Informed Sources e-preview by Roger Ford (view all archives)

INFORMED SOURCES e-Preview April 2011.

This month’s column is dominated by the linked announcements on Great Western Main Line electrification and the resumption of procurement of the Intercity Express Programme made by Transport Secretary Philip Hammond on 1 March. 

GWML electrification to Cardiff approved

Intercity Express Programme – the great survivor

Bi-mode dominate IEP procurement

IEP – European rail industry challenges deal

Yet more consultation on future rail research

Hammond’s announcement confirmed my prediction in last month’s column that the wires would stop at Swansea but that future electrification of the Cardiff Valley lines could be linked with the main line scheme. And so it turned out.

With Swansea served by only one train an hour off-peak, there is not ‘at present’ a viable business case for the extension of electrification.  Odd that BR could make a case in the 1980s for electrification of the similar distance from Cambridge to Kings Lynn

However, an initial ‘high level’ evaluation has shown that ‘a good case appears to exist’ for electrifying the key Valley commuter lines.   This could go ahead during Control Period 5 (2014-2019).

IEP procurement resumes

Philip Hammond also announced that procurement of the Intercity Express Programme was ‘resuming’ with the Department ‘proceeding with the proposal that Agility Trains have put forward as preferred bidder’.  Financial close is now targeted ‘by the end of the year’.

Reflecting concerns within his Department, Hammond warned that signing the contract would depend on the Government ‘continuing to be satisfied that the proposal offers value for money as the commercial negotiations are concluded and that the final arrangements are compliant with the United Kingdom’s EU obligations’.    

Less guarded

In one of those journalistic ‘gold-dust’ moments, after the announcement Mr Hammond spoke to the Northern Echo which has campaigned for the proposed Hitachi assembly plant to be located at Newton Aycliffe in Country Durham.  And he was much less guarded with the Regional press than in his official statement.

Thus, on the second of his caveats he dismissed suggestions that the award of the contract to Agility Trains might be challenged by European manufacturers.  ‘We have spent a lot of time looking at the legal position. We would not proceed unless we were confident that we were compliant with our obligations’ he explained.

On financing he said that Hitachi still have to ‘line up’ finance for the deal. ‘They have the Japanese import-export bank behind them, but will also need to line up some financing in Europe’.

Factory

Following the announcement,   Hitachi Europe, confirmed Newton Aycliffe as the preferred site for its proposed European rolling stock ‘manufacturing and assembly centre’. Business Secretary, Vince Cable, added that the Government would offer ‘conditional funding’ to support a new factory in the North-east.

Think about it.  The Department for Business, Innovation and Skills is prepared to put up money to build an assembly plant which, as pointed out in an earlier column, can stay in business only at the expense of existing UK factories.

Construction of the new plant would begin in 2012, with training of the 500-strong workforce starting in 2014.  Train assembly would follow in 2015 with the first deliveries to Great Western starting in 2016.

Coupling

Something else Hammond told the Echo was interesting. Justifying the decision to opt for 'bi-mode' trains, he explained that ‘advocates’ of the rival option had been unable to prove that the coupling of diesel locomotives could be done quickly enough’. He added, ‘they were not prepared to put blood on paper for less than about nine minutes - and that's too long’.

But where did this 9 minutes come from and who were these ‘advocates’ unwilling to put blood on paper?  The only ‘advocates’ of locomotive haulage of EMUs beyond the wires have been Sir Andrew Foster and his IEP Value for Money Review Team. They were clearly in no position to put blood on anything. 

Only a potential supplier could do that.  And, as far as I know, none of the potential traction and rolling stock manufacturers were involved in the evaluation. So whose blood on what paper?

Bi-mode DEMUs with everything

There must be some readers who can remember when electrification involved replacing diesel (or even steam) with electric traction.  Well here’s a statistic to shock you out of such 20^th Century thinking.

Over 60% of the new IEP multiple units for the electrified Great Western Main line would be diesel electric bi-modes.  Put it another way, of the 533 vehicles in the initial requirement for the GWML and the East Coast Main Line, 350 would be formed as five car bi-modes.

To get the necessary power to weight ratio, each five car bi-mode would need three 750hp Cummins QSK19 engines under the floor.  These are the lusty diesel which power the Class 22x fleets, the Alstom Class 180s and the Siemens Class 185 Desiros. So when running under the wires each five car unit would be carrying around 20 tonnes of diesel engines and fuel as dead weight. 

Allocations

Remembering that we are talking diagrams not actual numbers of sets or vehicles, Great Western and East Coast are allocated 35 five car bi-mode units each. East Coast is also down for 10 five car electric units. Great Western gets a mix of five and eight car EMUs.

I had assumed that with only 11 IC125 diagrams to be replaced East Coast would run composite pairs – an electric and a bi-mode - between London and Edinburgh, with the bi-mode continuing to Aberdeen or Inverness.  But with only 10 five car electrics, which also have to run in pairs on the King’s Lynn-Cambridge-King’s Cross service,  it looks as though the Anglo-Scots and the East Coast stoppers will be all bi-mode.

GWML

Destinations to be served by bi-modes, according to DfT, include Exeter, Hereford/Worcester and Cheltenham, in addition to Swansea.  Some IC125s will be retained long term for the Plymouth/Penzance service.

You can divide the GWML’s 133 EMU IEP vehicles into either nine 5-car plus 11 8-car or 17 5-car plus six 8-car.  These would cover Bristol Temple Meads services plus some Oxford commuter trains. This suggests more eight cars than fives. But we shall see.

IC125 uncertain

This leaves the future for the East Coast and Great Western IC125 fleets vague.  The previous re-engineering and refurbishing assumed service to 2013, so further work will be needed for Continued Service Operation up to at least 2016 for GW and 2018 for EC. 

A diminishing number of GW sets will have to remain in service for another two years while the replacement trains are commissioned.  A small fleet will require more extensive attention to run on past 2020 on West Country services.

But as I hope to report next month, whatever the future IC125 remains tomorrow’s train today.

Europe wakes up.
Back in the January column, I pointed out that there was a certain asymmetry between the UK and Japanese railway equipment markets.  British railway managers and engineers, with no awareness of national self interest have always offered an open door and a red carpet to foreign suppliers.  But when it comes to the Japanese railways importing equipment, it’s as if Admiral Perry and his ‘black ships’ never sailed into Uraga Harbour 160 years ago.

I suspect that the big European train manufacturers were lulled into a false sense of security by Sir Andrew Foster’s report on IEP value for money.  Some repeatedly assured me that the project was dead. 

Philip Hammond’s announcement must have been a brutal awakening, because a few days later a press release arrived from UNIFE the European rail industry trade body. It began ‘UNIFE is alarmed by UK Transport Secretary Philip Hammond’s decision to resume negotiations on the Intercity Express Programme’.  The decision ‘further reinforces the lack of reciprocity between Europe and Japan in rail procurement’.

According to UNIFE, ‘only 2% of the Japanese rail equipment market is opened to foreign suppliers’. This is achieved through the extensive use of the ‘so-called “Operational Safety Clause”’ by which foreign bidders are ‘effectively excluded’.

Then UNIFE went in hard, claiming that under the existing World Trade Organisation agreements Japanese firms have no legal right to participate in railway procurement procedures. As a result, European bodies can exclude Japanese bidders under the provisions of the existing European Directives on public procurement.

But the UK Government chose not to exercise this power. UNIFE doesn’t know the half of it. My signalling chums have been equally complacent.

Rebuttal

Naturally Hitachi came back.  Its press release began ‘UNIFE should not be so alarmed by the British Government’s award of the IEP contract to Hitachi which came after a rigorous competition ‘in which the three largest European Rolling Stock suppliers originally participated’.

In other words ‘stop whingeing, we beat your best manufacturers fair and square in a fair fight’.  Hitachi added that   Japanese investment has brought jobs and skills to the European automotive, machinery and other sectors without spelling the end of European competitors’.

So, Hitachi’s investment in the UK ‘is nothing but good news for the British and European rail industry’.  Unless, of course, you happen to build trains, I suppose.

As for UNIFE’s complaint about closed markets, ‘Hitachi believes in free market access between Europe and Japan in the rail industry and other sectors’.  I think that’s what is called a non-sequitur.

Another research consultation rant

In last month’s blog I pointed you to yet another consultation document on railway research which is at least an order of magnitude more irritating than that revised Rail Technical Strategy. As a reminder, the Second Rail Industry Research Strategy (RIRS2) was produced by the Transport Research Laboratory (TRL) for DfT Rail,   can be downloaded at http://www.trl.co.uk/transport_consultancy/rail/the_second_rail_industry_research_strategy_rirs2/.

Consultation does not close until 31 April.

In the April column I have restricted my critique of RIRS2 to one  particularly annoying assumption, a risibly optimistic claim for the power of research, have a general moan about technology cringe and highlight a classic example of arrogance.

As I say, you can judge for yourselves.  But as a reality check I asked the Chairman of the European Rail Research Advisory Council what he thought of RIRS2. He described it as ‘possibly the least useful piece of work I have seen on rail research’.

RTS update

 Meanwhile I have just a charming letter from Steve Yianni, the Chairman of TSLG, thanking me for my response to the RTS consultation, which ‘challenged the strategy in different ways to other responses’.  I have been invited to contribute further to the development of the New RTS.

And the right type of research is important, which is why I feel so strongly about misguided proposals.   Network Rail briefed me recently on a cracking example of applied research saving millions of pounds.  With a bit of luck I’ll have space to share it with you next month.

Roger’s blog.

Last month’s blog left me heading off to Swindon where I was due to chair the discussion after the Annual Seminar organised by the South West Centre of the Railway Division of the IMechE.  The theme was ‘High Speed Trains – what next?’ and it was a superb event.

Four highly experienced engineers from First Great Western, East Midlands Trains, Angel Trains and Porterbrook Leasing took us through the work done on IC125 for Continued Service Operation and outlined some of the resulting benefits.  I thought I knew about IC125, but these experts’ experts made the seminar a real eye-opener. There should be a full write-up in the May Informed Sources.  When I refer to IC125 as tomorrow’s train today I’m not exaggerating.

Wednesday evening in the same week saw me at an event organised by the IMechE to celebrate the life and works of my late uncle Hugh, the eminent engineer.

I had just sat down at the end of a row when an elderly chap, who seemed familiar, came in looking for somewhere to sit.  As he was walking with the aid of a stick I moved along and invited him in. 

Next thing, he sticks out his hand and says ‘I’m Bill Barlow’.  Well, when I was very young to me he was ‘Sir’ and later ‘Sir William’,

Then he said ‘I recognise you.  I still keep up with the industry through Modern Railways’.  And, with a twinkle in his eye added ‘and I read Informed Sources’.

Now while Sir William Barlow is probably best known as the Chairman and Chief Executive who reorganised the Post Office, like me, he began his career with English Electric Traction.  He joined in 1947 and in 1955, when he returned from managing English Electric’s electrification project for RENFE in North West Spain, he left Traction and went to Liverpool Works. By 1962, when I joined Traction, he was Managing Director of the Liverpool site with 14,000 employees, including Napiers.  Had I dared to speak to speak to him then he would certainly have been ‘Sir’.

An inspiring chance meeting with a true Captain of industry. And someone who has never forgotten his Traction roots,

Highlight of the following week was the annual lunch of the Railway Division of the IMechE.  The reception is around noon and I am lucky to get away by five with so many old chums present.  This year was no exception, with the GW<ML electrification and IEP announcement to discuss.  It was a long day, because before lunch I had two of those meetings that officially never happened.  

This was a special lunch because this year marks the 100th anniversary of the formation of the Institution of Locomotive Engineers which merged with the IMechE to become the Railway Division. Alan Baker, my old Deltic maintaining chum, has written a brief history of the ‘Loco Es’.  If you are interested in a copy e-mail me for details.

At the moment I’m keeping the rest of the month free because in April we’re off for a short holiday in France – by train, of course.  But one thing is certain in today’s railway, diaries rarely stay empty for long.

Roger

 

EZezine Company Terms of Service Privacy Policy