Class 175 future speculation

[Xenophon PCDGS]

How many "X-hand" will the Class 175 fleet be when they are in the hands of GWR?

 

[HamworthyGoods]

Well there's a smoking gun for the fleet's arrival in the absence of an official statement!

Does there actually have to be an official statement?

 

[signed]

How many "X-hand" will the Class 175 fleet be when they are in the hands of GWR?

All of the units have seen the following operators :

• First North Western
• Wales and Borders
• Arriva Train Wales
• Keolis Amey Wales
• TfW

11 have also been with First TransPennine Express

So basically a 3-rd hand one, bundling all W&B franchises together

 

[Caaardiff]

How many "X-hand" will the Class 175 fleet be when they are in the hands of GWR?

Just FNW and ATW/TFW isn't it?
What's your issue with GWR getting the 175s? There seems to be one.

 

[Class172]

Does there actually have to be an official statement?

Absolutely not, but some people on the forum seem to be obsessed with looking for some form of press release so I'd like to think this satisfies them.

 

[Lurcheroo]

Just FNW and ATW/TFW isn't it?
What's your issue with GWR getting the 175s? There seems to be one.

It seems to be that he wants GWR to only get brand new off the production line trains as he sort of hinted to in post #2600.
Whilst yes that would be lovely, and that is looking like it will happen through project Churchward, the rest of us can see what a benefit the 175’s will be to the passengers in the short term until that can happen.
But I think he may be of the older generation and stuck in the past as he also talks about the ‘big 4’ which is such an incredibly long time ago now.

 

[The exile]

In the days of yore, were companies such as the LNWR, GWR, etc. beholden upon the Treasury when new locomotive fleets were thought to be a need?

As always, he who pays the piper….

 

[craigybagel]

All of the units have seen the following operators :

• First North Western
• Wales and Borders
• Arriva Train Wales
• Keolis Amey Wales
• TfW

11 have also been with First TransPennine Express

So basically a 3-rd hand one, bundling all W&B franchises together

Just FNW and ATW/TFW isn't it?

You could arguably link FNW and the W&B franchises together as well - they lost their Lancashire work in favour of South Wales, but they spent their entire career based out of Chester and working trains around there.

 

[Xenophon PCDGS]

But I think he may be of the older generation and stuck in the past as he also talks about the ‘big 4’ which is such an incredibly long time ago now.

I am 79 years of age, born in April 1945 and before the 1948 railway rationalisation, if that helps.

I see nothing wrong whatsoever with wanting brand new units for any UK-based rail company.

 

[Philip]

I could be talking a load of rubbish here, but wasn't there something about a special braking system (hydrostatic brake?) which required the engine to rev up signficantly (or itself sounded like a diesel/petrol engine at high revs) which has since been disabled?

I remember that being used up until about 15 years ago, then isolated. The 197s have a working hydrodynamic brake but it sounds different to the 175 one; a gentle engine rev and later you can hear what sounds like a fan kicking in. The 175 brake sounded like the engine was being revved up to maximum (sounded a bit like a 185 accelerating from idle at full pelt).

 

[Snow1964]

It seems to be that he wants GWR to only get brand new off the production line trains as he sort of hinted to in post #2600.
Whilst yes that would be lovely, and that is looking like it will happen through project Churchward, the rest of us can see what a benefit the 175’s will be to the passengers in the short term until that can happen.
But I think he may be of the older generation and stuck in the past as he also talks about the ‘big 4’ which is such an incredibly long time ago now.

Clearly the 175s are a (relatively) quick way of expanding the fleet.

However there is a valid question of how was the timescale of project Churchward set (I think it is delivery 2029-2032), especially as DfT latest post covid spreadsheet is showing some days as 97% of pre covid (or 107% if including Elizabeth line).

If there has been an almost restoration of passengers nationally (and local evidence of the diesel locals in GWR west and SW suggests nearer 120-130% in the area), then why the Churchward timescale is still at least 5 years away, and not brought forward hasn't really been explained by anyone.

 

[Anonymous10]

I am 79 years of age, born in April 1945 and before the 1948 railway rationalisation, if that helps.

I see nothing wrong whatsoever with wanting brand new units for any UK-based rail company.

No one is saying you shouldn't want them, what people are saying is that the class 175's are acting as a 'plaster' to bolster capacity while plans are made and new trains are made / tested ect.

 

[Xenophon PCDGS]

No one is saying you shouldn't want them, what people are saying is that the class 175's are acting as a 'plaster' to bolster capacity while plans are made and new trains are made / tested ect.

Just as a matter of interest, with the time normally taken for a decision to order new trains and for the first of those newly-ordered trains to enter service, can anyone say how long it took for the placing of the Northern Class 195 fleet with CAF and for the first delivered train from that order to be fully operational.

 

[Lurcheroo]

I am 79 years of age, born in April 1945 and before the 1948 railway rationalisation, if that helps.

I see nothing wrong whatsoever with wanting brand new units for any UK-based rail company.

With the upmost respect (and I mean that) you certainly give a few clues away haha!

No, there really isn’t and I fully support the introduction of new units, and I’ve even said up thread that I agree with you that this issue should have been dealt with before it was a problem. But GWR are in the position (due to whoever’s failure) they’re in so at least they’re getting some more units to hold them over a bit better.
I think what I’m saying is I get what your saying but the issue should be with GWR/DFT or whoever else caused the lack of forward planning, and the 175’s shouldn’t be looked over as good units that will serve GWR passengers well.

 

[skyhigh]

can anyone say how long it took for the placing of the Northern Class 195 fleet with CAF and for the first delivered train from that order to be fully operational.

We'll let you know as soon as there's a fully operational 195.

 

[Xenophon PCDGS]

We'll let you know as soon as there's a fully operational 195.

Interestingly the order was for 25 two-car units and 33 three-car units, if my memory is correct. but I don't know which of these were to be the first delivered.

 

[vuzzeho]

Just as a matter of interest, with the time normally taken for a decision to order new trains and for the first of those newly-ordered trains to enter service, can anyone say how long it took for the placing of the Northern Class 195 fleet with CAF and for the first delivered train from that order to be fully operational.

From a quick read on Wikipedia, the order was made in 2016 and the first train entered service in July 2019. Apparently, part of the reason CAF was chosen because they could deliver the order quickly.

 

[Caaardiff]

Even with any new order of trains for GWR, it might be that when they do eventually get introduced that the 175s might outlive some of the 150s, 158s, and 16x's. There needs to be a stop gap to cover for that.

 

[Xenophon PCDGS]

From a quick read on Wikipedia, the order was made in 2016 and the first train entered service in July 2019. Apparently, part of the reason CAF was chosen because they could deliver the order quickly.

Thanks for that. Perhaps I may have mis-read some earlier postings in this thread which talked of the time it would take for a new train fleet to be delivered and that is why the Class 175 fleet were a much quicker alternative in the GWR area in question. Still, speculative discussion threads do have a lot to recommend themselves.

 

[Bikeman78]

Yes 175’s were designed with long distance in mind (as were 158’s) and 150’s were designed with shorter stop start routes in mind but I don’t think that really changes longevity.

Agreed. The class 313s and the HSTs are opposite ends of the scale in terms of use but they both worked the ECML for the same length of time, give or take a few months.

 

[Meerkat]

I am 79 years of age, born in April 1945 and before the 1948 railway rationalisation, if that helps.

I see nothing wrong whatsoever with wanting brand new units for any UK-based rail company.

Be careful of what you wish for - new trains are no longer a guarantee of better trains!

If there has been an almost restoration of passengers nationally (and local evidence of the diesel locals in GWR west and SW suggests nearer 120-130% in the area), then why the Churchward timescale is still at least 5 years away, and not brought forward hasn't really been explained by anyone.

Depends if they are the same passengers. If the commuter services are still down and the new passengers are filling daytime seats that were empty then there isn’t the same capacity issue.

 

[Xenophon PCDGS]

Be careful of what you wish for - new trains are no longer a guarantee of better train

Would that depend upon the manufacturer involved, all they all cannot be producers of poor quality rail traction.

 

[InkyScrolls]

Would that depend upon the manufacturer involved, all they all cannot be producers of poor quality rail traction.

Anything CAF is pretty well guaranteed to be utter sh*te.

We'll let you know as soon as there's a fully operational 195.

Amen to that!

 

[bramling]

Clearly the 175s are a (relatively) quick way of expanding the fleet.

However there is a valid question of how was the timescale of project Churchward set (I think it is delivery 2029-2032), especially as DfT latest post covid spreadsheet is showing some days as 97% of pre covid (or 107% if including Elizabeth line).

If there has been an almost restoration of passengers nationally (and local evidence of the diesel locals in GWR west and SW suggests nearer 120-130% in the area), then why the Churchward timescale is still at least 5 years away, and not brought forward hasn't really been explained by anyone.

The difficulty is that whilst passenger numbers might have restored, revenue hasn’t - largely due to the loss of lucrative season tickets and business journeys.

Against that background it remains difficult to justify investment in new trains when there are (arguably) perfectly good mid-life trains going spare.

The industry hasn’t exactly demonstrated prudence with the way a number of perfectly decent fleets have been tossed aside (350/2, 365, 379 to name the obvious ones).

 

[Xenophon PCDGS]

Glad to hear that a goodly number of website members have full confidence in the operational usage of the Class 175 units, which have already chalked up a large total of mileage since their introduction. Perhaps time has now solved all the earlier problems that once afflicted them.

 

[6Gman]

Glad to hear that a goodly number of website members have full confidence in the operational usage of the Class 175 units, which have already chalked up a large total of mileage since their introduction. Perhaps time has now solved all the earlier problems that once afflicted them.

I suspect there will be teething problems (as there would almost certainly be with new units) but if Laira gets a grip on things there's no reason why there should be significant issues.

 

[The exile]

Clearly the 175s are a (relatively) quick way of expanding the fleet.

However there is a valid question of how was the timescale of project Churchward set (I think it is delivery 2029-2032), especially as DfT latest post covid spreadsheet is showing some days as 97% of pre covid (or 107% if including Elizabeth line).

If there has been an almost restoration of passengers nationally (and local evidence of the diesel locals in GWR west and SW suggests nearer 120-130% in the area), then why the Churchward timescale is still at least 5 years away, and not brought forward hasn't really been explained by anyone.

Arguably we should be glad that the order hasn't been placed yet, rather than having been set in stone 2 or 3 years ago when passenger numbers were much weaker. The current stock shortages wouldn't be anything like as acute if the DfT hadn't:

a) forced the withdrawal of most of the Castle sets and
b) pulled the plug on the GWR 769s, apparently just at the point when they were ready to "go".

 

[REVUpminster]

I thought GWR scrapped the 769s as they couldn't make them do three jobs???

 

[Nym]

I thought GWR scrapped the 769s as they couldn't make them do three jobs???

What do you mean by "Do three jobs"?

Tri-mode traction is a relatively proven thing, and the 769/9 isn't exactly doing a complicated thing.

It's more likely the difficulties with them have come from all of the extra equipment that was installed in addition to the Tri-Mode FLEX conversion...

 

[REVUpminster]

What do you mean by "Do three jobs"?

Tri-mode traction is a relatively proven thing, and the 769/9 isn't exactly doing a complicated thing.

It's more likely the difficulties with them have come from all of the extra equipment that was installed in addition to the Tri-Mode FLEX conversion...

The three jobs I meant was diesel, overhead, and third rail.