Longest journey on 'inappropriate' rolling stock

[Kneedown]

I think the 158 is perfect for Liverpool to Norwich. It is the kind of service they were designed for.

I've gone into the severe shortcomings of this type of unit on this service on numerous occasions before and i'm not about to repeat myself in detail, so i'll just say "gutless, cramped, always going wrong, leaky, draughty, hot in summer and frequently cold in winter, sloooooooowwwwwwwwww".
--- old post above --- --- new post below ---

Oh c'mon, a Stagecoach 158 is hardly an unpleasant place to be!

You can have our 150/1s instead if you'd prefer?!

Re first sentence, it is if your driving the thing! You can paint a t**d in any pretty colour you like but it's still a t**d

Re second sentence, YES PLEASE! I had very few complaints about 150's when we had them, although not on Liv-Nor please.
--- old post above --- --- new post below ---

Heart of Wales line with a 153?

ANY line with a 153!

 

[northwichcat]

Don't forget that they'll disappear come mid December!

And they'll probably finish up on the Liverpool-Birmingham services instead, for which people do end to end travel - for the reason of it being the only direct train between the 2 cities and not just for the purpose of getting cheap fares.

 

[Tibbs]

LM 321 going anywhere. Worst. Seats. Ever.

I waited for the next service when I saw one was doing the Euston - Northampton Run (I think, I get off at Watford) earlier in the week.

 

[Eagle]

ANY line with a 153!

Other than their considerable shortness attribute and lack of capability for trolleys, what's actually wrong with them as a medium-distance unit?

 

[All Line Rover]

Other than their considerable shortness attribute and lack of capability for trolleys, what's actually wrong with them as a medium-distance unit?

The incredible noise, the awful lack of legroom, the horrible ride quality. I could go on! 158's are far superior.

 

[Kneedown]

Other than their considerable shortness attribute and lack of capability for trolleys, what's actually wrong with them as a medium-distance unit?

They're the closest thing i can imagine to driving a brick. Slow, take a long time to respond to controls, and once going they're not keen on stopping again when you want them to. Both cabs are incredibly cramped, not just the small end, and my legs are only little!
If, like happened last week, you pull up at Uttoxeter in one just after the last race of the day, you just want to hide, but there's nowhere to hide.

 

[northwichcat]

But what's wrong with a 153 being used to add additional capacity to a 156?

 

[Temple Meads]

With regards to the 150s, it seems as if any variety can turn up on any service - are they all treated as a common pool, or do FGW try to do as I suggested above?

They're treated as a common pool I think, as for what you said about 150's turning up more on Barnstaple/Exmouth/Paignton services recently, I've noticed this too, so maybe a couple of 143's are out of action, (as the aforementioned services are pretty much all they're used on)?

But what's wrong with a 153 being used to add additional capacity to a 156?

I think Kneedown is purely referring to the 153's from a drivers point of view, as a passenger I prefer 153's to 150's by quite a margin.

 

[Ivo]

The 13:30 from Fishguard Harbour to Cheltenham Spa, when it turns out a Pacer. And it does happen - I've done it!

 

[BestWestern]

I think Kneedown is purely referring to the 153's from a drivers point of view, as a passenger I prefer 153's to 150's by quite a margin.

I would imagine most pax have no issues with them, assuming they have been refurbished and maintained to a decent standard. The current FGW ones are really quite acceptable, however before they were facelifted they were rancid; stinking of damp with mould actually growing up the windows! Refurb makes all the difference.

From a Guard's point of view, I quite like them. Yes they are slow, and yes the small cab is too cramped to be of any use to anyone, but on the plus side they are reasonably quiet and civilised in the saloon, and they have arguably the best doors of any of the Sprinter fleets, nice positive closing action with a healthy 'clunk' as they lock shut. I will freely admit that I find it pleasing to work a train where the doors are sufficiently firm that anybody trying to force their through or block them is actually likely to face some mildly painful consequences, which in my view should be the case.

The only time I prefer a 150 is when you are packed solid, in which case the cab end vestibules are very useful. Otherwise, they are noisy, draughty, have frighteningly flimsy and painfully slow doors, and the cabs aren't great either.

 

[TEW]

HSTs on Thames Valley stopping services.

It's only really in peak times and on the semi-fast services that HSTs are used, and it's needed for the capacity. The most inappropriate use of stock is the two Oxford-London stopping services booked for 180s. End doors with frequent stops doesn't really work.

 

[Eagle]

End doors with frequent stops doesn't really work.

What, like the end doors on HSTs?

 

[TEW]

With regards to the 150s, it seems as if any variety can turn up on any service - are they all treated as a common pool, or do FGW try to do as I suggested above?

There are separate 150/1 and 150/2 diagrams but the fleet is always so stretched that in reality either type turns up on all the 150 diagrams. The diagramming used to be fairly illogical anyway. There were a couple of diagrams with 150/1s attached to 153s all day and the Cardiff-Plymouth service was booked a 150/1. The diagrams have probably changed quite a bit now though.

 

[ryan125hst]

I know the OP discounted "Voyagers are crap" comments, but I'd say that they are inappropriate for long journeys like Plymouth-Newcastle whilst being well suited for hour or two mid-distance journeys (capacity problems notwithstanding).

I agree with you there: A four coach train with an underfloor engine should not be used for journeys up to 13 hours in length. They are good, modern trains that would be fine if they were used on shorter, say up to three hour, journeys. I've never seen people complaining about the 222's on here.

In my opinion, a locomotive hauled train is the only comfortable option for long journeys. The HST's and 225's are so quiet and smooth- all you can hear is the sound of the air conditioning and the track noise!

If only Virgin ordered a modern loco hauled train, 7 or 8 carriages long. (They were weren't they, but changed there mind?). A bi mode locomotive, plenty of luggage space and a proper buffet and restaurant car would be perfect for the Cross Country routes.

 

[fgwrich]

There are separate 150/1 and 150/2 diagrams but the fleet is always so stretched that in reality either type turns up on all the 150 diagrams. The diagramming used to be fairly illogical anyway. There were a couple of diagrams with 150/1s attached to 153s all day and the Cardiff-Plymouth service was booked a 150/1. The diagrams have probably changed quite a bit now though.

I have to admit (and hope), that if First retains the next GW Franchise, 150202 & 216 Will be refurbished to standardise the 150/1 & 150/2 Fleets. Must be rather annoying knowing that whilst your service is booked a 150/2, 202/216 can turn up any time with its 3+2 Seating.

 

[HSTEd]

Oh c'mon, a Stagecoach 158 is hardly an unpleasant place to be!

You can have our 150/1s instead if you'd prefer?!

Well considering journey times on the Grantham-Nottingham stretch have gone up by 7-8 minutes or more based on the original Class 150 timetable for no apparent reason... I think I will take up that offer :P

 

[Firesprite]

I agree with you there: A four coach train with an underfloor engine should not be used for journeys up to 13 hours in length. They are good, modern trains that would be fine if they were used on shorter, say up to three hour, journeys. I've never seen people complaining about the 222's on here.

In my opinion, a locomotive hauled train is the only comfortable option for long journeys. The HST's and 225's are so quiet and smooth- all you can hear is the sound of the air conditioning and the track noise!

If only Virgin ordered a modern loco hauled train, 7 or 8 carriages long. (They were weren't they, but changed there mind?). A bi mode locomotive, plenty of luggage space and a proper buffet and restaurant car would be perfect for the Cross Country routes.

The memory's of lunch from the Cross-Country Grill come back.

 

[CC 72100]

I have to admit (and hope), that if First retains the next GW Franchise, 150202 & 216 Will be refurbished to standardise the 150/1 & 150/2 Fleets. Must be rather annoying knowing that whilst your service is booked a 150/2, 202/216 can turn up any time with its 3+2 Seating.

Aye that's true. You know if you've not got a local lines liveried unit rolling in that it could be a wee bit uncomfortable!
--- old post above --- --- new post below ---

The 13:30 from Fishguard Harbour to Cheltenham Spa, when it turns out a Pacer. And it does happen - I've done it!

Ouch. I thought the odd Maesteg - Cheltenham being a 142 was bad enough. When I used the service Gloucester to Cheltenham (mileage move!) it was a lovely refurbished 158, in the other direction an ATW 142. That would not be fun

 

[Rick1984]

The worst I've done is a pacer newcastle to carlise, although I enjoyed every second (sorry about the lack of logic there!)

Liverpool to Norwich with a 158.

.

When these are all 4 car then I don't see any problems. Just a shame they had to cram more seats in.

And in a similar vein I suppose SWT should get a mention then, for 450s (also 3+2) on Portsmouth - Waterloo peak hour runs.

Most of these are 450's are they not? Not a bad train just a shame they didn't get more 444's with there buffet car.

 

[Blindtraveler]

Inverness on a wedged, gutless 170, Manchest Scotland on a wedged 185

Re the 350/2s, are they being re-diagrammed away from the Eustons?

 

[Eagle]

They'll still abound on the Euston to Birmingham services (probably more so now).

 

[TEW]

What, like the end doors on HSTs?

Yes, but the HSTs are working completely different services. 180s work the 0700 OXF-PAD with 14 intermediate stops, the 1706 OXF-PAD with 13 intermediate stops and the 0522 PAD-OXF with 14 intermediate stops. All three of these run the entirety of the journey on the relief lines. At most the HSTs have 5 intermediate stops on a London-Oxford journey, and they are running on the main lines to/from Maidenhead.

 

[TrainBoy98]

In particular, First Gt Western's Brighton - Gt Malvern run, a journey of around five hours or so, is fairly often run with a class 150/1, three plus two seating and all. Is there anything longer out there?

I have to say I live in Worthing but have only ever seen a 150/1 twice in about three years (thankfully!). Its nearly always a three-car 158.

But for inadiquate stock, practically any journey with a 153 has got to be bad if the line has more than a 100 person usage. the 171s are not well suited to there job on the marshlink line. two carriges is deffo not enough! Most little DMUs on the Blackpool North services are inadiqute for the VERY crowded services.

 

[Firesprite]

Most of these are 450's are they not? Not a bad train just a shame they didn't get more 444's with there buffet car.

What buffet car?, Unless you mean that cubby hole with the cart serving luke warm drinks. The wessex sets had a proper buffet as did the 4Reps before. Both popular with members of the 'W' club on the 17.32 Waterloo-Weymouth.

 

[ValleyLines142]

I definitely have to agree with the FGW 150/1 on the 0600 Penzance to Cardiff and the 1300 Cardiff to Exeter. But then again most people wouldn't do the journey direct (I certainly couldn't for six hours!) as its quicker to get the 0628 Penzance to Glasgow and change at Bristol onto the 1054 to Cardiff (albeit probably more expensive).

I really don't know why FGW insist on putting a 150 on this service. I realise it's an extension of the hourly Taunton to Cardiff service, but even then I don't think it should be 150 operated. I think they're great on routes such as the Severn Beach Line and the local lines in Devon and Cornwall, but I think slightly more 'appropriate' stock should be used between Cardiff and Bristol definitely, big commuter route! I tend to get the 8.15 Bristol to Cardiff as its a Voyager!!

 

[Kneedown]

From a Guard's point of view, I quite like them. Yes they are slow, and yes the small cab is too cramped to be of any use to anyone, but on the plus side they are reasonably quiet and civilised in the saloon, and they have arguably the best doors of any of the Sprinter fleets, nice positive closing action with a healthy 'clunk' as they lock shut.

The doors used to be one of the worst features of 153's. In Regional Railways and Central days we used to come to a grinding halt quite frequently on the ECML when a 225 or HST passed in the opposite direction, the low pressure sucking the plug doors out just enough to trigger the interlock. That problem has been sorted now though.
One major drawback with the use of 153/156/158 on a lot of our local routes is the position of the doors at the ends of the carriages rather than a third/2 thirds along, which result in longer station dwell times, causing delays. Especially apparent when a cycle needs to board a 153 via the smaller of the vestibules adjacent to the cycle rack.

 

[northwichcat]

I think Kneedown is purely referring to the 153's from a drivers point of view, as a passenger I prefer 153's to 150's by quite a margin.

I realise that but having the 156+153 combination should be better for the driver as well as there's more total power and less time would be spent in a 153 cab.

 

[jimm]

I tend to think HST's through the Evesham are somewhat over the top, crawling along single track with a handful of passengers.

Not exactly an endurance but still inappropriate.

Have you ever travelled on a peak HST on the Cotswold Line? They may be quieter the further west you go but "over the top", when you look at the loads nearer to Oxford, you have to be joking. The single line west of Evesham is all 95mph capable - hardly a crawl.

What is nasty is the use of a 165 or 166 (3+2 seats - and 1 toilet if a 165) on the Sunday 14.42 from London to Hereford and the 18.30 return. And unlike those West Country 150s (whether or not there are cheap advances), the odds of some people actually travelling the entire route, for 3hrs 30mins on a Sunday timing, particularly heading back to London, are pretty high.

As for HSTs on Thames Valley services, there is a very simple reason they are used - they can shift a lot of passengers at one go and they are what FGW has to hand. No-one would pretend for a moment they are ideal for the job, with the dwell times that result from end doors, but without them there simply wouldn't be enough peak trains calling at places like Maidenhead to shift the crowds.

 

[Goatboy]

In particular, First Gt Western's Brighton - Gt Malvern run, a journey of around five hours or so, is fairly often run with a class 150/1, three plus two seating and all.

I came here to post about this one. Drives me mad - I regularly use this service for a 2 hour journey and before FGW went to 3 car 158's it was always booked a 2 car 158 which was absolutely the right train for the journey and a comfortable place to spend 2 hours.

Now it's always a 150. It really winds me up that the South West Trains Brockenhurst to Lymington service, all of what, 15 minutes, gets a 158 as does the local Romsey to Salisbury line whereas people travelling on FGW to and from Great Malvern, which I often do, are always lumbered with a 150 despite some of the journeys being anything up to 6 hours.

The Paignton and Exmouth branch lines get a 153 on the back - we don't even get that! I'd be fairly satisfied with a 153 to sit in rather than the 150.


I appreciate the reason is that FGW have 150's and SWT do not, but... grrr. Hateful things. It's even worse when it's a 150/1 with the 3+2 seating and no tables.

Last weekend I actually let it leave Bristol Temple Meads and chased it on a following Voyager to Cheltenham to pick it up there, thats how much I didn't want a 2 hour journey sat on a surburban DMU pretending to be a long distance DMU.

I want the 158's back

 

[RAGNARØKR]

No-one would pretend for a moment they are ideal for the job, with the dwell times that result from end doors, but without them there simply wouldn't be enough peak trains calling at places like Maidenhead to shift the crowds.

This statement is constantly made in relation to end door stock but to what extent is it end doors that are the problem?

I would suggest that it has become an article of faith without direct comparisons ever being made. Mark 3 stock has a narrow (ie short distance from nose to riser) step with has to be negotiated. Both mark 3 and classes 153/156/158 have small vestibule areas with "pinch points" between them and the saloons.

I would also question where the data has been derived from. The original BR sliding door stock eg classes 313 and 455, had 1.2 metre wide doorways with no standback inside the doorway, thus passengers would adopt the "sentinel" position on either side, leaving room for only for boarding and alighting in single file. The Bombardier plug door stock suffers from an awkward entrance step. Later stock, eg classes 376/378 with sliding doors, has good standback space and obstructions to the free movement of people have been reduced, which unfortunately also causes more draughts when the doors are open at stations. Since the trains are used on short distance routes and passengers are wearing their outdoor clothing this is not regarded as objectionable.

For station dwell time, a fleet of slam door trains is unbeatable, with 15 second stops being achievable. But for the system to work passengers had to be more disciplined and there were of course safety issues.

Probably the most useful feature to reduce station dwell times would be a retractable step as shown here.