Vivarail files intention to appoint administrators

['CHARD]

As the thread title says, it looks like the good idea has run into the sand drag.  A shame really, but beset with struggles, it was increasingly looking like a solution in search of a problem, and these never end gloriously (Nightstock, Adtranz 'Classic' anyone?).

 

The following link is just one of several, but RG is decent journalism by the standards of some other sources. 

 

https://www.railwaygazette.com/uk/vivarail-files-intention-to-appoint-administrators/63023.article

[APOLLO]

Good. These abysmal cheap and nasty rebuilds are an insult to the paying passenger. 

 

Brit15

[RANGERS]

1 minute ago, APOLLO said:

Good. These abysmal cheap and nasty rebuilds are an insult to the paying passenger. 

 

Brit15

Unfortunately what the passenger pays means this is all that some will get. Usually better to have less than perfect trains than no trains at all 🤔

[great central]

2 minutes ago, RANGERS said:

Unfortunately what the passenger pays means this is all that some will get. Usually better to have less than perfect trains than no trains at all 🤔

 

If Internet chatter is to be believed, seems likely there will be places with no, or at least less than currently, services come next May's timetable change.

[APOLLO]

37 minutes ago, great central said:

 

If Internet chatter is to be believed, seems likely there will be places with no, or at least less than currently, services come next May's timetable change.

 

Very concerning if true given the push to get people out of their cars and onto public transport. Also the London ULEZ zone expansion announced today.

 

Crazy times.

 

Brit15

[john new]

Not good news.

[John M Upton]

Plenty of surplus proper stock available, the D Stock rebuilds were never necessary. 

 

1 hour ago, great central said:

 

If Internet chatter is to be believed, seems likely there will be places with no, or at least less than currently, services come next May's timetable change.

 

Having looked at many examples of rail forums frequented by the enthusiast fraternity, 90% of what I have seen is at best speculative nonsense. 

[62613]

13 hours ago, great central said:

 

If Internet chatter is to be believed, seems likely there will be places with no, or at least less than currently, services come next May's timetable change.

Well, Northern have been advertising "More services" from the December timetable change, seemingly including restoring the Piccadilly - Hadfields to half - hourly throughout the day. So maybe, maybe not.

Edited November 26, 2022 by 62613

[great central]

13 minutes ago, 62613 said:

Well, Northern have been advertising "More services" from the December timetable change, seemingly including restoring the Piccadilly - Hadfields to half - hourly throughout the day. So maybe, maybe not.

 

The December timetable changes were already set some months ago, it's next May that will be interesting, they're currently  being decided.

[Mike_Walker]

14 hours ago, APOLLO said:

Good. These abysmal cheap and nasty rebuilds are an insult to the paying passenger. 

 

Brit15

Before you gloat, just spare a thought for the 70 or so remaining VivaRail employees and their families now facing unemployment in the run up to Christmas in a period of almost unprecedented economic strife.

 

Sadly this was looking increasingly like the outcome.  The original concept of recycling old LU stock came about when Adrian Shooter was led by Failing Grayling to think he could get a large order to replace the Northern Pacer fleet.  Thankfully, pressure from MPs and the public brought about a better solution but left VivaRail with the need to find a new direction which was, largely, coming up with a solution then finding the problem.

 

The fire aboard 230001 at Kenilworth and the subsequent discovery of the cause dented the company's reputation and the delays in getting the LNWR, TfW and Isle of Wight fleets into service didn't help.  The latest delay, in getting the battery trial of 230001 on the Greenford branch is down not to problems with ViavaRail, the train or the technology.  All are working successfully but there is a problem in arranging a suitable power supply for the rapid charger at West Ealing which, apparently, is a symptom of a wider problem involving the National Grid which has said it is unable to supply enough power for this or other major demands in west London.

 

Hopefully, the administrators will be able to find a good home for the IP of the battery trains and charging system as they do seem to work.  For some time I've thought that VivaRail would be better off working with one of the big boys to provide equipment packages for new build trains rather than going down the rebuild path.

[APOLLO]

Not gloating and bad news for the employees but this whole concept of foisting off rebuilt tatty, worn out old London Underground trains on the paying public was always questionable at the very least, especially when we are scrapping many more modern units with lots of life left in them.

 

Brit15

[Mike_Walker]

But have you actually been on one?  There is little reminder of the old LU stock inside and most passengers who use them seem pleased with them that's certainly true on the Marston Vale line - when the operator can be bothered to provide a crew to work them, the technical issues were largely resolved during the lockdowns.  They might not be ideal but they do provide a low cost alternative to operating branch lines which will likely never see a brand new train - although the good folk of Blaenau Ffestiniog would disagree with that after last week!

 

I repeat, the whole concept came about through the actions of a now discredited SoS not the rail industry itself which now has to do what it is told by the DafT and is not allowed to make it's own decisions.  

[APOLLO]

No, never been on one but did ride on Pacers when they where brand new - and they were rubbish even when new.

 

At last here in the NW we have some very nice new DMU & EMU trains running out of our new depot at Springs Branch, Wigan. 

 

We just need staff to turn up to work and run them !!!!!!!!!!!!!!

 

Brit15

 

 

[keefer]

16 hours ago, John M Upton said:

Plenty of surplus proper stock available, the D Stock rebuilds were never necessary.

 

4 hours ago, APOLLO said:

especially when we are scrapping many more modern units with lots of life left in them.

Ok, so why was/is none of this stock actually used? 

If it's so easy to redistribute/reallocate surplus stock then why isn't it done?

The Viva Rail project may not have been needed if there was a more cohesive railway, where owners/leasing companies were encouraged/obliged to work together to use surplus stock.

But even so, not all stock that is available would necessarily be suitable for somewhere it is needed, extreme example being the IOW line with its limited loading gauge.

As I see it, the Viva approach was to provide trains for lines which otherwise would not be able to get anything that is currently available, at feasible cost 

Like the continual argument about why they didn't make the Pacers better in the first place, the reason was there was no money - it was either that or nothing.

As for the trains being dirty, smelly, tatty old LT stock, I'd hazard a guess that there are many main line TOC  trains running about in a worse internal condition than the 230s.

 

Edited November 26, 2022 by keefer

[Nearholmer]

There is nothing at all wrong with the Vivarail concept, given that the D78 stock has exceedingly solid and corrosion-free body shells, and exceedingly modern and flexible bogies that are fairly new, conditional upon:

 

- there actually being a gap in the market that isn’t covered by other surplus stock; and,

 

- the cost of fitting new traction packages, interiors, and end-crash-resistance being low enough to compete with other refurb/cascade/new options.

 

My surmise is that those two conditions could not be met, and I’d wager that the problem is cost, which is always a challenge with upgrade/refurb because it can become more labour-intensive than building from new, and becomes truly crippling if the batch sizes are small.

 

Talking of the Vivarail product as somehow trashy and substandard is, to put it as politely as I can, nonsensical. 
 

 

Edited November 26, 2022 by Nearholmer

[08221]

37 minutes ago, APOLLO said:

No, never been on one but did ride on Pacers when they where brand new - and they were rubbish even when new.

 

Brit15

 

 

The 230’s on the Bletchley to Bedford branch are a world apart from the Pacers, they are smooth, quiet and well equipped internally.

 

Its shame what has happened, it was a true bit of good old British enterprise.

[Johann Marsbar]

Will be interesting to see what happens regarding the US based demonstration.....

https://rrdc.com/companies/pop-up-metro/

[Nova Scotian]

I found it interesting that there's some US ownership and a very short time before entering administration they shipped a second product to the US.

 

I'm disappointed by what's happened here. I think their product had application and was promising to maintain rail service in some areas - and much better than the pacer was.

 

They were set back by a number of clear problems - a fire, the software for the Isle of Wight (must have cost them a fortune), and then a "thermal incident".

 

I don't think the D stock are ratty, or can't be made to be good - particularly the bogies. However, I do think the choice of D stock caused one massive problem that's been talked about before - a 60mph top speed. This causes problems for any pathing on mainline. Anything else (passenger) out there is 75mph plus. Pacer was 75mph (if it ever got there and didn't give you brain damage shaking at that speed).

[Rivercider]

2 hours ago, APOLLO said:

No, never been on one but did ride on Pacers when they where brand new - and they were rubbish even when new.

 

At last here in the NW we have some very nice new DMU & EMU trains running out of our new depot at Springs Branch, Wigan. 

 

We just need staff to turn up to work and run them !!!!!!!!!!!!!!

 

Brit15

 

 

I have defended Pacers before elsewhere, and I will defend them again here. They did what they were designed to do, and often did it well.

I commuted to, or through, Bristol for 30 years and travelled on a wide variety of stock. When we had 143s at Bristol there were many times I was pleased to see my train home formed of a pair of them. Much better to sit in a 143 than stand in (or be unable to get on to)  a single 150 or 158. Once refurbished and with 2 + 2 seating  the ride in a 143 was good on anything other than poorly maintained jointed track. For a while 142s with 2 + 3 seating and refurbished 143s (2 + 2) worked side by side at Exeter so it was easy to tell the improvement of one over the other.

 

Regarding the Vivarail situation, it all seems a bit sad, and I feel for the employees. Failing Grayling indeed!

 

cheers

[Nova Scotian]

31 minutes ago, Rivercider said:

When we had 143s at Bristol there were many times I was pleased to see my train home formed of a pair of them. Much better to sit in a 143 than stand in (or be unable to get on to)  a single 150 or 158. Once refurbished and with 2 + 2 seating  the ride in a 143 was good on anything other than poorly maintained jointed track.

When still in use in Devon you had a 2+1 pacer plus class 153. The 153 was always filled before the pacer because of the difference in comfort (ride, sound levels etc).

The pacer did do what it was meant to do. That doesn't mean it wasn't a blight on our railways as compared to if they had invested in proper rolling stock. They weren't going to do that, so we got what we got. They did not see the economic benefit the railway brings as important enough - bean counting indeed.

 

I will maintain they are awful machines and are suitable only as public toilets (their other main use).

The 230s are a massive step up from them. The difference a set of real bogies makes.

['CHARD]

Having had 'skin in the game' with this project, one way or another, for several years, I do think it's a shame  to see its demise. The intervention of the S-o-S in the re-tendering of the Northern franchise in 2014-15 really holed this idea beneath the waterline. by ruling out refurbished (or repurposed) trains as Pacer replacements, and effectively mandating the cheapest new trains available (CAF). 

 

As defined at bidding stage, there were several suitable routes where the Vivarail trains could have been introduced, where their 60mph abilities were not an issue. The rules changed and these trains were ruled out before the fleet plan had developed far, so it's hard to say how many could have been featured in a final fleet strategy, but it's plausible that 40 or 50 may have. 

 

Hindsight could tell a story of Northern's customers and fleet engineers having dodged a bullet, but perhaps the critical mass that could have coalesced around this quantity of trains would have translated into a robust, reliable and well-supported proposition, far from the cottage industry perception that has dogged the concept for a while now.

[Mike_Walker]

I have to defend Pacers.  Having ridden umpteen miles in 142s in the North West they were rough on jointed track and across complex junctions but they would purr along on CWR at 75mph as smoothly as any other 2nd generation DMU.  The cab of the 142 was by far the best of modern units, a nice seat, big windows and a large desk on the right hand side to spread my documents out on, It was just a pain that where I most needed to take notes the bl**dy things went into full "nodding donkey" mode - not easy to write when your pen and paper are going in opposite directions!

 

They only existed because the government of the day was not prepared to make available sufficient funding to make something "more upmarket!" possible.  As always, decisions involving our railways are too often made in the DfT or treasury not by those who operate the system and have to make do with what they are given.

[Nearholmer]

24 minutes ago, 'CHARD said:

far from the cottage industry perception that has dogged the concept for a while now.

I’m afraid that it is much more than a perception. Much as I would strongly defend the train concept, without a solid base of orders on which to build, and being outside of a big multi-national company that can shelter a speculative work within a larger fold, my (for a very short period close-up) view is that it has had to operate in cottage industry mode. A lot of exceedingly experienced and clever people, humblingly so, but not able to “lift off”.

['CHARD]

Spot on.  In a nutshell, and I feel for those involved.

[Nile]

3 hours ago, keefer said:

Ok, so why was/is none of this stock actually used? 

 

Because they are EMUs when what is needed are DMUs or BEMUs.