Transport for Wales Class 230

[Lurcheroo]

Any beeping after the doors shut is likely to be driver-guard communication signals, doors closed, proceed.

I’ll just add, should typically be a set of 2 beeps followed by another set of 2 beeps. First set is the Guard giving the driver ‘ready to start’, once they have completed their station duties, then once the driver gets break release he repeats the ‘ready to start’ back to the guard.

 

[TDK]

Noting that the Class 230 are affected by different types of weather patterns, I do wonder which country would be the least problem-causing to those units?

The UK on LUL

Guard here who worked the 230s very often in their early days on this line. Can confirm driving style was partly to blame as were slow guards. I'm told 230s drive completely differently to anything else the Chester/Shrewsbury drivers are used to driving. The drivers were extremely cautious braking, the regen braking on a 230 apparently behaves very differently to the brakes our drivers are typically used to on DMUs, and the stopping has to be very precise due to short platforms. Guards were taking a while to get used to them as the door panels are a different layout to everything else (and even the opposite way round/mirrored depending which doors you use). I believe the rhetoric was pushed somewhat to try and cover up the poor reliability, however it was certainly a factor.

Now most crew are trained and used to working them this is generally no longer an issue.

Have a look at today's performance, yet more cancellations due to the 230's abysmal performance /reliability, it's not fair on passengers or train crew to have these units still in service

 

[Tony2]

230010 had a bad wheel flat on the centre car when I travelled on it yesterday, wonder if that was the problem?

 

[simple simon]

This is the short video showing these trains at Bidston - I will also add it to the video section but as its directly related to this thread
I'm adding it here too.

 

[Zontar]

Guard here who worked the 230s very often in their early days on this line. Can confirm driving style was partly to blame as were slow guards. I'm told 230s drive completely differently to anything else the Chester/Shrewsbury drivers are used to driving. The drivers were extremely cautious braking, the regen braking on a 230 apparently behaves very differently to the brakes our drivers are typically used to on DMUs, and the stopping has to be very precise due to short platforms. Guards were taking a while to get used to them as the door panels are a different layout to everything else (and even the opposite way round/mirrored depending which doors you use). I believe the rhetoric was pushed somewhat to try and cover up the poor reliability, however it was certainly a factor.

Now most crew are trained and used to working them this is generally no longer an issue.

Oh dear. A guard making critical claims about drivers being at fault.

And how long have you been a guard by the way?

 

[L401CJF]

Oh dear. A guard making critical claims about drivers being at fault.

And how long have you been a guard by the way?

I'm not saying drivers are at fault, merely stating the fact that drivers were much more cautious driving them initially than they are now. I also said the guards were much slower and more cautious working them initially than they are now too.

I don't see how it's any different to buying a new car and taking a while to get used to it.

I've been a guard for a few years now.

 

[John R]

I'm not saying drivers are at fault,

Problem is when you use the phrase “was partly to blame” that sounds very much like you are.

 

[L401CJF]

I think people are missing the point here. Lots of delays were caused by cautious drivers and cautious guards due to unfamiliarity. Fact. Lots of delays were due to the 230s poor reliability. Fact.

I'm not saying drivers were at "fault" or have done anything wrong, merely stating facts to try and provide some insight into what was actually going on in the early days. I'm not going into it any further, and I'm not going to bother bringing any info to this thread in future.

 

[Steve B]

I think people are missing the point here. Lots of delays were caused by cautious drivers and cautious guards due to unfamiliarity. Fact. Lots of delays were due to the 230s poor reliability. Fact.

I'm not saying drivers were at "fault" or have done anything wrong, merely stating facts to try and provide some insight into what was actually going on in the early days. I'm not going into it any further, and I'm not going to bother bringing any info to this thread in future.

Personally speaking I think it would be a shame if you felt unable to continue to contribute to this thread anymore - I've always appreciated the information that you have passed on, given that you have hands-on experience of working on these trains and have facts that you can pass on. Much better than some of the other ill-informed thoughts that are sometimes posted by a few others. I never considered that your comments about drivers and guards was in any sense apportioning blame, - it's just reality. Given that the service these days is much more consistent and reliable indicates that all involved seem to have gained the necessary experience. I now set out on my regular journeys from Shrewsbury to Hawarden with confidence that at least the Borderlands part will do what it should, even if the mainline bit can sometimes be a bit iffy!

 

[sd0733]

I think people are missing the point here. Lots of delays were caused by cautious drivers and cautious guards due to unfamiliarity. Fact. Lots of delays were due to the 230s poor reliability. Fact.

The same happens on all fleets and always will! Familiarity and confidence on new stock isn't apportioning blame, its fact on all new stock and it seems a little strange to say you are blaming drivers when Guards were also mentioned on the very same sentence and its been said on various threads across multiple fleets!

 

[Steve B]

On the subject of delays, I sometimes feel that some of the more knee-jerk reactions indicate that the 230's are considered to be the cause of the delays. Yes, there are occasions when they haven't been brilliant, but there are also occasions when a 197 get cancelled due to a "fault on the train". I personally have been delayed on a 230 with prolonged stops at both Hope and Caergwrle due to a stroppy passenger, and on other occasions more generally on the line due to trespass (and on one occasion some poor soul wanting to throw himself off a bridge). There have been bridge strikes, signal failures, track circuit failures, flooding, trees down, delayed freight trains, staff shortages, and let's not forget that some of the discontent with the line in general started when TFW had to withdraw the 175s and just simply stopped running trains completely on the Borderlands to use the 150s elsewhere with the replacement bus services unable to provide anything approaching an adequate service. When, in response to the subsequent outcry. a 2 hourly 230 service was brought in, the then deficiencies of the 230s started to show up when they were running all day, and had passengers using things like the doors. I have commented before about my experience of a door stopping about 2 inches open because I was foolish enough the press the open button a fraction of a second after someone else pressed the button on the other side... The other guy knew what had happened and how to work around it so it was resolved before the guard noticed

Things seem so, so much better now! (and hopefully will continue to improve).
Edit: Correcting spelling

 

[Cambrian359]

I think people are missing the point here. Lots of delays were caused by cautious drivers and cautious guards due to unfamiliarity. Fact. Lots of delays were due to the 230s poor reliability. Fact.

I'm not saying drivers were at "fault" or have done anything wrong, merely stating facts to try and provide some insight into what was actually going on in the early days. I'm not going into it any further, and I'm not going to bother bringing any info to this thread in future.

Ignore them, they know exactly what you meant and are being deliberate in missing your point just to have a pop at you.

 

[Foxcover]

Personally speaking I think it would be a shame if you felt unable to continue to contribute to this thread anymore - I've always appreciated the information that you have passed on, given that you have hands-on experience of working on these trains and have facts that you can pass on. Much better than some of the other ill-informed thoughts that are sometimes posted by a few others. I never considered that your comments about drivers and guards was in any sense apportioning blame, - it's just reality. Given that the service these days is much more consistent and reliable indicates that all involved seem to have gained the necessary experience. I now set out on my regular journeys from Shrewsbury to Hawarden with confidence that at least the Borderlands part will do what it should, even if the mainline bit can sometimes be a bit iffy!

L401CJF please don’t be put off by those comments. Yours are some of the most balanced and insightful comments I see on here. Please stay on board!

 

[RacsoMoquette]

Just out of interest, in this video by citytransportinfo shows various shots of 230008 at Bidston. However it seemed to have received thick white window surrounds around each window at the end of the coaches, could this have been a hopper window modification erected? Akin to the Marston Vale units, did the TFW ones suffer from excessive heat especially during Summer months.

 

[Steve B]

Deleted

Just out of interest, in this video by citytransportinfo shows various shots of 230008 at Bidston. However it seemed to have received thick white window surrounds around each window at the end of the coaches, could this have been a hopper window modification erected? Akin to the Marston Vale units, did the TFW ones suffer from excessive heat especially during Summer months.

Yes!

 

[TT-ONR-NRN]

I think people are missing the point here. Lots of delays were caused by cautious drivers and cautious guards due to unfamiliarity. Fact. Lots of delays were due to the 230s poor reliability. Fact.

I'm not saying drivers were at "fault" or have done anything wrong, merely stating facts to try and provide some insight into what was actually going on in the early days. I'm not going into it any further, and I'm not going to bother bringing any info to this thread in future.

That would be a shame for the others who benefit greatly from it, just to spite a handful of people ganging up, but I must admit the defensiveness from those who flat out refuse to accept any responsibility on the part of staff does nobody any favours.

 

[DelW]

I think people are missing the point here. Lots of delays were caused by cautious drivers and cautious guards due to unfamiliarity. Fact. Lots of delays were due to the 230s poor reliability. Fact.

I'm not saying drivers were at "fault" or have done anything wrong, merely stating facts to try and provide some insight into what was actually going on in the early days. I'm not going into it any further, and I'm not going to bother bringing any info to this thread in future.

Your explanations in post 404 seemed very even-handed to me.

Unfortunately sometimes there are people on these threads who do appear to be rather thin-skinned and find offence where none was intended.

 

[Zontar]

I'm hearing another on fire yesterday....anyone got any clarification on this?

 

[sd0733]

I'm hearing another on fire yesterday....anyone got any clarification on this?

One shows as having a dragging brake smoking. A case of smoke without fire!

 

[The_Train]

Oh dear. A guard making critical claims about drivers being at fault.

And how long have you been a guard by the way?

They also state that guards being unfamiliar with the panels is also adding to the slow process, but you seemed to have ignored that bit

Problem is when you use the phrase “was partly to blame” that sounds very much like you are.

The whole premise of the post was that drivers being cautious on the brakes is causing timing issues so I would say them being "partly to blame" is correct

 

[Invincible]

The whole premise of the post was that drivers being cautious on the brakes is causing timing issues so I would say them being "partly to blame" is correct

During braking the hybrid mode also uses regenerative braking on the motors to charge batteries, so in fairness to drivers may take time to get used to hybrid operation?

 

[The_Train]

During braking the hybrid mode also uses regenerative braking on the motors to charge batteries, so in fairness to drivers may take time to get used to hybrid operation?

I would imagine that certainly does take some getting used as will driving a different train. Whenever we get into a different car, it takes a while to get used to how different things work - brakes, clutch, steering, gears etc so I'd imagine a new train to be the same but on a vastly increased scale and with a lot more risk if things go wrong. So I absolutely see why drivers would be like this, but it remains a case that what @L401CJF has said is factual in that this is all part of the timing issue and it's unjust of those having a pop at them

 

[Zontar]

They also state that guards being unfamiliar with the panels is also adding to the slow process, but you seemed to have ignored that bit

The whole premise of the post was that drivers being cautious on the brakes is causing timing issues so I would say them being "partly to blame" is correct

Unless you are in the cab watching the driver and you are a driver yourself. It's hard to justify this claim.

 

[The_Train]

Unless you are in the cab watching the driver and you are a driver yourself. It's hard to justify this claim.

Obviously my response is entirely based on what @L401CJF being true in the first place. My point was more that the responses to him were unjust - it was basically made out that they were on some sort of witch-hunt against drivers which is clearly not the case

 

[CaergwrleKen]

Back to normal with the 230s this week everything cancelled yesterday afternoon and most of today. Useless.

I would just like to say that with this argument about the traincrews it’s not their fault whatsoever. Most of the crews and also the staff at Wrexham General are very good annd friendly and have bent over backwards at times to keep something going. I understand that one of the staff has made a comment but it’s not fair to have a go at them.

I feel the staff have been used as scapegoats along with various other excuses for this debacle. It’s the people in the TFW and DfT operations or whatever that are responsible, millions of pounds wasted and many people disrupted. We just want a regular service that’s fairly reliable which is what we had before with the 150 every hour at the same time.

 

[Zontar]

Back to normal with the 230s this week everything cancelled yesterday afternoon and most of today. Useless.

I would just like to say that with this argument about the traincrews it’s not their fault whatsoever. Most of the crews and also the staff at Wrexham General are very good annd friendly and have bent over backwards at times to keep something going. I understand that one of the staff has made a comment but it’s not fair to have a go at them.

I feel the staff have been used as scapegoats along with various other excuses for this debacle. It’s the people in the TFW and DfT operations or whatever that are responsible, millions of pounds wasted and many people disrupted. We just want a regular service that’s fairly reliable which is what we had before with the 150 every hour at the same time.

Yep agreed. It's hard to pass any blame anywhere other than the people that run the show and continually allow this farce of service to run how it does.

 

[Invincible]

Back to normal with the 230s this week everything cancelled yesterday afternoon and most of today. Useless.

Doing a quick check on the RTT site, yesterday 230008 and a 197 ran OK, but later 230007 had a traction control problem, then 230008 and a 197 carried on OK.
Today there was a brake problem, not sure if it was 230010 or a 197? but 230008 later took over?

 

[sansyy]

Doing a quick check on the RTT site, yesterday 230008 and a 197 ran OK, but later 230007 had a traction control problem, then 230008 and a 197 carried on OK.
Today there was a brake problem, not sure if it was 230010 or a 197? but 230008 later took over?

230010 had the break problem iirc

 

[CaergwrleKen]

230 anonymous again today looks like some problems have returned. 197s also seem to be in a bit of a muddle.

 

[sansyy]

No 230s running today as stated above and two 197s had break problems. That makes all 4 that are supposed to run either failed during or before a service