Transport for Wales Class 231 / 756 Stadler FLIRTs

[anthony263]

Heard from where, sorry?

Been reported on a couple of south wales railway groups on Facebook their usually pretty much on the ball

 

[Peter Sarf]

Looking at the photo again, the phrasing "Level access only" and "0-55mm"* might be a bit of a clue.

Though - helpful as it is - I'm not sure who it's aimed at. I'd have thought all staff needed to know is that it's for use with a 231.
(I hope also 756...)

* Didn't anyone tell the person making the lable that one puts a space between a number and its unit?

My eyesight says 0-50MM, and capital "M"s. But what is that referring to - the gap ?. If it is then Five Centimetres - that's just about two inches !. I can only imagine a front castor on a wheelchair needing that if the user decides to turn just as the wheels hit the gap.

I do get the sense that the last steps to introduction are happening and so must be imminent.

 

[CardiffKid]

0-55mm*

* Didn't anyone tell the person making the lable that one puts a space between a number and its unit?

No space please

 

[AdamWW]

My eyesight says 0-50MM, and capital "M"s. But what is that referring to - the gap ?. If it is then Five Centimetres - that's just about two inches !. I can only imagine a front castor on a wheelchair needing that if the user decides to turn just as the wheels hit the gap.

Yes 0-50. Typo - sorry.

I took that to be their definition of "level", i.e no more than 50 mm height difference.

No space please

No? The SI would certainly not agree.

 

[Energy]

I'm surprised at this. The "ramp" I've seen used on an Anglia FLIRT was practically flat - a gap filler rather than a ramp in the sense of accommodating a change in level.

It's a gap filler not a ramp, the trains themselves are built to the UK height of 915mm with the sliding bit to deal with the gap between the train and platform. Slight ramps on the platforms themselves are due to some platforms not being built to 915mm exactly.

 

[AdamWW]

It's a gap filler not a ramp, the trains themselves are built to the UK height of 915mm with the sliding bit to deal with the gap between the train and platform. Slight ramps on the platforms themselves are due to some platforms not being built to 915mm exactly.

Thanks.

Looking at the photo again, I'm also surprised to see an "SWL" quoted.

At least in the world of lifting gear, I believe the term "safe working limit" isn't generally used any more (partly for legal reasons - presumably implying that something is "safe" could imply liability if it turns out not to be).

 

[anthony263]

Screenshot from twitter confirming the first class 231 to enter service this week

 

[TT-ONR-NRN]

Screenshot from twitter confirming the first class 231 to enter service this week

That’s something for me to do on Monday then

 

[Anonymous10]

That’s something for me to do on Monday then

Should be nice for me when I next visit family there the 769s are OK but definitely not great

 

[sd0733]

That’s something for me to do on Monday then

None are planned Monday. Should be out from Wednesday.

 

[TT-ONR-NRN]

None are planned Monday. Should be out from Wednesday.

Ahh, okay, thanks. Might I request if you know which diagram, as I have exams due on Friday and should really keep train jaunts to a minimum, so if I can plan a very short trip that fits in with a day in the library it’s all the better

 

[sd0733]

Ahh, okay, thanks. Might I request if you know which diagram, as I have exams due on Friday and should really keep train jaunts to a minimum, so if I can plan a very short trip that fits in with a day in the library it’s all the better

No idea I'm afraid, was told today but that's where my knowledge ends on this one!!

 

[Peter Sarf]

Should be nice for me when I next visit family there the 769s are OK but definitely not great

Same here. Due a visit to Cardiff family branch.

 

[Anonymous10]

Same here. Due a visit to Cardiff family branch.

Don't mind the new train and the convenient need to time it totally not related. I digress this is brilliant news for the network

 

[anthony263]

First day in service is supposed to be Wednesday

 

[SuperLuke2334]

None are planned Monday. Should be out from Wednesday.

First day in service is supposed to be Wednesday

Was just reported above here.

 

[Peter Sarf]

Don't mind the new train and the convenient need to time it totally not related. I digress this is brilliant news for the network

Yes it is good news for South Wales - I was never worried about Flirts entering service. Nice enough trains as I have experienced them in Anglia. Seemed reliable enough from the start with not much delay to introduction unlike some other manufacturers' trains. Not heard Covid being mentioned as an excuse much (probably becsue no excuse needed). Downside is they are supposed to be expensive to make/buy which is believable - you get what you pay for. Only worry I have is the alternative trains also procured....

Bye bye 769s and 230s.

 

[Energy]

Bye bye 769s and 230s.

769s are being replaced by 231s and later 756s (769s seem to be a priority replacement due to their reliability). 230s are meant to be staying, 197s might supplement them but supposedly struggle to keep to 230 timings. Long term solution for 230s would be battery 777s.

 

[norbitonflyer]

769s are being replaced by 231s and later 756s (769s seem to be a priority replacement due to their reliability). 230s are meant to be staying, 197s might supplement them but supposedly struggle to keep to 230 timings. Long term solution for 230s would be battery 777s.

Have I missed something? I didn't think any 230s had entered service with TfW yet. (And the Marston Vale ones are now stored)

 

[Peter Sarf]

Have I missed something? I didn't think any 230s had entered service with TfW yet. (And the Marston Vale ones are now stored)

The TfW 230s have got more chance of carrying passengers than the Marston Vale 230s do now, but not much chance !.

I wonder if TfW would have gone for Flirts instead of 230s with hindsight ?.

Its a shame about the 230s, they could have been easy to support microfleets in awkward places not requiring a depot. So would that have counted against Flirts so far from Canton ?.

 

[Rhydgaled]

The TfW 230s have got more chance of carrying passengers than the Marston Vale 230s do now, but not much chance !.

I wonder if TfW would have gone for Flirts instead of 230s with hindsight ?.

Its a shame about the 230s, they could have been easy to support microfleets in awkward places not requiring a depot. So would that have counted against Flirts so far from Canton ?.

Wouldn't they have gone with 197s for Wrexham-Bidston rather than FLIRTs if they had wanted new stock up there instead of 230s? I assume the 230s were selected for one or more of the following reasons:

• in the hope* of speedier introduction **,
• with a view to early replacement to facilitate early replacement in the form of Merseyrail EMUs if the opportunity arose or **
• to allow KeolisAmey to make a cheaper bid for the franchise **

* false hope as it turned out to be, but weren't they originally supposed to be in service by the end of 2019 to release 150s to help replace the Pacers?
** I don't know whether any of these were in fact true

 

[Energy]

Have I missed something? I didn't think any 230s had entered service with TfW yet. (And the Marston Vale ones are now stored)

None of them have. The Marston Vale units were maintained by Vivarail so are in storage till maintenance is sorted. I'm not sure what's happening maintenance wise with the TfW units.

in the hope* of speedier introduction **,

Correct.

with a view to early replacement to facilitate early replacement in the form of Merseyrail EMUs if the opportunity arose or **

Probably, sending Merseyrail down there with battery 777s has been talked about for a while. The 230s accelerate pretty quickly but are more acceptable to be scrapped early with them costing a lot less.

to allow KeolisAmey to make a cheaper bid for the franchise **

A few extra Civitys or Flirts wouldn't push it up that much.

 

[317 forever]

769s are being replaced by 231s and later 756s (769s seem to be a priority replacement due to their reliability). 230s are meant to be staying, 197s might supplement them but supposedly struggle to keep to 230 timings. Long term solution for 230s would be battery 777s.

This means that the TfW 769s were refurbished for further service for not many years.

 

[Razorblades]

A few extra Civitys or Flirts wouldn't push it up that much.

When you are compiling a franchise bid (or were, as franchising is now dead!), unless you are trying to eliminate a non-compliance, you don't add anything in that will push up costs at all.

(Spoken as a member of a 2017 TfW franchise bid team.)

 

[Energy]

When you are compiling a franchise bid (or were, as franchising is now dead!), unless you are trying to eliminate a non-compliance, you don't add anything in that will push up costs at all.

(Spoken as a member of a 2017 TfW franchise bid team.)

Fair enough, out of curiosity what was in the tender which pushed it to 230s rather than a few 197s?

 

[Anonymous10]

This means that the TfW 769s were refurbished for further service for not many years.

That was always the plan

 

[Razorblades]

Fair enough, out of curiosity what was in the tender which pushed it to 230s rather than a few 197s?

I wasn't on the Amey-Keolis team, so I can only base this answer on franchise bidding logic, but in my view it would almost certainly have been the estimated whole life cost of this micro-fleet for the Borderlands service, compared to all-new (and later entering service*) DMUs. 230s were judged capable of providing this service (or they must have been, on paper) and were cheaper than an addition to the new DMU order.

* important distinction, because you can (could) in theory introduce the 230s earlier than new 197s, and start making the on paper savings earlier too. Decisions were all about whole cost.

 

[Energy]

This means that the TfW 769s were refurbished for further service for not many years.

They were planned under ATW for 150 refurbishment. Ever since TfWRS was a thing they were to be replaced by FLIRTs.

I wasn't on the Amey-Keolis team, so I can only base this answer on franchise bidding logic, but in my view it would almost certainly have been the estimated whole life cost of this micro-fleet for the Borderlands service, compared to all-new (and later entering service*) DMUs. 230s were judged capable of providing this service (or they must have been, on paper) and were cheaper than an addition to the new DMU order.

Makes sense, thanks.

* important distinction, because you can (could) in theory introduce the 230s earlier than new 197s, and start making the on paper savings earlier too. Decisions were all about whole cost.

They were meant to enter service earlier.

 

[Anonymous10]

I wasn't on the Amey-Keolis team, so I can only base this answer on franchise bidding logic, but in my view it would almost certainly have been the estimated whole life cost of this micro-fleet for the Borderlands service, compared to all-new (and later entering service*) DMUs. 230s were judged capable of providing this service (or they must have been, on paper) and were cheaper than an addition to the new DMU order.

* important distinction, because you can (could) in theory introduce the 230s earlier than new 197s, and start making the on paper savings earlier too. Decisions were all about whole cost.

Were you a part of the atw bid?

 

[Kyle2]

Is there any diagram info available yet, seeing as they're meant to be starting tomorrow?