What is this weird lightweight train for?

Revolution VLR is a project for ultra lightweight trains for use on routes where traffic is relatively light. It is described as

“an innovative, lightweight, cost-effective rail vehicle that provides a compelling alternative to operating traditional heavy rail vehicles on branch lines. Its low mass reduces all aspects of operating costs and can significantly improve the business cases for line reopenings and extensions, enhancing local connectivity. RVLR’s innovative design combines automotive and rail technologies to provide an attractive, environmentally and economically sustainable product that can be deployed rapidly. RVLR facilitates modal shift and enhanced public transport connectivity. It supports a more affordable, greener future for our railways.”

I look at this and scratch my head. What were the designers thinking of? It is a curious design, with vehicles only 18.5 metres long (when the standard mark 1 length of 20 metres can run over the entire British system and another metre of length is probably possible. It appears to have no means of coupling it to another vehicle or locomotive, at least not in regular use. There is what looks like cramped seating for 56, and standing for 26. It compares unfavourably with the trains provided for this kind of service in the past, such as the GWR Auto trains which were used on little branch lines, and main line stopping services a century ago. These were 21.5 metre vehicles; those built in early BR days had extremely comfortable seating.

What is it for? There are hundreds of quite modern EMUs and DMUs coming out of service which have driving trailer cars which could be converted for use as control trailers for push-pull service for this kind of operation. Traction is another issue but the power requirements are about what was needed to run the GWR Auto-trains, which were pushed or pulled by very small steam locomotives such as the 1400 class.

A single de-rated HST power car (which would otherwise go for scrap) could handle up to three coaches with ease, with years of useful service ahead, so that passengers would not have be crammed in and stand, and there would be plenty of space for wheelchairs, prams and bicycles.

Dare one say it - very small steam locomotives such as the 1400 class used for auto-trains are very cheap to build, given a production run of 20 or more; when fuelled with light oil or diesel they actually use less fuel and produce a clean exhaust, and have a 60+ years life. 

The project, sponsored by Eversholt Rail and Transport Design International, seems to be a good example of an inability to see wood from trees or to learn from history. Given the number of GWR Auto-trains which survive, one of these should at least have been brought out for use as a cost/performance benchmark. Whatever traction is used, the total carbon footprint of the operation is minuscule in the overall scheme of things - the carbon footprint of this project is probably bigger when everything is factored in, including embedded energy. One would have thought that there were still a few people left at Eversholt Rail who were aware how this kind of thing was done in the past, but seemingly not. You can read about it here.