CAF class 197 Civity for TfW: News and updates on introduction.

[Lurcheroo]

There's still some work to do before 5 cars are signed off. Some amendments are being made to the ASDO database, and there may need to be some movement of the 5 car stop boards. So we're not there yet, but hopefully soon.

Well that’s still progress so great stuff !

 

[FD99]

It's all the same - Arriva Train Care encompasses the entire depot on the Up side of the WCML The carriage shed is mostly used for overnight stabling and light maintenance whilst the modern building is used for more long term work.

Although there are several maintenance depots dotted around Crewe, ATC is the only one used by TOCs for overnight stabling.


There's still some work to do before 5 cars are signed off. Some amendments are being made to the ASDO database, and there may need to be some movement of the 5 car stop boards. So we're not there yet, but hopefully soon.

It is honestly embarrassing how long this has taken. This should have been sorted on day one. Were nearly 3 years into these things.

 

[Topological]

Yesterday did not seem to have any 2-car on Manchesters, but someone's law says that 1W12 is 2-car today. This will be cosy nearer Manchester.

Good to know the 5-car sign off is going well, but does require a 3-car for every train and we are not even there yet.

 

[aar0]

Finally travelled in one with standard plus, which is still free (although guard wasn’t totally sure if it was meant to be). Don’t think the seats are better enough than standard to be worth the cost, but maybe with a few free coffees and cake (which I believe is the plan?) I could be tempted on longer trips. It is a long way to the nearest loo!

 

[60159]

It's all the same - Arriva Train Care encompasses the entire depot on the Up side of the WCML The carriage shed is mostly used for overnight stabling and light maintenance whilst the modern building is used for more long term work.

Although there are several maintenance depots dotted around Crewe, ATC is the only one used by TOCs for overnight stabling.


There's still some work to do before 5 cars are signed off. Some amendments are being made to the ASDO database, and there may need to be some movement of the 5 car stop boards. So we're not there yet, but hopefully soon.

Thank you everyone re the info re Crewe depot.

 

[Lurcheroo]

Finally travelled in one with standard plus, which is still free (although guard wasn’t totally sure if it was meant to be). Don’t think the seats are better enough than standard to be worth the cost, but maybe with a few free coffees and cake (which I believe is the plan?) I could be tempted on longer trips. It is a long way to the nearest loo!

I don’t think there is a plan for any complimentary catering items in standard plus but I could be wrong.

Quite frankly, the catering provision is too ropey as it stands to reliably provide it anyway.

I must say that I do like standard plus (it’s the extra space and generally quieter environment that I like) and I’d definitely consider the upgrade on longer trips.

 

[craigybagel]

It is honestly embarrassing how long this has taken. This should have been sorted on day one. Were nearly 3 years into these things.

As I understand it it's mostly been software issues that have held things up, and that kind of thing isn't fixed overnight

Yesterday did not seem to have any 2-car on Manchesters, but someone's law says that 1W12 is 2-car today. This will be cosy nearer Manchester.

Good to know the 5-car sign off is going well, but does require a 3-car for every train and we are not even there yet.

There are a few different plans being worked on that should free up more units overall. The cascade this brings about should be enough to send more 3 cars to Manchester

 

[FD99]

As I understand it it's mostly been software issues that have held things up, and that kind of thing isn't fixed overnight

There are a few different plans being worked on that should free up more units overall. The cascade this brings about should be enough to send more 3 cars to Manchester

It really is though mate. These things really can be fixed pretty quickly but the railway pay the minimum price possible and get what they pay for. I mean, just look how difficult it is to change the temperature of a 197 from 26° to 19°, this can literally take 60+ seconds of tapping on the HMI. People on here will think I’m making that up, but that’s just how bad the software/hardware is on them. If proper equipment is installed first time round then this isn’t needed. Whoever greenlighted the HMI on a 197 in the first place should be ashamed.

 

[Bikeman78]

It really is though mate. These things really can be fixed pretty quickly but the railway pay the minimum price possible and get what they pay for. I mean, just look how difficult it is to change the temperature of a 197 from 26° to 19°, this can literally take 60+ seconds of tapping on the HMI. People on here will think I’m making that up, but that’s just how bad the software/hardware is on them. If proper equipment is installed first time round then this isn’t needed. Whoever greenlighted the HMI on a 197 in the first place should be ashamed.

In a Premier inn, or my house, it takes five or 10 seconds to set the desired temperature. Why would it be any harder on a 197? I can only conclude that people who design or sign off rubbish systems never have to use them.

 

[Jez]

Yesterday did not seem to have any 2-car on Manchesters, but someone's law says that 1W12 is 2-car today. This will be cosy nearer Manchester.

I also notice that hardly any 197s have been to Maesteg today. Maybe someone has been reading these forums!

I am going to discuss the shortage of 197s in a new thread though so I dont get told im going off topic.

 

[Jez]

There seems to have been a shortage of 197s in service for quite a while now. Today seems to be particularly bad.

Today I noticed almost all Maestegs were 150s with a pair of 153s on one diagram. Two of the 3 all day Pembroke Dock diagrams are also pairs of 153s with a 3 car 197 on the other diagram. This has resulted in 2 of the HOWL diagrams being short formed to a single 153 and the other diagram being a 150.

Looking at RTT, out of the 3 car units (currently 24 in service as waiting on the final 2) there are 4 not in service out of 24. Which doesnt seem too bad. Of the 4 not in service, 3 are SP (197116/197117/197119) and 1 is not SP (197101). Of the 3 car units around 16% of the fleet not available.

Of the 2 cars, I think 30 are supposed to be in service. Well out of the 30 in service it appears 8 are not in service which seems rather a lot, around 27% of the fleet not available. Those not in service are 002/005/006/011/015/019/044/048.

Overall when you combine the 3 cars and 2 cars id say around 22% of the fleet were not in passenger service today.

Anyone able to shed any light on whats going on and why they seem to have dropped in reliability recently? With so many of the Sprinters going soon and being stretched themselves until the new Valley tram-trains come into service its not going to be great going forward if reliability doesnt improve.

 

[childwallblues]

In my opinion they got rid of the 175s too early.

 

[Topological]

In my opinion they got rid of the 175s too early.

That is without doubt.

We ended up with more than a year of 150s to Manchester, which had the twin effect of making meeting the timetable impossible and adding a lot of miles to the 150s. The 150s are now getting to their C6 quicker than they would have done.

Of course the problem was the decision to use Chester for the 197s instead of a brownfield site (as had been done with Hitachi and the 80x, for example) and enabling Chester to carry on focusing on the 175s.

That has all gone now though and at least we do not have 150s on Manchesters.

Anecdotal admittedly, but the 1630 from Manchester today was very busy (a Mk4) and it makes me wonder how on earth the line coped with a 2-car on that diagram.

I was on a 2-car 197 as 1W12 this morning from Pontypool to Manchester. The train coped because it was Friday, but there were standees. That has been a 3-car most days this week, but sadly not today.

With the Standard Plus roll out delayed too, there are a lot of questions still outstanding about the transition to 197s.

 

[simonmpoulton]

Anecdotal admittedly, but the 1630 from Manchester today was very busy (a Mk4) and it makes me wonder how on earth the line coped with a 2-car on that diagram.

I'm fairly certain that you've got more regular passengers aiming to catch that service just because it's the Mk4 set!

 

[Topological]

I'm fairly certain that you've got more regular passengers aiming to catch that service just because it's the Mk4 set!

Other reasons include it being the last departure from Manchester to go west of Cardiff, and the last one with a high chance of not being 2-car.

All that said, most of the passengers are off by Shrewsbury, so maybe it is purely work times and nothing to do with the train.

 

[Lurcheroo]

.

 

[craigybagel]

It really is though mate. These things really can be fixed pretty quickly but the railway pay the minimum price possible and get what they pay for. I mean, just look how difficult it is to change the temperature of a 197 from 26° to 19°, this can literally take 60+ seconds of tapping on the HMI. People on here will think I’m making that up, but that’s just how bad the software/hardware is on them. If proper equipment is installed first time round then this isn’t needed. Whoever greenlighted the HMI on a 197 in the first place should be ashamed.

In a Premier inn, or my house, it takes five or 10 seconds to set the desired temperature. Why would it be any harder on a 197? I can only conclude that people who design or sign off rubbish systems never have to use them.

It's mostly down to the touchscreen. If we had a physical switch for the thermostat like in a hotel room it would be fine - but the temperature is controlled (like nearly everything on a 197) through the TCMS touch screen and it can be pretty unresponsive.

I also notice that hardly any 197s have been to Maesteg today. Maybe someone has been reading these forums!

I am going to discuss the shortage of 197s in a new thread though so I dont get told im going off topic.

There is a shortage of available sets at the moment. Honestly no idea as to why.

 

[childwallblues]

Having two on the Borderlands does not help.
Yesterday we had 197103 and 197120 on Chester to Liverpool all day. I think that units with minor faults like PIS or awaiting mainenance operate on the service as the units are back in Chester every two hours and can easily be swapped out.

 

[Western 52]

No services west of Swansea today so presumably fewer 197s needed, so maybe not as bad as it would otherwise be.

 

[Jez]

In my opinion they got rid of the 175s too early.

I agree. The transition between 175 and 197 should have been handled a lot better.

With the Standard Plus roll out delayed too, there are a lot of questions still outstanding about the transition to 197s.

I dont understand why SP is being delayed longer than the proposed end of September date. Good for passengers if they can get a seat on a SP unit of course without having to pay an additional fee. However very often SP is full and standing!

If almost all SP units are in service there should be no reason why it cant be introduced. But its better for passengers if they can indeed manage to get a seat in SP.

Other reasons include it being the last departure from Manchester to go west of Cardiff, and the last one with a high chance of not being 2-car.

All that said, most of the passengers are off by Shrewsbury, so maybe it is purely work times and nothing to do with the train.

From December the 1730 is supposed to be going to Swansea which will be a welcome compromise to the last service West of Cardiff being 1830 for many years.

I imagine the 1630 being booked MK4 will also tempt passengers as a better chance of getting a seat than say the 1530 or 1730 if these are maximum 3 car at the moment.

Yesterday I was in Cardiff and caught the 1549 home. It was held for a few minutes awaiting the late MK4 arrival on the next platform. I believe this one is a valid connection of 7 minutes. Quite a few people rushed across to the 2 car 197 so there are definately many people travelling from the Marches to Bridgend, Swansea and beyond. Even if the numbers arent huge.

Having two on the Borderlands does not help.
Yesterday we had 197103 and 197120 on Chester to Liverpool all day. I think that units with minor faults like PIS or awaiting mainenance operate on the service as the units are back in Chester every two hours and can easily be swapped out.

I noticed the Liverpools had 2 x 3 cars yesterday when I went through the allocations on RTT. No idea if this is a regular thing as dont check daily and no idea if the route justifies a 3 car. I cant imagine it does as for a long time it was 1 train per 2 hours but I dont have first hand experience of the route. Like you say it could be a good way of keeping units with issues close to the Chester depot.

14 197’s on stop today meaning 4 short for service.

Many thanks for posting this. It seems they are quite short again today with 4 diagrams uncovered. I assume this doesnt include what would be needed if there was a full service West of Swansea? And the 4 short are actually based on todays booked workings.

No services west of Swansea today so presumably fewer 197s needed, so maybe not as bad as it would otherwise be.

That will certainly help

 

[simonmpoulton]

It's mostly down to the touchscreen. If we had a physical switch for the thermostat like in a hotel room it would be fine - but the temperature is controlled (like nearly everything on a 197) through the TCMS touch screen and it can be pretty unresponsive.

You'd think whoever designed the software would have made an easy button to quickly set the temperature on the TCMS system! This isn't a railway specific issue mind you - software developers generally have no grasp of how there software is to be used in a real use case scenario! It'd be a huge step forward if you made these same developers sit in the cab in service and actually see how the software is being used and how they can improve it!

 

[Dai Corner]

You'd think whoever designed the software would have made an easy button to quickly set the temperature on the TCMS system! This isn't a railway specific issue mind you - software developers generally have no grasp of how there software is to be used in a real use case scenario! It'd be a huge step forward if you made these same developers sit in the cab in service and actually see how the software is being used and how they can improve it!

Surely the target temperature should be set once at commissioning or perhaps changed seasonally and the system then left to do its job so it hardly matters if it's a bit fiddly?

I agree about the TCMS user interface being reviewed, but no doubt CAF would charge (a lot!) for that and it wouldn't be a priority for a cash-strapped TOC.

 

[craigybagel]

You'd think whoever designed the software would have made an easy button to quickly set the temperature on the TCMS system! This isn't a railway specific issue mind you - software developers generally have no grasp of how there software is to be used in a real use case scenario! It'd be a huge step forward if you made these same developers sit in the cab in service and actually see how the software is being used and how they can improve it!

It's a very easy button to find - if you hit the HVAC tab it's right there in front of you. It just the combination of a touch screen that's very slow to react and the fact you can only change the temperature 1 degree at a time means if there's a big variety in driver preferences between a warm and cool cab, it can take a very frustrating minute of screen pushing.

Surely the target temperature should be set once at commissioning or perhaps changed seasonally and the system then left to do its job so it hardly matters if it's a bit fiddly?

I agree about the TCMS user interface being reviewed, but no doubt CAF would charge (a lot!) for that and it wouldn't be a priority for a cash-strapped TOC.

The saloon target temperatures are preset and as far as I'm aware there's no way for traincrew to alter them - we can only turn the saloon HVAC systems on or off. We do however have free reign over the temperatures in the cab. They default to 20° every time the cab is keyed in, but some drivers like them to be warmer than others. Personally I prefer driving with the window open instead.

Personally I'll take it over 175s that constantly blew cold air on in the cab no matter which switches you used.....

 

[Jacob Porrett]

What exactly do you mean by depot?
LNWR?
I may be wrong but did you not used to give regular updates re what’s at Donnington? Do you know? As also at Crewe South.
I’m trying to establish how many still have to leave the factory.

I used to report about Donnington but not much these days. The newest 197 to leave was 197035 which is now at Arriva TrainCare and I've seen it myself at work. Not sure how many 197s are at Donnington RFT as I haven't been over for a while now. Don't know what's a Cewe South sorry. The other unit a the depot currently is 197029 which has been around for a while.

 

[childwallblues]

I agree. The transition between 175 and 197 should have been handled a lot better.


I noticed the Liverpools had 2 x 3 cars yesterday when I went through the allocations on RTT. No idea if this is a regular thing as dont check daily and no idea if the route justifies a 3 car. I cant imagine it does as for a long time it was 1 train per 2 hours but I dont have first hand experience of the route. Like you say it could be a good way of keeping units with issues close to the Chester depot.

Cheater to Liverpool appears to be random 197 allocation. It is busy in peak hours and afternoons/evenings. End to end travel is light as the Merseyrail service is more popular with its more central stations and better connections. There are many passengers using Helsby and Frodsham now for leisure purposes whilst Runcorn even though it has hourly Avanti and LNWR services is a massive generator of local traffic.

 

[60159]

I used to report about Donnington but not much these days. The newest 197 to leave was 197035 which is now at Arriva TrainCare and I've seen it myself at work. Not sure how many 197s are at Donnington RFT as I haven't been over for a while now. Don't know what's a Cewe South sorry. The other unit a the depot currently is 197029 which has been around for a while.

Many thanks for that. Very helpful.

 

[D365]

Are any of the ETCS equipped 197s in service [on non-Cambrian duties] or are they all delayed?

 

[Lewisham2221]

Are any of the ETCS equipped 197s in service [on non-Cambrian duties] or are they all delayed?

Short answer - no

 

[Lurcheroo]

Are any of the ETCS equipped 197s in service [on non-Cambrian duties] or are they all delayed?

Whilst they are ‘delayed’ The issue with having ETCS units doing other duties (as I understand it) is that the maintenance depot as Chester is already full to capacity (and currently struggling to keep enough regular 197’s in service each day), the ETCS 197’s will be based out of Machynlleth depot and that is needed to be free of 158’s to look after the 197’s.

 

[Krokodil]

In my opinion they got rid of the 175s too early.

Should have avoided renewing the entire fleet in one go. Leave the 175s and Alstom in place until the South Wales Metro fleet was running. Possibly should have tried to get some 180s - if anyone could make them reliable it was Alstom Chester.

14 197’s on stop today meaning 4 short for service.
No idea what the issues with them are.

Only 14? It was 16 at the start of the day last Monday, plus however many 158s and one loco. There were some cancellations during the day too, after a couple more failures. On Saturday 28th they were dropping like flies. Maintenance Control's ears must have been burning.