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

[The Ham]

Apparently there are "robust" conversations ongoing at Transport Scotland.

As many contributors will be aware, stock availability is going to hit crisis point in Scotland in the very near future as a consquence of the end of lease of some of their 170 stock.

Abelio are already pre-apologising in the Scottish press for the predicted short-forming of services on the Glasgow/Edinburgh to Dunblane/Alloa routes.

Essentially, there are two factions.

Those who see the refurbished D78 units as having potential for releasing units from the far North line and Kyle line and other low-speed services.

Those who abhor the thought of "London's cast-offs" being used in Scotland and would rather votres in Central Scotaldn facing cancelled services.

This is going to be interesting.

The other option could be to find other TOC's with more suitable routes for the D78's and encourage them to release their DMU's for others to use.

If a 3 coach D78 has comparable loading capacity to a 2 coach DMU with 2 coaches but is the same cost (i.e. the D78's are 2/3rds the cost to lease) then many TOC's would stick with a uniform fleet if they could.

However, if DMU supply becomes more of a problem then the ROSCO's may put their lease costs up and/or a TOC may offer more to ensure that they have the trains they need. If this happens then the D78's may look a good prospect.

 

[Olaf]

One location in the SE which could be a suitable route is the Greenford Branch. Self contained, short (i.e. toilets wouldn't be needed) and potentially (if there is enough space for a train which is 9m longer than the current 165's) with the use of a 3 coach set wouldn't be much different in capacity than at present (dependent on seating layouts).

Does anyone have a use for a spare 165 or two? [Has hand bitten off]. Although given the lack of interest from the North for the D78's to provide extra units (even if they were only used on suitable routes) there'll probably be no interest from there for a 165.

I was thinking of various branches across the country, but I was wondering about the logistics of maintaining and operating one or two sets in isolated parts of the country - perhaps by way of a man with a van?
--- old post above --- --- new post below ---

Would this example that you quote above be what one would expect from a Private Equity company in such a matter?

No; this is financial gamble, so there is a substantial amount to be made; it's not a charity.

 

[Clip]

Are there clearer visual images available of the "universal" lavatory to which you allude which show the type of door access and the internal fitments?

It's almost like you are trying to pick the tiniest of issues to show these proposed trains are not suitable for service.

 

[al.currie93]

Perhaps a locomotive and 4x Mk.2 coaches including a DBSO for the Far north line. In the summer months and in the winter months used as crowd busters along the Fife circle.

That's what I think for that and other similar lines DRS would probably be happy to run it given their current progress in that field... if they had the stock that is! Mind you, they've got plenty of 37s and 68s suitable for it, and if it was looking likely, it wouldn't be hard or take long for them to source more Mk 2s.

 

[Xenophon PCDGS]

It's almost like you are trying to pick the tiniest of issues to show these proposed trains are not suitable for service.

No, just playing Devil's Advocate, which I assumed would have been made clear by noting what I had said in much earlier postings, in order to bring forth much better detailed internal information to the thread
--- old post above --- --- new post below ---

No; this is financial gamble, so there is a substantial amount to be made; it's not a charity.

By the mention that I made in my posting of a Private Equity Company, I would have assumed that you would have been aware of my garnered knowledge in the last ten years as Senior Head of Projects at the consultancy before retirement of how such companies carry out their affairs, without recourse to the need to make a reference to charity.
--- old post above --- --- new post below ---

Are you stating as fact that D78s will not have a toilet ?.

Read my posting, again. I was asking a hypothetical question based upon their existing usage....not making a statement of fact as to any future internal reordering.

 

[SpacePhoenix]

What's the estimated lifespan of the D78s due to be once converted? If I were in the shoes of the person buying stock I'd go for a modular DMU which could have the diesel engines replaced with an electric traction package at a later date (the IEPs probably won't suit all non-electrified routes in the UK)

 

[47802]

What's the estimated lifespan of the D78s due to be once converted? If I were in the shoes of the person buying stock I'd go for a modular DMU which could have the diesel engines replaced with an electric traction package at a later date (the IEPs probably won't suit all non-electrified routes in the UK)

That solution or a full bi-mode is likely to be expensive though, although their do seem to be rumours about a Bi-mode for TPX, clearly if most of the 185's could be cascaded even if TPX electrification runs late, that could put a big dent in Pacer Replacement.

If the D78's are really being considered for Scotland that's an interesting twist in looking at these units as a current diesel shortage gap filler, rather than just a Pacer replacement.

 

[D60]

My understanding is that they are indeed being promoted as a diesel shortage gap filler, as well as for Pacer replacement.. and as assets with usable life left in them once converted and upgraded, albeit with clear limitations as to where and on what routes they can be practicably used, it is to be hoped that some 'strategic thinking' is being applied at a 'national level' as to where they might best be utilised.. (despite public denials from within the Dft..)

 

[northwichcat]

That solution or a full bi-mode is likely to be expensive though, although their do seem to be rumours about a Bi-mode for TPX, clearly if most of the 185's could be cascaded even if TPX electrification runs late, that could put a big dent in Pacer Replacement.

Well Barrow, Scarborough and Middlesbrough aren't set to be electrified, while the Manchester Airport to Cleethorpes route is remaining as a diesel through route for the duration of the next TPE franchise (according to Patrick McLoughlin) so they'll be plenty of DMUs required for lines currently served by TPE.

DfT thinking was the released 185s would provide a new Chester-Sheffield service, as well as allowing 6 car 185s to run Liverpool-Nottingham, with 4 car 158s being used on a separate Nottingham-Norwich service. Network Rail have in their CP5 plans to extend platforms at stations such as Widnes, Liverpool South Parkway and Newton-le-Willows to be able to take formations of up to 145m (long enough for a 6 car 185.)

It looks like we're going to find out this week if the Liverpool-Norwich split is set to go ahead.

However, at the moment it's looking like the released 185s will provide extra capacity and service enhancements not Pacer/150 replacement.

 

[The Ham]

I was thinking of various branches across the country, but I was wondering about the logistics of maintaining and operating one or two sets in isolated parts of the country - perhaps by way of a man with a van?

With that in mind it could make the Greenford Branch a good candidate as those who used to maintain them wouldn't be that far away.

 

[47802]

Well Barrow, Scarborough and Middlesbrough aren't set to be electrified, while the Manchester Airport to Cleethorpes route is remaining as a diesel through route for the duration of the next TPE franchise (according to Patrick McLoughlin) so they'll be plenty of DMUs required for lines currently served by TPE.

DfT thinking was the released 185s would provide a new Chester-Sheffield service, as well as allowing 6 car 185s to run Liverpool-Nottingham, with 4 car 158s being used on a separate Nottingham-Norwich service. Network Rail have in their CP5 plans to extend platforms at stations such as Widnes, Liverpool South Parkway and Newton-le-Willows to be able to take formations of up to 145m (long enough for a 6 car 185.)

It looks like we're going to find out this week if the Liverpool-Norwich split is set to go ahead.

However, at the moment it's looking like the released 185s will provide extra capacity and service enhancements not Pacer/150 replacement.

I think that remains to be seen and presumably things might become clearer when the specification for the new TPX and Northern franchise is released.

A Bi-mode with good off Electric performance could allow more 185 to be cascaded than would be the case with purely electric units as well as allowing such as Scarborough to retain a through service on the North TPX route, but then there seems to be talk of a 125mph capable EMU, if you put those together then your talking something along the lines of an IEP which clearly isn't going to be cheap.

 

[northwichcat]

I think that remains to be seen and presumably things might become clearer when the specification for the new TPX and Northern franchise is released.

Whatever happens certain lines urgently need capacity/frequency enhancements and trains are unlikely to be withdrawn prior to that happening unless replacement stock is sourced first.

 

[RobShipway]

I think that remains to be seen and presumably things might become clearer when the specification for the new TPX and Northern franchise is released.

A Bi-mode with good off Electric performance could allow more 185 to be cascaded than would be the case with purely electric units as well as allowing such as Scarborough to retain a through service on the North TPX route, but then there seems to be talk of a 125mph capable EMU, if you put those together then your talking something along the lines of an IEP which clearly isn't going to be cheap.

I would suspect that you do not need 125mph capability though, as I believe that 100mpn capability as the class 185 will maybe be enough using the Hitachi bi - mode ATR trains that can be converted to run electric, if and when the routes become electrified.

 

[47802]

I would suspect that you do not need 125mph capability though, as I believe that 100mpn capability as the class 185 will maybe be enough using the Hitachi bi - mode ATR trains that can be converted to run electric, if and when the routes become electrified.

Well assuming the TPX 350's will be replaced as well by a single fleet 110mph would seem likely and 125mph would probably be useful up the east coast for the proposed half hourly service to Newcastle.

Anyway getting back to the point I'm a bit gobsmacked that they might consider the D stock for the far north especially given Transport for Scotland talk about scenic trains and they don't like the 170's door layout for long runs.

A surburban metro train which doesn't normally go above 45mph, with a suburban layout and a couple of sealed up doors, a transit engine underneath which we don't know how noisy that's going to be on a 3 or 4 hour journey, love it

 

[Peter Sarf]

Apparently there are "robust" conversations ongoing at Transport Scotland.

As many contributors will be aware, stock availability is going to hit crisis point in Scotland in the very near future as a consquence of the end of lease of some of their 170 stock.

Abelio are already pre-apologising in the Scottish press for the predicted short-forming of services on the Glasgow/Edinburgh to Dunblane/Alloa routes.

Essentially, there are two factions.

Those who see the refurbished D78 units as having potential for releasing units from the far North line and Kyle line and other low-speed services.

Those who abhor the thought of "London's cast-offs" being used in Scotland and would rather votres in Central Scotaldn facing cancelled services.

This is going to be interesting.

Since yesterday I have had a bit of time to think following what I read (up thread) about what is going on in Scotland train wise. This leads me to conclude that the obvious answer to the question of which units will move to where is, subject to suitability (fingers crossed), it will come down to which TOC (Train Operating Company) is prepared to make the best bid for a ROSCo's (Rolling Stock Company's) trains. I think we are beginning to witness the truth that the Rolling Stock Companies have been competitive in the past. I am thinking about those that demanded the investigation into the ROSCos a few years ago.

So each TOC is going to get what it is prepared to pay for and I guess there will be some TOCs who would prefer (etc) to pay for something as cheap as a converted D78. The obviously looming shortage of stock is beginning to make TOCs poach each others trains I think. In my view there is nothing sinister in that - you get what you pay for.

So hopefully the D78s will cheaply reduce that competitive pressure. I wonder, therefore, if the Rolling Stock companies will be comfortable with the existence of the converted D78s ?.

Personally I hate buying things on the never never or renting. I would buy the trains I wanted outright if I had the money as long term it is cheaper. That is provided the franchise the TOC has runs for long enough (well over ten years and more like twenty years). But thats not likely to happen soon enough.

This rolling stock shortage/mis-match has been coming for a long time. Too little electrification in the past and now the routes chosen do not include enough that would release the right kind of trains. We will soon have a surplus of diesel intercity trains BUT a shortage of diesel short distance (commuter and/or rural) trains. I doubt if that is within the DFTs grasp.

The D78s help alleviate the above problem without being expensive enough to prevent more routes being worth electrifying in the next ten years (I hope).

 

[Taunton]

Why do we have to cheapen and reduce standards of our trains all the time?

This is a long term issue, it seems that while competing modes like cars constantly upgrade their products (the standards now are way ahead of what they were say 40 years ago), rail goes the other way.

That 40 years ago, 1975, I first went from Cambridge to London. It was in 3-across, second class, Mk 1 side corridor stock, which was actually more comfortable than most modern first class seating. By 1990 it was was Mk 2 stock with 4-across, then came emu stock which was 5-across. Now we are about to get new Thameslink stock where the emphasis seems to be on standing, with grab poles round the doors like something on the Underground..

Meanwhile, I understand no manufacturer will now offer new-build DMUs because the Euro standards for engines have been redefined yet again, for the umpteenth time, rendering all recent engine types once again disallowed for further production. So we have none available. I am surprised the anti-EU political parties have not made anything of this.

 

[jopsuk]

The new engine emission standards were almost certainly written, in the main, by the engine manufacturers... they're also quite similar to US regulations, and being outside the EU would only marginally change the situation as we'd almost certainly still be signatories to international environmental treaties (that, or we'd be a weirdo pariah state isolated from trade)

 

[Xenophon PCDGS]

The new engine emission standards were almost certainly written, in the main, by the engine manufacturers... they're also quite similar to US regulations, and being outside the EU would only marginally change the situation as we'd almost certainly still be signatories to international environmental treaties (that, or we'd be a weirdo pariah state isolated from trade)

Which asks the question of exactly what engines Vivarail propose to use in the refitment of the D78 units.

 

[SpacePhoenix]

This is a long term issue, it seems that while competing modes like cars constantly upgrade their products (the standards now are way ahead of what they were say 40 years ago), rail goes the other way.

That 40 years ago, 1975, I first went from Cambridge to London. It was in 3-across, second class, Mk 1 side corridor stock, which was actually more comfortable than most modern first class seating. By 1990 it was was Mk 2 stock with 4-across, then came emu stock which was 5-across. Now we are about to get new Thameslink stock where the emphasis seems to be on standing, with grab poles round the doors like something on the Underground..

Meanwhile, I understand no manufacturer will now offer new-build DMUs because the Euro standards for engines have been redefined yet again, for the umpteenth time, rendering all recent engine types once again disallowed for further production. So we have none available. I am surprised the anti-EU political parties have not made anything of this.

Does that make the IEP engines foul of the newest version of the regs?

 

[edwin_m]

Which asks the question of exactly what engines Vivarail propose to use in the refitment of the D78 units.

Rail diesel engines have to comply with the relevant regulations applying to engines for off-road use. As the D78 engine is designed for automotive use it is likely to comply already with the more stringent regulations for on-road use.
--- old post above --- --- new post below ---

Does that make the IEP engines foul of the newest version of the regs?

According to Wikipedia they are IIIb compliant which I think is the latest version, and I read somewhere that they need AdBlue which is one method used to reduce the emissions of diesel engines. The extra equipment is probably one reason the floors of the diesel-fitted coaches have to be raised - something that can just about be done in a 25m car with doors at the ends but probably not in a 23m vehicle with doors at 1/3 and 2/3.

 

[Bletchleyite]

I'm pretty sure I read that the suggestion it was impossible to build a compliant DMU was completely false, and the issue was actually with large diesel locomotive engines?

Neil

 

[D60]

Paul asks which engines are being used in the D78 conversions. This month's (Feb) Railway Magazine describes them as "low-emission.. Ford 3.2-litre diesel units producing 200hp, as fitted to Jaguar XF and some Ford Ranger pick-ups..". Elsewhere it is stated that there will be 2 per motor carriage, providing power to the existing traction motors, utilising modern control systems. The engines are installed in underfloor rafts, containing engine, generator, compressor, one power pack per motorised bogie. Apparently the engine rafts are being engineered by a specialist engine supplier, and a complete unit can be installed/removed by forklift, for ease of maintenance, servicing, etc... And that yes, they are fully compliant with the relevant eu emiisions regulations inforce... Hope that helps!

 

[Mikey C]

This is a long term issue, it seems that while competing modes like cars constantly upgrade their products (the standards now are way ahead of what they were say 40 years ago), rail goes the other way.

That 40 years ago, 1975, I first went from Cambridge to London. It was in 3-across, second class, Mk 1 side corridor stock, which was actually more comfortable than most modern first class seating. By 1990 it was was Mk 2 stock with 4-across, then came emu stock which was 5-across. Now we are about to get new Thameslink stock where the emphasis seems to be on standing, with grab poles round the doors like something on the Underground..

Meanwhile, I understand no manufacturer will now offer new-build DMUs because the Euro standards for engines have been redefined yet again, for the umpteenth time, rendering all recent engine types once again disallowed for further production. So we have none available. I am surprised the anti-EU political parties have not made anything of this.

Having endured EPBs when I was younger, including the ones with the death trap compartments, I was very happy when they were replaced with the Networkers!

 

[Bletchleyite]

Having endured EPBs when I was younger, including the ones with the death trap compartments, I was very happy when they were replaced with the Networkers!

Generally passengers like a unit of seating to themselves or their group. Compartments were therefore only any good on very quiet trains - if it's busy, my favourite type of seating is a single airline seat as found in some First Class coaches, or failing that a pair of airline seats (as I don't have to play footsie with someone).

Neil

 

[47802]

Apparently there was an article in the Sunday times yesterday which suggests the Northern Bidders will need to order new Diesel trains, OK no surprises there and I suspect the term 'New' will be rather loose to possibly include remanufactured Tube Trains.

Apparently it also suggests that TPX electrification could be postponed indefinitely and beyond 2021 and TPX will need to buy new Diesel Trains, that bit doesn't make much sense and presumably means Diesels which can be converted to electric later or Bi-Modes.

Anyway the requirements are supposed to be released this week.

 

[northwichcat]

Apparently it also suggests that TPX electrification could be postponed indefinitely and beyond 2021 and TPX will need to buy new Diesel Trains, that bit doesn't make much sense and presumably means Diesels which can be converted to electric later or Bi-Modes.

Maybe DfT have ideas about future use.

377s were ordered for initial use on Thameslink despite short term plans to introduce a fleet of 700s large enough to operate all Thameslink services.

Maybe new 4 car regional DMUs could be ordered for North TPE, which could later be cascaded to the Wales and Borders franchise?

 

[notadriver]

This is a long term issue, it seems that while competing modes like cars constantly upgrade their products (the standards now are way ahead of what they were say 40 years ago), rail goes the other way.



That 40 years ago, 1975, I first went from Cambridge to London. It was in 3-across, second class, Mk 1 side corridor stock, which was actually more comfortable than most modern first class seating. By 1990 it was was Mk 2 stock with 4-across, then came emu stock which was 5-across. Now we are about to get new Thameslink stock where the emphasis seems to be on standing, with grab poles round the doors like something on the Underground..



Meanwhile, I understand no manufacturer will now offer new-build DMUs because the Euro standards for engines have been redefined yet again, for the umpteenth time, rendering all recent engine types once again disallowed for further production. So we have none available. I am surprised the anti-EU political parties have not made anything of this.

Whilst cars have 'upgraded' their products, the road network they use is busier than ever and no matter what car you buy you are limited to a maximum of 70 mph in the UK (if you can get to that speed on our busy motorways). Intercity trains at least have been steadily increasing speeds and decreasing journey times. There is no way a car could get from York to London in 2 hours for example.

 

[alexl92]

I've said it before, but obviously the pacers and 150s need replacing, which is around 275 units based on a rough, wikipedia-sourced count. Add this to 153s being reformed into 155s which halves the number of those available.... I'm sure that an order of even 100 DMUs could find work for many years to come on the lines that won't be electrified any time soon.

 

[jopsuk]

Does that make the IEP engines foul of the newest version of the regs?

No. As the regulations have been in development for a very long time, the engines specced for IEP will have been so that they meet the emissions regulations that will be in force at delivery. Changes to the regulations do not spring out of nowhere, they are part of a process in which the manufacturers are involved (so that they can say what is viable). The regulations are not some sort of flight of fancy dreamt up by a pencil pusher in an office in Brussels.

 

[Bletchleyite]

I've said it before, but obviously the pacers and 150s need replacing, which is around 275 units based on a rough, wikipedia-sourced count. Add this to 153s being reformed into 155s which halves the number of those available.... I'm sure that an order of even 100 DMUs could find work for many years to come on the lines that won't be electrified any time soon.

The Pacers need replacing. Getting rid of anything else would be lunacy while there is still overcrowding caused only by too-short trains as in plenty of places outside London.

Neil