Am I right in thinking the sradler stuff is heavy on standing room. If so, not particularly relevant to the Western, where generally the journies are a bit longer and standing isn't really a thing most of the time. We need trains with lots of seats, not lots of space for standing.
The amount of standing room available will depend on the specification set by the TOC.
I really think it would be a great opportunity for low-floored units to be rolled out (think FLIRTs), rather than CAFs. However, we will have to wait and see who they choose to manufacture the units, as FLIRTs would likely be a more costly option when compared to CAF units (and likely the same would go for Bi-Mode Hitachis).
150s are obviously oldest but they also operate on what would appear to be routes with lower income than the rest of the network and some of the more difficult issues - eg the short platform at Looe and tight curve at Calstock. At one point battery units based on 20m class 465 driving cars were being talked about. A big step to get to new build units from that point.
In this are you:
Specific units, obviously the 175s couldn't replace all of northern's 150 fleet but they could replace the prototypes and the ones with higher maintainance costs.
People always fall into a trap with the 150s. There is nothing more suitable for the Cornish branches than 150s. They can't be replaced by 158s on all their workings, and I think it has been pointed out before that more traincrew know 150s than 158s in the west - eg Exeter, Plymouth and Penzance HSS drive 150s but not 158s. Avoiding the cost of training crew saves money.
The 150/1s will go first I would've thought.
)
TfW has 11 2 car 175/0s and 16 3 car 175/1s (70 cars)
Always been in worse condition and they are generally less convenient with no gangway.
As someone who knows where's quiet the /1s are more convenient with no gangway, I get a quiet(er) half of the train while the front 2 cars are often standing space only. But yeah for other people it's not as nice.
New trains anywhere would be nice, there are FLIRTS being made for TfW right now so in theory once those are done could the factories be available for new trains?
Are the 150s going to be able to keep going into the late 2020s/early 2030s?
One issue the tfw fleet have had their lease extended they'd have 150s spare sooner or 175s
Depends if other electrostar operators are interested in additional stock.
150s have better door positions, the 158s can loose time when they are put on some services (St Ives iirc struggles). The interior on them is alright, wonder what they are like underneath.
GWR is meant to be doing quite well in the summer, I'd expect the fleet to expand.
Stadler will make the interior however you want but will struggle on high capacity interiors due to the shorter vehicles. Hitachi seems likely if they can share spare parts between AT200s and AT300s.
Why were 158 doors put at the ends either way,
They are really for regional express use, which lines like St Ives aren't.
Agreed, though the 158s have a nicer interior overall.
Really, the 2 coach 165s should be put on the Cornish branches, with 3 coach 165s and 166s split between the Thames Valley and Bristol suburban/middle distance services with 4 coach 158s on the interregional routes. I would be surprised if GWR were allowed to make any new train orders for the next few years and if they do, it'll almost certainly be for CAF DMUs or battery bimodes given that CAF are usually cheap. The only order I can see Hitachi getting from GWR are extra coaches for 5 car IETs.
The referbished 150s are rather nice compared to the rest if the country from my experience
Because 158s were designed for longer routes (think Cardiff to Portsmouth), and having doors at ends can be seen as better for longer journeys with less stops, as it often means a quieter environment and results in less heat (or cool air when the a/c is running) being lost during door cycles. Factors like the time taken to get to the door are less important on the routes the 158 were intended to operate. The double doors may look narrow but are not much narrow compared to single doors on the IETs or 444s.
Because when introduced the aim was for the longer-distance Regional Railways routes to have a DMU that had something of the feeling of an InterCity train rather than a suburban train.
That is clearly right. It is no accident that the 150, 158 and 16x fleets have different configurations and there isn't just one type of unit at the moment.
could 175s on Northern be hindered by training or are they efficient enough to justify the cost for training.
In theory FLIRTs could fit multiple door sets, the 1 per car of the GA ones to fit the kind of scenario the 158s doors were made for, and the 2 per side ones that some 756 cars have on the metro/local routes?
I would say a 158 as it is over a 3 hour journey end to end. The 166s were designed as London commuter trains and they aren't great on long distance regional operations while this is the sort of thing the 158s were designed for. They've also got quite a long dwell at Bristol anyway.
I believe it's only a 2 year extension but they'll go once the etcs 197s enter service.
