Vivarail to enter administration

[Ibex]

Messy situation. Here’s hoping LNR source a replacement service for the route A.S.A.P. I doubt any 172s will be available while they’re still covering for Hereford stock.

Bletchley based train crew don't sign 172s (or 170s and 196s for that matter!) either. Certainly be interesting to see what comes of it now. Not good news at all for the Vivarail employees.

 

[DarloRich]

I doubt any 172s will be available while they’re still covering for Hereford stock.

I don't think they fit in the platforms down the vale and i doubt the staff at Blethco sign anything other than 230's for Vale usage.

 

[TT-ONR-NRN]

Certainly be interesting to see what comes of it now. Not good news at all for the Vivarail employees.

Or those that live on the Marston Vale.

SWR seem to be alright. Then again, I’m fairly sure they own their D-Trains.

 

[Mike395]

Whilst appreciating it'll take time, hopefully there'll be an arrangement from LNWR to re-hire the trained staff to work on the 230s and buy the stock off Vivarail/the administrators if needed. Otherwise I fear we're going to be back to literally months of bustitution across the whole line.

 

[Bletchleyite]

Messy situation. Here’s hoping LNR source a replacement service for the route A.S.A.P. I doubt any 172s will be available while they’re still covering for Hereford stock.

I suspect they'll likely look to purchase them and employ maintenance staff. Bar permanent bustitution, there isn't another viable option at the moment, unless TfW can spare a couple of 153s.

It will depend on who Entity in Charge of Maintenance is. If it is Vivarail (which it is for Marston Vale) then you can’t keep running.

Ah.

What's the situation with the IoW units?

 

[TT-ONR-NRN]

unless TfW can spare a couple of 153s.

And if WMT consider it viable to train staff up on them.

 

[Silverlinky]

No easy solution. Any new traction will require a training course to be delivered to drivers. This is not an overnight fix.

Either replacement coaches for the short term, or i'm trying to remember the arrangement when 31's were used down there, something hired in from and run by a.n.other may be an option?

 

[Bletchleyite]

Bletchley based train crew don't sign 172s (or 170s and 196s for that matter!) either. Certainly be interesting to see what comes of it now. Not good news at all for the Vivarail employees.

23/24m units don't fit, which is the whole reason they even exist.

A couple of 150s or 153s are the only option in terms of other existing stock, though it'd take a while to train the Bletchley crews back up on them. Or long term bustitution, which in the present climate may be preferred...

 

[TT-ONR-NRN]

This sort of thing is the unfortunate drawback of taking a chance on these kinds of ambitious projects. I wonder how TfW and GWR are affected…

 

[Bletchleyite]

Either replacement coaches for the short term, or i'm trying to remember the arrangement when 31's were used down there, something hired in from and run by a.n.other may be an option?

31s can't be used again. Unfortunately some very poor decisions were made in terms of signal siting and level crossings when the line was resignalled and some of the platforms moved, and as a result about 40m is the maximum train length. Otherwise it'd be a solution to bring some 172s down and have Tyseley drivers drive them with Bletchley drivers route-conducting until they were trained.

 

[43096]

I suspect they'll likely look to purchase them and employ maintenance staff. Bar permanent bustitution, there isn't another viable option at the moment, unless TfW can spare a couple of 153s.



Ah.

What's the situation with the IoW units?

Owned by SWR and, I believe, maintained in house. The simplest way out for WMT would be to take over maintenance, although they’d need the documentation (VMI etc) from Vivarail.

 

[SuperLuke2334]

This sort of thing is the unfortunate drawback of taking a chance on these kinds of ambitious projects. I wonder how TfW and GWR are affected…

TfW's has been rumoured to be pushed back to January, but nothing yet confirmed. It will be interesting to see whether the GWR trial goes ahead now.

 

[zwk500]

31s can't be used again. Unfortunately some very poor decisions were made in terms of signal siting and level crossings when the line was resignalled and some of the platforms moved, and as a result about 40m is the maximum train length. Otherwise it'd be a solution to bring some 172s down and have Tyseley drivers drive them with Bletchley drivers route-conducting until they were trained.

Platform length could be managed on a temporary basis with Local Door Only operation, if LNWR can staff it.

 

[TT-ONR-NRN]

Platform length could be managed on a temporary basis with Local Door Only operation, if LNWR can staff it.

I’m not sure if it could if signals are overhung.

 

[Bletchleyite]

Platform length could be managed on a temporary basis with Local Door Only operation, if LNWR can staff it.

It can't. The issue is that the back end overhangs a level crossing. I think it's Lidlington?

Maybe time it was fixed properly by moving the offending signal, then it could be worked by 196s alongside East West Rail which would make sense.

 

[DarloRich]

Whilst appreciating it'll take time, hopefully there'll be an arrangement from LNWR to re-hire the trained staff to work on the 230s and buy the stock off Vivarail/the administrators if needed. Otherwise I fear we're going to be back to literally months of bustitution across the whole line.

We are used to bustitution

Platform length could be managed on a temporary basis with Local Door Only operation, if LNWR can staff it.

You are down to one door operation which is very slow and far from idea with the number of bikes we often see plus i think there might be issues with one or more crossings.

I’m not sure if it could if signals are overhung.

The signals tend to be right on the end of the platforms.

Either replacement coaches for the short term, or i'm trying to remember the arrangement when 31's were used down there, something hired in from and run by a.n.other may be an option?

Just run me an on demand service from Fenny to Bletchley. Couple of MKii, couple of 37's. Easy.

When i dont need it you can take it down to Bedford and back.

 

[Watershed]

Perhaps I'm being pessimistic here, but I would be surprised if the smaller shacks on the line (those which were proposed for closure under EWR plans) ever see a rail service again.

 

[zwk500]

I’m not sure if it could if signals are overhung.

It can't. The issue is that the back end overhangs a level crossing. I think it's Lidlington?

Maybe time it was fixed properly by moving the offending signal, then it could be worked by 196s alongside East West Rail which would make sense.

Then draw forward. It's plain line, it's not like you're going to be locking up a junction. The only thing that would really be blocking it is if you were then holding the next LX in advance down by drawing forward, but I wouldn't have thought the strike-in points are that close to preceding stations, even on the MV.

You are down to one door operation which is very slow and far from idea with the number of bikes we often see plus i think there might be issues with one or more crossings.

Better than a bus/taxi replacement. It's an isolated branch, there's very few freights that would come into conflict with a late running shuttle.

 

[TT-ONR-NRN]

Just run me an on demand service from Fenny to Bletchley. Couple of MKii, couple of 37's. Easy.

You’ll regret that suggestion when your local train service leaves people behind because it’s so full of tractor cranks no regular commuters can fit on-board! Oh, and when it smells as much of B.O. on board as the Gt. Yarmouth 37 set did!

Then draw forward. It's plain line, it's not like you're going to be locking up a junction.

I just feel like if there was a way of running 172/196s, WMT would be doing it, rather than wasting time and money investing in these odd little crusty compilations of tube carriages.

How ridiculous is the prospect of an EMR 2 carriage unit shuffling down to Bedford and working it for now, with crew training if necessary, and returning to/swapping at Derby when needed?

A Meridian currently does Kettering - Melton Mowbray and then goes back empty to Etches Park. A Turbostar could do it instead on its way back from working the Marston Vale perhaps.

 

[norbitonflyer]

31s can't be used again. Unfortunately some very poor decisions were made in terms of signal siting and level crossings when the line was resignalled and some of the platforms moved, and as a result about 40m is the maximum train length. Otherwise it'd be a solution to bring some 172s down and have Tyseley drivers drive them with Bletchley drivers route-conducting until they were trained.

If 40m is the maximum length a 172 won't fit (nor a 196) as they are 2x23m. Indeed, only classes 150 or 153 will fit unless you want to resurrect a Pacer (or borrow a Parry People Mover)
If run round facilities are available at each end I suppose a 31 plus one Mark 1 or 2 carriage could be used.

 

[Ibex]

Confirmation tweet from LNR now posted.

 

[zwk500]

I just feel like if there was a way of running 172/196s, WMT would be doing it, rather than wasting time and money investing in these odd little crusty compilations of tube carriages.

From a long-term point of view, it made sense to try the concept of the 230s on the Marston Vale, with the impending changes to the line for EWR. If nobody is now allowed to undertake maintenance on them, then alternative solutions are worth looking at, given how frequently this line has been Bustituted recently, between LX failures and 230 unreliability.
Of course, there may be good staffing or depot reasons not to use 172/196s. But operationally, there are solutions to the platform length issue.

 

[TT-ONR-NRN]

Confirmation tweet from LNR now posted.

It reads:

Our maintainers for Class 230s, Vivarail, have entered into administration. We are currently unable to provide a rail service on the Marston Vale line. Effective from today, buses replace trains on this line until further notice.

 

[zwk500]

If 40m is the maximum length a 172 won't fit (nor a 196) as they are 2x23m. Indeed, only classes 150 or 153 will fit unless you want to resurrect a Pacer (or borrow a Parry People Mover)
If run round facilities are available at each end I suppose a 31 plus one Mark 1 or 2 carriage could be used.

No runround at Bedford Midland. You'd need to propel out of the station to run it round. Also running round requires a Shunter. (TL require the through platforms, the MV would be stuck with the bay platform).

 

[Bletchleyite]

From a long-term point of view, it made sense to try the concept of the 230s on the Marston Vale, with the impending changes to the line for EWR. If nobody is now allowed to undertake maintenance on them, then alternative solutions are worth looking at, given how frequently this line has been Bustituted recently, between LX failures and 230 unreliability.
Of course, there may be good staffing or depot reasons not to use 172/196s. But operationally, there are solutions to the platform length issue.

Presumably the administrators will be looking to realise the value of Vivarail's assets, assuming it is liquidated. Thus, there are three Class 230s which are only really useful in one place, which they could sell for scrap or they could sell for slightly more than scrap to a TOC that's suddenly found itself without trains. It wouldn't seem too wide of the mark that they might be sold to a leasing company and leased back to WMT, with maintenance done by someone else e.g. WMT's own staff at Tyseley.

 

[zwk500]

Presumably the administrators will be looking to realise the value of Vivarail's assets, assuming it is liquidated. Thus, there are three Class 230s which are only really useful in one place, which they could sell for scrap or they could sell for slightly more than scrap to a TOC that's suddenly found itself without trains. It wouldn't seem too wide of the mark that they might be sold to a leasing company and leased back to WMT, with maintenance done by someone else e.g. WMT's own staff at Tyseley.

This is a very likely outcome. Another outcome is that the Stock and IP rights are sold to a contracting company like Colas, who then arrange to lease to WMT from a base at Bletchley. However the administrators might want to see if anybody is interested in taking over the company entirely. I would have thought WMT are unlikely to have the cash to purchase them directly.

 

[Starmill]

I suspect they'll likely look to purchase them and employ maintenance staff.

They will have a big job jumping through the hoops to make the argument that this is appropriate and getting the spend agreed.

 

[geoffk]

LNR 230's are leased from VivaRail therefore they are unable to continue in service. There are no maintenance staff left on site as of this afternoon.

What does this mean for the Isle of Wight and TfW?

 

[swt_passenger]

What does this mean for the Isle of Wight and TfW?

SWR do their own maintenance. I think they organised things on the assumption the trains were going to be there for many years.

 

[SuperLuke2334]

SWR do their own maintenance. I think they organised things on the assumption the trains were going to be there for many years.

I've heard that there are no spare parts available now so if one needs parts then it might be taken out of service?