Siemens-Alstom Merger & Amtrak

Exactly ... They would only file a protest if they thought it was anti-competitive.

However, it wouldn't be surprising if the US Commerce Department supported protests by Caterpillar/Progress Rail and General Electric.

mtuandrew wrote:However, it wouldn't be surprising if the US Commerce Department supported protests by Caterpillar/Progress Rail and General Electric.

Why? It'd likely be an advantage for those manufacturers... Just as it would likely be an advantage for the smaller European manufacturers like Stadler and CAF

mtuandrew wrote:However, it wouldn't be surprising if the US Commerce Department supported protests by Caterpillar/Progress Rail and General Electric.

To what extent do Caterpillar and GE compete with Alstom/Siemens even now? Aren't Caterpillar and GE out of the electric traction and passenger car businesses? And then do Alstom and Siemens even have heavy diesel engines to compete with the major freight businesses of the US companies?

EuroStar wrote:

mtuandrew wrote:However, it wouldn't be surprising if the US Commerce Department supported protests by Caterpillar/Progress Rail and General Electric.

To what extent do Caterpillar and GE compete with Alstom/Siemens even now? Aren't Caterpillar and GE out of the electric traction and passenger car businesses? And then do Alstom and Siemens even have heavy diesel engines to compete with the major freight businesses of the US companies?

AFAIK Siemens Mobility has bupkis in its product catalog for pure off-shelf freight locos, but does partner up with other builders to serve up the Vectron platform up in a freight profile. Their biggest installed base is on electric coal-hauling lines in Australia and Russia, though...not general-purpose competing against the diesels. Their railway logistics division focuses heavily on high-tech components and integration: onboard electrical, lineside electrical, signaling, automation, operations control. Mostly stuff universal to any/all mainline rail without getting into freight logistics where the global competition is very stiff. And obviously they're big on the train components supply chain to feed their own passenger installed base.

Alstom Transport appears to be the same way. They offer "multipurpose" Prima electric locos (sourced from Avelia tech) that can be geared for passenger and freight...but clearly they're chasing lion's share passenger and just the same electric coal-hauling lines as Siemens. As well as a "heavy freight" electric Prima. So I guess you can call the Prima a modern E60 at being able to brute-force any electric application, but that's still not a particularly wide target in freight-land. They also have a diesel switcher lineup in the Prima series, but I would bet given how passenger-heavy everything else they sell is that they attract a lot of passenger operators for work locos and yard switchers than they do freight haulers or terminal switching. Their write-up says those things work well for "hinterlands" passenger service because they're pretty zippy...and that's not a tagline you'll ever see promoted from a company aiming square at the bread-and-butter industrial switcher market. Most of their logistics stuff is in the same vein as Siemens: hi-tech components, computer automation, and parts supply chain for their installed base. The one area where they outflank Siemens bigtime is as a rebuilder...which shouldn't surprise anyone since they do such huge biz with all kinds of ongoing midlife overhaul contracts in the U.S. for RR, heavy rail, and light rail rolling stock. And they also do a lot more in the way of heavy work equipment (MOW machines, etc.) and lineside infrastructure management than Siemens, who stick more conservatively to components & systems rather than laying the actual rail.


So, yeah, your hunch is right. They complement each other pretty well with same business focus but differing strengths within that focus, but are pretty much worldwide bystanders when it comes to product specific to the freight sector.

EuroStar wrote:Isn't GE out of the electric traction and passenger car businesses?

GE no longer offers new AC or DC equipment for rail transit and passenger operations, at least for a decade and more. Here's an archived page of GE's rail transit catalog as of 1997, after the late 90s GE no longer actively marketed its electric rail transit products and services.

Westinghouse's transportation division, GE's longtime rival in the rail industry is still around, as BBD's Pittsburgh Shops. Westinghouse sold its transportation (rail) division to AEG (Daimler) in 1988, which merged into AdTranz 1995. If you recall history, GE was associated with Alco and MLW and Westinghouse was associated with Baldwin, Lima-Hamilton and F-M. The APMs (automated people movers) built in Pittsburgh are continuing Westinghouse's APM heritage, which began in the late 1960s with the Skybus pilot project. Rail propulsion, controls, electrical systems and other equipment are made at the Westinghouse/BBD facility.

So the only company which really has good reasons to protest is Bombardier. Currently though they do not seem to have much weight with the US government due to Boeing's complaint against the C-Series jets, so I doubt that they will even try.

For those who wish to know more about the Boeing-Bombardier dispute noted by Mr. EuroStar, and without having to wade through Airliners dot net's jargon (you think ours around here is bad, try theirs on for size), I think this WSJ article is now open content:

http://www.wsj.com/articles/trudeau-and ... 1505761250" onclick="window.open(this.href);return false;

Fair Use (admittedly "stretched a bit"):

OTTAWA—The prime ministers of the U.K. and Canada vowed Monday to join forces and press Boeing Co. and the Trump administration to bring an end to the aerospace company’s pursuit of a trade complaint against Montreal’s Bombardier Inc.

The dispute between the North American aircraft makers, over allegations that Bombardier unfairly benefits from Canadian government support, prompted Canadian Prime Minister Justin Trudeau to issue his most direct threat regarding Boeing’s behavior at a joint press conference involving the two Group of Seven leaders.

Mr. Trudeau said a failure to resolve the matter could prompt Canada to scrap previously announced plans to buy roughly $5 billion in Boeing jet fighters, as he said he has no intention to do business “with a company that’s trying to sue us".

U.K. Prime Minister Theresa May has been drawn into the dispute because it could affect a factory in Northern Ireland that makes parts for Bombardier’s 100-plus-seat C Series aircraft. That carries political implications for Mrs. May’s minority Conservative government, which depends on support from 10 lawmakers belonging to Northern Ireland’s Democratic Unionist Party to pass critical legislation, including on Britain’s exit from the European Union.

“We have discussed how we can work together to see a resolution to this issue, which from my point of view, I want to see a resolution which protects those jobs in Northern Ireland,” Mrs. May told reporters. She added she would raise the Bombardier dispute with President Donald Trump when she meets with him later this week at the United Nations General Assembly

What I'm at a loss to understand is why there is a dispute, and that Justy has to bring Tessie over to help him. For whatever reasons, Delta wants an aircraft in a seating range which neither Boeing nor Airbus offer. Why they have a need for this size and nobody else does is their business (I haven't flown 'em in years; Mr. Dunville seems to live aboard 'em). Volks, lest we forget, the Chinese are seeking to market worldwide a like sized aircraft (think they have problems with it) and I doubt very much if a US flagged carrier is about to go near them.

Possibly Google AMP can find a knothole in the paywall, but here's an article from the Journal suggesting that Bombardier is deep in the excrement:

https://www.google.com/amp/s/www.wsj.co ... 1506539097" onclick="window.open(this.href);return false;

Fair Use:

...Bombardier Inc. was licking its wounds on Wednesday, a day after two rivals said they would merge their train operations and the U.S. announced a tariff on its passenger jets.

Shares of the prominent Canadian manufacturer plummeted when trading opened on the Toronto Stock Exchange Wednesday, and finished the day down 7.8% at 2.12 Canadian dollars ($1.71).

Sales of Bombardier’s new CSeries passenger jets have stalled out this year, and the decision by the U.S. International Trade Commission certainly won’t help. The body is imposing a tariff that would triple the cost of CSeries jets sold in the U.S., acting on a complaint from Boeing Co. that Bombardier was improperly underpricing the aircraft.

Another problem for the Montreal-based company is its train division, which generates most of its profits but faces a sharply diminished global position as it struggles with production problems

What is ominous for Amtrak is I'm fearing a debacle over the Acela II's. There are too many analogies that can be drawn to the V-II's, and the former will be "the face of Amtrak" into the mid-century, rather than an ancillary service there for little more than to ensure political support, as is the latter.

Siemens came over here with a single-level car drawn from a proven design that they have sold throughout Central and Eastern Europe (Euro City and Rail Jet). If All Aboard Florida ever in fact runs (all know how skeptical I am about that), here is the test lab for what we all know will be a 700 car A-III order.

Gilbert B Norman wrote:For those who wish to know more about the Boeing-Bombardier dispute noted by Mr. EuroStar, and without having to wade through Airliners dot net's jargon (you think ours around here is bad, try theirs on for size), I think this WSJ article is now open content:

http://www.wsj.com/articles/trudeau-and ... 1505761250" onclick="window.open(this.href);return false;

Fair Use:

OTTAWA—The prime ministers of the U.K. and Canada vowed Monday to join forces and press Boeing Co. and the Trump administration to bring an end to the aerospace company’s pursuit of a trade complaint against Montreal’s Bombardier Inc.

The dispute between the North American aircraft makers, over allegations that Bombardier unfairly benefits from Canadian government support, prompted Canadian Prime Minister Justin Trudeau to issue his most direct threat regarding Boeing’s behavior at a joint press conference involving the two Group of Seven leaders.

Mr. Trudeau said a failure to resolve the matter could prompt Canada to scrap previously announced plans to buy roughly $5 billion in Boeing jet fighters, as he said he has no intention to do business “with a company that’s trying to sue us".

What I'm at a loss to understand is why there is a dispute, and that Justy has to bring Tessie over to help him. For whatever reasons, Delta wants an aircraft in a seating range which neither Boeing nor Airbus offer. Why they have a need for this size and nobody else does is their business (I haven't flown 'em in years; Mr. Dunville seems to live aboard 'em). Volks, lest we forget, the Chinese are seeking to market worldwide a like sized aircraft (think they have problems with it) and I doubt very much if a US flagged carrier is about to go near them.

Bombardier's new jet has 5 abreast seating, while Boeing's old reliable jet has 6 abreast seating. So the major difference between the jets is the diameter of the main fuselage.
A Boeing 737 jet fuselage is ~12 feet 4 inches wide, the Bombardier CS100 jet fuselage is ~12 feet 2 inches wide.

Bombardier also makes the CS300 jet, which is basically a CS100 jet that's ~12 feet longer.
The CS100 seats 108 (8F + 100Y) to 133 (1-class),
the CS300 seats 130 (12F + 118Y) to 160 (1-class).

As for Boeing's new 737 NGs
737-600 108 (8F@36" 100Y@32"), 123 @32" - 130 @ 30" (1-class)
737-700 128 (8F@36" 120Y@32"), 140 @32" - 148 @ 30" (1-class)
537-800 160 (12F@36" 148Y@32"), 175 @32" - 184 @ 30" (1-class)
737-900 177 (12F@36" 165Y@32"), 177 @32" - 215 @ 28" (1-class)
And Boeing's newest 737 MAXs
MAX 7 will have two more rows of six seats, (+12) than the 737-700.
MAX 8, MAX 9, and MAX 10 jets will have longer fuselages and higher capacities just like the earlier Next Generation models, with longer jets having more seats. Just the number of seats aren't standardized, as they can vary with seating pitches.

The CS100 jets have basically the same capacity as the 737-600. Note that Boeing has not announced plans to build MAX 6 jets, which is the hole in Boeing's lineup Bombardier is filling. So why has Boeing dropped the MAX 6 from its lineup?
737-600 69 orders
737-700 1,162 orders
737-800 5,166 orders
737-900 563 orders
I think the sales figures answers that question.

So why has Boeing won the argument with the US regulators so far?
5 abreast seating can be changed into six abreast seating, and vice versa 6 abreast seating can be changed into 5 abreast seating. There's only 2 inches difference in their fuselage widths.
You have got to look past the seating numbers and look at the other dimensions to come to this conclusion. But the idea that the CS 100 and CS 300 jets are not direct competitors for the Boeing jets is wrong.

[quote="Gilbert B Norman"]For those who wish to know more about the Boeing-Bombardier dispute noted by Mr. EuroStar, and without having to wade through Airliners dot net's jargon (you think ours around here is bad, try theirs on for size), I think this WSJ article is now open content:


What? You don't speak Anet?

Mod Note: This is an interesting discussion and all facets of Siemens-Alsthom and competitors such as BBD are relevant to the topic, but let's try to keep this framed within a discussion of the railroad issues. Thanks!

Swinging back on topic - BBD-Siemens was the reliable rumor for a while.

We now know it's Siemens-Alstom.

Does BBD get added to the mix? I don't see it - it brings nothing but headaches to the table.

BBD's rail division is in deep doodoo in the American market. The NY MTA - who brought them to prominence in the 80's, has openly suggested they not bother bidding on a 3.2 billion dollar subway car order. Their issues in Canada have gotten a few agencies to look elsewhere (!). They can't get much traction elsewhere in the US, and NJ Transit is in no position to order more science experiments (and not at 12 million a pop)

Alstmens, Siemenstrom, whatever, will squish them like a bug on a TGV's windshield. Stadler will get the rest, Talgo has its niche, CAF and Breda (heh) will fight over the scraps.

I don't see a way out, minus a huge injection of funding (Hi Boeing!), or a merger with someone who needs to merge.

The Canadian government might decide the C-Series is more important than a bunch of rocky railcar orders, and that'll be that. I doubt they can afford to prop up both for too long...

Nasadowsk wrote:Swinging back on topic - BBD-Siemens was the reliable rumor for a while.

We now know it's Siemens-Alstom.

Does BBD get added to the mix? I don't see it - it brings nothing but headaches to the table.

BBD's rail division is in deep doodoo in the American market. The NY MTA - who brought them to prominence in the 80's, has openly suggested they not bother bidding on a 3.2 billion dollar subway car order. Their issues in Canada have gotten a few agencies to look elsewhere (!). They can't get much traction elsewhere in the US, and NJ Transit is in no position to order more science experiments (and not at 12 million a pop)

Alstmens, Siemenstrom, whatever, will squish them like a bug on a TGV's windshield. Stadler will get the rest, Talgo has its niche, CAF and Breda (heh) will fight over the scraps.

I don't see a way out, minus a huge injection of funding (Hi Boeing!), or a merger with someone who needs to merge.

The Canadian government might decide the C-Series is more important than a bunch of rocky railcar orders, and that'll be that. I doubt they can afford to prop up both for too long...

https://www.nytimes.com/reuters/2017/09 ... emens.html" onclick="window.open(this.href);return false;

Bombardier wanted too much power for what they brought to the table.

Funny how this merger was to keep China Rail at bay. Since when has Amtrak ever bought China Rail equipment? China HSR made a proposal to California to run its high speed unit but thats it.

Many were suprised that Siemens did not win the Acela replacement contract, I guess though a back door they will still be involvded after the merger.

Nasadowsk wrote:The Canadian government might decide the C-Series is more important than a bunch of rocky railcar orders, and that'll be that. I doubt they can afford to prop up both for too long...

I suspect that unless BBD cleans up their stuff very quickly in a few years eventually one of the Japanese manufacturers will get Bombardier's train unit, probably for much less than what it is worth now. While the NJT MLs and ALPs work fine, the mess that they have made in their home market in Canada plus the problems with the MTA's subway order are likely to leave them scraping for new work.