Our new ticketing site is now live! Using either this or the original site (both powered by TrainSplit) helps support the running of the forum with every ticket purchase! Find out more and ask any questions/give us feedback in this thread!
The RAIB report into the 150-HST crash at Plymouth states that injuries were probably worse because of the number of passengers who were standing at the time.
I'm not sure how the MD of GWR could have been clearer – the D78 stock have been bought to be converted into battery-electric trains to work the GWR branch lines, using the IP they also bought from Vivarail's administrators.
I'm not sure how the MD of GWR could have been clearer – the D78 stock have been bought to be converted into battery-electric trains to work the GWR branch lines, using the IP they also bought from Vivarail's administrators.
How many of these battery-electric trains from the purchased Vivarail D78 stocks purchased would it possibly allow to be constructed and not being au fait with the referred-to information from the MD of GWR, was it stated that GWR proposed to construct in numerical terms.
I'm not sure how the MD of GWR could have been clearer – the D78 stock have been bought to be converted into battery-electric trains to work the GWR branch lines, using the IP they also bought from Vivarail's administrators.
EXCLUSIVE Mark Hopwood, MD of Great Western Rail, believes the 1970s rolling stock could be brought back to life and replace diesel-powered trains on aGreenford line.
www.dailymail.co.uk
Now, Mark Hopwood, Managing Director of GWR, believes the 1970s rolling stock could be brought back to life and replace diesel-powered trains on a west London branch line.
He described the move as ' Possibly one of my less conventional decisions – buying 67 former LUL (London Underground Limited) vehicles'.
I'm not sure how the MD of GWR could have been clearer – the D78 stock have been bought to be converted into battery-electric trains to work the GWR branch lines, using the IP they also bought from Vivarail's administrators.
That's not what he said. The quote is 'I believe we can make the project work and get a battery train up and running later this year, with more to follow'. That means more battery trains to follow, which may be battery trains converted from old D78 vehicles, or it may not. The fast-charging trial hasn't even started yet, so it's very premature to be talking about more 230s from D78 stock. It's just one option, should the principle of fast-charge battery trains be proven by the trial, but it wouldn't be an option without challenges - where would they be built for one thing?
That's not what he said. The quote is 'I believe we can make the project work and get a battery train up and running later this year, with more to follow'. That means more battery trains to follow, which may be battery trains converted from old D78 vehicles, or it may not. The fast-charging trial hasn't even started yet, so it's very premature to be talking about more 230s from D78 stock. It's just one option, should the principle of fast-charge battery trains be proven by the trial, but it wouldn't be an option without challenges - where would they be built for one thing?
But he did say "' Possibly one of my less conventional decisions – buying 67 former LUL (London Underground Limited) vehicles'. So I would say it is more likely that GWR will use D78 coaches than something else. That is if the trial is a success. If the trial is not a success then that rules out D78s, new build or converted 313s/442s etc etc.
But he did say "' Possibly one of my less conventional decisions – buying 67 former LUL (London Underground Limited) vehicles'. So I would say it is more likely that GWR will use D78 coaches than something else. That is if the trial is a success. If the trial is not a success then that rules out D78s, new build or converted 313s/442s etc etc.
Having the 442's been scrapped and I am pretty sure that the class 313 units are on their way to be scrapped too.
Where are the D78's currently being stored? If they are still by the premises that Vivarail where using, then maybe the deal also included the lease that Vivarail took out for those premises?
Where are the D78's currently being stored? If they are still by the premises that Vivarail where using, then maybe the deal also included the lease that Vivarail took out for those premises?
Having the 442's been scrapped and I am pretty sure that the class 313 units are on their way to be scrapped too.
Where are the D78's currently being stored? If they are still by the premises that Vivarail where using, then maybe the deal also included the lease that Vivarail took out for those premises?
Ironically 230001 is now back at Long Marston (at the Porterbrook Innovation Centre) for GWR to undertake further testing before it moves on to West Ealing.
Ironically 230001 is now back at Long Marston (at the Porterbrook Innovation Centre) for GWR to undertake further testing before it moves on to West Ealing.
But he did say "' Possibly one of my less conventional decisions – buying 67 former LUL (London Underground Limited) vehicles'. So I would say it is more likely that GWR will use D78 coaches than something else. That is if the trial is a success. If the trial is not a success then that rules out D78s, new build or converted 313s/442s etc etc.
I thought I would add this here as it is such a good rundown of the variations in the 230s (and 484) with a good description of the common parts and the parts inherited from LU. Thankyou for providing @Woods.
WMT, TfW and GWR 230s and the 484s all share the following common features:
AC traction motors from TSA of Austria. Replaced the original D78 DC motors.
Traction Control Unit (TCU) from Strukton of Holland, although it should be noted that the 484s have a water/glycol-cooled TCU rather than an air-cooled TCU as fitted to the WMT/TfW units, the former was envisaged to become the standard for all future 230s but Vivarail were badly let down by Strukton when commissioning the 484s and there was a big commercial fall-out as a result. Even though Vivarail is no more, this cast a long shadow and it is therefore yet to be determined whether Strukton will be the supplier of choice for future TCUs if more 230s are built by GWR.
Cab controls (with a few minor differences between the fleets) and cab crash structure.
Passenger door controls; same concept on all fleets but precise configuration depends on number of doors per car; e.g. WMT units only have 4 doors per car whereas TfW units have 8 doors per car (except on the DMB car where one of the doors is blocked up because of the presence of the toilet module).
Compressors; same (new) design on all fleets. One of the only bits, as with the TSA traction motors, that never changed!
Saloon heating provided by electric elements, same concept as original D78 but old elements replaced with new (as old elements were obsolete).
Brake system; basically unchanged from D78, with all components overhauled, with the addition of a modern WSP system on top and with the ability to do dynamic braking; in the case of the TfW and GWR units the energy is recovered back into the traction batteries providing they can receive it. In the case of the WMT and 484 units, the energy is dissipated through resistors (known as rheostatic braking).
Bogies; basically unchanged from D78, just overhauled.
Passenger Information System, WiFi, CCTV, Passenger Counting (only fitted on TfW units), OTDR, DSD/Vigilance, AWS/TPWS - the same systems are common to all fleets. The only exception is DOO; the GWR unit will be fitted with DOO to work on the Greenford branch. None of the other fleets have ever had DOO fitted.
The biggest technical differences are:
WMT and TfW units have basically the same diesel gensets acting as the 'prime movers'. The 484 takes power directly from the 3rd rail. The GWR unit carries batteries and is charged through the 'Fast Charge' system which has nothing whatsoever to do with normal 3rd rail electrification.
The TfW units have traction batteries manufactured by Valence, now LithiumWerks, whereas the GWR unit has traction batteries from Hoppecke which are capable of higher charge rates because each battery has its own active thermal management system. The Hoppecke batteries will most likely become standard in future. The TfW units work in a sort of 'series hybrid' configuration; the diesel gensets keep the batteries charged, but the charge rates required are much lower than for 'Fast Charging' hence it is possible to use the inferior Valence battery modules for this duty cycle.
I hope that is of some interest.
As the more informed observers have correctly noted over the years, the achillies heel of the 230s was and continues to be the diesel gensets. This is borne out by the fact that the 484s, which don't have gensets, are now generally trouble-free. And, touch wood, the GWR unit should hopefully end up in a similar happy place as the 484s for the same reason (no gensets).
If TfW can get on top of the genset reliability then eventually the 230s should prove their worth. I know that some people will never be convinced and will relish every opportunity to say "I told you they were rubbish old tube trains" but I guess that's just life. The fact of the matter is that the ex-D78 parts, where re-used, have never actually been much of a problem, so to suggest that the concept was flawed simply because the trains were old is just lazy Daily Mail-style thinking. 99% of the problems has actually been down to the new kit. But unfortunately, like the myths which are constantly peddled about HS2, misinformation has gone twice round the world before the truth has even got its trousers on (or words to that effect!).
== Doublepost prevention - post automatically merged: ==
It's hard to tell how bad the performance is from this thread. Of the number of scheduled round trips on the Borderlands route this week, how many have been cancelled due to failure of the 230s. Does anybody know?
We are aware of an issue with emails from the Forum to Microsoft-based email accounts (hotmail/outlook/live.com email addresses). This is being looked into currently, thanks for your patience meanwhile.
