Speed43125
Member
Ah. My bad. Didn't realise...While it's good to see progress, if that's the first pair of bodies I think we can rule out testing in April...
Island Line is 3rd rail?
Ah. My bad. Didn't realise...While it's good to see progress, if that's the first pair of bodies I think we can rule out testing in April...
Island Line is 3rd rail?
Of course it is. At the very least they need a traction return circuit via the wheels adding. That will need new brush gear, which is usually fitted on the axle ends of third rail stock.Island Line is 3rd rail?
(if I remember correctly the majority of the problems on the 230s related to cooling the diesel engines?).
Except the Control Supply ones.And thankfully no batteries to worry about either as was proposed at one time.
I am wondering if they're even going to replace the traction equipment...
Do random suggestions in these forums about battery power actually count as real proposals?And thankfully no traction batteries to worry about either as was proposed at one time.
Do random suggestions in these forums about battery power actually count as real proposals?
Do random suggestions in these forums about battery power actually count as real proposals?
Were they keen, or was it rumour or misreporting? Water under the pier by now though...Initially SWR seemed keen on of self-powered trains due to the condition of the 3rd rail infrastructure but that never made much sense to me - much more straightforward to renew as-is, especially if NR end up paying?
Were they keen, or was it rumour or misreporting? Water under the pier by now though...
Fair enough, I’d completely missed that...SWR in the 2017 consultation (PDF) suggested the 'most appropriate way forward' was:
...a self-powered train which can be accommodated on the exisiting infrastructure. This would save the cost of replacing the existing electrical equipment which a recent dilapidation report revealed is in a poor state, with the third rail in need of replacement and substations in poor condition. It would also avoid the storage and air pollution concerns associated with a diesel powered train.This was early days for SWR however, and they probably lacked a detailed understanding of the infrastructure, lease and battery operation.
Reducing traction motor and control equipment issues and maintenance requirements would be good.Except the Control Supply ones.
I am wondering if they're even going to replace the traction equipment...
Reducing traction motor and control equipment issues and maintenance requirements would be good.
I have feeling the increased real efficiency from the AC motors and drive system may well reduce some to the "power supply issues" on the line.Even if the Brush DC motors were being retained (I’m fairly confident they will be replaced), the motor control equipment was going to be changed in any case.
Just wandering if anyone knows if they are still on track for a supposed May delivery of the first unit? I would assume that the covid19 outbreak may be setting this back.
Just curious as I would like to have a last ride but am quarantined now until mid June.
The 484s are a lot simpler though, seeing that they have none of the complex bimode equipment.VivaRail haven't delivered the 230s for TfW yet so it seems a bit unlikely that the full 484 fleet will be in place for a while yet. Driver training on new fleets is reported elsewhere to be an issue with social distancing as well.
The 484s are a lot simpler though, seeing that they have none of the complex bimode equipment.
I don't think any of the original traction equipment is being retained, though, so it still involves quite a significant conversion job.
I seriously doubt they are going to sell 4 or 5 car 60 mph diesel units. Having an extra type complicates things and it's the diesel generators that are usually the limiting factor rather than a lack of motors. The Island Line is only getting 2 car trains, and I doubt anywhere else will really need them to be 3rd rail units. So I fail to see how having extra intermediate cars would be benefitial, even if the extra shunting 'cab' may occasionally be useful if you were somehow unable to store 4 car units as a whole?Not that (personally) I see too much point in such a severe conversion.
The under frames of D78 stock are a massive meccano kit so it woulnd't be too hard to re-use the existing traction equipment and support it using the same routes to market as 73TS (identical traction, MAs, etc) until that dies, then slowly convert the fleet over to some form of AC traction.
Would have been a much quicker way to deploy it, but then again, I doubt that anyone in VivaRail understands how the old kit works, or what would be needed to convert a D78 to 2 car operation from 3 car (or tbh, that there are even such things as UNDMs, since they didn't buy them and they'd have been VERY helpful indeed in producing units longer than two or three cars.
Oh well, there's only four left in existence now with the rest scrapped, and I don't think LUL want to sell their newly converted NDMs (converted from UNDM).
I seriously doubt they are going to sell 4 or 5 car 60 mph diesel units. Having an extra type complicates things and it's the diesel generators that are usually the limiting factor rather than a lack of motors. The Island Line is only getting 2 car trains, and I doubt anywhere else will really need them to be 3rd rail units. So I fail to see how having extra intermediate cars would be benefitial, even if the extra shunting 'cab' may occasionally be useful if you were somehow unable to store 4 car units as a whole?
I feel like I've missed something here, what's your motivation for the UNDMs?
This post already had the same image: https://www.railforums.co.uk/thread...on-the-island-line.192181/page-7#post-4470430If you visit Peter Tandy`s photo site there are a few background images which appear to show class 484`s starting to be painted in Island Line livery.
The above image looks to me to be a class 484 car.
The first D-Train used the original DC motors, so yes, they do understand the original traction equipment.Would have been a much quicker way to deploy it, but then again, I doubt that anyone in VivaRail understands how the old kit works, or what would be needed to convert a D78 to 2 car operation from 3 car (or tbh, that there are even such things as UNDMs, since they didn't buy them and they'd have been VERY helpful indeed in producing units longer than two or three cars.
The first D-Train used the original DC motors, so yes, they do understand the original traction equipment.
Vivarail have converted D78s to two car operation. They just did it as an integral part of the D-Train rebuilding process.
For what it's worth, here's the battery prototype operating as a single car.
A later photo of his was linked from a post on the TfW 230s thread, and shows what appear to be four Island Line cars sandwiching a TfW pair:If you visit Peter Tandy`s photo site there are a few background images which appear to show class 484`s starting to be painted in Island Line livery.
The above image looks to me to be a class 484 car.