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

Depends how reliable it is.

The 769 is far more of a "bodge job" as it would appear to me.

47802 said:

By the time take account of the power car I doubt a 2 car flirt or wink would be any shorter than a 195.

Click to expand...

With product names like these, should we anticipate an exposé of boardroom impropriety* at Stadler?

Joking aside, do Stadler still do the GTW range? Or is that what became the "wink"?

*=the impropriety being coming up with downright stupid names, of course.

61653 HTAFC said:

Joking aside, do Stadler still do the GTW range? Or is that what became the "wink"?

*=the impropriety being coming up with downright stupid names, of course.

Click to expand...

*=It never seems to worry the car industry who have come up with some "howlers" over the years.

61653 HTAFC said:

Joking aside, do Stadler still do the GTW range? Or is that what became the "wink"?

Click to expand...

The WINK is the replacement for the GTW as far as I know

Interesting that it's only offered as a 2-car, though, the GTW is offered in several lengths. I guess they want to upsell to the FLIRT.

I find the argument that "well-to-do" people on rural branch lines would have an adverse reaction to a 230 turning up strange, given that their alternatives at present are:

• 150/2s (built mid-1980s. Tired, dated, increasingly decrepid, no open gangway).
• 153s (technicalities aside, built late 1980s. Single carriage, starting to creak, great big rivets in the side that scream "modern unit".)
• 143s (built mid-1980s. They're Pacers.)

There's no question of 230s replacing 16Xs, so let's drop that one right now. The comparable units they're actually mooted to replace, however, are on their last legs without feasible replacements in the pipeline from any other company - there's only so much cascading of 17Xs you can do, and their capabilities render them over-engineered for rural branch services anyway.

All that in mind, is there really going to be a negative reaction from passengers to a 230 taking over the service? In terms of interior, capacity and component age they're far newer in 90%+ of aspects, and comparable in others. The interior is most important for a passenger, and by all accounts Vivarail have nailed that in their demonstration models.

Their outside appearance isn't really that stark - the slab look is still present on the sides but the cabs look passably "modern" - they remind me a bit of 360s.

mushroomchow said:

Their outside appearance isn't really that stark - the slab look is still present on the sides but the cabs look passably "modern" - they remind me a bit of 360s.

Click to expand...

Considering this is 2017 and most "new" rolling stock has an aesthetic look befitting the 21st century, I must take issue with your view that the outside appearance of the Class 230 isn't really stark.

Paul Sidorczuk said:

Considering this is 2017 and most "new" rolling stock has an aesthetic look befitting the 21st century, I must take issue with your view that the outside appearance of the Class 230 isn't really stark.

Click to expand...

It doesn't seem to be a problem in "ultra-modern" places like Japan, who still churn out boxy trains on a regular basis. The new Yamanote stock from 2015 springs to mind in the first instance, but that has gone down well with passengers by all accounts.


I'd also note that the original concept included additional casing to "mask" the slab look, which seems to have been given up on.

The overall point I'm getting at, though, is that aesthetically speaking the 230 is hardly a step down from a Sprinter or a Pacer, and that internally they are clearly superior - which is what passengers will care far more about.

I’ve read on occasion of passengers asking if refurbished Southern 313s were brand new trains. So I don’t think ‘boxy’ appearance trains are much of a factor to the untrained eye.

To be fair the PEP is fairly timeless - looks less dated in my view than MK3 EMUs despite being older.

D365 said:

That's an interesting report. Perhaps they are looking at supplying their technology to continental rolling stock manufacturers?

Click to expand...

Interestingly I'm not sure it is their own technology, it was my understanding that to produce their IPEMU they had taken the equipment used for the 1 month 379 trial which had been stored for two years after being immediately removed.

mushroomchow said:

The overall point I'm getting at, though, is that aesthetically speaking the 230 is hardly a step down from a Sprinter or a Pacer, and that internally they are clearly superior - which is what passengers will care far more about.

Click to expand...

Perhaps you may have missed my posting mention of the 21st century aesthetic look of "new trains", which neither applies to a Sprinter nor to a Pacer. Howsoever, you are welcome to your own views on that matter.

mushroomchow said:

All that in mind, is there really going to be a negative reaction from passengers to a 230 taking over the service? In terms of interior, capacity and component age they're far newer in 90%+ of aspects, and comparable in others. The interior is most important for a passenger, and by all accounts Vivarail have nailed that in their demonstration models.

Click to expand...

The interiors on the 'demo' unit vary from car to car. From a lightly cleaned ex London Undergound condition with just the LU maps removed to a repainted interior with new seating and a accessible toilet.
A refurbished Sprinter 150/153 is far superior. They can travel at 75mph instead of only 60mph. They have proper suspension not rubber blocks. In a crash I'd much rather be in a steel Mk3 than a riveted together aluminium D stock.

I'm all for cascading older stock for example the 315s (particularly the ones which TFL have looked after) would be great in the Valleys if electrification went ahead but the 230s (1978 D stock) are only useful on a few self contained branch lines such as the Marston Vale.

Let's get this clear, since people still seem to think I and others are advocating the replacement of long-distance "sprinter" diagrams with "crawlers" - the 230s are suited to rural branches and regional services on lines that rarely get above 60mph. Nothing else. That doesn't mean they won't represent an improvement in service though, with their brand-new interiors (as opposed to new seat covers on old casings), reduced need for positioning runs and superior acceleration.

tomuk said:

The interiors on the 'demo' unit vary from car to car. From a lightly cleaned ex London Undergound condition with just the LU maps removed to a repainted interior with new seating and a accessible toilet.
A refurbished Sprinter 150/153 is far superior. They can travel at 75mph instead of only 60mph. They have proper suspension not rubber blocks. In a crash I'd much rather be in a steel Mk3 than a riveted together aluminium D stock.

I'm all for cascading older stock for example the 315s (particularly the ones which TFL have looked after) would be great in the Valleys if electrification went ahead but the 230s (1978 D stock) are only useful on a few self contained branch lines such as the Marston Vale.

Click to expand...

Well that's incredibly subjective. I remember Central Trains "refurbishing" the 153s on our local route back in the mid-noughties and failing to even replace the carpets, one of which had a large and smelly stain from a dog's mess on it. That train went on to be affectionately referred to as the "dog s**t express". That's my over-riding memory of travelling on a "refurbished" 153.

I would hardly call anything I've seen since as particularly impressive either - I've yet to sit in a Sprinter, with the exception of the odd 158, that I can genuinely say feels modern and up-to-date. And the replacement of 158s is not on the cards at the moment, so a comparison is pointless.

Again, I'm not saying that these trains will replace regional / long distance services, but on precisely those isolated branch lines which are inappropriate for anything that could be cascaded down to them. 75mph is not necessary for these routes and never will be, and a train with the ability to be maintained "on site" removes the need for logistically bonkers long-distance moves every night. But similarly, you can't expect these 30-year old units to keep soldiering on forever with increasingly high maintenance costs and dwindling reliability - the latter seemingly being a major reason for WM Trains taking this gamble on the Marston Vale.

You can dolly up the interior all you want (though I've yet to be convinced by any attempt) - those knackered engines rattling on the undercarriage are the problem, and there doesn't seem to be any plan to replace them. I won't pretend that the Dutorqs on the 230s are proven in regular service yet, but teething problems aside I can't see them being any less of a gamble than continuing to rely on 30-year old Cummins engines that already seem that they could give out at any moment. These rural lines can't simply be left to rot until there's no stock left for them. Something needs to at the very least fill a gap until battery technology is sufficiently advanced for BEMUs to be implemented, and for it to remain cost-effective - what's the point of having 100mph-capable turbostars pottering around on Liskeard-Looe or Barton-upon-Humber services, for example? Doesn't necessarily have to be a 230, but one shouldn't be averse to an "upcycled" unit to keep heavily subsidised rural routes, for which any investment is difficult to justify, viable for the foreseeable future.

Finally, the crashworthiness of the aluminium stock has already been proven in tests, and it's ridiculous to think that a violent crash is going to happen on a bucolic branch line in any sense. What is it with this forum and it's strange, macabre obsession with posters theorising their own horrible death at the hands of railway accidents? The worst you might get on most routes the 230s will be useful for is hitting a cow on a bend.

Bletchleyite said:

Seems "wmtrains" haven't actually ordered any yet:

"We are considering the possibility of using these for this line as they are very suitable for the 55mph line speed and the increase in capacity the two-car trains will bring, however this is not yet confirmed. "

(from the staff Q&A doc)

Click to expand...

This posting above # 5581 was made on 5th December. Has anything occurred since that date that might update matters as far as that company is involved in?

I've no idea Paul, if only there was a way of searching for such information via a system of interconnected computers that you could use, maybe via a handheld or desktop device. But as this is just a pipe dream you may have to keep guessing until the information appears.on Ceefax.

Unless this is another snarky dig at Vivarail and the class 230s thinly disguised as a question? (See, I can do the same)

mushroomchow said:

It doesn't seem to be a problem in "ultra-modern" places like Japan, who still churn out boxy trains on a regular basis. The new Yamanote stock from 2015 springs to mind in the first instance, but that has gone down well with passengers by all accounts.

Click to expand...

Boxy is more fashionable in Japan than it is in Europe or North America.

I can't see many drivers in Britain wanting to trade in their existing cars so they can buy one of these instead:

D365 said:

I’ve read on occasion of passengers asking if refurbished Southern 313s were brand new trains. So I don’t think ‘boxy’ appearance trains are much of a factor to the untrained eye.

Click to expand...

Not everyone sees the front of the train and even if they do it could be argued the fronts look more modern than those on the newer 319s and 321s.

jcollins said:

Not everyone sees the front of the train and even if they do it could be argued the fronts look more modern than those on the newer 319s and 321s.

Click to expand...

Indeed, PEPs look quite timeless, also the sloping in sides are characteristic of modern stock (e.g. Javelins look like 313s on steroids due to that taper).

Rail Blues said:

I've no idea Paul, if only there was a way of searching for such information via a system of interconnected computers that you could use, maybe via a handheld or desktop device. But as this is just a pipe dream you may have to keep guessing until the information appears.on Ceefax.

Unless this is another snarky dig at Vivarail and the class 230s thinly disguised as a question? (See, I can do the same)

Click to expand...

My posting was made in response to a posting made by Bletcheyite who made the comment that the franchise he made reference to had not placed any orders as yet. How on earth do you make the assumption that I am having a "snarky dig at Vivrail " when the comment was made by a third-party?

Paul Sidorczuk said:

My posting was made in response to a posting made by Bletcheyite who made the comment that the franchise he made reference to had not placed any orders as yet. How on earth do you make the assumption that I am having a "snarky dig at Vivrail " when the comment was made by a third-party?

Click to expand...

Because your posts on this topic tend to be nothing but snide digs thinly disguised as questions. Your posting history is there for all to see. Your seeming absolute desperation for this venture to fail (and never mind the attendant job losses) strikes me as pretty childish. I haven't ridden on a class 230 and I suspect neither have you. I will at least reserve judgement until I've travelled on one, whereas you've set your face against it.

Rail Blues said:

Because your posts on this topic tend to be nothing but snide digs thinly disguised as questions. Your posting history is there for all to see. Your seeming absolute desperation for this venture to fail (and never mind the attendant job losses) strikes me as pretty childish. I haven't ridden on a class 230 and I suspect neither have you. I will at least reserve judgement until I've travelled on one, whereas you've set your face against it.

Click to expand...

My view with regard to this project was based upon my personal observation of an "unusual" commercial project, based upon a wealth of experience gained in over thirty years in the field of projects at our consultancy. I headed our consultancy project from 1995 to 2004 at the Toronto office, where we were the project lead on a hydro project.

There are times when a project can seem "wrong" to your way of thinking from the onset. However, as the years have passed, I still feel that I have seen nothing to have changed my view about it, especially in terms of lack of any sales obtained in the quantity hoped for. There is the matter of full requisite approval still being not yet obtained. If this project does fail, it will not be due to any "absolute desperation" on my part, but that of the company plans not coming to fruition. You have the temerity to use the phrase "pretty childish" in your posting above, but even at the age of 72, despite suffering from a stroke in 2012, my mental faculties are still as honed to keen sharpness as ever they were.

So your mention made of "attendant job losses" is one for both Vivarail and its American equity backers to view in terms of any future project viability. Unlike a number of contestants in the past on this thread, being "enthused by innovation" is not part of my mind set regarding this project, only the financial viability of this project as viewed in the cold monetary light of reality.

Paul Sidorczuk said:

Unlike a number of contestants in the past on this thread

Click to expand...

Contestants? I wasn't aware this was a competition - but this explains a lot.

bastien said:

Contestants? I wasn't aware this was a competition - but this explains a lot.

Click to expand...

Postings on this thread do at times have seen to be a competition by those who can come up with the best reason why Vivarail will prove that they have a "money-spinner" on their hands. It seems a pity it is taking Vivarail so long to prove that point to "the unbelievers". Battery-power appears now to their belief that this mode of traction is "the best thing since sliced bread" but it is not all that long ago that the "quickly-installed" diesel package was the only matter trumpeted by them.

Nonetheless, 'contributors' would have made more sense .

Paul Sidorczuk said:

My view with regard to this project was based upon my personal observation of an "unusual" commercial project, based upon a wealth of experience gained in over thirty years in the field of projects at our consultancy. I headed our consultancy project from 1995 to 2004 at the Toronto office, where we were the project lead on a hydro project.

Click to expand...

Ahh, the Canadians know all about how to run a railway with cold hard economics Beeching style. They closed all of their passenger railways and have no idea on how to build a train or run a decent train service!

Perhaps the D78s could run a service into Toronto? No need for aircon there!

Your absolute negativity makes me laugh.

reddragon said:

Ahh, the Canadians know all about how to run a railway with cold hard economics Beeching style. They closed all of their passenger railways and have no idea on how to build a train or run a decent train service!

Perhaps the D78s could run a service into Toronto? No need for aircon there!

Your absolute negativity makes me laugh.

Click to expand...

My reference to the consultancy hydro project in Canada was one that I had hoped would have needed no clarification as to the meaning of that word, noting the potential water power use of generation of electricity. It appears that my faith in the cognitive understanding by thread followers of this is sadly misplaced, as it did not take so very long for a totally unrelated matter of Canadian railways to surface in the posting above.

Negativity, as you state above, is all that can be attached to the Class 230 project from the date of inception until there appears something that will actually see a return on capital.

Paul Sidorczuk said:

Postings on this thread do at times have seen to be a competition by those who can come up with the best reason why Vivarail will prove that they have a "money-spinner" on their hands. It seems a pity it is taking Vivarail so long to prove that point to "the unbelievers". Battery-power appears now to their belief that this mode of traction is "the best thing since sliced bread" but it is not all that long ago that the "quickly-installed" diesel package was the only matter trumpeted by them.

Click to expand...

Absolutely no one is saying that and well you know it and ill behoves you to construct such transparently strawman argument.

It is just that some of us are prepared to wait and see before casting judgement, something you are seemingly unwilling or unable to do, having set your face against it from day one.

For all your self proclaimed expertise in consultancy in an unrelated field (a number of rail industry professionals take a more balanced view) you are coming across as someone who has a bee in their bonnet that defines all rationality. For example what earthly difference does the nationality of the investors matter? Yet you bang on about this almost incessantly.

All I have to say is that my view of this project, noting the original commercial raison d'etre of its originators, remains unchanged, as my view will be that of any managerial view of a commercial project that requires ongoing overheads to facilitate the continuance of it. Others seem to totally ignore the financial realities of the business world and put forward "wait and see" scenarios that would be ideally found in a university R & D project where such well-meaning platitudes have a home.