Vivarail chosen for GWR fast charging trial.

[Anonymous10]

...and GWR 769s which are three years late.

the 769 program as a whole is late and largely unreliable to what ive heard

 

[Wyrleybart]

The tfw 230's are over 2 years late into service and counting, this is not an exaggeration as you seem to imply by using the statement ridiculous hyperbole.....

Please state were I have exaggerated as you have claimed ?

But with respect TfW have had to keep so many plates spinning at the same time.
I am no Vivarail apologist and cannot believe they didn't run a test bed unit over the route which was actually fitted with the intended drivetrain. They could have used any combination of cars from 230001 and 230002 to achieve that but hey. We are where we are and TfW have presumably shelled out for them, presumably like they are paying Porterbrook the leases on the 769s.

i am sure the people on the 230s at the moment know their fuel range and TfW are drawing up diagrams to match those figures.

 

[wobman]

the TfW 230s dont have exclusivity in that club *cough* Aventra *cough*

The thing with the tfw 230's is they are intended as a short term stop gap 5 unit micro fleet until the battery 777s arrive, there's been huge amounts of time and money that have been wasted on them.
If they were a big fleet of units with a long life span the investment is worthwhile, but no more 230's of this spec will ever be produced !

 

[wobman]

But with respect TfW have had to keep so many plates spinning at the same time.
I am no Vivarail apologist and cannot believe they didn't run a test bed unit over the route which was actually fitted with the intended drivetrain. They could have used any combination of cars from 230001 and 230002 to achieve that but hey. We are where we are and TfW have presumably shelled out for them, presumably like they are paying Porterbrook the leases on the 769s.

i am sure the people on the 230s at the moment know their fuel range and TfW are drawing up diagrams to match those figures.

There a plan to run 1x230 and 1x150 on the route and then 1x197 on the route over the timetable, which will be an expensive venture for tfw. They don't trust the 230's to run solely on the route, there will be rescue 230's ready for when they breakdown! Out of a fleet of 5 x 230's only 1 is planned to run in May.

 

[Chris125]

The tfw 230's are over 2 years late into service and counting, this is not an exaggeration as you seem to imply by using the statement ridiculous hyperbole.....

Please state were I have exaggerated as you have claimed ?

I was referring to your comment that the 3rd rail and batteries "suit them" but "the other set ups don't work" - that's just hyperbole which ignores the 484s significant delays and difficulties and the recent progress made with the LNW 230s to address the cooling issues which are hardly unusual for new diesel-powered fleets.

 

[wobman]

I was referring to your comment that the 3rd rail and batteries "suit them" but "the other set ups don't work" - that's just hyperbole which ignores the 484s significant delays and difficulties and the recent progress made with the LNW 230s to address the cooling issues which are hardly unusual for new diesel-powered fleets.

Have you actually looked at the tfw 230's gen sets used by vivarail and how they are packaged ? That's one reason for the overheating and the radiator position is a poor design. Then there's the use of a car derived power plant instead of a power plant suited for the job of powering a train not a car !

My point is retro fitting diesel engines to the D78 units doesn't work, the LNW units still don't full fill complete diagrams as planned and the tfw units aren't even in service. How is it hyperbole ????? It's stating facts......

 

[JN114]

“Doesn’t work” is very definitive - where in they do work, just not perhaps as reliably as you personally would expect them. Using a definitive statement such as “doesn’t work” to describe something that demonstrably does work is a shining example of hyperbole.

Anyway 230001 isn’t going to have a Diesel genset in GWR service, so past performance with LNWR and TfW is relatively moot…

 

[43096]

My point is retro fitting diesel engines to the D78 units doesn't work, the LNW units still don't full fill complete diagrams as planned

They do. The reason for the limited use in recent months has nothing to do with the units and everything to do with (post-)Covid service reductions. But don't let the facts get in the way of your rant.

and the tfw units aren't even in service. How is it hyperbole ????? It's stating facts......

They aren't in service, but that's as much to do with TfW's own incompetence as anything else. How much crew training is taking place? Hasn't crew training been restricted by the Welsh Government's Covid regulations?

We know you don't like them and have a total blind spot over any facts that don't support your case. As a result, anything you say can be taken with a hefty pinch of salt.

 

[Watershed]

Hasn't crew training been restricted by the Welsh Government's Covid regulations?

More by TfW's interpretation and application of those regulations.

 

[Andypandy1968]

They do. The reason for the limited use in recent months has nothing to do with the units and everything to do with (post-)Covid service reductions. But don't let the facts get in the way of your rant.

They aren't in service, but that's as much to do with TfW's own incompetence as anything else. How much crew training is taking place? Hasn't crew training been restricted by the Welsh Government's Covid regulations?

We know you don't like them and have a total blind spot over any facts that don't support your case. As a result, anything you say can be taken with a hefty pinch of salt.

Sounds like someone works for vivarail?

 

[43096]

Sounds like someone works for vivarail?

Well, obviously someone does, or it wouldn’t be doing what it does.

But that someone is not me. I have no connection to Vivarail.

 

[Wyrleybart]

Well, obviously someone does, or it wouldn’t be doing what it does.

But that someone is not me. I have no connection to Vivarail.

I wonder how much longer Vivarail can sustain it's business in the UK.
Quite rightly they have turned their back on using diesel engines on their trains, but not sure where that leaves the support for 230003-230010 in the medium and long term. Theoretically, the Bletchley three will be obsolete when EWR takes over the running of the Bletchley -Bedford sector of the route, but that could still be a few years away. Also theoretically, if things don't pan out with the TfW 230s, then they could be ousted by the 197s

I would imagine Vivarail are focused on the Greenford battery trial for the next twelve months, but have Network Rail got the focus in terms and finances as well as staff to consider new battery charging projects with the double whammy of releasing staff in the voluntary severance scheme(s) and the transition into GBR ?

 

[Chris125]

Have you actually looked at the tfw 230's gen sets used by vivarail and how they are packaged ? That's one reason for the overheating and the radiator position is a poor design. Then there's the use of a car derived power plant instead of a power plant suited for the job of powering a train not a car !

You said they *don't work*, but they do. Cooling issues are nothing unusual for diesel-powered trains, and IIRC they think a redesign has solved the issue with the LNW fleet anyway.

My point is retro fitting diesel engines to the D78 units doesn't work, the LNW units still don't full fill complete diagrams as planned

It's not a D78 though, the motors electronics and controls are all new. As for fulfilling complete diagrams, of course they do - every one in the last week I think?

 

[wobman]

You said they *don't work*, but they do. Cooling issues are nothing unusual for diesel-powered trains, and IIRC they think a redesign has solved the issue with the LNW fleet anyway.



It's not a D78 though, the motors electronics and controls are all new. As for fulfilling complete diagrams, of course they do - every one in the last week I think?

I can assure you that the tfw 230s gensets certainly don't work very often, out of the 5 x 230's they are lucky to have 2 x 230's working. You cant blame tfw for the maintainance or design or the build or testing program as that's pure vivarail. Vivarail missed an opportunity to use the CAT power plant gen sets and carried on with the automotive derived ford ranger gen sets on the tfw units, these have many issues that results in poor reliability.

The LNW 230s actually worked for a whole week, that's good to hear they were productive for a complete week....
There's many parts that are D78 still the bodyshell that leadks during rainfall, the cab layout design that has no cab opening windows ! The suspension and bogies which bounce like a pogo stick on jointed track. I can testement to these having unfortunately travelled on a tfw 230 on the borderlands line....

 

[Chris125]

I can assure you that the tfw 230s gensets certainly don't work very often, out of the 5 x 230's they are lucky to have 2 x 230's working. You cant blame tfw for the maintainance or design or the build or testing program as that's pure vivarail.

Like you assured us the LNW units can't even complete a full diagram? No one doubts they have issues but the ridiculous hyperbole and total absence of balance makes it hard to know where the truth really lies.

There's many parts that are D78 still the bodyshell that leadks during rainfall, the cab layout design that has no cab opening windows ! The suspension and bogies which bounce like a pogo stick on jointed track. I can testement to these having unfortunately travelled on a tfw 230 on the borderlands line....

You said retrofitting diesel engines to a D78 'won't work'.... because the cab windows won't open?

A hybrid diesel-electric power train is inherently more complex than a pure diesel-electric, which is inherently more complex than simply getting the electricity from batteries or a 3rd rail... but while some are easier and quicker to get right, they will all work.

As for the other issues, I have *literally* heard it all before with the 484s - surprise surprise these 'issues' have proved to be wildly exaggerated, easily fixed, or just need adapting to - it's amazing how quickly the cynicism among certain staff down here evaporated once they actually got used to them.

 

[45669]

As for the other issues, I have *literally* heard it all before with the 484s - surprise surprise these 'issues' have proved to be wildly exaggerated, easily fixed, or just need adapting to - it's amazing how quickly the cynicism among certain staff down here evaporated.

And, surprise, surprise, the 484s do actually fit through the tunnel at Ryde!!

 

[Nicholas Lewis]

A hybrid diesel-electric power train is inherently more complex than a pure diesel-electric, which is inherently more complex than simply getting the electricity from batteries or a 3rd rail... but while some are easier and quicker to get right, they will all work.

It is but its been made to work reliably in many hybrid cars which is an even more dynamic environment than that of a train which has some reasonable certainty over what is needed to get from A to B.

 

[Mikey C]

It is but its been made to work reliably in many hybrid cars which is an even more dynamic environment than that of a train which has some reasonable certainty over what is needed to get from A to B.

Car manufacturers spend hundred of millions, if not billions on R&D to perfect their vehicles. I imagine the budget Toyota had to develop the Prius technology was somewhat more than Vivarail have to spend

 

[ABB125]

Car manufacturers spend hundred of millions, if not billions on R&D to perfect their vehicles. I imagine the budget Toyota had to develop the Prius technology was somewhat more than Vivarail have to spend

I wonder how much better the Prius would have been, if it had been developed by the Vivarail team using Toyota's budget...

 

[Greybeard33]

The PWI YouTube channel now has a video presentation about the fast charging system designed for the GWR trial, given by Richard Baker, Vivarail engineer:

 

[snowball]

The PWI YouTube channel now has a video presentation about the fast charging system designed for the GWR trial, given by Richard Baker, Vivarail engineer:

Thanks for that.

There are so many failsafes I can't help thinking that on any given day there'll be a fair chance that one or other of them will operate spuriously and stop the system working!

 

[Bletchleyite]

Thanks for that.

There are so many failsafes I can't help thinking that on any given day there'll be a fair chance that one or other of them will operate spuriously and stop the system working!

I'm not clear why it needs to be this complex - isn't shielded bottom contact third rail allowed, so it could just use that? Or even a pantograph?

 

[Greybeard33]

I'm not clear why it needs to be this complex - isn't shielded bottom contact third rail allowed, so it could just use that? Or even a pantograph?

It would be a more difficult mod to fit a pantograph to a 230, because of the need to create a well in the roof for it. Plus a large 25kV transformer would be needed, which would probably take up saloon space.

I do not think bespoke 800V DC OLE could be used, because of the lack of interoperability.

In response to a question, Richard did say that OLE fast charging might be a possibility for the future, although high current through the pantograph/contact wire interface could be problematic when stationary in a station.

 

[aleggatta]

I mean, playing devil's advocate here, but for overhead charging would it be possible to turn the pantograph on its head? I.e. Have the mechanism suspended over the rail and a simple contact point on the train? I realise this might limit inter-compatibility for the platform/area used for charging, but would mean there would only need to be provision for an insulated contact plate on the D78 shells.

 

[mmh]

I mean, playing devil's advocate here, but for overhead charging would it be possible to turn the pantograph on its head? I.e. Have the mechanism suspended over the rail and a simple contact point on the train? I realise this might limit inter-compatibility for the platform/area used for charging, but would mean there would only need to be provision for an insulated contact plate on the D78 shells.

"A simple contact point"? Doesn't sound very simple to me. The train and "pantograph" would need to be perfectly aligned, otherwise...

It would be very unlikely to be a reverse pantograph, more likely a plug and socket. How would the connection and release be triggered?

 

[Fincra5]

I'm not clear why it needs to be this complex - isn't shielded bottom contact third rail allowed, so it could just use that? Or even a pantograph?

Doesn't seem that complex... Gotta appease the ORR somehow!

 

[Bletchleyite]

Doesn't seem that complex... Gotta appease the ORR somehow!

Watch the video, it's highly complex compared with "pan up" or "shoe out onto bottom contact third rail".

 

[mmh]

Watch the video, it's highly complex compared with "pan up" or "shoe out onto bottom contact third rail".

I can understand why you might not want shoes to be deployed without a safety system though - particularly top contact shoes. Bottom contact rail isn't a panacea - and I say that as someone who thinks top contact rail should be extended where appropriate!

I agree that it does sound complex - the cynic in me wonders if too complex for them to deliver, given their inability to deliver far more simply powered trains.

 

[edwin_m]

I mean, playing devil's advocate here, but for overhead charging would it be possible to turn the pantograph on its head? I.e. Have the mechanism suspended over the rail and a simple contact point on the train? I realise this might limit inter-compatibility for the platform/area used for charging, but would mean there would only need to be provision for an insulated contact plate on the D78 shells.

There's a system that does that for buses and for Very Light Rail trams. But like a standard pantograph at a non-standard voltage it wouldn't be useable on sections with OLE, whereas this shoegear solution can be used anywhere.

World’s first Very Light Rail rapid-charger installed - Rail Professional

World’s first Very Light Rail ultra-rapid charging station installed at […]

www.railpro.co.uk

The Furrer+Frey All-In-One OpBrid charger is already in use for electric buses in Spain and the Netherlands. But new software developed by the Swiss firm’s British arm means the charger can support new light trams as well as buses.

I'm not clear why it needs to be this complex - isn't shielded bottom contact third rail allowed, so it could just use that?

Shielded bottom contact would have to be outside the normal loading gauge, otherwise passing trains might hit it. The shoegear to connect with it would therefore also have to be outside the gauge, meaning it would have to be retractable so the train was within gauge when not charging. If you go to all that trouble you might as well go for a safer solution where the contact rails are hidden underneath instead of being partly exposed to the side.

 

[Greybeard33]

I agree that it does sound complex - the cynic in me wonders if too complex for them to deliver, given their inability to deliver far more simply powered trains.

I noticed that the words "reliability" and "availability" did not feature in the presentation. Given the poor performance of Vivarail's previous products in those respects, this does not inspire confidence.

It would appear that a single failure in any of the multiple safety interlocks will prevent charging and so require the train to be taken out of service. Even just dirty optical train position sensors, or dropout of the WiFi link between train and the trackside charger. No mention of redundancy, or of workarounds when "computer says no".