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

[D365]

Rumour mill suggests Vivarail will have a complete 3 car 230 in October which FGW will be trialing in Cornwall.

I think it's been confirmed that testing will take place on the Plymouth-Gunnislake branch.

 

[Bevan Price]

Do I sense a certain geographical area location north of Birmingham being a common denominator in all those lines shown above?

Only because I live there. Some East Anglia, Devon & Cornwall branches could be added to the list, and if they were not being electrified, most of the Cardiff Valleys lines would also qualify for inclusion. Indeed, any line with closely-spaced stops would be potentially suitable - often such trains rarely attain much more than 45 to 50 mph between stops.

 

[D365]

and if they were not being electrified, most of the Cardiff Valleys lines would also qualify for inclusion.

If electrification works are not to be complete until after 2020 it's been suggested that the D-Trains might be of use in the interim period.

 

[JohnElliott]

According to the Hastings Observer, at least one rail users' group wants Southern to buy some D-Trains for the Ashford-Hastings line.

If so, I'll make the obvious suggestion that any sold to Southern should retain their pickup shoes and be switchable between electric and diesel power. How hard can it be?

 

[Xenophon PCDGS]

At this current point in time, does anyone know of the total number of these units that form part of the "expressed interest" to Vivarail.

 

[yorksrob]

According to the Hastings Observer, at least one rail users' group wants Southern to buy some D-Trains for the Ashford-Hastings line.

If so, I'll make the obvious suggestion that any sold to Southern should retain their pickup shoes and be switchable between electric and diesel power. How hard can it be?

That's an interesting development.

Do these trains have toilets though? It's a long enough journey between Ashford and Hastings, let alone all the way to Brighton!

 

[jimm]

That's an interesting development.

Do these trains have toilets though? It's a long enough journey between Ashford and Hastings, let alone all the way to Brighton!

As Vivarail's website says here, http://www.vivarail.co.uk/trains-town-country/ you can specify various interior layouts, including one with a full-accessible toilet module, though this would only be available in a three-car set.

 

[Philip C]

According to the Hastings Observer, at least one rail users' group wants Southern to buy some D-Trains for the Ashford-Hastings line.

If so, I'll make the obvious suggestion that any sold to Southern should retain their pickup shoes and be switchable between electric and diesel power. How hard can it be?

The current Ashford - Brighton service operates with a running time of 1hr 47min in one direction and 1hr 44min in the other. It achieves this basic service with 4 units of stock capable of running at 100mph, though I don't think top speed can currently be achieved on the line. In my experience this is not a dilatory service and the scope for delays to cause problems on the lengthy single track section often leads to the need to recover time en route.

The substitution of stock with a capability of 60mph would (1) imperil the operation of a through service with four units (2) would interwork poorly with existing fast Victoria - Eastbourne/Ore services (3) would compromise the scope for recovery of late running and (4) would, in particular, not be able to maintain scheduled runs such as Lewes-Polegate (11.5mls 12") and Eastbourne-Bexhill (12mls 14.5"). I'm sure that the Bexhill MP and the so-called User Group Chairman had a very nice day out in Warwickshire and enjoyed some Shooter Plonk but this is not likely to work without considerable down-sides.

I can see no golden bullet for the sorely stretched Ashford-Brighton service in this proposal.

 

[HSTEd]

Of course if BR had survived the Southern Region would probably building fleets of Mark 3 EMUs out of HST trailers by now.
If it hadn't already out of loco hauled Mark 3s

 

[bramling]

The current Ashford - Brighton service operates with a running time of 1hr 47min in one direction and 1hr 44min in the other. It achieves this basic service with 4 units of stock capable of running at 100mph, though I don't think top speed can currently be achieved on the line. In my experience this is not a dilatory service and the scope for delays to cause problems on the lengthy single track section often leads to the need to recover time en route.

The substitution of stock with a capability of 60mph would (1) imperil the operation of a through service with four units (2) would interwork poorly with existing fast Victoria - Eastbourne/Ore services (3) would compromise the scope for recovery of late running and (4) would, in particular, not be able to maintain scheduled runs such as Lewes-Polegate (11.5mls 12") and Eastbourne-Bexhill (12mls 14.5"). I'm sure that the Bexhill MP and the so-called User Group Chairman had a very nice day out in Warwickshire and enjoyed some Shooter Plonk but this is not likely to work without considerable down-sides.

I can see no golden bullet for the sorely stretched Ashford-Brighton service in this proposal.

Ashford - Brighton should revert to two services. For me the benefit of a through journey is outweighed by the disbenefit of overcrowding on the 2-car trains. I'd much rather change at Hastings if this allows a more comfortably journey overall.

 

[Philip C]

Ashford - Brighton should revert to two services. For me the benefit of a through journey is outweighed by the disbenefit of overcrowding on the 2-car trains. I'd much rather change at Hastings if this allows a more comfortably journey overall.

My wife, who travels daily between Warrior Square and Rye, would not agree with you! In any case loadings east of Hastings are commonly also well in excess of seating capacity.

 

[SpacePhoenix]

What's the maximum line speed on the Weymouth-Bristol route?

 

[dgl]

Well it's 75mph on sections between Dorchester west and Yeovil (and I guess Castle Cary) and 80 (iirc) between Weymouth and Dorchester (with a few slower sections coming into/leaving Weymouth station and in Dorchester)

 

[kieron]

I can think of several lines where a 60 mph limit would not be a major problem e.g.

Llandudno - Blaenau Ffestiniog
Bidston - Wrexham

Speed will be a problem with these lines, as the units currently start and end the day working along the coast. Not being able to couple to sprinters would also be a problem for the same reason.

They're things they could work around if the performance was good enough and the price reasonable, but there's still no news on that.

I don't know about the rest of your list.

 

[HSTEd]

If these units are cheaper then they can tolerate being worked less 'efficiently'.

You could dedicate units to Blaenau Ffestiniog for example.

 

[SpacePhoenix]

How many lines realistically could they be used on when you exclude all routes where they might spend part of the day on a route with a speed limit greater then 60mph?

 

[WillPS]

Loads. When the Pacers were mostly limited to 60mph they were all out every day, and they didn't have the superior acceleration these will have.

 

[yorksrob]

As Vivarail's website says here, http://www.vivarail.co.uk/trains-town-country/ you can specify various interior layouts, including one with a full-accessible toilet module, though this would only be available in a three-car set.

Fair doos.

That's the one they'd need.

Rubbish compared to a thumper trhough

 

[Xenophon PCDGS]

Loads. When the Pacers were mostly limited to 60mph they were all out every day, and they didn't have the superior acceleration these will have.

Can you clarify your comment above by stating who it was who limited the Pacer fleet to 60mph, please.

 

[route:oxford]

Can you clarify your comment above by stating who it was who limited the Pacer fleet to 60mph, please.

It was following the notorious Carden Shaft incident in Durham. It doesn't give the name of the individual who sanctioned the 60mph safety limit, but the organisation was Northern Rail.

https://www.gov.uk/government/uploa...nt_data/file/410832/120702_R122012_Durham.pdf

 

[edwin_m]

How many lines realistically could they be used on when you exclude all routes where they might spend part of the day on a route with a speed limit greater then 60mph?

That's not quite the question. If the stations on the route are close together then a stopping train might not get up to 60mph whatever the line speed. Better acceleration at lower speeds might offset short sections where other trains can exceed 60mph, and on some routes it might be acceptable to add the odd minute onto the timings.

 

[northwichcat]

It was following the notorious Carden Shaft incident in Durham. It doesn't give the name of the individual who sanctioned the 60mph safety limit, but the organisation was Northern Rail.

https://www.gov.uk/government/uploa...nt_data/file/410832/120702_R122012_Durham.pdf

It was a temporary restriction on the 142s which had been fitted with the same replacement final drives and was imposed prior to the RAIB report. A considerable number of 142s continued to operate at up to 75mph. The RAIB report actually identified more potential problems when Pacers are accelerating at low speed than when they are running at 75mph, despite the Durham incident occurring at 75mph.

No-one's provided any evidence that PPM wasn't affected on certain services by limiting some 142s to 60mph. It's not just Northern PPM that may have been affected, other operator's services might have got got stuck behind late running Northern services more often during the restrictions.

 

[Xenophon PCDGS]

That's not quite the question. If the stations on the route are close together then a stopping train might not get up to 60mph whatever the line speed. Better acceleration at lower speeds might offset short sections where other trains can exceed 60mph, and on some routes it might be acceptable to add the odd minute onto the timings.

Why should timings be seen to be "advantageously extended" () just to allow a type of unit with a low top speed to be fitted into the schedule?

 

[northwichcat]

That's not quite the question. If the stations on the route are close together then a stopping train might not get up to 60mph whatever the line speed. Better acceleration at lower speeds might offset short sections where other trains can exceed 60mph, and on some routes it might be acceptable to add the odd minute onto the timings.

I'm not sure what the long term plan is for local lines outside the North but in the Northern ITT on numerous lines there are requirements for additional services with the lesser used stations retaining the existing service level. This means they'll be more trains using the existing infrastructure and the average distance between stations will increase.

 

[Emblematic]

That's not quite the question. If the stations on the route are close together then a stopping train might not get up to 60mph whatever the line speed. Better acceleration at lower speeds might offset short sections where other trains can exceed 60mph, and on some routes it might be acceptable to add the odd minute onto the timings.

Indeed, if you start excluding trains on the basis of not being able to reach line speed, you will exclude much of the present traffic - most freight, and many suburban routes run with trains limited to below line maximum. Journey time and pathing are the only things that really matter. I think that some here have latched onto the low top speed of the D train to make out it's 'impossible' to use these trains on some routes, ignoring the fact that freight and passenger trains with widely differing speeds are often pathed on the same routes.

 

[Xenophon PCDGS]

Indeed, if you start excluding trains on the basis of not being able to reach line speed, you will exclude much of the present traffic - most freight, and many suburban routes run with trains limited to below line maximum. Journey time and pathing are the only things that really matter. I think that some here have latched onto the low top speed of the D train to make out it's 'impossible' to use these trains on some routes, ignoring the fact that freight and passenger trains with widely differing speeds are often pathed on the same routes.

One might well wonder as to the service frequency of these freight trains that you allude to in your posting above when compared to those of the passengers services.

 

[Emblematic]

One might well wonder as to the service frequency of these freight trains that you allude to in your posting above when compared to those of the passengers services.

I would imagine in many cases it's similar. Lots of routes have plenty of freight intermingling with passenger services. And in many cases it doesn't matter, if you have a regular passenger service, finding a path for one freight can mean you've found a path for that freight once per hour.

 

[Camden]

Why should timings be seen to be "advantageously extended" () just to allow a type of unit with a low top speed to be fitted into the schedule?

Only the odd minute or so was spoken about, so if it gets commuters a decent train with plenty of seating capacity that gives a smooth comfortable ride, I would say that it's probably an acceptable trade off from a passenger's perspective.

Looked at another way, your choices
Choice One, retain pacers and do nothing
Choice Two, get converted D stock, have slightly longer journeys
Choice Three, get new trains, same journey times but much higher fares

Which do you think you should go for?

 

[D365]

Choice Two, get converted D stock, have slightly longer journeys

Not necessarily - the improved acceleration of a D-Train unit could mean that journey time on stopping services will be bettered.

 

[northwichcat]

Indeed, if you start excluding trains on the basis of not being able to reach line speed, you will exclude much of the present traffic - most freight, and many suburban routes run with trains limited to below line maximum. Journey time and pathing are the only things that really matter. I think that some here have latched onto the low top speed of the D train to make out it's 'impossible' to use these trains on some routes, ignoring the fact that freight and passenger trains with widely differing speeds are often pathed on the same routes.

I agree with your first point. We see 75mph, 90mph, 100mph and 110mph trains on sections of mainline with line speeds of up to 125mph.

However, wouldn't it be a good thing to decrease the gap between the speed of the train and the line speed rather than say you can re-timetable services at the same time as others are saying there's no capacity for much needed additional services? And wouldn't it also be good to raise line speeds where possible to help provide additional capacity and to have trains which can make use of those higher line speeds?