Re: New Melboune F-class trams will cost $18.5 million EACH !!!!!
  Alex Cowie

The number of rail vehicles acquired in a particular time period by
different operators may depend on the vehicle cost but also on the size of
the network, the length of trains, and whether there is a need at that time
for additional capacity or replacement of existing fleet which typically
have 30-40 year lifetimes.

Alex Cowie

On Wednesday, August 17, 2022 at 10:31:19 PM UTC+9:30 TP wrote:

> Well it was the Whitlam government that signed the Lima Declaration that

> started the ball rolling on sending manufacturing overseas and importing

> the products. I agree that we should be encouraging local manufacturing,

> but the costs aren't always competitive and when it's a government

> procurement, the extra cost is borne by the taxpayer and comes with an

> opportunity cost of additional stock or other improvements to the public

> transport system foregone.

>

> According to Alstom, the basic cost of the G class trams is $10 million

> per car. The $18 million figure would, I think, relate to including those

> extras like the depot etc. Similar doublings of cost compared with ordering

> from overseas often occur with passenger trains built in Australia, like

> the 390 train cars to be built for Queensland Rail at Maryborough under the

> Queensland Train Manufacturing Program. (During the last decade, Queensland

> has also acquired 450 NGR suburban cars built in India, which would have

> enabled QR to build up the numbers quickly.) Perth and Adelaide have

> sourced electric trains from Maryborough or Melbourne, though Perth's C

> series order or 246 cars is being built in Perth. When local manufacture

> becomes a requirement in tenders, few will tender without a guarantee of

> continuing repeat orders, otherwise all of the plant and equipment has to

> be amortised over one job and the price of the product goes through the

> roof. Then you end up with a situation like with Alstom at Dandenong, where

> there is a monopoly local manufacturer, undermining the whole basis of

> competitive tendering, and that manufacturer can charge what they like. All

> of this gets charged to the public transport budget.

>

> I think you can see the effects of a local manufacturing requirement in

> the fleet-renewal/expansion outcomes in recent years. (Some of the overseas

> orders include finishing and outfitting in Australia, some don't.) Over the

> last decade (ignoring orders still in process), as far as I can determine,

> 425 suburban rail carriages and 100 tramcars have been built for Melbourne,

> of which 308 carriages were built in China. I want to include Vlocitys too

> because I believe they're regarded as interurban commuter trains, but I

> can't find a breakdown for the last decade. At a calculated guess, there

> are about 200 of these cars built over this time.. So that's about 600 or

> so commuter rail carriages and 100 trams over the past decade.

>

> In NSW, without the constraint of a local manufacture requirement, over

> the last decade there have been acquired by the present government 934

> suburban, metro and interurban rail carriages (from China, India and

> Korea), 91 tramcars (from Spain) and 19 large to medium ferries (from

> Australia, China and Indonesia). Some of these orders are still in

> progress with more to follow. During this decade, another 636 suburban cars

> were acquired from China, but I've separated them because they were an

> order set in motion by the previous Labor government. If we include them as

> actual products of the last ten years, that's 1,570 commuter rail

> carriages, 91 tramcars and 19 ferries. (Compare with the actual outcome

> record of the previous 15 years of Labor government of 220 train carriages,

> 5 medium ferries, no tramcars and no metro cars!)

>

> So NSW's record of local manufacture of these major vehicles/vessels has

> been pretty appalling over the last decade, but look at how much has been

> acquired and how far the money went compared to Victoria - more than twice

> as many rail carriages, almost the same number of trams, plus ferries on

> top. And I'm sure Victoria's figure would have been much lower had they not

> acquired the HCMTs from China but built them here. It's also not only the

> cost, but the local manufacturing capacity too. Since we lost Comeng, the

> capacity no longer exists for this scale of procurement within quite short

> timeframes.

>

> I've left buses out because, even though chassis and drive components are

> invariably imported, at least we can body buses locally. I also haven't

> mentioned the small fleets of trams in Gold Coast, Canberra and Adelaide,

> all of which have been imported from Germany or Spain. Trams are simply not

> viable to manufacture in Australia at a sensible cost, because of the low

> volume and lack of continuity. So we get a situation where production has

> to be drawn out in order to keep the plant running and the workforce and

> suppliers usefully employed. A tram can normally be built in a fortnight or

> less. How long does it take to build a tram at Dandenong for that fabulous

> price? It's a dilemma for sure. Import them, get heaps for the money and

> get them quickly, or manufacture them locally, get far less for the money

> and wait far longer for them. What's the answer?

>

> Tony P

>

>

>

>

>

>

>

> On Wednesday, 17 August 2022 at 12:14:50 UTC+10a...@... wrote:

>

>> The other negative aspect of importing everything manufactured while

>> exporting raw materials with no added value is the adverse environmental

>> effects of dragging stuff around on these enormous ships that burn the

>> worst, high sulphur, high CO2 emitting fuel that is available, kill more

>> whales and other sea mammals than Japanese “scientific research” ever has,

>> and dump containers full of whatever toxic filth they are carrying into the

>> ocean during storms.

>>

>> But these are all considered inconvenient “externalities” by the

>> perpetrators of this ecocide so the real cost of this global trade is

>> concealed in the name of greed and, as always, the polluters get off free.

>>

>> Tony

>>

>> On 17 Aug 2022, at 11:23, Matthew Geier mat...@...>

>> wrote:

>>

>> Are we able to compare like for like though?

>>

>> The G class contract price almost certainly includes the new depot and 20

>> years of maintenance. There will be a premium for local manufacturers and

>> yes it's not fair that the PT budget cops that cost, but the headline cost

>> probably includes much more than the cost of the actual vehicle making

>> direct comparisons difficult. And keeping those workers employed building

>> them is probably cheaper than throwing them all on social security

>> (although that comes out of a different pot of money). Although ultimately

>> as a taxpayer, I pay either way.

>>

>> Mal has pointed out in the past that the G class contract includes

>> handing over proprietary code and tools to the onboard computer systems to

>> PTV. How much did Bombardlier jack up the price for that 'option'?

>>

>>

>> On Wed, 17 Aug 2022 at 10:34, TP histor...@...> wrote:

>>

>>> This month's TAUT has an item that throws some rare insight into the

>>> basic cost of a tram. Pilsen is ordering a new fleet of Skoda 40Ts, which

>>> is a 30 metre design almost identical to the Melbourne E class. The price

>>> has apparently risen 23% because of the current economic situation in

>>> Europe - to $AUD 4 million per car. The discrepancy between this and the

>>> $10 million label on a 24 metre G class car sort of puts it into

>>> perspective. I agree about encouraging local manufacturing, but I have a

>>> problem with the extra cost coming out of the public transport budget

>>> because it means you get less than half as many trams for the money at a

>>> time when you desperately need to replace old trams and/or increase the

>>> fleet - or less of some other urgent public transport need.

>>>

>>> https://zdopravy.cz/wp-content/uploads/2021/04/Tram_Plzen_3.jpg

>>>

>>> Tony P

>>>

>>> On Wednesday, 10 August 2022 at 20:50:21 UTC+10 Mick Duncan wrote:

>>>

>>>> Good one,Greg

>>>>

>>>> Cheers, Mick

>>>>

>>>>

>>>> On 8/08/2022 4:37 pm, Gregory Robinson wrote:

>>>>

>>>> Yarra Trams got rid of route 69 so I guess F class would be out of the

>>>> question.

>>>> Adelaide had their F type.

>>>>

>>>> ------ Original Message ------

>>>> On Monday, 8 Aug, 2022 At 10:25 AM, TPhistor...@...>

>>>> wrote:

>>>>

>>>> When this thread started we didn't know what class the new trams were

>>>> going to be, so we speculated that it would be F. Subsequently it was

>>>> announced that they would be G class.

>>>>

>>>> Tony P

>>>> (tripped up by the thread title himself)

>>>>

>>>> On Monday, 8 August 2022 at 09:30:14 UTC+10 trams4me wrote:

>>>>

>>>>> Was the F class designation for the new trams ever an official "thing"

>>>>> or merely a gunzel affectation?

>>>>>

>>>>> All the official documentation refers to "G" class, thus named as "G"

>>>>> is the seventh letter of the alphabet, the tram is seventh generation and

>>>>> thus their numbers will be 7001 - 71xx.

>>>>>

>>>>> Yuri.

>>>>> --

>>>>> Gallery at https://tinyurl.com/trams4me

>>>>> ----------------------------------------

>>>>>

>>>> --

>>>> You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google

>>>> Groups "TramsDownUnder" group.

>>>> To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it, send

>>>> an email tounsub...@...">tramsdownunder+

>>>>unsub...@....

>>>> To view this discussion on the web visit

>>>> https://groups.google.com/d/msgid/tramsdownunder/567374f0-7e35-457f-a3f0-44c1a496b7d0n%40googlegroups.com

>>>> https://groups.google.com/d/msgid/tramsdownunder/567374f0-7e35-457f-a3f0-44c1a496b7d0n%40googlegroups.com?utm_medium=email&utm_source=footer

>>>> .

>>>>

>>>> --

>>>> You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google

>>>> Groups "TramsDownUnder" group.

>>>>

>>>> To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it, send

>>>> an email totramsdownunde...@....

>>>> To view this discussion on the web visit

>>>> https://groups.google.com/d/msgid/tramsdownunder/2f657584.3f4d4.1827c2ca379.Webtop.93%40telstra.com

>>>> https://groups.google.com/d/msgid/tramsdownunder/2f657584.3f4d4.1827c2ca379.Webtop.93%40telstra.com?utm_medium=email&utm_source=footer

>>>> .

>>>>

>>>>

>>>>

>>> --

>>> You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google

>>> Groups "TramsDownUnder" group.

>>> To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it, send

>>> an email totramsdownunde...@....

>>> To view this discussion on the web visit

>>> https://groups.google.com/d/msgid/tramsdownunder/09ef1153-0cb4-4bf5-9fc6-683028051999n%40googlegroups.com

>>> https://groups.google.com/d/msgid/tramsdownunder/09ef1153-0cb4-4bf5-9fc6-683028051999n%40googlegroups.com?utm_medium=email&utm_source=footer

>>> .

>>>

>>

>> --

>> You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups

>> "TramsDownUnder" group.

>> To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it, send an

>> email totramsdownunde...@....

>>

>> To view this discussion on the web visit

>> https://groups.google.com/d/msgid/tramsdownunder/CAG-%3DV-Ko-_q6i0an0gutLj26%3DkOuA8rVi-E3s7sX4AF%2BvW6dnw%40mail.gmail.com

>> https://groups.google.com/d/msgid/tramsdownunder/CAG-%3DV-Ko-_q6i0an0gutLj26%3DkOuA8rVi-E3s7sX4AF%2BvW6dnw%40mail.gmail.com?utm_medium=email&utm_source=footer

>> .

>>

>>

>>