Should Grand Central replace their 180s?

Kite159 · 28 Jan 2019

Emblematic said:
The only interest the Irish railways had in the UK stock was as a stopgap until new-build can be acquired. Near-term availability is key to that, particularly as guage conversation will take some time, and it looks like the 170 & 185 proposals may have foundered because of that (see other thread noted above.) Are GC (or HT for that matter) in a position to replace their stock in the very near future? If not, there's no use for them in Irelend, even if suitable.

Hull Trains have 802s on order which should enter traffic by the end of the year.

-----------

Something similar to 802s would be suitable for Grand Central, if only to reduce diesel workings under the wires as the Bradford services could change over to diesel at Doncaster and the Sunderland services could change over at Northallerton.

RailUK Forums

Roger100 · 29 Jan 2019

I used Grand Central 180s from Hartlepool to London a good many times last year. There were some failures in the summer (but not affecting me) but they seemed to recover. Today (Monday) all GC services ran and arrived at their final destinations within 5 minutes of the planned time. Hull trains suffered some cancellations.

It seems GC are contracted until the end of 2026, and are still hoping to be allowed to run more services, so maybe 800/802 are a possibility.

Their HSTs reached the end of lease almost 13 months ago and went to EMT. Even if they had been able to keep them, I guess they may have suffered shortages due to the excessive time it seems to take to sort out the doors and toilets.

Adam0984 · 29 Jan 2019

Just to add that the 1726 Northern service from Leeds to Hebden Bridge is a northern unit now fresh from Neville Hill then empty back to Neville Hill from Hebden

Tetchytyke · 29 Jan 2019

hibtastic said:
I remember an article back in the day when the 180s and 220/221s arrived in the UK. The article concluded that the 180 was a better unit.

The 180 is a better unit for passengers, except Alstom built them out of cheese.

The 220/221/222 trains are fairly terrible from a passenger perspective, but at least they work.

Mikey C · 29 Jan 2019

Arctic Troll said:
The 180 is a better unit for passengers, except Alstom built them out of cheese.

The 220/221/222 trains are fairly terrible from a passenger perspective, but at least they work.

The 222s I find perfectly ok

D365 · 29 Jan 2019

Mikey C said:
The 222s I find perfectly ok

Yes exactly - hardly "terrible".

Railperf · 29 Jan 2019

Are the class 180 s that fragile or is it a case that the TOC or it's maintenance contractor is not giving them the TLC they were promised and require? Interesting to see that East Midlands Trains class 222s are top of the Pile for DMU reliability. And even more interesting to see that Virgin Trains tilting class 221's are pretty close to cross-country class 221s for reliability in spite of arguably being worked harder and having the additional issue of Tilt mechanisms to add into the mix.

Mordac · 29 Jan 2019

Railperf said:
Are the class 180 s that fragile or is it a case that the TOC or it's maintenance contractor is not giving them the TLC they were promised and require?

They were crap from day one.

Railperf · 29 Jan 2019

Mordac said:
They were crap from day one.

Surely Alstom under contract should have been putting them right from day one?

dgl · 29 Jan 2019

Arctic Troll said:
The 180 is a better unit for passengers, except Alstom built them out of cheese.

And presumably cream cheese

Railperf · 29 Jan 2019

Mordac said:
They were crap from day one.

It is easy to say they are crap but can someone be more specific about why these are so unreliable compared to other modern DMUs?
The engines are the same as found in the Voyager and the Meridian trains. Is the engine installation flawed in terms of cooling or electronics?
The transmissions are hydraulic as opposed to diesel electric. Is that the issue? Or are we talking about are there small niggly things like door mechanisms etc ?

EDIT. Class 185 seems to be even more reliable and these are fitted with hydraulic transmissions.
The latest class 7xx trains aside - there seems to be a recurring theme about Siemens trains being among the most reliable on the network whether they are electric or diesel.

superkev · 29 Jan 2019

The 175's and 180's share engines and transmissions with other dmus of the time but where unreliable from the start. They where built after the 4 year order drought when expertise had drifted away and had design and build quality issues from the start. I remember one issue being the invertor being cooked next to the exhaust.
When will the over elevated clerks who seem to run things these days learn that engineering experience is hard won over many years and can't be turned on and off like a tap. Witness the electrification fiasco which seems to be repeating with most of the piling teams and equipment layed up. End of moan.
As for Grand central I'd just order some 802s which in case of failure would be able to couple to similar on the ecml
K

HOOVER29 · 29 Jan 2019

When I travel from Derby to Sheffield or vice versa i will always wait for a class 222 than suffer on a Cross Country 220/221. They just seem better built & ride better. Plus they look better too around the cab.
As for a home for the 180’s what about the Liverpool-Norwich Route?
Ideal for a blast down the Ecml between Grantham & Peterborough

Railperf · 29 Jan 2019

The last blast i had aboard a 180 was from Reading to Paddington and then Paddington to Oxford. Acceleration seemed okay ..if not as sprightly as a 222. And it had all engines running too!! I do prefer the window layout and straight bodysides of the 180s compared to the tapered 22xs.
It does seem GC units seem slightly more reliable..but with spare units to cover breakdowns ...they still seem to be able to run a regular train service.

Aictos · 29 Jan 2019

HOOVER29 said:
When I travel from Derby to Sheffield or vice versa i will always wait for a class 222 than suffer on a Cross Country 220/221. They just seem better built & ride better. Plus they look better too around the cab.
As for a home for the 180’s what about the Liverpool-Norwich Route?
Ideal for a blast down the Ecml between Grantham & Peterborough

Oh sure, but the rest of the route they won't be able to take advantage of Sprinter speeds so means slower speeds meaning longer journeys.

Plus you can't just allocate rolling stock to routes on looks alone as it doesn't work like that in real life :lol:

Suraggu · 29 Jan 2019

I cannot see Arriva allowing Grand Central to order any new rolling stock considering they only have 7 years left of operations at present.

And I am sure GC are/were interested in the HT Class 180's when they are replaced by 802's.

VT 390 · 29 Jan 2019

If East Midlands Trains replace their 222's before Grand Central order new stock could some class 222's be temporarily operated by Grand Central?

Ianigsy · 29 Jan 2019

I took my first return journey from Bradford to London on Grand Central last week- out on an unrefurbished unit with plenty of ex-FGW stickers round (one or two bilingual English-Welsh!) and back on a refurbished one. The first journey was early and the second on time to the minute; the one reservation I'd have is that the movement at speed was rather disconcerting. But comfortable enough, and while the First Class service wasn't exactly generous, they did at least keep serving until around Wakefield.

cactustwirly · 29 Jan 2019

Arctic Troll said:
The 180 is a better unit for passengers, except Alstom built them out of cheese.

The 220/221/222 trains are fairly terrible from a passenger perspective, but at least they work.

The 222s are perfectly ok, they're only let down by the huge amount of first class, and lack of carriages.
The 22xs aren't too bad when they have enough carriages (ie 8 or 9)

philthetube · 30 Jan 2019

Railperf said:
The last blast i had aboard a 180 was from Reading to Paddington and then Paddington to Oxford. Acceleration seemed okay ..if not as sprightly as a 222. And it had all engines running too!! I do prefer the window layout and straight bodysides of the 180s compared to the tapered 22xs.
It does seem GC units seem slightly more reliable..but with spare units to cover breakdowns ...they still seem to be able to run a regular train service.

More spares also equates to more time for preventive maintenance.

Doctor Fegg · 30 Jan 2019

The GWR employees on this forum will no doubt be able to correct me, but my impression is that Old Oak Common had the 180s firmly under control during their second stay with FGW. Reliability seemed fine as a traveller on the Cotswold Line, where they mostly worked. Indeed, in at least one aspect I greatly preferred them to the 800s (6 bike spaces vs a ridiculous 2).

paulravuslante · 30 Jan 2019

Doctor Fegg said:
The GWR employees on this forum will no doubt be able to correct me, but my impression is that Old Oak Common had the 180s firmly under control during their second stay with FGW. Reliability seemed fine as a traveller on the Cotswold Line, where they mostly worked. Indeed, in at least one aspect I greatly preferred them to the 800s (6 bike spaces vs a ridiculous 2).

This would make sense as Old Oak Common maintained some of the Hull Trains units. I think at least one was sent from OOC to KGX and vice versa each day. HT reliability seemed good then. Now that all 180 maintenance is conducted elsewhere (since OOCs closure) the reliability has suffered. Couldn't First have ensured skills for maintaining the 180s from OOC were transitioned over to the location that they are now maintained at as a precaution?

Tetchytyke · 30 Jan 2019

cactustwirly said:
The 222s are perfectly ok, they're only let down by the huge amount of first class, and lack of carriages.

It's all personal taste but I find all of them to be claustrophobic because of the way the bodysides rake inwards. I understand why they rake in, but I don't like it. The 222s are slightly better but not by much.

Comparatively the 180s and 175s are really light and airy. Just a shame they don't work!

craigybagel · 31 Jan 2019

whhistle said:
I wonder what changed between the 170 and the 175/180 to make the latter so bad in terms of reliability.

The 170s seem to soldier on all over the place.

(Bangs head against wall) 175s are not unreliable!

I think they may however show the reason why the 180s haven't worked out so well. When the 175s were introduced, they were indeed something of a disaster - but they've spent their entire career based exclusively out of one maintenance depot (Chester) who over the years have been able to iron out most of the kinks, and by and large they give excellent service. All they need to be perfect is a long needed refurbishment to make then look less dated, and hopefully fix the Arctic inspired Aircon.

180s on the other hand have been passed around from TOC to TOC, maintenance depot to maintenance deptd, and some of them even spent time in storage. The result is a fleet that's never been properly fixed, and is still a nightmare to this day.

Welshman · 31 Jan 2019

How very much I agree with you.
The 175[0]/175[1] fleet is still, in my view, the most comfortable, and reliable of trains on the network at present. A good interior refurbishment, and they'd be good for many years to come.
I think its a great pity that TfW intends to replace them so prematurely.

humbersidejim · 31 Jan 2019

Welshman said:
How very much I agree with you.
The 175[0]/175[1] fleet is still, in my view, the most comfortable, and reliable of trains on the network at present. A good interior refurbishment, and they'd be good for many years to come.
I think its a great pity that TfW intends to replace them so prematurely.

AIUI, as with the 180s, it's likely that certain parts for what is a relatively small fleet are becoming increasingly difficult and expensive to source.

Perhaps it's also a case of the economics of new build being better over the long term.

BahrainLad · 31 Jan 2019

Grand Central have some of the highest customer satisfaction scores of any TOC, so the 180s can’t be too bad (although maybe it’s due to the - consistently friendly and excellent - staff they employ).

I am a pretty regular traveller to Halifax and in general, suffer far more from overhead wire issues or strikes cocking my plans up than I do from broken stock.

whhistle · 1 Feb 2019

craigybagel said:
(Bangs head against wall) 175s are not unreliable!

By your own admission though, they were when first introduced.
But good points in your post.

craigybagel · 1 Feb 2019

whhistle said:
By your own admission though, they were when first introduced.
But good points in your post.

True, I've just often seen then lumbered together as fleets that are unreliable, when they couldn't be much different in terms of reliability today. They're paths have gone in two very different directions, which does make you wonder if the 180s would be the same if they'd been kept at the same depot and mostly working the same routes for their entire career.

And incidentally, the 170s had a far from stellar introduction into service themselves (including the then entire fleet requiring their engines being replaced IIRC) but nobody considers them as being especially unreliable today.

TheWalrus · 1 Feb 2019

I always wonder if the 180s would be better on more local work or semi-fasts rather than Intercity, high-speed work? Or would this make things worse?

Should Grand Central replace their 180s?

Veteran Member

RailUK Forums

Member

Member

Veteran Member

Established Member

Veteran Member

Established Member

Established Member

Established Member

Established Member

Established Member

Established Member

Member

Established Member

Established Member

Member

Established Member

Member

Established Member

Established Member

Established Member

Member

Veteran Member

Established Member

Established Member

Member

Member

On Moderation

Established Member

Established Member