From a revenue protection perspective it seems like it would be worth keeping the guards even if they don’t deal with the doors. Fair evasion is rife on Manchester’s Metrolink network even as they’ve tried to crack down on it by having armies of roving ticket officers getting in and off trams or guarding the entrance of a stop while shouting at people to tap off at the nearby machine - but that’s not really a very friendly customer experience.
-
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!
TfW class 398 Stadler Citylink tram trains
- Thread starter Bob Price
- Start date
From a revenue protection perspective it seems like it would be worth keeping the guards even if they don’t deal with the doors. Fair evasion is rife on Manchester’s Metrolink network even as they’ve tried to crack down on it by having armies of roving ticket officers getting in and off trams or guarding the entrance of a stop while shouting at people to tap off at the nearby machine - but that’s not really a very friendly customer experience.
Sponsor Post - registered members do not see these adverts; click here to register, or click here to log in
R
RailUK Forums
Or shouting at people who, being unfamiliar with the system, didn't realise that the people in hi-vis were a mobile ticket barrier and you were supposed to stop and show your ticket to them. Apparently it's obvious.
Are they really that narrow? I know they look it when seen end-on, but the gap fillers don't seem to be to be covering a noticably wider gap than on a 756 which suggests that at least at platform height there isn't much difference. Maybe higher up they don't widen out as much?
A benefit from leaving out the luggage racks?
tfw756rider
On Moderation
I believe that a 398 is about 3 inches narrower than a 756.
Is that on the inside, the outside, or both?
StarCrossing
Member
- Joined
- 27 Jul 2015
- Messages
- 227
The seats themselves appear to be a normal width. However....
- There is no armrest and no gap whatsoever between the two seats making up each pair.
- There is no armrest and no gap whatsoever between the window seat and the panelling.
However, in a lot of circumstances (e.g. having a pair to yourself, sitting next to a friend, two slim strangers sat next to each other), I'm sure it will be fine.
Which - assuming this is the interior width and that the aisle width is kept the same as a FLIRT takes a little under 2 cm off each seat.
So I imagine they're still doing better than trains with 5 across seating.
== Doublepost prevention - post automatically merged: ==
That makes sense if they have a similar width to a FLIRT at platform height but are narrower higher up.
CapitalStar378
Member
- Joined
- 22 Jun 2013
- Messages
- 595
I'm home for a few days tomorrow so will try and get one to check them out. Are they still just doing mornings?
A quick look at Realtimetrains for Monday shows the only one entering the depot from Pontypridd arriving around 1 pm.
Which suggests mornings only.
TfW has made a right mess of the interiors of its new trains, packing in too many seats which results in poor knee-room and often no window view. I can only imagine that senior management at TfW never travels on its trains.
In comparison, Cardiff Bus has introduced new buses on the Penarth route with bigger windows than the trains and seats that are more comfortable and offer more legroom. And they're more frequent than the train. The bus is always my first choice unless I'm travelling beyond Cardiff.
I'm not so impressed with the 197s but I don't think they've done badly on the whole on the FLIRTs or 398s.
I haven't been on one of their Evoras yet but they do look quite good.
Which is a nice change because Enviros seem to be designed to make it as difficult to see out of nicely as possible.
The bays of 4 seats on the FLIRTs are fine, but the airline seats are packed far too closely together and the foot space of the window seats is blocked by the support strut of the seat in front so you have to sit awkwardly.
Bob Price
Established Member
- Joined
- 8 Aug 2019
- Messages
- 1,243
Someone on Facebook has nicknamed them Gliders. What do we think?
Snow1964
Established Member
I think Glider Was a name used for articulated buses in Belfast.
They also have one big front window
But personally not in favour of that name for a tram
I quite like 398.
== Doublepost prevention - post automatically merged: ==
This amused me - seeing a 398 (in passenger service!) on the bridge over Newport Road that still advertises Valley Lines, two "franchises" back (or maybe three depending on how you count.
The trains do indeed still get you to the heart of Cardiff, and somewhat more frequently too.
The web site at www.valleylines.co.uk no longer seems to be there though.
Last edited:
tfw756rider
On Moderation
The 398/756/231/197 order was placed under KeolisAmey Transport for Wales Rail Services, and I heard that nationalised Transport for Wales Rail do think that some of the specification choices were questionable.
6opher
Member
- Joined
- 4 Jul 2016
- Messages
- 47
The amount of people who call them “trams” is ridiculous. Seriously don’t have a clue what the unit actually is.
Gliders also fgs. Just call them 398s.
Normal people - your everyday, non-enthusiast travellers - have no idea what class these units are, and '398' means nothing.
TfW calls them tram-trains, and they are planned to run on tram lines in the city. So, calling them trams isn't really ridiculous. Although most people will probably just refer to them as "those new trains", as they do now.
Referring to them as trams is far from ridiculous what's ridiculous is getting upset that people do that. They're essentially the same as many of the Sheffield trams as far as the average person would see. They will operate under line of sight and even will run on some sort of tram type track within 5 years.
If anything calling them trains is the more questionable thing.
Either way I don't think they need a name most people don't call sprinters by that name either, some even still call them pacers despite that being wrong. Trains don't need names they just need to actually run for people to get on.
If anything calling them trains is the more questionable thing.
Either way I don't think they need a name most people don't call sprinters by that name either, some even still call them pacers despite that being wrong. Trains don't need names they just need to actually run for people to get on.
CapitalStar378
Member
- Joined
- 22 Jun 2013
- Messages
- 595
That bridge is an eyesore, why can't TfW get it painted? (Sorry, bit OT).
Daniel Boone
Member
chargesmith
Member
From the best I can read RTT, the Pontypridd - Bay service will be much more normal from tomorrow morning but as pointed out by another user it looks like the 398 will run until just before 1pm.
It looks like this will be the case all week.
It looks like this will be the case all week.
Last edited:
I wish they had resurrected the Valley Lines brand (but with a modern logo) considering that's what everyone calls the network anyway, including the staff at TFW. That or some other name that's more unique then just "Metro".
Philip Roberts
Member
I know it's still early days but is there a timetable for when there will be enough 398s is service for the 756s to be cascaded to where they're supposed to be (and the same for the 231s)? End of the year?
trainspotter4
Member
Technically speaking, the 231s are booked on mainline duties come December timetable change, whether that ends up happening ultimately depends on this - but they're booked in!
DelW
Established Member
- Joined
- 15 Jan 2015
- Messages
- 5,935
My immediate reaction when I read this in the post before yours:
was that that sounds exactly like SWR's 450s - which are used on inter-city routes of up to a couple of hours duration, as well as on the outer suburban services for which they were intended. So I suspect you're right.
The AT coaches (ex 153) are the other way around, the airline seats are reasonably okay, but the table bays are hopeless. They can only accommodate two adults, sat diagonally opposite each other, there's no knee room for the other two.
Envoy
Established Member
- Joined
- 29 Aug 2014
- Messages
- 3,126
I think it would be a good idea to give the 398’s a fleet name. The trouble is that the public tend not to know the name for a type of train because it is not written on the train - well apart from LNER who put Azuma on their 800 series. TFW could start by putting FLIRT on the relevant trains.
PS. Asked a woman who went on a TFW train to Manchester whether she had a loco hauled train or a multiple unit Class 197? She could not tell me the answer because she does not even know what a loco hauled train is let alone a 197.
PS. Asked a woman who went on a TFW train to Manchester whether she had a loco hauled train or a multiple unit Class 197? She could not tell me the answer because she does not even know what a loco hauled train is let alone a 197.
chargesmith
Member
I actually quite like their Stadler brand name - Citylink. People are fine with Flirts for the 231 / 756s which is also a brand name.
== Doublepost prevention - post automatically merged: ==
028 is in service this morning, and there's a 150 parked up in the bay platform at Pontypridd which will presumably take over operations in the afternoon.
022 and 030 are the units out on test.
Last edited:
I’m a fan of naming for the route… and am proposing the Lido express for the summer bay-Ponty service.
Smwrff
Member
The troop carriers - for the Valley Commandoes