In signing a $1.26 billion contract with the Momentum Trains consortium for a new regional train fleet to be operated by NSW TrainLink the NSW Government seems to have learnt a few things from its chastening experience in selecting Hyundai Rotem’s offering to replace the intercity trains.
As part of the deal Spanish manufacturer CAF has been contracted to supply 29 trains based on its Civity platform. Unlike the intercity fleet, these trains will involve some local manufacture and assembly and will be maintained in rural NSW, with the bulk of the remainder of the $2.8 billion contract covering a new service facility to be located in Dubbo and maintenance of the trains for 15 years.
The government also appears to have avoided two other key aspects of its mishandling of the intercity trains agreement – at 2.88m width, the regional trains do not appear to require any major changes to rail infrastructure, and unlike the unpopular fixed seats in the intercity trains, seating in the regional trains will be reversible.
CAF also seems to have had a lot more experience in manufacturing the train it is contracted to provide than its Korean counterpart has had with making double-deck intercity trains. However, key questions remain – are the new regional trains going to be the best ones for the job and will the new fleet support the network’s future development?
What’s being ordered?
First to the trains themselves. While the Civity trains were launched in 2010 and had a fairly slow start in terms of sales, around 300 units are currently on order, mainly from operators in the UK and the Netherlands.
These trains are described by CAF as being “a family of modular low-floor trains designed for regional and commuter services”. Unlike the push-pull XPTs which make up over half the current NSW regional fleet, the Civity train cars are all self-powered, with options for electric, diesel, diesel-electric and bi-mode (electric and diesel) operation.
The NSW order involves an order for enough of the high-floor diesel-electric (DEMU) variant of the Civity to replace almost the entire current diesel fleet (the only DMUs unaffected by the order are the seven two-car Hunter railcars, which first entered service in 2006). The order consists of the following:
- Ten three-car “regional intercity” trains for shorter trips. These will replace the 14 two-car Endeavour DMUs currently used for routes in the Hunter Valley, Southern Highlands, the Illawarra and from Sydney to Bathurst.
- Nine three-car “regional” trains which will replace the 23 Xplorer DMUs currently running medium to long distances from Sydney to Armidale, Moree, Canberra, Griffith and Broken Hill in sets of between two and four cars.
- Ten six-car “regional” trains which will replace the XPT fleet of 19 power cars and 60 passenger carriages used for longer trips to Dubbo, Grafton, Casino and the interstate runs to Melbourne and Brisbane.
The trains will be delivered progressively, starting in 2023. In total 117 cars are being ordered, slightly more than the combined current total of 111 Endeavour and Xplorer trains and the XPT passenger cars (no XPT power car replacements are required as all the new carriages are self-powered). In theory this appears to allow for one or two additional trains to be operated in regular service, but it’s also possible that this capacity will be deployed to reduce the current intensity of use and also to accommodate operational changes resulting from the relocation of major servicing to Dubbo (see further discussion below).
As well as reversible seats, the new trains will be equipped with wider doors, accessible spaces, priority seats and accessible toilets, along with real-time information displays, CCTV, charging points, tray tables, seat pockets and reading lights. Passengers will have access to “filtered water, aeroplane-style overhead luggage storage and toilets with baby changing facilities in every carriage”.
The trains will have selective door opening for short platforms and retractable external steps. The regional intercity trains will have economy 2+2 seating, while the regional trains will have two classes – 2+2 economy, and 2+1 premium class, along with a buffet area.
Given CAF’s reputation the trains themselves seem to be a safer choice than the earlier electric intercity fleet order, but some questions remain.
Customisation. The first is the degree of adaptation the trains will require for the Australian climate and the relatively poor state (by European standards) of NSW rail lines. The fact that CAF is based in Spain and has sold trains into Algeria, Turkey and the Middle East suggests that they are familiar with adapting trains for hot climate operation. However, the operating conditions in NSW could still pose a challenge, especially as the routes the Civity trains will be running here will be significantly longer than those operated by most of their counterparts in Europe.
For example, the current Wikipedia article on the NSW XPT fleet notes that: “Between each duty in Sydney, trains are serviced at the XPT Sydenham Maintenance Centre. This pattern has led to the XPT being one of the most utilised train fleets worldwide with only three significant periods of downtime in [their operating] cycle“.
Local content. The extent of local involvement in what the government calls the “fit out and commissioning” of the new trains which will take place at the new facility in Dubbo is unclear. While this approach reverses the policy adopted for the procurement of both the intercity and Sydney metro trains as fully assembled units, local input is unlikely to match the nearly 70% local content involved in the manufacture of the VLocity regional trains in Victoria.
Depot location. While the location of the maintenance depot in Dubbo is no doubt a win for the inland city, it means that most of the trains will have to undertake hundreds of kilometres of “dead” running from the other lines to travel to Dubbo for maintenance. The decision to retain and upgrade the Sydenham XPT facility as a metropolitan base for refuelling, provisioning and “corrective maintenance” will reduce but clearly not remove the need for the new trains to visit Dubbo for major repairs and servicing.
Sleepers. There does not appear to be any mention of sleepers in the documentation, though the government is yet to confirm that it will not be replacing the eight XPT sleeping cars. While this would inconvenience some long-distance travellers, there is one advantage, given the order involves a similar overall number of carriages – an increase in seating capacity.
Power plant. The choice of propulsion for the new trains seems a little short-sighted. While the DEMUs will be an improvement in terms of emissions and efficiency compared to the current all-diesel fleet, the government did not select the bi-mode diesel-electric/electric variant on offer. This option would have allowed the trains to run in electric mode on the suburban and intercity network, further reducing pollution before switching to diesel outside the metro area. Update: in September 2019 the NSW Government announced that the new fleet would be bi-mode diesel-electric/electric.
Number of cars. As noted earlier the 117 new train cars represents a very modest increase on the current fleet, which seems to imply the government not planning a significant boost to current service frequencies or network coverage. Given the current intensity of usage of the XPTs mentioned earlier and the requirement for the new trains to travel to Dubbo for major servicing, there would be little capacity to do so without additional trains. This seems inconsistent with elements of the government’s own strategy to review and upgrade regional rail services, though it will be interesting to see if the contract with Momentum contains any options to order further trains.
Operating speed. The new trains have a maximum speed of 160km/h, which is no faster than the XPTs they will replace (they are described as “scalable to 200km/h”, though it is unclear what this means). The government’s documentation seems to imply that higher-speed trains are not required, stating that “while some time savings may be possible through timetable changes, increasing train speed would require significant infrastructure upgrades to train tracks, stations and platforms”.
Given its recent announcement about investigating high speed options for NSW regional rail services (discussed in the most recent Strategic Matters post), it’s surprising that the state government did not use the tender to seek trains with confirmed 200+km/h operational speeds which could have provided an intermediate step to “full” high-speed trains as infrastructure is improved. Of course, the Civity trains will be able to handle any modest potential increases in average speed resulting from minor track improvements, but the government will now have to order an additional fleet of faster trains if it decides to make more substantial upgrades to the regional network.
Are these the right trains for NSW?
In summary, the Civity trains will provide an overdue replacement for the current ageing regional train fleet, which is increasingly prone to mechanical problems – provided the new trains can cope with the operating environment and high intensity of use. The purchase of a new upgraded fleet would also seem to secure the future of regional rail services in NSW.
On the other hand, the number and type of trains on order suggests that the state government is planning to make at best only incremental upgrades to rail infrastructure well into the medium term. This seems to sit at odds with the Premier Gladys Berejiklian’s promise to start development of a fast rail network “in the next term of government”.
I concede I observed in my article on fast trains that whichever party wins the upcoming NSW election could follow Victoria’s lead in making a “medium-term investment in moderately fast trains” for which 160km/h railcars would be sufficient. However, the one-off purchase of a completely new fleet presented an ideal opportunity to go one step further by acquiring an increased number of 200+km/h trains.
The Civity order suggests the government has declined to take up this opportunity, which in turn throws into question the depth of its commitment to fast rail. It seems NSW passengers could be locked into slow and limited regional train services for some time yet, even if these services are a lot more comfortable and reliable.
Did we buy Tilt option? Apparently 30% faster trip times according to CAF. (https://www.caf.net/en/innovacion-tecnologia/productos-tecnologicos/sibi.php)
“Tilt could increase patronage by more than 60 per cent [..] and cut travel between Central and Canberra from four hours and 19 minutes to three hours 15 minutes.”
This is not including the speed benefit from Track work (which was my interpretation of the the recent election promise funded out of the Snowy sale to the commonwealth)
I’m pretty sure they are not tilt trains. Before the last NSW election I did considerable work simulating tilt train timings on the Sydney to Armindale route, and on how to deal with the numerous uncontrolled level crossings that would otherwise make 160km/h running too dangerous. With one the exception of one candidate, who wasn’t elected, no one seemed interested.
Several attempts to get sensible answers from the government just resulted in platitudes (as usual).
I don’t think the government wants to improve these services, because they have to be subsidised. If they became a reasonable means of travel, the demand would increase, and so would the subsidies. So they’re doing the minimum that’s required to avoid claims that they don’t care about regional NSW.
Thanks Sylvia. This could be an explanation for the government not wanting to improve services to any great extent, while at the same time cutting costs by purchasing new and more reliable rolling stock.
However, on the other side of the ledger is the Premier’s continued interest in HSR as evidenced in her recent European trade trip, as well as the announcement of the Fast Rail program which I wrote about in the preceding post. The NSW government has committed $295 million to this in the state budget, albeit over four years.
This suggests that the government is prepared to invest in faster services in just the four identified corridors. This could involve incremental changes in the first few years which as I argued in the earlier post would likely be within the capacity of the trains on order.
It’s feasible that at some point after the initial changes the government will consider moving to faster trains for some of these corridors which would allow the regional trains to be cascaded to other lines. This could increase capacity if not speeds in the corridors not covered by the Fast Rail proposal.
I think I’ll believe in the fast rail proposals when I see the trains running. Politicians like to talk about such things before elections, because the timescales, and thus significant expenditure, are invariably well beyond the next parliamentary term. So a few studies can be funded, and those studies will always conclude that it’s not economic, so the idea can be quietly dropped until next time.
The topography around Sydney is very challenging, making fast trains to Newcastle, Wollongong and through the Blue Mountains very expensive. And for what? To turn those places into new commuting suburbs? That is just a transfer of wealth to existing land owners in those places.
Hi Sylvia – please see my most recent article for a detailed response.
NSW Govt. has trains running to Brisbane & Melbourne, but on the western line they terminate
at Broken Hill; Are they even considering a service through to Adelaide?
Thanks Keith for your comment.
I think NSW TrainLink services to Adelaide are highly unlikely for a number of reasons. The demand would be relatively small; the trip is around 24 hours long which essentially makes it a tourist journey and therefore part of the market for the Indian Pacific. In addition the South Australian Government recently stopped making contributions towards the running of the Overland train from Melbourne to Adelaide. This service was only saved by the Victorian Government making up the shortfall, mainly to ensure communities in far western Victoria continued to receive train services. Under these circumstances I can’t see what’s in it for the NSW Government, especially if the South Australians aren’t going to make a financial contribution.
I see no chance of that. If they could get away with it politically, the government would close down all regional and interstate train services, so as to save the cost of running them. They’re certainly not going to create new services.
True, the NSW government has pretty much zero interest in regional rail. I think the only thing that *might* make a change of heart on the Sydney-Broken Hill-Adelaide route would be if there was demand specifically between Broken Hill and Adelaide (which is much shorter than the Sydney-BH route) that would generate enough usage reduce the financial cost of running the service overall. In reality, given the service is so infrequent as to be useless, I can’t see that demand translating into tickets unless the service also improves to daily or at least 5x a week.
Ultimately it’d be more sensible, if NSW Trains don’t want to make a realistic investment in the route (and clearly they don’t), to wait until the XPTs retire then contract with GSR to attach a few refurbished XPT seating cars (and maybe a sleeper as well) to on the Indian-Pacific between Sydney and BH and sell them as regular NSW Trains regional seats. It’d save money, *and* spare the passengers the ordeal of 14 hours on a DMU.
Where did you get the 2.88 metre width from?
Hi Craig, this is the width listed on the Wikipedia page on the Civity trains: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/CAF_Civity.
The CAF site doesn’t list the width but does have the length and capacity of the various trains for the NSW order: https://www.caf.net/en/productos-servicios/proyectos/proyecto-detalle.php?p=306
Anyone know if there will be room for more bicycles than the current limit of 2 or 3 on XPT? There is a bicycle tourism market developing in NSW, for instance on the Central West Cycle Trail around Mudgee, Gulgong, Dubbo, Wellington. A group in Sydney is lobbying NSW Govt for more bikes on trains, welcome any support.
Well, it is actually 5 bicycles allowed on XPTs. Main hope is that the weight limit of 20 kg will be removed, so e-bikes can be carried, and the requirement to box bikes removed. Civity trains in Europe seem to have roll-on roll-off space for bikes, hoping for a rethink here.
Sleeper cars for Melbourne, Brisbane are essential. What about people that cannot fly for medical reasons?
I fully believe that the rail system for passengers and freight are being terminated by stealth. Longer less frequent trains – which will compete with planes even more. Better carriages will mean extra costs no doubt. I am all for progress but not sure if this really is. Whispers have been about for some time now of cutting rail services even up the coast. Gone is the best service the Murwillumbah line. Really gone now with a useless bike track that locals complain about. Gone is Glen Innes to bike trail. Please pull each message apart for the ‘between the lines’ story.