195s truly awful, not a step forward

[Bletchleyite]

But if all seats are taken including the tip-ups, when Lycra Larry* boards with his Boardman and expects three people to stand (and be very careful not to brush against his precious machine!) it's a bit much. Non-folding bikes take up a lot of space, it's only fair that you pay for that space- particularly when said space is limited.

*= Yes I'm being a bit facetious, but my point stands. A vocal minority of entitled cyclists make everyone with a bike look bad.

Unless the train with a theoretical capacity of 120 has on it 118, 119 or 120 passengers, nobody should be sat there anyway. There are other seats.

 

[Llama]

Certainly I'd agree with that regardless of the merits or otherwise of DOO itself. Merseyrail appear to have dug themselves a similar hole.



I'm sure that's true, but vastly overpowering DMUs with inefficient transmissions to get high acceleration isn't exactly great for the environment or fuel costs.

The inefficiency of Voith transmissions is perhaps overegged by certain posters.

Maybe the inefficiency of poor build quality and design has an effect too. Waste heat from the engines on 195s is still not being used to heat the saloons due to the pipework for the coolant pipes down the side of the saloon interiors being not fit for purpose from new and leaking coolant all over the interiors. This created a COSHH hazard and ruined several interiors of new trains. The continued problem two years later still means the air conditioning has to provide all the saloon heating by electric heating, putting more strain on the HVAC systems, the alternators (already many 195s have had to have alternator replacements or are running round with inoperative alternators until they can be planned in) and meaning the engines having to work harder just to run the auxiliaries & 'hotel power', whether idling or running.

It's a lot more environmentally friendly to run a 24v fan behind a warm coolant matrix heated by an engine that is going to be warm anyway than it is to use the auxiliaries to heat electric elements they weren't designed to power continuously and have to replace worn out alternators and HVAC modules so frequently.

 

[61653 HTAFC]

Unless the train with a theoretical capacity of 120 has on it 118, 119 or 120 passengers, nobody should be sat there anyway. There are other seats.

Good luck trying to police which seats people use. Tip-up seats are useful for short hops or people with luggage regardless of whether there are regular seats available. If I've got my rucksack with me I'd rather sit in a tip-up seat than risk whacking another passenger with said rucksack as I squeeze into a regular seat.

P.S. If I'm in one of those seats and a cyclist boards, I'm generally happy to move and/or stand instead. That is, as long as said cyclist is (a) polite; and (b) allows me to put my rucksack on and gives me space to move, rather than blocking me in with his bike and cussing me out when my trouser leg gently brushes his tyre.

Anyway, the etiquette of cyclists on trains isn't really specific to 195s, so I'll leave it there.

 

[Domh245]

Unless the train with a theoretical capacity of 120 has on it 118, 119 or 120 passengers, nobody should be sat there anyway. There are other seats.

Especially in the current climate, but no doubt in the before and after times too, people may prefer to go for tip-ups as opposed to sitting next to someone else in a pair of seats. And that's not accounting for anyone who might use a bike space for non-bike carrying, eg large luggage or pushchairs

 

[LNW-GW Joint]

Others however, including the 195s, appear to have been specified simply as the cheapest way to get some new trains on the network and it shows. Being better than pacers is akin to being the best swimmer out of the non-swimmers… (No offence to anybody who can’t swim incidentally!).

I take it you know that Northern was lucky to get any new trains at all in the franchise award starting in 2015?
The DfT machine said there was no business case for Pacers to be replaced by new trains, and had to overruled by the Transport Secretary of the day (Patrick McLoughlin) for an order for new trains to be placed.
Undoubtedly, the debate then would be how cheap could the new order be to get the number needed.
In the end, Northern ordered too many EMUs and not enough DMUs (because of reductions in the electrification programme).
Later franchise competitions were more favourable for new trains (GA, WMT, TfW), although two of those also went for CAF DMUs (before Northern's were delivered).

 

[DustyBin]

I take it you know that Northern was lucky to get any new trains at all in the franchise award starting in 2015?
The DfT machine said there was no business case for Pacers to be replaced by new trains, and had to overruled by the Transport Secretary of the day (Patrick McLoughlin) for an order for new trains to be placed.
Undoubtedly, the debate then would be how cheap could the new order be to get the number needed.
In the end, Northern ordered too many EMUs and not enough DMUs (because of reductions in the electrification programme).
Later franchise competitions were more favourable for new trains (GA, WMT, TfW), although two of those also went for CAF DMUs (before Northern's were delivered).

I realise that don't get me wrong, it doesn't detract from my original point however. What was the reason for replacing the 321s and 322s? Was it to run 6 car trains (2 x 3 cars)? I would have thought Northern had other priorities to be honest.

 

[Bletchleyite]

Good luck trying to police which seats people use.

Which is why it's best not having them. If you don't wish to sit in a normal seat for your short journey, just stand.

Anyway, the etiquette of cyclists on trains isn't really specific to 195s, so I'll leave it there.

Fair point.

The inefficiency of Voith transmissions is perhaps overegged by certain posters.

Maybe the inefficiency of poor build quality and design has an effect too. Waste heat from the engines on 195s is still not being used to heat the saloons due to the pipework for the coolant pipes down the side of the saloon interiors being not fit for purpose from new and leaking coolant all over the interiors. This created a COSHH hazard and ruined several interiors of new trains. The continued problem two years later still means the air conditioning has to provide all the saloon heating by electric heating, putting more strain on the HVAC systems, the alternators (already many 195s have had to have alternator replacements or are running round with inoperative alternators until they can be planned in) and meaning the engines having to work harder just to run the auxiliaries & 'hotel power', whether idling or running.

It's a lot more environmentally friendly to run a 24v fan behind a warm coolant matrix heated by an engine that is going to be warm anyway than it is to use the auxiliaries to heat electric elements they weren't designed to power continuously and have to replace worn out alternators and HVAC modules so frequently.

To be honest as a passenger I'm quite glad they aren't using the bodyside radiators, as they are way too big, and so sitting in a window seat it would be impossible to avoid cooked ankles. Perhaps an opportunity to just remove them and beef up the alternators to cope.

 

[Grumpy Git]

But if all seats are taken including the tip-ups, when Lycra Larry* boards with his Boardman and expects three people to stand (and be very careful not to brush against his precious machine!) it's a bit much. Non-folding bikes take up a lot of space, it's only fair that you pay for that space- particularly when said space is limited.

*= Yes I'm being a bit facetious, but my point stands. A vocal minority of entitled cyclists make everyone with a bike look bad.

Just do what cyclists do on Merseyrail and stand with said machine in the vestibule, making life difficult for everyone using those doors.

 

[YorksLad12]

My objection is to the underhanded tactics used by Arriva under DfT instruction, specifying a fleet set up for DOO before the guard question had been settled.

DOO works on LU and in the South because almost all stations are staffed and gated. Trying to force it on Northern without the investment in station facilities was a monumental folly of the highest order.

Pedantically, DfT said they wanted DOO originally before changing it to DCO (driver-controlled opening). DCO is understandable and acceptable to most people in a way that DOO isn't; you get all the "they're removing the safety-critical guard" arguments, and you've lost.

Flagging the discrepancy when it appeared only earned me silence.

 

[Llama]

DCO is Driver Controlled Operation rather than 'opening'. It is important that that isn't misunderstood.

DCO as intended for Northern by DfT/ARN was just DOO by another name, with driver both opening and closing doors and having full responsibility for the train.

With proper DGO the guard is in fact the person in charge of the train and such trains therefore do not run without guards.

Edit: Getting off-topic now above. But it is relevant to note that the Asdo system fitted to 195/331 units that DCO (regardless whether the driver or guard closes doors) would have fully relied on has never worked properly and still doesn't to this day. The fact that guards happen to still be on trains working the doors has no relevance to this as Asdo still operates in the same way whether the doors are released from the saloon or whether they would be released from the front cab.

 

[SteveM70]

2. The information screens. If they just showed information that passengers need to know that would be okay but on recent trips I've found they're constantly flashing in bright garish colours warnings about health and safety and sexual harrassment which are not just irrelevant but incredibly distracting.

The “connections” info provided ahead of each station stop could also be a whole lot better. As far as I can tell it’s just a list of subsequent departures from the next stop, rather than anything useful to the passenger - quite often the departures listed as connections don’t go anywhere that the train you’re on is going

 

[Bletchleyite]

The “connections” info provided ahead of each station stop could also be a whole lot better. As far as I can tell it’s just a list of subsequent departures from the next stop, rather than anything useful to the passenger - quite often the departures listed as connections don’t go anywhere that the train you’re on is going

In essence they replicate what the passenger will look at when they get off. So they are still useful. You could I suppose curate them a bit, e.g. note that if you're arriving into Preston from the north you don't need to know when the next Barrow/Windermere is, but there's no real harm in keeping it simple.

 

[Neptune]

It's not the same though. The trains aren't designed for guard release, and it shows. There's a notable delay before the door release propogates along the train.

I’ve never had a delay due to the doors on a 195 or 331. They are released by the conductor in exactly the same way as other units with the exception of when you have to override the ASDO which is still not time consuming.

And the local door sounds the hustle alarm before closing .

Trying to see what the issue is here. The same has happened on 333’s for 21 years and nobody whatsoever has brought this up as an issue before.

The only time I've ever had a 5 second release is where the guard hasn't done the checks properly. When done properly it takes at least 10-15 seconds or so.

The trains are theoretically supposed to do 30 second dwells but there's not a cat's chance in hell of that, unless nobody boards or alights. It's only the excellent acceleration that masks it.

I always do my door checks properly (I indeed get told how thorough I am with them when I have been unobtrusively observed).

 

[AM9]

To be honest as a passenger I'm quite glad they aren't using the bodyside radiators, as they are way too big, and so sitting in a window seat it would be impossible to avoid cooked ankles. Perhaps an opportunity to just remove them and beef up the alternators to cope.

i.e. just burn more diesel.

 

[Ben Anslow]

If you bought a brand new car that rattled and banged like a 195 or 331 does, you'd send it back to the dealership. Why do TOCs just accept rubbish standards. Its quite unnerving going over Hare Park Jn on a 331 or 195 at high speed. The 321s and Pacers before them were smoother.

Why do TOCs poorly specify them? May be the actual question here most problems in the uk are currently down to poor specifications

 

[Grumpy Git]

Why do TOCs poorly specify them? May be the actual question here most problems in the uk are currently down to poor specifications

Educated guess - cost?

edit: but going back to my first reply, just the thought of getting on a draughty/rattly/manky 150 for the 03.37 to MIA makes me happy we now have the 195's.

Northern do need to clean-up the seats though, do they employ special passengers with filthy clothing to make them as dirty as they are?

 

[Ben Anslow]

Educated guess - cost?

I would agree

 

[Mat17]

Educated guess - cost?

edit: but going back to my first reply, just the thought of getting on a draughty/rattly/manky 150 for the 03.37 to MIA makes me happy we now have the 195's...

I read that as Missing In Action.

 

[Bletchleyite]

Educated guess - cost?

edit: but going back to my first reply, just the thought of getting on a draughty/rattly/manky 150 for the 03.37 to MIA makes me happy we now have the 195's.

Northern do need to clean-up the seats though, do they employ special passengers with filthy clothing to make them as dirty as they are?

It is because they are flat cloth - all trains with flat cloth suffer the same problem. Moquette might be dirty but like a good carpet (which is basically what it is) it hides it better.

Compare if you spill coffee (which is what most of the staining is) on a dark coloured sofa or a dark coloured carpet. The former will stain badly, the latter will often not show much of a mark.

I suspect once they get too bad they will be replaced with moquette, as has been used on the newer refurbs. GWR has done the same on their similarly affected 80x, and I bet Lumo will have to in due course.

 

[driverd]

... I have absolutely no interest however in Electrostars, Turbostars, Desiros etc. but like you I don’t see how any progress has been made over the last 20 years or so, and indeed one could argue things have gone backwards. The FLIRTs actually seem decent but they’re the outlier IMO. Other fleets (e.g. the 700s as much I detest them) are compromised due the routes on which they operate. Others however, including the 195s, appear to have been specified simply as the cheapest way to get some new trains on the network and it shows. Being better than pacers is akin to being the best swimmer out of the non-swimmers…

So where do we start in terms of progress? We have more efficient, more powerful engines. We have (arguably) one of the most effective brake systems fitted to a unit on the 195s. Air con (that reliably works) throughout, lighter bodies and bogies reducing damage to the track and associated maintenance requirements. The list is far, far longer when comparing to even Turbostars, but simply, just because you don't notice a better ride quality, doesn't mean there isn't substantial progress elsewhere.

Whether or not they're branded as Connect, those services aren't really the best use of 195s which are more suited to all-stations stoppers. However as a result of the Connect idea they were specified with an interior layout more suited to "regional express" type services. With hindsight the 195s should have been closer to 172s inside, with 158s and 170s on the semi-fasts.

The 170s don't have the acceleration (or indeed the numbers) to be effective (eg: on Calder valley). The 158s are, after refurb, really very similar (aside from the never worked from Day 1 aircon). I'd rather take a 195 to Blackpool than a 158.

1. The cycle space. Yet again a TOC has made the mistake of having fold down seats in the cycle space area, which creates unnecessary conflict when you board the train with your bike and someone is already sitting there and refusing to move even when there are other free seats on the train. I've said it many times on here but if you want to maximise space on trains then vertical cycle hooks are the way forward, as Northern have had for many years on their class 333 trains between Leeds and Skipton/Ilkley.

2. The information screens. If they just showed information that passengers need to know that would be okay but on recent trips I've found they're constantly flashing in bright garish colours warnings about health and safety and sexual harrassment which are not just irrelevant but incredibly distracting.

1. Why should a bike that isn't on the train be able to occupy a space that could be used for seats? I hear what you're saying but I think it a little unreasonable to expect a big area to be ruled out of use to everyone other than a cyclist. Surely you can just ask staff to intervene/ mediate if there is conflict?

2. I really think the PIS is one of the best on any units nationally. It's just a shame it's not been used to it's full function. I agree with with It's sentiment entirely, but that's more down to how its being used.

It's not the same though. The trains aren't designed for guard release, and it shows. There's a notable delay before the door release propogates along the train. And the local door sounds the hustle alarm before closing .

The only time I've ever had a 5 second release is where the guard hasn't done the checks properly. When done properly it takes at least 10-15 seconds or so.

The trains are theoretically supposed to do 30 second dwells but there's not a cat's chance in hell of that, unless nobody boards or alights. It's only the excellent acceleration that masks it.

Simply untrue, as pointed out by "Neptune". The doors on the 195s are very rapid, generally speaking. The only time there is a delay is when either, a. ASDO is being overridden at a terminus, or b. The guard is otherwise delayed, as could be the case on any unit.

195s have never been as quick as 185s. In fact 195s are generally not even as quick as they were last year - the majority of them have TCMS faults relating to the engines ('diesel engine anomaly' is the usual message) - when digging deeper you find that air filters are clogged and radiators are clogged with greenfly/pollen/dandelion seeds/dry leaves - pick one depending on season.

As for acceleration performance of 195s vs 185s, having been left for dust more than once despite the 195s I've been on being in 'super power' mode and wide open, and even without engine niggles, it's pretty plain that the bigger Cummins QSK-19 and Voith setup gives a lot more power at rail than the 195's Daimler 6H 1800 R85L and ZF Ecolife.

Interesting, because I have always found them to be atleast as quick, if not quicker. The engine issues are something that literally every DMU encounters and there is a procedure for fixing - do you "book it" so it can be resolved?

 

[DustyBin]

So where do we start in terms of progress? We have more efficient, more powerful engines. We have (arguably) one of the most effective brake systems fitted to a unit on the 195s. Air con (that reliably works) throughout, lighter bodies and bogies reducing damage to the track and associated maintenance requirements. The list is far, far longer when comparing to even Turbostars, but simply, just because you don't notice a better ride quality, doesn't mean there isn't substantial progress elsewhere.

I don’t dispute that progress has been made in many areas, as you’d expect. Passenger comfort certainly isn’t one however as you acknowledge, and this is rather critical IMO. I don’t think it’s too much to ask for a new train to outperform it’s twenty (and thirty) year old counterparts in every single area to be honest, other forms of transport manage it so why not rail?

 

[61653 HTAFC]

The 170s don't have the acceleration (or indeed the numbers) to be effective (eg: on Calder valley). The 158s are, after refurb, really very similar (aside from the never worked from Day 1 aircon). I'd rather take a 195 to Blackpool than a 158.

I didn't suggest Calder Valley for 170s, but they would be suitable for Leeds to Nottingham. Are they even route-cleared via Bradford Interchange anyway? I know they are cleared via Brighouse as TPE ran them that way, but the current Wigan services on that route are too stop-start for 170s much like the rest of the Calder Valley services including the Blackpools.

Not sure there are many routes besides the Nottinghams that would be ideal for 170s, mind!

 

[Northern_guard]

The only time I've ever had a 5 second release is where the guard hasn't done the checks properly. When done properly it takes at least 10-15 seconds or so.

The trains are theoretically supposed to do 30 second dwells but there's not a cat's chance in hell of that, unless nobody boards or alights. It's only the excellent acceleration that masks it.

I find that highly unlikely. The door operation on the 195's are no different to any other unit Northern has with the exception of the ASDO playing up.
It is plenty possible to do a proper check and have the doors released in 5 seconds.

 

[Watershed]

I find that highly unlikely. The door operation on the 195's are no different to any other unit Northern has with the exception of the ASDO playing up.
It is plenty possible to do a proper check and have the doors released in 5 seconds.

Well, if it's possible I'd love to see it happen!

 

[yorksrob]

Whether or not they're branded as Connect, those services aren't really the best use of 195s which are more suited to all-stations stoppers. However as a result of the Connect idea they were specified with an interior layout more suited to "regional express" type services. With hindsight the 195s should have been closer to 172s inside, with 158s and 170s on the semi-fasts.

Unfortunately your come up with capacity issues on the Hallam stopper a lot of the time with a 2 carriage 195, so we get the 158.

The inefficiency of Voith transmissions is perhaps overegged by certain posters.

Maybe the inefficiency of poor build quality and design has an effect too. Waste heat from the engines on 195s is still not being used to heat the saloons due to the pipework for the coolant pipes down the side of the saloon interiors being not fit for purpose from new and leaking coolant all over the interiors. This created a COSHH hazard and ruined several interiors of new trains. The continued problem two years later still means the air conditioning has to provide all the saloon heating by electric heating, putting more strain on the HVAC systems, the alternators (already many 195s have had to have alternator replacements or are running round with inoperative alternators until they can be planned in) and meaning the engines having to work harder just to run the auxiliaries & 'hotel power', whether idling or running.

It's a lot more environmentally friendly to run a 24v fan behind a warm coolant matrix heated by an engine that is going to be warm anyway than it is to use the auxiliaries to heat electric elements they weren't designed to power continuously and have to replace worn out alternators and HVAC modules so frequently.

Aren't the manufacturers supposed to rectify such faults ?

 

[Llama]

Aren't the manufacturers supposed to rectify such faults ?

Yes, decent manufacturers would do.

 

[yorksrob]

Northern do need to clean-up the seats though, do they employ special passengers with filthy clothing to make them as dirty as they are?

That's what comes of using flat cloth instead of moquette. Any fool could have told them that.

 

[Bletchleyite]

I don’t dispute that progress has been made in many areas, as you’d expect. Passenger comfort certainly isn’t one however as you acknowledge, and this is rather critical IMO. I don’t think it’s too much to ask for a new train to outperform it’s twenty (and thirty) year old counterparts in every single area to be honest, other forms of transport manage it so why not rail?

I would agree that the window alignment is lazy, but other than that I wouldn't call them uncomfortable. Legroom is good, seats are good (sit on one, they are not the same as Thameslink ironing boards) and there are plenty of tables as people tend to like.

I would say I prefer the refurb 158s which basically have the same interior but with full window alignment and equally good legroom, but they really aren't bad for comfort.

 

[Mat17]

The way I look at it - I had to endure (and endure is the word) Merseyrail Pacers on the Hope Valley stoppers for years.

Those cheap, nasty, back ache inducing excuses for seats... Truly awful and horrific. Trains you couldn't wait to get off, with the same level of comfort as being strapped into an Iron Maiden in a medieval dungeon.

Now we get 195s. The step up in quality is immesurable. The 195s are a massive, massive improvement.

 

[DustyBin]

I would agree that the window alignment is lazy, but other than that I wouldn't call them uncomfortable. Legroom is good, seats are good (sit on one, they are not the same as Thameslink ironing boards) and there are plenty of tables as people tend to like.

I would say I prefer the refurb 158s which basically have the same interior but with full window alignment and equally good legroom, but they really aren't bad for comfort.

The problem with seat comfort is that it’s subjective, I get that. However I found the entire passenger “experience” rather lacking to be honest, performance excepted (and I’m not sure many members of the public would notice or care about that). They really do feel I described them previously, i.e. the cheapest possible way to get new trains on the Northern network.

The way I look at it - I had to endure (and endure is the word) Merseyrail Pacers on the Hope Valley stoppers for years.

Those cheap, nasty, back ache inducing excuses for seats... Truly awful and horrific. Trains you couldn't wait to get off, with the same level of comfort as being strapped into an Iron Maiden in a medieval dungeon.

Now we get 195s. The step up in quality is immesurable. The 195s are a massive, massive improvement.

Again though this sets an incredibly low bar. I totally understand where you’re coming from but we shouldn’t be using what were the worst(?) trains in service until recently as a yardstick.