• Our new ticketing site is now live! Using either this or the original site (both 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.

fairysdad

Member
Joined
27 Dec 2010
Messages
943
Location
London, Surrey... bit of a blur round here...
There's a picture on the small article in this month's (September) Railway Magazine with the caption 'One of the possible interior seating combinations'. Now, aside from the fact that it's unlikely to have an exterior seating combination <D , isn't the picture shown just a normal D-stock interior with no changes made?
 
Sponsor Post - registered members do not see these adverts; click here to register, or click here to log in
R

RailUK Forums

158756

Established Member
Joined
12 Aug 2014
Messages
1,564
Clare Perry confirmed in parliament today D-Trains will not be used by the next Northern franchise.

Can she confirm that? If they are the cheapest option on the table and the bid is compliant with the ITT surely they have to be used.

The MEN article quoted on page 152 quotes Shooter as saying there is 'quite a good possibility' of them being used in Manchester, and Alex Hynes as having no doubt they will be successful.
 

61653 HTAFC

Veteran Member
Joined
18 Dec 2012
Messages
18,575
Location
Yorkshire
Clare Perry confirmed in parliament today D-Trains will not be used by the next Northern franchise.

Can she confirm that? If they are the cheapest option on the table and the bid is compliant with the ITT surely they have to be used.

The MEN article quoted on page 152 quotes Shooter as saying there is 'quite a good possibility' of them being used in Manchester, and Alex Hynes as having no doubt they will be successful.

This is disappointing to be honest. Whilst flooding the North with these things isn't the right idea, neither is arbitrarily ruling them out of areas where they could be of use, in a vain attempt to curry more votes/positive headlines. Wakefield to Huddersfield is a regular journey for me, and I've absolutely no problem with the idea of making that journey on a former underground train. In fact it would make me MORE likely to do that journey by rail than the current options of either a pacer or whatever Yorkshire Tiger throw out.
 

nuneatonmark

Member
Joined
5 Aug 2014
Messages
483
I find it astonishing that in this day and age when we are trying to recycle more that anyone would discount this option before one has even run, as a cheap, viable, environmentally friendly way of getting more trains on to our network. If the trains turn out to be comfortable, reliable and suitable for the use they are put to why would we give a monkeys if the shells used to be tube trains? I would happily have 3/4 of them providing a regular service on the Warwickshire 'metro' service between Nuneaton and Coventry/Leamington instead of a single dog box.
 

northwichcat

Veteran Member
Joined
23 Jan 2009
Messages
32,692
Location
Northwich
Can she confirm that? If they are the cheapest option on the table and the bid is compliant with the ITT surely they have to be used.

But D-Trains didn't meet the ITT spec.

The ITT spec said units currently used by Northern (but not Pacers beyond 2019), 15xs and 17xs freed up by other franchises, new build stock (including IPEMU) and loco-hauled stock were options for non-electrified lines, as well as 185s loaned from TPE.

Vivarail kept arguing the D-Train counted as new build stock as long as they were in addition to 120 proper new build but it doesn't seem DfT agreed.
 

JonathanH

Veteran Member
Joined
29 May 2011
Messages
21,200
I find it astonishing that in this day and age when we are trying to recycle more that anyone would discount this option before one has even run, as a cheap, viable, environmentally friendly way of getting more trains on to our network. If the trains turn out to be comfortable, reliable and suitable for the use they are put to why would we give a monkeys if the shells used to be tube trains? I would happily have 3/4 of them providing a regular service on the Warwickshire 'metro' service between Nuneaton and Coventry/Leamington instead of a single dog box.

That must be the point. If they could be used to improve the frequency of services at a lower cost (or provide an additional service) then they should be welcomed. Having them run the existing service between Southport and Manchester Airport is a completely different matter to them being used to establish a higher frequency and more capacity between Coventry and Nuneaton. There must be places in the Northern area where something similar would apply.
 

Bletchleyite

Veteran Member
Joined
20 Oct 2014
Messages
104,394
Location
"Marston Vale mafia"
That must be the point. If they could be used to improve the frequency of services at a lower cost (or provide an additional service) then they should be welcomed.

Or more importantly capacity. If the choice is between one two-car 170 or two three-car D78s, I can't see any reason not to choose the latter on a regional route.

Northern has a terrible overcrowding problem that needs solving soon, and unlike the South East the only thing required to solve it is a load of DMUs. D78s provide a low-cost way to get that solved.
 

northwichcat

Veteran Member
Joined
23 Jan 2009
Messages
32,692
Location
Northwich
Well, he would say that, wouldn't he...<(

Indeed. He also said

"You will have to ask Northern Rail what they think, but they were pretty impressed by what they saw. I think they are right for Manchester - but we only have enough to make 75 trains and they will soon be sold."

So he makes it sound like they are a suitable option for Northern but other operators might get there first, not that they don't meet the requirements set out in the ITT and other operators are the only option for Vivarail. He also doesn't mention about them being 60mph trains with Northern's paths being for 75mph or 90mph running or that they'd be too wide for some tunnels like one on the Buxton line.

Surely Vivarail must have know for months if none of the Northern Rail bids have included D-Trains?
 
Last edited by a moderator:

Xenophon PCDGS

Veteran Member
Joined
17 Apr 2011
Messages
34,066
Location
A typical commuter-belt part of north-west England
That must be the point. If they could be used to improve the frequency of services at a lower cost (or provide an additional service) then they should be welcomed. Having them run the existing service between Southport and Manchester Airport is a completely different matter to them being used to establish a higher frequency and more capacity between Coventry and Nuneaton. There must be places in the Northern area where something similar would apply.

What on earth do people have against the Southport to Manchester Airport route, which is not a short distance journey by any means. For far too long, examples of "Newton Heath's Finest" aka Class 142 were the units most often found upon this route and now to add insult to injury, there are those living miles away from it and never be likely to travel upon it making blasé suggestions that "Shooter's Incubus" aka Class 230 would be the ideal replacements.
 

northwichcat

Veteran Member
Joined
23 Jan 2009
Messages
32,692
Location
Northwich
What on earth do people have against the Southport to Manchester Airport route, which is not a short distance journey by any means. For far too long, examples of "Newton Heath's Finest" aka Class 142 were the units most often found upon this route and now to add insult to injury, there are those living miles away from it and never be likely to travel upon it making blasé suggestions that "Shooter's Incubus" aka Class 230 would be the ideal replacements.

Presumably they are trying to get back at Southport MP John Pugh after his long running campaign for the next Northern franchise to be Pacer free was successful after Nick Clegg backed his campaign and then got Cameron, Osborne and McLoughlin on side. Some people seem very angry that the worst trains in the country will be scrapped.
 
Last edited by a moderator:

northwichcat

Veteran Member
Joined
23 Jan 2009
Messages
32,692
Location
Northwich
How many two-car Class 170 units are envisaged to be cascaded into the area of the Northern Rail franchise?

There's 29 x 3 car 170s available which could be reformed in to 2 and 4 car sets if the franchise winner decides to. (Although they would finish up with one 3 car set unless they release a centre carriage to another operator or acquire a centre carriage from another operator.)
 

Xenophon PCDGS

Veteran Member
Joined
17 Apr 2011
Messages
34,066
Location
A typical commuter-belt part of north-west England
But D-Trains didn't meet the ITT spec.

The ITT spec said units currently used by Northern (but not Pacers beyond 2019), 15xs and 17xs freed up by other franchises, new build stock (including IPEMU) and loco-hauled stock were options for non-electrified lines, as well as 185s loaned from TPE.

I fear that despite your excellent educational postings that inform those from other franchise areas about the ITT specification NOT being met by the Class 230 units and repeated statements from those in high areas of Government ministries making statements in the House, to the same effect, we do appear to have certain forum members who assume that their long-held support for the Shooter "cheap and cheerful" product will overcome all statements to the opposite.
 

D365

Veteran Member
Joined
29 Jun 2012
Messages
12,175
(Although they would finish up with one 3 car set unless they release a centre carriage to another operator or acquire a centre carriage from another operator.)

I seem to remember that, by virtue of the Chiltern/Southern-proposed Turbostar fleet reforms, that one of the plans will end up with a spare intermediate carriage.
--- old post above --- --- new post below ---
I fear that despite your excellent educational postings that inform those from other franchise areas about the ITT specification NOT being met by the Class 230 units and repeated statements from those in high areas of Government ministries making statements in the House, to the same effect, we do appear to have certain forum members who assume that their long-held support for the Shooter "cheap and cheerful" product will overcome all statements to the opposite.

They might be cheap(er), in a time where the next franchise is looking to reduce costs, but the 'cheerful' depends on what sort of interior any potential operator will order.
 

Xenophon PCDGS

Veteran Member
Joined
17 Apr 2011
Messages
34,066
Location
A typical commuter-belt part of north-west England
Indeed. He also said....."You will have to ask Northern Rail what they think, but they were pretty impressed by what they saw. I think they are right for Manchester - but we only have enough to make 75 trains and they will soon be sold."

Did he go on to say that after the ATW interest and other similar expressions, exactly the number of firm order commitment that have been actually lodged with Vivarail?

Such comments of that type made by Shooter are usually made by companies when expected sales have not met the budgeted sales forecasts.
 

67018

Member
Joined
14 Dec 2012
Messages
459
Location
Oxfordshire
What on earth do people have against the Southport to Manchester Airport route, which is not a short distance journey by any means. For far too long, examples of "Newton Heath's Finest" aka Class 142 were the units most often found upon this route and now to add insult to injury, there are those living miles away from it and never be likely to travel upon it making blasé suggestions that "Shooter's Incubus" aka Class 230 would be the ideal replacements.

Hang on - I read the quoted post to imply the opposite: that Southport to Manchester Airport was an example of where they would *not* be appropriate, compared to a Nuneaton to Coventry shuttle or some other equivalent elsewhere ("a completely different matter").

Maybe we're getting a bit over-sensitive on this thread...
 

kieron

Established Member
Joined
22 Mar 2012
Messages
3,189
Location
Connah's Quay
Clare Perry confirmed in parliament today D-Trains will not be used by the next Northern franchise.
Do you have a quote for this? I know she's said before that they can't be used for the 120 carriages, so I'm wondering if this is meant to be a new announcement. Obviously the ITT says what it says, but we don't know what discussions have gone on between the government and the bidders since then.
 
Last edited:

Bletchleyite

Veteran Member
Joined
20 Oct 2014
Messages
104,394
Location
"Marston Vale mafia"
They might be cheap(er), in a time where the next franchise is looking to reduce costs, but the 'cheerful' depends on what sort of interior any potential operator will order.

Having seen the levels of overcrowding on Northern local services around Manchester as well as many TPE services, even the LUL D-stock interior with no modification would be an improvement if the stock was additional to what is there now. Capacity, capacity, capacity. Now, and as much as can be afforded. Once we've sorted that, we can then make things nice as and when money is available.
--- old post above --- --- new post below ---
How many two-car Class 170 units are envisaged to be cascaded into the area of the Northern Rail franchise?

That is of no significance. D-stock is cheaper than 170s. You could therefore, for the same amount of money, have more D-stock than you could have 170s. You won't solve the capacity issue by buying expensive, fancy stock. You will solve it by buying *much more* basic stock.
 

northwichcat

Veteran Member
Joined
23 Jan 2009
Messages
32,692
Location
Northwich
Do you have a quote for this? I know she's said before that they can't be used for the 120 carriages, so I'm wondering if this is meant to be a new announcement. Obviously the ITT says what it says, but we don't know what discussions have gone on between the government and the bidders since then.

Claire Perry said:
I can assure Members that the current franchise negotiations for the northern and TPE routes will be transformational for passengers in the north. Train capacity into major cities will increase by 30%. There will be brand-new trains, not the Pacers and not reworked tube rolling stock. Existing trains will be fully modernised. There will be £30 million of northern station investment funds. I could go on. The franchise negotiations will transform travel in the north and change passenger experiences from among the worst to some of the best in the country.

http://www.publications.parliament.uk/pa/cm201516/cmhansrd/cm150916/halltext/150916h0001.htm
--- old post above --- --- new post below ---
That is of no significance. D-stock is cheaper than 170s. You could therefore, for the same amount of money, have more D-stock than you could have 170s. You won't solve the capacity issue by buying expensive, fancy stock. You will solve it by buying *much more* basic stock.

Northern wouldn't buy 170s (which will actually be up to 20 years old by the time Northern could get hold of some), they would be leased from Porterbrook.

The 170s would be versatile enough to go anywhere and they can run in multiple with Sprinters. With D-Trains you get short carriages so you'd need longer formations to carry the same number of passengers. They also can't run in multiple with anything else and with D-Trains being slower you might also need more diagrams and consequently more trains and crews so using D-Trains may not provide the savings Vivarail are claiming they would bring.
--- old post above --- --- new post below ---
Rolling stock requirements for next Anglia franchise:

Only the following rolling stock may be proposed by Bidders for inclusion within
the East Anglia Train Fleet:
i. The rolling stock that is comprised within the East Anglia Train Fleet at the
date of issuing this ITT;
ii. Diesel multiple units that are leased by a relevant operator other than the
current Greater Anglia Franchisee at the date of issuing this ITT but that will
be demonstrably surplus to the requirements of that operator, either because
new rolling stock is being procured to replace it, or because other rolling
stock is due to be cascaded to replace it or because the Bidder proposes to
release suitable replacement stock from the East Anglia Franchise to that
operator which must be capable of delivering comparable or better
performance characteristics and/or better level of passengers' satisfaction
with the quality of rolling stock;
iii. Electric multiple units, locomotives, driving van trailers and coaching stock of
any class that are leased by a relevant operator other than the current
Greater Anglia Franchisee at the date of issuing this ITT and that either:
(a) Will be demonstrably surplus to the requirements of that franchisee
because new rolling stock is being procured to replace it or because
other rolling stock is due to be cascaded to replace it or because the
Bidder proposes to release suitable replacement stock from the East
Anglia Franchise to that operator; or
(b) Will not be demonstrably surplus to the requirements of that operator,
but the Bidder can demonstrate that it will be feasible for that operator
to secure alternative rolling stock in sufficient time to enable that
operator to maintain the operation of its train services to at least current
standards. Such alternative rolling stock must be capable of delivering
comparable or better operational performance characteristics, and of
achieving comparable or better levels of passenger satisfaction with the
quality of rolling stock. For these purposes the Bidder must demonstrate
68
that it has allowed an appropriate lead time for any modifications that
may be needed to the alternative rolling stock to enable it to meet the
stated operational and quality requirements, for the training of drivers,
and a reasonable contingency margin;
iv. Electric multiple units, diesel multiple units, locomotives, driving van trailers
and coaching stock of any class that are not leased at the date of issuing this
ITT by any Relevant Operator; and
v. Any new-build rolling stock that the Bidder commits to procure.

That doesn't seem to rule out D-Trains or ePacers.
 

kieron

Established Member
Joined
22 Mar 2012
Messages
3,189
Location
Connah's Quay
I don't think anyone will be able to say the government hasn't delivered on that particular quote if we get to whenever it is in 2020 and the Northern franchise has at least 3 new trains in service.
The 170s would be versatile enough to go anywhere and they can run in multiple with Sprinters.
They're not that versatile given their lack of end gangways and their singular performance characteristics.
 

sd0733

Established Member
Joined
7 Nov 2012
Messages
4,617
The East Anglian branches would seem a hugely logical place to send the '230s'. There is a huge shortage of units down there so they could get units to entirely replace the 153s/156s and hired in 37s/158. With the 15xs released to EMT/Northern or whoever and the 170s on Ipswich-Cambridge/Peterboroughs. That would mean the coupling issues would be irrelevant and could have a massive increase in capacity/frequency there where required. Also I cant see any of the Lowestoft/Yarmouth/Felixstowe/Lowestoft lines have much if any 60mph+ running on them. The only issue could be the large amount of crossings, the collision a few years ago of the 156 and sewerage tanker may have been different if a 230 had been involved.
 
Last edited:

northwichcat

Veteran Member
Joined
23 Jan 2009
Messages
32,692
Location
Northwich
I don't think anyone will be able to say the government hasn't delivered on that particular quote if we get to whenever it is in 2020 and the Northern franchise has at least 3 new trains in service.

The debate was actually Midland Mainline electrification but she didn't want to respond to Harry Harpham just with bad news, so she diverted off on to investment for the Northern and TPE franchises, where she was able to repeat things which Patrick McLoughlin had already said last year when announcing the Northern ITT. On the day he launched the ITT a journalist asked McLoughlin if old Underground trains could be used and he responded with a firm 'no.' I've pointed this out before but it seems no-one believes the word of Tory MP 3 months before an election.
 

WatcherZero

Established Member
Joined
25 Feb 2010
Messages
10,272
While the actual product is questionable you've got to admire Vivarails marketing department, total media saturation and keeping it in magazines and newspapers week after week.
 

90sWereBetter

Member
Joined
13 Nov 2012
Messages
1,044
Location
Lost somewhere within Bank-Monument tube station,
The East Anglian branches would seem a hugely logical place to send the '230s'. There is a huge shortage of units down there so they could get units to entirely replace the 153s/156s and hired in 37s/158. With the 15xs released to EMT/Northern or whoever and the 170s on Ipswich-Cambridge/Peterboroughs. That would mean the coupling issues would be irrelevant and could have a massive increase in capacity/frequency there where required. Also I cant see any of the Lowestoft/Yarmouth/Felixstowe/Lowestoft lines have much if any 60mph+ running on them. The only issue could be the large amount of crossings, the collision a few years ago of the 156 and sewerage tanker may have been different if a 230 had been involved.

The Wherry Lines and the East Suffolk line only ever get up to 60mph, so no problems there. Felixstowe could be an issue though, as the section between Derby Road and Trimley is 75mph, unless this much-mooted doubling project ever comes to fruition.
 
Status
Not open for further replies.

Top