East Midlands Trains Class 158799 - On Hire to SWT

[starrymarkb]

That is the reason. It was primarily for safety if the driver had to leave the train when running on the fast lines of the four tracked third rail route between Waterloo and Basingstoke.

The 442 did use exactly the same policy.

The lock out was fitted to both 442s and 159s from new... Remember that these were the only NSE units without a dedicated drivers door (something that is required on all new builds)

 

[Silvyelton]

As Olympics finishes today is 158799 returning to EMT this week, does anyone know?

 

[willc789]

Presumably it will remain with SWT/FGW for the Paralympics as well?

On a separate note have EMT fitted there 158's with the high back seating during the refurbishment or have they remained similar to the SWT 158/9's internally?

 

[MCR247]

Yes they have. EMT 158s have the same seats as FGW HSTs. ATW 158s also have these minus the wings on the seats

 

[willc789]

Went past Salisbury this morning and the unit was stabled at the west end of the depot so assuming it wont be part of the diagrams for today as its normally gone by the time I pass on my way to work. Presumably it will either remain there until Paralymipics start or will return home soonish?

 

[PHILIPE]

Went past Salisbury this morning and the unit was stabled at the west end of the depot so assuming it wont be part of the diagrams for today as its normally gone by the time I pass on my way to work. Presumably it will either remain there until Paralymipics start or will return home soonish?

Only for duration of Weymouth sailing events, I believe.

 

[TheBigD]

EMT need it back asap. Chronic overcrowding on the Skeggy line again this weekend.

 

[Benno]

Booked to return on Sunday 19th August. No times yet

 

[mallard]

The lock out was fitted to both 442s and 159s from new... Remember that these were the only NSE units without a dedicated drivers door (something that is required on all new builds)

Is there some reason why they can't just lock the vestibule door (and shoo out any passengers) if/when they need to go lineside? Seems silly to lock out 25% of the train's doors for something that happens fairly infrequently.

 

[Dieseldriver]

As far as I'm concerned it's brilliant for the front set of doors to lock out. It prevents passengers going in there to make a mobile phone call which could be distracting to the driver. Also, it means there is not a build up of luggage blocking the drivers only escape route from the crumple zone.

 

[mallard]

As far as I'm concerned it's brilliant for the front set of doors to lock out. It prevents passengers going in there to make a mobile phone call which could be distracting to the driver. Also, it means there is not a build up of luggage blocking the drivers only escape route from the crumple zone.

But it could very easily end up blocking the passengers only escape route, in the event of damage/fire/etc. at the other end of the carriage...

 

[swt_passenger]

But it could very easily end up blocking the passengers only escape route, in the event of damage/fire/etc. at the other end of the carriage...

That's covered though. When it is 'locked' it is only due to the normal push button system being isolated.

Exit is still possible from within the carriage using an emergency (break glass) push button. An illuminated sign above the door comes on showing that it is an emergency exit only.

It's quite remarkable that this feature is debated every few months, given that the units are nearly 20 years old, and the system has been on the 159s since modified prior to introduction by NSE. That's what surprised me when one of the rail mags (was it TR UK?) did a short piece criticising it within the last year, written in a way that seemed to blame SWT as though it was a recent idea...

 

[starrymarkb]

That's covered though. When it is 'locked' it is only due to the normal push button system being isolated.

Exit is still possible from within the carriage using an emergency (break glass) push button. An illuminated sign above the door comes on showing that it is an emergency exit only.

It's quite remarkable that this feature is debated every few months, given that the units are nearly 20 years old, and the system has been on the 159s since modified prior to introduction by NSE. That's what surprised me when one of the rail mags (was it TR UK?) did a short piece criticising it within the last year, written in a way that seemed to blame SWT as though it was a recent idea...

And indeed UK regulations require at least two exit routes from a passenger compartment (this can be through a cab/staff area with 'Break Glass' door release)

 

[Goatboy]

Can confirm it is on swindon - Cheltenham shuttles as suspected.

Does anyone know why they run a 158 on a reasonably short shuttle route yet leave people travelling on the Weymouth to Great Malvern services - a distance of some 4-5 hours - to suffer a 150?

 

[MCR247]

People actually travel from Great Malvern to Weymouth?! hock:

 

[fgwrich]

Does anyone know why they run a 158 on a reasonably short shuttle route yet leave people travelling on the Weymouth to Great Malvern services - a distance of some 4-5 hours - to suffer a 150?

Probably because the 158 is an SWT Hire in, so it can jump back down to Salisbury every night. Weymouth services are Bristol worked and so are FGWs Bristol based 150s.

 

[Goatboy]

Probably because the 158 is an SWT Hire in, so it can jump back down to Salisbury every night. Weymouth services are Bristol worked and so are FGWs Bristol based 150s.

We used to get 158's, it was so nice

 

[BestWestern]

Does anyone know why they run a 158 on a reasonably short shuttle route yet leave people travelling on the Weymouth to Great Malvern services - a distance of some 4-5 hours - to suffer a 150?

The Weymouth line is not ideally suited to 158's. The trains call at all stops, meaning that much of the traffic is made up of people making journeys far shorter than the full end-to-end time of the route. It really isn't an express service. 158's would also struggle chronically with the very heavy loadings during busy times, with volume of families, buggies and luggage causing big problems due to the restrictive access to the coaches. A 150 will swallow a large crowd far more quickly.
--- old post above --- --- new post below ---

As far as I'm concerned it's brilliant for the front set of doors to lock out. It prevents passengers going in there to make a mobile phone call which could be distracting to the driver. Also, it means there is not a build up of luggage blocking the drivers only escape route from the crumple zone.

It's fine on most of SWT's work, as you generally have a 6 or 9 car to W'loo with lots of other doors available, or just a 158 on the lightly loaded Romsey shuttles. There is a manager at FGW who is trying to put together a case for doing the same mod, however the person concerned has completely failed to grasp the enormous problems this would cause on services which are frequently full to standing capacity, and the associated skyrocket in delay costs as passengers fight their way out of the front coach at station after station (exactly what happened when the SWT hire-in ended up on the Brighton service, carnage ). Very unlikely to happen.