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

[Chris125]

Controversial statement alert, I would rather have a load of these than tarted up 150s on short to mid distance low speed work. Great vid.

Absolutely, that looks and sounds so much better than my recent experiences of 150s.

 

[Blindtraveler]

Bluddy Hell, someone agrees with me!

 

[Bornin1980s]

Are we sure these units are no longer fire hazards? This might get renewed scrutiny after Grenfell.

I mean, can a miniaturised genset ever be safe? You can't just miniatureise internal combustion engines, high voltage alternators and fuel lines like smartphone circuits.

 

[Chris125]

Are we sure these units are no longer fire hazards? This might get renewed scrutiny after Grenfell.

It isn't the first DMU to have an engine fire and I doubt it'll be the last, so long as they've rectified the issues that led to the previous incident I can't see a problem.

 

[Blindtraveler]

Unless the walls of the coaches, cabs and bog are clad in a certain way I doubt the above has any baring.

 

[Bornin1980s]

That's true. The interior of the burning carriage was undamaged. Apparently, some engineers had complained when dmus were first required to have steel firewalls in the floor, but the system was proven here. Would I be right in saying that building and transport fire regulations are entirely separate, with transport regulations generally tougher?

 

[fgwrich]

Thanks for the Video Simon, I've just watched it over on RMweb and it goes to enforce my view that ordered to the right specification, These will be very versatile and handy units for areas that really do need them. For example, with the looming deadline for the Pacer Fleet, Rolling stock shortage and virtually stalled franchise replacement, a batch of these would pretty much be ideal for the Cardiff Valley Lines network as a stop gap until Electrification completed and pacer replacement / Valley Lines stock supplement. The Marston Vale line would also be my other main choice for these units. They can provide a good balance of standing and seated capacity, and thanks to their extensive 2006 refurbishment still have a fairly high quality base to work from.

 

[edwin_m]

Any train that runs underground has to meet very stringent fire regulations so the ex-LT parts of the D78 probably exceeded the requirements for surface running from the start. In relation to the genset and other parts added by Vivarail, the principles of fire protection for underfloor engines have been learned the hard way over many years. It's unfortunate that many of those failed to be applied to the original design of the genset, but we have to hope that lesson has also been learned.

 

[DerekC]

I mean, can a miniaturised genset ever be safe? You can't just miniatureise internal combustion engines, high voltage alternators and fuel lines like smartphone circuits.

The gensets aren't miniaturised - they are assembled from standard automotive and industrial components. Just small by railway standards.

 

[asylumxl]

Great video Simon. Even answered a question I had regarding the gangways between coaches!

Sent from my LG-H870 using Tapatalk

 

[1179_Clee2]

Controversial statement alert, I would rather have a load of these than tarted up 150s on short to mid distance low speed work. Great vid.

I would rather ride on a 150 that has had a proper refurb that a tarted up tube train any day of the week.
Great vid it shows exactly what vivarail are offering (a MK 2 pacer) Poor quality ride on jointed track and noisy on curves due to running on LU bogies with small diameter wheels. Exactly what you would expect from a MK 2 pacer D(E)MU !!

 

[keith1879]

I would rather ride on a 150 that has had a proper refurb that a tarted up tube train any day of the week.
Great vid it shows exactly what vivarail are offering (a MK 2 pacer) Poor quality ride on jointed track and noisy on curves due to running on LU bogies with small diameter wheels. Exactly what you would expect from a MK 2 pacer D(E)MU !!

I would have thought that smaller wheels wold reduce flange squeal - or was it another aspect of the noise that you were referring to?

 

[1179_Clee2]

I would have thought that smaller wheels wold reduce flange squeal - or was it another aspect of the noise that you were referring to?

The small wheels produce flange squeal, vids of them on LU or NR track show that they do this.
A 150 DMU also does this but not as long or as noisy. I have not seen or rode on a D78 or a 230 but have rode on several 150 DMU's from 3 different TOC's.

 

[47802]

I would rather ride on a 150 that has had a proper refurb that a tarted up tube train any day of the week.
Great vid it shows exactly what vivarail are offering (a MK 2 pacer) Poor quality ride on jointed track and noisy on curves due to running on LU bogies with small diameter wheels. Exactly what you would expect from a MK 2 pacer D(E)MU !!

I would agree and the automotive bits of this train are still somewhat un proven in a railway environment, along with the ride at 60mph.

You can argue that the finished product will be OK from a passenger perspective and maybe some TOC's will opt to use them in some way, but on the other hand is not exactly taking Rail Travel forward being somewhat equivalent to a mid 80's DMU.

 

[D365]

I would rather ride on a 150 that has had a proper refurb that a tarted up tube train any day of the week.

You're in luck then as this isn't a 'tube' train.

 

[MatthewRead]

Thanks for the Video Simon, I've just watched it over on RMweb and it goes to enforce my view that ordered to the right specification, These will be very versatile and handy units for areas that really do need them. For example, with the looming deadline for the Pacer Fleet, Rolling stock shortage and virtually stalled franchise replacement, a batch of these would pretty much be ideal for the Cardiff Valley Lines network as a stop gap until Electrification completed and pacer replacement / Valley Lines stock supplement. The Marston Vale line would also be my other main choice for these units. They can provide a good balance of standing and seated capacity, and thanks to their extensive 2006 refurbishment still have a fairly high quality base to work from.

The refurbishment was in 2004 not 2006.
Besides I had a dream that they were being used on the Paginton local services with 150's and 158's now imagine if that became reality

 

[northwichcat]

The small wheels produce flange squeal, vids of them on LU or NR track show that they do this.
A 150 DMU also does this but not as long or as noisy. I have not seen or rode on a D78 or a 230 but have rode on several 150 DMU's from 3 different TOC's.

Between Skelton Junction and Deansgate Junction a 142 produces a deafening squeal - really if the windows are open passengers should be given ear protectors. A 150 produces a squeal but no way near as loud as a Pacer. D-Trains did squeal on the curve near Fulham Broadway when they were being used on District Line services, while the replacement Underground trains on the District Line don't produce any real noticeable squeal.

 

[Bletchleyite]

You can argue that the finished product will be OK from a passenger perspective and maybe some TOC's will opt to use them in some way, but on the other hand is not exactly taking Rail Travel forward being somewhat equivalent to a mid 80's DMU.

I wouldn't say that the passenger experience level was an awful lot different to a Stadler GTW, which is the rough equivalent (the FLIRT's cheaper baby brother for low-speed branch lines - GA have chosen the premium option! ).

 

[Dstock7080]

D-Trains did squeal on the curve near Fulham Broadway when they were being used on District Line services, while the replacement Underground trains on the District Line don't produce any real noticeable squeal.

When S Stock became in the majority on the District Line the rails were reprofiled to better suit the new trains, thus causing much more squeal for D Stock on several sections.

S Stock also have on-board lube-sticks, whereas D Stock relied upon track mounted greasers.

 

[Clip]

Excellent video Simon.Really want a go on one now.

 

[47802]

I wouldn't say that the passenger experience level was an awful lot different to a Stadler GTW, which is the rough equivalent (the FLIRT's cheaper baby brother for low-speed branch lines - GA have chosen the premium option! ).

I would class a Stadler GTW a lot better than these, and alright well these are OK for a low speed branch line well yes OK but operators may want maximum flexibility. With Northern their post 2019 fleet will have min top speed of 75mph most will be able to go anywhere on the network, all the non connect diesel fleet can work in multiple giving a lot of flexibility.

Anyway we have been around the houses with this many times we are now on what page 348. Some people like them and some like me think there bit of cheap and nasty Pacer solution for Northern which isn't now required. Lets see who if anybody buys/leases them.

 

[fgwrich]

The refurbishment was in 2004 not 2006.
Besides I had a dream that they were being used on the Paginton local services with 150's and 158's now imagine if that became reality

Summer 2005 - 2008. So while I was 6 months out, it shows how relatively new their interiors are still.

Also in response to a comment made about their ride quality and that of them still using their ex LT Bogies - Had Metro-Cammel won the order from BR for the 1st Gen DMU replacement with their 151, We would perhaps be more used to those bogies by now as the prototype units had very similar bogies.

 

[northwichcat]

Some people like them and some like me think there bit of cheap and nasty Pacer solution for Northern which isn't now required. Lets see who if anybody buys/leases them.

Vivarail were trying to sell them to the Northern franchise but DfT & Rail North ruled them out for Northern (probably because there was an election coming up.) Vivarail also didn't produce their prototype in time. However, Vivarail did try to claim they'd be good 'Pacer replacements' and as yet there's 30 x Pacers operating in South Wales for which there are no replacements for.

 

[1179_Clee2]

I wouldn't say that the passenger experience level was an awful lot different to a Stadler GTW, which is the rough equivalent (the FLIRT's cheaper baby brother for low-speed branch lines - GA have chosen the premium option! ).

The vid of the internal corridor connection between coaches shows both cars bouncing around and giving a very rough ride, you can see this very well due the glass on the unit ends.
I don't think the Stadler units will be this bad as they will have shared bogies.
How can anybody say the passenger experience of BOTH trains would be roughly the same.
Rough riding may have been accepted on LU but it wont be accepted anywhere on NR as the company building the 230's say that they are "NEW TRAINS".

 

[Bletchleyite]

The vid of the internal corridor connection between coaches shows both cars bouncing around and giving a very rough ride, you can see this very well due the glass on the unit ends.

Be fair, it's a normally non-passenger freight line, the track will not be in great condition.

 

[1179_Clee2]

Be fair, it's a normally non-passenger freight line, the track will not be in great condition.

Just the track on many Northern (passenger) branch lines that the trains were proposed for. A ideal comparison.

 

[keith1879]

Be fair, it's a normally non-passenger freight line, the track will not be in great condition.

There doesn't seem to be much effort to make fair comparisons here. The trackwork on the LU sub-surface routes is different from normal NR track ...and this branch is typical of neither.

 

[keith1879]

Just the track on many Northern (passenger) branch lines that the trains were proposed for. A ideal comparison.

Sorry - are you seriously suggesting that Northern passenger branch lines have track like this 20 mph limited route??

 

[Bletchleyite]

Just the track on many Northern (passenger) branch lines that the trains were proposed for.

Nowhere near as bad as a 20mph freight branch.

 

[northwichcat]

Just the track on many Northern (passenger) branch lines that the trains were proposed for. A ideal comparison.

Many Northern 'branch' services join a mainline before reaching a large town or city. Would it also be ideal for them to run flat out for 5 minutes while an Intercity train passes on the adjacent track at 100mph?