Class 175s to GWR

[tfw756rider]

Quick question, did 175s work over the Central Wales Line?

@craigybagel or @tfw756rider are probably the ones to know if they ever ventured onto the Heart of Wales line.

== Doublepost prevention - post automatically merged: 1 May 2026 ==

Yes they have on one-off occasions such as when the marches is closed or unit unavailability like in this video from October 2021

(not mine)

They also occasionally worked the extra service for Eisteddfod in Builth Wells. I took one before to Ffairfach, but I understand this was rare and most of the traction operating these services were 153s and/or 150s.

I've been made aware of this discussion by @XFeed, and although I never saw a 175 on the Heart of Wales line myself, I will add that I do remember a previous discussion in this thread on this subject, linked here.

 

[Ashley Hill]

Thanks @tfw756rider . @craigybagel .

 

[tfw756rider]

The cab windows were at best difficult to open from a sitting position in the drivers seat, and at worst impossible (it depended on how stiff they were). I never worked a 175 down the HOWL, but given you'd have to get out of the seat both to open and close the window and get enough reach out to get the string, I would imagine it would be easier to just open the cab door and lean out instead.

Would that have been allowed?

 

[Ashley Hill]

Would that have been allowed?

As it’s the cab door it could be.

 

[tfw756rider]

As it’s the cab door it could be.

Ah, so the driver could still lean out of the open cab door while stopped outside of a station without the "going on the track" kit on, just not get out.

 

[Ashley Hill]

Ah, so the driver could still lean out of the open cab door while stopped outside of a station without the "going on the track" kit on, just not get out.

Can’t see drivers liking that in the rain though.

 

[tfw756rider]

Can’t see drivers liking that in the rain though.

I've posted in the 197 thread about how the 197/0e units when on the Cambrian Coast Line could have similar issues at its pull cord-operated level crossings.

 

[RPI]

As it’s the cab door it could be.

Be interesting how this works at Eggesford then!

 

[craigybagel]

Would that have been allowed?

I can't think of any reason why it wouldn't be.

Ah, so the driver could still lean out of the open cab door while stopped outside of a station without the "going on the track" kit on, just not get out.

Exactly. To be fair though, the window does drop down far enough you could probably reach out and pull the wire, but it could be awkward - and you'd definitely have to leave the cab seat to do it. If it was me, I'd just pop the door open. If you're driving a 175 on 153 timings you're already going to be early enough you won't need to rush anything.

 

[DannyMich2018]

week commencing 4th May:
5x 2 car diagrams, two of which have passenger workings on.
3x 3car diagrams, static driver training, no passenger workings.

Okay thanks for that. So 2 passenger diagrams. Considering previous to last December there were 3 HST diagrams for the 4 car sets there's less capacity now unless more 150/158/165/166 diagrammed, presume more diagrams for May TT change to release units for Newquay hourly?

 

[Ashley Hill]

Be interesting how this works at Eggesford then!

That’s what I was thinking hence the question.

 

[BillStampy]

Realtime Trains | 2Z51 0725 Laira T.& R.S.M.D. to Par Chapel Siding | 07/05/2026

Real-time train running information for 2Z51 0725 departure from Laira T.& R.S.M.D. to Par Chapel Siding on 07/05/2026. From Realtime Trains, an independent source of train running info for Great Britain.

www.realtimetrains.co.uk

Is this 175 related, just a bit random?

 

[XFeed]

The cab windows were at best difficult to open from a sitting position in the drivers seat, and at worst impossible (it depended on how stiff they were).

Agreed cab windows were difficult to open at times and we did modify them, possibly around 2014 but we carried out that many mods to the units that its hard to remember when each one was carried out.

The original windows had two, finger operated spring catches which you needed both of your hands to release the two catches to drop the window, in an attempt to make it a one handed operation the two catches were replaced by a single spring loaded push bar which worked better but wasn`t ideal at times as the windows could still be stiff to drop down.

As the window frames were bonded into the cab door leaf it wasn`t a straight forward quick job just to swap them out as we had to call out PSV Glass to replace them and then there was the curing time of the adhesive to add to the down time and sometimes there just wasn`t enough time.

 

[Apedlar12]

Realtime Trains | 2Z51 0725 Laira T.& R.S.M.D. to Par Chapel Siding | 07/05/2026

Real-time train running information for 2Z51 0725 departure from Laira T.& R.S.M.D. to Par Chapel Siding on 07/05/2026. From Realtime Trains, an independent source of train running info for Great Britain.

www.realtimetrains.co.uk

Is this 175 related, just a bit random?

Looks like there is another movement later in the day from Par to Laira via Newquay, so it could be...

Realtime Trains | 5Z52 1301 Par Chapel Siding to Laira T.& R.S.M.D. | 07/05/2026

Real-time train running information for 5Z52 1301 departure from Par Chapel Siding to Laira T.& R.S.M.D. on 07/05/2026. From Realtime Trains, an independent source of train running info for Great Britain.

www.realtimetrains.co.uk

 

[HamworthyGoods]

Okay thanks for that. So 2 passenger diagrams. Considering previous to last December there were 3 HST diagrams for the 4 car sets there's less capacity now unless more 150/158/165/166 diagrammed, presume more diagrams for May TT change to release units for Newquay hourly?

Yes, but as the HSTs ceased to be available for use from the December timetable it’s more capacity than if the 175s hadn’t been introduced.

 

[43096]

Yes, but as the HSTs ceased to be available for use from the December timetable it’s more capacity than if the 175s hadn’t been introduced.

Well, yes. But on sensible railways it is traditional to have the replacement fleet ready before taking the old one out of service.

 

[HamworthyGoods]

Well, yes. But on sensible railways it is traditional to have the replacement fleet ready before taking the old one out of service.

But as we know this often isn’t the case as money wont be spent on a retiring fleet and is nothing new.

Look at Waterloo to Exeter prior to introduction of 159s in 1993, the loco-hauled sets shrunk from load 9 to 8 and then many were 7s in the run up to replacement. Again new fleet not ready, old fleet being withdrawn.

 

[sh24]

But as we know this often isn’t the case as money wont be spent on a retiring fleet and is nothing new.

Look at Waterloo to Exeter prior to introduction of 159s in 1993, the loco-hauled sets shrunk from load 9 to 8 and then many were 7s in the run up to replacement. Again new fleet not ready, old fleet being withdrawn.

…and also saw pairs of Thumpers deployed, 5 car Salisbury rakes used on the full route, any vaguely functioning 47 used with a dismal impact on reliability. It’s not a new phenomenon.

 

[Snow1964]

Well, yes. But on sensible railways it is traditional to have the replacement fleet ready before taking the old one out of service.

But as we know this often isn’t the case as money wont be spent on a retiring fleet and is nothing new.

This is textbook failure of strategic or coordinated planning.

Know the date one fleet will need expensive heavy patching up and overhaul, but don't manage to persuade the paymasters that would be sensible and cheaper to have new fleet available just before this date.

 

[John R]

Well, yes. But on sensible railways it is traditional to have the replacement fleet ready before taking the old one out of service.

It’s not the railway’s fault that DfT mandated withdrawal of the HSTs before the 175s would be ready.

 

[YorkshireBear]

It’s not the railway’s fault that DfT mandated withdrawal of the HSTs before the 175s would be ready.

I agree almost entirely.

But the railway has allowed itself to be dictated to by the DfT.

 

[43096]

It’s not the railway’s fault that DfT mandated withdrawal of the HSTs before the 175s would be ready.

As usual the railway blames everyone else and doesn’t take responsibility for its own failings. In this case, it was completely foreseeable that the 175s would not have been ready in time - the process should have started earlier.

 

[John R]

But the railway has allowed itself to be dictated to by the DfT.

Chris Gibb is a great example of what happens when you try to stick your head above the parapet and disagree with DfT, whether publicly (in his case) or behind the scenes. And I have seen many examples in my career where disagreeing with your boss or ultimate paymaster has resulted in a new career opportunity being sought.

So I don't agree that the railway has allowed itself to be dictated to.

 

[YorkshireBear]

Chris Gibb is a great example of what happens when you try to stick your head above the parapet and disagree with DfT, whether publicly (in his case) or behind the scenes. And I have seen many examples in my career where disagreeing with your boss or ultimate paymaster has resulted in a new career opportunity being sought.

So I don't agree that the railway has allowed itself to be dictated to.

Yes that is a fair point.

I should have been a bit clearer. I meant in terms of lack of delivery making politicians want to get involved.

 

[John R]

As usual the railway blames everyone else and doesn’t take responsibility for its own failings. In this case, it was completely foreseeable that the 175s would not have been ready in time - the process should have started earlier.

I agree it was completely forseeable that the 175s would not be available in time, but again, the process can only start when DfT gives the go ahead.

It was talked about for months, everybody knew it was going to happen, but only when DfT allowed the contract to be signed could the transition start. And when either the civil servants sit on their thumbs, or more likely, the government ministers kept delaying releasing the purse strings, then it doesn't matter what GWR said, nothing could start.

 

[HamworthyGoods]

As usual the railway blames everyone else and doesn’t take responsibility for its own failings. In this case, it was completely foreseeable that the 175s would not have been ready in time - the process should have started earlier.

The railway simply isn’t allowed to start projects without DfT approval.

 

[Kite159]

And I wonder how many of the issues have arisen due to the units being stored for many months between going off lease with TfW before it was formally announced GWR were getting the units?

 

[Snow1964]

The railway simply isn’t allowed to start projects without DfT approval.

That is true, but there must be some sort of problem at railways end, with their ability to convince DfT, that delay beyond a certain date, or do nothing will be a much more expensive option because massive costs will be incurred if temporary/interim solutions are needed.

 

[northernbelle]

As usual the railway blames everyone else and doesn’t take responsibility for its own failings. In this case, it was completely foreseeable that the 175s would not have been ready in time - the process should have started earlier.

The process started considerably earlier than you might imagine. The ludicrous thing is how long the process to authorise these things takes - and yes, that is squarely in the court of the DfT.

Put it this way, the process to start adopting these trains was started in TOC-land nearly 30 months ago - formal lease agreements were only authorised 15 months later and the first train arrived on GWR metals within 4 months of then - 12 months before the final HSTs were due to be withdrawn.

Had there been a cohesive, national, rolling stock strategy (again, see DfT), the 175s might have not been allowed to be parked up and go cold and might just have been ready to enter service before the HSTs were withdrawn. Instead - time, pain and effort is being used to do this retrospectively.

 

[brad465]

The process started considerably earlier than you might imagine. The ludicrous thing is how long the process to authorise these things takes - and yes, that is squarely in the court of the DfT.

Put it this way, the process to start adopting these trains was started in TOC-land nearly 30 months ago - formal lease agreements were only authorised 15 months later and the first train arrived on GWR metals within 4 months of then - 12 months before the final HSTs were due to be withdrawn.

Had there been a cohesive, national, rolling stock strategy (again, see DfT), the 175s might have not been allowed to be parked up and go cold and might just have been ready to enter service before the HSTs were withdrawn. Instead - time, pain and effort is being used to do this retrospectively.

This has probably been explained before but don't know where to find it: how did Scotrail get 10x 365s into service as quickly as they did? If they had been hit with the same obstacles/delays, the year they were operating with Scotrail would have been spent doing paperwork, by which point the 385s would have been fully ready. Do Scotland have a more streamlined process, or is the case that the DfT has got worse at this since 2018?