Class 175 future speculation

[61653 HTAFC]

Aren't the 175s built to the C3 profile anyway, therefore they wouldn't fit on the Uckfield branch?

Are they any wider than the 171s which are also 23m?

Thought the restriction on Uckfields was specifically the 20m mk3s, so no 319s if the juice rail had been fitted, and no 769s when that concept was first proposed.

 

[RobShipway]

Are they any wider than the 171s which are also 23m?

Thought the restriction on Uckfields was specifically the 20m mk3s, so no 319s if the juice rail had been fitted, and no 769s when that concept was first proposed.

The class 175 units width is 2.73 m (8 ft 11 in) and carriage length is 23.71 m (77 ft 9 in), where as the class 171 units are 2.69 m (8 ft 9+7⁄8 in) width and 23.62 m (77 ft 5+7⁄8 in) length.

However, the 175 height I believe is higher compared to the class 171 height which is 3.77 m (12 ft 4+3⁄8 in)?

 

[317 forever]

Some could go back to First, this time for their London King's Cross to Sheffield service. They could use triple 3-car formations.

 

[skyhigh]

Some could go back to First, this time for their London King's Cross to Sheffield service. They could use triple 3-car formations.

It has been made very clear that 22x will be used for that service.

 

[Snow1964]

Would it theoretically be possible to create say 8 four car units and keep other vehicles as spares (assuming lease company is open to offers).

Would have thought if could get them on some dedicated service as an interim, to minimise training, could free up other units in areas that are struggling.

 

[craigybagel]

Some could go back to First, this time for their London King's Cross to Sheffield service. They could use triple 3-car formations.

Good luck finding 100mph DMU paths all the way up the ECML to Retford.

 

[Whistler40145]

Instead of 175s heading to Chiltern, could they go to Northern with the 170s heading south instead?

 

[skyhigh]

Instead of 175s heading to Chiltern, could they go to Northern with the 170s heading south instead?

Here we go again. It has been made abundantly clear that the 170s are staying and Northern don't want the 175s.

For crying out loud why does everyone have their eyes on the Northern 170’s. It’s almost as if Northern have said they don’t want them and they suddenly aren’t spending a hell of a lot of money on Hull Botanic Gardens as a dedicated maintenance facility for them.

I wish people would change the bloody record and concentrate on the units that actually will be available.

You evidently aren’t in the loop on this ongoing subject so I’ll explain.

I’ve discussed with said forum member over and over again for over a year about the fleet situation at Northern (a company we both work for) and continually explained to said member that the 175’s are not coming here. I even explained that the 175’s were looked at and the decision was made that they weren’t economically viable due to the small size of the fleet which is not compatible with the rest of the fleet (unlike the 170’s for instance) and that the way to go was a new fleet to replace the 15x fleet.

Now to have to explain this time and again as it keeps getting ‘conveniently’ forgotten by said member when they decide on the 175’s going variously to Heaton, Botanic Gardens, Newton Heath, Longsight is rather frustrating so I 100% stand by what I feel.

They also know I’m heavily involved in Northern planning, I put nothing in my bio as I wish to remain anonymous to what my actual role within the department is. Nobody needs to know that level of detail about me but I know a hell of a lot more on the subject on here then most and most people accept my explanations. Is it a coincidence that only 1 person constantly ignores these explanations or are they constantly just looking for a rise which I unfortunately keep falling for.

Like everything in life it’s a matter of trust. All I’ll say is that everything I’ve said about the fleet has happened and very little of that was in the public domain. The fact that said member has challenged me over this (that’s how I see it) means that I am no longer prepared to make that information available anymore to anyone.

Anyway I hope this explains to you why I posted what I did. It might seem harsh but everyone has their limits of tolerance don’t they?

Definitely not us. We looked at them a couple of years ago and ruled them out. There’s many pages about the whys and wherefores elsewhere. The new build will directly replace our 15x fleet, nothing planned to come in in the interim.

 

[Whistler40145]

The Class 175s don't seem to be heading anywhere very soon

 

[Lurcheroo]

Would it theoretically be possible to create say 8 four car units and keep other vehicles as spares (assuming lease company is open to offers).

I have thought, and can’t remember if I wrote it down on any of these threads, but if there was an operator who wanted 4 cars specifically then you could take the middle car out of 8 of the 3 cars and put it into the other 8, you could have 8 4 car units and then 19 2 cars which could then be used in multiple to form 8 more 4 cars and a spare 2 or add it to one formation to make a 6.

 

[skyhigh]

The Class 175s don't seem to be heading anywhere very soon

No, hence why the owners have made them available for lease/disposal. They have nobody lined up to use them.

 

[Philip]

175110 has either new or refurbished bogies from work done late last year, which nods towards future use by another TOC.

GWR and Scotrail seem to be the most likely, with EMR & Chiltern outside bets.

 

[Anonymous10]

175110 has either new or refurbished bogies from work done late last year, which nods towards future use by another TOC.

GWR and Scotrail seem to be the most likely, with EMR & Chiltern outside bets.

They were still in routine tfw service so possibly just standard to be able to hand back.

Forgive me forgot its now 2024 if done in 2023 yes that does indicate something.

 

[43096]

They were still in routine tfw service so possibly just standard to be able to hand back.

Forgive me forgot its now 2024 if done in 2023 yes that does indicate something.

It may just indicate that Angel believe that they still have a chance of getting them back on lease (but that no lease has been agreed) and are therefore enforcing the lease return conditions.

 

[Christmas]

I've read that the 175s have undergone a £40m refurbishment during their time at Transport for Wales. What, if any, changes would anyone suggest they still require if they were to oust the decrepit ScotRail HSTs?

The grey and red seats and the red and white livery might look out of place but definitely too costly to replace just yet.

 

[Bikeman78]

I've read that the 175s have undergone a £40m refurbishment during their time at Transport for Wales. What, if any, changes would anyone suggest they still require if they were to oust the decrepit ScotRail HSTs?

The grey and red seats and the red and white livery might look out of place but definitely too costly to replace just yet.

The failure rate of the 175s is worse than the Scottish HSTs. Be careful what you wish for.

 

[Lurcheroo]

Is there any sign of scotrail getting rid of their HST’s ?

 

[craigybagel]

The failure rate of the 175s is worse than the Scottish HSTs. Be careful what you wish for.

Source?

 

[TT-ONR-NRN]

Is there any sign of scotrail getting rid of their HST’s ?

A tender was issued for stock replacement from 2027.

 

[Bikeman78]

Source?

Modern Railways January 2024. 175s 3834 miles per failure, HST 5530 miles per failure. It would take a lot of effort to make the 175s reliable again. You'd need a depot with dedicated Alstom staff that actually care about them, like Chester used to be. I still think that scrap is the likely outcome.

 

[Caaardiff]

Modern Railways January 2024. 175s 3834 miles per failure, HST 5530 miles per failure. It would take a lot of effort to make the 175s reliable again. You'd need a depot with dedicated Alstom staff that actually care about them, like Chester used to be. I still think that scrap is the likely outcome.

Is that for a specific period or over their lifetime?

 

[Bikeman78]

Is that for a specific period or over their lifetime?

That's the average over the 12 months to period 6, whenever that is. They were okay until February last year so the figure was probably even worse at the end. A long way from their heyday of 15000 miles per failure.

 

[Anonymous10]

Modern Railways January 2024. 175s 3834 miles per failure, HST 5530 miles per failure. It would take a lot of effort to make the 175s reliable again. You'd need a depot with dedicated Alstom staff that actually care about them, like Chester used to be. I still think that scrap is the likely outcome.

Personally they could be made to work if they were a good solution, for example the class 334 scotrail operate are also corardia units. Whilst electric one would assume their Alstom technicians could in time learn the maintenance of a diesel variant.

The larger issue is the scotrail hst fleet consists of 52 power card and 120 coaches in either 4 or 5 coach formation. That gives assuming everything was formed in sets 24 sets of 5 with 2 power cars spare.

The 175 fleet could achieve 11 5 carriage formations 2 6 carriage formations and 1 spare 3 carriage at max if in multiple permanently or 5 4 coach formations with 1 spare 2 coach and 8 6 coach formations.

Please note information is sourced from Wikipedia and do not allow for maintenance just the number of units and vehicles.

 

[Bikeman78]

Personally they could be made to work if they were a good solution, for example the class 334 scotrail operate are also corardia units. Whilst electric one would assume their Alstom technicians could in time learn the maintenance of a diesel variant.

The larger issue is the scotrail hst fleet consists of 52 power card and 120 coaches in either 4 or 5 coach formation. That gives assuming everything was formed in sets 24 sets of 5 with 2 power cars spare.

The 175 fleet could achieve 11 5 carriage formations 2 6 carriage formations and 1 spare 3 carriage at max if in multiple permanently or 5 4 coach formations with 1 spare 2 coach and 8 6 coach formations.

Please note information is sourced from Wikipedia and do not allow for maintenance just the number of units and vehicles.

I think there's 15 HST diagrams. So 14 three cars and a pair of two cars would cover that. Assuming you diagram nine two cars that leaves seven to strengthen half the three cars to five car formations.

 

[Anonymous10]

I think there's 15 HST diagrams. So 14 three cars and a pair of two cars would cover that. Assuming you diagram nine two cars that leaves seven to strengthen half the three cars to five car formations.

Fair enough. Was assuming with 24 possible sets there'd be more than 15 diagrams. Possibly they could in that case. But the onboard buffet service would cease, I do partly wonder if they'd pick up the mk5 carriages off tpe instead bur that's off topic.

 

[craigybagel]

Modern Railways January 2024. 175s 3834 miles per failure, HST 5530 miles per failure. It would take a lot of effort to make the 175s reliable again. You'd need a depot with dedicated Alstom staff that actually care about them, like Chester used to be. I still think that scrap is the likely outcome.

Fair enough. They really did fall off a cliff in the last year! Quite depressing to read (and it wasn't fun to be part of either, though I didn't realise things had gotten that bad).

They've certainly got the potential to be a lot more reliable than the HSTs though - haver ScotRail HSTs ever been reliable since they went up?

I do agree with you on the most likely outcome.

 

[Caaardiff]

That's the average over the 12 months to period 6, whenever that is. They were okay until February last year so the figure was probably even worse at the end. A long way from their heyday of 15000 miles per failure.

Which isn't really a true reflection of their reliability. It's well known they weren't well maintained towards the end of their time with TFW.
They are going through extensive maintenance before being handed back to the leasing company. If a new operator looked after them then there's little reason why they won't be reliable again.

 

[Dan G]

Is there any sign of scotrail getting rid of their HST’s ?

No, it's just wishful thinking on here

 

[Bikeman78]

Which isn't really a true reflection of their reliability. It's well known they weren't well maintained towards the end of their time with TFW.
They are going through extensive maintenance before being handed back to the leasing company. If a new operator looked after them then there's little reason why they won't be reliable again.

What is the nature of the extensive maintenance and who is doing it? Are the fire damaged vehicles being repaired? Standing about getting cold and damp will not help them. I agree that they can be made to work again if someone wants to put the effort in. But the first 18 to 24 months will be painful.

== Doublepost prevention - post automatically merged: 10 Jan 2024 ==

They've certainly got the potential to be a lot more reliable than the HSTs though - haver ScotRail HSTs ever been reliable since they went up?

I suppose that depends on what you call reliable. For comparison, the figures for Scotrail 158s and 170s are 5855 and 5911 respectively, so the chances of getting home without a fault are broadly the same for all three fleets up there.

 

[Anonymous10]

What is the nature of the extensive maintenance and who is doing it? Are the fire damaged vehicles being repaired? Standing about getting cold and damp will not help them. I agree that they can be made to work again if someone wants to put the effort in. But the first 18 to 24 months will be painful.

== Doublepost prevention - post automatically merged: 10 Jan 2024 ==


I suppose that depends on what you call reliable. For comparison, the figures for Scotrail 158s and 170s are 5855 and 5911 respectively, so the chances of getting home without a fault are broadly the same for all three fleets up there.

Several units have been going to Alstom in Ilford.

If that's for maintenance I am unsure.