Class 180 Adelantes leaving EMR

[James Kevill]

Did the corrosion of the unit with 4 coaches happen before or after the transfer to EMR?

I think it's after when they are replaced by Class 802/3s from Hull Trains then yes.

 

[liamf656]

Are there any timetable reductions as a result of this, or will the difference be made up simply by running fewer double sets?

Not confirmed yet realistically you only need to shorten two services in the morning and two in the evening. During the day the loss of the 09:45 STP-MMO and the 14:35 MMO-STP will certainly help, plus the 10:02 STP-SHF and 12:37 SHF-STP is a lightly loaded 10 car so I wouldn’t be surprised to see that shortened. I also reckon the 222s will see Cricklewood a bit less during the day

Did the corrosion of the unit with 4 coaches happen before or after the transfer to EMR?

I was told that it should be back as a 5 car “very soon”, and that it’s either in Doncaster now or will go imminently, but don’t quote me on that!!

 

[baz962]

I am led to believe that EMR are considering running a unit round ECS for route retention. Not sure of the details though.

 

[Wolfie]

Or indeed the plan for the Adelantes themselves?

Wilkinson Sword. They've always been junk, now they are heavily corroded junk.

 

[londonmidland]

Overcrowding is going to be horrendous on the MML at weekends.

It’s already bad as it is now…

 

[DannyMich2018]

Overcrowding is going to be horrendous on the MML at weekends.

It’s already bad as it is now…

I agree, however weekdays can be less busy so maybe diagram more then? For example the 17.35 St Pancras to Nott on weekdays is a double 222 (I'm on it now) and it's never too busy as I get it every Friday Kett to Leicester, easily can go 5 cars). 16.35 from St Pancras to Nott is the same. Sundays might be fun as 3 180s are usually diagrammed (2 been a double set). Cutting the Melton service makes sense as few passengers travel north of Corby and its not much slower for Melton or Oakham passengers to travel via Leicester and change there.

 

[QSK19]

Cutting the Melton service makes sense as few passengers travel north of Corby and its not much slower for Melton or Oakham passengers to travel via Leicester and change there.

As per message #57 in this thread, the Melton service is needed for diversionary route knowledge.

 

[Wyrleybart]

I am led to believe that EMR are considering running a unit round ECS for route retention. Not sure of the details though.

Happening at other TOCs so wouldn't be a surprise

 

[DannyMich2018]

As per message #57 in this thread, the Melton service is needed for diversionary route knowledge.

Yes of course we need a few to go this way but main point was weekdays many 10 car 222 can be 5 so eliminate 180s. Let's see what happens in the coming weeks and months...

 

[QSK19]

Let's see what happens in the coming weeks and months...

Well this is it, there is so much uncertainty that the lesson is not to believe something until we actually see it!

 

[Merle Haggard]

As per message #57 in this thread, the Melton service is needed for diversionary route knowledge.

I'm puzzled, because most days there's a 5M17 08.39 (ish) St Pancras to Cricklewood A to F which spends the day shuttling via Melton to Leicester and back, and on slow lines on all the 4 track sections twice and I thought this was for route retention.

 

[spotify95]

Whilst more crowded trains isn’t ideal, one good thing about EMR is that they do seem willing to declassify the first class section in coach D which does help things somewhat.

The worst thing about the 180s going is that you can’t get a decent phone signal on the 222s and the wifi is awful

This is because the metallic film in the windows block all sorts of RF out - from 87.5MHz (FM) all the way up to 3500MHz (5G) and beyond.
As such, the Wi-Fi gets very overloaded very quickly because everyone has to use the Wi-Fi, due to not being able to get a decent phone signal.

The HSTs used to be fine, before they were scrapped. The 360s are also fine. The 222s are not.

IMO the 222s should go before the 180s. But that's just my opinion. Hopefully the 810s won't have this sort of issue.

 

[D365]

IMO the 222s should go before the 180s. But that's just my opinion.

Even without the impending 180 withdrawal, the 222 fleet is far larger. Note how LNER got rid of the 90s as soon as the 800s came in.

 

[Wolfie]

This is because the metallic film in the windows block all sorts of RF out - from 87.5MHz (FM) all the way up to 3500MHz (5G) and beyond.
As such, the Wi-Fi gets very overloaded very quickly because everyone has to use the Wi-Fi, due to not being able to get a decent phone signal.

The HSTs used to be fine, before they were scrapped. The 360s are also fine. The 222s are not.

IMO the 222s should go before the 180s. But that's just my opinion. Hopefully the 810s won't have this sort of issue.

The 222s are not, and never have been, unreliable old junk likely to catch fire at any moment, from the day that they entered service.

Edited to add: I forgot the junkheaps severe corrosion issues. The scrapman is calling....

 

[WizCastro197]

IMO the 222s should go before the 180s. But that's just my opinion.

Because older corroding units should take prevalence over newer not corroding units? Without wanting to sound demanding, why do you think this?

 

[bramling]

The 222s are not, and never have been, unreliable old junk likely to catch fire at any moment, from the day that they entered service.

Edited to add: I forgot the junkheaps severe corrosion issues. The scrapman is calling....

It is something of a shame, as the general view seems to be that the 180s (and 175s) are pretty nice units from the passenger point of view, when they’re working correctly of course.

Very unfortunate they have never really been able to be made to work reliably, and unfortunately on that score I do tend to agree it is probably time for them to go now, as their reliability is likely to only get worse.

What would be good is if someone could offer a unit with the same external appearance and passenger ambience, that actually works!

 

[spotify95]

The 222s are not, and never have been, unreliable old junk likely to catch fire at any moment, from the day that they entered service.

Edited to add: I forgot the junkheaps severe corrosion issues. The scrapman is calling....

The 222s have, however, needed their panes of glass smashing out and replacing with standard, non metallic glass. The same can be said for CrossCountry's 220/221 and Avanti's 221.

I once managed to get a 180 and the acceleration actually felt better than a 222, it also didn't have the design flaw with the windows that the 222s have. I don't like their squeaky brakes though, why the brakes make so much noise when entering a station (not noticeable with any other type of train) I do not know!

And if the 180s really are as bad as you say they are, then why did we get those added to the fleet and the HSTs removed? Surely someone thought they were fit for purpose?

 

[liamf656]

I once managed to get a 180 and the acceleration actually felt better than a 222, it also didn't have the design flaw with the windows that the 222s have. I don't like their squeaky brakes though, why the brakes make so much noise when entering a station (not noticeable with any other type of train) I do not know!

Acceleration and phone signal quality are unfortunately not worthy reasons to keep them in service

And if the 180s really are as bad as you say they are, then why did we get those added to the fleet and the HSTs removed? Surely someone thought they were fit for purpose?

The HSTs were also way past it. The ex LNER ones had to be shortened to 6 coaches when they moved to EMR as too many coaches were in such bad condition that they couldn’t be fully formed, and that’s without addressing the elephant in the room, the disability discrimination laws. Slam door stock couldn’t stay beyond May 2021. However I’ll admit that those particular HSTs were so much nicer as a passenger (even compared to 222s)

 

[HamworthyGoods]

The 222s have, however, needed their panes of glass smashing out and replacing with standard, non metallic glass. The same can be said for CrossCountry's 220/221 and Avanti's 221.

What’s the design flaw with the windows you go on about? I understand these windows are designed to ensure passengers are not ejected from a train in the unlikely event of a collision.

Surely a far bigger design flaw is the horrendous corrosion the 180s are suffering, so much so one of the vehicles in a set has had to be taken out of traffic. That sounds like a big flaw.

 

[QSK19]

I don't like their squeaky brakes though, why the brakes make so much noise when entering a station (not noticeable with any other type of train) I do not know!

Sintered brake pads.

 

[Kneedown]

Sintered brake pads.

Brake pads of which the biting surface is comprised of 18 large copper "nuts", that give you a phenominally good braking performance at all speeds, even if they are a tad squealy.

 

[Pete_uk]

I would love to see a photo of the corrosion.

 

[spotify95]

I would love to see a photo of the corrosion.

Same, I'd love to see real photos/examples showing just how unserviceable these 180s are (except for one of the coaches of 110, I know that's been out of service for ages).

I'm typing this between Market Harborough and Leicester; I couldn't do it between Kettering and Market Harborough because 222011 (and all of the other 22x) have metalized windows which screen out all RF. You can't GPS these trains either because the GPS signals are also blocked by the metallic RF screening. Oh, and the Wi-Fi was complete trash as expected!

 

[InTheEastMids]

I once managed to get a 180 and the acceleration actually felt better than a 222

I don't think you're the first on here to say this, although in practical terms there difference is pretty small. I don't think the timetable performance would change noticeably if somebody was able to conjure 27 or more additional Class 180s from somewhere and bin the 222s.

The ex LNER ones had to be shortened to 6 coaches when they moved to EMR as too many coaches were in such bad condition that they couldn’t be fully formed

LNER only finished with them in December 2019 and they were all gone from EMR by the end of 2021. Not disagreeing about the condition - I've no knowledge. However, the pandemic must have influenced decisions about if, and how quickly, to bring them up to standard, and whether to keep them serviceable.

Brake pads of which the biting surface is comprised of 18 large copper "nuts", that give you a phenominally good braking performance at all speeds

Were these always a feature of Cl180s? My recollection from other threads is that the 180s had hydrodynamic brakes in the transmission, which weren't up to the job, so were locked out or removed. If so, then were these installed to give the disc brakes a bit more stopability?

 

[supervc-10]

What’s the design flaw with the windows you go on about? I understand these windows are designed to ensure passengers are not ejected from a train in the unlikely event of a collision.

Surely a far bigger design flaw is the horrendous corrosion the 180s are suffering, so much so one of the vehicles in a set has had to be taken out of traffic. That sounds like a big flaw.

The way that the 222 (and Voyagers) have a film coating on the glass that stops RF, such as mobile phone signals. Nothing to do with preventing people being ejected in an accident - other trains have the same requirements but don't block your phone signal.

But yes, chronic corrosion is a bigger issue, in my opinion, along with chronic unreliability. 222s are a better overall train, but the 180s do have certain plus points.

 

[3RDGEN]

I don't think you're the first on here to say this, although in practical terms there difference is pretty small. I don't think the timetable performance would change noticeably if somebody was able to conjure 27 or more additional Class 180s from somewhere and bin the 222s.


LNER only finished with them in December 2019 and they were all gone from EMR by the end of 2021. Not disagreeing about the condition - I've no knowledge. However, the pandemic must have influenced decisions about if, and how quickly, to bring them up to standard, and whether to keep them serviceable.


Were these always a feature of Cl180s? My recollection from other threads is that the 180s had hydrodynamic brakes in the transmission, which weren't up to the job, so were locked out or removed. If so, then were these installed to give the disc brakes a bit more stopability?

The 180's have had the sintered pads since build. The 175 & 180's have hydrodynamic braking via the transmission which worked fine, same as 185's, however the heat generated was too much for the cooler group so it caused overheating issues. The hydrodynamic braking has been isolated on both fleets for many years but remains in place within the transmission.

 

[Dinszy]

Does anyone know when we expect to see the missing carriage out of 180 110 put back into service?

 

[skyhigh]

Does anyone know when we expect to see the missing carriage out of 180 110 put back into service?

I think you'd be better off asking "Does anyone know if we expect to see the missing carriage out of 180 110 put back into service?". If they're being withdrawn soon with no future home, you can see why the owner wouldn't be overly keen on putting a vehicle through expensive works...

 

[liamf656]

Does anyone know when we expect to see the missing carriage out of 180 110 put back into service?

It shouldn’t be too long. It’s back at Etches Park now fully formed

 

[Kneedown]

I think you'd be better off asking "Does anyone know if we expect to see the missing carriage out of 180 110 put back into service?". If they're being withdrawn soon with no future home, you can see why the owner wouldn't be overly keen on putting a vehicle through expensive works...

I'm pretty sure they would have to be returned to the rosco the same as they were received.