IIRC they will have 2 toilets for a 3 car set.
Agree with all you say 100%. The quality is appalling to say they are new units. I’ve also pointed out before that a major problem with them is that they are a jack of all trades, master of none due to the wide variety of service types they work on.
If you'd substituted Class 458 for 195/331 and it was 20 years ago this report would be almost identical. Uncanny.
Interesting you say that, because look at them now. Not so long ago yardsticks of reliability and, while a little bit shoddy, generally considered more comfortable and better units than what will likely replace them...
I agree with you that it will make a difference to dwell times. However, my opinion is that this dwell time reduction comes at an unacceptable cost. It's not one small downgrade, it is several small downgrades and one big one (the loss of a toilet being the big one).
Apart from Cwmbran and the extra stops between Crewe and Shrewsbury every two hours isn't that pretty much what it was under ATW?
Less unacceptable than the 195s (assuming they only have 1 toilet even on the 3-car units) but still a step back from 175s. It's also 94 seats per toilet, which still falls short of the value specified in the key train requirements, with the planned 5-car formations on Swansea-Manchester being over 100 seats per toilet.
Although I don't think Northern Trains or any future ToC in the region will be inclined to refurbish the Civity fleet the way SWT did with the 458s in 2008 and Porterbrook with the 458/5 refurbishment which together solved the problems the early Juniper fleet suffered from. SWT's train care was known for being second to none. The 458s went from being the UKs most unreliable to the most reliable. I'm not sure the Civity will get that level of maintenance that determines a long lifespan for a train.
Exactly, and some 3-car 170s even have 3 toilets I have read. The 195s have been described in other topics as "poor man's Turbostars"; I think the only benefit of the 195s (from what others have written) is larger overhead racks and possibly fuel economy (but on the latter point at least they don't really seem to be any better than a 158). The 197s have one other improvement; unit end gangways.
Something Northern & future operators will rue, unless they have interchangeable cabs like Desiro's do.
Out of the 3, the 196's have the best spec, and they're the ones being used on commuter services! It's laughable.
Apart from the actual seats themselves, do the 196s have the best spec? I mean, don't get me wrong, the 196s look ideal for what the commuter services they work (the layout reminds me of the class 365s actually, which I consider the best layout for a commuter train) but the seating layout looks quite dense with lots of unidirectional seats and few bay seats, and they don't have armrests. The 197s, although using the sophia seat, look like they will have a slightly less dense layout, with armrests, as well as a floor mounted luggage stack in each carriage.
A fairly large chunk of the South East last got new trains about 20 years ago too...your point is?
Too he fair the north of England gets way more new stock than say the southwest. I'm sure passengers down here would sooner have a 175 rather than a clapped out 150. The north has been relatively lucky .
