Don't be ridiculous, what would be perfect is a Bi-Mode 88 coupled to a class 442 .Obviously they should get it wired and use 11.390
(This post is not speculative, because it's such a ridiculous suggestion that nobody would seriously even speculate that that might happen despite the odd traction it's hosted over the years! )
With interest rates rising the buy new on the never never will go out of fashion. Sadly, after we recover from Covid-19 austerity, there will be a shortage of "mature" trains to revamp.My feeling is that, as mentioned above, the railway has become far too used to buying shiny new kit and replacing older trains long before the end of their economic life, although there are are exceptions. This is combined with a feeling that each company must outdo the others by having newer trains, and anyway it is somebody else’s money that pays for the stuff. And all the non-railway interests (‘stakeholders’) demand that they get the latest trains. The carefully planned cascades of BR days which spread some improvement across the network at the lowest cost and got the best out of trains over their lifetime is probably regarded as ridiculously old fashioned nowadays.
Well it was a tempting idea and there is (was) a need. But it got too expensive and too much teething problems. What could have been....The battery and hydrogen ideas have all been more recent. The original plan, when you think about it, to take a load of 70s Tube stock and mass convert them into the next "Pacer" - as it was originally envisioned these would rule the branch lines and less well-patronised rural routes of the UK - was a vanity project. I reckon the fact three TOCs took them and actually brought the idea to fruition is very surprising and against the odds.
Very true. I wonder what proportion of ideas and inventions failed and subsequently got forgotten.It is absolutely not a vanity project. You don't buy a sizeable proportion of the D stock fleet for a vanity project.
Although sales have been limited, it was an enterprising, entrepreneurial business: that is something that we should never discourage. It may have failed, but that is the nature of such enterprises: some work, some don't. To criticise - usually from an armchair - without the full facts (as on a forum like this) is very easy. Rather harder to get a venture like this off the ground.
Yes. Lets not talk Vivarail down.Seems a lot of doom and gloom on here, administration is just that, administration, there may well be an investor willing to take care of the financial side
Possibly but if no one wants the whole business im sure they will find buyers for bits of it.Seems a lot of doom and gloom on here, administration is just that, administration, there may well be an investor willing to take care of the financial side
Yes. If they had kept them electric it would probably have been more successful, but they turned them into something they never were, which probably worked on paper....but as we see, not in reality.The business model wasn't a bad one, up cycling rolling stock that was still in good nick but I think Vivarail bit off more than they could chew with the 230s. The 484s in comparison was a slightly easier process.
Still lets not forget even the big boys can't get right either ie 701's all with a common denominator of overly complicating trains with too much dependency on softwareYes. If they had kept them electric it would probably have been more successful, but they turned them into something they never were, which probably worked on paper....but as we see, not in reality.
In one of the biggest ironies ever, Linkedin is reporting that Vivarail today won a Golder Spanner for most reliable repurposed train (the Class 484). That's got to hurt.
Ok as a potential investor, are you going to put more weight and faith into a company who won an award in LinkedIn over the fact they are facing liquidation?It won't hurt if it helps convince a potential investor that there's a future for the company
Ok as a potential investor, are you going to put more weight and faith into a company who won an award in LinkedIn over the fact they are facing liquidation?
It'd be cheaper to take their patents and what they did to make the 484s over taking over the companies.
Yes, I'd be looking to put my money into a company that wins things, obviously I've no idea who actually 'voted' for them but I assume it's people that know something about the industry, above all, of course, is what my accountants find ....
The D78s as withdrawn by London Underground would have been a massive step up internally over the 483s.At least having been through the Vivarail treatment means that the 484s are, mechanically and internally, a massive step up.
The extra work has probably added another decade to the former D78s.The D78s as withdrawn by London Underground would have been a massive step up internally over the 483s.
And mechanically they were in decent enough condition. It wasn't as if they NEEDED all the extra work done on them, even if was desitable.
Even the remaining bodyshells will have some value, even if its halfway through being made into another class 230 or class 484. Simply finish off what there is and lease the lot out to recupperate the expediture on the bits bought from the administrators.Possibly but if no one wants the whole business im sure they will find buyers for bits of it.
As far as I know the only Golden Spanners are the Modern Railways ones which were held on Friday and are based on performance statistics not votes.Yes, I'd be looking to put my money into a company that wins things, obviously I've no idea who actually 'voted' for them but I assume it's people that know something about the industry, above all, of course, is what my accountants find ....
The previous 1938 stock trains arrived in the IoW in 1989 and lasted over 30 years, with just cosmetic work. The D78s were much newer when removed from service.The extra work has probably added another decade to the former D78s.
Yes. If they had kept them electric it would probably have been more successful, but they turned them into something they never were, which probably worked on paper....but as we see, not in reality.
I'm not sure if another refurbishment of the 483s was ever an option, they were two left that were serviceable and it was becoming harder to maintain them.The IOW application was a special case, but didn’t really need Vivarail. It is certainly an interesting question as to what might have happened with the 483s had Vivarail not been on the scene. Would a really heavy refurbishment / life extension have been viable?
How many repurposed trains are there? The 230s, the 484s, the 769s, any others? Vivarail would have struggled not to win that category.In one of the biggest ironies ever, Linkedin is reporting that Vivarail today won a Golder Spanner for most reliable repurposed train (the Class 484). That's got to hurt.
There may be a gap in the market,but is there a market in the gap as they say ? I'm not taking any pleasure in the fact things have gone sour.The fast charge battery tech was very appealing for a project my colleagues talked to them about.Hopefully staff can find new positions doing something similar.It is absolutely not a vanity project. You don't buy a sizeable proportion of the D stock fleet for a vanity project.
Although sales have been limited, it was an enterprising, entrepreneurial business: that is something that we should never discourage. It may have failed, but that is the nature of such enterprises: some work, some don't. To criticise - usually from an armchair - without the full facts (as on a forum like this) is very easy. Rather harder to get a venture like this off the ground.
The 484s are hardly that repurposed either.How many repurposed trains are there? The 230s, the 484s, the 769s, any others? Vivarail would have struggled not to win that category.
As you say, the battery tech is of interest to others, so it leaves me wondering what happened to make the bottom fall out so quickly.There may be a gap in the market,but is there a market in the gap as they say ? I'm not taking any pleasure in the fact things have gone sour.The fast charge battery tech was very appealing for a project my colleagues talked to them about.Hopefully staff can find new positions doing something similar.
Cashflow, presumably.As you say, the battery tech is of interest to others, so it leaves me wondering what happened to make the bottom fall out so quickly.
As you say, the battery tech is of interest to others, so it leaves me wondering what happened to make the bottom fall out so quickly.
Looking at Companies House, it must be that Henry Posner III's Railroad Development Corp has declined to continue funding the lossesIt reads like they were losing money all along but were being backed financially by one entity (Shooter perhaps?) but that backing was withdrawn and they weren't viable without it.