Class 230 into revenue service

[jim.snowdon]

If the mechanical parts - the bodyshell and running gear - along with the major electrical components have an economic life left in them, why not re-use them? The railway doesn't need new stock every time the operator changes, although the likes of Bombardier and Siemens might take a different view.

 

Jim

[Guest teacupteacup]

Will be interesting to see when/if the 230s enter revenue service. There was an ASLEF circular that came out a few weeks back, apparently Vivarail have completely ignored all the issues that had been raised and carried on regardless. As it currently stands, ASLEF refuses to allow any of its members to operate them.

 

Personally, the best place for redundant old Underground stock is being recycled into tin cans, not being re-engineered and passed off as Trains for the future!

 

Andrew

The best place for the unions of today is the bin

[Andrew Young]

Why do you say that?

  

Really? They have had ballots already? Or is it they recommend members not to drive them.

  

On what basis?

Jim

There were a whole series of issues with the design, safety and can ergonomics that ASLEF has issues with, all of which had been previously notified to Vivarail. I’m not going to copy them all to hear, but safety say that introduction to squadron service might not be quite so straight forward as these press events make out.

 

There haven’t been ballots, this is direct communication between Head Office at the highest level and Vivarail.

 

Andrew

[Nearholmer]

Which is an argument about particular details, not an argument that supports your contention that the whole idea is a bad one.

 

I’ve yet to hear of a design for anything that wasn’t debated in detail between designers and potential users. And, some of those discussions are conducted well, and others aren’t.

[Andrew Young]

Well somebody is driving the first WMT / LNW unit, 003, at Bletchley as it’s been out on night time testing recently.

Whilst more new stock would be preferable, if government won’t sanction it then at least these will be newer and better than Pacers and help fill gaps in fleets. The battery prototype is great innovation and would improve several short branch lines currently in pacer / 153 duties.

They’re not much different to the class 769 flex programme

Suspect that the current testing is being carried out by drivers from R.O.G. Or some other outfit that doesn’t recognise the unions. The problems will come, if the current issues aren’t resolved, when a TOC wishes to put them into revenue service.

 

There’s a lot of differences between the 769 and 230’s! The more to it than battery packs and engines. Crash worthiness and cab ergonomics are two for a start. There are too many drivers with buggered backs from driving 14x and 15x fleets through the years, if the companies want us to spend large numbers of hours in th seat, then the least they can do is make the suspension and sets take the forces of the track, not the drivers’ backs.

 

Andrew

[Andrew Young]

Which is an argument about particular details, not an argument that supports your contention that the whole idea is a bad one.

I’ve yet to hear of a design for anything that wasn’t debated in detail between designers and potential users. And, some of those discussions are conducted well, and others aren’t.

Think there’s a loss in communication here somewhere. I’m not non-life expired trains being reused and reengineered, just saying that not all are fit for redeployment elsewhere. Plus, the aim of my first message was to highlight issues that have been made, not to condemn the process of re-engineering, they’re your words, not mine.

 

Andrew

The best place for the unions of today is the bin

Not from where I’m sat!

 

Andrew

[Nearholmer]

“Personally, the best place for redundant old Underground stock is being recycled into tin cans, not being re-engineered and passed off as Trains for the future!”

 

I read that as meaning that you thought the whole thing was a bad idea.

[jjb1970]

There was an ASLEF circular that came out a few weeks back, apparently Vivarail have completely ignored all the issues that had been raised and carried on regardless.

That is making a huge assumption, it may be that Vivarail have fully considered the points raised by ASLEF and disagreed with them hence have not actioned any associated requests. The fact that a company, agency or individual person does not act on feedback or comments received cannot be taken as meaning they've ignored it.

[Kelly]

For those who may be interested, there is a RCTS talk in Coventry by Adrian Shooter tomorrow at 2pm on the Class 230 and other developments at Vivarail.

[russ p]

The best place for the unions of today is the bin

Not the best thing to say on a forum that has many ASLEF and RMT members active on it!

[jim.snowdon]

Not the best thing to say on a forum that has many ASLEF and RMT members active on it!

Maybe not, but the RMT, in particular, has neither endeared itself to the passengers who are dependent upon the railway, nor done the railway industry as a whole any favours. It needs to remember that it is not there to run the railways, nor is it the safety authority.

 

Jim

[russ p]

I hear what you are saying but It makes sense for the union to have input into cab design before they enter service.

And its us that sit at the front so where crash worthiness is involved the union IS the safety authority.

We pay good money to the union so in return we expect they make sure new traction is fit for purpose

[Davexoc]

There’s a lot of differences between the 769 and 230’s! The more to it than battery packs and engines. Crash worthiness and cab ergonomics are two for a start. There are too many drivers with buggered backs from driving 14x and 15x fleets through the years, if the companies want us to spend large numbers of hours in th seat, then the least they can do is make the suspension and sets take the forces of the track, not the drivers’ backs.

I haven't been in either, but I would have thought the cab of a 230 was far supierior to that of a 153 (modified end).......

[russ p]

The space saving cab on a 153 needed a few tweaks after a Union inspection.

I'm sure the 230 will be fine but as its a bodyshell designed for a completely different work environment I has to be thoroughly checked before entry into service

[Nearholmer]

It would be really strange not to consult potential users during the cab-design process. And, it would be really strange if that consultation revealed that the design process had got everything absolutely right, first time.

 

And, and, this thread is supposed to be about Class 230s, not a place to air our personal opinions about whether or not TUs are A Good Thing. If we pursue that line, it will doubtless get locked as it descends into all-out opinion-war.

[mdvle]

If the mechanical parts - the bodyshell and running gear - along with the major electrical components have an economic life left in them, why not re-use them? The railway doesn't need new stock every time the operator changes, although the likes of Bombardier and Siemens might take a different view.

 

Jim

 

Ironic then that there is another thread going on where the visitors complaint amounts to disgust / disappointment that his trips were on 30+ year old trains unlike his experiences elsewhere in the world - http://www.rmweb.co.uk/community/index.php?/topic/138360-the-state-of-uk-rail-some-personal-experiences/

 

It does matter to a certain segment of the traveling public as to whether a train is new or not, though sometimes a decent refurbishment/rebuilding can give a like new experience.

[russ p]

The public doesn't know why it wants a new train and quite often it doesn't know if its got one.

When GA refurbished the mk3s on the GE a lot thought they had for new trains.

Pity them when the stadler souped up trams turn up!

[jim.snowdon]

It's a bit presumptuous to write Stadler's trains off as "souped up trams" just because they aren't loco hauled Mark 3s.

 

Jim

[Zomboid]

But they are articulated, and stadler do make trams. As well as the most recent locomotives to be purchased for the UK...

 

From just looking (from a passenger perspective) those "souped up trams" look like they could be the best trains we'll have in this country. Guess time will tell...

[jim.snowdon]

So was a lot of Gresley's stock for the LNER, and Bombardier make trams as well as trains.

 

You could equally well say that trams are down market trains for running in the streets.

 

What matters is how passengers see the new Stadler trains as their means of getting from A to B. As long as they are comfortable enough, ride well and get them there on time, what's underneath is irrelevant.

 

Jim

[Zomboid]

Articulation being a feature of the more advanced trains we've had (for their time) - APT, Eurostar, Gresley's streamliners...

[wombatofludham]

You could equally well say that trams are down market trains for running in the streets.

 

 

 

Ansaldo made the old Midland Metro T69 trams at the same factory as the Italian Railways ETR 500 high speed train trailers (on one visit to the factory I was shown around one under construction) and of course also built the Danish IC4 high speed DMUs and the Benelux "Fyra" units.

 

Given the IC4s never worked as designed and were 9 years late, and the Fyra units started falling apart during testing and Belgian and Dutch railways refused to accept them, I bet DSB, SNCB and NS wished they HAD bought souped up trams.

['CHARD]

Ansaldo made the old Midland Metro T69 trams at the same factory as the Italian Railways ETR 500 high speed train trailers (on one visit to the factory I was shown around one under construction) and of course also built the Danish IC4 high speed DMUs and the Benelux "Fyra" units.

 

 

British Leyland built all sorts of things in the same factory that now produces the MINI range.   The past is another country, and Stadler's set-up is rather different to Ansaldo's.

[Nearholmer]

Given that electric traction really 'got going' in the 1880s as an alternative to pit ponies in mines and tram horses in streets, a cogent argument could be made that all electric traction is either souped-up trams or souped-up mines locos, but quite what such an argument would add to the sum of human wisdom, I'm not totally sure.

 

Most of the difference between 'tram' electrical equipment and 'train' electrical equipment is in size/rating, rather than anything fundamental.

[wombatofludham]

British Leyland built all sorts of things in the same factory that now produces the MINI range.   The past is another country, and Stadler's set-up is rather different to Ansaldo's.

 

I know that.  I personally have no gripe with modern units and think the Stadler units look to be quality trains that will be extremely popular with real people who pay lots of money to travel across East Anglia.  Let's face it when was the last time the Norfolk and Suffolk branch lines got new investment on such a scale - probably the 1950s.  What real people want from rail travel and what obsessive enthusiasts want are poles apart and in any argument what Joe and Joanna Normal want will trump any misty eyed misplaced affection for noisy, poor riding, poorly ventilated and uncomfortable Mk1 stock which if still in service would have driven people back onto the M11 faster than a wheezing 37 could manage.

 

My comments about the (former) Ansaldo were humour.  Since Hitachi have taken them over they have injected some serious management time into the company and it has resulted in them allegedly snatching the Stir Welding plant investment from Newton Aycliffe such has been the turnaround in quality (and Brexit uncertainty).