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

[xc170]

Perhaps the negativity concerning the Class 230 unit can subside until it has finally emerged from its testing period and received full acceptance.

Is this too much to ask?

Good luck, unless it's an HST you have no hope here, I really don't understand the hate towards anything new here, 230, 800, 220 etc... but hey.

If the 230 is going to add capacity to branch lines, releasing 153s, 150s etc to strengthen other services then I wish Viva all the best.

From a standard passengers point of view, if the 230 has empty seats and gets you form A to B then you're not going to care where it's come from.

Just out of interest, are there any cab photos of the 230 floating around anywhere?

 

[43021HST]

I have evidence all right but I am not sharing it on a public forum, thanks. I prefer to have a job. I try and keep people here up to speed on what is and isn't going on but there are limits about how much I can post.

Because this information can't be shared into the public domain, that suggests that it's not evidence then, because clearly the decisions haven't been finalised.

With lines like Marlow, this is nothing new. I remember the discussions way back when about whether it should get a Turbo or whether we should keep an old DMU on it. The advantages of a totally standardised (and then new) fleet won the day and my list of possible retained DMU sets for Thames branches got binned!

Strange to think the possibility of Class 121s in the Thames valley into the privatisation has been mooted.

I'm still struggling to see how the D230 product is going to result in any significant orders from TOCs, especially from those that have already had a close look, are doing something else and as a consequence said no thanks.

I remain sceptical that the D230 won't be produced becuase TOCs have a habit of U-turning. Although overall I think they could be like the PPM, only a few examples ordered for specific lines. I don't think they would ever be introduced en masse. But that's my personal opinion.

Good luck, unless it's an HST you have no hope here, I really don't understand the hate towards anything new here, 230, 800, 220 etc... but hey.

That seems to be re-occurring and rather grating theme on here. I think if the users of RUK ran the railways, the average age of rolling stock would be about 60.

 

[Techniquest]

Oh dear, here come the Voyager fanboys...:roll:

Not *all* of us who despise Voyagers are against 230s, 800s and others. Quite, I'm looking forward to seeing how they get on. Voyagers, however, have major flaws and some of us will avoid them for good reason. However, would I prefer a 220 to a 170? An incredibly tough question and I think I know the answer...

Most of us here love the HSTs, yes, but only a small number of us would want to never replace them or anything else! Quite the opposite for some of us, we're looking forward to seeing what the new era will be like. Doesn't mean we can't enjoy what we like while it's still here though! My point is that you can take your tar brush and go away (I did of course have different words in my head...)

As for the 230s, I'm still waiting for an opportunity to have a ride on one. Until then, I cannot comment fairly on them. I'll still prefer a proper train over a 230, of course, but it doesn't mean I won't enjoy the 230s.

 

[superkev]

That seems to be re-occurring and rather grating theme on here. I think if the users of RUK ran the railways, the average age of rolling stock would be about 60.

It's not just on here. The whole country seems populated with "can't do that" people.
Personally it's nice to see someone brave enough to try something different.
Better to try and fail rather than not try at all.
Happy New year
K

 

[Xenophon PCDGS]

Even if the other alternative turned out to be closure of the branch?

Are you really expecting anyone to believe that if all that unfulfilled traffic demand was there, that bus operators would not miss the opportunity to garner the financial benefits ensuing?

 

[Xenophon PCDGS]

Perhaps the negativity concerning the Class 230 unit can subside until it has finally emerged from its testing period and received full acceptance.

Is this too much to ask?

On the actuality existing since the time this Vivarail project first commenced, there is more to back my argument than yours.

 

[Bletchleyite]

Oh dear, here come the Voyager fanboys...:roll:

I don't really see what an InterCity DMU has to do with a regional DMU other than them being DMUs, to be honest.

Most of us here love the HSTs, yes, but only a small number of us would want to never replace them or anything else! Quite the opposite for some of us, we're looking forward to seeing what the new era will be like.

And me - some of it looks quite good. I don't think the Voyager mistakes will be made again - they were made in the context of it being the first "high speed" DMU in very different times (for the railway). Meanwhile, the 170 was just the offspring of a Thames Turbo and a 158 (or something like that )

As for the 230s, I'm still waiting for an opportunity to have a ride on one. Until then, I cannot comment fairly on them. I'll still prefer a proper train over a 230, of course, but it doesn't mean I won't enjoy the 230s.

I think there are a few specific places (Cov-Nun and the Marston Vale being two) where such a DMU would be very suitable (in particular because of the short vehicles[1]). I don't share the problems some have with microfleets - after all, I operate a car with a fleet size of one (and LM have the PPMs of which there are only two in service anywhere on the network). If it's modular and easily maintainable, what's the problem?

[1] Other short-vehicle DMUs are available - now we have had a UK FLIRT, maybe time for a GTW for this kind of line as well?

 

[BestWestern]

Are you really expecting anyone to believe that if all that unfulfilled traffic demand was there, that bus operators would not miss the opportunity to garner the financial benefits ensuing?

I do wonder at times whether there would likely be a very plausible case for some branches to go over to high frequency bendibus operation, with the vehicles staying on the dedicated route and an interchange with rail services at one end...

But that's a long way off topic!

 

[najaB]

But that's a long way off topic!

And also the top of a very slippery slope! How long until the model moves from quiet branch lines to less trafficked mainlines (e.g. HWL, S&C)? And then how long until the dedicated bus service is 'temporarily' substituted by a regular service bus? And then that bus is withdrawn due to lack of demand? Wait a minute... haven't we been here before?

Bring on the Class 230 as far as I'm concerned!

 

[Bletchleyite]

Actually, new thread time:

http://www.railforums.co.uk/showthread.php?p=2829131#post2829131

 

[Xenophon PCDGS]

And also the top of a very slippery slope! How long until the model moves from quiet branch lines to less trafficked mainlines (e.g. HWL, S&C)? And then how long until the dedicated bus service is 'temporarily' substituted by a regular service bus? And then that bus is withdrawn due to lack of demand? Wait a minute... haven't we been here before?

I have emboldened the most relevant part of your posting.

How many of our esteemed website members running a bus service when money was being lost month after month due to lack of demand would carry on until all their available finance was gone?

 

[Clarence Yard]

Because this information can't be shared into the public domain, that suggests that it's not evidence then, because clearly the decisions haven't been finalised.

Strange to think the possibility of Class 121s in the Thames valley into the privatisation has been mooted.

I remain sceptical that the D230 won't be produced becuase TOCs have a habit of U-turning. Although overall I think they could be like the PPM, only a few examples ordered for specific lines. I don't think they would ever be introduced en masse. But that's my personal opinion.

That seems to be re-occurring and rather grating theme on here. I think if the users of RUK ran the railways, the average age of rolling stock would be about 60.

The decision on D stock for GWR has been made. Following the decision to go HST-GTI, GWR will now have a small surplus of DMU stock in 2018/9 and if there is a decision to go 319 Flex, there could be a whole lot more coming out. So there really is no need to introduce yet another type for a very limited period of use.

There was quite a discussion about which type of DMU vehicles would be used on the Thames branches if they didn't get Turbos. Most of the branches required a bit more than a bubble car but the suggestion we retained the 104 sets got a resounding no from me! My preference was to retain the 101 and/or the 108 drive trailer sets.

I agree that likely orders for the D230 stock are likely to be in penny packet numbers. I can see people like Anglia or LM using them for fill in purposes and they could have a role in the Welsh valleys but they need to get that test set working properly as time is ticking away and the day that 15x sets become spare is approaching.

When I joined BR, 25 years was the book life of stock. I get the fascination with older stock but in BR days when stock was obsolete or surplus it just got scrapped, even if it didn't last its book life. There are some future cost advantages of buying new, especially when finance is cheap.

 

[Elecman]

I'd happily see some 230s on the Blackpool South - Colne and Preston - Ormskirk routes and use the released units for strengthening other services

 

[furnessvale]

Are you really expecting anyone to believe that if all that unfulfilled traffic demand was there, that bus operators would not miss the opportunity to garner the financial benefits ensuing?

You do have way with the English language!

The question was simple. Let us say 142s are now life expired. No one will pay for new DMUs but 230s are on offer. The alternative is to close the branch. Would you accept 230s or see the branch closed?

Garnered financial benefits from unfulfilled traffic demand to local bus operators do not enter the equation.

 

[Xenophon PCDGS]

I'd happily see some 230s on the Blackpool South - Colne and Preston - Ormskirk routes and use the released units for strengthening other services

Perhaps you may care to let Northern know of this innovative idea and report back to us with their views on the same matter.

 

[Xenophon PCDGS]

You do have way with the English language!

The question was simple. Let us say 142s are now life expired. No one will pay for new DMUs but 230s are on offer. The alternative is to close the branch. Would you accept 230s or see the branch closed?

Garnered financial benefits from unfulfilled traffic demand to local bus operators do not enter the equation.

Being in the field of senior management for over thirty years, the only way that I would view this is from the perspective of a business model. Successful businesses do not thrive on sentiment. The question to be asked is if the said branch line is profitable or not. If not, it is meaningless to replace a Class 142 Pacer with another unit. The most sensible financial thing to do is just close down the branch line service, that point being the alternative that you state. That then brings into equation of the actual reality of the franchise requirements.and how the wording of that actually reads, in terms of what action would be allowed.

Let us not enter into "Titfield Thunderbolt" reasoning, which was purely based on sheer emotive sentiment.

 

[Peter Sarf]

Perhaps the negativity concerning the Class 230 unit can subside until it has finally emerged from its testing period and received full acceptance.

Is this too much to ask?

My thoughts entirely, and wonderfully put !.

I do like the idea of a 230 so lets see where it goes. That's even though I like electrification and the 442s. Sadly both of those seem to have less hope .

 

[SpacePhoenix]

The most sensible financial thing to do is just close down the branch line service, that point being the alternative that you state. That then brings into equation of the actual reality of the franchise requirements.and how the wording of that actually reads, in terms of what action would be allowed.

Would some branch lines be better off being converted to light rail (trams)?

 

[northwichcat]

You do have way with the English language!

The question was simple. Let us say 142s are now life expired. No one will pay for new DMUs but 230s are on offer. The alternative is to close the branch. Would you accept 230s or see the branch closed?

Garnered financial benefits from unfulfilled traffic demand to local bus operators do not enter the equation.

How would that scenario occur?

Are you suggesting the 142s pack in before Northern get new and cascaded trains to replace them?

Or are you suggesting a short-term fix for Valley Lines prior to electrification?

In either case would the 230s be economically viable as a short term fix? If the idea is to recoup the cost of conversion in just a few years then the cost of running 230s would be astronomical.

 

[DenmarkRail]

The most sensible financial thing to do is just close down the branch line service,

Thats what issue we have today, companies which have an iron chest of cash will close down lines even if they are losing £1....

The 230s are great for some branches, and maybe they will make the case for them to be reopened...

On that note, how about the Scottish Borders? allow 158s to be cascaded to more demanding routes in Scotland?

 

[Bantamzen]

You do have way with the English language!

The question was simple. Let us say 142s are now life expired. No one will pay for new DMUs but 230s are on offer. The alternative is to close the branch. Would you accept 230s or see the branch closed?

Garnered financial benefits from unfulfilled traffic demand to local bus operators do not enter the equation.

But there are various TOCs with new DMU or bi-modes orders already in, and wide-scale cascades possible as a result of various electrification schemes either in progress or completed. So even with the timescales to lose the Pacers and current electrification delays, there is still enough slack for all these to come into play.

VivaRail took a punt that franchises with large Pacer stocks like Northern would be awarded to companies willing to take them on. That hasn't happened so far, and they are quickly running out of large scale buyers. It is becoming increasingly difficult to see more than a handful of possibilities that might see 230s bought specifically for, and even then there are likley to be other DMU options available by cascade or in the case of franchise renewals potential bolt-on orders to existing orders.

I make no bones about the fact that I am not a fan of the scheme. I've always thought it was a cheap, limited, short term solution for a complex long term problem. And now that several TOCs have turned their backs on the 230 it might be time to accept that it simply isn't the Pacer replacement solution it was originally mooted to be be. If some do make it out into the wild full time to keep low capacity branches open then so be it, but I seriously doubt that most of the D-stock currently owned by VivaRail will end up as anything other than scrap.

 

[northwichcat]

Actually, new thread time:

http://www.railforums.co.uk/showthread.php?p=2829131#post2829131

I think some people missed your post judging by the above posts.

 

[D60]

In the (almost) two and a half years (!) since the D-train proposal was first made public, the goalposts, indeed the whole playing field, have shifted considerably... (emissions-compliant diesel trains that were then seemingly difficult to source, now on order... large-scale investment in new trains for the North of England that then seemed unlikely, now forthcoming... etc... etc...)..

And despite the possibility/likelihood (see post #4369) that Vivarail might have received tacit encouragement 'from on high' at that time to proceed with the D-train project... goalposts have since shifted... and informed industry insiders are suggesting that routes, and TOCs, that many have speculated over 300 pages may have been possible homes for 230s, now in fact won't be...

So with potential doors being closed off to Vivarail over the ensuing 2 1/2 years.. apart from possible further interest from LM, and ATW(?)...

Bearing in mind that Vivarail's principal financier is a US-based international investor with interests in rail operations in developing markets on 4 continents... might it be possible that Vivarail's 'confirmed orders' might include an export order..? (the recent revaluation of the pound post-referendum would be beneficial in this respect..)..

 

[Z12XE]

...

Bearing in mind that Vivarail's principal financier is a US-based international investor with interests in rail operations in developing markets on 4 continents... might it be possible that Vivarail's 'confirmed orders' might include an export order..? (the recent revaluation of the pound post-referendum would be beneficial in this respect..)..

I was thinking that (about these mysterous buyers) else wouldnt those who have ordered them be part of the trial, rather than this West Midlands Partnershp.

Go look at the WNXX forum for details on how London Midland are even in the dark over the prototype unit and just how its being funded

 

[Xenophon PCDGS]

Would some branch lines be better off being converted to light rail (trams)?

The Manchester Metrolink and the former Oldham loop line was one example of this happening, after the original Bury and Altrincham lines were the original heavy rail lines thus converted.

 

[Xenophon PCDGS]

On that note, how about the Scottish Borders? allow 158s to be cascaded to more demanding routes in Scotland?

Oh dear, I can well imagine how that particular Class 230 aspiration would be received by certain political parties over the border...

 

[D365]

Would some branch lines be better off being converted to light rail (trams)?

Absolutely not. For a start, it's more expensive, and look at how well the tram-train 'pilot' is going in Sheffield.

As for simply culling branch lines, rather than providing a low-cost solution... eh?

 

[Ianno87]

Would some branch lines be better off being converted to light rail (trams)?

That was the plan for the Abbey Line. Until Herts CC realised that they would be lumbered with the running costs.

 

[HSTEd]

Absolutely not. For a start, it's more expensive, and look at how well the tram-train 'pilot' is going in Sheffield.

But it wouldn't be tram-trains.... it would be trams?

Delta-RAil came to the conclusion that a low performance electric traction supply would be inexpensive to provide - at which point the lower performance and structural demands of a tram will start to tell against a heavy rail diesel unit. If we were permitted third rail it might be a different story - but we aren't.

 

[Xenophon PCDGS]

Absolutely not. For a start, it's more expensive, and look at how well the tram-train 'pilot' is going in Sheffield.

As for simply culling branch lines, rather than providing a low-cost solution... eh?

Are you aware of how the Manchester Metrolink system is funded?

How do your financial estimates for your stated "low cost" solution meet the financial examination of the auditors charged with carrying out this task. No such figures are available for the Class 230 unit project that is still in the mode of testing. Is it not said that only the very basic Vivarail Class 230 unit design was only the base upon which additional refinements by a TOC over and above that would most certainly increase the leasing cost.