• 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!

Transport for Wales Class 230

CaergwrleKen

Member
Joined
2 Oct 2019
Messages
151
Location
Caergwrle
230 gone awol again after being 30 minutes late on the 1135 from Wrexham today. Sorry to report again i’m not trying to be negative so if anyone feels that it’s not necessary then i will stop. Wow obviously people are fed up with it all now because it’s been tucked away in a different topic area
 
Last edited:
Sponsor Post - registered members do not see these adverts; click here to register, or click here to log in
R

RailUK Forums

Woods

Member
Joined
3 Sep 2021
Messages
145
Location
Banbury
Where has the TFW 230 disappeared to? Looks like everyone is fed up with them now?
The thread is still there (bottom of page 4) and appears to have been locked by the moderators for further comments.

How has the service been in the last 10 days, dare I ask?
 

DLAYKEGER

Member
Joined
21 Mar 2023
Messages
118
Location
Heswall
The rest of the thread has been moved to the speculative threads. Probably best to keep this thread to just report about 230 issues or their excellent performance
 

CaergwrleKen

Member
Joined
2 Oct 2019
Messages
151
Location
Caergwrle
The thread is still there (bottom of page 4) and appears to have been locked by the moderators for further comments.

How has the service been in the last 10 days, dare I ask?

Failed last two days at least, Yesterday only the last 230 trip was missed i think after a full day of late running and a couple of journeys into Central missed, todays went missing after the 1135 from Wrexham arrived at Bidston 30 mins late. A new unit came out of Birkenhead at 1635.
 

Woods

Member
Joined
3 Sep 2021
Messages
145
Location
Banbury
Failed last two days at least, Yesterday only the last 230 trip was missed i think after a full day of late running and a couple of journeys into Central missed, todays went missing after the 1135 from Wrexham arrived at Bidston 30 mins late. A new unit came out of Birkenhead at 1635.
Is it possible to differentiate between:

a) Planned withdrawal of units / unit swaps during the day which don't give rise to cancellations? My understanding is that TfW are doing a lot of this to try at present to manage an issue with heat gradually building up inside the battery rafts (causing them to shut down) which they are currently trying to understand. I don't think these should count as 'failures'.

b) Unplanned genuine failures in service which cause cancellations, bustitution and inconvenience to passengers.

I also understand that the gensets have suddenly and out of the blue suffered a glut of radiator fatigue failures which has resulted in a temporary shortage of spares, so I think they're trying to manage that one as well.

Is it also possible to say that the late running is exclusively the preserve of the 230s, and doesn't affect the 150s as well?
 

tomuk

Established Member
Joined
15 May 2010
Messages
2,009
a) Planned withdrawal of units / unit swaps during the day which don't give rise to cancellations? My understanding is that TfW are doing a lot of this to try at present to manage an issue with heat gradually building up inside the battery rafts (causing them to shut down) which they are currently trying to understand. I don't think these should count as 'failures'.
So is this new? Because the reason given for the set swaps previously was pollen blocking the rads.
 
Joined
1 Dec 2022
Messages
192
Location
Lancashire
Is it also possible to say that the late running is exclusively the preserve of the 230s, and doesn't affect the 150s as well?

The turnaround times at both ends of the line are that tight that any delay incurred by either a 150 or a 230 can't really be recovered from.

Here's a 150 that was operating yesterday, arrived into Wrexham Central 5L and departed again 6L. Don't know what caused the initial delay but on the inbound it departed Hawarden 2L, progressively getting later and couldn't catch back up.

https://www.realtimetrains.co.uk/service/gb-nr:V16603/2023-07-12/detailed#allox_id=0
[A link to real time trains that shows a late running 150 operating 2J56 BID to WXC on 12/07/23]

https://www.realtimetrains.co.uk/service/gb-nr:V16591/2023-07-12/detailed#allox_id=0
[A link to real time trains that shows a late running 150 operating 2F62 WXC to BID on 12/07/23].

I was using the borderlands line before the 230s commenced operations and it was struggling to keep to it's timetable then (a few of my trains were as late as 20 minutes), so I'd suggest it's not just the units that are causing issues along the line (even though they are causing a lot of issues currently), but also the very short turnaround times that don't allow for any recovery of delays.

[Edit: Typos]
 
Last edited:

CaergwrleKen

Member
Joined
2 Oct 2019
Messages
151
Location
Caergwrle
Is it possible to differentiate between:

a) Planned withdrawal of units / unit swaps during the day which don't give rise to cancellations? My understanding is that TfW are doing a lot of this to try at present to manage an issue with heat gradually building up inside the battery rafts (causing them to shut down) which they are currently trying to understand. I don't think these should count as 'failures'.

b) Unplanned genuine failures in service which cause cancellations, bustitution and inconvenience to passengers.

I also understand that the gensets have suddenly and out of the blue suffered a glut of radiator fatigue failures which has resulted in a temporary shortage of spares, so I think they're trying to manage that one as well.

Is it also possible to say that the late running is exclusively the preserve of the 230s, and doesn't affect the 150s as well?

What do we count as a failure then? They are currently doing two diagrams to cover not even a full day, one works empty from Birkenhead does 0730-1530 ex Wrexham then goes back to Birkenhead at 1640, the other one does a trip or two for training in the morning then goes back to Birkenhead and takes over the diagram from Bidston at 1635 until 1940 at Wrexham then runs empty back to Birkenhead meanwhile the poor 150 is getting flogged from early morning until after midnight, it rarely fails and keeps more or less to time in fact the recent 150 delays are usually because it’s stuck behind the 230.

We have established that there are battery, engine and door issues also bad leaking water has been reported with them but I’m not sure what you mean by not counting these as failures when they obviously are. TfW are just getting what they can out of them at the moment which is making the timetable very unreliable. Issues again today with late running and skipping Central and even the full route which is pointless. It seems like we are just going to go back to square one with this discussion, some people will make any excuses for them and never accept they aren’t fit for purpose. People are losing their jobs and moving to other towns because of the service and nothing looks like it will change. I won’t be wasting my time anymore.
 
Last edited:

Phil from Mon

Member
Joined
28 Nov 2014
Messages
403
Location
Beaumaris, Ynys Môn
Originally posted in the Speculative thread.

Going back to the 230s, as I understand it one of the problems is with pollen clogging the filters on the diesel engine. Now, pollen has been around for millions of years, and diesel engines on road, rail, and marine (even in the air in at least one instance) for over 100 years, and this does not seem to have been a problem before except in a very few cases which by now should be well understood. The filters in car engines are low down and presumably as exposed to pollen as on anything else, so what is the specific fault with the 230s?
 

tomuk

Established Member
Joined
15 May 2010
Messages
2,009
Which in turn causes the overheating.
So its the rad for the water cooled? battery packs rather than the rads for the diesel generators?

Originally posted in the Speculative thread.

Going back to the 230s, as I understand it one of the problems is with pollen clogging the filters on the diesel engine. Now, pollen has been around for millions of years, and diesel engines on road, rail, and marine (even in the air in at least one instance) for over 100 years, and this does not seem to have been a problem before except in a very few cases which by now should be well understood. The filters in car engines are low down and presumably as exposed to pollen as on anything else, so what is the specific fault with the 230s?
It isn't unusual for trains to have issues with pollen and the like blocking their radiators\intercoolers. Unlike a car or lorry where the radiator is at the front in the full air stream on a train it is underneath at the side in the slipstream. Hitachi have had issues with the 80x diesel generators overheating as have other stock. In some cases modifications have been required after introduction or a more in depth\regular cleaning regime is instituted during summer months. Other stock can usually last through a day though unlike at appears the 230s.
 
Last edited:

Woods

Member
Joined
3 Sep 2021
Messages
145
Location
Banbury
The pollen was only affecting the gensets on the TfW 230s for a period of about 3 weeks. It's gone away now. There was a fix for this on the WMT 230s which had the same problems during 2019 but I can't remember what it was now. The pollen very rapidly creates a very thick 'mat' which blocks the air filters and then leads to the gensets overheating. In the short term during 'pollen season' the only thing that an operator can do is to implement a higher frequency cleaning regime, which is what TfW were doing. I'm almost certain that operators of other diesel trains have had similar problems in the past.

The temperature build-up inside the battery rafts has nothing to do with pollen. The temperature is gradually building up during the day. The battery rafts have no forced cooling, it was never thought necessary on account of the low charge rates in the diesel/battery hybrid architecture. The cells are in a sealed steel box (same shape and size as a genset) but with no venting, because Vivarail didn't think it would be necessary to force cool them. The charge rates involved shouldn't require forced cooling, but there is something odd going on. TfW are working with Valence (the battery manufacturer) and a couple of ex-Vivarail Engineers who were involved in the design of the battery rafts to get to the bottom of it. Apparently if the internal temp of the battery rafts start at around 17 degrees C in the morning, the units can get through the day without the battery rafts shutting down. The problem is that when they get to 23-24C, they shut down, and then they don't lose enough heat overnight when the units are stabled. One solution might be to force cool them overnight in the depot. My pet theory is that with the gensets constantly charging the batteries (gensets were supposed to shut down in urban areas via the 'geofencing' system but this isn't being done at the moment because TfW are too nervous about shutting down the gensets for fear that they might not start up again), and then the batteries getting balance charged in the depot overnight as well, and charging creates heat, I think they may be charging the batteries a bit too often.

The leaking radiators on the diesel gensets seem to be a fatigue failure and again, TfW are trying to understand why so many of them failed so rapidly. Maybe it's something to do with the radiator mounts, who knows. In the meantime the issue is being managed by getting the radiators repaired or renewed.

With regards to the doors, on the official timing runs the units were able to easily meet the timetable. I'm told the drivers are generally just not driving the units aggressively enough. Cue angry responses.....don't shoot me, I'm just the messenger....

And as others have said, the 150s can't keep time comfortably either, so let's not blame that entirely on the 230s.

Yes, TfW are having to 'nurse' these units at the moment, which is rubbish. And I accept that the hardcore Vivarail-haters will never be satisfied. But there is nothing fundamentally wrong with the units, and I believe that good engineering will eventually overcome the issues.

By the way, here is a little home truth. TfW originally paid £17.5m to Vivarail for the units. They then paid consultants to find every possible reason to not accept the units into service, to mess about with dozens of variation orders, to change their minds multiple times on the maintenance location and strategy, rather than signing a maintenance deal with Vivarail as per the terms of the original 2018 Manufacturing and Services Agreement (MSA) and just letting Vivarail get on with it, as was the original plan. At one point TfW even tried to tender the maintenance to a third party, which of course TfW will claim was their right to do, but it was totally against the spirit of the MSA ("anyone but Vivarail"), but surprise surprise no third party was interested, so they ended up paying Vivarail through the nose for a short-term maintenance deal which was a lot more expensive than what they'd originally signed up to. Whoops. Talk about reaping what you sow. So the additional £12.5m which TfW has spent on the units to get to the price tag of £30m where we are today was entirely due to mismanagement, indecision and incompetence on the part of TfW. And consequently, the lack of income and certainty from the maintenance deal, plus the hundreds of thousands which Vivarail had to spend to try and counter TfW's stop-the-job consultant-led culture and contractual wriggling, was a factor in Vivarail's bankruptcy, and also severely delayed the introduction of the units into service, which quite frankly could have started in 2020. Of course, none of this was reported in the letter from James Price to the Senedd. The full truth will probably never be told.

What do we count as a failure then? They are currently doing two diagrams to cover not even a full day, one works empty from Birkenhead does 0730-1530 ex Wrexham then goes back to Birkenhead at 1640, the other one does a trip or two for training in the morning then goes back to Birkenhead and takes over the diagram from Bidston at 1635 until 1940 at Wrexham then runs empty back to Birkenhead meanwhile the poor 150 is getting flogged from early morning until after midnight, it rarely fails and keeps more or less to time in fact the recent 150 delays are usually because it’s stuck behind the 230.

We have established that there are battery, engine and door issues also bad leaking water has been reported with them but I’m not sure what you mean by not counting these as failures when they obviously are. TfW are just getting what they can out of them at the moment which is making the timetable very unreliable. Issues again today with late running and skipping Central and even the full route which is pointless. It seems like we are just going to go back to square one with this discussion, some people will make any excuses for them and never accept they aren’t fit for purpose. People are losing their jobs and moving to other towns because of the service and nothing looks like it will change. I won’t be wasting my time anymore.
I am merely trying to explain the facts of what is going on. Not making excuses for it. It is all rather a sorry situation, it cannot be denied. The users of the Borders Line deserve much better.
 

Snow1964

Established Member
Joined
7 Oct 2019
Messages
8,156
Location
West Wiltshire
North Wales MS Mark Isherwood highlighted the unreliability of the Transport for Wales (TfW) ‘Class 230’ train service between Wrexham and Bidtson in the Senedd this week and called on the Welsh Government to work to address it. ‌‌‌‌‌‌‍‌‌‌‌‌‍‌‌‌‌‌

Following months of disruptions on the Borderlands Line due to a shortage of rolling stock, TfW introduced the Class 230 trains after years of delays. ‌‌‌‌‌‌‍‌‌‌‌‌‍‌‌‌‌‌

The Class 230s are a fleet of five hybrid diesel/battery trains which use the bogies and aluminium bodyshells of withdrawn London Underground trains. ‌‌‌‌‌‌‍‌‌‌‌‌‍‌‌‌‌‌ ‌‌‌‌‌‌‍‌‌‌‌‌‍‌‌‌‌‌

TfW purchased them for the Wrexham to Bidston line to fulfil a short-term commitment of increasing the number of services on the line, woith a view to eventually delivering a half-hourly service. ‌‌‌‌‌‍‌‌‌‌‌‍‌‌‌‌‌ ‌‌‌‌‌‌‍‌‌‌‌‌‍‌‌‌‌‌

The trains were intended to come into service in 2019 but were blighted by delays due to the pandemic and technical issues. ‌‌‌‌‌‌‍‌‌‌‌‌‍‌‌‌‌‌

TfW finally bit the bullet and introduced the Class 230s on the Borderlands Line – a vital route through Flintshire to Wrexham and the Wirral – in early April. ‌‌‌‌‌‌‍‌‌‌‌‌‍‌‌‌‌‌

Since then the units have struggled with reliability and adhering to the hourly timetable with multiple breakdowns and cancellations of services. ‌‌‌‌‌‌‍‌‌‌‌‌‍‌‌‌‌‌ ‌‌‌‌‌‌‍‌‌‌‌‌‍‌‌‌‌‌

In March, rail user group The Wrexham Bidston Rail User Association (WBRUA) has expressed significant concerns regarding the management and operation of the line by Transport for Wales (TfW) and has said it should be handed over to Merseyrail. ‌‌‌‌‌‌‍‌‌‌‌‌‍‌‌‌‌‌ ‌‌‌‌‌‌‍‌‌‌‌‌‍‌‌‌‌‌

In response, the Deputy Minister responsible for transport Lee Waters said it is “important” the Welsh government “faces the music” over criticism around the Wrexham to Bidston railway line as the situation for passengers in recent months has been “awful.” ‌‌‌‌‌‌‍‌‌‌‌‌‍‌‌‌‌‌

Transport for Wales has now made a series of commitments under its ‘5 step plan’ which includes improving the reliability of the new Class 230 trains ‘through investment into the new depot at Birkenhead.” ‌‌‌‌‌‌‍‌‌‌‌‌‍‌‌‌‌‌

A dedicated route officer has also been appointed “to delve deep into the issues on the line.” ‌‌‌‌‌‌‍‌‌‌‌‌‍‌‌‌‌‌

Nonetheless, even after the 5-step plan was put into action, the service on the line has been experiencing disruptions almost daily and appears to be unable to maintain an hourly service. ‌‌‌‌‌‌‍‌‌‌‌‌‍‌‌‌‌‌

Concerns about the Wrexham Bidston line were brought up during a meeting of the Welsh Parliament on Wednesday. ‌‌‌‌‌‌‍‌‌‌‌‌‍‌‌‌‌‌

Mark Isherwood questioned the Minister for Rural Affairs and North Wales, Lesley Griffiths MS, despite the Chief Executive of Transport for Wales stating the Class 230 trains “have generally been operating reliably.” ‌‌‌‌‌‌‍‌‌‌‌‌‍‌‌‌‌‌

He said: “Growth Track 360, as you know, is the public-private partnership, uniting north Wales, the Wirral, and Cheshire West and Chester, working to improve cross-border transport connectivity, with specific emphasis on rail.” ‌‌‌‌‌‌‍‌‌‌‌‌‍‌‌‌‌‌

“After local concerns about poor service delivery and delays to the introduction of the long-promised half-hourly service on the Wrexham-Bidston line required them to make representations to the Welsh Government, they welcomed the commitment from Welsh Government and Transport for Wales to improve services on the borderlands line.” ‌‌‌‌‌‌‍‌‌‌‌‌‍‌‌‌‌‌

Mr Isherwood said: “However, how will you engage with Welsh Government colleagues regarding the concern expressed to me by the Wrexham-Bidston Rail Users’ Association about the statement made to me by the chief executive of Transport for Wales that the class 230 trains have generally been operating reliably, and the major technical issues seem to have been resolved, where they instead state that the continuing unreliability of the class 230s and their inability to keep scheduled time throughout their full-day’s diagrams, suggest that this units will be unable to maintain an hourly service this summer, still less operate a 30-minute frequency in the autumn?” ‌‌‌‌‌‌‍‌‌‌‌‌‍‌‌‌‌‌

In response, Lesley Griffiths MS said: The new class 230 train did begin on the Wrexham to Bidston line on 3 April, and I think it’s again very fair to say that there were some very disappointing delays bringing them into service.” ‌‌‌‌‌‌‍‌‌‌‌‌‍‌‌‌‌‌

“And I know that Transport for Wales had to rigorously ensure the train’s safety and reliability following incidents during initial testing.” ‌‌‌‌‌‌‍‌‌‌‌‌‍‌‌‌‌‌

“The reliability of those trains has to be Transport for Wales’s focus going forward, and I know they’ve invested in the Birkenhead depot, and trains no longer have to travel to Chester for service and repair, which I think is a very positive move.” ‌‌‌‌‌‌‍‌‌‌‌‌‍‌‌‌‌‌

 

Prime586

Member
Joined
26 May 2023
Messages
182
Location
Knowsley
The temperature build-up inside the battery rafts has nothing to do with pollen. The temperature is gradually building up during the day. The battery rafts have no forced cooling, it was never thought necessary on account of the low charge rates in the diesel/battery hybrid architecture. The cells are in a sealed steel box (same shape and size as a genset) but with no venting, because Vivarail didn't think it would be necessary to force cool them. The charge rates involved shouldn't require forced cooling, but there is something odd going on. TfW are working with Valence (the battery manufacturer) and a couple of ex-Vivarail Engineers who were involved in the design of the battery rafts to get to the bottom of it. Apparently if the internal temp of the battery rafts start at around 17 degrees C in the morning, the units can get through the day without the battery rafts shutting down. The problem is that when they get to 23-24C, they shut down, and then they don't lose enough heat overnight when the units are stabled. One solution might be to force cool them overnight in the depot. My pet theory is that with the gensets constantly charging the batteries (gensets were supposed to shut down in urban areas via the 'geofencing' system but this isn't being done at the moment because TfW are too nervous about shutting down the gensets for fear that they might not start up again), and then the batteries getting balance charged in the depot overnight as well, and charging creates heat, I think they may be charging the batteries a bit too often.
I would hope the steel battery boxes are not totally sealed, or have over-pressure vents? Having had experience of Li-Ion thermal runaways with radio control battery packs, one would hope that the battery boxes have some kind of venting (in RC land we generally use military surplus ammunition boxes, but with the lid seals removed).

The gensets should not be continually charging the batteries during normal running, as Li-Ion does not tolerate trickle charging like Lead-Acid or NiCd/NiMH. If the gensets are running, the battery management system should be disabling the outputs of the alternators once the battery is fully charged until the charge level drops by a significant percentage before resuming charging. The BMS should also receive the cell temps as an input and stop charging if the temperature increases above a set threshold (typically 5-10% above ambient - this is standard practice in the more sophisticated RC Li-Ion chargers that have a temperature input).

However, Li-Ion cells also produce heat when being discharged, so the lack of any type of cooling system integrated into the battery boxes seems to be a very odd design choice, especially as they were also developing a rapid charging system. Every EV on the road has either air or liquid cooling of it's battery pack (and a heating system to bring it up to a temperature that won't lead to cell damage when being charged and discharged in cold ambient temperatures). In RC aircraft it's common practice to use outside ducted air to provide forced air cooling for the batteries, ESCs and motors. In RC cars fans and heatsinks are used, but it's still common practice to leave the packs to cool before charging
 

Invincible

Member
Joined
23 Apr 2022
Messages
631
Location
Surrey
My pet theory is that with the gensets constantly charging the batteries (gensets were supposed to shut down in urban areas via the 'geofencing' system but this isn't being done at the moment because TfW are too nervous about shutting down the gensets for fear that they might not start up again), and then the batteries getting balance charged in the depot overnight as well, and charging creates heat, I think they may be charging the batteries a bit too often.
But thought modern diesel engines, once warmed, can be shut down and restarted without problems?. Has there been problems with the Ford engines not restarting in hybrid operation?.
Traditionally old Diesel engine designs were not, so they were kept on tickover rather than be stopped.
Is it perhaps drivers used to old designs being cautious when engines stop in hybrid mode?.
 

Wyrleybart

Established Member
Joined
29 Mar 2020
Messages
1,946
Location
South Staffordshire
I am merely trying to explain the facts of what is going on. Not making excuses for it. It is all rather a sorry situation, it cannot be denied. The users of the Borders Line deserve much better.

Many thanks indeed for that post. Probably the first time I have seen such information, and as I suspected the Senedd appear to have made several rather serious errors, which have compounded.

The theory of the battery electric propulsion was good, but was unproven on the routes TfW intended, and please let us not forget the plans to use the five 230s on the Blaenau branch and Chester- Crewe, as well as the Borderlands line. The truth is that current timetables allow precious little slack apparently even for the stock traction of class 150. So the first question to be asked is

Is there proof a 230 could outperform a 150 on the current timings ? If not then surely the timetable is unrealistic and TfW should be questioned over the validity of a timetable which seems not to be practicable.

The 230s were alleged to be a temporary acquisition for the Borderlands, which I am not doubting
What was to replace the 230s on the Borderlands route, and what was their expected fate ?
Were they to be written and off TfW's books in X years ? Presumably yes.

Their maintenance contract at Birkenhead North presumably runs for several more years with no "get out" clause, so withdrawing and scrapping them, or selling them to GWR via DfT might be an option. I struggle to see a reliable future for them
 

Invincible

Member
Joined
23 Apr 2022
Messages
631
Location
Surrey
The 230s were alleged to be a temporary acquisition for the Borderlands, which I am not doubting
The 230s have internally been rebuilt, so like the 484s on the Island line could have at least 20 years more life in them if well maintained.
The page https://news.tfw.wales/news/uks-first-hybrid-train-enters-service-on-borderlands-line
seems to indicate TfW will be using them for a long while.
Diesel trains are planned to be removed in 2040, but hybrid trains may last longer (for the 230s the stop start function on the 230 Ford diesel engines, when the train becomes battery driven, will need be sorted)
 
Last edited:

Bletchleyite

Veteran Member
Joined
20 Oct 2014
Messages
104,330
Location
"Marston Vale mafia"
The 230s have internally been rebuilt, so like the 484s on the Island line could have at least 20 years more life in them if well maintained.
The page https://news.tfw.wales/news/uks-first-hybrid-train-enters-service-on-borderlands-line
seems to indicate TfW will be using them for a long while.

The case for them was for 10-20 rather than 40-50 years' life, the idea being that for TfW the long term future of the line (e.g. under Merseyrail) would become apparent in that time. Similar to the Marston Vale and East West Rail.
 

rich.davies

Member
Joined
18 Apr 2011
Messages
164
Location
Wrexham
Buses set to replace the trains again on the 22 & 23 of July due to engineering works on the line.

 

Woods

Member
Joined
3 Sep 2021
Messages
145
Location
Banbury
Many thanks indeed for that post. Probably the first time I have seen such information, and as I suspected the Senedd appear to have made several rather serious errors, which have compounded.

The theory of the battery electric propulsion was good, but was unproven on the routes TfW intended, and please let us not forget the plans to use the five 230s on the Blaenau branch and Chester- Crewe, as well as the Borderlands line. The truth is that current timetables allow precious little slack apparently even for the stock traction of class 150. So the first question to be asked is

Is there proof a 230 could outperform a 150 on the current timings ? If not then surely the timetable is unrealistic and TfW should be questioned over the validity of a timetable which seems not to be practicable.

The 230s were alleged to be a temporary acquisition for the Borderlands, which I am not doubting
What was to replace the 230s on the Borderlands route, and what was their expected fate ?
Were they to be written and off TfW's books in X years ? Presumably yes.

Their maintenance contract at Birkenhead North presumably runs for several more years with no "get out" clause, so withdrawing and scrapping them, or selling them to GWR via DfT might be an option. I struggle to see a reliable future for them

Talking of being unproven; Vivarail's 2-car battery train 230002 was temporarily equipped with a centre trailer car with 4 x gensets so as to form a 3-car diesel/battery hybrid unit in the summer or 2019. This was approved for mainline use and did a few hundred miles on the Cotswold Line. The idea was that 230002, which at that time had the same batteries and power architecture as the TfW units, would be the experimental precursor to the 5 x TfW production units 230006 to 230010. In reality, overly-optimistic programme timescales followed by the onset of Covid in March 2020 meant that 230002 didn't get many miles under its belt. The original idea, if I remember rightly, was to send it to Wales to run on the Borderlands Line, the Chester-Crewe line, and the Blaenau branch, to obtain valuable lessons which would feed back into the design of the production units. But despite the mainline certification, and despite it having been the plan from the beginning, for reasons known only to itself TfW reneged on that as well, forbidding Vivarail to take 230002 on to its routes to do the trial running. So yet another bullet in the foot.

There was a timing run with the 230s on the Borderlands route, I think it happened last year, or possibly it was even earlier this year. Acceleration and deceleration was so aggressive that it over-shot a couple of stations apparently, but I'm told that it achieved the journey in something like 57mins. This shows you that it can be done, but they're not letting it be done. Again, for reasons known only to themselves.

Having seen all the efforts to improve things at Birkenhead depot, my prediction is that reliability will improve soon, maybe not quick enough for a lot of people, and maybe it will never make up for the massively delayed introduction of this fleet. But once it does, all this absolutely justified dissatisfaction will fade away and the units will prove to be useful and popular for many years to come. A lot of people will probably think I've been taking hallucinogenic drugs!

But thought modern diesel engines, once warmed, can be shut down and restarted without problems?. Has there been problems with the Ford engines not restarting in hybrid operation?.
Traditionally old Diesel engine designs were not, so they were kept on tickover rather than be stopped.
Is it perhaps drivers used to old designs being cautious when engines stop in hybrid mode?.
On the 230s the driver has no direct control over where the power comes from. He/she can't switch on and off individual engines like on old DMUs. In simple terms the driver just selects the power notch he/she wants and the traction control system automatically does the rest, mixing power from batteries or gensets as available. And when braking, energy is put back into the batteries. The traction control system, in other words, handles all the energy flows.
 
Last edited:

Invincible

Member
Joined
23 Apr 2022
Messages
631
Location
Surrey
On the 230s the driver has no direct control over where the power comes from. He/she can't switch on and off individual engines like on old DMUs. In simple terms the driver just selects the power notch he/she wants and the traction control system automatically does the rest, mixing power from batteries or gensets as available. And when braking, energy is put back into the batteries. The traction control system, in other words, handles all the energy flows.
So the TFW engineering staff have temporary changed the software settings for the 'geofencing' system so the genset engines currently do not shutdown, but still tickover?
Guess eventually the function will be restored and the engines stop and start in the hybrid mode as planned?
 
Last edited:

tomuk

Established Member
Joined
15 May 2010
Messages
2,009
There was a timing run with the 230s on the Borderlands route, I think it happened last year, or possibly it was even earlier this year. Acceleration and deceleration was so aggressive that it over-shot a couple of stations apparently, but I'm told that it achieved the journey in something like 57mins. This shows you that it can be done, but they're not letting it be done. Again, for reasons known only to themselves.
If you overrun a station that is treated as a SPAD and as the driver more than a couple of those and you will be out on the street after having put up with disciplinary and retraining measures in the meantime. You can not operate a train in service in that way. So proving that it can do the run in 57mins if you drive like you stole it proves nothing.
 

Woods

Member
Joined
3 Sep 2021
Messages
145
Location
Banbury
So the TFW engineering staff have temporary changed the software settings for the 'geofencing' system so the genset engines currently do not shutdown, but still tickover?
Guess eventually the function will be restored and the engines stop and start in the hybrid mode as planned?
The geofencing was originally designed to totally shut down the engines in urban areas.

But Vivarail set the parameters to reduce the engines to tickover due to the fear of not being able to restart the engines once they'd been turned off.

Once TfW have more confidence with gensets, they could switch the parameters to actually shut down the engines with the geofencing.

The geofencing itself works fine. But I believe at the moment that they've chosen to disable the geofencing entirely. Something to do with getting the paperwork in order, even though the system was working fine and the paperwork was already in order. It's probably not in approved TfW document format or something silly like that, knowing them. There is probably a highly paid consultant being paid somewhere to re-format documents, or waiting for some clueless third party 'expert' to review it. It's the sort of stupid timewasting exercise that holds up the job in the rail industry. Pure speculation of course....

If you overrun a station that is treated as a SPAD and as the driver more than a couple of those and you will be out on the street after having put up with disciplinary and retraining measures in the meantime. You can not operate a train in service in that way. So proving that it can do the run in 57mins if you drive like you stole it proves nothing.
So the point is, the timetable is too tight.
 

Invincible

Member
Joined
23 Apr 2022
Messages
631
Location
Surrey
The geofencing was originally designed to totally shut down the engines in urban areas.

But Vivarail set the parameters to reduce the engines to tickover due to the fear of not being able to restart the engines once they'd been turned off.

Once TfW have more confidence with gensets, they could switch the parameters to actually shut down the engines with the geofencing.

The geofencing itself works fine. But I believe at the moment that they've chosen to disable the geofencing entirely.
Thanks, Guess as the train accelerates out of a station with the gensets on tickover it is still mostly battery powered rather than diesel, so at least some exhaust is minimalised?
 

Woods

Member
Joined
3 Sep 2021
Messages
145
Location
Banbury
Thanks, Guess as the train accelerates out of a station with the gensets on tickover it is still mostly battery powered rather than diesel, so at least some exhaust is minimalised?
That's exactly right. In fact the batteries handle most of the acceleration and braking, hence you can have EMU levels of acceleration. The gensets moreorless run at constant revs, which also gives them an easier life, and should pay reliability dividends (once they've got over the cracked radiators).
 

Wyrleybart

Established Member
Joined
29 Mar 2020
Messages
1,946
Location
South Staffordshire
Talking of being unproven; Vivarail's 2-car battery train 230002 was temporarily equipped with a centre trailer car with 4 x gensets so as to form a 3-car diesel/battery hybrid unit in the summer or 2019. This was approved for mainline use and did a few hundred miles on the Cotswold Line. The idea was that 230002, which at that time had the same batteries and power architecture as the TfW units, would be the experimental precursor to the 5 x TfW production units 230006 to 230010. In reality, overly-optimistic programme timescales followed by the onset of Covid in March 2020 meant that 230002 didn't get many miles under its belt. The original idea, if I remember rightly, was to send it to Wales to run on the Borderlands Line, the Chester-Crewe line, and the Blaenau branch, to obtain valuable lessons which would feed back into the design of the production units. But despite the mainline certification, and despite it having been the plan from the beginning, for reasons known only to itself TfW reneged on that as well, forbidding Vivarail to take 230002 on to its routes to do the trial running. So yet another bullet in the foot.

There was a timing run with the 230s on the Borderlands route, I think it happened last year, or possibly it was even earlier this year. Acceleration and deceleration was so aggressive that it over-shot a couple of stations apparently, but I'm told that it achieved the journey in something like 57mins. This shows you that it can be done, but they're not letting it be done. Again, for reasons known only to themselves.

Having seen all the efforts to improve things at Birkenhead depot, my prediction is that reliability will improve soon, maybe not quick enough for a lot of people, and maybe it will never make up for the massively delayed introduction of this fleet. But once it does, all this absolutely justified dissatisfaction will fade away and the units will prove to be useful and popular for many years to come. A lot of people will probably think I've been taking hallucinogenic drugs!


On the 230s the driver has no direct control over where the power comes from. He/she can't switch on and off individual engines like on old DMUs. In simple terms the driver just selects the power notch he/she wants and the traction control system automatically does the rest, mixing power from batteries or gensets as available. And when braking, energy is put back into the batteries. The traction control system, in other words, handles all the energy flows.
Again. Many thanks for your insight / correction of myths in the case of the TfW 230s.
I really would have expected TfW to be more on the ball with Vivarail, but then parts of TfW were probably fairly new and immature *, without the experience of rail traction and infrastructure.

I didn't realise that 230002 was mainline certified, probably because it's visit to Bo ness was on low loaders I believe.

Vivarail has offered the rail industry much, but I believe there was so much more to give had they not gone the automotive route whilst messing around with car engines in tin boxes under D78s.

* immature intended with respect rather than disrespect.
 

Top