TPE Class 397 ('Nova 2') construction and updates

[driver9000]

I found when travelling on them the speed didn’t seem to be consistent, but instead you could feel a 3-5 second burst of acceleration followed by a bit of coasting. I thought it was quite noticeable. Pity as I think these are better laid out from a train crew operating perspective, however I still think catering should be centrally located and not in different parts of the train.

Take the lowest power setting available (4-6%) and the train will accelerate regardless. Shut off and speed will immediately begin to fall. That's why there is the on/off feel to them. They are very powerful trains.

 

[gimmea50anyday]

So there’s no speed set like on the 185s or any other form of cruise control that “holds” the speed at a given figure then?

 

[TRAX]

So there’s no speed set like on the 185s or any other form of cruise control that “holds” the speed at a given figure then?

The speed set would still be sensitive to the point @driver9000 explained just above.

 

[driver9000]

So there’s no speed set like on the 185s or any other form of cruise control that “holds” the speed at a given figure then?

No speed set function apart from wash mode and coupling mode.

 

[MisterT]

Take the lowest power setting available (4-6%) and the train will accelerate regardless. Shut off and speed will immediately begin to fall. That's why there is the on/off feel to them. They are very powerful trains.

Well, at least it's only 4-6%. On our CAF Civity (SNG) trains in the Netherlands, the minimum power setting is 14% , so it has exactly the same issue. That's one of the few things I really don't like about the trains.

Braking has the same issue at high speeds. The minimum braking setting is around 20%, with the next one around 35% (and from there on we can gradually increase it, without any notches). On low speeds, it is actually pretty good. The holding brake only comes on at 0.49 km/h, with just the minimum amount required to actually hold the train. This means that we can stop the train perfectly without noticeable bump to the passengers.

 

[Efini92]

Well, at least it's only 4-6%. On our CAF Civity (SNG) trains in the Netherlands, the minimum power setting is 14% , so it has exactly the same issue. That's one of the few things I really don't like about the trains.

Braking has the same issue at high speeds. The minimum braking setting is around 20%, with the next one around 35% (and from there on we can gradually increase it, without any notches). On low speeds, it is actually pretty good. The holding brake only comes on at 0.49 km/h, with just the minimum amount required to actually hold the train. This means that we can stop the train perfectly without noticeable bump to the passengers.

I wish our CAF trains could stop smoothly. It’s ridiculous that the train decides when to apply/release the holding brake. On the 331’s you can select 1% power but it requires precision movement of the CPBC.

 

[MisterT]

We've had trains with holding brakes for a about 10-15 years now, so for us it's nothing new to stop with a bit of a bump unfortunately. With the older trains (SLT, which were the first generation trains to feature a holding brake), the holding brake applies with much more force and at 2 km/h, which leads to a noticeable bump unfortunately. Even though some drivers claim that they have managed to fool it and stop the trains smoothly, I've never managed to do that.
Although the CAF units come very, very close to a perfectly smooth stop, the only trains (with a holding brake) that actually allow for a perfectly smooth stop are our loco-hauled (top-and-tail) InterCity Direct-trains (Bombardier Traxx loco + 7 or 9 coaches + Bombardier Traxx loco). With those trains, the holding brake (which is only the direct loco brake, coach brakes are not applied with the holding brake) will only apply at a full standstill, which allows us to come to a perfectly smooth stop with all brakes fully released, and at that point the holding brakes will apply.

 

[driver9000]

Well, at least it's only 4-6%. On our CAF Civity (SNG) trains in the Netherlands, the minimum power setting is 14% , so it has exactly the same issue. That's one of the few things I really don't like about the trains.

Braking has the same issue at high speeds. The minimum braking setting is around 20%, with the next one around 35% (and from there on we can gradually increase it, without any notches). On low speeds, it is actually pretty good. The holding brake only comes on at 0.49 km/h, with just the minimum amount required to actually hold the train. This means that we can stop the train perfectly without noticeable bump to the passengers.

The holding brake is 30% but it will come to a stand in a very low brake demand so while there isn't much of a jolt when it stops you notice the motors dropping out to disc brake more. When running the brake can be applied to about 10% probably even less but 30-50% is recommended. You can have fairly good brake control with slight movement of the PBC and even in traction you can raise/lower the setting by 1% if you want.

 

[Mitchell Hurd]

Just out of curiosity, what's the reason that coaches B, C and D on the 397's have less seats than the Nova 1's? I know its because of more table seats and that the seats are aligned with windows but for example coaches B and D have 76 seats and C has 68 seats.

On the Nova 1's coach B has 86 seats and C and have 88 seats and the Class 802 coaches are a bit shorter than the Nova 2's.

Also coaches B, C and D have longer carriages (B and D have 10 windows (not sure about C).

I'm a big fan of window table seats for longer journeys - I'll happily be given any (unless the formation is always say Coach A at the north end and E at the Manchester end on West Coast Mainline services in which case any forward window table one).

 

[driver9000]

Just out of curiosity, what's the reason that coaches B, C and D on the 397's have less seats than the Nova 1's? I know its because of more table seats and that the seats are aligned with windows but for example coaches B and D have 76 seats and C has 68 seats.

On the Nova 1's coach B has 86 seats and C and have 88 seats and the Class 802 coaches are a bit shorter than the Nova 2's.

Also coaches B, C and D have longer carriages (B and D have 10 windows (not sure about C).

I'm a big fan of window table seats for longer journeys - I'll happily be given any (unless the formation is always say Coach A at the north end and E at the Manchester end on West Coast Mainline services in which case any forward window table one).

The 397 are 23m coaches (DMF and DMS are 24m) and the 802 are 26m coaches. Coach C on the 397 has a toilet at each end too slightly reducing saloon space.

 

[Mitchell Hurd]

The 397 are 23m coaches (DMF and DMS are 24m) and the 802 are 26m coaches. Coach C on the 397 has a toilet at each end too slightly reducing saloon space.

Ah right yes , the windows are slightly curved Square on the 397's which explains it - thanks.

 

[Martin222002]

Ah right yes , the windows are slightly curved Square on the 397's which explains it - thanks.

To add, the reason a 397s coaches B and D have more windows compare to an 802 is due to the fact the 397s windows are designed to match up with the standard class seating layout, hence why all the seats line up in standard. Where as the 802s like most over modern Intercity trains have their windows designed to match up with the first seating layout, so are wide which means there's less of them.

 

[kermit]

Just had my first ride on one of these, from Edinburgh to Manchester. Sorry to say I was profoundly unimpressed. Seats in second class far too hard for lengthy intercity journeys. The ride was poor - the bogie beneath me in coach C clanked and knocked like a bucket of large, heavy bolts, to the point of being alarming. I'm not nervous, but a newbie passenger could easily be put off. I've seen posts deriding those who say the mk3 was the high water mark in coach design, but honestly, other than the brake smell, they were so much better than this thing.

 

[Liverpool 507]

Just had my first ride on one of these, from Edinburgh to Manchester. Sorry to say I was profoundly unimpressed. Seats in second class far too hard for lengthy intercity journeys. The ride was poor - the bogie beneath me in coach C clanked and knocked like a bucket of large, heavy bolts, to the point of being alarming. I'm not nervous, but a newbie passenger could easily be put off. I've seen posts deriding those who say the mk3 was the high water mark in coach design, but honestly, other than the brake smell, they were so much better than this thing.

I personally have no problem with these units, fantastic and spacious interior with comfortable seating, large windows and a lovely, smart and sleek looking unit.

 

[Jamesrob637]

They're still unreliable. Tonight is the second in as many that the late Manchester to Glasgow was terminated short and the following morning's Glasgow to Manchester has been cancelled.

 

[kermit]

They're still unreliable. Tonight is the second in as many that the late Manchester to Glasgow was terminated short and the following morning's Glasgow to Manchester has been cancelled.

I should have mentioned that the on board computer was playing up badly. 1 minute out of Waverley, we got a loud auto announcement that we would shortly arrive at Mcr Picc. The crew tried to reset, with a couple more false announcements, then gave up by switching off the sound. The displays continued to give wrong info throughout the journey. Dirty windows exacerbated by low sunshine completed the poor experience. The 350s were better IMHO, this was not as bad as a Voyager, but not good, really.

 

[Liverpool 507]

They're still unreliable. Tonight is the second in as many that the late Manchester to Glasgow was terminated short and the following morning's Glasgow to Manchester has been cancelled.

They’re still a new class of train and as with all new trains, they do have teething problems.

 

[Rob F]

They’re still a new class of train and as with all new trains, they do have teething problems.

Poor ride quality and poor seats can hardly be described as teething problems.

 

[route101]

They're still unreliable. Tonight is the second in as many that the late Manchester to Glasgow was terminated short and the following morning's Glasgow to Manchester has been cancelled.

What service was this?

As theres not many running through to Manchester from Glasgow?

Was on one yesterday, yes the seats are hard but you dont have the 350 door arrangement. Ride is bumpy over the bogies , you notice every bump!

 

[Jamesrob637]

What service was this?

As theres not many running through to Manchester from Glasgow?

Was on one yesterday, yes the seats are hard but you dont have the 350 door arrangement. Ride is bumpy over the bogies , you notice every bump!

Exactly. Not many in the first place and what is scheduled gets canned!

The services in question are the 17:27 Piccadilly to Glasgow and 04:22 return the following morning.

 

[route101]

Exactly. Not many in the first place and what is scheduled gets canned!

The services in question are the 17:27 Piccadilly to Glasgow and 04:22 return the following morning.

I see, is that the last TPE to Glasgow still? I wonder when the services will be restored.

 

[kermit]

They’re still a new class of train and as with all new trains, they do have teething problems.

You're clearly a fan of these trains, and each to their own, but honestly, the extreme semi random knocking and clanking from the bogie was such that I wouldn't have been that surprised if a large metal component had made an escape bid through the floor! Also, if there were at-seat phone charging points, I couldn't see them. Sorry, but this train did not impress me!

 

[Bletchleyite]

Poor ride quality and poor seats can hardly be described as teething problems.

The seats are an issue with pretty much anything new. I do agree the Fainsa Sophia is an awful seat (not quite the worst but not far off), but it's slightly separate from the stock it's in, as the same stock fitted with other seats would be OK in that regard.

That aside, the rest of the train looks quite good, but is of poor build quality compared with e.g. 80x. Just like my view that a 195 is a poor man's 170.

 

[route101]

You're clearly a fan of these trains, and each to their own, but honestly, the extreme semi random knocking and clanking from the bogie was such that I wouldn't have been that surprised if a large metal component had made an escape bid through the floor! Also, if there were at-seat phone charging points, I couldn't see them. Sorry, but this train did not impress me!

The plug sockets are under the seats like most trains these days.

 

[hexagon789]

That aside, the rest of the train looks quite good, but is of poor build quality compared with e.g. 80x. Just like my view that a 195 is a poor man's 170.

Seems to be a recurring theme with CAF at least vis-à-vis the Mk5, 195s and 397s...

 

[Liverpool 507]

You're clearly a fan of these trains, and each to their own, but honestly, the extreme semi random knocking and clanking from the bogie was such that I wouldn't have been that surprised if a large metal component had made an escape bid through the floor! Also, if there were at-seat phone charging points, I couldn't see them. Sorry, but this train did not impress me!

There are charging points at every set of seats, beneath the seat cushions and in the middle, both USB and mains. Stickers also advertise this.

 

[Rhinojerry]

Used one for the first time today.397012..very nice inside...yes they do shoot off then slow,we seemingly crawled all the way to Wigan,but checking RTT its was all on time.?

 

[hexagon789]

Used one for the first time today.397012..very nice inside...yes they do shoot off then slow,we seemingly crawled all the way to Wigan,but checking RTT its was all on time.?

Still on 350 timings?

 

[Huntergreed]

I find them very pleasant, and far far better suited to intercity travel than the 350’s, which weren’t much more than a glorified commuter train with a trolley service (particularly the 350/2’s, nasty things!)

I’m interested to hear what people find so unpleasant about them? I’ve ridden several in the last few weeks and had no issues whatsoever, comfy enough, almost all seats well aligned with windows, great number of table seats, nice vestibules (the main problem with 350s was the lack of a vestibule turning into glorified commuter stock)

One criticism I have is if you sit right under the pantograph, the neutral sections are extremely loud indeed and sound like a loud hammer smashing the roof right above you.

 

[driver9000]

Still on 350 timings?

More likely following another train.