Bob Price
Member
- Joined
- 8 Aug 2019
- Messages
- 1,034
197002 passed Crewe cameras today heading for Chester. It will be returning at about 10.30 and can be seen on the YouTube Crewe camera 5 feed.
-
Our booking engine at tickets.railforums.co.uk (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!
CAF Civity for TfW: News and updates on introduction.
- Thread starter hexagon789
- Start date
Sponsor Post - registered members do not see these adverts; click here to register, or click here to log in
R
RailUK Forums
6Gtraincrew
Member
- Joined
- 22 Feb 2018
- Messages
- 439
197 booked to do more trips to Chester tomorrow (23rd)
Also looks like one is heading out in Thursday as there are paths in from Crewe cs to Llandudno junction and then Junction to Blaenau Ffestiniog and back twice.
d CRE cs @ 07:20
a LLJ @ 08:34
d LLJ @ 08:43
a BFF @ 09:55
d BFF @ 10:05
a LLJ @ 11:26
d LLJ @ 11:40
a BFF @13:00
d BFF @ 13:10
a LLJ @ 14:28
d LLJ @ 15:00
a CRE cs @ 16:53
Same paths are in for Friday.
Also looks like one is heading out in Thursday as there are paths in from Crewe cs to Llandudno junction and then Junction to Blaenau Ffestiniog and back twice.
d CRE cs @ 07:20
a LLJ @ 08:34
d LLJ @ 08:43
a BFF @ 09:55
d BFF @ 10:05
a LLJ @ 11:26
d LLJ @ 11:40
a BFF @13:00
d BFF @ 13:10
a LLJ @ 14:28
d LLJ @ 15:00
a CRE cs @ 16:53
Same paths are in for Friday.
Attachments
Last edited:
Bob Price
Member
- Joined
- 8 Aug 2019
- Messages
- 1,034
Only running Chester to Crewe today.
.
What the heck do you have to do to make a new post in this forum? The above text was posted yestery. This post is posted on the 24th. However the forum keeps merging them.
The Llandudno and BF runs look like they are happening today (the 24th)
.
What the heck do you have to do to make a new post in this forum? The above text was posted yestery. This post is posted on the 24th. However the forum keeps merging them.
The Llandudno and BF runs look like they are happening today (the 24th)
Last edited:
That can happen if no one else has posted in the thread in the meantime. Not sure that there is a way around it. Perhaps include the date in any new posts?
krus_aragon
Established Member
Nope. The forum moderators have enabled an auto-merge system to encourage members to edit old posts (or use the multi-quote function when replying to multiple posts).
It's turned off for a few forums where it's clearly superfluous (trip reports, quizzes), but otherwise it will merge any consecutive "double" posts by a user within a 7-day period. The lack of a new-post notification when a post is automerged with an old one seems to be a limitation of this system.
See the latest(?) announcement in this thread here, along with a lot of discussion by forum members elsewhere in the thread.
6Gtraincrew
Member
- Joined
- 22 Feb 2018
- Messages
- 439
Wow, seeing it moving the lack of yellow ends and big red patch on the front looks really, really odd.
175001
Established Member
Fantastic to see it on my local branch.
As a 195 driver, they look better than ours!
As a 195 driver, they look better than ours!
Bletchleyite
Veteran Member
Also more practical due to the gangway, though I guess less space for the driver.
I think the red gangway looks OK as it hides the dead flies a bit. Yellow gangways look awful as it just draws attention to them.
61653 HTAFC
Veteran Member
I'm slowly getting used to non-yellow ends, but that red makes it look like S-Stock wearing a Groucho Marx mask*.
A real shame, as it would be a cool looking unit (subjective as that is) with a better paint job on the front.
*= having watched the video rather than reacting to the thumbnail alone, it's more Deadpool than Groucho. It does look better in motion to be fair.
43096
On Moderation
- Joined
- 23 Nov 2015
- Messages
- 15,264
I’m not convinced a red gangway is really compliant with the relevant standard, as it should avoid use of colours that have operational meanings (so the likes of red and green).
The_Train
Established Member
- Joined
- 2 Jun 2018
- Messages
- 4,347
Would they be able to go out onto the network if they weren't compliant?
Interestingly the 230s were originally pictured with red fronts but now been given yellow - I thought that might be because of a violation of the standard but if so how come the 197 has been allowed out with a red front?
Bob Price
Member
- Joined
- 8 Aug 2019
- Messages
- 1,034
No, they have to have had clearance by the ORR. They wouldn't be out without it.
You’ve got a hell of a commute eh!
175001
Established Member
Especially when I've been banned from doing so basically from March 2020...
MDB1images
Member
- Joined
- 9 Jun 2018
- Messages
- 654
Like the look of that.
Must admit prefer the gangway for easy access if coupling up compared (for example)to a 2 car Class 195.
Must admit prefer the gangway for easy access if coupling up compared (for example)to a 2 car Class 195.
Y Ddraig Coch
Established Member
- Joined
- 1 Nov 2013
- Messages
- 1,298
A 197 is currently sitting at platform 4 at Llandudno Junction just arrived from Crewe and about to head up the Conwy Valley.
My first time seeing one up close. They look better than I thought to be fair.
My first time seeing one up close. They look better than I thought to be fair.
Yes, that is one of the few things TfW/KeolisAmey got right about the specification for the class 197s. Northern were absolutely nuts going for non-gangwayed units.
Fantastic working environment in a 195/331 cab which should be the prime function of a driving cab. The large window with central seat is far better than being squashed into a third of that space.
Bletchleyite
Veteran Member
What is the railway for? Drivers or passengers?
Of course, Northern could have avoided the issue entirely by ordering 3 and 4-car units instead of 2s and 3s. TfW needed 2s because of their portion working plans.
Portion working seems to be the way of working TFW have gone for, how many other tocs work this way ? Shrewsbury is the prime example of constant coupling and uncoupling of units continuously all day. The regular travellers understand the way of working but occasional travellers get very confused, hopefully the 197's utilise the side pis screens on the sides of the units to save passengers getting on the wrong trains
I disagree - they may not have needed to work in multiple initially but with 3 and 4-car units there is still the possibility of multiple working in future. WMR have gangways on their 3-car 172s and 4-car 196s after all, and SWR have gangways on the 5-car class 444s. Only when you get to 7 or 8 coach units (which if run in pairs would create 14 or 16 coach trains which wouldn't fit in sufficient stations for most purposes) do gangways probably become an irrelevance. Even a 6-car unit (with vehicles shorter than 23m admittedly) should have gangways - with 21.8m vehicles a 6-car unit coupling up with a 5-car unit would make an 11-car formation coming out at a similar length to a 12-car formation of class 450s out of Waterloo.
I don’t get the obsession with gangways.
How long do passengers spend on the train in the average week and how many wish they had a gangway to walk through between units.
Contrary to popular belief cab comfort is extremely important. Do office workers have to work 9 hours a day cramped into 4 sq feet of space?
Though, to be fair, there is the revenue benefit if the guard can access the whole train.
195/331’s were built for DOO. They were built by the time of the agreement to keep guards.
Bletchleyite
Veteran Member
And the trolley. And if the single bog is out of order.
Customer service benefit too. And portion working (as TfW intend but Northern not) is awkward without because people can't walk through if they are in the wrong bit.
How long they spend on the train is irrelvant to the need for gangways - the need for them is:
- to allow the guard to get through
- to allow the catering trolley (if provided) to get through
- shortly after boarding, to allow passengers to walk through to find a (prefered) seat
- shortly after boarding, having used the nearest door while rushing to make a tight connection, to move to the correct portion for their destination
- shortly after being told by the guard that they are in the wrong portion for their destination, to move to the correct portion
- shortly before the train divides, to move the correct portion, having sat in the wrong portion due to lack of (prefered) seat availability in the correct portion
- to reach an alternative toilet if the nearest one is occupied or out of order (particularly important on suburban stock like the Civity DMUs which have limited toilet provision)
LOL The Irony
On Moderation
The initial artists impressions also lack end gangways.
- As mentioned Northern intended the CAF trains for DOO.
- Northern only have trolleys on the S&C which is 158 operated.
- I’ve worked gangwayed trains for over 20 years and rarely see this inter unit seat searching that this forum seems to think is an all day occurrence.
- You can move at the next station.
- As above
- Northern services don’t divide.
I can see the benefit for TfW services of having a gangway on the above points but the Northern units were built for the requirements of what was needed. Passenger access I agree for things such as the single toilet being OOU (a rare occurrence in my experience on the CAF units). But all this about people constantly going too-and-fro between units is nonsense.
Precisely. They were never intended to have gangways because arriva thought that DOO was a done deal and they would win the dispute no problem.
Anyway I’ve gone off thread. Apologies.
Last edited: