195s truly awful, not a step forward

[yorksrob]

The 158/9 sub class only has 1 toilet.

Yes, that was a mistake which could do with being rectified.

Might I suggest that there is a bit of a "rose-tinted spectacles" aspect with that comment...

To be honest, as long as my drinkisn't flying across the carriage, ride quality isn't something I'm particularly bothered by. The comfortable armchair aspect is far more important to me, and you could theoretically have that in any carriage, old or new.

By the way, given Mk3's of that description were in regular use until a couple of years ago, isn't it a bit early to be talking of rose tinted spectacles ?

It seems that some in my age group just long for their rail(way?) travel experience to being swaddled and gently rocked right next to a convenient toilet. Maybe the TOCs should offer a travelling nanny service for some Senior Railcard holders.

If that's a reference to me, "senior railcard holder" ? I wish. There are sod all railcards for me, except some of the geographically defined ones.

As for being so presumptuous as to want a convenient toilet on the train, how very dare we - the moon on a stick. Perhaps we should consider ourselves lucky to have a roof on the carriage, as opposed to the third class passengers on the Liverpool and Manchester

Actually, I prefer to be a bit away from the loo on a multiple unit as they tend to open straight into the carriage. Having one available is enough !

I think their inappropriate acceptance into service was a consequence of Northern/DfT's desperate to appease some passengers by bringing in a shiny new train.

The trains have some extremely good features. The overall layout and presence of table seats are a step up.

To my mind, if the vast majority had been delivered as three carriage units with more than one toilet, they would have been more or less there.

 

[Wolfie]

Yes, that was a mistake which could do with being rectified.



To be honest, as long as my drinkisn't flying across the carriage, ride quality isn't something I'm particularly bothered by. The comfortable armchair aspect is far more important to me, and you could theoretically have that in any carriage, old or new.

By the way, given Mk3's of that description were in regular use until a couple of years ago, isn't it a bit early to be talking of rose tinted spectacles ?



If that's a reference to me, "senior railcard holder" ? I wish. There are sod all railcards for me, except some of the geographically defined ones.

As for being so presumptuous as to want a convenient toilet on the train, how very dare we - the moon on a stick. Perhaps we should consider ourselves lucky to have a roof on the carriage, as opposed to the third class passengers on the Liverpool and Manchester

Actually, I prefer to be a bit away from the loo on a multiple unit as they tend to open straight into the carriage. Having one available is enough !



The trains have some extremely good features. The overall layout and presence of table seats are a step up.

To my mind, if the vast majority had been delivered as three carriage units with more than one toilet, they would have been more or less there.

MK3 seating was utter crap. The rubbish in old Southern region EMUs was even worse. Thank God that they are all razor blades. The HSTs next.....

 

[Bletchleyite]

MK3 seating was utter crap. The rubbish in old Southern region EMUs was even worse. Thank God that they are all razor blades. The HSTs next.....

To be fair you can replace seats. On the other hand, I find the seats to be the least problematic feature of 195s.

 

[yorksrob]

MK3 seating was utter crap. The rubbish in old Southern region EMUs was even worse. Thank God that they are all razor blades. The HSTs next.....

Got out of the wrong side of bed have we ?

 

[Bletchleyite]

Got out of the wrong side of bed have we ?

The InterCity 70 was a truly awful seat.

 

[yorksrob]

The InterCity 70 was a truly awful seat.

To be fair, it's the 1st class ones I miss.

I never had a problem with the standard ones in my youth, but they were getting to be a bit tight for my current build !

 

[43096]

The InterCity 70 was a truly awful seat.

In your opinion. Same old, same old: you aren’t going to convince anyone to change their minds just because you post it several times a week on here.

 

[Wolfie]

The InterCity 70 was a truly awful seat.

Agreed

In your opinion. Same old, same old: you aren’t going to convince anyone to change their minds just because you post it several times a week on here.

True enough. Nor are those who keeping praising it likely to change any minds.

 

[greyman42]

To be fair, it's the 1st class ones I miss.

I never had a problem with the standard ones in my youth, but they were getting to be a bit tight for my current build !

The fact that they stopped people spreading over the seat being used by the passenger sat next to them was a good thing.

 

[gimmea50anyday]

IC70 seats were better on CEPs than HST because with no tables fitted on CEPs they were easy to get in and out of as you didn’t wallop your bum and hips trying to get to them.

 

[LOL The Irony]

The lack of toilets on them is a major oversight and shows their design brief was based off of pacers, yet Arriva wanted them to be their flagship long distance trains. The fact that they couldn't even fit a second bog to the 4 car 331s is just stupid. Now, instead of ordering bi modes, Northern are ordering 2 CAR hybrid 195s. What use are those beyond saving fuel? The entire Northern Civity project has just been a self inflicted disaster since day 1.

 

[Bletchleyite]

IC70 seats were better on CEPs than HST because with no tables fitted on CEPs they were easy to get in and out of as you didn’t wallop your bum and hips trying to get to them.

I'd go with "slightly less bad". They are awful for anyone who is tall (airline seats) or broad, and torture for anyone who is both. A product of their time not to be repeated.

 

[mcnw35282]

I live on the junction side of St Helens...so we very rarely see a 331. I 5hink a couple run between man Vic and lime St during peak hours. I was a bit gutted when they told us we were getting 323s instead of the shiney brand new 331s...but having ridden a couple of 331s and 195s, I have to agree with the op's comment. They sound like they're gonna shake themselves apart!

 

[John Luxton]

I've got the impression many people have made there minds up on the civicity fleets in a negative way, so it's good to hear some positive comments on them.
Having travelled on them myself I'm pleasantly surprised how nice they are, the ride isn't as good as 158s but the civicitys offer a more modern and better experience in my view.
Things such as Air con that actually works, in the winter they have heating that work. The PIS systems are a huge improvement over the 158s, the civicitys are faster and much better for the environment.
The Northern 195s seem to be running around OK as are the 331, wmt 196s have started there testing and the 197s are out testing and traincrew training. So civicitys will be a regular sight around the network in the north.

It was just my initial feeling about the 195s comparing it to the 150 I had been on a couple of hours or so earlier.

I have only returned to rail travel since summer 2021 having confined myself to heritage lines and network branch lines.

When I drifted away after passing my driving test in the early 1980s many lines were still on first generation MUs - not are only are some of these third generation units new to me - I only travelled on a 158 for the first time last September and a 175 at the beginning of March!!!

Perhaps that has helped me to look a things a bit differently?

 

[northwichcat]

it’s difficult to find a seat that aligns with windows

That puts them in the same class as 150s and Pendolinos.

Un face lifted 158s are far superior

Not if they have faulty air conditioning and it's a hot day.

 

[Bletchleyite]

Ps it’s not just CAF, could make similar criticisms of hitachi designs.....what an oversight to have pantographs on end vehicles

There is some sense in where they are. The end vehicles are "low floor" (ish) and so having the pantographs there prevents people clouting their head on the well. Why's it a problem?

 

[Domh245]

There is some sense in where they are. The end vehicles are "low floor" (ish) and so having the pantographs there prevents people clouting their head on the well. Why's it a problem?

I think the lower floor are because of the pantographs (or more accurately the lack of gensets) rather than the other way around! The main reason for the pantographs being on the end vehicles is to maximise the pantograph spacing when operating in multiple

 

[py_megapixel]

Can someone explain why the pantographs have to be widely spaced?

 

[Domh245]

Can someone explain why the pantographs have to be widely spaced?

Getting off topic, but Pantographs make the overhead wires bounce as they move along it, particularly at higher speeds. If the pantographs are too close, the following pantographs are at risk of losing contact which would cause both electrical issues with loss of supply and arcing damage, but also mechanical issues as the wire whacks into the carbons and the pantograph keeps extending and compressing. With greater spacing the vibrations reduce before the following pantographs reach the same point

 

[northwichcat]

Let the engineers decide where the pantographs need to be but involve passengers in deciding on the most suitable internal layout.

 

[LOL The Irony]

Let the engineers decide where the pantographs need to be but involve passengers in deciding on the most suitable internal layout.

Couldn't agree more. Passengers know what they want and the people ordering the train (where possible) should consult them and make sure they follow their demands. After all, the engineers and bean counters (for the most part) won't be the ones using them.

 

[SteveM70]

I think their inappropriate acceptance into service was a consequence of Northern/DfT's desperate to appease some passengers by bringing in a shiny new train.

Indeed. And to go full DfT / Tory MPs in West Yorkshire, you could add “and hasten the end of the hated Pacers”

 

[PeterY]

If you notice pendolino pantographs are on inner vehicles....a very good reason for that...if the driver happens to be using the forward one ( its usual practice to use the rear one) there is time to lower it when a defect on the OHLE is noticed.

I know it's the wrong thread but now pendo's have been mentioned and a general question only. I have noticed on a couple of occasions pendo's with the front pantograph up instead of back. My question (this is how we learn) can they still run at 125mph?

 

[northwichcat]

Avanti, LNER, XC and TPE don't run trains that are much like the 195s

For a short journey like Wilmslow to Stockport you have a choice of three operators - Northern, Avanti and TfW Rail. To the passenger making the journey it doesn't matter if the train has come from London, Cardiff or Crewe, if it's a good train and has seats available then the passengers will like travelling on it.

Indeed. And to go full DfT / Tory MPs in West Yorkshire, you could add “and hasten the end of the hated Pacers”

And are the 195s worse than the Pacers were in the 1980s?

Also which manufacturers (if any) had a suitable alternative to the CAF Civity diesel to offer that could be delivered in a similar time frame? If there's no competition then the cheapest option is also the best, while the most expensive is also the worst.

 

[yorksrob]

For a short journey like Wilmslow to Stockport you have a choice of three operators - Northern, Avanti and TfW Rail. To the passenger making the journey it doesn't matter if the train has come from London, Cardiff or Crewe, if it's a good train and has seats available then the passengers will like travelling on it.



And are the 195s worse than the Pacers were in the 1980s?

Also which manufacturers (if any) had a suitable alternative to the CAF Civity diesel to offer that could be delivered in a similar time frame? If there's no competition then the cheapest option is also the best, while the most expensive is also the worst.

They're definitely a step up from a 142.

 

[IamTrainsYT]

They're definitely a step up from a 142.

They didn’t replace the 14x’s on 99% of routes though. Passengers would’ve previously been travelling on 15X’s… The only anomaly that instantly springs to mind is the hope valley line?

To be quite honest, the 142’s and 144’s should’ve never gone. Plenty of routes would’ve benefitted from the extra 2 carriages here and there that they would have given. There are far too many two coach services that are day after day full and standing…

 

[northwichcat]

They didn’t replace the 14x’s on 99% of routes though. Passengers would’ve previously been travelling on 15X’s… The only anomaly that instantly springs to mind is the hope valley line?

I thought Lincoln to Sheffield was pretty much only Pacers prior to it becoming a 'Northern Connect' route and getting joined up with the Sheffield to Leeds service. There were also some Pacers running Manchester Victoria to Leeds services on a regular basis, wasn't it one of the three hourly services was booked to be a Pacer at one point?

Wiki says 195s are used on Leeds-Knottingley, not sure if that's correct but there's another local route and I think the new trains appear on some of the Manchester Oxford Road to Liverpool stoppers.

I think Liverpool to Wigan/Blackpool also saw some Pacers before electrification, as did Hazel Grove to Blackpool, which now see the electric CAF trains.

To be quite honest, the 142’s and 144’s should’ve never gone.

I finished up catching a Pacer almost every morning in the month they were initially being withdrawn, before being reintroduced to provide extra capacity during COVID and social distancing. If you gave me £1 for each time a Pacer turned up that was free of leaks, had fully operational door controls, didn't have broken seats and had a working toilet you probably wouldn't have given me 1p. They needed thousands of pounds spent on them to be fit to remain in service, even ignoring accessibility legislation.

 

[Mikey C]

Having previously moaned in this thread about the poor ride quality of the 331s, I had a really uncomfortable ride last week on a GN 387, coming back from Cambridge to London. It was shaking and jolting in a most unpleasant manner

 

[yorksrob]

They didn’t replace the 14x’s on 99% of routes though. Passengers would’ve previously been travelling on 15X’s… The only anomaly that instantly springs to mind is the hope valley line?

To be quite honest, the 142’s and 144’s should’ve never gone. Plenty of routes would’ve benefitted from the extra 2 carriages here and there that they would have given. There are far too many two coach services that are day after day full and standing…

Yes, I definitely think it's a shame that some 144's weren't kept on to add capacity.

before being reintroduced to provide extra capacity during COVID and social distancing.

Shame the Government can't provide for extra capacity when there are actual passengers on the trains, as opposed to when they're empty.

 

[YorksLad12]

Wiki says 195s are used on Leeds-Knottingley, not sure if that's correct but there's another local route and I think the new trains appear on some of the Manchester Oxford Road to Liverpool stoppers.

My observation of P17 is that at least one of the stoppers (Knottingley or Sheffield) are 158s now, while the semi-fasts are 195s (having been 158s, or sometimes a 150).