• 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!

CAF Civity for TfW: News and updates on introduction.

hexagon789

Veteran Member
Joined
2 Sep 2016
Messages
15,713
Location
Glasgow
The complication I foresee is the need for it to be connected a balise under the leading cab. Still doable, but not as straightforward as the portable RETB units.

Unless you fitted everything with the balise but not the physical ECTS equipment.
 
Sponsor Post - registered members do not see these adverts; click here to register, or click here to log in
R

RailUK Forums

hexagon789

Veteran Member
Joined
2 Sep 2016
Messages
15,713
Location
Glasgow
Or just fit enough units for a theoretical 6-car operation all day, then you can move them in when it gets busy and rejig the others.

That would probably be easier and more workable. The present set-up, like so much of today's railway, seems too inflexible. It's fine when everything is going well but when there's a hiccough or you need more capacity or whatever this lack of inflexibility is just painful really because they had the ability to plan for such eventualities but didn't.
 

Bletchleyite

Veteran Member
Joined
20 Oct 2014
Messages
97,530
Location
"Marston Vale mafia"
That would probably be easier and more workable. The present set-up, like so much of today's railway, seems too inflexible. It's fine when everything is going well but when there's a hiccough or you need more capacity or whatever this lack of inflexibility is just painful really because they had the ability to plan for such eventualities but didn't.

Indeed. To me the main use-case for this is the summer holidays. A 2-car unit will have less capacity than 2.158, and that is presently inadequate in mid August, while more commuter style services will be quieter. So a rejig to allow 4 to Aber and 2 to Pwll on every train at those times of year would make sense - or maybe even to allow 3-car sets to be used for 3+3, as Pwll can get very busy in summer.

You don't need all the sets, just enough to max out all the train lengths on the Cambrian.
 

hexagon789

Veteran Member
Joined
2 Sep 2016
Messages
15,713
Location
Glasgow
Indeed. To me the main use-case for this is the summer holidays. A 2-car unit will have less capacity than 2.158, and that is presently inadequate in mid August, while more commuter style services will be quieter. So a rejig to allow 4 to Aber and 2 to Pwll on every train at those times of year would make sense - or maybe even to allow 3-car sets to be used for 3+3, as Pwll can get very busy in summer.

You don't need all the sets, just enough to max out all the train lengths on the Cambrian.

I guess we'll see whether TfW have thought things through properly or not. They've got it half-right if nothing else.
 

krus_aragon

Established Member
Joined
10 Jun 2009
Messages
6,042
Location
North Wales
Unless you fitted everything with the balise but not the physical ECTS equipment.
I'm guessing that's (roughly) what's being done with the TfW Civity fleet.
Or just fit enough units for a theoretical 6-car operation all day, then you can move them in when it gets busy and rejig the others.
At least fitting more of the fleet with the ECTS equipment in the future should be relatively straightforward.
 

Rhydgaled

Established Member
Joined
25 Nov 2010
Messages
4,568
The cascading / electrification strategy works with the planned 170s too, plus there's scope for acquiring extra DMUs if demand rises: there will probably be more 170s spare in the UK than 175s.

Was your argument focusing on the internal layout of the 175 compared with the likes of the 170?
Partly, but I'm not against having the 170s as well. The 170s I would keep on Maesteg/Cheltenham/Ebbw Vale/Swanline services. While you could cascade the new DMUs to replace 170s, something suitable for Manchester-Swansea regional expresses is not ideal for a stopper to Maesteg. My suggestion for retaining 158s or 175s would see them work new services (hourly Carmarthen-Cardiff expresses, with alternate workings continuing to Pembrokeshire) in addition to the existing Pembrokeshire-Swansea services and an enhanced Heart Of Wales timetable. Any left over units could also continue to cover a small part of their existing work (possibly the non-LHCS Cardiff-Holyheads), reducing the number of new diesel-only Civities required (though rather than cutting down the number of vehicles ordered I would suggest building a smaller number of Civity units but with more of them being 3-car).
 

krus_aragon

Established Member
Joined
10 Jun 2009
Messages
6,042
Location
North Wales
That's interesting, previous posts led me to believe they were getting the full works.

I'm just working on outsider's observation and intuition. Given that there have been official statements* that the whole fleet is to be ERTMS-capable, and later that only a specific number will actually be fitted with the equipment, it stands to reason that fitting more with the relevant equipment should be reasonably straightforward. (I believe @Gareth Marston ran the numbers and found that this subfleet won't give much of a capacity increase to the Cambrian services once the hourly timetable is fully implemented.)

There may not be a balise fitted to every non-ETCS units when they roll into service, but there will be an empty space where one can be fitted (and possibly a mounting bracket too).

*If you want me to, I can have a dig about for the sources and/or the relevant discussion threads at some point.
 

krus_aragon

Established Member
Joined
10 Jun 2009
Messages
6,042
Location
North Wales
@krus_aragon, in what way would there be more spare 170s in the UK than 175s...? (when...?)
In that there are more 170s in existence (139 vs 27), and in use by a number of different operators. So at an unspecified point in time, there are more people you could ask for a spare 170 than a spare 175.

(If TfW kept half the 175s instead of the planned 170 fleet, the rest would probably end up with one single TOC, who could just sit on their hands and say no. If they kept all the 175s, then there'd be no more anywhere else. In order to expand their DMU fleet, they'd have to order some more Civitys, or acquire an incompatible microfleet. Going for the more common 170 fleet gives more flexibility for the future to acquire or get rid of DMUs according to passenger growth or electrification.)
 

hexagon789

Veteran Member
Joined
2 Sep 2016
Messages
15,713
Location
Glasgow
I'm just working on outsider's observation and intuition. Given that there have been official statements* that the whole fleet is to be ERTMS-capable, and later that only a specific number will actually be fitted with the equipment, it stands to reason that fitting more with the relevant equipment should be reasonably straightforward. (I believe @Gareth Marston ran the numbers and found that this subfleet won't give much of a capacity increase to the Cambrian services once the hourly timetable is fully implemented.)

There may not be a balise fitted to every non-ETCS units when they roll into service, but there will be an empty space where one can be fitted (and possibly a mounting bracket too).

*If you want me to, I can have a dig about for the sources and/or the relevant discussion threads at some point.

No that's fine thank you.
 

390112A

Member
Joined
7 May 2017
Messages
41
Location
Liverpool
Now that the 195s are in service with northern do you think the TfW Civity will be introduced into traffic quicker, and are the welsh trains similar enough that northern could lease TfW a few 195s to help with training and route clearance, In return could 175s operate on the Cheshire lines as lengths matches up 2/3 car?
 

tomwills98

Member
Joined
18 Feb 2018
Messages
292
Location
Bridgend
Now that the 195s are in service with northern do you think the TfW Civity will be introduced into traffic quicker, and are the welsh trains similar enough that northern could lease TfW a few 195s to help with training and route clearance, In return could 175s operate on the Cheshire lines as lengths matches up 2/3 car?

Would be nice but I doubt it. Northern have their own unit shortage problems and need to get them in service as soon as possible. Also, now TfW are no longer Arriva group the higher ups may be less likely to cooperate.
 

hexagon789

Veteran Member
Joined
2 Sep 2016
Messages
15,713
Location
Glasgow
Now that the 195s are in service with northern do you think the TfW Civity will be introduced into traffic quicker, and are the welsh trains similar enough that northern could lease TfW a few 195s to help with training and route clearance, In return could 175s operate on the Cheshire lines as lengths matches up 2/3 car?

They could but it's unlikely, don't see 175s going the other way somehow.
 

PHILIPE

Veteran Member
Joined
14 Nov 2011
Messages
13,472
Location
Caerphilly
Now that the 195s are in service with northern do you think the TfW Civity will be introduced into traffic quicker, and are the welsh trains similar enough that northern could lease TfW a few 195s to help with training and route clearance, In return could 175s operate on the Cheshire lines as lengths matches up 2/3 car?

Whatever for ? This boils down to taking units out of service for training for another company and leasing 175s to Northern where staff would have to train there also. Never in this wide world would this happen.
 

Eccles1983

On Moderation
Joined
4 Sep 2016
Messages
841
It's one of the silliest ideas I've heard.

3 weeks to train on 175's, and at least 50-100 drivers to train on them for the mid Cheshire line.

Then the kicker being that you'd still need to have a conversion course for 196's after doing a 7 day 195 course.

This added with the requirement for Northern to provide instructors to deliver said course.

This whilst the line in Wales suffer chronic shortages of units due to PRM mods.

Sorry if it comes across as cynical but it's a none starter.
 

krus_aragon

Established Member
Joined
10 Jun 2009
Messages
6,042
Location
North Wales
Now that the 195s are in service with northern do you think the TfW Civity will be introduced into traffic quicker
I expect that the lessons learned from getting the 195s into service (and shortly the 196s for the West Midlands) will make the introduction of TfW's Civity fleet more straight-forward. Enough to recoup the production delays* that led to the 195s being late into service, perhaps, but probably not enough for them to arrive significantly ahead of schedule.

*I think they were behind schedule, but couldn't swear to it.
 

Mitchell Hurd

On Moderation
Joined
28 Oct 2017
Messages
1,648
They didn't have a fleet of shiny new trains on order that would provide the capacity to allow enough space for 1st Class. The CAFs will run as 5 cars between Manchester and Swansea, which gives plenty of room for 1st.

5 cars??? That's great but I know wikipedia says 2 and 3-cars on the Manchester routes basically instead of saying 5-cars.

I think the only problem with the CAF Cavity DMU's is what's often said about trains with door layouts ideal for commuter services - cold drafts in winter.
However, one great thing about these trains and commuter trains with tables on will be table seats by the doors which are much easier reach than on InterCity trains!
 

krus_aragon

Established Member
Joined
10 Jun 2009
Messages
6,042
Location
North Wales
5 cars??? That's great but I know wikipedia says 2 and 3-cars on the Manchester routes basically instead of saying 5-cars.
The Manchester - Carmarthen / Milford services are continuing, but TfW have announced that they'll be offering First Class between Manchester and Swansea. We did some number crunching on another thread last year, and came to the following conclusion:

The way they'll do this is by having two units coupled together for Manchester-Swansea, and only one unit (without first class) will continue into West Wales. As you say, the units on order are all 2 and 3 car, so two of them will mean Manchester-Swansea will be a minimum of 4-5 cars (depending on whether the first class units are 2- or 3-car).
 

Rhydgaled

Established Member
Joined
25 Nov 2010
Messages
4,568
I think the only problem with the CAF Cavity DMU's is what's often said about trains with door layouts ideal for commuter services - cold drafts in winter.
Yes that, and:
  • Greater loss of cold (air-conditioned) air through the doors in summer
  • Toilet cubicles in the passenger saloons, instead of leading off vestibules
  • Reduced quanity of bay seating / full sized tables
  • Reduced seat-pitch and thus, probably, legroom (compared to a 175)
  • Reduced seating capacity (when comparing 2-car 158s/175s to 2-car TfW Civity)
  • Reduced toilets on 3-car units compared to 3-car 175s
  • Reduced space for large luggage
  • Possibility of 'Ironing Board' seats (unlikely, but not ruled out either)
 

krus_aragon

Established Member
Joined
10 Jun 2009
Messages
6,042
Location
North Wales
I've now found the source and it's not as clear cut as I'd remembered:
First class accommodation is to be introduced between Manchester and Swansea using 14 of the three-car DMUs; the units will initally operate as standard only.
From Modern Railways: December 2018 issue (page 14). You could read that as 14x 3-car units having first class and the other 12x 3-car units not having first class. Or you could read it as the 14 units for Manchester-Swansea will initially be standard only and the other 12 will be first class fitted from new. I'm inclined to go with the first interpretation myself (ie. 12x 3-car units WILL NOT get first class).
If you'll forgive me for indulging is a spot of thread resurrection...
The Fleet Composition requirements (linked here) agree with the 14x3-car statement in Modern Railways. It lists 12 standard class 3-car Civitys on lease until 2033, 14 first class 3-car Civitys on lease from 2024 to 2033, and a combined total of 14 that are either "first class ready" or "decommissioned first class" until 2024 (ratio undetermined).

That document also lists passenger carrying capacity for each of the units:
  • 2-car Civity: 202
  • 3-car Standard Class Civity: 316
  • 3-car First Class Ready Civity: 314
  • 3-car Decomissioned First Class Civity: 302
  • 3-car First Class Fitted Civity: 284
As compared to the existing units:
  • 2-car 158: 199
  • 2-car 175: 194
  • 3-car 175: 299
 

Cambrian359

Member
Joined
17 Jun 2018
Messages
202
If you'll forgive me for indulging is a spot of thread resurrection...
The Fleet Composition requirements (linked here) agree with the 14x3-car statement in Modern Railways. It lists 12 standard class 3-car Civitys on lease until 2033, 14 first class 3-car Civitys on lease from 2024 to 2033, and a combined total of 14 that are either "first class ready" or "decommissioned first class" until 2024 (ratio undetermined).

That document also lists passenger carrying capacity for each of the units:
  • 2-car Civity: 202
  • 3-car Standard Class Civity: 316
  • 3-car First Class Ready Civity: 314
  • 3-car Decomissioned First Class Civity: 302
  • 3-car First Class Fitted Civity: 284
As compared to the existing units:
  • 2-car 158: 199
  • 2-car 175: 194
  • 3-car 175: 299
Noticed there’s no seated capacity column, especially given the civitys are supposed to be a lower seating capacity than what they are replacing
 

Grumpy

Member
Joined
8 Nov 2010
Messages
1,064
That document also lists passenger carrying capacity for each of the units:
  • 2-car Civity: 202
  • 3-car Standard Class Civity: 316
  • 3-car First Class Ready Civity: 314
  • 3-car Decomissioned First Class Civity: 302
  • 3-car First Class Fitted Civity: 284
As compared to the existing units:
  • 2-car 158: 199
  • 2-car 175: 194
  • 3-car 175: 299
Presumably those figures are with passengers standing in every nook and cranny, luggage racks, toilets etc.
 

Cambrian359

Member
Joined
17 Jun 2018
Messages
202
If you'll forgive me for indulging is a spot of thread resurrection...
The Fleet Composition requirements (linked here) agree with the 14x3-car statement in Modern Railways. It lists 12 standard class 3-car Civitys on lease until 2033, 14 first class 3-car Civitys on lease from 2024 to 2033, and a combined total of 14 that are either "first class ready" or "decommissioned first class" until 2024 (ratio undetermined).

That document also lists passenger carrying capacity for each of the units:
  • 2-car Civity: 202
  • 3-car Standard Class Civity: 316
  • 3-car First Class Ready Civity: 314
  • 3-car Decomissioned First Class Civity: 302
  • 3-car First Class Fitted Civity: 284
As compared to the existing units:
  • 2-car 158: 199
  • 2-car 175: 194
  • 3-car 175: 299
Also noticed 6x3car 150s were planned to transfer to tfw.
By the way good find!
 

krus_aragon

Established Member
Joined
10 Jun 2009
Messages
6,042
Location
North Wales
Presumably those figures are with passengers standing in every nook and cranny, luggage racks, toilets etc.
Maybe not that bad. If you look further down the table at (e.g.) the class 150/2, that has different capacity figures for long-distance/rural and suburban/valleys, 216 vs 293. The 158, 175 and Civity only have long-distance/rural capacity figures, of course.

Edit: Angel trains quote 136 seats on a 2-car 175, so that makes 58 extra people standing or on tip-up seats etc. to make the figure in the quoted document.
 
Last edited:

Rhydgaled

Established Member
Joined
25 Nov 2010
Messages
4,568
Noticed there’s no seated capacity column, especially given the civitys are supposed to be a lower seating capacity than what they are replacing
Not in that document, but the 'Long Distance Express' table does have the seating capacities:
  • 2-car Civity 116 (+5)
  • 3-car Civity 188 (+8) (STD ONLY)
  • 3-car Civity 186 (+8) (First-ready)
  • 3-car Civity 158 (+8) + 16 (First-fitted)
  • 3-car Civity 174 (+8) (First-decommissioned)
Numbers in brackets are tip-up seats. Note that the first class units have 158 standard plus 16 first class seats, which is 174 seats so why call the last category 'first class decommissioned' rather than 'declassified'? Another point of concern; only one toilet on a 2-car unit. If true, that means every single one of these new units will have a carriage without a toilet. Also, I've now seen three different seating capacities for the new 2-car units:
  • 112 seats (by e-mail from TfW)
  • 116 seats ('Long Distance Express' table)
  • 120 seats (table in SARPA Newsletter 78, which also overstates the 3-car capacity at 196 seats)
Angel trains quote 136 seats on a 2-car 175
I think that figure is wrong. From counting seats on a seat plan I get 118 seats in a 2-car and 186 in a 3-car class 175, which ties up with the 'Long Distance Express' table. The Civity by contrast cuts tables, a toilet, seat pitch and maybe luggage space to get the same capacity. A 175 with unit end gangways is what the Civity design team should be aiming for. You cannot do that with double-width doors at thirds.

Quite. They will be a disaster on the Cambrian, where 3 car units are really needed.
I don't have a reliable figure for the seating capacity for a 158, I counted the tables once though and there are 16. Personally, I think the Manchester-Milford service should be cut back to Manchester-Swansea with 158s or 175s working west of Swansea and new Carmarthen-Cardiff services. That would save 3x 2-car Civity, freeing up six vehicles to bolster the Cambrian fleet. However, would it be more useful to have 24x 2-car Civity or 21x with six of them being 3-car units? Ideally of course you'd also find a way of saving another 3 units so that the Cambrian could have 24 units AND have a number of those be 3-car.

Also noticed 6x3car 150s were planned to transfer to tfw.
I wonder where from? Also, all 9 class 769s should be here by now according to that.
 

6Gtraincrew

Member
Joined
22 Feb 2018
Messages
439
But that document also says that the lease start date for the 3 car 150's is October LAST YEAR.
 

Top