CAF Civity for TfW: News and updates on introduction.

[Dai Corner]

I think if there is enough space to provide first class, which there clearly will be between Swansea-Manchester with 5 carriages, then it should be provided. The Swansea-Manchester should be intercity IMO as its covering 2 major cities Cardiff and Manchester one of which is a capital city, another is seen as the capital of North England. Also there is Hereford and big towns such as Shrewsbury. It should be limited stop only calling at Neath, Port Talbot, Bridgend, Cardiff, Newport, Hereford, Shrewsbury, Crewe, Wilmslow and Stockport. All smaller stops should be picked up by a stopping service that runs hourly between Cardiff-Shrewsbury/Crewe in between the Manchester services.

I understand the plan is to run a Cardiff-Shrewsbury stopper with an extension to Liverpool every 2 hours.

A true InterCity would call only at Swansea, Cardiff, Newport, Hereford and Manchester.

 

[Jez]

A true InterCity would call only at Swansea, Cardiff, Newport, Hereford and Manchester.

True!

 

[Rhydgaled]

The first part of this post has been moved to this topic in the speculative ideas section.

I understand the plan is to run a Cardiff-Shrewsbury stopper with an extension to Liverpool every 2 hours.

I have seen different documents which contradict each other on this - one said it would be as you said it, the other said it would be hourly Liverpool to Shrewsbury with one every two hours extended through to Cardiff.

 

[craigybagel]

AIUI, the plan South of Shrewsbury is hourly Manchester, and hourly alternating Liverpool or Holyhead. There isn't really the capacity for much more than 2tph with the existing signalling, especially with the need to find paths for freight and the HOWL services.

However, as with a lot of things with TfW it might be best to "wait and see" as both fleet and timetable plans have clearly changed from the original franchise proposals.

 

[yorkie]

Just a gentle reminder this is a Traction & Rolling Stock thread to discuss updates regarding CAF Civity for TfW

Confirmed timetable changes are welcome to be discussed in the timetable section, while any suggestions, ideas or other speculative posts should be made in the Speculative Ideas section please.

Many thanks

 

[wobman]

The timetable plans all involve lots of unit coupling and uncoupling, that's the reason for the high number of 2 car units ordered by TFW. The initial plan was 4 car Cardiff to Chester then 2 onwards to Liverpool rear 2 onwards to Llandudno. On return to Chester the 2 is then a 4 car to Cardiff. Let's see if it is the plan, but this high number of coupling and uncoupling takes time and causes high wear and tear on couplers. Lots of TFWs future plans involve this method of working, that's what the plans say.

Do the 197's have some kind of auto coupling system ?

 

[craigybagel]

Do the 197's have some kind of auto coupling system ?

They do indeed. Going to be interesting to see how well it works in practice, and if it's better than what we can do ourselves!

 

[Bletchleyite]

The timetable plans all involve lots of unit coupling and uncoupling, that's the reason for the high number of 2 car units ordered by TFW. The initial plan was 4 car Cardiff to Chester then 2 onwards to Liverpool rear 2 onwards to Llandudno. On return to Chester the 2 is then a 4 car to Cardiff. Let's see if it is the plan, but this high number of coupling and uncoupling takes time and causes high wear and tear on couplers. Lots of TFWs future plans involve this method of working, that's what the plans say.

Fortunately modern couplers are designed for this. Lots of splitting and joining all over the South East without everything falling over by the minutes.

 

[TrainTrackJack]

The other TfW units still have yellow ends - even the 230s which were originally shown with red ends - and most have a black surround to the windows.

It could change yet - the ORR might have something to say about that red gangway!

 

[krus_aragon]

The initial plan was 4 car Cardiff to Chester then 2 onwards to Liverpool rear 2 onwards to Llandudno

That doesn't match my recollection: it was 4 car Liverpool to Chester, then 2 onwards to Llandudno, other 2 onwards to Shrewsbury/Cardiff.

Unless you're thinking of a pre-franchise-award initial plan that wasn't announced to the public?

It could change yet - the ORR might have something to say about that red gangway!

At what point would they speak up? I'd have thought it'd be before the units start mainline testing.

 

[py_megapixel]

Do the 197's have some kind of auto coupling system ?

They do indeed. Going to be interesting to see how well it works in practice, and if it's better than what we can do ourselves!

Is that a new design which is in some way more "auto" than the automatic couplers on the sprinters they'll be replacing? Or is it similar to what is currently standard?

 

[Bletchleyite]

Is that a new design which is in some way more "auto" than the automatic couplers on the sprinters they'll be replacing? Or is it similar to what is currently standard?

It is a Scharfenberg coupler as fitted to almost everything built new in the last 15 years or so. Nothing ground breaking.

 

[Neptune]

It is a Scharfenberg coupler as fitted to almost everything built new in the last 15 years or so. Nothing ground breaking.

Pretty sure it’s Dellner couplings as fitted to most new uk stock for many years.

 

[Envoy]

Perhaps they will have to change the configurations once they get more idea of the passenger flows? Who is to know whether 2 cars will be suitable for the Liverpool to Cardiff run or even west of Swansea? Much will also depend on pricing. Low fares will attract business whilst higher fares will more likely induce people to travel by car. I also think that the Cardiff to Liverpool service would attract people travelling from Bristol to Liverpool via a quick change at Newport. Another factor to take into account is comfort. If the loco hauled services are better than the 197’s (or vice versa), people who are travelling between places served by both might gravitate to the service they consider to be the best - as long as it fits in with their schedule.

 

[wobman]

Pretty sure it’s Dellner couplings as fitted to most new uk stock for many years.

It's the Dellner but the electrical boxes are different from the class 195 due to the gangway doors, I haven't seen any of the new CAF units coupling so was wondering if the process has been more automated to save time.
TFW are planning a lot more coupling but the diagrams only give drivers very limited time for the process at present, so units usually leave late as a result.

 

[craigybagel]

At what point would they speak up? I'd have thought it'd be before the units start mainline testing.

Indeed, that was my first thought too. It's a matter of months since the first unit arrived; it's been on various jollies on the mainline. If it was a problem surely the flag would have been raised by now? It's not like it was a surprise when the units arrived like that - they were shown with red front ends on the drawings the day the franchise bid was announced!

Is that a new design which is in some way more "auto" than the automatic couplers on the sprinters they'll be replacing? Or is it similar to what is currently standard?

The former....

It is a Scharfenberg coupler as fitted to almost everything built new in the last 15 years or so. Nothing ground breaking.

.... Which is why once again I would suggest you shouldn't make assumptions about things that haven't entered service.

Perhaps they will have to change the configurations once they get more idea of the passenger flows? Who is to know whether 2 cars will be suitable for the Liverpool to Cardiff run or even west of Swansea?

This too, a general point I've been making for years against certain posters who think the 197s are going to ruin the Wales and Borders franchise for generations to come. You only have to look at how much the plans have changed just in the last few years since the franchise started to see that nothing has to be set in stone. Just because Arriva had it's hands tied behind it's back for 15 years doesn't mean the same thing is happening now.

 

[Domh245]

Pretty sure it’s Dellner couplings as fitted to most new uk stock for many years.

Dellner are the manufacturer, but that type of "ball and socket" coupler is technically a scharfenberg (or 'Type 10', as set out by EN16019:2014). You're right in that it's the de-facto standard for anything new built in the UK

The former....

More automatic than what's on the sprinters isn't mutually exclusive with what's currently standard!

I'm curious now though, what sets these apart from other modern stock given they appear to have utterly standard mechanical/electrical connectors? Are they like the desiros in that once you've mechanically coupled them, the cab will shut down and complete the electrical/pneumatic coupling and train configuration automatically (vice pressing a button)

 

[wobman]

Indeed, that was my first thought too. It's a matter of months since the first unit arrived; it's been on various jollies on the mainline. If it was a problem surely the flag would have been raised by now? It's not like it was a surprise when the units arrived like that - they were shown with red front ends on the drawings the day the franchise bid was announced!

The former....

.... Which is why once again I would suggest you shouldn't make assumptions about things that haven't entered service.

This too, a general point I've been making for years against certain posters who think the 197s are going to ruin the Wales and Borders franchise for generations to come. You only have to look at how much the plans have changed just in the last few years since the franchise started to see that nothing has to be set in stone. Just because Arriva had it's hands tied behind it's back for 15 years doesn't mean the same thing is happening now.

TFW have shown great ambition with the new franchise and they show that they are willing to change plans. This is a positive for the Wales and borders franchise, as it had 15 years of stagnation with the DFT awarding a non growth franchise to ATW.

I'm glad TFW got the 197's I wish it was Stadler bi model units but the costs must have put a block on that plan.

 

[Bletchleyite]

Pretty sure it’s Dellner couplings as fitted to most new uk stock for many years.

Dellner is one manufacturer of Scharfenberg-type couplings (the two-hemisphere type).

The former....

.... Which is why once again I would suggest you shouldn't make assumptions about things that haven't entered service.

The coupler is the same as the one used on the Class 195/196 and other CAF units, which is a Scharfenberg design (manufactured by Dellner, as someone else said), which is exactly the same thing that has been fitted to pretty much all third generation UK rolling stock except where compatibility with 15x/16x was needed.

It is not custom for TfW nor anything particularly new, if you've been told that you've been told rubbish.

It does differ from the BSI fitted to 15x in that you don't have to bang the trains together to couple them (rather the coupling mechanism is operated pneumatically), but this is nothing new.

These couplings have been around since the 1990s in the UK, but have existed for far longer than that. I think the first UK application was the T68 Metrolink tram.

 

[Bikeman78]

Fortunately modern couplers are designed for this. Lots of splitting and joining all over the South East without everything falling over by the minutes.

Indeed. Southern splits and joins at Horsham every 30 minutes without much hassle. Used to happen at Haywards Heath too until the service changes in connection with the Gatwick rebuild. When the 317s ran out of King's Cross, they split and joined all over the place. Used to take as little as 60 seconds to split at Letchworth. On the Welsh network, there are frequent splits and joins at Shrewsbury and Machynlleth. These do sometimes go wrong. Hopefully the new couplers will be better.

 

[craigybagel]

The coupler is the same as the one used on the Class 195/196 and other CAF units, which is a Scharfenberg design (manufactured by Dellner, as someone else said), which is exactly the same thing that has been fitted to pretty much all third generation UK rolling stock except where compatibility with 15x/16x was needed.

It is not custom for TfW nor anything particularly new, if you've been told that you've been told rubbish.

It does differ from the BSI fitted to 15x in that you don't have to bang the trains together to couple them (rather the coupling mechanism is operated pneumatically), but this is nothing new.

These couplings have been around since the 1990s in the UK, but have existed for far longer than that. I think the first UK application was the T68 Metrolink tram.

Moving aside from the fact that it's not the same coupler as on the 195s (it's a rearranged version of it with the electrical box moved to accommodate the corridor connection), I have never claimed on this forum or anywhere else that these are custom to TfW and nor have I been told that so no need to worry about any "rubbish" occuring.

What I did do was confirm a suggestion that they are more automatic than the BSI couplers - and that the coupling process for drivers will be different to what takes place at present.

Once again I'll leave it to the good burghers of this forum to decide which users are the ones spouting "rubbish" - and whether or not they want to believe the people who will actually be operating these units.

 

[Bletchleyite]

Moving aside from the fact that it's not the same coupler as on the 195s (it's a rearranged version of it with the electrical box moved to accommodate the corridor connection), I have never claimed on this forum or anywhere else that these are custom to TfW and nor have I been told that so no need to worry about any "rubbish" occuring.

In post 1365 you claim it is a new design. It is not a new design. The design is quite possibly used in more UK multiple units than it is not and has been in UK usage since the 1990s (on trams). It is also the design used on the Class 175.

Yes, the electrical boxes are in a different place to the 195 (but I think the same as the 196) but that is rather de-minimis (and is only because they'd be in the way of the gangway rubbing plate otherwise) and doesn't stop it being a standard coupler used all over the world for years, invented in the 1930s if I recall.

whether or not they want to believe the people who will actually be operating these units

To defend @Rhydgaled those of us who have misgivings about the suitability of these units mostly have misgivings about the passenger experience they will bring, not the operational aspect of them. They will no doubt be fine to operate, give or take the famous CAF "quality".

But anyone who has concerns about coupling/uncoupling with Scharfenberg couplers can be reassured they are unfounded, as this happens thousands of times a day across the network without incident.

 

[py_megapixel]

My apologies, I think I may have caused some confusion here by citing the Sprinters. Other posters are correct that it is entirely possible for the couplers to be more advanced than a BSI-type one but not more advanced than what is currently the standard for new build.

 

[craigybagel]

In post 1365 you claim it is a new design. It is not a new design. The design is quite possibly used in more UK multiple units than it is not and has been in UK usage since the 1990s (on trams). It is also the design used on the Class 175.

I did not claim it is a new design, I was agreeing that it is a new design and more automatic when compared to the BSI couplers on the Sprinters. It is also more automatic and the coupling process will be different from what currently takes place on the 175s, even if the physical coupler itself is similar

Yes, the electrical boxes are in a different place to the 195 (but I think the same as the 196) but that is rather de-minimis (and is only because they'd be in the way of the gangway rubbing plate otherwise) and doesn't stop it being a standard coupler used all over the world for years, invented in the 1930s if I recall.

I believe it is indeed the same as on 196s.

To defend @Rhydgaled those of us who have misgivings about the suitability of these units mostly have misgivings about the passenger experience they will bring, not the operational aspect of them. They will no doubt be fine to operate, give or take the famous CAF "quality".

But anyone who has concerns about coupling/uncoupling with Scharfenberg couplers can be reassured they are unfounded, as this happens thousands of times a day across the network without incident.

With all due respect to @Rhydgaled , they're not the poster I had in mind. And I still maintain that the vast majority of passengers will find these units an improvement over the previous offering, both with and without the other improvements (like the timetable) they bring with them. I do agree with you though that there should be no misgivings about the reliability of the couplers.

 

[HST274]

I have just seen a 197 carriage on the motorway- any idea where they are going?

 

[6Gtraincrew]

I have just seen a 197 carriage on the motorway- any idea where they are going?

Depends which way it was heading. Could be part of 001 going back to Llanwern for engine mods, or something heading from there to Donnington before heading up to Crewe by rail.

 

[FOH]

At what point would they speak up? I'd have thought it'd be before the units start mainline testing.

IIRC from years ago, when SWT put their first 442 through the paint shop it had red painted ends and it was driver feedback that at a glance it could be a rear indicator that caused them to change the livery.

That said, it was at the time of red roller blinds rather than the ubiquitous high intensity LEDs we have now

 

[PHILIPE]

I have just seen a 197 carriage on the motorway- any idea where they are going?

Which Motorway and in which direction ? Post #1376 seems to provide the answer

 

[HST274]

Which Motorway and in which direction ? Post #1376 seems to provide the answer

M5 towards Birmingham

 

[anthony263]

M5 towards Birmingham

Probably 197003 then