Class 230 into revenue service

[jjb1970]

My own preference would be to renew the trains they had before, despite the higher engine noise I prefer the 15x series of trains. 

[Nearholmer]

Partly a matter of personal taste I guess, and the interior design, but I always thought they lacked a feeling of spaciousness inside, and the doorways were a PITA with a bike!

 

I can’t find a figure for the weight per car of the 230 to allow me to work out weight seat, but I’m certain they weigh less than the 150 series.

[Kelly]

2 hours ago, jjb1970 said:

My own preference would be to renew the trains they had before, despite the higher engine noise I prefer the 15x series of trains. 

 

They were probably much more likely to be cascaded than renewed for where they were. 

 

My view has always been that there was plenty of life left in the d stock, especially as the bogies and motors had been refurbished not long before retirement by tfl. It is far better in these days of expense and such to reuse where it makes sense. 

 

If they're only ever a stop gap until other units become available that is still better than things like 142s and the like continuing in service decades after they should have gone for scrap! 

[Trevellan]

I was able to participate in a study trip to the Marston Vale line last week and sampled the 230s for the first time. Having become used to the class 484s on my local railway I was interested in how the diesel version would perform.

 

As others have noted, the noise from the underfloor engine packs is much lower than expected, with an EMU soundtrack being more the norm. Personally, I think the interior layout is quirky, while recognising that this will often be a compromise. As a six-footer I found the directional seat spacing to be rather tight, but there were other, less cramped options. Overall, I think the 230s are perfect for such a self-contained service with short journey times.

 

Our visit finished with tea and cake at the Ridgmont Visitor Centre, and very enjoyable it was too!

[Kelly]

7 hours ago, Trevellan said:

 

As others have noted, the noise from the underfloor engine packs is much lower than expected, with an EMU soundtrack being more the norm. Personally, I think the interior layout is quirky, while recognising that this will often be a compromise. As a six-footer I found the directional seat spacing to be rather tight, but there were other, less cramped options. Overall, I think the 230s are perfect for such a self-contained service with short journey times.

 

 

The seating/interior is down to the operator to choose. The comments early on about the seating of them were all against demonstration seating thatd been installed I believe.

[mdvle]

17 hours ago, jjb1970 said:

My own preference would be to renew the trains they had before, despite the higher engine noise I prefer the 15x series of trains. 

 

Except the 15x units are all still in service I think, so it wasn't a question of life renewing those - they were simply deemed to be necessary elsewhere.

 

So the choice really came down to redoing the ex LU stock and creating the 230/whatever units or ordering new.

[Kelly]

42 minutes ago, mdvle said:

 

Except the 15x units are all still in service I think, so it wasn't a question of life renewing those - they were simply deemed to be necessary elsewhere.

 

So the choice really came down to redoing the ex LU stock and creating the 230/whatever units or ordering new.

 

Ordering new was never going to be on the cards unless it was on another line and caused cascading again. 

 

There will be new units in the next 5 years probably,  but gradually they may well not be diesel if the fuel costs keep going up. I expect we'll see more battery units potentially,  especially on relatively short lines or maybe hybrid units. Hydrogen still remains a possibility. 

[Covkid]

20 hours ago, jjb1970 said:

My own preference would be to renew the trains they had before, despite the higher engine noise I prefer the 15x series of trains. 

 

3 hours ago, mdvle said:

 

Except the 15x units are all still in service I think, so it wasn't a question of life renewing those - they were simply deemed to be necessary elsewhere.

 

So the choice really came down to redoing the ex LU stock and creating the 230/whatever units or ordering new.

 

3 hours ago, Kelly said:

 

Ordering new was never going to be on the cards unless it was on another line and caused cascading again. 

 

There will be new units in the next 5 years probably,  but gradually they may well not be diesel if the fuel costs keep going up. I expect we'll see more battery units potentially,  especially on relatively short lines or maybe hybrid units. Hydrogen still remains a possibility. 

 

Battery technology has advanced tremendously since 2017 and with 25kV at each end of the Marston Vale line there should be a battery option.  I personally doubt the EWR will actually get beyond Bletchley towards Bedford, and it is planned to diesels anyway, so a golden opportunity exists for some new 25kV + battery railcars  - which would give the option of eventually extending the OLE along the branch from both ends.  

Maybe 350/2s when they come off lease fitted with batterys and SDO for short platforms 

[Kelly]

1 minute ago, Covkid said:

 

 

 

Battery technology has advanced tremendously since 2017 and with 25kV at each end of the Marston Vale line there should be a battery option.  I personally doubt the EWR will actually get beyond Bletchley towards Bedford, and it is planned to diesels anyway, so a golden opportunity exists for some new 25kV + battery railcars  - which would give the option of eventually extending the OLE along the branch from both ends.  

Maybe 350/2s when they come off lease fitted with batterys and SDO for short platforms 

 

Quite and new battery technologies are on the horizon from Tesla and Toyota amongst others. Toyoya working on solid state batteries, which make them lighter and thinner as well as much harder to set on fire.

[jjb1970]

Unfortunately, any energy carrier with sufficient energy density to power something like a train for any distance is always going to represent something of a hazard in the event of a release of that energy I think. Are the railways considering ammonia?

[Kelly]

6 minutes ago, jjb1970 said:

Unfortunately, any energy carrier with sufficient energy density to power something like a train for any distance is always going to represent something of a hazard in the event of a release of that energy I think. Are the railways considering ammonia?

 

Quite a bit of experimentation is happening with hydrogen in Germany and other countries I believe.

[jjb1970]

Methyl-alcohol/methanol is another alternative fuel with a lot of advocacy.

[Christopher125]

TfW's Class 230 fleet entered passenger service today, 230010 doing the honours.

 

 

[Nearholmer]

Any idea how they’ve been got into service post the demise of Vivarail?

[frobisher]

53 minutes ago, Nearholmer said:

Any idea how they’ve been got into service post the demise of Vivarail?

 

Vivarail - Wikipedia says...

 

Quote

In November 2022, the company entered into administration. Assets of Vivarail have been purchased by train operating company GWR. GWR bought intellectual property, rolling stock and equipment relating to the development of high-performance battery and Fast Charge technology to continue Vivarail's work in these areas. The technology is being trialled between West Ealing and Greenford.[4]

 

And taken on 9 of the staff too, so clearly they see some kind of future.

 

Ah, this also might explain why the 369's weren't taken up...

Edited April 3, 2023 by frobisher

[Kris]

13 hours ago, frobisher said:

 

Vivarail - Wikipedia says...

 

 

And taken on 9 of the staff too, so clearly they see some kind of future.

 

Ah, this also might explain why the 369's weren't taken up...

Does this mean that GWR are the first train operator in the UK to become a manufacturer as well? At least since BR existed.

 

GWR's news release on this is here https://www.firstgroupplc.com/news-and-media/latest-news/2023/160223.aspx looks like it took place a couple of months ago. 

[phil-b259]

On 03/04/2023 at 18:28, Nearholmer said:

Any idea how they’ve been got into service post the demise of Vivarail?

 

Because they are owned outright by TfW and maintenance is being by TfW at Birkenhead depot - i.e. not leased from and maintained by Vivarail.

 

Thus from a legal standpoint there is a viable organisation which can underwrite the legal side of things should an incident occur

 

TfW have also been buying up spares from the administrators - and of course they are also aided by these units being battery / diesel hybrids and thus having a different design to the Marston Vale units

Edited April 4, 2023 by phil-b259

[adb968008]

23 hours ago, frobisher said:

 

Vivarail - Wikipedia says...

 

 

And taken on 9 of the staff too, so clearly they see some kind of future.

 

Ah, this also might explain why the 369's weren't taken up...

9 staff..

 

Is the process of converting the remaining  D stock to 230’s done by robots or outsourced, of just a pretty slow task ?

 

[phil-b259]

23 hours ago, frobisher said:

 

Ah, this also might explain why the 369's weren't taken up...

 

Nope!

 

The 369s were dumped because:-

 

(1) They were expensive to lease

(2) They were proving unreliable / still not in public service

(3) The DfT are pushing for big cuts* - including train services and train lengths so as to "recompense hard working taxpayers" (only 2% of whom use the railways) for all the cash they put into the industry during the Pandemic.

(4)  With the cuts mentioned above, GWR can just about cope with keeping a batch of Turbo units at Reading to cover this service (and the Thames Valley branch lines)

 

* The remaining GWR HST fleet are going with no additional stock to replace them for the exactly the same reason. 

[frobisher]

43 minutes ago, phil-b259 said:

 

Nope!

 

The 369s were dumped because:-

 

(1) They were expensive to lease

(2) They were proving unreliable / still not in public service

(3) The DfT are pushing for big cuts* - including train services and train lengths so as to "recompense hard working taxpayers" (only 2% of whom use the railways) for all the cash they put into the industry during the Pandemic.

(4)  With the cuts mentioned above, GWR can just about cope with keeping a batch of Turbo units at Reading to cover this service (and the Thames Valley branch lines)

 

* The remaining GWR HST fleet are going with no additional stock to replace them for the exactly the same reason. 

 

Well yes, I suppose I should have said that any consideration to keeping the 369's on at all went out the window when they had the potential to home grow a similar solution.

 

 

 

[Kris]

2 hours ago, adb968008 said:

9 staff..

 

Is the process of converting the remaining  D stock to 230’s done by robots or outsourced, of just a pretty slow task ?

 

I suspect that these were the only remaining staff. 85 were made redundant when the administrator was appointed. 

[adb968008]

Class 369 ?

 

Do you mean 769 ?

 

or something else ?

Edited April 4, 2023 by adb968008

[frobisher]

5 hours ago, adb968008 said:

Class 369 ?

 

Do you mean 769 ?

 

or something else ?

 

Yes on 769, and DOH! on 369.

[toby_tl10]

9 hours ago, phil-b259 said:

(1) They were expensive to lease

(2) They were proving unreliable / still not in public service

Does Northern or TfW have reliability issues with their 769s? Or is it only with the GWR units?

[adb968008]

2 hours ago, toby_tl10 said:

Does Northern or TfW have reliability issues with their 769s? Or is it only with the GWR units?

I think theres an element of snobbery in the UK about repurposing  stock. Theres also an ageist culture.. Post war stock never really gets past 40 years old, even if theres nothing really wrong with it.

its a culture change that came about post war.
 

It either has to be fashionably new or reliably old, but hand me downs are never well recieved. Hence the nose curling at 230’s, 769’s even class 69’s, class 57’s arent universally popular. No one likes “cheap”, especially when its openly touted as being cheap… hence why 142’s werent popular either.

Going back further classes like 29, 74 met similar hesitance.

 

The way to off “cheap” is to give it a bad reputation, justly or not… 142’s were the lowest operating cost, highest availability units… the ultimate of cheap.. but the reputation out there was anything but.

 

769’s seem to work fine for Northern, GWR will never know as they never entered them into service.

Edited April 5, 2023 by adb968008