TfW class 398 Stadler Citylink tram trains

[positron]

Aside from 024 on it's first run out, I've noticed that give or take a few minutes, all the 398 diagrams seem to have run as scheduled. Given all the doom and gloom that's been posted on here, I'd take that as a positive

They're also not running out of power and breaking down and crippling a whole railway either so that's good. They're actually doing quite well on their batteries.

 

[Sam 76]

Aside from 024 on it's first run out, I've noticed that give or take a few minutes, all the 398 diagrams seem to have run as scheduled. Given all the doom and gloom that's been posted on here, I'd take that as a positive

It’s almost like the people in charge of testing and commissioning know what they are doing …

 

[800001]

Today we have 031 in public service, and 021 and 022 out on test.

For now it seems they are just rotating the first three units, hopefully more will available soon as they do more testing miles though.

I wonder if they are focusing on these three, to sort all faults that crop up, get software working properly etc, once they know it works on these 3 then roll it out to the rest of the fleet?

 

[The exile]

I wonder if they are focusing on these three, to sort all faults that crop up, get software working properly etc, once they know it works on these 3 then roll it out to the rest of the fleet?

Would make a lot of sense.

 

[chargesmith]

Timetable next week is still looking more typical but with one significant amendment.

The 1254 service from Pontypridd - Cardiff Bay is scheduled to leave at 1300, and skip Radyr station, on Monday to Wednesday.

Possibly an official launch service for the media etc with backup schedules for the following days in case of an issue? I can't see why else they would do this.

 

[35B]

It’s almost like the people in charge of testing and commissioning know what they are doing …

To which this cynic would say that by now they darn well ought to!

 

[tfw756rider]

I rode on 398024 today / Wed 1/7/26 (my first 398 ride) and most of what I'd have to say would just be repeating what others have said, but here are a few things I noticed:

• Although the 398s' initial steady electric traction whine is an octave lower than on the 756s, the ascending whine that follows when accelerating does sound like the 756 one.
• The 398s can also sometimes make some 'unique' / interesting electric traction sounds when slowing down.
• The automated announcements not only have the unfixed 'dim ond i', but they were also either jumping ahead or going behind in terms of stations (and saying, when between Radyr and Taffs Well, 'we have now arrived at... Llandaf' and so the Passenger Information System kept having to be reset).

Finally, it turns out that the 398s have exterior speakers at the top of the sides of the vehicles, like the 555s and 777s!

I saw 398021 on a training run, and as it pulled in to the station I saw it at, a manual announcement was made from the 398 over its exterior speakers, saying "this train is not in passenger service, it's on a training run. Please do not board this train".

I forgot to mention that unfortunately, at least one of the gangways was squeaking on 398024.

 

[Avowedsevern]

Paths are supposed to be in for the 4tph from December 14th, this will be to Treherbert from Cardiff Bay firstly. Providing an additional service alongside the current Cardiff Central terminators. Merthyr and Aberdare will still be half hourly loops around the city line.

There’s also reportedly no reduction in the journey times between Cardiff and Treherbert despite the claims, meaning it’s still going to be over an hour. Journeys over an hour require a toilet onboard if I remember.

Taffs well depot will also require 12 units daily just to meet the requirements due to the empty stock moves coming off for the TAM. They also want 398’s coming off Treherbert. Except some cancellations, that’s all I will say - or the majority to be 150’s. I don’t think they’ll be ready by December. They’re struggling now just to get the one unit out with the the others required for training runs. And these are full of faults and require a laptop to assist.

There’s also another heatwave in the coming days so units won’t be able to cope and will be need to go home early no doubt!

After all of this faff, if there’s not going to be a reduction in journey times then that’ll be a disgrace. I don’t want to hear from anyone defending TfW when you haven’t relied on the Valley lines which spent years closed, leaving us with shoddy bus replacements. It’s all nice from your ivory towers.

All of this wait and money spent for a bunch of “decent” tram-trains. It has not been worth it. If they do increase services to four an hour then that’ll be a solid start. If they do reduce journey times then that’ll be great too. Anything short, and the whole thing was a waste of time imo.

 

[WelshBluebird]

After all of this faff, if there’s not going to be a reduction in journey times then that’ll be a disgrace. I don’t want to hear from anyone defending TfW when you haven’t relied on the Valley lines which spent years closed, leaving us with shoddy bus replacements. It’s all nice from your ivory towers.

The whole point has been:

1. Modernising the infrastructure so that equipment and trains that have been on their last legs can be replaced.
2. Allowing for double the frequency of the services.

The journey times aren't really part of it.

And I am someone who whilst not living there anymore still travels on the valley lines semi regularly to visit family and yes had to deal with those shoddy bus replacements.

 

[chargesmith]

After all of this faff, if there’s not going to be a reduction in journey times then that’ll be a disgrace. I don’t want to hear from anyone defending TfW when you haven’t relied on the Valley lines which spent years closed, leaving us with shoddy bus replacements. It’s all nice from your ivory towers.

All of this wait and money spent for a bunch of “decent” tram-trains. It has not been worth it. If they do increase services to four an hour then that’ll be a solid start. If they do reduce journey times then that’ll be great too. Anything short, and the whole thing was a waste of time imo.

They will reduce journey times significantly. The current timetables are built around the limitations of the Class 150.

TFW have said that coming out of Cathays, the point where the 398 reaches 50mph is a mile earlier than where the 150 does. When I rode the 398 this week this definitely felt like it was the case, even though it still felt like there was time left on the table.

Pay no attention to that user, they are very salty about the units for some reason and seem to believe / make up ridiculous things about them, not sure why.

 

[Coleridge]

TFW have said that coming out of Cathays, the point where the 398 reaches 50mph is a mile earlier than where the 150 does. When I rode the 398 this week this definitely felt like it was the case, even though it still felt like there was time left on the table.

That's a very unusual way of describing the performance of a train, and I can't really work out whether it's helpful.

Stations on the Valley Lines are very close together - as little as half a mile apart - and unless there's going to be a change in the time-consuming piece of theatre that the train manager has to go through at every stop (open his door; step out onto the platform to check... well, something; step back onto the train; release the passenger doors; close the passenger doors; step out onto the platform to check whatever it is again; step back into the train; close his door; tell the driver it's ok to go) I don't see that there's much scope for reducing journey times.

 

[800001]

That's a very unusual way of describing the performance of a train, and I can't really work out whether it's helpful.

Stations on the Valley Lines are very close together - as little as half a mile apart - and unless there's going to be a change in the time-consuming piece of theatre that the train manager has to go through at every stop (open his door; step out onto the platform to check... well, something; step back onto the train; release the passenger doors; close the passenger doors; step out onto the platform to check whatever it is again; step back into the train; close his door; tell the driver it's ok to go) I don't see that there's much scope for reducing journey times.

Surely the reducing of journey times comes when all the fleet is introduced and the timetable can be rewritten?

 

[chargesmith]

That's a very unusual way of describing the performance of a train, and I can't really work out whether it's helpful.

Stations on the Valley Lines are very close together - as little as half a mile apart - and unless there's going to be a change in the time-consuming piece of theatre that the train manager has to go through at every stop (open his door; step out onto the platform to check... well, something; step back onto the train; release the passenger doors; close the passenger doors; step out onto the platform to check whatever it is again; step back into the train; close his door; tell the driver it's ok to go) I don't see that there's much scope for reducing journey times.

I believe the door opening procedure is changing to reduce dwell times as well. I can't remember if I heard this directly from TFW or from a rumour on this forum but I will try to look back and confirm.

I vaguely remember seeing that journey times from Cardiff to Treherbert would be under an hour (58 minutes) when it's all in place, again, I'll try to look back and work out if this is correct or not.

== Doublepost prevention - post automatically merged: 2 Jul 2026 ==

Surely the reducing of journey times comes when all the fleet is introduced and the timetable can be rewritten?

Precisely this. 150s need to be off the TAM lines at a minimum (there are other things that need to happen too like remodelling track and signalling at Queen Street) because they would end up causing delays if the timetable was built around the 398s capabilities. The CEO of TFW confirmed that in a Green Signals podcast IIRC.

 

[Coleridge]

I believe the door opening procedure is changing to reduce dwell times as well. I can't remember if I heard this directly from TFW or from a rumour on this forum but I will try to look back and confirm.

I'd like to think so, as at the moment dwell times can be as much as 30 or 40 seconds, and even more if the train manager is caught unawares and has to make his way through the train to the right set of doors. That quickly adds up.

 

[chargesmith]

I'd like to think so, as at the moment dwell times can be as much as 30 or 40 seconds, and even more if the train manager is caught unawares and has to make his way through the train to the right set of doors. That quickly adds up.

Given it's a metro train I imagine there is door controls on every door. I'll see if I can confirm this next week when I next commute.

 

[AdamWW]

That's a very unusual way of describing the performance of a train, and I can't really work out whether it's helpful.

Isn't it just a statement of how much better the acceleration is? Something that is generally more useful the closer stations are together?

== Doublepost prevention - post automatically merged: 2 Jul 2026 ==

Given it's a metro train I imagine there is door controls on every door. I'll see if I can confirm this next week when I next commute.

I think there are controls at one pair of doors (i.e. one each side) in each carriage.
Which is of course all passenger doors.

I believe the door opening procedure is changing to reduce dwell times as well. I can't remember if I heard this directly from TFW or from a rumour on this forum but I will try to look back and confirm.

Some of the 398 passenger runs (including on the first day) have been with the driver controlling the doors, and it massively reduces dwell time.
When I've seen the guard operating the doors it looked as if it was part of training.

It seems rather likely that the intention is to use driver door operation when possible.

== Doublepost prevention - post automatically merged: 2 Jul 2026 ==

unless there's going to be a change in the time-consuming piece of theatre that the train manager has to go through at every stop (open his door; step out onto the platform to check... well, something; step back onto the train; release the passenger doors; close the passenger doors; step out onto the platform to check whatever it is again; step back into the train; close his door; tell the driver it's ok to go) I don't see that there's much scope for reducing journey times.

Checking that nobody is trapped in the doors before closing the local door and telling the driver to start seems an entirely reasonable process to me.

It's less obvious to me that the risk of opening doors without first having checked for unexpected hazards on the platform justifies the time taken.

 

[chargesmith]

It's less obvious to me that the risk of opening doors without first having checked for unexpected hazards on the platform justifies the time taken.

I suspect that any hazards on the platform can be better spotted from the drivers field of view as they come into the station. They can presumably then either choose to open the doors themselves or use a signal code to instruct the train manager to do it if they are concerned about something (i.e. revert to traditional procedure)

 

[John R]

Checking that nobody is trapped in the doors before closing the local door and telling the driver to start seems an entirely reasonable process to me.

Yet thousands of train services (and indeed tram services) must make (probably) tens of thousands of close doors movements each day in the UK with the driver in full control. And yet serious incidents are almost infinitely rare.

 

[AdamWW]

Yet thousands of train services (and indeed tram services) must make (probably) tens of thousands of close doors movements each day in the UK with the driver in full control. And yet serious incidents are almost infinitely rare.

Yes indeed because the driver checks. I was responding to a post that seemed to be questioning (on trains where the guard controls the doors) the need for the guard to check it was safe for the train to leave before closing the local door.
If the driver does it instead, fine.
But I think there's a good argument that someone ought to do it.

 

[Dr Day]

Surely one of the basic reasons behind the conversion into the South Wales Metro was the use of more tram-like processes to speed up dwell times? Most metros don’t even need a second person on board, but I don’t want another DOO debate….

 

[AdamWW]

Surely one of the basic reasons behind the conversion into the South Wales Metro was the use of more tram-like processes to speed up dwell times? Most metros don’t even need a second person on board, but I don’t want another DOO debate….

I'd have thought that the fact that they are already using driver door operation on the 398s some of the time suggests that this is how they intend to operate.
And it certainly does speed things up.

It would be even better if they could do it on the FLIRTs as the gap fillers are somewhat slower.

 

[StripeyNick]

Newbie out today .....022 on the Bay diagram

 

[chargesmith]

Newbie out today .....022 on the Bay diagram

022 was out on test yesterday so it's clearly been approved for service, 017 and 021 are out on test today.

 

[Smwrff]

There are certain individuals who want the 398s to fail - because they know these will eventually lead to a gradual reduction in ridiculous arcane rules - whose main purpose seems to be job protection (disguised as safety).

Surprised they dont want a man with a flag walking in fron if each tram while street running....

 

[chargesmith]

There are certain individuals who want the 398s to fail - because they know these will eventually lead to a gradual reduction in ridiculous arcane rules - whose main purpose seems to be job protection (disguised as safety).

Surprised they dont want a man with a flag walking in fron if each tram while street running....

Starting to make sense where all the negativity is coming from.

Haven't TFW confirmed there's no plans to reduce traincrew requirements on the CVL though?

Maybe people don't trust this or are fearful for what happens further down the line though.

 

[craigybagel]

There are certain individuals who want the 398s to fail - because they know these will eventually lead to a gradual reduction in ridiculous arcane rules - whose main purpose seems to be job protection (disguised as safety).

Surprised they dont want a man with a flag walking in fron if each tram while street running....

Starting to make sense where all the negativity is coming from.

Haven't TFW confirmed there's no plans to reduce traincrew requirements on the CVL though?

Maybe people don't trust this or are fearful for what happens further down the line though.

As far as this forum is concerned, it's one person, who's been called out multiple times by other posters, including some who are TfW employees.

Both ASLEF & RMT have engaged with TfW throughout the process of getting the new units into service on the Valleys, notably without much arguing from either side. There also hasn't been a mess exodus of staff from the Valleys side to Mainline trying to escape any impending disaster, which you would expect to be the case if there were genuine concerns.

Please don't assume that the negativity is a majority opinion, or take any of those "facts" as being completely accurate.

 

[chargesmith]

As far as this forum is concerned, it's one person, who's been called out multiple times by other posters, including some who are TfW employees.

Both ASLEF & RMT have engaged with TfW throughout the process of getting the new units into service on the Valleys, notably without much arguing from either side. There also hasn't been a mess exodus of staff from the Valleys side to Mainline trying to escape any impending disaster, which you would expect to be the case if there were genuine concerns.

Please don't assume that the negativity is a majority opinion, or take any of those "facts" as being completely accurate.

Fair point, I don't personally take any of those negative comments seriously, just trying to understand why that user is so against them, there must be a reason even if it is a trivial one!

 

[StarCrossing]

I had my much-anticipated first ride on them today.

They look great, sound quiet, seem to accelerate well and are well fitted out inside. The big windows will be great for those who like to enjoy the scenery.

The narrow body does mean the seats are wedged in together, which could be unpleasant on a busy service (depending on who sits next to you!), but maybe not a massive issue.

However, the air conditioning was a massive disappointment. It was definitely turned on, as I could feel some cooler air coming out, but it wasn't very effective - it may have felt a degree or two cooler than standing outside in the sun, but definitely felt warmer than standing outside in the shade.

Hopefully they can do something about the air conditioning, because otherwise I liked them.

 

[positron]

Iirc there's a potential desire for driver only operation the crossrail line (pending discussions with unions etc), but for the main services they were pretty clear in the green signals interview that they intend to keep the guard. Tbh I think a world where the guard is more a customer service and revenue protection role would be far better for customers. It's awkward sometimes when you're asking a question and the guard then has to apologise, run off to do the doors and then come back.

 

[tfw756rider]

Newbie out today .....022 on the Bay diagram

Thanks for letting us know

The entry-to-service of 398022 'today' (Fri 3/7/26) now means that 4 (of 36) 398s have been in service:

398022/024/028/031

The number of 398s still to enter service is down to 32:

398001-021, 398023, 398025-027, 398029-030, 398032-036

==============================

The overall number of new Transport for Wales (TfW) trains that have been in service is now up to 115 (of 148):

76 (of 77) 197s
All 11 231s
4 (of 36) 398s
All 24 756s

This leaves 33 new TfW trains still to enter service:

1 197
32 398s