daily menu » rate the banner | guess the city | one on oneforums map | privacy policy | DMCA | news magazine | posting guidelines

Go Back   SkyscraperCity > Infrastructure and Mobility Forums > Railways

Railways (Inter)national commuter and freight trains



Global Announcement

As a general reminder, please respect others and respect copyrights. Go here to familiarize yourself with our posting policy.


Reply

 
Thread Tools
Old November 12th, 2010, 10:15 PM   #1081
sotavento
Registered user
 
sotavento's Avatar
 
Join Date: May 2005
Posts: 7,419
Likes (Received): 322

Quote:
Originally Posted by Marie-Joseph-Paul View Post
A lot of new trains in France are actually from .........Bombardier Transport France S.A.S.
http://www.bombardier.com/en/corpora...1260d80017172#
Usines---->Crespin, Caen, Paris
Le site BOMBARDIER Transport de Crespin (Nord), anciennement ANF Industrie, emploie plus de 1600 employés. Il produit des métros, tramways, trams sur pneus, trains urbains et régionaux, automotrices et rames TGV. Les principaux contrats sont le TGV Duplex, le TER2N NG et le ZTER pour la SNCF, le MI2N et le MF 2000 pour la RATP et l’AGC, pour les régions Françaises. L’établissement de Crespin comporte également un Centre d’Expertise Bogies.
http://www.grrt.fr/html/grrt/adheren...id_adherent=45

http://www.bombardier.com/en/corpora...01260d800f835b
Oui biensur messieur.
__________________
"O País perdeu a inteligência e a consciência moral. Ninguém se respeita nem crê na honestidade dos homens públicos. O povo está na miséria. Os serviços públicos vão abandonados. A mocidade arrasta-se das mesas das secretarias para as mesas dos cafés. A ruína económica cresce o comércio definha, a indústria enfraquece. O salário diminui. O Estado é considerado um ladrão e tratado como um inimigo.
Neste salve-se quem puder a burguesia proprietária de casas explora o aluguel. A agiotagem explora o juro…"”
— Eça
sotavento no está en línea   Reply With Quote

Sponsored Links
Old November 12th, 2010, 10:16 PM   #1082
sotavento
Registered user
 
sotavento's Avatar
 
Join Date: May 2005
Posts: 7,419
Likes (Received): 322

Quote:
Originally Posted by K_ View Post
The law is the law, but there is nothing illegal in proposing a product that does not comply with current requirements, but that anticipates complying with future requirements.
The bidding process Eurostar used needs to be open and transparent, that is the law. Only if Alstom can prove that the choice was not made according to the a priori published criteria do they have a case.
Each and every time that such p+roposals are made we get the usual winner of the 1st proposal to be refused in any given railway procurement inquiry.


If it's off the specks then it's simply refused ... no further apeals can put it back into the race.
__________________
"O País perdeu a inteligência e a consciência moral. Ninguém se respeita nem crê na honestidade dos homens públicos. O povo está na miséria. Os serviços públicos vão abandonados. A mocidade arrasta-se das mesas das secretarias para as mesas dos cafés. A ruína económica cresce o comércio definha, a indústria enfraquece. O salário diminui. O Estado é considerado um ladrão e tratado como um inimigo.
Neste salve-se quem puder a burguesia proprietária de casas explora o aluguel. A agiotagem explora o juro…"”
— Eça
sotavento no está en línea   Reply With Quote
Old November 12th, 2010, 11:42 PM   #1083
Marie-Joseph-Paul
BANNED
 
Marie-Joseph-Paul's Avatar
 
Join Date: Aug 2010
Posts: 393
Likes (Received): 1

Quote:
Originally Posted by sotavento View Post
Oui biensur messieur.

http://www.ces.fas.harvard.edu/publi...fs/Meunier.pdf
Marie-Joseph-Paul no está en línea   Reply With Quote
Old November 13th, 2010, 12:10 PM   #1084
pietje01
Registered User
 
Join Date: Mar 2008
Posts: 488
Likes (Received): 8

Quote:
Originally Posted by caserass View Post
No the bidding is illegal, of course I can be sure, but that's my conclusion about this story.
But what you don't really seem to understand is that Eurosar has the right to buy trainsets with whatever specs they want. If, in the end, they are not allowed to go through the tunnel hasn't got anything to do with the law.

They just get stuck with unusable trains, get bankrupt, but thats the internal affair of Eurostar and their shareholders. Alstom has no say in that.
pietje01 no está en línea   Reply With Quote
Old November 13th, 2010, 12:41 PM   #1085
K_
Registered User
 
Join Date: Jan 2010
Posts: 2,744
Likes (Received): 243

Quote:
Originally Posted by caserass View Post
all the countries in the world with few exceptions follow a policy of protectionism and I can tell you the european countries (and France of course) aren't the worst about that.
protectionism is generally bad for the country that is protectionist. The US is a nice example: They could have far better passenger rail if they allowed European off the shelf equioemnt.

Quote:
Also, I would say seeing the result of a free trade world and the consequences on Africa and some other parts in the world, so yes my conclusion is sometimes protectionnism can be a good thing and seeing the result the french have had with their public companies, I'm sorry but I cannot see any good reason to stop fighting for them.
Actually the "results of a free trade world" is an unprecedented reduction in poverty and misery in the world, so it's a good thing. It's the countries that participated most in world trade that have made the biggest advancements here. The misery you see in some parts of Africa is not due to increased free trade, as these countries have actually reduced trading with the rest of the world...

And I wouldn't claim that the French public companies are that good. SNCF for example is good at running trains very fast, but not so good at transporting passengers in a convenient way.
K_ no está en línea   Reply With Quote
Old November 13th, 2010, 12:50 PM   #1086
K_
Registered User
 
Join Date: Jan 2010
Posts: 2,744
Likes (Received): 243

Quote:
Originally Posted by caserass View Post
It seems you don't understand very well, in regards of the law there is not future requirements since the future requirements haven't been validated. That's the point.
If I read all the documents correctly trains are validated on a case by case basis. It's not requirements that need to be validated, it's rolling stock.
In order for a company to run through channel tunnel is needs to get a safety certificate for the rolling stock it uses. In order to get that certificate it needs to demonstrate the train can run safely.
There has in fact never been a "a priori" ban on the use of distributed traction. (If there was, than the current Eurostar sets would not comply either).
Both Siemens and Alstom assumed that a train with distributed traction could get a safety certificate. But the safety certificate will only be given to the train once it's build. I suppose the contract Eurostar intends to sign with it's supplier would include a cancellation clause if the trains don't pass their certification.

Quote:
No the bidding is illegal, of course I can be sure, but that's my conclusion about this story.
The bidding was not illegal. My conclusion from this story is that Alstom is just behaving like a bad loser.
K_ no está en línea   Reply With Quote
Old November 13th, 2010, 02:59 PM   #1087
33Hz
Registered User
 
33Hz's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jul 2006
Posts: 436
Likes (Received): 47

People are talking about protectionism as if it's ok or understandable, but the reality is this deal was taking place in the EU between companies in three EU countries. There is no point in having the EU if it's members don't respect what it means.
33Hz no está en línea   Reply With Quote
Old November 13th, 2010, 07:44 PM   #1088
caserass
Normandie
 
caserass's Avatar
 
Join Date: Feb 2008
Posts: 8,516
Likes (Received): 5165

Quote:
Originally Posted by pietje01 View Post
But what you don't really seem to understand is that Eurosar has the right to buy trainsets with whatever specs they want. If, in the end, they are not allowed to go through the tunnel hasn't got anything to do with the law.

They just get stuck with unusable trains, get bankrupt, but thats the internal affair of Eurostar and their shareholders. Alstom has no say in that.


guess who will have to pay if Eurostar get bankrupt ?
caserass no está en línea   Reply With Quote
Old November 13th, 2010, 07:56 PM   #1089
caserass
Normandie
 
caserass's Avatar
 
Join Date: Feb 2008
Posts: 8,516
Likes (Received): 5165

Quote:
Originally Posted by Sopomon View Post
How can you be sure? What in the literature of this case have read that tells you this is illegal?
The trains made by siemens doesn't follow the security rules.


Quote:
Otherwise, it's too early to jump to conclusions such as that.
Secondly, on such a valuable order, it's highly unlikely that illegal practices would have occurred, there's simply too much risk of said order becoming null and void.
IMO i think you have no idea how it is hard to fulfill all the requirements in this kind of order, If I say that 90% of this kind of order could be null and void it's not an exageration at all.


Quote:
In the end, it seems that Alstom has provided an inferior product,
not really, actually Alstom has provided a superior product but by far more expensive, plus I tend to believe that eurostar is trying to change the security rules in the tunnel to increase their margin.

Quote:
and Eurostar simply chose the rolling stock that would serve the company best.
The company, yes, the owner of the tunnel not really, as for the consummer.... it would be largely exagerated to say the futur consumer in the train of siemens jeopardize his life but the risk would be certainly higher. The thing is the french state gave its agreement to examine the new criterias of the trains but it seems they did it a bit too fast and didn't expect siemens would be able to provide a trains fulfilling the requirements.


Quote:
Alstom (and to an extent the French Government) are probably simply trying to make a show of their displeasure, to appease the French population,
no actually the french population doesn't care about this story. I think it's really a probem of money and reputation.


Quote:
and they'll eventually let this event fade away and concentrate their efforts on producing a better product for the next time.
That's not the problem.

As you can see, you already think the ICE is better than the AGV, as I said a problem of reputation....
caserass no está en línea   Reply With Quote
Old November 13th, 2010, 08:02 PM   #1090
caserass
Normandie
 
caserass's Avatar
 
Join Date: Feb 2008
Posts: 8,516
Likes (Received): 5165

Quote:
Originally Posted by K_ View Post
Actually the "results of a free trade world" is an unprecedented reduction in poverty and misery in the world, so it's a good thing. It's the countries that participated most in world trade that have made the biggest advancements here. The misery you see in some parts of Africa is not due to increased free trade, as these countries have actually reduced trading with the rest of the world...
Actually, this point is always brought by the liberal, but when you are looking at the economy of countries well behind you'll see that the free trade is never made for them and cost more than it brings.

The free trade world is certainly the best solution but it's not the only solution. As I said sometimes a bit of protectionnism can be good. Of course I talk about the free trade world of 2010 not the one knew by grand daddy in the 50 and 60. The advancements made by the poorer are peanuts compared to the one made by countries like France, UK or US and you still have famine everywhere in Africa despites 60 years of free trade. Of course there's more than that, and you could find more arguments to show me how I'm wrong about that, but we are off topic, so if you want to discuss about that with me you can PM me.


Quote:
And I wouldn't claim that the French public companies are that good. SNCF for example is good at running trains very fast, but not so good at transporting passengers in a convenient way.
you focus on train, but the support of big companies in France are paying, France has got more multinational than any other country in europe. Among them there are a lot of number one.
caserass no está en línea   Reply With Quote
Old November 13th, 2010, 09:33 PM   #1091
pietje01
Registered User
 
Join Date: Mar 2008
Posts: 488
Likes (Received): 8

Quote:
Originally Posted by caserass View Post
guess who will have to pay if Eurostar get bankrupt ?
Like always with a bankrupcy: the creditors
pietje01 no está en línea   Reply With Quote
Old November 13th, 2010, 09:54 PM   #1092
Sopomon
Hideous and malformed
 
Sopomon's Avatar
 
Join Date: Oct 2010
Posts: 870
Likes (Received): 153

Quote:
Originally Posted by caserass View Post
The trains made by siemens doesn't follow the security rules.




IMO i think you have no idea how it is hard to fulfill all the requirements in this kind of order, If I say that 90% of this kind of order could be null and void it's not an exageration at all.




not really, actually Alstom has provided a superior product but by far more expensive, plus I tend to believe that eurostar is trying to change the security rules in the tunnel to increase their margin.



The company, yes, the owner of the tunnel not really, as for the consummer.... it would be largely exagerated to say the futur consumer in the train of siemens jeopardize his life but the risk would be certainly higher. The thing is the french state gave its agreement to examine the new criterias of the trains but it seems they did it a bit too fast and didn't expect siemens would be able to provide a trains fulfilling the requirements.




no actually the french population doesn't care about this story. I think it's really a probem of money and reputation.




That's not the problem.

As you can see, you already think the ICE is better than the AGV, as I said a problem of reputation....
Not sure you know what you're talking about, but I'll try to clear things up anyway.

Firstly, the trains made by Siemens don't follow the current security rules, that's probably true, but neither do the current trains, nor do what Alsthom was planning on supplying. (Current trains aren't 400m long)

Secondly. if Siemens have it 90% null and void, then Alsthom would have probably ended up with a contract that was 90% null and void as well, as they were both offering very similar products, and going by your arguement, Alsthom wouls have also found it exceptionally difficult to fulfil all criteria.

Thridly, that is a moot point, as Eurostar would have chosen that which would have been the best product in many categories, for example; Reliability, Running Costs, Total Passenger Number, *and* that it's have to pass all saftey regulations. Eurostar wouldn't have signed the deal if it felt that it would get no return from the trainsets due to them being forbidden from running through the tunnel. Also, what is a margin? You can't have a margin just by itself, what are you trying to say? Marginal productivity? Marginal costs? Marginal Revenue? You're not really making sense there.

Your point about the safety doesn't make much sense, could you clarify, please?

I personally am neutral on the issue, and simply claiming that I have bias for a particular rolling stock manufacturer is no way to make a point, I simply felt I had to counter your views wich were largely baseless and more opinion than fact.
__________________
And he kicked so many rosebushes at her that eventually, Sasuke turned into a log.
Sopomon no está en línea   Reply With Quote
Old November 14th, 2010, 11:34 AM   #1093
Maarten Otto
Registered User
 
Maarten Otto's Avatar
 
Join Date: Apr 2010
Location: Almere (Greater Amsterdam)
Posts: 464
Likes (Received): 24

For what I understand in this matter is that Eurostar used a very odd, "through the back door" construction for their procurement. This contruction was set up many years ago. Both Alstom and Siemens are in this odd construction of rail equipment and rolling stock procurement since day one.
It has something to to with options to scout market conditions and possibilities without any need to announce it to the public or rail industry.

Eurostar just asked both manufactuers what they could do without any obligation to buy or announce anything. In the end they were satisfied by the Siemens offer.... and bought it.

As this is a solely British construction that both Eurostar, Siemens and Alstom are part of, the Court decided that this construction was valid (all parties involved knew of it's existence).

Eurotunnel safety certification has nothing to do with a rolling stock procurement. If Eurostar says "we can do this" then they must prove their new trains are indeed safe enough for the tunnel.
And last month ICE 3 tests in the tunnel (by DB) is proving that it might work.

Indeed Alstom is a bad loser.
Maarten Otto no está en línea   Reply With Quote
Old November 14th, 2010, 12:26 PM   #1094
caserass
Normandie
 
caserass's Avatar
 
Join Date: Feb 2008
Posts: 8,516
Likes (Received): 5165

Quote:
Originally Posted by Sopomon View Post
Not sure you know what you're talking about, but I'll try to clear things up anyway.
I'm sure it will be very funny ! of course beginning with a sentence like "not sure you know what you're talking about " means you know a lot of things but you are a bit rude or arrogant...

Quote:
Firstly, the trains made by Siemens don't follow the current security rules, that's probably true, but neither do the current trains, nor do what Alsthom was planning on supplying. (Current trains aren't 400m long)
Read the question, you will maybe understand the answer.

Quote:
Secondly. if Siemens have it 90% null and void, then Alsthom would have probably ended up with a contract that was 90% null and void as well, as they were both offering very similar products, and going by your arguement, Alsthom wouls have also found it exceptionally difficult to fulfil all criteria.
Great! excepted I didn't talk about that at all. I said "kind of order" not THIS ORDER.


Quote:
Thridly, that is a moot point, as Eurostar would have chosen that which would have been the best product in many categories, for example; Reliability, Running Costs, Total Passenger Number, *and* that it's have to pass all saftey regulations. Eurostar wouldn't have signed the deal if it felt that it would get no return from the trainsets due to them being forbidden from running through the tunnel.
what you say is logic, unfortunately, I think I'm going to use your introduction to respond you : "Not sure you know what you're talking about"


Quote:
Also, what is a margin? You can't have a margin just by itself, what are you trying to say? Marginal productivity? Marginal costs? Marginal Revenue? You're not really making sense there.
oh come on, when you use the word margin all alone it's commercial margin. BTW since we are talking about that, you should re-read your post for a start.


Quote:
Your point about the safety doesn't make much sense, could you clarify, please?
it's not my point, there are safety criterias who are not followed by the siemens or the alstom train. That's all.



Quote:
I personally am neutral on the issue, and simply claiming that I have bias for a particular rolling stock manufacturer is no way to make a point, I simply felt I had to counter your views wich were largely baseless and more opinion than fact.
no no, I have no views as you say, I just say Alstom will win the trial and will break the order. That's it, I do not say the alstom train is better than the siemens one, frankly I don't care, First people here was thinking the new safety criterias were applied in the tunnel ( letter of the 31march 2010) I put the letter of the 31th march 2010 on the thread to show them these criterias weren't validated, and thus the order (the order doesn't mean the siemens trains) is null and void. Now they want to change my opinon about that, unfortunately I have no opinon, the most of the time I REPEAT AGAIN it's almost impossible to fulfill all the requirements put in an invitation to tender and the most of the time the order is broken.

Some people here really seems to have some problems of comprehension it's forbidden in UK and in France to order something who doens't fulffil the security rules. As I said the law is the law, and I'm pretty well informed about the invitation to tender, now people are pushing me to change my view, unfortunately it's not a VIEW.

I have to say that I'm a bit tired to talk about that with some people who don't want to understand that even if the siemens train is good even if the alstom train doens't follow the requirements of the invitation to tender it doesnt mean the order will be validated.


BTW you didn't "clear things up " in your post, you just put some questions and you were very critical about my post being supposedly baseless, excuse me to tell you this, but where are your arguments and your sources to back up any of your claims ???
caserass no está en línea   Reply With Quote
Old November 14th, 2010, 12:39 PM   #1095
caserass
Normandie
 
caserass's Avatar
 
Join Date: Feb 2008
Posts: 8,516
Likes (Received): 5165

Quote:
Originally Posted by Maarten Otto View Post
As this is a solely British construction that both Eurostar, Siemens and Alstom are part of, the Court decided that this construction was valid (all parties involved knew of it's existence).
Not sure to understand what you say here ?

Quote:
Eurotunnel safety certification has nothing to do with a rolling stock procurement. If Eurostar says "we can do this" then they must prove their new trains are indeed safe enough for the tunnel.
And last month ICE 3 tests in the tunnel (by DB) is proving that it might work.
lol any train can go through the tunnel.... now to meet the safety criterias that's the problems, as long as you have no problem any train is ok.

Eurostar will have the worst difficulties to prove to eurotunnel their siemens trains are safe for the tunnel, mark my word.
caserass no está en línea   Reply With Quote
Old November 14th, 2010, 12:43 PM   #1096
caserass
Normandie
 
caserass's Avatar
 
Join Date: Feb 2008
Posts: 8,516
Likes (Received): 5165

Quote:
Originally Posted by pietje01 View Post
Like always with a bankrupcy: the creditors


No, the one who will have to pay the creditors are not the creditors. if tommorrow eurostar get bankrupt the ones who will have to pay are :

SNCF (69 %) : french state, in other words, french people
LCR
SNCB
caserass no está en línea   Reply With Quote
Old November 14th, 2010, 12:58 PM   #1097
K_
Registered User
 
Join Date: Jan 2010
Posts: 2,744
Likes (Received): 243

Quote:
Originally Posted by pietje01 View Post
But what you don't really seem to understand is that Eurosar has the right to buy trainsets with whatever specs they want. If, in the end, they are not allowed to go through the tunnel hasn't got anything to do with the law.

They just get stuck with unusable trains, get bankrupt, but thats the internal affair of Eurostar and their shareholders. Alstom has no say in that.
Eurostar will have been clever enough to put a clause in the purchase contract voiding it if the trains don't pass certification. It thus becomes a problem for Siemens...
K_ no está en línea   Reply With Quote
Old November 14th, 2010, 01:14 PM   #1098
K_
Registered User
 
Join Date: Jan 2010
Posts: 2,744
Likes (Received): 243

Quote:
Originally Posted by caserass View Post


No, the one who will have to pay the creditors are not the creditors. if tommorrow eurostar get bankrupt the ones who will have to pay are :

SNCF (69 %) : french state, in other words, french people
LCR
SNCB
They will not have to "pay". When a company goes bankrupt the following happens:
- The shareholders see the value of their shares drop, or even disappear altogether.
- Creditors will not get all the money they lend out back.

But the French state will not have to "pay" more. It has already paid for it's share of Eurostar. The French state might have to write off Eurostar, but that's a different thing.
K_ no está en línea   Reply With Quote
Old November 14th, 2010, 01:18 PM   #1099
K_
Registered User
 
Join Date: Jan 2010
Posts: 2,744
Likes (Received): 243

Quote:
Originally Posted by caserass View Post
Eurostar will have the worst difficulties to prove to eurotunnel their siemens trains are safe for the tunnel, mark my word.
They have allies however.
Their first ally is be Deutsche Bahn, which wants their Velaro sets to run through to London too.
Their second ally is the British government, which would like to see more trains through the Channel tunnel.
The third ally is Eurotunnel, which would like to earn more money.

DB certainly seems to expect that its Velaro D sets will get a safety certificate for the Channel tunnel in due time. So I suppose the E320 sets will get certified in due time too.
K_ no está en línea   Reply With Quote
Old November 14th, 2010, 01:21 PM   #1100
K_
Registered User
 
Join Date: Jan 2010
Posts: 2,744
Likes (Received): 243

Quote:
Originally Posted by caserass View Post
it's not my point, there are safety criterias who are not followed by the siemens or the alstom train. That's all.
So neither Alstom, nor Siemens offered a train that met current safety standards according to you.
But how can then Alstom contest granting the contract to Siemens on the basis that the Siemens train doesn't meet current standards as you keep insisting?

And anyway, I have not seen any evidence that the current standards a priori prohibit both the AGV or the Velaro from running through the tunnel.
K_ no está en línea   Reply With Quote


Reply

Thread Tools

Posting Rules
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

BB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is Off

Related topics on SkyscraperCity


All times are GMT +2. The time now is 07:20 PM.


Powered by vBulletin® Version 3.8.11 Beta 4
Copyright ©2000 - 2018, vBulletin Solutions Inc.
Feedback Buttons provided by Advanced Post Thanks / Like (Pro) - vBulletin Mods & Addons Copyright © 2018 DragonByte Technologies Ltd.

vBulletin Optimisation provided by vB Optimise (Pro) - vBulletin Mods & Addons Copyright © 2018 DragonByte Technologies Ltd.

SkyscraperCity ☆ In Urbanity We trust ☆ about us | privacy policy | DMCA policy

tech management by Sysprosium