On Aug 11, 3:44*pm, wrote:
Not that I can recall. The Bakerloo is the only other Metronet line with
old trains, but they're not due for replacement for a few years yet. Had
Metronet remained in its original form, I'm sure these would just have
been follow-ons from the Bombardier 2009 stock (rather like the Met-Cam
1972 stock was based on the 1967 TS), but TfL is much more likely to put
it out to tender.

Is it really to much to ask for LUL to stick with a common design to save
on the cost of a new one as opposed to just adding extra orders onto the book?
Not to mention being able to spread staff maintenance expertise over more than
1 line, saving on the cost of spares etc. While train builders seem to like to
pretend they're designing the space shuttles replacement there really hasn't
been any large scale new tech in trains for the last 10 years so why bother
with yet another design?

Do you understand how train procurement works?

The client (so Metronet for the S-stock, TfL for the new Bakerloo
stock) asks a manufacturer to quote for providing a certain number of
trains in service over their expected lifetime, to a particular set of
specifications. The manufacturer provides maintenance, is responsible
for all maintenance costs, and has to pay the client compensation if
availability targets aren't met.

Different manufacturers bid for the trains based on their expected
costs of providing and maintaining the trains. If a particular
manufacturer has just built 47 Tube trains and 191 sub-surface trains,
it's quite likely that their expected costs will be lower. However, if
another manufacturer is willing to underbid them (e.g. they're
desperate to break into the UK market, or the first supplier is taking
the mick because they think they're a shoe-in), then the client will
save money compared with picking the original supplier.

In other words, when LU puts the Bakerloo contract out to tender,
Bombardier will be favourite to win it with something pretty similar
to the S-stock for the reasons you list (ie it'll be cheaper for them
to build and maintain the trains), and if someone else wins that's
because they want to offer us an even better deal that outweighs the
economies of scale.

--
John Band
john at johnband dot org
www.johnband.org