http://news.independent.co.uk/busine...icle337145.ece

Something old something new.

"Bob" wrote in message
oups.com...
http://news.independent.co.uk/busine...icle337145.ece

Something old something new.


I wonder why they think the trains will be '... a cross between those used
on the Underground and those operating on the rail network...'. All they
need to be is normal main line stock with appropriate wide sliding doors,
surely?

Paul

Paul Scott wrote:
"Bob" wrote in message
oups.com...

http://news.independent.co.uk/busine...icle337145.ece

Something old something new.



I wonder why they think the trains will be '... a cross between those used
on the Underground and those operating on the rail network...'. All they
need to be is normal main line stock with appropriate wide sliding doors,
surely?

AND

Higher proportion of standing to sitting space (than suburban stock)

NO need for Loos as most trips will be short
(Just think how many standing passengers you could get in a disabled loo
(;-)

Jim Chisholm

"J. Chisholm" wrote in message
...
Paul Scott wrote:
"Bob" wrote in message
oups.com...

http://news.independent.co.uk/busine...icle337145.ece

Something old something new.



I wonder why they think the trains will be '... a cross between
those used on the Underground and those operating on the rail
network...'. All they need to be is normal main line stock with
appropriate wide sliding doors, surely?

AND

Higher proportion of standing to sitting space (than suburban stock)

NO need for Loos as most trips will be short
(Just think how many standing passengers you could get in a disabled
loo (;-)


Which I would guess means the Bombardier bid is a modified 376 to
include a pantograph.

"J. Chisholm" wrote in message
...
Paul Scott wrote:
"Bob" wrote in message
oups.com...

http://news.independent.co.uk/busine...icle337145.ece

Something old something new.



I wonder why they think the trains will be '... a cross between those
used on the Underground and those operating on the rail network...'. All
they need to be is normal main line stock with appropriate wide sliding
doors, surely?

AND

Higher proportion of standing to sitting space (than suburban stock)

NO need for Loos as most trips will be short
(Just think how many standing passengers you could get in a disabled loo
(;-)

Jim Chisholm

Exactly - there are already many trains in use in the SE that already
have/don't have the features you mention...

Paul

"Matt Wheeler" wrote in message
news

"J. Chisholm" wrote in message
...
Paul Scott wrote:
"Bob" wrote in message
oups.com...

http://news.independent.co.uk/busine...icle337145.ece

Something old something new.



I wonder why they think the trains will be '... a cross between those
used on the Underground and those operating on the rail network...'.
All they need to be is normal main line stock with appropriate wide
sliding doors, surely?

AND

Higher proportion of standing to sitting space (than suburban stock)

NO need for Loos as most trips will be short
(Just think how many standing passengers you could get in a disabled loo
(;-)


Which I would guess means the Bombardier bid is a modified 376 to include
a pantograph.

How will the pantograph help on the third rail system planned for the ELLX
Phase 1? Possibly if ever extended along the NLL.

Paul

Paul Scott wrote:
"J. Chisholm" wrote in message
...
Paul Scott wrote:
"Bob" wrote in message
oups.com...

http://news.independent.co.uk/busine...icle337145.ece

Something old something new.



I wonder why they think the trains will be '... a cross between those
used on the Underground and those operating on the rail network...'. All
they need to be is normal main line stock with appropriate wide sliding
doors, surely?

AND

Higher proportion of standing to sitting space (than suburban stock)

NO need for Loos as most trips will be short
(Just think how many standing passengers you could get in a disabled loo
(;-)

Jim Chisholm

Exactly - there are already many trains in use in the SE that already
have/don't have the features you mention...

Paul


Put pantographs in the spare 458s (which was always intended to be
easy) and put them on the equivalent of existing Silverlink services
and, without need for pantographs, allow for the release of 508s from
long-distance Kent services (directly or by cascade of 465/9s).

This might include some new demisemifast services stopping at South
Hampstead, Kilburn High Road, Queens Park, Harrow and Wealdstone and
Watford (when the Bakerloo takes over).

Put the 508s and 313s on the ELL, where windows and toilets are not
needed.

Sortid.

But it would be a dramatic reduction in comfort and ambience from the
existing 45-year-old Underground stock.

The Independent archives its material within a short period. I annex
therefore an extensive quotation for the benefit of later discussion.
Quote
East London Line's £100m bids
By Tim Webb The Independent
Published: 08 January 2006
Four companies have each submitted £100m bids to supply trains for the
£900m East London Line Tube extension. Manufacturers Siemens,
Bombardier and Hitachi are offering to build new trains, which would be
a cross between those used on the Underground and those operating on
the rail network. The fourth bidder, the train-leasing company
Portabrook, would supply pre-owned trains.
Transport for London will select the winning bidder at the end of next
month.
The East London Line is being extended in the north to Dalston and in
the south to West Croydon and Crystal Palace in the first phase of
expansion, scheduled to be completed in 2010. It is the largest
transport infrastructure project in the London Mayor's five-year plan.
Four consortia are already bidding for the main contract, worth around
£500m, to build new bridges and stations and lay new track. Those bids
are being led by Laing O'Rourke, Mowlem, Balfour Beatty and Skanska.
The construction consortia, which have already been through a
pre-qualification process, will submit their offers at the end of
March.
The second phase of the expansion will see the East London Line extend
across south London to Peckham Rye and terminate at Clapham Junction,
mostly using existing track.
This had been slated to be completed by 2012. But the timetable is
likely to slip as other infrastructure projects, which will more
directly benefit the Olympic Games, take priority to be completed in
time for 2012.
Transport for London will receive a £400m low-interest loan from the
European Investment Bank because the work will benefit deprived areas
of inner London. Funding has not yet been secured for the second phase
of the expansion.
Unquote

I also annex the original RFP published in respect of this stock.

Quote
EAST LONDON LINE ROLLING STOCK PREQUALIFICATION
3.2 Rolling Stock Requirements
3.2.1 The initial rolling stock requirement is for a minimum of 18
trains for service
with sufficient spare trains to accommodate fleet maintenance and
ensure fleet
availability. The trains will be Electric Multiple Units ('Units')
with each Unit
being no more than 83 metres long over coupler faces. The Units are to
be
capable of operation on the Extended East London Line and associated
main
line routes. Additional Units may be required to accommodate further
expansion of operations.
3.2.2 The proposed service plan is for a minimum of 18 trains in
service for
approximately 19 hours a day, 7 days a week. The service pattern will
be
constant from start-up to closure (i.e. there will be no peak and
off-peak service
pattern).
3.2.3 From the initial timetabling, the predicted annual passenger
mileage per Unit is approximately 100,000 miles (160,000km).
3.2.4 The Units are intended for use on inner suburban metro type
services with
typical distances between stations on the core route being less than
1km. The
performance characteristics of the Units must be suitable for this type
of
operation with high acceleration performance levels between 0.8m/s²
and
1.0m/s² up to the maximum core route line speed of 40mph.
3.2.5 A fully rated friction braking system will be required such that
a Unit may
operate normally with the dynamic brake isolated. Blended regenerative
and
fully rated rheostatic braking systems are also required. However,
these
systems must each be capable of isolation by maintenance staff. To
reflect the
metro type service, the braking system must have a high performance to
optimise the operational performance of the Units.
3.2.6 The Units must be designed for a maximum speed of not less than
75mph in order to maximize flexibility in operation.
3.2.7 The interior layout of the Units should maximize passenger
capacity and
facilitate the efficient access and egress of passengers in order to
minimize
station dwell times. A fully loaded Unit with fully occupied seats and
standing
passengers at 5.5 passengers/m² should have a minimum capacity of 750
passengers.
3.2.8 Toilets are not required.
3.2.9 The Units shall be supplied with driver's cabs fitted with
independent Heating,
Ventilation and Air Conditioning ('HVAC') units.
3.2.10 The passenger compartment should have, as a minimum, a forced
pressure ventilation system. If only a forced pressure ventilation
system is proposed it should be possible to upgrade it to air-cooling
or full air conditioning.
3.2.11 The supplied Units must meet the requirements of BS6853 and
comply with at least Category 1b fire rating.
3.2.12 The Units must be capable of being Driver-Only-Operated
('DOO') and fitted with the necessary onboard equipment to monitor
passengers' access and
egress.
3.2.13 The Units must represent a low technical and commercial risk.
Therefore the use of proven systems, designs and configurations is
preferred.
3.2.14 The Units will operate in narrow single bore tunnels. For
emergency egress each Unit must include end access doors and emergency
egress steps/ramps at each end. The end access doors should allow for
Unit-to-Unit evacuation as well as Unit-to-track evacuation. The
vehicles shall be semi-permanently coupled, preferably with wide
through gangways within the Unit.
3.2.15 Potential design options may include number and layout of seats,
fittings and equipment. An ability to accommodate design options as
late as possible is
preferred, in order to reflect the requirements of the appointed
operator.
3.2.16 The Units must be capable of operation on the national rail
third rail
electrification system. An ability to be readily converted to 25 kV AC
overhead
operation is desirable.
3.2.17 The Rolling Stock Supplier will be responsible for all
activities required to
enable the passenger service operator to obtain a Route Acceptance
Safety
Case and any other approvals required to allow the Units to operate.
3.2.18 The supply, operation and maintenance of the Units will be
required to comply with Railway Group Standards, ATOC Standards, HMRI
requirements and guidance and other standards and requirements as more
specifically detailed in the Invitation to Tender and detailed
specification (see section 10 below for further information).
3.2.19 The Units will operate through Network Rail and LU operated
stations. The Rolling Stock Supplier will be required to take due
cognizance of pertinent LU Standards and other special requirements
that may apply at these stations.
3.2.20 The supplied Units are required to interface efficiently with
the upgraded
infrastructure and installations. The Rolling Stock Supplier will be
required to
co-operate with the infrastructure contractors and the Contracting
Authority to
ensure an efficient and effective interface.
3.2.21 The integration and delivery of the rolling stock is programmed
over an
approximate thirty-six month period. Test running of the rolling stock
on the
upgraded East London Line infrastructure is anticipated to commence in
early
2009. See section 8 below for further information.
3.2.22 The provision of a driver cab simulator unit as part of a
developed driver training programme is also anticipated to form part of
the Rolling Stock Supply
Contract.
3.2.23 The Units must be fully compliant with the Rail Vehicle
Accessibility Regulations (RVAR) 1999 and the Disability Discrimination
Act (DDA) 1995.

The quote required 5.5 passengers per square metre both standing or
sitting. How does this compare with the LUL A stock currently in use?

The quote also requested a capability to be easily converted to 25kv AC
- I assume that is an " as well as" 750v DC.

With a production run of only 20 trains (18 in service 2 on overhaul)
(BWOR CSC use 72 trains with maintenance cover of 2)- this has got to
be an out of the catalogue buy as bespoke trains would just be too
expensive - so it looks like £5 million pound per train.
These penny numbers train orders cannot be economic.

In message . com of
Tue, 10 Jan 2006 09:00:40 in uk.transport.london, Bob
writes

The Independent archives its material within a short period. I annex
therefore an extensive quotation for the benefit of later discussion.
Quote

I much prefer an attributed copy of a URL than a mere reference so
searching a news archive is more effective.

The East London Line is being extended in the north to Dalston and in
the south to West Croydon and Crystal Palace in the first phase of

I saw this the first time and could not understand why the line should
go south to West Croydon and then north to Crystal Palace.

http://www.tfl.gov.uk/rail/downloads/pdf/ELLbrochureupdate17.08.pdf
is a 1.05Mb document which is not easily copiable here because it
contains pictures. It shows the "new" stations south of the river are
Brockley, Honor Oak Park, Forest Hill, Sydenham, Penge West, Anerley,
Norwood Junction and West Croydon. There is a spur to Crystal Palace
from Sydenham.

I infer that East Croydon is not served - it is the only Croydon station
I have ever used. It has tram services and good Gatwick Airport
connections. I don't know about trams from other stations served by the
"new" line. OTOH, a recent trip from London Bridge to East Croydon did
go through Norwood Junction. Perhaps I need another diagram.

expansion, scheduled to be completed in 2010. It is the largest
transport infrastructure project in the London Mayor's five-year plan.

I find it depressing it goes from roughly nowhere to roughly nowhere.
I fear I may be dead before CrossRail is built.

[snip]
This had been slated to be completed by 2012. But the timetable is
likely to slip as other infrastructure projects, which will more
directly benefit the Olympic Games, take priority to be completed in
time for 2012.

Infrastructure for a 16 day sporting festival? I am reminded of the 3.5
thousand million pounds spent to serve the obsolete tent at North
Greenwich. (AKA The Millennium Dome
--
Walter Briscoe

Walter Briscoe wrote:
I much prefer an attributed copy of a URL than a mere reference so
searching a news archive is more effective.

I agree and posted the link to the original article in the first
posting of this thread. IIRC the Independent moves material to its
premium payable archive after five days

The East London Line is being extended in the north to Dalston and in
the south to West Croydon and Crystal Palace in the first phase of

I saw this the first time and could not understand why the line should
go south to West Croydon and then north to Crystal Palace.

And the second time you saw it - you realised that for the ELL - West
Croydon and Crystal Palace are separate termini? - Crystal Palace will
reopen the northern bay platforms 5 and 6 for the ELL.Direct connecting
services from West Croydon to Crystal Palace go via platforms 1&2 and
on to Victoria

I infer that East Croydon is not served - it is the only Croydon station
I have ever used. It has tram services and good Gatwick Airport
connections. I don't know about trams from other stations served by the
"new" line. OTOH, a recent trip from London Bridge to East Croydon did
go through Norwood Junction. Perhaps I need another diagram.

West Croydon has a tram station on the northern inbound town centre
"Cannon Hilling" section. The Brighton line RUS has been discussed
extensively in other threads on this group particularly in relation to
the Gatwick Express. East Croydon has very busy six through platforms -
turn rounds are not practical.

I find it depressing it goes from roughly nowhere to roughly nowhere.
Only at the northern end - again something that has aready been
discussed extensively

I fear I may be dead before CrossRail is built.

Separate project from the ELL. Gestation periods tend to be lengthy -
the LUL Victoria line IIRC took thirty plus years from inception to the
beginning of construction and that is regarded as quick.

This had been slated to be completed by 2012. But the timetable is
likely to slip as other infrastructure projects, which will more
directly benefit the Olympic Games, take priority to be completed in
time for 2012.

I have still to see a satisfactory explanation of what will slip and
why and how long. The northern end restoration is underway with no
insuperable problems found so far in the existing viaduct
infrastructure. the Liverpool Street station approach bridge push is
booked. The stock is being procured. Only under the Thames and in the
New Cross area do developments not seem to have a firm date
yet.Capacity constraints might arise in London's construction industry
but in the absence of a Thameslink and Crossrail go ahead this should
not seriously affect this project which is small by comparison to them
at this stage.

Infrastructure for a 16 day sporting festival? I am reminded of the 3.5
thousand million pounds spent to serve the obsolete tent at North
Greenwich. (AKA The Millennium Dome

Every Olympic City seeks to gain a permanent infrastructure legacy -
Athens has a new tramway - Montreal had a new metro system. The Jubilee
Line extension was a classic tale of mismanaged construction project
management but the routing and the stations on the south bank of the
Thames all broke new ground in linking the previously split transport
infrastructure of London. Bermondsey, Canada Water and North Greenwich
have a significant impact on social exclusion in some of the most
deprived inner city areas. If nothing else North Greenwich reclaimed
the "poisoned peninsula" for London As a piece of construction the Dome
was not expensive - per square metre it cost about as much as a B&Q
warehouse. An operational nightmare - its failure to attract punters
because of its content and prices and then the lack of a post
operational closure/disposal plan were its biggest problems. The
transport hub for both buses and the Jubilee line remain and act as a
focus for employment and investment.If big events shake money for
transport out of the Treasury's grasp I am all for them - Sensible
transport infrastructure investment plans don't seem to cut it.