Vivarail files intention to appoint administrators

[cessna152towser]

On 26/11/2022 at 16:49, APOLLO said:

Scotland if Nicola gets her way !!!!!!!!!

 

Brit15

 

 

On 26/11/2022 at 16:49, APOLLO said:

Do you have any specific "third world needy countries" in mind?

 

Considering Scotland holds most of Great Britain's natural resources, in my opinion England would be more likely to become a third world needy country.  The constitutional argument is best left for Facebook rather than here, all I will say is let us all hope that none of our British Nations ever become third world and needy.

Back on topic the 230s could have potential for some of Scotland's lightly used lines, to Stranraer, Kyle of Lochalsh, for example so it is unfortunate that the project appears to be floundering.  Worrying times for the Vivarail staff and their families.

Edited December 3, 2022 by cessna152towser

[Mike_Walker]

1 hour ago, Nearholmer said:

I think the contract Vivarail has is to provide “trains ready for traffic”, so if they can’t trade, they can’t make trains available.

 

Does anyone know what else LNW might have access to, and which crews are trained in, that could be deployed? I don’t know what they’ve got on lease, or what’s floating about in the market.

 

 

As I understand it, the competency of LNW crews at Bletchley on the Class 150s and 153s previously used on the Marston Vale service has now lapsed.  If those types or any other DMU in the LNW fleet are to be used there will be a period of training before they can be deployed. 

 

The issue here is indeed that VivaRail are contracted to maintain and supply the trains for the service.  Although there is, apparently, a subsidiary maintenance company within the VivaRail "group", it too is affected by the placing of the company into administration and has ceased trading.  Thankfully in the case of the Class 484s on the IoW, the operator undertakes the maintenance and, presumably, will be able to go to the OEM suppliers of the traction equipment (who supplied it to VivaRail) should parts be required.  The big question hangs over the five TfW Class 230s which have not yet entered service and training on which is still suspended.  It appears that TfW purchased the units outright in an attempt to prop up VivaRail's ailing finances and, it would seem, are now left with five useless "assets".  Whilst it is claimed that the Greenford battery trial will go ahead, the view within GWR is that it is increasingly unlikely - there were many at senior levels that hoped VivaRail wouldn't get the contract in the first place.

[Nova Scotian]

8 hours ago, Bucoops said:

HSTs anyone?

GWR is starting to dispose of the Castle sets :)

[Bucoops]

1 hour ago, Nova Scotian said:

GWR is starting to dispose of the Castle sets :)

 

Indeed - although perhaps not quicktly enough to fix this issue. But I believe there's still a fair few stored ones (power cars and trailers)?

[Nova Scotian]

1 hour ago, Bucoops said:

 

Indeed - although perhaps not quicktly enough to fix this issue. But I believe there's still a fair few stored ones (power cars and trailers)?

Unfortunately I can't imagine seeing Castle sets on the Marston Vale line. Just don't need that power-to-weight ratio, top speed, etc. And the door configuration, seats etc are all a bit silly for 16.5 miles.

That said, there were the top-tailed 37s (then 68s!) on mk2s in East Anglia on routes not much longer. 

 

I assume the biggest challenge will be some form of rolling stock that meets accessibility standards and is currently sitting around waiting for lease opportunities?

 

For the other lines, maybe TfW would entertain an HST? That'd be fun.

 

The other potential here is someone comes along, offers creditors 30pence on the pound but has to assume the existing contracts - everyone gets to hit the reset button a bit and creditors are happy to see 30p back rather than nothing. (30p chosen as an example, not as someone with an inside track). There are times that a business can be sustainable, but the debt load it carries is too much - a sale that buys out some of that debt and cancels the rest is often still better than no sale and a liquidation of assets.

 

Personally I wanted to see them succeed, because if they can be "more sustainable" with less fuel consumption, a decent overhauled set (passengers seem happy with them), and they can push rail service into communities where no other model makes sense that's a good thing.

 

I also feel for the employees.

 

It's tough being a new entrant to a market like this - your future may depend on developing and implementing a step-change technology (eg. the battery storage side), but to get there you have to get a product out the door with revenue, your runway keeps getting shorter and any slippage in the commercialisation funnel makes it harder and harder. Small firms can be scrappy and do things the large firms can't due to interia, but they're not resourced and financed like the big firms, obviously!

[jjb1970]

20 hours ago, Nearholmer said:

I think the contract Vivarail has is to provide “trains ready for traffic”, so if they can’t trade, they can’t make trains available.

 

Does anyone know what else LNW might have access to, and which crews are trained in, that could be deployed? I don’t know what they’ve got on lease, or what’s floating about in the market.

 

 

 

As I understand it they're in Administration, not liquidation, so they can still trade if the administrator agrees. Given the implications, that maintaining O&M is probably viable if the operator wants to keep the trains I'd have thought it would be in everyone's interest to keep the part of the business supporting in-service units going while they figure out what they will do with the business. 

[Bucoops]

10 hours ago, Nova Scotian said:

Unfortunately I can't imagine seeing Castle sets on the Marston Vale line. Just don't need that power-to-weight ratio, top speed, etc. And the door configuration, seats etc are all a bit silly for 16.5 miles.

That said, there were the top-tailed 37s (then 68s!) on mk2s in East Anglia on routes not much longer. 

 

I assume the biggest challenge will be some form of rolling stock that meets accessibility standards and is currently sitting around waiting for lease opportunities?

 

For the other lines, maybe TfW would entertain an HST? That'd be fun.

 

The other potential here is someone comes along, offers creditors 30pence on the pound but has to assume the existing contracts - everyone gets to hit the reset button a bit and creditors are happy to see 30p back rather than nothing. (30p chosen as an example, not as someone with an inside track). There are times that a business can be sustainable, but the debt load it carries is too much - a sale that buys out some of that debt and cancels the rest is often still better than no sale and a liquidation of assets.

 

Personally I wanted to see them succeed, because if they can be "more sustainable" with less fuel consumption, a decent overhauled set (passengers seem happy with them), and they can push rail service into communities where no other model makes sense that's a good thing.

 

I also feel for the employees.

 

It's tough being a new entrant to a market like this - your future may depend on developing and implementing a step-change technology (eg. the battery storage side), but to get there you have to get a product out the door with revenue, your runway keeps getting shorter and any slippage in the commercialisation funnel makes it harder and harder. Small firms can be scrappy and do things the large firms can't due to interia, but they're not resourced and financed like the big firms, obviously!

 

 

Oh it's very "rose tinted" - kind of Titfield Thunderbolt in real life :)

[009 micro modeller]

On 27/11/2022 at 14:54, Nearholmer said:

So which trains is it that you think are, or were, suitable to cascade north to south then?

 

I can’t think of a single fleet in the north that has been ‘bumped’ by rising demand/traffic and was/is suitable for use in London or the SE., primarily because the three big fleets in succession, first generation DMMUs, Pacers, and the 15X generation were all diesel, whereas almost all of the busy routes in the south are electrified.

 

Which I think brings up the real issue of railways in the north of England, which isn’t rolling stock cascades but the dreadfully slow pace of electrification.

 

 

Off the top of my head, very old trains that stay in the south-east tend to just have been used on the same routes continuously, from the time they were constructed to when they wear out. One example is the GN 313s - that was the route they were built for, and, apart from the ones that got transferred to the North London DC network and then cascaded to the south coast, they stayed for I think 42 years (I liked them but they did look worn out by the end). The Piccadilly and Bakerloo line tube stock is even older and still in service (it’s odd that people don’t seem to notice or comment on the age of tube and metro stock in the same way as they do for the national railway - the original Tyne and Wear metro stock is similarly old, as another example). The new Thameslink trains leave something to be desired compared to the old (now cascaded) ones in terms of passenger comfort but their internal layout and design does seem (having commuted on them) to make them better at packing in more people (including lots of standing passengers) during busy times, which seems to be becoming increasingly critical on Thameslink routes.

 

I can’t think of any trains that have been cascaded north to south either (unless there have been any DMUs moved to SWR or similar - I’m obviously not counting intercity stock that runs from one side/end of the country to the other), although there was the proposal at one point to use ex-Merseyrail 502s or 503s on the Isle of Wight, for which gauging trials were done. Possibly the idea was suggested (not sure how seriously) again more recently with 507s and 508s (although I think the similar 313s were also mentioned), before they settled on the 484s. But Island Line is a bit of a special case, and of course pretty much everywhere on the network is ‘north’ relative to it. The only other example that springs to mind is also from ages ago - the Tyneside 2-EPBs moving south, although that actually just supports the point that there isn’t enough investment in electrification up north, as the reason they moved, only a few years after they were built, was because of the de-electrification of the lines they worked on.

 

I quite like the D-train concept but I thought the original idea was that they would fill in the gaps as more electrification was rolled out, allowing some DMUs to be moved around and others (older ones) to be withdrawn. The early press coverage on the D-train seemed to suggest that they would have a shorter lifespan than a conventional, new DMU (about 15-20 years rather than 30-40), but would be much cheaper, avoiding the creation of a whole new load of DMUs that would then become obsolete through the expansion of electrification (which has now been cancelled or slowed down). It sounds as though introducing D-trains en masse in the north could have been a bit of a repeat of the Pacer situation - a good short term solution for some lines, but then ending up continuing in use beyond its intended lifespan, and being used in situations it wasn’t really designed for that show up the limitations of the design. The Marston Vale line is different in that it’s a relatively slow, rural line but is attached to a commuter network where the other trains are electric (so having to maintain more extensive facilities to maintain conventional DMUs rather than D-trains is inconvenient - I understand the St. Albans Abbey line was electrified partly for similar reasons, in the sense that it removed the need to supply a DMU all the way from Bletchley). Wasn’t there some discussion at one point about using them on similar unelectrified branches in East Anglia?

[Nearholmer]

The 508 were cascaded S to N, very early in their lives. I never quite understood what was going on with that cascade when it happened, why the trains didn’t just go direct to Merseyside.

 

 

Edited December 4, 2022 by Nearholmer

[keefer]

There were ones sent North initially which left behind a TS which would end up in a cl.455!

Edited December 4, 2022 by keefer

[009 micro modeller]

1 hour ago, Nearholmer said:

The 508 were cascaded S to N, very early in their lives. I never quite understood what was going on with that cascade when it happened, why the trains didn’t just go direct to Merseyside.

 

 

I knew about that one, I was referring to some vague suggestions of further use after they were withdrawn. I think a few (can’t remember if they were 507 or 508) stayed behind rather than going to Liverpool with the others, but ended up on the North London DC lines (the lines that, post-privatisation, used to be operated by Silverlink Metro and now form the core of the London Overground network), rather than the Southern Region. I’m not sure why they didn’t immediately go to Merseyrail either - were they needed to provide a temporary stopgap or something?

[Titan]

People seem to forget about the poor old GE.  Until recently the intercity stock on the line had been hand-me-downs for generations, the DBSO's being ex Scotrail - you can't get much more north to south than that!

Edited December 4, 2022 by Titan

[Bucoops]

7 minutes ago, Titan said:

People seem to forget about the poor old GE.  Until recently the intercity stock on the line had been hand-me-downs for generations, the DBSO's being ex Scotrail - you can't get mujch more north to south than that!

 

And when we got them we loved them! Way more fun than the Mk3s (from WCML?) that then replaced them.

[Artless Bodger]

Some 506/507s used on Medway Valley line for a while, were they transfers South, or leftover ex LSWR route never moved north?

[woodenhead]

22 minutes ago, Artless Bodger said:

Some 506/507s used on Medway Valley line for a while, were they transfers South, or leftover ex LSWR route never moved north?

Don't think they would have appreciated a 506 anywhere outside of some GE lines if they had travelled further south than Glossop

[Artless Bodger]

Ah, showing my ignorance of electric unit classes, should have checked first - 508 is probably what I was thinking of. I can remember travelling from West Station to Paddock Wood in a 3 car unit, with bicycle storage space between the vestibule and driving cab. OR were 313s used by South Eastern?

Thanks for the correction.

[Nearholmer]

I think that some 507 (or maybe 508) were cascaded from Merseyrail to SE when the former had a surplus of stock and the latter a shortage as it tried to get rid of slam-door stock as fast as it could.

 

All of the SW 508 went to Merseyrail, but whether any of the trains that came back down the line to SE were from the batch that started life on the SW I don’t know.

 

From what I recall, the North London Line had 313 rather than 507/508, but I heartily dislike riding in any of those PEP-derivatives, so never took much trouble to differentiate between them and I might have misremembered.

 

I don’t believe 313 were ever used by SE.

 

 

 

 

Edited December 4, 2022 by Nearholmer

[John M Upton]

The South Eastern PEP's were a small number of 508's surplus to Merseyrail's requirements.  This was back in Connex days and they then passed to South Eastern.

 

A few cars survive as translator coaches working out of Eastleigh.

 

 

Edited December 4, 2022 by John M Upton

[DavidB-AU]

On 04/12/2022 at 09:20, Nova Scotian said:

Unfortunately I can't imagine seeing Castle sets on the Marston Vale line. Just don't need that power-to-weight ratio, top speed, etc. And the door configuration, seats etc are all a bit silly for 16.5 miles.

 

I did read a suggestion that a 769 minus the TSO or a bi-mode conversion of a 323 might be a possibility for Marston Vale. There would be half a coach off the platform at most intermediate stations but that's not an insurmountable problem, especially as the 323 already has SDO. There was also a vague idea about running through trains from Euston to Bedford.

[frobisher]

7 hours ago, Nearholmer said:

The 508 were cascaded S to N, very early in their lives. I never quite understood what was going on with that cascade when it happened, why the trains didn’t just go direct to Merseyside.

 

SR needed to retire some 4SUBs so that they could reclaim the traction motors for the new build 455s. So the 43 508s were borrowed with the extra carriage that Meseyside didn't need but was vital to SR's 4 car operations which were then reused in the new build 455s.

[adb968008]

On 26/11/2022 at 15:13, APOLLO said:

 

I remember a "ride" on a pacer between Bolton and Salford on the long 75mph (or more) downhill CWR stretch just before electrification, rocking, rolling, screaming (the engines not me !!) - I've never been as scared on any train before. Horrible things and glad they are gone. I waited for a "proper train" after that.

 

I wonder how many lines will now become very uneconomical with a 195.

Ive done the Bolton line with a 142 dozens of times, for dozens of years, nothing wrong with them.

 

On 26/11/2022 at 15:13, APOLLO said:

For those concerned with Vivarail and it's "trains" (IF they are so good) why not build & test them here in the UK, paid for by our Government and donate them to third world needy countries under our generous overseas aid programme of countless millions ?

Your quite strong on this, why dont you pay for it ?

I suspect most taxpayers will want to pay their electric bill before someone elses trains.

[adb968008]

On 03/12/2022 at 12:43, cessna152towser said:

 

 

Considering Scotland holds most of Great Britain's natural resources, in my opinion England would be more likely to become a third world needy country.  The constitutional argument is best left for Facebook rather than here, all I will say is let us all hope that none of our British Nations ever become third world and needy.

Back on topic the 230s could have potential for some of Scotland's lightly used lines, to Stranraer, Kyle of Lochalsh, for example so it is unfortunate that the project appears to be floundering.  Worrying times for the Vivarail staff and their families.

I wouldnt want to be caught in in rural scotland one night on a 230 that catches fire.

[adb968008]

15 hours ago, 009 micro modeller said:

I can’t think of any trains that have been cascaded north to south either (unless there have been any DMUs moved to SWR or similar - I’m obviously not counting intercity stock that runs from one side/end of the country to the other),

The south doesnt do “hand me downs”, London centric planning traditionally see’s London getting the money, the north getting the rejects.

This isnt just down to railways either, one airline recycles its unopened “headphone” bags onto Manchester flights.

Manchester has all manner of rejects pushed onto it… 303’s, AM series electrics, various scrap 1st gen DMUs, 37’s with NSE stock, 31’s with the same.

It hasnt changed with 319’s being most recent.

 

When it came to investment, London had its 455’s, Electrostars, 701’s, 707s, Manchester got 142’s, 150’s and recently 195’s.

 

in the past theres no escaping London provided the revenue, but is it still true today with regards to expenses ?

 

The North has a massive overcrowding problem, which post covid, London does not, but still has an excess of stock and suspect some closely duplicated metro stations on lines in south London could really closed.

 

As for stuff going south, the best of the 2nd Generation multiple units, are running from waterloo… the 3 car 158’s taken from TPE to strengthen SWR.

 

it can only be a matter of time before the MK5s and 68 are taken away, given the preference to use aging 185’s… given the dire shortage of diesel power why these are not used more is beyond me.

 

Stuff doesnt go south, because the stuff up north is closer to the scrap yard, in more ways than one… Where is the DfTs offices again ?

 

 

 

 

 

 

Edited December 5, 2022 by adb968008

[Michael Hodgson]

8 minutes ago, adb968008 said:

Manchester has all manner of rejects pushed onto it… 303’s, AM series electrics, various scrap 1st gen DMUs, 37’s with NSE stock, 31’s with the same.

 

... and the BBC

[Mike_Walker]

8 hours ago, DavidB-AU said:

 

I did read a suggestion that a 769 minus the TSO or a bi-mode conversion of a 323 might be a possibility for Marston Vale. There would be half a coach off the platform at most intermediate stations but that's not an insurmountable problem, especially as the 323 already has SDO. There was also a vague idea about running through trains from Euston to Bedford.

The Marston Vale line is pretty much restricted to 2-car 20m units, i.e. 150s.  This is due to a combination of short platforms in many cases immediately after a level crossing and the position of signals so longer units with SDO are not really a viable option.

 

The 769s have electrical equipment under both intermediate cars so you can't simply take one out and make a 3-car which was equally the case with the original Class 319s - this was looked at early on in the GW electrification plan as a possible way of operating the TV branches.  Given the experience with the 769s and 230s I don't think any TOC will be too keen to embark on another drastic repowering project and even if they did it would probably be at least two years before a viable alternative was available.