195s truly awful, not a step forward

[Bletchleyite]

Northern is currently one of the fastest growing parts of the railway

This is unsurprising, as demand has been hugely suppressed by just how awful the North's train services have been for a very long time.

 

[507020]

Why are there so many trying to justify the ride quality of the 195s/331s as them being better than Pacers that have delivered 35+ years of service. They should be compared against their peers, i.e. equivalent designs from Siemens and Bombardier which run all over UK metals without the CAF 'shake, rattle and roll'. If BR could design acceptable bogies in the 'late eighties, why can't CAF even do as well in the 20 teens? This apologist argument saying that they are at least better than Pacers shows either a lack of ambition or no experience of anything better.

But Northern have not got nor have they ever had any Siemens or Bombardier stock. The CAF units therefore do not representing a downgrade over any comfortable modern stock, only ex-BR stock, with the 15x fleet sadly having a limited remaining lifespan. Happily though the uncrashworthy, inaccessible 14x fleet has now been belatedly withdrawn and new stock ordered which is vastly superior, including from a ride quality perspective. That they aren’t actually actually much good when compared to other modern stock, particularly the most innovative FLIRTs, isn’t the point at all when the baseline was Pacers.

We all know exactly why BREL in the late 80s/early 90s was able to build almost the perfect bogie for its own network, drawing on over 150 years of experience dating back to 1830 with all the unique challenges posed by the infrastructure in this country and why it is inappropriate to compare this to the introduction of a first generation CAF product, from a place with no conventional standard gauge track! However any bogies at all must be an improvement over a 4 wheeled underframe with a fixed wheelbase so this is what I draw comparison on.

 

[Neptune]

But Northern have not got nor have they ever had any Siemens or Bombardier stock.

Except for the 333’s and 170’s of course.

 

[507020]

Except for the 333’s and 170’s of course.

I did forget about the 170s and I have never been on one. They are also unsuitable for their role unless regeared for lower speed operation. The 333s were also made by CAF. On the west side, my statement is still true.

 

[AM9]

But Northern have not got nor have they ever had any Siemens or Bombardier stock. The CAF units therefore do not representing a downgrade over any comfortable modern stock, only ex-BR stock, with the 15x fleet sadly having a limited remaining lifespan. Happily though the uncrashworthy, inaccessible 14x fleet has now been belatedly withdrawn and new stock ordered which is vastly superior, including from a ride quality perspective. That they aren’t actually actually much good when compared to other modern stock, particularly the most innovative FLIRTs, isn’t the point at all when the baseline was Pacers.

This is RUK and I would expect comparisons to be made by people who at least sometimes venture beyong the single line that serves them. Services in the Northern area have had Siemens Desiros (TPE class 350/4) and Bombardier classes including 170, 220 & 221. I have travelled on Northern class 142, 150, 156, 195, 323 & 331, none of which go anywhere near London.

We all know exactly why BREL in the late 80s/early 90s was able to build almost the perfect bogie for its own network, drawing on over 150 years of experience dating back to 1830 with all the unique challenges posed by the infrastructure in this country and why it is inappropriate to compare this to the introduction of a first generation CAF product, from a place with no conventional standard gauge track! However any bogies at all must be an improvement over a 4 wheeled underframe with a fixed wheelbase so this is what I draw comparison on.

CAF have been supplying standard gauge rolling stock to many countries for many years since they expanded their business in 1958. That includes the UK (class 332 & 333) and NI railways (I really don't think a bogie that runs on 5ft 3in gauge is a totally different design task to 4ft 8 1/2 in requirements. It's not as if most of the GB track is 60ft jointed bullhead on wooden sleepers now. So, lining a new train with a 35+ year old train is largely irrelevant as a valued comprison, except to say that the newer trains should be much more robust and reliable.

 

[skyhigh]

I did forget about the 170s and I have never been on one. They are also unsuitable for their role unless regeared for lower speed operation.

In your opinion! Suitable or not they are Bombardier stock that's in use with Northern.

The 333s were also made by CAF.

The order for the 333s was placed with Siemens, they subcontracted bodywork to CAF but were responsible for the traction equipment and TMS themselves.

 

[43096]

I did forget about the 170s and I have never been on one. They are also unsuitable for their role unless regeared for lower speed operation. The 333s were also made by CAF. On the west side, my statement is still true.

The assembly of the 333s was sub-contracted to CAF by Siemens. It was Siemens who won the contract and it’s Siemens who support the maintenance at Neville Hill.

 

[Neptune]

I did forget about the 170s and I have never been on one. They are also unsuitable for their role unless regeared for lower speed operation.

Yet more RF BS Bingo. The 170’s are 100% suitable for Scarborough to Sheffield which everyone loves to ignore because of the Harrogate line (by the way if it was such a problem and they were constantly dying and needing works attention as seems to be the perception why would they still be running on there).

The 333s were also made by CAF. On the west side, my statement is still true.

Siemens equipment, Siemens maintenance, built by CAF. Still superb solid units after 21 years.

 

[Blindtraveler]

Scarborough to Hull is a very good home for a 170, and this said by someone who spends an awful lot of his time moaning about 1 70s. The Harrogate line is not what I would call appropriate for them and and certainly in the past the evidence has been there to prove my point but what reliability is like now I don't know



How do 195 cope on that route


I must admit though I agree with the original poster of this thread that the 195 are awful and a retrograde step

 

[skyhigh]

The Harrogate line is not what I would call appropriate for them and and certainly in the past the evidence has been there to prove my point but what reliability is like now I don't know

170 reliability is perfectly fine on the Harrogate line.

 

[Watershed]

But Northern have not got nor have they ever had any Siemens or Bombardier stock. The CAF units therefore do not representing a downgrade over any comfortable modern stock, only ex-BR stock, with the 15x fleet sadly having a limited remaining lifespan. Happily though the uncrashworthy, inaccessible 14x fleet has now been belatedly withdrawn and new stock ordered which is vastly superior, including from a ride quality perspective. That they aren’t actually actually much good when compared to other modern stock, particularly the most innovative FLIRTs, isn’t the point at all when the baseline was Pacers.

It should go without saying that a new train must be better than what it replaces. New trains don't deserve praise for meeting that low bar.

Instead, they should be compared to what the alternative options from other manufacturers would have been. And in this case, that comparison ends up rather unfavourable for the 195s.

If you were replacing a 35 year old Mini Metro, you wouldn't praise a Dacia Sandero for having airbags and power steering. You'd judge it based on how it compared in terms of ride quality, safety, cost of running etc. to a Kia Picanto or Skoda Citigo. And again, here the comparison is unfavourable.

We all know exactly why BREL in the late 80s/early 90s was able to build almost the perfect bogie for its own network, drawing on over 150 years of experience dating back to 1830 with all the unique challenges posed by the infrastructure in this country and why it is inappropriate to compare this to the introduction of a first generation CAF product, from a place with no conventional standard gauge track! However any bogies at all must be an improvement over a 4 wheeled underframe with a fixed wheelbase so this is what I draw comparison on.

I don't think it is really a matter of 150 years' experience - just about the only commonality between Stephenson's Rocket in 1830 and a 195 in 2020 is that they both run on rails. Nor has the gauge particularly got anything to do with it, as that doesn't alter the fundamental design characteristics.

Ultimately this is about (Arriva) Northern not giving enough of a toss to put in place detailed contract specifications for ride quality, and simply accepting the dross that CAF produced rather than rejecting it or putting in a variation request for improved ride quality. It's not really feasible for (DfT) Northern to do anything about it now, even for follow-on orders, as they are hardly going to go with another product from another manufacturer and start a whole new wave of traction training...

 

[Train Maniac]

So i tried out the new 195's between Machester Picc and Liverpool Lime St today, and i must say, im not entirely convinced on what all the fuss on here is about. While yes, the bogies could do with some fine tuning, you need to be specifically looking out for it to notice it. I think tey are an overall improvement over the Sprinters and Pacers they are replacing (the seats and windows match up for a start!)

 

[Bletchleyite]

So i tried out the new 195's between Machester Picc and Liverpool Lime St today, and i must say, im not entirely convinced on what all the fuss on here is about. While yes, the bogies could do with some fine tuning, you need to be specifically looking out for it to notice it. I think tey are an overall improvement over the Sprinters and Pacers they are replacing (the seats and windows match up for a start!)

Umm, only the end sections. They don't in the middle section.

 

[AM9]

So i tried out the new 195's between Machester Picc and Liverpool Lime St today, and i must say, im not entirely convinced on what all the fuss on here is about. While yes, the bogies could do with some fine tuning, you need to be specifically looking out for it to notice it. I think tey are an overall improvement over the Sprinters and Pacers they are replacing (the seats and windows match up for a start!)

But they should be, they were designed 30+ years later, - even good suspension existed before 1980.

 

[Shaw S Hunter]

So i tried out the new 195's between Machester Picc and Liverpool Lime St today, and i must say, im not entirely convinced on what all the fuss on here is about. While yes, the bogies could do with some fine tuning, you need to be specifically looking out for it to notice it. I think tey are an overall improvement over the Sprinters and Pacers they are replacing (the seats and windows match up for a start!)

Totally agree! Have had a few trips on 195s now and while ride quality is not the absolute best it's perfectly acceptable. I suspect the issue many have is the amount of noise made by the wheelsets and suspension when traversing points and crossings or otherwise uneven sections of track. So if you board one expecting ride issues you will be predisposed to noticing every little disturbance. Switch that off and you find yourself on just another train. I even dozed off on one the other day. I'm much more bothered having journeys disrupted by ailing 150s running late.

 

[js1000]

So i tried out the new 195's between Machester Picc and Liverpool Lime St today, and i must say, im not entirely convinced on what all the fuss on here is about. While yes, the bogies could do with some fine tuning, you need to be specifically looking out for it to notice it. I think tey are an overall improvement over the Sprinters and Pacers they are replacing (the seats and windows match up for a start!)

Only some on here long for Pacers and Sprinters. They are not representative of the population. If you ask the ordinary punter in the street they would take 195/331s all day long. I accept the ride quality is not great but in terms of comfort, noise and grottiness there is no comparison.

 

[Bletchleyite]

Only some on here long for Pacers and Sprinters. They are not representative of the population. If you ask the ordinary punter in the street they would take 195/331s all day long. I accept the ride quality is not great but in terms of comfort, noise and grottiness there is no comparison.

I don't think there's really anyone who would say a 195 isn't better than a Sprinter or a Pacer. I think what people are disappointed about is that they're not as good as they could be compared with a decent modernish unit like a 170, 175 or the better brand new ones like the FLIRTs.

I'll admit they are growing on me somewhat, to be honest. Maybe now I've accepted they aren't quite as spectacularly good as a FLIRT or a 350 or 185 I'm starting to like them for what they are - which is a transformation of a network which has had nothing but old cast-offs for the last 30 odd years. And there's the capacity too - in the 1990s the idea of six-car formations on Peak District stopping services was fantasy land.

 

[L+Y]

Just one to throw in on this topic, from a couple of non-enthusiast friends, one from the US. They travelled from Piccadilly to Wigan North Western by 195, and described it as "the nicest British train we've ever been on". Indeed, they were so impressed they made a point of talking to me about it!

 

[D6130]

Just one to throw in on this topic, from a couple of non-enthusiast friends, one from the US. They travelled from Piccadilly to Wigan North Western by 195, and described it as "the nicest British train we've ever been on". Indeed, they were so impressed they made a point of talking to me about it!

One of our neighbour's sister, who lives in North London, came up to visit her over the Easter weekend....and told me that she really liked the new trains (Class 1950) on the Calderdale Line.

 

[Bletchleyite]

Just one to throw in on this topic, from a couple of non-enthusiast friends, one from the US. They travelled from Piccadilly to Wigan North Western by 195, and described it as "the nicest British train we've ever been on". Indeed, they were so impressed they made a point of talking to me about it!

I've certainly heard "this is nicer than the train from London" from someone boarding one at Lancaster having got off the Pendolino. "Normal" passengers don't notice a lot of things, but I think they do notice big windows and tables.

The thing I particularly like about them is the massive overheads, so any luggage can always go above my seat.

 

[Phlip]

I did forget about the 170s and I have never been on one. They are also unsuitable for their role unless regeared for lower speed operation. The 333s were also made by CAF. On the west side, my statement is still true.

Unsuitable for their role on Scarborough - Hull - Sheffield fast service? Rubbish - they're prefect.

I made this point before. People carry on as if 170s are isolated to the Harrogate loop. They're not.

 

[Neptune]

Unsuitable for their role on Scarborough - Hull - Sheffield fast service? Rubbish - they're prefect.

I made this point before. People carry on as if 170s are isolated to the Harrogate loop. They're not.

Don’t worry, as usual a few of us will prompt the naysayers into remembering that they do work suitable services (and that if they were suffering so badly on the Harrogate line that they’d all be in works every other month).

Then it’ll go quiet on the subject for a month or so and then somebody will trot out the old ‘unsuitable for the services they operate’ line.

Sleep, eat, repeat!!

 

[matacaster]

Went on a 195 today Bradford to Leeds. Been a while since I've been on one. The acceleration coming out of Bradford towards pudsey was impressive. The air conditioning worked well. Whilst I am sure a few improvements could be made (like making nearly all sets 3-car), they are a great improvement on 14x's and a considerable improvement on 150's which I truly hate.

 

[John Luxton]

Just one to throw in on this topic, from a couple of non-enthusiast friends, one from the US. They travelled from Piccadilly to Wigan North Western by 195, and described it as "the nicest British train we've ever been on". Indeed, they were so impressed they made a point of talking to me about it!

I did my first ever 195 trip last week from Oxford Road to Liverpool LS. I thought they were a breath of fresh air over the 150 I had travelled to Manchester on earlier in the day.

Appears to be some concern about about toilet provision but in a 1 hour trip how many people need to use the train toilet? If I am travelling be train I tend to prefer to use the station toilets before or after a journey.

 

[yorksrob]

I did my first ever 195 trip last week from Oxford Road to Liverpool LS. I thought they were a breath of fresh air over the 150 I had travelled to Manchester on earlier in the day.

Appears to be some concern about about toilet provision but in a 1 hour trip how many people need to use the train toilet? If I am travelling be train I tend to prefer to use the station toilets before or after a journey.

Clearly enough people that the tank gets full before the end of service. That's the key issue.

One thing that could be altered quickly would be to cease draining sink water into the tank to save space.

 

[Killingworth]

I did my first ever 195 trip last week from Oxford Road to Liverpool LS. I thought they were a breath of fresh air over the 150 I had travelled to Manchester on earlier in the day.

Appears to be some concern about about toilet provision but in a 1 hour trip how many people need to use the train toilet? If I am travelling be train I tend to prefer to use the station toilets before or after a journey.

How many Northern stations have toilets? 10% at most.

A few years ago I travelled the short hop from Banetby to Matket Rasen on an EMR 153. It wasn't even half full yet there were people using the toilet throughout, all from different parts of the train and all ages.

Part of the problem with train toilets is that they don't flush enough first time so often need another two or three goes, sometimes on entering the cubicle before use!

 

[yorksrob]

Just got on a 195 now.

Needless to say, the illuminated w/c out of use sign is on.

Not good enough really.

I dread 195's on last evening services. Christ alone knows why Northern insist on putting them on them.

 

[Halish Railway]

Clearly enough people that the tank gets full before the end of service. That's the key issue.

One thing that could be altered quickly would be to cease draining sink water into the tank to save space.

I remember being at York and wanting to use a Blackpool North service to get to Leeds. It arrived but then had to go to Holgate Yard to empty the cess tank. It went there and back into a different platform as the original one was then occupied by another service. In the end it departed about 20 minutes late and skipped Church Fenton to make up time.

We couldn’t use another train as my father had to travel on a Northern service as he wanted to use a voucher as part of a delay repay scheme and he had a bike - All other operators on the route make you reserve a bike space, Northern’s policy allowing much more flexibility.

Worryingly this was only at about 4 or 5 in the afternoon.

 

[John Luxton]

I must admit I had not considered the implications of the retention tank reaching capacity and the toilet not being available.

I have no understanding of sanitary engineering but could some kind of filter be fitted to allow the fluids to be discharged at certain designated remote locations enroute whilst the solids were retained to the depot?

One would imagine the fluid would be well diluted with flush and basin water anyway and would pose little harm to track workers.

 

[yorksrob]

I must admit I had not considered the implications of the retention tank reaching capacity and the toilet not being available.

I have no understanding of sanitary engineering but could some kind of filter be fitted to allow the fluids to be discharged at certain designated remote locations enroute whilst the solids were retained to the depot?

One would imagine the fluid would be well diluted with flush and basin water anyway and would pose little harm to track workers.

If you were to design such a system, one would presumably have a drain or sluice at the designated location.