Our new ticketing site is now live! Using either this or the original site (both powered by TrainSplit) helps support the running of the forum with every ticket purchase! Find out more and ask any questions/give us feedback in this thread!
You also have to bear in mind this is a fleet. Few of them are in service which won't help with the figures, but if all 14 were in operation, an average MTIN of 3000 across all of them would mean you'd expect a defect more than once a day.
Keep looking at Journey Check and it's always a Scarborough which is formed of 3 coaches instead of 5. Newcastles don't seem to suffer as much - mainly only in times of more general disruption - maybe a Nova 1 can more easily be subbed for another Nova 1 so it is still 5-car and therefore doesn't need to be reported to Joe Public.
The advantage of ordering the 80x is that as the standard inter city bimode, it can easily be moved to another operator, whereas the 397 and Mk5 are far more unique and less useful elsewhere on the network.
Yes, true, though I've highlighted where they could be used in another post above. That, however, only applies to if they were ordering them now. They already exist, so binning them off, unless CAF could be got on breach of contract, would be an expensive choice.
== Doublepost prevention - post automatically merged: ==
Given the regional nature of TPE routes, with many sections wired (and more to come), why did TPE not just order a single fleet of bi-modes, such at the class 755 Flirts now used in East Anglia, for their north Transpennine services, rather than 3 different expensive and unreliable train types?
It's almost as if the Hitachi's were performing quite poorly at the start of 2020. certainly up until Covid hit. Whereas those Mk5a sets accepted (limited amount running limited journeys) were performing better than the 802's. That still doesn't mean the product delivered by CAF is good and that sets have kept failing their fault free running, thus not been accepted. CAF's product is poor, Hitachi's is better but they've not been the smoothest entering service and there's been issues with maintenance for all TOC's using them.
I agree it’s unlikly, but I wouldn’t be betting my mortgage on that. In the current state of ‘franchise’ negotiations, almost anything is possible with TPE. Hence all these rumours!
I would. I'd bet my mortgage on a direct award similar to SWR/AWC/GWR. If any trains leave TPE in the near future, it will be the 185s and then, I'd say, most likely the mk5a's as they're only on lease until 2023.
I would. I'd bet my mortgage on a direct award similar to SWR/AWC/GWR. If any trains leave TPE in the near future, it will be the 185s and then, I'd say, most likely the mk5a's as they're only on lease until 2023.
If the Mk5as are only on lease until 31 March 2023 (and there is no realistic chance of getting them to Redcar until December 2021), it must now be a close run thing between the waste of incurring the costs of training the remaining staff on them for fifteen months of use and just incurring the lease costs for them to remain in sidings for the remainder of the lease period.
If the Mk5as are only on lease until 31 March 2023 (and there is no realistic chance of getting them to Redcar until December 2021), it must now be a close run thing between the waste of incurring the costs of training the remaining staff on them for fifteen months of use and just incurring the lease costs for them to remain in sidings for the remainder of the lease period.
I have no idea, just throwing the idea out there as it's surprising how many products (both big and small) have embedded systems, and bad software can cripple them as a result.
What's interesting there is that the build quality of the Class 170 is often criticised and always was, and they certainly have a lot of rattles and it took many years for the internal doors to be made to actually work, but they do seem to keep moving as reliably as a 158, and the aircon works most of the time.
I think there's a difference between slightly rough riding and a bit rattly and cheap (class 195/331 and 397) and plain not working reliably.
Though the superb build quality of the 185s does rather put the lot to shame even if ride quality isn't Siemens' best point. So good that even 750hp under each coach fails to rattle them to bits.
Given the regional nature of TPE routes, with many sections wired (and more to come), why did TPE not just order a single fleet of bi-modes, such at the class 755 Flirts now used in East Anglia, for their north Transpennine services, rather than 3 different expensive and unreliable train types?
It’s been discussed many times already. Basically it was believed Hitachi couldn’t build enough 80x in the time available. Maybe they didn’t believe there was enough electrification distance to justify bimodes for the Scarborough route.
It’s been discussed many times already. Basically it was believed Hitachi couldn’t build enough 80x in the time available. Maybe they didn’t believe there was enough electrification distance to justify bimodes for the Scarborough route.
I believe the idea was that they'd start as diesel and bounce between routes as wires went up, and eventually have the diesel locomotive replaced with an electric one and then operate only on wholly electrified routes.
I believe the idea was that they'd start as diesel and bounce between routes as wires went up, and eventually have the diesel locomotive replaced with an electric one and then operate only on wholly electrified routes.
That's mostly a result of how many data points there are. Here's a version with simplified colours and all but the last data point for the 185s removed:
That's mostly a result of how many data points there are. Here's a version with simplified colours and all but the last data point for the 185s removed:
That's mostly a result of how many data points there are. Here's a version with simplified colours and all but the last data point for the 185s removed:
But minor variants in terms of being able to be built on the same jigs, which is why they are 22m vehicles (and have the CS style higher quality interior, e.g. with window blinds). Otherwise they'd have been a single-ended unpowered 397 (24m vehicles).
The DfT procured sets were, but haven't the ones obtained by franchises been a bit cheaper?
The main reason for the Mk5a sets was that they would be delivered quickly, which didn't happen in the end.
I guess it depends on the terms of the lease, but if they could get out of that it might not be beyond the realms of possibility that they would do so, and keep all the 185s (if allowed to). That would then leave a potential stock shortage for Liverpool-Nottingham, but refurbished 185s might be an option there.
== Doublepost prevention - post automatically merged: ==
Would make a lot more sense if there was a mandatory set of protocols for communication between train types, so that Train X could work with Train Y. BR managed it with the second-generation DMUs, and of course with locos the US had it sorted decades ago with AAR.
I understood from way back in the master thread for this class that TPE went for a rather conservative design of air brake rather that what was suggested as the EU practice of electronically controlled air brake. Is this a factor for the poor performance, and if so, could a more sophisticated braking system be retrofitted in fullness of time?
Also food for thought (this is the speculative thread after all) the EU are evaluating various candidates for a digital autocoupling system. This would replace the screw and buffers of any loco hauled stock with an auto coupler (an upgrade taken for granted in the USA and former soviet union) but with standardised digital signals. Potentially the loco hauled stock could have a revival if such trains are as 'smart' (I really hate that term, LOL) as their EMU cousins.
The loco is great from an enthusiasts point of view, but logistically they could have ordered a 6-car EMU/BMU then the issue of short-forms wouldn't be there.
Unless the whole thing went tech - that's where pinching 185s off Redcars at York can mean that TPE keep running trains rather than cancelling them!
We are aware of an issue with emails from the Forum to Microsoft-based email accounts (hotmail/outlook/live.com email addresses). This is being looked into currently, thanks for your patience meanwhile.
