CAF class 197 Civity for TfW: News and updates on introduction.

[Anonymous10]

Why does it take so long to allow a 5 car train? I thought they had selective door opening for short platforms.

Likely because the relevant teams are busy with the role out for across the network so once they're working in the West they'll probably start to work on clearing for 5 carriages

 

[sd0733]

Why does it take so long to allow a 5 car train? I thought they had selective door opening for short platforms.

Very similar to with the diversion routes, priority was given to getting them into service.
With 5 cars and above there are some minor differences with how the ASDO will operate at some ststions and a few issues came to light on some of the 5 and 6 car proving runs so until those are resolved it'll be 4 car maximum.

 

[Envoy]

Very similar to with the diversion routes, priority was given to getting them into service.
With 5 cars and above there are some minor differences with how the ASDO will operate at some ststions and a few issues came to light on some of the 5 and 6 car proving runs so until those are resolved it'll be 4 car maximum.

Many thanks for quick response.

 

[Techniquest]

If that 1343 Swansea-Manchester Piccadilly was the 1730 off Crewe, and I'm sure it was, then I can happily confim 197042 was on its own on that as I observed it at Crewe.

 

[CapitalStar378]

On my first 197 trip on a Swanline to Cardiff from Swansea, my thoughts are that it's quiet, quite smooth and seats are comfortable but the lights are way too bright and there are definitely too many announcements.

Train lighting is the same on all new stock now, the 756s & GA 755s are actually even worse! Why is this necessary? It's not very relaxing and any glow can be achieved with LEDs.

 

[simonmpoulton]

When I travelled on one of these recently I thought they rattled quite a lot, certainly more than a 158/175. Definitely too many announcements however!

Also it got me wondering looking at them - has there been a rule change so that this new stock is exempt from being painted yellow on the front? I watched one pulling into Chester station from the bridge near the station in the dark tonight and thought they're aren't very visible in the dark!

 

[Diedinium]

When I travelled on one of these recently I thought they rattled quite a lot, certainly more than a 158/175. Definitely too many announcements however!

Also it got me wondering looking at them - has there been a rule change so that this new stock is exempt from being painted yellow on the front? I watched one pulling into Chester station from the bridge near the station in the dark tonight and thought they're aren't very visible in the dark!

They meet the standards for headlights meaning that the yellow paint isn't necessary, has been a thing for a while now with various different trains - and for the better really, always felt the yellow fronts have made British trains look old fashioned and weird compared to the sleeker liveries other countries use.

 

[childwallblues]

According to RTT 197108 is in service on Chester to Liverpool Lime Street services today.
Is this its first day in passenger service?

 

[SuperLuke2334]

According to RTT 197108 is in service on Chester to Liverpool Lime Street services today.
Is this its first day in passenger service?

No. It started on a Chester-Wrexham and return before failing on Saturday 28th.

 

[childwallblues]

No. It started on a Chester-Wrexham and return before failing on Saturday 28th.

Ah missed that.

 

[Jez]

Good to see the majority of the Carmarthen/Swansea to Cardiff services are 197s now even if most are 2 carriages. It's only really the ones that start in Fishguard/Pembroke Dock and the Swanline Shuttles that are Sprinters.

 

[TT-ONR-NRN]

Has there been any progress on 197102/103?

Also, a very pleasant guard on 170208 a few days ago was telling me that unions are refusing to accept the 197/1B fleet for some reason (that with Business Class); is this true?

 

[sd0733]

Has there been any progress on 197102/103?

Also, a very pleasant guard on 170208 a few days ago was telling me that unions are refusing to accept the 197/1B fleet for some reason (that with Business Class); is this true?

102 and 103 are both at Crewe still undergoing acceptance alongside 107.
005 is also Moving up the Acceptance queue.

No idea with the business class ones, not something I've heard but that's not to say there's no truth in it. There has been a lot of discussion about them due to the location of toilets compared to business class so could be related to that.

 

[TT-ONR-NRN]

102 and 103 are both at Crewe still undergoing acceptance alongside 106 and 107.
005 is also Moving up the Acceptance queue.

No idea with the business class ones, not something I've heard but that's not to say there's no truth in it. There has been a lot of discussion about them due to the location of toilets compared to business class so could be related to that.

Yes, I was told it was down to Business Class passengers not having access to a wheelchair accessible toilet in the same carriage. When there's only about ten Business Class seats, and no difference between the two classes other than the seat layout - and wheelchair customers would be in a space, not a seat - I struggle to believe that is a reason for unions to reject them. Besides, that's nothing to do with unions; unions work for themselves, not the customers (usually the primary targets of their actions), so why would they care?

Thanks for the update of the units. 045 was accepted at least a month ago now, but is yet to work in passenger service still, so I've noticed.

106 has been in service a while, I thought? RTT has shown it on Manchester North Wales services several days this week - yet to work to Cardiff, unfortunately for me.

 

[sd0733]

Yes, I was told it was down to Business Class passengers not having access to a wheelchair accessible toilet in the same carriage. When there's only about ten Business Class seats, and no difference between the two classes other than the seat layout - and wheelchair customers would be in a space, not a seat - I struggle to believe that is a reason for unions to reject them. Besides, that's nothing to do with unions; unions work for themselves, not the customers (usually the primary targets of their actions), so why would they care?

Thanks for the update of the units. 045 was accepted at least a month ago now, but is yet to work in passenger service still, so I've noticed.

106 has been in service a while, I thought? RTT has shown it on Manchester North Wales services several days this week - yet to work to Cardiff, unfortunately for me.

Genuinely not sure, if there is an issue it could be that but not heard so could be something completely unrelated.

045 has been used for training I believe and is now back in Crewe but unsure what for.

Yes it has, you caught my error before I corrected it! 109 is the other not 106.

 

[Rhydgaled]

Yes, I was told it was down to Business Class passengers not having access to a wheelchair accessible toilet in the same carriage. When there's only about ten Business Class seats, and no difference between the two classes other than the seat layout - and wheelchair customers would be in a space, not a seat - I struggle to believe that is a reason for unions to reject them. Besides, that's nothing to do with unions; unions work for themselves, not the customers (usually the primary targets of their actions), so why would they care?

I thought the seats themselves (not just the layout of them) were also planned to be different between 1st class and standard on the 197s? As you say though, different seats would make no difference to a wheelchair user. Since 1st class would be at one end of the unit, if that's the end without a UAT then there is no toilet at all in that carriage, not even a space-saver one. If I recall correctly we have had an ORR 'authorisation to carry passengers' noticed posted earlier in this topic for the non-ETCS and non-1st class 197s but nothing for the remaining units. I therefore wonder whether the objection to the business class units is coming from the ORR rather than unions? Since TfW were (if I recall correctly) noted upthread somewhere for not being sure whether to implement 1st class on the 197s after all I wonder if they will just drop that variant completely and just have all the 3-car units delivered to the same spec as those already in service. Have any of the 'business batch' emerged from the CAF works yet?

 

[Lurcheroo]

I thought the seats themselves (not just the layout of them) were also planned to be different between 1st class and standard on the 197s? As you say though, different seats would make no difference to a wheelchair user. Since 1st class would be at one end of the unit, if that's the end without a UAT then there is no toilet at all in that carriage, not even a space-saver one. If I recall correctly we have had an ORR 'authorisation to carry passengers' noticed posted earlier in this topic for the non-ETCS and non-1st class 197s but nothing for the remaining units. I therefore wonder whether the objection to the business class units is coming from the ORR rather than unions? Since TfW were (if I recall correctly) noted upthread somewhere for not being sure whether to implement 1st class on the 197s after all I wonder if they will just drop that variant completely and just have all the 3-car units delivered to the same spec as those already in service. Have any of the 'business batch' emerged from the CAF works yet?

I also thought they were having wider seats and the 2+1 layout.

I ‘think’ but can’t be totally sure, some, if not most of the 1st class 197’s have by now been fitted.
I’m personally in favour of keeping the 1st class area on them, I’d certainly be willing to pay to upgrade (provided it’s reasonably priced) on long journeys.

In regards to the toilet. The rules currently say the train can’t leave a maintenance depot without a working PRM toilet.
You can’t discriminate against someone with a disability so you have to be able to offer them the same 1st class option as anyone else. So If a passenger who uses a wheel chair can’t access the toilet from 1st class then that’s as good as having toilet and the unit shouldn’t be in service.
I would not be at all surprised if the ORR aren’t happy signing them off as it is.

 

[SuperLuke2334]

I thought the seats themselves (not just the layout of them) were also planned to be different between 1st class and standard on the 197s? As you say though, different seats would make no difference to a wheelchair user. Since 1st class would be at one end of the unit, if that's the end without a UAT then there is no toilet at all in that carriage, not even a space-saver one. If I recall correctly we have had an ORR 'authorisation to carry passengers' noticed posted earlier in this topic for the non-ETCS and non-1st class 197s but nothing for the remaining units. I therefore wonder whether the objection to the business class units is coming from the ORR rather than unions? Since TfW were (if I recall correctly) noted upthread somewhere for not being sure whether to implement 1st class on the 197s after all I wonder if they will just drop that variant completely and just have all the 3-car units delivered to the same spec as those already in service. Have any of the 'business batch' emerged from the CAF works yet?

Yes, there are a few of the business batch either in Wolverton, Crewe, or awaiting moving to Crewe at Donnington.

 

[Anonymous10]

Yes, there are a few of the business batch either in Wolverton, Crewe, or awaiting moving to Crewe at Donnington.

But weren't they finished with an all standard configuration. Ie fitted for but not with.

 

[GWVillager]

In regards to the toilet. The rules currently say the train can’t leave a maintenance depot without a working PRM toilet.
You can’t discriminate against someone with a disability so you have to be able to offer them the same 1st class option as anyone else. So If a passenger who uses a wheel chair can’t access the toilet from 1st class then that’s as good as having toilet and the unit shouldn’t be in service.
I would not be at all surprised if the ORR aren’t happy signing them off as it is.

I can't see this being the case, though. If it was that big of an issue, surely they would have intervened before the sets were built? See the Class 800s entering service with only a wheelchair space in first class.

 

[The_Train]

102 and 103 are both at Crewe still undergoing acceptance alongside 107.
005 is also Moving up the Acceptance queue.

No idea with the business class ones, not something I've heard but that's not to say there's no truth in it. There has been a lot of discussion about them due to the location of toilets compared to business class so could be related to that.

Does anybody happen to know when 102 came out of Wolverton please?
My last update was it arriving there in June and that seems to be where the trail ends on Flickr as well

 

[Lurcheroo]

I can't see this being the case, though. If it was that big of an issue, surely they would have intervened before the sets were built? See the Class 800s entering service with only a wheelchair space in first class.

oh that's interesting. yes I would have hoped they'd have spotted it in the design stage, but, it's the railway. With the 800's, I suppose if they have a standard ticket and are placed in first, it may not be an issue. I'm not totally sure, just trying to think of some logic too it. but we dont even know if they have definitely been held up.

 

[AdamWW]

In regards to the toilet. The rules currently say the train can’t leave a maintenance depot without a working PRM toilet.

Is it OK if you lock the other loo? Given that trains don't have to have toilets at all.

 

[L401CJF]

There's a photo on internal social media of the "business" section on a 197 finished. Can confirm its 2+1 seating with wider seats and different tables. Of course I am unable to share said photo here - but it is a thing and they do exist!

 

[Lurcheroo]

Is it OK if you lock the other loo? Given that trains don't have to have toilets at all.

Yep small loo can be locked out without concern. If the unit has its PRM toilet locked mid journey then it should only make 1 trip in passenger service to a maintenance depot. (Except if it is coupled to another unit with a working PRM toilet).

There's a photo on internal social media of the "business" section on a 197 finished. Can confirm its 2+1 seating with wider seats and different tables. Of course I am unable to share said photo here - but it is a thing and they do exist!

I’ve just had to go and find it! Looks snazzy in my opinion. I’m glad they’ve kept them.
If the MK4’s remain in service on the Manchester to Cardiff / Swansea every other hour then there only half the number of the business class 197 3 cars will be needed compared to what was ordered.
It would be nice to see them used on some of the other long distance routes.
Selfishly Aberystwyth to Birmingham. Not sure if they would really do very well though.

 

[AdamWW]

Yep small loo can be locked out without concern. If the unit has its PRM toilet locked mid journey then it should only make 1 trip in passenger service to a maintenance depot. (Except if it is coupled to another unit with a working PRM toilet).

What I mean is that if the PRM toilet is out of action, can you lock the other loo and then put the train in service?

There's clearly no requirement for a train to have a toilet of any kind at all, PRM or otherwise, and if a train has only a non accessible toilet it can still run so long as the toilet is locked so nobody gets to use it.

 

[RailWonderer]

There's a photo on internal social media of the "business" section on a 197 finished. Can confirm its 2+1 seating with wider seats and different tables. Of course I am unable to share said photo here - but it is a thing and they do exist!

I heard a while back first would be renamed to business but will they still sell it as first class or will it be 'buy standard, sit in business and upgrade?' I'm sure a weekend upgrade will stay in place either way.

 

[Lurcheroo]

I heard a while back first would be renamed to business but will they still sell it as first class or will it be 'buy standard, sit in business and upgrade?' I'm sure a weekend upgrade will stay in place either way.

Seems like it will be called ‘standard plus’ and will be an on-board upgrade only. This is so that it will be clearly differentiated from 1st class on the MK4’s.
I agree with this approach because if I bought a 1st class ticket expecting the MK4 experience and service and got the 197 version, I’d feel pretty robbed.

== Doublepost prevention - post automatically merged: 4 Nov 2023 ==

What I mean is that if the PRM toilet is out of action, can you lock the other loo and then put the train in service?

There's clearly no requirement for a train to have a toilet of any kind at all, PRM or otherwise, and if a train has only a non accessible toilet it can still run so long as the toilet is locked so nobody gets to use it.

No absolutely not.

I’m not sure on all the rules regarding toilets as the new Valleys metro trains won’t have them on board but this is supposedly because you’re never more than 10 or so minutes from a station with toilets.
The routes I work are up to two hour stretches where you couldn’t stop for a toilet break as no stations have them.

 

[AdamWW]

I’m not sure on all the rules regarding toilets as the new Valleys metro trains won’t have them on board but this is supposedly because you’re never more than 10 or so minutes from a station with toilets.
The routes I work are up to two hour stretches where you couldn’t stop for a toilet break as no stations have them.

TfW also run 153s with the toilet locked out. Presumably intended to be run with other stock - at least the signage tells you to find another carriage if you need to go - but they will happily run them solo.

 

[Lurcheroo]

TfW also run 153s with the toilet locked out. Presumably intended to be run with other stock - at least the signage tells you to find another carriage if you need to go - but they will happily run them solo.

Yeah so the 153 9xx’s should never be in service in its own, it should always be coupled to one with a PRM toilet. They do make it out by themselves but that is non intentional (I hope).