Future of Class 15x units

[Bletchleyite]

You wouldn't immediately think that Northern would have an issue with 155s being replaced with 156s (possibly, if the costs work out, with some net unit gains) although l get that there are training and maintenance implications.

TBH 153/155 don't look like buses unless you are very familiar with the construction of the Leyland National, so they probably just need to be considered on the basis of if they're falling to bits or not.

The things that primarily make Pacers look like buses are the doors and the destination display.

 

[Wolfie]

Simple. Scrap them and replace them with new bimode or electric stock (not 769s or D78s or whatever conversions people want). Most of the 1xx range should go (168/170/171/172 are fine and obviously I'm not including new stock).

Unlimited budget? If not, your aspirations are likely to happen over a rather extended period. I note that you include 165s and 166s to go. Massively unlikely any time soon!

 

[Wolfie]

Why ? If 769s or D78s are a cost effective solution in some cases, why scrap them and build new ? New trains cost alot more and you need 30+ years to payback. For many quieter lines they make a lot of sense and may give 20 years useful service before being replaced.

Hardly, given the energy expended in building new trains, a green solution either.

 

[Wolfie]

Exactly.

150s, 31x and 153s in the next few years.Then 156s.Then 158s and 16x and 769s if they actually get any of the damn things in service. Then Turbostars. Then Networkers and 323s. You get the idea.

Of course, replacement by cascade is perfectly reasonable.

When replacement by cascade was proposed for Northern previously there were massive whinges about "old" London/southern cast-offs....

 

[Energy]

But those are all in use for the forseeable with their respective TOCs...

My point is that they can be released by electrification.

 

[Wolfie]

British Rail when developing the sprinter should have only designed one type instead of 5 and instead of 158s they should have designed stock like today's loco /mark 5/DVT

An enthusiasts view point. Would likely, on many lines, meant much less usable capacity due to platform space constraints.

 

[Bletchleyite]

An enthusiasts view point. Would likely, on many lines, meant much less usable capacity due to platform space constraints.

The fundamental problem with 158s was that not enough vehicles were built due to the stupid 2-for-3 policy. Had they built the same number of units but 3 or 4-car they'd have been great.

 

[Wolfie]

The fundamental problem with 158s was that not enough vehicles were built due to the stupid 2-for-3 policy. Had they built the same number of units but 3 or 4-car they'd have been great.

Absolutely spot on.

 

[Meerkat]

Yes, I can certainly see benefits in a standard regional bi-mode. You wouldn't even need 2 bodies, just lay the seats out differently (and use different seats) based on application, e.g. the 350s.

IMO you do need two bodies - regional trains should be end door. But it wasn’t an issue for Siemens to offer the same package in two length/door combos for SWT so it shouldnt be an issue.
One issue with mass standardisation is you are definitely going to kill more of the factories. I would rather there was at least two competing options to keep price/quality/innovation competition. BR did that at least once didn’t it? Just have a national compatibility spec - couplers, computers, wiring, so they can all work together. Maybe other standardisation to reduce cross training.

 

[Wolfie]

IMO you do need two bodies - regional trains should be end door. But it wasn’t an issue for Siemens to offer the same package in two length/door combos for SWT so it shouldnt be an issue.
One issue with mass standardisation is you are definitely going to kill more of the factories. I would rather there was at least two competing options to keep price/quality/innovation competition. BR did that at least once didn’t it? Just have a national compatibility spec - couplers, computers, wiring, so they can all work together. Maybe other standardisation to reduce cross training.

The counter-argument is that such an approach kills innovation and locks in obsolescence (e.g. see former SR EMUs) as well as potentially creating an almost network closing situation in the event that serious rolling stock deficiencies are identified.

 

[Meerkat]

The counter-argument is that such an approach kills innovation and locks in obsolescence (e.g. see former SR EMUs) as well as potentially creating an almost network closing situation in the event that serious rolling stock deficiencies are identified.

Should be rare if standardisation is interfaces - any computer you like as long as it can kick out a standard set of control commands (and stop kicking out anything else, which might cause issues). ie if your train is extra special then it has a switch which tells it it is either coupled to an equally whizzo train and can talk accordingly, or something else so needs to talk standard interface.
If you are really cynical you spec it so your favoured factory has a head start.....

 

[Wolfie]

Should be rare if standardisation is interfaces - any computer you like as long as it can kick out a standard set of control commands (and stop kicking out anything else, which might cause issues). ie if your train is extra special then it has a switch which tells it it is either coupled to an equally whizzo train and can talk accordingly, or something else so needs to talk standard interface.
If you are really cynical you spec it so your favoured factory has a head start.....

Re your last para, l'm sure that happens...

 

[Bletchleyite]

Another benefit of doing this would be it could come with a move to low-floor.

 

[Speed43125]

Re your last para, l'm sure that happens...

As demonstrated in the aspiration one post further down!

 

[Wolfie]

As demonstrated in the aspiration one post further down!

Hahaha...

 

[Rick1984]

Another benefit of doing this would be it could come with a move to low-floor.

Yes I would push the low floor option. Doesn't have to be every carriage either

 

[Pacco]

150s are terrible. They are the most basic train that could be considered acceptable, and show exactly what successive governments think of the value of the regions.

They are 36 years old and if new trains are ordered today it will be 40+ years before they are all replaced.

I have seen London-folk get off a Pendo, get on a 150 to their final destination and go 'urgh'.

Bare fluorescent tubes, 3+2 seating that struggle to fit even the smallest of passengers in side-by-side or opposite each other - hello, interlocking knees.

And to cap it all off they are noisy as a Def Leppard concert on a loud day. Inside and out.

The 319s were actually an upgrade because electric and a proper four-car train. But they still have the same NHS-prescription specs vibe about them.

If we want people to get out of their cars then new trains are a must. Yes, Covid-19 has changed commuting, but people will return to the office in a greater way than they are right now, and people should be choosing quieter, comfortable, frequent trains, over their cars for more of their personal journeys. Especially as cities and towns become more liveable in our 'new' world.

 

[Anonymous10]

150s are terrible. They are the most basic train that could be considered acceptable, and show exactly what successive governments think of the value of the regions.

They are 36 years old and if new trains are ordered today it will be 40+ years before they are all replaced.

I have seen London-folk get off a Pendo, get on a 150 to their final destination and go 'urgh'.

Bare fluorescent tubes, 3+2 seating that struggle to fit even the smallest of passengers in side-by-side or opposite each other - hello, interlocking knees.

And to cap it all off they are noisy as a Def Leppard concert on a loud day. Inside and out.

The 319s were actually an upgrade because electric and a proper four-car train. But they still have the same NHS-prescription specs vibe about them.

If we want people to get out of their cars then new trains are a must. Yes, Covid-19 has changed commuting, but people will return to the office in a greater way than they are right now, and people should be choosing quieter, comfortable, frequent trains, over their cars for more of their personal journeys. Especially as cities and towns become more liveable in our 'new' world.

The Welsh 150s aren't to bad nice bright lighting usb power in table seats WiFi ect and 2+2 seating

 

[Philip Phlopp]

You can stop grumbling about the Class 150 units, they'll be withdrawn at the end of 2039 along with everything else that goes to meet the diesel ban (assuming it still happens).

 

[Bletchleyite]

I have seen London-folk get off a Pendo, get on a 150 to their final destination and go 'urgh'.

Given how many Mk3-based EMUs (exactly the same body) there still are knocking round the SE, I don't think this is any different to what they'd say when they changed to their local service to get back home.

That said, I've heard the opposite comments about 195s, e.g. "Wow, this is nicer than the London train".

 

[hst43102]

You can stop grumbling about the Class 150 units, they'll be withdrawn at the end of 2039 along with everything else that goes to meet the diesel ban (assuming it still happens).

I doubt it will happen, the 195/196/197 etc will be less than 20 years old. Sure the DfT will want to get maximum usage out of them!

 

[Pacco]

You can stop grumbling about the Class 150 units, they'll be withdrawn at the end of 2039 along with everything else that goes to meet the diesel ban (assuming it still happens).

2039! They'll be 55 years old!
People will be putting sawdust in the fuel tanks to get rid!

I take the point about the MKIII units in the South East, but most have the end in sight; and a Renatus 321 or a class 444, are a long way from a Cummins-powered 150 thrashing up a steep gradient.

I know that they are functional, but when a 323 or 319 are like getting on a spaceship in comparison, never mind a 195/331, then at least sight of a proposed replacement is probably a good idea.

 

[Speed43125]

I doubt it will happen, the 195/196/197 etc will be less than 20 years old. Sure the DfT will want to get maximum usage out of them!

I thought the main reason for the Civity was the 'raft' where in theory you could swap out the diesel and put a different source in. Commonality with 331s and this change being designed in should make it easier than the 769 stuff, even if they will be around that age.

 

[Philip Phlopp]

I thought the main reason for the Civity was the 'raft' where in theory you could swap out the diesel and put a different source in. Commonality with 331s and this change being designed in should make it easier than the 769 stuff, even if they will be around that age.

I don't know who has fallen for this sales pitch, but it's fantasy.

The Civity DMU stock will not and cannot be converted to electric* without extensive expenditure. They're fitted with mechanical transmission and final drives which will need to be replaced alongside the removal of the engines and fuel tanks, there's no pantograph well vehicles in their formation, so there will need to be bodywork modifications (with subsequent interior changes) to allow the pantograph to be fitted, plus the necessary HV wiring to take 25kV from the pantograph to the transformer.

* I suspect the intermediate motor vehicle from the Class 195/1 family could be converted to an unpowered trailer and inserted into the 3 car Class 331 fleet to make them up to more Class 331/1 4 car units.

 

[hst43102]

I thought the main reason for the Civity was the 'raft' where in theory you could swap out the diesel and put a different source in. Commonality with 331s and this change being designed in should make it easier than the 769 stuff, even if they will be around that age.

I'm fairly sure the Civities are diesel-mechanical - the "theory" would mean stripping out all the diesel engines and drivetrain and fitting all the electrical equipment. I don't even think they have pantograph wells like 376s or DC 377s have.

 

[py_megapixel]

You can stop grumbling about the Class 150 units, they'll be withdrawn at the end of 2039 along with everything else that goes to meet the diesel ban (assuming it still happens).

Still got slightly under 20 years left with them then? I don't really think that's good enough if the railway wishes to remain competitive with other modes.

I can understand hanging onto them until suitable battery or hydrogen technology can replace them as it doesn't make sense introducing trains that will only see 15-20 years of service.

 

[Anonymous10]

I doubt it will happen, the 195/196/197 etc will be less than 20 years old. Sure the DfT will want to get maximum usage out of them!

Depends how viable other options are for non electrified lines

 

[Speed43125]

I don't know who has fallen for this sales pitch, but it's fantasy.

Oh I agree. There was a lot of defense of the Civity fleet on the 195 thread a while back with this brought up frequently. They are, as you say, in the 1xx series and likely to be nigh on impossible to convert economically to OHLE.*

* If hydrogen tech improves dramatically, I doubt that would be out of the question, but certainly looks to be very tricky.

 

[popeter45]

Oh I agree. There was a lot of defense of the Civity fleet on the 195 thread a while back with this brought up frequently. They are, as you say, in the 1xx series and likely to be nigh on impossible to convert economically to OHLE.*

* If hydrogen tech improves dramatically, I doubt that would be out of the question, but certainly looks to be very tricky.

if they really wanted to make them convertible they should have made then DEMU's so 295,296 and 297

 

[Speed43125]

if they really wanted to make them convertible they should have made then DEMU's so 295,296 and 297

As if we'd have the money for that!