Question about Class 158 and Class 170

[greyman42]

The 158’s are notorious for having failed air conditioning. The 170’s have nice big windows due to the pillars being very thin. (Wish all trains were like that). I wonder how customers on routes that have lost their 170’s, find the brand new trains in comparison?

I preferred the 170s to the 185s on the Edinburgh - Glasgow route. They are not as quick but the better seating and big windows made up for it.

 

[37424]

The 170 are a compromise design without doubt, but I have always found them quite comfortable even on Highland line, they certainly fine for regional journeys up to couple of hours, probably not the most ideal for Scotrail Intercity Services except Glasgow-Edinburgh, but for Northern of course they are a massive improvement, and of course Northern's new DMU's are of similar design.

 

[D365]

When I was commuting that and one less carriage were the biggest differences when taking a 158 over a 170, I didn't know until I joined this forum that 158's had air conditioning as they were always sweltering when I travelled on them.

Having air conditioning fitted is one thing. An effective air conditioning system is something else, that the majority of Class 158s do not have.

 

[delt1c]

Having air conditioning fitted is one thing. An effective air conditioning system is something else, that the majority of Class 158s do not have.

OK the aircon fitted to 158's has always been a problem. It could be fixed but no one wants to spend the money. Aircon aside give me a 158 anyday over a 170

 

[hexagon789]

Having air conditioning fitted is one thing. An effective air conditioning system is something else, that the majority of Class 158s do not have.

It really depends on what TOCs did after CFC gases were no longer permitted to be used, the system in place after that have hugely varying effectiveness

 

[LOL The Irony]

Having air conditioning fitted is one thing. An effective air conditioning system is something else, that the majority of Class 158s do not have.

I know that the SWR 158's have had new HVAC units installed, but I don't know about any others.

 

[hexagon789]

I know that the SWR 158's have had new HVAC units installed, but I don't know about any others.

Their 159s too and ScotRail 158s - same system I think

 

[ge0m112]

Thank you all for your informative replies. Some interesting points which I hadn't considered and definitely puts things in perspective.

 

[TheBigD]

Internal doors were fitted to the 170/5 and 170/6, to the larger middle saloon in each car. I'm not sure if they were taken out before Central Trains ceased to exist, or whether it was after. I do remember tho, that the passengers caught on how to isolate them without using a key, so they would be stuck open very often. The 2 saloons at each end of the car didnt have internal doors on the 170/5 and 170/6s, they were open.

The various internal doors on XCs 170s (/1, /3, /5 & /6) were removed when they were refurbished at Clacton around 2008/9. The various internal layouts were also standardised at the same time.

 

[Sprinter107]

The various internal doors on XCs 170s (/1, /3, /5 & /6) were removed when they were refurbished at Clacton around 2008/9. The various internal layouts were also standardised at the same time.

That sounds about right. The London Midland ones mustve been done around the same time.

 

[Neptune]

The first few 170 orders were to help expand mainline services.

The original MML units were useful to start up the additional stopping services from Derby/Nottingham to St Pancras as well as infrequent extensions for the Derby service to Matlock and Barnsley. As traffic grew 10 units gained a centre car with a buffet and vastly improved First class area and they also gained 170397 in Qjump livery (remember that?). I saw them working in 5 car formation on occasions at peak times.

Similarly Anglia‘s initial 8 x 3 car units were fitted with a buffet from new for extensions of GE mainline services to Lowestoft and Great Yarmouth from Liverpool Street. They also used them on the (original) Crossrail service with 170399 added to the fleet. Anglia later added the 4x2 car units for the new Norwich - Cambridge service.

Hull Trains used Anglia 170’s to start up their service and ended up ordering almost identical units.

They were all eventually replaced by more suitable stock but were good to get the market going.

 

[MarkWiles]

When I lived in Norfolk for a few years I used one of Anglia's 3 car 170s to London from Acle, and another from Norwich to Basingstoke. I found the units a revelation, comfortable, relatively quiet and pretty quick when able to run at speed. Above a certain speed the primary noise generated is wheel-rail so the underfloor engine is less intrusive, plus a bit of engine noise is good at drowning out other people and their noise. Having done several long Class 158 journeys, for me the 170 just has the edge in terms of overall passenger experience. The narrow, end of body doors on the 158 are a pain here on the Cambrian especially in the summer or on busy school flows all year round. It's noticeable here at Fairbourne how long the station dwell time can be as many of my neighbours prefer to hop onto the train for a quick trip to Barmouth (especially as they can use their bus passes in the winter) and getting a load of twirlys on and off through narrow end vestibule doors can take for ever. I've even seen the adjacent level crossing time out on very busy days. By comparison, the 1/3 and 2/3 door layout of the 170s, with larger vestibule area, would have aided boarding times.

 

[LowLevel]

When I lived in Norfolk for a few years I used one of Anglia's 3 car 170s to London from Acle, and another from Norwich to Basingstoke. I found the units a revelation, comfortable, relatively quiet and pretty quick when able to run at speed. Above a certain speed the primary noise generated is wheel-rail so the underfloor engine is less intrusive, plus a bit of engine noise is good at drowning out other people and their noise. Having done several long Class 158 journeys, for me the 170 just has the edge in terms of overall passenger experience. The narrow, end of body doors on the 158 are a pain here on the Cambrian especially in the summer or on busy school flows all year round. It's noticeable here at Fairbourne how long the station dwell time can be as many of my neighbours prefer to hop onto the train for a quick trip to Barmouth (especially as they can use their bus passes in the winter) and getting a load of twirlys on and off through narrow end vestibule doors can take for ever. I've even seen the adjacent level crossing time out on very busy days. By comparison, the 1/3 and 2/3 door layout of the 170s, with larger vestibule area, would have aided boarding times.

Central Trains did try 170s on the Cambrian when first introduced but they didn't get on at all well with the gradients between Shrewsbury and Machynlleth, frequently overheating in summer. Then in the event the route was transferred to Wales and Borders and they got a batch of 158s for it from Central anyway.

 

[Mikey C]

My impression of rolling stock around the time of the 170s is that there was a coming together in standards between Inter City style trains and commuter style DMUs

In the 1980s there was a clear different in comfort between Inter City trains - decent seats and legroom, air con - and the Sprinters

By comparison, the Turbostars are a big step up in comfort from the Sprinters, while the 390s are arguable a step down in comfort from their predecessors...

 

[Sprinter107]

The 170s seats are very comfortable i must admit. I still prefer 158 tho. At least if the loo on a 158 leaks, it doesnt spread all of its contents into the carpet in the seating area, like the 170s do.

 

[Envoy]

Central Trains did try 170s on the Cambrian when first introduced but they didn't get on at all well with the gradients between Shrewsbury and Machynlleth, frequently overheating in summer. Then in the event the route was transferred to Wales and Borders and they got a batch of 158s for it from Central anyway.

Well, if they had problems on the Cambrian, how are they going to cope with the gradients on the Heart of Wales? (They are due to switch to this route in about 2 years time - along with Swansea to Pembrokeshire). Perhaps TfW ought to test one out on a hot day this summer & also clear The Marches route for 170’s - even though they will not enter service on this line?

I joined a rammed southbound 2 coach 158 at Hereford on a hot day last summer. Needless to say, air conditioning was not working and the 4 tiny vent windows per coach were open. One woman was actually standing by one of these in order to get some air. Staff were handing out water. I was very tempted to get off at Abergavenny and wait for the next southbound train as conditions were so terrible. Anyway, I continued south and would have jumped off at Newport but a quick check revealed no westbound train was due. The sooner these trains are gone the better. Goodness knows how people making longer trips on this service going to Pembrokeshire from Manchester would have felt? They should have had a refund in my opinion.

 

[grumpyoldman01]

I think it's wrong to mix 158s and 170s; they come from a different times, and were to meet different requirements.

BR's programme to replace first generation DMUs started with 'Pacers'; quite simply. they were all that could be afforded at the time and could be got through the investment criteria laid down by government. The first batch of 142s/143s were ordered in June, 1984, but by then an invitation to tender had been issued to BREL and Met-Camm (in April 1984) for up to 50x2-car DMUs, similar to the 150 and 151 prototypes which had already been procured, and tenders had been returned for these before the 142s/143s were ordered. Therefore, at the time the contracts for 'Pacers' were placed, BR already knew that ''Sprinters' would cost roughly 1/3 more, and the 150/1s were subsequently ordered in August of the same year.

Further authorities were obtained to procure more 'Sprinters', and the invitation to tender went out for 20m long vehicles, with 1/3-2/3 doors; however, after these were received, there was a change of mind by the Provincial Sector and the bidders were asked to revise their bids and submit supplementary offers for 23m long vehicles with end doors. The design submitted by BREL wasn't acceptable to BR's D&MEE, and so 23m long vehicle were ordered from Leyland and Met-Camm (155s and 156s); however, there were some lines were 23m long vehicles would have had clearance problems, and so 150/2s were ordered from BREL primarily for such services.

The Provincial Sector created the Express Network, and initially it was worked by 155s/156s; however, these didn't compare favourably with longer distance InterCity trains, and so the requirement for what became class 158s was developed. At that time, these weren't really seen as being the jack of all trades which they became, and were only intended for either long distance services, or those which required an internal environment similar to those found on IC services.

I don't think they were referred to as class 157s at the time, but BR issued an invitation to tender for more trains similar to class 155s/156s; however, 158s were still being built, and BREL tendered to make more 158s for a lower unit price than offered by other bidders for ones without HVAC, and so more 158s were procured although these weren't BR's first choice from s design point of view. The decision to procure more 158s instead of 155/156 type trains was determined solely by cost.

There were financing problems somewhere along the way, and consequently some of the class 158s ended up with NSE (after being modified at Rosyth) as class 159s; a result of this was that some first generation DMUs remained in the north west and Scotland. The 157s emerged at this time, which was not much before privatisation.

I'm sure that the first images I saw of the class 157s showed end gangways and end doors, and the front end shown in Wikipedia came along later; certainly, if the project had gone ahead, they would have been procured from Hunslet-Barclay, but my understanding was that they would have been assembled at Kilmarnock. Moreover, my understanding was that they would be basically either 158s without HVAC or 155/156 type trains, but I don't know what the planned maximum speed was.

The situation post-privatisation was different to that which existed before; the M&EE departments which each sector of BR had disappeared, and so (with the major exception of Virgin) franchises opted for "platform" products, and Adtranz was the first off the mark in providing these. Moreover, when learning what the post-privatisation market wanted, the views of ROSCOs were taken into account by Adtranz; therefore, the 'Turbostar' could work in multiple with BR's 14X/15X family and operate at Sprinter speeds, and have a flexible internal design so that seat layouts, internal doors, the position/number/types of toilets, etc could all be determined by users/owners.

However, as Adtranz developed three main platforms - 'Turbostar', 'Electrostar', and 'Citystar' - it's possible that the company didn't anticipate that 'Turbostars' would be used on services such as those in Scotland where they are now being replaced by 2+4/5 HSTs in Scotland; 'Citystars' were never ordered - but the design of the 220 nose looks very similar to that on the 'Citystar' tender drawings sent to Virgin by Adtranz!

As 'Turbostars' seem to be very much sought after, Adtranz must have got the design pretty well right for local/regional trains.

But - back to the original question - would Regional Railways have ordered trains like 'Turbostars' or 158s if privatisation hadn't come along?

So far as I am aware, there weren't any plans to increase Regional Railways fleet size, so apart from replacing the last of the "heritage" DMUs, no more would have been bought; therefore, IF more trains had been procured, I guess the design would have been determined by what they were intended for, because as a general rule 1/3-2/3 doors were used for local/suburban services, end doors for longer distance ones. So if they'd been ordered as direct replacements for the "heritage" units operated on suburban services around Manchester or in Scotland, they might have been 'Turbostar' type trains; but it might have been that - to get new trains through the investment process - 150s would have been transferred to those areas, and something like 158s (or 175s) procured to work elsewhere.

But one thing which can be said with certainty; BR would NOT have purchased 185s. There'd have been hell to play if anyone had even suggested procuring DMUs which could not operate, say, between York and Scarborough, at SP speeds.

 

[grumpyoldman01]

Central Trains did try 170s on the Cambrian when first introduced but they didn't get on at all well with the gradients between Shrewsbury and Machynlleth, frequently overheating in summer. Then in the event the route was transferred to Wales and Borders and they got a batch of 158s for it from Central anyway.

Central's were early 'Turbostars' and didn't this problem get sorted?

Weren't the engine rafts either rebuilt or replaced?

 

[LowLevel]

Central's were early 'Turbostars' and didn't this problem get sorted?

Weren't the engine rafts either rebuilt or replaced?

I believe so. They seem to manage OK in Scotland nowadays.

 

[greyman42]

Having air conditioning fitted is one thing. An effective air conditioning system is something else, that the majority of Class 158s do not have.

East Midlands Trains 158s have decent air conditioning.

 

[D365]

East Midlands Trains 158s have decent air conditioning.

They're definitely nicer than the Northern 158s.

 

[Envoy]

Mention has been made that 156’s replaced first generation DMU’s on many routes. Some of these routes were in fact using loco hauled trains - such as The Marches Line through the Welsh borders and the Cardiff to Portsmouth route. You can see some of these here:> https://www.derbysulzers.com/crewecardiff.html

The 156’s arrived and started operating more frequent services which seems to have resulted in increased passenger numbers. The 158’s came along and offered a leap forward in passenger experience on routes such as those mentioned above. This translated into increased passenger numbers leading to 3 coach 158 trains* being introduced on the Cardiff to Portsmouth route and most 158’s on the south Wales to Manchester/north Wales services being replaced with the even better class 175’s. * The extra vehicles coming from Trans Pennine.

 

[ic31420]

But one thing which can be said with certainty; BR would NOT have purchased 185s. There'd have been hell to play if anyone had even suggested procuring DMUs which could not operate, say, between York and Scarborough, at SP speeds.

Didn't that particular issue only become apparent after delivery or during testing?

I think there are a couple of issues with the 185 design. Including being somewhat over powered and more thirsty than was absolutely necessary. But I suppose there was at the time a gap in proven powertrains between the 450hp power train of the 170 and the 750hp voyager engine.

I dare say there is probably an interesting story behind how the 185s came to be just as they are.

 

[jopsuk]

There were financing problems somewhere along the way, and consequently some of the class 158s ended up with NSE (after being modified at Rosyth) as class 159s; a result of this was that some first generation DMUs remained in the north west and Scotland.

I think this (something I was aware of) is worth highlighting- I'd presume that had the finance issues not been there the Waterloo-Exeter & Salisbury 6 fleet would have been Diesel Networkers of some sort, as the timing would have been about right (they would have stuck with locos and coaches for a couple more years than they did, in this situation)

 

[JonathanH]

I think this (something I was aware of) is worth highlighting- I'd presume that had the finance issues not been there the Waterloo-Exeter & Salisbury 6 fleet would have been Diesel Networkers of some sort, as the timing would have been about right (they would have stuck with locos and coaches for a couple more years than they did, in this situation)

Waterloo to Exeter was meant to get a Networker derivative of its own - which would have been classified 171. This would have been the equivalent of the 471s planned for Kent Coast fleet replacement. (There was no Salisbury 6.)

However, the reliability of the locomotive hauled fleet, which had led to cut backs in the service (eg Reading to Salisbury locals with DEMUs replacing Waterloo to Salisbury hauled workings) and the availability of the 22 3-car 158s, together with an economic recession, meant diversion of this fleet to the Waterloo to Exeter.

The extra 22 three-coach 158s were part of a fleet intended for extension of Regional Railways services that never happened. As has been posted in a thread about Turbos, part of the release involved NSE taking over the Cotswold line with an extra 2 166s.

See also https://www.railforums.co.uk/threads/were-any-158s-ever-painted-in-nse-livery.52737/#post-813005

 

[Mikey C]

I think it's wrong to mix 158s and 170s; they come from a different times, and were to meet different requirements.

BR's programme to replace first generation DMUs started with 'Pacers'; quite simply. they were all that could be afforded at the time and could be got through the investment criteria laid down by government. The first batch of 142s/143s were ordered in June, 1984, but by then an invitation to tender had been issued to BREL and Met-Camm (in April 1984) for up to 50x2-car DMUs, similar to the 150 and 151 prototypes which had already been procured, and tenders had been returned for these before the 142s/143s were ordered. Therefore, at the time the contracts for 'Pacers' were placed, BR already knew that ''Sprinters' would cost roughly 1/3 more, and the 150/1s were subsequently ordered in August of the same year.

Further authorities were obtained to procure more 'Sprinters', and the invitation to tender went out for 20m long vehicles, with 1/3-2/3 doors; however, after these were received, there was a change of mind by the Provincial Sector and the bidders were asked to revise their bids and submit supplementary offers for 23m long vehicles with end doors. The design submitted by BREL wasn't acceptable to BR's D&MEE, and so 23m long vehicle were ordered from Leyland and Met-Camm (155s and 156s); however, there were some lines were 23m long vehicles would have had clearance problems, and so 150/2s were ordered from BREL primarily for such services.

The Provincial Sector created the Express Network, and initially it was worked by 155s/156s; however, these didn't compare favourably with longer distance InterCity trains, and so the requirement for what became class 158s was developed. At that time, these weren't really seen as being the jack of all trades which they became, and were only intended for either long distance services, or those which required an internal environment similar to those found on IC services.

I don't think they were referred to as class 157s at the time, but BR issued an invitation to tender for more trains similar to class 155s/156s; however, 158s were still being built, and BREL tendered to make more 158s for a lower unit price than offered by other bidders for ones without HVAC, and so more 158s were procured although these weren't BR's first choice from s design point of view. The decision to procure more 158s instead of 155/156 type trains was determined solely by cost.

There were financing problems somewhere along the way, and consequently some of the class 158s ended up with NSE (after being modified at Rosyth) as class 159s; a result of this was that some first generation DMUs remained in the north west and Scotland. The 157s emerged at this time, which was not much before privatisation.

I'm sure that the first images I saw of the class 157s showed end gangways and end doors, and the front end shown in Wikipedia came along later; certainly, if the project had gone ahead, they would have been procured from Hunslet-Barclay, but my understanding was that they would have been assembled at Kilmarnock. Moreover, my understanding was that they would be basically either 158s without HVAC or 155/156 type trains, but I don't know what the planned maximum speed was.

The situation post-privatisation was different to that which existed before; the M&EE departments which each sector of BR had disappeared, and so (with the major exception of Virgin) franchises opted for "platform" products, and Adtranz was the first off the mark in providing these. Moreover, when learning what the post-privatisation market wanted, the views of ROSCOs were taken into account by Adtranz; therefore, the 'Turbostar' could work in multiple with BR's 14X/15X family and operate at Sprinter speeds, and have a flexible internal design so that seat layouts, internal doors, the position/number/types of toilets, etc could all be determined by users/owners.

However, as Adtranz developed three main platforms - 'Turbostar', 'Electrostar', and 'Citystar' - it's possible that the company didn't anticipate that 'Turbostars' would be used on services such as those in Scotland where they are now being replaced by 2+4/5 HSTs in Scotland; 'Citystars' were never ordered - but the design of the 220 nose looks very similar to that on the 'Citystar' tender drawings sent to Virgin by Adtranz!

As 'Turbostars' seem to be very much sought after, Adtranz must have got the design pretty well right for local/regional trains.

But - back to the original question - would Regional Railways have ordered trains like 'Turbostars' or 158s if privatisation hadn't come along?

So far as I am aware, there weren't any plans to increase Regional Railways fleet size, so apart from replacing the last of the "heritage" DMUs, no more would have been bought; therefore, IF more trains had been procured, I guess the design would have been determined by what they were intended for, because as a general rule 1/3-2/3 doors were used for local/suburban services, end doors for longer distance ones. So if they'd been ordered as direct replacements for the "heritage" units operated on suburban services around Manchester or in Scotland, they might have been 'Turbostar' type trains; but it might have been that - to get new trains through the investment process - 150s would have been transferred to those areas, and something like 158s (or 175s) procured to work elsewhere.

But one thing which can be said with certainty; BR would NOT have purchased 185s. There'd have been hell to play if anyone had even suggested procuring DMUs which could not operate, say, between York and Scarborough, at SP speeds.

The "missing link" between the Sprinters and the Turbostars is the Network Turbos, from which the Turbostars were developed. I'd forgotten that the 165s entered service before the 465s, at around the same time as the 158s, and while the 158s were "one of a kind", the 165/165 format of 23m vehicles with 1/3 2/3 doors would go on to be the regional standard DMU arrangement ever since

 

[Energy]

The "missing link" between the Sprinters and the Turbostars is the Network Turbos, from which the Turbostars were developed. I'd forgotten that the 165s entered service before the 465s, at around the same time as the 158s, and while the 158s were "one of a kind", the 165/165 format of 23m vehicles with 1/3 2/3 doors would go on to be the regional standard DMU arrangement ever since

The turbos are sort of the father for a lot of trains, the 168s are based of them, the turbostars and electrostars are both based of the 168 and the aventra is based of the electrostar.

 

[Metal_gee_man]

Is anyone in East Anglia missing their 170s or their 153s yet, aren't the 755s a huge improvement on any existing diesel no loco hauled rolling stock in the UK.
And if that the case why aren't more TOCs (barring TFW) looking into them over any CAFs

 

[Railperf]

Nope, not even missing the loco hauled stock either - apart from some visual variety.
But those wanting a 158 and 156 fix can still travel on EMR 158s and 156s between Norwich Ely and Peterboro. As well as XC 170s between Stansted, Ely and Peterboro.

 

[dk1]

Is anyone in East Anglia missing their 170s or their 153s yet, aren't the 755s a huge improvement on any existing diesel no loco hauled rolling stock in the UK.
And if that the case why aren't more TOCs (barring TFW) looking into them over any CAFs

I admit I was sorry to lose the 170s but certainly not the others. That said the 755s a certainly a step up in every way.