• Our booking engine at tickets.railforums.co.uk (powered by TrainSplit) helps support the running of the forum with every ticket purchase! Find out more and ask any questions/give us feedback in this thread!

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

Status
Not open for further replies.
Sponsor Post - registered members do not see these adverts; click here to register, or click here to log in
R

RailUK Forums

W

WatcherZero

Established Member
Joined
25 Feb 2010
Messages
10,272
samgeorge965 said:
I believe that GWR wanted to trial them on the Tamar valley line.
Sam
Click to expand...

Think it was the opposite way round, GWR had written in to their contract by Dft that they had to test them but the company were doing everything they could to avoid it.
 
N

northwichcat

Veteran Member
Joined
23 Jan 2009
Messages
32,693
Location
Northwich
WatcherZero said:
Think it was the opposite way round, GWR had written in to their contract by Dft that they had to test them but the company were doing everything they could to avoid it.
Click to expand...

From the GWR franchise agreement

The Franchisee shall, to the extent reasonably requested by the Secretary of State
and subject to payment of the Franchisee's reasonable costs by the relevant third
party, co-operate with any third party which the Secretary of State may specify
(including a Successor Operator, a rolling stock vehicle manufacturer, Network
Rail or the Secretary of State) in connection with the testing and commissioning
of new rolling stock vehicles or any new equipment to be fitted to rolling stock
vehicles (whether such rolling stock vehicles are new or otherwise). Such cooperation
shall not unreasonably disrupt the provision and operation of the
Franchise Services and may include:
(a) the movement of test trains within and around depots;
(b) making available suitably qualified personnel to operate test trains along
the Routes and provide information on the Routes;
(c) making Train Slots available for such purposes;
(d) granting or procuring the grant of access to the third party and its
representatives to any relevant facilities; and
(e) the delivery of rolling stock vehicles to specific locations.
Click to expand...
 
T

The Ham

Established Member
Joined
6 Jul 2012
Messages
10,373
iantherev said:
Just what have you got against our 159's that you're so insistent on replacing them? Presumably under your vision, it would be 230s west of Salisbury with a change for Waterloo....
Click to expand...

Nothing wrong with the 159's, past suggestions have been made with the view to allow their release to other TOC's (either by using EMU's and some 159's or EMU's and long sets of 22x's).
 
S

SF-02

Member
Joined
26 Oct 2008
Messages
477
Class 466 said:
I can't say much on the subject - but expect it to turn up where you'd least expect it!
Click to expand...

Isle of Sheppey line? Southeastern need all the spare stock they can get. DfT seem happy to starve the whole franchise just because HS1 is a money sink due to track access fees. Every SE passenger therefore suffers. This may be rare chance for more stock but a waste on electrified lines if so.

Many people in here moan about them coming over. SE passengers would take anything right now on the whole.
 
Last edited:
J

jopsuk

Veteran Member
Joined
13 May 2008
Messages
12,773
If they were going to be used in 3rd rail land then conversion would be much simpler than strapping a diesel on
 
Harbornite

Harbornite

Established Member
Joined
7 May 2016
Messages
3,634
class 9 said:
Off topic but those grey box wagons that the unit runs past look brand new, any idea where they are destined?
Click to expand...

Wellingborough.
http://www.petertandy.co.uk/Recentpics.html
--- old post above --- --- new post below ---
I imagine that these units would be a good stopgap for TPE or Chiltern, they could be hauled by top and tailed 68's or 88's...
--- old post above --- --- new post below ---
phil281 said:
What's happening with this project? Seem's to have gone cold. I know the Northern franchise can't take them now, but is there still interest from elsewhere? Anglia, Valleys, Cornwall?
Click to expand...

London Midland had also expressed interest.
 
gimmea50anyday

gimmea50anyday

Established Member
Joined
8 Jan 2013
Messages
3,456
Location
Back Cab
TP bloomin' E!!!!!!! Hahahaha!!!!!!!

That's funnier than a 442 with a Gat Ex DVT conversion and a 314 centre car!!!!!
 
Last edited:
T

t_star2001uk

Member
Joined
23 Aug 2011
Messages
723
jcollins said:
From the GWR franchise agreement
The Franchisee shall, to the extent reasonably requested by the Secretary of State
and subject to payment of the Franchisee's reasonable costs by the relevant third
party, co-operate with any third party which the Secretary of State may specify
(including a Successor Operator, a rolling stock vehicle manufacturer, Network
Rail or the Secretary of State) in connection with the testing and commissioning
of new rolling stock vehicles or any new equipment to be fitted to rolling stock
vehicles (whether such rolling stock vehicles are new or otherwise). Such cooperation
shall not unreasonably disrupt the provision and operation of the
Franchise Services and may include:
(a) the movement of test trains within and around depots;
(b) making available suitably qualified personnel to operate test trains along
the Routes and provide information on the Routes;
(c) making Train Slots available for such purposes;
(d) granting or procuring the grant of access to the third party and its
representatives to any relevant facilities; and
(e) the delivery of rolling stock vehicles to specific locations.
Click to expand...


This exact same clause is written into the Chiltern franchise agreement that was signed in 2002, and i suspect that there are other operators with the same clause as well... (For the pedants out there it is clause 12.16 at the top of page 50). Just had a quick scan through the Southeastern franchise agreement and guess what, on page 164, schedule 2.4 clause 1.1 is the exact same wording. So does that mean there are 3 operators now committed to testing the 230's, or could that clause be part of a standard franchise agreement.
 
Last edited:
W

WatcherZero

Established Member
Joined
25 Feb 2010
Messages
10,272
Yeah its a standard clause. The extra bit in the Great Western franchise agreement is this;

12. Rolling stock project feasibility studies
The Franchisee shall carry out and present to the Secretary of State by 31 December 2015 initial feasibility studies in respect of each of the following potential projects, with any further implementation of the Projects being subject to a Variation:
(a) proposals for the trial and, if successful, implementation of Independently Powered EMUs ("IPEMUs") on the route between Newbury and Bedwyn (including an assessment of the feasibility of through operation from London Paddington);
(b) proposals for the trial and, if successful, implementation of IPEMUs on the route between Reading, Redhill and Gatwick Airport;
(c) subject to initial examination confirming likely viability, proposals for the trial deployment and, if successful, implementation of converted former London Underground D rolling stock on one or more selected branch lines within the Franchise; and
(d) proposals for an alternative rolling stock solution for services operating between Portsmouth and Cardiff.
Click to expand...
 
H

HLE

Established Member
Joined
27 Dec 2013
Messages
1,405
By the sounds of it Greater Anglia could do with a few extra units.

According to the press another unit was involved in an incident - hit the crossing gate at Breydon on the way into Yarmouth yesterday morning. A strange one indeed.

Suprised it hasn't been reported on the main forum.
 
R

RobShipway

Established Member
Joined
20 Sep 2009
Messages
3,337
SpacePhoenix said:
Would a 3 car class 230 be too long for the Marlow branch?
Click to expand...

Not sure of the length of the platforms for the Marlow route, but if they are big enough to take a 4 car class 387, then that is likely going to be used with battery packs within that can power the train having been charged from running off the overhead line.
 
Class 466

Class 466

Established Member
Joined
5 Mar 2010
Messages
1,441
SF-02 said:
Isle of Sheppey line? Southeastern need all the spare stock they can get. DfT seem happy to starve the whole franchise just because HS1 is a money sink due to track access fees. Every SE passenger therefore suffers. This may be rare chance for more stock but a waste on electrified lines if so.

Many people in here moan about them coming over. SE passengers would take anything right now on the whole.
Click to expand...

Southeastern will start receiving extra electric stock before the year is out. But that's off topic.

With the Dover sea wall closure, stock is even further stretched with 466s now operating to 39 diagrams out of 43 units - and with one away at Doncaster at a time that leaves 3 spare. The line these will be used on will all become clear rather soon.
 
4

47802

Established Member
Joined
8 Oct 2013
Messages
3,455
Isn't GWR original franchise agreement essentially a work of fiction anyway with the Rolling Stock plan having to be completely re-written with the electrification delays, suggestions from elsewhere seem to indicate that these units wont be happening as far as GWR are concerned, and the Dft have lost interest in these trains but I guess we will see.

With Northern not getting any I suspect any Franchise bidder will be cautious about taking these trains, and with the speed of electrification now all its going to do now is increase the number of Diesel units that will need to be replaced into the mid 2020's when the bulk of the 15x units will need to be replaced.
 
Last edited:
S

swt_passenger

Veteran Member
Joined
7 Apr 2010
Messages
31,557
Robbies said:
Not sure of the length of the platforms for the Marlow route, but if they are big enough to take a 4 car class 387, then that is likely going to be used with battery packs within that can power the train having been charged from running off the overhead line.
Click to expand...

I thought it had been explained time and time again that the reason it is not being electrified is because the platforms at Bourne End do not allow for reversing 4 car trains such as a 387, and there are no suitable short EMUs to use.

Here for instance, which you must have forgotten: http://www.railforums.co.uk/showthread.php?t=113919&highlight=marlow&page=8

The lack of electrification results from an acknowledgement of the platform and train length problem, it is not due to any difficulty with electrification in itself.
 
Last edited:
Status
Not open for further replies.

Top