Do CAF Civity trains really suit the East Coast Mainline?

[158 fan]

Moderator note: Split from

LNER announce CAF fleet (Class 897)

Taken from LNER website, link below from announcement that 10 x 10 car CAF trains will be introduced from 2027, to replace the intercity 225 and provide some extra trains...

www.railforums.co.uk

What is this ugly mess? Who thought for one moment that a civity would suit the ECML?

 

[Class 800]

As someone who is not an expert in the field I do definitely wonder about 140 running.
It was promised in the IRP, but recent mentions of it have all but disappeared.
Indeed some argue that 140 running will have an adverse impact on capacity.

Was it part of the tender to require 140 capability?

I presume CAF could create a variant of the Civity with 140 operation, but at what point would you cross the threshold between Civity speeds and Oaris speeds?

 

[61653 HTAFC]

Indeed - so no surprise given everything is rooted in cost at the moment.

The idea that CAF has been selected as being 'better' than Hitachi is nonsense - have a chat with TPE about that one.

TPE have two CAF fleets... one which hasn't been a success, and one which broadly speaking has. These new LNER units will have more in common with the 397s than the Mk5s.

What is this ugly mess? Who thought for one moment that a civity would suit the ECML?

Civity is the name CAF use for their current range of UK units- some are regional stock (19x, 331) and some are intercity (397). Just the same as how both 450s and 444s are Desiros. In what way would a 397-esque unit not be suitable?

 

[Snow1964]

What is this ugly mess? Who thought for one moment that a civity would suit the ECML?

Don't the 397s work northern part of WCML, so is it that different

TPE have two CAF fleets... one which hasn't been a success, and one which broadly speaking has. These new LNER units will have more in common with the 397s than the Mk5s.

In what way would a 397-esque unit not be suitable?

Just because they have ordered 10 units to replace the aging 91s plus mk4s, does it mean they will be allocated to exactly the same services. In theory would be nothing to stop them being used mainly on part of the route. Not all the passenger flows go to London.

The tender had base of 10 units with option of upto extra 5. I don't know if they can still add some as a priced option.

If they work, like a 397, then would be fairly easy to build more, not necessarily just for LNER, imagine if Bristol got electrified and these took over London to Bristol and Cardiff workings freeing up 9car IETs to West Country to cascade the 5car IETs to where they are better suited

 

[Peter Sarf]

Don't the 397s work northern part of WCML, so is it that different


Just because they have ordered 10 units to replace the aging 91s plus mk4s, does it mean they will be allocated to exactly the same services. In theory would be nothing to stop them being used mainly on part of the route. Not all the passenger flows go to London.

The tender had base of 10 units with option of upto extra 5. I don't know if they can still add some as a priced option.

If they work, like a 397, then would be fairly easy to build more, not necessarily just for LNER, imagine if Bristol got electrified and these took over London to Bristol and Cardiff workings freeing up 9car IETs to West Country to cascade the 5car IETs to where they are better suited

Surely almost all of LNERs services go to and from London.

Leeds Neville Hill depot already services CAF units (331s definitely & maybe 195s ?). Would be difficult to see these LNER CAF intercity trains being deployed else where on the LNER network without starting or finishing their duties in Leeds. The other LNER depots are run by Hitachi ?. Furthermore that is the setup the IC225s work under.

 

[YorkRailFan]

Surely almost all of LNERs services go to and from London.

Leeds Neville Hill depot already services CAF units (331s definitely & maybe 195s ?). Would be difficult to see these LNER CAF intercity trains being deployed else where on the LNER network without starting or finishing their duties in Leeds. The other LNER depots are run by Hitachi ?. Furthermore that is the setup the IC225s work under.

Correct, the only exception is the Leeds-Aberdeen service.

 

[Peter Mugridge]

Just because they have ordered 10 units to replace the aging 91s plus mk4s, does it mean they will be allocated to exactly the same services. In theory would be nothing to stop them being used mainly on part of the route. Not all the passenger flows go to London.

I'd agree. I'd say it's more likely that this fleet will be used elsewhere where their off the wires ability will be useful and it'll be the existing pure electrics getting used directly in place of the 91s.

 

[Bletchleyite]

I can't see what's unsuitable about it, and subjectively I think it looks better than an 80x.

 

[GC class B1]

I have travelled on TPE class 397 units twice and they are the worst riding trains in service today. The bogies hunt a lot and the resultant vibrations feel like the vehicle is going to shake itself apart. They even make the Hitachi units seem good.

 

[Bletchleyite]

I have travelled on TPE class 397 units twice and they are the worst riding trains in service today. The bogies hunt a lot and the resultant vibrations feel like the vehicle is going to shake itself apart. They even make the Hitachi units seem good.

They don't ride well, but it still remains the case that the worst bit of riding I've experienced away from a Pacer on UK rolling stock was a Mk4 north of Newcastle, I genuinely thought we had come off and was considering going for the red handle, then it stopped.

 

[800001]

Surely almost all of LNERs services go to and from London.

Leeds Neville Hill depot already services CAF units (331s definitely & maybe 195s ?). Would be difficult to see these LNER CAF intercity trains being deployed else where on the LNER network without starting or finishing their duties in Leeds. The other LNER depots are run by Hitachi ?. Furthermore that is the setup the IC225s work under.

They could maybe be serviced overnight at Heaton, as it’s a northern depot?

 

[Bletchleyite]

They could maybe be serviced overnight at Heaton, as it’s a northern depot?

In the other thread this is confirmed as what is happening.

 

[The Planner]

Moderator note: Split from

LNER announce CAF fleet (Class 897)

Taken from LNER website, link below from announcement that 10 x 10 car CAF trains will be introduced from 2027, to replace the intercity 225 and provide some extra trains...

www.railforums.co.uk

What is this ugly mess? Who thought for one moment that a civity would suit the ECML?

How does a train "suit" any line? Your average punter doesn't give a monkeys as long as they can get a seat and its on time.

 

[800001]

They could maybe be serviced overnight at Heaton, as it’s a northern depot?

Ah, must of missed amongst all comments.
Maybe Leeds/Newcastle diagrams interlinked then which makes sense.

 

[HSTEd]

It wouldn't take a particularly high performance multiple unit to beat a worn out locomotive hauled train from the very early 1990s.

 

[Irascible]

How does a train "suit" any line? Your average punter doesn't give a monkeys as long as they can get a seat and its on time.

Ah, the "average punter is a brainless commodity" answer. The "average member of the public" ( whatever that means ) cares about fares, reliability, comfort, speed ( possibly in that order ) just like everyone else. If something isn't right there then the service is not perceived as good value for money & they'll go somewhere else... again, just like everyone does. If the stock isn't suited to the route for some reason then it's not gonig to give good perceived value for money unless the fares drop to match ( hah, right ). There are plenty of "average punters" who take SWR from Exeter over GWR because it's better perceived value & comfort. Dismissing the public's ability to form an opinion is contemptuous & smacks of something government would do.

 

[DanNCL]

They could maybe be serviced overnight at Heaton, as it’s a northern depot?

In the other thread this is confirmed as what is happening.

The issue with that is, unless they were confined to a small number of daytime out and back trips from London (which in the current timetable only exist on Sundays, that’ll change if the long delayed recast ever happens), to use them on Newcastle services would require one or even two more crew depots to sign them than would otherwise be necessary. Not having to maintain traction competency at Newcastle and Edinburgh was one of the reasons given for restricting the 91s to York/Leeds.

Heaton also doesn’t currently have a CAF presence but of course that could be easily overcome.

 

[Energy]

cares about fares, reliability, [comfort], speed ( possibly in that order ) just like everyone else

So what The Planner said? As for comfort, I'd expect these to be similar or to exceed the AT300s.

There are plenty of "average punters" who take SWR from Exeter over GWR because it's better perceived value & comfort.

There may be some but for most, it may be something to do with the fares...


Image showing train fares on 24/11/2023, SWR fare is £29.50 while GWR is £55.50.

 

[800001]

The issue with that is, unless they were confined to a small number of daytime out and back trips from London (which in the current timetable only exist on Sundays, that’ll change if the long delayed recast ever happens), to use them on Newcastle services would require one or even two more crew depots to sign them than would otherwise be necessary. Not having to maintain traction competency at Newcastle and Edinburgh was one of the reasons given for restricting the 91s to York/Leeds.

Heaton also doesn’t currently have a CAF presence but of course that could be easily overcome.

There is a new timetable coming on December 2024 with that comes new diagrams.
If the business seems it a requirement for Newcastle depot to sign caf units as well as King’s Cross and Leeds then they will do that, am sure they will be very similar in nature to an 800, so a quick conversion course compacted to a 91.

 

[158 fan]

IIRC The 91s were meant to be 140 running but the ECML wasn't right for it. Will these units go 140?

 

[Starmill]

Ah, the "average punter is a brainless commodity" answer. The "average member of the public" ( whatever that means ) cares about fares, reliability, comfort, speed ( possibly in that order ) just like everyone else. If something isn't right there then the service is not perceived as good value for money & they'll go somewhere else... again, just like everyone does. If the stock isn't suited to the route for some reason then it's not gonig to give good perceived value for money unless the fares drop to match ( hah, right ). There are plenty of "average punters" who take SWR from Exeter over GWR because it's better perceived value & comfort. Dismissing the public's ability to form an opinion is contemptuous & smacks of something government would do.

Has a lot to do with Network Railcards being accepted on SWR between Exeter and London, as well as the flexible ticket being lower priced in the first place.

 

[NSE]

I think it’s ludicrous they aren’t using IETs. I’m not saying I prefer them over whatever CAF offer, but we talk about microfleets costing more money and LNER had two fleets, diesel and electric and the IET’s could have condensed it to one. But they kept some IC225’s instead of getting more IETs and now they’re creating a needless microfleet.

Rant over!

 

[Peter Sarf]

IIRC The 91s were meant to be 140 running but the ECML wasn't right for it. Will these units go 140?

There was even the possibility of tilt (on/off switch in the class 91 cab) but I think the decision was not to do that with the Mk4s on the ECML - the Mk4s are not designed for it I would say as they are not claustrophobic enough !. I seem to recall the use of 140mph was not considered worth the extra running costs.

I think it’s ludicrous they aren’t using IETs. I’m not saying I prefer them over whatever CAF offer, but we talk about microfleets costing more money and LNER had two fleets, diesel and electric and the IET’s could have condensed it to one. But they kept some IC225’s instead of getting more IETs and now they’re creating a needless microfleet.

Rant over!

Tends to suggest that LNER did not want more IETs.

 

[HSTEd]

There was even the possibility of tilt (on/off switch in the class 91 cab) but I think the decision was not to do that with the Mk4s on the ECML - the Mk4s are not designed for it I would say as they are not claustrophobic enough !. I seem to recall the use of 140mph was not considered worth the extra running costs.]

They have a tilting body profile I believe, but the idea was dropped pretty early.

 

[GC class B1]

I wonder whether the cracking issue with class 800 has influenced the decision to buy CAF units. What is perhaps more relevant (and disappointing) than the CAF vs Hitachi discussion in this thread is the lack of orders for Alstom Derby Litchurch lane works which is the only complete build facility in the UK.

 

[Starmill]

I wonder whether the cracking issue with class 800 has influenced the decision to buy CAF units. What is perhaps more relevant (and disappointing) than the CAF vs Hitachi discussion in this thread is the lack of orders for Alstom Derby Litchurch lane works which is the only complete build facility in the UK.

Similar issues with cracks have affected some CAF products too haven't they? I'm sure the contract for this award addresses it, either way.

 

[gingertom]

Tends to suggest that LNER did not want more IETs.

Maybe LNER did want more IETs, to keep a homogenous fleet, but the DfT said no due to the cost and/or other political reasons?

 

[Class 800]

Will these units go 140?

If the commitment in the Integrated Rail Plan is anything to go by, hopefully.
That was in 2021, however, and the political and economic landscape has changed significantly since then.

 

[Trainbike46]

TPE have two CAF fleets... one which hasn't been a success, and one which broadly speaking has. These new LNER units will have more in common with the 397s than the Mk5s.

Civity is the name CAF use for their current range of UK units- some are regional stock (19x, 331) and some are intercity (397). Just the same as how both 450s and 444s are Desiros. In what way would a 397-esque unit not be suitable?

The Civity also exists in mainland europe - NS has a large electric civity local train fleet and has placed an order for a civity double decker intercity fleet - so not just a UK platform, and intercity designs do exist already

The tender had base of 10 units with option of upto extra 5. I don't know if they can still add some as a priced option.

If they work, like a 397, then would be fairly easy to build more, not necessarily just for LNER, imagine if Bristol got electrified and these took over London to Bristol and Cardiff workings freeing up 9car IETs to West Country to cascade the 5car IETs to where they are better suited

This is a good idea, though you may want to order an electric-only fleet rather than trimode. Now if we only could convince the DfT, starting with finishing the bits of electrification on GWr (Bristol both ways, Swansea, Oxford)....