Northern Class 195: Construction/Introduction Updates

[Bornin1980s]

Services that were run by TPE with 185s. Namely Barrow and Windermere to Manchester. And Liverpool to Manchester via Warrington Central.

Are those all stops or limited stop?

 

[childwallblues]

Are those all stops or limited stop?

Limited stop.

 

[childwallblues]

The Wikipedia page is saying Northern will use them on Airport - Liverpool via Warrington services, keep the 185's and give TPE 170's in return, however, the latter is uncited.

Makes sense to put them on LIV-MIA via WAC services first. It is a self contained service and will keep the units near Edge Hill if they base them at Allerton. The service was TPE to Scaborough as far as Piccadilly until May when that was replaced by a Northern service supposedly using pairs of 156s. That did not last long and now can be 142/150/156 operated either singly or in pairs.

 

[LNW-GW Joint]

Makes sense to put them on LIV-MIA via WAC services first. It is a self contained service and will keep the units near Edge Hill if they base them at Allerton. The service was TPE to Scaborough as far as Piccadilly until May when that was replaced by a Northern service supposedly using pairs of 156s. That did not last long and now can be 142/150/156 operated either singly or in pairs.

The Liverpool-Warrington-Airport trains seem to interwork at times with the CLC stoppers to Oxford Road.
I suspect we will end up with 195s on some of the stoppers.

 

[Bletchleyite]

The Liverpool-Warrington-Airport trains seem to interwork at times with the CLC stoppers to Oxford Road.
I suspect we will end up with 195s on some of the stoppers.

I bet their punctuality will skyrocket - the powerful engines and mechanical transmissions will give the units near EMU performance. The 172s have worked well on West Midlands stopping services for that reason.

 

[scrapy]

Makes sense to put them on LIV-MIA via WAC services first. It is a self contained service and will keep the units near Edge Hill if they base them at Allerton. The service was TPE to Scaborough as far as Piccadilly until May when that was replaced by a Northern service supposedly using pairs of 156s. That did not last long and now can be 142/150/156 operated either singly or in pairs.

Apparently Liverpool depot has lost all of their driver managers and is short of instructors so there is a rethink on the cards as to which routes the 195s will be on first although Barrows are likely.

I wouldn't expect the 331s or 195s anytime soon though as Northern and ASLEF have failed to agree the training package for drivers and may be heading into a dispute (nothing to do with DOO which still hasnt been discussed).

 

[Confused52]

Apparently Liverpool depot has lost all of their driver managers and is short of instructors so there is a rethink on the cards as to which routes the 195s will be on first although Barrows are likely.

I wouldn't expect the 331s or 195s anytime soon though as Northern and ASLEF have failed to agree the training package for drivers and may be heading into a dispute (nothing to do with DOO which still hasnt been discussed).

Interesting, what have they failed to agree? Are they arbiters of the purpose, the content, safety or what?

 

[175001]

Update from our leaders this morning...

You won't see a 195 or 331 in service till the spring atleast...

 

[Philip]

Is this a dispute only related to Northern drivers? Will Wales and the West Midlands potentially have similar problems when their Civity units are ready for entering service? Is there a risk they could be moved elsewhere if this dispute drags on and thus Northern lumbered with more Sprinters and 158s from elsewhere to run their extra services? I doubt the DfT/rosco will be happy seeing the new trains sat idle in the sidings.

 

[Bantamzen]

Is this a dispute only related to Northern drivers? Will Wales and the West Midlands potentially have similar problems when their Civity units are ready for entering service? Is there a risk they could be moved elsewhere if this dispute drags on and thus Northern lumbered with more Sprinters and 158s from elsewhere to run their extra services? I doubt the DfT/rosco will be happy seeing the new trains sat idle in the sidings.

Without knowing what the possible issues are with the 195s, its almost impossible to speculate on this. If it is an issue with a safety system for example, then it would be very unlikely that ASLEF would accept any other drivers at other TOCs signing them. So could potentially end up sitting in sidings awaiting resolution. If however the issue is procedural, say the training at Northern included some form of Driver Operation that reflects the current RMT guard dispute, then who knows? But again they could extend the ballot to other TOC drivers, and the same result of 195s sitting idle could happen. Either way, it could signal a meltdown that would make the current problems in the North look like a slight hiccup.

 

[Eccles1983]

Their is no issues with the 195's.

The issue is management attempting to extract the urine again.

An agreement was found. Everyone was happy, then as always the agreement was interpreted a different way than it was meant to be applied and now it's in the process of being torn up.

Only one side at fault here. And they will pay for it unless they manage to do a remarkable recovery. And knowing the parties involved In find it highly unlikely.

 

[lammergeier]

Update from our leaders this morning...

You won't see a 195 or 331 in service till the spring atleast...

When you say "leaders" do you mean Union bods or management?

Depending on the issue raised of course, if were advising ASLEF I would suggest being very careful about entering into a dispute over the units. In the public eye at least the position of railway unions is not very strong, and another dispute that prevents these units entering service would be political gold for both Northern and more so the government. it may turn out to need a new thread in the long run, so I'll leave it there apart from saying that all these delays & disputes could be the precursor to a serious public backlash.

I agree, but I think ASLEF are collectively sensible enough to realise this too. We will see.

 

[175001]

When you say "leaders" do you mean Union bods or management?

The quote came from our intranet off mgmt

 

[Bornin1980s]

Just what is ASLEF's complaint about these?

 

[craigybagel]

Just what is ASLEF's complaint about these?

As close to a description of what you're after appeared above your post....

Their is no issues with the 195's.

The issue is management attempting to extract the urine again.

An agreement was found. Everyone was happy, then as always the agreement was interpreted a different way than it was meant to be applied and now it's in the process of being torn up.

Only one side at fault here. And they will pay for it unless they manage to do a remarkable recovery. And knowing the parties involved In find it highly unlikely.

Interestingly enough I wrote a post defending ASLEF and declaring my trust in their intentions, even though I don't know exactly what the dispute is about, bit for reasons unknown the mods chose to delete it.....

 

[Mathew S]

Their is no issues with the 195's.

The issue is management attempting to extract the urine again.

An agreement was found. Everyone was happy, then as always the agreement was interpreted a different way than it was meant to be applied and now it's in the process of being torn up.

Only one side at fault here. And they will pay for it unless they manage to do a remarkable recovery. And knowing the parties involved In find it highly unlikely.

With the best will in the world, if someone from Northern management were to relate that story I imagine it would be something like:
"We had an agreement, which we're now implementing, but ASLEF have decided that the agreement means something different and are holding us to ransom."
There are always two sides to every story and very, very rarely does the fault rest purely with one party.

 

[Train jaune]

Saw a 331 heading south through Lancaster yesterday morning, 8.45am approx, stopped at the platform so had a chance of a good look. I'm quite impressed

 

[Eccles1983]

With the best will in the world, if someone from Northern management were to relate that story I imagine it would be something like:
"We had an agreement, which we're now implementing, but ASLEF have decided that the agreement means something different and are holding us to ransom."
There are always two sides to every story and very, very rarely does the fault rest purely with one party.

It's been explained elsewhere but I can assure you that the goalposts have been moved from the company side. Effectively they have attempted to make a 3 tier package when one was agreed.

Is it an issue I will take industrial action on? Absolutely. It is very underhand what has been done and any goodwill between staff and company on the drivers side is going to erode due to it.

 

[pemma]

It's been explained elsewhere but I can assure you that the goalposts have been moved from the company side. Effectively they have attempted to make a 3 tier package when one was agreed.

Did ASLEF get a signed agreement and ensured that the wording wasn't ambiguous before signing it? If not and I was a ASLEF member I'd be questioning whether ASLEF were doing their job properly. If they did then they need to ensure Northern honour the clearly worded signed agreement.

 

[Eccles1983]

The agreement is worded correctly.

The issue is now one side is trying to say it doesn't mean what it actually says. As I said, moving the goalposts.

 

[InOban]

And, presumably, each side is saying that the other side has moved the goalposts.

 

[pemma]

David Brown is talking about Spring 2019 introduction for the brand new trains

In spring 2019 Northern will introduce the first of its brand new trains on the network, giving customers an entirely new journey experience.

https://www.northernrailway.co.uk/n...northern-announces-december-timetable-changes

 

[Bevan Price]

Apparently Liverpool depot has lost all of their driver managers and is short of instructors so there is a rethink on the cards as to which routes the 195s will be on first although Barrows are likely.

I wouldn't expect the 331s or 195s anytime soon though as Northern and ASLEF have failed to agree the training package for drivers and may be heading into a dispute (nothing to do with DOO which still hasnt been discussed).

Naive question, but why the need to agree a training package ? In what way does "learning" a 195 differ in principle from needing to learn an existing unit that is unfamiliar to a driver (e.g. if the driver did not "know" Class 158 or 156.). Surely all it should need is an explanation of all the controls, followed by practice driving with a qualified instructor - and I would see no justification if, for example, someone were to be asking for additional payments.

 

[Eccles1983]

Naive question, but why the need to agree a training package ? In what way does "learning" a 195 differ in principle from needing to learn an existing unit that is unfamiliar to a driver (e.g. if the driver did not "know" Class 158 or 156.). Surely all it should need is an explanation of all the controls, followed by practice driving with a qualified instructor - and I would see no justification if, for example, someone were to be asking for additional payments.

Nope.

Completely new traction. The way it brakes is completely alien compared to anything used on Northern.

Mcbs in different places, different components, different driving style....

The list could go on.

Why the need to agree? This may come as a shock to you, but TOC's have tried to implement new working and Traction before without it. It fails miserably.

The big bad union actually knows what it is doing - all being train drivers. It's to stop pointless and possibly dangerous practices taking place.

And where have you got additional payments from? The mask slipped a bit I take it?

 

[Bevan Price]

Nope.

Completely new traction. The way it brakes is completely alien compared to anything used on Northern.

Mcbs in different places, different components, different driving style....

The list could go on.

Why the need to agree? This may come as a shock to you, but TOC's have tried to implement new working and Traction before without it. It fails miserably.

?

I was not trying to say their should not be a thorough training procedure, but in many other industries, learning new highly technical equipment was part of the job. No need to agree with any union - we got some training, as part of the job, in normal working hours - and then used the new equipment -- some of which probably cost as much as any train at the time it was built. So I was just wondering why drivers needed to agree anything which in many industries would just be considered part of the normal working practices.

 

[Bertie the bus]

In a rational industry it would be - this is a train, you are a train driver, this is how you drive this particular train, off you go. But it's the railway...

 

[Eccles1983]

I was not trying to say their should not be a thorough training procedure, but in many other industries, learning new highly technical equipment was part of the job. No need to agree with any union - we got some training, as part of the job, in normal working hours - and then used the new equipment -- some of which probably cost as much as any train at the time it was built. So I was just wondering why drivers needed to agree anything which in many industries would just be considered part of the normal working practices.

Because it's a package, not just about the actual train but drivers agreeing to suspend terms and conditions in order to get the training.

Otherwise I stick to my terms and conditions and they cannot physically train me. I stick to my hours and days as detailed.

It takes 7 days continual training. Believe me that if the company could get this less they would. CAF would have a big say in how long it would take.

A side point, and people won't like hearing it - drivers are the experts on trains. If you want to find out what works and what doesn't then let drivers loose on it for a few weeks. That's exactly what has happened from the start of the project and the trains are designed, and delivered with very few hiccups.

 

[Bletchleyite]

In a rational industry it would be - this is a train, you are a train driver, this is how you drive this particular train, off you go. But it's the railway...

AIUI airlines only allow you one type approval at a time, because confusion can be deadly.

 

[TBSchenker]

Airlines also, mostly, have a close working relationship with unions. Whenever an airline is ordering new planes they consult the unions before ordering so issues such as training is resolved early on.

The railways seem to be caught by surprise that there’s shiny new trains being delivered and no agreed training plan.

 

[jfowkes]

On the subject of airlines, it's instructive to look at the Lion Air Flight 610 investigation to see what can happen when manufacturers, operators and unions fail to agree on training for new technology.