Peter Mugridge
Veteran Member
Given the size of the order, would it not be likely that the 333s would be life expired anyway by the time the tail end of the deliveries are made?
Also, if this order is including a replacement of the 333s and 170s then I'd like to question why they are willing to order replacements for perfectly good mid life rolling stock that probably have another 15 years of their Operating life still left in them?
You obviously don't work them!I've literally just said the same thing above. And I wouldn't be opposed to it as I really like the Civities that Northern have got. They're probably my favourite trains in the Northern fleet
Fixed that for you! I would not be surprised if they went at the same time at all.While choosing CAF would make a lot of sense, whatever is ultimately chosen will be because it best matches the specification Northern are asking for. By the time a new fleet of EMUs potentially begins to enter service in late 2028, the 333s will be approaching 30 years old, which isn't what I'd call mid-life. They are also a highly non-standard and unreliable micro fleet, so while I personally consider the 333s to be very decent units, it just doesn't make sense to retain them longer term.
They may be good for a further ten years but it will likely be more cost-effective simply to replace as many trains as possible all in one go. And look at the 332s - built at roughly the same time and similarly nonstandard.I can understand why Northern would want to replace their 323 stock by 2030 as they are rapidly approaching the end of their service life. But why would they want to get rid of the 333s at the same time? Won't they be perfectly good to use up until 2040?
Won't the 333s still have another 10 years of their service life left in them by 2028? Would it not be best to keep them another 10 years and run them until the end of their life instead of scrapping them?
If it was not for the fact that I don't think the three remaining class 360/2 units I don't believe have been used that much by the Global Centre for Rail Excellence, I would have said that the class 333 units could be used by them. If the class 360/2 units still exist when the class 333 units, is there parts that can be taken from the class 333 units to keep the class 360/2 or for that matter the class 360/1 units going?
The Dale for the Tender?For those members newly joining this thread, what is the dale of the tender referred to in the title of this thread.
Assuming you mean date, the notice came out in August 2023, full specs were sent to those who registered interest in October 2023For those members newly joining this thread, what is the dale of the tender referred to in the title of this thread.
Did the specs get issued in October 2023 as per the original tender, I can't find any further update on the .gov website but then again perhaps they don't publish that?Assuming you mean date, the notice came out in September 2023, full specs were sent to those who registered interest in October 2023
Assuming you mean date, the notice came out in August 2023, full specs were sent to those who registered interest in October 2023
Initial batch to be awarded by early 2025 as part of framework, additional batches can be called taking it upto max of 450 units, over following 96 months.
Haven't ever seen exact delivery dates but seems to be from late 2027 or early 2028. Adding 96 months suggests deliveries until 2032
Is there any idea if/when we'll hear the about potential Bidders?Did the specs get issued in October 2023 as per the original tender, I can't find any further update on the .gov website but then again perhaps they don't publish that?
The DfT are quoting end of 2024 for contract sign off/start so there needs to be some progress soon if that's to be achieved.
Unlikely to be made public, until someone signs contract.Is there any idea if/when we'll hear the about potential Bidders?
Why? What's wrong with the Civity Fleet?You obviously don't work them!
Well I'll admit it obviously not objective, but the vast majority of conductors, and most drivers I speak so (myself included) find them unpleasant to work. Poor build quality, horrendous touchscreens, ergonomically odd to say the least, awful cab doors - those are the main points! Give me a 158 or a 333 any day. But as I say, not everyone agrees with me.Why? What's wrong with the Civity Fleet?
The 197s with enhanced seat cushions are quite nice in my opinion, a bit rough riding on jointed track so in my experience west of Swansea but otherwise nice enough.How is the Civity fleet viewed by rail passengers travelling in those units?
From those I've spoken to the views are actually pretty mixed. Tables are a big plus and no-one seems to mention the seats (I think enthusiasts must have Princess-and-the-Pea behinds!). But the ride quality (shaking, vibrations, jolting) and sounds (occasional alarming bangs coming from the panto and suspension) are negatives. Of course this is based on my own conversations with passengers, mostly around Leeds, and is not necessarily a representative sample.How is the Civity fleet viewed by rail passengers travelling in those units?
Only time I've heard the "bangs" are in the neutral sections between leeds and shipley.From those I've spoken to the views are actually pretty mixed. Tables are a big plus and no-one seems to mention the seats (I think enthusiasts must have Princess-and-the-Pea behinds!). But the ride quality (shaking, vibrations, jolting) and sounds (occasional alarming bangs coming from the panto and suspension) are negatives. Of course this is based on my own conversations with passengers, mostly around Leeds, and is not necessarily a representative sample.
Presumably, you mean the circuit breakers opening and closing at Neutral sections?Only time I've heard the "bangs" are in the neutral sections between leeds and shipley.
I use them primarily around the Aire / Wharfe triangle, and sometimes over the Calder Valley, and I honestly don't mind them. They are very light on their feet so delay recovery, especially noticeable on the Calder Valley services is pretty good. The ride quality seems to vary from unit to unit, but the litmus test is that it is far easy to travel standing than it is on practically every other unit Northern has in my experience.How is the Civity fleet viewed by rail passengers travelling in those units?
The 195s have too many tables, I'd rather have a seat to sit on than be stood in the aisle looking at a row of tables.
The ride quality seems to vary from unit to unit, but the litmus test is that it is far easy to travel standing than it is on practically every other unit Northern has in my experience.
As with many fleets, they provide sufficient seating capacity at the majority of times, but not where there are peaks of travel. Many trains are designed to allow standees, not least since they have fewer seats now than trains did in previous eras.This is rather sad, that they are being judged on basis of quality for standees, rather than do they provide sufficient quality seating.
More a judgement of inadequate train length by operators that the trains.
The 195s have too many tables, I'd rather have a seat to sit on than be stood in the aisle looking at a row of tables.
Maybe, but for Aire / Wharfe triangle services and especially with only 3 car 331s on this side now, standing is a reality for peak services.This is rather sad, that they are being judged on basis of quality for standees, rather than do they provide sufficient quality seating.
More a judgement of inadequate train length by operators that the trains.
Are the touchscreens ever used for operationally critical functions?Well I'll admit it obviously not objective, but the vast majority of conductors, and most drivers I speak so (myself included) find them unpleasant to work. Poor build quality, horrendous touchscreens, ergonomically odd to say the least, awful cab doors - those are the main points! Give me a 158 or a 333 any day. But as I say, not everyone agrees with me.
I always thought the 158s had a good balance of tables/seats and airline/bays. Something for everyone. They're just really well designed trains.I agree with the former, but being designed for premier long distance routes originally a low density seating layout is appropriate even if I would go for more airline seats.
I think it’s a fairly reasonable ask not to be crushed between 2 other people seated either side of you for a couple of hours.A 48 metre train could have nearly 200 seats if organised in a 3+2 pattern. The railway rightly or wrongly chooses to only put 124 seats in. The view is often expressed that people prefer to stand than sit in the middle seat of a three, and that people like table seats.
Key dates are
- Contract signature early 2025
- Late 2028 new EMUs
- 2029 for new multi-mode units
From those I've spoken to the views are actually pretty mixed. Tables are a big plus and no-one seems to mention the seats (I think enthusiasts must have Princess-and-the-Pea behinds!).
A 48 metre train could have nearly 200 seats if organised in a 3+2 pattern. The railway rightly or wrongly chooses to only put 124 seats in. The view is often expressed that people prefer to stand than sit in the middle seat of a three, and that people like table seats.
I agree with the former, but being designed for premier long distance routes originally a low density seating layout is appropriate even if I would go for more airline seats.
Agree with this, at busy times & on busy journeys the lack of seats on a Class 195 is quite noticeable with a number of people stood in the doorway areas. A few more airline type seats would help with this.The 195s have too many tables, I'd rather have a seat to sit on than be stood in the aisle looking at a row of tables.