Overall is Cityrail happy with the performance of the Waratah train so far? I have read that there is an option to order 20 additional sets. Do you think they will exercise that option or not? I hope they do.
Cam
Cam
Is Cityrail pleased with the Waratah Train and will they order more?
ctang
Station Master
R44
Chief Commissioner
Location: Moving paper
Ok, they order another 20 sets...with who building them?
boxythingy
Chief Commissioner
Location: Banned
R44
Chief Commissioner
Location: Moving paper
Should've asked in this thread http://www.railpage.com.au/f-t11355248-s1850.htm
This is a perfectly valid discussion for this thread. It wouldnt really fit in the other thread.
boxythingy
Chief Commissioner
Location: Banned
Overall is Cityrail happy with the performance of the Waratah train so far? I have read that there is an option to order 20 additional sets. Do you think they will exercise that option or not? I hope they do.
Cam
Seeing that they are asking about the (current) performance of the Waratah trains and asking for any news on the additional sets, I don't see how it cannot be asked in the Waratah Updates thread.
R44
Chief Commissioner
Location: Moving paper
Overall is Cityrail happy with the performance of the Waratah train so far? I have read that there is an option to order 20 additional sets. Do you think they will exercise that option or not? I hope they do.Seeing that they are asking about the (current) performance of the Waratah trains and asking for any news on the additional sets, I don't see how it cannot be asked in the Waratah Updates thread.
Cam
The waratah UPDATES Thread is for news, Yes, However this is a very interesting seperate discussion. besides, the updates thread is bound to get sidetracked with A9's PC in a few weeks
newington
Chief Commissioner
Location: Here, very occasionally.
Ok, they order another 20 sets...with who building them?
The same company presumably.
Kamz
Assistant Commissioner
Is 20 enough to replace all K & C sets?
labhenryboy
Chief Train Controller
Location: Mortdale via Syndal
Ok, they order another 20 sets...with who building them?
The same company presumably.
With the consortium building the current ones essentially broke I would think it unlikely that the government would go back to them for more.
R44
Chief Commissioner
Location: Moving paper
Is 20 enough to replace all K & C sets?
And why would you want to do that. The C Sets are essentially a year or 2 younger than the Tangaras. They have aircon, so I dont see a problem
boxythingy
Chief Commissioner
Location: Banned
Is 20 enough to replace all K & C sets?
And why would you want to do that. The C Sets are essentially a year or 2 younger than the Tangaras. They have aircon, so I dont see a problem
That's right and they still have a chance to keep them from being abused. They are decent trains except for the C-Set irreversible seating.
littleal9
Train Controller
Location: bellambi
Is 20 enough to replace all K & C sets?
And why would you want to do that. The C Sets are essentially a year or 2 younger than the Tangaras. They have aircon, so I dont see a problem
I thought C sets were the test bed for Chopper control prior to being used in Tangaras and V sets. that would make them older.
C Sets built 1986-87 Tangaras 1988-94
A78
Assistant Commissioner
Location: Banned
Watch c set commissioning on YouTube they were the test for T sets also go to the next page of Sydney forum there is a post from me with a video of the tangaras design
PDCL
Chief Train Controller
Is 20 enough to replace all K & C sets?
Aside from the why would you argument, no. There are 20 x 8-car K-sets (or 40 actual 4 car sets). So the option on the Waratah's could replace them, however there are also 7 x 8-car C-sets (14 individual 4-car sets). So I suppose the option on the contract is to either replace the K's which will all be at least 30 years old in 2015, or, to increase network capacity, the C's are hanging around for a while yet.
http://www.cityrail.info/about/fleet/
Raichase
Captain Rant!
Location: Sydney, NSW
With the consortium building the current ones essentially broke I would think it unlikely that the government would go back to them for more.
The company building the Waratah trains is not broke - that company is Downer EDI. The company that went broke was Reliance Rail, which was a seperate entity to Downer EDI, despite EDI holding a large stake in the company. This presumably allowed the parent company to wash their hands of it when it went bust, forcing the State Government to step in and bail them out.
From the Reliance Rail website:
Reliance Rail is owned by the following companies:
Downer EDI Limited (49%) — one of Australasia's largest outsourcing engineering services companies providing comprehensive engineering and infrastructure management services to the public and private transport, energy, communications and resources sectors.
Interests managed by AMP Capital Investors (25.5%) — one of Australia and New Zealand’s leading specialist investment managers and one of the longest standing participants in Australian infrastructure, with involvement in the asset class since 1988.
Royal Bank of Scotland Group plc (12.75%) — RBS is a market leader in developing and financing of social infrastructure in Australia
International Public Partnerships Limited (12.75%) — a U.K. listed PPP/PFI infrastructure fund managed by Amber Infrastructure Limited, a world leading developer and manager of social infrastructure assets.
As for the experts here saying there is "nothing wrong with the C-Sets", basing a decision to retire a train solely on it's age and air-conditioning is poor business sense indeed. Mechanically, the S-Sets are reliable trains (when maintained well), and are reasonably simple to fix in service, depending on the fault. The Chopper sets have a number of differences from a K-Set that make them prone to failure, and they are far less reliable than the older sets. No point in having an air-conditioned train if it spits the dummy and becomes a complete failure in a section...
djf01
Chief Commissioner
[quote="Raichase"]
From the Reliance Rail website:
[quote]Reliance Rail is owned by the following companies:
Downer EDI Limited (49%) — one of Australasia's largest outsourcing engineering services companies providing comprehensive engineering and infrastructure management services to the public and private transport, energy, communications and resources sectors.
Interests managed by AMP Capital Investors (25.5%) — one of Australia and New Zealand’s leading specialist investment managers and one of the longest standing participants in Australian infrastructure, with involvement in the asset class since 1988.
Royal Bank of Scotland Group plc (12.75%) — RBS is a market leader in developing and financing of social infrastructure in Australia
International Public Partnerships Limited (12.75%) — a U.K. listed PPP/PFI infrastructure fund managed by Amber Infrastructure Limited, a world leading developer and manager of social infrastructure assets.[/quote]
AIUI, The State Government has assumed 100% equity in Reliance Rail. Even before the GCF, Reliance Rail was highly geared, so it didn't take much in terms of cost overruns to wipe out the equity in the project. Even before any cost overruns, Reliance Rail was in trouble as the debt financiers wanted this unwound in some way to continue to roll over the debt.
Personally, (so long as the Reliance Rail structure remains in place and the debt financiers are committed) I expect increasing the order would be enough to make Reliance solvent - or at least give it positive equity value again. In that case, the government could subsequently sell it's equity stake back to the private sector - perhaps the original owners, perhaps the holders of the debt, perhaps some other suckers. It *should* be possible to get these extra new trains for effectively nothing, which is the job Greiner was brought in for, not to get rail projects cancelled.
From the Reliance Rail website:
[quote]Reliance Rail is owned by the following companies:
Downer EDI Limited (49%) — one of Australasia's largest outsourcing engineering services companies providing comprehensive engineering and infrastructure management services to the public and private transport, energy, communications and resources sectors.
Interests managed by AMP Capital Investors (25.5%) — one of Australia and New Zealand’s leading specialist investment managers and one of the longest standing participants in Australian infrastructure, with involvement in the asset class since 1988.
Royal Bank of Scotland Group plc (12.75%) — RBS is a market leader in developing and financing of social infrastructure in Australia
International Public Partnerships Limited (12.75%) — a U.K. listed PPP/PFI infrastructure fund managed by Amber Infrastructure Limited, a world leading developer and manager of social infrastructure assets.[/quote]
AIUI, The State Government has assumed 100% equity in Reliance Rail. Even before the GCF, Reliance Rail was highly geared, so it didn't take much in terms of cost overruns to wipe out the equity in the project. Even before any cost overruns, Reliance Rail was in trouble as the debt financiers wanted this unwound in some way to continue to roll over the debt.
Personally, (so long as the Reliance Rail structure remains in place and the debt financiers are committed) I expect increasing the order would be enough to make Reliance solvent - or at least give it positive equity value again. In that case, the government could subsequently sell it's equity stake back to the private sector - perhaps the original owners, perhaps the holders of the debt, perhaps some other suckers. It *should* be possible to get these extra new trains for effectively nothing, which is the job Greiner was brought in for, not to get rail projects cancelled.
jaseee
Chief Train Controller
The initial order of Waratah's is for 626 carriages right? Which is more than how many S, L and R sets CityRail has? Therefore there will already be extra trains for extra capacity already so I don't see why the 20 extra order couldn't replace some of the K-sets.
A78
Assistant Commissioner
Location: Banned
Yeah it could replace the k sets but I think if they do cityrail will definatley keep them as spare trains and for major events
A78
Assistant Commissioner
Location: Banned
Yeah it could replace the k sets but I think if they do cityrail will definatley keep them as spare trains and for major events
Raichase
Captain Rant!
Location: Sydney, NSW
I don't know why all of the armchair experts are so quick to replace the K-Sets?
RTT_Rules
Minister for Railways
Location: Dubai UAE
[quote="djf01"][quote="Raichase"]
From the Reliance Rail website:
[quote]Reliance Rail is owned by the following companies:
Downer EDI Limited (49%) — one of Australasia's largest outsourcing engineering services companies providing comprehensive engineering and infrastructure management services to the public and private transport, energy, communications and resources sectors.
Interests managed by AMP Capital Investors (25.5%) — one of Australia and New Zealand’s leading specialist investment managers and one of the longest standing participants in Australian infrastructure, with involvement in the asset class since 1988.
Royal Bank of Scotland Group plc (12.75%) — RBS is a market leader in developing and financing of social infrastructure in Australia
International Public Partnerships Limited (12.75%) — a U.K. listed PPP/PFI infrastructure fund managed by Amber Infrastructure Limited, a world leading developer and manager of social infrastructure assets.[/quote]
AIUI, The State Government has assumed 100% equity in Reliance Rail. Even before the GCF, Reliance Rail was highly geared, so it didn't take much in terms of cost overruns to wipe out the equity in the project. Even before any cost overruns, Reliance Rail was in trouble as the debt financiers wanted this unwound in some way to continue to roll over the debt.
Personally, (so long as the Reliance Rail structure remains in place and the debt financiers are committed) I expect increasing the order would be enough to make Reliance solvent - or at least give it positive equity value again. In that case, the government could subsequently sell it's equity stake back to the private sector - perhaps the original owners, perhaps the holders of the debt, perhaps some other suckers. It *should* be possible to get these extra new trains for effectively nothing, which is the job Greiner was brought in for, not to get rail projects cancelled.
[/quote]
This is the time for govt to step up and work with EDI for a 10 year supply contract, local assembly based using the A set drawings allowing for minor variation in design making what ever number of trains is required annually in 2-3 years time to replace and expand existing fleet. Plant will produce both DD SMU and DD IMU and if required SD DMU's. Then with 3 years to go on 10 year contract govt goes out for tender for next generation of trains and Engineering company to design and build for the following 10 years. Staff are employed by Eng company.
No more batch one off contract models all using different parts.
From the Reliance Rail website:
[quote]Reliance Rail is owned by the following companies:
Downer EDI Limited (49%) — one of Australasia's largest outsourcing engineering services companies providing comprehensive engineering and infrastructure management services to the public and private transport, energy, communications and resources sectors.
Interests managed by AMP Capital Investors (25.5%) — one of Australia and New Zealand’s leading specialist investment managers and one of the longest standing participants in Australian infrastructure, with involvement in the asset class since 1988.
Royal Bank of Scotland Group plc (12.75%) — RBS is a market leader in developing and financing of social infrastructure in Australia
International Public Partnerships Limited (12.75%) — a U.K. listed PPP/PFI infrastructure fund managed by Amber Infrastructure Limited, a world leading developer and manager of social infrastructure assets.[/quote]
AIUI, The State Government has assumed 100% equity in Reliance Rail. Even before the GCF, Reliance Rail was highly geared, so it didn't take much in terms of cost overruns to wipe out the equity in the project. Even before any cost overruns, Reliance Rail was in trouble as the debt financiers wanted this unwound in some way to continue to roll over the debt.
Personally, (so long as the Reliance Rail structure remains in place and the debt financiers are committed) I expect increasing the order would be enough to make Reliance solvent - or at least give it positive equity value again. In that case, the government could subsequently sell it's equity stake back to the private sector - perhaps the original owners, perhaps the holders of the debt, perhaps some other suckers. It *should* be possible to get these extra new trains for effectively nothing, which is the job Greiner was brought in for, not to get rail projects cancelled.
[/quote]
This is the time for govt to step up and work with EDI for a 10 year supply contract, local assembly based using the A set drawings allowing for minor variation in design making what ever number of trains is required annually in 2-3 years time to replace and expand existing fleet. Plant will produce both DD SMU and DD IMU and if required SD DMU's. Then with 3 years to go on 10 year contract govt goes out for tender for next generation of trains and Engineering company to design and build for the following 10 years. Staff are employed by Eng company.
No more batch one off contract models all using different parts.
Ben_Daui
Deputy Commissioner
As for the experts here saying there is "nothing wrong with the C-Sets"
Well if Railcorp decide to swap the seating over to Directional seating as the R/Sets will be disposed of so there will be more then enough seats to allow all C-Sets to have Directional seating.
NoDont
Station Master
I think it's a fair assumption that they're going to continue ordering - after all, Waratah training still seems to be going full pelt out at Petersham.
Also, my understanding of Reliance's financial position is that it will come good once they start rolling sets out at pace; when RailCorp starts forking out the big bucks for each set used every day.
They're costing so much that train crew have been told to not let any problems out of AMF when they're bringing Waratahs into service because so much money is being handed over.
Also, my understanding of Reliance's financial position is that it will come good once they start rolling sets out at pace; when RailCorp starts forking out the big bucks for each set used every day.
They're costing so much that train crew have been told to not let any problems out of AMF when they're bringing Waratahs into service because so much money is being handed over.
jaseee
Chief Train Controller
FYI, I have nothing against the K-sets. In fact, I prefer a K-set over a T-set any day due to the fact that the T-set seats seem too small (I always seem to get squashed in those seats even though I take up less than half the seat). Not to mention they are not reversable.
VSet2012
Station Master
Is 20 enough to replace all K & C sets?
And why would you want to do that. The C Sets are essentially a year or 2 younger than the Tangaras. They have aircon, so I dont see a problem
I thought C sets were the test bed for Chopper control prior to being used in Tangaras and V sets. that would make them older.
C Sets built 1986-87 Tangaras 1988-94
No, t sets are younger mate, C sets were only made because T sets were delayed and so they could test out the chopper mechanism.
Quick Reply
We've disabled Quick Reply for this thread as it was last updated more than six months ago.