

...If 319s go to the Thames Valley they will need an awful lot of interior work to make them acceptable. .....

 

From when it was first announced that the 319's would be cascaded, the plan has always been that they will undergo a major refurbishment and overhaul (both mechanically/electrically and to interior passenger provision), before being re-deployed to the TV and NW.

 

IIRC, this will include a total gutting of the interior and a complete refit, with new seating, toilet modules and aircon.

 

I seem to remember that the traction packages could be included as well - removal of the 3rd rail gear, modification/renewal with regenerative braking possibly??

Does anyone have up-to-date information on this?

 

Porterbrook published a brochure about the options, some time ago. How this project has progressed and evolved, I don't know.

 

 

.

[phil-b259]

From when it was first announced that the 319's would be cascaded, the plan has always been that they will undergo a major refurbishment and overhaul (both mechanically/electrically and to interior passenger provision), before being re-deployed to the TV and NW.

 

IIRC, this will include a total gutting of the interior and a complete refit, with new seating, toilet modules and aircon.

 

I seem to remember that the traction packages could be included as well - removal of the 3rd rail gear, modification/renewal with regenerative braking possibly??

Does anyone have up-to-date information on this?

 

Porterbrook published a brochure about the options, some time ago. How this project has progressed and evolved, I don't know.

 

 

.

 

It hasn't is the answer

 

So far we have seen the lease companies try out completely new interiors on a 317 and a 321 to demonstrate what is available (and very nice they look too) as well as a much improved traction package - but that hasn't so far lead to any indication from the DfT that such refurbishment will be rolled out across the fleets. A cl319 refurbished to the same standard (as hinted at in the document you mention) would give Thames Valley / NW commuters a "as new" train experience while at the same time getting the most out of a bodyshell that is far from life expired but again DfT seem to be showing very little interest in the concept.

 

In fact for what its worth the DfT seem pretty incompetent when it comes to rolling stock - first there was the IEP feasco, then the much delayed Thameslink fleet order, followed by numerous add on orders of Electrostars to get them out of the mess they have created. Recently we have also seen a deal done by Chiltern to pinch some DMUs from Northern when the lease expires next year because the minions at the DfT couldn't / wouldn't let Northern make any firm decisions about their fleet size due to re-franchising coming up.

 

As Mike says the lobbying of a certain MP may bring dividends - though unlike Mr Ashdown said MP strikes me as someone not particularly interested in local matters with her only real concern being how to prevent UKIP from ousting her. That said I don't live in the area of course so could be wrong.......

[4630]

It hasn't is the answer

 

So far we have seen the lease companies try out completely new interiors on a 317 and a 321 to demonstrate what is available (and very nice they look too) as well as a much improved traction package - but that hasn't so far lead to any indication from the DfT that such refurbishment will be rolled out across the fleets. A cl319 refurbished to the same standard (as hinted at in the document you mention) would give Thames Valley / NW commuters a "as new" train experience while at the same time getting the most out of a bodyshell that is far from life expired but again DfT seem to be showing very little interest in the concept.

 

In fact for what its worth the DfT seem pretty incompetent when it comes to rolling stock - first there was the IEP feasco, then the much delayed Thameslink fleet order, followed by numerous add on orders of Electrostars to get them out of the mess they have created. Recently we have also seen a deal done by Chiltern to pinch some DMUs from Northern when the lease expires next year because the minions at the DfT couldn't / wouldn't let Northern make any firm decisions about their fleet size due to re-franchising coming up.

 

As Mike says the lobbying of a certain MP may bring dividends - though unlike Mr Ashdown said MP strikes me as someone not particularly interested in local matters with her only real concern being how to prevent UKIP from ousting her. That said I don't live in the area of course so could be wrong.......

 

I agree 100% with the sentiments but just to correct a small inaccuracy, the DMUs that have been pinched are 170s that are currently operated by Trans Pennine Express not Northern) - mainly on the Hull to Manchester Piccadilly route. 

[phil-b259]

Having blamed the DfT of course, its not entirely their fault as they are only allowed to do what HM Treasury will let them do and IIRC that was one of the main reasons the Thameslink stock replacement took so long to sort out. Not that the Treasuary would ever admit it of course.

[Christopher125]

The DfT seem to want any decisions regarding major refurbs of the 319s to be taken by the next franchise winner, at least in the case of Northern - thankfully they'e agreed to more minor work in the meantime.

 

Chris

[Joseph_Pestell]

Like Mike (and others) I have never seen 319s as a sensible option for the Thames Valley. There are many more suitable locations as electrification spreads across the North West and, hopefully, the South Wales Valleys.

 

As to the length of trains (vice SWT to Windsor), I think First GW trains will have to be longer simply because there will be fewer paths available to them once Crossrail is taken into account.

[phil-b259]

Like Mike (and others) I have never seen 319s as a sensible option for the Thames Valley. There are many more suitable locations as electrification spreads across the North West and, hopefully, the South Wales Valleys.

 

I cannot help but think that your view is influenced by the frankly appalling state of most of the 319 fleet. As has been pointed out it is perfectly possible to get the "new train" effect by suitable refurbishment including air con, better door mechanisms, better lighting,wi-fi, power points, etc within the current bodyshell (a la 317 / 321 demonstrators). Yes one four car unit may not be suitable on its own but providing enough of the fleet are allocated its not exactly hardship to run them as two or even three 4 car units where demand exists. Yes I agree that given their current state, the 319s are not suitable, but that doesn't mean they will allways be.

 

The real issue is, assuming their plans haven't changed, will the DfT get their finger out and start refurbishment before electrification goes live. Leaving it all to the new franchise may well suit the been counters, but at the expense of actual travellers who having suffered significant disruption while the wires are rewarded by having tatty trains dumped on them because it suits the accountants.

 

In any case even if you do get new trains they will have exactly the same door positioning as the present Turbos & 319s to ensure low dwell times at stations and there is no guarantee a new unit will feature through gangways (like the Desiro / main line Electrostar fleet). Seat quality and spacing is extremely unlikely to be better on new stock than what you get in a Turbo now as the aim will be to pack as many commuters in as is reasonably possible, not give them space to spread out.

 

As for the Cardiff valleys, well it was allways intended that gap would be filled by EMUs being displaced from the GEML by Crossrail - and since the announcement that TfL is going to procure new stock of the West Anglia routes it will be taking over this pool of displaced stock has got bigger. While I understand the Welsh aren't happy with the idea of inheriting London's cast offs, given the DfT / treasury is playing hard ball on funding the electrification in the first place, I can't see the stock cascade plans changing.

[Southernman46]

In the 10 years the SWT 455 fleet will be 40 years old too.......................

[newbryford]

Like Mike (and others) I have never seen 319s as a sensible option for the Thames Valley. There are many more suitable locations as electrification spreads across the North West and, hopefully, the South Wales Valleys.

 

 

Is that a subtle way of saying the Thames Valley area want new units and won't accept cast-offs refurbs? So let's give them to the provinces as they won't notice? 

 

 

Cheers,

Mick

[royaloak]

In the 10 years the SWT 455 fleet will be 40 years old too......................

There is nothing wrong with them now (even less when they are retractioned with the AC gubbins) so I reckon they will be in service for at least another 20 years simply so they can get a return on the costs of the retractioning.

 

They are cheap and cheerful and just get on with the day job, quietly and efficiently.

[Glorious NSE]

I cannot help but think that your view is influenced by the frankly appalling state of most of the 319 fleet. As has been pointed out it is perfectly possible to get the "new train" effect by suitable refurbishment including air con, better door mechanisms, better lighting,wi-fi, power points, etc within the current bodyshell (a la 317 / 321 demonstrators). Yes one four car unit may not be suitable on its own but providing enough of the fleet are allocated its not exactly hardship to run them as two or even three 4 car units where demand exists. Yes I agree that given their current state, the 319s are not suitable, but that doesn't mean they will allways be.

 

The real issue is, assuming their plans haven't changed, will the DfT get their finger out and start refurbishment before electrification goes live. Leaving it all to the new franchise may well suit the been counters, but at the expense of actual travellers who having suffered significant disruption while the wires are rewarded by having tatty trains dumped on them because it suits the accountants.

 

In any case even if you do get new trains they will have exactly the same door positioning as the present Turbos & 319s to ensure low dwell times at stations and there is no guarantee a new unit will feature through gangways (like the Desiro / main line Electrostar fleet). Seat quality and spacing is extremely unlikely to be better on new stock than what you get in a Turbo now as the aim will be to pack as many commuters in as is reasonably possible, not give them space to spread out.

 

One outstanding issue though is Marlow, where a 319 is not currently a viable solution (though if they do get retractioned then possibly some 3 car sets can be created.) 

[The Stationmaster]

One outstanding issue though is Marlow, where a 319 is not currently a viable solution (though if they do get retractioned then possibly some 3 car sets can be created.) 

I think there are two likely answers with Marlow -

 

1. Electrify and re-form a couple of sets to provide sufficient to work beyond Bourne End, or

2. Don't electrify beyond Bourne End (assuming the wires will actually get that far)

 

The latter might sound daft but just wait until we see the GWML electrification budget being 'trimmed' as HM Treasury get their mitts well and truly onto NR's expenditure and investment plans and electrification of the London Division branches slips into the next Control Period (we are already being told 2018 for our branch).  We now have what probably amounts to the worst of all worlds with what is effectively a state owned rail system without  a senior level of professional railway managers in a position to stand up to Civil Servants (who basically know very little - all too obviously at times) and say 'we run it, you just supply the money - we will decide how it is best spent'

 

That latter idea doesn't sound like a sensible idea?  It was just how BR managed and look at some of the huge changes and improvements it delivered, the Civil Servants noses were very firmly kept out of it because in reality - trying to stay within topic - they have as much idea about how to best cascade rolling stock as they have of just about anything else which involves real decisions and requires knowledge of what is being done.

[Joseph_Pestell]

I think there are two likely answers with Marlow -

 

1. Electrify and re-form a couple of sets to provide sufficient to work beyond Bourne End, or

2. Don't electrify beyond Bourne End (assuming the wires will actually get that far)

 

The latter might sound daft but just wait until we see the GWML electrification budget being 'trimmed' as HM Treasury get their mitts well and truly onto NR's expenditure and investment plans and electrification of the London Division branches slips into the next Control Period (we are already being told 2018 for our branch).  We now have what probably amounts to the worst of all worlds with what is effectively a state owned rail system without  a senior level of professional railway managers in a position to stand up to Civil Servants (who basically know very little - all too obviously at times) and say 'we run it, you just supply the money - we will decide how it is best spent'

 

That latter idea doesn't sound like a sensible idea?  It was just how BR managed and look at some of the huge changes and improvements it delivered, the Civil Servants noses were very firmly kept out of it because in reality - trying to stay within topic - they have as much idea about how to best cascade rolling stock as they have of just about anything else which involves real decisions and requires knowledge of what is being done.

 

I see (in Modern Railways?) that there is a battery unit being worked on. Electrification without wires could be perfect for Marlow.