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

[superalbs]

If I recall correctly, the LNWR informally called it the penguins due to the front yellow panel looking like a beak (source). I would not be surprised if they started using names associated with penguins.

I hope they name one after Club Penguin.

 

[Xenophon PCDGS]

Not even a grudging acknowledgment of Vivarail's success after years of knocking the project, Paul? It's beaten the 769 into service too.

After all those "said years", in that time how many fully operational units have they now produced to run in commercial service?

 

[krus_aragon]

If I recall correctly, the LNWR informally called it the penguins due to the front yellow panel looking like a beak (source). I would not be surprised if they started using names associated with penguins.

Pingu
Feathers McGraw
Skipper, Kowalski, Private and Rico

I'm drawing a blank after that...

 

[Bletchleyite]

OK, so in the end I managed Ridgmont and back... sadly the crossover isn't allowed for passenger service so track bashers needn't be jealous, though I've got a photo of the unit crossing it which must itself be pretty rare!

Overall I would say I was positively impressed. Generally a good job has been done on the conversion but it is still possible to tell what it was - no attempt has been made to hide that.

So some thoughts:

• Build quality generally good with no rattles at all (though an odd up and down bounce at a certain engine revs). However, a few specific build issues do exist - you can tell it's "coachbuilt" rather than mass produced (some panel fit is a bit random) and there was the issue mentioned upthread of a missing gangway handle which fell off earlier. Also I noted that the anti vandal film wasn't quite 100% on one of the windows.
• Seating is ironing board style but is a different type of seat by a different manufacturer, I think similar to the Renatus 321s. Certainly entirely suited to the purpose to which it is being put, and more comfortable than the regular "ironing board" due to having a contoured rather than flat base. Moquette rather than flat cloth in a classy grey with green highlighting. Perhaps a little close to the sidewall (though there is a spacer). Legroom excellent in the airline seats (partly due to some clever niches in the back which unlike many such designs are actually where a typical tall male's knees go rather than in the middle) but a little tight in the facing ones. Overall verdict - better than the 150 or 153 by some margin, and TBH far better than the Class 800 too, not that that takes much doing, though not quite as good as a 350/1.
• I don't *think* they actually do have aircon (ref comments above) but the existing forced-air ventilation system they had on the Tube. TfW have specced it on theirs though. Staff did mention it being a little warm earlier on. I do wonder if they might end up fitting hoppers to the "small" windows where the doors were.
• Talking of windows, those small ones are a bit odd (like portholes but with a sloped frame so you can't rest your arm on it) but alignment is as good as you're going to get with such a strange layout - it's certainly been thought about and not forgotten.
• Lighting not as harsh as the photos seem to suggest. About the same as, though slightly whiter than, a Class 350. LED "fake tubes" I think.
• Bog (yes, I did use it given the long delay) is the two-door module used in the 319s but with a small modification which means one could, were a seated performance necessary, sit on it without clouting knees on the sink. The tap was a bit powerful, though, and has caused a bit of a puddle which has escaped to the saloon. Stickers on the outside are a good touch, avoiding it feeling obtrusive in the centre of the saloon like the similar layout does on SBB FLIRTs. I reckon stickers on the inside would be good though.
• Gangway door setup really odd. Basically the existing doors have been retained with new handles (one of which has fallen off as noted) and an air-powered pushbutton release has been added. I assume this was for PRM compliance, but it's a really odd setup and I don't know how much money it's saved. Doors don't close automatically and the handle must be operated to close them, so I reckon this will need fixing or they'll be permanently banging back and forward.
• Door operation is really, really slow - like worse than a 350 slow. This will need some changes and is almost certainly one of the causes (there were, it seems, several) for losing time today. I know they slowed it down deliberately, but I think it does need speeding up a little. Conventional guarded operation is being used as expected (with 3 guards today - two in training I think!) including opening the local door first, which combined with the slow doors means it's about 15-20 seconds from stop to release. This will need sorting out if there is to be a real gain here. Given the short trains which are never longer than the platform, I wonder if a SWT-style approach could be used, with no need to step out?
  
• The actual buttons are low on the inside and high on the outside which is strange.
• Side facing seating will allow for effectively unlimited cycle carriage, but there's no dedicated bike space, just a wheelchair one by the bog which curiously has no proper backrest.
• Not noisy at all, though you can tell it's a DMU when idling. Once above 20mph or so, it just sounds like a Merseyrail EMU or similar, with the transmission noise (apparently that's what classic EMU traction motor whine mostly is!) being the only thing that is audible. With the short vehicles giving a very certain "clickety clack" over the rail joints I could have closed my eyes and remembered being on a 507 through Kirkdale Tunnel in the 90s...
• New style front lighting is fitted (i.e. "3 the same") but not *that* bright.
• A general spacious feel - but not surprising as they are quite wide.
• Credit to Mr Jessup (who I know I've criticised in the past) for the "local facts" interior etc, it does look quite good. I really think branch lines thrive on local interest and association, and the dedicated nature of these units allow for this. Perhaps a nice addition would be, once they are named (if they will be), some relevant photos on the outside like the promotional 350 liveries?
• No overhead luggage racks but space between some seat backs, and a trolley case wouldn't really block the very wide aisle. Not that big luggage is common on this service.
• Acceleration good - and I'm told that one of the reasons for the delays is that it's an engine out on one coach (the one with the bog - I was sitting in the other one, so it won't have influenced my view on noise levels), so with that fixed it should be well up to Class 350 standards, and if the slow door issue can be sorted could mean a few minutes easily lopped off the timetable compared to the 153.
• Sockets with USB at the new seats, just USB at the "ex-Tube" seats.
• For those who like me like putting their foot on the heating conduit, it is square so you can. It's also quite small so doesn't get in the way at all.
• The panels below the windows have a pattern which is a bit computer-esque - a nice nod to the Park?

So to sum up - needs a few minor tweaks but otherwise perfectly suited to the purpose. I reckon TfW should get themselves one more (or maybe two) to dedicate to the Conwy Valley and brand up in a similar manner, ideally a 3-car. Overall a good job, I think I'm more impressed with this than I have been with many other new launches.

Some photos below including my ugly mug! (@DarloRich will now know who to avoid on the 0713...)

 

[Bletchleyite]

A few more photos. Love the nod to the original "obstructing the doors causes delay and can be dangerous".

And amused by the Delay Repay forms given the timekeeping today

 

[Bletchleyite]

as for the northern 14x/15x combos' the 769 is the best solution for sure,once they get it up and running.

There are certainly Northern routes for which it would be entirely suited - I'm thinking Manchester suburbans, Ormskirk-Preston, Kirkby/Skem-Wigan if it was to become a permanent shuttle - but the 769 is probably overall better for them - *if* it works! That said, I think Northern may not have *quite* enough new stock on order for demand, so they could probably find a decent use for maybe 10 of them. And there aren't *that* many D78s to convert anyway.

Would also work well for a self contained Cumbrian Coast service, again in 3-car form configured with some decent standing room and plenty of bike space for people getting to Sellafield for work (which is what keeps the line going).

 

[LowLevel]

Thanks for your thorough review and photos!

 

[Bletchleyite]

it's got a place....with 153's going out of service this is a fairly decent replacement on sparse lines, but not ones with interconnect to mainline.
for mainline use then I think we need to be looking at a modular 2/3 car 18-20m,90mph capable unit as a minimum(769 is reportedly testing at 87mph so 80mph in service on diesel,100mph under the wires.)

What it basically is is a high floor Stadler WINK (GTW replacement) on the cheap. Which is no bad thing - the "dedicated simple units for branch lines" thing works well in Germany and Switzerland. Some branch lines (I did mention Ormskirk-Preston) might need 90mph running, though, so perhaps there is a call for something actually new-build along these lines.

Thanks for your thorough review and photos!

No worries Interested to hear others' views too.

 

[tnxrail]

Hopefully out tomrow or sat if running have loads of videos of if it running need to go on it, Is it diagram 2 off timetable any ideas if stay the same.

 

[700007]

Absolutely brilliant review @Bletchleyite You have me pumped to be reunited with my childhood stock when I go up to the Vale in a few weeks. Very thorough, honest and appears to be unbiased.

 

[Bletchleyite]

Absolutely brilliant review @Bletchleyite You have me pumped to be reunited with my childhood stock when I go up to the Vale in a few weeks. Very thorough, honest and appears to be unbiased.

Cheers

 

[physics34]

A few more photos. Love the nod to the original "obstructing the doors causes delay and can be dangerous".

And amused by the Delay Repay forms given the timekeeping today

Nice! Will be looking forward to seeing them everyday at bletchley

 

[700007]

Cheers

Might I add that the mug shot was a lovely touch.

 

[Bletchleyite]

Might I add that the mug shot was a lovely touch.

I'm normally happier than that...took it when it was by no means certain it was going to go anywhere! (Traincrew needed their PNB)

 

[johnnychips]

After all those "said years", in that time how many fully operational units have they now produced to run in commercial service?

Fair point Paul. I do hope these trains are successful - after all, nobody wants passengers travelling on crap and unreliable trains, and there seem to be one or two niche markets where they might work. Whether they have been or will be a commercial success for the developers remains to be seen.

 

[class387]

This is potentially my least favourite unit on the rails today.

Been on one yet?

 

[DarloRich]

The 230 is out an about today on the same schedule as yesterday. There is a level crossing failure somewhere along the line so check before travel

 

[Techniquest]

Bletchleyite, I really appreciated your review of the 230s. They sound like they will be an interesting thing to try out one day, which is only all that likely to be if I re-discover the fun of visiting required stations again. Not terribly likely I'll make the cross-country trip over otherwise!

Never say never though, things are always subject to change! With the 230s now entering service, this means I've no longer the honour of having cleared the LNWR fleet. That on its own means I'll have to make an effort, hmm...

How many of the 230s are planned to be in use with LNWR?

 

[Class172]

How many of the 230s are planned to be in use with LNWR?

Just three units (230003-005), two running the service and one spare if I recall.

 

[Bletchleyite]

Bletchleyite, I really appreciated your review of the 230s. They sound like they will be an interesting thing to try out one day, which is only all that likely to be if I re-discover the fun of visiting required stations again. Not terribly likely I'll make the cross-country trip over otherwise!

Never say never though, things are always subject to change! With the 230s now entering service, this means I've no longer the honour of having cleared the LNWR fleet. That on its own means I'll have to make an effort, hmm...

Cheers

There are also some additional 319s to get if you didn't get those as Thameslink units (I believe LNR now have all the lovely /2s), and then the 350/4s and Aventras coming up...

There are 3 230s, 2 in service at any given time plus a spare.

 

[Techniquest]

Just three units (230003-005), two running the service and one spare if I recall.

Thanks, most appreciated! I'd best create a '2xx DMUs Needs' list today. I assume 230001 and 230002 are floating around somewhere and will, eventually, enter service somewhere?

Cheers

There are also some additional 319s to get if you didn't get those as Thameslink units (I believe LNR now have all the lovely /2s), and then the 350/4s and Aventras coming up...

There are 3 230s, 2 in service at any given time plus a spare.

Woah woah woah, hold up, now I must be well out of touch (NormLand was fun but by cripes the amount of changes around the country are taking some catching up on!) here. Aventras? I'm going to need a class number here I'm afraid!

I did notice some 319s either stabled or in use on LNWR last week I didn't have buried in my head as being in the LNWR fleet. I think the majority of my needs are somewhere with Northern at this time, although 422 I think is now going to be a 769? The page on Wikipedia was not super clear when I looked last week. Thankfully the 319/2s were all cleared on Thameslink or on LM moves.

350/4s I managed to clear a good long time back, and I still remember saying to Blindtraveller on the 2017 ALR I did with him that we'd have the /4s right there, right then. No complaints, no waiting to put them into service, let's have them! I still would be happy to have the 185s down here on WMR as well, although I've lost my extreme hatred of 170s since then. They're tolerable these days, although that does have a lot to do with that recent journey from Worcester to Birmingham on the bus...

 

[Bletchleyite]

Aventras? I'm going to need a class number here I'm afraid!

730 possibly, though I'm not quite sure? They aren't due for a few years yet, but will replace the 350/2s and add capacity.

 

[Techniquest]

730 possibly, though I'm not quite sure? They aren't due for a few years yet, but will replace the 350/2s and add capacity.

Ahh! I thought there was a new class in use that I wasn't aware of *wipes forehead clear of sweat*

Thanks for clearing that up

 

[Class172]

I assume 230001 and 230002 are floating around somewhere and will, eventually, enter service somewhere?

I think those units are being used as demonstrators for the technology; indeed I believe 002 is the battery hybrid unit, so probably won’t enter service with a TOC any time soon. Don’t forget there’ll be the 5(?) TfW units entering service later this year if I recall, but also here in the Midlands, the class 196s for the Hereford/Shrewsbury services.

 

[Techniquest]

I think those units are being used as demonstrators for the technology; indeed I believe 002 is the battery hybrid unit, so probably won’t enter service with a TOC any time soon. Don’t forget there’ll be the 5(?) TfW units entering service later this year if I recall, but also here in the Midlands, the class 196s for the Hereford/Shrewsbury services.

Thought 001+002 were the demo sets, not yet created that needs list as I keep finding other things to do!

The 196s I'm looking forward to, and as they're coming my way it'll be easy to clear the class. Well, in theory anyway! The 230s with TfW could be interesting, don't suppose you have any fleet numbers for them at all?

 

[Railperf]

anyone know which services these are running today

 

[DarloRich]

anyone know which services these are running today

there has been a level crossing failure. Trains were cancelled until 11am so i am unsure what is working what.

 

[pt_mad]

OK, so in the end I managed Ridgmont and back... sadly the crossover isn't allowed for passenger service so track bashers needn't be jealous, though I've got a photo of the unit crossing it which must itself be pretty rare!

Overall I would say I was positively impressed. Generally a good job has been done on the conversion but it is still possible to tell what it was - no attempt has been made to hide that.

So some thoughts:

• Build quality generally good with no rattles at all (though an odd up and down bounce at a certain engine revs). However, a few specific build issues do exist - you can tell it's "coachbuilt" rather than mass produced (some panel fit is a bit random) and there was the issue mentioned upthread of a missing gangway handle which fell off earlier. Also I noted that the anti vandal film wasn't quite 100% on one of the windows.
• Seating is ironing board style but is a different type of seat by a different manufacturer, I think similar to the Renatus 321s. Certainly entirely suited to the purpose to which it is being put, and more comfortable than the regular "ironing board" due to having a contoured rather than flat base. Moquette rather than flat cloth in a classy grey with green highlighting. Perhaps a little close to the sidewall (though there is a spacer). Legroom excellent in the airline seats (partly due to some clever niches in the back which unlike many such designs are actually where a typical tall male's knees go rather than in the middle) but a little tight in the facing ones. Overall verdict - better than the 150 or 153 by some margin, and TBH far better than the Class 800 too, not that that takes much doing, though not quite as good as a 350/1.
• I don't *think* they actually do have aircon (ref comments above) but the existing forced-air ventilation system they had on the Tube. TfW have specced it on theirs though. Staff did mention it being a little warm earlier on. I do wonder if they might end up fitting hoppers to the "small" windows where the doors were.
• Talking of windows, those small ones are a bit odd (like portholes but with a sloped frame so you can't rest your arm on it) but alignment is as good as you're going to get with such a strange layout - it's certainly been thought about and not forgotten.
• Lighting not as harsh as the photos seem to suggest. About the same as, though slightly whiter than, a Class 350. LED "fake tubes" I think.
• Bog (yes, I did use it given the long delay) is the two-door module used in the 319s but with a small modification which means one could, were a seated performance necessary, sit on it without clouting knees on the sink. The tap was a bit powerful, though, and has caused a bit of a puddle which has escaped to the saloon. Stickers on the outside are a good touch, avoiding it feeling obtrusive in the centre of the saloon like the similar layout does on SBB FLIRTs. I reckon stickers on the inside would be good though.
• Gangway door setup really odd. Basically the existing doors have been retained with new handles (one of which has fallen off as noted) and an air-powered pushbutton release has been added. I assume this was for PRM compliance, but it's a really odd setup and I don't know how much money it's saved. Doors don't close automatically and the handle must be operated to close them, so I reckon this will need fixing or they'll be permanently banging back and forward.
• Door operation is really, really slow - like worse than a 350 slow. This will need some changes and is almost certainly one of the causes (there were, it seems, several) for losing time today. I know they slowed it down deliberately, but I think it does need speeding up a little. Conventional guarded operation is being used as expected (with 3 guards today - two in training I think!) including opening the local door first, which combined with the slow doors means it's about 15-20 seconds from stop to release. This will need sorting out if there is to be a real gain here. Given the short trains which are never longer than the platform, I wonder if a SWT-style approach could be used, with no need to step out?
  
• The actual buttons are low on the inside and high on the outside which is strange.
• Side facing seating will allow for effectively unlimited cycle carriage, but there's no dedicated bike space, just a wheelchair one by the bog which curiously has no proper backrest.
• Not noisy at all, though you can tell it's a DMU when idling. Once above 20mph or so, it just sounds like a Merseyrail EMU or similar, with the transmission noise (apparently that's what classic EMU traction motor whine mostly is!) being the only thing that is audible. With the short vehicles giving a very certain "clickety clack" over the rail joints I could have closed my eyes and remembered being on a 507 through Kirkdale Tunnel in the 90s...
• New style front lighting is fitted (i.e. "3 the same") but not *that* bright.
• A general spacious feel - but not surprising as they are quite wide.
• Credit to Mr Jessup (who I know I've criticised in the past) for the "local facts" interior etc, it does look quite good. I really think branch lines thrive on local interest and association, and the dedicated nature of these units allow for this. Perhaps a nice addition would be, once they are named (if they will be), some relevant photos on the outside like the promotional 350 liveries?
• No overhead luggage racks but space between some seat backs, and a trolley case wouldn't really block the very wide aisle. Not that big luggage is common on this service.
• Acceleration good - and I'm told that one of the reasons for the delays is that it's an engine out on one coach (the one with the bog - I was sitting in the other one, so it won't have influenced my view on noise levels), so with that fixed it should be well up to Class 350 standards, and if the slow door issue can be sorted could mean a few minutes easily lopped off the timetable compared to the 153.
• Sockets with USB at the new seats, just USB at the "ex-Tube" seats.
• For those who like me like putting their foot on the heating conduit, it is square so you can. It's also quite small so doesn't get in the way at all.
• The panels below the windows have a pattern which is a bit computer-esque - a nice nod to the Park?

So to sum up - needs a few minor tweaks but otherwise perfectly suited to the purpose. I reckon TfW should get themselves one more (or maybe two) to dedicate to the Conwy Valley and brand up in a similar manner, ideally a 3-car. Overall a good job, I think I'm more impressed with this than I have been with many other new launches.

Some photos below including my ugly mug! (@DarloRich will now know who to avoid on the 0713...)

Superb review had me gripped well done excellent piece of writing.

Re the EMU esque whining you mentioned (transmission?), is it the sound which is like an electric motor sort of turning over which can be heard when a 323 idles at stations? It sometimes goes completely silent on a 323 in the station and then this motor starts turning like a car engine but electric style? Not sure if you were talking about that or the sound when an electric motor sort of kicks in when an EMU is starting to move? I realise the 230 is a DMU but on youtube sounds strangely like an EMU!

I think the operators have probably made a wise choice using these on the Vale line rather than the Leamington to Coventry and Nuneaton shuttles after reading your review. No overhead racks may have been an issue with connections down there, as well as no aircon and some passengers would presumably be travelling inter-regional distance with connections at Coventry, Leamington and Nuneaton onwards. Also a 23 metre length of coach would probably be more beneficial on Coventry shuttles if it were to be a 2 car vs 2 car 230.

The gangway door description was interesting. So theres like a manual handle and an electric push button? What happens when you push the button, does it turn the handle and the door is released and pushes outwards to walk through? Again I do wonder whether that would have been suited to the Coventry services although I guess no real reason why it shouldn't be other than the door style sounds a little old fashioned/manual vs a conventional DMU such as the 172.

 

[Bletchleyite]

Superb review had me gripped well done excellent piece of writing.

Cheers

Re the EMU esque whining you mentioned (transmission?), is it the sound which is like an electric motor sort of turning over which can be heard when a 323 idles at stations? It sometimes goes completely silent on a 323 in the station and then this motor starts turning like a car engine but electric style? Not sure if you were talking about that or the sound when an electric motor sort of kicks in when an EMU is starting to move? I realise the 230 is a DMU but on youtube sounds strangely like an EMU!

It's a DEMU - the diesel engines generate electricity to drive traction motors, hence the EMU like sounds.

There are basically 3 sounds you get on the 230, the air compressor is not really audible.
- The diesel engines, which you only really hear at idle and on starting off, above that it's a bit of an almost-imperceptible rumble a bit like a Voyager
- A highish pitched whine on starting out which comes from the inverter equipment (the units have had the traction motors replaced with modern AC ones), again you can't hear this at speed. This is the same thing that makes a similar whine on Electrostars, the "siren" type noise on 350s and the "gear change" noise on 323s.
- Something that sounds like classic EMU traction equipment - a sort of "buzz" that increases in pitch as the unit speeds up. I always thought this was DC traction motor noise, but it seems it actually comes from straight-cut gears used in the gearbox because these units don't have DC traction motors (the same reason why car reverse gears tend to be noisy compared with forward). This is the only one really audible at speed, and is why it sounds a bit like a Class 508 or similar.

I think the operators have probably made a wise choice using these on the Vale line rather than the Leamington to Coventry and Nuneaton shuttles after reading your review. No overhead racks may have been an issue with connections down there, as well as no aircon and some passengers would presumably be travelling inter-regional distance with connections at Coventry, Leamington and Nuneaton onwards. Also a 23 metre length of coach would probably be more beneficial on Coventry shuttles if it were to be a 2 car vs 2 car 230.

The specification is very flexible and I'm sure additional luggage capacity could have been fitted. A 3 coach version would have been fine for those services, and indeed that, had things not gone wrong with the earlier fires, was exactly where the first trials were to be. But the reason for them being used on the Marston Vale (as opposed to 172s or something) was the need for a 2-car unit with vehicles of 20m or less due to a combination of platform lengths and level crossing positions, and for various reasons (not just availability) them being preferable to a few 150s. (And I definitely do think them preferable to 150s on many levels having ridden one - Vivarail were not lying when they said they were a modern train that just happened to be built on the bodyshell of an old one - a bit like a fully-refurbished Victorian terraced house, say).

Aircon can be specified, though LNR haven't, it is opening windows and pressure ventilation.

The gangway door description was interesting. So theres like a manual handle and an electric push button? What happens when you push the button, does it turn the handle and the door is released and pushes outwards to walk through? Again I do wonder whether that would have been suited to the Coventry services although I guess no real reason why it shouldn't be other than the door style sounds a little old fashioned/manual vs a conventional DMU such as the 172.

The doors fitted are exactly the same as those which were in place on the D-stock with LUL, except for that a UIC "rubber bumper" style gangway surround (the type you get on pretty much all European LHCS) has been fitted to stop people falling out and so make it safe for passenger use unlike on LU. While new handles have been fitted, no doubt to meet PRM spec, you can still use these to open the door in exactly the same way you could on LU. What has been added is a pushbutton on the latch side which appears to use air pressure to release the latch on both doors at the same time and pop them open slightly (though the latter might not be intentional). It's a bit like the unlock feature on Eurotunnel car shuttles in concept except for that you can just use the manual handle if you prefer (a bit like you can use the button or the handle on 350 cab end gangways).

 

[DarloRich]

@Bletchleyite has produced a good review which i agree with. Plus it has saved me doing it! Overall i was VERY impressed with the product delivered. Very impressed indeed. Personally i was sniffy about the concept at the outset but what has been delivered has really changed my mind. I was wrong. I wonder if other critical commentators will be able to say the same? I might go as far as saying that Northern have missed a trick here!

What we really need now is a period of reliable operation that shows an improvement in service delivery. That will go a long way towards attracting more passengers to the Vale.

A few points from me:

Seating is ironing board style but is a different type of seat by a different manufacturer, I think similar to the Renatus 321s. Certainly entirely suited to the purpose to which it is being put, and more comfortable than the regular "ironing board" due to having a contoured rather than flat base. Moquette rather than flat cloth in a classy grey with green highlighting. Perhaps a little close to the sidewall (though there is a spacer). Legroom excellent in the airline seats (partly due to some clever niches in the back which unlike many such designs are actually where a typical tall male's knees go rather than in the middle) but a little tight in the facing ones. Overall verdict - better than the 150 or 153 by some margin, and TBH far better than the Class 800 too, not that that takes much doing, though not quite as good as a 350/1.

agree with that. I will add the inward facing seats at the very end of the carriage are snug to say the least up against the glass partition. I didn't have time to try a table seat so will feedback on that later. the airline style seats seem very good.

I don't *think* they actually do have aircon (ref comments above) but the existing forced-air ventilation system they had on the Tube. TfW have specced it on theirs though. Staff did mention it being a little warm earlier on. I do wonder if they might end up fitting hoppers to the "small" windows where the doors were.

no aircon - there is "air cooling" apparently. That seems an oversight to me. There were small hopper windows at the end of the carriage but they will offer little ventilation.

Door operation is really, really slow - like worse than a 350 slow. This will need some changes and is almost certainly one of the causes (there were, it seems, several) for losing time today. I know they slowed it down deliberately, but I think it does need speeding up a little. Conventional guarded operation is being used as expected (with 3 guards today - two in training I think!) including opening the local door first, which combined with the slow doors means it's about 15-20 seconds from stop to release. This will need sorting out if there is to be a real gain here. Given the short trains which are never longer than the platform, I wonder if a SWT-style approach could be used, with no need to step out?

I noticed this. I put it down to staff getting to know the new equipment but it was VERY slow. It also seemed to take the guards a bit of time to open the connecting door between the carriages. I had a lot of LNWR "suits" on my train so everyone was having a good look at every operation!

Not noisy at all, though you can tell it's a DMU when idling. Once above 20mph or so, it just sounds like a Merseyrail EMU or similar

i am not into all this noise appreciation that people here seem to love but the train was very quiet indeed and did sound like an EMU to me. None of the throb and trhum you expect with a DMU. It was also very quiet on pull away form my local station. No need to rev the pants of it like the drivers seem to have to do with the 150/153

Acceleration good - and I'm told that one of the reasons for the delays is that it's an engine out on one coach

the difference between this unit and the 150/153 in pull away speed at Blethcley was noticeable. Very much similar to an EMU and very impressive.

A general spacious feel - but not surprising as they are quite wide.

there seemed to be lots of space inside with large circulating spaces near the doors. Even the toilet end seemed less cramped than the 153 toilet end and the aisle space was much improved over the 150

No overhead luggage racks but space between some seat backs, and a trolley case wouldn't really block the very wide aisle. Not that big luggage is common on this service.

it should not be a problem on the Vale but it did strike me as perhaps short sighted if they are to be used somewhere busier.

Credit to Mr Jessup (who I know I've criticised in the past) for the "local facts" interior etc, it does look quite good. I really think branch lines thrive on local interest and association, and the dedicated nature of these units allow for this. Perhaps a nice addition would be, once they are named

Agreed! I really liked the internal "fact sheets" and the use of the tube advertising spaces to display them. Lots of information about the line and the history of the area. The artwork on the toilet doors was also a really nice touch.