On 6 Jul, 12:07, "Paul Scott" wrote:
"JP" wrote in message

oups.com...

The three most reliable DMU Fleets at present are SWT 159s, TPE 185s
and FGW 165/166s. Two of those are Barbie liveried, and the Chiltern
Fleets are a few thousand MPC adrift of the top three.

Am I right in thinking SWT haven't had the overhauled 158s long enough for
meaningful statistics to be gathered yet? I guess they are hoping to achieve
similar figures to the 159s in due course?

Paul

I was speaking to one of their Salisbury based engineers a month back.
SWT certainly intend their 158 and ex-158 DMUs to perform as well.
They have always reported the 158/159 fleets as a combined figure in
any case. Contrary to popular belief the idea of ATOC's NFRIP is to
increase co-operation between commercial rivals and increase overall
reliability. So with 158s from FGW going to Wabtec it makes sense to
see what worked well and not so well with other operators. SWTs fleet
visit Salisbury very regularly and get tender loving care, other
operators can have their fleets stuck in sidings away from depots for
several days at a time so I suspect SWT will always have or be very
near the top spot DMU wise.

On Jul 6, 3:20 am, TheOneKEA wrote:
Oh wonderful. If any of the usual suspects acquire it I can see
Chiltern getting sucked into a tiolet tank and turned into a shadow of
its clean, reliable, expansionist, common-sense self. Whoopee.

It's expansionism seems to be a shadow of its former self already. The
"Projects" section of their website lists:
- Aylesbury Vale Parkway (fair enough)
- Evergreen 2 (completed last year)
- Wembley depot (completed 2005)
- West Hampstead Interchange (dead)

Sounds like they could do with a new injection of cash.

U

--
http://londonconnections.blogspot.com

Ridership does not seem to be a problem, but reliability of the 165
fleet, whilst hitting a peak a few months ago has again slumped to
around half that achieved by the Reading based examples. ATP problems
perhaps? The Chiltern 165s do have a few extra bits on them which
would mean more to fail. The Chiltern engineering staff are looking at
some innovations which have caught the attention of other DMU
operators, all of which would go a long way to improving reliability.

I spent a few weeks at Aylesbury TMD about 3 years ago and one of the
new fitters was a former employee for FGW at Reading Turbo depot. He was
saying that staff at Reading were set to work in teams, (eg: those with
electrical expertise would work on electrics.) Whereas at Aylesbury, all
fitters end up doing all types of work. Could possibly be an issue...

JP wrote:
Ridership does not seem to be a problem, but reliability of the 165
fleet, whilst hitting a peak a few months ago has again slumped to
around half that achieved by the Reading based examples. ATP problems
perhaps? The Chiltern 165s do have a few extra bits on them which
would mean more to fail. The Chiltern engineering staff are looking at
some innovations which have caught the attention of other DMU
operators, all of which would go a long way to improving reliability.

Could it simply be down to a bit of over-zealous fault reporting? Certainly
I can't recall the last time that I encountered a Chiltern 165/0 operated
service that was cancelled or that was a failure in traffic (it's been 168s,
if anything). Similarly, I can't recall the last time that I found a 165
with defective air-cooling in any vehicle in the set or was on a set that
had door problems - in fact I can't think of any instance in the last year.
Conversely, your 165/1s don't have air-cooling to worry about and, IME, on
the 166s I've found it quite common to find a vehicle in traffic with the
air-con not working, even on my infrequent GWML inner-suburban journeys.

Bob wrote:
http://investing.reuters.co.uk/news/...-HENDERSON.XML

Quote
Henderson appoints KPMG for Chiltern sale-source
Thu Jul 5, 2007 12:15 PM BST ]
LONDON, July 5 (Reuters) - Fund manager group Henderson (HGI.L: Quote,
Profile , Research) has retained accountancy group KPMG [KPMG.UL] to
advise on the sale of its Chiltern Railways unit, a source said on
Thursday.
Henderson acquired Chiltern Railways last year when it bought John
Laing and is selling the rail firm to focus on its public
infrastructure portfolio, the source said.

If that's the case why did they bid (and win) the London Overground
franchise?

"Stuart" wrote in message
o.uk...
Bob wrote:
http://investing.reuters.co.uk/news/...-HENDERSON.XML

Quote
Henderson appoints KPMG for Chiltern sale-source
Thu Jul 5, 2007 12:15 PM BST ]
LONDON, July 5 (Reuters) - Fund manager group Henderson (HGI.L: Quote,
Profile , Research) has retained accountancy group KPMG [KPMG.UL] to
advise on the sale of its Chiltern Railways unit, a source said on
Thursday.
Henderson acquired Chiltern Railways last year when it bought John
Laing and is selling the rail firm to focus on its public
infrastructure portfolio, the source said.

If that's the case why did they bid (and win) the London Overground
franchise?

To fatten up the animal for sale?

Paul

In article .com,
Mr Thant wrote:

On Jul 6, 3:20 am, TheOneKEA wrote:
Oh wonderful. If any of the usual suspects acquire it I can see
Chiltern getting sucked into a tiolet tank and turned into a shadow of
its clean, reliable, expansionist, common-sense self. Whoopee.

It's expansionism seems to be a shadow of its former self already. The
"Projects" section of their website lists:
- Aylesbury Vale Parkway (fair enough)
- Evergreen 2 (completed last year)
- Wembley depot (completed 2005)
- West Hampstead Interchange (dead)

Sounds like they could do with a new injection of cash.

which of those did Chiltern pay for, I guess none but I am not a local,
certainly Evergreen is Network rail


SB

In article ,
"Paul Scott" wrote:

"chunky munky" wrote in message
ups.com...
On Jul 6, 11:36 am, Steve Broadbent wrote:
In article . com,

wrote:
There are suggestions going round that whilst Chiltern is doing very
well on punctuality etc. there are many problems to do with other "key
performance indicators" linked to retaining the franchise that need
very urgent attention. (suggested as one reason behind the change of
MD recently announced) - so whilst it may seem to be doing very well
it could be that there are issues that need to be resolved elsewhere
in the company that we aren't aware of.

Tony

and this weeks Transit magazine shows chiltern's latest financial
figures, indicating that the previous year's decent profit has been
turned into a reasonable loss....

SB

I spy a bank or venture capitalist firm lurking about...!


What isn't clear is if Henderson is selling Laing Rail, which is Chilterns
parent, or just Chiltern.

If they are selling Laing Rail division, is there any reason why GoVia, the
second placed for the London Rail concession, couldn't buy it? I thought
they were in with a shout for the Ovewrground, if only because there will be
a lot of interaction between the ELL/WLL and other GoVia/Southern routes.
Same applies to services through Snow Hill now as well of course with West
Midlands...

any body can buy it, another TOC's parent, a would be TOC, merchant
bank, Sainsburys, but what is it worth... Transit says the company net
worth is £3 million, it is making a loss and has 15 years to run as a
franchise, so £50 should easily buy it?? Plus, if relevant, the half
share in London Overground.

SB

On 6 Jul, 13:10, Steve Broadbent wrote:
In article ,
"Paul Scott" wrote:





"chunky munky" wrote in message
oups.com...
On Jul 6, 11:36 am, Steve Broadbent wrote:
In article . com,

wrote:
There are suggestions going round that whilst Chiltern is doing very
well on punctuality etc. there are many problems to do with other "key
performance indicators" linked to retaining the franchise that need
very urgent attention. (suggested as one reason behind the change of
MD recently announced) - so whilst it may seem to be doing very well
it could be that there are issues that need to be resolved elsewhere
in the company that we aren't aware of.

Tony

and this weeks Transit magazine shows chiltern's latest financial
figures, indicating that the previous year's decent profit has been
turned into a reasonable loss....

SB

I spy a bank or venture capitalist firm lurking about...!

What isn't clear is if Henderson is selling Laing Rail, which is Chilterns
parent, or just Chiltern.

If they are selling Laing Rail division, is there any reason why GoVia, the
second placed for the London Rail concession, couldn't buy it? I thought
they were in with a shout for the Ovewrground, if only because there will be
a lot of interaction between the ELL/WLL and other GoVia/Southern routes.
Same applies to services through Snow Hill now as well of course with West
Midlands...

any body can buy it, another TOC's parent, a would be TOC, merchant
bank, Sainsburys, but what is it worth... Transit says the company net
worth is £3 million, it is making a loss and has 15 years to run as a
franchise, so £50 should easily buy it?? Plus, if relevant, the half
share in London Overground.


Just to clarify, the share in London Overground belongs to John Laing
Group, not Chiltern Railways, so it will not necessarily be included
in any sale of the latter.

Also, as far as I am aware, it has not been stated that the split
between John Laing and MTR in the London Overground Consortium is
50/50. It might be 60/40 or 40/60 for all we know. Or 10/90 ... etc.

The Gerrards Cross fiasco has cost Chiltern dear. Apparently, during
the blockade, many Chiltern passengers found viable alternatives and
have not returned to rail in the numbers expected. The nearby M40 is
not such a bad option, either by coach or by car.

In addition, at long last, the Virgin Trains service between
Birmingham New Street and London Euston has experienced a strong
revival. At least some of the passengers using this must have moved
back from Chiltern Railways' services between Snow Hill/Moor Street
and London Marylebone. Anyway, the result is that the Birmingham
traffic on Chiltern, which experienced explosive growth, only to be
cut short by the Gerrards Cross blockade, is now being hit by
competition from a much faster (although vastly more expensive) Virgin
Trains service, and is therefore growing much more slowly than
expected.

The ownership of John Laing Group by Henderson was always going to
mean changes. Whereas Laing had always taken a longer-term view, and
made strategic decisions, Henderson Global Investors Limited is
unashamedly focused on shareholder value, which means that
underperformance will not be tolerated for long.

It will be interesting to see who buys Chiltern. In my view, a trade
sale to another transport operator is far more likely than a sale to
another finacial institution. A Train Operating Company is unlikely
to appeal to a private equity firm, for example, as there are few
assets that can be realised and the scope for rapidly increasing
profit performance simply does not exist because of the inertia that
is built into the franchise agreement.

My money will be on one of the TOCs that will have been disappointed
in the current tound of franchise awards. National Express Group is
one possibiity, but there are others.

On 6 Jul, 13:06, Steve Broadbent wrote:
In article .com,
Mr Thant wrote:

On Jul 6, 3:20 am, TheOneKEA wrote:
Oh wonderful. If any of the usual suspects acquire it I can see
Chiltern getting sucked into a tiolet tank and turned into a shadow of
its clean, reliable, expansionist, common-sense self. Whoopee.

It's expansionism seems to be a shadow of its former self already. The
"Projects" section of their website lists:
- Aylesbury Vale Parkway (fair enough)
- Evergreen 2 (completed last year)
- Wembley depot (completed 2005)
- West Hampstead Interchange (dead)

Sounds like they could do with a new injection of cash.

which of those did Chiltern pay for, I guess none but I am not a local,
certainly Evergreen is Network rail


John Laing Group was project manager for Evergreen 1 although the work
was carried out by and for Network Rail.

Evergreen 2 was carried out by John Laing Group on a Design, Build,
Finance and Transfer basis. John Laing Group funded the project and
took full commercial risk. However the assets became the property of
Network Rail, because that is the way the franchise system works,
Chiltern Railways being effectively prevented from owning such
assets.