Creation of class 230 DEMUs from ex-LU D78s by Vivarail

[GrimsbyPacer]

So here's a thought.

If it's viable for modular engine rafts using 3.2l automotive diesel engines to be slung under a Tube train, is it also viable to do exactly the same to a modern EMU, to be removed when electrification is complete?

If not, why not?

Neil

Ofcourse it's possible. Even Mk 3 coaches have been converted into working trains. NI 450's and 150's for example. An engine can even be fitted above the floor as on some very early prototypes.
I suggested on another thread that HST cars be converted and someone said it's silly because of 'obvisious reasons' though.
I still think anything can be turned into a DMU with enough effort.

 

[Bletchleyite]

Why 185s not 172s? 172s are newer and much cheaper to operate. 185s being the most expensive type of DMU to operate while only high leasing costs of newer trains prevent 172s costing more to operate than Pacers - they have the lowest track access charges of any DMU.

I've edited my post as I forgot about those. My general point though is that there are plenty of newish DMUs about running on lines that should be electrified - 185s, 172s, 168/170s on Chiltern etc. Wire those lines and redeploy those DMUs and you won't need to build any new ones.

The problem is that wiring will take 20 years or so, so we need some DMUs as a stopgap that will last 20 years and needn't last 40-50 as new ones might.

Neil
--- old post above --- --- new post below ---

Ofcourse it's possible. Even Mk 3 coaches have been converted into working trains. NI 450's and 150's for example. An engine can even be fitted above the floor as on some very early prototypes.
I suggested on another thread that HST cars be converted and someone said it's silly because of 'obvisious reasons' though.
I still think anything can be turned into a DMU with enough effort.

There is very little sense in converting HST Mk3s when you have 442s which have the same body, power doors, cabs and 750VDC traction equipment. That said, the easiest way to convert those is probably to shove a diesel locomotive on one end and convert the cab on the other to control it.

Neil

 

[northwichcat]

As for the Parlies, wire them and operate a proper service, or be honest about it and close them.

I love a ride on the Flying Dentonian as well as anyone else, but it is not a sensible situation.

A number of services (freight and ECS) use the Denton line: http://www.realtimetrains.co.uk/sea...14/11/28/0000-2359?stp=WVS&show=all&order=wtt Where will they all go if you close it properly? Not to mention the Denton line is used as a diversionary route if Stockport-Manchester is closed.

 

[sprinterguy]

Ofcourse it's possible. Even Mk 3 coaches have been converted into working trains. NI 450's and 150's for example. An engine can even be fitted above the floor as on some very early prototypes.

No mark 3 carriages have ever been converted into DMUs. The 150s and Northern Irish 450s (plus many others) were based on the profile and construction techniques used on the mark 3s, but not converted from them.

 

[Bletchleyite]

A number of services (freight and ECS) use the Denton line: http://www.realtimetrains.co.uk/sea...14/11/28/0000-2359?stp=WVS&show=all&order=wtt Where will they all go if you close it properly? Not to mention the Denton line is used as a diversionary route if Stockport-Manchester is closed.

I'm not clear why you would need to run a passenger service on it to maintain it for passenger diversionary use. There are other lines that get diverted passenger services that have or had no passenger service.

You could also close Reddish South and Denton stations.

Though personally I would like to see it brought into use for a half-hourly Stockport to Manchester Victoria shuttle.

Neil

 

[sprinterguy]

But a "sticking plaster" approach is what is needed, as (to stick with that analogy) the final cure, at least for the next 50 years or so, is electrification and a cascade of things like 185s onto the few remaining non-electrified branch lines.

I still don't see it. I strongly suspect that there are a number of lines, regional and rural, that will still be un-electrified in thirty years time, so a new build of DMUs would still be viable today.

I also expect that by 2020 a political U-turn will have been performed and electrification will be right off the boil again, as happens once a generation or so (Mid sixties - West Coast...and stop, late eighties - East Coast...and stop, mid 2010s - Great Western...), and whatever schemes that are still on the drawing board will either be quietly scrapped or left hanging in contention.

 

[northwichcat]

I'm not clear why you would need to run a passenger service on it to maintain it for passenger diversionary use. There are other lines that get diverted passenger services that have or had no passenger service.

The reason a passenger service is provided is because BR used to run a regular Stockport-Stalybridge service and when TPE services were diverted from Victoria to Piccadilly they thought the Stockport-Stalybridge service was no longer required.

Providing 1 service per week was cheaper than the legal process that would have been involved with closing the line even if it didn't have any fare paying passengers.

Though personally I would like to see it brought into use for a half-hourly Stockport to Manchester Victoria shuttle.

Agreed the best cause of action is to provide the service but if it doesn't get the go-ahead which option which would you take:
1. Electrify it
2. Keep DMUs operating in the Manchester area
3. Build bi-mode trains for the Manchester area

 

[GrimsbyPacer]

There is very little sense in converting HST Mk3s when you have 442s which have the same body, power doors, cabs and 750VDC traction equipment. That said, the easiest way to convert those is probably to shove a diesel locomotive on one end and convert the cab on the other to control it.

Neil

I know HSTs aren't the first choice to convert. But the tread was about converting HSTs to feight, which I didn't like. And they will be scrapped in the not too distant future. They can't be much worse than diesel tube trains.

 

[Bletchleyite]

Providing 1 service per week was cheaper than the legal process that would have been involved with closing the line even if it didn't have any fare paying passengers.

I know, and I contend that that process needs examining. Most probably to protect against this kind of thing by requiring the same process to be followed for a substantial frequency reduction, perhaps defined as something like reducing to below 2 hourly between 7am and 6pm, or if the existing service was less frequent than that reducing to or below half the existing frequency.

Agreed the best cause of action is to provide the service but if it doesn't get the go-ahead which option which would you take:
1. Electrify it
2. Keep DMUs operating in the Manchester area
3. Build bi-mode trains for the Manchester area

If it's a useful diversionary route or electrifying it for freight makes sense, electrify it. Otherwise, withdraw the service completely.

Though I can see a case for bi-mode for things like Barrow and Buxton.

Neil

 

[Murph]

Ofcourse it's possible. Even Mk 3 coaches have been converted into working trains. NI 450's and 150's for example. An engine can even be fitted above the floor as on some very early prototypes.
I suggested on another thread that HST cars be converted and someone said it's silly because of 'obvisious reasons' though.

Neither were converted from mark 3 carriage. The NI 450s are a mark 3 derived body bolted onto a mark 1 frame. The BR 150s are mark 3 derived, but not the same design as a mark 3 carriage. The BR 150s took the mark 3 carriage design as a starting point, then modified it significantly before construction. The structural engineering of the mark 3 carriage (the monocoque design) makes it very difficult to make any extensive modifications to the body once it has been built —*only small modifications are possible without having to completely redo the structural engineering of the entire vehicle.

I still think anything can be turned into a DMU with enough effort.

You're correct in that, but there is a point where the effort required makes it a worse option than building a completely new vehicle. Some can be easily converted, others would be so expensive to convert that it's just not viable.

Anything with monocoque construction which would require significant holes cutting into the body during conversion instantly becomes a huge problem, as the new holes destroy the structural integrity, and you have to more or less start over with the engineering to restore that integrity around the new design. The other issue with a monocoque is that bolting very heavy lumps (e.g. engines) onto it can also cause severe structural problems, unless they were part of the original design, as you don't have a simple frame and body arrangement to work with (e.g. bolt an engine onto the floor, and you add stress to the body sides and roof).

Monocoque is excellent for new designs, as it pretty much guarantees the maximum strength for the weight, maximum structural integrity, but it's very limiting when it comes to making major changes later (unless those changes were specifically allowed for in the original design).

 

[GrimsbyPacer]

No mark 3 carriages have ever been converted into DMUs. The 150s and Northern Irish 450s (plus many others) were based on the profile and construction techniques used on the mark 3s, but not converted from them.

But it proves that mk 3 cars and others could be used as a frame before being refitted with an engine. Mk 3's would be more similar to current trains than tube trains. They are other trainsets that should be considered first. But I'm okay with the plan as long as it's done okay.

 

[sprinterguy]

Mk 3's would be more similar to current trains than tube trains.

The D78 stock is far more suitable than mark 3s for the urban services where additional/DDA compliant trains are needed, though (See Murph's post above for good reasons why mark 3s can't be easily converted) - we already have a glut of modern, long distance and regional stock built in the last decade or so. Plus, the D78 stock isn't "Tube" stock in the strict sense of the term, they're sub-surface trains and a good deal more roomy than the proper deep-level tube stock.

I would agree, however, that they're not a suitable substitute for "proper" DMUs.

 

[GrimsbyPacer]

I'm struggling on my phone here. I know they are the bigger trains. And in another post further up I said they are suitable for all short routes. In this post I said mark 3's are more similar to current trains like sprinters. I only brought mk 3's up as someone else said why can't other stock be converted. Which in an old thread about turning HSTs into freight I said it'll be better to cut them into smaller trains.

I have no problem with this plan for London Underground trains being refitted.

 

[route:oxford]

All it takes is to convert one unit and find a suitable home for it on the network.

Oddly enough, my first thought of a home for one isn't the North, but a little bit closer to me. I can't be the only one who looks at one of these and thinks that the first demonstrator would operate rather nicely between Princes Risborough and Aylesbury.

Think of all the potential services that enthusiasts consider and are swiftly dashed as someone says "and where are the units going to come from?", here we have what will be an "as new" unit, but achieved at a cost far lower than a brand new unit.

Would a couple of these make an Oxford-Horspath service from "fair possibility" to a secure financial opportunity?

How about other locations? Driving growth through partnerships...

Chinnor (or even Watlington)-Princes Risborough shuttle?

 

[Bletchleyite]

Bedford-Bletchley, as noted above. Another route requiring interim DMUs to release 15x for elsewhere.

Possibly also a 2-car on the Stourbridge Shuttle should the PPM break.

Cardiff Bay - another waste of a 153?

Cornish branches?

Windsor?

There are loads of suitable locations for a low-cost local DMU which could release 15x or even 16x.

Neil

 

[WatcherZero]

Im dubious from the sounds its a big punt, they buy 300 carriages for little more than scrap value (£2m) make a demonstrator and hope for an order if it doesnt work out they scrap them again and get probably half their investment back. 2 years ago this would probably have been a good bet when the government wasnt looking to withdraw pacers. Now however the plan isnt in line with either government who now are leaning towards withdrawal or the public who are dead set against pacers and wouldnt look favourably on a chimera thats even older being forced on them. Meanwhile they have competition in the interim solution dmu from porterbrook doing a trial conversion. I think they will have just as hard a time selling these as the chinese did with their knockoff sprinters based on aquired maintenence blueprints

 

[Wolfie]

I don’t think that many people quite believe what they’re hearing yet! If an order is actually firmed up, and routes begin to be proposed, expect the rants to come rolling in…

Well there has been talk of replacing the Pacers....

I would be completely unsurprised if these replaced the 142s and the 143/144s were refurbished for further use. I would expect all of these trains, due to the electrification programmes agreed thus far, to be with Northern/its successor. When more modern DMUs become free the latter (ie the 143/144s)would be the first to go.....
--- old post above --- --- new post below ---

Has anyone thought that the D78 stock is quite a bit older than the 142's they'd replace? I know they're probably better built, but they would be between 32 and 36 years old by the time they enter service, the conversion cost seems like another elastoplast approach, further delaying the chance of real "new" DMU's in the future. Whatever happens, eventually, new DMU's will be needed, I expect by then the Londonised government will feel something built by the Indians and based on a rickshaw will be suitable for people in the North whilst Southerners ride around in German smooth-riding multi million pound air conditioned carriages. Tuctuc Ltd will be starting up again and putting conversion plans forward soon enough!

Yup, that is the stereotype, and boy do Londoners pay through the nose for it! There is now talk of maintaining the "short-term" Olympic levy which was imposed on London council tax payers in order to fund Crossrail 2 (a programme which will have regional and national benefits).....

 

[ac6000cw]

Other possible branch uses:

Marks Tey - Sudbury?

Norwich area branches ?

(Ipswich-Felixstowe probably not - the 153s already have to be 'hustled' to fit in with the freights/tight turnarounds at each end)

 

[GrimsbyPacer]

Bedford-Bletchley, as noted above. Another route requiring interim DMUs to release 15x for elsewhere.

Possibly also a 2-car on the Stourbridge Shuttle should the PPM break.

Cardiff Bay - another waste of a 153?

Cornish branches?

Windsor?

There are loads of suitable locations for a low-cost local DMU which could release 15x or even 16x.

Neil

Newark and Barton to Grimsby uses 153's all day.
The Worksop to Nottingham line might be a good place for them.

 

[ac6000cw]

Well there has been talk of replacing the Pacers....

I would be completely unsurprised if these replaced the 142s and the 143/144s were refurbished for further use. I would expect all of these trains, due to the electrification programmes agreed thus far, to be with Northern/its successor. When more modern DMUs become free the latter (ie the 143/144s)would be the first to go.....
--- old post above --- --- new post below ---


Yup, that is the stereotype, and boy do Londoners pay through the nose for it! There is now talk of maintaining the "short-term" Olympic levy which was imposed on London council tax payers in order to fund Crossrail 2 (a programme which will have regional and national benefits).....

Please - don't turn this thread into another north/south debate - it's been done to death and back already

 

[Wolfie]

Please - don't turn this thread into another north/south debate - it's been done to death and back already

That wasn't my intent nor was I the first to bring up London/the South but I take your point.

I actually think this is a quite imaginative short-term fix to a short-term problem.

 

[ac6000cw]

I actually think this is a quite imaginative short-term fix to a short-term problem.

I agree - should be quite fun to watch how it develops

 

[deltic08]

That wasn't my intent nor was I the first to bring up London/the South but I take your point.

I actually think this is a quite imaginative short-term fix to a short-term problem.

If D78s are so damn good why is LUL getting rid instead of refurbing them? This could only happen in England. Imagine asking Scotland to take them as a stop-gap on scenic lines if the windows are so panoramic. Get real, another cheap and nasty Pacer in disguise.

It shouldn't be "here is an otherwise scrap train so where can we re-use it". It should be "this line or lines needs a train lets design one most suitable for the job".

 

[GrimsbyPacer]

If D78s are so damn good why is LUL getting rid instead of refurbing them? This could only happen in England. Imagine asking Scotland to take them as a stop-gap on scenic lines if the windows are so panoramic. Get real, another cheap and nasty Pacer in disguise.

It shouldn't be "here is an otherwise scrap train so where can we re-use it". It should be "this line or lines needs a train lets design one most suitable for the job".

It is a cheap and nasty Pacer replacement option for the North. But the Tories are in and they like doing this. I agree totally with what you said but in these times when the North-South divide is huge, it's the best we will probably get unless something happens to allow a change in the system. These have been replaced 15 years early according to wikipedia and therefor will last longer than current trains.

 

[Wolfie]

If D78s are so damn good why is LUL getting rid instead of refurbing them? This could only happen in England. Imagine asking Scotland to take them as a stop-gap on scenic lines if the windows are so panoramic. Get real, another cheap and nasty Pacer in disguise.

It shouldn't be "here is an otherwise scrap train so where can we re-use it". It should be "this line or lines needs a train lets design one most suitable for the job".

It would be great to completely ignore resources and economics.... however in the real world.....

As it happens the D-types are being withdrawn from LU not because they are junk but because having one type on the SSL eases maintenance.

Yes I know that is contrary to National Rail (for want of a better term), and Northern in particular, practice. If the converted D-types buy Northern 10-20 years to get rid of Pacers, take on EMUs due to electfication and then replace remaining old DMUs with more modern cascades is that really so bad?
--- old post above --- --- new post below ---
Having promised to avoid a North/South spat I would say tgat you are also assuming Pacer replacement is the only usage. A number of others have already been suggested.

 

[21C101]

It would be great to completely ignore resources and economics.... however in the real world.....

As it happens the D-types are being withdrawn from LU not because they are junk but because having one type on the SSL eases maintenance.

Yes I know that is contrary to National Rail (for want of a better term), and Northern in particular, practice. If the converted D-types buy Northern 10-20 years to get rid of Pacers, take on EMUs due to electfication and then replace remaining old DMUs with more modern cascades is that really so bad?
--- old post above --- --- new post below ---
Having promised to avoid a North/South spat I would say tgat you are also assuming Pacer replacement is the only usage. A number of others have already been suggested.

Maybe a better idea would be to give them to Southern to run on inner suburban services for which little work would be required (in very crude terms remove the fourth rail collector shoes and solder the wires they were connected to to the chassis), cascade the 455s to outer suburban & coastway services and send some of the dual voltage 377s up north? If they ran the D78s as 5 car sets, it means they could really take advantage of the new 10 car platforms in the inner area.

As for the 442s. I reckon Chiltern would snap them up sans traction motors and run them with push pull units with class 67's if they got the chance. Mk3s with plug doors already fitted, happy days.

 

[Olaf]

Where did you find that info from ? (I can't find anything on http://www.creactive-design.co.uk/ about it, or on Google)

Being a sync, one-third of their rail design business experience is based on a cup holder:
http://www.creactive-design.co.uk/Chiltern_Railways_Body-side_Cup_Holder .php

 

[edwin_m]

As it happens the D-types are being withdrawn from LU not because they are junk but because having one type on the SSL eases maintenance.

Perhaps more importantly, having all the trains on the sub-surface lines with the same performance means they can follow each other more closely. To allow this increase in capacity they will be fitted with a transmission-based signalling system which would be much more difficult to fit to an older train like the D78.

Most of the LU fleets have operated in intensive service for lives that are long by main line standards. The A stock from the early 1960s lasted until a couple of years ago and the C stock from the late 60s has only just gone. Both of these were significantly older than any passenger stock in main line scheduled service, with the exception of the Isle of Wight sets which are 1938 Tube stock re-purposed after around 50 years on the Underground and therefore now well into their eighth decade!

 

[Olaf]

It does seem to be (all round) a serious proposal.

I doubt people like Adrian Shooter and investors like the Railroad Development Corporation would want to be involved in something that didn't make any sense or was very unlikely to succeed.

I'm guessing that they do not yet have any particular end user in mind yet given that they are putting forward proposals for a number of potential uses.
--- old post above --- --- new post below ---

Here you are:

http://companycheck.co.uk/company/08661726

The address is in there, and the list of directors, but no accounts yet as it isn't old enough to have filed any.

Plus there is a contact email here:
http://www.vivarail.co.uk/contact-us/
--- old post above --- --- new post below ---

It's not perfect by any means but I applaud to blue sky thinking.

Next they will be buying up retired Routemasters and putting them on rail trucks. Not real blue-sky thinking, just a VC investment opportunity by the looks of it.
--- old post above --- --- new post below ---
Have the vehicles already been "acquired"; i.e. has Vivarail taken ownership of those that have already been retired by TfL, or have they purchased those still in service that are due to leave service in 2016?

If the latter, the fleet would likely not be ready, in service, before approx 2018.

 

[fgwrich]

Being a sync, one-third of their rail design business experience is based on a cup holder:
http://www.creactive-design.co.uk/Chiltern_Railways_Body-side_Cup_Holder .php

Maybe so, but they are also designers of the Hyundai Rotem 22000 Class Intercity DMUs for Ireland, so they do have a fair amount of transport experience already in rolling stock interior design.

And they are very highly rated units!

http://www.creactive-design.co.uk/Mitsui_Rotem_TCC_Irish_Rail_Intercity_DMU.php