CAF class 197 Civity for TfW: News and updates on introduction.

[Energy]

I can't help but think that the only reason for the 197s is a political one to be able to say >50% of the trains will be built in Wales. Otherwise, why would they not have gone for a much simpler option of having all 231s for their regional fleet, perhaps with a few more Mk4 sets. They might possibly be more expensive to build, but I would have thought that the savings that come from a uniform fleet would have offset most of that cost.

They are both large fleets in their own right so I doubt the savings is enough for all 231s. I would imagine Stadler would be very happy to build a factory/assembly plant in Wales if they got given an order for a total fleet replacement, they have been doing well in the UK recently.

 

[Anonymous10]

They are both large fleets in their own right so I doubt the savings is enough for all 231s. I would imagine Stadler would be very happy to build a factory/assembly plant in Wales if they got given an order for a total fleet replacement, they have been doing well in the UK recently.

personally I'd have rather the stadler but its cost as well thats the issue

 

[Bletchleyite]

Of course TfW did order some Stadlers for the Valley Lines. I guess they were too expensive to have a full set, perhaps?

 

[RealTrains07]

Given that said DMUs have "second hand value" (yes, I know they are leased), why not? There are plenty of older DMUs on routes that will not be electrified for the foreseeable, both in Wales and elsewhere.

What you're saying is a bit like saying "I won't buy a car because I'm only going to need one for a year because a new station is going to be opened in my town". You would buy one, then flog it when it was no longer needed.

Your argument completely ignores the fact that other operators may want their own new fleet like wales 197s and not cast offs or hand me downs from other operators.

If they are casted off in the future who would want them as by the time this even occurs the old DMUs would be long gone.

 

[craigybagel]

I can't help but think that the only reason for the 197s is a political one to be able to say >50% of the trains will be built in Wales. Otherwise, why would they not have gone for a much simpler option of having all 231s for their regional fleet, perhaps with a few more Mk4 sets. They might possibly be more expensive to build, but I would have thought that the savings that come from a uniform fleet would have offset most of that cost.

Of course TfW did order some Stadlers for the Valley Lines. I guess they were too expensive to have a full set, perhaps?

They are both large fleets in their own right so I doubt the savings is enough for all 231s. I would imagine Stadler would be very happy to build a factory/assembly plant in Wales if they got given an order for a total fleet replacement, they have been doing well in the UK recently.

It's a pretty well known fact that Stadlers products are more pricey than CAF's - and I doubt the MKIVs are an especially cheap option either (they might be cheaper to acquire now, but the notoriously thirsty and heavy 67s to move them can't be cheap to run!). As Energy points out, it's difficult to see how the extra costs of that kind of fleet could be recouped.

And, as I seem to end up pointing out oh so often, this is already a very heavily subsidised franchise. Nobody would have expected Northern to stump up the costs for a large fleet of Stadlers, so I don't see why people expect W&B to be so extravagant either.

 

[Envoy]

Of course TfW did order some Stadlers for the Valley Lines. I guess they were too expensive to have a full set, perhaps?

Nope - I think they would have preferred all the fleet in the valleys and down to the coast to have been 398’s (the tram-trains). This all comes from Mark Barry advising the Welsh Government on having a Metro system with tram-trains that could take to the streets if need be. Much debate took place about this in the South Wales Metro forum with some favouring tram-trains whilst others saying something like the Stadler Flirts should be the best option with no street running. Anyway we are going off topic here - which is the 197’s so I think that if anyone wishes to discuss that they should do so on the South Wales Metro forum:>

South Wales 'Metro' updates

The plot thickens.... https://www.walesonline.co.uk/news/wales-news/m4-relief-road-commission-plan-19348191 Six new train stations between Cardiff and Newport have been recommended by a report looking into issues around the M4 in south Wales. The South East Wales Transport Commission has...

www.railforums.co.uk

 

[Philip]

What is the expected timescale for the first units entering service and the 175s leaving the franchise? Can we expect some 175s off lease by the end of this year? Also, any ideas which routes 197s will be used on first?

 

[Rhydgaled]

What is the expected timescale for the first units entering service and the 175s leaving the franchise? Can we expect some 175s off lease by the end of this year? Also, any ideas which routes 197s will be used on first?

According to the rolling stock specifications on the TfW website, the original timescale was:

• Class 175 lease end 31/05/2022
• Class 153 lease end 31/10/2022
• Class 158 lease end 31/10/2022
• Class 150 lease end 31/12/2023
• Class 197 with declassified first class lease end 31/12/2024 (ie. all first class compartments to be classified as first class from Jan 2025 onwards)
• Class 230 lease end 16/10/2033 (end of franchise)
• Class 170 lease end REDACTED (beyond end of franchise)

According to a presentation to the Modern Railways 4th Friday club 'Rail in Wales and the West' virtual conference, the first class 197 is nearing completion and is expected to be seen on test on the north Wales coast line shortly. I don't think any are expected to enter service until 2022.

 

[craigybagel]

What is the expected timescale for the first units entering service and the 175s leaving the franchise? Can we expect some 175s off lease by the end of this year? Also, any ideas which routes 197s will be used on first?

First units supposed to arrive towards the end of this year, and enter service at the beginning of 2022. That's assuming everything runs on time - and when was the last time that happened with a new fleet at any TOC? The 175s are supposed to be leaving before the 158s, but I still doubt you'll see any going until well into 2022.

 

[berneyarms]

The first Class 197s are not due to enter service until next year.

Given virtually every new class of rolling stock has had a delayed entry in recent years, I'd not be holding my breath on that.

 

[Energy]

I don't think any are expected to enter service until 2022.

2022 was always the planned year to enter service.

Class 170 lease end REDACTED (beyond end of franchise)

Presumably the WG are happy to have the 170s for a long time, they are good trains and a long lease will win them from the other TOCs who want them.

 

[squizzler]

Pick a small branch line that barely carries any traffic at any time of year and has a passing loop and a level crossing. Ormskirk-Preston maybe? Or even the Heart of Wales Line which barely even fills a 153 in the height of August.

The Cambrian continues to suffer and suffer again because of this idiotic decision.

Arguably the fault lies with the rest of the network for continuing to run obsolescent signalling technology Give it a decade and the rest of the world will have caught up!

Eh? Whether the trains are hopeless or brilliant has nothing to do with them being a statement of intent not to invest in electrification. You don't buy 77 brand new DMUs if you are intending to electrify much of your network within the working life of said DMUs.

I should have expanded a little on what I meant here. As I read it you are concerned that the units would be an 'Electrification killer' whose deployment would result in the need for further electrification coming under heavy scrutiny. That would seem to suggest that the punters will be quite satisfied with their new trains. However if they are as bad as you make out, they would actually increase the desire to electrify so that they could be rapidly replaced. It can't really be both. Hence:

That's an interesting take on it - a short stay on long-distance services followed to by a move to shorter-distance stopping services with new lines openning would make the suituation rather more acceptable provided their replacments on the long-distance services represent a return to the high quality offered by 158s and 175s. For example there are proposals for a Swansea area metro - if the 197s were to be moved there after a few years I'd be less concerned about the interior spec although the Swansea metro should really have something capable of electric traction (though not necessarily pure EMUs).

Roscos will naturally specify their trains to be flexible so they can be moved around. As it happens, the current order seems especially pragmatic in light of the situation we find ourselves in today. We don't know yet if the coronavirus and subsequent fallout will precipitate a massive shift away from the paradigm of car ownership which will favour the transport system, or whether the converse will happen. Having a brand new fleet of DMUs will allow the rural network to be relaunched at reasonable cost and grow the traffic - and hence business case - for something truly transformative in due course.

If the trains are eventually converted from straight diesel to zero carbon (other than second generation biodiesel, which is one option), then they will probably be lower performance than they would be if designed as non-diesel from the outset. These modified trains can be cascaded to humbler routes where the utilitarian interior spec is more appropriate.

The provenance of the trains - made in Wales - is no doubt a factor in the huge interest that Welsh Government is now showing for rail and integrated transport in general. The Cardiff attitude used to be positively antedeluvian on transport matters but has now become almost progressive. Also we must consider the train manufacturing industry needs new orders while transitioning to new technologies. Manufacturers are hardly going to have the resources to develop all these lovely new trains you think we should be buying if nobody orders the ones they have and they go out of business. Drivetrain manufacturers like Voith and ZF also need to keep their factories humming along fast they develop their zero carbon systems. Perhaps the proposed 'rail innovation centre' for South Wales will not only have a hand in developing the next generation of trains but also play its part in developing affordable ways of decarbonising the Civities, in partnership with their original builder just down the road?

 

[Rhydgaled]

I should have expanded a little on what I meant here. As I read it you are concerned that the units would be an 'Electrification killer' whose deployment would result in the need for further electrification coming under heavy scrutiny. That would seem to suggest that the punters will be quite satisfied with their new trains. However if they are as bad as you make out, they would actually increase the desire to electrify so that they could be rapidly replaced.

It's not the need for electrification that I think will come under heavy scrutiny as a result of the 197s but the business case for electrification. If a line is worked by old trains and a new fleet is due anyway the reduced cost of new EMUs can be used as a benefit to improve the BCR of electrification. However, if a nearly new fleet is running the line the cost of new EMUs goes firmly on the 'costs' side of the BCR equation. Leasing complicates matters, but in BR days when the stock was purchased directly by the train operator you wouldn't spend millions on a new diesel fleet if you were planning to electrify in 5 years time - you would wait the five years and buy an electric fleet.

Also, the fleet is leased until at least the original expected end of KeolisAmey's now terminated franchise. If there is a desire to rapidly replace them because they are so awful, no other TOC would want to sub-lease them meaning any cascade would need to be internal to TfW until at least 2033.

For me though the big thing is waste; if all we will have spent a portion of our limited carbon budget on fabricating metalwork for the new carraige bodies. If you then scrap them after only 5-10 years you are wasting all that carbon, but if you don't scrap them you keep burning diesel. Thus by building more diesel trains that are absolutely required you create a carbon catch-22.

Roscos will naturally specify their trains to be flexible so they can be moved around. As it happens, the current order seems especially pragmatic in light of the situation we find ourselves in today. We don't know yet if the coronavirus and subsequent fallout will precipitate a massive shift away from the paradigm of car ownership which will favour the transport system, or whether the converse will happen. Having a brand new fleet of DMUs will allow the rural network to be relaunched at reasonable cost and grow the traffic - and hence business case - for something truly transformative in due course.

I disagree completely - a large order of new low-spec trains does not seem at all pragmatic. You either want something high-quality to try and win back traffic or you want an old fleet so you are not wasting anything if the public has abandoned public transport for good and you have to shut the passenger railway down. It just so happens that we have a high-quality (most recently refurbished) fleet of old (158) and mid-life (175) trains which is perfect for trying to win back traffic with a high-quality offer without massive capital outlay (both in financial and carbon terms) on a new fleet.

If the trains are eventually converted from straight diesel to zero carbon (other than second generation biodiesel, which is one option), then they will probably be lower performance than they would be if designed as non-diesel from the outset. These modified trains can be cascaded to humbler routes where the utilitarian interior spec is more appropriate.

Biodiesel or something like LPG is what I think will happen to the Civity DMU fleets if the UK Government sticks to their guns over "no diesel-only trains by 2040" - hardly zero carbon though possibly marginally better than fossil diesel. Routes where the utilitarian interior spec is more appropriate (such as the Swansea metro) really could do with electric traction for at least part of the journey, and that doesn't look very practical to do with a Civity DMU given that eVoyager (much easier on paper at least) was put in the too difficult pile.

Manufacturers are hardly going to have the resources to develop all these lovely new trains you think we should be buying if nobody orders the ones they have and they go out of business.

CAF have produced the class 397 (an electric Civity with narrow doors in various positions) and their website offers a bi-mode Civity (not sure whether it is offered for the Civity UK though). In theory therefore the lovely new trains could have been procured and if CAF couldn't do it in Newport, bi-mode Aventras built in Derby were presumably available. To minimise waste the thing to have done would be to order 20-30 units for fleet expansion in 2022/23 and a further batch of around 30 units to replace the 158s around 2030 when more electrification is available which would also keep the factory busy for longer than rushing all the units out now. A final batch (probably of an updated design) would follow around 2040, following more electrification, to replace the 175s. Having a large number of DMUs all of the same age isn't great for electrification - you want replacements due in dribs and drabs so you can time electrificiation of each route with life expiry of that fleet.

 

[Bletchleyite]

Biodiesel or something like LPG is what I think will happen to the Civity DMU fleets if the UK Government sticks to their guns over "no diesel-only trains by 2040" - hardly zero carbon though possibly marginally better than fossil diesel.

Point of order - 100% biodiesel (if they can be adjusted to run on that) is carbon neutral because the crops you make it from have taken in the carbon that is then emitted when it's burnt. It is however not pollution free as particulates etc are emitted.

Routes where the utilitarian interior spec is more appropriate (such as the Swansea metro) really could do with electric traction for at least part of the journey, and that doesn't look very practical to do with a Civity DMU given that eVoyager (much easier on paper at least) was put in the too difficult pile.

I'd argue that what's an awful lot more stupid than that is having ordered FLIRTs without a pantograph!

CAF have produced the class 397 (an electric Civity with narrow doors in various positions) and their website offers a bi-mode Civity (not sure whether it is offered for the Civity UK though). In theory therefore the lovely new trains could have been procured and if CAF couldn't do it in Newport, bi-mode Aventras built in Derby were presumably available. To minimise waste the thing to have done would be to order 20-30 units for fleet expansion in 2022/23 and a further batch of around 30 units to replace the 158s around 2030 when more electrification is available which would also keep the factory busy for longer than rushing all the units out now. A final batch (probably of an updated design) would follow around 2040, following more electrification, to replace the 175s. Having a large number of DMUs all of the same age isn't great for electrification - you want replacements due in dribs and drabs so you can time electrificiation of each route with life expiry of that fleet.

I fundamentally don't agree with you that wide doors are a bad thing on regional expresses. Indeed, I'd go as far to say that the Class 170 is the best regional express DMU of the bunch, in part because of the wide doors at thirds. The problem with the 197s isn't the lower capacity than a 158, it's that they're all (other than one for the Conwy Valley) a coach too short, just like Northern's 195s are.

 

[Caaardiff]

Out of curiosity which parts of the TfW network are likely to be electrified by 2040?
And how much of the entire UK rail network still won't be electrified so the 197s can be cascaded to other TOCs?

 

[Bletchleyite]

Out of curiosity which parts of the TfW network are likely to be electrified by 2040?
And how much of the entire UK rail network still won't be electrified so the 197s can be cascaded to other TOCs?

The Valley Lines, Cardiff-Swansea and *possibly* the North Wales Coast is the most I can see happening.

 

[Cardiff123]

Out of curiosity which parts of the TfW network are likely to be electrified by 2040?
And how much of the entire UK rail network still won't be electrified so the 197s can be cascaded to other TOCs?

As rail infrastructure in Wales is not devolved (apart from the Core Valley Lines), and so is the responsibility of the DfT and Westminster, as things stand, the answer is STJ to Cardiff Central only.

Which is why the 197s were ordered by Keolis Amey in the first place. Chris Grayling was UK transport secretary at the time, who was cancelling electrifictaion schemes all over England & Wales in 2017-18 when the new W&B franchise bids were being prepared. In that environment, I'm not sure what else could have been ordered.

 

[squizzler]

Out of curiosity which parts of the TfW network are likely to be electrified by 2040?
And how much of the entire UK rail network still won't be electrified so the 197s can be cascaded to other TOCs?

I think that there will be late non electrified areas remaining in 19 years time. There will, IMO, be plenty of opportunity for cascading the 197s to replace units reaching retirement.

I disagree completely - a large order of new low-spec trains does not seem at all pragmatic. You either want something high-quality to try and win back traffic or you want an old fleet so you are not wasting anything if the public has abandoned public transport for good and you have to shut the passenger railway down.

That's not going to happen. Worst case is we are stuck at the steady state demand that the SRA notoriously called back in 2000s when the Arriva franchise started before traffic went and doubled.

If the traffic doubles again I would like to see the engine rafts in the units converted to hybrid models. Now we have electric motors and batteries in the mix, perhaps a pantograph car with additional batteries could then be inserted to feed the motor cars, a-la project Thor, lengthening the trains also. Railway technology is advancing so rapidly, who can rule that out?

 

[craigybagel]

It's not the need for electrification that I think will come under heavy scrutiny as a result of the 197s but the business case for electrification. If a line is worked by old trains and a new fleet is due anyway the reduced cost of new EMUs can be used as a benefit to improve the BCR of electrification. However, if a nearly new fleet is running the line the cost of new EMUs goes firmly on the 'costs' side of the BCR equation. Leasing complicates matters, but in BR days when the stock was purchased directly by the train operator you wouldn't spend millions on a new diesel fleet if you were planning to electrify in 5 years time - you would wait the five years and buy an electric fleet.

The business case for electrification in Wales is already abysmal, even before you take into account the new diesel fleet on order.

Also, the fleet is leased until at least the original expected end of KeolisAmey's now terminated franchise. If there is a desire to rapidly replace them because they are so awful, no other TOC would want to sub-lease them meaning any cascade would need to be internal to TfW until at least 2033.
I disagree completely - a large order of new low-spec trains does not seem at all pragmatic. You either want something high-quality to try and win back traffic or you want an old fleet so you are not wasting anything if the public has abandoned public transport for good and you have to shut the passenger railway down. It just so happens that we have a high-quality (most recently refurbished) fleet of old (158) and mid-life (175) trains which is perfect for trying to win back traffic with a high-quality offer without massive capital outlay (both in financial and carbon terms) on a new fleet.

The hyperbole on how awful the new fleet is going to be is really a bit excessive. And in any case, they're coming whether you like it or not. For your own health and sanity I'd advise trying to come to peace with this fact!

Out of curiosity which parts of the TfW network are likely to be electrified by 2040?

Only the parts that are already electrified, plus the Valley lines. Even busy lines line the North Wales coast have an appalling business case for it. In a post Covid cash strapped UK, I think the chances of further electrification in an area like Wales is virtually nil.

 

[Caaardiff]

The Valley Lines, Cardiff-Swansea and *possibly* the North Wales Coast is the most I can see happening.

Which would surely mean there's enough work for most, if not all of the 197s for many years to come. It could mean they replace the 170s in West Wales and HOW, maybe one or two of the loco journeys depending on what the WG want to do with funding the catering on South-North trips. IF, and its a big IF, some of lines can utilise DEMUs then some of the 197s can be cascaded to other TOCs but ultimately there's enough work to maintain a fairly large fleet for a long time.

 

[Bletchleyite]

The business case for electrification in Wales is already abysmal, even before you take into account the new diesel fleet on order.

The hyperbole on how awful the new fleet is going to be is really a bit excessive. And in any case, they're coming whether you like it or not. For your own health and sanity I'd advise trying to come to peace with this fact!

Only the parts that are already electrified, plus the Valley lines. Even busy lines line the North Wales coast have an appalling business case for it. In a post Covid cash strapped UK, I think the chances of further electrification in an area like Wales is virtually nil.

It's not about a business case. Once COVID has died down it's environmental case which is much stronger. It'll be mass electrification or mass closure, though I'd concede the latter is very much a risk.

== Doublepost prevention - post automatically merged: 12 Feb 2021 ==

Which would surely mean there's enough work for most, if not all of the 197s for many years to come. It could mean they replace the 170s in West Wales and HOW, maybe one or two of the loco journeys depending on what the WG want to do with funding the catering on South-North trips. IF, and its a big IF, some of lines can utilise DEMUs then some of the 197s can be cascaded to other TOCs but ultimately there's enough work to maintain a fairly large fleet for a long time.

Yes, powered by biodiesel we could end up in a position where classes 195, 196 and 197 are cascaded to cover the UK's entire DMU requirement, which will be a requirement for a while (unless there is a bonfire of the branch lines in favour of electric buses). Even 170/175/180 are old tech now, and 185 are heavy and polluting.

 

[craigybagel]

It's not about a business case. Once COVID has died down it's environmental case which is much stronger. It'll be mass electrification or mass closure, though I'd concede the latter is very much a risk.

The former is too financially expensive, and the latter is too politically expensive. In a country with such a long and proud history of politicians playing it safe by doing nothing, neither of these scenarios is going to play out by 2040.

 

[Rhydgaled]

Point of order - 100% biodiesel (if they can be adjusted to run on that) is carbon neutral because the crops you make it from have taken in the carbon that is then emitted when it's burnt. It is however not pollution free as particulates etc are emitted.

It can only be carbon neutral if the land has always been used for growing that crop and continues to be used for that purpose (so that the carbon is re-absorbed by the next batch). If the land used was previously built-over then it might be carbon negative but most likely the land would previously have been used for food production in which case an area of rainforest has probably been cleared to replace the food-production land and therefore the land-use change has a carbon impact.

I'd argue that what's an awful lot more stupid than that is having ordered FLIRTs without a pantograph!

Yes, that was pretty stupid unless they have worked out that it adds to much weight and they actually burn less fuel this way AND a pantograph can be added later. I'm not sure but I think there's even a pantograph well on the 231s so adding a pantograph should be as easy as putting it back on the TfW 769s - I sure hope it is that easy.

I fundamentally don't agree with you that wide doors are a bad thing on regional expresses.

Sorry, I cannot see any justification for additional standing capacity on a regional express. There is always something more useful you could do with the space.

Out of curiosity which parts of the TfW network are likely to be electrified by 2040?
And how much of the entire UK rail network still won't be electrified so the 197s can be cascaded to other TOCs?

Who knows. My concern is that the existence of 161 relatively new DMUs (the Civity fleets being the only pure DMUs built recently) gives the DfT/treasury an excuse to kick the can down the road on electrification makes it likely that less electrification will be authorised by 2040 than would be the case with only 110 newish DMUs (110 Civity DMUs being what we would have if only 26 class 197s are built instead of the full 77).

Only the parts that are already electrified, plus the Valley lines. Even busy lines line the North Wales coast have an appalling business case for it. In a post Covid cash strapped UK, I think the chances of further electrification in an area like Wales is virtually nil.

As rail infrastructure in Wales is not devolved (apart from the Core Valley Lines), and so is the responsibility of the DfT and Westminster, as things stand, the answer is STJ to Cardiff Central only.

Which is why the 197s were ordered by Keolis Amey in the first place. Chris Grayling was UK transport secretary at the time, who was cancelling electrifictaion schemes all over England & Wales in 2017-18 when the new W&B franchise bids were being prepared. In that environment, I'm not sure what else could have been ordered.

I agree, in that environment there was little prospect of anything other than DMUs being ordered (except perhaps DEMUs, which would have been a better choice if designed for an easy version of Project Thor to be undertaken later), but they did not need to order 77 of them and with Climate Change moving rapidly up the agenda and the publication of Network Rail's TDNS the decision to order so many DMUs is now looking extremely outdated. If you are proved to be correct and no more electrification has been delivered by 2040 then government will not have been taking climate change seriously and humanity will be facing a crisis far bigger than COVID.

If the traffic doubles again I would like to see the engine rafts in the units converted to hybrid models. Now we have electric motors and batteries in the mix, perhaps a pantograph car with additional batteries could then be inserted to feed the motor cars, a-la project Thor, lengthening the trains also.

Thor was filled in the too expensive/difficult pie - in part because of lack of existing cables/systems to feed motors from other cars. Not insurmountable I'm sure but I fear still too difficult to get the go ahead.

The hyperbole on how awful the new fleet is going to be is really a bit excessive. And in any case, they're coming whether you like it or not. For your own health and sanity I'd advise trying to come to peace with this fact!

I came to terms with the fact that some of them are coming whether I like it or not a long time ago. But all 77? I cannot come to terms with that.

Yes, powered by biodiesel we could end up in a position where classes 195, 196 and 197 are cascaded to cover the UK's entire DMU requirement, which will be a requirement for a while (unless there is a bonfire of the branch lines in favour of electric buses). Even 170/175/180 are old tech now, and 185 are heavy and polluting.

I agree that the UK will eventually end up with the Civity DMUs being the entire DMU fleet, supplemented by bi-modes and perhaps the odd DEMU (eg. 231s) - it's just that the timeframe doesn't tie up with when we need to decarbonise (ie. ASAP). The map of recommended solutions to decarbonise each route is on page 79 of Network Rail's TDNS (but the page number you need to enter in Adobe Reader is 85). While I would love to see pathway 4 (net-zero by 2040), even without the 197s I think that is undeliverable. Thus the best-case scenario which I am trying desperately to preserve is completion of the full TDNS programme by 2050. The problem with that is that the 197s could potentially operate until 2062 (if the government sits on their hands and gives them 40 years as the 150s seem likely to get) and full TDNS implementation involves zero DMUs.

Scotland has already pledged to be rid of diesel passenger trains by 2035 with most of their electrification to be done by then and all bar the West Highland due to eventually have a signficant portion under the wires. So they won't need any of the Civity DMUs, and neither will Anglia thanks to their FLIRTs. The only routes on the TDNS map where a Civity DMU could run without wasting investment in electrification by running under the wires for a substantial part of the trip are:

• Newport - Ebbw Vale (Cardiff - Ebbw Vale has more under-wires running)
• Conwy Valley Line
• Wrexham Central - Bidston
• Oxenholme - Windermere (if you don't run through to Manchester)
• Looe, Falmouth, Gunnislake and St. Ives branches
• Henley and Marlow Branches (assuming no through running onto the GWML)
• Middlesborough - Whitby
• Darlington - Bishop Auckland

Based on this topic, that's about 22 units in service daily. Everything else really ought to be able to draw power from OHLE and/or third rail and even then I get nowhere near 161 self-powered units. Admittedly that's the end game and we've a long way to go before we get there, but if we want to decarbonise rail by 2050 with a steady rate of electrification we are looking like having a surplus of diesel units sometime after 2040.

 

[Jez]

According to the rolling stock specifications on the TfW website, the original timescale was:

• Class 175 lease end 31/05/2022
• Class 153 lease end 31/10/2022
• Class 158 lease end 31/10/2022
• Class 150 lease end 31/12/2023
• Class 197 with declassified first class lease end 31/12/2024 (ie. all first class compartments to be classified as first class from Jan 2025 onwards)
• Class 230 lease end 16/10/2033 (end of franchise)
• Class 170 lease end REDACTED (beyond end of franchise)

According to a presentation to the Modern Railways 4th Friday club 'Rail in Wales and the West' virtual conference, the first class 197 is nearing completion and is expected to be seen on test on the north Wales coast line shortly. I don't think any are expected to enter service until 2022.

Its a real shame the 175s could be going in 15 months! Especially as they are looking the best they have in a number of years (those that have been refurbished) I wish TFW would at least keep some of them instead of the 170s for West Wales/HOW/Shrewsbury-Crewe.

Having said that I am looking forward to seeing the 197s!

 

[craigybagel]

Sorry, I cannot see any justification for additional standing capacity on a regional express. There is always something more useful you could do with the space.

It's got nothing to do with creating more standing space (though that is a side effect) and everything to do with reducing dwell times - which are an issue on large parts of the network these trains will serve.

I came to terms with the fact that some of them are coming whether I like it or not a long time ago. But all 77? I cannot come to terms with that.

Well tough - all 77 are coming - barring some kind of drastic Armageddon scenario. So you had might as well get used to that as well. None of us have the power to change that, and most of us don't want to either

 

[animationmilo]

Its a real shame the 175s could be going in 15 months! Especially as they are looking the best they have in a number of years (those that have been refurbished) I wish TFW would at least keep some of them instead of the 170s for West Wales/HOW/Shrewsbury-Crewe.

Having said that I am looking forward to seeing the 197s!

Lets hope things change, with COVID things could change big time

 

[Bletchleyite]

It's got nothing to do with creating more standing space (though that is a side effect) and everything to do with reducing dwell times - which are an issue on large parts of the network these trains will serve.

It is in places, in particular if Pwllheli is going to stay 0.5tph and 2-car then they will need lots of standing space in summer. But yes, by their nature regional expresses will sometimes carry standing loads, particularly at peak times (and "peak times" doesn't just mean commuter times).

Didn't realise the 231s were the Stadlers, I assumed that was the D78s getting a different class number due to not being pure diesel!

 

[Rhydgaled]

It's got nothing to do with creating more standing space (though that is a side effect) and everything to do with reducing dwell times - which are an issue on large parts of the network these trains will serve.

Yes, dwell times are the reason KeolisAmey made the decision they did, but in my opinion they should have addressed that issue in a different way (running longer trains and amending schedules) rather than creating additional standing room which has rendered the fleet totally inappropriate for the long journeys they are planned to operate.

 

[craigybagel]

It is in places, in particular if Pwllheli is going to stay 0.5tph and 2-car then they will need lots of standing space in summer. But yes, by their nature regional expresses will sometimes carry standing loads, particularly at peak times (and "peak times" doesn't just mean commuter times).

Oh indeed, there will be times when it comes in handy - either by design or otherwise! Though I'm hopeful a better alternative can be found for the Cambrian Coast.

But my point is, the layout will have been chosen not because of a desire to have more standing space and fewer seats as Rhydgaled implies - but to assist with dwell times whilst still providing a comfortable train.

Didn't realise the 231s were the Stadlers, I assumed that was the D78s getting a different class number due to not being pure diesel!

Of all the strange decisions made around unit numbering in recent years I think this one might be the most baffling!

 

[Wyrleybart]

.
TfW-RS inherrited 'a car' in the form of 51 existing high-quality DMUs. Yes that fleet was insufficient to introduce the promised extensions of the Liverpool-Chester service or extra capacity on Manchester-Swansea, but they didn't need to order anywhere near 77 units.

Can I just check the composition of your fleet of 51 high quality DMUs please ?
Because if it includes the 158s I have to disagree. The 158s were a pretty good trin in their day for a particular use. But they have very rarely managed to deliver successful air conditionng, and my last journey on one started off nicely at 0830 but rapdily declined as the temperature hotted up along with pax on the train.

They are 30 years old, have had their day and the expense of finally sorting the air con is not justifiable. i