What is the cause of unreliability of Vivarail Class 230 trains?

Bletchleyite · 28 Oct 2019

samuelmorris said:
I don't really see any wibble, the only comments made primarily concern the (seemingly) continued poor reliability of the fleet, not any bold presumptive statements about the class needing to be withdrawn on grounds of being unsafe.

Yes, it's just another reason why the trains are not of merchantable quality and urgently need replacement with something else. With three 15x, the line would have been near 100% reliable - it was only unreliable because there was no spare and they had to get one from Birmingham - it was reliable enough when a spare 150 was kept there as a matter of course or was no more than an hour away to get one from Wembley. With three 230s it's very poor. That's just not good enough, and Vivarail have had more than ample chance.

The interior is nice (though I dislike the lighting) - but a nice interior is useless if the unit isn't going to reliably get you where you are going.

I'd also support the cancellation of the TfW order, to be honest. The product needs to be ready before it was ordered, it clearly was not. Perhaps they should have funded a "free trial" by a TOC with the existing stock waiting in the wings ready.

I think they should be withdrawn because they are rubbish in reliability terms with no improvement in sight, not because they are unsafe. A long-term bus service pending something else being made available e.g. 150s from Wales on delivery of CAF units would be more use, at least you could rely on it being as per the timetable.

RailUK Forums

DarloRich · 28 Oct 2019

samuelmorris said:
I don't really see any wibble, the only comments made primarily concern the (seemingly) continued poor reliability of the fleet, not any bold presumptive statements about the class needing to be withdrawn on grounds of being unsafe.

I simply state this was a minor firs and not a large problem. It has happened before. It has happened to other trains. IT will happen again. The bigger frustration is that reliability had been crawling upwards for a few weeks. However idraw your attention to the post below

Bletchleyite said:
This must surely be the end of the project. Another solution for the MV has to be found (ref the other thread on the subject ).

I don't think there are any options for now. I also dont think that your FLIRT obsession is the answer in the medium to long term

samuelmorris · 28 Oct 2019

To add to this, the new TIN figures are out in modern railways and the 230 figures are down on where they were previously at just 419 (with the MAA having dropped to 461). That's 12555 unit miles and 30 breakdowns, between three units, meaning statistically each unit fails every 3 days, even though only 2 out of 3 are required for service. By comparison, the 7-car 345s, which have had by no means an easy introduction and are still posting mediocre scores, only had 19 breakdowns, between 16 units that are each 5 times the size.
I'm always prepared to give new stock the benefit of the doubt but to have not even achieved 500 MTIN 6 months after introduction and indeed to be showing no sign of improvement is pretty woeful. It's no wonder that even with a spare unit the line sees regular cancellations.

DarloRich · 28 Oct 2019

Bletchleyite said:
I think they should be withdrawn because they are rubbish in reliability terms with no improvement in sight, not because they are unsafe. A long-term bus service pending something else being made available e.g. 150s from Wales on delivery of CAF units would be more use, at least you could rely on it being as per the timetable.

6/12/18 months of bustitution will kill the line dead. If the trains cant run a decent service cut the service to peak hours and make damn sure those trains run. Oh and Saturday so i can get to the match

people are drifting away from the train. They cant be bothered with the hassle. I have tied a couple of times to buy a second hand car but haven't found a deal I am happy with. That should show how bad things have been.

samuelmorris said:
To add to this, the new TIN figures are out in modern railways and the 230 figures are down on where they were previously at just 419 (with the MAA having dropped to 461). That's 12555 unit miles and 30 breakdowns, between three units. By comparison, the 7-car 345s, which have had by no means an easy introduction and are still posting mediocre scores, only had 19 breakdowns, between 16 units that are each 5 times the size.
I'm always prepared to give new stock the benefit of the doubt but to have not even achieved 500 MTIN 6 months after introduction and indeed to be showing no sign of improvement is pretty woeful.

I am not sure those figures are right, or if they are LNWR have targeting running certain trains. My journey to and from work has been getting better. Reliability or perhaps delivery of those key services has improved.

I know i am talking marginally but walking home has been down to once a week.

Bletchleyite · 28 Oct 2019

DarloRich said:
I don't think there are any options for now. I also dont think that your FLIRT obsession is the answer in the medium to long term

To be fair, I've called for 3x150 more than I've called for FLIRTs. But that's for the other thread

Bletchleyite · 28 Oct 2019

DarloRich said:
6/12/18 months of bustitution will kill the line dead.

Looking at the demographic of most users (mostly younger) that isn't in my view actually true, though it might be wise to use buses capable of carrying bicycles.

samuelmorris · 28 Oct 2019

Bletchleyite said:
Looking at the demographic of most users (mostly younger) that isn't in my view actually true, though it might be wise to use buses capable of carrying bicycles.

They've run often enough already that I don't think that's necessarily true, but what would help is knowing in advance if it's a bus or not, and knowing that the bus is actually there. As a TOC, having to intermittently arrange buses every other day as knee-jerk reactions to units failing continuously but unpredictably, can't be an easy task, nor can it be an easy task meeting that need as a bus operator. A permanent bus service until the units are at least somewhat fit for purpose seems perfectly reasonable.

Bletchleyite · 28 Oct 2019

samuelmorris said:
They've run often enough already that I don't think that's necessarily true, but what would help is knowing in advance if it's a bus or not, and knowing that the bus is actually there. As a TOC, having to intermittently arrange buses every other day as knee-jerk reactions to units failing continuously but unpredictably, can't be an easy task, nor can it be an easy task meeting that need as a bus operator. A permanent bus service until the units are at least somewhat fit for purpose seems perfectly reasonable.

Yes, precisely my view. Just like it's all very well having nice seats but no use if the nice seats don't go anywhere (one reason I dislike 175s/180s), I'd rather a punctual bus than a train so unreliable you have no idea if it's going to run or not and if so when it will run.

@DarloRich I suspect the minor improvement is directly related to the reduction in ambient temperature

What is for sure is that it's an unacceptable state of affairs, though evidence elsewhere is that the TOC aren't that bothered about continuing unacceptable states of affairs by having failed to do anything at all about the debacle on the WCML.

Bletchleyite · 28 Oct 2019

samuelmorris said:
A permanent bus service until the units are at least somewhat fit for purpose seems perfectly reasonable.

What would be interesting would be to see what happened in terms of passenger choice if the bus and train services operated together.

DarloRich · 28 Oct 2019

Bletchleyite said:
To be fair, I've called for 3x150 more than I've called for FLIRTs. But that's for the other thread

if you can find me 3 x 150 in the next few weeks i will have your arm off. Before FLIRTS ( no idea what they are tbh) i would take 4 or 5 pacers. And if LNWR haven't had a look at that they should do!

Bletchleyite said:
Looking at the demographic of most users (mostly younger) that isn't in my view actually true, though it might be wise to use buses capable of carrying bicycles.

Disagree. Most users are going to work. Most of those are going to MK ahead of London now. ( all anecdotal of course)

Bletchleyite said:
What would be interesting would be to see what happened in terms of passenger choice if the bus and train services operated together.

The non stop bus to Bedford is quicker! The mini bus round the villages is pretty unpleasant tbh.

samuelmorris said:
They've run often enough already that I don't think that's necessarily true, but what would help is knowing in advance if it's a bus or not, and knowing that the bus is actually there. As a TOC, having to intermittently arrange buses every other day as knee-jerk reactions to units failing continuously but unpredictably, can't be an easy task, nor can it be an easy task meeting that need as a bus operator. A permanent bus service until the units are at least somewhat fit for purpose seems perfectly reasonable.

They have devolved more flexibility to the station staff ( essentially the long suffeirng Bletchley ticket office team) who their best to help us. One lady there in particular is wasted on LNWR. it is crew depot and it is left to the fantastic lady on the ticket desk to try and help passengers. No managers, no on duty staff. Shameful.

( now the managers could be in the back on the phone to control playing hell but all we say is the one lady trying her best to get us home. No one comes out of the crew depot to help her)

Chris125 · 28 Oct 2019

samuelmorris said:
To add to this, the new TIN figures are out in modern railways and the 230 figures are down on where they were previously at just 419 (with the MAA having dropped to 461).

I gather the figures in MR cover Period 5 (21st July-15th August) when they were suffering from their well known issues with overheating.

Reliability has clearly improved since the summer, presumably due to cooler weather and/or any mods they've made, but that won't show till we see the figures for P7.

Sleeperwaking · 28 Oct 2019

Chris125 said:
I gather the figures in MR cover Period 5 (21st July-15th August) when they were suffering from their well known issues with overheating.

Reliability has clearly improved since the summer, presumably due to cooler weather and/or any mods they've made, but that won't show till we see the figures for P7.

Although if the fire is due to leaves building up on top of the engine and catching alight*, it could start to dip again until we're out of leaf fall (I don't know if these are more or less prone to wheel flats too).

*Please note this is a slightly jokey comment to point out one of the many and varied ways each season can mess with train reliability - although leaf build up on hot components has been the cause of DMU fires in the past (possibly pacers?), I have no idea what caused the recent 230 fires.

Brissle Girl · 28 Oct 2019

Bletchleyite said:
I'd also support the cancellation of the TfW order, to be honest. The product needs to be ready before it was ordered, it clearly was not.

I'm sure the Welsh Government and TfW have both been keenly waiting for your view on the subject as a relevant stakeholder. And if you haven't noticed, TfW has said that it's not taking delivery this year, and I suspect a lot of that is down to pushing Vivarail for a robust plan to improve reliability.

As for products being ready before they are ordered, in case you haven't noticed, that's not how it works for any new design of rolling stock, and hasn't done for at least 30 years back to the days when BREL or whoever would knock up a couple of prototypes before a mass order was produced.

Meanwhile, all the other new fleets being introduced have gone smoothly, to time, and with no teething troubles. Now, off to peruse the Class 195 thread, and maybe a few others after that....

Bletchleyite · 28 Oct 2019

Brissle Girl said:
As for products being ready before they are ordered, in case you haven't noticed, that's not how it works for any new design of rolling stock, and hasn't done for at least 30 years back to the days when BREL or whoever would knock up a couple of prototypes before a mass order was produced.

Except there are Vivarail prototypes. Clearly not enough testing has been done.

superkev · 28 Oct 2019

Hmm " Not enough testing". They seem to have been around for years.
K

ashkeba · 28 Oct 2019

superkev said:
Hmm " Not enough testing". They seem to have been around for years.
K

It is almost as if real world daily passenger operation is different to any amount of mileage accumulation or running on test tracks with engineers nearby.

Neen Sollars · 28 Oct 2019

But the 230 business is booming!

https://www.railadvent.co.uk/2019/10/vivarail-to-move-manufacturing-base-as-business-booms.html

43096 · 28 Oct 2019

DarloRich said:
One of the 230's caught fire at Millbrook station over the weekend. The "street word" is a gen set fire. The fire brigade attended and dealt with the situation. it was a small fire and really not worth the wibble up thread. It wasn't anything that hasn't happened to other trains.

Set was repaired and available for service again by 2200 Saturday night.

43096 · 28 Oct 2019

Bletchleyite said:
Yes, it's just another reason why the trains are not of merchantable quality and urgently need replacement with something else. With three 15x, the line would have been near 100% reliable - it was only unreliable because there was no spare and they had to get one from Birmingham - it was reliable enough when a spare 150 was kept there as a matter of course or was no more than an hour away to get one from Wembley. With three 230s it's very poor. That's just not good enough, and Vivarail have had more than ample chance.

The interior is nice (though I dislike the lighting) - but a nice interior is useless if the unit isn't going to reliably get you where you are going.

I'd also support the cancellation of the TfW order, to be honest. The product needs to be ready before it was ordered, it clearly was not. Perhaps they should have funded a "free trial" by a TOC with the existing stock waiting in the wings ready.

I think they should be withdrawn because they are rubbish in reliability terms with no improvement in sight, not because they are unsafe. A long-term bus service pending something else being made available e.g. 150s from Wales on delivery of CAF units would be more use, at least you could rely on it being as per the timetable.

I’m seeing plenty of wibble. Reliability is improving.

In recent weeks, hasn’t crew shortage been the biggest issue? I’m not seeing you foaming at the mouth about that, though.

DarloRich · 28 Oct 2019

43096 said:
Set was repaired and available for service again by 2200 Saturday night.

thanks! I thought that was the case

43096 said:
I’m seeing plenty of wibble. Reliability is improving.

In recent weeks, hasn’t crew shortage been the biggest issue? I’m not seeing you foaming at the mouth about that, though.

Crew shortage has been the main problem. We still get gremlins from time to time. This morning was staff problems.

samuelmorris · 28 Oct 2019

Chris125 said:
I gather the figures in MR cover Period 5 (21st July-15th August) when they were suffering from their well known issues with overheating.

Reliability has clearly improved since the summer, presumably due to cooler weather and/or any mods they've made, but that won't show till we see the figures for P7.

Fair enough, I wasn't aware the figures were that far behind. I shall look forward to seeing better numbers later on then.

Bletchleyite · 29 Oct 2019

43096 said:
In recent weeks, hasn’t crew shortage been the biggest issue? I’m not seeing you foaming at the mouth about that, though.

Check other threads on LNR about that (I am probably their biggest general critic on here), it's not really on topic for this thread.

DarloRich · 29 Oct 2019

samuelmorris said:
Fair enough, I wasn't aware the figures were that far behind. I shall look forward to seeing better numbers later on then.

that will be a relative concept! I am not convinced the problems have gone away. I think the cooler weather is masking the issue. I am also concerned about autumn performance and wheel damage.

Bob Price · 29 Oct 2019

It is interesting that Vivarail are using 002 in three car mode to test the battery hybrid combination rather than one of the TfW ones. If this works I wonder if they will upgrade the Bedford units.

DarloRich · 29 Oct 2019

ashkeba said:
It is almost as if real world daily passenger operation is different to any amount of mileage accumulation or running on test tracks with engineers nearby.

the 230's had real world testing and mileage accumulation on the Marston Vale line. They had months of it.

Bletchleyite · 29 Oct 2019

DarloRich said:
the 230's had real world testing and mileage accumulation on the Marston Vale line. They had months of it.

One thing they didn't do is stop at every station and do the doors. Surprise surprise, one of the big issues to start with was slow door operation and door reliability issues.

DarloRich · 29 Oct 2019

Bletchleyite said:
One thing they didn't do is stop at every station and do the doors. Surprise surprise, one of the big issues to start with was slow door operation and door reliability issues.

they did. Just not as often as they should/could have done

Sleeperwaking · 29 Oct 2019

DarloRich said:
they did. Just not as often as they should/could have done

I presume they didn't do much testing in the middle of a heatwave either? What slackers, not arranging for one of those!

87015 · 29 Oct 2019

2 East Mids 153s on hire now. Not sure when will make it to Bletchley given the absolute calamity than is LNR this week.

BucksBones · 29 Oct 2019

87015 said:
2 East Mids 153s on hire now. Not sure when will make it to Bletchley given the absolute calamity than is LNR this week.

To replace the 230s or as emergency cover? Good news either way...

What is the cause of unreliability of Vivarail Class 230 trains?

Veteran Member

RailUK Forums

Veteran Member

Established Member

Veteran Member

Veteran Member

Veteran Member

Established Member

Veteran Member

Veteran Member

Veteran Member

Established Member

Member

Established Member

Veteran Member

Established Member

Established Member

Member

On Moderation

On Moderation

Veteran Member

Established Member

Veteran Member

Veteran Member

Member

Veteran Member

Veteran Member

Veteran Member

Member

Established Member

Member