It really wouldn't be that difficult to filter out 'nonsensical' trains. It would just take a bit of care and effort - something which it's painfully obvious is lacking on the 195s.
-
Our new ticketing site is now live! Using either this or the original site (both powered by TrainSplit) helps support the running of the forum with every ticket purchase! Find out more and ask any questions/give us feedback in this thread!
195s truly awful, not a step forward
- Thread starter dp707
- Start date
- Status
Sponsor Post - registered members do not see these adverts; click here to register, or click here to log in
R
RailUK Forums
Bletchleyite
Veteran Member
It would be more complex given that you have to consider stopping patterns etc. Even SBB and DB I think just show a departure list.
If we had a Takt so you could just filter out all S2s or RE5s or whatever it's be easy, but as it is it very much isn't.
py_megapixel
Established Member
One thing I do find extremely poor is that for stations with short platforms, the announcement just says "Please follow the instructions on the information screens", regardless of whether the coach you are in is going to open or not. That is incredibly bad, since an important function of the automated announcements is to assist the blind or partially sighted.
On every other SDO-equipped train I can think of, it says "Please move forward to leave the train" in the coaches which are locked out. On 185s, it's very clever: it says that in each coach sequentially, starting from the back, which means that if you start moving when the announcement tells you to and walk fairly briskly, you will keep hearing "Please move forward" until you're in the right place. (Not sure if that's the purpose, or if it's just because the system can only do one announcement at once across the entire train, but even if it's the latter, it still makes sense to start from the back as passengers at the back will need the most time to move forward).
Overall though, I quite like the PIS on the Civities. Apart from the SDO issue, it is a step up from anything else in the country except the Desiros that have proper screens (700, 717, 185 and now 350)
On every other SDO-equipped train I can think of, it says "Please move forward to leave the train" in the coaches which are locked out. On 185s, it's very clever: it says that in each coach sequentially, starting from the back, which means that if you start moving when the announcement tells you to and walk fairly briskly, you will keep hearing "Please move forward" until you're in the right place. (Not sure if that's the purpose, or if it's just because the system can only do one announcement at once across the entire train, but even if it's the latter, it still makes sense to start from the back as passengers at the back will need the most time to move forward).
Overall though, I quite like the PIS on the Civities. Apart from the SDO issue, it is a step up from anything else in the country except the Desiros that have proper screens (700, 717, 185 and now 350)
Given that those 'proper screens' have been in service for over 5 years, would it not be appropriate for a standard to be established across all coaching stock, certainly from delivery and for refreshes and refurbishments to all but the most 'razor blade ready' classes. The PIS is just a computer driven display using data that is for the most part, available on all modern stock.
jonnyfan
Member
That's not quite correct, the PIS screens and announcements for short platforms only play in the carriages not accommodated, with the normal next station announcements in the other carriages - all of these happen at the same time. Unless there is some kind of fault. However if one door on a carriage is staying locked out then that whole carriage will receive a short platform announcement.
py_megapixel
Established Member
If that's the case then it suggests the computer system is capable of making different announcements in different sections of the train.. so why can't it be more specific? At the very least, it could say the doors in this coach will not open, not just a generic not every door will open.
In the early days, it was definitely making the short platform announcements in coaches where the doors did subsequently open, but I think that may have been a bug that was later fixed.
At risk of sounding like a cliche - I'm sure that would make sense, which means it will never happen.
Are you sure it doesn't say that? I can't remember the exact wording having not heard it for months, but I thought it did say something along those lines.
py_megapixel
Established Member
Not heard it for a while either to be fair. But I thought it just said follow the instructions on the screens for information on which doors will be available for use.
It's possible they may have updated it, in which case good on them for implementing a simple yet worthwhile improvement.
ac6000cw
Established Member
I recently spent a day on sampling as many different MUs around the Manchester area as I could, including several 150s, a 175, a 185, several 195s, a 331, a 769 and a Voyager.
I thought the 331 and the 195s were quite pleasant inside - nice big windows and typical modern seating (a bit hard but OK), ride was a bit lively but OK (again, not untypical of some modern trains). The 195s seemed reasonably quiet for an underfloor engined DMU, gear changes were smooth and acceleration good.
Best-riding train of the day was probably the 769 (I was in the front carriage), followed by the 185 then 175, 150 and Voyager.
Noisiest train of the day was the 769 on diesel - quite 'boomy' engine noise where I was sitting (towards the rear of the front carriage). It's interesting that it was fairly quiet from the outside.
I thought the 331 and the 195s were quite pleasant inside - nice big windows and typical modern seating (a bit hard but OK), ride was a bit lively but OK (again, not untypical of some modern trains). The 195s seemed reasonably quiet for an underfloor engined DMU, gear changes were smooth and acceleration good.
Best-riding train of the day was probably the 769 (I was in the front carriage), followed by the 185 then 175, 150 and Voyager.
Noisiest train of the day was the 769 on diesel - quite 'boomy' engine noise where I was sitting (towards the rear of the front carriage). It's interesting that it was fairly quiet from the outside.
Killingworth
Established Member
You're not in the minority. Anyone who regularly had to travel on Pacers and now uses 195s would find them truly brilliant. Obviously opinions must vary but truly awful is a very harsh judgement. I speak as a regular standee by choice rather than one who previously had to be a sardine!
YorkshireBear
Established Member
- Joined
- 23 Jul 2010
- Messages
- 9,667
I find them very acceptable and enjoy them a lot more than the 150s, 156s and 155s. 158s and 170s are better though.
No it isn't a harsh judgement at all. They are truly awful - not because of anything that is actually particularly wrong about them but because they were built about 15 years too late. By the time they entered service, the Government had set an ambition to take all diesel-only trains off the track by 2040. Given 35 years in service some class 195s will still be with us in 2055, to make 2040 they would have had to have entered service in 2005, or in 2015 for life-expiry in 2050.
py_megapixel
Established Member
So shall we go back to Pacers then?
No; the CAF Civity units should have been future-proofed with electric traction (bi-mode, although if the Northern Pacers were used on similar routes to the Welsh Pacers (ValleyLines) then really they should have been electrified by 2020 meaning only 331s would have been needed and no 195s and we wouldn't be having this conversation).
Razorblades
Member
Who would have paid for that, though? It was not a requirement of the franchise bid, so a bidder including it would have priced themselves out of contention in their fleet strategy.
Quite, the Transport secretary at the the time had to formally overrule his civil servants to 'waste money' by including a requirement to just replace the Pacers in the franchise agreement.
Pete_uk
On Moderation
They'll still have a use in 30 years or so
It shouldn't have needed to be a requirement in the franchise bid - it should have been illegal to place orders for brand new trains that did not have OLE compatibility (or passive provision for it) since about 2010. After all, sales of new petrol and diesel cars are going to be banned; an equivalent is needed in the rail industry.
That is the problem. They will in all likelyhood still be in use in 30 years time, but they shouldn't be. As the topic title says, the class 195s are "not a step forward" at a time when we need to be making massive strides forward.
So TfW couldn't of ordered your hated 197s?
Razorblades
Member
You're speaking entirely hypothetically. Those of us engaged in real-world railway activity at the time (2014-15 Northern bid) could only play the hand of cards we were dealt. Airy-fairy idealism is just that, eight years on.
And Northern couldn't have ordered the 195s, West Midlands Trains couldn't have ordered the 196s and Eversholt wouldn't be able to go ahead with their planned order for 10 hydrogen Aventras unless they can easily have a pantograph added.
Decarbonisation isn't idealism, it's essential. And the extent of electrification recommended by Network Rail's decarbonisation strategy would make a pantograph (or 3rd rail compatiblity) mandatory for virtually the entire fleet. If we are where we should be in electrification terms by 2050 the only units that could get by without would be:
- Thames Valley branches (DCBMU) - 4 diagrams
- Cornish Branches (DCBMU) - 5 diagrams
- Wrexham Central - Bidston (DCBMU) - 4 diagrams
- Bishop Auckland and Whitby branches (DCBMU) - 5 diagrams
- Conwy Valley line (DCBMU) - 1 or 2 diagrams
- Ebbw Vale line (DCBMU) - 5 diagrams
- Bittern Line, Wherry Lines and Ipswich-Lowestoft (HFCMU) - 15 diagrams
And the acronyms I just made up:
DCBMU = battery unit with Dedicated Charging facilities (rather than charging using electrification infrustructure)
HFCMU = Hydrogen Fuel Cell Multiple Unit
Razorblades
Member
For the record, that's your opinion, not a demonstrable fact.
These should be electrified there is no need for dedicated battery stock.
Possibly but would the Cornish mainline be electrified by then? Should it not be a common pool of BeMUs not a dedicated ones for the branches?
This will be part of MerseyRail by then with 3rd rail electrification to at least Upton.
Whatever TfW are running on the coast
Whatever TfW are running in the south I'd suggest it will be electrified using the Stadller 231s\756s possibly with the diesel power pack replaced by a diesel one.
Same as above they have already got the Stadlers, bit of extra electrification plus battery power pack instead of diesel.
In the absence of reading the entire thread, I have to agree I do not like the 195s and would actually rather have a 142. Make of that what you will.
The 195s to me seem like just another pacer albeit even more cheaply made. An absolutely terrible unit for something brand new. Even 150s are better.
The 195s to me seem like just another pacer albeit even more cheaply made. An absolutely terrible unit for something brand new. Even 150s are better.
Agent_Squash
Established Member
- Joined
- 22 Jul 2016
- Messages
- 1,271
How on earth is a 142 even comparable to a 195? Would be interesting to hear your thoughts other than just about how it feels cheaply made.
Crikey we haven’t had one of these rants for a while. Thought it was too good to be true.
As each year of unprecedented extreme weather demonstrates accelerating climate change, I find it disappointing that so many still dismiss it as an "opinion".
Razorblades
Member
Opinion is defined as 'a statement of advice by an expert on a professional matter' (source, Oxford Languages), and on the basis that expert opinions differ on the topic of climate change, it's hardly dismissing it.
That is a definition of 'opinion'. The Oxford dictionary's first definition of the word is:
"a view or judgement formed about something, not necessarily based on fact or knowledge."
That, in my opinion is the primary definition of the word for everyday use rather than a secondary one chosen to support a specific argument. Unless of course in your opinion the Oxford Dictionary has got it wrong!
- Status