195s truly awful, not a step forward

[Iskra]

Absolutely it isn't. On Sundays they often manage longer, presumably because that platform space is available. Similar problem on Sheffield-Manchester where 2 coach Platform 2c at Sheffield limits lengths.

However I don't think 195s are awful at all, unless having insufficient platform capacity can be laid at their door. Too few 3 car and Inability to walk through between coupled units would be my mild quibbles.

I think the 195’s are decent enough and the normal passengers seem happy with them. I think some enthusiasts are over-thinking them and finding faults on them, but they are a clear upgrade on pacers and 15X stock.

 

[Bletchleyite]

I think the 195’s are decent enough and the normal passengers seem happy with them. I think some enthusiasts are over-thinking them and finding faults on them, but they are a clear upgrade on pacers and 15X stock.

They are indeed a more than competent 150 replacement and an unrecognisable improvement from a Pacer. What they aren't is a great long-distance train (comparing TfW's 197 interior designed for that purpose will be interesting). Fortunately DafT Northern are realising that what they've bought is a set of excellent regional and urban local units (high acceleration, able to fit in huge crowds due to the wide doors and standbacks) and seem increasingly to be using them in that way, e.g. on the Marples and Sheffield locals - to think that in fNW days those routes had the oldest of the stock, the 101s!

I do think the layout of the centre section is lazy, though, and could have been done more aligned to the windows with a bit of thought.

But yes people do seem to comment positively on them, I've heard stuff like "this is far nicer than the London train" (referring to a Pendolino). They're a downgrade on a 185 generally (for Barrow/Windermere passengers) but the upside over those is that they don't lose a load of space to First Class - 3.185 was rarely adequate for Barrows but 3.195 is because there's more Standard.

2-car units shouldn't have been ordered, though, there is very little sensible use for them.

 

[NewClee153]

I think the 195’s are decent enough and the normal passengers seem happy with them. I think some enthusiasts are over-thinking them and finding faults on them, but they are a clear upgrade on pacers and 15X stock.

Hmm… I’d argue it depends on which 15x stock you’re referring to

I did hear somewhere that northern were contemplating ordering some more 195s (internal panic), is there any truth in this?

 

[Iskra]

Hmm… I’d argue it depends on which 15x stock you’re referring to

I did hear somewhere that northern were contemplating ordering some more 195s (internal panic), is there any truth in this?

I nearly was more specific but the 158’s are long in the tooth, have poor door layouts for the routes they are used on and are unbearable in the summer these days. The refurbed ones are okay in winter but the last example I was on a couple of weeks ago was falling to bits.

Northern released a press release a while back saying they were contemplating getting more 195’s but it’s all gone quite since and that was before the treasury started swinging their axe.

 

[Bletchleyite]

I nearly was more specific but the 158’s are long in the tooth, have poor door layouts for the routes they are used on and are unbearable in the summer these days. The refurbed ones are okay in winter but the last example I was on a couple of weeks ago was falling to bits.

Northern released a press release a while back saying they were contemplating getting more 195’s but it’s all gone quite since and that was before the treasury started swinging their axe.

It definitely went "out to tender"*. They're initially for services relating to the Transpennine electrification project, and are hybrids (not bi-modes), i.e. have a driveline similar to the Chiltern Hydrive project. I suspect in time all units will be converted to that spec.

* Obviously a well-written tender that means CAF is the only possible bidder.

 

[NewClee153]

I nearly was more specific but the 158’s are long in the tooth, have poor door layouts for the routes they are used on and are unbearable in the summer these days. The refurbed ones are okay in winter but the last example I was on a couple of weeks ago was falling to bits.

Northern released a press release a while back saying they were contemplating getting more 195’s but it’s all gone quite since and that was before the treasury started swinging their axe.

That’s music to my ears . I know people like them, but I genuinely can’t stand them

They do, however, seem to be very popular, hopefully TfW and WMR civities leave a better impression

Not when Northern cancel their hourly morning peak train from Barrow

Or when the service is formed of 6 coaches but the rear 3 are locked out of use

 

[trover]

They're a downgrade on a 185 generally (for Barrow/Windermere passengers) but the upside over those is that they don't lose a load of space to First Class - 3.185 was rarely adequate for Barrows but 3.195 is because there's more Standard.

Not when Northern cancel their hourly morning peak train from Barrow

 

[NoOnesFool]

I like these trains apart from a few things, the seats aren't great, too thinly cushioned and the section behind the driver's cab feels very claustrophobic. The interior design is airy, modern, the window views are good. The ride quality is smooth. They are cool in the summer and warm in the winter. Does anyone else think the braking system sounds like an air-raid siren btw?

 

[Bletchleyite]

Not when Northern cancel their hourly morning peak train from Barrow

Cancellations cause overcrowding. What next, Papal Roman Catholicism and ursine defecation in forested areas?

To be fair, a 195 is better at taking that overcrowding than say a 156 or 158, even one of the same length.

 

[trover]

Cancellations cause overcrowding. What next, Papal Roman Catholicism and ursine defecation in forested areas?

To be fair, a 195 is better at taking that overcrowding than say a 156 or 158, even one of the same length.

They need more carriages on this line. Many passengers get off (or change trains) at Preston, but it also gains quite a lot pax from there towards Manchester, while trains from Blackpool North are 6 cars 331 which cope with it well.

 

[AM9]

They need more carriages on this line. Many passengers get off (or change trains) at Preston, but it also gains quite a lot pax from there towards Manchester, while trains from Blackpool North are 6 cars 331 which cope with it well.

There has been some concern among those trying to meet the environmental obligations ordering the diesel-only forever 195/196/197s. To commit to any more order any more in flagrant disregard to the Government's oft bragged about position would become embarassing. If they are wedded to cheap CAF units despite their serious design flaws, they should make a more serious purchase of DEMUs with a convert to EMU option or even get CAF to quote for a genuine hybrid BEMU.

 

[skyhigh]

Northern released a press release a while back saying they were contemplating getting more 195’s but it’s all gone quite since and that was before the treasury started swinging their axe.

It's still progressing.

 

[Bletchleyite]

They need more carriages on this line. Many passengers get off (or change trains) at Preston, but it also gains quite a lot pax from there towards Manchester, while trains from Blackpool North are 6 cars 331 which cope with it well.

The plan is for most if not all Manchester to Barrow and Windermere services to be 5. or 6.195 from December because they'll return to running via Chorley (so will be overcrowded otherwise) and taking 3 off at Preston is too much of a faff.

 

[Pinus contorta]

The plan is for most if not all Manchester to Barrow and Windermere services to be 5. or 6.195 from December because they'll return to running via Chorley (so will be overcrowded otherwise) and taking 3 off at Preston is too much of a faff.

Don't you mean the other way round, taking two off at Preston. I'm thinking of the full and standing services at Lancaster. More so now that TpExpress and Avanti services can be subject to cancellation at the drop of a hat.

 

[Agent_Squash]

Don't you mean the other way round, taking two off at Preston. I'm thinking of the full and standing services at Lancaster. More so now that TpExpress and Avanti services can be subject to cancellation at the drop of a hat.

How much of that overcrowding is simply because of a 195 trying to take up to 29 carriages worth of passengers (with Avanti and TPE being the mess they are) in three?

If the stock was available, it would be great to see the Northern service double in frequency rather than double in capacity between Preston and the Lakes - but the capacity boost is not far behind. There's definitely been a quasi sparks effect from the 195s in Cumbria.

 

[Bletchleyite]

How much of that overcrowding is simply because of a 195 trying to take up to 29 carriages worth of passengers (with Avanti and TPE being the mess they are) in three?

If the stock was available, it would be great to see the Northern service double in frequency rather than double in capacity between Preston and the Lakes - but the capacity boost is not far behind. There's definitely been a quasi sparks effect from the 195s in Cumbria.

The branch line is single track with no passing places so it can't be any more than hourly, though one thing I have suggested in the past is 6.195 to Lancaster and split every hour for both destinations, ideally clearing 195s round the coast so no services would terminate at Barrow any more. However that may be hard to path northbound at Lancaster as there's only a loop southbound.

 

[Watershed]

The branch line is single track with no passing places so it can't be any more than hourly, though one thing I have suggested in the past is 6.195 to Lancaster and split every hour for both destinations, ideally clearing 195s round the coast so no services would terminate at Barrow any more. However that may be hard to path northbound at Lancaster as there's only a loop southbound.

You'd simply use platform 5 at Lancaster and leave the Windermere portion there for longer if need be. But yes, having taken a look at this sort of option, splitting and joining at Lancaster sounds nice in theory but means inefficient unit utilisation and/or long journey times. So it's not necessarily a land of milk and honey.

Pathing in the Lancaster area is notoriously difficult due to the layout and (relatively) high headway. Really there needs to be much greater standardisation, rather than e.g. the Morecambe service being at completely random intervals and times in the hour, as it currently is.

 

[Bikeman78]

They are indeed a more than competent 150 replacement and an unrecognisable improvement from a Pacer. What they aren't is a great long-distance train (comparing TfW's 197 interior designed for that purpose will be interesting). Fortunately DafT Northern are realising that what they've bought is a set of excellent regional and urban local units (high acceleration, able to fit in huge crowds due to the wide doors and standbacks) and seem increasingly to be using them in that way, e.g. on the Marples and Sheffield locals - to think that in fNW days those routes had the oldest of the stock, the 101s!

I've never understood why all six circuits on Liverpool to Manchester Oxford Road aren't booked class 195s. They'd be better at keeping out of the way of the following fast train and could probably make one or two extra stops as well. Thus giving some of the smaller stations a better service.

 

[Bletchleyite]

I've never understood why all six circuits on Liverpool to Manchester Oxford Road aren't booked class 195s. They'd be better at keeping out of the way of the following fast train and could probably make one or two extra stops as well. Thus giving some of the smaller stations a better service.

Other than electrification, 195s are made for the CLC, so I completely agree. It's even, as it's fairly quiet on the local services, something useful to do with the 2-car units. Other sensible place for them is Atherton which sometimes sees them.

 

[coradiafan2000]

It seems like enthusiasts always have an agenda against whatever new stock comes round. It's true that a lot of modern trains aren't great, but I don't think the 195s are one of them.

They're clean, have a smart interior with decent PIS and are much quicker than the stock they replace. Whenever I'm in the north I look forward to riding them, and I'd certainly take them over a 150, 153, 155, 156 or even a 158. I think the only DMUs Northern operates that beats them from a passenger's point of view are the 170s.

 

[Wolfie]

It seems like enthusiasts always have an agenda against whatever new stock comes round. It's true that a lot of modern trains aren't great, but I don't think the 195s are one of them.

They're clean, have a smart interior with decent PIS and are much quicker than the stock they replace. Whenever I'm in the north I look forward to riding them, and I'd certainly take them over a 150, 153, 155, 156 or even a 158. I think the only DMUs Northern operates that beats them from a passenger's point of view are the 170s.

That's probably the point though. They are a 2020s product which is better than 1980/90s products but inferior to a decent turn of the century product (so a probably 25 year old design). Hardly great.

 

[YorksLad12]

It seems like enthusiasts always have an agenda against whatever new stock comes round. It's true that a lot of modern trains aren't great, but I don't think the 195s are one of them.

They're clean, have a smart interior with decent PIS and are much quicker than the stock they replace. Whenever I'm in the north I look forward to riding them, and I'd certainly take them over a 150, 153, 155, 156 or even a 158. I think the only DMUs Northern operates that beats them from a passenger's point of view are the 170s.

I've nothing against the 195s and 331s per se, just Northern's assumption that everyone would like to be seated round a table, kicking the person opposite and being encouraged into conversations when I just want to be left alone. Like in a 158 with all of those lovely airline seats. It's not as if I can look out of the window, thanks to the way the tables don't line up with them. I seem to recall the 170s having a similar layout.

 

[Bletchleyite]

I've nothing against the 195s and 331s per se, just Northern's assumption that everyone would like to be seated round a table, kicking the person opposite and being encouraged into conversations when I just want to be left alone. Like in a 158 with all of those lovely airline seats. It's not as if I can look out of the window, thanks to the way the tables don't line up with them. I seem to recall the 170s having a similar layout.

There are a few airline seats aligned to the windows and they're surprisingly easy to get in my experience. Most people genuinely do want the tables, it seems.

 

[NewClee153]

It seems like enthusiasts always have an agenda against whatever new stock comes round. It's true that a lot of modern trains aren't great, but I don't think the 195s are one of them.

They're clean, have a smart interior with decent PIS and are much quicker than the stock they replace. Whenever I'm in the north I look forward to riding them, and I'd certainly take them over a 150, 153, 155, 156 or even a 158. I think the only DMUs Northern operates that beats them from a passenger's point of view are the 170s.

It’s not an agenda, I just genuinely don’t think they’re very good trains. I wouldn’t take them over any of the aforementioned stock, mainly because I don’t think they particularly ride better than any of them

I’ve excluded the 331s from this criticism, despite them being just as bad, they’re extremely quick off the mark

 

[coradiafan2000]

That's probably the point though. They are a 2020s product which is better than 1980/90s products but inferior to a decent turn of the century product (so a probably 25 year old design). Hardly great.

I wouldn't say the 195s are "inferior" to the 170s, I don't think there's much between them honestly. While it's true I'd choose the 170 for longer distance journeys, I think I'd actually prefer the 195 for a short hop between destinations.

 

[Bletchleyite]

I wouldn't say the 195s are "inferior" to the 170s, I don't think there's much between them honestly. While it's true I'd choose the 170 for longer distance journeys, I think I'd actually prefer the 195 for a short hop between destinations.

I'd generally call a 195 a poor man's 170, but some features are better e.g. luggage rack size and acceleration (170s are horribly underpowered).

 

[coradiafan2000]

It’s not an agenda, I just genuinely don’t think they’re very good trains. I wouldn’t take them over any of the aforementioned stock, mainly because I don’t think they particularly ride better than any of them

I’ve excluded the 331s from this criticism, despite them being just as bad, they’re extremely quick off the mark

I genuinely don't think the ride is that bad. The first journey I had on one was from Manchester Piccadilly to Ulverston (a journey approaching two hours in length) and I found them perfectly comfortable, no worse than a Sprinter.

Then again I seem to be pretty bad at identifying ride quality in trains. Every time I hear someone say a multiple unit or carriage rides poorly (or well), I always have the same response of "really? I hadn't noticed".

 

[Bletchleyite]

I genuinely don't think the ride is that bad. The first journey I had on one was from Manchester Piccadilly to Ulverston (a journey approaching two hours in length) and I found them perfectly comfortable, no worse than a Sprinter.

Then again I seem to be pretty bad at identifying ride quality in trains. Every time I hear someone say a multiple unit or carriage rides poorly (or well), I always have the same response of "really? I hadn't noticed".

It often depends where you sit. Between the bogies is generally the smoothest, at a vehicle end generally the roughest.

I'd say "not great but OK" - similar to Desiros - but with a quite annoying set of clunks and bangs as it goes.

 

[NewClee153]

I genuinely don't think the ride is that bad. The first journey I had on one was from Manchester Piccadilly to Ulverston (a journey approaching two hours in length) and I found them perfectly comfortable, no worse than a Sprinter.

Then again I seem to be pretty bad at identifying ride quality in trains. Every time I hear someone say a multiple unit or carriage rides poorly (or well), I always have the same response of "really? I hadn't noticed".

I’ve tried them on several different occasions, on different types of routes, and the incessant *CLONK* sound when going over bits of track irks me to my very core. I’m not someone to usually notice bad ride quality, but it can’t be ignored. The build quality is extremely disappointing for a modern day train, it feels like they were rushed out as quickly as possible, with corners cut to save money, and marketed as “better than a pacer”, which, yeah, sure, they are, but this isn’t exactly a groundbreaking revelation

Like I’ve said before, if the majority of people who use them like them, that is the main thing. But for me, I’ve had more comfortable less irritating journeys on every type of sprinter. It’s not agenda driven, I just don’t find them good, at all

 

[coradiafan2000]

It often depends where you sit. Between the bogies is generally the smoothest, at a vehicle end generally the roughest.

I'd say "not great but OK" - similar to Desiros - but with a quite annoying set of clunks and bangs as it goes.

It can't be as bad as an 800. I've spilt hot tea over my lap thanks to how "lively" the ride is when sitting above the bogies on those.