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

[Bletchleyite]

Delayed, Dumped, Degraded, Donkey or Dirtcheap.

Why, if a quality job is done? What's the UK's obsession with glitzy and new, when many countries are happy for a quality, refurbished train? What's wrong[1] with, say, the 40-year-old fGW HSTs that have brand new looking interiors?

[1] Debate on specific seating and lighting choice not really invited - the point is that the only thing that makes them not seem brand-new is the use of slam doors.

Neil

 

[Xenophon PCDGS]

Why, if a quality job is done? What's the UK's obsession with glitzy and new, when many countries are happy for a quality, refurbished train?

Neil

I note what you say above about "a quality job" and "obsession with "glitzy and new" and other countries being happy with a quality refurbished train.

The only problem seems to be is the fact that if certain cascaded units for anywhere other than Northern, the word "refurbish" is oft quoted in postings, but let Northern Rail be the intended recipient, then the word immediately becomes "refresh" with all that so implies..

 

[Bantamzen]

They tick the DfT public checklist in two respects, being:
a Not a Pacer;
b More modern.

The other (more hidden) advantage they have for DfT is that they are realtively cheap.

The problem is:

a. They are slower than Pacers &
b. Not more modern, just old ex-tube stock with diesel engines slung under & new interiors.

How do you imagine this news is going to be received? With joyful glee, or deep cynicism? A few people have suggested that Northern passengers will just be grateful for something that looks new. However when they come to realise that this seemingly shiny new unit is plodding along at around 60mph and not able to keep the times on many routes......

And all this enthusiasm for these cheap 'n' cheerful units stems from a few rendered pictures (in which frankly they look awful), and some computer simulations based on the Penistone line in which they managed a whopping 3 minute improvement. However it would be interesting to see how they perform on other routes, in more challenging conditions when rammed. I suspect that given that these are meant to be inexpensive units compared to new stock, the budget for the engines will mean an engine that's going to struggle to offer good performance in all potential conditions and scenarios.

The extent to which this in inherent in the Northern franchise (question: does anything similar happen in other such franchises) as opposed to being a feature of Northen's own mismanagement is likley be prominent in decision making. Given that there is not an infinite budget I have s atrong suspicion that Northern (or successors) could be told "here is your rolling stock, you make best use of it....".

But often, certainly before the arrival of the 322s, this wasn't down to mismanagement. On a route that had only 3 321s, breakdowns almost always meant diesel replacement and when the bulk of your diesel stock are Pacers what are you supposed to do. Click your heels together and wish up some more EMU stock?

As to the wider network the same basically applies. You use what is available rather than cancel a set of diagrams throughout. Northern have never been allowed to procure new stock so they have had to rely on what gets cascaded, and in many cases this means Pacers. With 79 142s and 23 144s there is a fair chance that any replacement unit is going to end up being one of these, or sometimes a 153/155/156/158 deployed on an electric route with a Pacer picking up the slack. So this isn't about Northern's management in planning diagrams and dealing with contingencies, it's about having to deal with the stock they are allowed to have.

The "278s" and refurbished 143/144 will be a sticking plaster. If, however, they get us to a point 10-15 years down the line where electrification is much more widely spread and more modern DMUs are in use on remaining diesel lines then that is not such a bad thing. Trying to run them on past that point on the other hand....

And it would be a sticking plaster that barely fits. Northern has for far too long been constrained in their fleet, and it's lead to problems. The D78 units would just be expected to operate far longer than 10-15 years so as to please the DfT and some Daily Mail readers.

 

[Xenophon PCDGS]

They tick the DfT public checklist in two respects, being:
a Not a Pacer;
b More modern.
The other (more hidden) advantage they have for DfT is that they are realtively cheap.

I have emboldened part of your posting above that should most certainly tick a few "approved for use by Northern Rail" boxes...
--- old post above --- --- new post below ---

The "278s" and refurbished 143/144 will be a sticking plaster. If, however, they get us to a point 10-15 years down the line where electrification is much more widely spread and more modern DMUs are in use on remaining diesel lines then that is not such a bad thing.

So this takes us to 2025-2030 with the usage of "second-rate/hand" offerings to still be the bête noir of the long suffering passengers of the rail services of the Northen Rail and successor franchise still living in the world of "jam tomorrow"...:roll:

"Do not ask for new modern rail units as a refusal often offends"

 

[Bletchleyite]

The only problem seems to be is the fact that if certain cascaded units for anywhere other than Northern, the word "refurbish" is oft quoted in postings, but let Northern Rail be the intended recipient, then the word immediately becomes "refresh" with all that so implies..

This is possibly true in some circumstances (319s), but there is pretty much no chance of the D-train not being fully refurbished, because the interior as-is is completely unsuitable for the kind of services we are talking about. So they'll be 1970s shells with brand-new interiors - precisely the same as the fGW HSTs.

Neil

 

[47802]

This is possibly true in some circumstances (319s), but there is pretty much no chance of the D-train not being fully refurbished, because the interior as-is is completely unsuitable for the kind of services we are talking about. So they'll be 1970s shells with brand-new interiors - precisely the same as the fGW HSTs.

Neil

Except an FGW HST is a much better train, as for completely new interior I think remains to be seen, I'm expecting a fairly cheap job, and of course even a prototype may not tell us much about the interior as that could be a full bell's and whistle's version inside while the version Northern gets is less so, and only in the Country version do all the seat appear to be changed to transverse. We also don't know what the noise and vibrations levels are going to like with the Transit van engines plonked underneath on a train not designed to be a DEMU. I also notice on WNXX there's a bit of campaign to try get ASLEF to query the crash worthiness of these trains.

Personally I think that refurbished 143/144's may be a better option, I found refurbished FGW 143's to be quite reasonable OK the ride still the same, but obviously they can do 75mph and are compatible with sprinters, the question is then could we assume that electrification and Scotrail 170 cascade etc. could cascade enough sprinters to eliminate the 142's in time.

 

[Bringback309s]

How did we all miss this... They're fighting over the old tubes! https://www.transportxtra.com/magazines/local_transport_today/news/?id=38776

 

[northwichcat]

How did we all miss this... They're fighting over the old tubes! https://www.transportxtra.com/magazines/local_transport_today/news/?id=38776

We didn't miss it - it was discussed much earlier in the thread - that's months out-of-date now - Vivarail won the battle.

 

[tbtc]

There’s a certain grim inevitability about the D78 now (especially in light of the vague suggestion by politicians of "Pacer replacement" rather than "no more bottom of the barrel DMUs", so that replacing a 142 with a "278" will allow them to claim that they've replaced Pacers as promised)... if you thought that getting rid of Pacers would mean an end to “basic” units then be careful what you wish for! I’d like to think that places will get either Pacers or D78s – seems unfair to blight a depot/region with both!

The positives are:

• It may mean the ROSCOs will have to reduce their prices on Pacer leasing for the next franchises (since a plentiful amount of D78s means competition, which may mean lower leasing costs).
• It buys some breathing space from the electrification delays.
• It’s an example of the private sector taking some risk and entrepreneurial spirit, trying to solve a problem that many enthusiasts acknowledge exists (not enough “Provincial” DMUs, Pacers are bad) – am not pretending that they are doing this for altruistic reasons, but I’m fed up of reading people claim that the railways are a “risk free” area for private companies, a “licence to print money” – here’s a private company taking a risk on providing a product that nobody may decide to lease.

Apart from that though, there’s little in the way of sunshine headed our way:

The Marple/ New Mills lines look a reasonable prospect, on the proviso that the Hope Valley extensions are 156 run (to cope with the running speeds between 158s and 185s through the Hope Valley). As the Hope Valley services could be run as a three hour cycle, it should be possible to path them to have a ten minute layover in Manchester and a ten minute layover in Sheffield, without interworking with any other services. Maybe even upgrade the service to hourly, using the saved DMUs?

The problem with Marple/ New Mills is whether downgrading from 75mph to 60mph would slow down the TPE services through Guide Bridge (I know this is a tediously slow part of the Transpennine route, so maybe the 185s aren’t pathed much above 60mph anyway?). Plus, they’d only take up a handful of diagrams (and I can’t think of any other suitable services around Manchester, without inventing new ones) which leaves the “microfleet” problem.

In the rest of the North West you’ve got:

• Blackpool South – Colne – four units for an hourly service (until the SELRAP plan to upgrade this line to HS4, of course...)
• Morecambe – Lancaster – Skipton – two units could provide a regular bi-hourly service (instead of the current mishmash timetable - connecting to faster EMUs at Skipton for Bradford/Leeds)
• Lancaster – Barrow – three units for an hourly service (with gaps for whatever Manchester services remain)
• Barrow – Carlisle – six units for an hourly service
• Preston – Ormskirk – one unit for the current service

...so that’s sixteen units, add in spare capacity (for maintenance etc) and that takes you to around twenty – operating on routes that have very little running in the way of fast services. You could maybe throw in an extra DMU on a Lancaster – Morecambe shuttle - that always seems like a line that could sustain a fairly frequent service (given the regular Stagecoach buses, plus the busy roads between the two).

The North East is a possibility, but realistically I think you’d need to retain a number of 156s (esp on Newcastle – Morpeth/ Chathill for reasons of speed, Newcastle – Carlisle, the school trips on the Whitby branch and the morning Darlington – Newcastle service up the ECML which needs faster units).

Plus you’d need to find depot space around Yorkshire for the dozen-or-so 142s that Heaton maintain for us (60mph stock not being suitable for the returns to depot up the ECML, and not suitable for routes like Sheffield – Dearne Valley – Leeds which are tightly pathed between Voyagers and 225s, before anyone complains that I don’t want D78s in my own backyard).

Lincolnshire may be more suitable (Barton branch plus EMT services from Cleethorpes/ Doncaster – Lincoln - Peterborough/ Newark Northgate), but that’s not going to free up a large number of DMUs.

West Yorkshire has slim pickings. Maybe you could use a few up on a Leeds – Castleford – Pontefract – Knottingley – Pontefract – Wakefield Kirkgate – Castleford – Leeds round trip (which would mean withdrawing the unnecessary third service an hour from Wakefield Kirkgate to Barnsley, running an hourly Dodworth – Barnsley – Sheffield service as a replacement further south). Hmm, a half hourly Sheffield – Dodworth stopper with hourly extension to Huddersfield could use up half a dozen D78s, maybe worth a shot. Maybe even through services to Lincoln (currently dominated by 142s, and separate from any “fast” services)? See, I can accept some on my local route... (notwithstanding the previous point about no area being lumbered with Pacers and D78s).

Most other West Yorkshire services are either pathed between 100mph services (Wakefield – Huddersfield, Wakefield – Bradford) or are going to be electrified (Leeds – Selby)... apart from the idea of putting them on the Harrogate Line. After all, the Chamber of Commerce wanted these trains, seems only right that they are first in line to receive them (albeit without the line being electrified)!

Branches in Devon and Cornwall are a possibility, but we have fifty-ish freed up 165/166s moving to the South West, so some look to be coming onto these lines.

Nobody has mentioned west Wales though. There’ll be quite a few DMU diagrams from Swansea to Fishguard, Milford Haven, Pembroke and Shrewsbury (Heart of Wales) – and almost no “fast” services west of Swansea – could these 60mph units work those services (when the Valley Lines and Cardiff – Swansea are electrified)? They’d be virtually segregated from other trains, and I don’t think that the timetables are particularly stretching in terms of speeds...

Slimmer pickings in north Wales – a couple on the Bidston line plus one to Blaneu Ffestiniog (the Crewe – Chester shuttle seems to get a fairly random assortment of whatever’s spare in Chester depot), may be harder to justify based on current franchise boundaries.

 

[Wolfie]

They are not more modern. They are slightly older, just of better construction.
And some have already called them "SuperPacers" I would call them D-Trains like Vivarail want though.

People will assume the D means either:
Delayed, Dumped, Degraded, Donkey or Dirtcheap.

You are correct that the basic vehicles are slightly older. However, LU had already given them a major upgrade and more is proposed by Vivarail. Compare this to a 142 many of which, I am advised on this very forum, are literally falling apart.

Look at ATWs 158s or SWTs 355s to see what can be achieved with a proper refurbishment, something Northern has never done to any of its stock...

Why, if a quality job is done? What's the UK's obsession with glitzy and new, when many countries are happy for a quality, refurbished train? What's wrong[1] with, say, the 40-year-old fGW HSTs that have brand new looking interiors?

[1] Debate on specific seating and lighting choice not really invited - the point is that the only thing that makes them not seem brand-new is the use of slam doors.

Neil

Spot on

I note what you say above about "a quality job" and "obsession with "glitzy and new" and other countries being happy with a quality refurbished train.

The only problem seems to be is the fact that if certain cascaded units for anywhere other than Northern, the word "refurbish" is oft quoted in postings, but let Northern Rail be the intended recipient, then the word immediately becomes "refresh" with all that so implies..

Sad but true thus far - there does indeed need to be a sea-change in that respect. It is, however, far from clear where the blame ultimately lies as Northern hardly help themselves...

 

[Dstock7080]

You are correct that the basic vehicles are slightly older. However, LU had already given them a major upgrade and more is proposed by Vivarail.

Although the units received new bogies 2000-2002 little was done mechanically or electricly when they were refurbished 2003-2008, mostly cosmetic internal changes.

 

[eastwestdivide]

There’s a certain grim inevitability about the D78 now ...

Not so sure it's a grim inevitability - the concept might not work at all once they get to build a prototype (large amounts of scepticism regarding crashworthiness over on wnxx), or on the other hand, the resulting trains might turn out to be "quite nice".
Too soon to judge I'd say, but still worth a punt by the D-train people.

 

[Xenophon PCDGS]

Not so sure it's a grim inevitability - the concept might not work at all once they get to build a prototype (large amounts of scepticism regarding crashworthiness over on wnxx), or on the other hand, the resulting trains might turn out to be "quite nice". Too soon to judge I'd say, but still worth a punt by the D-train people.

Have there been any comments from any members of the Shadow Cabinet forthcoming about these D78 proposals?

 

[61653 HTAFC]

There are no 100mph linespeeds between Wakefield and Huddersfield or Bradford. These services may be run with faster trains (180s on GC, very rare for anything faster than 75mph on the Wakefield to Huddersfield shuttles) but I don't think the linespeeds are any higher than 90 through there, probably very little above 75. Probably still a push to path them between the TPE services on those particular routes, though they'd be okay on HUD-BDI-LDS and Penistone services. Pontefract/Knottingley services likewise, and if depot capacity is a problem there's a huge chunk of disused railway land at Healey Mills for a servicing facility.

It would be lovely to have some nice shiny (for the first few weeks) 172-variants instead, but that's unlikely. Even if the interiors were just given a deep clean, the D trains would be a significant step up from the pacers!

 

[Greybeard33]

The problem with Marple/ New Mills is whether downgrading from 75mph to 60mph would slow down the TPE services through Guide Bridge (I know this is a tediously slow part of the Transpennine route, so maybe the 185s aren’t pathed much above 60mph anyway?). Plus, they’d only take up a handful of diagrams (and I can’t think of any other suitable services around Manchester, without inventing new ones) which leaves the “microfleet” problem.

The New Mills and Sheffield services turn off at Ashburys to go via Belle Vue not Guide Bridge. The linespeed between Ashburys and Guide Bridge is only 60mph. Not sure if there are plans to increase it, but in any case the Rose Hill Marple service is all shacks to Guide Bridge, so acceleration is what matters. The Rose Hill service might be suitable for battery EMUs, since it is under the wires as far as Hyde Junction.

 

[superalbs]

Will any of these new trains be coming down to Exeter and it's locale for testing/service?

 

[GrimsbyPacer]

Will any of these new trains be coming down to Exeter and it's locale for testing/service?

Maybe, The guy behind this plan said he's talking to different operators and that these are suitable for slow stopping services like those Pacers are found on.
But he also said he is talking with all bidders for the Northern franchise who are said to be interested.

 

[superalbs]

I think Exeter - Exmouth would be a good route for them. What is the max speed on that line?

 

[61653 HTAFC]

I think Exeter - Exmouth would be a good route for them. What is the max speed on that line?

Services on the Devon Metro are generally timed as pacers I think, on the Exmouth branch itself the stations are fairly close together, so I'd be surprised if there's anything above 60. The stretch from the junction to Central is only short, and all services on there call at Central so I can't see there being a problem.
Quite a few of the Devon and Cornwall branches would be ideal routes for the D-Trains, but generally those with little or no shared tracks with 'mainline' services. I probably wouldn't include Paignton in this though, as it's not a 'branch' in the same way as Looe or St. Ives. Barnstaple would be fine providing the run between Exeter St. Davids and the junction wouldn't get in the way of mainline services.

 

[superalbs]

Services on the Devon Metro are generally timed as pacers I think, on the Exmouth branch itself the stations are fairly close together, so I'd be surprised if there's anything above 60. The stretch from the junction to Central is only short, and all services on there call at Central so I can't see there being a problem.
Quite a few of the Devon and Cornwall branches would be ideal routes for the D-Trains, but generally those with little or no shared tracks with 'mainline' services. I probably wouldn't include Paignton in this though, as it's not a 'branch' in the same way as Looe or St. Ives. Barnstaple would be fine providing the run between Exeter St. Davids and the junction wouldn't get in the way of mainline services.

Great, anything beats a Pacer, even if the FGW ones are very nicely refurbished!
Does anyone know when the first unit will enter service or at least be completed?

 

[RPI]

Services on the Devon Metro are generally timed as pacers I think, on the Exmouth branch itself the stations are fairly close together, so I'd be surprised if there's anything above 60. The stretch from the junction to Central is only short, and all services on there call at Central so I can't see there being a problem.
Quite a few of the Devon and Cornwall branches would be ideal routes for the D-Trains, but generally those with little or no shared tracks with 'mainline' services. I probably wouldn't include Paignton in this though, as it's not a 'branch' in the same way as Looe or St. Ives. Barnstaple would be fine providing the run between Exeter St. Davids and the junction wouldn't get in the way of mainline services.

The eventual plan is for all Exmouth services to go through to Paignton, Barnstaple would be no good as there are a couple of decent 70mph sections firstly between Cowley Bridge and Crediton and Between Barnstaple and Umberleigh with a general desire to speed the line up in other places. But the Cornish branches would be ideal for these units

 

[northwichcat]

The eventual plan is for all Exmouth services to go through to Paignton, Barnstaple would be no good as there are a couple of decent 70mph sections firstly between Cowley Bridge and Crediton and Between Barnstaple and Umberleigh with a general desire to speed the line up in other places. But the Cornish branches would be ideal for these units

Would would be the timing/pathing impact of using 60mph units?

Northern use 75mph Pacers on sections of the WCML and ECML where the service could operate at 90 or 100mph if Turbostars were used and it could well be that some of the 75mph sections on non-mainline sections could be upgraded to 80 or 85mph with little or no work if faster trains were available, so it isn't always the case that operators get trains which can run at the fastest permitted speed.

 

[eastwestdivide]

Great, anything beats a Pacer, even if the FGW ones are very nicely refurbished!
Does anyone know when the first unit will enter service or at least be completed?

Prototype this summer according to the December 2014 Modern Railways article linked on Vivarail's website.

Entering service? That's more of an "if" than a "when", surely.
Only once the prototype is done (and probably only after extensive testing) will anyone be in a position to work out if it's a viable project and if so, to what extent the D-trains would be suitable for different lines/services.

 

[Bletchleyite]

Prototype this summer according to the December 2014 Modern Railways article linked on Vivarail's website.

Entering service? That's more of an "if" than a "when", surely.
Only once the prototype is done (and probably only after extensive testing) will anyone be in a position to work out if it's a viable project and if so, to what extent the D-trains would be suitable for different lines/services.

Indeed.

But remember very few thought the Parry People Movers would ever go into public service even on the Stourbridge branch - but they did and have been in service a few years now.

Neil

 

[northwichcat]

Prototype this summer according to the December 2014 Modern Railways article linked on Vivarail's website.

Entering service? That's more of an "if" than a "when", surely.
Only once the prototype is done (and probably only after extensive testing) will anyone be in a position to work out if it's a viable project and if so, to what extent the D-trains would be suitable for different lines/services.

It'd be interesting with Vivarail claiming they've done a computer simulation on the Penistone line if the prototype is put on to the Penistone line and they find clearance issues from the D-trains being wider than Pacers.

Despite the claim about the D-trains being suitable for the Penistone line rail journalists are saying Vivarail have been in talks with Northern franchise bidders only about potential use of D-trains in the North East and Cumbria.

 

[47802]

It'd be interesting with Vivarail claiming they've done a computer simulation on the Penistone line if the prototype is put on to the Penistone line and they find clearance issues from the D-trains being wider than Pacers.

Despite the claim about the D-trains being suitable for the Penistone line rail journalists are saying Vivarail have been in talks with Northern franchise bidders only about potential use of D-trains in the North East and Cumbria.

I be surprised for them not to be considered for some routes in Yorkshire also

 

[northwichcat]

I be surprised for them not to be considered for some routes in Yorkshire also

Maybe Metro likes the idea of refurbished 144s more for routes like the Penistone line and Wakefield-Huddersfield shuttles?

 

[eastwestdivide]

Wouldn't necessarily read too much into "north east" - perhaps the definition of the north east varies depending on where else you draw the lines. If I was at Vivarail in the Cotswolds, Penistone would be north east rather than north west, south east or south west.

 

[GrimsbyPacer]

Wouldn't necessarily read too much into "north east" - perhaps the definition of the north east varies depending on where else you draw the lines. If I was at Vivarail in the Cotswolds, Penistone would be north east rather than north west, south east or south west.

North East is an official region which covers Northumberland, Tyne and Wear, Teesside, Cleveland and County Durham areas. Penistone is in Yorkshire and Humber region.
I have heard regions refered differently though by people generalising or being more precise. So maybe he did mean NE quarter??

 

[eastwestdivide]

Well exactly - did the original source specifically say the official North East region?