Possible future 158 cascade

[Failed Unit]

The doors are the thing that a lot of posters on here dislike about the 170s. Personally, I'm more bothered about ride quality than door location

The main thing about the way the 170's are done is that the heat escapes on frequent stopping services, but to be honest on a run like Sheffield - Stockport the units should keep thier temperature equally well. As I stated earlier when they were introduced by Scotrail you could certainly tell a big difference at stations. The 170 possibly halved the time to empty at the terminals.

It always amuses me when people state they don't like a class of unit because of the seats, when this is an easy problem to solve just put the seats that you do like in that unit!

 

[tbtc]

It always amuses me when people state they don't like a class of unit because of the seats, when this is an easy problem to solve just put the seats that you do like in that unit!

Agreed, especially when the same class of unit might have different seating (and decor) etc up and down the country, like 158s

 

[northwichcat]

Relating to the heat escaping the CT 170s were the first units where I noticed the doors automatically close after a couple of minutes of being open. The 185s being the only other unit I've noticed it on.

 

[royaloak]

Desiros do that as well

 

[devon_metro]

Simpler idea. Scrap Crossrail and other unnecessary projects, and allocate the money to some new rolling stock...

Not gonna happen i know.

Crossrail is hardly unnecessary. As it so happens the number of people travelling around London is far greater than the rest of the country. As such it has a first class public transport system to match. Besides, Crossrail causes a release of Turbo units in the Thames Valley, which will most likely be sent to other parts of the FGW network providing much needed relief in and around Bristol.

 

[northwichcat]

Desiros do that as well

185 is a type of Desiro. I've been on a 350 but not where it's been stopped long enough at a station to show up, but a 350 does seem to be almost an exact electric version of a 185 so I would guess the 350s do have that feature.

 

[Fincra5]

Relating to the heat escaping the CT 170s were the first units where I noticed the doors automatically close after a couple of minutes of being open. The 185s being the only other unit I've noticed it on.

Being made my bombardier, its hardly suprising the doors on the electrostar close too. Unless you, or someone stands in the way of the sensor .

I personally prefere a 170 to a 158, its more open and brighter, however because the doors arent over the bogies, some comfort is lost to passengers sitting on seats that are. But hardly too noticable, in my opinion.

 

[Kneedown]

With this refurbishment they're finally up to the standard that they need to be

Apart from the nice new paint job and bright internal decor, the refurb 158's are even worse than before they went into Disasterail! They come out with all sorts of strange quirks, problems, questionable workmanship, sluggishness, less luggage space, more cramped in the saloon - Try walking down the aisle without bruising your thighs or ripping your coat pockets off.

 

[37372]

It always amuses me when people state they don't like a class of unit because of the seats, when this is an easy problem to solve just put the seats that you do like in that unit!

Oh yes, I often carry one of my favourite train seats with me when I travel just incase I end up on a train with seats I don't like!

 

[2030720310]

Dont know exactly, but it would sort out everyone in one foul swoop
--- old post above --- --- new post below ---


To help relieve over crowding, and they could apply to DfT.
--- old post above --- --- new post below ---


Thank you GNERman! For answering those questions and realising my point. Cheers
--- old post above --- --- new post below ---


Is Northern your local TOC? If so, I could say that for FGW...
--- old post above --- --- new post below ---


I think you will find 170s used to operate these routes under CT and people preferred them to 158s...

But don't 170s have less capacity than 158s?? I'm probably talking rubbish now though, the 3 car ones (/1s) are probably most suitable.

 

[jamesontheroad]

Oh yes, I often carry one of my favourite train seats with me when I travel just incase I end up on a train with seats I don't like!

You should drop a line to Michael O'Leary. He'd love that idea...

 

[Failed Unit]

But don't 170s have less capacity than 158s?? I'm probably talking rubbish now though, the 3 car ones (/1s) are probably most suitable.

A 2 car class 170 has less seats than a 2 car 158 (a 3 car 170 also has less seats than a 3 car 158)

As for carrying around you own seats, it does help if you are going to the pub as you can use it there as well. I have got a nice one with space for my beer.

 

[asylumxl]

Crossrail is hardly unnecessary. As it so happens the number of people travelling around London is far greater than the rest of the country. As such it has a first class public transport system to match. Besides, Crossrail causes a release of Turbo units in the Thames Valley, which will most likely be sent to other parts of the FGW network providing much needed relief in and around Bristol.

I'm well aware. I work in London and live on the Thameslink route.

But, what I was trying to get at was that the money being spent on Crossrail could just as easily be used to buy new rolling stock for the Thames Valley route anyway.

 

[WillPS]

A 2 car class 170 has less seats than a 2 car 158 (a 3 car 170 also has less seats than a 3 car 158)

As for carrying around you own seats, it does help if you are going to the pub as you can use it there as well. I have got a nice one with space for my beer.

But a 170 can safely (and comfortably) carry far more standees. I know that shouldn't be how it is, but it is. ExpressSprinters are an awful experience for standees; you're either wedged in a claustrophobic/smelly vestibule or trying to find something to grab/lean against in the saloon. Turbostars have loads of bars to grab and large areas with partitions to lean against.

 

[TheWalrus]

Oh yes, I often carry one of my favourite train seats with me when I travel just incase I end up on a train with seats I don't like!

Yh like the **** ones in 165/166

 

[northwichcat]

A 2 car class 170 has less seats than a 2 car 158 (a 3 car 170 also has less seats than a 3 car 158)

Isn't one difference that 158s have 2+2 seating in First Class and 170s have 2+1 seating in First Class? On their 170s TPE managed to get 13 standard class seats in to one of the sections where SWT had 8 first class seats (and left the other FC section as it was), but unfortunately the new seats are the 185 style, rather than like the more comfortable type already on the 170s.

 

[Bellwater]

Here we go again, let's give up some more of our units to Northern and others because they desperately need them more than us. honest.

I agree with Will, 158s aren't brilliant these days. the best unit for our Local Routes(barring Norwich to Liverpool)are 156s, Plenty of seats, luggage and wheelchair space if needed, reliable.

If we could pinch some from NXEA and Scotrail that'd be great. instead of having 1X or 2X153 which often turns up on Nottingham-Lincoln.

 

[northwichcat]

Here we go again, let's give up some more of our units to Northern and others because they desperately need them more than us. honest.

The original post was suggesting EMT get 3 car Turbostars to replace 2 car Sprinters.

But possibly the best thing to do is to put Liverpool-Norwich in the TPE franchise and routes like Birmingham-Stansted Airport with LM. Then if unit swaps are needed the operator has other appropriate units for the service.

 

[TheWalrus]

Here we go again, let's give up some more of our units to Northern and others because they desperately need them more than us. honest.

At last! Someone who thinks on the same wavelength as me! :L And yes, just because Northern fancy starting an hourly Notts-Leeds service we lose a load of our trains! It's pathetic, because if FGW suddenly wanted to start a new hourly service beteen 2 randon places they wouldn't be able to magis up a load of 158s from another operator!

 

[Muttley]

They didn`t just fancy giving it a go. They were told to do it by the DfT.

 

[fgwrich]

At last! Someone who thinks on the same wavelength as me! :L And yes, just because Northern fancy starting an hourly Notts-Leeds service we lose a load of our trains! It's pathetic, because if FGW suddenly wanted to start a new hourly service beteen 2 randon places they wouldn't be able to magis up a load of 158s from another operator!

And Me too!

 

[northwichcat]

Right lets get a few things straight here:

Firstly, 8 158s that are supposed to be with Northern are subleased for the forseeable future to Scotrail under DfT orders. This effectively means that the FGW units that went to Northern are now with Scotrail. Also, Northern only got the 158s off FGW by agreeing to sublease 4 of their CT livered 158s to FGW during refurbishment works.

Secondly, the Leeds to Nottingham service is an extension of a Leeds to Sheffield service again ordered by DfT. Northern running a service between Sheffield and Nottingham means less chance of overcrowding on EMT trains between Sheffield and Nottingham.

Thirdly, the real losers of the CT 158 centre cars going to Northern are people in Liverpool, Warrington, Manchester, Stockport and Sheffield (the busiest part of the Liverpool-Norwich route that has had capacity reduced)

Fourthly, Northern are short of trains. 323s are being substituted by single 142s. Conductors of short formed Crewe-Manchester and Macclesfield-Manchester services have had to resort to asking passengers to alight at Stockport and board the next service so that passengers at Heaton Chapel and Levenshulme don't get left behind. The 142s with FGW to cover refurbishment are despartley needed by Northern, who can't afford to take a single unit out of operation.

 

[tbtc]

Northern are short of trains. 323s are being substituted by single 142s. Conductors of short formed Crewe-Manchester and Macclesfield-Manchester services have had to resort to asking passengers to alight at Stockport and board the next service so that passengers at Heaton Chapel and Levenshulme don't get left behind. The 142s with FGW to cover refurbishment are despartley needed by Northern, who can't afford to take a single unit out of operation.

What are the five ex Oldham Pacers being used on?

I agree that Northern are short of units. ScotRail use 158s to provide additional capacity coupled to 158s, whilst Northern services are cancelled due to lack of stock... (would make life easier if they'd built some 170s as five car)

 

[WillPS]

The original post was suggesting EMT get 3 car Turbostars to replace 2 car Sprinters.

But possibly the best thing to do is to put Liverpool-Norwich in the TPE franchise and routes like Birmingham-Stansted Airport with LM. Then if unit swaps are needed the operator has other appropriate units for the service.

Placing it in the TPE franchise does seem a more logical fit, but they have their own stock shortages. For this to work, they'd need to get the Turbostars back from London Midland.

What are the five ex Oldham Pacers being used on?

I agree that Northern are short of units. ScotRail use 158s to provide additional capacity coupled to 158s, whilst Northern services are cancelled due to lack of stock... (would make life easier if they'd built some 170s as five car)

Surely, with the Turbostar production line reopened, there is ample opportunity for this to happen?

 

[Aictos]

I disagree with the need for 5 car 170s but rather extend the existing 2 and 3 car 170s to 4 cars by inserting unpowered trailer cars.

 

[me123]

Glasgow - Anniesland (Pacer)

Not this again...

Glasgow-Anniesland is diagrammed for one 158 a day, throughout the day, off peak. This operates alongside a 156, which does stay on the diagram from start to finish. The 158 diagram starts the day in Aberdeen (I think) and goes back there at the end of the day. And don't tell me that you'd put a 156 on a Glasgow-Aberdeen train! Most services on the Anniesland line are booked 156s.

Why is a 158 used? Well, it's in Queen Street anyway. I presume someone thought it sensible to make use of it while it was there. A far better option than bringing a 156 over from Corkerhill between the peaks, don't you think?

 

[northwichcat]

What are the five ex Oldham Pacers being used on?

Strengthening Manchester Victoria-Rochdale-Leeds services i.e. the service most of the Oldham Loop passengers are using to get in to Manchester now the Oldham Loop is closed.

 

[Failed Unit]

Isn't one difference that 158s have 2+2 seating in First Class and 170s have 2+1 seating in First Class? On their 170s TPE managed to get 13 standard class seats in to one of the sections where SWT had 8 first class seats (and left the other FC section as it was), but unfortunately the new seats are the 185 style, rather than like the more comfortable type already on the 170s.

That will be the case but SWT 158's have 2+1 in first class as did the former XC 158's. The main reason for the difference I think is more to do with the disabled space in the 170's. It is fit for purpose but the penalty is a loss of seats, this is happenning with most modern D / EMU's

Not this again...

Glasgow-Anniesland is diagrammed for one 158 a day, throughout the day, off peak. This operates alongside a 156, which does stay on the diagram from start to finish. The 158 diagram starts the day in Aberdeen (I think) and goes back there at the end of the day. And don't tell me that you'd put a 156 on a Glasgow-Aberdeen train! Most services on the Anniesland line are booked 156s.

Why is a 158 used? Well, it's in Queen Street anyway. I presume someone thought it sensible to make use of it while it was there. A far better option than bringing a 156 over from Corkerhill between the peaks, don't you think?

I am aware why 158's and 170's are used on the Glasgow - Anniesland services. But this diagram could quite easily be self contained and operated by a 153! There are many examples in the UK where unsuitable stock is diagrammed, I could have picked on Northern with Wakefield - Knottingley. I do know that putting a pacer or a 153 would be totally pointless however as you would only need 3 units to cover the service and having staff trained to use / maintain such a small subfleet would be wrong. To balance this out however many routes in Scotland where the 158 is used really should be running with 3 coach units, Dunblane - Edinburgh & Fife lines spring to mind which are often very full all day (and overcrowded on Saturday) - just in case you feel I am picking on Scotland.

Placing it in the TPE franchise does seem a more logical fit, but they have their own stock shortages. For this to work, they'd need to get the Turbostars back from London Midland.

Surely, with the Turbostar production line reopened, there is ample opportunity for this to happen?

I think the 170's line is closed forever as there are issues with the engine, but there is no reason why the 172's can extended. I don't know if this also stops existing 170's from ever becoming 4 cars. Sounding like a stuck record however no more diesil builds. We have enough of them running around under the wires. As I have stated before build an EMU to get the Voyagers away from Birmingham - Scotland. Move them onto Nottingham - Cardiff and that is some 170's to cascade. You may say that Voyagers are not suitable for Nottingham - Birmingham - Cardiff but surely this is better than running them under the wires!

 

[MCR247]

Placing it in the TPE franchise does seem a more logical fit, but they have their own stock shortages. For this to work, they'd need to get the Turbostars back from London Midland.

Surely, with the Turbostar production line reopened, there is ample opportunity for this to happen?

Back?

 

[WillPS]

Back?

Yes back, given that 3 years ago they would have been used on this service (admittedly alongside Sprinters).