• Our new ticketing site is now live! Using either this or the original site (both powered by TrainSplit) helps support the running of the forum with every ticket purchase! Find out more and ask any questions/give us feedback in this thread!

Could 158s outlast classes 16x, 17x and 18x?

Status
Not open for further replies.

Philip

On Moderation
Joined
27 May 2007
Messages
3,704
Location
Manchester
Do you think the class 158s may still be in passenger service after the Turbostars, Coradias and Pennines have been withdrawn?

They seem to be more solid mechanically than the 175s and 180s, whilst more fuel efficient and cheaper to run than the 185s, and lighter than both hence able to run at SP speeds. They accelerate quicker than 170s and seem to be a little more popular with the average passenger than any Turbostar is. Can you see them still running around whilst all the subsequent DMU families up to and including the 185s have been withdrawn?
 
Sponsor Post - registered members do not see these adverts; click here to register, or click here to log in
R

RailUK Forums

JonathanH

Veteran Member
Joined
29 May 2011
Messages
20,125
Do you think the class 158s may still be in passenger service after the Turbostars, Coradias and Pennines have been withdrawn?
No, it seems unlikely. It will depend somewhat on construction fatigue.

seem to be a little more popular with the average passenger than any Turbostar is
How do you measure that? I'm not sure the average passenger rates a 158 above a Turbostar because they probably don't have a view. Do people make explicit choices between 158s and 170s where they work alongside each other. People look for a seat, not the type of unit. Around Edinburgh, through Fife, there are opportunities to choose between a 158 and 170 on the same service. I don't think one fills up quicker than the other.
 

Philip

On Moderation
Joined
27 May 2007
Messages
3,704
Location
Manchester
No, it seems unlikely. It will depend somewhat on construction fatigue.


How do you measure that? I'm not sure the average passenger rates a 158 above a Turbostar because they probably don't have a view.

Class 158s have always had a classy 'express' feel to them and continue to have, to the point where they seem a bit out of place on some of Northern's suburban services. Turbostars, on the other hand, are noisy and vibrate and feel like a modern commuter train; without the 'cosiness' of the 158. The 158s also ride better than any of the subsequent DMUs built.
 

JonathanH

Veteran Member
Joined
29 May 2011
Messages
20,125
Class 158s have always had a classy 'express' feel to them and continue to have, to the point where they seem a bit out of place on some of Northern's suburban services. Turbostars, on the other hand, are noisy and vibrate and feel like a modern commuter train; without the 'cosiness' of the 158. The 158s also ride better than any of the subsequent DMUs built.
That depends on how grubby the ceiling is. Some 158s can be quite dingy. The drone of the 158s' transmission could also put some passengers off (although it is part of their 'character' also)
 

tbtc

Veteran Member
Joined
16 Dec 2008
Messages
17,882
Location
Reston City Centre
I can't see them outlasting the Turbostars but maybe the 175/180s, given the low class size.

The 180s were built to do a specific thing which electrification and bi-modes mean there isn't as much of a market for pure diesel trains doing 125mph - especially ones with such reliability problems. 175s are more reliable (without being great), but still, only twenty seven units, so maybe harder to find homes for.

185s were also built to do a specific thing - would you want heavy/thirsty units on routes that don't need heavy/thirsty trains that are good at climbing hills? Especially with so many 168/170/171s running around, doing a fairly similar job but without being quite as heavy/thirsty?

Whereas the 158s are pretty low-tech (in comparison), which might mean they can last longer (since there's less to go wrong!) - they are pretty tried/tested, and there are enough of them that you could find a number of them to suit your operation (whereas the 175/180/185s might be the wrong size of class to suit a TOC*)

Look at how the 460s (units built to do a specific thing) were partly scrapped whilst 313s (low tech units) are still running - there's something to be said for a big class of relatively basic/ low-tech trains, but a lot of negatives when it comes to ordering tiny classes of bespoke units (something FirstGroup seem rather good/bad at - depending on your point of view!)

But I think that the 150s will still be running even after the 158s are on a one-way-trip to Rotherham - 150s are like cockroaches - they'd survive anything!

(* - I appreciate we aren't necessarily going to have TOCs in the way that we used to but you know what I mean - a depot/ region/ operation may beed "x" DMUs but either too many for 175/180/185s to be enough or not enough but then the TOSCO will want to lease the full class size)
 

Bletchleyite

Veteran Member
Joined
20 Oct 2014
Messages
101,125
Location
"Marston Vale mafia"
185s could have the centre car depowered and the other two engines derated, and possibly the transmission swapped to mechanical. They are a bit heavy, but then you'd have a decent 150 replacement.
 

brad465

Established Member
Joined
11 Aug 2010
Messages
7,733
Location
Taunton or Kent
Depends how long 158s would have to live for to outlast them: if they are so good that they can live to their half-century they'd be going along with any other outstanding diesel stock in line with 2040 being when there's the target to have none on the network, when 175s would be around 40 and 185s 34/35, where it maybe possible for them to live to those ages if reliable for long enough.
 

Journeyman

Established Member
Joined
16 Apr 2014
Messages
6,295
I think to some extent we're discussing how many angels can dance on the head of a pin here. 158s and 170s have particularly strengths and weaknesses, but your average rail passenger wouldn't be able to tell the difference, and won't really care which of the two they're travelling in.

Pretty convinced the 158s will go first myself, they have a good decade on the 170s.
 

Irascible

Established Member
Joined
21 Apr 2020
Messages
2,226
Location
Dyfneint
Pretty sure pax on regional long distance services - the sort of thing 158s were built for - *can* tell them apart. I have a feeling they'll all probably go about the same time, though. Although possibly whatever suits the south west best will be the last...
 

zwk500

Veteran Member
Joined
20 Jan 2020
Messages
14,369
Location
Bristol
I have no actual numbers for this but I'd imagine the 170s fills up quicker due to the door arrangement.
I think JonathanH was saying passengers don't choose the 170 over the 158 or Vice versa, rather than talking about actual boarding time.
 

RobShipway

Established Member
Joined
20 Sep 2009
Messages
3,337
Unless the passengers are train enthusiasts like any of us, they would not know if they are a class 158, 170 or 175.

The class 158's where constructed between 1989 - 1993, which also includes Class 159 builds. The construction on the first class 170's started in 1998, with the last 170 built 2005 which includes the building of the class 168 & 171's. The class 175 units where built between 1999 - 2001. The class 185 got constructed 2005 - 2006.

If you go on age, then yes the class 158/159 units would be going first and you also have to look at the fact of things like future disability laws are they are they going to be adaptable for any future laws.

After the class 158/159 going though, I would say that it would be the class 175/180 units as I suspect the regulations to door widths may come into act with regards to disability laws. These laws would not be an issue for class 165 - 170 or the class 185 units which I think will go on beyond 2040.
 

hexagon789

Veteran Member
Joined
2 Sep 2016
Messages
16,326
Location
Glasgow
It's difficult to say, I mean 158 vs 170 is one particularly more reliable or better built?

The 170 perhaps rattles more but I would say the train itself seems inferior.

On age the 158 may well lose out but they are good units and could well outlast some of the newer classes. I could certainly see them outlasting 175s and 185s. Not definitely but it's very possible for a number of reasons.

The 170 is less likely, they can pretty much be interchanged without discrimination in service (ignoring things such as RETB/ERTMS equipment)
 

Energy

Established Member
Joined
29 Dec 2018
Messages
4,875
I think JonathanH was saying passengers don't choose the 170 over the 158 or Vice versa, rather than talking about actual boarding time.
I think more people will get on the 170 total (ignoring the 3 cars vs 2) as they see a shorter queue to get on.
 

zwk500

Veteran Member
Joined
20 Jan 2020
Messages
14,369
Location
Bristol
I think more people will get on the 170 total (ignoring the 3 cars vs 2) as they see a shorter queue to get on.
Entirely possible. @Philip's proposition was that the average customer would prefer the 158 as a unit over the 170, whereas @JonathanH was saying that it is not a consideration for the ordinary passenger. The suggestion that people will get on the 170 for the shorter queue backs up the view that the unit itself carries no preference. People are just going for where they think a seat is most likely, and would continue to do so if you swapped 170s out for 158s or vice versa.
 

bramling

Veteran Member
Joined
5 Mar 2012
Messages
18,204
Location
Hertfordshire / Teesdale
I think JonathanH was saying passengers don't choose the 170 over the 158 or Vice versa, rather than talking about actual boarding time.

I bet there are passengers who are sufficiently clued up to avoid 158s during hot weather, with their iffy air conditioning.

There’s certainly punters who do notice these sorts of things. I remember on the Chase Line when it was 170+153, the train came in and there was a conspicuous dash towards the 170, and people could be heard remarking “make sure we avoid the dodgy carriage”. It did cross my mind that this might have been to avoid the guard, but it wasn’t.
 

edwin_m

Veteran Member
Joined
21 Apr 2013
Messages
25,792
Location
Nottingham
I'm not sure the average passenger rates a 158 above a Turbostar because they probably don't have a view.
Is that a subtle comment about window pillars :D?

The boarding time is definitely an issue with 158s, due to the slow doors and particularly because only one person can board/alight at a time versus two for 170s. For that reason I'd expect EMR, now they are retaining Liverpool-Nottingham, to swap 170s onto that route to reduce dwell times in Manchester, and run the 158s somewhere like Lincolnshire. This could in fact lead to 158s lasting longer, as those more minor routes are probably the last ones where diesels will be phased out.
 

bramling

Veteran Member
Joined
5 Mar 2012
Messages
18,204
Location
Hertfordshire / Teesdale
Is that a subtle comment about window pillars :D?

The boarding time is definitely an issue with 158s, due to the slow doors and particularly because only one person can board/alight at a time versus two for 170s. For that reason I'd expect EMR, now they are retaining Liverpool-Nottingham, to swap 170s onto that route to reduce dwell times in Manchester, and run the 158s somewhere like Lincolnshire. This could in fact lead to 158s lasting longer, as those more minor routes are probably the last ones where diesels will be phased out.

Something like a 158 is quite a nuisance if you have luggage. Personally I’ve never really got the thing about end-door stock - I find 1/3 2/3 door stock a lot easier to use. At busy stations it can be quite a chore getting off something like a 158, especially as they’ve tended to find themselves on more suburban work over time.
 

RobShipway

Established Member
Joined
20 Sep 2009
Messages
3,337
Something like a 158 is quite a nuisance if you have luggage. Personally I’ve never really got the thing about end-door stock - I find 1/3 2/3 door stock a lot easier to use. At busy stations it can be quite a chore getting off something like a 158, especially as they’ve tended to find themselves on more suburban work over time.
That is exactly why I think the class 170 and 185 units will out last the class 158 & 175 units.
 

Energy

Established Member
Joined
29 Dec 2018
Messages
4,875
It did cross my mind that this might have been to avoid the guard, but it wasn’t.
Its a 153, that says enough... I think most if not all the WM stations have ticket barriers anyway so avoiding the guard wouldn't be the reason.
Entirely possible. @Philip's proposition was that the average customer would prefer the 158 as a unit over the 170, whereas @JonathanH was saying that it is not a consideration for the ordinary passenger. The suggestion that people will get on the 170 for the shorter queue backs up the view that the unit itself carries no preference. People are just going for where they think a seat is most likely, and would continue to do so if you swapped 170s out for 158s or vice versa.
Regulars will go to the nicer unit but I don't think there is much difference between the 158 and 170 in terms of comfort so likely to go to the 170 due to the better chance of getting a seat, or at least getting a better spot to stand. A 153 and 170 is a different story though.
 

HST274

Member
Joined
3 Mar 2020
Messages
710
Location
Worcestershire
Class 158s have always had a classy 'express
Hence the name 'Express'. :lol:
There’s certainly punters who do notice these sorts of things. I remember on the Chase Line when it was 170+153, the train came in and there was a conspicuous dash towards the 170, and people could be heard remarking “make sure we avoid the dodgy carriage”. It did cross my mind that this might have been to avoid the guard, but it wasn’t.
Having been on 153+170 and 153+153 configurations on the Birmingham Hereford line I can sympathise with trying to avoid them. One of the loudest, dirtiest shaky trains I have ever been on.
 

Class172

Established Member
Associate Staff
Quizmaster
Joined
20 Mar 2011
Messages
3,824
Location
West Country
But I think that the 150s will still be running even after the 158s are on a one-way-trip to Rotherham - 150s are like cockroaches - they'd survive anything!
I don't think you're far off there. Given their relatively simple construction and numerous nature, I can see them living out their final periods of service on the more distant branch lines until they get replaced by battery multiple units - such branch lines being the Devon and Cornwall services that they already work. I imagine their short bodyshell compared to every other DMU could be seen as another thing in their favour, given it allows longer trains in some scenarios where platform extensions would be deemed uneconomical

Having been on 153+170 and 153+153 configurations on the Birmingham Hereford line I can sympathise with trying to avoid them. One of the loudest, dirtiest shaky trains I have ever been on.
Sometimes I would actively go for the 153 when coupled to a 170 as the chances of getting a seat were sometimes higher. I only did this though on quieter services as they were a nightmare to get on/off quickly when the services were busy due to the single leaf doors, not that it is a problem anymore since all the WMR 153s have been withdrawn. I was on a 172+153 combo once (they didn't last long) -- it felt like both units were complaining up the Lickey Incline due to their vastly different performance characteristics.
 

Mikey C

Established Member
Joined
11 Feb 2013
Messages
7,121
Class 158s have always had a classy 'express' feel to them and continue to have, to the point where they seem a bit out of place on some of Northern's suburban services. Turbostars, on the other hand, are noisy and vibrate and feel like a modern commuter train; without the 'cosiness' of the 158. The 158s also ride better than any of the subsequent DMUs built.
Not sure I can agree with that. The Chiltern Mainline 168 Turbostars are very nice, while I find 158s quite noisy

The 158s are still nice trains of course, and the end door layout "feels" nicer on longer distance routes, which is why it's a shame that the 175s had reliability problems and thus ended up a tiny class
 

Irascible

Established Member
Joined
21 Apr 2020
Messages
2,226
Location
Dyfneint
How many seats on a long distance 170 vs a 158? the WoE 159s are the most pleasant way to get around on rails in the area ( well, not really been near one much since SWR took over & apparently started underappreciating them ).

There are a few things you can do to lengthen unit lifespan of course - as an example if you cascaded a load of 158s to SWR so they could give 'em a quick interior redo & then rotate them on the WoE line, their fatigue life & it's escalation in maintenance costs wouldn't be sonsumed quite so fast as running them all flat out every day. That sort of thing would need some sort of commitment to electrifying becuse I doubt we're getting any more DMU orders when these units really are at the end of their life...
 

edwin_m

Veteran Member
Joined
21 Apr 2013
Messages
25,792
Location
Nottingham
Does anyone really know the fatigue life of the 158s/159s? I dimly recall that aluminium always has a finite life (steel can be engineered to last indefinitely) but they were the first to use a new construction type and had such problems early in their careers. Recent events suggest the industry still doesn't understand this issue fully.
 

Irascible

Established Member
Joined
21 Apr 2020
Messages
2,226
Location
Dyfneint
Does anyone really know the fatigue life of the 158s/159s? I dimly recall that aluminium always has a finite life (steel can be engineered to last indefinitely) but they were the first to use a new construction type and had such problems early in their careers. Recent events suggest the industry still doesn't understand this issue fully.

I used fatigue life as a vague term to cover what you might just call wearing out - metal *does* fatigue obviously, but I wonder what it covers in trains; do they eventually become weakened enough to fail their crashworthiness specifications, for instance? and then there's the general loss of stiffness which makes everything attached start to move more & so on which is probably trackable just in maintenance hours per mile ( as that chart in the pdf upthread showed ).
 

40129

Member
Joined
23 May 2014
Messages
413
I bet there are passengers who are sufficiently clued up to avoid 158s during hot weather, with their iffy air conditioning.

There’s certainly punters who do notice these sorts of things. I remember on the Chase Line when it was 170+153, the train came in and there was a conspicuous dash towards the 170, and people could be heard remarking “make sure we avoid the dodgy carriage”. It did cross my mind that this might have been to avoid the guard, but it wasn’t.
Anyone who avoided the cl-153 to avoid the guard when they worked with cl-170s on the Chase Line would have been in for a nasty surprise as IME almost all guards tried to avoid being in the cl-153 if at all possible. However, there were one or two guards who would deliberately swap from the cl-170 to the cl-153 at Walsall on up direction trains in order to catch those who were so desperate to avoid paying that they'd choose the cl-153 over the cl-170
 

Grecian 1998

Member
Joined
27 Oct 2019
Messages
438
Location
Bristol
I would certainly expect regular passengers to notice differences. Whilst it hasn't much happened due to the pandemic, GWR did plan to use 166 + 165 to work most Cardiff - Portsmouth services. 165s have effective air cooling systems. On hot days the air conditioning on 166s invariably either doesn't work or isn't given the chance to work as the windows are left open - either way it pumps out hot air. Any commuters awaiting one of these services on a hot summer's evening might notice the discrepancy in comfort and learn to spot carriages D and E, despite the lack of obvious external differences.

I would generally favour a 150 over a 158 in high summer on the basis that the 150 will only be uncomfortable when stopped, whereas the 158 will be uncomfortable the entire journey.

Occasional travellers are less likely to notice such differences.

Back on topic, I suspect 158s / 159s will be running around until they start to fall apart. Simple, comfortable (save for the dodgy aircon) and there's plenty of them, so easier to find them suitable services to run.

The 16x are similar albeit less comfortable but they do have wider doors for swifter boarding. Obviously an issue for them is gauging as they are wider than most UK units so this causes some restrictions. I would expect them to be in service for a long time though.

170s will probably last a long time, but 175s are less likely due to reliability (albeit this is improved from the early days) and being a smaller fleet.

18xs are probably too specialised and expensive to be cascaded to quieter routes. Also 185s are heavy and 180s appear to be somewhat combustible. Once their frontline services are gone, they'll probably be on the way to the scrapyard before the 158s.
 
Status
Not open for further replies.

Top