Here's another new document that could be posted almost anywhere, but as it has never had its own thread is seems only fair to give it one.
Last month the rail delivery Group published a new version - the third - of the "Long Term Passenger Rolling Stock
Strategy for the Rail Industry". The first was issued by
ATOC» , before the
RDG‡ took over last year. The links for all three are:
Edition 1Edition 2Edition 3Apart from updating the numbers to include new orders, the report cites the completion of the first "new generation" franchise competitions as the main new factor. Here they reiterate the industry view that
DfT» should leave rolling stock ordering to the
TOCs▸ and
ROSCOs» , and also say:
| 9. | We recognised the short term pressures faced by the DfT, but stated that we believed that the
principles of our approach still held true and that it was important to mitigate the risks which
those pressures might pose to securing long term value for money.
|
| 10. | In particular, we stated that care must be taken that:
- guidance from DfT should not be interpreted as, and should not become (however
inadvertently), the specification of inputs; - short term savings in rolling stock costs to meet the DfT^s medium term budget constraints
should not be made at the expense of whole-life, whole-system value. (For example, the
business case for some enhancements such as re-tractioning for some older fleets would
become progressively weaker, the longer that they were deferred); and - the need for short term action should not constrain competitive tension and innovation.
|
| 11. | RSSSG undertook a constructive dialogue with the DfT on these issues. We are pleased to
report the strong evidence that the DfT (and Transport Scotland and Transport for London
(TfL» )) do indeed understand the longer-term opportunities to secure value for money from
rolling stock. In particular it will be noted that our forecasts contained in Section H on page
22 of the quantities of new rolling stock to be delivered in CP5▸ and CP6▸ have been significantly
increased by the confirmation of additional orders for new trains for the new Essex Thameside,
Thameslink (for Gatwick Express and Moorgate services), ScotRail and Caledonian Sleepers
franchises, the South West Trains (SWT▸ ) TOC, and the London Overground concession. A
material factor here has been the inclusion in franchise ITTs▸ and in franchise bid evaluation
criteria for credit to be given for incremental quality to be delivered, and in some cases for
benefits to be delivered beyond the life of the franchise.
|
| 12. | The increased emphasis on credit being given for quality to be delivered by franchises and
concessions, which RSSSG totally supports, together with continuing high levels of growth in
peak period passenger demand and concerns about the pace of completion for the committed
electrification projects, has made it certain that some additional non-electric rolling stock will
be required in CP5. This is discussed in Sections E, F, G and H on pages 14 to 24.
|
Two points in that are worth noting:
" the inclusion in franchise ITTs and in franchise bid evaluation criteria for credit to be given for [...] benefits to be delivered beyond the life of the franchise" - an attempt to overcome one (or more) of the well-known deficiencies of the franchising model.
"some additional non-electric rolling stock will be required in CP5" - quantified later on (para 68) as "350 to 500 additional non-electric vehicles", where last year they said "no new diesel vehicles (or other self-powered vehicles) would be required to be built in either CP5 or CP6". Note that both statements are heavily conditional on many assumptions, and represent a range of possible outcomes.
