Transport for Wales Class 230

[Woods]

So much I want to say on this thread, so many misunderstandings, so much speculation, so little time to address it all! One day a book will be written about the truth behind what went on with Vivarail.....

 

[Invincible]

With the amount of work that's gone into the 230's. What is their expected lifespan?

Does look like TfW, GWR and SWR have sorted the spares issues on the 230 and 484s.

Now depends on if the latest 230 battery updates give a reliable service for TfW and GWR?. If they work out then the 230s could have at least 10 years life left, and could provide useful feedback to the proposed GBR and elimination of diesel trains in 2040 target.

However there is a still a possibility the 230 upgrades for Wales and Greenford fail.

== Doublepost prevention - post automatically merged: 17 Sep 2024 ==

So much I want to say on this thread, so many misunderstandings, so much speculation, so little time to address it all! One day a book will be written about the truth behind what went on with Vivarail.....

Could be an interesting read.

 

[D365]

One day a book will be written about the truth behind what went on with Vivarail.....

Could be an interesting read.

Definitely will be an interesting read…

 

[Invincible]

Here we are at another timetable change, not a major one i know but again it looks like only one 230 out so the fleet is still only going to cover half a diagram per day probably until at least December again. What an absolute waste of money. And the 197s still being kept off the mainline which is struggling with shortages of trains.

Assuming the 230 upgrades work, and they start to run a full day and all 5 are available, then couldn't they just replace the 197s in the current timetable?

 

[Xenophon PCDGS]

Assuming the 230 upgrades work, and they start to run a full day and all 5 are available, then couldn't they just replace the 197s in the current timetable?

How long have TfW now had these units as a stop-gap and when was it proposed the next "proper" rail units would be delivered?

 

[43096]

How long have TfW now had these units as a stop-gap and when was it proposed the next "proper" rail units would be delivered?

They weren’t a stop gap.

 

[Lurcheroo]

Assuming the 230 upgrades work, and they start to run a full day and all 5 are available, then couldn't they just replace the 197s in the current timetable?

Yes they would, but it seems that’s still quite a way off.

How long have TfW now had these units as a stop-gap and when was it proposed the next "proper" rail units would be delivered?

I dont know that there are any public plans for replacement so quite some time away.

 

[Invincible]

Yes they would, but it seems that’s still quite a way off.


I dont know that there are any public plans for replacement so quite some time away.

So if they now have 3 working trains and started the updates for the other 2 in April,

Establishing a secure connection ...

which should have been tested and in operation by now.
What's the current situation?

 

[Lurcheroo]

So if they now have 3 working trains and started the updates for the other 2 in April,

Establishing a secure connection ...

which should have been tested and in operation by now.
What's the current situation?

I have no idea what that says as it’s behind a pay wall.

My understanding is that 007,008,009 and 010 are all unmodified.
A quick flit through RTT and it seems 008,009 and 010 are out routinely but not sure about 007.

006 is the first one to bed and has been modified and has been seen out at least once on a test run back on the 26th of august as said in post #660.
As that seems to be its first and only test run, I would still think there is some way to go.

 

[Invincible]

I have no idea what that says as it’s behind a pay wall.

My understanding is that 007,008,009 and 010 are all unmodified.
A quick flit through RTT and it seems 008,009 and 010 are out routinely but not sure about 007.

006 is the first one to bed and has been modified and has been seen out at least once on a test run back on the 26th of august as said in post #660.
As that seems to be its first and only test run, I would still think there is some way to go.

Thanks, it was saying TfW were debating about if 2 or 3 would be modified and in April agreed on 2, so another will be modified with 006?

 

[Lurcheroo]

Thanks, it was saying TfW were debating about if 2 or 3 would be modified and in April agreed on 2, so another will be modified with 006?

Is that 2 or 3 initially or total ?
Perhaps that’s where 007 is.

I would have thought that If successful all 5 would get the modifications.

 

[Steve B]

Is that 2 or 3 initially or total ?
Perhaps that’s where 007 is.

I would have thought that If successful all 5 would get the modifications.

The article says that they decided to apply the modifications to 2 units to prove the modifications, with the third being added once the costs and benefits were clear. It is intended that all 5 will eventually be modified.
The modifications involve the engine management software, battery efficiency and cooling, and prevention of radiator blockages. They are also looking to increase strategic spares holding.

 

[Xenophon PCDGS]

The article says that they decided to apply the modifications to 2 units to prove the modifications, with the third being added once the costs and benefits were clear. It is intended that all 5 will eventually be modified.
The modifications involve the engine management software, battery efficiency and cooling, and prevention of radiator blockages. They are also looking to increase strategic spares holding.

Just imagine if the TfW Class 230 saga (aka "The Neverending Story") were to be made the standard TfW future fleet procurement specification.

If train units had a union to look after their interests, that union would not be happy if the agreed "only half-day working" agreement for TfW Class 230 operational workload was amended to a full-day working....

 

[Lurcheroo]

The article says that they decided to apply the modifications to 2 units to prove the modifications, with the third being added once the costs and benefits were clear. It is intended that all 5 will eventually be modified.
The modifications involve the engine management software, battery efficiency and cooling, and prevention of radiator blockages. They are also looking to increase strategic spares holding.

Ahh good to know!
I had a rough idea as to what the mods were doing, good to hear about looking to increase the holding of spare parts though !

 

[Wyrleybart]

Now that I have gone part time I must have a ride up there to sample the 230s.
I am guessing the geo fencing system is turned off and the diesels run constantly to charge the batteries.

 

[Steve B]

From my experience the engines currently run continuously - the revs drop (to idle?) when the train is stationary, but never seem to get to what I would imagine to be full revs.

 

[CaergwrleKen]

From what i know about travelling on them and from what the crews say the engines constantly run and they also help power the train along with the batteries, the geofence thing happens at a couple of places where the engines are still running but don’t give power it’s battery only and you can feel when the full power with the engines kicks in again. If the engines were switched off and the train ran on battery only they would never keep on time and will soon run out of power. But they only do a couple of trips a day anyway, i don’t think they will ever run a full day and full timetable with just the 230s.

 

[Lurcheroo]

From what i know about travelling on them and from what the crews say the engines constantly run and they also help power the train along with the batteries, the geofence thing happens at a couple of places where the engines are still running but don’t give power it’s battery only and you can feel when the full power with the engines kicks in again. If the engines were switched off and the train ran on battery only they would never keep on time and will soon run out of power. But they only do a couple of trips a day anyway, i don’t think they will ever run a full day and full timetable with just the 230s.

That’s interesting that the batteries can’t provide suitable acceleration.

Perhaps the geo-fencing was only ever intended to have the gensets go to idle and not switch off all the time ?


Well the modifications are coming so we will see if that’s provides a full day of running for a single unit, but TFW will almost certainly never put them on a full days diagram in their current state.

 

[Turbo004]

There was a day last week or perhaps the week before that a Class 230 stayed all day. I can't remember which number it was either unfortunately but was asked to make train crew arrangements to keep the unit out all day.

 

[danielnez1]

So much I want to say on this thread, so many misunderstandings, so much speculation, so little time to address it all! One day a book will be written about the truth behind what went on with Vivarail.....

Once face value what has happened is the same that happened with the BR/Leyland Pacer project - lots of good intentions to cut costs in order to produce an affordable train for regional work. I wonder how much cost and effort has been spent on the D-Train concept (especially for the organisations purchasing them) vs the cost of just buying a new trains, a bit like all of the mods the Pacers needed over the years vs just buying more Class 15x units from the start.

At least the Battery tech developments may have long term benefits for new trains, so that is a good thing.

 

[Wyrleybart]

From what i know about travelling on them and from what the crews say the engines constantly run and they also help power the train along with the batteries, the geofence thing happens at a couple of places where the engines are still running but don’t give power it’s battery only and you can feel when the full power with the engines kicks in again. If the engines were switched off and the train ran on battery only they would never keep on time and will soon run out of power. But they only do a couple of trips a day anyway, i don’t think they will ever run a full day and full timetable with just the 230s.

You have the advantage over me as I have not even seen one let alone ridden on one, but what you say is different to how they were initially conceived. AIUI the three car units were designed with traction motored bogies on the two end cars and two engine pods in each end car. The engine pods were to solely provide power to charge the batteries which were located under the centre car, and it was the batteries that supply 100% of traction motor energy as well as the auxilliaries for lighting, heating, doors etc. Obviously braking and retardation of units was to provide regen braking to top the batteries up.

AIUI the 230s were only going to be powered by onboard generation via batteries so based on Ken's experience, has the traction circuitry been modified so that the onboard engines now provide traction power straight to the traction motors ?

Sound like a big change to me.

 

[Peter Sarf]

You have the advantage over me as I have not even seen one let alone ridden on one, but what you say is different to how they were initially conceived. AIUI the three car units were designed with traction motored bogies on the two end cars and two engine pods in each end car. The engine pods were to solely provide power to charge the batteries which were located under the centre car, and it was the batteries that supply 100% of traction motor energy as well as the auxilliaries for lighting, heating, doors etc. Obviously braking and retardation of units was to provide regen braking to top the batteries up.

AIUI the 230s were only going to be powered by onboard generation via batteries so based on Ken's experience, has the traction circuitry been modified so that the onboard engines now provide traction power straight to the traction motors ?

Sound like a big change to me.

And - I can believe this would imply more fuel usage if the batteries were not sufficient to accelerate the train as originally planned.

 

[Prime586]

You have the advantage over me as I have not even seen one let alone ridden on one, but what you say is different to how they were initially conceived. AIUI the three car units were designed with traction motored bogies on the two end cars and two engine pods in each end car. The engine pods were to solely provide power to charge the batteries which were located under the centre car, and it was the batteries that supply 100% of traction motor energy as well as the auxilliaries for lighting, heating, doors etc. Obviously braking and retardation of units was to provide regen braking to top the batteries up.

AIUI the 230s were only going to be powered by onboard generation via batteries so based on Ken's experience, has the traction circuitry been modified so that the onboard engines now provide traction power straight to the traction motors ?

Sound like a big change to me.

I suepct it was due to how the charge/discharge system was concieved on paper versus the practical realities of working with lithium-basecd cells that led to the change.

Lithium batteries can only be charged (or discharged) at a specific rate based on the cell chemistry and construction method (known as the 'C' rating), and that rate is also dependent on the charge state and cell temperature to avoid going into thermal runaway. The gensets are probably capable of producing more current than can be used to safely charge the batteries (especially once they have heated up), which can be directly sunk by the traction circuitry to augment the current the batteries are capable of discharing. if acceleration demand is there. The 'safe' discharge rate threshold in the BMS (which will be determined by the battery C-rating, charge state and temperature) will determine the accleration profile when running battery-only and the gensets are idling due to geofencing.

 

[Lurcheroo]

I suepct it was due to how the charge/discharge system was concieved on paper versus the practical realities of working with lithium-basecd cells that led to the change.

Lithium batteries can only be charged (or discharged) at a specific rate based on the cell chemistry and construction method (known as the 'C' rating), and that rate is also dependent on the charge state and cell temperature to avoid going into thermal runaway. The gensets are probably capable of producing more current than can be used to safely charge the batteries (especially once they have heated up), which can be directly sunk by the traction circuitry to augment the current the batteries are capable of discharing. if acceleration demand is there. The 'safe' discharge rate threshold in the BMS (which will be determined by the battery C-rating, charge state and temperature) will determine the accleration profile when running battery-only and the gensets are idling due to geofencing.

interesting stuff! it certainly would make sense to not let unused capability go to waste.

 

[Steve B]

Seems that 006 is out on test again today.

 

[Lurcheroo]

Seems that 006 is out on test again today.

So it does! Good to see it’s coming along.

Realtime Trains | 3F40 1019 Birkenhead North E.M.U.D to Wrexham General | 29/09/2024

Real-time train running information for 3F40 1019 departure from Birkenhead North E.M.U.D to Wrexham General on 29/09/2024. From Realtime Trains, an independent source of train running info for Great Britain.

www.realtimetrains.co.uk

 

[Xenophon PCDGS]

Only 3 minutes lats passing Shotton Paper Company, but shortly afterwards, 14 minutes late at Dee Marsh Junction....what happened?

 

[Lurcheroo]

Only 3 minutes lats passing Shotton Paper Company, but shortly afterwards, 14 minutes late at Dee Marsh Junction....what happened?

No idea unfortunately. I was wondering the same though .

 

[FD99]

What really annoys me about geo-fencing is that it was designed to keep noise pollution down in built up areas. Then they whacked an air raid siren on the doors when they close! Driving them I can tell you there’s not much difference in speed if the engines are off, except leaving shotton heading towards Wrexham. A 197 gets to 40mph quicker up the bank. But otherwise there’s very little in it. Last year we were asked to turn then engines off between certain stations to remove leaves from the radiators and there was no lost time at all. Obviously this assumes there’s no other issues with the unit.

 

[Lurcheroo]

What really annoys me about geo-fencing is that it was designed to keep noise pollution down in built up areas. Then they whacked an air raid siren on the doors when they close! Driving them I can tell you there’s not much difference in speed if the engines are off, except leaving shotton heading towards Wrexham. A 197 gets to 40mph quicker up the bank. But otherwise there’s very little in it. Last year we were asked to turn then engines off between certain stations to remove leaves from the radiators and there was no lost time at all. Obviously this assumes there’s no other issues with the unit.

Ahh ok that’s interesting!

From driving them, do you think (assuming that the modifications are successful) that the 230’s could reliably keep to a timetable for a service every 30 minutes ?

Again assuming no other issues e.g having to drive defensively in low adhesion season.