• 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!

Class 230 units training/introduction on the Borderlands line: updates

Status
Not open for further replies.

Wyrleybart

Established Member
Joined
29 Mar 2020
Messages
1,649
Location
South Staffordshire
A question for those who may be clued up - I'm not familiar with the Marston Vale 230s and their introduction. I have heard they weren't brilliant.

Is anybody able to say if they were more/less reliable in their early days? I know they're different to TFWs 230s so arnt a direct comparison, I'm just curious to the level of disruption those ones caused in their initial months.
Probably horses for courses. 230003-005 are two car units so there was 33% less of anything to go wrong compared to the TfW examples. but with the diesel-electric transmission they seem to have suffered from power module failures much more than the battery systems on the TfW units. I don't think there is real evidence posted in the public domain but there is heresay that the demand was outstripping supply of power modules at Bletchley.

Theoretically the TfW units are supposed to be able to run purely on battery power - for as long as the batteries have charge - and the batteries recharge from the braking effect. Not sure how many engine modules can be lost before 230003-005 completely die.
 
Sponsor Post - registered members do not see these adverts; click here to register, or click here to log in
R

RailUK Forums

zwk500

Veteran Member
Joined
20 Jan 2020
Messages
13,478
Location
Bristol
A question for those who may be clued up - I'm not familiar with the Marston Vale 230s and their introduction. I have heard they weren't brilliant.

Is anybody able to say if they were more/less reliable in their early days? I know they're different to TFWs 230s so arnt a direct comparison, I'm just curious to the level of disruption those ones caused in their initial months.
@Bletchleyite or @DarloRich will be able to provide more details, but my understanding was the reliability was pretty shocking at first and only very slowly got better, although there were infrastructure problems that ran concurrently and potentially distorted the figures. Once they'd figured out the issue the impression I got was that they were pretty reliable.
 

Techniquest

Veteran Member
Joined
19 Jun 2005
Messages
21,674
Location
Nowhere Heath
I'm not talking about failures here, the point I'm making is to those who like to complain on this thread every time its a bit late saying that the 230 "can't keep to time" - clearly they can.

They can indeed, my first run on a 230 in recent times was more or less bang on time all the way. It was late yesterday, but it didn't lose more time on my journey.

The 230s are excellent machines, the known issues will soon sort themselves out I'm sure!
 

TDK

Established Member
Joined
19 Apr 2008
Messages
4,155
Location
Crewe
I'm not talking about failures here, the point I'm making is to those who like to complain on this thread every time its a bit late saying that the 230 "can't keep to time" - clearly they can.
They can when all the gen sets are functioning correctly, these are 150 timings and not the proposed 230 timings.
 

tomuk

Established Member
Joined
15 May 2010
Messages
1,953
The 230s are excellent machines, the known issues will soon sort themselves out I'm sure!
Despite your enthusiasm they are not excellent machines if they were VivaRail would still be around to support them.
 

Techniquest

Veteran Member
Joined
19 Jun 2005
Messages
21,674
Location
Nowhere Heath
Despite your enthusiasm they are not excellent machines if they were VivaRail would still be around to support them.

I don't know the details about the failure of Vivarail, what I do know is that the 230s *are* excellent trains and quite the contrast to a 150. Whatever is causing the failures, it will hopefully be all resolved soon.
 

TDK

Established Member
Joined
19 Apr 2008
Messages
4,155
Location
Crewe
It will remain that way until all crew are comfortable/used to working them unfortunately. With an experienced crew onboard, such as the first 8 hours of service today, it speaks for itself.

I'm not saying its a great achievement, I'm saying they are capable of keeping to time.
So, are you insinuating the delays are due to inexperienced train crew and not problems with the unit's themselves? Nearly all the heavy delays are gen set issues. It's easy to blame the train crew I suppose
 

tomuk

Established Member
Joined
15 May 2010
Messages
1,953
I don't know the details about the failure of Vivarail, what I do know is that the 230s *are* excellent trains and quite the contrast to a 150. Whatever is causing the failures, it will hopefully be all resolved soon.
They went bust because in general nobody wanted to buy 230s because they aren't excellent and also they had to shoulder the huge warranty costs in keeping the few 230s that were in service operational because again they aren't excellent.
 

Zontar

Member
Joined
17 May 2021
Messages
397
Location
Birmingham
So, are you insinuating the delays are due to inexperienced train crew and not problems with the unit's themselves? Nearly all the heavy delays are gen set issues. It's easy to blame the train crew I suppose
Exactly. Don't see the same issues with 197s
 

L401CJF

Established Member
Joined
16 Oct 2019
Messages
1,486
Location
Wirral
So, are you insinuating the delays are due to inexperienced train crew and not problems with the unit's themselves? Nearly all the heavy delays are gen set issues. It's easy to blame the train crew I suppose
Not at all. I'm not saying they're overly reliable at the moment either and clearly there are major delays and cancellations due to faults when they occur.

Being a guard who works them myself, my experience is as follows. My first in service working was 2 round trips (4hrs). The first trip I lost around 5 minutes getting used to the door controls, the position of the door panels, being extra careful to ensure the whole train was platformed as they're longer and quite tight at some stations. For your first working you have trainers onboard to assist - in their words I picked the unit up quickly in comparison to some others. I had one of the regular drivers on the 1st trip who was very good on the acceleration/braking!

By the 2nd trip, I had got used to working it, however there was a driver change and the driver was also on their first working in service, and lost about 15 minutes as they were very cautious coming into stations. It took a few minutes at each end for them to setup the desk. In the 12 hours I've spent on 230s since, my maximum delay has been no more than 5 minutes.

Exactly. Don't see the same issues with 197s
This is an interesting point. I worked a 197 recently where a group of trainees were onboard doing their first ever session of dispatch training. The opening/closing of doors was extremely slow as you would expect and dwell times were quite lengthy. The 197 performance however is very good and they have few issues keeping to time along the coast, often having to wait time at all stations (whereas a 175 might lose a minute or 2, the 197 makes up a minute or 2)

The door control layout on a 230 is quite different to every other unit, the buttons are all arranged differently and panels on some doors are the complete opposite way around to those at others - certainly takes a while to get used to! On the Bidston line there just isn't time for dwells at all. You open, quick watch as everybody gets on/off, then close up and go asap.

They can when all the gen sets are functioning correctly, these are 150 timings and not the proposed 230 timings.
I wasn't aware different timings were coming in for 230s at some point, an improved timetable with chance to recover time would be a welcome change on this line as its been crying out for it for decades. Here's hoping!
 

DarloRich

Veteran Member
Joined
12 Oct 2010
Messages
29,334
Location
Fenny Stratford
@Bletchleyite or @DarloRich will be able to provide more details, but my understanding was the reliability was pretty shocking at first and only very slowly got better, although there were infrastructure problems that ran concurrently and potentially distorted the figures. Once they'd figured out the issue the impression I got was that they were pretty reliable.
They were pretty shocking at first, progressed to shocking and then to ok. They never got to good on a regular basis in my book.
 

Dan G

Member
Joined
12 May 2021
Messages
538
Location
Exeter
I don't think anyone likes to complain. It's just facts.
Keeping time for a couple of trips isn't really a great achievement to be honest, in fact it's highly embarrassing.

Oh god people love it! It's all many want to talk about. Look how quiet the 175 thread went as soon they began returning to service.
 

Wyrleybart

Established Member
Joined
29 Mar 2020
Messages
1,649
Location
South Staffordshire
They went bust because in general nobody wanted to buy 230s because they aren't excellent and also they had to shoulder the huge warranty costs in keeping the few 230s that were in service operational because again they aren't excellent.
I have to agree with Tom but I believe Vivarail were a tad on the optimistic with the whole D78 concept. 60mph passenger trains are a huge issue to planners and timetablers, particularly here in the UK where trains start from and return to depots nearly every night. I am sure that if a 60mph DMU could remain captive at Maidenhead or Slough overnight for maintenance purposes they be more palatable to the Ops and therefore TOC and DfT but pathing them along 125mph lines is not easy.

On top of that and with hindsight the use of automotive power trains has simply not proved to be as reliable as rail industry equipment. The theory of 230s working the Leamington-Nuneaton "NUCKL" shuttles is good, but clearly hasn't been good enough for the DfT to show interest - maybe tainted after 230001's "thermal incident".

I cannot comprehend "Excellent" and "230" i nthe same sentence to be honest.
 

Xenophon PCDGS

Veteran Member
Joined
17 Apr 2011
Messages
32,468
Location
A semi-rural part of north-west England
Oh god people love it! It's all many want to talk about. Look how quiet the 175 thread went as soon they began returning to service.
Let us draw more information to what you state above. The Class 175 units were from an order placed for 27 of these which have been in service for over 20 years. Refurbishment works began in 2019.

The TfW Class 230 mini-fleet of 5 units in a short operational period have, as has been stated, one of these units already cannibalised for items for the other four units and the manufacturer of these units is no longer in existence.
 

TDK

Established Member
Joined
19 Apr 2008
Messages
4,155
Location
Crewe
Not at all. I'm not saying they're overly reliable at the moment either and clearly there are major delays and cancellations due to faults when they occur.

Being a guard who works them myself, my experience is as follows. My first in service working was 2 round trips (4hrs). The first trip I lost around 5 minutes getting used to the door controls, the position of the door panels, being extra careful to ensure the whole train was platformed as they're longer and quite tight at some stations. For your first working you have trainers onboard to assist - in their words I picked the unit up quickly in comparison to some others. I had one of the regular drivers on the 1st trip who was very good on the acceleration/braking!

By the 2nd trip, I had got used to working it, however there was a driver change and the driver was also on their first working in service, and lost about 15 minutes as they were very cautious coming into stations. It took a few minutes at each end for them to setup the desk. In the 12 hours I've spent on 230s since, my maximum delay has been no more than 5 minutes.


This is an interesting point. I worked a 197 recently where a group of trainees were onboard doing their first ever session of dispatch training. The opening/closing of doors was extremely slow as you would expect and dwell times were quite lengthy. The 197 performance however is very good and they have few issues keeping to time along the coast, often having to wait time at all stations (whereas a 175 might lose a minute or 2, the 197 makes up a minute or 2)

The door control layout on a 230 is quite different to every other unit, the buttons are all arranged differently and panels on some doors are the complete opposite way around to those at others - certainly takes a while to get used to! On the Bidston line there just isn't time for dwells at all. You open, quick watch as everybody gets on/off, then close up and go asap.


I wasn't aware different timings were coming in for 230s at some point, an improved timetable with chance to recover time would be a welcome change on this line as its been crying out for it for decades. Here's hoping!
The original timings for 230's was about 47 minutes to introduce 2 TPH due to the extended block sections, currently they are running at 57 minutes and struggling to maintain these timings. Time will tell how it pans out.

Exactly. Don't see the same issues with 197s
You can't compare the 197's with the 230's unless they are operating on the same route, 197 unit's are high geared due to the 100mph maximum permitted speed and were not designed for stop/start operations that is required on the Borderlands line, 197's are slow up to about 25mph, they will struggle competing with a 150 on this route.
 
Last edited:

Techniquest

Veteran Member
Joined
19 Jun 2005
Messages
21,674
Location
Nowhere Heath
There are a number of internet sources available where you can source that information.

What I meant by my post was that not only do I not know but I am not hugely curious enough to find out.

Regardless of what others are saying about the 230s not being excellent, I think they are and I want them to be a success. I really believe they will be, or at the least they can be.
 

Peter Sarf

Established Member
Joined
12 Oct 2010
Messages
5,744
Location
Croydon
I have to agree with Tom but I believe Vivarail were a tad on the optimistic with the whole D78 concept. 60mph passenger trains are a huge issue to planners and timetablers, particularly here in the UK where trains start from and return to depots nearly every night. I am sure that if a 60mph DMU could remain captive at Maidenhead or Slough overnight for maintenance purposes they be more palatable to the Ops and therefore TOC and DfT but pathing them along 125mph lines is not easy.

On top of that and with hindsight the use of automotive power trains has simply not proved to be as reliable as rail industry equipment. The theory of 230s working the Leamington-Nuneaton "NUCKL" shuttles is good, but clearly hasn't been good enough for the DfT to show interest - maybe tainted after 230001's "thermal incident".

I cannot comprehend "Excellent" and "230" i nthe same sentence to be honest.
My bold.

One of the virtues of the 230s was that the engine raft could be exchanged easily by use of a forklift on a hard-standing next to the unit so they would not need to leave the branch very often. Same would apply to the raft containing the batteries.

We have to be careful how we compare 230s as there a three distinct versions. Diesel only (as was used on Marston Vale Line), Battery+diesel (Borderlands line - the subject of this thread) and Battery with quick Charging (as anticipated for the GW Greenford Branch). Not often does one class number have so many variations !.
 

Xenophon PCDGS

Veteran Member
Joined
17 Apr 2011
Messages
32,468
Location
A semi-rural part of north-west England
We have to be careful how we compare 230s as there a three distinct versions. Diesel only (as was used on Marston Vale Line), Battery+diesel (Borderlands line - the subject of this thread) and Battery with quick Charging (as anticipated for the GW Greenford Branch). Not often does one class number have so many variations !.
You make no mention of the units running on the Island Line above.
 

The_Train

Established Member
Joined
2 Jun 2018
Messages
4,372
Oh god people love it! It's all many want to talk about. Look how quiet the 175 thread went as soon they began returning to service.
This is so true :lol: I made the same point in the Class 769 threads - you could tell when they were running ok because no-one was ever posting about them but the minute something negative happened, the thread lit up once again. Negative issues will generally garner more discussion, naturally, but I do think some people just thrive on it!
Let us draw more information to what you state above. The Class 175 units were from an order placed for 27 of these which have been in service for over 20 years. Refurbishment works began in 2019.

The TfW Class 230 mini-fleet of 5 units in a short operational period have, as has been stated, one of these units already cannibalised for items for the other four units and the manufacturer of these units is no longer in existence.
Without wanting to speak for @Dan G I'd say the point he was making was more the fact of how discussions are more vigorous when things are going wrong and how some thrive on that, but are very quiet when things are operating well (or as well as can be)
 

southern442

Established Member
Joined
20 May 2013
Messages
2,198
Location
Surrey
It does seem as though, touch wood, the introduction of these units has been the least problematic of all the D-trains so far. That being said I don't really know how well the 484s are doing, but I heard they did have some teething issues. From a passenger perspective I would have to say they are an upgrade on 150s, but then again almost anything is!
 

Xenophon PCDGS

Veteran Member
Joined
17 Apr 2011
Messages
32,468
Location
A semi-rural part of north-west England
It does seem as though, touch wood, the introduction of these units has been the least problematic of all the D-trains so far. That being said I don't really know how well the 484s are doing, but I heard they did have some teething issues. From a passenger perspective I would have to say they are an upgrade on 150s, but then again almost anything is!
It seems strange to draw comparisons between the class 150 units that were introduced as long ago as the 1980s with the 5 Class 230 units of TfW that were introduced to the line in question some 40 years later.
 

southern442

Established Member
Joined
20 May 2013
Messages
2,198
Location
Surrey
It seems strange to draw comparisons between the class 150 units that were introduced as long ago as the 1980s with the 5 Class 230 units of TfW that were introduced to the line in question some 40 years later.
This is a fair point, although the point I was making is that even if reliability is not solid, from a passengers point of view I would not consider them to be a bad train. Also worth noting that there are many classes of train being introduced which several would argue are downgrades from their predecessors!
 

tomuk

Established Member
Joined
15 May 2010
Messages
1,953
The Island line units were blessed with a different class number (surprisingly logicall !). They are straight electric so arguably the most different of the Ex D78s.
Don't you mean most similar to the D78s as they are still DC powered EMUs.
 
Status
Not open for further replies.

Top