New press release from the DfT announcing that Bombardier have got the
contract for the 120 new carriages for the Stansted Express. Other
improvements flow from the transfer of trains from London Midland and
Clacton depot is to be reopened.

More here

http://nds.coi.gov.uk/environment/fu...partment=False

--
Paul C
via Google

"plcd1" wrote in message
...
New press release from the DfT announcing that Bombardier have got the
contract for the 120 new carriages for the Stansted Express. Other
improvements flow from the transfer of trains from London Midland and
Clacton depot is to be reopened.


It confirms that 17 x 321s (68 cars) will transfer from LM to NXEA
(presumably these will arrive by December this year - difficult to see new
Electrostars that soon) as proposed in the various iterations of the rolling
stock plan. So it just shows how long a cascade takes to plan, never mind
new build...

Paul

In article
,
(plcd1) wrote:

New press release from the DfT announcing that Bombardier have got the
contract for the 120 new carriages for the Stansted Express. Other
improvements flow from the transfer of trains from London Midland and
Clacton depot is to be reopened.

More here

http://nds.coi.gov.uk/environment/fu...seID=397597&Ne
wsAreaID=2&NavigatedFromDepartment=False

The new trains will be leased from Lloyds TSB I see, pursuant to the DfT's
vendetta against the ROSCOs. Who's going to look after them, then? And
what happens to them after the end of NXEA'a franchise? ISTR it was only
for 9 years, giving us enough grief planning the future of Cambridge
station.

--
Colin Rosenstiel

wrote:
In article
,
(plcd1) wrote:

New press release from the DfT announcing that Bombardier have got
the contract for the 120 new carriages for the Stansted Express.
Other improvements flow from the transfer of trains from London
Midland and Clacton depot is to be reopened.

More here

http://nds.coi.gov.uk/environment/fu...seID=397597&Ne
wsAreaID=2&NavigatedFromDepartment=False

The new trains will be leased from Lloyds TSB I see, pursuant to the
DfT's vendetta against the ROSCOs.

Er, doesn't that just make the Lloyds TSB subsidiary another Rosco? What's
the main difference?

Who's going to look after them, then?

Bombardier, at Ilford - according to their press release:

http://www.bombardier.com/en/transpo...01260d8008ecc3

And what happens to them after the end of NXEA'a franchise?

Nothing, other than a relivery. New trains like these are normally tied to
the franchise - DfT will simply require any new operator to take on the
fleet. By then the idea will be to find a way of replacing the older stuff
like 317s.

IIRC this is why the competition commission reported that there was no
likelihood of any incoming franchisee changing the existing rolling stock,
unless requested to by DfT. An example of this was GoVia, with the LM 321s
and 150s

Paul

"Paul Scott" wrote:

Er, doesn't that just make the Lloyds TSB subsidiary another Rosco? What's
the main difference?


It depends how you define a ROSCO. The accepted definition is being one
the three Rolling Stock Companies that were set up in the mid-1990s to
hold former BR rolling stock.

These three ROSCOs - Angel Trains, Eversholt Leasing and Porterbrook-
were privatised in 1996. Angel Trains was later sold to Abbey National
which later became part of the Banco Santander group. Eversholt
Leasing was sold to HSBC and became HSBC Rail. But all three are still
trading.

Other leasing companies have entered the market, but they don't tend to
be called "ROSCOs" because they were not among the original three. The
Lloyds TSB subsidiary will probably resemble a ROSCO in all but origin -
if it isn't one of the original three, it isn't a true ROSCO.

"Tony Polson" wrote in message

"Paul Scott" wrote:

Er, doesn't that just make the Lloyds TSB subsidiary another Rosco?
What's the main difference?


It depends how you define a ROSCO. The accepted definition is being
one the three Rolling Stock Companies that were set up in the
mid-1990s to hold former BR rolling stock.

These three ROSCOs - Angel Trains, Eversholt Leasing and Porterbrook-
were privatised in 1996. Angel Trains was later sold to Abbey
National which later became part of the Banco Santander group.
Eversholt Leasing was sold to HSBC and became HSBC Rail. But all
three are still trading.

Other leasing companies have entered the market, but they don't tend
to be called "ROSCOs" because they were not among the original three.
The Lloyds TSB subsidiary will probably resemble a ROSCO in all but
origin - if it isn't one of the original three, it isn't a true ROSCO.

Certainly, the DaFT vendetta is only against those original three
ROSCOs, as it is convinced that they're over-charging for the leases on
the legacy BR stock they inherited. This may be partly because the
original ROSCOs were sold for a song, and the first owners therefore
paid a very low price for all that BR stock, much of which remains in
service. [As an aside, the low prices were largely because of the
Prescott threat in 1995-7 to nationalise the ROSCOs with minimal
compensation, once Labour got into power. Once in became clear that this
wasn't going to happen, the ROSCOs shot up in value and the MBO teams
retired rich.]

Of course, the current ROSCO owners all paid much higher prices when
they bought the second-hand ROSCOs, so one could argue that the
unjustified profit all went to the original ROSCO owners, and that the
current owners paid a fair market price for them. I think there's much
less dispute over the lease prices charged for new-build post-BR stock,
whether by the original ROSCOs or newer entrants to the market, as all
transactions are at market value.

"Recliner" wrote:

"Tony Polson" wrote in message

"Paul Scott" wrote:

Er, doesn't that just make the Lloyds TSB subsidiary another Rosco?
What's the main difference?


It depends how you define a ROSCO. The accepted definition is being
one the three Rolling Stock Companies that were set up in the
mid-1990s to hold former BR rolling stock.

These three ROSCOs - Angel Trains, Eversholt Leasing and Porterbrook-
were privatised in 1996. Angel Trains was later sold to Abbey
National which later became part of the Banco Santander group.
Eversholt Leasing was sold to HSBC and became HSBC Rail. But all
three are still trading.

Other leasing companies have entered the market, but they don't tend
to be called "ROSCOs" because they were not among the original three.
The Lloyds TSB subsidiary will probably resemble a ROSCO in all but
origin - if it isn't one of the original three, it isn't a true ROSCO.

Certainly, the DaFT vendetta is only against those original three
ROSCOs, as it is convinced that they're over-charging for the leases on
the legacy BR stock they inherited. This may be partly because the
original ROSCOs were sold for a song, and the first owners therefore
paid a very low price for all that BR stock, much of which remains in
service. [As an aside, the low prices were largely because of the
Prescott threat in 1995-7 to nationalise the ROSCOs with minimal
compensation, once Labour got into power. Once in became clear that this
wasn't going to happen, the ROSCOs shot up in value and the MBO teams
retired rich.]

Of course, the current ROSCO owners all paid much higher prices when
they bought the second-hand ROSCOs, so one could argue that the
unjustified profit all went to the original ROSCO owners, and that the
current owners paid a fair market price for them. I think there's much
less dispute over the lease prices charged for new-build post-BR stock,
whether by the original ROSCOs or newer entrants to the market, as all
transactions are at market value.


Yes, I would agree with all of that.

The demonising of the original three companies probably means that being
called a ROSCO is the very last thing that new entrants to the rail
leasing sector would want. ;-)

In message , at 16:54:51
on Thu, 2 Apr 2009, remarked:
And what happens to them after the end of NXEA'a franchise? ISTR it was
only for 9 years, giving us enough grief planning the future of
Cambridge station.

Is it not the case that franchises such as FCC to Cambridge will run
until taken over by an integrated "Thameslink 2013" franchise, by which
time all the infrastructure improvements will be complete.
--
Roland Perry

In article , (Roland
Perry) wrote:

In message , at
16:54:51 on Thu, 2 Apr 2009,
remarked:
And what happens to them after the end of NXEA'a franchise? ISTR it
was only for 9 years, giving us enough grief planning the future of
Cambridge station.

Is it not the case that franchises such as FCC to Cambridge will
run until taken over by an integrated "Thameslink 2013" franchise,
by which time all the infrastructure improvements will be complete.

Bzzt! Cambridge station comes under the East Anglia franchise!

--
Colin Rosenstiel

In message , at 03:16:09
on Fri, 3 Apr 2009, remarked:
And what happens to them after the end of NXEA'a franchise? ISTR it
was only for 9 years, giving us enough grief planning the future of
Cambridge station.

Is it not the case that franchises such as FCC to Cambridge will
run until taken over by an integrated "Thameslink 2013" franchise,
by which time all the infrastructure improvements will be complete.

Bzzt! Cambridge station comes under the East Anglia franchise!

So it's being extended independently of the Thameslink 2013 project?

In any event, the NXEA franchise is extendable until March 2014.

Now we are on the subject, have they done the small increases in length
of platform 1 & 4 (to 12 cars) yet?
--
Roland Perry