Creation of class 230 DEMUs from ex-LU D78s by Vivarail

[A0wen]

I know it's OT, but you'd be surprised. The Pinto and Cologne V6 are still quite popular for kit cars and such. Plenty of companies still produce more major components for them.

No I wouldn't - I actually own a car with a Ford Cologne engine - so am well aware of what most local branches of Halford's stock - plugs, filters and at a push a distributor cap - for anything beyond that you're into the proper motor factors.

 

[asylumxl]

No I wouldn't - I actually own a car with a Ford Cologne engine - so am well aware of what most local branches of Halford's stock - plugs, filters and at a push a distributor cap - for anything beyond that you're into the proper motor factors.

You'd be lucky if Halford's even stocked sponges. They hardly the pinnacle of car part suppliers.

 

[Greybeard33]

No I wouldn't - I actually own a car with a Ford Cologne engine - so am well aware of what most local branches of Halford's stock - plugs, filters and at a push a distributor cap - for anything beyond that you're into the proper motor factors.

According to Wikipedia, Vivarail is using the 3.2L Ford Duratorq TDCi inline-five turbo intercooled engine, rated at 150kW with 470Nm torque. This is no longer available on current UK models of the Transit van, which all have 2.2L 4-cylinder engines. It is still an option on the Ford Ranger pickup.

 

[northwichcat]

Tony Miles has said he understands the GWR trial of a D-Train has been called off. From what he said it's sounds like D-Trains won't be introduced under any DfT let franchise currently up for renewal.

It sounds like a devolved Wales franchise is Shooter's only hope.

 

[traji00]

Tony Miles has said he understands the GWR trial of a D-Train has been called off. From what he said it's sounds like D-Trains won't be introduced under any DfT let franchise currently up for renewal.

It sounds like a devolved Wales franchise is Shooter's only hope.

That doesn't bode well for the project...

 

[ScotGG]

I know there's plenty of doubt about the project, but even if going well could it be because they won't be coming through big finance the govt is seemingly in thrall to?

 

[northwichcat]

A few years back Clare Perry hinted that there might be a need for a stop-gap solution for non-electrified lines and it seems Vivarail have always been targeting to fill that gap. However, electrification delays and new DMUs being available for a lower price than expected means Vivarail need to find a new market if they want to succeed with the D-Train, maybe they need to look at getting closed lines reopened with a low cost D-Train which can be replaced with a better train at a later date if it proves successful?

 

[Xenophon PCDGS]

A few years back Clare Perry hinted that there might be a need for a stop-gap solution for non-electrified lines and it seems Vivarail have always been targeting to fill that gap. However, electrification delays and new DMUs being available for a lower price than expected means Vivarail need to find a new market if they want to succeed with the D-Train, maybe they need to look at getting closed lines reopened with a low cost D-Train which can be replaced with a better train at a later date if it proves successful?

How much political wherewithal do Vivarail have that can bring about the reopening of any closed line?
--- old post above --- --- new post below ---

Tony Miles has said he understands the GWR trial of a D-Train has been called off. From what he said it's sounds like D-Trains won't be introduced under any DfT let franchise currently up for renewal.

A not too surprising outcome to the hoped-for GWR trial situation.

 

[The Ham]

A few years back Clare Perry hinted that there might be a need for a stop-gap solution for non-electrified lines and it seems Vivarail have always been targeting to fill that gap. However, electrification delays and new DMUs being available for a lower price than expected means Vivarail need to find a new market if they want to succeed with the D-Train, maybe they need to look at getting closed lines reopened with a low cost D-Train which can be replaced with a better train at a later date if it proves successful?

Their market will have shifted a little, if you are a TOC with a need for a few DMU's until electrification then the D-train will still be a good prospect.

As such Northern was never going to have lots of them.

The thing that's messed up their business plan is TPE releasing a load of 185's, which will mean that there's spare DMU's which have about 20 years of life left and can infill for a wider range of units. Which makes them a much better prospect than the D-trains.

Would you rather lease a train which you could use for the franchise after next if you need it (slower than expected electrification and/or more than expected passenger growth) or one that may be a little cheaper but will need to be replaced near the start of the next franchise?

 

[47802]

I'm a little surprised that they don't appear to be going ahead with the trial though, to see if it actually does work as well as Vivarail suggest and hope or its a piece of junk

 

[jimm]

I'm a little surprised that they don't appear to be going ahead with the trial though, to see if it actually does work as well as Vivarail suggest and hope or its a piece of junk

Give them a chance. The thing hasn't even left Long Marston yet to be tested at night on the Cotswold Line. If GWR had a particular timeframe in mind to take a look at the thing in a particular place and it isn't going to be available or Network Rail-approved at that point in time then it's not surprising they have pulled out.

 

[Emblematic]

Would you rather lease a train which you could use for the franchise after next if you need it (slower than expected electrification and/or more than expected passenger growth) or one that may be a little cheaper but will need to be replaced near the start of the next franchise?

A: Lease the cheapest one. Make as much money as possible on the franchise you have, pay no heed to a future one that may well go to a competitor. Did I miss something?

 

[Greybeard33]

A: Lease the cheapest one. Make as much money as possible on the franchise you have, pay no heed to a future one that may well go to a competitor. Did I miss something?

If you were a ROSCO, would you charge a much lower lease rate for a D-train, which you would have to buy from Vivarail at one-off prices and write off after 10 years, with a risk that it might be returned early and you could not find another customer? Compared with a bulk purchase of new DMUs, which you were confident would earn you returns for 30-40 years?

 

[Emblematic]

If you were a ROSCO, would you charge a much lower lease rate for a D-train, which you would have to buy from Vivarail at one-off prices and write off after 10 years, with a risk that it might be returned early and you could not find another customer? Compared with a bulk purchase of new DMUs, which you were confident would earn you returns for 30-40 years?

If I were a ROSCO I would have zero interest in financing new DMUs that were not covered by a Section 54 undertaking to cover the break-even period. Too many uncertainties, not least being government policy and financing of electrification, environmental regulation, and possible disruptive entrants to the market, like Vivarail.

Units which I can cover my costs on the first lease, and be in profit if I manage a second - well, that's interesting.

 

[The Ham]

A: Lease the cheapest one. Make as much money as possible on the franchise you have, pay no heed to a future one that may well go to a competitor. Did I miss something?

It's not quite that straight forward. The cheaper one may not be able to have the warning potential of the other (number of seats) or may cause you operational issues (not enough power to make up list time) or many other issues which could make the more expensive unit a better option.

Yes there is a chance that the competition take over the franchise and be prepared and having the better units doesn't benefit you. However if you don't take them on it's certain that someone else will certainly take on those units.

 

[61653 HTAFC]

Their market will have shifted a little, if you are a TOC with a need for a few DMU's until electrification then the D-train will still be a good prospect.

As such Northern was never going to have lots of them.

The thing that's messed up their business plan is TPE releasing a load of 185's, which will mean that there's spare DMU's which have about 20 years of life left and can infill for a wider range of units. Which makes them a much better prospect than the D-trains.

Would you rather lease a train which you could use for the franchise after next if you need it (slower than expected electrification and/or more than expected passenger growth) or one that may be a little cheaper but will need to be replaced near the start of the next franchise?

It was always known that the 185s would be freed up sooner or later, I'm of the opinion that releasing any of them would be a mistake until wiring is complete but that's not really for this topic. I'm still hoping to see these units in use somewhere, I'd have welcomed them with open arms on the Penistone line were it not for political points-scoring during the election campaign. They won't work everywhere of course, but even Shooter never tried to claim they would.

 

[Emblematic]

It's not quite that straight forward. The cheaper one may not be able to have the warning potential of the other (number of seats) or may cause you operational issues (not enough power to make up list time) or many other issues which could make the more expensive unit a better option.

Yes there is a chance that the competition take over the franchise and be prepared and having the better units doesn't benefit you. However if you don't take them on it's certain that someone else will certainly take on those units.

Of course it isn't that simple - the franchise system as currently operated means the TOC has very little freedom over rolling stock selection, franchise specifications and existing agreements between ROSCOs and DfT see to that. DfT are the decision makers.
Not sure what your second point is. Why do I care what other operators outside my franchise do?

 

[3141]

If you were a ROSCO, would you charge a much lower lease rate for a D-train, which you would have to buy from Vivarail at one-off prices and write off after 10 years, with a risk that it might be returned early and you could not find another customer? Compared with a bulk purchase of new DMUs, which you were confident would earn you returns for 30-40 years?

A year ago, or maybe even less, everyone was saying that there wouldn't be any new DMUs because

- it was impossible to fit a Euro 6 engine into the British loading gauge, or at least so difficult and expensive that it wasn't worth trying for the limited number of units that could be sold;
- no ROSCO would finance new DMUs because electrification would reduce the opportunities to use them after the first few years and they might not get their investment back in the longer term;
- they were so much more expensive to buy than EMUs.

But now I read about "cheap" DMUs and the "bulk purchase" of new DMUs. So what's changed? Yes, electrification will be slower, but that won't alter the problem of fitting in Euro 6 engines - if that really was a major problem; or reduce the cost of DMUs; or create a full 30 -40 year life for a "bulk purchase".

It appears likely that some of the stuff being said quite recently was badly informed, or that some of the stuff being said now is badly-informed, or maybe both.

In the meantime, it seems to me there is still a case for an economic product like the D train for use where higher speeds aren't needed and which doesn't have to last for 30 years or more in order to cover the cost of procuring it.

 

[Xenophon PCDGS]

In the meantime, it seems to me there is still a case for an economic product like the D train for use where higher speeds aren't needed and which doesn't have to last for 30 years or more in order to cover the cost of procuring it.

Your view with regards to the Class 230 units still has not seen an order of any size placed with Vivarail by any purchasing or leasing body. Vivarail certainly have been very slow in ensuring all required testing and approval have been done, which has not helped their case. I understand that GWR have now decided not to proceed with their interest.

 

[asylumxl]

Your view with regards to the Class 230 units still has not seen an order of any size placed with Vivarail by any purchasing or leasing body. Vivarail certainly have been very slow in ensuring all required testing and approval have been done, which has not helped their case. I understand that GWR have now decided not to proceed with their interest.

Is this confirmed or purely a rumour at the moment?

 

[Skimble19]

Your view with regards to the Class 230 units still has not seen an order of any size placed with Vivarail by any purchasing or leasing body. Vivarail certainly have been very slow in ensuring all required testing and approval have been done, which has not helped their case. I understand that GWR have now decided not to proceed with their interest.

We get it, for some reason you're ridiculously against this - you don't need to keep pointing it out every 5 seconds in as many ways as you can...

Realistically until Vivarail release a finished unit there is no knowing what will happen.. From what they have shown so far it could work well in certain areas - but until there's been testing we will have to wait and see.

 

[Emblematic]

A year ago, or maybe even less, everyone was saying that there wouldn't be any new DMUs because

- it was impossible to fit a Euro 6 engine into the British loading gauge, or at least so difficult and expensive that it wasn't worth trying for the limited number of units that could be sold;
- no ROSCO would finance new DMUs because electrification would reduce the opportunities to use them after the first few years and they might not get their investment back in the longer term;
- they were so much more expensive to buy than EMUs.

But now I read about "cheap" DMUs and the "bulk purchase" of new DMUs. So what's changed? Yes, electrification will be slower, but that won't alter the problem of fitting in Euro 6 engines - if that really was a major problem; or reduce the cost of DMUs; or create a full 30 -40 year life for a "bulk purchase".

It appears likely that some of the stuff being said quite recently was badly informed, or that some of the stuff being said now is badly-informed, or maybe both.

In the meantime, it seems to me there is still a case for an economic product like the D train for use where higher speeds aren't needed and which doesn't have to last for 30 years or more in order to cover the cost of procuring it.

I don't recall there ever being a consensus on these forums about DMU procurement, so claiming 'everyone' said something is rather bold. Some of your other points are also overstating - or oversimplifying - what has been discussed.
-It would be very difficult, if not impossible, to adapt existing designs to Euro IIIB emissions standard. The implication is that the next order would therefore need to cover the costs of a new design; this presents particular problems for small orders.
-An illustration being when TFL tendered to extend (or replace) their eight 2-car 172s, the prices were unpalatable and no order was placed.
-ROSCOs rarely finance any new trains without some form of underwriting, usually a Section 54 undertaking. This essentially means the DfT commit that the units will remain leased beyond the current franchise, to ensure the ROSCO is not exposed. Otherwise risk is priced in, and things become unaffordable. An example taken from the West Coast franchise consultation:

The core fleet has section 54 undertakings guaranteeing use of the Pendolinos until 2022 and of the Super Voyagers until 2016

So, while a ROSCO may finance a popular unit without backing, such as Porterbrook's speculative 387 purchase, DMUs are only likely when the government a) specifies and b) underwrites the order.
-Price we don't really know, there haven't been any orders for 5 years! The CAF order is £490m for 281 carriages, 140 of these are DMU. The GatEx 387 order was £145.2m for 108 EMU carriages. If we say the CAF EMUs are priced head-to-head with Bombardier at £1.35m/car, that makes the DMUs £2.15m/car. In comparison, the London Midland 172s were £1.35m/car, five years ago.
That cost is close to Vivarail's estimate of £2m/car, which they claim to provide a 3-car train for.
I don't see this as a bulk order; it's probably the minimum viable order for a new design. As to whether it's cheap, or any more orders (bulk or otherwise) are in the pipeline, I guess we'll continue to speculate.

 

[Xenophon PCDGS]

We get it, for some reason you're ridiculously against this - you don't need to keep pointing it out every 5 seconds in as many ways as you can...Realistically until Vivarail release a finished unit there is no knowing what will happen. From what they have shown so far it could work well in certain areas - but until there's been testing we will have to wait and see.

Just because I report on the factual matter as it stands, those who appear to be supportive of Shooter immediately go into overdrive defensive mood and act as his apologists for the time period taken so far over this conversion project.

You obviously have difficulty in understanding exactly what I said in my posting. Perhaps you will enlighten all of us on the reasons why GWR have taken the decision they have just made.
--- old post above --- --- new post below ---

That cost is close to Vivarail's estimate of £2m/car, which they claim to provide a 3-car train for. I don't see this as a bulk order; it's probably the minimum viable order for a new design. As to whether it's cheap, or any more orders (bulk or otherwise) are in the pipeline, I guess we'll continue to speculate.

Indeed, speculation seems to be the only current course of discussion action until matters move much nearer to a point of financial logic based upon the actuality of orders placed with Vivarail.

 

[irish_rail]

Your view with regards to the Class 230 units still has not seen an order of any size placed with Vivarail by any purchasing or leasing body. Vivarail certainly have been very slow in ensuring all required testing and approval have been done, which has not helped their case. I understand that GWR have now decided not to proceed with their interest.

Correct, this is what we have been told, some other poor saps will have to try them out, not coming to GWR land

 

[Bletchleyite]

Correct, this is what we have been told, some other poor saps will have to try them out, not coming to GWR land

If we can have 3 based at Bletchley send them to the Marston Vale, they would be most welcome.

 

[Xenophon PCDGS]

Is this confirmed or purely a rumour at the moment?

I refer you to the later posting # 2964 on the thread, made by irish rail in answer to your query
--- old post above --- --- new post below ---

If we can have 3 based at Bletchley send them to the Marston Vale, they would be most welcome.

Maybe as a cause for celebration for their first such order, Vivarail will do a "3 for the price of 2" offer, so beloved by the large supermarkets...

 

[Mikey C]

The Coventry to Nuneaton line was highlighted as somewhere desperate for additional DMU capacity to serve the Ricoh Arena, and a possible use for the 230s, though I don't know how economic this would be considering the capacity would only be needed on match days (Wasps and Coventry City)

 

[jimm]

Just because I report on the factual matter as it stands, those who appear to be supportive of Shooter immediately go into overdrive defensive mood and act as his apologists for the time period taken so far over this conversion project.

I would hardly describe someone pointing out that there probably isn't a person alive who is not by now well aware of your views on this subject as acting as an apologist for Adrian Shooter. Why shouldn't Vivarail take their time over it? They want to get it right to give themselves the best chance of securing orders.

You obviously have difficulty in understanding exactly what I said in my posting. Perhaps you will enlighten all of us on the reasons why GWR have taken the decision they have just made.

Well given that about all we have heard so far is Tony Miles's 'understanding' of something, the odds of us hearing much more could be pretty limited, given that GWR were less than effusive previously on the possibility of them trying out the 230.

Indeed, speculation seems to be the only current course of discussion action until matters move much nearer to a point of financial logic based upon the actuality of orders placed with Vivarail.

Maybe we might wait for the actuality of the prototype being tested on the Cotswold Line, when it will be possible to see what it can do on a proper railway - rather than the beat-up War Department and MoD track that predominates on the circuit at Long Marston.

I suspect these tests are what a lot of TOCs and transport officials who have been to Long Marston are also waiting to hear about, so they can take a fully informed view on the possibility of placing orders once they know if the acceleration is what is claimed, how well it handles climbing four miles of 1 in 100 with a dank tunnel at the top, and what the ride is like running at a sustained 60mph over a decent distance.

I say that as someone who has been to Long Marston, seen the work being done there by Vivarail's engineering team and ridden round on the prototype. There is only so much you can tell from pottering along at 25mph on rough track.
--- old post above --- --- new post below ---

The Coventry to Nuneaton line was highlighted as somewhere desperate for additional DMU capacity to serve the Ricoh Arena, and a possible use for the 230s, though I don't know how economic this would be considering the capacity would only be needed on match days (Wasps and Coventry City)

Depends how you define capacity, doesn't it? If you mean providing lots of standing capacity for a short trip - like an Underground commute - assuming you use a train configured internally much as the D78s look now to handle Ricoh Arena crowds, then yes, but of course the rest of the time the limited seating capacity would do just fine for the regular demand on Coventry-Nuneaton. It would certainly come in cheaper than the arrangements Wasps are footing the bill for.

 

[northwichcat]

Some of us will recall CSRE (UK) trying to sell low cost Chinese built DMUs as a Pacer replacement option, which reportedly Northern Rail were interested in but DfT weren't interested and DfT's lack of interest is what resulted in it not going ahead. Is the Vivarail project heading for the same outcome?

 

[Xenophon PCDGS]

I would hardly describe someone pointing out that there probably isn't a person alive who is not by now well aware of your views on this subject as acting as an apologist for Adrian Shooter. Why shouldn't Vivarail take their time over it? They want to get it right to give themselves the best chance of securing orders.

As long as Vivarail accept the old adage of "time and tide wait for no man". If they choose to accept a long period of development time then find out that in the interim period that events have overtaken them in terms of new franchise agreements with certain strictures and new fleets being ordered to meet the wording of these new franchises, they cannot expect that special allowances will be made for them by those charged with rolling stock procurement.

I am so pleased to hear that my "fame" has now spread far and wide in my opposition to Britain accepting a third world "new lamps for old" rolling stock scenario, so very soon after the Pacer "short-term branch line saviour" debacle, but even I will be the first to admit that the Pacers were not subject to a 60mph top speed. As far as I am concerned, the latest score remains at Shooter 0 Sidorczuk 1....