Class 175 future speculation

[Xavi]

I am sure I read elsewhere quoting a Mark Hopwood briefing that the option is 2-car 175s on Okehampton (2 units), 3-car on Barnstaple (3 units), replacement for Castle / IET on Cardiff - Penzance (6 x 2-car + 9 x 3-car with some multi-unit). One 3-car 158 will continue to be diagrammed on Cardiff/Bristol/Penzance to retain traction knowledge.

This releases 150s for Cornwall Metro, 158s for Portsmouth, and IETs for lengthening Paddington services.

 

[Class172]

Regardless of the veracity of the above description, it does make a lot of sense to me. Where would the home depot be under this scenario?

 

[Xavi]

Regardless of the veracity of the above description, it does make a lot of sense to me. Where would the home depot be under this scenario?

I think the same source mentioned Laira. I expect Exeter would also be involved.

 

[vicbury]

I am sure I read elsewhere quoting a Mark Hopwood briefing that the option is 2-car 175s on Okehampton (2 units), 3-car on Barnstaple (3 units), replacement for Castle / IET on Cardiff - Penzance (6 x 2-car + 9 x 3-car with some multi-unit). One 3-car 158 will continue to be diagrammed on Cardiff/Bristol/Penzance to retain traction knowledge.

This releases 150s for Cornwall Metro, 158s for Portsmouth, and IETs for lengthening Paddington services.

As a passenger on the Cardiff-Portsmouth route, this is disappointing. The 158s are horrid.

 

[Dan G]

158s described as horrid?! Sacrilege! I hope you have a hard hat...

 

[Iskra]

As a passenger on the Cardiff-Portsmouth route, this is disappointing. The 158s are horrid.

Is it the 158's that are horrid, or the lack of carriages in the formations that make them horrid?

I am sure I read elsewhere quoting a Mark Hopwood briefing that the option is 2-car 175s on Okehampton (2 units), 3-car on Barnstaple (3 units), replacement for Castle / IET on Cardiff - Penzance (6 x 2-car + 9 x 3-car with some multi-unit). One 3-car 158 will continue to be diagrammed on Cardiff/Bristol/Penzance to retain traction knowledge.

This releases 150s for Cornwall Metro, 158s for Portsmouth, and IETs for lengthening Paddington services.

This appears to make a lot of sense, thanks for sharing.

 

[Energy]

As a passenger on the Cardiff-Portsmouth route, this is disappointing. The 158s are horrid.

The 158s themselves are alright, it's the lack of carriages. With Cardiff - Portsmouth IIRC there were concerns about 175s being stored far from home due to their reliability.

 

[Lurcheroo]

The 158s themselves are alright, it's the lack of carriages. With Cardiff - Portsmouth IIRC there were concerns about 175s being stored far from home due to their reliability.

They’re ok to out-stabled, they just need a good maintenance regime from people that know what they’re doing and they’ll be a real asset to GWR and their passengers.

 

[Rhydgaled]

The 158s themselves are alright, it's the lack of carriages. With Cardiff - Portsmouth IIRC there were concerns about 175s being stored far from home due to their reliability.

They’re ok to out-stabled, they just need a good maintenance regime from people that know what they’re doing and they’ll be a real asset to GWR and their passengers.

The 175s seemed to do just fine under Arriva Trains Wales at a time when virtually everything outstationed at Carmarthen overnight was a 175. In my view Cardiff-Portsmouth needs to be predominately run using 5-car fixed-formations of either 158s or 175s. By 'fixed formations' I mean keeping units coupled in their pairs all day, particularly if 175s are used (due to the lack of gangways between units), without spliting or joining. This would help avoid what happened to my uncle a while ago where he was left stuck in Bristol for a while because GWR decided to split the 166 and/or 165 formation he was on at Bristol and him not being able to get through to the other unit (which was continuing to his intended destination of Cardiff).

 

[Bikeman78]

158s described as horrid?! Sacrilege! I hope you have a hard hat...

They are in summer. Far too hot inside.

 

[Lurcheroo]

They are in summer. Far too hot inside.

I have made this point to many on the Cambrian who are not overly pleased about the 197’s impending arrival. It’s winter and people seem to forget what they’re like in summer. Then all summer long people complain about the 158’s hahaha.

 

[gc4946]

I am sure I read elsewhere quoting a Mark Hopwood briefing that the option is 2-car 175s on Okehampton (2 units), 3-car on Barnstaple (3 units), replacement for Castle / IET on Cardiff - Penzance (6 x 2-car + 9 x 3-car with some multi-unit). One 3-car 158 will continue to be diagrammed on Cardiff/Bristol/Penzance to retain traction knowledge.

This releases 150s for Cornwall Metro, 158s for Portsmouth, and IETs for lengthening Paddington services.

Sounds like a reasonable fit for those duties but we'll need to wait if a 175 is on GWR metals for static training at a depot.

 

[vicbury]

They are in summer. Far too hot inside.

Exactly this. Not to mention the complete lack of fresh air inside at all times of the year as the ventilation system may as well not exist.

Then the regular exhaust fumes inside, excruciatingly slow doors and passenger egress and access, engine noise, overly soft unsupportive seats (GWR) or oppressive seats that dominate (TfW), slow acceleration, passenger information system that looks like it was designed in Microsoft Word (GWR)...

And yes, some of my hate may well stem from years of overcrowded 158s between Bath and Southampton, but you could give me a 12-car 158 and I'd still say they are horrid. Only redeeming feature is the ride quality.

 

[Lurcheroo]

I worked 158’s every day as a conductor, and travelled in them regularly as a passenger. Never noticed exhaust fumes in the saloon ?

The GWR PIS did make me think “what the hell?” When I first saw it being used to TFW’s units.

 

[irish_rail]

As a passenger on the Cardiff-Portsmouth route, this is disappointing. The 158s are horrid.

Well a good job the 175s will be used for Cardiff to Penzance then. 175s on this route benefits a far greater number of people, they are excellent trains from a passenger point of view, and Penzance to Cardiff is practically intercity (many people do do long trips like Plymouth to Cardiff). The 175s would be absolutely ideal. They'd be wasted on the Portsmouth route frankly.

 

[TT-ONR-NRN]

I worked 158’s every day as a conductor, and travelled in them regularly as a passenger. Never noticed exhaust fumes in the saloon ?

The GWR PIS did make me think “what the hell?” When I first saw it being used to TFW’s units.

A particularly odd choice by GWR to fit those hopeless blue screens seeing as their own 165s and 166s use the identical PIS system to that in the TfW 158s.

 

[The exile]

I worked 158’s every day as a conductor, and travelled in them regularly as a passenger. Never noticed exhaust fumes in the saloon ?

The GWR PIS did make me think “what the hell?” When I first saw it being used to TFW’s units.

I’m in a Northern one right now and it also has the typical 158 odour, which have also always assumed was small quantities of exhaust being drawn into the air con. It’s not permanent - I’m trying to work out when it happens…

 

[Energy]

A particularly odd choice by GWR to fit those hopeless blue screens seeing as their own 165s and 166s use the identical PIS system to that in the TfW 158s.

Seems to be a ROSCO decision.

The screens fitted on the GWR 158s are a TrainFX system which Porterbrook has also fitted to all the 323s, the Northern 158s which they own, the EMR 158s (Angel EMR 158s also got them), the 144e demonstrator, and more.

The Angel Northern 158s all got normal scrolling dot-matrix displays under the same refurb. TfW 158s are all owned by Angel.

 

[Neptune]

Seems to be a ROSCO decision.

The screens fitted on the GWR 158s are a TrainFX system which Porterbrook has also fitted to all the 323s, the Northern 158s which they own, the EMR 158s which they own, the 144e demonstrator, and more.

The non-Porterbrook-owned Northern 158s all got normal scrolling dot-matrix displays under the same refurb. TfW 158s are all owned by Angel.

The Eversholt owned 158‘s at Northern have also got them (158901-910). Also the Angel owned EMR 158’s have them I believe (possibly with the exception of 158889). The trouble is that internal PIS has come on in leaps and bounds even in the last few years since these were done. Imagine if they’d fitted the PIS units that are in the Alstom Aventra’s or Stadler units. Far superior than the awful things connected to equally awful TrainFX.

 

[Energy]

The Eversholt owned 158‘s at Northern have also got them (158901-910). Also the Angel owned EMR 158’s have them I believe (possibly with the exception of 158889). The trouble is that internal PIS has come on in leaps and bounds even in the last few years since these were done. Imagine if they’d fitted the PIS units that are in the Alstom Aventra’s or Stadler units. Far superior than the awful things connected to equally awful TrainFX.

Thanks, corrected it.

I presume Porterbrook has been fitting them to so many fleets on the presumption that they could be programmed like the 700s, Stadler, and Aventra screens to show the status of other transport. I don't have high hopes given that no operator has gotten them of the horrendous blue/yellow colours yet.

 

[LowLevel]

The Eversholt owned 158‘s at Northern have also got them (158901-910). Also the Angel owned EMR 158’s have them I believe (possibly with the exception of 158889). The trouble is that internal PIS has come on in leaps and bounds even in the last few years since these were done. Imagine if they’d fitted the PIS units that are in the Alstom Aventra’s or Stadler units. Far superior than the awful things connected to equally awful TrainFX.

889 originally had the SWT spec screens and system fitted but it was never used by EMT and it has been removed and replaced by the standard rubbish TrainFX kit.

 

[Rhydgaled]

They are in summer. Far too hot inside.

I have made this point to many on the Cambrian who are not overly pleased about the 197’s impending arrival. It’s winter and people seem to forget what they’re like in summer. Then all summer long people complain about the 158’s hahaha.

True, 158s can get pretty much insufferable on a hot summer's day (though I don't seem to see the same complaints regarding SWT (and possibly EMT) units - so did Stagecoach fix the aircon on their examples?). However, the class 800s etc. (and everything else with Fainsa or other new seating, such as the 197s) are pretty much insufferable for a long journey all year round. Somebody needs to do something about seat hardness ASAP, I'm rapidly running out of reachable railway (90min limit on Sophias).

The 158s therefore still get my vote for something like the Cambrian (or Cardiff-Portsmouth) as they are suitable/optimised at times (as long as enough of them are provided). The 197s (or 165/166) are never optimal for those services.

Well a good job the 175s will be used for Cardiff to Penzance then. 175s on this route benefits a far greater number of people, they are excellent trains from a passenger point of view, and Penzance to Cardiff is practically intercity (many people do do long trips like Plymouth to Cardiff). The 175s would be absolutely ideal. They'd be wasted on the Portsmouth route frankly.

Isn't the current Cardiff-Penzance service just the former Cardiff-Taunton outer-suburban service* extended through to Exeter/Plymouth and combined with a service from there to Penzance? Intercity services on the Bristol-Penzance axis should really be being provided by XC - unfortunately the ridiculously short Voyagers don't look like being suplemented by something adequate any time soon. The ideal suituation in my view (short of the 197s never having been ordered and the 175s still being with TfW) would be for XC to provide a much better product on the Edinburgh-Plymouth/Penzance route (much longer trains, much better window alignment and legroom, seats like the existing (Virgin-era) Avanti Voyager seats - not the new hard seats on the Pendos), with the 175s going onto Cardiff-Portsmouth. TfW providing a Swansea-Bristol stopper in place of the GWR Penzance service and GWR running Gloucester-Taunton (via Weston-Super-Mare) stoppers with 166s/165s. However, that doesn't seem to be likely any time soon, so the 175s would be welcome on the Cardiff-Penzance as a means for long-distance passengers to avoid the failure to provide long-enough trains on XC. That's not to say they would be wasted on Cardiff-Portsmouth - both Cardiff-Portsmouth and Bristol-Penzance deserve high-quality stock like the 175s.

* hardly intercity since it runs via Western-Super-Mare

 

[43096]

True, 158s can get pretty much insufferable on a hot summer's day (though I don't seem to see the same complaints regarding SWT (and possibly EMT) units - so did Stagecoach fix the aircon on their examples?).

SWT did two things: they funded changing the aircon system over to the Liebherr system and they then maintained it in accordance with the manufacturers instructions. AIUI there was an HVAC engineer at Salisbury who would do planned maintenance tasks (i.e. per the Liebherr maintenance schedule) on the aircon every spring and the heating system late summer/autumn. In between times was fault finding and fixing.

 

[Russel]

Wow so this is definitely happening then ? Good stuff!!!

Some of the speculation here would suggest so but I think that is all it currently is, I don't recall seeing any conformation.

 

[irish_rail]

True, 158s can get pretty much insufferable on a hot summer's day (though I don't seem to see the same complaints regarding SWT (and possibly EMT) units - so did Stagecoach fix the aircon on their examples?). However, the class 800s etc. (and everything else with Fainsa or other new seating, such as the 197s) are pretty much insufferable for a long journey all year round. Somebody needs to do something about seat hardness ASAP, I'm rapidly running out of reachable railway (90min limit on Sophias).

The 158s therefore still get my vote for something like the Cambrian (or Cardiff-Portsmouth) as they are suitable/optimised at times (as long as enough of them are provided). The 197s (or 165/166) are never optimal for those services.


Isn't the current Cardiff-Penzance service just the former Cardiff-Taunton outer-suburban service* extended through to Exeter/Plymouth and combined with a service from there to Penzance? Intercity services on the Bristol-Penzance axis should really be being provided by XC - unfortunately the ridiculously short Voyagers don't look like being suplemented by something adequate any time soon. The ideal suituation in my view (short of the 197s never having been ordered and the 175s still being with TfW) would be for XC to provide a much better product on the Edinburgh-Plymouth/Penzance route (much longer trains, much better window alignment and legroom, seats like the existing (Virgin-era) Avanti Voyager seats - not the new hard seats on the Pendos), with the 175s going onto Cardiff-Portsmouth. TfW providing a Swansea-Bristol stopper in place of the GWR Penzance service and GWR running Gloucester-Taunton (via Weston-Super-Mare) stoppers with 166s/165s. However, that doesn't seem to be likely any time soon, so the 175s would be welcome on the Cardiff-Penzance as a means for long-distance passengers to avoid the failure to provide long-enough trains on XC. That's not to say they would be wasted on Cardiff-Portsmouth - both Cardiff-Portsmouth and Bristol-Penzance deserve high-quality stock like the 175s.

* hardly intercity since it runs via Western-Super-Mare

The reason I refer to it as intercity is due to the amount of time people spend on board. I have found it surprising how many people do actually make long distance trips on it like Plymouth to Cardiff. As you say, this is in a big part down to XC hopeless inadequacy, but direct services and not having to have to change does seem to play a part as well. My guess is on the Cardoff to Pompey route there are more journeys of just a few stops.

 

[REVUpminster]

Exeter depot is built to handle 2 and 3 car units so 175s would be good for Okehampton and Barnstaple; not Paignton-Exmouth. The depot was very good at keeping 143s running and the 150s. Still like to have the 165/6s though.

 

[Snow1964]

I am sure I read elsewhere quoting a Mark Hopwood briefing that the option is 2-car 175s on Okehampton (2 units), 3-car on Barnstaple (3 units), replacement for Castle / IET on Cardiff - Penzance (6 x 2-car + 9 x 3-car with some multi-unit). One 3-car 158 will continue to be diagrammed on Cardiff/Bristol/Penzance to retain traction knowledge.

This releases 150s for Cornwall Metro, 158s for Portsmouth, and IETs for lengthening Paddington services.

This makes lot of sense, I guess it means the 166 and 165s can be concentrated on the Bristol suburban and services to Weymouth and Worcester etc. perhaps returning Portsmouth-Cardiff to 158s rather than the mix of 158 and 16x that can't couple in multiple

Guessing
20 (2car) 150s for Devon and Cornwall
5x3car, 13x2car (41 vehicles) 158s of which Portsmouth -Cardiff uses set sets of 4 or 5 cars, so most of them

The 175s could also release a number of 5car IETs on Cardiff-Penzance which hopefully mean less short trains to London.

The mix of 2car and 3car units in the west does cause some formation headaches making up longer trains, because many platforms are limited to 5car formations, whereas 6car formations often appear start and end of day to/from Bristol area. Although some platforms are now 145-150m suitable for 6car formations.

 

[HamworthyGoods]

This makes lot of sense, I guess it means the 166 and 165s can be concentrated on the Bristol suburban and services to Weymouth and Worcester etc. perhaps returning Portsmouth-Cardiff to 158s rather than the mix of 158 and 16x that can't couple in multiple

Guessing
20 (2car) 150s for Devon and Cornwall
5x3car, 13x2car (41 vehicles) 158s of which Portsmouth -Cardiff uses set sets of 4 or 5 cars, so most of them

The 175s could also release a number of 5car IETs on Cardiff-Penzance which hopefully mean less short trains to London.

The mix of 2car and 3car units in the west does cause some formation headaches making up longer trains, because many platforms are limited to 5car formations, whereas 6car formations often appear start and end of day to/from Bristol area. Although some platforms are now 145-150m suitable for 6car formations.

There aren’t quite enough 158 vehicles to cover all the Portsmouth workings, you can cover more if the 3 cars were at Bristol but not them all.

1 x 3 car and 2 x 2 cars are maintenance units so that leaves 34 vehicles which isn’t enough to cover all 8 diagrams unless you split up the remaining 3 car sets which isn’t without its challenges.

Portsmouth route is likely to remain a mixed operation whatever fleet cascade happens or not.

 

[Snow1964]

There aren’t quite enough 158 vehicles to cover all the Portsmouth workings, you can cover more if the 3 cars were at Bristol but not them all.

1 x 3 car and 2 x 2 cars are maintenance units so that leaves 34 vehicles which isn’t enough to cover all 8 diagrams unless you split up the remaining 3 car sets which isn’t without its challenges.

Portsmouth route is likely to remain a mixed operation whatever fleet cascade happens or not.

Only couple of diagrams are normally 5car, so could have 6x4car plus 2x5car = 34. But you are correct, wrong mix of 2and 3car units for simple full conversion, although parts of some workings are busy enough to justify 6cars not 5cars.

But keeping 175s away from area would mean Westbury and Fratton based staff wouldn't need to learn them.

 

[Anonymous10]

The reason I refer to it as intercity is due to the amount of time people spend on board. I have found it surprising how many people do actually make long distance trips on it like Plymouth to Cardiff. As you say, this is in a big part down to XC hopeless inadequacy, but direct services and not having to have to change does seem to play a part as well. My guess is on the Cardoff to Pompey route there are more journeys of just a few stops.

It's also not much faster Plymouth to Cardiff with xc.