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

[Chris125]

From Roger Ford's latest 'e-preview'

"Last week I drove to the Quinton Rail Technology Centre at Long Marston to poke around the Viva Rail D78 stock conversion plus a couple of gentle laps the test track. It was a fascinating visit and the only disappointment was that I couldn’t see inside one of the diesel engine power packs which, judging by a photo Adrian Shooter showed me on his mobile, is a clever piece of packaging.

As you might expect, given those involved, the engineering is impressive and on the brief trip the little engines purred away sounding like a proper traction diesel even though the control software is still under development. Obviously we could only bimble around the test track, reaching what we were told was 35 mile/h.

Adrian was coy over the location for service trials, no doubt hoping I hadn’t seen the First Great Western Direct Award Franchise agreement. One requirement is to evaluate the Class 230 as it is known and my bet is that this will be on the Gunnislake branch."​

 

[gazthomas]

From Roger Ford's latest 'e-preview'

"Last week I drove to the Quinton Rail Technology Centre at Long Marston to poke around the Viva Rail D78 stock conversion plus a couple of gentle laps the test track. It was a fascinating visit and the only disappointment was that I couldn’t see inside one of the diesel engine power packs which, judging by a photo Adrian Shooter showed me on his mobile, is a clever piece of packaging.

As you might expect, given those involved, the engineering is impressive and on the brief trip the little engines purred away sounding like a proper traction diesel even though the control software is still under development. Obviously we could only bimble around the test track, reaching what we were told was 35 mile/h.

Adrian was coy over the location for service trials, no doubt hoping I hadn’t seen the First Great Western Direct Award Franchise agreement. One requirement is to evaluate the Class 230 as it is known and my bet is that this will be on the Gunnislake branch."​

Intriguing. I am an advocate of this project, will continue to watch in interest.

 

[Xenophon PCDGS]

I didn't respond because it's not relevant. A D78 is better than a pacer, and I believe a D78 will provide a better experience than many 15x DMUs too. Ultimately the ability to withdraw pacers depends on the availability of stock to run the services instead. With much electrification in danger, there are obvious knock on consequences with regard to cascading. So do you want a better train ride or not, is what I think it comes down to.

There may be some who aren't enamoured with the concept of receiving hand-me-downs, of course, however the passengers riding these trains are the ones that matter and they are the ones who will receive a superior ride when they otherwise would be faced with either continuing to ride pacers or facing steep fare rises to pay for brand new trains, which are used only marginally compared to those in London (hence the economics). I think it's worth noting the advice given to the government regarding the lack of business case for replacing pacers, yet I'm sure 99% of people will be happy to see them go and replaced by something better. The D78 is better.

"Pacer" is not a generic term and there are two lessees of two different types of these units. I made reference to the Class 142 Pacer fleet that Angel Trains own and lease which are numerically greater that the Class 143/144 units owned by Porterbrook. Angel Trains made a very definitive statement about what their views on this particular type of unit when the new disability regulations come into force and as far as I can see, they have not changed their stance on that matter.

Therefore, all I can now assume is that you wish to make reference to the "Porterbrook owned Pacer units" of which, like Vivarail, they have had a prototype (Class 144) under evaluation. If you feel that the trials so far of both the Vivarail D78 and the Porterbrook Class 144 "prototype" units show that the D78 is better as stated at the end of your posting, then you have far better internal knowledge of the prototype test comparisons and as such, I would not dare to be so churlish as to dispute your newly-gained knowledge on trial results so far of both units.
--- old post above --- --- new post below ---

Currently....but not for much longer if Porterbrook have their way!

I am well aware of the matter of the Class 323 units to which you allude but for the life of me, I really cannot see anything other than another EMU replacing these on this long-electrified line.

 

[najaB]

The only logic I can see to your thinking is if you think faster trains are always slower to accelerate and require longer dwell times than slower trains, which may be the case with some trains but isn't always the case.

Show me a train that can accelerate to 125mph and brakes back down to a stop faster than it can get to 110mph and back down to zero. Also, for pathing purposes, an x minute headway translates to less physical track at a lower speed - for example a 5 minute headway requires 1.3 miles less track at 110mph than at 125mph.

So yes, you can create more capacity on the WCML by slowing all the trains down, at the cost of increased journey times.

 

[northwichcat]

In that case we have a solution to Euston capacity as well as the 323 problem - the 323s all go on Euston services and the 350s can transfer to Birmingham and Manchester. Now why didn`t anyone say that previously!

 

[SpringsBranch]

http://www.railmagazine.com/news/2015/08/24/vivarail-begins-testing-on-first-converted-d-stock

"...along the Cotswold's line to Evesham"

 

[glbotu]

................(not re-using components from existing
rolling stock)...............

This puts the nail in the coffin for the D-Train as part of the 120 new vehicles for Northern. They can't procure trains which re-use components. I feel an entire body shell is probably something that falls under this category.

It doesn't prevent them from making their own order separately and specifically not in that 120 new vehicles.
--- old post above --- --- new post below ---

http://www.railmagazine.com/news/2015/08/24/vivarail-begins-testing-on-first-converted-d-stock

"...along the Cotswold's line to Evesham"

Surely this can't be right? That would be interworking on a line with capacity constraints and 90mph speed limits. Surely that won't be for in-service testing. Maybe night runs?

 

[northwichcat]

This puts the nail in the coffin for the D-Train as part of the 120 new vehicles for Northern. They can't procure trains which re-use components. I feel an entire body shell is probably something that falls under this category.

It doesn't prevent them from making their own order separately and specifically not in that 120 new vehicles.

Or does it? The first line says "Only the following rolling stock may be proposed by Bidders" and doesn't anywhere say trains rebuilt from old trains or mention converted LU stock. Brand new S stock adapted for use on non-electrified National Rail routes would certainly meet the requirement of "Any new-build rolling stock that the Bidder commits to procure" but saying converted D78s meets that requirement is very dubious.
--- old post above --- --- new post below ---

Surely this can't be right? That would be interworking on a line with capacity constraints and 90mph speed limits. Surely that won't be for in-service testing. Maybe night runs?

Maybe it will be just for checking there's no major problems on National Rail before giving it to FGW? If they send it all the way to Cornwall and find a serious problem then it would be a long way back to Long Marston!

 

[jopsuk]

Must be night runs, surely? Makes some sense as it's rail-linked to the site- I guess there's nowhere on the Long Marston site that allows 60mph running

 

[Haydn1971]

http://www.railmagazine.com/news/2015/08/24/vivarail-begins-testing-on-first-converted-d-stock

"...along the Cotswold's line to Evesham"

Photo of the interior too !

 

[Camden]

Worth noting there that there doesn't appear to be much meaningful done to the interior of this one. If you look, there's even still a District Line stations strip stuck on.

 

[MarkyT]

Worth noting there that there doesn't appear to be much meaningful done to the interior of this one. If you look, there's even still a District Line stations strip stuck on.

They are probably (sensibly) concentrating on the new drive-train and controls. The detailed interior design development work can no doubt proceed in parallel, away from the dirty engineering workshop environment.

 

[northwichcat]

Photo of the interior too !

Direct link to the image: https://railm.blob.core.windows.net...-on-first-converted-d-stock/jak-0583_w650.jpg

Looks a bit different to the closest matching mockup even ignoring the lack of tables: http://www.lythamstannesexpress.co.uk/webimage/1.7128377.1424966549!/image/3214619073.jpg

 

[asylumxl]

I don't think the interior or the exterior is really of importance to Viva Rail at the moment. Whether or not their trains are actually useful is still up for debate, but I admire the work that has gone in to re-engineering the trains to be powered by modular diesel power packs.

Also, this video is on their blog. It's rather poor but gives us an idea of the noise level at low speed. Blog claims that section of the track is limited to 5mph.

http://www.vivarail.co.uk/wp-content/uploads/2015/08/IMG_1954.mov

 

[telstarbox]

Direct link to the image: https://railm.blob.core.windows.net...-on-first-converted-d-stock/jak-0583_w650.jpg

Looks a bit different to the closest matching mockup even ignoring the lack of tables: http://www.lythamstannesexpress.co.uk/webimage/1.7128377.1424966549!/image/3214619073.jpg

A door between the seats - reminds me of the old slammer EMUs in Kent! Or is that the door which has been plated up?

 

[Bletchleyite]

A door between the seats - reminds me of the old slammer EMUs in Kent! Or is that the door which has been plated up?

I think it's the door intended to be plated up, but for now not actually plated up.

I don't think the seating looks very good. They'd be better buying in some proper seats instead.

 

[jopsuk]

Looking at maps/aerial photos, there appears to be a siding at Evesham facing the right way. If they're talking about testing there it could be possible to run there from Long Marston in the lengthy gaps between services?

 

[61653 HTAFC]

Looking at maps/aerial photos, there appears to be a siding at Evesham facing the right way. If they're talking about testing there it could be possible to run there from Long Marston in the lengthy gaps between services?

...As long as it doesn't conk out halfway... (!)

 

[Bantamzen]

This puts the nail in the coffin for the D-Train as part of the 120 new vehicles for Northern. They can't procure trains which re-use components. I feel an entire body shell is probably something that falls under this category.

It doesn't prevent them from making their own order separately and specifically not in that 120 new vehicles.

However, given that they are likely going to be procuring (via I assume the ROSCOs) at least 120 vehicles would they really opt for a small number of non-compatible stock, or simply increase the order for the brand new units? From a logistical point of view, buying stock that can't be worked with any other units might be an issue and negate any savings made. The pros and cons of operating a mirco-fleet of stock has often been discussed here, usually with people agreeing that it usually isn't for the best.

 

[glbotu]

However, given that they are likely going to be procuring (via I assume the ROSCOs) at least 120 vehicles would they really opt for a small number of non-compatible stock, or simply increase the order for the brand new units? From a logistical point of view, buying stock that can't be worked with any other units might be an issue and negate any savings made. The pros and cons of operating a mirco-fleet of stock has often been discussed here, usually with people agreeing that it usually isn't for the best.

I guess that depends on just how cheap the D-Trains are, right. I mean, if Vivarail can really make a cut-price train out of these, then it might be viable, regardless of the other impracticalities.

 

[northwichcat]

However, given that they are likely going to be procuring (via I assume the ROSCOs) at least 120 vehicles would they really opt for a small number of non-compatible stock, or simply increase the order for the brand new units? From a logistical point of view, buying stock that can't be worked with any other units might be an issue and negate any savings made. The pros and cons of operating a mirco-fleet of stock has often been discussed here, usually with people agreeing that it usually isn't for the best.

Rumour is the new build will either be a UK version of Stadler's FLIRT or a DMU produced by CAF, it sounds like manufacturers who haven't been supplying much to the UK see it as an opportunity.

I would be surprised if DfT didn't allow an option for an add-on to the new diesel order (even if the add-ons don't go to Northern) as that's what they've done with all recent orders.
--- old post above --- --- new post below ---

I guess that depends on just how cheap the D-Trains are, right. I mean, if Vivarail can really make a cut-price train out of these, then it might be viable, regardless of the other impracticalities.

Rumoured price is £2m for a 3 car D-Train (54m in length), for a similar price a few years ago Bombardier would have given you a brand new vehicle just under 24m in length.

To me considering the brand new vehicle could last 30+ years and can run at 100mph, the D-Train seems poor value for money.

 

[HSTEd]

Rumoured price is £2m for a 3 car D-Train (54m in length), for a similar price a few years ago Bombardier would have given you a brand new vehicle just under 24m in length.

To me considering the brand new vehicle could last 30+ years and can run at 100mph, the D-Train seems poor value for money.

The D-Train could probably manage 20 and 100mph isn't much use on some lines I could think of.
£2m for 54m is roughly £37k per metre, compared to well over £80k.
The interest payments alone would be crippling for the... one carriage Turbostar?

For example the timetable on the Nottingham-Skegness via Grantham route is so padded that they would probably be able to manage to keep to time there.
And many people would trade one 156 per hour for 2 D-trains I imagine.

EDIT:

Not one section above 60mph between Allington Junction and Skegness - there is some 75mph between Grantham and Nottingham, but as I said it is slackly timetabled.
It appears to be roughly ten miles or so at 75mph - rest at 50/60 or other speeds.
Ten miles at 75 instead of 60 saves at maximum 2 minutes - and a lot of that will be lost as the relatively slow accelerating sprinter speeds up or slows down.
Especially with station stops in the middle of some of those sections - like at Bottesford.

You could probably manage it with similar travel times and stopping patterns today if you just removed some of the padding and accepted slightly lower reliability, which people would care less about once you pack in additional trains - at least on the Nottingham to Sleaford section as the long section of single track approaching Skegness would become limiting.

Assuming the incredibly expensive 'upgrade' at Nottingham was actually capable of accepting more trains.

 

[SpacePhoenix]

Given that it's been mentioned in another thread about a possible major budget cut for NR, if that results in a load of electrification schemes getting "paused" or axed, with some DMU units possibly having to be withdrawn within the next decade with structural issues, if all absolutely all D-stock gets converted would that be enough to cope with the replacement of knackered units or would new units need to be ordered in addition to replace knackerd units and to boost capacity?

 

[D365]

Given that it's been mentioned in another thread about a possible major budget cut for NR, if that results in a load of electrification schemes getting "paused" or axed, with some DMU units possibly having to be withdrawn within the next decade with structural issues, if all absolutely all D-stock gets converted would that be enough to cope with the replacement of knackered units or would new units need to be ordered in addition to replace knackerd units and to boost capacity?

I was always under the impression that a 'Control Period' investment budget is separate to that of the general Network Rail budget, as when these budget cuts have previously been discussed it wasn't supposed to have had any impact on CP5 planning and implementation.

 

[GrimsbyPacer]

Why is the D-Train green? I thought Northern were getting them.

 

[Haydn1971]

Why is the D-Train green? I thought Northern were getting them.

No, Sodor Railways are having them !

 

[gazthomas]

I dropped a note to the Comms Manager at Vivarail to explain the debate we're having here. I am now on their mailing list and got this earlier. Maybe of interest: http://us10.campaign-archive1.com/?u=f595bd06814b920da968cadee&id=e25862eea4&e=5cfeb664da

 

[Emblematic]

Given that it's been mentioned in another thread about a possible major budget cut for NR, if that results in a load of electrification schemes getting "paused" or axed, with some DMU units possibly having to be withdrawn within the next decade with structural issues, if all absolutely all D-stock gets converted would that be enough to cope with the replacement of knackered units or would new units need to be ordered in addition to replace knackerd units and to boost capacity?

Easy enough to work out. There are 188 carriages of class 142 which even the owners have lost interest in, so they are gone. Let's assume there are no takers for e-Pacer scheme, that's another 102 lost. What else? The sprinter fleet is in reasonable shape, probably OK for another decade; but the Leyland built units seem to be less robust than the others, reports of body sagging etc. so let's also assume they don't last a decade - another 84 cars gone. So on the debit side that's 374 carriages down.
On the upside we have 120 new-build carriages for the Northern franchise, plus the D trains. These are limited by the number of DMs available, some are being retained for de-icing trains so let's say 160 DMs, no shortage of trailers so let's assume we get 80 3-car trains. That's 360 potential new carriages. So the numbers are quite even.
Obviously there are some huge simplifications in the above - all carriages are not equal, and there are 70 single-car units included in the debit list (although these could well get reformed back to twins to meet 2020 regs anyway.) But there will be units released from the GW electrification, which is certain to get completed - all the Thames turbos will cascade westwards, and the released units should make up shortfalls and allow some growth (more or less.)
Where it gets interesting is if if electrification stalls and remains stalled through CP6 - then all the sprinter units start reaching the end of their useful lives and will need plans for replacement. If electrification proceeds with further projects, there should be progressive displacement of DMUs and little need for more DMU procurement.

 

[Nym]

VivaRail have 78 'A' DM, 'D' DM, 'A' UDM and 'D' UDM vehicle pairs if I'm remembering correctly, from a fleet of 85 driving motor pairs.

Some are to be retained by LUL for Rail Adhesion Trains, although they are de-icer units, there is plenty of de-icer available on S-Stock...

There may be some other destinations for the remaining DM and UDM cars...?

 

[Domh245]

My understanding is that all of the UDMs are off to Rotherham for processing. Vivarail might have (rather, I hope they have!) come to some agreement to obtain the bogies and motors from the UDMs for use as spares later down the line.