Thanks for that.
South of the block there's 0 Mk4s and looks to be approximately 11 197s so a very small fleet of non 150s to cover all the south of Hereford network.
I make it 18 comprising of 14 x 2 car and 4 x 3 car South of the Hereford block.
Interesting. I’d be seething
Just for the noise! Front 153 of a 153 153 158 up the Marches a couple of years ago was the best fun I've had in years. I suppose a pair of 153s is too much to ask on a Fishguard to Hereford (vice Manchester) service next weekInteresting. I’d be seething
Looking at RTT, you might not be getting a couple of 150s
Yes possibly just the oneLooking at RTT, you might not be getting a couple of 150s
or nothing at all 
www.realtimetrains.co.uk
Not as bad when its only Cardiff to Hereford though. Not as if its totally replacing a MK4 from Cardiff-Manchester. Id be more bothered about a replacement busInteresting. I’d be seething
I mean individual opinions will very. I personally have a strong dislike for the TfW 150s.Not as bad when its only Cardiff to Hereford though. Not as if its totally replacing a MK4 from Cardiff-Manchester. Id be more bothered about a replacement bus
A 150 is a 150 surely? The TfW 150s are comparable to the GWR 150s for the 2+2 seating layout. The absolute worst must surely be the original cramped 1980s 3+2 seating on the Northern 150/2s.
The TfW 150s are amongst the best 150s.
True and I used to hate them when they did nearly every South Wales to Manchester for what felt like an endless wait for the 197s. But recently I've been on one a few times including a trip on the HOWL and they don't seem so bad
I agree they were totally unsuitable for the long distance Milford to Manchester route and because they messed up the transition from 175 to 197 so very badly we were lumbered with them on the majority of services for the best part of a year.
Personal prejudices here of course, but I prefer a 153 appearing on HoWL services. The 150s always seem bare, cold and unwelcoming to me, especially in the dark with their harsh overbright lighting. Their poor seat/window alignment doesn't help either, though they do avoid the tight legroom issues of the 153s' seats.
Yes 153s have their good points but i always feel they are more cramped than a 150. Perhaps the doors in the middle of the carriages on 150s makes it seem more spacious. One of the many reasons i like a 197 too. 150 have better dwell time at stations which for a route like the HOWL with its regular stops, they are good for timekeeping. But i do agree the 153s are better for views out of the windows.
Oh, that's disappointing to hear, I haven't been able to try a /5 yet but I'd hoped they'd be better for legroom. I agree the seat pitch is the Achilles heel of the 153s, especially if you're in a seat that has a heater in the way of your feet as well.
Yes it is very disappointing. I suppose with half the carriage taken up with bike space it's to cram in as many seats as possible. Interestingly they chose to go for mostly table seats. Normally table seats are fine but for a tall stocky person like myself these tables are far too close to the seat than it is on a standard train.
Since HoWL services can often be just a single 153, I'd have hoped that the extra space of an added /5 might have allowed a better seat spacing. But then I don't use the line in the summer, so I don't see it at its busiest.
I think AT units will be active all year as they will be in fixed formations most the time
I believe the plan is to use 2 cars on all services regardless of the time of year. In winter with the free pass services can be even busier than Summer.
I thought that going flat out for up to 900 miles a day would finish them off, but it didn't. They just got on with it. The MTIN at the end of 2023 was about the same as the previous year. The improved reliability also applies to the Coryton line. Now that the 153s are gone, the daily routine of turning several trains short seems to have eased off.
A few ECS moves ran in the early hours to stock the south with units as they were 20 short hence the increase.
All the 'AT' formations are supposed to be permanent and all the reformed ones have multi only restrictions placed on them. The only likely use of a 1 car is if the spare unit ever ventures out on it's own.
The /5s have got a slightly improved pitch, seemingly not enough to improve things much!
1, possibly 2 of the 6 Active Travel formations will be fully made up of those seats so you might end up on a unit with no choice.
I thought 153s and 150s were equally awful in terms of legroom and window alignment, although I'm not sure if I've been on either since the PRM refurbs were done so the seating layout may have changed then. Before the PRM mods, I'd have taken a pair of ATW 153s over a single ATW 150 because of the extra 6 metres (roughly) of train length and thus greater capacity. Also, on a cold day/night, the 153's narrower doors (and possibly being able to sit further away from them, possibly interior vestibule doors too but I can't remember if they have those) mean less icy blasts of cold air when the doors are open at stations. I think the 153s might also have a higher total number of table bays, - on a lightly loaded service I would normally try and grab a table to myself since this is the only way to get room for my knees on both 150s amd 153s due to the awful legroom in the airline-style seats.
I assume the PRM toilet took out quite a lot of seats, so the seating end of the active travel coach is probably just making up for that to a degree.
The 153 Wikipedia article says:
It would not be good for travelling a significant distance on the HOWL. Id probably sit on one of the side seats meant for people with bikes if they were free or just stand!
If you got a table on the Active |ravel Carriage it would be worse than the airline seats in the standard carriage believe me! Especially for tall people like ourselves!
