How long left for Sprinters

[bramling]

We must be a strange pair! I genuinely find 156’s really pleasant to travel on, they’re comfortable and like you I prefer natural ventilation (I often lower the window in my car!). They are noisy I won’t deny that, but not to the extent that some people are claiming; they’re not really “deafening”.

Must admit I don’t get the moaning about 156s. My only slight gripe would be that legroom isn’t great (which of course isn’t an issue unless the train is heavily loaded). Otherwise they’re fine IMO. I don’t sense that people get on them and find the atmosphere rubbish, I can’t say I’ve ever heard anyone make negative comments, which is more than can be said for some modern trains with hard seats. And better a 156 with opening windows than something else with non-functioning air conditioning, an issue which seems to affect many types of train in hot weather nowadays.

I must be strange too!

 

[greatvoyager]

Must admit I don’t get the moaning about 156s. My only slight gripe would be that legroom isn’t great (which of course isn’t an issue unless the train is heavily loaded). Otherwise they’re fine IMO. I don’t sense that people get on them and find the atmosphere rubbish, I can’t say I’ve ever heard anyone make negative comments, which is more than can be said for some modern trains with hard seats. And better a 156 with opening windows than something else with non-functioning air conditioning, an issue which seems to affect many types of train in hot weather nowadays.

I must be strange too!

I’m okay with them too, although a few are looking a little long in the teeth now.

 

[DJ_K666]

Wasn't there supposed to be a further type? You had the 'Sprinter', the 150s, 151 and even the short lived 154 (Now on GWT as 150002 - one of the two prototypes I encountered on the Brighton to Great Malvern run. The driver was quite surprised when I told him what he had there was a prototype. 001 and 002 are now at Newton Heath) the Super Sprinter (The 153, 155 and 156 - You can still travel on a 155 in Yorkshire if you want to see what they were like) then the Express for long runs, like 4 hours+ or the epic Stansted to Liverpool run (The 158 and 159)
There was also supposed to be a Platinum type unit which never came to pass. I am guessing a development of the 158 but who knows? Maybe there is some literature about it in some dark archive somewhere. Also there was going to be a 157 for Strathclyde and BR had actually set aside the intended carriage numbers for them. Not to mention the intended class 152 which would have seen 156s get the same treatment as the 155s and be turned into single car units.

 

[rangersac]

Must admit I don’t get the moaning about 156s. My only slight gripe would be that legroom isn’t great (which of course isn’t an issue unless the train is heavily loaded). Otherwise they’re fine IMO. I don’t sense that people get on them and find the atmosphere rubbish, I can’t say I’ve ever heard anyone make negative comments, which is more than can be said for some modern trains with hard seats. And better a 156 with opening windows than something else with non-functioning air conditioning, an issue which seems to affect many types of train in hot weather nowadays.

I must be strange too!

It's all fine for us train buff types on here who like using them, but for most of your average punters the valid comparison is whether the train experience is more comfortable, convenient and costs on par with using their car. By any stretch a 156 is much noisier than your average car and whilst I agree having fresh air access 'can' be a bonus, hopper windows generally add to the racket as they are prone to being rattly, and when it's particularly hot or cold the lack of decent air conditioning or potentially heating (yes a 156 has heating but I can tell you on the first train of the day in the middle of winter out of Oban it leaves a fair bit to be desired) is a significant drawback. Also it's one thing to to put up with noise for an hour or two, but on routes like the WHL I reckon even the hardiest diesel enthusiast will have had their fill of thrash by the end of the journey.

 

[Rhydgaled]

It's all fine for us train buff types on here who like using them, but for most of your average punters the valid comparison is whether the train experience is more comfortable, convenient and costs on par with using their car. By any stretch a 156 is much noisier than your average car and whilst I agree having fresh air access 'can' be a bonus, hopper windows generally add to the racket as they are prone to being rattly, and when it's particularly hot or cold the lack of decent air conditioning or potentially heating (yes a 156 has heating but I can tell you on the first train of the day in the middle of winter out of Oban it leaves a fair bit to be desired) is a significant drawback. Also it's one thing to to put up with noise for an hour or two, but on routes like the WHL I reckon even the hardiest diesel enthusiast will have had their fill of thrash by the end of the journey.

I agree, it's important to remember that the car is a very important consideration - a 156 fails in terms of noise (and possibly saloon temp.) and a 195 fails in terms of seat comfort (and a few other things, probably including saloon temp due to the saloons openning to the outside world at every stop - on a winter evening that's going to be almost as bad as the first 156 off Oban).

 

[sprinterguy]

There are certainly lots of 156s and until ScotRail fitted theirs with ironing boards didn't all the 156s have Chapmans?

No, just the former Regional Railways North West and Central area units had Chapman seating (38 units out of 114): The former Regional Railways North East units all have Richmond seating fitted by Northern Spirit (28 units out of 114) and all the Scotrail units had their original Ashbourne seating (48 units out of 114) before the latest refurbishment.

I don't think anyone will really miss Sprinters. I travelled on a Greater Anglia 156 a few years ago after not having experienced one for a quite some time, 170s having replaced them on most of the longe rural runs by then.

I'll certainly miss the 156s, for the reasons outlined by other contributors above. Robust, simple, comfortable trains with decent luggage provision, for a multiple unit, that are ideal for rural and provincial services.

Mind you I will admit that the thirty year old interiors did fall short of the standards of comfort offered by the competing Scottish Citylink coach over the Fort William - Glasgow route in recent years. Not sure how much the new Fainsa seating has changed the experience.

 

[Rhydgaled]

No, just the former Regional Railways North West and Central area units had Chapman seating (38 units out of 114): The former Regional Railways North East units all have Richmond seating fitted by Northern Spirit (28 units out of 114) and all the Scotrail units had their original Ashbourne seating (48 units out of 114) before the latest refurbishment.

Ok, I stand corrected. Still, as far as I can remember, I found having an unrefurbished 156 from Fort William to Glasgow quite alright and I doubt I would be able to say the same had it been a refurb unit with ironing boards. So Ashbourne (ScotRail) and Chapman (EMT) gives 86 units out of 114 with seats that beat ironing boards hands down. I can't remember if I like Richmonds - they look uncomfortable in the picture I just looked up.

 

[Bletchleyite]

Ok, I stand corrected. Still, as far as I can remember, I found having an unrefurbished 156 from Fort William to Glasgow quite alright and I doubt I would be able to say the same had it been a refurb unit with ironing boards. So Ashbourne (ScotRail) and Chapman (EMT) gives 86 units out of 114 with seats that beat ironing boards hands down. I can't remember if I like Richmonds - they look uncomfortable in the picture I just looked up.

Richmond seating is terrible with a flawed design - the bases collapse and slope the wrong way. They look comfortable but they are not (except when very new). Ironing boards are far preferable.

Ashbournes are OK but very dated and a bit low.

 

[ed1971]

Commuting on them I didn't feel the same way. Sounds like someone just threw a brick in a washing machine.

To be fair to the washing machine, it probably accelerates faster.

That said, I'll probably ride Pacers on heritage lines and the like, it's always interesting to ride old units, even if they are a bit rubbish!

Yeah, even delapidated trains are generally more efficient fuel wise. Newer models would be better though, especially if they were electric.

It's odd that 319's are being scrapped, they are definitely an improvement. However, there is generally always a surplus of EMU stock, with a shortage of DMU, due to the frequent cutbacks of electrification programmes.

That is the key issue - especially in enclosed stations and lines running into dense city centres.

Generally, rail is the most efficient form of transport, especially as average car occupancy usually hovers around 1.5 persons.

However, thirty year old diesel units that sound and smell like a WW2 fighter plane hardly promote the railway's green credentials.

The Cummins NTA855 and Voith setup on the Class 15x series dates from the late 1960s and the high noise levels give the game away.

Australian railways were amongst the first to use the driveline and one such example were the Western Australian Government Railways (WAGR) ADK/ADB Classes that were later sold to New Zealand.

ADK/ADB class diesel multiple unit - Wikipedia

en.wikipedia.org

I regard them as a sort of Australian version of a Class 150. Here is a video of an ADK Class in New Zealand:

 

[route101]

I quite enjoy class 156s on my local line. I don't think they are suitable for the West Highland Line, though Class 158s would not have as good views.
With the wiring of the East Kilbride line, if we get 318/320s, they will be cramped compared to 156s but with more standing room.

 

[HSTEd]

(and a few other things, probably including saloon temp due to the saloons openning to the outside world at every stop - on a winter evening that's going to be almost as bad as the first 156 off Oban).

I do think, to a certain extent, this can be overcome by installing massive heater plant.

Also I think the railway should consider improving station environment with more enclosed stations (as long as ventilation is good enough obviously)

 

[rangersac]

Richmond seating is terrible with a flawed design - the bases collapse and slope the wrong way. They look comfortable but they are not (except when very new). Ironing boards are far preferable.

Ashbournes are OK but very dated and a bit low.

As a relatively tall chap I agree with regard to the Ashbournes, definitely too low to the ground for my back. Ironing boards are much better posture wise at the expense of a numb backside if you have to sit in them for an extended period.

 

[Journeyman]

As a relatively tall chap I agree with regard to the Ashbournes, definitely too low to the ground for my back. Ironing boards are much better posture wise at the expense of a numb backside if you have to sit in them for an extended period.

I liked the Ashbournes as I'm pretty much just the right height for them, and with the big windows, I thought they made the 156s feel very open and spacious.

Ironing boards force you to sit very upright, and they're far too firm, but they're actually better than a lot of people say they are. They're just not good at all for journeys that can be 4+ hours.

 

[61653 HTAFC]

Wasn't there supposed to be a further type? You had the 'Sprinter', the 150s, 151 and even the short lived 154 (Now on GWT as 150002 - one of the two prototypes I encountered on the Brighton to Great Malvern run. The driver was quite surprised when I told him what he had there was a prototype. 001 and 002 are now at Newton Heath) the Super Sprinter (The 153, 155 and 156 - You can still travel on a 155 in Yorkshire if you want to see what they were like) then the Express for long runs, like 4 hours+ or the epic Stansted to Liverpool run (The 158 and 159)
There was also supposed to be a Platinum type unit which never came to pass. I am guessing a development of the 158 but who knows? Maybe there is some literature about it in some dark archive somewhere. Also there was going to be a 157 for Strathclyde and BR had actually set aside the intended carriage numbers for them. Not to mention the intended class 152 which would have seen 156s get the same treatment as the 155s and be turned into single car units.

A slight correction, the proposed 152 would have been new-build single cars, though very similar in design to the 156. If you look at the inner ends of 156 cars, you'll see that there simply wouldn't be room to fit a cab (even the 153s were a squeeze and they had significantly more space to play with between the door and the vehicle end). Such a unit would no doubt have been nicer for crews (both cabs being full-size) and for passengers than the 153s ended up being, but then BR would have had 35 2-car units without work for them.

 

[Neptune]

Ironing boards force you to sit very upright,

Which is good for your back. We are not designed to slouch.

 

[DJ_K666]

A slight correction, the proposed 152 would have been new-build single cars, though very similar in design to the 156. If you look at the inner ends of 156 cars, you'll see that there simply wouldn't be room to fit a cab (even the 153s were a squeeze and they had significantly more space to play with between the door and the vehicle end). Such a unit would no doubt have been nicer for crews (both cabs being full-size) and for passengers than the 153s ended up being, but then BR would have had 35 2-car units without work for them.

I stand corrected. It's been literally decades since I travelled in a 156

 

[Rhydgaled]

I do think, to a certain extent, this can be overcome by installing massive heater plant.

Or fitting internal doors as most intercity and (proper) regional express stock have; and even some suburban units for first class.

 

[Jozhua]

Speaking of comfort, the 150/2's have those awful rows of seats that are incredibly low and incredibly close together. Even sat on the facing seats, one gave me deadleg by the time I got to Wigan, I had to hop off the train and lean against a wall until the blood returned and I could walk properly again!

The 150/1's are better, just with some facing seats.

The Cummins NTA855 and Voith setup on the Class 15x series dates from the late 1960s and the high noise levels give the game away.

Australian railways were amongst the first to use the driveline and one such example were the Western Australian Government Railways (WAGR) ADK/ADB Classes that were later sold to New Zealand.

ADK/ADB class diesel multiple unit - Wikipedia

en.wikipedia.org

I regard them as a sort of Australian version of a Class 150. Here is a video of an ADK Class in New Zealand:

Ahh! Yeah those units sound like a tractor from the 40's being revved far higher than the intended design.

Or fitting internal doors as most intercity and (proper) regional express stock have; and even some suburban units for first class.

158's have that, most 15X units are used for local services though.

 

[MattRat]

So I just found out that Sprinters seem to be next on the chopping block now the Pacers are gone, and now I'm really sad. I know time marches on but these units have been the backbone of the railways, supporting not only branch lines, but most of the North. They were the first 'regular' train I fell in love with. I just hope when it's over, they get a good send off. If people can love the Pacers, then surely they can find it in their hearts to love the Sprinters, the little trains that could.

 

[Jozhua]

So I just found out that Sprinters seem to be next on the chopping block now the Pacers are gone, and now I'm really sad. I know time marches on but these units have been the backbone of the railways, supporting not only branch lines, but most of the North. They were the first 'regular' train I fell in love with. I just hope when it's over, they get a good send off. If people can love the Pacers, then surely they can find it in their hearts to love the Sprinters, the little trains that could.

Sprinters are better than Pacers by every metric. Including cost.

They can be at times uncomfortably loud and hot, but during winter they provide a pretty acceptable experience.

158's are great and the EMR ones especially, provide an experience better than the 170's. Unfortunate about some of their reliability issues though. Very capable, plenty of bathroom facilities, good sound insulation and lots of seats.

If the 150/3/5/6 units were fitted with A/C, perhaps even retrofitted, I think the experience would be a lot better, because the windows could be closed for some more noise isolation.

The 155's and 153's were a mistake that should be forgotten lol. The tragedy of leaving Matlock on a early morning service to see one carriage roll up. People were left behind by Belper... (to wait an hour for the next train!)

 

[MattRat]

Sprinters are better than Pacers by every metric. Including cost.

They can be at times uncomfortably loud and hot, but during winter they provide a pretty acceptable experience.

158's are great and the EMR ones especially, provide an experience better than the 170's. Unfortunate about some of their reliability issues though. Very capable, plenty of bathroom facilities, good sound insulation and lots of seats.

If the 150/3/5/6 units were fitted with A/C, perhaps even retrofitted, I think the experience would be a lot better, because the windows could be closed for some more noise isolation.

The 155's and 153's were a mistake that should be forgotten lol. The tragedy of leaving Matlock on a early morning service to see one carriage roll up. People were left behind by Belper... (to wait an hour for the next train!)

Engine noise never really bothered me but then again I also like cars. The thrum of a distinct engine note puts a smile on my face. That also means I'll happily pop open a window when needed. I do like the extra performance of a 158/159 though.

I won't defend one car trains though, but I do wonder why they don't use them to make the 155 and 156 into 3 car trains for example. It not only solves the 153 problem, but would also extend the life of the other vehicles becuase that extra capacity is or will be needed.

 

[XAM2175]

I won't defend one car trains though, but I do wonder why they don't use them to make the 155 and 156 into 3 car trains for example.

You have apparently missed this:

5x Class 153 conversion to bike and baggage vans for Scotrail

Report in Local Transport Today on a possible conversion of 153s to be baggage vans on Scottish tourist routes like the Far North, as they can be joined to existing trains...

www.railforums.co.uk

 

[MattRat]

You have apparently missed this:

5x Class 153 conversion to bike and baggage vans for Scotrail

Report in Local Transport Today on a possible conversion of 153s to be baggage vans on Scottish tourist routes like the Far North, as they can be joined to existing trains...

www.railforums.co.uk

Does that mean the 153s might outlive the other Sprinters? I'd actually find that funny if it happened.

 

[Jozhua]

Engine noise never really bothered me but then again I also like cars. The thrum of a distinct engine note puts a smile on my face. That also means I'll happily pop open a window when needed. I do like the extra performance of a 158/159 though.

I won't defend one car trains though, but I do wonder why they don't use them to make the 155 and 156 into 3 car trains for example. It not only solves the 153 problem, but would also extend the life of the other vehicles becuase that extra capacity is or will be needed.

For me, the 156 engine noise is very gratuitous and does not seem to correlate with performance lol.

Sounds like someone is trying to over-rev a tractor engine. It also doesn't really vary in tone, so is just overall very monotonous and unpleasant.

 

[XAM2175]

Does that mean the 153s might outlive the other Sprinters? I'd actually find that funny if it happened.

Only if the Class 156 vehicles on either side of the 153s cease to be Sprinters

 

[MattRat]

For me, the 156 engine noise is very gratuitous and does not seem to correlate with performance lol.

Sounds like someone is trying to over-rev a tractor engine. It also doesn't really vary in tone, so is just overall very monotonous and unpleasant.

Well, normal people think loud revving cars all sound the same, so it's personal opinion.

Only if the Class 156 vehicles on either side of the 153s cease to be Sprinters

The 170 used by ScotRail can work in multiple with Sprinters. So when they get cascaded down I can see 153s being coupled onto them.

 

[Bikeman78]

Sprinters are better than Pacers by every metric. Including cost.

Are you sure about this? The engines on Pacers are slightly quieter. I've no idea about cost. The Pacers needed a lot of remedial work in their early years but I don't know how they compare over 30 years.

I don't have a major problem with Sprinters. I've done long journeys on Welsh 150s. They are okay with the nice 2+2 seats that they have now. Much better than the cramped 3+2 layout they were built with.

 

[DustyBin]

For me, the 156 engine noise is very gratuitous and does not seem to correlate with performance lol.

Sounds like someone is trying to over-rev a tractor engine. It also doesn't really vary in tone, so is just overall very monotonous and unpleasant.

I love the sound of a 156 (all Sprinters sound good IMO). Nice summer evening, windows open, full power applied, what more could you ask for? Up here some of them are quite lively too.

 

[XAM2175]

The 170 used by ScotRail can work in multiple with Sprinters. So when they get cascaded down I can see 153s being coupled onto them.

My understanding is that following the modifications the 153 vehicles won't be able to used outside the 156 formations, but now that I think about it at a more sensible time I'm not 100% sure.

 

[Rhydgaled]

I don't have a major problem with Sprinters. I've done long journeys on Welsh 150s. They are okay with the nice 2+2 seats that they have now. Much better than the cramped 3+2 layout they were built with.

The 2+2 seats on the Welsh 150s are rather nice seats, but due to the layout (a rather tight seat pitch) they are still cramped with very little legroom.

My understanding is that following the modifications the 153 vehicles won't be able to used outside the 156 formations, but now that I think about it at a more sensible time I'm not 100% sure.

I can't remember when the bike-153 project was announced - was it part of Abellio's bid for the ScotRail franchise? If so, the plan was originally for all the 156s to be withdrawn and replaced by 158s wasn't it - meaning the 153s would have been working with 158s and not 156s?