Class 175 future speculation

[I'm here now]

Since it's a very small proportion of the route, do GWR even bother to use electric mode on those services? At least they call at Patchway, which in theory allows them to run in electric mode between there and Cardiff (I'm guessing they can't raise/lower the pantograph on-the-move or, if they can, that it needs to be specially set up with balises etc. to tell the train when to do so and that this won't have been done given they don't really want to be using them on this route).

According to RTT it’s pathed as electric from Patchway. It’s probably cheaper to go electric for this section, as the OHLE is always on (apart for engineering) and the diesels don’t have to be.

 

[REVUpminster]

Surely the 175s are to get rid of the HSTs first; then cut out Cardiff Taunton by running them through to Plymouth to take up the HST workings. In the future they may be calling at Cullompton and Wellington.

Taunton in future could be the terminus for Taunton-Axminster (Devon Metro aspiration) workings so would need to take away Cardiff reversers for platform space. I know it's thought Okehampton or Barnstaple may make up a future Axminster service.

 

[Caaardiff]

In any case the numbers turn into:

27x 90% = 24 in traffic each day
27x 85% = 23 in traffic each day
27x 80% = 22 in traffic each day
27x 75% = 20 in traffic each day

Given their history, 75% would be a very low availability figure but perhaps warranted?

Under TFW/Alstom there were usually 4 planned stopped 175 on maintenance at any time.

 

[m79900]

Haven't looked at this thread in a while. Are they confirmed for GW now?

 

[Snow1964]

Haven't looked at this thread in a while. Are they confirmed for GW now?

Nothing announced formally, but unlikely to be so during election purdah.

But obviously, unless DfT staff have sat around doing nothing for 6 weeks, quite likely some contracts have been processed recently.

 

[Lurcheroo]

Locking out an entire unit for certain stations (meaning passengers are unable to alight from those coaches) is similar to portion working in that end-ganways really should be provided in my view (to ensure that passengers can move coaches to be able to alight at their destination) in such suituations.

It’s really not ideal at all and passengers have certainly been in the wrong sets before. If they do run as 3+2 then hopefully only on routes where all doors fit.
But GWR are in desperate need of stock, the 175’s are nice units and even if they can’t fully stretch their legs, their improve acceleration and braking will bring the opportunity for better delay recovery or improved timetable timings.

I'm guessing they can't raise/lower the pantograph on-the-move

I don’t sign 802’s or work for GWR but there is definitely raise and lower pantograph signage on the network so I assume they ‘can’ but don’t know if GWR allow it while on the move.

 

[FlybeDash8Q400]

I don’t sign 802’s or work for GWR but there is definitely raise and lower pantograph signage on the network so I assume they ‘can’ but don’t know if GWR allow it while on the move.

GWR do allow it while on the move, indeed the 802’s do it at Newbury.

 

[Lurcheroo]

GWR do allow it while on the move, indeed the 802’s do it at Newbury.

Ahh cool !

 

[Rhydgaled]

It’s really not ideal at all and passengers have certainly been in the wrong sets before.

Yes, including my uncle on a pair of Turbos from Portsmouth that split at Bristol rather than both units going through to Cardiff.

If they do run as 3+2 then hopefully only on routes where all doors fit.

Even if just one door can open on each unit, that would do. If all doors fit on Cardiff-Portsmouth but don't on Cardiff-Penzance, or only one of the two has/needs portion working, then in my view they should use 158s on the appropriate route and 175s only where all doors fit.

GWR do allow it while on the move, indeed the 802’s do it at Newbury.

Great. Does it require specific signage and/or infrustructure (eg. balises) to be able to do it on the move or can the driver just press the rasie/lower button anywhere?

 

[Energy]

Great. Does it require specific signage and/or infrustructure (eg. balises) to be able to do it on the move or can the driver just press the rasie/lower button anywhere?

Several balises and signage is required. There's a balise where the pantograph will emergency drop and I think one before for the train to alert the driver to the start of the changeover procedure.

The procedure cannot be done where there is a complicated junction or complex signalling which would require the driver's attention.

 

[The exile]

Even if just one door can open on each unit, that would do. If all doors fit on Cardiff-Portsmouth but don't on Cardiff-Penzance, or only one of the two has/needs portion working, then in my view they should use 158s on the appropriate route and 175s only where all doors fit.

Do they have SDO?
While appreciating that 175s will probably need route clearance to be done wherever they go, getting things cleared for working to Portsmouth seems more problematic than for other places.

 

[Whistler40145]

Do they have SDO?
While appreciating that 175s will probably need route clearance to be done wherever they go, getting things cleared for working to Portsmouth seems more problematic than for other places.

I believe 175s have SDO

 

[pokemonsuper9]

Do they have SDO?
While appreciating that 175s will probably need route clearance to be done wherever they go, getting things cleared for working to Portsmouth seems more problematic than for other places.

I believe 175s have SDO

See this post from earlier in the thread:

175’s don’t have SDO.
When coupled in multiple they have the capability for the guard to only release doors on the front unit but that’s it.

 

[Rhydgaled]

Several balises and signage is required. There's a balise where the pantograph will emergency drop and I think one before for the train to alert the driver to the start of the changeover procedure.

The procedure cannot be done where there is a complicated junction or complex signalling which would require the driver's attention.

Thanks. I guess for Cardiff-Penzance the traction changeover can only be done manually during the call at Patchway, or are there balises between there and wherever the wires end on the Filton line?

 

[Whistler40145]

Maybe 175s could be upgraded to have full SDO

 

[Snow1964]

Maybe 175s could be upgraded to have full SDO

Not familiar with all the stations on Cardiff-Penzance, so don't know how many short platforms. But for Cardiff-Portsmouth, there are about 13 platforms that need bit of lengthening (some just 10-15m extra) for 6car working.

There has to be a cost for adding non-standard SDO (and the complications it adds operationally) vs cost of extending a few short platforms

 

[Lurcheroo]

Yes, including my uncle on a pair of Turbos from Portsmouth that split at Bristol rather than both units going through to Cardiff.

End gangways are not a cure all though. I’ve known many in the wrong half even with them.

Even if just one door can open on each unit, that would do. If all doors fit on Cardiff-Portsmouth but don't on Cardiff-Penzance, or only one of the two has/needs portion working, then in my view they should use 158s on the appropriate route and 175s only where all doors fit

I didn’t sign them so I don’t know for certain, but from how I saw them worked it was either front unit or both units and nothing else.

Do they have SDO?

unfortunately not. They have 2nd Unit Door Isolation which gets referred to as something like ‘TUDI’. Perhaps @craigybagel could could put my poor explanation straight

Maybe 175s could be upgraded to have full SDO

Would be quite costly and likely not required if put onto routes where they fit on platforms fully.

 

[Wilts Wanderer]

Not familiar with all the stations on Cardiff-Penzance, so don't know how many short platforms. But for Cardiff-Portsmouth, there are about 13 platforms that need bit of lengthening (some just 10-15m extra) for 6car working.

There has to be a cost for adding non-standard SDO (and the complications it adds operationally) vs cost of extending a few short platforms

The problematic one that springs to mind is Saltash Up platform, which I believe only accommodates 2 cars due to the signal position (assumption must be that the signal is red when arriving.) Therefore some form of local door or SDO will be required to operate west of Plymouth.

 

[Rhydgaled]

for Cardiff-Portsmouth, there are about 13 platforms that need bit of lengthening (some just 10-15m extra) for 6car working.

Would a 5-car 158/165/175 formation fit at all the platforms on that route (Portsmouth)?

 

[JonathanH]

Would a 5-car 158/165/175 formation fit at all the platforms on that route (Portsmouth)?

5-158 and 5-16x have routinely worked Cardiff to Portsmouth over the last few years. 6-car is where it becomes a problem, but there have been plenty of postings which indicate that 175s aren't going to Portsmouth.

 

[craigybagel]

unfortunately not. They have 2nd Unit Door Isolation which gets referred to as something like ‘TUDI’. Perhaps @craigybagel could could put my poor explanation straight

You've got it perfect! Trailing Unit Door Isolation switch, locks out the unit or units behind the cab it's activated in. In my experience it was more useful for keeping a knackered unit locked out altogether when it was being ferried back to the depot, than for normal passenger working.

 

[Rhydgaled]

5-158 and 5-16x have routinely worked Cardiff to Portsmouth over the last few years.

They've worked it yes; what I don't know is whether they have to use SDO/local-door anywhere on that route. Going by the rest of you response, I'm guessing they are able to open all doors on a 5-car formation at every station on the Cardiff-Portsmouth service.

there have been plenty of postings which indicate that 175s aren't going to Portsmouth.

Yes, but based on the above I am just saying that I think that decision (assuming a decision has actually been made behind the scenes to bring the 175s to GWR and not to use them to Portsmouth) was a poor one and that 5-car 175s to Portsmouth would be a better move.

 

[Lurcheroo]

You've got it perfect! Trailing Unit Door Isolation switch, locks out the unit or units behind the cab it's activated in. In my experience it was more useful for keeping a knackered unit locked out altogether when it was being ferried back to the depot, than for normal passenger working.

Ohhh it’s trailing !! Good to know.
That’s interesting, it certainly would be handy for pulling a knacker.
so if you had a 5 or 6 car and were stopping at one of the short platforms between Shrewsbury and Crewe for example, did the guard just use local door only ?

== Doublepost prevention - post automatically merged: 22 Jun 2024 ==

They've worked it yes; what I don't know is whether they have to use SDO/local-door anywhere on that route. Going by the rest of you response, I'm guessing they are able to open all doors on a 5-car formation at every station on the Cardiff-Portsmouth service.


Yes, but based on the above I am just saying that I think that decision (assuming a decision has actually been made behind the scenes to bring the 175s to GWR and not to use them to Portsmouth) was a poor one and that 5-car 175s to Portsmouth would be a better move.

With 158’s the guard can use local door only and then use a butterfly valve to individually open any doors on the platform. Not sure on Turbos.

It may be that it would be preferred they did Cardiff - Portsmouth but the people who know the route well decided that it was better to use them elsewhere and put 158’s on it instead due to the operational difficulties that the 175’s might cause.

 

[craigybagel]

They've worked it yes; what I don't know is whether they have to use SDO/local-door anywhere on that route. Going by the rest of you response, I'm guessing they are able to open all doors on a 5-car formation at every station on the Cardiff-Portsmouth service.


Yes, but based on the above I am just saying that I think that decision (assuming a decision has actually been made behind the scenes to bring the 175s to GWR and not to use them to Portsmouth) was a poor one and that 5-car 175s to Portsmouth would be a better move.

It may be that it would be preferred they did Cardiff - Portsmouth but the people who know the route well decided that it was better to use them elsewhere and put 158’s on it instead due to the operational difficulties that the 175’s might cause.

It may well be that there are sensible operational reasons for using them in Devon/Cornwall rather than on Portsmouth - Cardiff. It may be that the traincrew training costs are lower for example - or that given the lack of alternative units that can rescue them if they fail, the branches were seen as a safer place to use them.

Ohhh it’s trailing !! Good to know.
That’s interesting, it certainly would be handy for pulling a knacker.
so if you had a 5 or 6 car and were stopping at one of the short platforms between Shrewsbury and Crewe for example, did the guard just use local door only ?

== Doublepost prevention - post automatically merged: 22 Jun 2024 ==

It was pretty rare for a 5 or 6 car to run along there at a time when they'd be busy enough to require both sets being open to the public - and when it did happen it was usually on Sunday services that are mostly non stop along that section.

Even between Shrewsbury and Newport there are issues - Hereford is the only station that'll take a 6 car in both directions, and 5 cars also didn't fit everywhere. So it was pretty rare to run with passengers in both sets.

 

[Lurcheroo]

It may well be that there are sensible operational reasons for using them in Devon/Cornwall rather than on Portsmouth - Cardiff. It may be that the traincrew training costs are lower for example - or that given the lack of alternative units that can rescue them if they fail, the branches were seen as a safer place to use them.

Ahh yes, I hadn’t thought about the requirement for rescue in this context.

It was pretty rare for a 5 or 6 car to run along there at a time when they'd be busy enough to require both sets being open to the public - and when it did happen it was usually on Sunday services that are mostly non stop along that section.

Even between Shrewsbury and Newport there are issues - Hereford is the only station that'll take a 6 car in both directions, and 5 cars also didn't fit everywhere. So it was pretty rare to run with passengers in both sets.

Oh well that makes sense. Not signing the route and never really having looked at it, I’m surprised so few platforms can take 6 cars on that route.

Thanks for the info

 

[The Ham]

Other than the InterCity fleet there are no 5-car units either - you could always make a 6-car or 7-car train by coupling shorter units together, just as you can make a 5-car train by coupling a 2-car unit to a 3-car one. Just need to have enough units (and, where short platforms and/or portion working is involved, for those units to have end-gangways).

Not sure if you count the 444's as intercity units, however 707's and (some of the) 458's/701's are 5 coach units (there maybe others too) - granted electric so not usable for the routes in question, but there are 5 coach units.

Whilst off topic, if you are going to have non gangway units then there should be more units of 5 or 6 coaches long to limit the need to pair units up going forwards (yes they'll always be a need for short units, however less so then the was in the past).

 

[I'm here now]

Could you convert the coupling mechanism to work with some surplus EMU (dual mode or AC)? It could provide extra capacity and utilise existing infrastructure.

 

[Snow1964]

5-158 and 5-16x have routinely worked Cardiff to Portsmouth over the last few years. 6-car is where it becomes a problem, but there have been plenty of postings which indicate that 175s aren't going to Portsmouth.

My take on it is the 175s could be used in Devon and Cornwall until mid 2030s or even late 2030s

Portsmouth-Cardiff will probably be getting BEMUs in about 5 years time, so there is an element of deferring electrification alternatives with allocating them to far south west.

It is much easier (on paper financially) to order a GWR fleet for project Churchward with about 100 vehicles less as definite firm orders, but options for delivery in 2030s, than to justify replacing every DMU in one fully financed mega order. Even if did replace everything in one huge order, having 175s probably allows order to be spread over 6-9 years delivery, instead of getting all DMUs replaced in 3-4 years from about 2028 onwards

 

[Nym]

Could you convert the coupling mechanism to work with some surplus EMU (dual mode or AC)? It could provide extra capacity and utilise existing infrastructure.

Long version anything is possible.
Short version no.

 

[Trainguy34]

So does all of this signal the end of the line (puns intended) for the GWR HSTs? If so, how long will it be roughly, might try and go ride some.