• 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!

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

Status
Not open for further replies.
HSTEd

HSTEd

Veteran Member
Joined
14 Jul 2011
Messages
16,841
The nominal value is 660Vdc IIRC.
The question is whether the reconstruction that the D-Trains is already scheduled to recieve, with new motor control choppers, is tolerant of the full 750V specification.

I would guess it probably is, if it is proper rail rated stuff.
So it might be feasible to convert them into EMUs using part of the full D-Train fleet, then fit the diesel engine components at a later date.
 
Sponsor Post - registered members do not see these adverts; click here to register, or click here to log in
R

RailUK Forums

Domh245

Domh245

Established Member
Joined
6 Apr 2013
Messages
8,425
Location
nowhere
HSTEd said:
The nominal value is 660Vdc IIRC.
The question is whether the reconstruction that the D-Trains is already scheduled to recieve, with new motor control choppers, is tolerant of the full 750V specification.

I would guess it probably is, if it is proper rail rated stuff.
So it might be feasible to convert them into EMUs using part of the full D-Train fleet, then fit the diesel engine components at a later date.
Click to expand...

The 2 D stock RATs will be capable of operating from the 750Vdc rails post upgrade. Either that or somebody is going to be mightily embarrassed!

However, more on topic, I've also come across an old (2014) Roger Ford article about the conversion that says that the alternator outputs at 750Vdc

Power from the alternator will be fed to an inverter giving a 750V dc output. The DM’s existing camshaft control equipment will be replaced by a new solid-state DC chopper system, designed and supplied by Strukton Rail of The Netherlands.
Click to expand...
 
HSTEd

HSTEd

Veteran Member
Joined
14 Jul 2011
Messages
16,841
Yes, but 750Vdc from a generator is probably inside the 660Vdc voltage specification.
The problem only comes if the raiil voltage shoots up to 850Vdc or something due to regeneration or near the substation.
 
C

Clip

Established Member
Joined
28 Jun 2010
Messages
10,822
Paul Sidorczuk said:
How many months of the current franchise is left? Is it not the case that some time in March 2017, funding from the DfT to the Combined Authority would cease to be made available for the said trial on the Coventry to Nuneaton line if matters are as at this point in time.
Click to expand...


Post #4594 shows the relevant information
 
43021HST

43021HST

Established Member
Joined
11 Sep 2008
Messages
1,564
Location
Aldershot, Hampshire
In regards to their possible application for 3rd rail purposes.

Could D Stock by used on the Isle of Wight? I know the loading gauge in Ryde tunnel prohibits full size trains but I do believe D stock are built to a loading gauge slightly smaller than standard rolling stock. I assume they'd still be to big?

--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

Woops scrap my last comment, just noticed the comment above, does that mean end game then for the project?
 
Last edited:
S

sn1975

Member
Joined
16 May 2011
Messages
154
Article in Nuneaton News:

http://www.nuneaton-news.co.uk/tria...has-derailed/story-30041689-detail/story.html

AN INNOVATIVE trial to use former London underground trains to boost services on the Nuneaton to Coventry railway line has derailed.

The News can reveal that partners have pulled out of the project following a fire during a trial run of the scheme.

It will bring much dismay to commuters who were looking forward to a solution to the misery they suffer due to major overcrowding of the one carriage train that calls at the Ricoh Arena, Bedworth and Bermuda Park stations.

It was fanfared that the use of the D train would pave the way for three times as many commuters to use the hourly train service, which at the moment caters for 75 people, as it would boast extra seating and it would also stop off at the Ricoh on event days.

Rail groups had called for the project to use former London Underground carriages, known as the D Train, to continue in spite of the fire.

But, in a joint statement, Coventry City Council, Coventry and Warwickshire Local Enterprise Partnership, London Midland, Warwickshire County Council and the West Midlands Combined Authority, said: "We have been working with Vivarail on this innovative but technically challenging project to try and find a solution to the UK-wide shortage of diesel trains.

"Our goal throughout has been to provide passengers with an enhanced service on the Coventry to Nuneaton line and this remains the case.

"That's why it is so unfortunate that this fire and the subsequent investigation has led to a suspension of the trial that had been due to start in February.

"This delay means there is no longer enough time to run and evaluate a pilot service using these trains before the next local rail franchise starts in October. It is for this reason we have little choice but to reluctantly withdraw from the trial.

"The partners will, however, continue to discuss future opportunities with suppliers of diesel trains, including Vivarail, for this railway line and other routes in the region where the shortage of available rolling stock is impacting on capacity and service operation."

As featured in the News, the D train was nearing completion of tests on the main line ahead of being handed over to train operator London Midland ready for use between Nuneaton and Coventry when a fire within one of the engine modules broke out .

Warwickshire Fire and Rescue crews had to tackle the blaze as it passed through Kenilworth on Friday, December 30.
Click to expand...
 
TH172341

TH172341

Member
Joined
22 Aug 2010
Messages
394
Shame to see it is now suspended until further announcement - bit of a hit for Vivarail really. Also annoying as it now means continuing to get on by with the current...would've been nice for a 153 to be freed up for use elsewhere in the West Mids. However safety must come first and I can understand the decision.
 
B

Bletchleyite

Veteran Member
Joined
20 Oct 2014
Messages
98,334
Location
"Marston Vale mafia"
I'm starting to wonder if the D319 and any other similar project will kill the D-train, as it is simply likely to be a better product because of the reduced number of limitations of the base train (and reduced number of changes needed to be made). I can think of few if any[1] applications for the 230 that wouldn't be better served by the D319 or similar, particularly given that you could fit a Tube-like seating arrangement (or any other) if you wished.

In a way Vivarail have done the development/proof of concept work for them - but, absent a patent on fitting diesel engines to existing electric trains (not heard of Vivarail having such a thing) that, sadly, is business.

At least they do have assets (in the form of valuable scrap steel and aluminium) if they do have to liquidate the business.

[1] Bedford-Bletchley possibly, but platform extensions to allow 4x20m would be better - and would help future-proof towards East West Rail.
 
Last edited:
Z

Z12XE

Member
Joined
30 Sep 2005
Messages
876
Why doesn't Mr Shooter get one of the companies which have supposedly already ordered the things to take part in the trial, or is that possibly a load of bullshine to make others take it seriously?
 
Xenophon PCDGS

Xenophon PCDGS

Veteran Member
Joined
17 Apr 2011
Messages
32,515
Location
A semi-rural part of north-west England
adrock1976 said:
Regarding London Midland now seemingly pulling out of the trail, could an alternative location for a trial be either the Coryton - Radyr, or Nottingham - Mansfield Woodhouse/Worksop routes?
Click to expand...

Surely we would have to wait for the results of the investigation into the recent matter and any recommendations that are made to be put in place and the unit in question suitably put in good order, an actual short-period unit lease period contract signed and agreed, before any trial anywhere takes place
 
Last edited:
4

47802

Established Member
Joined
8 Oct 2013
Messages
3,455
What's the scrap value these days has it gone up or down since Vivarail bought them:lol:

Goodbye and good riddance.
 
B

Billy A

Member
Joined
9 Jan 2017
Messages
171
D365 said:
Good riddance to what would have been perfectly adequate high-capacity diesel units?
Click to expand...
For reasons unknown the very idea of these units, which seem an interesting and potentially useful idea to me, seems to inspire loathing in some quarters.
 
M

MML

Member
Joined
25 Oct 2015
Messages
588
Disappointed with the slow progress so far with the Class 230, but perhaps more so with the comments which regard the units as somehow inferior.

Pacer units were originally designed as a low cost alternative for branch lines and seen as a way of matching the economy of bus travel. Most buses today have a driver who also collects the fare. The Pacer still requires a driver and guard, with the additional expense of staffing only offset by potential savings in journey time compared to a bus travelling along winding country roads.
But eventually Pacers were used on routes for which they were not really designed. Commuter and long-distance country routes to name but two.

The Class 230 does give the opportunity to deliver improved frequency services to many branch lines and to do this at a minimal cost.
Lines such as the Marston Vale which currently only has an hourly service in each direction and the Whitby to Middlesborough line with even fewer trains can only hope to improve their services with a low cost unit. I certainly hope Vivarail can help revitalised branch line services where the cost of alternative units would be prohibitively expensive.
 
Last edited:
4

47802

Established Member
Joined
8 Oct 2013
Messages
3,455
MML said:
Disappointed with the slow progress so far with the Class 230, but perhaps more so with the comments which regard the units as somehow inferior.

Pacer units were originally designed as a low cost alternative for branch lines and seen as a way of matching the economy of bus travel. Most buses today have a driver who also collects the fare. The Pacer still requires a driver and guard, with the additional expense of staffing only offset by potential savings in journey time compared to a bus travelling along winding country roads.
But eventually Pacers were used on routes for which they were not really designed. Commuter and long-distance country routes to name but two.

The Class 230 does give the opportunity to deliver improved frequency services to many branch lines and to do this at a minimal cost.
Lines such as the Marston Vale which currently only has an hourly service in each direction and the Whitby to Middlesborough line with even fewer trains can only hope to improve their services with a low cost unit. I certainly hope Vivarail can help revitalised branch line services where the cost of alternative units would be prohibitively expensive.
Click to expand...

You seem to be making out that these are substancially lower cost solution yet those in the know have previously suggested that a fully refurbished version of one of these doesn't stack up that well against the alternatives, and on the Whitby branch for instance will a 3 car 230 be significantly cheaper than a refurbished 2 car 156?

As for my nasty comments regarding this train I standby them, from an engineering viewpoint I'm sure its an interesting exercise, from an actual train viewpoint its a maybe not so cheap but definitely nasty solution of the Railbus ilk which we should be leaving behind.
 
Last edited:
najaB

najaB

Veteran Member
Joined
28 Aug 2011
Messages
30,931
Location
Scotland
47802 said:
...from an actual train viewpoint its a maybe not so cheap but definitely nasty solution of the Railbus ilk which we should be leaving behind.
Click to expand...
There are many criticisms that can be leveled towards the Class 230, but a Railbus it is not.
 
B

bnsf734

Member
Joined
15 Oct 2007
Messages
571
Location
Nuneaton
There was an article on BBC Midlands Today tonight in which a spokesman for London Midland said that the fire had pushed the development back 3 months and there was insufficient time for a trial before the franchise change.

So its back to the wedged 153 every day then.
 
RPM

RPM

Established Member
Joined
24 Sep 2009
Messages
1,471
Location
Buckinghamshire
It's looking like the Chiltern bubble cars are going to come out of service at the May timetable change, so maybe that would be an opportunity for a Vivarail trial? It would have to be a 2-car unit though.
 
B

Bantamzen

Established Member
Joined
4 Dec 2013
Messages
9,787
Location
Baildon, West Yorkshire
MML said:
Disappointed with the slow progress so far with the Class 230, but perhaps more so with the comments which regard the units as somehow inferior.

Pacer units were originally designed as a low cost alternative for branch lines and seen as a way of matching the economy of bus travel. Most buses today have a driver who also collects the fare. The Pacer still requires a driver and guard, with the additional expense of staffing only offset by potential savings in journey time compared to a bus travelling along winding country roads.
But eventually Pacers were used on routes for which they were not really designed. Commuter and long-distance country routes to name but two.

The Class 230 does give the opportunity to deliver improved frequency services to many branch lines and to do this at a minimal cost.
Lines such as the Marston Vale which currently only has an hourly service in each direction and the Whitby to Middlesborough line with even fewer trains can only hope to improve their services with a low cost unit. I certainly hope Vivarail can help revitalised branch line services where the cost of alternative units would be prohibitively expensive.
Click to expand...

You say minimal cost, but the cost of the 230s (assuming that enough where to be leased for a period of time that would allow VR to recoup their costs) is expected to be about 2/3rd that of a new unit. But that only gets you the basic configuration, i.e. mainly longitudinal seating, no toilets, 2 cars etc. Any additional extras will quickly bump the cost up and before you know it you could end up with basically a 35 year old unit with new diesel engines and a refurb but costing that of new unit. So actually it is not minimal cost, especially when you consider that the expected lifespan of the 230s is nothing like that of a new unit. And for a line such as the Eskdale, a low seating 230 configuration would not be suitable. In summer these services can get very busy, with a mixture of local and tourist traffic. I don't know about you, but I would not use it if there was a risk that at the end of a long journey you were faced with 1.5 hours standing as you trundled down to Whitby. But again it is a moot point, Arriva have made their decision and no amount of wishing will see them replace the usual 156s with 230s.

The D-stock project was a punt by Shooter and his team. They thought they saw a niche in the market, i.e. Northern's need to replace the Pacer stock in this current franchise, and ran with the idea of "cheap", temporary replacements. However Arriva have thought differently and gone for a large order of new stock to supplement the cascade program. Other operators may have been keeping an eye on the project, but until now only LM committed to a test, and following the recent fail even they have backed away. It remains to be seen if any other will follow, but with Poterbrook's 319 conversion potentially about to start, I think the 230 is in serious trouble now.

It isn't about just hating the idea as some suggest, it is about seeing the project for what it is. A cheap 'n' cheerful, temporary solution to the problem of replacing Pacers which themselves were just a cheap 'n' cheerful solution to another problem. If the 230s had taken off, we would be having the same Pacer-like debates in 10 or 15 years as we are having now. But the UK's rail network isn't going to magically get quieter, or massively shrink in this time frame. For most of the country, passenger flows are up and growing. So a cheap 'n' cheerful solution simply isn't enough anymore. We need more permanent solutions to permanent problems. Even the converted 319s won't cut it forever, but at least they can offer regular speeds on electrified sections with (I assume) lower speed offerings over final miles that are not wired. But their approach shows that we need a new approach to rolling stock, it needs to be flexible enough to serve the needs of the TOCs and more importantly the passengers. So as we are starting to see, bi-modes will offer much longer term solutions and better flexibility throughout the network. They won't be needed everywhere, but where all electric / diesel are appropriate the companies supplying bi-modes can also offer single traction versions, or even eventually remove redundant diesel units. Basically, the latest raft of train orders has all but rendered the 230 unnecessary.
 
Status
Not open for further replies.

Top