superkev
Established Member
Yes but how may they got in store and theres the remaining pacers.
K
-
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
K
Sponsor Post - registered members do not see these adverts; click here to register, or click here to log in
R
RailUK Forums
Why would Northern have units at Edge Hill on a Saturday, particularly? Edge Hill isn't an operational depot, not for Northern.
themiller
Member
If at Edge Hill, they’re probably there for commissioning. If at other locations, there may be no trained crew available.
Everybody said ordering 2 car units was ridiculous years ago when they were announced, and now it’s coming to fruition. It’s a great way to take the shine off brand new trains.
I’m hoping as part of the governments attempt to hold onto their newly gained northern seats, they might announce additional carriages to increase the 2 cars to 4 cars.
ohgoditsjames
Member
By the time we get 4 cars we’ll need 5 or 6. 
J-2739
Established Member
I can confirm that they do operate coupled sets of 195s on the Nottinghams, of which I'm currently on.
First time I've also noticed the door problems on these units, but we all used the next door along, without a big commotion.
Northern have already said additional carriages are a possibility but dependent on growing passenger numbers. I'm not overly worried - getting rid of the Pacers was the major stumbling block. The problem with the 195/331s having used them from day one is that more people have started to travel on them on the routes that they serve rather than an alternative route/service which has older units. Victim of their own success in a sense.
Arty Morgan
Member
PIS can announce wrong stations when request stops are bypassed. System normally resets once doors have been released once more.
a_c_skinner
Established Member
- Joined
- 21 Jun 2013
- Messages
- 1,585
Serious question, cannot it tell where it is from GPS?
Arty Morgan
Member
I would have thought so too but seemingly not. Disappointing...
The PIS does work from GPS, when it's first set up it knows where it is, eg if you were to set up a Chester-Leeds at say Helsby it knows you're at Helsby and makes announcements accordingly.
Re-releasing the doors at a station does tend to cause it to then announce the following station but that's usually rectified by the time you get to that next station by a positive GPS signal en-route.
Re-releasing the doors at a station does tend to cause it to then announce the following station but that's usually rectified by the time you get to that next station by a positive GPS signal en-route.
a_c_skinner
Established Member
- Joined
- 21 Jun 2013
- Messages
- 1,585
Thanks. I don't understand why the GPS input doesn't make it pretty much foolproof. After all my iPhone (iPad, car GPS, van GPS in fact all of them) gets my place and direction of travel pretty much spot on nearly all the time.
My guess would be that it’s just a poor software implementation. Rather than relying on the GPS it seems to be counting the number of times the doors have been opened then thinking “the GPS says I’m still at Helsby but the doors have opened again so I must be at frodsham”. There seem to have been a lot of poor decisions made in the logic of the software on these trains which unfortunately appears to be a worrying trend in all types of vehicles at the moment.
Your phone and your tablet use a lot of other information to check/supplement what they get from GPS. If they didn't, accuracy would be a fraction of what you're used to.
As for van/car GPS, massive investment has gone into that technology over many years. I don't have any direct knowledge, but I doubt that the CAF GPS system on their trains is anything like as sophisticated or refined purely because it's not had the time/money ploughed into it (nor, I think, will it ever have due to the limited market and increasing desire to reduce reliance on GPS).
If only they had a system where a member of staff looked out of a window, knew where they was and where they was going and made the relevant announcement.
The member of staff could also be in control of the door releases too.
Incidentally does a manual SDO exist anywhere - I'm thinking a system where the guard punches in how many doors to open as opposed to locking doors out?
The member of staff could also be in control of the door releases too.
Incidentally does a manual SDO exist anywhere - I'm thinking a system where the guard punches in how many doors to open as opposed to locking doors out?
a_c_skinner
Established Member
- Joined
- 21 Jun 2013
- Messages
- 1,585
All the GPS devices I use get a fix without anything more than the GPS and GLONASS signals. It is quicker with mobile phone triangulation and wifi but once with a fix it remains good (except on Voyagers). It seems to me that it is simply a bad implementation of what should be a simple if protracted programming task.
darylyates17
Member
How many 195s are yet to be delivered to Northern as of now?
SDO exists whereby a guard can only open doors forward (or rear) of the door control panel they are stood at.
Bletchleyite
Veteran Member
UDS (Unit Deselect) is the most basic form, the WCML 350s have it. It can only be done (I think) from the front cab of the unit behind the ones you want to release. So you can release 4, 8 or 12 cars depending where you do it from. Done from a local panel on a passenger door you always release all of them.
craigybagel
Established Member
- Joined
- 25 Oct 2012
- Messages
- 5,081
Correct. At one point the 450s on SWT (before they had a more modern system fitted) had a strange situation where there was a station they called it that had a platform that was 8 cars long exactly. If the train was 8 cars the guard could release all 8 cars, but if the train was 12 cars the guard could only release the front 4 - because they'd need to work the doors from the cab of the 9th car to operate UDS and they wouldn't be able to step onto a platform there.
175s have a similar system where you can lock out the doors on an entire unit with just one switch, but in that case the switch is activated in cab of the last car of the train that is being kept open, rather then the front cab of the unit being kept closed.
They aren't really. Some/many Liverpool to Manchester Airport services have gone from being pairs of 156's to one 195/0. Farce.
childwallblues
Established Member
Totally agree with you. I was on 195007 a few weeks ago and passengers were standing before the train left Lime Street.
I agree (and have travelled on single 195/0s on this route). However it is clearly not booked that way (other than early morning / late evening) and I hope that once more 195/0s are available the 2x195/0 working is a bit more reliable and the single 195/1 working might also be a pair of 195/0s.
Part of the problem of course is the arrangements at Manchester Airport and the need to double platform trains there which constrains train lengths on a number of different routes.
a_c_skinner
Established Member
- Joined
- 21 Jun 2013
- Messages
- 1,585
Do I understand correctly that means leaving a set parked there with another set using the rest of the platform? There must be a solution to that surely? The services across a swathe of the North are hamstrung by limits to train length.
Xenophon PCDGS
Veteran Member
The area of any future Manchester Airport heavy-rail station expansion-wise at present is limited (by being situated in a cutting) with on one side by the currently terminal Manchester Metrolink platforms which already have been earmarked for future onwards tunnel extension and the hotel land and airport roads area on the other side.
There's no easy solution, no. Physical constants at the airport mean it's close to impossible to expand the station. The only other option is to run fewer trains to the airport which is all well and good, but there's precious little capacity to terminate them elsewhere either.
Xenophon PCDGS
Veteran Member
I think that those operating Manchester Airport would not be too happy at having fewer trains to what is a British top-three airport. There are already vast amounts of adjacent land to the airport that are covered with airport car parking facilities.
a_c_skinner
Established Member
- Joined
- 21 Jun 2013
- Messages
- 1,585
Surely it is not beyond the wit of man to keep the trains moving earning money rather than parked? Airlines seem to manage to always have their assets in the air earning money. It is always tempting to take something that is difficult and file it under "too difficult".
It was tried, though, in the May 2018 timetable. TPE shortened the turnarounds at the airport, partly for this reason. It failed spectacularly because the recovery time at the airport is badly needed.
There's other threads for detailed discussion about the airport, but the point for here is that 2 or 3 car trains are actually needed for a lot of the airport services because there's just no room for anything longer.
- Status