Discussion: 158s, who does them best?

[43096]

Can you please indulge me though on class 158s for a minute. BR bought a batch of three car class 158s for the Trans Pennine services. I think I understand the politics of why some of them were converted into 159/1s, but why did all bar 158798 have their centre cars removed and formed into other two car units to form erm three car units ? There is plenty of evidence to suggest that splitting up and augmenting units is not wholly positive. Different mileages, periodocities etc

Why was it done ?

In simple terms: DfT.

There was a big carve up of fleets as a consequence of the Central Trains/MML/Silverlink reorganisation that affected a significant slice of the 158 fleet. The ROSCOs came up with a much more sensible plan that took into account the different flavours of 158 with different owners, engines etc. That plan also dealt with the 10 x 400hp Cummins sets (158863-872) that were with Angel when all the other 400hp sets (159001-022) were with Porterbrook - there was an ownership swap proposed that would have seen all 400hp units with Porterbrook and the sets sent to SWT to go with the 159s. All very logical, but DfT said no - a 158 is a 158 is a 158 in their world and they are all the same.

 

[tfw756rider]

I guess it is seriously flawed, but that will only be known by people who understand the real history of the referred rolling stock - like you. This thread has led me to reconsider the use of AI, particularly not quoting anything on a forum, but it shows how erroneous information can be regarded as fact when obtained from the internet.

And me. See also my response (which was the first visible response) if you haven't done so already:

What utter AI nonsense.

The units in the first bullet point would've been transferred from Wessex Trains to First Great Western, not the other way round.

No 158/9s have operated outside Northern England, but First Great Western (whose regional division took over Wessex Trains) reconfigured a lot of their 158s to 3-car "hybrid" formations, which remained in subclass 158/0 but were renumbered as 15895x/15896x.

 

[Wolfie]

They feel like 10 year old trains, never had one without working aircon, decent legroom (and I’m 6’6”), and they’re kept clean by TfW. Feel 20 years newer than SWR’s!

Lucky you. As a reasonably regular traveller on the New Street to Shrewsbury section l would say that over the last three summers probably 75% have had failed aircon. The small number of opening windows is wholly inadequate. SWR, while not as good as SWT, do far better than that.

 

[tfw756rider]

Lucky you. As a reasonably regular traveller on the New Street to Shrewsbury section l would say that over the last three summers probably 75% have had failed aircon. The small number of opening windows is wholly inadequate.

Exactly, they're fit (after their next and last operator) for the bin. They feel like the 35 year old trains that are falling apart that they are.

 

[Yorkshire09876]

I don't get the "same class working for the same operator but based at different depots getting different refurbishments" thing - I believe both ScotRail and Northern have done this? Surely all units of the same class working for the same operator, even if based at different depots, should be refurbished equally?

With the Northern ones I think it's ownership? i.e. the 3-car ones belong to a different ROSCO to the 2-car ones.

 

[tfw756rider]

With the Northern ones I think it's ownership? i.e. the 3-car ones belong to a different ROSCO to the 2-car ones.

Ah so like Angel vs. Porterbrook, that would make sense too.

 

[43096]

Ah so like Angel vs. Porterbrook, that would make sense too.

For Northern, the 3-car sets are Porterbrook's, 158901-910 are leased from Eversholt and the rest are Angel.

 

[FrontSideBus]

Do 3 car 158's have the upgraded engines like the 159's?

 

[tfw756rider]

Do 3 car 158s have the upgraded engines like the 159s?

I think that was originally the case, but it's more mixed up now. I think the original 159 conversions have the 400hp engines, but the later 159 conversions have the 350hp engines. Also, with the swapping of vehicles, I think there are some 3-car 158s that have 350hp driving vehicles and 400hp centre cars or something like that.

 

[43096]

I think that was originally the case, but it's more mixed up now. I think the original 159 conversions have the 400hp engines, but the later 159 conversions have the 350hp engines.

Correct, although AIUI the original 159s (001-022) have been de-rated to 350hp.

Also, with the swapping of vehicles, I think there are some 3-car 158s that have 350hp driving vehicles and 400hp centre cars or something like that.

That's never been the case. The 3-car 158s have always been formed with 350hp Cummins engines on all three vehicles. The only three car sets with 400hp engines were 159001-022.

Engine types:
158701-814 Cummins 350hp
158815-862 Perkins 350hp
158863-872 Cummins 400hp
158901-910 Cummins 350hp
159001-022 Cummins 400hp (de-rated to 350hp)
The 158 centre cars (58701-717) have 350hp Cummins engines.

 

[tfw756rider]

Correct, although AIUI the original 159s (001-022) have been de-rated to 350hp.

That's never been the case. The 3-car 158s have always been formed with 350hp Cummins engines on all three vehicles. The only three car sets with 400hp engines were 159001-022.

Engine types:
158701-814 Cummins 350hp
158815-862 Perkins 350hp
158863-872 Cummins 400hp
158901-910 Cummins 350hp
159001-022 Cummins 400hp (de-rated to 350hp)
The 158 centre cars (58701-717) have 350hp Cummins engines.

Thanks.

 

[JD2168]

I find the EMR 158’s to have had a more higher specification refurbishment on the interior than the Northern versions.

The Ironing Board seats on the Northern 158’s are ok for short journeys but unacceptable for more long distance journeys.

I find the Northern 158’s are still more superior than the Northern Class 195’s which feel cheap. The one of a similar decency from Northern are the Class 170’s

 

[19Gnasher69]

The Ironing Board seats on the Northern 158’s are ok for short journeys but unacceptable for more long distance journeys.

I find the Northern 158’s are still more superior than the Northern Class 195’s which feel cheap. The one of a similar decency from Northern are the Class 170’s

All 158s are only suitable for (very) short journeys! Grinding over the S&C in one is awful. Heaven knows what visitors from abroad think as they slog up to Ais Gill in a careworn train with what sounds like a bag of nails under the floor. Especially in the summer.

The 195s certainly seem cheap, though part of that may be due to the interior colour scheme - blue, white and, particularly, yellow gives a combination with all the class of a low-end 1980s supermarket. The 170s are a cut above. Even though the terrain is hardly DMU-friendly, I’d welcome either on the S&C in place of the 158s.

 

[FrontSideBus]

One of these days I'm going to have to do the full Liverpool to Norwich on an EMR 158... I'd probably be more comfortable spending 5 hours on that then a Northern 195!

 

[Bletchleyite]

One of these days I'm going to have to do the full Liverpool to Norwich on an EMR 158... I'd probably be more comfortable spending 5 hours on that then a 195!

I've theorised about doing that before but have never done it, though I think I have done all the parts of it now, just not together.

 

[Harpo]

They're in such a state now; while everyone's entitled to their own opinion and I don't have anything against anyone personally, all the comments saying they're "the best" and "nice" are utterly baffling! I'd agree if it was still 2021, but not in 2025.

The outer-suburban carts displacing TfWs 158s do have the effect of making the 158s seem nice.

 

[Bletchleyite]

The outer-suburban carts displacing TfWs 158s do have the effect of making the 158s seem nice.

They have a drab interior scheme, but I'll take them any day - more legroom, better overhead luggage racks and better at dealing with crowds. They will be far better on the busy North Wales Coast and Cambrian in summer. Plus the aircon works.

 

[Harpo]

They have a drab interior scheme, but I'll take them any day - more legroom, better overhead luggage racks and better at dealing with crowds. They will be far better on the busy North Wales Coast and Cambrian in summer.

Providing only a 2 coach unit to deal with 4+ coaches worth of passengers is not an issue about unit types.

 

[Bletchleyite]

Providing only a 2 coach unit to deal with 4+ coaches worth of passengers is not an issue about unit types.

It isn't financially feasible to provide seats for everyone at very busy times. It's a different type of peak than that arriving in London by 9am, but it's still a peak and it does require provision for a reasonable amount of standing and easy access even when this is taking place. 158s do not do this, not even slightly, it's why 185s were far better for TPE than 158s.

 

[19Gnasher69]

They have a drab interior scheme, but I'll take them any day - more legroom, better overhead luggage racks and better at dealing with crowds. They will be far better on the busy North Wales Coast and Cambrian in summer. Plus the aircon works.

Absolutely. And they don’t have the awful underfloor engine sounds. Though at a similar vintage to the 158s they no doubt will have……..

 

[Yorkshire09876]

158s do not do this, not even slightly, it's why 185s were far better for TPE than 158s.

True, but the 185s didn't cope well either when they frequently had at least four or five carriages' worth of passengers crammed into three. In that case, layout and overall capacity were issues.

 

[Bletchleyite]

Absolutely. And they don’t have the awful underfloor engine sounds. Though at a similar vintage to the 158s they no doubt will have……..

Indeed, 158 whine does my ears in!

True, but the 185s didn't cope well either when they frequently had at least four or five carriages' worth of passengers crammed into three. In that case, layout and overall capacity were issues.

There is that, but a unit with doors at thirds/quarters will always cope better than a unit with the same number of seats with end doors. End doors just aren't optimal for mixed-traffic regional express services. They are suitable for long distance services with few stops and long dwells.

 

[Harpo]

It isn't financially feasible to provide seats for everyone at very busy times. It's a different type of peak than that arriving in London by 9am, but it's still a peak and it does require provision for a reasonable amount of standing and easy access even when this is taking place. 158s do not do this, not even slightly, it's why 185s were far better for TPE than 158s.

Can’t disagree with that. It’s pretty unfortunate that it’s driven the dumbing down of the rail user experience from units built to a near-IC spec to the modern equivalent of the 150s.

 

[Bletchleyite]

Can’t disagree with that. It’s pretty unfortunate that it’s driven the dumbing down of the rail user experience from units built to a near-IC spec to the modern equivalent of the 150s.

I'd heavily debate that. While the seats themselves aren't quite as good, the 197 has better legroom, better overhead racks and the aircon works. Do I smell a niff of door position prejudice? Remember that the unit often held up by people here as the best IC unit in the country (I don't agree, but a lot do), the GA FLIRT, doesn't have end doors. Mid-doors don't make a unit a 150 equivalent.

 

[Harpo]

I'd heavily debate that. While the seats themselves aren't quite as good, the 197 has better legroom, better overhead racks and the aircon works. Do I smell a niff of door position prejudice? Remember that the unit often held up by people here as the best IC unit in the country (I don't agree, but a lot do), the GA FLIRT, doesn't have end doors. Mid-doors don't make a unit a 150 equivalent.

Door position matters in my books. Anything that puts seating by cold blasts from the outside is not IC in my view. The GA flirts are undoubtedly the best regional stock in the country.

 

[pokemonsuper9]

Door position matters in my books. Anything that puts seating by cold blasts from the outside is not IC in my view. The GA flirts are undoubtedly the best regional stock in the country.

Then put internal doors next to the doors like the 745 has.
A Pendolino with double doors at quarters would be so much quicker to board/empty than the current slow single file, but it is clear with HS2 that long dwell times are to be expected as people work their way through the single door.

 

[Yew]

It isn't financially feasible to provide seats for everyone at very busy times. It's a different type of peak than that arriving in London by 9am, but it's still a peak and it does require provision for a reasonable amount of standing and easy access even when this is taking place. 158s do not do this, not even slightly, it's why 185s were far better for TPE than 158s.

Yes, a 1/3 2/3 door layout works well for suburban units, I think this is something that we've known about for a long time.

 

[FrontSideBus]

I actually quite like the sound of the big Cummins throbbing away under the floor of 158's tbh

Re doors on IC stock, at the risk of going off topic, it would have been interesting to see how well the APT-P would have done in service with only a single door on each side of the coach!

 

[Bletchleyite]

I actually quite like the sound of the big Cummins throbbing away under the floor of 158's tbh

I don't mind guttural engine noise (as on say a 150 or 156), it's the horrible whine of the transmission that hurts my ears.

 

[FrontSideBus]

I can't say I've noticed it tbh, least not to the point that I've been annoyed. I'll have to try sitting over that section next time.