Wales & Borders Franchise Consultation

[Bletchleyite]

A bi-mode version of the 172/2 or 172/3, IF it had a suitable interior, would be good for the outer-suburban services (eg. Cardiff-Cheltenham and possibly Wrexham Central - Liverpool if it has a third rail mode) but NOT regional/regional-express/intercity services as alot of the routes on the W&B franchise are.

I can accept the argument on end doors for IC, but for regional and regional express services not - that's precisely what those trains are designed for and are used for all over the place.

ATW operates but one true InterCity service - the WAG Express - and it uses InterCity rolling stock i.e. Mk3s. ATW don't operate any other true InterCity services at all - some have that aspect but all of them also operate as a local service. This makes the Class 172-style layout (but with high quality seating) pretty much ideal.

 

[Gareth Marston]

I wouldnt mind seeing that either as the down train gets to Talerddig first and a Carno stop will add a good 3 minutes in.

If I get them ill PM to you.

 

[Gareth Marston]

Eluned is only a contractor to gather information and will not be on the team for much longer I have been advised.

Penarth House? Do you mean St Mary's?

Regarding the wifi, apparently it was very heavily subsidised by the DfT, as are all wifi installs on trains.

Penarth Rd - write the address enough times!

Wifi -Yes was a bit naughty not to say in public installed with help of DfT grant....

 

[Rhydgaled]

Yeah if the interior was done right would be suitable for those - to be honest I've got no complaints about the current arrangement. If you put tables at the bays/seatbacks and better vestible partitions that'd be adequate. If there was the strutural capability to put the passenger doors at the ends as opposed to the traditional 170/172 design, then that would make for an excellent passenger environment. Would be similar to a 175/158 standard then.

I must admit I've never been on a 172 (except maybe a Chiltern one once, or that may have been a 168), so the 172/2s and 172/3s might already be perfect for outer-suburban services (it's just that, in my experience, airline seats on most trains tend to be crammed too closely together for anything other than inner-suburban (up to 1hr)).

I can accept the argument on end doors for IC, but for regional and regional express services not - that's precisely what those trains are designed for and are used for all over the place.

I disagree. I can't tell you why my brother said the doors were in the wrong place, but the way I see it nobody should be without a seat on regional and regional express services. Nobody ever, even in the peaks. Suburban services yes, a small standing allowance in the peaks maybe (as long as nobody has to stand for more than about 10 minutes) but not on regional services. Given that nobody should have to stand, the use of suburban units (eg. 170s) with wide doors providing room for standees at the expense of a comfortable seating layout on regional-express services (eg. Cardiff-Nottingham) is morally wrong. British Rail built 158s (regional express) and 156s (regional) with the doors at the end of carriages (although the legroom is substandard on at least some of those units), ditto Alstom with the 175s after privatisation. They got it right; the TOCs who ordered 170s for regional express work were wrong; morally wrong.

ATW operates but one true InterCity service - the WAG Express - and it uses InterCity rolling stock i.e. Mk3s. ATW don't operate any other true InterCity services at all - some have that aspect but all of them also operate as a local service.

Yes, only Gerald is intercity. However, even that also serves local markets (certainly northbound) so really is only intercity because it has intercity facilities (hot meals). If they had used a 175 on the same service from the outset, unless there was a clear demand for longer trains and fewer stops, it would be regional-express and (having not been treated to the intercity-spec train) I would have had no cause for complaint.

I see the key difference between regional-express and intercity services as the level passenger demand; if it is enough to justify hot meals then it is intercity, if not it is regional-express. Also, the proportion of the route doubling as a local service (with calls at all/most stations) may be higher on regional-express, but that doesn't stop the likes of Gerald and the afternoo Pembroke Dock to London on summer Saturdays being intercity.

 

[Bletchleyite]

I disagree. I can't tell you why my brother said the doors were in the wrong place, but the way I see it nobody should be without a seat on regional and regional express services. Nobody ever, even in the peaks.

That would be ideal, but it is not realistic.

Suburban services yes, a small standing allowance in the peaks maybe (as long as nobody has to stand for more than about 10 minutes) but not on regional services. Given that nobody should have to stand, the use of suburban units (eg. 170s) with wide doors providing room for standees at the expense of a comfortable seating layout on regional-express services (eg. Cardiff-Nottingham) is morally wrong.

The purpose of wide doors at thirds is not to provide for standees, though it does that incidentally (you provide well for standees by providing door standbacks and 3+2 width seating with a 2+2 layout, like the Class 700 does). The purpose of wide doors is to ease access on trains where there will be significant on-and-off passenger changeover at many stations, which is true of most UK regional express services, and certainly true of most ATW services where there is not really one single centre everyone is travelling to.

So no, it is not "morally wrong". It is a very good choice for those services. Class 170s or 172s would be ideal for near enough all ATW services except Gerald.

FWIW I do like classes 156 and 158, but loading and unloading is *very* slow - that's why TPE, which itself is a regional express operation despite having ideas above their, er, station, chose new units with doors at thirds, i.e. Class 185.

Yes, only Gerald is intercity. However, even that also serves local markets (certainly northbound) so really is only intercity because it has intercity facilities (hot meals). If they had used a 175 on the same service from the outset, unless there was a clear demand for longer trains and fewer stops, it would be regional-express and (having not been treated to the intercity-spec train) I would have had no cause for complaint.

Yes, you can debate if it should exist at all - personally I don't think it should, fun though it is, as it provides for a really small market and costs a packet with no significant social benefits for the money unlike a rural branch line. The big rail markets in Wales are North Wales to Chester, Liverpool and Manchester (and a lesser extent London), Cambrian to Shrewsbury and Birmingham (and again to a lesser extent London), local services into Cardiff and GWR from South Wales to London.

I see the key difference between regional-express and intercity services as the level passenger demand; if it is enough to justify hot meals then it is intercity, if not it is regional-express. Also, the proportion of the route doubling as a local service (with calls at all/most stations) may be higher on regional-express, but that doesn't stop the likes of Gerald and the afternoo Pembroke Dock to London on summer Saturdays being intercity.

I'd say that's a bit flawed - a regional service is an all stations stopper (a Class 150 being a perfect example of a unit designed for that usage), a regional express a local service that stops a bit less often but still primarily carries local flows (most ATW services are this), an inter-regional service is maybe what you are talking about but few exist in the UK - XC is probably most of it, then InterCity is about big city to big city with almost no local flows at all (you'll get the odd people doing Cov-Birmingham or Stockport-Manchester Pic but if you banned those flows from VT nobody would be significantly disadvantaged, say).

If the Pembroke Dock service was a DB service, it would be "RegionalBahn to Cardiff Central, then InterCity to London Paddington". There are a few like that in Germany, the once daily Hamburg-Berchtesgaden is a good example. Similarly, when XC used to serve the local stops like Barry Links around Aberdeen that would, by DB parlance, have run as "InterRegio to Edinburgh, then RegionalBahn to Aberdeen".

 

[Chester1]

I am really surprised people think its realistic for Wales and Borders to recieve new trains in the next franchise. The vast majority of the franchise is not wired so there is not a big advantage using bi modes, new build DMU orders have been very rare since the last turbostar in 2011 and there are plenty of diesel options for regional services anyway, certainly 2023 to 2033. There are 185s, more 158s, 170s, Meridans, Voyagers and more Mark IIIs. A rosco would be mad to fund a new DMU fleet for W&B because there is a very high chance they will be redundant long before they are life expired and there is no chance of new EMUs if the Valleys Lines are electrified because there is surpless of EMUs. At least one franchise has to end up with the left overs and that franchise is now W&B.

 

[Rhydgaled]

The purpose of wide doors at thirds is not to provide for standees, though it does that incidentally (you provide well for standees by providing door standbacks and 3+2 width seating with a 2+2 layout, like the Class 700 does). The purpose of wide doors is to ease access on trains where there will be significant on-and-off passenger changeover at many stations, which is true of most UK regional express services, and certainly true of most ATW services where there is not really one single centre everyone is travelling to.

True, the suburban door layout does both speed up dwell times and provide standing space. But there is also 'significant on-and-off passenger changeover' at stations on intercity services. I would also argue that neither dwell time nor room for standees is relevant on regional, regional-express or intercity services. At the minor stations on regional services, there aren't enough passengers to make the dwell time all that long anyway and on limited-stop services the number of station calls is less so the need to cut dwell times is much reduced (20 stations taking 1 minute longer is 20 minutes on the journey, with only five stations it is only 5 minutes on the journey). Doors at thirds on short-distance stoppers, end-doors on everything else please.

Class 170s or 172s would be ideal for near enough all ATW services except Gerald.

[snip]

a regional service is an all stations stopper (a Class 150 being a perfect example of a unit designed for that usage)

I strongly disagree on those units being universally ideal in Wales. The way I categorise rolling stock and services is as follows:

• Inner-Suburban
  • All-stations stoppers, very few (if any) gaps of over 10mins between stations
  • Maximum journey duration 1hr
  • The same rolling stock (eg. 150s) may also be suitable for some rural areas (where the above requirements are met). If you magicly cut a few minutes from the shcedule, Whitland - Pembroke Dock, if run as a shuttle, would fit the bill.
• Outer-Suburban
  • All-stations or semi-fast services on routes 1-2.5hrs
  • faster, longer-distance, alternatives must exist on most of the route, at sufficient frequency that few will use the OS service for long
  • Eg. Cardiff-Cheltenham (because the XC service is faster) and possibly Swansea - Pembroke Dock all stations (if Swansea-Whitland was also covered by sufficiently frequent trains of higher standard to Fishguard and Milford Haven)
• Regional
  • Calling at all or most stations, in areas with few alternative trains and journey times longer than 1hr
  • No need to run at more than 75mph
  • Eg. Heart Of Wales, Conwy Valley, Swansea-Fishguard (the latter calling at all stations except Kidwelly and Ferryside)
• Regional Express
  • Like regional, but with streches of running above 75mph or
  • with stretches where the route is shared by local-stopping (often 'suburban) services, allowing the regional express to ommit more stations
  • Eg. Cardiff - Nottingham, Aberystwyth - Birmingham (both because of 80mph running and being the fast service east of Shrewsbury), Swansea - Manchester
• Intercity
  • Like regional express, but with more of the route (prefrably all of it) shared by other services serving the smaller stations
  • Needs a big enough end-to-end demand to justify missing quite a lot of intermediate stations

 

[Rhydgaled]

I am really surprised people think its realistic for Wales and Borders to recieve new trains in the next franchise. The vast majority of the franchise is not wired so there is not a big advantage using bi modes, new build DMU orders have been very rare since the last turbostar in 2011 and there are plenty of diesel options for regional services anyway, certainly 2023 to 2033. There are 185s, more 158s, 170s, Meridans, Voyagers and more Mark IIIs. A rosco would be mad to fund a new DMU fleet for W&B because there is a very high chance they will be redundant long before they are life expired and there is no chance of new EMUs if the Valleys Lines are electrified because there is surpless of EMUs. At least one franchise has to end up with the left overs and that franchise is now W&B.

If, as I hope, the ValleyLines are electrified as heavy-rail then yes, it makes sense for W&B to pick up some of the glut of EMUs being released elsewhere (I'm particularly interested in the 458s and 379s, since these have air-con (I think) and UEGs, but given current platform lengths ideally some would be reformed into 3-car formations) if the ROSCO is desperate to lease them and offers a good rate. Diesel is alot more difficult; something is going to have to be magiced out of the hat by 2020 to replace the Pacers and I don't think there's time for a new build. A ROSCO isn't likely to offer anything on a short-enough lease to allow diesels without delaying electrification, so I think it'll have to be 319 bi-modes.

 

[jamess]

Penarth Rd - write the address enough times!

Wifi -Yes was a bit naughty not to say in public installed with help of DfT grant....

Dave Koring always used to be the first to shout out CF10 5DJ

 

[Chester1]

If, as I hope, the ValleyLines are electrified as heavy-rail then yes, it makes sense for W&B to pick up some of the glut of EMUs being released elsewhere (I'm particularly interested in the 458s and 379s, since these have air-con (I think) and UEGs, but given current platform lengths ideally some would be reformed into 3-car formations) if the ROSCO is desperate to lease them and offers a good rate. Diesel is alot more difficult; something is going to have to be magiced out of the hat by 2020 to replace the Pacers and I don't think there's time for a new build. A ROSCO isn't likely to offer anything on a short-enough lease to allow diesels without delaying electrification, so I think it'll have to be 319 bi-modes.

I agree about 319 bi modes, they may have serious performance issues running diesel powered through the Valley Lines. However, the pacer upgrade project has been cancelled and I don't see WAG signing off on D trains if they plan to introduce trams or electrify the Valleys lines and there arent enough sprinters available so bi mode 319s seem to be the only option.

 

[The Planner]

Something like that. I managed to find the rules of the plan (or is it rules of the route?) on Network Rail's website and got the signalling headways. Those were 5 minutes at most, with most of the route being less than that, so I went onto Real Time Trains and thought it looked like there were gaps of sufficient length between services (whereas trying to use Wolverhampton station didn't seem to work). My main remaining concern is if there isn't a platform free at New Street for long enough (I couldn't work out platform occupation on real-time trains, given the size of the station). If no platforms at New Street is the problem then getting the ETCS 158s off the north Wales coast would have to wait until HS2 or the new chords allowing access to Moor Street are built.

Headway isn't your problem there, it is Aston with the Cross City.

 

[northwichcat]

However, the pacer upgrade project has been cancelled

Has it been cancelled? Porterbrook produced one ePacer in the hope of attracting interest from bidders of franchises. As the Great Western, East Midlands and Wales & Borders franchises are still to be re-let I don't think it can be ruled out yet.

 

[craigybagel]

I agree about 319 bi modes, they may have serious performance issues running diesel powered through the Valley Lines. However, the pacer upgrade project has been cancelled and I don't see WAG signing off on D trains if they plan to introduce trams or electrify the Valleys lines and there arent enough sprinters available so bi mode 319s seem to be the only option.

Supposedly the benchmark they used for designing the 319 bi modes was matching the performance of a sprinter on the Buxton line, a fairly similar type of route to the valleys. It's not like the 150s and 14x are particularly spritely on the valleys anyway, it's a network that's really crying out for electrification.

 

[tomuk]

After watching the evidence given by Porterbrook to committee the following seems to be the current situation.

143 - To be Scrapped.

150/2 - Porterbrook plan to PRM them but would like a guarantee from WAG for their continued use by the new franchisee for at least five years

319 Flex - Primarily temporary cover to allow larger number of 150/2 to be taken out of service for PRM work to meet the PRM deadline.

Porterbrook seemed to be a lot more cautious about the 150/2 work then one would of expect. This is probably due to the 'flux' in the market due to SWT 458/707/455.

 

[PHILIPE]

Penarth Rd - write the address enough times!

Wifi -Yes was a bit naughty not to say in public installed with help of DfT grant....

Reply to a question on ATW Twitter stating DFT and Welsh Government paying for the WIFI. Get the feeling that ATW want to take the credit.

 

[gareth950]

After watching the evidence given by Porterbrook to committee the following seems to be the current situation.

143 - To be Scrapped.

150/2 - Porterbrook plan to PRM them but would like a guarantee from WAG for their continued use by the new franchisee for at least five years

Good luck to Porterbrook in trying to get that guarantee from Welsh Govt. Getting blood from a stone would be easier for them. As far as I can remember Porterbrook first told the same WAG committee about the need to PRM their 150/2s in 2013!

 

[Philip]

I'd prefer a 185 for a Regional Express service than a Voyager, even IC. It's just a real shame that the 4th coach was rejected by the SRA...a mixture of 3 and 4 coach 185s would be excellent for the W&B interurban and regional express services.

Would Siemens still build new Pennine Desiro coaches if the case was brought up again? With a mixture of 3 and 4 coach you could double up to form 6-coach trains for the busiest peak services, single 4-car for all other fairly busy services and leave the single 3-car units for the quieter off-peak services.

 

[Gareth Marston]

I am really surprised people think its realistic for Wales and Borders to recieve new trains in the next franchise. The vast majority of the franchise is not wired so there is not a big advantage using bi modes, new build DMU orders have been very rare since the last turbostar in 2011 and there are plenty of diesel options for regional services anyway, certainly 2023 to 2033. There are 185s, more 158s, 170s, Meridans, Voyagers and more Mark IIIs. A rosco would be mad to fund a new DMU fleet for W&B because there is a very high chance they will be redundant long before they are life expired and there is no chance of new EMUs if the Valleys Lines are electrified because there is surpless of EMUs. At least one franchise has to end up with the left overs and that franchise is now W&B.

There's a lot sense in the new WestMidlands franchise takes on surplus 170's from GA to replace its remaining 150/153 stock leaving it with just two types of DMU 170/172. Likewise East Midlands makes sense for GA's surplus 156's. The big question mark remains the surplus TPE 185's but the way the franchise rounds are going we could see new bi modes in Wales or even loco hauled 442's and the 185's ending up at Long Marston!

 

[gareth950]

Reply to a question on ATW Twitter stating DFT and Welsh Government paying for the WIFI. Get the feeling that ATW want to take the credit.

https://arrivatrainswales-newsroom.prgloo.com/news/free-wifi-on-all-cambrian-line-trains

The Welsh Government have now announced funding for a second phase of the project that will see the remainder of the ATW Fleet fitted with WiFi, including the 142,143, 153 and "Gerald" units. Free wifi will also be made available at the 50 busiest stations within Wales.

What's the point?

 

[tomuk]

There's a lot sense in the new WestMidlands franchise takes on surplus 170's from GA to replace its remaining 150/153 stock leaving it with just two types of DMU 170/172. Likewise East Midlands makes sense for GA's surplus 156's. The big question mark remains the surplus TPE 185's but the way the franchise rounds are going we could see new bi modes in Wales or even loco hauled 442's and the 185's ending up at Long Marston!

It has already been decided that the London Midland 3x150s are going to Northern, in return LM get some extra 153 as Northern are getting rid. (Although Northern are keeping their small fleet of 155s)

LM can cover 153/150 use in West Midlands by freed up 170s from Rugeley electrification.

The problem LM have is the Marston Vale (Bedford - Bletchley) line as the stations can only take 1x23m (1x153) or 2x20m (1x150) but not all the passengers fit on a 1x153.

Most if not all the 442s are going back to SWT for use Waterloo-Portsmouth.

I've a feeling that the 185s will stay with TPE for a while longer to cover expansion they are required to provide later in their franchise and the late delivery of TP electrification.

I think Wales need to prepare for the warmed over 1970s ex District Line VivaRail 230s.

Ken Skates stated to Welsh Assembley Economy, Infrastructure and Skills Committee in response to a question about VivaRail 230s 'despite what you might have been told they can be made to have the look and feel of new trains'

 

[tomuk]

https://arrivatrainswales-newsroom.prgloo.com/news/free-wifi-on-all-cambrian-line-trains



What's the point?

None. I agree the WiFi can be variable anyway, particularly if the Mobile signal is bad. I suppose they can recover the WiFi equipment from the pacers and fit it to the ex Manchester and Birmingham Trams it looks like the Valleys will end up with.:roll:

 

[Rhydgaled]

Headway isn't your problem there, it is Aston with the Cross City.

Didn't Wrexham & Shropshire go that way? Ok, that was only a few trains a day but I'm assuming the current services are clockface so if there are paths in one hour there should be in all the others (except maybe in the peaks, because of peak-extra services). A solution needs to be found for north Wales - Birmingham otherwise the Cambrian cannot have the 2x 158s currently working between Chester and Holyhead/Llandudno.

After watching the evidence given by Porterbrook to committee the following seems to be the current situation.

143 - To be Scrapped.

150/2 - Porterbrook plan to PRM them but would like a guarantee from WAG for their continued use by the new franchisee for at least five years

319 Flex - Primarily temporary cover to allow larger number of 150/2 to be taken out of service for PRM work to meet the PRM deadline.

Porterbrook seemed to be a lot more cautious about the 150/2 work then one would of expect. This is probably due to the 'flux' in the market due to SWT 458/707/455.

Pacers to be scrapped; replaced by what? Need the flex for more than just short-term cover I think. 5yrs for 150s, that's shorter than I feared but still potentially 2025 when electrification is supposed to be done in 2023 else the money for it disapears.

I'd prefer a 185 for a Regional Express service than a Voyager, even IC. It's just a real shame that the 4th coach was rejected by the SRA...a mixture of 3 and 4 coach 185s would be excellent for the W&B interurban and regional express services.

That's like asking if you'd rather by shot by a shotgun or a crossbow; neither 185 nor Voyager are really suitable for regional express. The Voyager is too expensive and the 185 wrongly designed. As for intercity, the basic shell of a Voyager is suitable whereas the 185's isn't; but the current interior layout and insufficient coaches mean Voyagers aren't really good enough for anything currently. Ditch some of the driving vehicles to make the Voyager fleet up to 7 or more carriages per set, put in some legroom and align seats with the windows and you'd have a decent intercity train fleet for XC (if they could bear the cost, 5-car ones could be used as regional express on the Cardiff-Nottingham services too I suppose, but you still need the legroom added and the window alignment).

There's a lot sense in the new WestMidlands franchise takes on surplus 170's from GA to replace its remaining 150/153 stock leaving it with just two types of DMU 170/172. Likewise East Midlands makes sense for GA's surplus 156's. The big question mark remains the surplus TPE 185's

That's if West Midlands is allowed to take existing DMUs; I'm not sure they are from my interpretation of the ITT. Thus if the two electrification schemes on London Midland do not free enough DMUs to get rid of the Sprinters I expect they will need one of the following:

• 153/155 PRM works
• 319 Flex
• D-Stock with van engines

https://arrivatrainswales-newsroom.prgloo.com/news/free-wifi-on-all-cambrian-line-trains

What's the point?

WiFi on 153s and Pacers is pretty pointless; there's not enough legroom to use a laptop and no power points to keep a laptop running if the battery runs out either. Ok, there's a few (4?) table bays on a 153 but the number of pepole able to benifit is pretty small. Gerald probably has better legroom (I've only used it once since mrk3s replaced mrk2s, and that was in 1st class) so might be worth putting WiFi on that esspecially if the equipment can be moved onto whatever stock replaces the mrk3s for 2020.

I think Wales need to prepare for the warmed over 1970s ex District Line VivaRail 230s.

Ken Skates stated to Welsh Assembley Economy, Infrastructure and Skills Committee in response to a question about VivaRail 230s 'despite what you might have been told they can be made to have the look and feel of new trains'

Where would they put them? Yes they can probably be made to appear new (soon after the 158 refurb I heard some passengers comment on the 'new train'), but as ex-LU stock they are metro trains; and a new metro train is not what we need, unless it can take advantage of ValleyLines electrification.

 

[Gareth Marston]

It has already been decided that the London Midland 3x150s are going to Northern, in return LM get some extra 153 as Northern are getting rid. (Although Northern are keeping their small fleet of 155s)

LM can cover 153/150 use in West Midlands by freed up 170s from Rugeley electrification.

The problem LM have is the Marston Vale (Bedford - Bletchley) line as the stations can only take 1x23m (1x153) or 2x20m (1x150) but not all the passengers fit on a 1x153.

Most if not all the 442s are going back to SWT for use Waterloo-Portsmouth.

I've a feeling that the 185s will stay with TPE for a while longer to cover expansion they are required to provide later in their franchise and the late delivery of TP electrification.

I think Wales need to prepare for the warmed over 1970s ex District Line VivaRail 230s.

Ken Skates stated to Welsh Assembley Economy, Infrastructure and Skills Committee in response to a question about VivaRail 230s 'despite what you might have been told they can be made to have the look and feel of new trains'

Vivarail are dead in the water until someone lets them have a trial and they don't catch fire.

We all look at things holistically ie there's a fleet of whatever coming off lease in Area B and theirs need for extra units in Area C. We automatically allocate based on best use of overall resources. However franchising doesn't work that way the bubble of the individual franchises finances can and does produce odd outcomes. A Stadler bi mode fleet (20 units) doing Manchester to West Wales would tick the innovative box (pan up Manchester-Gresty Lane and Newport to Swansea) and free up 175's and 158's.

 

[Bletchleyite]

That's like asking if you'd rather by shot by a shotgun or a crossbow; neither 185 nor Voyager are really suitable for regional express.

Only because of your prejudice about door positions. 185s are too short, but a double set would be entirely suitable, particularly if First Class was either removed or moved to the other end so it isn't in the way.

Those are the only things that really cause issues with them on TPE.

 

[northwichcat]

Vivarail are dead in the water until someone lets them have a trial and they don't catch fire.

A trial has been agreed in the West Midlands but Vivarail haven't delivered the product for the trial.

 

[gareth950]

Could the Welsh Govt seriuosly be considering replacing valleys 150s with D-trains? How long till the media picks up on the fact D-trains are 14-15 yrs older than 150s?

I thought the WG wanted to avoid any negative publicity for awarding the new franchise. Just get on and PRM the 150s, like starting NOW, as its blatantly obvious they will be needed in Wales until at least the mid-2020s.

 

[craigybagel]

That's like asking if you'd rather by shot by a shotgun or a crossbow; neither 185 nor Voyager are really suitable for regional express. The Voyager is too expensive and the 185 wrongly designed. As for intercity, the basic shell of a Voyager is suitable whereas the 185's isn't; but the current interior layout and insufficient coaches mean Voyagers aren't really good enough for anything currently. Ditch some of the driving vehicles to make the Voyager fleet up to 7 or more carriages per set, put in some legroom and align seats with the windows and you'd have a decent intercity train fleet for XC (if they could bear the cost, 5-car ones could be used as regional express on the Cardiff-Nottingham services too I suppose, but you still need the legroom added and the window alignment).

185s: Fast acceleration and able to move large amounts of people, but also with comfortable seating designed for medium to long journeys. Sounds absolutely perfect for regional express services to me. If you don't like the doors, don't sit near them.

Granted, there are other issues with them that would need to be overcome (less seats than a 3 car 175, inability to run at MU speeds) but if that's all that's available to provide extra capacity then they're quite a lot better than nothing.

WiFi on 153s and Pacers is pretty pointless; there's not enough legroom to use a laptop and no power points to keep a laptop running if the battery runs out either. Ok, there's a few (4?) table bays on a 153 but the number of pepole able to benifit is pretty small. Gerald probably has better legroom (I've only used it once since mrk3s replaced mrk2s, and that was in 1st class) so might be worth putting WiFi on that esspecially if the equipment can be moved onto whatever stock replaces the mrk3s for 2020.

Why are you complaining about an improvement?! The local bus from my housing estate into town (a journey of 10 minutes) has WiFi - is it needed? Probably not. But it's a handy marketing gimmick that some people probably like so why not enjoy it? Incidentally your point about powerpoints also applies to 175s, and yet the WiFi on them is proving to be very popular. Given the 153s do sometimes get used on some very long journeys I see no harm in putting WiFi in, especially when it's the government putting up the bill. Also, 6 tables in a 153, all in the middle.

Where would they put them? Yes they can probably be made to appear new (soon after the 158 refurb I heard some passengers comment on the 'new train'), but as ex-LU stock they are metro trains; and a new metro train is not what we need, unless it can take advantage of ValleyLines electrification.

I've said it before and I'll say it again - if the D-train does everything it's makers claim it will, it'd be absolutely perfect for the valley lines, which are crying out for extra stock RIGHT NOW. I don't think it very likely it would happen, Cardiff Bay won't stand for it, but as a short to medium term fix they could be very useful.

 

[northwichcat]

How long till the media picks up on the fact D-trains are 14-15 yrs older than 150s?

You mean 4 to 5 years older. Although, I wouldn't be surprised if the media tried to claim they are older. I recall seeing a BBC report on the 142s subleased to FGW where they claimed they were 30 years old (in 2007) and had been left to rot in sidings for years (they had been in 'warm storage' for a few months.)

 

[Rhydgaled]

A Stadler bi mode fleet (20 units) doing Manchester to West Wales would tick the innovative box (pan up Manchester-Gresty Lane and Newport to Swansea) and free up 175's and 158's.

Unless Stadler have a UEG-equiped model (or the franchisee fails to act in the best interests of passengers), that would not solve the big problem with the Manchester to S.W. Wales services which is that Swansea-MAN needs 3-5 coaches and west of Swansea only needs 2-3 coaches.

185s: Fast acceleration and able to move large amounts of people, but also with comfortable seating designed for medium to long journeys. Sounds absolutely perfect for regional express services to me. If you don't like the doors, don't sit near them.

Perfect for outer-suburban services if the legroom is any good (I can't remember, having not been on one for some time). It isn't just me who doesn't like the doors, and in my case at least sitting away from the doors doesn't make it any better. If 185s are used on a fast service I will resent that wasted space inside the doors wherever I am on the train.

Granted, there are other issues with them that would need to be overcome (less seats than a 3 car 175, inability to run at MU speeds) but if that's all that's available to provide extra capacity then they're quite a lot better than nothing.

Certainly, if it's a choice between single 150s or single 185s and nothing else is allowed I'll take the latter.

Why are you complaining about an improvement?! The local bus from my housing estate into town (a journey of 10 minutes) has WiFi - is it needed? Probably not. But it's a handy marketing gimmick that some people probably like so why not enjoy it? Incidentally your point about powerpoints also applies to 175s, and yet the WiFi on them is proving to be very popular. Given the 153s do sometimes get used on some very long journeys I see no harm in putting WiFi in, especially when it's the government putting up the bill. Also, 6 tables in a 153, all in the middle.

I don't really have a problem with installing Wi-Fi, it's just that it isn't a very useful improvement on those units. If the trains were guaranteed to be staying long-term then it would be sensible, but as it is it doesn't look like the a particularly high priority to be spending taxpayer's money on.

I've said it before and I'll say it again - if the D-train does everything it's makers claim it will, it'd be absolutely perfect for the valley lines, which are crying out for extra stock RIGHT NOW. I don't think it very likely it would happen, Cardiff Bay won't stand for it, but as a short to medium term fix they could be very useful.

As a short-term fix, if they can be delivered within few months, then yes they would be very useful for the ValleyLines. However, how much does it cost to make a D-train and how long a lease would be necessary for Viva-Rail to recover that cost? If the lease is too long, it might move beyond short-term fix teritory into delaying electrification of the ValleyLines.

 

[craigybagel]

Unless Stadler have a UEG-equiped model (or the franchisee fails to act in the best interests of passengers), that would not solve the big problem with the Manchester to S.W. Wales services which is that Swansea-MAN needs 3-5 coaches and west of Swansea only needs 2-3 coaches.

Aside from the fact that passenger figures on those services at present are nowhere near high enough to warrant 5 car services (as I keep pointing out on various threads decrying overcrowding on the Marches), if the best product available doesn't include end doors that doesn't seem like a deal breaker for me. Given the amount of passengers travelling through to West Wales is miniscule it shouldn't be too hard to tell them before boarding to be in the right half of the train. That said, it would be a lot easier to just split the services up, rather than sending trains designed for long distances trundling down the Milford Haven branch....

Perfect for outer-suburban services if the legroom is any good (I can't remember, having not been on one for some time). It isn't just me who doesn't like the doors, and in my case at least sitting away from the doors doesn't make it any better. If 185s are used on a fast service I will resent that wasted space inside the doors wherever I am on the train.

Certainly, if it's a choice between single 150s or single 185s and nothing else is allowed I'll take the latter.

I have very long legs. The 185s are perfectly comfortable for long journeys. That space around the doors has to go somewhere, you've still got space with no seats whether you put it at the ends or at 1/3 2/3. Granted, the doors are bigger, but it speeds up station dwell times and it's much easier for people with wheelchairs and buggies and so on.

If the plan is to bring in new limited stop services (which I'm all for - Manchester-Cardiff at present has way too many stops) then yes there are more appropriate designs out there, but for the services currently run by ATW then they'd be fine. Put them on the North Wales Coast - no speeds to worry about, lots of stations fairly close together and the end to end journeys aren't all that long. Plus most of the platform's out there can take 6 cars if you need to double them up.

As a short-term fix, if they can be delivered within few months, then yes they would be very useful for the ValleyLines. However, how much does it cost to make a D-train and how long a lease would be necessary for Viva-Rail to recover that cost? If the lease is too long, it might move beyond short-term fix teritory into delaying electrification of the ValleyLines.

I think we can take it for granted that unless something radical comes up in the new franchise (ie light rail) then there is going to be a delay on valleys electrification, if it even goes ahead at all.