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!
To be honest I'd rather keep the 175s and 158s can we just replace 150s 153s and 170s with them pls or maybe I'd keep the 170s over the 197s and order proper long distance intercity trains
That's not a bad idea. Personally I'd go for loco+Mk4 for all North Wales Coast "IC" services (i.e. the whole North-South Wales hourly service) rather than just a few of them, releasing 3-car sets to use on the Cambrian Coast as 2 won't be enough, plus do the work to allow 3-car working (unless it can just be done via SDO).
That's not a bad idea. Personally I'd go for loco+Mk4 for all North Wales Coast "IC" services (i.e. the whole North-South Wales hourly service) rather than just a few of them, releasing 3-car sets to use on the Cambrian Coast as 2 won't be enough, plus do the work to allow 3-car working (unless it can just be done via SDO).
It just makes sense the 158 and 175 still have life so let's refurb them get the 150s gone then get a proper intercity variant built or something surely we can do better
Bit like London Overground ordering 3 coach 378's that are now 5 coaches! I bet TfW will have the same issues and regret their choices and spec and will say please Sir (CAF) can we have some more!
It just makes sense the 158 and 175 still have life so let's refurb them get the 150s gone then get a proper intercity variant built or something surely we can do better
Using 5-car Class 175 formations on the North Wales Coast "IC" services would be another decent option; fit proper First Class to one coach of the 3-car sets.
Using 5-car Class 175 formations on the North Wales Coast "IC" services would be another decent option; fit proper First Class to one coach of the 3-car sets.
Or buy iet bi mode 5 car units and see if they can have a 3 car version but maybe that's a little too hopeful but would give plenty of scope to working all new long distance routes. If they did that they could actually become a competitor and use shared maintenance facilities with gwr ect on their long haul services giving customers more options
Yes! Keep the 158's & 175s with their better non-ironing board seats it has my vote for sure! 170's once refurbished will be nice too though. Still more comfy than new builds I would imagine!
Yes! Keep the 158's & 175s with their better non-ironing board seats it has my vote for sure! 170's once refurbished will be nice too though. Still more comfy than new builds I would imagine!
From what I know trains are very slow in Wales aren't they, I've never been there so I've not experienced it first hand. Isn't 100 Mph a bit OTT for most of Wales?
That's what I thought. Why didn't they just order a mostly Stadler Flirt fleet for most operations rather than them and 197's for the sake of easier training and maintenance or was it all down to cost as everything else seems to be these days! Obviously I'm leaving out the 230's, 398's & MK4's but apart from that they could've had an all stadler fleet instead.
Passenger numbers nosedive due to lockdown with no guarantee that they'll get anywhere near their old levels (as people adjust to working from home, leisure travel becomes much less certain whilst millions face unemployment)...
...and we're arguing about replacing two coach 90mph DMUs with five coach 125mph trains, bringing back loco-hauled etc...
...is there anything to back up the OP's assertion that "they have ordered too few 197s"? Or is it just another thread about seats (ignoring the fact that modern stock has much better space for standing passengers, so a direct "seat for seat" comparison with something like a 158 is a bit simplistic)?
...is there anything to back up the OP's assertion that "they have ordered too few 197s"? Or is it just another thread about seats (ignoring the fact that modern stock has much better space for standing passengers, so a direct "seat for seat" comparison with something like a 158 is a bit simplistic)?
As things stand Cambrian Coast services are quite busy particularly at weekends and in summer, and a lot of passengers do the whole run. It is not appropriate to have standing passengers for 4+ hours.
Passenger numbers nosedive due to lockdown with no guarantee that they'll get anywhere near their old levels (as people adjust to working from home, leisure travel becomes much less certain whilst millions face unemployment)...
...and we're arguing about replacing two coach 90mph DMUs with five coach 125mph trains, bringing back loco-hauled etc...
...is there anything to back up the OP's assertion that "they have ordered too few 197s"? Or is it just another thread about seats (ignoring the fact that modern stock has much better space for standing passengers, so a direct "seat for seat" comparison with something like a 158 is a bit simplistic)?
North south tfw services Cambrian and west Wales lines are all busy still personally rail travel will return slowly but the 5 car case is for north south which is already 4 car the 3 car iet idea I had would be instead of the existing 2 and 3 car 197s
Passenger numbers nosedive due to lockdown with no guarantee that they'll get anywhere near their old levels (as people adjust to working from home, leisure travel becomes much less certain whilst millions face unemployment)...
...and we're arguing about replacing two coach 90mph DMUs with five coach 125mph trains, bringing back loco-hauled etc...
...is there anything to back up the OP's assertion that "they have ordered too few 197s"?
And not forgetting the fact, as I keep having to point out on these threads, that we're talking about one of the most heavily subsidised franchises in the country.
North south tfw services Cambrian and west Wales lines are all busy still personally rail travel will return slowly but the 5 car case is for north south which is already 4 car the 3 car iet idea I had would be instead of the existing 2 and 3 car 197s
Again, as I've pointed out many many times in this forum over the years, TfW long distance services really aren't anywhere near busy enough to justify 5 car services. During the day even the 2 car services have plenty of space onboard and that's before you take into account the big timetable increase that is coming with the 197s.
And not forgetting the fact, as I keep having to point out on these threads, that we're talking about one of the most heavily subsidised franchises in the country.
Indeed, they are lucky they are getting new trains and not hand me downs from elsewhere. Stadlers or 5 car 125mph trains are expensive and some of the routes may not be able to justify the cost of these. CAFs are known to be cheaper.
And not forgetting the fact, as I keep having to point out on these threads, that we're talking about one of the most heavily subsidised franchises in the country.
Again, as I've pointed out many many times in this forum over the years, TfW long distance services really aren't anywhere near busy enough to justify 5 car services. During the day even the 2 car services have plenty of space onboard and that's before you take into account the big timetable increase that is coming with the 197s.
Have they ordered too few? If there aren't enough seats then they can extend some of the sets to be longer.
Indeed, they are lucky they are getting new trains and not hand me downs from elsewhere. Stadlers or 5 car 125mph trains are expensive and some of the routes may not be able to justify the cost of these. CAFs are known to be cheaper.
And it's not nice to always get hand me downs Welsh trains are notorious for being tatty if you were to live in Wales we would understand this is speculative and wishful thinking it is posted on my post that it's hopeful I understand it's heavily funded but end of the day it's not as bad as everyone makes their services to be
Be a shame if TfW disposed of the 175 units. I caught one of the refurbished units today, quite reasonable I thought plus WiFi and plug sockets.
Seats are comfy, plenty of leg room and big windows. Plenty of life left in them from a passenger perspective, not sure what they are like mechanically though...?
Hard to say, their near identical sibling the 180 has had reliability issues but have settled down. The 175s did have issues such as catching fire but Arriva Trains Wales weren't very good at maintaining them.
And it's not nice to always get hand me downs Welsh trains are notorious for being tatty if you were to live in Wales we would understand this is speculative and wishful thinking it is posted on my post that it's hopeful I understand it's heavily funded but end of the day it's not as bad as everyone makes their services to be
I never said it is nice to get hand me downs but it is what you would otherwise be getting. Trains are expensive to run and I doubt the Welsh Government would be too interested in spending the extra money to get new trains which aren't CAFs. CAF building an assembly plant in Wales, which creates jobs, is probably part of the reason they have managed to justify the cost of new trains.
Hard to say, their near identical sibling the 180 has had reliability issues but have settled down. The 175s did have issues such as catching fire but Arriva Trains Wales weren't very good at maintaining them.
I never said it is nice to get hand me downs but it is what you would otherwise be getting. Trains are expensive to run and I doubt the Welsh Government would be too interested in spending the extra money to get new trains which aren't CAFs. CAF building an assembly plant in Wales, which creates jobs, is probably part of the reason they have managed to justify the cost of new trains.
The 5 car as said in my post would replace the loco hauled services
== Doublepost prevention - post automatically merged: ==
And it's not nice to always get hand me downs Welsh trains are notorious for being tatty if you were to live in Wales we would understand this is speculative and wishful thinking it is posted on my post that it's hopeful I understand it's heavily funded but end of the day it's not as bad as everyone makes their services to be
Even the loco hauled services don't need to be 5 cars long. Using the loco and stock sets is the easiest way to get the first class service that was a requirement by the Welsh government for the franchise.
Incidentally, whilst I may not live in Wales I do work on these trains in and out of Wales every day.
Be a shame if TfW disposed of the 175 units. I caught one of the refurbished units today, quite reasonable I thought plus WiFi and plug sockets.
Seats are comfy, plenty of leg room and big windows. Plenty of life left in them from a passenger perspective, not sure what they are like mechanically though...?
I do agree with you on that one. Given a choice I'd keep them over the 170s, but it's not my call. Hopefully another TOC can make good use of them if they do go.
Mechanically they're not as bad as they were when first introduced - and nowhere near as bad as the reputation they gained then. Spending their entire career based out of the same one depot has probably helped.
An IEP has transformers in the end cars, so that would leave one with a diesel engine - not enough. Or a major redesign as the floor levels are different in the end cars. And what would be the point of a 125 mph bi mode, when that speed is not required and hardly sny of its route is or us likely to be electrified?
An IEP has transformers in the end cars, so that would leave one with a diesel engine - not enough. Or a major redesign as the floor levels are different in the end cars. And what would be the point of a 125 mph bi mode, when that speed is not required and hardly sny of its route is or us likely to be electrified?
But they are designed for 125mph operation with pointed noses and crumple zones. For a slower speed this is not required and is a waste of space. There is also no need for bi mode units. The 175s are perfectly adequate unitsfor what is needed.
But they are designed for 125mph operation with pointed noses and crumple zones. For a slower speed this is not required and is a waste of space. There is also no need for bi mode units. The 175s are perfectly adequate unitsfor what is needed.
But they are designed for 125mph operation with pointed noses and crumple zones. For a slower speed this is not required and is a waste of space. There is also no need for bi mode units. The 175s are perfectly adequate unitsfor what is needed.
But the IEPs are simply not the right type of train. What would be needed would be a standard 100mph max DMU. Possibly designed such that it could be converted to an EMU in the future.
An IEP has transformers in the end cars, so that would leave one with a diesel engine - not enough. Or a major redesign as the floor levels are different in the end cars. And what would be the point of a 125 mph bi mode, when that speed is not required and hardly sny of its route is or us likely to be electrified?
3 (or 4) car AT200 units would only need one transformer, which doesn't need to be in a driving vehicle. I would assume the easiest option would be to fit the driving vehicles with the usual MTU 12V1600 engine, pantograph vehicle in the centre of the formation and you can throw in another unpowered trailer in the formation.
I completely disagree with the topic title. They have not ordered too few 197s, they have ordered too many and got the spec very, very wrong. What they should have done in my opinion was something along these lines for long-distance services:
Ordered 20-30 bi-modeCAF Civity units with:
3-cars per unit (or roughly equal numbers of 2-car and 3-car units)
a toilet in EVERY COACH
ETCS fitted on all units
the gangway-equipped cabs from the 196s (which is the one thing TfW have got right with the spec)
the single-width doors used on the 397s, with a least one of them being near the vehicle end (to isolate the toilets in the vestibles)
the exact same spec seats as the TfW 158s and mark 3 coaches
an interior spec similar to the 175s (legroom and number of tables)
big windows, small window pillars and every table aligned perfectly with said windows
Retained all ex-ATW class 158s and 175s
Brought in 3x 4-car mark 4 sets for Holyhead-Cardiff (they got that part right) with 1st class buffet car and 3x TSO
Brought in either:
a number of additional 158s (released from EMR) which would be used to run additional Cardiff-Carmarthen/Milford services, via the Swansea District Line or
a number of 5-car mark 4 sets (1st class buffet and 4x TSO) which would be used on Manchester-Swansea services to release 175s for aformentioned additional services
Aside from the last bullet point the total number of trains in the fleet would be very similar to what TfW actually went with, the extra being needed to facilitate the new service which would in turn allow Manchester - Swansea services to terminate there (with connecting local train further west).
Yes! Keep the 158's & 175s with their better non-ironing board seats it has my vote for sure! 170's once refurbished will be nice too though. Still more comfy than new builds I would imagine!
Technically the class 197s will have Fainsa Sophia seats not 'ironing boards' although the Sophia is just as bad as the ironing board. I call the Sophias the 'interrogation centre seats'.
That's what I thought. Why didn't they just order a mostly Stadler Flirt fleet for most operations rather than them and 197's for the sake of easier training and maintenance or was it all down to cost as everything else seems to be these days! Obviously I'm leaving out the 230's, 398's & MK4's but apart from that they could've had an all stadler fleet instead.
398s are Stadler anyway... But the FLIRTs aren't too great either, they don't have unit end gangways and I'm not sure how much toilet provision is practical on a FLIRT.
...is there anything to back up the OP's assertion that "they have ordered too few 197s"? Or is it just another thread about seats (ignoring the fact that modern stock has much better space for standing passengers, so a direct "seat for seat" comparison with something like a 158 is a bit simplistic)?
These are long-distance services, standing space should have nothing to do with it. This is (almost) all about quality and comfort both of which will take a nose dive when 197s appear. The exceptions are the Cambrian where 21x 2-car 158s (which have more seats than 175s) will be replaced by 21x 2-car 197s and perhaps west of Swansea where 3-car 175s may be replaced by 2-car 197s on a one-for-one basis.
Indeed, they are lucky they are getting new trains and not hand me downs from elsewhere. Stadlers or 5 car 125mph trains are expensive and some of the routes may not be able to justify the cost of these. CAFs are known to be cheaper.
Lucky? The class 158s from EMR would have been a better choice than 197s. I would not be in favour of FLIRTs (unless they can have end gangways and plenty of toilets without compromising seating capacity or legroom) or 125mph trains either. What is needed is 90/100mph trains with unit end gangways, a long-distance spec interior that is at least as good as the present 158/175 fleet and consideration of a decarbonisation programme. The class 197s are 100mph trains but have only one of those other three things.
Be a shame if TfW disposed of the 175 units. I caught one of the refurbished units today, quite reasonable I thought plus WiFi and plug sockets.
Seats are comfy, plenty of leg room and big windows. Plenty of life left in them from a passenger perspective, not sure what they are like mechanically though...?
Built around 2000, so given the life span the 150s will have had the 175s should be with us until 2040. I agree with you, TfW should not be planning to dispose of them.
== Doublepost prevention - post automatically merged: ==
But they are designed for 125mph operation with pointed noses and crumple zones. For a slower speed this is not required and is a waste of space. There is also no need for bi mode units. The 175s are perfectly adequate unitsfor what is needed.
I agree with you on 125mph units not being suitable and that 175s are adequate units. However, TfW did not inherit enough 158/175 units to increase services and therefore additional trains were required. New DMUs ordered at this time will have a life expectency taking them beyond 2050, by which time we are supposed to be net-zero carbon. Any new-build trains must in my opinion must have the ability to run off electrification. Thus the options for Wales were cascaded 158s from EMR and/or new build bi-modes to suplement (not replace) the existing 158s and 175s. No need to replace the 158s and 175s with bi-modes yet because there aren't enough wires to justify it, but the new stock will last long enough that it should have been future-proofed.
Hard to say, their near identical sibling the 180 has had reliability issues but have settled down. The 175s did have issues such as catching fire but Arriva Trains Wales weren't very good at maintaining them.
3 (or 4) car AT200 units would only need one transformer, which doesn't need to be in a driving vehicle. I would assume the easiest option would be to fit the driving vehicles with the usual MTU 12V1600 engine, pantograph vehicle in the centre of the formation and you can throw in another unpowered trailer in the formation.
Yeah, probably. Bodyshells something like the 385, or possibly with end doors.
Not sure that there would be much point in a pantograph and transformer though, for the little electrified line available - at least provision for their future easy installation would be sensible, though.
== Doublepost prevention - post automatically merged: ==
I agree with you on 125mph units not being suitable and that 175s are adequate units. However, TfW did not inherit enough 158/175 units to increase services and therefore additional trains were required. New DMUs ordered at this time will have a life expectency taking them beyond 2050, by which time we are supposed to be net-zero carbon. Any new-build trains must in my opinion must have the ability to run off electrification. Thus the options for Wales were cascaded 158s from EMR and/or new build bi-modes to suplement (not replace) the existing 158s and 175s. No need to replace the 158s and 175s with bi-modes yet because there aren't enough wires to justify it, but the new stock will last long enough that it should have been future-proofed.
RailUK was launched on 6th June 2005 - so we've hit 20 years being the UK's most popular railway community! Read more and celebrate this milestone with us in this thread!
