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!
I doubt we will ever see further Class 230 Battery conversions. This exercise simply frees up a 165 and allows GWR to confirm BEMU performance and costs with real passenger use. Yes GWR have other class 230 units and D Stock collecting dust but the cost of converting them to BEMU use, is probably close to what would be spent on ordering BEMUs with all the latest bells and whistles rather than seeking exemptions from various accessibility compliance requirements.
Given the history of Vivarail and the other units, I'm sadly forced to agree. When Vivarail collapsed into administration, it had clearly been struggling with both finances and product quality for some time. This was confirmed by the fact that, ultimately, no-one was interested in purchasing Vivarail as a going concern to convert more D78s into Class 230s.
The only reason why the GWR battery train project survived was because it was well advanced and there was a political desire for it to continue. Thus, GWR (who were under DfT control at this point) purchased the assets and IP relating to the battery train project, specifically to trail the fast charge aspect of the technology. It's understood that the remaining assets of Vivarail (the other 230s, unconverted D-stock and stock of spare parts) were included by the administrators at close to scrap value, probably because they saw it as the most expeditious method of returning cash to creditors.
Given that a train operator is a very different type of organisation from a rolling stock manufacturer, the mostly likely scenario is that GWR either license or sell the fast charge technology, proabably as part of the forthcoming rolling stock replacement programe. I'm afriad the mostly likely destination for the 230s and D78s will be scrap.
The exercise doesn’t currently free up a 165, one is stationed in West Ealing Sidings while the 230 is running incase it breaks down. Obviously in theory this could change in the future.
Indeed. When the project was announced in 2022, there may well have been thoughts about building a 230 mini-fleet to release Turbos from the Thames Valley branches. However, subserquent events means that the only outcome is to prove the fast charge technology in the real world, with a bit of positive PR as bonus. In hindsight, the fact that Vivarail were publicly comitted to start the trail in 2022 says something to why they struggled to survive.
The 230 has been in service today. It was running slightly late when I caught the 09:30 from Greenford. It was being driven very cautiously down the slope from the Greenford bay and the brakes seemed to grind a bit. I liked the interior though somewhat on the bright side. I noticed the 165 spare by the Plasser depot, in time they may trust the battery unit enough to risk doing without the turbo standing by.
The 230 has been in service today. It was running slightly late when I caught the 09:30 from Greenford. It was being driven very cautiously down the slope from the Greenford bay and the brakes seemed to grind a bit. I liked the interior though somewhat on the bright side. I noticed the 165 spare by the Plasser depot, in time they may trust the battery unit enough to risk doing without the turbo standing by.
It doesn’t accelerate or brake the same as a turbo, it’s 15mph leaving Greenford until after the points at Greenford South, it doesn’t like sitting at that speed, going towards Greenford it won’t sit at 15 either so it’s a case of taking power and then shutting off annoyingly where as a turbo will just sit at 15 in notch 1
Thanks, but I was specifically asking if it was planned to run on the 7/2/26 and the 21/2/26 (but not the 14/2/26), as I was hoping to postpone my riding from the 7/2/26 to the 21/2/26.
Given the history of Vivarail and the other units, I'm sadly forced to agree. When Vivarail collapsed into administration, it had clearly been struggling with both finances and product quality for some time. This was confirmed by the fact that, ultimately, no-one was interested in purchasing Vivarail as a going concern to convert more D78s into Class 230s.
The only reason why the GWR battery train project survived was because it was well advanced and there was a political desire for it to continue. Thus, GWR (who were under DfT control at this point) purchased the assets and IP relating to the battery train project, specifically to trail the fast charge aspect of the technology. It's understood that the remaining assets of Vivarail (the other 230s, unconverted D-stock and stock of spare parts) were included by the administrators at close to scrap value, probably because they saw it as the most expeditious method of returning cash to creditors.
Given that a train operator is a very different type of organisation from a rolling stock manufacturer, the mostly likely scenario is that GWR either license or sell the fast charge technology, proabably as part of the forthcoming rolling stock replacement programe. I'm afriad the mostly likely destination for the 230s and D78s will be scrap.
I don't disagree with your assessment, but I am somewhat puzzled that (AFAIK) none of the ex Marston Vale cl230 diesel units, nor the ex LU D78 electric units, have yet been scrapped. If they were indeed wished upon GWR at scrap value as a condition of their buying the charging technology, as is the accepted narrative, I'd have expected GWR to dispose of them straight away to recoup the cost. There might be some need to retain spare parts in case of need by 001 (or TfW or Island Line), but that wouldn't need the whole fleet to be kept.
I agree that they're unlikely ever to be used, but then again, GWR said last summer that there were no plans to use 001 in passenger service, so who knows?
The exercise doesn’t currently free up a 165, one is stationed in West Ealing Sidings while the 230 is running incase it breaks down. Obviously in theory this could change in the future.
My feeling is that given time GWR will trust 230001 as much as they trust a 165. In which case if a 165 is kept as backup then it is no different to a backup 165 being kept as a backup for the 165 that was being used in the past. So one way or another a 165 is being saved. Long term the backup 165 might well be kept at Reading as that is where I believe the previous backup was kept.
Either way as long as 230001 is no less reliable than a 165 then there will be one unit saved.
I suspect 230001 will be more reliable than a diesel engined train.
I don't disagree with your assessment, but I am somewhat puzzled that (AFAIK) none of the ex Marston Vale cl230 diesel units, nor the ex LU D78 electric units, have yet been scrapped.
Some of the stored units may prove to be useful Christmas trees not just for GWR but possible TFW and the Island Line units. Doubtless passenger use of this GWR unit may help them identify what 230 specific kit is actually worth retaining and then allow most of the scrap value to be obtained quickly and storage costs minimised.
Exceptionally as the former marston vale units had already received structural modifications to meet mainline standards, there is a remote chance they might be further adapted to become BEMUs but that would be a lengthy and costly exercise especially as most of the former VivaRail expertise of such conversions has surely moved on to other things.
Whilst the raft mounted engine components should be relatively easy to remove and possibly sell, there are fuel tanks, exhaust systems and other gubbins which would also need to go, followed by installing expensive batteries and a fairly comprehensive rewire and control system needed to reconfigure these units as BEMUs. For now this might justify retaining a few trailer cars in case they wanted to create a consistent fleet of 3 car Class 230 units.
Doubtless TFW are keeping tabs on the GWR trial as a potential emission reducing upgrade path for their hybrids, especially as it would potentially allow the Bidston BEMU services to be extended through the tunnels into Liverpool. It may also lay behind the fairly relaxed approach to clearing the unconverted D-Stock rolling stock - although of late the TFW units seem to have largely managed to settle down and are operating a lot more reliably.
Sadly the cost and residual lifespan of these units is another factor which counts heavily against further conversions. It will be a very hard sell to convince the Treasury to fund any further conversions especially when any new BEMUs are likely to be ordered and purchased via leasing companies which helps defer any immediate call on the public purse.
In the recent series on More 4 about railway stations, there is a segment on the Barry Island Railway, where two D-stock cars can be seen partially dismantled, with one lying on its side.
The series is still available on catch-up. I only knew about because i met Si King (the surviving "Hairy Biker") filming for it at Snowdon Summit last summer. I'd been sitting at the same table as him in the cafe, chatting to him and his film crew, but didn't realise who he was until lots of other people started greeting him.
(He'd come up on the train, we'd walked up the Rydd Dhu path)
In the recent series on More 4 about railway stations, there is a segment on the Barry Island Railway, where two D-stock cars can be seen partially dismantled, with one lying on its side.
The series is still available on catch-up. I only knew about because i met Si King (the surviving "Hairy Biker") filming for it at Snowdon Summit last summer. I'd been sitting at the same table as him in the cafe, chatting to him and his film crew, but didn't realise who he was until lots of other people started greeting him.
(He'd come up on the train, we'd walked up the Rydd Dhu path)
A new 4-part series starts on More 4 at 9pm when Si King (the surviving one of the 'Hairy Bikers' duo) looks at his favourite railway stations. Assisting him are Siddy Holloway (of 'Secrets of the London Underground') and architect Damion Burrows. See...
Had a ride on this yesterday afternoon, West Ealing to Greenford, interesting unit and certainly unique.
I do wonder what the long term prospects are for this unit though, the real test will be if and when it enters daily Mon-Fri service, if faults start to appear, how much patients will GWR have with it?
Had a ride on this yesterday afternoon, West Ealing to Greenford, interesting unit and certainly unique.
I do wonder what the long term prospects are for this unit though, the real test will be if and when it enters daily Mon-Fri service, if faults start to appear, how much patients will GWR have with it?
I guess what you've got to remember is that the only reason that the unit is in existence is to trial the fast charge technology.
If other aspects of the unit prove to be too unreliable for daily operation, but the fast charge continues to work effectively and reliably, then GWR won't see that as a failure.
They will have got all the information they need for the DfT to understand how practical it is to deploy the technology as part of any new build, and for what routes.
I guess what you've got to remember is that the only reason that the unit is in existence is to trial the fast charge technology.
If other aspects of the unit prove to be too unreliable for daily operation, but the fast charge continues to work effectively and reliably, then GWR won't see that as a failure.
They will have got all the information they need for the DfT to understand how practical it is to deploy the technology as part of any new build, and for what routes.
A patent was filed in 2018 and granted in 2021. I'm not sure what the ownership situation is post Vivarail. I imagine that, as above, the IP would have passed on to GWR; @Woods may be able to elaborate.
Some of the stored units may prove to be useful Christmas trees not just for GWR but possible TFW and the Island Line units. Doubtless passenger use of this GWR unit may help them identify what 230 specific kit is actually worth retaining and then allow most of the scrap value to be obtained quickly and storage costs minimised.
Exceptionally as the former marston vale units had already received structural modifications to meet mainline standards, there is a remote chance they might be further adapted to become BEMUs but that would be a lengthy and costly exercise especially as most of the former VivaRail expertise of such conversions has surely moved on to other things.
Whilst the raft mounted engine components should be relatively easy to remove and possibly sell, there are fuel tanks, exhaust systems and other gubbins which would also need to go, followed by installing expensive batteries and a fairly comprehensive rewire and control system needed to reconfigure these units as BEMUs. For now this might justify retaining a few trailer cars in case they wanted to create a consistent fleet of 3 car Class 230 units.
Doubtless TFW are keeping tabs on the GWR trial as a potential emission reducing upgrade path for their hybrids, especially as it would potentially allow the Bidston BEMU services to be extended through the tunnels into Liverpool. It may also lay behind the fairly relaxed approach to clearing the unconverted D-Stock rolling stock - although of late the TFW units seem to have largely managed to settle down and are operating a lot more reliably.
Sadly the cost and residual lifespan of these units is another factor which counts heavily against further conversions. It will be a very hard sell to convince the Treasury to fund any further conversions especially when any new BEMUs are likely to be ordered and purchased via leasing companies which helps defer any immediate call on the public purse.
When GWR bought the remnants of Vivarasil a lot cam with it. They have some (more than one ?) of the former Vivarail staff, including @Woods on this forum.
As others have said - it is all about the fast charge capability. The fact it is trialled on a 230 (ex LT D78) is potentially a distraction but the unconverted stock is not being thrown away prematurely it would seem.
On my ride yesterday I could not help thinking how long will it be before the residents of the houses along side the line complain about dirty noisy diesels on weekdays.
Then maybe a 3rd rail/ Battery Demonstrator that can be trialed on the Reading to Gatwick service to test collecting, and recharging power via the 3rd rail
I do wonder what the long term prospects are for this unit though, the real test will be if and when it enters daily Mon-Fri service, if faults start to appear, how much patients will GWR have with it?
I hope they want as much real world experience as they can get until the Churchward order (of new BEMUs) is made and delivered. It would certainly help public opinion if they cared.
On my ride yesterday I could not help thinking how long will it be before the residents of the houses along side the line complain about dirty noisy diesels on weekdays.
Just to be clear, what's the reason for this 230001 running on the 7/2/26 and (planned) the 21/2/26, but not the 14/2/26? Surely not "because it's Valentine's Day"?
Just to be clear, what's the reason for this 230001 running on the 7/2/26 and (planned) the 21/2/26, but not the 14/2/26? Surely not "because it's Valentine's Day"?
The fact it is trialled on a 230 (ex LT D78) is potentially a distraction but the unconverted stock is not being thrown away prematurely it would seem.
The remaining D78s are not being disposed of at the moment, partly because they are a source of spares for not only GWR but also SWR, TfW and even LUL. And partly because nobody has made up their mind about what to do with them, not GWR and not the DfT. Fair to say that the 'direction of travel' seems to be new trains and no more 230s on GWR, but the flame has not been entirely extinguised in some quarters. It would not be beyond the realms of impossibilty to make some more 230s, even if GWR had to contract out the conversions to a third party (which they would have to). Once converted, the trains would be good for another 20-25 years and the cost to convert them into BEMUs would be roughly half the cost per car of a new BEMU (possibly even less than half given how quickly the cost of new trains seems to be escalating). In my mind that is 'eminently fundable' if a ROSCO could be persuaded, better still if they would fund the fast charging infrastructure for various branch lines as a package. And believe it or not, as I think I've said upthread, if platform heights could be sorted out then, right now, with really very little extra design work, 230s could be made to be FULLY compliant with the Accessibility regulations. Yes, that's right, you heard it right; FULLY compliant. So on that basis, I think it would be a fool who authorises the scrapping of all the remaining D78s, especially these days when money is tight, hundreds of perfectly good modern trains are stood stored at various sites across the country, and the Treasury isn't going to be authorising billions of pounds on new trains any time soon.
== Doublepost prevention - post automatically merged: ==
A patent was filed in 2018 and granted in 2021. I'm not sure what the ownership situation is post Vivarail. I imagine that, as above, the IP would have passed on to GWR; @Woods may be able to elaborate.
The IPR is now owned by the DfT, currently held as a 'franchise asset' of GWR (like with 230001 and the remaining D78s, all the spares parts etc) but of course, all soon to be part of DfTO and ultimately GBR. The interesting thing will be if, and how, the experience and knowledge accumulated from the fast charge trial can be exploited. Knowing how Britain tends to work, it will be probably be stolen, developed and sold back to us by a foreign country before anybody here has made a decision!
== Doublepost prevention - post automatically merged: ==
Had a ride on this yesterday afternoon, West Ealing to Greenford, interesting unit and certainly unique.
I do wonder what the long term prospects are for this unit though, the real test will be if and when it enters daily Mon-Fri service, if faults start to appear, how much patients will GWR have with it?
As others have said, it's only got to be more reliable than the Turbo and it will be seen as a success. The downside of having only 1 class 230 unit though is obvious, if there is one serious failure then it could be stopped for months on end, for example waiting for spares.
Doubtless TFW are keeping tabs on the GWR trial as a potential emission reducing upgrade path for their hybrids, especially as it would potentially allow the Bidston BEMU services to be extended through the tunnels into Liverpool. It may also lay behind the fairly relaxed approach to clearing the unconverted D-Stock rolling stock - although of late the TFW units seem to have largely managed to settle down and are operating a lot more reliably.
Have you been following the TfW Class 230 thread recently? Even when they aren't being taken out of service for wheel turning, they still only run 1 diagram per day and they are still swapping units at midday.
With respect to running BEMU-converted TfW 230s through the Merseyrail tunnel network, they would need to go through the same safety case process that Stadler did for the 777/1s, as a lithium battery fire in the tunnels would be just as bad as a diesel fire.
Regarding the patents on the ex-VivaRail/DfT fast charging system, every other rolling stock manufacturer that offers BEMUs has developed their own fast charging systems (Stadler, for instance, have partnered with Furrer & Frey and VoltTap for the fast charging system for the FLIRT AKKU units). Making licencing the DfT's system a condition of any future rolling stock buy is likely to be met with resistance (no pun intended) from the manufacturers and will potentially push costs up as the DfT's system would need to be integrated into their existing designs and then extensively tested.
Most (if not all) other BEMU fast charging systems seem to have settled on high voltage AC via pantograph for fast charging rather than high-current DC like the DfT's system (though Stadler do have a 750V DC-based charging system as well, developed for the 777/1s). The losses from the additional AC to DC and DC to DC conversion steps and charge-discharge cycles in the charger batteries that are part the DfT's fast charging system will also have an impact on the system's overall efficiency (which is presumably seen as an acceptable loss against only requirung a 415V three phase DNO connection).
It should be noted that the 3.5 minutes spent charging at West Ealing station is only to top up the batteries with the 40kWh used for a single 7.8km round trip of the shuttle. There is a PDF containing the slides from a 2024 presentation to the PWI covering the technical aspects of the GWR 230 BEMU and Fast Charge system available on the Permanent Way Institution's website (page 40 is probably of interest regarding potential 'blue sky' future plans for expanded BEMU operations in the area).
The IPR is now owned by the DfT, currently held as a 'franchise asset' of GWR (like with 230001 and the remaining D78s, all the spares parts etc) but of course, all soon to be part of DfTO and ultimately GBR. The interesting thing will be if, and how, the experience and knowledge accumulated from the fast charge trial can be exploited. Knowing how Britain tends to work, it will be probably be stolen, developed and sold back to us by a foreign country before anybody here has made a decision!
== Doublepost prevention - post automatically merged: ==
It should be noted that the 3.5 minutes spent charging at West Ealing station is only to top up the batteries with the 40kWh used for a single 7.8km round trip of the shuttle. There is a PDF containing the slides from a 2024 presentation to the PWI covering the technical aspects of the GWR 230 BEMU and Fast Charge system available on the Permanent Way Institution's website (page 40 is probably of interest regarding potential 'blue sky' future plans for expanded BEMU operations in the area).
I guess that's been my only question mark over wider operation of the current fast charge system. It would seem that unless there are very short branches, the time needed to recharge enough to maintain adequate charge over the day could easily exceed the turnaround time available on a branch to maintain a consistent interval timetable.
The Battery Electric Storage System (BESS) element of the DfT fast charging system is nothing particularly novel - there are a number of companies who offer similar systems for EV charging stations where a HV connection to a substation is not avaialble (it's also fairly commonly used for depot fast charging of EV buses). The novel part of the patent is the conductor rails and their control system. I am surprised to read the charging control protocl is based on analogue frequency signals, though - I would have expected something a bit more modern and secure that would be less susceptible to RFI/EMI.
Alstom have installed a similar containerised BESS-based charging system at Drogheda station for fast charging the X'Trapolis BEMU trains for the DART Coastal+ North extension via pantographs (it is eventuially intended to electrify the line all the way to Drogheda). The problem is there are no trains to charge at the moment, as the battery packs for the trains have had to be redesigned after issues encountered with similar battery packs on the Flexity 2-based battery trams supplied to Melbourne.
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.
(sorry, couldn't resist)
