Class 185 refurbishment for TPE.

[Bantamzen]

Lots of this is true. People refuse to move sometimes, and when they don't I'm standing wherever I fit with my bike, because more often than not when I leave it unattended it gets manhandled, and if it's in the cycle space someone else might lean theirs on it, which is a real pain when I want to get off. When it's busy it gets leant on by people which I really don't appreciate.
It's also unaccpetable that most guards won't enforce the cycle space unless the train is rammed, and when it's that bad I can't get to the cycle space, I don't want it there - I'd rather stay in the vestibule with my bike. It takes an age to get back out, and while it's in there it gets leant on, and often the whole thing just annoys everyone.

Bike spaces are for bikes, not people.
TPE are completely clueless about cycle storage. Nowhere else that you can take a bike on the train have I ever had an issue!

Just on this matter, and sorry to be really blunt, but frankly be grateful that there is any cycle space currently on the 185s at all. I think I can safely say that most passengers rammed onto the peaks each would rather have an area for disabled passengers and the rest for seating people. As has been mentioned, TPE’s policy will be changing with the pending arrival of the new stock, and as also mentioned over on one of the Crossrail threads elsewhere cycle restrictions are from just a TPE thing. I have no problem with some people occasionally bringing bikes onto trains, but with the ever increasing popularity of cycling in general more and more people are starting to arrive at stations with them. I’ve seen on at least one occasion half a dozen or more cyclists having angry exchanges with other passengers about the limited space, and on one occasion (during the Tour De France in Yorkshire) cyclists (as well as prams) trying to ram onto chock-full 333s even after Northern had specifically told passengers (both through publicity & by station announcements) not to attempt to board the service with them. At some point the TOCs need to deal with this, most trains have at best only a limited amount of room to carry them and if too many are carried they start to cause issues with blocking doorwells, corridors and even occasionally depriving fare paying passengers room to board services. Cycling I’m afraid has become something of a victim of it’s own success, and it is highly unlikely that TOCs will ever be able to meet the demand for more cycle storage space on trains.

It is worth remembering that trains are primarily for people, not bikes. And on services where there are many more people than seats, and these services also act as not only commuter and even inter-city / international airport services priorities have to be made. Hopefully the idea of cycle reservations will mean that the numbers can better be managed to reduce issues for train crews in future.

 

[Goldie]

The fact that new and recently built trains still do not include sensibly thought out cycle storage is just another way that the railways are utterly failing to respond to the needs of their customers. As a passenger, I don't want to be sharing space with bikes and in particular, I don't want to be bumping into the various spiky and greasy bits that bikes have on them. As a cyclist, I don't want a carriage full of resentful passengers to be jealously eying up the tip up seats behind my bike or using it as a handhold. Both points of view are reasonable, and the solution is for TOCS to reintroduce (and monetise, if necessary) dedicated luggage space, separate from passenger accommodation.

Fast forward to TPE's introduction of the Mk5 loco hauled stock. How nice would it be to turn up at, say, Scarborough station on your bike, and load it into a rack in the DVT, knowing that it will be safe in there for the duration of the journey? Conversely, how good would it be as a standing passenger on a crowded train to not have the sinking feeling that comes from seeing a lad with a bike in amongst the crowd waiting on the platform? Yes, it would mean longer dwell times. But it would be a major step towards the railways actually offering the services that you might reasonably expect of them.

 

[northwichcat]

Never mind all this naming business when are the set numbers going to be reinstated on the cab fronts? At least put the last 3 digits on. It's impossible now to identify a set from a bridge if you're taking a photo of it as speed...... Why were they taken off in the first place when the second raft of refurbs began? 108 and 123 were fine.......

So? Unit numbers aren't put on trains for the convenience of spotters.

 

[185143]

So? Unit numbers aren't put on trains for the convenience of spotters.

They aren't. But if it ain't broke and all that...

 

[northwichcat]

and when it's that bad I can't get to the cycle space, I don't want it there - I'd rather stay in the vestibule with my bike.

So when it's more convenient to leave it in the bike rack you want to use it but when it's not convenient you want to block the aisle/doors with your bike.

I really don't know what the solution is with bikes. On the Northern 156s they have clear markings on the exterior telling you which door to load your bike on through. Yet often people load them at the wrong end and put them in the wheelchair space next to the toilet, where there's a sign clearly saying not to leave bikes or luggage there. Some do even worse and load them through the middle doors and then leave them blocking the door on the other side, as though they think the doors will be released on the same side at every station. (Something some people also do with suitcases.)

 

[northwichcat]

Think you mean a 323, 322s dont go to piccadilly, well not yet anyway.

Perhaps there was a time warp? 322s were once used by First North Western.

 

[jonesy3001]

Perhaps there was a time warp? 322s were once used by First North Western.

can only remember the 303s,304s,305s,309s and the 323s that replaced them.

 

[northwichcat]

can only remember the 303s,304s,305s,309s and the 323s that replaced them.

322s were used on the limited open access services to London via the Trent Valley for a short period - similar to what LM run now but I think they started at Manchester Airport. I don't know for certain if they ever went through Piccadilly.

 

[61653 HTAFC]

can only remember the 303s,304s,305s,309s and the 323s that replaced them.

They weren't there long- used on Manchester Airport to London Euston services shortly after privatisation. IIRC they had awkward stopping patterns due to Moderation of Competition and weren't a huge success. There were also 158s to Euston from Rochdale via Victoria.

One or two 322s stayed in FNW Gold Star livery for several years afterwards, working with WAGN.

 

[BurtonM]

So when it's more convenient to leave it in the bike rack you want to use it but when it's not convenient you want to block the aisle/doors with your bike.

So the train is standing room only and I want to get on with my bike - I'm already met with disapproving looks.
Do I try and part the crowds and work my way to and from the inevitably fully occupied cycle space, whether it be full of misplaced suitcases that I then have to move and completely block the aisle, or displace three to four people from the tip up seats? And then have to get it out again when I get off?
Or do I just put the bike in the vestibule where it fits and causes the least inconvenience to everyone until space frees up?

 

[xotGD]

If you take a bike onto the train every day as part of your commute then it would seem reasonable to invest in a folding bike (or have two bikes - one stabled at each end). If you take your bike on the train as part of a tour/day out, then getting a reservation shouldn't be too much of a faff.

Secure bike storage at stations is important - and ought to be promoted.

 

[Eboordna]

So 185121 is confirmed as being in the new livery and both 185110 and 185118 were out in old livery yesterday, so we should be at this as of 10th September:

Units in bold are re-vinyled but unrefurbished
Units in blue are re-vinyled AND refurbished
Units in red are currently being refurbished

185101, 185102, 185103, 185104, 185105, 185106, 185107, 185108, 185109, 185110, 185111, 185112, 185113, 185114, 185115, 185116, 185117, 185118, 185119, 185120, 185121, 185122, 185123, 185124, 185125, 185126, 185127, 185128, 185129, 185130, 185131, 185132, 185133, 185134, 185135, 185136, 185137, 185138, 185139, 185140, 185141, 185142, 185143, 185144, 185145, 185146, 185147, 185148, 185149, 185150, 185151.

118 is now stopped on Ardwick for vinyls. Due back out on 19/09.

 

[Bletchleyite]

They weren't there long- used on Manchester Airport to London Euston services shortly after privatisation. IIRC they had awkward stopping patterns due to Moderation of Competition and weren't a huge success. There were also 158s to Euston from Rochdale via Victoria.

The Airport services largely carried one man and possibly, but not always, his dog and bicycle.

The Rochdale service did better, though it was killed by poor paths in the end. Realistically, though, a 2-car Class 158 was a waste of space on the WCML - in 2017 it'd be laughed at.

 

[Uncle Bulgaria]

So? Unit numbers aren't put on trains for the convenience of spotters.

Sorry to be blunt here, but I find your comment both rude (as in cocky) and crass. As a spotter, I spend a lot of money travelling around on the railways and particularly TPE. Most spotters are not second class citizens who sit on a bridge, they do actually put something back into the railways and certainly in my case - a lot!

As another poster said, if it ain't broken, don't mend it....

 

[ValleyLines142]

I'm going for '110, since it was the last one to be seen in the original 'barbie' livery. No logic there I know!

And as post #702 confirms 185110 is the very last unit in First livery!

 

[northwichcat]

Sorry to be blunt here, but I find your comment both rude (as in cocky) and crass. As a spotter, I spend a lot of money travelling around on the railways and particularly TPE. Most spotters are not second class citizens who sit on a bridge, they do actually put something back into the railways and certainly in my case - a lot!

As another poster said, if it ain't broken, don't mend it....

Perhaps TPE want a consistent system which will work with their 802s and 397s as well. The new trains will have fronts similar to Voyagers and 390s, which as mentioned, have never had unit numbers on their fronts. For the average passenger a TOC's branding on the front is far more useful than a plain yellow front with a unit number.

I simply pointed out a fact. It might be nice for spotters like yourself to be able to see the numbers on the front of the train but it's not something TOCs have to provide. Saying how much you spend doesn't change that.

 

[MCR247]

Sorry to be blunt here, but I find your comment both rude (as in cocky) and crass. As a spotter, I spend a lot of money travelling around on the railways and particularly TPE. Most spotters are not second class citizens who sit on a bridge, they do actually put something back into the railways and certainly in my case - a lot!



As another poster said, if it ain't broken, don't mend it....

So what you're saying is because you pay for travel TPE should put unit numbers on the front? Surely you're proving his point more than anything!

 

[CosherB]

Sorry to be blunt here, but I find your comment both rude (as in cocky) and crass. As a spotter, I spend a lot of money travelling around on the railways and particularly TPE. Most spotters are not second class citizens who sit on a bridge, they do actually put something back into the railways and certainly in my case - a lot!

So you're an elitist first-class spotter?

Perhaps you should write to First Group asking for the unit numbers to be applied to the front of all of their TPE stock? GWR do it ....

 

[61653 HTAFC]

The Airport services largely carried one man and possibly, but not always, his dog and bicycle.

The Rochdale service did better, though it was killed by poor paths in the end. Realistically, though, a 2-car Class 158 was a waste of space on the WCML - in 2017 it'd be laughed at.

Since my previous post, I half-remembered that the 158 Rochdale service may have combined with an ex-Blackpool unit somewhere en-route, sending 4 cars down the WCML. Slightly less of a waste in theory, though not if the loadings consisted of just a handful of people and the occasional Member of Parliament!

Back on topic, can't believe I've yet to bag a new interior! Yet 110 (and previously 118) seem to be stalking me!

 

[driver9000]

Since my previous post, I half-remembered that the 158 Rochdale service may have combined with an ex-Blackpool unit somewhere en-route, sending 4 cars down the WCML. Slightly less of a waste in theory, though not if the loadings consisted of just a handful of people and the occasional Member of Parliament!

Back on topic, can't believe I've yet to bag a new interior! Yet 110 (and previously 118) seem to be stalking me!

The North Western Trains London services combined and split at Warrington Bank Quay. As I recall it didn't call for passengers though and stopped just to attach and detach. The Blackpool portion wasn't allowed to call at Preston either.

 

[Crossforth]

Since my previous post, I half-remembered that the 158 Rochdale service may have combined with an ex-Blackpool unit somewhere en-route, sending 4 cars down the WCML. Slightly less of a waste in theory, though not if the loadings consisted of just a handful of people and the occasional Member of Parliament!

Back on topic, can't believe I've yet to bag a new interior! Yet 110 (and previously 118) seem to be stalking me!

Don't worry, I work onboard the 185s and only bagged a new interior on Saturday

 

[Uncle Bulgaria]

So you're an elitist first-class spotter?

Perhaps you should write to First Group asking for the unit numbers to be applied to the front of all of their TPE stock? GWR do it ....

Maybe I am, if that's what putting my money into the TOC's coffers!

I have written to TPE three times and e-mailed twice - sadly never got a reply on any occasion!

 

[Uncle Bulgaria]

So what you're saying is because you pay for travel TPE should put unit numbers on the front? Surely you're proving his point more than anything!

I do both - travel on the rails a lot and also spend time on other days with the camera on bridges.

 

[Uncle Bulgaria]

Perhaps TPE want a consistent system which will work with their 802s and 397s as well. The new trains will have fronts similar to Voyagers and 390s, which as mentioned, have never had unit numbers on their fronts. For the average passenger a TOC's branding on the front is far more useful than a plain yellow front with a unit number.

I simply pointed out a fact. It might be nice for spotters like yourself to be able to see the numbers on the front of the train but it's not something TOCs have to provide. Saying how much you spend doesn't change that.

It's really got nothing to do with how much I spend on network travel, it's more to do with the photographic side of the hobby which is pointless from a bridge with a set at speed which is now unidentifiable front on.... As there's no way online of checking any data to see which set is operating or did operate a particular service, I've kind of given up....

 

[CosherB]

I have written to TPE three times and e-mailed twice - sadly never got a reply on any occasion!

Fair play to you!

 

[Uncle Bulgaria]

Fair play to you!

As stated in the original post, by the time of letter number 3, I even offered to sponsor the numbers ()

 

[Crossover]

It's really got nothing to do with how much I spend on network travel, it's more to do with the photographic side of the hobby which is pointless from a bridge with a set at speed which is now unidentifiable front on.... As there's no way online of checking any data to see which set is operating or did operate a particular service, I've kind of given up....

You can always ask on the TOPS thread here as to find out what was booked, at least, to work it

 

[Uncle Bulgaria]

You can always ask on the TOPS thread here as to find out what was booked, at least, to work it

Thanks, that's really kind. It would be great if there were to be something like flightradar or flightaware going forward which has totally up to the minute and accurate info.. Suppose the easiest is to find a way of doing it on the realtimetrains.co.uk site.

 

[BurtonM]

If you take a bike onto the train every day as part of your commute then it would seem reasonable to invest in a folding bike (or have two bikes - one stabled at each end). If you take your bike on the train as part of a tour/day out, then getting a reservation shouldn't be too much of a faff.

Secure bike storage at stations is important - and ought to be promoted.

My bike is part of my job so a folding bike is no good to me, and I'd rather not leave a bike exposed to the elements regularly for a lot of reasons. On top of that Manchester has something of a bike theft problem - as well as that I can't use the TfGM cycle hubs as they close at 7pm and I finish work at 10pm.
If I want to take my bike on the train I should be able to. TPE are trying to have it both ways and it doesn't work.

 

[Bungle965]

My bike is part of my job so a folding bike is no good to me, and I'd rather not leave a bike exposed to the elements regularly for a lot of reasons. On top of that Manchester has something of a bike theft problem - as well as that I can't use the TfGM cycle hubs as they close at 7pm and I finish work at 10pm.
If I want to take my bike on the train I should be able to. TPE are trying to have it both ways and it doesn't work.

I always thought that the cycle hubs were open until at least midnight, with perhaps the exception of City Tower.
I believe the MediaCity one is 24h.
Sam