Class 175 future speculation

[61653 HTAFC]

Do the 175s have the same engines, exhausts & transmission now that they had when new, and do they sound the same? I've seen some old videos in the FNW days and they seemed to sound a little different & louder then, but I guess this might be the recording quality.

They've had various modifications over the years, but nothing as dramatic as replacing engines and transmission systems wholesale (something that did happen with the early-built 170s which had the engines replaced). The differences you've observed are probably a combination of the recording quality (as you suggest) and multiple smaller changes over the years that overall make some difference to the sound. Along with drivers getting more familiar with the idiosyncrasies of the units and how they operate. When new these units were notoriously troublesome and unreliable, and it took a good while and a fair bit of work to get them to perform close to intended.

 

[simonmpoulton]

Cant say i've personally noticed any difference between the engine noise on them having ridden on them regularly since the mid 2000's until 2020.

 

[Mitchell Hurd]

So many people west of Exeter use the Cardiff service to go to Bristol. Cutting it at Exeter would be bad. As mentioned beforehand the Crosscountry service would suffer.

Yeah Cardiff-Penzance has been a massive success for GWR. Connectivity has increased so much between many communities. There's a massive market from Devon and Cornwall to Bristol.

If IET's ran Cardiff - Exeter and 175's Exeter - Penzance it wouldn't be so bad.

 

[REVUpminster]

If IET's ran Cardiff - Exeter and 175's Exeter - Penzance it wouldn't be so bad.

People don't like changing trains if they have settled in their seats. It's not a metro service over that distance.

 

[Xenophon PCDGS]

The Class 175 units are now three years older since the date this particular thread was opened. Realistically, what remaining life cycle can be expected of them?

 

[Sporty60]

People don't like changing trains if they have settled in their seats. It's not a metro service over that distance.

Isn't this perhaps only for an initial period of maybe 12 months whilst drivers are trained for the 175s and then many services WILL run Cardiff to Penzance?

 

[Snow1964]

Isn't this perhaps only for an initial period of maybe 12 months whilst drivers are trained for the 175s and then many services WILL run Cardiff to Penzance?

Not exactly the way to encourage rail travel, more a way to encourage them to permanently change mode.

Could you imagine if LNER made everyone travelling from London to Edinburgh change change trains mid journey, not exactly a great idea, so why it is thought acceptable between Cornwall and Somerset/Wales even for a year or two.

Sometimes I think passengers are being inconvenienced to simplify some operators shortcomings

 

[Lurcheroo]

The Class 175 units are now three years older since the date this particular thread was opened. Realistically, what remaining life cycle can be expected of them?

They were built 99-01 so at most they’re 25 years old. 158’s we’re built 89-91 so at most are 35 years old.
150’s started construction in 84 so are 40 years old.
If it was needed the 175’s could probably do another 15 years, they seem well built units from what I have had to do with them (which Is not a huge amount in truth) and what those who have had a lot to do with them tell me.
But more likely, they will be place holder units to help with capacity until project Churchwood can produce a replacement which should replace the 150’s 158’s 165’s 166’s and 175’s. Which is essentially everything not sleeper, IET or 387’s.

 

[Xenophon PCDGS]

They were built 99-01 so at most they’re 25 years old. 158’s we’re built 89-91 so at most are 35 years old.
150’s started construction in 84 so are 40 years old.
If it was needed the 175’s could probably do another 15 years, they seem well built units from what I have had to do with them (which Is not a huge amount in truth) and what those who have had a lot to do with them tell me.
But more likely, they will be place holder units to help with capacity until project Churchwood can produce a replacement which should replace the 150’s 158’s 165’s 166’s and 175’s. Which is essentially everything not sleeper, IET or 387’s.

Is it not the case that the Class 175 units were intended to be a type of long-distance DMU, whereas the Class 150 units were more of "workhorse" units.

 

[Topological]

Not exactly the way to encourage rail travel, more a way to encourage them to permanently change mode.

Could you imagine if LNER made everyone travelling from London to Edinburgh change change trains mid journey, not exactly a great idea, so why it is thought acceptable between Cornwall and Somerset/Wales even for a year or two.

Sometimes I think passengers are being inconvenienced to simplify some operators shortcomings

That is slightly overstating it.

We are talking about services with 5 carriages at most, services which were recently 4 carriage HSTs. The split is not ideal, but it is no worse than has happened with South Wales to Manchester now that there are Cardiff splits.

Passengers across Exeter from Bristol still have the CrossCountry offerings.

I do not know how big the market from Cardiff and Newport is, but I doubt it is that large.

Releasing IETs will allow the Cardiff and Newport passengers to be more sure of 10-car trains to London (and Bristol Parkway) which has been a big casualty of the stretching of the IET fleet to operate routes like Cardiff to Penzance.

Getting a better service is definitely worth it.

 

[The exile]

That is slightly overstating it.

We are talking about services with 5 carriages at most, services which were recently 4 carriage HSTs. The split is not ideal, but it is no worse than has happened with South Wales to Manchester now that there are Cardiff splits.

Passengers across Exeter from Bristol still have the CrossCountry offerings.

I do not know how big the market from Cardiff and Newport is, but I doubt it is that large.

Releasing IETs will allow the Cardiff and Newport passengers to be more sure of 10-car trains to London (and Bristol Parkway) which has been a big casualty of the stretching of the IET fleet to operate routes like Cardiff to Penzance.

Getting a better service is definitely worth it.

Indeed - after all there are countless flows which require a change of trains as it is a physical impossibility to provide through services from everywhere to everywhere else. It is of course harder when a through service that previously existed no longer does so (particularly for shorter distance regular travellers, but I'm sure that the good burghers of Newport and Cardiff are just as capable of changing trains if they wish to reach Plymouth (or wherever is on the other side of the putative split) as their counterparts in Bath or Swindon currently are.

 

[Lurcheroo]

Is it not the case that the Class 175 units were intended to be a type of long-distance DMU, whereas the Class 150 units were more of "workhorse" units.

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.

 

[Rhydgaled]

Do the 175s have the same engines, exhausts & transmission now that they had when new, and do they sound the same? I've seen some old videos in the FNW days and they seemed to sound a little different & louder then, but I guess this might be the recording quality.

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?

 

[craigybagel]

The Class 175 units are now three years older since the date this particular thread was opened. Realistically, what remaining life cycle can be expected of them?

They were built 99-01 so at most they’re 25 years old. 158’s we’re built 89-91 so at most are 35 years old.
150’s started construction in 84 so are 40 years old.
If it was needed the 175’s could probably do another 15 years, they seem well built units from what I have had to do with them (which Is not a huge amount in truth) and what those who have had a lot to do with them tell me.
But more likely, they will be place holder units to help with capacity until project Churchwood can produce a replacement which should replace the 150’s 158’s 165’s 166’s and 175’s. Which is essentially everything not sleeper, IET or 387’s.

Unless they've suffered from their time in storage, their 10 year advantage over the 158s is very much apparent. They are much more modern units that should have plenty of time left in them. Most TfW traincrew miss working them, and GWR should hopefully enjoy them.

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?

No, you're correct - that system was isolated years ago and they've been running purely on disk brakes ever since but as built they used a hydrostatic brake. From talking to colleagues, they had phenomenal stopping power but it didn't help reliability much. Even on disc brakes alone though they'll still stop better than GWR's existing units.

 

[Xenophon PCDGS]

Compared to other long-distance DMU, would it be correct to say that the Class 175 units have been more subject to fires?

 

[zwk500]

Compared to other long-distance DMU, would it be correct to say that the Class 175 units have been more subject to fires?

Are they worse than Class 180?

 

[Xenophon PCDGS]

Are they worse than Class 180?

The Class 175 fire problems spanned a numbers of years:-
2004...Preston
2009...Prestatyn
2011...Manchester Piccadilly
2017...Shrewsbury
2017...Between Chester and Crewe
2018...Deganwy
2019...Pontrilas
2019...Gowerton

Is it not the case that at one time, the entire Class 175 fleet were withdrawn from service?

 

[zwk500]

We are discussing Class 175 units on this thread. Perhaps you could address that query concerning the Class 180 units on a thread specific to them if one exists or open up a new thread.

Is it not the case that at one time, the entire Class 175 fleet were withdrawn from service?

You said 'compared to any other long distance DMU'.
I asked how 175s compared to the 180s, which is another long distance DMU.

 

[Xenophon PCDGS]

You said 'compared to any other long distance DMU'.
I asked how 175s compared to the 180s, which is another long distance DMU.

I did withdraw that part of my posting and replaced it with a time schedule of Class 175 fires.

 

[Lurcheroo]

I did withdraw that part of my posting and replaced it with a time schedule of Class 175 fires.

I must say, I’m really not sure what your point is? Do you think GWR shouldn’t have them?

== Doublepost prevention - post automatically merged: 23 Aug 2024 ==

 

[Xenophon PCDGS]

I must say, I’m really not sure what your point is? Do you think GWR shouldn’t have them?

Why cannot GWR have brand new modern state-of-the-art units, rather than those of another era?

 

[The exile]

Why cannot GWR have brand new modern state-of-the-art units, rather than those of another era?

For a start, these will be available to enter service in a matter of months rather than years.

 

[Xenophon PCDGS]

For a start, these will be available to enter service in a matter of months rather than years.

If GWR have always been aware of the need, why were not matters put in hand then?

 

[Class172]

Why cannot GWR have brand new modern state-of-the-art units, rather than those of another era?

They likely will eventually, since this is precisely what ‘Project Churchward’ aims to achieve. New stock takes a number of years to procure and GWR are in dire need of stock sooner rather than later. The GWR rolling stock situation has suffered in recent years due to different factors: withdrawal of 769s which prevented wholesale cascade of the Turbo fleet westwards; aging Sprinter and Turbo fleets requiring more maintenance and awaiting parts for longer periods; IETs covering stopping services where ideally they wouldn’t be.

As @The exile mentions, the 175s can help improve the rolling stock situation on a much shorter timeframe. I’d even go out and say they will be excellently suited to the majority of services they are proposed to run here in the South West.

== Doublepost prevention - post automatically merged: 23 Aug 2024 ==

If GWR have always been aware of the need, why were not matters put in hand then?

To a large extent I imagine money is a driving factor; one that GWR are not in a position to dictate, but instead resides with the Treasury.

 

[Lurcheroo]

Why cannot GWR have brand new modern state-of-the-art units, rather than those of another era?

As has been said. I know that you’re aware of how long it can take for new trains to be ordered, built and then brought into service.
The 175’s are a (relatively) quick way of getting GWR additional DMU’s to fill the gap that they have in rolling stock which is causing over crowding.

Project Churchward is looking at getting GWR brand new stock to replace its DMU’s and will very likely replace the 175’s also.

Establishing a secure connection ...

But I suppose if you’d rather GWR could continue with a lack of stock (that will get worse when the HST’s go) for who knows how many years until the replacement units arrive.

If GWR have always been aware of the need, why were not matters put in hand then?

A fair question but one that does not resolve anything right now. The 175’s do though.

I’d say look at how TFW are doing despite getting their ball rolling back in 2018 or something like that.

 

[The exile]

If GWR have always been aware of the need, why were not matters put in hand then?

Matters quite likely were put in hand by GWR. They can put as many matters in hand as they like but until the Treasury says “ok, if you really must” (it’s never going to get more positive than that) nothing will happen.

 

[Xenophon PCDGS]

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?

 

[43096]

Why cannot GWR have brand new modern state-of-the-art units, rather than those of another era?

Because there is a ticking clock in terms of the end of the remaining HST fleet around engine hours and bogie mileage.

 

[HSTfan!!!]

May be of interest….

DMU Fleet Engineer (Class 175) - Swindon, Wiltshire, United Kingdom

Who are we? GWR is the proud custodian of Brunel's railway - one of the most prestigious networks in the world. We have some of the newest trains in the country and exciting plans to extend our services. With more than one hundred million passenger journeys each year, we carry people to over...

careers.firstgroup.co.uk

 

[Class172]

May be of interest….

DMU Fleet Engineer (Class 175) - Swindon, Wiltshire, United Kingdom

Who are we? GWR is the proud custodian of Brunel's railway - one of the most prestigious networks in the world. We have some of the newest trains in the country and exciting plans to extend our services. With more than one hundred million passenger journeys each year, we carry people to over...

careers.firstgroup.co.uk

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

== Doublepost prevention - post automatically merged: 23 Aug 2024 ==

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?

Today's railways are very tightly controlled by the government in a way I imagine would not be recognisable to the pre-nationalisation Big Four companies.