JakeMurphy
Established Member
- Joined
- 30 Aug 2018
- Messages
- 1,222
I’ve just seen 197101 at Chester on 5D99, possible comeback soon
-
Our new ticketing site is now live! Using either this or the original site (both 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!
CAF class 197 Civity for TfW: News and updates on introduction.
- Thread starter hexagon789
- Start date
Sponsor Post - registered members do not see these adverts; click here to register, or click here to log in
R
RailUK Forums
BillStampy
Member
Oh good! I'll be honest, I forgot the unit existed!
It's unlikely just yet. It's likely heading back to Crewe ETD.
Jacob Porrett
Established Member
Thank you.
tfw756rider
Member
Yes, this was first done in July 2024 when a 197 test train ran in broad daylight through Machynlleth while a normal 158 passenger train was doing its same old.
BenBracken
Member
Is there any data out there on how reliable 197s have been and how many delays and cancellations there have been due to train faults? Anecdotal evidence from myself and quite a lot of people I know that have been travelling on them in west Wales is that they seem to be pretty unreliable and a quote from a guard and driver was having a 197 without a fault with the toilet or the whole unit needing a reset was ‘like winning the lottery’. Is this actually the case or have myself and everyone I’ve spoken to had bad luck?! Have any fixes been found yet?
The latest issue of Modern Railways seems to suggest that the Miles per 701d figure over the last period is 10,106, with a moving annual average of 5,668. 10,106 is an acceptable figure, not great but certainly not the worst.
LNW-GW Joint
Veteran Member
The monthly reliability figures for new train fleets quoted in Modern Railways show 197s at a "Mp701D MAA" of 5668 (miles).
This is above the figures for TfW's 231 and 756 fleets (4894 and 1303 respectively), but below WMT's 196 fleet (6769) and well below Northern's 2-car 195/0s (9764).
On the other hand, Northern's 3-car 195/1s have a very similar figure to TfW's 197s (both 2 and 3 car) of 5270.
You'll have to read MR to comprehend the calculations, but they represent average miles between failures, on a moving 12-month basis.
Topological
Established Member
It would also be interesting to compare the 197s with the Mk4.
I have had one issue with a 197 and probably 5 with Mk4s. I make more journeys on 197s than Mk4s, but recently I have been taking the 18:30 from Manchester which is Mk4. I do not know how representative that is without the Mk4 figure.
I did try using Google for a comparison but nothing.
I have had one issue with a 197 and probably 5 with Mk4s. I make more journeys on 197s than Mk4s, but recently I have been taking the 18:30 from Manchester which is Mk4. I do not know how representative that is without the Mk4 figure.
I did try using Google for a comparison but nothing.
MP393
Member
The 197s tend to have more faults than failures, but manage to keep going. They have endless toilet issues, engines isolated, low on power etc, but they’ll keep moving so probably go unnoticed in stats, they won’t even loose time on two engines instead of 3 at times, so you could well of been on a faulty one and not really noticed, whereas when a Mk4 goes wrong they tend to go very wrong and have more full blown high profile failures which need rescuing.
Topological
Established Member
Quite probably.
I think passengers are probably more forgiving when the faults do not cause their train to be cancelled. Certainly, the relevant statistic for me is whether the train got me to where I wanted to be on time.
The ability to keep to time with fewer engines working is one of the reasons I grew to like multiple units over hauled stock.
Though those figures are unlikely to include units running around with toilets out of use and certainly won't count the number of occasions that the guard has to reset the toilet or otherwise tinker with it to keep it in service.
No other class of unit has ever given me so much toilet trouble.
william.martin
On Moderation
It's very much the same on the sister class 196 units, 196107 and 196113 were both running with toilets locked out of use last week.
BenBracken
Member
Would a service cancelled west of Carmarthen due to a toilet not working be counted as a failure?
Yes it would.
If it got cancelled, yes.
Those which lose time while the train waits at staffed stations for passengers to use the facilities there, probably not.
Those which the guard ends up tinkering with every five minutes in a vain attempt to keep things in service, definitely not.
BenBracken
Member
I’ll admit I had to Google search Miles per 701d I saw some figures from 2021 which showed that Pacers had a better record than 197s, which is kinda embarrassing. Has there been no attempt by TfW to get some CAF engineers flown in to sort these issues?
Never understood why trains need to have automatic doors for toilets. Always seemed needlessly complicated when a sliding door with a latch would do the job. Unless you’re talking about issues with the toilets themselves not flushing and such?
MP393
Member
A lot of the times it’s the door which requires the reset. The slightest touch/manual pull on the automatic door when sliding will cause it to freeze and/or lock itself out. The smaller, non PRM toilets require far less resets and attention from the guard. There are of course occasions where they’ll get full & blocked as per any other traction but it’s by far and away the sliding door which causes headaches
Anonymous10
Established Member
The automatic doors on the 197s are only for the accessible loo, much easier for those in wheelchairs and such who may not ba able to pull a normal door, hold it open and close it.
Would / could manual doors comply with accessibility requirements? That said, I've never seen an accessible toilet in a building with anything other than a manual door.
Tunnel Bore
Member
- Joined
- 28 Feb 2016
- Messages
- 50
It's a classic bathtub curve for failure rates and you're comparing the initial period with the mid-life or near end-of-life.
They must do because I've used Swiss and Austrian trains where the accessibility requirements derive from the same EU directive, yet the UAT door is slid open manually.
But there's no reason that a powered door can't work, I seldom had issues with any other class of unit.
Peter Sarf
Established Member
I agree TfW would be more likely to go for avoiding a big bang (overnight) switchover of all 158s to all 197s. Thats unless they have to.
This would indicate that the 158s and 197s can share the same route so a big bang would be unnecessary.
Caveat - It might be that the 197 was running on an older version of ETCS/ERTMS than it is meant to. But that does not mean the fleet roll out could not be done the same way. Then at a later date an overnight software upgrade for the route and 197s when everything else is bedded in. Maybe ?.
FrodshamJnct
Established Member
I would imagine all modern office developments have automatic doors for accessible toilets. My office certainly does and many others I’ve been in.
Interesting. Mine doesn't and it was only fitted out last year. Maybe it's a nice to have not a must have.
tfw756rider
Member
I heard that the railway was updated to a new software version, and then the 158s and 197s were found to both work on it "alongside" each other (don't quote me on this).
Peter Sarf
Established Member
That is good. Would make sense as the only catch I can see is if the hardware on the 158s cannot cope with the newest version but it is not a hardware hungry graphics hungry computer game is it !.
But that then means the question is why are TfW holding back ?.
I suppose that answer could be that they do not feel the 197s are reliable in large enough numbers yet ?.
Thats enough conjecture without answers.
I assume you'd have to eliminate most/all portion-working, which they'd be loathe to do? It looks like the 158 diagrams are mostly attaching and detaching throughout the day.
Peter Sarf
Established Member
Thats true. Forgot that. TfW would really need all the 197s that should be available to be available and that includes 197s borrowed to cover other units (in South Wales). Which of course brings us back to big bank switch over.