Autumn refresh for GWR Class 165/166 Turbos

[CR165022]

25/10

5Q70 165123
Realtime Trains - 500J 0940 Reading Traincare Depot to Wolverton Centre Sidings

5Q74 165122
Realtime Trains - 525J 1403 Wolverton Centre Sidings to Reading Traincare Depot

Has 122 had a refurb or was it just there for general maintenance?

 

[superalbs]

25/10

5Q70 165123
Realtime Trains - 500J 0940 Reading Traincare Depot to Wolverton Centre Sidings

5Q74 165122
Realtime Trains - 525J 1403 Wolverton Centre Sidings to Reading Traincare Depot

So that's it? Done? Seems a bit quick...

 

[chiltern trev]

Though there are challenges. The reason Chiltern have a mixed 2+2 and 3+2 layout in their 165s isn't an abortive First Class, it is because to do 2+2 throughout you have to move some above floor kit. Nothing is impossible but it would be costly.

When Chiltern planned a refurb about 15 years ago, Chiltern did a proper consultation. There were questions on seats, which types, 2+2, 2+3 and one unit had a long seat trial (1 month or maybe 3 months).

The passenger answer was a 50-50 split for 2-2 Vs 2+3 and that is why the carriage ends are 2+2 and the carriage centres are 2+3.

Edit - comments noted about stuff in the centre of the carriage not being good for 2+2. But passenger feedback was 50/50. Single commuters wanted 2+2. Families wanted 2+3.

 

[Pete_uk]

I could see 2+3 working at the unit ends. But that's just me

 

[jimm]

Yes they do and on the turbos the seats aren’t narrow due to the slightly wider loading gauge.

The seats were the same design (without armrests) that BR used on other rolling stock built in the late 80s and early 90s - eg Class 319s. The extra width in the Turbo bodyshells was used to make the aisles as wide as possible.

Resulting in the extra-wide aisle in the 2+2 section of the Class 166 centre cars, which is a yawning chasm compared with the 158s with 2+2 seats fitted with armrests built around the same time.

When Chiltern planned a refurb about 15 years ago, Chiltern did a proper consultation. There were questions on seats, which types, 2+2, 2+3 and one unit had a long seat trial (1 month or maybe 3 months).

The passenger answer was a 50-50 split for 2-2 Vs 2+3 and that is why the carriage ends are 2+2 and the carriage centres are 2+3.

Edit - comments noted about stuff in the centre of the carriage not being good for 2+2. But passenger feedback was 50/50. Single commuters wanted 2+2. Families wanted 2+3.

Sorry, but without some serious (and presumably seriously expensive) reengineering of the radiator header tank equipment under the seats, the 3+2 section had to stay, whatever passengers said in a survey. And no one at GWR, Chiltern or the leasing company ever seems to have wanted to foot the bill for that work.

 

[JonathanH]

The seats were the same design (without armrests) that BR used on other rolling stock built in the late 80s and early 90s - eg Class 319s. The extra width in the Turbo bodyshells was used to make the aisles as wide as possible.

Class 165 / 166 / 365 / 465 / 466 moved on from the 'Ashbourne' seat used in previous classes - eg 319s. The 165 etc seat pan is a single moulded unit that attaches both the seat bottom and the upright. The pan sits on the frame. The (deeper) seat squabb on the Ashbourne seat attaches directly to the frame with a separate moulded seat back.

 

[jimm]

Class 165 / 166 / 365 / 465 / 466 moved on from the 'Ashbourne' seat used in previous classes - eg 319s. The 165 etc seat pan is a single moulded unit that attaches both the seat bottom and the upright. The pan sits on the frame. The (deeper) seat squabb on the Ashbourne seat attaches directly to the frame with a separate moulded seat back.

Which is all fine and dandy, but made no difference to the actual width of the seats provided, which was the key point I was making.

 

[JonathanH]

Which is all fine and dandy, but made no difference to the actual width of the seats provided, which was the key point I was making.

Yes, writing width rather than design would have been accurate. Although I agree that there are similarities in the way the seats were fastened they are not the same 'design'.

 

[Mikey C]

The "Networker" seats to me are at a better height than the 319 era ones, which are mounted far too low down

 

[Wolfie]

The "Networker" seats to me are at a better height than the 319 era ones, which are mounted far too low down

Agreed. I used a Southerneastern one last night for the first time in a while and was pleasantly surprised. Slightly dated but immaculate.

 

[superalbs]

Pictures on the GW Modernisation Facebook group of 165122's interior:

Log in to Facebook

Log in to Facebook to start sharing and connecting with your friends, family and people you know.

www.facebook.com

As it's a private group, I will describe the changes. Basically, the same layout is retained, seemingly without First Class.

Everything looks clean, so for the first time in many years you will be able to travel on a GWR Turbo in good condition. It honestly looks pretty nice, definitely a lot better than the current state.

Let's hope the 166s have a more ambitious refurbishment.

 

[JonathanH]

Basically, the same layout is retained, seemingly without First Class.

The first class had already been removed on the 20 2-car 165s.

 

[TT-ONR-NRN]

Pictures on the GW Modernisation Facebook group of 165122's interior:

Log in to Facebook

Log in to Facebook to start sharing and connecting with your friends, family and people you know.

www.facebook.com

As it's a private group, I will describe the changes. Basically, the same layout is retained, seemingly without First Class.

Everything looks clean, so for the first time in many years you will be able to travel on a GWR Turbo in good condition. It honestly looks pretty nice, definitely a lot better than the current state.

Let's hope the 166s have a more ambitious refurbishment.

Are seat covers still FGW blue?

 

[superalbs]

Are seat covers still FGW blue?

Nope, same as on 166205 now.

 

[GeekyJamez]

Does anyone know if new seats are being fitted into the Class 166 units? Surely they've got to for the Portsmouth - Cardiff route

 

[Kite159]

Does anyone know if new seats are being fitted into the Class 166 units? Surely they've got to for the Portsmouth - Cardiff route

Hopefully with seat back tables to allow passengers to put hot drinks on [or use to rest a laptop/tablet against]


I wonder how long 165122 will remain in a clean condition, before someone travelling decides to rest their dirty wet feet on the seat opposite rather than on the floor

 

[JN114]

Does anyone know if new seats are being fitted into the Class 166 units? Surely they've got to for the Portsmouth - Cardiff route

Remains to be seen, but I won’t be holding my breath.

165122 hasn’t had any changes, just new flooring; a lick of paint and new seat covers. If that’s all the budget is stretching to on the 2 car fleet then I can’t see the money being spent on the 3 cars or the 166s.

It’s a shame as I know the company aspire to more; but are over a barrel with the DfT and funding, especially under these post-COVID new management contracts etc.

 

[Non Multi]

Hopefully with seat back tables to allow passengers to put hot drinks on [or use to rest a laptop/tablet against]

If only there was a fleet of Networkers going for scrap with seats with seat back tables that could be salvaged and swapped over...

 

[Ashley Hill]

The 1st class seats in turbos are very comfortable,I wonder if they would sell some?

 

[fgwrich]

If only there was a fleet of Networkers going for scrap with seats with seat back tables that could be salvaged and swapped over...

... If only there was a fleet of Mk3s going for scrap with decent, high quality Grammer seats which could or should have been re-used, creating an even nicer environment...

 

[jimm]

Yes, writing width rather than design would have been accurate. Although I agree that there are similarities in the way the seats were fastened they are not the same 'design'.

But to the casual observer/average passenger, not fussed about the minutiae of the structure of the seats, they look near enough identical and sure as heck were just the same dismal experience on a heavily-loaded peak service pre-Covid with people wedged into every seat, whichever type of unit you were on.

Does anyone know if new seats are being fitted into the Class 166 units? Surely they've got to for the Portsmouth - Cardiff route

There is list of the items of work being carried out in the current issue of Modern Railways which says nothing about replacing seats - just that seat shells and pedestals will be refreshed (inspected and repaired if necessary?) and repainted, and new seat covers will be fitted. The article says the first 166 will be worked on this month and the full Turbo fleet will take until 2023 to complete.

As JN114 says, the DfT has a bee in its bonnet about not reducing seat numbers (even if no one sits in the middle of a bench of 3 on a Turbo if they can help it) and has rebuffed any attempts to persuade them otherwise - even if it has not then insisted that the 707s get full 2+2 seating installed when switching to South Eastern, in order to boost their number of seats to something a bit closer to that on Networkers...

 

[fgwrich]

As JN114 says, the DfT has a bee in its bonnet about not reducing seat numbers (even if no one sits in the middle of a bench of 3 on a Turbo if they can help it) and has rebuffed any attempts to persuade them otherwise - even if it has not then insisted that the 707s get full 2+2 seating installed when switching to South Eastern, in order to boost their number of seats to something a bit closer to that on Networkers...

We shall have to wait and see if the department sticks to the status quo though - they might have loved the idea of keeping them 3+2 in a commuter focused pre pandemic railway, but in a leisure focused railway will they be so keen to maintain that stance or finally accept that interior changes are needed.

 

[JonathanH]

leisure focused railway

I'd imagine that the DfT's view of how to operate a leisure focused railway is equally that the number of seats on a given train should be maximised, particularly if there isn't money to spend on changing the seats (although the railway's continued lack of ability to recycle seats between train fleets really does need to change rather than just sending perfectly satisfactory seats for scrap).

 

[Energy]

We shall have to wait and see if the department sticks to the status quo though - they might have loved the idea of keeping them 3+2 in a commuter focused pre pandemic railway, but in a leisure focused railway will they be so keen to maintain that stance or finally accept that interior changes are needed.

Isn't their a technical reason to the 165s and 166s which requires 3+2 in the centre?

 

[Class172]

Isn't their a technical reason to the 165s and 166s which requires 3+2 in the centre?

Based off this post it would appear so:

Sorry, but without some serious (and presumably seriously expensive) reengineering of the radiator header tank equipment under the seats, the 3+2 section had to stay, whatever passengers said in a survey. And no one at GWR, Chiltern or the leasing company ever seems to have wanted to foot the bill for that work.

 

[REVUpminster]

I'll put a word in for 3+2 down here in Devon for the "metro" services. They have now been to all branches emanating from Exeter except east of Exmouth Junction siding unless someone knows different.

 

[HamworthyGoods]

I'll put a word in for 3+2 down here in Devon for the "metro" services. They have now been to all branches emanating from Exeter except east of Exmouth Junction siding unless someone knows different.

Once the 769s enter traffic in the Thames Valley and the cl165 3 car units head west these will be the units running Devon and Bristol Metro services with cl166s covering the longer runs to Worcester, Weymouth, Pompey etc.

 

[Bletchleyite]

We shall have to wait and see if the department sticks to the status quo though - they might have loved the idea of keeping them 3+2 in a commuter focused pre pandemic railway, but in a leisure focused railway will they be so keen to maintain that stance or finally accept that interior changes are needed.

3+2 isn't bad for leisure, families love the groups of 6, and you can fill it to 3 across before you are squashed against someone.

 

[Mitchell Hurd]

What about First Class on the 166's? I understand from seeing a picture that 166205 has leather seats in First Class but will both areas be declassified now?

 

[GeekyJamez]

3+2 isn't bad for leisure, families love the groups of 6, and you can fill it to 3 across before you are squashed against someone.

Not much good for those trying to work or with foot and drink to eat. At the very least new 2+2 seats should be fitted to the carriage ends - as Chiltern did