Sure sounds like the concept did since most manufacturers have now copied it including Alstom, Siemens, Stadler but the execution? Not so much... Probably needed a bigger operation to really get it going and that just never happened, especially after the passing of the founder which is what really did it in...
I agree - there was nothing fundamentally wrong with the business model and millions of companies started and are still running with worse management so not really "how not to run a company". The failure was not down to mis-management. The idea was a great approach to re-cycling, the "mix n match" approach to the trains themselves was great - having didfferent energy packs that could be exchanged to suit the requirement is a great step forward. Failure was down to teething troubles, death of the founder and a measly £1M (initially) and it's a great shame that no-one stepped up - Sadiq Khan spent £110M on "art installtions" for London - go figure. I can tell you if I were a multi-millionaire, I would have invested and probably not felt it.
There's actually no such stock, you're thinking of 1938 stock which is what is pictured. While you are correct that the D stock didn't replace 1938 stock on the London underground it did eventually go on to replace the Isle of Wight"s 1938 stock.
The D stock trains replaced the R stock trains in 1979 and 1980. The 1938 stock were deep level trains, and therefore never ran on the District Line. They were used on lines like the Piccadilly and Bakerloo lines.
"Can the North have new trains?" "Yes! You can have London Underground's 30-year-old cast-offs! We'll refurbish them!" In retaliation, I think every time the Underground wants new trains (eg for the Bakerloo and Piccadilly) they should have to have refurbished Pacers.
Sorry this was bugging me - The 1938 stock is deep level, while the D stock is sub-surface which would not fit in the deep level tunnels - great video though!
I was surprised that the various versions of the pacer were never used for such types of diesel electric or straight electric units. It seemed that the North were never going to get rid of them at one point!🤣
Used them almost every day to commute(hope valley line) There was a point where I didn’t want them to go anymore, I thought they’d become a badge of honour and a symbol of northern grit and under-dog status, then I realised this was just a form of Stockholm syndrome and I thought nothing more of it. I do sometimes still miss somehow being rocked to sleep after a long day by the terrible suspension (or lack thereof).
The problem the Pacers had that their Sprinter siblings don't is their inability to comply with accessibility laws. I suppose it might be technically possible to mod a Pacer to provide decent accessibility support, but it was clearly way too costly and disruptive for any operator to countenance. Had that been an option, you can bet those MFers would still be on the network and prime candidates for battery conversion! As another northerner who suffered the damp and bouncy wrath of the Pacers for decades I feel relieved to have dodged that bullet!
Thanks, I enjoyed your video. The D(78) stock was built to replace the remaining CO/CP stock on the District Line, which did indeed first enter service in 1937. (You showed a photo of 1938 tube stock, which had me confused for a second.)
@@OnlyTheRightTrack Mhmm, that is true. Though one good way to differenciate between sub-surface stock and deep-level stock is the height of the trains - since it's a lot harder to build tunnels deep beneath the surface, they (along with the trains that have to run through them) are generally a lot shorter in height. I know it's maybe tricky to picture, but if you compared them, units such as the D78, C69 and S7 Stocks for example are a lot taller compared to deep-level tube stock like the 1938, 1972, 1996 and 2009 Stocks. A way to quite easily recognise which is which is the shape of the unit when viewed from the front - sub-surface stock generally have relatively straight sides (like on non-Underground multiple units) having more of a square-like shape with the doors being exclusively on the sides and not reaching any further up. These units also generally have a well-defined roofline, with the roof itself still being rounded, but overall being relatively flat. Now, comparing that to something like a 1972 Stock, you can already see how the unit's sides quite quickly transition into the roof and the front silhouette of the unit looking less square and more circular. Having the sides start to smoothly curve into the roof quite low down, the doors are by effect also a lot less straight and bend quite a bit inward near the top following the shape of the curve, as the passengers wouldn't have enough space if the doors ended any lower down. I hope this helps! 🙂
Just an addition - Henry Posner III (you missed the "3rd") owns/controls Railroad Development Corporation (RRDC) which in turn was part-controller of Vivarail. One of the reasons why HPIII brought a Vivarail set to the US was an attempt at making a bid for the refurbishing of the "Dinky", the shuttle service which connects Princeton, NJ with Princeton Junction and the NY-Washington mainline, which is due for a complete makeover, the format of which has yet to be decided by New Jersey Transit.
Such a shame that Vivarail is no longer here and of course Adrian Shooter but Vivarail could have been saved and to carry on with converting the D78 Stocks to Class 230 DEMU/Battery powered trains.
Genuinely interesting content but why the lengthy use of filters to “age” the video footage? It cheapens the look of the final product and is very tiresome.
I really really don't want to be labelled a perv here but out of all the you tube train geeks this lad is the best of them all. Reminds me of that guy who did all the underground stations in one day when he first started 10 years ago he was super cute but this guy is in a totally different category!!!
In one of the Rail magazines a year or so before they went under, they did decline any further investment funding and wanted to go alone, which is odd considering they were doing well. Also the Island Line trains are now facing issues of high wear on the wheels. They've had to deal with leaks and the designs of the cabs had to be redone due to space and blind spots. You could of added so much more to this video, great job on the research you have done on them.
There's an LNR one still parked up near the fence that you can see at the Bletchley depot. Wish I had ridden one while they were operating on the Marston Vale line, but I delayed it because of covid and assumed I'd have plenty of time to do so in the future! Back to Class 150's.
As others are saying, D stock replaced CO,CP, built from 1938, & similar R stock on district line. However, the 232's derived from D stock replaced 38 tube stock on the IoW Island line. End credits a bit unfortunate, Shooters name vo'ed by condemnation of magement of co'.
Deep level tube stock never runs on sub-surface lines such as the District - hence the D stock did not replace 1937 tube stock, it was R/Q stock, the last of which was withdrawn in 1983.
A 1400 class or BR Standard Class 2 could have handled a couple of D stock cars just as well, with a small battery electricity supply to work the doors. One of these or a similar small locomotive type could have been overhauled, upgraded and converted to run on light oil or renewable fuel, plus a batch of new build, for a fraction of what has been spent just on research and development. They would have worked straight out of the box.
All the newscaster clips calling it first of its kind is really weird, because they're not. Battery electric MUs are on many branch lines in Japan already (by multiple companies) and they've not had the same troubles the Vivarails ones had.
I wonder what advice their in house accountans were offering prior to failure. The company lasted a long time so it seems a little strange why the lack of working capital could not be spotted?
All viva rail aside, The d stock had so much life to be honest to still run on the underground, they looked healthy when they were withdrawn, at one point they were running better than the s stocks, basically vivarail broke the D stocks, not even tfl
All those S - stock trains are going to wear out at the same time, TFL are going to learn the same lesson San Fransisco's Muni did, and Belfast Corporation didn't .
Latest news from the IoW is that three of the units have suffered unexpected amounts of tyre wear (on a design of bogie meant for indifferent track), they're looking for somewhere to reprofile them in a hurry.
I honestly think if they focused only on a diesel version instead of the years of testing and development of a hybrid unit and got in with 2 big operator who still ran old 150,155,153 like Northern and TFW they might have made a success of it but i can only imagine how much was spent on the battery version of the units. I know the whole green 0% emissions targets means they probably couldn't just make diesels versions but I honestly think they might have made it through.
WADR though that may have been the case it is still looking to maintain the status quo rather than move the technology forward. It would have been nice if the VC (venture capitalist) had had a little more patience; but that is not in the nature of the beast. Let us just hope that GWR can make it all work.
This was a really good video and I’ve just subscribed to your channel, but I think your closing comment on how not to run a company misses the point. This was a great idea but with any experimental technology their was goanna be a lot of trial and error. This was never goanna be profitable until the tech had been fully worked out. In an ideal world this would have been funded by the Department for Transport as an alternative way to solve Stock issues across Britains rail network and also introduce trains that had a better impact on the environment. Being funded by a foreign holding company meant that eventually they were going to want their money back sooner rather then later. This would have only happened if things had gone perfectly for Vivarail straight from the start. That was never goanna happen so at some point RDC were always goanna pull the plug to save money. I think it is looking increasingly likely that our railways are going to be fully renationalised. If and when this happens I hope the DFT can re asses what Vivarail achieved and maybe apply it to other parts of the network.
wheel wear is being caused by bad track. Most of the island line still uses bullhead rail dating back to the 60s!! The ballast is still in some places pea shingle dredged from bembridge harbour. They are slowly replacing sections of the line with newer flat bottom rail and proper ballast. They are slowly sorting out the wheel sets and they have managed to aquire some spare wheel sets
This is a bit unfair Adrian Shooter was a very competent man. Whom I knew personally. The real problem was Adrian's death. The administration issue was due to Henry Posner III putting the financial plug. I would suggest that this was a premature and shortsighted act (I was told by an American friend that the reason Mr Posner pulled out was due to his very involvement in the East Broad Top project. That said I have no idea if this is actually true!) As for the Class 485 and 486 unitis that operated on the Isle of Wight between 1967 and 1991. The rolling stock was actually built between 1923 and 1935. With the bulk of the Driving Motor cars dating from the 1930's. So in general the 1938 Stock Class 483 was only three years younger than the stock it replaced! Recently there have been significant issues with the new Class 484 stock due to wheel failure. So much so that at present there is on some days only one unit in service! It should also be noted that battery rail services are nothing new even in the London area. As the first use of battery electric traction in public service commenced in 1886 when six 4wBE locomotives built to the design of Chaimsonovitz Prosper Elieson started work hauling horse trams on the North Metropolitan Tramway in the Stratford area. They were eventually withdrawn in 1889.
On the Greenford Branch (between West Ealing and Greenford). They aren't in passenger service yet (at the time of posting this reply), but if you travel on the Elizabeth Line between West Ealing and Hanwell, you will usually see one in the sidings just outside West Ealing station.
other than getting the 1938 stock wrong (deep level tube is by year, surface lines by letter) - Why are you putting the old world film effects over modern footage - it just makes it look rubbish, sure if you have taken new footage in black and white of an old train then maybe, but the effect is lost when you apply it across the entire video. - TL Museum Hidden London have videos on the Isle of White line and the transfer from the 1938 to the new stock.
that's what happens when you finally come up with a title after the script is finished. I added it to justify the title as I had not adressed the financial issues prior and needed to hammer this point in somehow.
@@OnlyTheRightTrack Agreed. Sir Adrian Shooter was a highly experienced and well respected business leader. He had more than proved himself with the revolution he created in Chiltern post privatisation. He must have taken a great financial and reputational risk to do 'the right thing' for the railways and create a low-cost, eco-friendly solution to providing alternative power-sources for branch-line trains. He didn't need to take on the D-train role. He could have gone off and played golf. I am sure that he had weighed up the risks and rewards of such an innovative project. To his credit, several elements of the 'product' have been taken on by GWR and the like and this demonstrates that the concept was valid. Funding research and development of a product is incredibly complex and risky, especially in a highly regulated market like the railways and in a way it was an incredible achievement that a 'minnow' like Vivarail got this far. It is a great pity that the Government or one of the organisations who have made a fortune out of privatised railways over the years didn't have the courage to support this project. I am not a journalist but I know one key journalistic lesson. 'Check your facts before you recklessly throw mud'. I trust that you are hanging your head in shame.
It was supposed to operate the then Nuneaton to Coventry line, with a lease signed in 2016 for a year long trial, then it caught fire in Kenilworth. It would have replaced a single carriage class 153 that was always overcrowded pre-covid. Ultimately I always saw these a stop gap until the operators implemented long term rolling stock replacement but I think they had factors against them.
In practice, even in sunny locales, that only lets them run at 5-10mph on a fairly level grade. (There was a Tom Scott video about such a project, if I recall.) So while it could theoretically marginally decrease their energy consumption, in practice it’s just better to site the panels elsewhere - like on station buildings, and on certain embankments. Easier to clean them, more consistent power output, and often larger.
Customers don't care in the slightest about de-carbonising the railway at all. They care about how much it costs, how quick, clean and convenient the service is, and whether it works reliably. Strikes. Fires. Break downs. Signal failures. Crime. Anti-social behaviour. Bus Replacements. This is what works against the railways.
I understand the ex LU stock Vivarail bought has gone for scrap, so any future development in BE trains will require new(/old) stock with a whole new design.
Trains should never use fast charge and instead should charge in motion. Yes, you need a few more meters of third rail or overhead wire, but it increases the lifespan of the battery significantly.
@@BernardLS Nah, look: The fast charging trains use proprietary charging ports, but for what reason? The solution of how to get electric power to and from trains is fully developed and in widespread us. The best option is always AC overhead wire, but DC overhead wire or third rail is also good enough and works just fine. The proprietary charging port for the fast charging trains is technically also a very very short section of 3rd and 4th rail. If you use regular compatible third rail or overhead wire for charging, what hinders you to build a very very short section? And then if you determine that you need more charging time because you don't want your batteries to degrade, overheat and catch fire, you can always build a longer stretch of power supply. That's not possible for the shown proprietary approach, because if you determine that you need to charge more slowly, your only option is to wait longer at charging ports. The original approach for powering the cars per third rail, which was built in from the beginning, worked just fine and should not have been changed in the refurbishment, and the charging ports simply should have been equipped with short sections of regular third rail.
@@doctorhabilthcjesus4610 One assumes it is all down to cost. charging station and linger time versus infrastructure (rail, gantry, et cetera). Thanks for the info, have I given GWR to much credibility are they chasing a rainbow? In Göteborg, Sweden some of the buses use a point charging system similar, but smaller scale, rather than trolley buses or VLR.
@@BernardLS It seems as if the experiment is not going as cheap and well as first thought. On a system that uses third rail or overhead wire, and may it be only a very short section, you do exactly know what you get at what to expect. Maybe it is estimated to be more expensive in advance, but you don't need to pay for surprises. And if you want to extend the electrified sections, you always know how to do it. You have an new system which you expect to be 10% cheaper than doing the same thing with existing technology and standards? Yeah, expect surprises that will cost you more. You have new technology, and it will surprise you. Especially in this case possible savings could only be minor in comparison to the whole value of the project.
What a metaphor for the hybrid vs all electric vision of the future. Greater range isn't always great when technical complexity does in a project be it a converted car or converted rail car... #TeamEV
@@Sir_Rheilffordd the difference between the two is that Germany will replace equipment when they need to be replaced. While the British will try to keep their famous locomotives in operation basically forever. Example the BR Class 43.
@@gamerfan8445 No sadly not, we have a giant shortage of rolling stock while thousands of carriages and hundreds of locomotives are rotting away in storage yards. If refurbished they could easily run for another 10 to 15 years. Yet because of the federal states that demand new stock to be ordered many private operators and the DB cant use them on their lines. :/
Then why is every modern rolling stock manufacturer now building fast-charging battery electric trains just like these? That's why I thought. Sorry foamer. Reality differs from your lame pun...
@@stickynorth because green movement and legal forcing of not fully thought out tech that tends to burn out. Tho you and your "simp"sons profile can feel the way you want to.
Of course D stock _trains_ were replaced by S stock _trains_ and surely they weren't replaced by cars. So why emphasise the _trains_ ? And a front end I would consider a _front_ end, not a front _end_ (it obviously is an end but we have two options here). One train probably stopped with a _compressor_ failure, not a compressor _failure_ while Southern Railway is not Northern Railway (or any other) so I'd see it as _Southern_ Railway with no emphasis on the fact that they are a "Railway" (obviously...). just as Great Wester Railway is _Great_ _Western_ Railway...obviously a Railway. Meanwhile some go into _city_ centres, other need more _product_ development (and probably no other development). At the end it should be said that de-carbonising doesn't equate to electrification. It's not about the propulstion tech but the source of energy. And any combusution engine can use non-fossil fuels like biogas, bio-metha-/ethanol or straight (used or fresh) vegoil.
I don't know how and when the government and companies got the insidious idea that the general public has any regard for the woke fever dream of 'net zero'. All that matters are safe, clean (no trash), punctual and affordable trains. Excellent video however!
'Woke fever dream'. All the words, but none of the meaning, and even less of the comprehension on your part. A mere word salad! I presume that you realise that there is more to creating a coherent sentence than stringing together fascistic buzz words, like a Daily Mail headline.
@@frmattdrummond6535 hilarious given its people who say things like you statement that insist that the baseline view around which all law should be structured is that 1- the people that ended slavery were uniquely to blame for it/the people that invented it are only victims of it ditto colonialism, 2- the group that was mass disposed of via government servitude and which is more likely to be homeless or murdered etc is gender privileged and 3- that men can give birth. so all good talking about coherent but you see the problem, im sure you do even, if you wont admit it. its how you ended up with idiotic leftwing headlines such as 'larry elder is the black face of white supremacism'. erm sure. and with net zero we get a load of people who insist on travelling private jet everywhere, having a booze up every year to discus how the plebs should be stopped/priced out from their once a year holiday. cant have the meeting on the net oh no, has to be the gulfstream5 to whichever place has been picked. again nice and coherent i suppose. and he is, of course right, that people don't care about net zero. they just want clean, cheap, safe transport. maybe they should care, maybe if those three are satisfied they would come to care. maybe they simply see john kerry get of his private jet and roll their eyes as he delivers another tedious lecture about net zero and think 'yeah right, sure pal, not very cohrent there jonny boy.' daily mail jokes dont work now you guys are openly pushing flat earth theory type stuff re biology in you preferred hate rags notably the guardian im afraid...
The fact of the matter is, electric vehicles are also much cleaner. The old ladies at my bus stop couldn’t have cared less either way - until electric buses came into service! They noticed how much quieter it is without diesel engines idling, and how much less sooty the bus stop was. They also appreciated how much smoother the ride was without the engine vibrations, or the clunking of the gearbox. After that, they started to notice when a van going by was also electric, even chastising idling diesel vans for “ruining the tranquility”! One of them said to me “you don’t even notice when it’s there, but once it’s gone you never want it back”.
They could have had a lot more success if those trains had hydrogen fuel cell systems instead of lithium ion batteries which can also be safer and easier to maintain than diesel engines! :)
SO .... All's well that ends well ..( William S ! ) ... but they MUST have manual override doors .... in case of HUGE BATTERY FIRE .... just an example : EV automobiles , ( MONSTA infernos ! ) .......................... DAVE™🛑
Bit harsh on Vivarail at the end there. They have set up a wonderful concept and given it life. It was never going to work straight out of the box.
Sure sounds like the concept did since most manufacturers have now copied it including Alstom, Siemens, Stadler but the execution? Not so much... Probably needed a bigger operation to really get it going and that just never happened, especially after the passing of the founder which is what really did it in...
@@stickynorth And Merseyrail have Class 777/1 BEMUs (from Stadler) running in passenger service.
I agree - there was nothing fundamentally wrong with the business model and millions of companies started and are still running with worse management so not really "how not to run a company". The failure was not down to mis-management. The idea was a great approach to re-cycling, the "mix n match" approach to the trains themselves was great - having didfferent energy packs that could be exchanged to suit the requirement is a great step forward. Failure was down to teething troubles, death of the founder and a measly £1M (initially) and it's a great shame that no-one stepped up - Sadiq Khan spent £110M on "art installtions" for London - go figure. I can tell you if I were a multi-millionaire, I would have invested and probably not felt it.
@@captainboing Adrian Shooter wsa pretty much bankrolling the project himself .
The 1937 stock were deep level trains while the D stock are much larger subsurface trains, there's no way the D stock would have replaced the 1937s...
it was to replace the 1937 stock that was running on the subsurface sections, not in deep level
There's actually no such stock, you're thinking of 1938 stock which is what is pictured. While you are correct that the D stock didn't replace 1938 stock on the London underground it did eventually go on to replace the Isle of Wight"s 1938 stock.
@@class73fan69 Subsurface trains use letters not years for names. You're referring to the CO/CP stock.
The D stock trains replaced the R stock trains in 1979 and 1980. The 1938 stock were deep level trains, and therefore never ran on the District Line. They were used on lines like the Piccadilly and Bakerloo lines.
@@kwlkid85 ....an the R Stock of course.
"Can the North have new trains?"
"Yes! You can have London Underground's 30-year-old cast-offs! We'll refurbish them!"
In retaliation, I think every time the Underground wants new trains (eg for the Bakerloo and Piccadilly) they should have to have refurbished Pacers.
Sorry this was bugging me - The 1938 stock is deep level, while the D stock is sub-surface which would not fit in the deep level tunnels - great video though!
Yes, they used the wrong footage. The D78 replaced O and P stock, which started to enter service in 1937.
3:50 you should do a history on the Isle of Wight railway as I don’t think many people know the history of it
+1 here!
I was just reminiscing with your old videos today. You brought happiness to us with this new video from you.
I was surprised that the various versions of the pacer were never used for such types of diesel electric or straight electric units.
It seemed that the North were never going to get rid of them at one point!🤣
Used them almost every day to commute(hope valley line) There was a point where I didn’t want them to go anymore, I thought they’d become a badge of honour and a symbol of northern grit and under-dog status, then I realised this was just a form of Stockholm syndrome and I thought nothing more of it. I do sometimes still miss somehow being rocked to sleep after a long day by the terrible suspension (or lack thereof).
The problem the Pacers had that their Sprinter siblings don't is their inability to comply with accessibility laws. I suppose it might be technically possible to mod a Pacer to provide decent accessibility support, but it was clearly way too costly and disruptive for any operator to countenance.
Had that been an option, you can bet those MFers would still be on the network and prime candidates for battery conversion! As another northerner who suffered the damp and bouncy wrath of the Pacers for decades I feel relieved to have dodged that bullet!
Thanks, I enjoyed your video.
The D(78) stock was built to replace the remaining CO/CP stock on the District Line, which did indeed first enter service in 1937.
(You showed a photo of 1938 tube stock, which had me confused for a second.)
Ah I apologise! It's quite easy to get them mixed up If you aren't an expert I suppose
@@OnlyTheRightTrack Actually it is very hard to get them mixed up, one is tube stock, the other sub-surface.
@@PsychicLord they both run on the underground, no? I could not be less of an expert on this topic haha.
@@OnlyTheRightTrack Mhmm, that is true. Though one good way to differenciate between sub-surface stock and deep-level stock is the height of the trains - since it's a lot harder to build tunnels deep beneath the surface, they (along with the trains that have to run through them) are generally a lot shorter in height.
I know it's maybe tricky to picture, but if you compared them, units such as the D78, C69 and S7 Stocks for example are a lot taller compared to deep-level tube stock like the 1938, 1972, 1996 and 2009 Stocks.
A way to quite easily recognise which is which is the shape of the unit when viewed from the front - sub-surface stock generally have relatively straight sides (like on non-Underground multiple units) having more of a square-like shape with the doors being exclusively on the sides and not reaching any further up. These units also generally have a well-defined roofline, with the roof itself still being rounded, but overall being relatively flat.
Now, comparing that to something like a 1972 Stock, you can already see how the unit's sides quite quickly transition into the roof and the front silhouette of the unit looking less square and more circular. Having the sides start to smoothly curve into the roof quite low down, the doors are by effect also a lot less straight and bend quite a bit inward near the top following the shape of the curve, as the passengers wouldn't have enough space if the doors ended any lower down.
I hope this helps! 🙂
@@CangoFango I'll certainly be sure to keep that in mind! Thanks very much
It seems insane to me that this is the approach taken over just… putting up some cables. Thanks Margaret / John
Why does the ingenuity of the engineer always get talked down or at least 'damned by faint praise' who else is exporting any trains from the UK?
Just an addition - Henry Posner III (you missed the "3rd") owns/controls Railroad Development Corporation (RRDC) which in turn was part-controller of Vivarail. One of the reasons why HPIII brought a Vivarail set to the US was an attempt at making a bid for the refurbishing of the "Dinky", the shuttle service which connects Princeton, NJ with Princeton Junction and the NY-Washington mainline, which is due for a complete makeover, the format of which has yet to be decided by New Jersey Transit.
Thanks for the information!
Definitely one of your best videos yet. Keep up the great work mate!
Thanks, will do!
Amazing job yet again! 🎉
Such a shame that Vivarail is no longer here and of course Adrian Shooter but Vivarail could have been saved and to carry on with converting the D78 Stocks to Class 230 DEMU/Battery powered trains.
Too many consultants making a quick buck.
Genuinely interesting content but why the lengthy use of filters to “age” the video footage? It cheapens the look of the final product and is very tiresome.
Yes, why make it look crap???
I really really don't want to be labelled a perv here but out of all the you tube train geeks this lad is the best of them all. Reminds me of that guy who did all the underground stations in one day when he first started 10 years ago he was super cute but this guy is in a totally different category!!!
It’s out finally 😊
In one of the Rail magazines a year or so before they went under, they did decline any further investment funding and wanted to go alone, which is odd considering they were doing well. Also the Island Line trains are now facing issues of high wear on the wheels. They've had to deal with leaks and the designs of the cabs had to be redone due to space and blind spots. You could of added so much more to this video, great job on the research you have done on them.
There's an LNR one still parked up near the fence that you can see at the Bletchley depot. Wish I had ridden one while they were operating on the Marston Vale line, but I delayed it because of covid and assumed I'd have plenty of time to do so in the future! Back to Class 150's.
The 230s never felt new. But the battery trains are a good idea
Not expecting a modern image video, totally not complaining! 😉
Another peak video from The Right Track
You should try and collaborate with Train of Thought.
Phenomenal video dude, your videos just get better and better, your channel is going to be massive one day 🙌🏼
I appreciate that!
Oh my god I spotted the island line ones I didn’t know they went wrong
As others are saying, D stock replaced CO,CP, built from 1938, & similar R stock on district line. However, the 232's derived from D stock replaced 38 tube stock on the IoW Island line. End credits a bit unfortunate, Shooters name vo'ed by condemnation of magement of co'.
Deep level tube stock never runs on sub-surface lines such as the District - hence the D stock did not replace 1937 tube stock, it was R/Q stock, the last of which was withdrawn in 1983.
Perfect video been subbed from the beginning keep it up 🔥🔥🔥
Appreciate it
dam that was quick
DoyoumeanTHEEspeedofhiscommentary?ItwasAYbitfastwasn'tit?
Can you do a vid on the Isle of Wight steam railway
I really must at some point
A 1400 class or BR Standard Class 2 could have handled a couple of D stock cars just as well, with a small battery electricity supply to work the doors.
One of these or a similar small locomotive type could have been overhauled, upgraded and converted to run on light oil or renewable fuel, plus a batch of new build, for a fraction of what has been spent just on research and development. They would have worked straight out of the box.
You sound familiar?
Yeah it’s tons of trackmasters second channel
All the newscaster clips calling it first of its kind is really weird, because they're not. Battery electric MUs are on many branch lines in Japan already (by multiple companies) and they've not had the same troubles the Vivarails ones had.
I wonder what advice their in house accountans were offering prior to failure. The company lasted a long time so it seems a little strange why the lack of working capital could not be spotted?
this thumbnail is the most thumbnail thing ever
Well researched and edited 👍
Babe wake up the right track posted
All viva rail aside, The d stock had so much life to be honest to still run on the underground, they looked healthy when they were withdrawn, at one point they were running better than the s stocks, basically vivarail broke the D stocks, not even tfl
All those S - stock trains are going to wear out at the same time, TFL are going to learn the same lesson San Fransisco's Muni did, and Belfast Corporation didn't .
Latest news from the IoW is that three of the units have suffered unexpected amounts of tyre wear (on a design of bogie meant for indifferent track), they're looking for somewhere to reprofile them in a hurry.
Good video but did you have a cold when you recorded the narration
i believe so, sorry
I didn't Know Vivarail Would Existed
I honestly think if they focused only on a diesel version instead of the years of testing and development of a hybrid unit and got in with 2 big operator who still ran old 150,155,153 like Northern and TFW they might have made a success of it but i can only imagine how much was spent on the battery version of the units. I know the whole green 0% emissions targets means they probably couldn't just make diesels versions but I honestly think they might have made it through.
WADR though that may have been the case it is still looking to maintain the status quo rather than move the technology forward. It would have been nice if the VC (venture capitalist) had had a little more patience; but that is not in the nature of the beast. Let us just hope that GWR can make it all work.
Therapist: 1 car D stock doesn't exist. It can't hurt you.
D Stock: 0:10
Weird seeing a shot of 1938 deep tube stock then showing a cut-and-cover tube train - a lot bigger - described as a replacement. Just wrong.
This was a really good video and I’ve just subscribed to your channel, but I think your closing comment on how not to run a company misses the point. This was a great idea but with any experimental technology their was goanna be a lot of trial and error. This was never goanna be profitable until the tech had been fully worked out.
In an ideal world this would have been funded by the Department for Transport as an alternative way to solve Stock issues across Britains rail network and also introduce trains that had a better impact on the environment. Being funded by a foreign holding company meant that eventually they were going to want their money back sooner rather then later. This would have only happened if things had gone perfectly for Vivarail straight from the start. That was never goanna happen so at some point RDC were always goanna pull the plug to save money.
I think it is looking increasingly likely that our railways are going to be fully renationalised. If and when this happens I hope the DFT can re asses what Vivarail achieved and maybe apply it to other parts of the network.
“Quick low cost solution” pacer flashbacks intensify
haha that's quite good lol. might make a vid about those at some point
SWR have recently been having problems with their Class 484s on the Island line. Excessive wheel wear, causing service issues.
Why might that be? Is it tighter curves that don't suite the D stock rolling stock or something?
Track?
wheel wear is being caused by bad track. Most of the island line still uses bullhead rail dating back to the 60s!! The ballast is still in some places pea shingle dredged from bembridge harbour. They are slowly replacing sections of the line with newer flat bottom rail and proper ballast.
They are slowly sorting out the wheel sets and they have managed to aquire some spare wheel sets
@@James-kx3fl thanks 👍
This is a bit unfair Adrian Shooter was a very competent man. Whom I knew personally.
The real problem was Adrian's death. The administration issue was due to Henry Posner III putting the financial plug. I would suggest that this was a premature and shortsighted act (I was told by an American friend that the reason Mr Posner pulled out was due to his very involvement in the East Broad Top project. That said I have no idea if this is actually true!)
As for the Class 485 and 486 unitis that operated on the Isle of Wight between 1967 and 1991.
The rolling stock was actually built between 1923 and 1935.
With the bulk of the Driving Motor cars dating from the 1930's.
So in general the 1938 Stock Class 483 was only three years younger than the stock it replaced!
Recently there have been significant issues with the new Class 484 stock due to wheel failure. So much so that at present there is on some days only one unit in service!
It should also be noted that battery rail services are nothing new even in the London area.
As the first use of battery electric traction in public service commenced in 1886 when six 4wBE locomotives built to the design of Chaimsonovitz Prosper Elieson started work hauling horse trams on the North Metropolitan Tramway in the Stratford area.
They were eventually withdrawn in 1889.
Interesting video. What is the difference between "Twenty Twenty..." and "Twenny Twenny..." ?
just how I said it haha
And they still the class 484 brakes down a lot 😂😂
There are two ways of doing things: The Great Western Way or the Wrong Way
Hey all.
Can someone tell me, on which GWR services can I find this trains? Thanks for helping
On the Greenford Branch (between West Ealing and Greenford). They aren't in passenger service yet (at the time of posting this reply), but if you travel on the Elizabeth Line between West Ealing and Hanwell, you will usually see one in the sidings just outside West Ealing station.
interesting vid, please slow down in parts though its like you're speed reading
They've been a disaster for island line.
other than getting the 1938 stock wrong (deep level tube is by year, surface lines by letter) - Why are you putting the old world film effects over modern footage - it just makes it look rubbish, sure if you have taken new footage in black and white of an old train then maybe, but the effect is lost when you apply it across the entire video. - TL Museum Hidden London have videos on the Isle of White line and the transfer from the 1938 to the new stock.
I'll take that into consideration
Your final flippant comments about financial mis-management of the company were in my view not warranted and a bit of a 'throw away'.
that's what happens when you finally come up with a title after the script is finished. I added it to justify the title as I had not adressed the financial issues prior and needed to hammer this point in somehow.
@@OnlyTheRightTrack Agreed. Sir Adrian Shooter was a highly experienced and well respected business leader. He had more than proved himself with the revolution he created in Chiltern post privatisation. He must have taken a great financial and reputational risk to do 'the right thing' for the railways and create a low-cost, eco-friendly solution to providing alternative power-sources for branch-line trains. He didn't need to take on the D-train role. He could have gone off and played golf. I am sure that he had weighed up the risks and rewards of such an innovative project. To his credit, several elements of the 'product' have been taken on by GWR and the like and this demonstrates that the concept was valid. Funding research and development of a product is incredibly complex and risky, especially in a highly regulated market like the railways and in a way it was an incredible achievement that a 'minnow' like Vivarail got this far. It is a great pity that the Government or one of the organisations who have made a fortune out of privatised railways over the years didn't have the courage to support this project. I am not a journalist but I know one key journalistic lesson. 'Check your facts before you recklessly throw mud'. I trust that you are hanging your head in shame.
It was supposed to operate the then Nuneaton to Coventry line, with a lease signed in 2016 for a year long trial, then it caught fire in Kenilworth. It would have replaced a single carriage class 153 that was always overcrowded pre-covid.
Ultimately I always saw these a stop gap until the operators implemented long term rolling stock replacement but I think they had factors against them.
Bro I remember watching a video about this and thought it was cool what the fuck
The fact one 230 is in the states.
2 are, 230002 and 230011 :)
8:26 meanwhile we have electric locomotives that don’t need batteries for 100 years 😂
Twennytwennywun. Humph....
Train roofs cry out for solar panels.
That's a great idea but in Britain we have rain instead of sun im afraid
In practice, even in sunny locales, that only lets them run at 5-10mph on a fairly level grade. (There was a Tom Scott video about such a project, if I recall.) So while it could theoretically marginally decrease their energy consumption, in practice it’s just better to site the panels elsewhere - like on station buildings, and on certain embankments. Easier to clean them, more consistent power output, and often larger.
Customers don't care in the slightest about de-carbonising the railway at all.
They care about how much it costs, how quick, clean and convenient the service is, and whether it works reliably.
Strikes. Fires. Break downs. Signal failures. Crime. Anti-social behaviour. Bus Replacements. This is what works against the railways.
The Aisle of White!
Bro spent money like a monopoly 💀
I understand the ex LU stock Vivarail bought has gone for scrap, so any future development in BE trains will require new(/old) stock with a whole new design.
I believe you have mistaken the class of tube train they are 1938 stock or class 483s on the isle of white
Wight
Before the 1938 stock it was standard stock 😉😉
I know
Trains should never use fast charge and instead should charge in motion. Yes, you need a few more meters of third rail or overhead wire, but it increases the lifespan of the battery significantly.
That may be 'a different horse for a different course'
@@BernardLS Nah, look: The fast charging trains use proprietary charging ports, but for what reason? The solution of how to get electric power to and from trains is fully developed and in widespread us. The best option is always AC overhead wire, but DC overhead wire or third rail is also good enough and works just fine. The proprietary charging port for the fast charging trains is technically also a very very short section of 3rd and 4th rail. If you use regular compatible third rail or overhead wire for charging, what hinders you to build a very very short section? And then if you determine that you need more charging time because you don't want your batteries to degrade, overheat and catch fire, you can always build a longer stretch of power supply. That's not possible for the shown proprietary approach, because if you determine that you need to charge more slowly, your only option is to wait longer at charging ports. The original approach for powering the cars per third rail, which was built in from the beginning, worked just fine and should not have been changed in the refurbishment, and the charging ports simply should have been equipped with short sections of regular third rail.
@@doctorhabilthcjesus4610 One assumes it is all down to cost. charging station and linger time versus infrastructure (rail, gantry, et cetera). Thanks for the info, have I given GWR to much credibility are they chasing a rainbow? In Göteborg, Sweden some of the buses use a point charging system similar, but smaller scale, rather than trolley buses or VLR.
@@BernardLS It seems as if the experiment is not going as cheap and well as first thought. On a system that uses third rail or overhead wire, and may it be only a very short section, you do exactly know what you get at what to expect. Maybe it is estimated to be more expensive in advance, but you don't need to pay for surprises. And if you want to extend the electrified sections, you always know how to do it.
You have an new system which you expect to be 10% cheaper than doing the same thing with existing technology and standards? Yeah, expect surprises that will cost you more. You have new technology, and it will surprise you. Especially in this case possible savings could only be minor in comparison to the whole value of the project.
What a metaphor for the hybrid vs all electric vision of the future. Greater range isn't always great when technical complexity does in a project be it a converted car or converted rail car... #TeamEV
What with the British trying to resell their older equipment.
Better than we here in Germany where everything is scrapped after 20 years of use
@@Sir_Rheilffordd the difference between the two is that Germany will replace equipment when they need to be replaced. While the British will try to keep their famous locomotives in operation basically forever. Example the BR Class 43.
@@gamerfan8445 No sadly not, we have a giant shortage of rolling stock while thousands of carriages and hundreds of locomotives are rotting away in storage yards. If refurbished they could easily run for another 10 to 15 years. Yet because of the federal states that demand new stock to be ordered many private operators and the DB cant use them on their lines. :/
@@Sir_Rheilffordd fair
@@gamerfan8445 yeah, we'll see. Every nations railway systems have their flaws.
G'day!
13 secs
congrats 💪💪
This is why budd RDC's still exist in some commuter services. Cause unlike these battery trains, budds don't die
Then why is every modern rolling stock manufacturer now building fast-charging battery electric trains just like these? That's why I thought. Sorry foamer. Reality differs from your lame pun...
@@stickynorth because green movement and legal forcing of not fully thought out tech that tends to burn out. Tho you and your "simp"sons profile can feel the way you want to.
Have you ever considered talking more slowly in your vids?
Of course D stock _trains_ were replaced by S stock _trains_ and surely they weren't replaced by cars. So why emphasise the _trains_ ?
And a front end I would consider a _front_ end, not a front _end_ (it obviously is an end but we have two options here).
One train probably stopped with a _compressor_ failure, not a compressor _failure_ while Southern Railway is not Northern Railway (or any other) so I'd see it as _Southern_ Railway with no emphasis on the fact that they are a "Railway" (obviously...). just as Great Wester Railway is _Great_ _Western_ Railway...obviously a Railway.
Meanwhile some go into _city_ centres, other need more _product_ development (and probably no other development).
At the end it should be said that de-carbonising doesn't equate to electrification. It's not about the propulstion tech but the source of energy. And any combusution engine can use non-fossil fuels like biogas, bio-metha-/ethanol or straight (used or fresh) vegoil.
I don't know how and when the government and companies got the insidious idea that the general public has any regard for the woke fever dream of 'net zero'. All that matters are safe, clean (no trash), punctual and affordable trains. Excellent video however!
'Woke fever dream'.
All the words, but none of the meaning, and even less of the comprehension on your part. A mere word salad!
I presume that you realise that there is more to creating a coherent sentence than stringing together fascistic buzz words, like a Daily Mail headline.
@@frmattdrummond6535 hilarious given its people who say things like you statement that insist that the baseline view around which all law should be structured is that 1- the people that ended slavery were uniquely to blame for it/the people that invented it are only victims of it ditto colonialism, 2- the group that was mass disposed of via government servitude and which is more likely to be homeless or murdered etc is gender privileged and 3- that men can give birth. so all good talking about coherent but you see the problem, im sure you do even, if you wont admit it.
its how you ended up with idiotic leftwing headlines such as 'larry elder is the black face of white supremacism'. erm sure.
and with net zero we get a load of people who insist on travelling private jet everywhere, having a booze up every year to discus how the plebs should be stopped/priced out from their once a year holiday. cant have the meeting on the net oh no, has to be the gulfstream5 to whichever place has been picked. again nice and coherent i suppose.
and he is, of course right, that people don't care about net zero. they just want clean, cheap, safe transport. maybe they should care, maybe if those three are satisfied they would come to care. maybe they simply see john kerry get of his private jet and roll their eyes as he delivers another tedious lecture about net zero and think 'yeah right, sure pal, not very cohrent there jonny boy.'
daily mail jokes dont work now you guys are openly pushing flat earth theory type stuff re biology in you preferred hate rags notably the guardian im afraid...
The fact of the matter is, electric vehicles are also much cleaner.
The old ladies at my bus stop couldn’t have cared less either way - until electric buses came into service! They noticed how much quieter it is without diesel engines idling, and how much less sooty the bus stop was. They also appreciated how much smoother the ride was without the engine vibrations, or the clunking of the gearbox.
After that, they started to notice when a van going by was also electric, even chastising idling diesel vans for “ruining the tranquility”! One of them said to me “you don’t even notice when it’s there, but once it’s gone you never want it back”.
They could have had a lot more success if those trains had hydrogen fuel cell systems instead of lithium ion batteries which can also be safer and easier to maintain than diesel engines! :)
Great point!
SO .... All's well that ends well ..( William S ! ) ... but they MUST have manual override doors .... in case of HUGE BATTERY FIRE .... just an example : EV automobiles , ( MONSTA infernos ! ) .......................... DAVE™🛑