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

[edwin_m]

Exactly, especially given the rolling resistance (friction) of metal wheels on metal track is much lower.

Now, hopefully we can back to what's happening with the 230s...

Sorry to continue a digression, but rolling resistance is not the same as friction. It's the energy lost by each bit of the wheel being squashed as it takes the weight of the vehicle.

 

[gazthomas]

Sorry to continue a digression, but rolling resistance is not the same as friction. It's the energy lost by each bit of the wheel being squashed as it takes the weight of the vehicle.

That's true

 

[DarloRich]

230004 arrived at bletchley this evening

 

[krus_aragon]

Could someone please clarify the following acronyms, as per the forum rules?

ALARP/ALAP (not sure if the second was a typo of the first)
HAZID

Cheers.

Bletchleyite did happen to explain the first two a little earlier:

The problem with ALARP is that it stands for "as low as reasonably possible". It is therefore quite subjective, and can be driven by other factors.

It isn't ALAP i.e. "as low as possible", which would be quite different.

 

[jimm]

Some pictures of 230004 on the Cotswold Line and then heading north from Oxford today taken by Martin Loader here

http://hondawanderer.com/Recent_Additions.htm

 

[Metal_gee_man]

I hate to sound dumb but side evacuation is obviously a bit dangerous in an electrified tunnel like the tunnels down to Moorgate hence the end evact 717s! But a diesel loco doesn't provide as many dangers as a 3rd rail etc... Why are the rules to tough?

 

[edwin_m]

I hate to sound dumb but side evacuation is obviously a bit dangerous in an electrified tunnel like the tunnels down to Moorgate hence the end evact 717s! But a diesel loco doesn't provide as many dangers as a 3rd rail etc... Why are the rules to tough?

Any third/fourth rail should be isolated before evacuating (though that occasionally fails to happen, recent incident at Peckham) so electrocution isn't an issue. The problem with side doors is if the tunnel is physically too narrow for people to get down the side of the train. This applies to most of the Underground and used to apply to Shakespeare Tunnel in Dover, but I believe the track there was offset to one side to allow 395s to operate. Is there anywhere else where passenger-carrying trians must have end doors?

 

[apk55]

Any third/fourth rail should be isolated before evacuating (though that occasionally fails to happen, recent incident at Peckham) so electrocution isn't an issue. The problem with side doors is if the tunnel is physically too narrow for people to get down the side of the train. This applies to most of the Underground and used to apply to Shakespeare Tunnel in Dover, but I believe the track there was offset to one side to allow 395s to operate. Is there anywhere else where passenger-carrying trians must have end doors?

Class 313 which worked into Moorgate

 

[ac6000cw]

Merseyrail? (thinking about the old Mersey tunnels here, rather than the modern link and loop tunnels)

 

[43096]

Any third/fourth rail should be isolated before evacuating (though that occasionally fails to happen, recent incident at Peckham) so electrocution isn't an issue. The problem with side doors is if the tunnel is physically too narrow for people to get down the side of the train. This applies to most of the Underground and used to apply to Shakespeare Tunnel in Dover, but I believe the track there was offset to one side to allow 395s to operate. Is there anywhere else where passenger-carrying trians must have end doors?

Farringdon-Moorgate was one. Hence why the 319s have end doors and why the 700s don’t (as the line has closed and junction built over at Farringdon).

 

[Neen Sollars]

Official confirmation of 230004`s delivery to Bletchley. Plus brief statement open to speculation.

http://vivarail.co.uk/230004-arrives-at-bletchley/

 

[krus_aragon]

Official confirmation of 230004`s delivery to Bletchley. Plus brief statement open to speculation.

http://vivarail.co.uk/230004-arrives-at-bletchley/

Egads, that's a lot of camera shake on the title photo there!

 

[Old Hill Bank]

Paths for next week
http://www.realtimetrains.co.uk/sea.../0000-2359?stp=S&show=non-passenger&order=wtt
http://www.realtimetrains.co.uk/train/K91548/2019/02/13/advanced

 

[mmh]

The 101s were still running to Blaenau in 2001, as seen here. And come to think of it, top-and-tail railtours to Blaenau may have redundant motive power, but they don't have any end-doors available.

I accept that risk assessments change, but don't feel that the risk at Blaenau Tunnel is comparable to that of the Mersey Tunnel or the London Underground. Plus, they've stopped sending nuclear traffic through now...


I can't find any any evidence to back up my recollection of Pacers being trialled on the line, but Penmorfa has photos of the LEV1 railbus at Betws y Coed.

There's a picture here: http://www.6g.nwrail.org.uk/alanhaywardpage11.html

"LLANRWST - As viewed from the cab of a train waiting to go forward to Blaenau Ffestiniog. A Class 142 attached to a Class 150 passes in the loop."

 

[mmh]

Any third/fourth rail should be isolated before evacuating (though that occasionally fails to happen, recent incident at Peckham) so electrocution isn't an issue. The problem with side doors is if the tunnel is physically too narrow for people to get down the side of the train. This applies to most of the Underground and used to apply to Shakespeare Tunnel in Dover, but I believe the track there was offset to one side to allow 395s to operate. Is there anywhere else where passenger-carrying trians must have end doors?

The Northern City line to London Moorgate, and probably the Merseyrail loop line.

 

[edwin_m]

Merseyrail? (thinking about the old Mersey tunnels here, rather than the modern link and loop tunnels)

Farringdon-Moorgate was one. Hence why the 319s have end doors and why the 700s don’t (as the line has closed and junction built over at Farringdon).

Class 313 which worked into Moorgate

Agreed, three more Underground-like examples. But I still can't think of any on the "main line" railway comparable to Blaenau, other than formerly at Shakespeare.

 

[tnxrail]

230004 at Kenilworth:

 

[krus_aragon]

There's a picture here: http://www.6g.nwrail.org.uk/alanhaywardpage11.html

"LLANRWST - As viewed from the cab of a train waiting to go forward to Blaenau Ffestiniog. A Class 142 attached to a Class 150 passes in the loop."

Thanks. That'll be where I knew it from.

 

[class387]

Found these (not mine):
https://twitter.com/tobythetram/status/1093604097398312961

Looking smart!

 

[Bletchleyite]

Merseyrail? (thinking about the old Mersey tunnels here, rather than the modern link and loop tunnels)

The Wirral trains had end doors but the Northern ones not.

 

[jimm]

Paths for next week
http://www.realtimetrains.co.uk/sea.../0000-2359?stp=S&show=non-passenger&order=wtt
http://www.realtimetrains.co.uk/train/K91548/2019/02/13/advanced

No sign of 230005 on the Cotswold Line on Monday in the end but the test run paths are back in the system for tomorrow and Thursday, plus a conditional path is also showing for a Thursday afternoon move from Long Marston to Bletchley

http://www.realtimetrains.co.uk/search/advanced/MIM/2019/02/13/0000-2359?stp=WVS&show=all&order=wtt

http://www.realtimetrains.co.uk/train/K91548/2019/02/13/advanced

 

[Peter Sarf]

No sign of 230005 on the Cotswold Line on Monday in the end but the test run paths are back in the system for tomorrow and Thursday, plus a conditional path is also showing for a Thursday afternoon move from Long Marston to Bletchley

http://www.realtimetrains.co.uk/search/advanced/MIM/2019/02/13/0000-2359?stp=WVS&show=all&order=wtt

http://www.realtimetrains.co.uk/train/K91548/2019/02/13/advanced

I think 230005 has been out today. If so then it looks like a big step forward !.

 

[matt]

Yes 230005 has been out on test today.

 

[DarloRich]

Not sure 004 has been out on test on the vsle yet. 093 has also vanished

 

[AndrewE]

The problem with ALARP is that it stands for "as low as reasonably possible". It is therefore quite subjective, and can be driven by other factors. It isn't ALAP i.e. "as low as possible", which would be quite different.

Sorry to be picky, but (as SET_passenger said) it is "as low as reasonably practicable." This has been tested in the law courts, and means that you have to invest what is necessary until additional expenditure outweighs the further safety returns. Of course "invest" might mean spend, or it might be that management effort and leadership is required.
"Practicable" by itself means physically possible - regardless of cost.

 

[jimm]

Pictures by Peter Tandy of 230005 at Honeybourne today.

http://www.petertandy.co.uk/Recentpics.html

And some by Stephen Widdowson at Evesham and Honeybourne here

https://www.flickr.com/photos/149822823@N04/

The Cotswold Line test run paths for tomorrow have disappeared from realtimetrains, with just the one for Long Marston-Bletchley now showing, so looks like 005 may be on its way at lunchtime.

 

[jimm]

Looks like 230005's move to Bletchley is on for today.

The path this afternoon has now been allocated a headcode, with the 'runs as required' note removed.

http://www.realtimetrains.co.uk/train/K91548/2019/02/14/advanced

 

[gallafent]

Looks like 230005's move to Bletchley is on for today.

The path this afternoon has now been allocated a headcode, with the 'runs as required' note removed.

http://www.realtimetrains.co.uk/train/K91548/2019/02/14/advanced

… it's regained “Runs as required” and also gained a “This service was cancelled throughout due to a problem with the train (M8).” note now though … so maybe not!

 

[boby32]

Does anybody have any news of class 230 for Transport for Wales?

 

[sw1ller]

Does anybody have any news of class 230 for Transport for Wales?

Only rumours and speculation I’m afraid.