Reforming class 175s

[Philip]

Should the class 175s be reformed into 2 and 4 coach sets as part of the programme when they go off lease, to offer more flexibility for whoever operates them next? A fleet of 8 four coach units would be better for busier routes than a couple of two coach sets joined together, whilst having a fleet of 19 two coach units would provide a good oppurtunity for a large Sprinter replacement programme; to operate on quieter and more local routes.

The problem with a three coach unit is that it is a bit short for busy services nowadays, but coupling two together to make 6 coaches would be over capacity for a lot of routes.

 

[JonathanH]

Should the class 175s be reformed into 2 and 4 coach sets as part of the programme when they go off lease, to offer more flexibility for whoever operates them next? A fleet of 8 four coach units would be better for busier routes than a couple of two coach sets joined together, whilst having a fleet of 19 two coach units would provide a good oppurtunity for a large Sprinter replacement programme; to operate on quieter and more local routes.

The problem with a three coach unit is that it is a bit short for busy services nowadays, but coupling two together to make 6 coaches would be over capacity for a lot of routes.

It probably depends on where they end up working.

If they are used for HST replacement on GWR, then the idea would seem to have some merit as they would be replacing four coach trains.

If they go to Northern for the North East, keeping them as 2 and 3 car units would make most sense as they would generally operate alone, with the 3-car units providing an uplift in capacity relative to the current 2-car 156s and 158s.

Of course, they may not go to either.

 

[Philip]

It probably depends on where they end up working.

If they are used for HST replacement on GWR, then the idea would seem to have some merit as they would be replacing four coach trains.

If they go to Northern for the North East, keeping them as 2 and 3 car units would make most sense as they would generally operate alone, with the 3-car units providing an uplift in capacity relative to the current 2-car 156s and 158s.

Of course, they may not go to either.

Have GWR shown some interest recently as a possible future operator? Do you think 4-car 175s would be a better option for replacing HSTs than an order for more Azumas?

 

[43096]

Have GWR shown some interest recently as a possible future operator? Do you think 4-car 175s would be a better option for replacing HSTs than an order for more Azumas?

You don’t need electro-diesel 125mph trains to replace HSTs on 100mph max diesel only routes, it’s an utter waste. That’s before saying that nothing should be ordered from Detachi until they sort out the chronic issues with the existing 80x fleets.

 

[Neptune]

Future speculation on the 175’s has been done so many times and still the answer is nobody knows.

Is there a merit in making them a 2 & 4 car fleet really? Making 8 out of 27 sets 4 car instead of 16 out of 27 sets 3 car makes them less flexible for me and also increases the amount of 2 car units from 11 to 19. Not ideal.

 

[Philip]

Future speculation on the 175’s has been done so many times and still the answer is nobody knows.

Is there a merit in making them a 2 & 4 car fleet really? Making 8 out of 27 sets 4 car instead of 16 out of 27 sets 3 car makes them less flexible for me and also increases the amount of 2 car units from 11 to 19. Not ideal.

More 2-car sets would be better for a 156/150 replacement programme. And 4-car sets would be good for routes like Manchester to Cumbria, Liverpool to Nottingham, express Northern services out of Newcastle, GWR as mentioned upthread, Chiltern mainline etc.

The fact that they are due to leave TfW by the end of the year does make their future operations a relevant topic now.

 

[Neptune]

More 2-car sets would be better for a 156/150 replacement programme. And 4-car sets would be good for routes like Manchester to Cumbria, Liverpool to Nottingham, express Northern services out of Newcastle, GWR as mentioned upthread, Chiltern mainline etc.

The fact that they are due to leave TfW by the end of the year does make their future operations a relevant topic now.

But as there are no currently known plans for the units we cannot speculate that they’d be good for x, y, z route in a, b, c formation until any plans are confirmed of their future. Guessing they’ll go to Northern, GWR or Chiltern is just that, guessing because of a particular ideal. They could equally end up in Ireland or Iran or a recycling plant.

Also they may be due to leave TfW by the end of the year but nobody seems to be in a rush to stake a claim to them even though there is a shortage of DMU’s.

 

[61653 HTAFC]

If they were to be reformed, that would be at the behest of any new operator rather than the owners. If a use-case required a mix of 2 & 4-car units, that's what they'd become... but it would be daft for the ROSCO to reform them beforehand and tell any potential lessor that that's how they are now.

 

[MattRat]

Couldn't you also put two 2 cars together? And then all of them can technically run as 4 cars.

 

[Energy]

Given GWR's history with 180s I doubt they are too interested in the 175s, apparently Angel have pitched the 180s to GWR again before with a definite "no" from GWR.

 

[6Gman]

More 2-car sets would be better for a 156/150 replacement programme.

Heavier weight (so presumably higher fuel consumption), fewer seats, and end doors. Hardly ideal 150 (or 156 on the first two) replacements.

 

[Philip]

Heavier weight (so presumably higher fuel consumption), fewer seats, and end doors. Hardly ideal 150 (or 156 on the first two) replacements.

What else can replace them without ordering new diesel/bi-mode stock? Class 185s are staying on their TPE operations for the forseeable future. The government won't want to order a big new batch of CAF DMUs.

 

[MattRat]

What else can replace them without ordering new diesel/bi-mode stock? Class 185s are staying on their TPE operations for the forseeable future. The government won't want to order a big new batch of CAF DMUs.

Well, they could electrify more routes, as it would be cheaper than new locos in the long run, but I doubt they can see past their noses....

 

[greatvoyager]

Surely reforming them would decrease flexibility, surely on some routes 2 car would be too little and 4 car too much.

 

[Philip]

It seems like one operator they won't be going to is East Midlands Railway.

Not many TOCs left which would offer a good deployment, in the UK at least. Northern is an obvious one, perhaps ScotRail could be another one to replace their HSTs, 156s and 170s?

Are Irish Rail looking to take on replacement DMUs?

 

[Bletchleyite]

It seems like one operator they won't be going to is East Midlands Railway.

Not many TOCs left which would offer a good deployment, in the UK at least. Northern is an obvious one, perhaps ScotRail could be another one to replace their HSTs, 156s and 170s?

Are Irish Rail looking to take on replacement DMUs?

Northern is the obvious one to me, really. GWR's HSTs could be got rid of using the Welsh 158s. I can't see ScotRail wanting them.

They were originally built for NorthWest Express services and could happily run those and similar again, though due to the end doors ideally Victoria based services rather than Piccadilly ones (though assuming they're cleared or can be I don't think using them on the Hope Valley would be a massive issue, and I believe they have also worked Mid Cheshire services in the past). Some 150s or 156s could then be scrapped.

 

[FrodshamJnct]

Northern is the obvious one to me, really. GWR's HSTs could be got rid of using the Welsh 158s. I can't see ScotRail wanting them.

They were originally built for NorthWest Express services and could happily run those and similar again, though due to the end doors ideally Victoria based services rather than Piccadilly ones (though assuming they're cleared or can be I don't think using them on the Hope Valley would be a massive issue, and I believe they have also worked Mid Cheshire services in the past). Some 150s or 156s could then be scrapped.

Yep, definitely still cleared for Mid-Cheshire as TFW still operates a very early morning service from Chester (such as this one), only stopping at Piccadilly, East Didsbury and the airport to maintain route knowledge.

 

[geoffk]

Wherever they go it means another crew-training programme of course. Even if there are current Northern crews who once drove them in the north-west it will be a long time ago since they were used there (2004?)

 

[Eccles1983]

Should the class 175s be reformed into 2 and 4 coach sets as part of the programme when they go off lease, to offer more flexibility for whoever operates them next? A fleet of 8 four coach units would be better for busier routes than a couple of two coach sets joined together, whilst having a fleet of 19 two coach units would provide a good oppurtunity for a large Sprinter replacement programme; to operate on quieter and more local routes.

The problem with a three coach unit is that it is a bit short for busy services nowadays, but coupling two together to make 6 coaches would be over capacity for a lot of routes.

Short answer - no.

The 175 only has one compressor per each 2/3 car.

It would take a massive amount of engineering to change this.

Cost wise it would be difficult to justify rather than just coupling then up but maintaining the original formation.

 

[43096]

perhaps ScotRail could be another one to replace their HSTs, 156s and 170s?

Replace HSTs, 156s and 170s? I'm not sure how 70 vehicles could replace 117 HST trailers, 86 Class 156 vehicles and 102 Class 170 vehicles.