• 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!

Very Light Rail stock ordered for passenger trials

duffield

Established Member
Joined
31 Jul 2013
Messages
1,360
Location
East Midlands
Well, there are some isolated use cases I've just thought of - I believe Bradford MBC have got some funding for a commuter service on the Worth Valley alongside the heritage services, Revolution VLR may be suitable for that kind of service.
The "commuter service on the KWVR" talk was rubbish (according to the KWVR themselves).

This thread started off as a discussion of the "commuter service" but it was debunked by various volunteers and then officially by the KWVR, as reported in this post.
 
Last edited:
Sponsor Post - registered members do not see these adverts; click here to register, or click here to log in
R

RailUK Forums

AlastairFraser

Established Member
Joined
12 Aug 2018
Messages
2,164
The "commuter service on the KWVR" talk was rubbish (according to the KWVR themselves).

This thread started off as a discussion of the "commuter service" but it was debunked various volunteers and then officially by the KWVR, as reported in this post.
Hmm, well that is a shame. You'd think you could trust a BBC report, but clearly not.
 

BRX

Established Member
Joined
20 Oct 2008
Messages
3,640
This is the text of a Times article, published a couple of days ago:


It is just the sort of line that the government’s Restore Your Railway Fund initiative envisages resurrecting, in this instance connecting a new community — the old power station plot is now renamed Benthall Grange — by train with the old town of Ironbridge and into Telford, avoiding road trips and congestion.

Irrespective of whether this particular instance will ever make any commercial sense, the line has become a testbed for a train venture whose ambitions are in its name. Revolution.
 

Russel

Member
Joined
30 Jun 2022
Messages
1,170
Location
Lichfield
It's not really telling us anything new...

"We've built a small railcar that may or may not get tested at some point", in summary.
 

AlastairFraser

Established Member
Joined
12 Aug 2018
Messages
2,164
No paywall on the link I gave.
Looks like only part of the article got quoted.
I'll quote the full article below:
On the one hand, you have a property developer unsure what to do with a disused railway running through the middle of a would-be housing estate; on the other, a rail engineer in want of a test track for a next-generation electric battery “trainpod”. The serendipitous meeting of the two could herald the end of too many dirty diesel units carrying too few passengers on branch lines and rural links and the arrival of zero-emission, track-charged, single-car trains. It also could rehabilitate parts of the network axed by the Beeching cuts six decades ago.

Where the West Midlands sprawl recedes into rural Shropshire, just outside Ironbridge, a crucible of the Industrial Revolution, an old coal-fired power station has been decommissioned. The land has been acquired by Harworth Group, a listed property developer that grew out of the regeneration of dismantled collieries in Nottinghamshire and South Yorkshire. Work has begun to build a thousand homes.

It is a pretty spot overlooking a speeding River Severn, more so now that the cooling towers are gone and rewilding has taken root, but its industrial past has not been wholly erased. A rail track for coal-bearing freight trains is still in place. More intriguingly, there is an adjacent disused passenger line, complete with rails and sleepers, part of the old Severn Valley Railway that ran as far north as Shrewsbury. Much of it was dug up after the 1960s, but parts remain in operation, in steam heritage mode, comprising a dozen or so miles south between Bridgnorth and Kidderminster.

It is just the sort of line that the government’s Restore Your Railway Fund initiative envisages resurrecting, in this instance connecting a new community — the old power station plot is now renamed Benthall Grange — by train with the old town of Ironbridge and into Telford, avoiding road trips and congestion.

Irrespective of whether this particular instance will ever make any commercial sense, the line has become a testbed for a train venture whose ambitions are in its name. Revolution.

Revolution Very Light Rail, or RVLR, is a commercial initiative between Transport Design International, a Warwickshire-based engineering consultancy, and Eversholt Rail, one of the big beasts of the rolling stock leasing sector. Now, ten years into RVLR’s development, Eversholt has commissioned three vehicles to begin trials on branch lines around the country in 2026. Over a 12-month period, seasonal demand and machine performance will be assessed to see whether a promised 15 per cent reduction in total cost of ownership compared with conventional trains can be delivered: in short, proving that such zero-emission trains have commercial viability.

The RVLR vehicle comprises a single car, nearly five metres, or 20 per cent, shorter than a conventional carriage, with a capacity of 56 seats, more than a typical single-decker bus. It is engineered to run on two or four batteries with 60 kilowatt-hours or 120kWh of capacity, at the upper end of the sort on large electric vans but significantly lower than that of an electric bus.

RVLR originally assumed that it would need to fix a range-extending diesel engine, but, thanks to the development of battery capability and recharging innovations, that has been scrapped for an electric-only future. The vehicle is designed to be recharged when stationary via a two metre-long, fast-charge third rail installed at stations, connected to a trackside bank of batteries in turn connected to the electricity network.

According to Tim Burleigh, the Eversholt director leading the RVLR project, the sweet spot for such a vehicle is “relatively short routes, typically a shuttle service between two points with frequent stops”. The key points are that they can go into service without expensive civil engineering on overhead electric lines and stanchions; and that at a maximum speed of 60mph, line-of-sight driving minimises the need for expensive signalling systems (the trains could be engineered to operate autonomously, but the necessary advanced technology, on-train and trackside, would make the whole venture prohibitively expensive). Depending on certifications and authorisations, the company argues that it means the RVLR could be rapidly deployed and diesels trains more rapidly retired.

The trains are intended to have a capacity of 56 seats, more than a typical single-decker bus.

This is a very limited market. The relatively low speed of the vehicles bars them from operating on main lines and that restricts the addressable market in Britain to about 150 units, even factoring in some reopenings of lines axed in the Beeching cuts. However, for Transport Design International, there is a greater prize: export potential. It has had interest already with agencies from Mongolia to Morocco and, most significantly, the United States, where there are hopes for a renaissance in passenger train travel.

The company is scouting for a manufacturing facility near its Long Marston home and going into production would swell the business to more than 100 employees. Depending on demand and because of the ease-of-assembly modular design, Geoff Newman, Transport Design International’s chief of operations, believes that “we could get to a build rate of three per month”.

With a nod to the Department for Transport logjam of decision-making on the railways, not least the fiasco over the northern legs of HS2, Burleigh said of potential RVLR markets: “These aren’t grand schemes in either cost or delivery. These can be deployed within an electoral cycle. We could be substituting existing rolling stock on a rural line or with a start-up service on a reopening Beeching line. The recurring message from Treasury is around finding private sector funding and how best to invest scarce funds. This fulfils both these criteria.”

BEHIND THE STORY​

After the Second World War, with the rise of the motor car and local bus services and the end of petrol rationing, the extraordinary lattice of lossmaking lines that the national rail network had created over the previous century was done for. The year after a report into the industry by Richard Beeching in 1963, a thousand miles of rail track was stood down from active service. In reality, though, what became known as The Beeching Axe had fallen already, with nearly 4,000 miles of track retired in the previous decade or so.
Before the pandemic hit in 2020 and with train usage at high levels not recorded since the 1920s, the government set up its Restoring Your Railway Fund initiative. An initial 200 or so putative bids to reverse lines cut 50 or more years previously were put forward.
Nostalgia ain’t what it used to be and in many cases it proved to be simply a romanticised wishlist. Nevertheless, a handful are on track to make their return, most notably (and most controversially, if you are waiting for trans-Pennine upgrades in the north) the revival of the Varsity Line between Oxford and Cambridge.
There are hopes for the reopening or the beginning of substantial works on: the Northumberland Line re-connecting Ashington with Newcastle; in Scotland restoring the link between Levenmouth on the north bank of the Firth of Forth to Edinburgh; around Bristol, with separate projects to reconnect Portishead and Avonmouth on the coast back to Great Western main line; and around Birmingham, focused on the Camp Hill line south of the city.
 

AlanL

Member
Joined
3 Sep 2019
Messages
37
Location
Wolverhampton
The VLR has a lot of potential for reviving short branch lines, very cheap to operate and 'green'. Locally there are a couple of lines that they could be used in, a reopened Ironbridge -Wellington line and the Oswestry-Gobowen route (which is on the restoring your railway list) and of course there maybe extra funding from the newly announced 'Local Transport Fund'. Shropshire/Telford are due to receive around £250million over 7 yrs.
 

Bald Rick

Veteran Member
Joined
28 Sep 2010
Messages
29,221
The VLR has a lot of potential for reviving short branch lines, very cheap to operate and 'green'.

It really doesn‘t. It will still be more expensive (and less green) than an electric bus in opersting costs. And cost a LOT more to provide the infrastructure.
 

AlanL

Member
Joined
3 Sep 2019
Messages
37
Location
Wolverhampton
It really doesn‘t. It will still be more expensive (and less green) than an electric bus in opersting costs. And cost a LOT more to provide the infrastructure.
The Ironbridge Gorge is an area of severe flooding of the river Severn (5 times flood defences put up this winter blocking the main road), buses regularly cannot get to the town and the rail infrastructure is intact (although needs upgrading) and is above the flood plain and the VLR being much less lighter which significantly reduces maintenance costs.
 

Bald Rick

Veteran Member
Joined
28 Sep 2010
Messages
29,221
The Ironbridge Gorge is an area of severe flooding of the river Severn (5 times flood defences put up this winter blocking the main road), buses regularly cannot get to the town and the rail infrastructure is intact (although needs upgrading) and is above the flood plain and the VLR being much less lighter which significantly reduces maintenance costs.

I know. That doesnt change the economic comparison, at all.
 

The Chimaera

Member
Joined
15 Jun 2018
Messages
54
The Ironbridge Gorge is an area of severe flooding of the river Severn (5 times flood defences put up this winter blocking the main road), buses regularly cannot get to the town and the rail infrastructure is intact (although needs upgrading) and is above the flood plain and the VLR being much less lighter which significantly reduces maintenance costs.
Unfortunately though the Ironbridge branch does not go to Ironbridge town, it goes to the former power station site. You would still have to bus passengers from there or perhaps Coalbrookdale to the town. The former rail route from the power station site to Ironbridge town does still exist but would need some earthworks at the power station end as the ground level was built up when the cooling towers were constructed. I would love to see this all relayed but unless it turns into a major tourism project I don’t see where the money would come from.
 

Bald Rick

Veteran Member
Joined
28 Sep 2010
Messages
29,221
Unfortunately though the Ironbridge branch does not go to Ironbridge town, it goes to the former power station site. You would still have to bus passengers from there or perhaps Coalbrookdale to the town. The former rail route from the power station site to Ironbridge town does still exist but would need some earthworks at the power station end as the ground level was built up when the cooling towers were constructed. I would love to see this all relayed but unless it turns into a major tourism project I don’t see where the money would come from.

And neither does it go to Wellington, nor Telford. There is little chance of these vehicles being permitted on the national network. So where would these ‘not quite Ironbridge’ VLR services go?

It could be a local service serving not quite Ironbridge, Coalbrookdale, Woodside, Brookside and the Stafford Park Industrial estate. But then the same (in fact better) service could be provided at a tiny fraction of the cost by running a bus up the parallel A4169 / A442.
 

InTheEastMids

Member
Joined
31 Jan 2016
Messages
734
New and unproven solution from UK SME fitted with automotive diesel engines, with short car length intended for branch line work?
Might not work that well in practice and completely ruin the service you say?

I thought we already had an approved test track for that type of thing, between Bedford and Bletchley?
 

Bletchleyite

Veteran Member
Joined
20 Oct 2014
Messages
97,927
Location
"Marston Vale mafia"
New and unproven solution from UK SME fitted with automotive diesel engines, with short car length intended for branch line work?
Might not work that well in practice and completely ruin the service you say?

I thought we already had an approved test track for that type of thing, between Bedford and Bletchley?

The more obvious test track for this one is the Stourbridge Town Car (and WMT are actively looking for replacement stock for that because the rubber band on the Parry People Movers is getting rather worn now). Marston Vale wouldn't be suitable because there would be inadequate capacity for the school/college trains. Also I don't think these are compliant for working alongside "big trains" as the MV does at the Bletchley end and because of the occasional freight?
 

Russel

Member
Joined
30 Jun 2022
Messages
1,170
Location
Lichfield
New and unproven solution from UK SME fitted with automotive diesel engines, with short car length intended for branch line work?
Might not work that well in practice and completely ruin the service you say?

I thought we already had an approved test track for that type of thing, between Bedford and Bletchley?

For all of these grand ideas of opening disused branch lines, it's never going to happen in most cases, just stick the RVLR on the Stourbridge branch and run it until it starts to fall apart as per the current class 139's.
 

bib

Member
Joined
15 Nov 2021
Messages
180
Location
East Midlands
So it's a lightweight, battery-powered, line-of-sight operated, mini-train, which can't operate on mainline. Presume if the charging kit wasn't too expensive you could use it to decarbonise lightly-used branch lines which you didn't want to shut once the existing DMUs finally fall apart, and it should require minimal track maintenance and no signalling. So it might facilitate the bare-minimum zero-carbon railway.
 

stevieinselby

Member
Joined
26 May 2023
Messages
190
Location
Selby
If the VLR could run on mainlines then a few obvious candidates for it would be Tamar Valley, Looe Valley, Heart of Wales and maybe Marston Vale. Apart from those and Stourbridge, I'm struggling to think of any existing routes where it would be a viable option given the low capacity, and I can't imagine that any new (or reopened) lines could justify the cost of works needed if they're only going to carry enough passengers to merit a VLR.

Tamar Valley is going to suffer in the future as some sections of the route have a differential linespeed where only 150s and 153s can run at linespeed of 40–55mph for the 6 miles between St Budeaux and Bere Alston, and when they're gone anything else has a restriction of 30mph, which would add several minutes to the journey (although probably not so much that it would prevent a 2-hourly service) – VLR should be allowed to run at the 150/153 speeds, and who knows maybe even faster than 15mph on the Gunnislake branch!
 

Bletchleyite

Veteran Member
Joined
20 Oct 2014
Messages
97,927
Location
"Marston Vale mafia"
No use for the Marston Vale. The school/college trains require too much capacity. That's why 153s aren't much use (the 150+153 pair allowed the 150 to be diagrammed onto those busy trains).
 

edwin_m

Veteran Member
Joined
21 Apr 2013
Messages
24,932
Location
Nottingham
If the VLR could run on mainlines then a few obvious candidates for it would be Tamar Valley, Looe Valley, Heart of Wales and maybe Marston Vale. Apart from those and Stourbridge, I'm struggling to think of any existing routes where it would be a viable option given the low capacity, and I can't imagine that any new (or reopened) lines could justify the cost of works needed if they're only going to carry enough passengers to merit a VLR.
If unable to share track with other trains when carrying passengers, it could still operate Looe Valley and possibly Marston Vale (at least until EWR arrives). Also St Ives, but it wouldn't cope with the park and ride passengers, and maybe Newquay too. But unless it could use the main line without passengers to access a depot, each route would require a mini-depot as Stourbridge has. Unit swaps for heavier maintenance elsewhere, or to replace a failed unit, would have to be by road.

I recall trying to convince John Parry nearly 30 years ago that a vehicle with a 30mph top speed (and that's probably charitable) and a capacity of around 20 people with no ability to multiple would have very limited usefulness on the national network. Being an incorrigible optimist he was having none of it. The VLR is a lot more advanced than Parry's low-cost but technically limited solution, but has the same problems to a lesser degree - and probably costs a lot more.
Tamar Valley is going to suffer in the future as some sections of the route have a differential linespeed where only 150s and 153s can run at linespeed of 40–55mph for the 6 miles between St Budeaux and Bere Alston, and when they're gone anything else has a restriction of 30mph, which would add several minutes to the journey (although probably not so much that it would prevent a 2-hourly service) – VLR should be allowed to run at the 150/153 speeds, and who knows maybe even faster than 15mph on the Gunnislake branch!
Is the reason for this restriction known? 158s have similar dimensions to 153s so if it's clearances it's probably a relatively minor infringement. If Tavistock ever re-opened then a connecting shuttle from Bere Alston to Gunnislake could be made into a self-contained VLR route, though the journey time probably means it would only meet alternate Tavistock trains.
 

stevieinselby

Member
Joined
26 May 2023
Messages
190
Location
Selby
Is the reason for this restriction known? 158s have similar dimensions to 153s so if it's clearances it's probably a relatively minor infringement. If Tavistock ever re-opened then a connecting shuttle from Bere Alston to Gunnislake could be made into a self-contained VLR route, though the journey time probably means it would only meet alternate Tavistock trains.
I wonder whether it's to do with the quality of the track or permanent way – if it was a gauging infringement then you would expect it to be at specific bridges or other locations rather than along the whole length of the line, where most of it is pretty open.

Current timing for Bere Alston to Gunnislake is 20 minutes each way, so it could manage an hourly service quite easily as a shuttle service, but I guess the question then is whether the arrival and departure times would be such that it could provide a good connection in each direction. Bere Alston to Tavistock is about 6 miles, so probably 10 minutes running time. If it's possible to accommodate a generous 15 minute turnaround at Tavistock then with and a quick turnaround at Gunnislake, it should be possible to do that.
 

Western 52

Member
Joined
19 Jun 2020
Messages
1,125
Location
Burry Port
Even if connections at Bere Alston are good, I can't see the loss of through services Gunnislake to Plymouth being popular.
 

stevieinselby

Member
Joined
26 May 2023
Messages
190
Location
Selby
Even if connections at Bere Alston are good, I can't see the loss of through services Gunnislake to Plymouth being popular.
The current service isn't popular ... average loadings are fewer than 10 passengers per train!
If they lose the direct service but gain an hourly service with an easy cross-platform change then I would imagine most people would welcome the change.
 

edwin_m

Veteran Member
Joined
21 Apr 2013
Messages
24,932
Location
Nottingham
I wonder whether it's to do with the quality of the track or permanent way – if it was a gauging infringement then you would expect it to be at specific bridges or other locations rather than along the whole length of the line, where most of it is pretty open.
I'm not aware of a 150/153 being more tolerant of bad track than a 158, though I guess it's possible. The VLR might also have simpler suspension that might also be susceptible.
 

stevieinselby

Member
Joined
26 May 2023
Messages
190
Location
Selby
I'm not aware of a 150/153 being more tolerant of bad track than a 158, though I guess it's possible. The VLR might also have simpler suspension that might also be susceptible.
I was thinking more in terms of the weight – I could be wrong but I was under the impression that a 150 was lighter than the SuperSprinters that followed.
 

edwin_m

Veteran Member
Joined
21 Apr 2013
Messages
24,932
Location
Nottingham
I was thinking more in terms of the weight – I could be wrong but I was under the impression that a 150 was lighter than the SuperSprinters that followed.
According to Wikipedia a 158 is actually lighter at 38.5 tonnes per car compared with 42 for a 153.
 

stevieinselby

Member
Joined
26 May 2023
Messages
190
Location
Selby
According to Wikipedia a 158 is actually lighter at 38.5 tonnes per car compared with 42 for a 153.
But a 158 is 2 cars and a 153 is only 1 car, which might make a difference.
I don't know, weight seemed a more likely rationale to me than dimensions but I could be wrong.
 

edwin_m

Veteran Member
Joined
21 Apr 2013
Messages
24,932
Location
Nottingham
But a 158 is 2 cars and a 153 is only 1 car, which might make a difference.
I don't know, weight seemed a more likely rationale to me than dimensions but I could be wrong.
The main weight issue is nearly always weight on individual axles not for the train as a whole. And two 153s coupled together would be heavier than a 158 - does the restriction apply then too?
 

BogiePicker

Member
Joined
29 Dec 2020
Messages
34
Location
Leeds
I see this tech as being useful if it could allow a reduced number of bogies per unit length. Don't know how the economics of a standalone VLR works out.

Talgo has used CFRP in its high speed trains IIRC to reduce weight. The VLR on its own is not a bad idea, but if you could somehow combine this manufacturing tech with existing tried and tested stuff to keep axle loads down with low bogie counts, whilst being safe for main line use, it could bring costs down. Siemens Mireo is now an articulated train with 26m end cars, same as an IET.

Could also be an attractive basis for tram-trains which are functionally closer to trains than most.

These can have in cab signalling if needed.

Not sure I see the point in just having branch lines maintained to bare minimum condition.
 

daodao

Established Member
Joined
6 Feb 2016
Messages
2,953
Location
Dunham/Bowdon
In addition to being a potential replacement for the class 139 PPMs on the Stourbridge line, the Revolution VLR has the possibility of enabling regular weekday (or Mon-Sat) services on some short preserved lines that connect with the national network, as well as re-opening short branches off the main line, to serve significant towns not on the current National Rail network. A key requirement would be the ability to serve a platform at the junction station where the line itself can be completely isolated while the Revolution VLR is in operation. For preserved lines, the heritage stock could not be run at the same time.

Possible examples of suitable preserved lines include:
  • Bodmin General to Bodmin Road (Parkway)
  • Alresford to Alton
  • Wallingford to Cholsey
  • Chinnor to Princes Risborough
  • Ongar to Epping
  • Holt to Sheringham
Possible examples of potential re-openings include:
  • Oswestry to Gobowen
  • Abertillery to Aberbeeg (a new station would be required at Aberbeeg junction)
  • Nelson & Llancaiach-Ystrad Mynach (now that the coal trains from Cwmbargoed have ceased)
  • Llangefni to Gaerwen (a new station would be required at Gaerwen junction)
  • Fleetwood to Poulton
  • St Andrews to Leuchars Junction
 
Last edited:

Top