Chiltern MK3 replacement fleet possibilities?

[TrainTrackJack]

A tender has been placed for the replacement of MK3 stock on the Chiltern Mainline. It includes the potential of a locomotive hauled fleet - a strong indication towards the ex TPE MK5As.

The Chiltern Railway Company Limited ("Chiltern"), is seeking proposals from established rolling stock owners for the leasing and associated maintenance services of between 25 and 70 of their existing vehicles to operate intercity and regional services on the Chiltern Main line. The vehicles are expected to have the following characteristics:

• Comprised of either self-powered multiple units or coaching vehicles that can be hauled by locomotive;

• Be able to be utilised in fixed formations of between 5 and 6 passenger vehicles or sub-multiples of;

• Capable of operating at 100mph;

• (in relation to driving vehicles) fitted with the TPWS Mark 4 protection system (this is a requirement of the Chiltern Main Line);

• Have power operated centrally-locked doors;

• Compliant with accessibility legislation;

• Compatible with the existing infrastructure on the Chiltern Main Line;

• Offer passengers a high-level of on-board comfort including full HVAC systems, on-board CCTV and real-time passenger information;

• Deliver a reduction in ambient noise compared to the rolling stock that operates Chiltern's existing London to Birmingham services (Class 68 locomotive and MKIII coaches).

• Any diesel-powered solutions shall be compatible with alternative fuels, such as HVO, from the service introduction date.

The above is not an exhaustive list of Chiltern's requirements and further information will be provided in the procurement documentation.

The rolling stock proposed shall be available to support a driver training programme within 2024 and available to enter passenger service by early 2025...

The tender is attached  here:

Replacement (Existing) Rolling Stock for Chiltern Railways [Notice]

The Chiltern Railway Company Limited ("Chiltern"), is seeking proposals from established rolling sto... A Utilities Contract Notice by Chiltern Railway. Value 300M.

bidstats.uk

 

[TT-ONR-NRN]

But how does using MK5s instead of MK3s “deliver a reduction in ambient noise?” Yes, MK3s are very squeaky, but it’s the 68 that cause the noise obviously.

 

[AJDesiro]

But how does using MK5s instead of MK3s “deliver a reduction in ambient noise?” Yes, MK3s are very squeaky, but it’s the 68 that cause the noise obviously.

The tender doesn't explicitly state that they'd run with 68s.

 

[TT-ONR-NRN]

The tender doesn't explicitly state that they'd run with 68s.

What do you suggest they’d be hauled with?

 

[AJDesiro]

What do you suggest they’d be hauled with?

I don't really know what else they could use, but that's what's in the tender. It could just elude to the noise reduction modification trials on the 68s as announced back in July.

 

[TT-ONR-NRN]

I don't really know what else they could use, but that's what's in the tender. It could just elude to the noise reduction modification trials on the 68s as announced back in July.

I know, but I’m referring more to the OPs suggestion that they want MK5a. Probably more likely that they want units.

 

[Doomotron]

I know, but I’m referring more to the OPs suggestion that they want MK5a. Probably more likely that they want units.

I'm not certain myself. They do seem like a shoe-in, almost a drag-and-drop replacement for the Mark 3s since they will likely need very little work to be used with the 68s Chiltern already have. Plus, Chiltern is pretty much the only operator that is an obvious place for them to go. The fact that loco-hauled stock is marked as a possibility in the tender means that they are distinctly a possibility, although MUs are still possible. That said, other than Bombardier I don't think anyone is offering quite what Chiltern want if they were set on having multiple units, unless Stadler would consider putting two power cars into their FLIRT units.

 

[AJDesiro]

I'm not certain myself. They do seem like a shoe-in, almost a drag-and-drop replacement for the Mark 3s since they will likely need very little work to be used with the 68s Chiltern already have. Plus, Chiltern is pretty much the only operator that is an obvious place for them to go. The fact that loco-hauled stock is marked as a possibility in the tender means that they are distinctly a possibility, although MUs are still possible. That said, other than Bombardier I don't think anyone is offering quite what Chiltern want if they were set on having multiple units, unless Stadler would consider putting two power cars into their FLIRT units.

Another thing that suggests the Mk 5As is the given timeframe, with training starting in 2024, and entry to service in early 2025, that’s an almost impossible timeframe for new units nowadays.

 

[matt]

The tender specifies existing stock not new build.

 

[Bletchleyite]

To me that does seem a shoe in for the Mk5s. Only other thing coming close is the 175s, and it does say existing fleet so effectively excludes new build.

 

[3RDGEN]

If they want Mk5's then why spec up to 70 vehicles when there's only 65 (+1 spare) Mk5's and also the six coach format means reforming the sets?

The 175's meet that limited spec as written.

 

[Topological]

To me that does seem a shoe in for the Mk5s. Only other thing coming close is the 175s, and it does say existing fleet so effectively excludes new build.

Yes, 175s surely as they can easily run as 3+2 or 3+3 or even 2+2+2 (though that is a bit of a problem without gangways) so fit the 5/6 car length. Noise would definitely be reduced.

Presumably, any other mention of stock is purely so that it is not guaranteed to be the 175s.

If they want Mk5's then why spec up to 70 vehicles when there's only 65 (+1 spare) Mk5's and also the six coach format means reforming the sets?

The 175's meet that limited spec as written.

 

[TT-ONR-NRN]

175s were also written into some sort of contract for Chiltern Railways which referred to "The 165 and 175 classes in the fleet" ages ago I think

 

[D6975]

If they want Mk5's then why spec up to 70 vehicles when there's only 65 (+1 spare) Mk5's and also the six coach format means reforming the sets?

The 175's meet that limited spec as written.

Because it's 25-70 vehicles in 5 or 6 coach sets, not 70 vehicles in 6 coach sets.

 

[fgwrich]

To me that does seem a shoe in for the Mk5s. Only other thing coming close is the 175s, and it does say existing fleet so effectively excludes new build.

I would be highly surprised if the 175s have TPWS Mk4 fitted in them. The 68+Mk5 option would point to a much quicker entry into service too, as driver training would only really be required for the DVTs - and IIRC, I think they have a cab designed similar to the 68s?

 

[SuperLuke2334]

Yes, 175s surely as they can easily run as 3+2 or 3+3 or even 2+2+2 (though that is a bit of a problem without gangways) so fit the 5/6 car length. Noise would definitely be reduced.

Presumably, any other mention of stock is purely so that it is not guaranteed to be the 175s.

Lack of gangways wouldn't be an issue for Chiltern, none of their other stock has them and they regularly run in multiples.

 

[172007]

Because it's 25-70 vehicles in 5 or 6 coach sets, not 70 vehicles in 6 coach sets.

Chiltern need 9 sets of 6 coaches so that all MYB to West Mids trains are loco hauled. That would lead to MK5A's with spares.

I think it's purely down to the Class 68 silencer Mods being successfull with one local authority on the the line of route.

 

[Carlisle]

Chiltern need 9 sets of 6 coaches so that all MYB to West Mids trains are loco hauled. That would lead to MK5A's with spares.

That’d mean every train required a conductor for its entire journey rather than just north of Banbury as happens currently.

 

[172007]

Correct. That would be a sticking point but not unsumountable i immagine.

 

[meld3]

"up to 70 vehicles" is like "up to 300 miles" from your EV, or "up to 100 Mb broadband".

Sounds like DfT (not Chiltern) want the 175's, so they write a tender that only qualifies 175's and Mk5's (being far more expensive) to show to "hard working families" that you take tax payers money / procurement seriously and the 175s are great value for money....

 

[172007]

"up to 70 vehicles" is like "up to 300 miles" from your EV, or "up to 100 Mb broadband".

Sounds like DfT (not Chiltern) want the 175's, so they write a tender that only qualifies 175's and Mk5's (being far more expensive) to show to "hard working families" that you take tax payers money / procurement seriously and the 175s are great value for money....

Nothing like it. Whatever upto 70 they get is what they get. If they get 55 vehicles they will have that many and it won't vary, not 53 vehicles due to it being cold or 75 mb as everyone in the local exchange is downloading a film.

 

[xotGD]

An early Christmas present for cranks.

I hope!

 

[JonathanH]

Correct. That would be a sticking point but not unsumountable i immagine.

It would be an odd decision to increase the number of services needing a second member of staff on a DOO railway, although it might be noted that 175s have also never yet run DOO in passenger service.

 

[Energy]

"up to 70 vehicles" is like "up to 300 miles" from your EV, or "up to 100 Mb broadband".

No, it just allows a more flexible tender rather than requiring exactly 70.

Also allows them to only take enough for just 68/MKIII replacement if the bids aren't well priced.

Chiltern need 9 sets of 6 coaches so that all MYB to West Mids trains are loco hauled. That would lead to MK5A's with spares.

I think it's purely down to the Class 68 silencer Mods being successfull with one local authority on the the line of route.

I wouldn't be surprised if the tender goes nowhere, rolling stock stays as is until 2027 then the 168s are focused on MYB - West Mids and the future 165 replacement runs Aylesbury (Or LU does) and Oxford services.

Also, the question of post Old Oak Common is whether Chiltern services go via OOC into Paddington or stay going into Marylebone.

 

[JonathanH]

Also, the question of post Old Oak Common is whether Chiltern services go via OOC into Paddington or stay going into Marylebone.

I'm not sure there is any question at all. There won't be a connection between the Park Royal line and Paddington through Old Oak Common, and no space in between Elizabeth Line services in any case. Running via West Ealing wouldn't work either.

Chiltern services will continue to use Marylebone.

There is provision for some Chiltern services to possibly terminate in the North Acton area but no construction planned - https://www.railforums.co.uk/thread...old-oak-options-post-hs2.244633/#post-6117623

Anyway, it has no bearing on the current tender.

 

[Energy]

I'm not sure there is any question at all. There won't be a connection between the Park Royal line and Paddington through Old Oak Common, and no space in between Elizabeth Line services in any case. Running via West Ealing wouldn't work either.

Chiltern services will continue to use Marylebone.

Thought they would go via the Acton - Northolt Line? It was severed by HS2 works but I thought it was going to be reinstated.

 

[43096]

"up to 70 vehicles" is like "up to 300 miles" from your EV, or "up to 100 Mb broadband".

No it is to allow a competition between the 175s (70 vehicles) and Mark 5As (65 vehicles).

 

[Benjwri]

Thought they would go via the Acton - Northolt Line? It was severed by HS2 works but I thought it was going to be reinstated.

Regardless they’d have nowhere to go, OOC itself isn’t designed for Chiltern services to terminate, there are no free platforms, and there certainly isn’t space for them on the lines into Paddington, or the platforms in Paddington.

 

[InTheEastMids]

I, for one, will enjoy contract award immensely.

If the Mk5s are selected, there will be a political sh.tstorm as modern trains taken away from long suffering TPE customers are redeployed to serve well off Buckinghamshire commuters.

Alternatively, furious and influential home counties folk railing against knackered, combustible Welsh cast-offs that are only fit for the scrapyard being foisted on them.

 

[meld3]

Also, the 175's aren't exactly ideal for quick, high volume loading through the end-doors. Will only increase station dwell time.