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

[Lurcheroo]

From discussions we had with the tech guys in the very early testing days all the sets have the background wiring and sockets for ERTMS (hence why it comes up on the TMS as a fault) and that it's more of a "laptop job than a workshop job" to install/remove ERTMS, so the fleet shouldn't be set in stone if it is decided to change it.

I've been making this point since the 197s were ordered to show that they're not going to single handedly destroy the entire Cambrian coast line. Some people still don't believe me...

Yes. Have heard they’re all ETCS-ready but good to hear that it should be that easy to add or takeaway from any unit.

Could make sense to get some 3s over on the Cambrian particularly in Summer though

Having worked it as a guard, I think most of the services on the Cambrian coast during summer should be minimum 3 cars (2 are just silly busy any day where it’s even reasonably nice) with at least the 10:55 from Mach running as a 4 car (as it did a few times this summer). Even 3 cars between Mach and Aberystwyth would be good. So 6 from shrewbury split at Mach with 3 going each way seems sensible.
I’ve taken over £700 on just one trip between Mach and Pwllheli before so guards selling tickets is still big up there, that was on top of 150 ticket scans and what ever card style tickets I checked.
Having a 3 as opposed to 4 on the coast would also make the guards life easier due to the number of platforms that won’t accommodate 4 cars and the requirement to be at specific doors for stops only 2 or 3 minutes apart.

If TW just plan to run more of them as 4 cars then I’d see that as a reasonable plan equally to save the hassle of getting 3 cars up there. my understanding is it’s still just planned to be 2 cars on the coast services though.

I had heard that they weren’t keen on 3’s in the Cambrian as the depot had to be extended to accommodate the 2 car 197’s and wouldn’t fit the 3 cars.

 

[sd0733]

109 is out. I haven't seen 103 out!

Just testing . You're right, my mistake 103 is still with 102 and 107 at Crewe seemingly held up with acceptance.

Original post edited to correct. So 40 197s accepted with 33 to go.

 

[Lurcheroo]

Just testing . You're right, my mistake 103 is still with 102 and 107 at Crewe seemingly held up with acceptance.

Original post edited to correct. So 40 197s accepted with 33 to go.

So with 21 of those 33 to go being the ERTMS units, that leaves only 12 non ERTMS units to come into service.
I wonder if we will see some of the ERTMS ones out on the rest of the network before they are on the Cambrian.

 

[SuperLuke2334]

So with 21 of those 33 to go being the ERTMS units, that leaves only 12 non ERTMS units to come into service.
I wonder if we will see some of the ERTMS ones out on the rest of the network before they are on the Cambrian.

None of the ETCS units have entered service yet!

 

[Lurcheroo]

None of the ETCS units have entered service yet!

Yeah, so I wonder if once the non ERTMS ones are all in service, if they will start to get the ERTMS ones into service just not on the Cambrian.

 

[craigybagel]

None of the ETCS units have entered service yet!

Yeah, so I wonder if once the non ERTMS ones are all in service, if they will start to get the ERTMS ones into service just not on the Cambrian.

I suspect there's going to be a need for some form of driver training before the ERTMS units come into service - unless they're allowed to run with it semi-permanently isolated. From what I've heard, they won't be running in the same way that the 158s do on conventionally signalled lines. Some drivers, myself included, did do their training on ERTMS fitted 003 with the system isolated but I'm not sure if they'll be able to run them in normal service like that.

 

[Lurcheroo]

I suspect there's going to be a need for some form of driver training before the ERTMS units come into service - unless they're allowed to run with it semi-permanently isolated. From what I've heard, they won't be running in the same way that the 158s do on conventionally signalled lines. Some drivers, myself included, did do their training on ERTMS fitted 003 with the system isolated but I'm not sure if they'll be able to run them in normal service like that.

Interesting, all of our training so far has been on non ERTMS units but I did get to do a drive on Level 2 on the 197 sim. I’ve driven the sim as a non ERTMS unit as well so no need to logo so unsure just how different it’ll be from the 158’s under level 0.

 

[childwallblues]

Although the Chester to Ljverpool Lime Street service is not due to revert to hourly until next month there has been an hourly service for the past two Sundays. Units today were 197045 and 197018.

 

[Dan G]

@craigybagel @Lurcheroo , what's your opinion of the cab window when driving?

 

[Lurcheroo]

@craigybagel @Lurcheroo , what's your opinion of the cab window when driving?

The opening window ? Or the small view port window ?

 

[craigybagel]

@craigybagel @Lurcheroo , what's your opinion of the cab window when driving?

Assuming you mean the rather small windscreen (caused by having such a large gangway), it's honestly not as noticeable or as big of a problem as you'd expect. Other than at a handful of places where you're approaching a potentially red signal on a tight right hand curve, for normal operations it gives more than sufficient visibility. It's also nice to be able to see out the left hand side window to line up with platform stop boards, something you couldn't do with 175s.

 

[The_Train]

Just testing . You're right, my mistake 103 is still with 102 and 107 at Crewe seemingly held up with acceptance.

Original post edited to correct. So 40 197s accepted with 33 to go.

I have 109 as having entered service in November - is that not the case?

 

[SuperLuke2334]

I have 109 as having entered service in November - is that not the case?

Yes that is correct. sd got muddled!

 

[The_Train]

Yes that is correct. sd got muddled!

Thanks for confirming, Luke

 

[Dan G]

The opening window ? Or the small view port window ?

Assuming you mean the rather small windscreen (caused by having such a large gangway), it's honestly not as noticeable or as big of a problem as you'd expect. Other than at a handful of places where you're approaching a potentially red signal on a tight right hand curve, for normal operations it gives more than sufficient visibility. It's also nice to be able to see out the left hand side window to line up with platform stop boards, something you couldn't do with 175s.

I did indeed mean the windscreen! Thanks

 

[FrodshamJnct]

Has the Standard Premium thing started as planned? Currently on a 3 car and there is absolutely no branding or signage whatsoever. Sitting here until I get told to move (if at all). The seats are brilliant - wide, comfortable, good armrest height for taller people and winged headrests. Only thing keeping me awake is the DSD and AWS from the cab right behind me!

 

[TT-ONR-NRN]

Has the Standard Premium thing started as planned? Currently on a 3 car and there is absolutely no branding or signage whatsoever. Sitting here until I get told to move (if at all). The seats are brilliant - wide, comfortable, good armrest height for taller people and winged headrests. Only thing keeping me awake is the DSD and AWS from the cab right behind me!

I don’t know if you saw sd0733’s post but they’re waiting for the Christmas period to be over to fit the signage. Also, the only unit with it is 115 which is on Llandudno Manchester today. There aren’t upgrade fares for this route, so whenever it comes onto it you’ll be all good to sit there at no extra cost, unless they add the route in future. Some of us were saying it’s ironic that there aren’t SP fares programmed for that route but they are for the exclusively 158 Cambrian.

 

[Bletchleyite]

I don’t know if you saw sd0733’s post but they’re waiting for the Christmas period to be over to fit the signage. Also, the only unit with it is 115 which is on Llandudno Manchester today. There aren’t upgrade fares for this route, so whenever it comes onto it you’ll be all good to sit there at no extra cost, unless they add the route in future. Some of us were saying it’s ironic that there aren’t SP fares programmed for that route but they are for the exclusively 158 Cambrian.

There are now upgrade fares, though not at 25% of Standard (so goodness knows where that came from), e.g.:

Purchase flexible walk-up fares for any British train journey

Purchase flexible single/return tickets & Travelcards – in 3 clicks, at face value with no fees. Every British rail fare shown, railcard discounts included.

www.brfares.com

 

[TT-ONR-NRN]

There are now upgrade fares, though not at 25% of Standard (so goodness knows where that came from), e.g.:

Purchase flexible walk-up fares for any British train journey

Purchase flexible single/return tickets & Travelcards – in 3 clicks, at face value with no fees. Every British rail fare shown, railcard discounts included.

www.brfares.com

I must say 25% of Standard would have entitled me to a £1 upgrade each time I have to pop to Newport (which is unfortunately often), which would definitely have suited me!

 

[Plasmanoodle]

Should a 197 with standard premium substitute for a mark 4 in future, would passengers with first class tickets be permitted to sit here, I wonder?

 

[TT-ONR-NRN]

Should a 197 with standard premium substitute for a mark 4 in future, would passengers with first class tickets be permitted to sit here, I wonder?

Yes.

 

[Bletchleyite]

I must say 25% of Standard would have entitled me to a £1 upgrade each time I have to pop to Newport (which is unfortunately often), which would definitely have suited me!

It's pretty good value though, appears to be about a fiver for Manchester to Llandudno.

 

[Plasmanoodle]

Yes.

To the point. Thanks! Looking forward to trying one of these out on a longer distance journey.

 

[TT-ONR-NRN]

To the point. Thanks! Looking forward to trying one of these out on a longer distance journey.

But I would expect you to be able to claim a full refund on the First Standard distance anyway. Some more troublesome staff could perhaps tell you this and therefore refuse you entry to SP without premium, but I think that’d take somebody really desperate.

 

[Plasmanoodle]

But I would expect you to be able to claim a full refund on the First Standard distance anyway. Some more troublesome staff could perhaps tell you this and therefore refuse you entry to SP without premium, but I think that’d take somebody really desperate.

To refuse someone who’s paid a fare that costs more than what SP asks for certainly wouldn’t look good. I suppose time will tell what happens in that instance.

 

[Lurcheroo]

But I would expect you to be able to claim a full refund on the First Standard distance anyway. Some more troublesome staff could perhaps tell you this and therefore refuse you entry to SP without premium, but I think that’d take somebody really desperate.

I would say there is potential for that to be abused so I would think TFW will put something in place.
Ultimately if TFW say that a 1st ticket doesn’t entitle you to use SP then the conductor is fully within their right to expect them to pay the upgrade and then claim the refund for their 1st ticket or whatever TFW say should happen.

The actual problem is people like me, who are too soft and don’t ensure the rules are enforced properly. I’d have just been like “ahh yeah no problem” pretty much as I was with advance tickets on wrong time trains. Thank god I’m just a driver these days

Besides, and this isn’t the first time I’ve seen it on this forum, I think we should stop calling conductors “troublesome”, “desperate” or “jobsworths” for doing the job they are employed too do, in they way they are expected to do it, just because someone(who likely doesn’t work on the railway) has a pre-conceived notion about how they think u t should be done. The ‘troublesome’ ones are the ones who don’t go out into the saloon and do tickets or provide customer service (CS especially during disruption) in my opinion.

 

[TT-ONR-NRN]

Besides, and this isn’t the first time I’ve seen it on this forum, I think we should stop calling conductors “troublesome”, “desperate” or “jobsworths” for doing the job they are employed too do

No. There is a difference between following rules and being plain awkward, and not allowing a first class customer in standard premium (a cheaper version of first class) when the train with first class is switched is simply being awkward and difficult. And it’s very poor customer service.

While I’m sure you’ll wish to defend your colleagues, it’s perfectly reasonable for us to criticise that on a public discussion forum, all the while we’re not rude or deliberately antagonistic - the J word, for example, is considered provocative by some these days so I take care not to use it - and it is not reasonable to suggest we should not be allowed to call inhospitable behaviour out.

I’m tempted to email TfW and ask what the rules are planned to be for that.

 

[Bletchleyite]

I would be astonished if First Class tickets weren't accepted in there.

As for claiming a partial refund, that only applies if the train you use was supposed to have 1st and doesn't.

 

[Kite159]

There are 'first class' stickers on the door between standard & first on 195115. Was being guarded by the catering host earlier, anybody dare enter his private area was told to move as it was first class even with the rest of the train rather busy.

Reminded me of the coach K 'staff coach' before Avanti reduced 1st class.

 

[Cambrian359]

No. There is a difference between following rules and being plain awkward, and not allowing a first class customer in standard premium (a cheaper version of first class) when the train with first class is switched is simply being awkward and difficult. And it’s very poor customer service.

What service did this happen on?