Class 175s to GWR

[REVUpminster]

175009 running in passenger service (2C26) running very late but making up time. I think that is the third train in passenger service 175001/002/009.

 

[The exile]

The car comparisons are interesting, but

- big car companies will scrap more pre production prototypes and samples than there are class 175 vehicles built. Trains are bespoke handbuilds by car standards.
- cars don't typically have interlocks that stop them working because the door is open or even that critical safety systems are faulty.

Also , cars (or at least private ones) tend to be driven by a very limited pool of people who very quickly learn their individual quirks - which bits of “weirdness” can be ignored and which not.

 

[156444]

175009 running in passenger service (2C26) running very late but making up time. I think that is the third train in passenger service 175001/002/009.

4th, I believe - also 175007

 

[brad465]

4th, I believe - also 175007

Now that four units have been seen in service, are there imminent plans to add more diagrams, or double-up the existing diagram?

 

[Rich McLean]

The big problem as the moment is signing off guards on the use of the TUDI system, which requires units in multiple in order to fully sign off guards as competent. At present, guards are only passed out on single units, which they can't work any trains formed of more than one unit.

 

[Ashley Hill]

I believe drivers have to be trained in coupling/uncoupling. The last time I saw this done at Plymouth was by the FOC driver.

 

[FGW_DID]

Now that four units have been seen in service, are there imminent plans to add more diagrams, or double-up the existing diagram?

There are already three diagrams per day so that requires 3 units. The diagrams are LA801, LA802 & LA803.
2C26 is a single working NOT a diagram. It is contained in diagram LA801.
For 2C26 etc to be worked by more than one unit, the working would need to appear in one of the other diagrams as well but at the moment it seems that the other two diagrams are either static training at Laira or ECS driver training runs.

The two units that are required out in traffic do leave Laira coupled before splitting at Plymouth, maybe there is scope for them to remain coupled and 2C26 / 2P21 will operate as a 4 car.

An example of a 175 traction diagram, it shows that the unit allocated to LA801 leaves Laira attached to the unit allocated to LA802. Once split at Plymouth after 5Z13 the single unit allocated to LA801 goes on to work 2C26 & 2P21 before returning to Laira at the end of day.

 

[plymothian]

Currently the TUDI is not permitted to be used when in public service, so even if there are double units, the trailing unit must be locked out of use.

 

[Davester50]

43104 when it was off-lease at Laira for a few years back in the late 1990s/early 2000s. It was returned to service as a replacement for 43011.

43101 was in a state at Loughborough before MTU conversion too.

 

[BillStampy]

Just noticed there hasn't been a 3-car unit out in a while, the only one Laira had until a week ago (175114) hasn't been out in nearly 2 months for training. Hopefully we'll see some of the Wolverton units headed off Laira into service soon, namely 175011, 175006 and 175101.

 

[Rich McLean]

Just noticed there hasn't been a 3-car unit out in a while, the only one Laira had until a week ago (175114) hasn't been out in nearly 2 months for training. Hopefully we'll see some of the Wolverton units headed off Laira into service soon, namely 175011, 175006 and 175101.

Many units had their milages maxed out before hand back, so will likely require major exams with long lead times for parts. Mark Hopwood brought this up in an interview on youtube a few days ago

Link:

 

[DelW]

Many units had their milages maxed out before hand back, so will likely require major exams with long lead times for parts. Mark Hopwood brought this up in an interview on youtube a few days ago.

If only there'd been a suitably long time interval between the trains leaving TfW and joining GWR, when that sort of work could have been carried out without affecting passenger services (sarcasm emoji here).

 

[GilfachFargoed]

If only there'd been a suitably long time interval between the trains leaving TfW and joining GWR, when that sort of work could have been carried out without affecting passenger services (sarcasm emoji here).

I accept it was sarcastic, but no business is going to invest in an asset on the basis that it 'might' have a future life, as opposed to storage followed by scrapping.

 

[fgwrich]

I accept it was sarcastic, but no business is going to invest in an asset on the basis that it 'might' have a future life, as opposed to storage followed by scrapping.

Well… Porterbrook (769s) and Angel (442s) might have something to say about that but I do get the just of where you’re coming from. Certainly in an ideal world anyway.

Do we have any identities yet of today’s 175 shuffle from Ely to Wolverton and Wolverton to Laira?

 

[DelW]

I accept it was sarcastic, but no business is going to invest in an asset on the basis that it 'might' have a future life, as opposed to storage followed by scrapping.

Well… Porterbrook (769s) and Angel (442s) might have something to say about that but I do get the just of where you’re coming from. Certainly in an ideal world anyway.

It was more aimed at the DfT - they must have known that they were planning to force GWR to dump the Castle sets, and that the 175s were probably the only replacement option (other than reviving those 769/9s). So they could have given the owning ROSCO a guarantee of future lease revenue if they got the fleet up to scratch in time for the Castles' withdrawal.

The whole cascade has been hopelessly badly planned. The 175s were withdrawn prematurely (to give CAF their depot) before the 197s were ready, leaving TfW with years of cancellations and elderly unsuitable 150s struggling up and down the Marches, overloaded and unable to keep time. But then DfT dumped the 175s in sidings for years to moulder and corrode, even though they knew they'd be needed as soon as the Castles went. So DfT repeated their mistake, no 175s were ready in time, so now GWR in turn is struggling along with cancellations and unsuitable stock having to cover.

Still, little doubt that whoever presided over this shambles won't ever use GWR or TfW trains, and has his knighthood* and generous civil service pension all lined up.

(*or her damehood, there are probably incompetent women there too)

 

[Wolfie]

It was more aimed at the DfT - they must have known that they were planning to force GWR to dump the Castle sets, and that the 175s were probably the only replacement option (other than reviving those 769/9s). So they could have given the owning ROSCO a guarantee of future lease revenue if they got the fleet up to scratch in time for the Castles' withdrawal.

The whole cascade has been hopelessly badly planned. The 175s were withdrawn prematurely (to give CAF their depot) before the 197s were ready, leaving TfW with years of cancellations and elderly unsuitable 150s struggling up and down the Marches, overloaded and unable to keep time. But then DfT dumped the 175s in sidings for years to moulder and corrode, even though they knew they'd be needed as soon as the Castles went. So DfT repeated their mistake, no 175s were ready in time, so now GWR in turn is struggling along with cancellations and unsuitable stock having to cover.

Still, little doubt that whoever presided over this shambles won't ever use GWR or TfW trains, and has his knighthood* and generous civil service pension all lined up.

(*or her damehood, there are probably incompetent women there too)

DelW, in an ideal world you are probably correct. If you've ever dealt with HMT, which is pathologically allergic to spending one additional penny prior to it being necessary, then you would understand why it happens. If anything it's more likely that DfT sought to do what you suggest and were stymied.

"Generous civil service pension" - hahaha-bloody-ha. Stop parroting the Daily Heil. That hasn't been true for many years if it ever was. The CS pension scheme is significantly inferior to the rail industry one.

 

[John R]

"Generous civil service pension" - hahaha-bloody-ha. Stop parroting the Daily Heil. That hasn't been true for many years if it ever was. The CS pension scheme is significantly inferior to the rail industry one.

But far, far superior to the private sector...

 

[Wolfie]

But far, far superior to the private sector...

Possibly. But the pay and benefits are crap.

The deal with the CS traditionally was somewhat below market pay but job security and a good pension. They screwed with the pension four times, each worse, during my career. Job security? Don't make me laugh. Other T&Cs and benefits? Decimated. But still the below market pay.

That's why the CS is now a mixture of youngsters getting experience who won't stay and old-timers counting down the days to their pension. The excrement is coming.....

 

[3RDGEN]

It was more aimed at the DfT - they must have known that they were planning to force GWR to dump the Castle sets, and that the 175s were probably the only replacement option (other than reviving those 769/9s). So they could have given the owning ROSCO a guarantee of future lease revenue if they got the fleet up to scratch in time for the Castles' withdrawal.

The whole cascade has been hopelessly badly planned. The 175s were withdrawn prematurely (to give CAF their depot) before the 197s were ready, leaving TfW with years of cancellations and elderly unsuitable 150s struggling up and down the Marches, overloaded and unable to keep time. But then DfT dumped the 175s in sidings for years to moulder and corrode, even though they knew they'd be needed as soon as the Castles went. So DfT repeated their mistake, no 175s were ready in time, so now GWR in turn is struggling along with cancellations and unsuitable stock having to cover.

Still, little doubt that whoever presided over this shambles won't ever use GWR or TfW trains, and has his knighthood* and generous civil service pension all lined up.

(*or her damehood, there are probably incompetent women there too)

TfW leased the 175's and they decided to replace them not the DfT, Angel Trains stored them at Ely again nothing to do with the DfT. The delay in approving the units going to GWR would be DfT/Treasury budget related but the "Industry" will have agreed to the timescales of the introduction since removing the HST's would clearly save money for the DfT/Treasury.

 

[DelW]

TfW leased the 175's and they decided to replace them not the DfT, Angel Trains stored them at Ely again nothing to do with the DfT. The delay in approving the units going to GWR would be DfT/Treasury budget related but the "Industry" will have agreed to the timescales of the introduction since removing the HST's would clearly save money for the DfT/Treasury.

So TfW deliberately trashed its own services for years? And GWR followed suit? Somewhere there's been a complete failure of forward planning, and as always, it's the passengers who suffer. I'd just like a railway that works reliably, and significant parts of it don't at present.

 

[fgwrich]

Linking back to today moves, whilst it seems the Wolverton to Laira hasn’t run, do we know what moved over from Ely to Wolverton this morning, which did run?

Realtime Trains | 7Q70 0833 Ely Mlf Papworth Sidings to Wolverton Centre Sidings | 30/01/2026

Real-time train running information for 7Q70 0833 departure from Ely Mlf Papworth Sidings to Wolverton Centre Sidings on 30/01/2026. From Realtime Trains, an independent source of train running info for Great Britain.

www.realtimetrains.co.uk

 

[ThatBloke]

From all the comments about who is or isn't responsible for the slow roll out of the 175s to GWR, it is the the role of the asset owner Angel that stands out.

Angel were responsible for:
-Enforcement of hardback condition from TFW/CAF.
-Ensuring the maintenance whilst in cold storage was adequate and correctly executed, for the facility/location they are stored at.
-Organising and resourcing the recommissing activity and scope, of the units following their cold storage. Including any catch back work or enhancements.

Whilst GWR might have been slicker, more organised and better resourced for their staff training and competence assessment.
It is for Angel to deliver those 175units in the agreed condition to their customer, GWR.
Other stakeholders need to assist Angel, but ultimately it appears its Angel's responsibility.
Once at Laira clearly its upto GWR to manage their resources and those other stakeholders who support them with materials, technical support and any facility changes required at depots to for their new units.

 

[GilfachFargoed]

Linking back to today moves, whilst it seems the Wolverton to Laira hasn’t run, do we know what moved over from Ely to Wolverton this morning, which did run?

Realtime Trains | 7Q70 0833 Ely Mlf Papworth Sidings to Wolverton Centre Sidings | 30/01/2026

Real-time train running information for 7Q70 0833 departure from Ely Mlf Papworth Sidings to Wolverton Centre Sidings on 30/01/2026. From Realtime Trains, an independent source of train running info for Great Britain.

www.realtimetrains.co.uk

175 004 and 110

 

[fgwrich]

175 004 and 110

Cheers, nice to see a 3 car on the move.

Just came across a video at Peterborough on YouTube:

 

[3RDGEN]

From all the comments about who is or isn't responsible for the slow roll out of the 175s to GWR, it is the the role of the asset owner Angel that stands out.

Angel were responsible for:
-Enforcement of hardback condition from TFW/CAF.
-Ensuring the maintenance whilst in cold storage was adequate and correctly executed, for the facility/location they are stored at.
-Organising and resourcing the recommissing activity and scope, of the units following their cold storage. Including any catch back work or enhancements.

Whilst GWR might have been slicker, more organised and better resourced for their staff training and competence assessment.
It is for Angel to deliver those 175units in the agreed condition to their customer, GWR.
Other stakeholders need to assist Angel, but ultimately it appears its Angel's responsibility.
Once at Laira clearly its upto GWR to manage their resources and those other stakeholders who support them with materials, technical support and any facility changes required at depots to for their new units.

Would agree that is the case, however GWR should only be taking the units on lease once they are happy all is correct so Angel will only get paid when that happens and they will be paying Wolverton, or contractors, for the extra work. As such Angel maybe taking some financial hit but in turn they may have/had claims against TfW/CAF/Alstom too, all depends on the contracts which we will not get to know about.

 

[REVUpminster]

I think this is right.
Ely Mif :7: 175005/008, 175103/104/105/109 (175008 is in two halves)

Wolverton : 10 : 175102/106/107/108/110/111/112/113/115/116

Laira : 9: 175002/004/007/009, 175114; 175001/003/006/011, 175101 are refurbished.

Long Rock : 1 : 175010

Updated 30 January 2026

 

[Rich McLean]

Would agree that is the case, however GWR should only be taking the units on lease once they are happy all is correct so Angel will only get paid when that happens and they will be paying Wolverton, or contractors, for the extra work. As such Angel maybe taking some financial hit but in turn they may have/had claims against TfW/CAF/Alstom too, all depends on the contracts which we will not get to know about.

A lot of it is exam miles. By the time they get to GWR, they are not far off major exams. So as long as they are still within the mileage by the time they get to Laira and accepted, it's GWRs responsibility to carry out the exams (unless there is an arragement with Angel of course to fund exams)

 

[3RDGEN]

A lot of it is exam miles. By the time they get to GWR, they are not far off major exams. So as long as they are still within the mileage by the time they get to Laira and accepted, it's GWRs responsibility to carry out the exams (unless there is an arragement with Angel of course to fund exams)

GWR should have asked for that information when agreeing the lease so they could prepare, can you say if it's overhaul activities or the routine service exams that's the issue?

Given there's outstanding depot works still to be done at Laira for the 175's they could struggle to do some of the works required anyway which isn't going to help the roll out.

 

[Rich McLean]

GWR should have asked for that information when agreeing the lease so they could prepare, can you say if it's overhaul activities or the routine service exams that's the issue?

Given there's outstanding depot works still to be done at Laira for the 175's they could struggle to do some of the works required anyway which isn't going to help the roll out.

I don't know the details so can't comment on that. Major compoent changes and engine changes was mentioned in the interview linked further back in the topic.

 

[ThatBloke]

A lot of it is exam miles. By the time they get to GWR, they are not far off major exams.....

I suggest its not the miles driven maintenance that will be causing any difficulty, as they have hardly done any.miles.
It will be the the time driven maintenance that will potentially be problematic. However if the will is there, a maintenance schedule optimisation activity can often make this go away or at least reduce the impact.