Better, surely, to keep the 156s and ditch as many 150s as possible? They're so much better from a passenger perspective. In comfort terms, I'm as happy with one of the refurbed 156s as I am with a 195.
-
Our booking engine at tickets.railforums.co.uk (powered by TrainSplit) helps support the running of the forum with every ticket purchase! Find out more and ask any questions/give us feedback in this thread!
Northern Class 195: Construction/Introduction Updates
- Thread starter Haydn1971
- Start date
- Status
Sponsor Post - registered members do not see these adverts; click here to register, or click here to log in
R
RailUK Forums
Why would the 156s be scrapped before the 150s, surely it'd be the other way round?
Grumpy Git
On Moderation
I sat in the last/back seat in the leading 195,002 unit with my back against the cab bulkhead, so I was directly over the trailing bogie. There was a lot of rattling going on under the floor and the ride over points was horrendous!
Southsider
Member
- Joined
- 10 Aug 2015
- Messages
- 759
The dwell times for 156s on the East Kilbride line are huge, I guess it’s the same on any commuter route they are used on owing to the end door configuration.
a_c_skinner
Established Member
- Joined
- 21 Jun 2013
- Messages
- 1,585
I've now had some more rides on the 195s. One had some very loud clunks/bangs but the others did not and were a deal better. I imagine the noisy ones need a measure of fettling of some sort.
Yes I’ve always thought 156s are nice units. With a full as new refurb they’d pass as a new for most punters. They ride very well.
156s do feel very very slow though and take ages to load with the end doors. That’s the thing with the 195s, very fast and they load and unload amazingly quickly, the wider gangways encourage standing pax to move down the aisles also.
a_c_skinner
Established Member
- Joined
- 21 Jun 2013
- Messages
- 1,585
Passengers get a move on in case the doors suddenly shut.
156s have direct replacements going off lease soon i.e. EMR 158s, TfW 158s and TfW 175s. While the 150s are of lower quality their doors at thirds make them more suitable for commuter services because of their lower dwell time. End door units could takeover some 150 routes but there are others e.g. through Manchester where it would be a terrible idea. Replacing 150s with 195s would be a big investment, which doesn't make sense while their is a much cheaper "phase 2" for improving Northern's fleet. Maybe additional 195s could be ordered by the next franchise.
Of course, but it isn't a given that Northern would be able to lease all of the 158s which are due to become available, because it's entirely possible GWR and/or SWR would want some as well. If Northern do lease any more 158s in the future, I'd say it's more likely they'll replace 150s before anything else.
If anything, I can see Northern's allocation of 156s increasing, rather than decreasing. I'd be very surprised if EMR's allocation ends up anywhere else.
Personally, I don't think the new franchise would be able to order more 195s. I just can't see the moulds and jigs for them being retained that long.
Sorry about this, but I'm afraid that last night's 2047 Manchester Airport - Liverpool Lime Street (which is on the same diagram as the 1150 journey) was formed of 195002+195007. Even a 4-car 195 is still a big train.
5-car 195s have operated on the peak journeys which are diagrammed for 6-car sets. They could operate on the diagram we are discussing, but they wouldn't be able to use P5 at Oxford Road. A 6-car set was used one day and it had to be put into P3.
Bletchleyite
Veteran Member
ScotRail have done exactly that, so go give one a go
The issues with 156s that make them seem dated is the engine noise (though I find the deep guttural grunt far less of an issue than the whiney noise of 158s) and the lack of aircon.
Bletchleyite
Veteran Member
What would make sense would be tarted-up 158s on Northern Connect (e.g. Windermere) and 195s on stopping services like the CLC, as the superior acceleration and door standbacks deal with overcrowding and EMU-style timetables with ease.
The imbalance is corrected by tagging a unit on to the rear of another. I'll amend the diagrams accordingly.
Don't quote me but I've heard rumours there is very little interest being shown in the EMR 156s. Northern would rather have 158s, ScotRail have enough and no one else operates them. One of the two ROSCOs at least is spending only the bare minimum on them.
People commenting on the impressive acceleration of class 195s should perhaps bear in mind that most services are currently being driven with the train in Superpower mode. However, the default operating mode is Eco which gives substantially slower acceleration than Superpower. The units always default to Eco mode on setting up the cab as this is the intended normal operating mode. Superpower mode has to be manually selected.
Once all the initial troubles are sorted out I suspect Northern will start looking at the fuel consumption figures and I wouldn't be at all surprised to find all three of the enhanced performance modes either being disabled or requiring special permission for their use.
Once all the initial troubles are sorted out I suspect Northern will start looking at the fuel consumption figures and I wouldn't be at all surprised to find all three of the enhanced performance modes either being disabled or requiring special permission for their use.
Killingworth
Established Member
Northern's problems are compounded when they are confronted with their eco targets to reduce diesel, electricity and water use. They are challenging in the extreme.
How do they significantly reduce diesel consumption when they're running more train miles with longer and heavier trains loaded with more equipment? Pacers may be more environmentally friendly than the new stock!
We haven't heard much about these targets, but they're giving those responsible for meeting them major headaches.
Grumpy Git
On Moderation
I must go to Specsavers.
EE Andy b1
Established Member
Just like a Class 390 Pendolino really, although electric. The cab setup default is the train in ECO mode (isolates a traction pack - 2 motors) but if needed the driver can select Boost mode with all motors working for better acceleration if running late, no special permissions required, at drivers discretion, but the norm to save energy is ECO mode.
Even Class 185s shut engines down for economy. So that will be the norm for 195s in the future.
Bletchleyite
Veteran Member
Replied here to go into that in more detail:
https://www.railforums.co.uk/thread...electricity-and-water-usage-reduction.195574/
EE Andy b1
Established Member
That another bad design fault then or sets unable to run on one or two engines only. I'm sure they have auto shutdown when stabled with no drivers key in desk.
Why were these not built as diesel electric traction as opposed to that self change auto gearbox? Costs perhaps!
Bletchleyite
Veteran Member
Why would you want to shut an engine down on a 195? They have smaller engines than 185s and so aren't overpowered. The engine shutdown thing on 185s is purely because they are overpowered.
EE Andy b1
Established Member
Not just because they are overpowered but for economy. 185s are an expensive thing to feed. ECO is a big thing now don't you know. Even 221s can shut engines down after set times in a sequence, not whilst on the mainline mind but when stabled, no drivers key.
That's my feeling. I doubt that there will be any more diesel-mechanical multiple units procured as they are a dead-end technology as far as pollution and CO2 production are concerned. With the 331s being almost identical in terms of dimensions and roles (excepting that the 331s need OLE of course), the bodies and bogies from the 331s could easily form part of a flexible multi configuration (DEMU, BEMU, EDMU & EMU) design with opportunities to reconfigure them when the routes themselves change. The 769 programme, although it has had issues, has shown that a common body/bogie design could be adapted for these type of changing roles.
EE Andy b1
Established Member
Because they are overpowered.
So if they had gone for 750 hp diesel engines like most modern Classes of diesel unit, 180, 185, 220, 221, 222, 755?!, 800 they could have an engine shut down to save fuel and not worry about being under powered like the Class 195 with 523 hp.
Bletchleyite
Veteran Member
So if they had gone for 750 hp diesel engines like most modern Classes of diesel unit, 180, 185, 220, 221, 222, 755?!, 800 they could have an engine shut down to save fuel and not worry about being under powered like the Class 195 with 523 hp.
The Class 195 is not under or overpowered, it's spot on.
Given that the 185 is extraordinarily heavy, is the bhp/tonne much different from the 195?
I agree about the strange choice of a mechanical gearbox (as well as the lack of through gangways)
The latter is remedied in the 196 series, but will they still have a mechanical gearbox?
I agree about the strange choice of a mechanical gearbox (as well as the lack of through gangways)
The latter is remedied in the 196 series, but will they still have a mechanical gearbox?
that’ s a good question, but it’s still not a myth that the 185 are comfortably powered, as they were designed to cope with the hills of the TPE network.
EE Andy b1
Established Member
I know they are, I've now been on plenty, both 2 and 3 cars as singles and multiples, that's why i was laughing.
Just an out of date transmission and no ECO mode for the next 30 years until converted to some other power type if possible in the future.
I also think the 195s are on some of the wrong services, stoppers would be more suitable, ECO would not matter as much neither.
Yes and as mentioned by @InOban and others in the past, why no through gangways. I would order some 196s if i was Northern.
- Status