Should GWR order class 195 CAF Civities to replace its DMUs (bar the 165/166)?

[SouthEastBuses]

If GWR are not going to bother with electrification on the remaining lines, should they order class 195s (CAF Civity DMU) to replace the 142s, 143s, 144s, 150s, 153s, 156s and 158s?

 

[Bletchleyite]

If GWR are not going to bother with electrification on the remaining lines, should they order class 195s (CAF Civity DMU) to replace the 142s, 143s, 144s, 150s, 153s, 156s and 158s?

No, it should, if it's going to, order WMR style Class 196s, as they have gangways and seats aligned to the windows. I'd favour bi-mode, though.

 

[SouthEastBuses]

No, it should, if it's going to, order WMR style Class 196s, as they have gangways and seats aligned to the windows. I'd favour bi-mode, though.

Same here. I'd also prefer hydrogen and battery electric, ideally. But I was just wondering what it would be like with GWR ordering Civity DMUs.

 

[py_megapixel]

GWR don't have any 153s or 156s left.

If units were to be ordered to replace the 150s:

1. As @Bletchleyite says, they should be 196s with gangways and LEAN seats aligned to the windows
2. I would suggest that it should be primarily an order for Northern, who operate hundreds of 150s, with a few extra tagged on for GW.

The 158s don't need replacing yet.

 

[JonathanH]

GWR don't have any 153s or 156s left.

If units were to be ordered to replace the 150s:

1. As @Bletchleyite says, they should be 196s with gangways and LEAN seats aligned to the windows
2. I would suggest that it should be primarily an order for Northern, who operate hundreds of 150s, with a few extra tagged on for GW.

The 158s don't need replacing yet.

The corollary of those statements is that 158s from ATW or EMR could replace the 150s (with some reorganisation to allow 165s to directly replace the 150s).

 

[SouthEastBuses]

I would prioritise the 142 replacement first, as the Pacers do not meet the current accessibility requirements.

 

[Energy]

I would prioritise the 142 replacement first, as the Pacers do not meet the current accessibility requirements.

As I understand the 143s (GWR have no 142s now) aren't really getting used much and will be replaced by cascades when the 769s enter service

I wouldn't bother getting a small fleet of trains just to replace the 150s, 158s are getting released from TfW and EMR soon so they will be available. I would rather not order new diesel trains instead electrifying elsewhere to get existing diesel trains. Electrifying Chiltern would make 165s available.

 

[brad465]

As I understand the 143s (GWR have no 142s now) aren't really getting used much and will be replaced by cascades when the 769s enter service

Their use probably has reduced but having used Exmouth services on part of their journey a few times in January and July this year, I saw many 4 car sets of a 142+150, which I imagine is a derogation requirement for 142s to keep being used, but yes hopefully their replacement isn't far away.

 

[py_megapixel]

Their use probably has reduced but having used Exmouth services on part of their journey a few times in January and July this year, I saw many 4 car sets of a 142+150, which I imagine is a derogation requirement for 142s to keep being used, but yes hopefully their replacement isn't far away.

No 142s left with GW: must have been a 143

 

[swt_passenger]

If GWR are not going to bother with electrification on the remaining lines, should they order class 195s (CAF Civity DMU) to replace the 142s, 143s, 144s, 150s, 153s, 156s and 158s?

GWR have absolutely nothing to do with any future electrification decision.

 

[SussexLad]

Could the 196s or 195s be a suitable replacement for the hst castle sets? Sooner or later they'll need a replacement too

 

[py_megapixel]

Could the 196s or 195s be a suitable replacement for the hst castle sets? Sooner or later they'll need a replacement too

I'd probably advocate something closer to a 397, with vestibules and specced for 125mph (obviously diesel traction though)

 

[JonathanH]

Why does it need to go 125mph. Where do Castle Sets run where the speed is 125mph?

A common fleet can replace both 15x and HSTs suitable for 100mph running.

The point of this thread is a bit flawed in that it isn't really up to GWR to replace its units. It is a decision that will need to be taken towards the end of this decade. Things may be different by then. If there has just been a thread about level boarding, 195s or 196s might not even be suitable. The fleet has just gone through a refresh programme.

 

[py_megapixel]

Why does it need to go 125mph. Where do Castle Sets run where the speed is 125mph?

A common fleet can replace both 15x and HSTs suitable for 100mph running.

Sorry my mistake. I guess I automatically assumed "HST = InterCity125 = 125 mph"

Still I don't think a 196 would be acceptable for some journeys of the length that the 158s and 2+4 HSTs operate.

 

[Irascible]

Could the 196s or 195s be a suitable replacement for the hst castle sets? Sooner or later they'll need a replacement too

Maybe about the time the 159s need replacement? big order covering the entire South-West then with a decent interior for distance travel ( and hopefully anything that's causing the reports of discomfort & bad ride will have been sorted, if they did - 159s are really nice to ride ). The nearest 125mph to down here is Bristol though & I doubt there's any chance of that spreading.

 

[py_megapixel]

Maybe about the time the 159s need replacement?

There's nothing much wrong with them is there though? At least nothing that a quality refurb (not a Northern-style "repaint, slap in PRM mods and a rubbish PIS and call it a day") can't fix?

 

[Bletchleyite]

There's nothing much wrong with them is there though? At least nothing that a quality refurb (not a Northern-style "repaint, slap in PRM mods and a rubbish PIS and call it a day") can't fix?

Indeed. If only they'd swap the aircon out, the Inverness 158s with the Grammer IC3000s are about the nicest rolling stock in the UK.

 

[Irascible]

There's nothing much wrong with them is there though? At least nothing that a quality refurb (not a Northern-style "repaint, slap in PRM mods and a rubbish PIS and call it a day") can't fix?

There is nothing wrong with them & I don't want to see them go - but they're 30 years old already & do long distances every day, so they're not going to last forever. But no, no need to replace now, just like there's no need to get rid of the short HSTs for a while. Most of the other locals down here are ok for 158s ( Edit: which will need replacing at the same time as everything else so you can bung them on the order too ), it's only the Torbay-Exeter-Exmouth route that might need something with more doors.

 

[brad465]

No 142s left with GW: must have been a 143

Apologies I meant 143, a mistake of identity.

 

[Philip Phlopp]

It'll need to be bi-mode, diesel only is to be phased out by 2040.

Hitachi AT200 bi-mode. 23m, carriage end doors, 100/110mph and end gangways.

CAF wouldn't be my choice from what I'm hearing within the industry - badly assembled, poorly designed and tricky to maintain, which is why they're languishing alongside everybody's least favourite train manufacturer, Bombardier, in the reliability tables.

 

[Bletchleyite]

Stadler would be mine as it would be low-floor. Other manufacturers need to offer this.

 

[JonathanH]

Stadler would be mine as it would be low-floor. Other manufacturers need to offer this.

Working on routes also operated by high floor 80x units?

 

[Philip Phlopp]

Stadler would be mine as it would be low-floor. Other manufacturers need to offer this.

If they would kindly learn how to bolt their trains together properly, I could be convinced.

And I do very much mean bolt.

 

[Bletchleyite]

Working on routes also operated by high floor 80x units?

Yes. At least some trains would be fully accessible without assistance. Much better than no trains.

If they would kindly learn how to bolt their trains together properly, I could be convinced.

And I do very much mean bolt.

Have bits actually been falling off the Stadlers? That's not very Swiss. I'd more expect that from CAF

 

[py_megapixel]

I'd more expect that from CAF

Actually CAF hasn't done too badly with build quality. IIRC the main reliability issues have been door faults, as well as the inevitable software issues, and of course the incorrectly specified gangways before introduction

 

[tetudo boy]

It'll need to be bi-mode, diesel only is to be phased out by 2040.

I'm pretty sure CAF were looking into making Bi-mode Civity's. I might be wrong.

Could the Class 195/196's work on Wessex routes too?

 

[Bletchleyite]

Actually CAF hasn't done too badly with build quality. IIRC the main reliability issues have been door faults, as well as the inevitable software issues, and of course the incorrectly specified gangways before introduction

I'm not sure I'd agree. They ride like a cart and rattle like an old bus.

If you want build quality you want Siemens, no contest.

 

[py_megapixel]

I'm not sure I'd agree. They ride like a cart and rattle like an old bus.

I've not experienced the rattling. But you're right that the 195s (not the 331s, they're pretty good) seem to ride roughly as well as a derailed Pacer. However, I mostly put that down to the utterly sh*t choice of seat (Fainsa ironing board with cloth covers and no padding)

If you want build quality you want Siemens, no contest.

I agree there. If Siemens have sorted out the painfully slow doors, and had actually bid for the relevant contracts, then I'd think they were silly for not going with Desiros.

 

[tetudo boy]

I'm not sure I'd agree. They ride like a cart and rattle like an old bus.

Um, why? I went on a Class 331 and it was (sort of) smooth.

 

[Irascible]

Are there any diesel AT200s anywhere already?