The Menace Of Class 150 Rail Travel

[Mogster]

The problem is they aren’t getting a decent internal refurb.

I bet pacers wouldn’t be so hated if they’d all received proper train seats 20 years ago.

People expect more than the original British Rail seats repainted and then recovered with office chair material these days.

Just had the full on Northern Pacer experience on my commute home. Overcrowded, failing engine, soaking wet inside and smelling like a wet dog. The best bit was the common leaking roof that had soaked 2 rows of bench seats... My main issue with the 142s has always been how cold they are in winter and the dampness they retain all winter making them smell so musty. The bouncy ride is a secondary consideration.

The 150s although old are solid trains that ride well. The main issue with them involve the seating arrangements and the lack of space caused by the short carriages. They really need to be sent out in 6 car configurations as standard. I’m not sure most punters can tell the difference between refurb’d 150s and many more modern units, I know my family can’t. They know what a Pacer is though...

That’s not to say the 150s and their derivatives aren’t past their sell by date in 2018, they are, but to scrap the 150s first and keep the 142s would be a bizarre decision...

 

[geoffk]

I remember my first ever 150 trip, which was from Droitwich to Worcester in 1986. 33 years later I use Northern 150s regularly and their power to weight ratio is good so you can get a fast ride downhill from Rochdale into Manchester. The door layout is much better for frequent stops than the end doors on 155s and 156s. The main problems are the poor view from the windows and narrow gangways. The TfW examples which sometimes turn up in Manchester are much better and even carry a trolley, as the seats are 2+2 configuration - not that I would really want to do Manchester to Swansea on one.

 

[Mitchell Hurd]

As nice as I find these trains, I feel sorry for those that have to spend til probably around 22:15 (to Manchester Piccadilly) in a 2-car 150. I saw it leave Cardiff Central on the delayed 18:55 around 19:10.

I'm guessing a 175 failed.

 

[centraltrains]

I think there is some rose tinted glasses being wearing with some of you saying a pacer is better than a 150.

The main advantage of a pacer I can think of, is the environment is much lighter with the larger window to metal ratio they have.
The main comparative disadvantage of pacers compared to sprinters is that they have less seats, there is no separate cab door for opening/closing doors, the doors themselves are relatively slow to open and cause internal space to be eaten up in opening/closing them.
Others have said they are more reliable, and I believe they also have better acceleration.
150s are simply better than pacers in most ways.

If anything, into the future, they should be used as 6 coach peak-time commuter busters until every line can have an adequate peak time service capacity time using other newer trains.


Has there been any attempt in carpeting the 150s? The difference between the carpeted WMR 172s and uncarpeted Chiltern 172s is vast.

It is ironic that Northern have launched a drive to create an Autism friendly railway, (https://media.northernrailway.co.uk/news/northern-helps-launch-uks-first-autism-friendly-railway) whilst at the same time the trains I feel at ease travelling on (because they are light and airy and I don't feel trapped) are being withdrawn.

I have Autism and love the sound of the class 150, I find it extremely soothing. However that probably says more about Autism being a spectrum condition [I actually find it very unsettling when the train engine isn't loud enough... Class 350s are especially bad in that respect as the main thing heard is the air con!]

 

[Mitchell Hurd]

I think there is some rose tinted glasses being wearing with some of you saying a pacer is better than a 150.

The main advantage of a pacer I can think of, is the environment is much lighter with the larger window to metal ratio they have.
The main comparative disadvantage of pacers compared to sprinters is that they have less seats, there is no separate cab door for opening/closing doors, the doors themselves are relatively slow to open and cause internal space to be eaten up in opening/closing them.
Others have said they are more reliable, and I believe they also have better acceleration.
150s are simply better than pacers in most ways.

If anything, into the future, they should be used as 6 coach peak-time commuter busters until every line can have an adequate peak time service capacity time using other newer trains.


Has there been any attempt in carpeting the 150s? The difference between the carpeted WMR 172s and uncarpeted Chiltern 172s is vast.


I have Autism and love the sound of the class 150, I find it extremely soothing. However that probably says more about Autism being a spectrum condition [I actually find it very unsettling when the train engine isn't loud enough... Class 350s are especially bad in that respect as the main thing heard is the air con!]

I'm 26 and I have autism as well. I love the sound of a 150 at 75mph in particular!

 

[86247]

the thing with both 150/1 and 150/2 they are out dated and both won't be replaced for the next 15 to 20 years to refurbish these units is a good step forward but a lot don't like them including myself I've said before I would rather have a 142 or dare I say it a 153

 

[bramling]

The 144's are a case in point. They're generally more highly regarded than the 142's.

Which I’ve never really understood. The seating on the Northern 144s is extremely cramped, the only thing possibly going for it is that it’s not 2+3. A Northern Spirit interior 142 I’d say is a lot more comfortable, as is one with the original bus seats.

 

[ashkeba]

None of the Mk3 EMUs have that horrible 3+2 airline seat arrangement too with knee crushing legroom

Indeed have any other trains had 3+2 airline seats?

The 2 side of Greater Anglia's 3+2 321s were airline-style (pre-refurb - I'm not sure about Renatus), but I don't think anyone else has been so mean.

 

[bramling]

None of the Mk3 EMUs have that horrible 3+2 airline seat arrangement too with knee crushing legroom

Indeed have any other trains had 3+2 airline seats?

Pacers?

Apart from that the new GA trains appear to be having it?

 

[yorksrob]

Which I’ve never really understood. The seating on the Northern 144s is extremely cramped, the only thing possibly going for it is that it’s not 2+3. A Northern Spirit interior 142 I’d say is a lot more comfortable, as is one with the original bus seats.

I suppose hight has a lot to do with it. If, like me, you're short enough to wedge yourself in, the 144 seats can be quite comfortable.

 

[Mogster]

I think there is some rose tinted glasses being wearing with some of you saying a pacer is better than a 150.

I think most people who find the 142s acceptable don’t have to board them regularly at 6am in winter...

 

[Mikey C]

The 2 side of Greater Anglia's 3+2 321s were airline-style (pre-refurb - I'm not sure about Renatus), but I don't think anyone else has been so mean.

It's only the 2 seater section which was airline seated though, never the 3, which seems to be uniquely rubbish to the 150s amongst the Mark 3 derivatives

 

[ChrisC]

As nice as I find these trains, I feel sorry for those that have to spend til probably around 22:15 (to Manchester Piccadilly) in a 2-car 150. I saw it leave Cardiff Central on the delayed 18:55 around 19:10.

I'm guessing a 175 failed.

I saw one leaving Manchester Piccadilly last Thursday morning on the 0932 to Carmarthen. I wouldn’t like to be on that for 5 hours. It looked quite crowded too.

 

[86247]

good job mersey travel didn't get their hands on any of them the 142s that they did have must have the world's worst seats and legroom in any pacer heaton's are far more comfy and have 2+2 seating instead of the horrid 3+2

 

[Kite159]

In my eyes the Welsh & (majority) of GWR 150s which have 2+2 seating with table seats plus pull-down tables on the backs of airline seats are a lot better than the Northern 150s. Of the Northern 150s the ones which have 3+2 seating in a bay style layout are slightly better than the 3+2 in high density airline seating, at least when it's not so crowded you can get some legroom

 

[bramling]

I suppose hight has a lot to do with it. If, like me, you're short enough to wedge yourself in, the 144 seats can be quite comfortable.

I’m not short nor tall, however I find the 144s very uncomfortable. Wedged in is about right! The only other train which I find so unbearable is the Merseytravel 142, although the airline seats in a 700 aren’t much better.

To be fair, in all three cases it’s down to interior specification rather than any inherent flaw with the trains themselves.

As regards 150s, those with the original seats I find okay in terms of legroom. However some of the versions which have kept the original layout but with newer seats can be a bit tight. When I was in Wales last month it was strange that a couple of 150s seemed to have *very* tight legroom in certain seats, yet one could sit in ostensibly the same seat/location on another unit without issue - I don’t claim to know enough about their origins to know if the difference might be down to different operator/refurb history. Where a Pacer scores over a 150 for me is that one can sit in *any* Pacer seat and have a decent window view, which can’t be said for a 150.

 

[bramling]

It's only the 2 seater section which was airline seated though, never the 3, which seems to be uniquely rubbish to the 150s amongst the Mark 3 derivatives

No doubt because BR wanted to offer as many seats as possible with a given length of unit. Given the propensity for 150s to find their way on to longer journeys, I wouldn’t say this was entirely a bad decision.

The alternative is a 3+2 facing layout as in something like a 317, and people don’t seem to like that much either - although personally I find it quite okay providing the train isn’t too busy. I think I’m right in saying the 150s squeeze in one extra row of seats compared to a 317?

 

[xotGD]

Basically, 3+2 seating is the biggest problem. Refitted with 2+2 and tables and the 150s aren't too bad. Of course, we'll never see that with the Northern fleet.

 

[irish_rail]

Having sampled a 195 I'll happily say give me a pacer any day. Seats on the 195 were terrible and the over sensitive braking and powering give for such an un smooth ride. Also all the drivel given over the auto PIS (in line with other new trains I might add) and the poor seat to window alignment , I'd sooner a 150 or 142 over a 195 any day

 

[mjmason1996]

Never actually been aboard a 150 before, I've always imagined though it'd be a somewhat similar experience to a 156, which I've been on plenty of times in the past (Newcastle area). Are they generally considered better or worse than 156s?

 

[PHILIPE]

As nice as I find these trains, I feel sorry for those that have to spend til probably around 22:15 (to Manchester Piccadilly) in a 2-car 150. I saw it leave Cardiff Central on the delayed 18:55 around 19:10.

I'm guessing a 175 failed.

They are on this route several times a day and have been for some months due to a severe shortage of units due to 769s not turning up, PRM Mods, WSP fitting. major refurbishments of 175s and tree bashing damage. This has led to a severe shortage, well documented in other threads. It is situation that what is available at the time has to go out putting unsuitable units on jobs for which they are not suited.

Here is the link to the main thread:-

https://www.railforums.co.uk/threads/atw-keolis-amey-wales-stock-shortages.166304

 

[bramling]

Never actually been aboard a 150 before, I've always imagined though it'd be a somewhat similar experience to a 156, which I've been on plenty of times in the past (Newcastle area). Are they generally considered better or worse than 156s?

Like most trains, a pleasant experience when not too busy, but can be awful when packed. Some versions of 156 aren’t wonderful for legroom either, but a 156 has a different ambience simply due to the doors being at the vehicle ends. A 156 is also 23m and entirely 2+2. In terms of noise they’re about the same.

I think your average layman punter would probably regard a 156 as superior.

 

[danielnez1]

Never actually been aboard a 150 before, I've always imagined though it'd be a somewhat similar experience to a 156, which I've been on plenty of times in the past (Newcastle area). Are they generally considered better or worse than 156s?

When comparing a 150 to a 156, the key differences was my perceived dwell times (far better on a 150) and the window alignment (god awful on the 150s compared to the 156s). That aside, I personally get the feeling that now is the right time that both classes should have been replaced en masse.

 

[mjmason1996]

When comparing a 150 to a 156, the key differences was my perceived dwell times (far better on a 150) and the window alignment (god awful on the 150s compared to the 156s). That aside, I personally get the feeling that now is the right time that both classes should have been replaced en mass.

Right, cheers for the info!

 

[Bevan Price]

Personally, I think that Class 150 is OK for big-city suburban services on non-electrified routes. Not perfect, because they needed to be at least 3 coaches, many have poor out of window views, and 2+2 seating would be better than 3+2 for all but the shortest journeys. But they are vastly superior to any Pacer.
I was a bit surprised to see 150.002 working a Brighton to Great Malvern service, with its next working to Weymouth on 3 August, but at least it had 2+2 seating.

 

[trebor79]

There is some wibble bordering on hyperbole posted on this thread! The class 150's are good, solid, simple trains. Most of the issues could be fixed with a decent internal refurb.

That wouldn't fix the single biggest issue which is the absolutely appalling noise level. A Pacer is an oasis of tranquility in comparison.

 

[Paul_10]

Never actually been aboard a 150 before, I've always imagined though it'd be a somewhat similar experience to a 156, which I've been on plenty of times in the past (Newcastle area). Are they generally considered better or worse than 156s?

Worse in general although like the 156s, it depends on where you sit as if your nearer to the central part of the train the engine noises and vibrations can be quite loud(louder than a 156). I just think it's the interior layouts of Northerns 150s is the main issue here rather than ride quality. I was on a refurbished northern 150/2 set and I personally found it more than comfortable and accept its a train from the 1980s so its hardly going to be as luxorious as a 185/195.

I also think all 150s will be gone between 2027 and 2030 as I would imagine the next franchise aim is to remove these trains as well as the 155s and 156s although I think the 158s may stay for a bit longer than that.

 

[mjmason1996]

Worse in general although like the 156s, it depends on where you sit as if your nearer to the central part of the train the engine noises and vibrations can be quite loud(louder than a 156). I just think it's the interior layouts of Northerns 150s is the main issue here rather than ride quality. I was on a refurbished northern 150/2 set and I personally found it more than comfortable and accept its a train from the 1980s so its hardly going to be as luxorious as a 185/195.

I also think all 150s will be gone between 2027 and 2030 as I would imagine the next franchise aim is to remove these trains as well as the 155s and 156s although I think the 158s may stay for a bit longer than that.

Yeah i've find the 156s quite agricultural but not bad as per se, i guess the 2x doors in the middle of the 150 dont help the seat layout much in a 20m coach.

 

[MarkWiles]

I'm of an age that remembers the prototypes on the Matlock branch, I made a special journey up there to try them out. The 150 in use that day had very basic bus type seats similar to the 142s, and the 151 I also tried out had low back bench seats laid out in bays which reminded me a bit of the kind of seating in some underground trains. Both were light years ahead of the usual DMU fare I was used to out of New Street, mainly Class 116s some of which were still non-corridor. Subsequently I did a production 150/1 from Birmingham to Ely (the ones with the lurid aubergine and burgundy striped seats) which again I actually enjoyed. Eventually I became acquainted with the Centro fleet when they ended up on the Walsall-Hednesford circuit and given they were thrashed to within an inch of their lives, and worked into the ground, combined with the often disgraceful way they were abused by passengers, they must represent one of the best investment decisions taken by BR in the 1980s when the PM thought trains were for the dregs and the Ministry only allowed BR to build two coaches for every three scrapped. Despite the unsuitable 2+3 airline seating (something I know my former colleagues at Centro involved in the rail planning operations were less than happy with but had to accept to keep capacity on the busy Snow Hill lines) they helped grow the West Midlands rail network and helped get the Chase Line out of "experimental" status into a key route into Birmingham.

I have a very soft spot for the trains based on many years of using them around the West Midlands despite their cramped seating, faint whiff of oily exhaust and ear splitting din compared to more modern trains. I even went on the infamous "Farewell to the 150s" railtour around the Midlands (which of course, like some pop groups, wasn't quite "farewell") so I suppose you can say I am a fanboy!

 

[ed1971]

I have Autism and love the sound of the class 150, I find it extremely soothing. However that probably says more about Autism being a spectrum condition [I actually find it very unsettling when the train engine isn't loud enough... Class 350s are especially bad in that respect as the main thing heard is the air con!]

This goes to show how different two people can be on the Autism spectrum. I don't like anything too noisy, but at the same time, I don't like things to be too quiet and have no character. My favourite train sounds were the original spec Pacer with Leyland TL11 engine and SCG gearbox and first generation DMUs with Leyland 680 engines. My favourite buses include Leyland Titan PD2s and PD3s, AEC Routemasters and Gardner engined Daimler/Leyland Fleetlines. I always found the transmission whine from the latter very soothing.