Scotrail unit 156478's return to service

[380101]

The difference with a train is that it is far more likely to be repaired to a high standard of safety. Sadly though the papers will make a meal out of this - "Scotrail making their passengers travel in written off carriages". Send em a 230 I say !.

Doubt the papers even know of 478s history bar a photo of it stranded in flood water. Was never really publicised that the insurers had "written it off". More likely to be "Scotrail roll out newly refurbished trains". As most people will see a shiny new paint job, new seats, wifi etc as a "new train". I remember people thought the 4 314 units that received the Saltire branding along with refurbished interiors were brand new trains!

 

[HMS Ark Royal]

Whats the latest with the old girl?

 

[Peter Mugridge]

I saw in another thread earlier this week that the rebuild is almost done... service re-entry is imminent. Two weeks or so...

Unless I'm thinking of another unit?

 

[PHILIPE]

Extract from another Forum:-

I'm sure I've seen it elsewhere that 156478 has been sold to Brodie Engineering in Kilmarnock who are planning to repair it and refurbish the interior as a demonstrator.

 

[HMS Ark Royal]

Extract from another Forum:-

I'm sure I've seen it elsewhere that 156478 has been sold to Brodie Engineering in Kilmarnock who are planning to repair it and refurbish the interior as a demonstrator.

Yes, knew about that... Wondering what its status is now

 

[Blindtraveler]

Heck they didnt hang around did they? Assuming it is indeed this set? Good on m I say, we need anything with a cab, wheels and a deezol engine at the moment

 

[D365]

Good on m I say, we need anything with a cab, wheels and a deezol engine at the moment

So why aren't we keeping the Pacers?

 

[Blindtraveler]

at the wrisk of taking this off topic, we should be really, not so much for the a day work we currently put them to but as extra capacitty at peek times till electriffication is all done and also as cover whilst units that are staying can be life extemded and propperly refurbished. I would personally have made the deadline for withdrawal 2025 as its not just the sprinter fleats that need major work but the 170s as southerns conversion proves

 

[380101]

Extract from another Forum:-

I'm sure I've seen it elsewhere that 156478 has been sold to Brodie Engineering in Kilmarnock who are planning to repair it and refurbish the interior as a demonstrator.

Was sold to Brodies and they have rebuilt it. ScotRail branded interior and new CET toilet. Not sure on livery, but imagine it will be the saltire one. Due back in service with Scotrail the end of April if the rebuild is on schedule. To remain with Scotrail till at least 2019 when it's lease from Brodies will be reviewed.

I just hope, as a driver of 156 units (including 478) that they have done something amazing with the driving cabs and made some much needed improvements, as the 156 cabs isn't the best place to drive a train from!

 

[HMS Ark Royal]

Was sold to Brodies and they have rebuilt it. ScotRail branded interior and new CET toilet. Not sure on livery, but imagine it will be the saltire one. Due back in service with Scotrail the end of April if the rebuild is on schedule. To remain with Scotrail till at least 2019 when it's lease from Brodies will be reviewed.

I just hope, as a driver of 156 units (including 478) that they have done something amazing with the driving cabs and made some much needed improvements, as the 156 cabs isn't the best place to drive a train from!

Well lets hope that 478 has a good few years left in her... Maybe nominate her for preservation on the grounds she took on Mother Nature and beat her!

Joking aside, can she work to Carlisle?

 

[380101]

Well lets hope that 478 has a good few years left in her... Maybe nominate her for preservation on the grounds she took on Mother Nature and beat her!

Joking aside, can she work to Carlisle?

Can work to Newcastle. Scotrail operate 3 services a day to Newcastle via Dumfries with 156 units. Oddly, it's operated as a Northern service (northern crew to Carlisle then scotrail to glasgow) on the way back to Glasgow. This may change in the near future as Scotrail aim to reduce the amount of services Northern crews operate for them between Newcastle - Carlisle - Dumfries.

 

[alexf380]

156478 was also, I believe, a West Highland unit with all the necessary gubbins needed to operate up there. Whether that will be the case once it returns is anybody's guess, but I'd imagine so.

 

[PHILIPE]

156478 was also, I believe, a West Highland unit with all the necessary gubbins needed to operate up there. Whether that will be the case once it returns is anybody's guess, but I'd imagine so.

It was RETB fitted. Equipment removed at Kilmrnock.

 

[A0]

So why aren't we keeping the Pacers?

Or, alternatively, clamouring to get the D trains in service?!

 

[sprinterguy]

I would personally have made the deadline for withdrawal 2025 as its not just the sprinter fleats that need major work but the 170s as southerns conversion proves

The 2020 date was at least partially set because even the youngest Sprinter units would be thirty years old, and potentially fit for withdrawal: How great a window of opportunity must the railways be provided with?

Unless I have missed something, as I have not been keeping pace with the Southern 170 conversion thread throughout, the breadth of the work has little to do with PRM TSI compliance and a lot to do with the need to rewire the units for compatibility with 171s (and, to be fair, the tired interiors were in need of a major refurbishment: The units are fifteen years old, after all).

As I understand it, the work required to bring 170s up to PRM TSI 2020 compliant standard is minimal, as many of the vehicles were already subject to the earlier Rail Vehicle Accessibility Regulations 1998. Apologies if I am mistaken on any of this.

 

[route:oxford]

Was sold to Brodies and they have rebuilt it. ScotRail branded interior and new CET toilet. Not sure on livery, but imagine it will be the saltire one. Due back in service with Scotrail the end of April if the rebuild is on schedule. To remain with Scotrail till at least 2019 when it's lease from Brodies will be reviewed.

I just hope, as a driver of 156 units (including 478) that they have done something amazing with the driving cabs and made some much needed improvements, as the 156 cabs isn't the best place to drive a train from!

Has much changed mechanically?

Just imagining my favourite DMU switching from the standard 285hp engine to a similar 750hp engine as the Voyager...

 

[cjmillsnun]

Has much changed mechanically?

Just imagining my favourite DMU switching from the standard 285hp engine to a similar 750hp engine as the Voyager...

Mechanically very little would've changed as it would need recertification.

 

[Emblematic]

The 2020 date was at least partially set because even the youngest Sprinter units would be thirty years old, and potentially fit for withdrawal: How great a window of opportunity must the railways be provided with?

Unless I have missed something, as I have not been keeping pace with the Southern 170 conversion thread throughout, the breadth of the work has little to do with PRM TSI compliance and a lot to do with the need to rewire the units for compatibility with 171s (and, to be fair, the tired interiors were in need of a major refurbishment: The units are fifteen years old, after all).

As I understand it, the work required to bring 170s up to PRM TSI 2020 compliant standard is minimal, as many of the vehicles were already subject to the earlier Rail Vehicle Accessibility Regulations 1998. Apologies if I am mistaken on any of this.

Yes, there's nothing needed for the 170s for 2020 as they were built to RVAR standards, so need only to keep that level of compliance. It's pre-RVAR 1998 vehicles that have the 2020 deadline to be brought up to RVAR standards (or more likely PRM-TSI, as that's a bit more flexible.)

So you're right, nothing related to disability in the Southern conversions.

 

[cjmillsnun]

Yes, there's nothing needed for the 170s for 2020 as they were built to RVAR standards, so need only to keep that level of compliance. It's pre-RVAR 1998 vehicles that have the 2020 deadline to be brought up to RVAR standards (or more likely PRM-TSI, as that's a bit more flexible.)

So you're right, nothing related to disability in the Southern conversions.

Kind of...

On the 170/1, intermediate vehicles are fine, but end vehicles must be made compliant in certain areas prior to 2020 as per this letter from DfT

https://www.gov.uk/government/uploa...203730/class-170-1-end-cars-pb-compliance.pdf

We have already started working together to record existing non-compliances on pre- RVAR fleets but these are already known for 170/1 vehicles as the intermediate cars are already subject to RVAR, while we carried out an audit of the end vehicles in anticipation of their becoming subject to RVAR as a result of the DDA 2005. Using information from that audit as a basis, we have formed a view (below) of those non-compliances which
Porterbrook Class 170-1 End Cars compliance letter 25 September 2007.doc
must be rectified in time for the End Date (preferably sooner), and those which need only be corrected if the opportunity arises as they deliver marginal improvements in accessibility.
Regulations where compliance must be achieved by the End Date:

Class 170/1 end vehicles
5(3)

Vehicle end door sensor
5(4)
Vehicle end door sensor
6(1)(d)
No illumination of step
7(b)
Contrast on floor
8(1)
No priority seats
11(1)(a)
Handrail in doorway shorter than required
14(c)
Toilet seat (contrast)
16(1)(c)
Inadequate support in one wheelchair space
20(1)(f)
Handrail in toilet
23(7)
Ramp

Regulations which need only be rectified if the opportunity arises:
Class 170/1 end vehicles
5(1)(a)

Close button is 1230 not 1200mm high
20(1)(c)
Toilet seat is 470 not 475mm high
20(1)(h)
Lower alarm in toilet is 485 not 450m

However it looks like Porterbrook has undertaken the work required prior to 2011.

 

[Emblematic]

Kind of...

On the 170/1, intermediate vehicles are fine, but end vehicles must be made compliant in certain areas prior to 2020 as per this letter from DfT

https://www.gov.uk/government/uploa...203730/class-170-1-end-cars-pb-compliance.pdf



However it looks like Porterbrook has undertaken the work required prior to 2011.

You are right, a few of the 170s were built pre-RVAR, I'd forgotten that. I believe the Southern units transferred are all Eversholt 170/4s which were built after RVAR was in force.

 

[Peter Mugridge]

Toilet seat is 470 not 475mm high

Are they seriously going to re-work all the toilets just to add 5mm to the seat height?

My gut feeling is telling me this won't be as simple as putting something 5mm thick between the seats and the mounts to gain the height...?

 

[D365]

Are they seriously going to re-work all the toilets just to add 5mm to the seat height?

My gut feeling is telling me this won't be as simple as putting something 5mm thick between the seats and the mounts to gain the height...?

The heading above your quoted line states:

Regulations which need only be rectified if the opportunity arises:
Class 170/1 end vehicles

... which implies that a dispensation will be granted.

 

[Peter Mugridge]

One would assume for such minute issues that a dispensation will be granted.

I really hope so - otherwise my already low opinion of the mentality within the DfT will plumb new depths.

 

[Ianigsy]

Toilet seat is 470 not 475mm high
20(1)(h)
Lower alarm in toilet is 485 not 450m

Actually, looking at that, when the regulations are applied to the letter, the net effect will be to increase the distance between the toilet seat and the alarm (currently +15mm, to become -25mm). Which is curious in itself- I'd have thought that for anybody sitting on the toilet, it's easier to reach an alarm which is higher than seat level (15mm higher would put it comfortably at lap level) rather than having to lean forwards and reach below the level of the seat.

 

[D6975]

Note that it says lower alarm. This is intended to be used by someone who has fallen on the floor.

 

[380101]

Was sold to Brodies and they have rebuilt it. ScotRail branded interior and new CET toilet. Not sure on livery, but imagine it will be the saltire one. Due back in service with Scotrail the end of April if the rebuild is on schedule. To remain with Scotrail till at least 2019 when it's lease from Brodies will be reviewed.

I just hope, as a driver of 156 units (including 478) that they have done something amazing with the driving cabs and made some much needed improvements, as the 156 cabs isn't the best place to drive a train from!

Due to issues with the rebuild the return date has been delayed until end of May now.

 

[Xenophon PCDGS]

Are they seriously going to re-work all the toilets just to add 5mm to the seat height?

My gut feeling is telling me this won't be as simple as putting something 5mm thick between the seats and the mounts to gain the height...?

Are toilet seats that are 5mm thicker in depth not easily sourced?

 

[Peter Mugridge]

Are toilet seats that are 5mm thicker in depth not easily sourced?

I have no idea; have to ask a plumbing specialists!

Having said that, it wouldn't surprise me if somewhere else in the DfT's warehouse full of standards they've got a specification saying the seat has to be x mm thick.

 

[HA25322]

At least it is coming back which is the main thing. Thought it was going leave a big hole in my ned book but now I have a chance of having all of them which will be nice.

 

[djpontrack]

That's exactly what I was thinking HA25322.