Class 175 future speculation

[12LDA28C]

Why do we have the issue about noise levels with class 68s? In the 60s, 70s & 80s people used to put up with much noisier locos much more frequently. The class 68 noise isn't even particularly intrusive and it must be easier on the ears than the more typical noise pollution from the city centres of London & Birmingham?

Seems like much ado about nothing, particularly with these engines being quite clean for combustion pollution.

You'd have to speak to the residents of Marylebone about that. Or Scarborough.

 

[The_Train]

Why do we have the issue about noise levels with class 68s? In the 60s, 70s & 80s people used to put up with much noisier locos much more frequently. The class 68 noise isn't even particularly intrusive and it must be easier on the ears than the more typical noise pollution from the city centres of London & Birmingham?

Seems like much ado about nothing, particularly with these engines being quite clean for combustion pollution.

People just have to have something to moan about in the modern world

 

[Bikeman78]

Chiltern's 165s are increasingly difficult to maintain and are approaching the end of their working life - they won't last another ten years, that's why they are being replaced by new units.



More electrification nonsense which is pure fantasy and totally irrelevant to this particular thread.

Your previous sentence does show why electrification is the way forward though. Electric trains can easily run 40 to 50 years and remain reliable. Merseyrail has been in the top three most reliable TOCs for years, even keeping up with C2C which has a much newer fleet.

 

[Energy]

Why do we have the issue about noise levels with class 68s? In the 60s, 70s & 80s people used to put up with much noisier locos much more frequently.

And technology has moved on since then?

The class 68 noise isn't even particularly intrusive and it must be easier on the ears than the more typical noise pollution from the city centres of London & Birmingham?

They are very loud. Given that Westminster hasn't made anywhere near the same amount of fuss on the 168s or Scarborough on the 185s it may not be unsubstantiated...

 

[12LDA28C]

Your previous sentence does show why electrification is the way forward though. Electric trains can easily run 40 to 50 years and remain reliable. Merseyrail has been in the top three most reliable TOCs for years, even keeping up with C2C which has a much newer fleet.

I don't disagree, but as I've said many times before, it ain't gonna happen, no matter how many people on this forum fantasise that it will. That's why Chiltern have tendered for new units to replace the 165s - because they know there is zero prospect of electrification for many many years and I suspect not within my lifetime.

 

[The Planner]

I don't disagree, but as I've said many times before, it ain't gonna happen, no matter how many people on this forum fantasise that it will. That's why Chiltern have tendered for new units to replace the 165s - because they know there is zero prospect of electrification for many many years and I suspect not within my lifetime.

As I said earlier, there are costed proposals for options for electrification. Chiltern are basing their replacement on that.

 

[Purple Train]

You'd have to speak to the residents of Marylebone about that. Or Scarborough.

As has been mentioned on the 68 withdrawal thread, the Scarborough complainants seem to be hearing with their eyes.

 

[12LDA28C]

As I said earlier, there are costed proposals for options for electrification. Chiltern are basing their replacement on that.

And costed proposals always translate to completed projects?

 

[Mikey C]

I don't disagree, but as I've said many times before, it ain't gonna happen, no matter how many people on this forum fantasise that it will. That's why Chiltern have tendered for new units to replace the 165s - because they know there is zero prospect of electrification for many many years and I suspect not within my lifetime.

I don't know your age, but electrification of the Chiltern Line WILL obviously happen if we're to get to Net Zero etc. it's not some quiet branch line, it's a London commuter line. And indeed a Birmingham commuter line.

There may not be a published timescale for it, but I'd be amazed if something wasn't put forward within the next 5 years.

 

[Energy]

And costed proposals always translate to completed projects?

Costed proposals are options that are being seriously considered.

As I said earlier, there are costed proposals for options for electrification. Chiltern are basing their replacement on that.

Can you hint how likely/good they are

 

[northwichcat]

Your previous sentence does show why electrification is the way forward though. Electric trains can easily run 40 to 50 years and remain reliable. Merseyrail has been in the top three most reliable TOCs for years, even keeping up with C2C which has a much newer fleet.

Yet 25 year old 319s have been an unreliable train type for Northern and the ones given newer parts as part of the 769 conversion have faired even worse! To be fair the 319s and the ex-Anglia 156s are similar in age and both need replacing urgently.

The Merseyrail trains were 3rd rail only and the operator had the advantage of a common train fleet. The Bakerloo underground trains have also faired well.

but electrification of the Chiltern Line WILL obviously happen if we're to get to Net Zero etc.

Overhead electrics might become a thing of the past as technology advances, especially given the huge cost of wiring routes. It wasn't that long ago hybrid buses in city centres were seen as a revolution. Now a mixed network around Warrington is set to get a fully electric bus fleet. That will mean buses running out as far as Northwich and Manchester Airport, and only needing an overnight recharge. Not trolley buses or electric charging points at terminus bus stations, like in the past.

 

[Energy]

Yet 25 year old 319s have been an unreliable train type for Northern and the ones given newer parts as part of the 769 conversion have faired even worse! To be fair the 319s and the ex-Anglia 156s are similar in age and both need replacing urgently.

25 years old? They're 36 years old now unless you're counting when they started at Northern.

To be fair the 319s had an intensive life at Thameslink.

 

[The Planner]

Costed proposals are options that are being seriously considered.

Can you hint how likely/good they are

Dont expect wires in Marylebone is all I will say.

 

[Mikey C]

Overhead electrics might become a thing of the past as technology advances, especially given the huge cost of wiring routes. It wasn't that long ago hybrid buses in city centres were seen as a revolution. Now a mixed network around Warrington is set to get a fully electric bus fleet. That will mean buses running out as far as Northwich and Manchester Airport, and only needing an overnight recharge. Not trolley buses or electric charging points at terminus bus stations, like in the past.

Using that logic, you'd cancel electrification of the MML straight away.

Trains, even going between Oxford or Aylesbury and Marylebone will do vastly greater mileage than electric buses will do.

 

[6Gman]

Just to return to the 175s ...

The route for which they would be ideal would be Manchester - Crewe - Shrewsbury - Cardiff - Swansea.

Just an idea.

 

[northwichcat]

25 years old? They're 36 years old now unless you're counting when they started at Northern.

To be fair the 319s had an intensive life at Thameslink.

I meant 35, that was a typo. It doesn't change the fact that electric and diesel trains the same age are both getting towards being life expired.

Isn't the same true of the 156s? The ones that arrived from Anglia via East Midlands have been worked more intensively than the ones that arrived from Scotrail a few years back?

Using that logic, you'd cancel electrification of the MML straight away.

Trains, even going between Oxford or Aylesbury and Marylebone will do vastly greater mileage than electric buses will do.

I don't see why you've concluded that. The Chiltern routes aren't top of any lists for being electrified. There's a big difference between thinking like Chris Grayling and saying North TransPennine doesn't need continuous electrification, when it was a priority for electrification a few years back, and saying continuous electrification might not been be needed by the time Network Rail get to medium level priorities in over 10 years time.

I also wasn't suggesting trains work the same way as buses, just pointing out what was unviable as recently as 10 years ago is now viable. Advancements in technology are happening at a rapid rate, so it no longer makes sense to plan for a UK network with overhead wires throughout. It made sense when the Swiss did it, but we need to consider all options.

Just to return to the 175s ...

The route for which they would be ideal would be Manchester - Crewe - Shrewsbury - Cardiff - Swansea.

Just an idea.

Not sure tbh. 3 cars isn't enough capacity on some services and they don't have corridor connectors. Ideally on a route that long you should have a shop or trolley service.

 

[12LDA28C]

I don't know your age, but electrification of the Chiltern Line WILL obviously happen if we're to get to Net Zero etc. it's not some quiet branch line, it's a London commuter line. And indeed a Birmingham commuter line.

Ah of course, Net Zero, the mythical aspiration of the current Government, as long as it doesn't involve any unpopular policies which will cost them votes.

Didcot to Oxford is not a quiet branch line either but that hasn't been electrified yet. If Chiltern procure a fleet of battery/hybrid units or similar then that will push electrification back even further into the realms of fantasy.

 

[317 forever]

I'm all for criticising the DfT, but I disagree here. If the DfT had a big pot of money for these TOCs, why spend it on 175s? Much better to buy CAF bi-modes for Northern for example, saving on training, and giving a fleet that is fit for the long term, rather than a 5 year stop gap, and probably not a massive difference in leasing + operating costs.

For GWR, the 158s are clearly a much better option and not very far away.

For Chiltern, I can't see the benefit of replacing half a fleet. Either the 165s need to go, in which case replace them all, or they are fine, in which case keep them. What do you gain by replacing some with an incompatible fleet needing more training and which is hardly renowned for reliability.

For Scotrail, if a short term HST replacement is needed then 222s look more sensible.


Railways are here to efficiently carry passengers, not to be homes for trains that have reached the end of their fitness for purpose but which enthusiasts can't help but try to find homes for! When that happens at an official level you get disasters like the 442 conversion for SWR or HSTs for Scotrail!

On the contrary. Railways are here to provide enthusiasts with a soap opera on tracks to follow. If passengers decide to use them, that's their shout.

The 175s have been ruled out for Chiltern this week by the MD, surely if they're looking for extra DMUs it'll be 170s (potentially from Cross Country)?

Talking of which, the 175s could replace 170s with Cross Country. They would be suitably familiar with the Cardiff area for example.

 

[Bikeman78]

I don't disagree, but as I've said many times before, it ain't gonna happen, no matter how many people on this forum fantasise that it will. That's why Chiltern have tendered for new units to replace the 165s - because they know there is zero prospect of electrification for many many years and I suspect not within my lifetime.

I'm certainly under no illusions but that simply shows that the people in charge of the country are idiots. An electric railway is cheaper, quieter, usually faster and more reliable; assuming the OHL is built to a robust standard. It makes sense to electrify routes as the diesel trains are due for replacement, or have a plan as to where they will be cascaded. We currently have the farcical situation of modern EMUs sitting around whilst various DMU fleets are coming to the end of their lives. How could we possibly solve that problem?

As for the 175s, I won't be at all surprised to see them go for scrap. I doubt they are cheaper to run than 150/156/158 and they would need a lot of work doing on them to make them reliable again.

Yet 25 year old 319s have been an unreliable train type for Northern and the ones given newer parts as part of the 769 conversion have faired even worse! To be fair the 319s and the ex-Anglia 156s are similar in age and both need replacing urgently.

That is nothing to do with their age. I remember them in the Connex era when they were only a few years old. They were even worse then. One thing that has been constant is the poor heating. No idea why 319s are worse than the similar 317s or 321s.

 

[The Planner]

Ah of course, Net Zero, the mythical aspiration of the current Government, as long as it doesn't involve any unpopular policies which will cost them votes.

Didcot to Oxford is not a quiet branch line either but that hasn't been electrified yet. If Chiltern procure a fleet of battery/hybrid units or similar then that will push electrification back even further into the realms of fantasy.

That assumes that full electrification of the route is the best value.

 

[Caaardiff]

Talking of which, the 175s could replace 170s with Cross Country.

Realistically that would make more sense. XC have 29 170s made up of 7 2 cars and and 22 3 cars, totalling 80 carriages. The 27 175's are made up of 11 2 car and 16 3 cars totalling 70 carriages. If XC could pick up a couple more 5 car voyagers then the capacity would be balance.
That would free up 170's for other franchises that already have them in the fleet. From a maintenance perspective XC change from 170 to 175 and another TOC can add to an already existing fleet.
In an ideal world TFW would then pick up some of those 170's to replace the god awful 153's and actually put some investment into the route clearances for what's required on the routes they were originally destined for.

 

[RobShipway]

Realistically that would make more sense. XC have 29 170s made up of 7 2 cars and and 22 3 cars, totalling 80 carriages. The 27 175's are made up of 11 2 car and 16 3 cars totalling 70 carriages. If XC could pick up a couple more 5 car voyagers then the capacity would be balance.
That would free up 170's for other franchises that already have them in the fleet. From a maintenance perspective XC change from 170 to 175 and another TOC can add to an already existing fleet.
In an ideal world TFW would then pick up some of those 170's to replace the god awful 153's and actually put some investment into the route clearances for what's required on the routes they were originally destined for.

The classes 756, 231 and 197 are set to replace the class 153 units. So TFW do not need any class 170 units. In fact I am sure I read that the TFW class 170 units where going to EMR?

 

[43102EMR]

The classes 756, 231 and 197 are set to replace the class 153 units. So TFW do not need any class 170 units. In fact I am sure I read that the TFW class 170 units where going to EMR?

The 170s were originally meant to replace the 153s on the HoW line, but TfW abandoned the plans due to route clearance issues/the transfer of the 170s to EMR, so they instead purchased 153s outright to continue running on the line.

 

[43096]

The classes 756, 231 and 197 are set to replace the class 153 units.

They’re not - some of the 153s are being retained for HoW and associated services.

 

[Bob Price]

And some of the 153's will be rebuilt as active travel units, taking bikes similar to the Scotrail ones.

 

[6Gman]

Not sure tbh. 3 cars isn't enough capacity on some services and they don't have corridor connectors. Ideally on a route that long you should have a shop or trolley service.

My suggestion re using them on the Marches was tongue in cheek but they were ideal for that route given their level of comfort.

It's a service I used a lot pre-Covid (albeit only between Ludlow and Manchester) and honestly cannot remember ever having to stand*! Yes, people did stand but this was generally either because they suffer from the British reluctance to sit next to anyone to whom they have not been formally introduced or for short stretches* - yes, the 1730 from Manchester would be full & standing; after Stockport it would be 100%; after Wilmslow there would be empty seats.

And if they were concentrated on that route they could have provided ample capacity: 175/0 + 175/0; 175/1 + 175/0. The lack of through corridor connection is a drawback but not insuperable.

There was a trolley service at one time - I presume it was withdrawn because it was a heavy loss-maker.

* Clearly there was severe overcrowding during disruption or special events but that would be the same whatever units were used.

As for the 175s, I won't be at all surprised to see them go for scrap. I doubt they are cheaper to run than 150/156/158 and they would need a lot of work doing on them to make them reliable again.

Sadly, I believe this is the likely outcome.

Basically they were a mistake. An expensive incompatible micro-fleet with reliability issues.

But a glorious mistake as they were supremely comfortable.

 

[northwichcat]

My suggestion re using them on the Marches was tongue in cheek but they were ideal for that route given their level of comfort.

It's a service I used a lot pre-Covid (albeit only between Ludlow and Manchester) and honestly cannot remember ever having to stand*! Yes, people did stand but this was generally either because they suffer from the British reluctance to sit next to anyone to whom they have not been formally introduced or for short stretches* - yes, the 1730 from Manchester would be full & standing; after Stockport it would be 100%; after Wilmslow there would be empty seats.

And if they were concentrated on that route they could have provided ample capacity: 175/0 + 175/0; 175/1 + 175/0. The lack of through corridor connection is a drawback but not insuperable.

There was a trolley service at one time - I presume it was withdrawn because it was a heavy loss-maker.

* Clearly there was severe overcrowding during disruption or special events but that would be the same whatever units were used.

Last time I caught it there was a 2 car 150 running it and it arrived in Stockport with all seats occupied and around 30 standing in each carriage. More people got on at Stockport than off and it was more lightly loaded after leaving Crewe.

A few years back there were certain services that showed in the timetable as "Reservations Recommended", rather than "Reservations Available". The use of that symbol was very rare, it was only usually used on the first Off Peak Intercity services to and from London. Of course, a bit vague too - is it going to be busy from Manchester to Milford Haven, ot just for specific sections?

I doubt many middle class people from Wilmslow actually use that service. The town has social housing too and onward bus connections. The Wilmslow stereotype you're thinking of are the type of people who park oversized cars badly in the station car park, ahead of heading to the platform for the next London service and boarding one of the first class carriages.

 

[Purple Train]

There was a trolley service at one time - I presume it was withdrawn because it was a heavy loss-maker.

There was a trolley when I used the service (2-coach 150) a couple of weeks ago!

Sadly, I believe this is the likely outcome.

Basically they were a mistake. An expensive incompatible micro-fleet with reliability issues.

But a glorious mistake as they were supremely comfortable.

Well said.

 

[YorkRailFan]

As this is the Speculative Section, I'll let my mind run wild and say that 2 car 175s could run on the Marston Vale Line in the future.

 

[6Gman]

Last time I caught it there was a 2 car 150 running it and it arrived in Stockport with all seats occupied and around 30 standing in each carriage. More people got on at Stockport than off and it was more lightly loaded after leaving Crewe.

A few years back there were certain services that showed in the timetable as "Reservations Recommended", rather than "Reservations Available". The use of that symbol was very rare, it was only usually used on the first Off Peak Intercity services to and from London. Of course, a bit vague too - is it going to be busy from Manchester to Milford Haven, ot just for specific sections?

I doubt many middle class people from Wilmslow actually use that service. The town has social housing too and onward bus connections. The Wilmslow stereotype you're thinking of are the type of people who park oversized cars badly in the station car park, ahead of heading to the platform for the next London service and boarding one of the first class carriages.

I never referred to any "Wilmslow stereotype" so I'm puzzled by your comment.

I simply pointed out that, in my experience, the 1730 ex-Manchester empties significantly at Wilmslow. Whether they are "middle class" or live in "social housing" I have no idea. But they get on at Piccadilly and get off at Wilmslow!

There was a trolley when I used the service (2-coach 150) a couple of weeks ago!

That's good news!