Class 175 future speculation

[Rhydgaled]

They’ve done what Virgin CrossCountry did and halved train lengths for double frequency. An extra train per hour now runs between Bristol and Salisbury, utilising the extra stock.

Had GWR been able to retain the 769s, then who knows, perhaps they would have been able to have both.

That's a good point about the GWR 769s, I had forgotten about them. Along with the castle HSTs, that is more trains GWR previously expected to have that they now will not have, so all the more need to bring in other stock such as the 175s.

There simply isn't enough 158, 165, 166 to operate them all at full length (strictly there is on paper, provided none need fixing and 100% are available for service), but 100% availability is not realistic with aging 31-34 year old diesel trains.

I wouldn't have thought 100% availability is realistic with anything - even brand new EMUs require routine maintenance.

If GWR get them could be used on either of Cardiff-Portsmouth or Cardiff-Penzance route, but how many would be available is unclear (there were 11 2car and 16 3car, but some are dead). So not really enough to fully convert both unless trains are limited to 3car and pairs of 2car.

Are the dead 175s permanently dead or just waiting for spare parts (and/or a major overhaul TfW didn't want to pay for)? And how are Chiltern's hybrid drive DMU trials going (a class 165 and a 168 I think)? If I recall correctly, Angel proposed a hybrid modification for the 175s back in the late 2010s in an effort to encourage TfW to keep them. Perhaps if such a modification programme was implemented it would be an opportunity to restore all 27 units to operational condition. Presumably would still have their 158s to operate alongside the 175s.

 

[Mzzzs]

To theorize from memory the 769s were supposed to displace 16 turbos which would go west but now that's not happening so to fill that gap they take on the 16 3-car 175.

 

[tomuk]

And how are Chiltern's hybrid drive DMU trials going (a class 165 and a 168 I think)?

The 165 conversion by the 'innovative start up' is reported as going nowhere except possibly Newport Docks to be shredded as the conversion has been abandoned and work so far is difficult to reverse. The 168 by Rolls Royce-MTU works and has been in service but the fuel savings aren't as great as predicted so pending DfT finding some spare money under the sofa further conversions are unlikely.

 

[D365]

could be possible that GWR and/or Chiltern has a good relationship with Angel Trains (owner of Class 15x/16x fleets) and thereby has managed to negotiate a favourable deal. But that’s as much as I will say at this time.

 

[Snow1964]

could be possible that GWR and/or has a good relationship with Angel Trains (owner of Class 15x/16x fleets) and thereby has managed to negotiate a favourable deal. But that’s as much as I will say at this time.

There is a lot of commercial logic in this, especially if the leaseco has terms where X quantity of trains should be available, and there are now problems sourcing parts. You get into the realm of remedy and compensation (in legal and contractual terms, rather than operational), and the contractual remedy might be an offer involving something else.

I guess when off lease the 175s produce no income for leaseCo (Angel), and if previous user has to fix them to a standard for return, or compensate for returning in below contractual return condition, then they are available to be used, or the repairs are funded to allow them to be used.

From a commercial point of view, what LeasoCo doesn't want is glut of available units, an a price race to the lowest to find a user, but if nothing else is available (and there aren't lines of store DMUs, just a few odd ones) then getting a deal before more get retired and come back onto the market makes sense.

 

[12LDA28C]

The 168 by Rolls Royce-MTU works and has been in service but the fuel savings aren't as great as predicted so pending DfT finding some spare money under the sofa further conversions are unlikely.

I'm not sure the Class 168 Hybrid could be classed as a runaway success which might have more of a bearing on whether further units are converted than any lack of DfT funding.

 

[Rhydgaled]

The 165 conversion by the 'innovative start up' is reported as going nowhere except possibly Newport Docks to be shredded as the conversion has been abandoned and work so far is difficult to reverse. The 168 by Rolls Royce-MTU works and has been in service but the fuel savings aren't as great as predicted so pending DfT finding some spare money under the sofa further conversions are unlikely.

Thanks for the update. I guess more will only be done if the Government decides that a hybrid doesn't count as a diesel-only train and that it is going to stick to Jo Johnson's target to remove all diesel-only trains.

 

[Mikey C]

Thanks for the update. I guess more will only be done if the Government decides that a hybrid doesn't count as a diesel-only train and that it is going to stick to Jo Johnson's target to remove all diesel-only trains.

Any future government can change this deadline anyway. And presumably blame previous governments for making it impossible to meet the deadline!

 

[RobShipway]

Thanks for the update. I guess more will only be done if the Government decides that a hybrid doesn't count as a diesel-only train and that it is going to stick to Jo Johnson's target to remove all diesel-only trains.

Any future government can change this deadline anyway. And presumably blame previous governments for making it impossible to meet the deadline!

I do wonder if the class 165/168 Hybrid actually shows that possibly these trains possibly may have been better at looking at none carbon fuels with these trains?

But this is for leasing companies and train operating companies to decide if it is a better path than the Hybrid trains or changing existing trains to be battery operated.

I cannot see any government changing the deadline for the removal of diesel trains, unless evidences is given by leasing companies and TOC's that the existing date cannot be met to the DFT.

 

[D365]

I do wonder if the class 165/168 Hybrid actually shows that possibly these trains possibly may have been better at looking at none carbon fuels with these trains?

What it shows is, just like other rolling stock projects from the past decade, how technically challenging it is to modify/convert the traction systems of any existing multiple unit.

 

[Energy]

I do wonder if the class 165/168 Hybrid actually shows that possibly these trains possibly may have been better at looking at none carbon fuels with these trains?

Different goals. The class 168 project was largely to reduce fuel costs and improve acceleration by having regenerative breaking and batteries, as well as more efficient engines. Being environmentally greener is more of a side effect than a main goal.

 

[RobShipway]

Different goals. The class 168 project was largely to reduce fuel costs and improve acceleration by having regenerative breaking and batteries, as well as more efficient engines. Being environmentally greener is more of a side effect than a main goal.

What it shows is, just like other rolling stock projects from the past decade, how technically challenging it is to modify/convert the traction systems of any existing multiple unit.

True to both comments, which is why I personally go with a new train from scratch, rather than doing the testing with existing stock. If I was at Chiltern, I would have said that it is better to place the money spent into a new stock of trains like the Flirt trains or BDEMU version of the Aventra. Either way as part of the deal, I would make sure that the trains are constructed in the UK or there is at least 90-95% parts within the train that are made within the UK.

 

[Energy]

Either way as part of the deal, I would make sure that the trains are constructed in the UK or there is at least 90-95% parts within the train that are made within the UK.

Stadler wouldn't struggle to bid if you're aiming for FLIRTS.

True to both comments, which is why I personally go with a new train from scratch, rather than doing the testing with existing stock. If I was at Chiltern, I would have said that it is better to place the money spent into a new stock of trains like the Flirt trains or BDEMU version of the Aventra.

AFAIK new stock for Chiltern is being considered.

 

[Mikey C]

Any scheme for the 168, which is just a Turbostar variant, can be used on the other Turbostar variants and is on a train with 20 years life left

The 165s on the other hand are an older, more niche fleet, with a shorter payback time.

 

[Philip]

In the days when Chester depot/ATW provided a set number of units to FNW and TPE, what would happen if they were short of 175s at Chester (due to unreliability etc) and didn't have enough to provide the required number to TPE? Did TPE have to reshuffle their own stock to cover the diagrams or did ATW loan 158s to TPE in lieuw of 175s?

 

[ben2012]

Does anyone know what the future of the 175s is yet or is it not been decided

 

[Bletchleyite]

Does anyone know what the future of the 175s is yet or is it not been decided

There has been suggestion that a TOC has agreed to take all of them, but not yet confirmation of which one it is.

 

[Whistler40145]

There has been suggestion that a TOC has agreed to take all of them, but not yet confirmation of which one it is.

Can take the East-West service out of the equation, that's going to be using 196s

 

[anthony263]

Yet dft trying to talk Chiltern into using 165s on the East-West route

 

[Philip]

TPE could be a possible wildcard for future use. They want to get rid of their mk5 stock but this would lead to a severe shortage of stock against the timetable. If all Liverpool-Cleethorpes services had 6-car 175 formations, it'd probably utilise about 20 of the 27. The remaining units could be sold abroad, stored or scrapped; or they could be used by a different TOC.

The units could be maintained at Longsight and wouldn't need that many depots trained on them.

 

[Iskra]

TPE could be a possible wildcard for future use. They want to get rid of their mk5 stock but this would lead to a severe shortage of stock against the timetable. If all Liverpool-Cleethorpes services had 6-car 175 formations, it'd probably utilise about 20 of the 27. The remaining units could be sold abroad, stored or scrapped; or they could be used by a different TOC.

The units could be maintained at Longsight and wouldn't need that many depots trained on them.

The 175’s are unreliable and don’t have first class, so would be seen as a downgrade on a line that already is perceived to be the Cinderella line of TP. A second fleet has just been withdrawn from this route due to the complexity of training crews on them, so any new fleet doesn’t look to be viable here for some time and the route needs to just focus on operating reliably with 185’s for a good period of time before anything new is tried to try and recover passenger numbers after years of unreliable debacle.

 

[geoffk]

GWR is getting very short of serviceable trains for its local services and 175s to Chiltern, releasing 165s to GWR would go down well here in Devon! Wherever the 175s go it will be a non-standard type with a lot of training requirements, the last thing TPE would want surely, given their backlog of training.

 

[Wolfie]

TPE could be a possible wildcard for future use. They want to get rid of their mk5 stock but this would lead to a severe shortage of stock against the timetable. If all Liverpool-Cleethorpes services had 6-car 175 formations, it'd probably utilise about 20 of the 27. The remaining units could be sold abroad, stored or scrapped; or they could be used by a different TOC.

The units could be maintained at Longsight and wouldn't need that many depots trained on them.

You seem desperate to get the 175s somewhere in the north.

 

[Philip]

You seem desperate to get the 175s somewhere in the north.

Passengers in the north are familiar with them for a start and they were ordered and built for North Western routes. Whilst new training courses will be needed, it'll still probably help having traincrew around who worked them between 2000-06 and are familiar with them.

Besides this, the only TOCs away from the north which have been mentioned as possibilities seemingly don't want them. I think there are cases for TPE or Northern taking them, even if the latter have withdrawn interest. The issues of driver/guard training for TPE and potential unreliability mentioned in the thread will be the same issues even if GWR or Chiltern use them.

 

[liamf656]

Passengers in the north are familiar with them for a start and they were ordered and built for North Western routes. Whilst new training courses will be needed, it'll still probably help having traincrew around who worked them between 2000-06 and are familiar with them.

This makes zero difference. Passengers don't need to be "familiar" to certain train types, and the training courses for staff would be the same if it's a type used 20 years ago or a type never used

 

[tomm]

Any updates on the TFW 175s new home

 

[Zontar]

My money remains on Chiltern

Mine too. Chilterns new business plan mentions them specifically.

 

[warwickshire]

Mine too. Chilterns new business plan mentions them specifically.

Locally in Warwickshire, West Midlands area from a few local sources also heard Chiltern as well as 175, looking into the ex Tpe 68s and mk5s. Maybe the 175 are doing East West rail, with Chiltern drivers based at Bletchley Ewr depot and the lnwr drivers at Bletchley ie drivers are doing the 196s, on East West also, not enough to go around, maybe? .
However as well etc, maybe the case until one possible new total fleet replacement arrives in due course on East West rail when it develops. In full?

 

[anthony263]

I'm definitely putting my money on chiltern.

 

[Dan G]

Would be perfect for GWR's Cardiff-Portsmouth service.

Does Chiltern actually have a need for additional rolling stock? GWR certainly does.