Transport for Wales Class 230

[Steve B]

At Wrexham this afternoon

 

[driverd]

A ridiculous idea from the start, it's nice to see it come to a ridiculous conclusion. I think I'm quite passionate about this one, because the idea of these things giving a better passenger experience than the (younger) pacers was insane from the outset.

Hyperbole aside, it's a shame some of the more innovative elements haven't proven successful, as wider deployment of battery tech onto other units would have been really great to see, along with things like the pretty unique and industry leading rapid charge. Its just unfortunate vivarail decided old underground units were they best place for it. Heck, if they had chosen something like the 456s and just used the old tube trains as technology demonstrators, I could even have got behind it.

I think, as with the Mk5s at TPE, there's going to be one predictable conclusion for these. A follow on 197 order would seem to make further logical sense.

 

[The exile]

A ridiculous idea from the start, it's nice to see it come to a ridiculous conclusion. I think I'm quite passionate about this one, because the idea of these things giving a better passenger experience than the (younger) pacers was insane from the outset.

Hyperbole aside, it's a shame some of the more innovative elements haven't proven successful, as wider deployment of battery tech onto other units would have been really great to see, along with things like the pretty unique and industry leading rapid charge. Its just unfortunate vivarail decided old underground units were they best place for it. Heck, if they had chosen something like the 456s and just used the old tube trains as technology demonstrators, I could even have got behind it.

I think, as with the Mk5s at TPE, there's going to be one predictable conclusion for these. A follow on 197 order would seem to make further logical sense.

The thing is is that it is the “innovative elements” that have caused the problems. From an ambience perspective (yes, I know that is to a certain extent subjective) they are pretty good - certainly an improvement on pacers. As for taking something like the 456, the bi-mode conversion of another mainline emu for TfW didn’t exactly cover itself in glory either.

 

[Bertie the bus]

A ridiculous idea from the start, it's nice to see it come to a ridiculous conclusion. I think I'm quite passionate about this one, because the idea of these things giving a better passenger experience than the (younger) pacers was insane from the outset.

Hyperbole aside, it's a shame some of the more innovative elements haven't proven successful, as wider deployment of battery tech onto other units would have been really great to see, along with things like the pretty unique and industry leading rapid charge. Its just unfortunate vivarail decided old underground units were they best place for it. Heck, if they had chosen something like the 456s and just used the old tube trains as technology demonstrators, I could even have got behind it.

I think, as with the Mk5s at TPE, there's going to be one predictable conclusion for these. A follow on 197 order would seem to make further logical sense.

You can’t blame Vivarail for trying. Entrepreneurism should be admired and a bit of wackiness makes the world a better place.

You can, however, blame certain TOCs and both local and national governments for throwing money at something that is more suited to Scrapheap Challenge than the 21st Century mainline railway.

 

[TT-ONR-NRN]

A ridiculous idea from the start, it's nice to see it come to a ridiculous conclusion. I think I'm quite passionate about this one, because the idea of these things giving a better passenger experience than the (younger) pacers was insane from the outset.

Completely agree.

I think, as with the Mk5s at TPE, there's going to be one predictable conclusion for these. A follow on 197 order would seem to make further logical sense.

What I’ve still not had answered is why 197s weren’t ordered for this line in the first place? What good was randomly ordering a microfleet for one line, while the rest of the network gets big homogeneous fleets with operational flexibility?

You can’t blame Vivarail for trying. Entrepreneurism should be admired and a bit of wackiness makes the world a better place.

It doesn’t when it means you get ancient recycled stock instead of the alternative - new build. And look what it’s lead to for both customers of the 230 - a year long shut down of service for LNR, and a completely unusable (or would be without the saviour of the 197s) for TfW.

 

[Bertie the bus]

It doesn’t when it means you get ancient recycled stock instead of the alternative - new build. And look what it’s lead to for both customers of the 230 - a year long shut down of service for LNR, and a completely unusable (or would be without the saviour of the 197s) for TfW.

Don't just quote part of what I wrote and then argue when the bit you didn't quote quite clearly shows whose fault all this is. It isn't Vivarail's for converting them and trying to make some money but the people who ordered them, especially TfW who only ordered them after the LM units were already very late and it was pretty obvious they weren't going to work very well.

 

[TT-ONR-NRN]

Don't just quote part of what I wrote and then argue when the bit you didn't quote quite clearly shows whose fault all this is. It isn't Vivarail's for converting them and trying to make some money but the people who ordered them, especially TfW who only ordered them after the LM units were already very late and it was pretty obvious they weren't going to work very well.

I didn’t mean to crop the quote. I actually agree.

You can, however, blame certain TOCs and both local and national governments for throwing money at something that is more suited to Scrapheap Challenge than the 21st Century mainline railway.

I completely agree TfW, WMT and Welsh Government should never have given them the time of day, yes.

 

[D365]

A ridiculous idea from the start, it's nice to see it come to a ridiculous conclusion. I think I'm quite passionate about this one, because the idea of these things giving a better passenger experience than the (younger) pacers was insane from the outset.

Hyperbole aside, it's a shame some of the more innovative elements haven't proven successful, as wider deployment of battery tech onto other units would have been really great to see, along with things like the pretty unique and industry leading rapid charge. Its just unfortunate vivarail decided old underground units were they best place for it. Heck, if they had chosen something like the 456s and just used the old tube trains as technology demonstrators, I could even have got behind it.

BIB - this was Vivarail’s plan. Before they went under, Vivarail had announced a agreement with Eversholt to fit the Class 321 “Renatus” units with traction batteries.

Not sure what your comment about better passenger experience means. Of all the criticisms levelled at the Vivarail vehicles, passenger environment has never been one of them.

 

[Xenophon PCDGS]

You can’t blame Vivarail for trying. Entrepreneurism should be admired and a bit of wackiness makes the world a better place.

Not for those passengers who expect a TOC to provide a reliable form of traction.

 

[D365]

Not for those passengers who expect a TOC to provide a reliable form of traction.

With hindsight there is a lot that has has not gone right with this [and Porterbrook’s similar] rolling stock reengineering projects.

 

[Xenophon PCDGS]

With hindsight there is a lot that has has not gone right with this [and Porterbrook’s similar] rolling stock reengineering projects.

I am sure that you will recall from the very first postings ever made on the "innovative" Vivarail "new trains for old" project that certain members on this website expressed reservations. Well before any hindsight.

 

[Iskra]

At Wrexham this afternoon

View attachment 149888

I also caught one at Wrexham this evening.

I quite liked my ride on it, the interior was decent enough and the ride quality is better than the 197’s! Still has the tube ‘whirr’ sound too.

 

[anthony263]

They are nice enough units when they work. I'm looking forward to the Greenford trial.

Maybe tfw should look at converting theirs to batteries if the gwr trial works

 

[Xenophon PCDGS]

Maybe tfw should look at converting theirs to batteries if the gwr trial works

Don't you feel that TfW have already spent more than enough money on these "innovative" items, without spending even more money on them?

 

[Lurcheroo]

Don't you feel that TfW have already spent more than enough money on these "innovative" items, without spending even more money on them?

Regardless, what other choice would you suggest ?
5 more 197’s to replace the 5 230’s ? A very expensive proposition.

 

[Sam 76]

Regardless, what other choice would you suggest ?
5 more 197’s to replace the 5 230’s ? A very expensive proposition.

To be honest if there is funding I would go for it. Better to get 197s that will last for 20-30 years, than continue with these for 5 and then buy new ones anyway.

Of course it’s probably not that simple and perhaps there is a plan to make this reliable. But as it stands it must be under consideration

 

[Xenophon PCDGS]

To be honest if there is funding I would go for it. Better to get 197s that will last for 20-30 years, than continue with these for 5 and then buy new ones anyway.

Of course it’s probably not that simple and perhaps there is a plan to make this reliable. But as it stands it must be under consideration

What recent official statement has been made that would suggest the Welsh Government intends funding?

 

[OutdoorM]

Regardless, what other choice would you suggest ?
5 more 197’s to replace the 5 230’s ? A very expensive proposition.

If there is funding, and the battery 777's settle down, I would trial and then go for them. That way the line could be brought into Liverpool

 

[Bob Price]

If there is funding, and the battery 777's settle down, I would trial and then go for them. That way the line could be brought into Liverpool

They need battery fast charging abilities to get too and from Wrexham. Once the trial is done and if the concept is proven this is a very likely step.

 

[Invincible]

008 and 009, passed Crewe webcams, as you say gone for tyre turning.

Wonder if damage to wheels was caused by training, or "wear and tear"?
Guess will be back in operation.
Stadler should be maintaining the 230s as per the contract and getting new parts for 006.
Next issue will be getting a permanent fix for the diesel engine s to reliably switch off and back on in hybrid battery mode, and to stop pollen clogging up radiators to prevent overheating

 

[33017]

Completely agree.


What I’ve still not had answered is why 197s weren’t ordered for this line in the first place? What good was randomly ordering a microfleet for one line, while the rest of the network gets big homogeneous fleets with operational flexibility?


It doesn’t when it means you get ancient recycled stock instead of the alternative - new build. And look what it’s lead to for both customers of the 230 - a year long shut down of service for LNR, and a completely unusable (or would be without the saviour of the 197s) for TfW.

From what I recall, the original intention was they’d be used on the Blaenau branch (1), Crewe to Chester (1) and Wrexham to Bidston (2).

Things changed and the four diagrams were to be concentrated on the Bidston line with an enhanced service, but the way things are now four 230 would be required to cover just two full (all day) diagrams. Seems the batteries need significant time to cool after use.

 

[Lurcheroo]

To be honest if there is funding I would go for it.

The biggest issue is funding. Im
Not sure what TFW’s plan is but they desperately need to do something with them.

 

[Kite159]

Regardless, what other choice would you suggest ?
5 more 197’s to replace the 5 230’s ? A very expensive proposition.

You wouldn't need 5 extra 197s, maybe just an extra 3 as they can be maintained alongside the other 197s at Chester and rotate with the other units.

Probably would be cheaper for TfW to order them when the production line is still running.

 

[Lurcheroo]

You wouldn't need 5 extra 197s, maybe just an extra 3 as they can be maintained alongside the other 197s at Chester and rotate with the other units.

Probably would be cheaper for TfW to order them when the production line is still running.

ok but TFW want to run a half hourly service which requires 4 diagrams so 4 units minimum.
Very likely to still be significantly more expensive.
Also a 2 car 197 is slight a capacity downgrade on the 230’s (not that it seems to be an issue much these days).

 

[TT-ONR-NRN]

Regardless, what other choice would you suggest ?
5 more 197’s to replace the 5 230’s ? A very expensive proposition.

Why was that not the first choice back when the orders were made?

 

[Lurcheroo]

Why was that not the first choice back when the orders were made?

I couldn’t say as I was not involved in the procurement process as to why these were given the time of day.

I’ve seen talk of a Northwales Metro so perhaps they were seen as a shorter term cheaper option. I think they were a good idea, not worked in reality, a shame as they’re nice units for passengers

 

[CaergwrleKen]

230010 has failed again this morning, i’ve heard again also there are problems at Chester on the mainline because of a shortage of 197 and we have two here instead of 230, pathetic

 

[Anonymous10]

230010 has failed again this morning, i’ve heard again also there are problems at Chester on the mainline because of a shortage of 197 and we have two here instead of 230, pathetic

From looking at journey check there only appears to be 2 cancelled trains our of Chester - both being chester to Liverpool services and a 9 altered services. All things considered not a bad day.

 

[driverd]

The thing is is that it is the “innovative elements” that have caused the problems. From an ambience perspective (yes, I know that is to a certain extent subjective) they are pretty good - certainly an improvement on pacers.

I'm referencing the battery and fast charge more than the diesel power packs. They were the more revolutionary elements and have been, in part, demonstrated to work well (379 IPEMU). It's my suspicion that vivarail were in some regards too ambitious (ie: going for diesel and electric and battery and fast charge projects rather than focusing on one) and also underestimated the level of red tape a 2020s TOC can surround a project in.

As for taking something like the 456, the bi-mode conversion of another mainline emu for TfW didn’t exactly cover itself in glory either.

Yet the 379 was considered a success. The 319 project was again a case of all things to all men and, yes, hasn't exactly been a success story.

You can’t blame Vivarail for trying. Entrepreneurism should be admired and a bit of wackiness makes the world a better place.

Except when their "wackiness" is the proposition of a material downgrade for all of the North of England - replacing make-shift bus trains with, to quote your own post "something that is more suited to scrapheap challenge".

You can, however, blame certain TOCs and both local and national governments for throwing money at something that is more suited to Scrapheap Challenge than the 21st Century mainline railway.

Actually that's where I'd disagree - I'd not blame government or TOCs for attempt to support domestic business over international competition, even if the idea was total batsh*t.

What I’ve still not had answered is why 197s weren’t ordered for this line in the first place? What good was randomly ordering a microfleet for one line, while the rest of the network gets big homogeneous fleets with operational flexibility?

My suspicion (and again, totally speculative), would be that it was almost a token gesture, likely politically motivated, to support UK innovation etc.

Otherwise, like you say, a microfleet of 5 makes absolutely no commercial sense, especially - as others have said in the thread - when you could have 3x 197s do the job of 5x 230s.

BIB - this was Vivarail’s plan. Before they went under, Vivarail had announced a agreement with Eversholt to fit the Class 321 “Renatus” units with traction batteries.

But, of course, the timelines never would have worked for 321s to have been bid for a lot of the contracts 230s got.

Not sure what your comment about better passenger experience means. Of all the criticisms levelled at the Vivarail vehicles, passenger environment has never been one of them.

Have you ever travelled on one? The IoW 230s are leagues below 144012 in almost every regard. From the significant lack of seating, lack of luggage space and overhead racks to the lack of toilet and thats before weve even considered the atrociousride quality of tube stock at speed. They're incomparable.

 

[Wyrleybart]

I'm referencing the battery and fast charge more than the diesel power packs. They were the more revolutionary elements and have been, in part, demonstrated to work well (379 IPEMU). It's my suspicion that vivarail were in some regards too ambitious (ie: going for diesel and electric and battery and fast charge projects rather than focusing on one) and also underestimated the level of red tape a 2020s TOC can surround a project in.

Yet the 379 was considered a success. The 319 project was again a case of all things to all men and, yes, hasn't exactly been a success story.

Have you ever travelled on one? The IoW 230s are leagues below 144012 in almost every regard. From the significant lack of seating, lack of luggage space and overhead racks to the lack of toilet and thats before weve even considered the atrociousride quality of tube stock at speed. They're incomparable.

Regarding the 379 trial, AFAIK it was one very limited trial over how many days ? On one piece of railway ?
I have no doubt it worked well, and there is scope for a lot more battery operation.
It strikes me that at least some of the 325s could benefit from "last 1/2 mile" battery to shunt them into the new terminal at Daventry, but that is going O/T