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

[Haydn1971]

Why does it matter how old the shell is provided the comfort and capacity is up to scratch? Is it that

In principle, I've no issues with old stock with new interiors, but what does annoy me is the so called "refurbs" that we so often get, the 319's got a lick of paint, new carpets, seat covers and not much else, despite promises of much more. Some stock is just dire, with saggy seats, smelly toilets, deeply filthy, lack sufficient baggage space, lack of onboard information, no power, no wifi, aircon/heating that doesn't work. That's before we get onto the mechanics, crash worthiness and other such safety related features, not to mention lack of seat bookings or real time information on how full a train is.

Fix all that and I'll be happy with old trains

 

[jopsuk]

Yup- there's been much proposed with the Mark 3 EMUs, but over and over again we seem to have got the budget options, In a better world, the 317, 321, 322 and no-longer-to-ever-use DC 319s could be given a thorough going over to give them air conditioning, new seating, even new cabs (a couple were proposed for the 319s) and new traction

 

[Dent]

not to mention lack of seat bookings or real time information on how full a train is.

Fix all that and I'll be happy with old trains

What has whether the operator offers seat reservations got to do with the age or condition of the stock?

I have never known any operator provides real time information about loading, but again what does that have to do with the age or condition of the stock?

 

[southern442]

Yup- there's been much proposed with the Mark 3 EMUs, but over and over again we seem to have got the budget options, In a better world, the 317, 321, 322 and no-longer-to-ever-use DC 319s could be given a thorough going over to give them air conditioning, new seating, even new cabs (a couple were proposed for the 319s) and new traction

Sometimes I wonder to myself about the hundereds of new trains that could be made from all the mark 2 and 3 coaches lying around. Obviously they would need a cab and a traction engine, and probably a done up interior. I know the chances of it happening are a million to one, but I really think that the idea of 'recycling trains' can work.

 

[TransportHub]

In a better world, the 317, 321, 322 and no-longer-to-ever-use DC 319s could be given a thorough going over to give them air conditioning, new seating, even new cabs

While they are old I will miss the distinctive groan of the 319s when they all go up north. However I can't complain the 700s look amazing.

 

[Bletchleyite]

Sometimes I wonder to myself about the hundereds of new trains that could be made from all the mark 2 and 3 coaches lying around. Obviously they would need a cab and a traction engine, and probably a done up interior. I know the chances of it happening are a million to one, but I really think that the idea of 'recycling trains' can work.

There aren't loads of Mk3 coaches lying around, and the Mk2s are old and fairly knackered.

 

[jopsuk]

Sometimes I wonder to myself about the hundereds of new trains that could be made from all the mark 2 and 3 coaches lying around. Obviously they would need a cab and a traction engine, and probably a done up interior. I know the chances of it happening are a million to one, but I really think that the idea of 'recycling trains' can work.

There's not that many "spare" Mark 3 coaches. Between the Ex WSMR (now Chiltern) mark 3 sets, the Grand Central HSTs (which use what were "spare" power cars and coaches built as loco-hauled) and the GW HST extensions to 8-car (and long before that, EC extension to 9-car) there's few to be found.

 

[Haydn1971]

Are most of the 850 ish Mk3's that were built still in service ? If not, what happened to them ?

 

[Bletchleyite]

In principle, I've no issues with old stock with new interiors, but what does annoy me is the so called "refurbs" that we so often get, the 319's got a lick of paint, new carpets, seat covers and not much else, despite promises of much more. Some stock is just dire, with saggy seats, smelly toilets, deeply filthy, lack sufficient baggage space, lack of onboard information, no power, no wifi, aircon/heating that doesn't work. That's before we get onto the mechanics, crash worthiness and other such safety related features, not to mention lack of seat bookings or real time information on how full a train is.

Fix all that and I'll be happy with old trains

The great majority of that has nothing to do with the age of the train and everything to do with how it is maintained. And the fGW HSTs and Arriva Trains Wales Mk3s prove you can make a 1970s train into something that is brand new. As for crashworthiness I don't think it's going to be any worse than Sprinters etc, which aren't going away any time soon. As trains crash so rarely, I really wouldn't worry about it - you'll make yourself safer by changing things about how you get to the station.

 

[jopsuk]

Are most of the 850 ish Mk3's that were built still in service ? If not, what happened to them ?

Lets see. Making a big assumption the Wikipedia is up to date on this.
FGW have 464
XC have 40
Chiltern have 26
EMT have 108
GC have 16
ATW have 8
AGA have 201
VTEC have 117
Royals have 9

which totals 989, and that's not including SLE/SLEP & DVTs. Not sure if it includes (in the AGA total) the "Pretendolino" and I don't know how many DBS have (company train, in store) or how many are at charter operators?

Plus, how many have been written off?

 

[D6975]

Are most of the 850 ish Mk3's that were built still in service ? If not, what happened to them ?

Yup, most of the daytime Mk3s are still in service. A few have been scrapped after accidents, but most of them are still going. FGW, EC EMT and GC have loads of the HST type, over 600 in service IIRC. Some of the loco hauled ones got converted to HST use, the XC HSTs are a mix of original HST and conversions. The other loco hauled Mk3s are mostly in Anglia and on the Chiltern line.

 

[Clip]

So the rubbish trains that run on the Chiltern route. Do they stop at stations or do they run no stop, subject to signalling of course. What will take more space on a minimum 75mph railway, is it the train that runs no stop or the train that stops at stations. And yes i do know the railway that i work on......

Hmm you seem to be going round in circles here sweatheart so to recap, you asked - when talking about running to PAD

Where is it going to be kept? The nearest depot is Wembley LMD. To get from West Ruislip to Wembley will mean a 60mph journey on a 100mph railway as far as Great Central Way Junction to reverse into Wembley, otherwise a journey all of the way in to London.

You automatically assumed Wembley due to your perceived idea that you cant run a 60MPH train on the mainline - which shows you are not thinking openly.

Or like your friend thinks

Unlikely to be able to path a 60mph unproven train in between 100mph mainline services either.
.

So I gave a situation where there is another train that runs at the same speed as these on the line that a couple of you say cannot happen Yet I have demonstrated that it can and does happen. I mentioned nothing about the train stopping at any stations on its way to Aylesbury - you assumed I did and you assumed that Wembley would be the only place to store.

As I said earlier - open thinking isn't quite your forte nor others is it?

 

[t_star2001uk]

Hmm you seem to be going round in circles here sweatheart so to recap, you asked - when talking about running to PAD

You were the one who mentioned the Skip train that runs on the Chiltern route. So You have not answered the question posed. What type of 60 mph train will clear the line faster. Is it a 60 mph freight train that runs non stop or is it the stopping passenger train.

You automatically assumed Wembley due to your perceived idea that you cant run a 60MPH train on the mainline - which shows you are not thinking openly.

Again if a D-Train is used on WRU-PAD the nearest depot for fuel and servicing on the Chiltern Route is Wembley.

So I gave a situation where there is another train that runs at the same speed as these on the line that a couple of you say cannot happen Yet I have demonstrated that it can and does happen. I mentioned nothing about the train stopping at any stations on its way to Aylesbury - you assumed I did and you assumed that Wembley would be the only place to store.

Again the question that was asked above. What will be faster between SRU and AYL. Is it a 60 mph freight train that does not stop or a 60 mph stopping passenger train. Would it be the non stop freight?

You have mentioned that you used to work on Chiltern. Was that before or after Evergreen 3?

 

[Bletchleyite]

Again the question that was asked above. What will be faster between SRU and AYL. Is it a 60 mph freight train that does not stop or a 60 mph stopping passenger train. Would it be the non stop freight?

Yes, but that is of no significance because there are already 4tph of 60mph (well, 62mph strictly, but what's 2mph between friends?) EMUs on the Aylesbury line in the form of the Met Line services.

 

[Buttsy]

Looks to me as if t_star2001uk has the same feeling as those in Northernland - I don't want it running in my area as it'll be s***.

If the Bicester Town service was still just a stub, or if the Cotswold line was double at the southern end, I'd be happy enough to see them running out of Oxford to replace a unit (Bicester) or provide a service enhancement for stations to Moreton-in-Marsh. TBH, would be happy if they were on the Banbury shorts if timings allowed (busy, that bit north of Oxford).

As I have said before, there are places that could be suited to these units and Princes Risborough - Aylesbury seems a reasonable proving ground. Would also suggest the Stourbridge shuttle, but that might be too short. Nuneaton - Coventry and Marston Vale lines would probably fit as well as they are not too far from Long Marston either.

 

[Bletchleyite]

Looks to me as if t_star2001uk has the same feeling as those in Northernland - I don't want it running in my area as it'll be s***.

But none of us have seen one to see if it will indeed be "s***" or not.

 

[Buttsy]

But none of us have seen one to see if it will indeed be "s***" or not.

Very true, but I'm hoping that it won't be as s*** as a 142 pacer!

 

[Clip]

You were the one who mentioned the Skip train that runs on the Chiltern route. So You have not answered the question posed. What type of 60 mph train will clear the line faster. Is it a 60 mph freight train that runs non stop or is it the stopping passenger train.


?

Erm as I pointed out - in the terms of the PAD service it can run all the way back from where it finishes at West Ruislip to Aylesbury - it doesn have to stop anywhere so what do you think will clear the line faster?

Again if a D-Train is used on WRU-PAD the nearest depot for fuel and servicing on the Chiltern Route is Wembley.

In terms of distance yes, however getting it on the right road from WRU is very difficult as you well know so there is nothing stopping it from going to Aylesbury - non stop - magically just like that.

Again the question that was asked above. What will be faster between SRU and AYL. Is it a 60 mph freight train that does not stop or a 60 mph stopping passenger train. Would it be the non stop freight??

Again I have to point out that it is you who thinks it has to be a stopping service - I haven't said it has to - has anyone else but you ?? No. Sorry I forgot this is you

You have mentioned that you used to work on Chiltern. Was that before or after Evergreen 3?

Irrelevant.

I have sat here and pointed out with reasoned thought why the demonstrator could be used on both the line to PAD as well as the line between risborough and Aylesbury - I have asked you and your mate to actually have an open mind and to think about it yet you stubbornly refuse to do so and to try and prove your point you have invented spurious different things which were not well thought out nor actually relevant. and still claim that a service limited to 60MPH can not run on the mainline. Complete crap.

 

[devinier]

It seems to me that a max speed of 60mph compared to 75 mph should not be a major handicap. Providing the D train can accelerate to 60 mph faster than a 14x, or a 15x for that matter, then why can't they replace such units on the majority of their workings ?

 

[Harpers Tate]

Precisely. Some of the nay-sayers here seem all obsessed with this top speed limitation, whereas in truth it will be an irrelevance in many potential locations.

For example (and I know there is stuff in the ITT with seems to suggest no D-trains for Northern) but that aside for the moment:
- ALL of the route Lincoln - Sheffield - (all stations to) Doncaster: I don't believe any of the current rolling stock will ever exceed 60 mph on this route, except on the rare occasion the random unit generator produces a 158, and then only for about a mile between Aldwarke and Swinton.
- ALL of the route York (via Harrogate) Leeds - doesn't mix with anything else anywhere significant
- Stopping services Leeds - Barnsley - Sheffield; Leeds - Knottingley (and occasionally on to Goole)
- and so on; the list goes on and on and on. 60mph top speed will make not one iota of difference. And this is just in S & W Yorks. North East Coast? Whitby? On and on. We could easily find allocation for 120 cars, improve the service from what it is at present and offer more room, and probably get there quicker. Yes, quicker.

 

[NSEFAN]

Again I have to point out that it is you who thinks it has to be a stopping service - I haven't said it has to - has anyone else but you ?? No. Sorry I forgot this is you

Even if put on the semi fast (heck why not the Birmingham - London service!!), the acceleration will probably be no better than the native DMUs which also have a higher top speed. Ignoring the aspect of passenger comfort and interior furnishings, a D train is probably downgrade in terms of line capacity if put on the Chiltern mainline. A stopping service is the only diagram where the existing trains may not achieve their top speed and hence a D train might be acceptable.

This is in the context of the Chiltern route. How timings compare will depend on the acceleration of a D train compared to the native stock. I would suggest that a D train would be an improvement on the Princes Risborough - Aylesbury shuttles but would be a downgrade for Banbury - Marylebone workings, for example.

 

[route:oxford]

Again the question that was asked above. What will be faster between SRU and AYL. Is it a 60 mph freight train that does not stop or a 60 mph stopping passenger train. Would it be the non stop freight?

That's easy. It's bound to be the 60mph stopping passenger train.

Throughout the Network there are many areas of trackwork that have a DMU/Sprinter limit and a freight or loco hauled speed limit.

So despite the headline 60mph train, it's unlikely that 60mph freight service would actually run continuously at 60mph.

 

[Xenophon PCDGS]

So despite the headline 60mph train, it's unlikely that 60mph freight service would actually run continuously at 60mph.

If a dedicated pathway for that freight train alluded to above so exists, besides any obvious pre-existing speed restriction that so apply, why would not continuous running at 60mph be seen as something not achievable?

 

[route:oxford]

If a dedicated pathway for that freight train alluded to above so exists, besides any obvious pre-existing speed restriction that so apply, why would not continuous running at 60mph be seen as something not achievable?

Well, the pre-existing speed restriction would apply.

No need to make up a new one when an existing one exists.

 

[edwin_m]

While they are old I will miss the distinctive groan of the 319s when they all go up north.

Replaced by the distinctive groan of the people complaining about either losing them or getting them...

 

[FordFocus]

So I gave a situation where there is another train that runs at the same speed as these on the line that a couple of you say cannot happen Yet I have demonstrated that it can and does happen. I mentioned nothing about the train stopping at any stations on its way to Aylesbury - you assumed I did and you assumed that Wembley would be the only place to store.

As I said earlier - open thinking isn't quite your forte nor others is it?

You've ignored the reasons of why I said there are better routes than the Risborough branch. Of course a 60mph can run on a 40mph branch but that's not exactly testing it to the max is it?

I asked the question of where it's been stored and gave the reasons of where it couldn't be stored on Chiltern. Wembley was mentioned on here previously.

I'm still open minded on the project but clearly not yourself as you seem to have this obsession over a branch line in Buckinghamshire been the new Old Dalby test track

 

[Bletchleyite]

You've ignored the reasons of why I said there are better routes than the Risborough branch. Of course a 60mph can run on a 40mph branch but that's not exactly testing it to the max is it?

The traditional test ground for Derby-built DMUs, including those to be used at 100mph on the MML, was the Matlock branch. You've got to start somewhere, and if that's a success move to bigger things.

 

[47802]

Precisely. Some of the nay-sayers here seem all obsessed with this top speed limitation, whereas in truth it will be an irrelevance in many potential locations.

For example (and I know there is stuff in the ITT with seems to suggest no D-trains for Northern) but that aside for the moment:
- ALL of the route Lincoln - Sheffield - (all stations to) Doncaster: I don't believe any of the current rolling stock will ever exceed 60 mph on this route, except on the rare occasion the random unit generator produces a 158, and then only for about a mile between Aldwarke and Swinton.
- ALL of the route York (via Harrogate) Leeds - doesn't mix with anything else anywhere significant
- Stopping services Leeds - Barnsley - Sheffield; Leeds - Knottingley (and occasionally on to Goole)
- and so on; the list goes on and on and on. 60mph top speed will make not one iota of difference. And this is just in S & W Yorks. North East Coast? Whitby? On and on. We could easily find allocation for 120 cars, improve the service from what it is at present and offer more room, and probably get there quicker. Yes, quicker.

Yes there are some routes where it wont be much of an issue, but it still makes them less flexible being limited to routes where the speed is not an issue and no compatibility with northern's sprinter fleet. Incidently hasn't the joint line speed limit been put up to 70 since modernisation.

One might also ask how achievable the 60mph top speed on these trains will be and what will the ride and noise level be like at 60 mph.

People are fed up with the third rate franchise that is northern, so I think you will get more resistance to these trains on northern than anywhere else.

 

[Xenophon PCDGS]

People are fed up with the third rate franchise that is Northern, so I think you will get more resistance to these trains on Northern than anywhere else.

I am surprised that you are still having to make this statement and while that I am glad that you did so, it appears that there are still some upon this thread who still cannot accept this as a statement of fact.

 

[61653 HTAFC]

I am surprised that you are still having to make this statement and while that I am glad that you did so, it appears that there are still some upon this thread who still cannot accept this as a statement of fact.

I caught a Northern 144 from Huddersfield to Batley earlier, and it was like riding a mechanical bull at a fairground. The D stock is probably too slow for this route, but I'd bet my bottom dollar that it would be more comfortable.