Class 230 units training/introduction on the Borderlands line: updates

[Eccles1983]

Ready for service a year ago?

Nonsense. Utter nonsense. They only delivered the first one a year ago, and its been plagued with issues. The "thermal episode" being the latest.

They are polished, but ultimately still very unreliable. Keeping things in warm storage isn't an excuse for that.

Vivarail have promised lots, carried out inadequate testing and now appear to be shocked that they are falling to pieces under actual real life testing.

Tickle me pink.

 

[Woods]

Ready for service a year ago?

Nonsense. Utter nonsense. They only delivered the first one a year ago, and its been plagued with issues. The "thermal episode" being the latest.

They are polished, but ultimately still very unreliable. Keeping things in warm storage isn't an excuse for that.

Vivarail have promised lots, carried out inadequate testing and now appear to be shocked that they are falling to pieces under actual real life testing.

Tickle me pink.

Let's not confuse 'delivered' with 'ready for service'.

By mid-November 2020, three of the five units had completed their Fault Free Mileage on the Cotswold Line, and had been provisionally accepted by TfW. Ok, I submit, it was not quite a year ago - had to consult my notes!

However, as I've said, had there been a depot set up and ready to go as per Vivarail's original deployment proposal, the Wrexham-Bidston service would have been operating with 230s by now. The staff had been recruited (to Vivarail) and trained. As it is, the facilities at Birkenhead North are really rather substandard for maintaining these units, and everything is having to fit around Stadler. The lack of a depot and a maintenance strategy is purely down to TfW's inability to make their minds up, despite plenty of assistance having been offered by Vivarail on multiple occasions - I can tell you that for certain. I now understand that TfW are considering going out to tender for maintaining the units. That was never part of the plan. Goodness knows who they expect to be interested in maintaining these units other than Vivarail!

It is hard to say whether reliability is good or bad. Do you have access to MTIN figures? Have they started recording them yet? Though I would say that it's not exactly fair to expect Vivarail to achieve their contractual MTINs when the units are effectively squatting in a sub-optimal maintenance depot which hasn't been set up for them, they're not yet running every day, and there is only an ad-hoc maintenance contract in place between TfW and Vivarail. Please tell me where such an arrangement has been a glowing success elsewhere, on a small fleet like this?

Also, please note, my understanding is that TfW have now requested a load of variations (extras) to be added to the units, which I understand will see the units going to Crewe this autumn - because the work can't be undertaken at Birkenhead. As with everything TfW, it's a bit late in the day to be requesting changes. Those close to the action have reported that it's another symptom of TfW being unable to make up their minds about the train spec, which has been a feature since the day the contract was signed with Vivarail, and in part has contributed to the delays.

I'm not saying that Vivarail are perfect, by any means. These units are not everybody's cup of tea and they have certainly not been without their problems. Vivarail itself seems to be a 'Marmite' project. But let's be fair - TfW aren't exactly a shining example of how to run a railway either, and from people I've spoken to around the industry, they are a nightmare to deal with.

 

[wobman]

What about the units high fuel consumption on the borderlands route and lack of battery deployment ?
The units can't complete a full day of service without needing refueling, whilst the plan was a 3 day fueling cycle.

What about the dpf fire (thermal incident) has this issue been fixed ?
The vivarail report conflicts with what the traincrew reported regarding the lack of fire alarms and extinguisher deployment. The signaller had to inform the traincrew of the incident via the gsmr and the smoke continued after manual deployment of onboard extinguishers by traincrew.

Isn't it true that on most training days multiple units fail even to complete training runs due to reliability issues ?
Most training runs are being cancelled as a result of this, even though there a paths allocated for the runs.

Isn't it true it's £2000 a day to get a vivarail fitter to attend a unit ?
Maybe this is the reason TFW are looking at using LNWR depot for 230 maintenance as it's far cheaper than using vivarail staff and as TFW own them they can choose who maintains the units.

Didn't the 230 units arrive with no second man's seat in the cab even though it was requested by TFW ?

If coupled didn't the wipers foul the coupled unit ?

Isn't the bike storage are too short to fit a bike ?

Isn't the disabled ramp cupboard behind were the disabled passengers will be sitting ?

Isn't the passenger seat behind the cab door in a place that would injure a passenger if opened ? I know this has been highlighted by TFW.

Is it true that the cab windows don't open and if the air con fails the units are out of service ? It's a poor design issue I suppose but how do drivers see the hazard lights !

 

[Woods]

What about the units high fuel consumption on the borderlands route and lack of battery deployment ?
The units can't complete a full day of service without needing refueling, whilst the plan was a 3 day fueling cycle.

What about the dpf fire (thermal incident) has this issue been fixed ?
The vivarail report conflicts with what the traincrew reported regarding the lack of fire alarms and extinguisher deployment. The signaller had to inform the traincrew of the incident via the gsmr and the smoke continued after manual deployment of onboard extinguishers by traincrew.

Isn't it true that on most training days multiple units fail even to complete training runs due to reliability issues ?
Most training runs are being cancelled as a result of this, even though there a paths allocated for the runs.

Isn't it true it's £2000 a day to get a vivarail fitter to attend a unit ?
Maybe this is the reason TFW are looking at using LNWR depot for 230 maintenance as it's far cheaper than using vivarail staff and as TFW own them they can choose who maintains the units.

Didn't the 230 units arrive with no second man's seat in the cab even though it was requested by TFW ?

If coupled didn't the wipers foul the coupled unit ?

Isn't the bike storage are too short to fit a bike ?

Isn't the disabled ramp cupboard behind were the disabled passengers will be sitting ?

Isn't the passenger seat behind the cab door in a place that would injure a passenger if opened ? I know this has been highlighted by TFW.

Is it true that the cab windows don't open and if the air con fails the units are out of service ? It's a poor design issue I suppose but how do drivers see the hazard lights !

I can't comment in public on any of that. Some is true, some is not. Some is for good reason, some is due to designs which were actually signed off by TfW, some is due to legacy D78 design. Maybe you should write to Vivarail, there are two sides to every story. From the sounds of it, you are only getting the (skewed) TfW messroom gossip side of it.

 

[Gag Halfrunt]

Is it true that the cab windows don't open and if the air con fails the units are out of service ?

The cabs don't have side windows. The windows in the cab doors, which are pocket doors just like the passenger doors, do not open.

 

[Woods]

The cabs don't have side windows. The windows in the cab doors, which are pocket doors just like the passenger doors, do not open.

This is legacy D78 design. The cab doors never had opening windows. If TfW had wanted them, they should have put that in the spec!!
It is standard practice for a unit to be taken out of service if the cab aircon fails. ASLEF requirement etc.

 

[Caaardiff]

I think it speaks for itself that so far that this week no units have made it for training due to faults.

 

[Xenophon PCDGS]

Drawing a matter of Class 230 comparison to the units that provide the Marston Vale service, did those units have any problems during the very hot summer weather in 2020?

 

[wobman]

I can't comment in public on any of that. Some is true, some is not. Some is for good reason, some is due to designs which were actually signed off by TfW, some is due to legacy D78 design. Maybe you should write to Vivarail, there are two sides to every story. From the sounds of it, you are only getting the (skewed) TfW messroom gossip side of it.

It's always easy to say messroom gossip and skewed the TFW way, but the units haven't been very reliable at all. I know that for a fact. That's why TFW want 3 units fit for service on training days, 2 for training and 1 for recovery incase of a breakdown.

I know that have heavy fuel consumption, I don't know the exact reason but it's far higher than planned. This has caused a lot of
logistical problems as the fueling point is at Chester depot.

Maybe TFW didn't spec certain aspects but you can see why they asked for the spec changes in the cases I mentioned. Some have safety implications and others just makes Sence.

 

[Bletchleyite]

Drawing a matter of Class 230 comparison to the units that provide the Marston Vale service, did those units have any problems during the very hot summer weather in 2020?

It's a bit hard to tell what was going on in 2020 as a full service has not operated for some time (so they have only needed one out of the three units working to operate the single diagram in place), but in 2019 which was also hot the service basically collapsed.

 

[Woods]

Drawing a matter of Class 230 comparison to the units that provide the Marston Vale service, did those units have any problems during the very hot summer weather in 2020?

From memory, the Bletchley units got through 2020's spell of hot weather without any problems. Reliability was climbing well before Covid and there had been several consecutive periods without a service affecting failure, if I recall correctly.

== Doublepost prevention - post automatically merged: 8 Sep 2021 ==

I think it speaks for itself that so far that this week no units have made it for training due to faults.

230006 was out this afternoon on driver training.

Not sure there was actually any driver training scheduled yesterday? 230008 and 230006 were due to go to Chester yesterday evening I believe (for fuelling?) but a GSMR fault scuppered it just as the coupled units were about to leave the depot. I suppose you'll blame that all on the Vivarail project as well....because no other operators ever suffer GSMR faults....

 

[wobman]

It was said the units would be more reliable if used more, but lack of use shouldn't be an issue. Rolling stock should be able to sit idle and then be reliable once in service.

The fueling issue must be a huge concern with these units, as said today 2 units need fueling in Chester. Now they can't be utilised for training until they are fueled. This is a constant issue having to be fueled far more regularly than planned. All DMU's go for many days before needing fueling use// dependent, so this must be a major concern.

It's unusual to have gsmr faults on units, it's a robust system. Let's hope it's fixed asap then.

 

[Woods]

It was said the units would be more reliable if used more, but lack of use shouldn't be an issue. Rolling stock should be able to sit idle and then be reliable once in service.

Hmm, I think that's wishful thinking to be honest. Most rolling stock, as soon as it sits idle for any length of time, things will start to degrade. My point was really that to achieve reliability growth, you need a well set-up maintenance facility with a well-established team. Not the ad-hoc arrangement which currently exists at Birkenhead.

The fueling issue must be a huge concern with these units, as said today 2 units need fueling in Chester. Now they can't be utilised for training until they are fueled. This is a constant issue having to be fueled far more regularly than planned. All DMU's go for many days before needing fueling use// dependent, so this must be a major concern.

Yes, let's hope the fuelling issue is sorted. Perhaps it is the wrong balance between battery state of charge and genset running at the moment, maybe some tuning is required. I am sure that Vivarail engineers will be on the case.

It's unusual to have gsmr faults on units, it's a robust system. Let's hope it's fixed asap then.

Looks like it already has been. No issues reported on 230008 today. Seems like it was a bit of bad luck there. Nothing worse than an intermittent fault or one that can't be recreated.

== Doublepost prevention - post automatically merged: 8 Sep 2021 ==

Maybe TFW didn't spec certain aspects but you can see why they asked for the spec changes in the cases I mentioned. Some have safety implications and others just makes Sence.

Maybe that is true. But for example surely TfW have known for a very long time that the trains would be too long for some of the platforms, so why have they only just requested that a set of doors at one end be made into 'staff only'.....so that's a fairly significant wiring mod then.....bit late in the day!

== Doublepost prevention - post automatically merged: 8 Sep 2021 ==

I know that have heavy fuel consumption, I don't know the exact reason but it's far higher than planned. This has caused a lot of
logistical problems as the fueling point is at Chester depot.

Ok so the heavy fuel consumption isn't good news but the logistical problem is the separation of maintenance facility (Birkenhead) from fuelling point (Chester), not the fuel consumption per se. Ideally maintenance and fuelling should be done in the same location, to save on the ECS mileage. This is another symptom of TfW not having a sensible maintenance strategy for them.

 

[wobman]

230006 was in Chester sidings today ready to be fueled then out working hopefully, the fueling issues was combatted with a linked job that was the 1 spare unit out of the 5 would fuel daily at Chester. That is unsustainable with the units needing fueling daily. TFW had planned this way but it's causing a big rethink.
The fueling problem is a major issue in many ways, maybe software changes are needed or bigger fuel tanks.

How come all 230's need hand taillamps for each end when stabled ? This surely is a vivarail design flaw, TFW shouldn't have to spec this.

How come once delivered all 230's leaked heavily during an rain ? This is another design flaw. This has been combatted with roof patches but I don't know how long they will last !

How come you could when they first arrived you could open a door in service a few inches and the brakes did not apply ? Isn't this a design flaw. I know this has been now fixed.

What help did vivarail offer then regarding a depot and unit maintenance ?

They can't go to Chester it's too busy and no room, especially with the CAF units coming into service soon. Wrexham has no facilities or road access for fueling etc
Dee marsh was the original long term plan but maybe the new freight streams would put an end to this idea
I think shotwick sidings would be ideal it does have road access from the paper mill end and are still connected to the main line.
I can see why TFW chose Birkenhead as a short term depot but it's just not working as it is with limited access/no fueling facilities/ the shed has no ventilation for the diesel fumes / Stadler shunters just don't want TFW in there.

I always get the old it's messroom gossip quote thrown at my comments, but they are all valid and reliability of units is a priority for any TOC.

 

[Bletchleyite]

How come you could when they first arrived you could open a door in service a few inches and the brakes did not apply ? Isn't this a design flaw. I know this has been now fixed.

To be fair you can on any PEP EMU and D-stock is of similar vintage.

 

[Dstock7080]

How come once delivered all 230's leaked heavily during an rain ? This is another design flaw. This has been combatted with roof patches but I don't know how long they will last !

LU knew about this, as they returned from refurbishment 2003/2005 leaking badly, when investigated it was found the standard practice was to walk along the top of the train, thus cracking the riveting, rather than use gantries.

How come you could when they first arrived you could open a door in service a few inches and the brakes did not apply ? Isn't this a design flaw. I know this has been now fixed.

Standard for D Stock in LU service.

 

[wobman]

LU knew about this, as they returned from refurbishment 2003/2005 leaking badly, when investigated it was found the standard practice was to walk along the top of the train, thus cracking the riveting, rather than use gantries.


Standard for D Stock in LU service.

These issues are obviously known about and really should have been resolved in the refurbishment process.

 

[Caaardiff]

What I don't understand about these "new/refurbished" trains, is how a manufacturer/leasing company can offer trains (230's/769's) that aren't fit for service, and how TOC's, in whatever negotiations have taken place, end up having to deal with the aftermath. If this was a motor vehicle or a boeing/airbus plane for an Airline, it would be sent straight back! How much are these manufacturers promising, not delivering and screwing TOC's for?

 

[The exile]

What I don't understand about these "new/refurbished" trains, is how a manufacturer/leasing company can offer trains (230's/769's) that aren't fit for service, and how TOC's, in whatever negotiations have taken place, end up having to deal with the aftermath. If this was a motor vehicle or a boeing/airbus plane for an Airline, it would be sent straight back! How much are these manufacturers promising, not delivering and screwing TOC's for?

While it’s certainly true that neither project has covered itself in glory (yet?!) - this is hardly unique to these effectively prototype conversions. Lots of new designs have been labelled a disaster before they settle down. Whose expression is the “ bathtub curve” of the failure-rate graph?

 

[Bletchleyite]

While it’s certainly true that neither project has covered itself in glory (yet?!) - this is hardly unique to these effectively prototype conversions. Lots of new designs have been labelled a disaster before they settle down. Whose expression is the “ bathtub curve” of the failure-rate graph.

As you say it's not like bits haven't been quite literally falling off the likes of 80x and 195s...

 

[Caaardiff]

Fair points, but has there been a different level of care offered by Hitachi and CAF for their issues in comparison to Porterbrooks and Vivarails involvement in solving their respective issues? The 230 and 769 projects are about 2 years late and still not in reliable service.

 

[Woods]

How come all 230's need hand taillamps for each end when stabled ? This surely is a vivarail design flaw, TFW shouldn't have to spec this.

Is that really such a problem?

How come once delivered all 230's leaked heavily during an rain ? This is another design flaw. This has been combatted with roof patches but I don't know how long they will last !

Yes that has certainly been a bit of a problem. Not so much a design flaw I think just one of those problems in trying to splice new things on to an old train.

How come you could when they first arrived you could open a door in service a few inches and the brakes did not apply ? Isn't this a design flaw. I know this has been now fixed.

As somebody else has already pointed out, that's legacy D78 design. I think it was designed that way to ensure that people could prise open the door slightly to free trapped bag straps etc without causing huge delays on the Underground. The doors don't have sensitive edges like some modern stock does. The doors can be manually pulled back about 2" before they hit a mechanical stop and push-back spring that prevents the door coming any further open. I don't know of any design flaws.

What help did vivarail offer then regarding a depot and unit maintenance ?

As I understand it, the original build contract required that Vivarail and TfW should follow on and sign a separate maintenance contract. TfW have reneged on that commitment and now seek to go out to competitive tender, for whatever reason (they probably believe they can do it cheaper themselves - good luck to them!). My sources tell me that Vivarail have spent hundreds of man hours working up maintenance proposals only to have TfW change their minds multiple times on what they actually want to do. Staff were recruited and trained in anticipation. This is time and money which a small company like Vivarail can ill afford to be wasting. This even included offering to build a new depot at Dee Marsh as a complete 'turnkey' project along with an industry partner. So I think they've been pretty helpful, wouldn't you say?

They can't go to Chester it's too busy and no room, especially with the CAF units coming into service soon. Wrexham has no facilities or road access for fueling etc
Dee marsh was the original long term plan but maybe the new freight streams would put an end to this idea
I think shotwick sidings would be ideal it does have road access from the paper mill end and are still connected to the main line.

Yep. It sounds like you know more about TfW's operation than they do. Have you considered going to work for them?!

I can see why TFW chose Birkenhead as a short term depot but it's just not working as it is with limited access/no fueling facilities/ the shed has no ventilation for the diesel fumes / Stadler shunters just don't want TFW in there.

Not to mention the poor old Vivarail techs having to work outside in the pouring rain!

I always get the old it's messroom gossip quote thrown at my comments, but they are all valid and reliability of units is a priority for any TOC.

Well they're not quite all valid are they? Doors. But yes, reliability of units is certainly a priority for TOCs, as it is for Vivarail and other manufacturers. Pisspoor reliability leads to very bad reputational damage. I am sure that Vivarail understand that threat only too well.

== Doublepost prevention - post automatically merged: 9 Sep 2021 ==

While it’s certainly true that neither project has covered itself in glory (yet?!) - this is hardly unique to these effectively prototype conversions. Lots of new designs have been labelled a disaster before they settle down. Whose expression is the “ bathtub curve” of the failure-rate graph?

Indeed. Doing things differently and trying to introduce new technology like what Vivarail and Porterbrook are trying to do, is fraught with risk. Just look at the problems when BR scrapped steam and introduced dozens of untried diesel locos. Fair play to both companies for having a go. They are doing so with far, far fewer engineering and servicing resources than the likes of Hitachi and Alstom.

 

[wobman]

Is that really such a problem? Having no tail lamps on units whilst stabling them is a problem, on LU they may have had shore supply but whilst building the 230's this should have been noticed. It's a safety issue and safety is the main priority on the railway.


Yes that has certainly been a bit of a problem. Not so much a design flaw I think just one of those problems in trying to splice new things on to an old train.


As somebody else has already pointed out, that's legacy D78 design. I think it was designed that way to ensure that people could prise open the door slightly to free trapped bag straps etc without causing huge delays on the Underground. The doors don't have sensitive edges like some modern stock does. The doors can be manually pulled back about 2" before they hit a mechanical stop and push-back spring that prevents the door coming any further open. I don't know of any design flaws.
No TFW main line units enable this to happen and modern units don't let this happen, again vivarail should have picked up in this in the quality control stage/testing.


As I understand it, the original build contract required that Vivarail and TfW should follow on and sign a separate maintenance contract. TfW have reneged on that commitment and now seek to go out to competitive tender, for whatever reason (they probably believe they can do it cheaper themselves - good luck to them!). My sources tell me that Vivarail have spent hundreds of man hours working up maintenance proposals only to have TfW change their minds multiple times on what they actually want to do. Staff were recruited and trained in anticipation. This is time and money which a small company like Vivarail can ill afford to be wasting. This even included offering to build a new depot at Dee Marsh as a complete 'turnkey' project along with an industry partner. So I think they've been pretty helpful, wouldn't you say?
The vivarail maintenance costs must be excessive compared to other rolling stock maintenance contracts, TFW have contracts with other rolling stock companies and they maintain in-house at canton. They must have compared comparable costings and thought it's worth looking elsewhere. Maybe vivarail need to look at there costings.


Yep. It sounds like you know more about TfW's operation than they do. Have you considered going to work for them?! All of this information is in the public domain, maybe you should work for vivarail or do you ?


Not to mention the poor old Vivarail techs having to work outside in the pouring rain! They should pop to go outdoors and get a gazebo : )


Well they're not quite all valid are they? Doors. But yes, reliability of units is certainly a priority for TOCs, as it is for Vivarail and other manufacturers. Pisspoor reliability leads to very bad reputational damage. I am sure that Vivarail understand that threat only too well.

== Doublepost prevention - post automatically merged: 9 Sep 2021 ==

Reliable units is a priority for TFW aswell as the borderlands line is going to be the flagship North Wales Metro line. Would battery and 3rd pick up be more reliable than the DEMU present set up ?

Indeed. Doing things differently and trying to introduce new technology like what Vivarail and Porterbrook are trying to do, is fraught with risk. Just look at the problems when BR scrapped steam and introduced dozens of untried diesel locos. Fair play to both companies for having a go. They are doing so with far, far fewer engineering and servicing resources than the likes of Hitachi and Alstom.

That's one concern about this technology if the likes of Alstom / CAF / Hitachi etc are not yet trialing it can a small company likes vivarail get it to work successfully !

 

[Wyrleybart]

I am sure that one of Vivarail's selling points was the ruggedness of the 230 requiring just basic kit and a stacker truck to switch modules around on a hard standing.
Is that the case with the Marston Vale units but not the more complex battery electric hybrids ?

 

[wobman]

I am sure that one of Vivarail's selling points was the ruggedness of the 230 requiring just basic kit and a stacker truck to switch modules around on a hard standing.
Is that the case with the Marston Vale units but not the more complex battery electric hybrids ?

It's the same principle as the TFW 230's quick and easy power pack swaps and battery packs. It always looks easy on paper with these kind of projects, but the reality is far more complex.

 

[sleeper fan]

So when are they actually going to be in passenger service, there seems to be alot of faults with them

 

[wobman]

So when are they actually going to be in passenger service, there seems to be alot of faults with them

The plan is December on the borderlands line, the training is ongoing to get the Chester depot traincrew trained up on them.

 

[Zontar]

The plan is December on the borderlands line, the training is ongoing to get the Chester depot traincrew trained up on them.

Have they committed to increased service on Dec timetable?

 

[PHILIPE]

Have they committed to increased service on Dec timetable?

In view of the present circumstances everything will have to be reviewed first. The additional ones are in RTT (provisional) as "Q" paths so nothing decided yet

 

[wobman]

Have they committed to increased service on Dec timetable?

That's TFWs aim but it's dependent on the traincrew training being completed and the units being fit for service by December.
There's an ongoing traincrew training program now, lets see if things go to plan.

TFW wanted the 230's running and an increases timetable in December, let's see if it's completed in time.