Transport for Wales Class 231 / 756 FLIRTs

[MikePJ]

They’re not a length-efficient design, certainly! There’s always a trade-off in engineering, and so for the FLIRT the train is longer but gains design flexibility (which is Stadler’s selling point) and also level boarding, especially for the non-UK market where low platforms are the norm.

 

[Annetts key]

So, in overall train length, how would a FLIRT compare with a locomotive and set of coaches (which include accessible toilets, luggage and bike areas and of course air conditioning and the other modern electrical and electronic services for passengers)?

 

[AdamWW]

They’re not a length-efficient design, certainly! There’s always a trade-off in engineering, and so for the FLIRT the train is longer but gains design flexibility (which is Stadler’s selling point) and also level boarding, especially for the non-UK market where low platforms are the norm.

The level boarding is - in my opinion - worth some sacrifices. The roof looks pretty cluttered so I suspect there isn't scope for putting much else up there.
The 4 coach FLIRTs do have a coach without much underneath (presumably for commonality with the three coach variant) so maybe in principle something could be done with that.

Of course a fully electric version doesn't need the power pack which saves some space.

 

[Trainbike46]

I remember there was a discussion about seat numbers on a 755 vs a 150 a while ago, but it stopped becasue it appeared that wikipedia might have incorrect seat numbers for the 150s, and even if they are correct, they are unclear about which numbers refer to rebfurbished/unrefurbished and 2 vs 3 car. If someone has accurate numbers for a 150 that would be really appreciated!

But, this is what we know:
755 4 car: 202+27 tip up = 229 seats
755 3 car: 144+23 tip up = 167 seats
These are all 2+2 seating, and are in my experience very comfortable

Class 150 according to wikipedia:
Northern Trains: 124, 131 or 149 seats
GWR: 147 seats
At least some of the 150 designs involve 2+3 seating

Now, if the 147/149 seats are 3-car units, then that is comparable to a 3-car 755 if you exclude the tip-up seats

So assuming wikipedia is at least somewhat close in seat counts, the difference isn't actually something to really worry about. I think the FLIRTs lose less space at the car connections compared to many other trains

 

[AlexNL]

Now, if the 147/149 seats are 3-car units, then that is comparable to a 3-car 755 if you exclude the tip-up seats

Those are 2 car units with high capacity seating. There's only a handful of 3-car units.

A two car 150 measures about 40m in length whereas a 755/3 is 65m long. A 755/4 is 81m long.

A pair of 2+2 seated 150s offers more seats than a 755/4. On rural lines with short platforms, this may be a dealbreaker.

 

[XAM2175]

... it appeared that wikipedia might have incorrect seat numbers for the 150s, and even if they are correct, they are unclear about which numbers refer to rebfurbished/unrefurbished and 2 vs 3 car ...

As the citations indicate, the 150 numbers for Northern come from the 2014 franchise spec, and the GWR ones come from FGW's own literature, so they were correct for some 150s at some point in time, but not necessarily up to date (primarily because it's a pain in the backside to keep up with all the chopping and changing). The 755 numbers come straight from Stadler's datasheets.

 

[penguin8967]

Class 150 according to wikipedia:
Northern Trains: 124, 131 or 149 seats
GWR: 147 seats
At least some of the 150 designs involve 2+3 seating

According to GWR's facilities guide (from April 2021), a 2 car unit with 2+2 seating has 122 seats (counting the seat map provided gives a figure of 108 plus 12 tip up seats). TfW's fleet accessibility specification from October 2021 states 108 plus 36 tip up making 144. No idea how TfW somehow has 24 extra tip up seats when the layout is the same? Might just be an error (GWR and TfW seating maps below - virtually identical layout)).

The TfW guide also specifies that a 4-car 231 has 170 seats (+34 tip up) making 204 total. If you're counting only proper seats, a 4 car 150 pair has 46 more seats (216) than a 231 (170) - a 27% increase.

 

[Rhydgaled]

It would be far more logical to move the 150s from Merthyr/Aberdare/Treherbert to cover for the 170s.

How would that be more logical than TfW's proposal to move the 150s back onto the Rhymney line? Either way, a route which has relatively modern stock (231s in the case of the Rhymney line or 170s in the case of Maesteg, Ebbw Vale and Cheltenham) would have to suffer the 150s for a while before eventually getting FLIRTs. The only difference from the passenger's point of view is which route(s) are temporarily downgraded* to 150s (from an operational point of view, I guess it depends which staff sign which stock - will there still be some 150s going to Rhymney when all the 769s are gone and replaed by 231s or will traction knowlege on 150s at Rhymney have a chance to lapse?).

* assuming of course that 150s are considered inferior to both 170s and 231s - of the three I personally think the 170s are probably the most comfortable (meaning replacing 170s with 150s would be a bigger downgrade than replacing 231s with 150s) with 231s vs 150s being a difficult one to call (the 231s are probably better in most respects but the seats are hard meaning the 150s have nicer seats).

I remember there was a discussion about seat numbers on a 755 vs a 150 a while ago, but it stopped becasue it appeared that wikipedia might have incorrect seat numbers for the 150s, and even if they are correct, they are unclear about which numbers refer to rebfurbished/unrefurbished and 2 vs 3 car. If someone has accurate numbers for a 150 that would be really appreciated!

I think the Arriva Trains Wales franchise agreement (can't find the right document again now though) stated that they would refurbish their class 150s with each 2-car unit having 149 seats before refurbishment (presumably 2+3 seating) and 116 seats afterwards. This would have been before PRM works, so the current TfW class 150s with the larger (PRM) toilet are presumably less than 116 seats.

 

[Jez]

How would that be more logical than TfW's proposal to move the 150s back onto the Rhymney line? Either way, a route which has relatively modern stock (231s in the case of the Rhymney line or 170s in the case of Maesteg, Ebbw Vale and Cheltenham) would have to suffer the 150s for a while before eventually getting FLIRTs. The only difference from the passenger's point of view is which route(s) are temporarily downgraded* to 150s (from an operational point of view, I guess it depends which staff sign which stock - will there still be some 150s going to Rhymney when all the 769s are gone and replaed by 231s or will traction knowlege on 150s at Rhymney have a chance to lapse?).

* assuming of course that 150s are considered inferior to both 170s and 231s - of the three I personally think the 170s are probably the most comfortable (meaning replacing 170s with 150s would be a bigger downgrade than replacing 231s with 150s) with 231s vs 150s being a difficult one to call (the 231s are probably better in most respects but the seats are hard meaning the 150s have nicer seats).


I think the Arriva Trains Wales franchise agreement (can't find the right document again now though) stated that they would refurbish their class 150s with each 2-car unit having 149 seats before refurbishment (presumably 2+3 seating) and 116 seats afterwards. This would have been before PRM works, so the current TfW class 150s with the larger (PRM) toilet are presumably less than 116 seats.

A 231 is far nicer to travel on than a 170. Although the 170s are fine for the routes they work.

I travelled on a 150 at the weekend and I actually think they have grown on me a bit (the TFW refurbished not the Northern ones). I prefer them to a pair of 153s. Obviously I still think 175/158/170 and especially a 197 are all much better than a 150. To be fair it was very quiet so that probably helped me enjoy the journey more. The main issue with 150s are when they are crowded and there is very little space for luggage. That shouldnt be too much of an issue on the Valley, Ebbw Vale and Maesteg lines although people obviously do travel with luggage and change at Cardiff Central to other services but generally not as much luggage as id expect on a Cardiff-Manchester or Holyhead for example.

 

[Trainbike46]

Those are 2 car units with high capacity seating. There's only a handful of 3-car units.

A two car 150 measures about 40m in length whereas a 755/3 is 65m long. A 755/4 is 81m long.

A pair of 2+2 seated 150s offers more seats than a 755/4. On rural lines with short platforms, this may be a dealbreaker.

so wikipedia is entirely missing the 3-car seat numbers then!

According to GWR's facilities guide (from April 2021), a 2 car unit with 2+2 seating has 122 seats (counting the seat map provided gives a figure of 108 plus 12 tip up seats). TfW's fleet accessibility specification from October 2021 states 108 plus 36 tip up making 144. No idea how TfW somehow has 24 extra tip up seats when the layout is the same? Might just be an error (GWR and TfW seating maps below - virtually identical layout)).
View attachment 133605View attachment 133606
The TfW guide also specifies that a 4-car 231 has 170 seats (+34 tip up) making 204 total. If you're counting only proper seats, a 4 car 150 pair has 46 more seats (216) than a 231 (170) - a 27% increase.

Thank you for finding these!

Do you have any idea clue why the 231s whould have 32 fewer proper seats compared to the GA 755s, which have 202 proper seats?

 

[Envoy]

The seats in the 231’s are terrible - too hard, seat base not long enough, seat back too upright and apart from those on the bogies, the seats are set too low to the floor making it hard to get up/down.

 

[3973EXL]

6L22 92042 66002 756003/006/007

Realtime Trains | 6L22 1659 Dollands Moor Sdgs to Ripple Lane Exch Sdgs | 24/04/2023

Real-time train running information for 6L22 1659 departure from Dollands Moor Sdgs to Ripple Lane Exch Sdgs on 24/04/2023. From Realtime Trains, an independent source of train running info for Great Britain.

www.realtimetrains.co.uk

5Q99 66002 756003/006/007

Realtime Trains | 5Q99 0253 Ripple Lane Exch Sdgs to Canton Pullmans | 25/04/2023

Real-time train running information for 5Q99 0253 departure from Ripple Lane Exch Sdgs to Canton Pullmans on 25/04/2023. From Realtime Trains, an independent source of train running info for Great Britain.

www.realtimetrains.co.uk

 

[Techniquest]

The seats in the 231’s are terrible - too hard, seat base not long enough, seat back too upright and apart form those on the bogies, the seats are set too low to the floor making it hard to get up/down.

Definitely not an issue I had on my four journeys on 231s so far! They're not as comfortable as a 170 for example, but the issues you list I have not yet seen!

 

[ac6000cw]

Do you have any idea clue why the 231s whould have 32 fewer proper seats compared to the GA 755s, which have 202 proper seats?

One major difference is the 231's have two sets of doors per side on the end cars (and one set per side on the inner cars), whereas the 755's have one set of doors per side on all cars. So per 4-car train the 231's have two extra vestibule areas/loss of seating space, but you gain extra standing space and faster boarding. Swings and roundabouts...

 

[CardiffKid]

How would that be more logical than TfW's proposal to move the 150s back onto the Rhymney line?

Because in the eyes of the ordinary passenger (which seldom visit this site FYI) a 150 is a significant downgrade from a brand new 231s which are now a regular sight on the route.

These have been launched and are now essentially going to disappear in the eyes of regular commuters on that line.

 

[AdamWW]

Because in the eyes of the ordinary passenger (which seldom visit this site FYI) a 150 is a significant downgrade from a brand new 231s which are now a regular sight on the route.

These have been launched and are now essentially going to disappear in the eyes of regular commuters on that line.

Quite.

Once you've done the publicity announcing that the brand new trains are starting to come into use, it probably doesn't look too great to take them away again.

(And so far as I know they never actually explained that the new trains aren't actually the ones that will be running on the "Metro" long term).

 

[Peter Sarf]

Quite.

Once you've done the publicity announcing that the brand new trains are starting to come into use, it probably doesn't look too great to take them away again.

(And so far as I know they never actually explained that the new trains aren't actually the ones that will be running on the "Metro" long term).

Yes. I have often wondered if passengers are not expected to notice a difference between 231s and 398s.

 

[AdamWW]

Yes. I have often wondered if passengers are not expected to notice a difference between 231s and 398s.

Well they will be on different lines at least so there won't be a changover from one to the other.

The difference between a 231 and 756 is more subtle.

 

[Peter Sarf]

Well they will be on different lines at least so there won't be a changover from one to the other.

The difference between a 231 and 756 is more subtle.

Aye. Fingers crossed there wont be an intervening class between 231 moving on and 756s arriving. All depends on the knitting I suppose.

I am still wondering what the 756s are going to do at first - seems very likely they will be ready before a route is ready for them.

 

[Anonymous10]

Aye. Fingers crossed there wont be an intervening class between 231 moving on and 756s arriving. All depends on the knitting I suppose.

I am still wondering what the 756s are going to do at first - seems very likely they will be ready before a route is ready for them.

in theory could they work cheltenham/ maesteg/ ebbw vale services?

 

[Peter Sarf]

in theory could they work cheltenham/ maesteg/ ebbw vale services?

I think the battery range won't be sufficient. That is if I remember correctly that the 756s have one diesel engine module, three battery modules and a pantograph. The 231s have four diesel engine modules so four times the power when away from the wires for a distance.

 

[AlexNL]

When testing the 777/1s in Germany, Stadler and Merseytravel found out that the range of the batteries is much better than was expected. A 777/1 has 320 kWh of battery capacity, whereas TfW have stated that 756s will have 480 kWh (3 car) / 600 kWh (4 car) of capacity.

Here's hoping that the finding for the 777s also goes for the 756s - perhaps that would make it feasible to run 756s to Ebbw Vale and Cheltenham as they could run under the wires between Cardiff and Newport?

 

[AdamWW]

When testing the 777/1s in Germany, Stadler and Merseytravel found out that the range of the batteries is much better than was expected. A 777/1 has 320 kWh of battery capacity, whereas TfW have stated that 756s will have 480 kWh (3 car) / 600 kWh (4 car) of capacity.

Here's hoping that the finding for the 777s also goes for the 756s - perhaps that would make it feasible to run 756s to Ebbw Vale and Cheltenham as they could run under the wires between Cardiff and Newport?

Likewise perhaps they could cope with the Rhymney line electrification partially complete.

I presume that the batteries will gradually lose their ability to hold charge so I wonder how they are specced. Is the quoted capacity for the end of the nominal lifetime? (After which presumably one has to buy a new battery).

In which case it presumably isn't surprising that new trains perform better than "expected".

 

[Peter Sarf]

When testing the 777/1s in Germany, Stadler and Merseytravel found out that the range of the batteries is much better than was expected. A 777/1 has 320 kWh of battery capacity, whereas TfW have stated that 756s will have 480 kWh (3 car) / 600 kWh (4 car) of capacity.

Here's hoping that the finding for the 777s also goes for the 756s - perhaps that would make it feasible to run 756s to Ebbw Vale and Cheltenham as they could run under the wires between Cardiff and Newport?

I fear the battery range will decline with age (beaten to it below).

Likewise perhaps they could cope with the Rhymney line electrification partially complete.

I presume that the batteries will gradually lose their ability to hold charge so I wonder how they are specced. Is the quoted capacity for the end of the nominal lifetime? (After which presumably one has to buy a new battery).

In which case it presumably isn't surprising that new trains perform better than "expected".

That is my hope. That the 756s could cope on the Rhymney in the short term until electrification is completed.

I do agree the battery range will decline over the years so an unambitious promise has to be made.

 

[AdamWW]

I do agree the battery range will decline over the years so an unambitious promise has to be made.

So it might be that at present they can cope better with a lack of wiring than they will later on. Which is perhaps convenient. But of course the more running you do that isn't under the wires, the faster they will decline.
I don't suppose the batteries are cheap either.

 

[Meerkat]

How warm are the batteries? I read something somewhere about battery buses loses significant lumps of range when the temperature went negative.
The railway really doesn't need that kind of scandal.

 

[AlexNL]

In Germany, Stadler recently set a world record by running a FLIRT Akku in wintery conditions for much further than they anticipated. The guaranteed range was 80 km, but they were able to run it for 224 km before the batteries were empty.

Stadler’s FLIRT Akku sets world record for battery-only range | RailTech.com

 

[Peter Sarf]

How warm are the batteries? I read something somewhere about battery buses loses significant lumps of range when the temperature went negative.
The railway really doesn't need that kind of scandal.

I know the cold adversely affects to mobile batteries. I have seen it with my mobile and apparently even a fairly well charged mobile can end up temporarily dead if too cold.

 

[Annetts key]

All battery technologies have limitations at low and high temperatures. But the temperature range depends on which chemistry is being used. Some systems have heaters to keep the temperature above the minimum (very common on space probes and space craft for example).

The other thing to remember, is that a battery when being discharged or charged will produce some heat itself.

 

[Rhydgaled]

Because in the eyes of the ordinary passenger (which seldom visit this site FYI) a 150 is a significant downgrade from a brand new 231s which are now a regular sight on the route.

I agree, that's an unsatisfactory suituation which ideally would be avoided. However a 150 is, if anything, an even more significant downgrade from the 170s that passengers on the Maesteg, Ebbw Vale and Cheltenham Spa routes have enjoyed for even longer than Rhymney has had 231s. As I see it, unless TfW are able to delay releasing the 170s until sufficient 756s can enter service on the Rhymney line to release all the 231s directly, there are only two clear options:

1. significantly downgrade Rhymney and Penarth passengers from 231s to 150s
2. significantly downgrade Maesteg, Ebbw Vale and Cheltenham Spa passengers from 170s to 150s

I don't see how one option is "far more logical" than the other (from the passenger's point of view) - both options are awful but unfortunately it seems likely that TfW will have to choose and implement one of them.

Aye. Fingers crossed there wont be an intervening class between 231 moving on and 756s arriving. All depends on the knitting I suppose.

I am still wondering what the 756s are going to do at first - seems very likely they will be ready before a route is ready for them.

in theory could they work cheltenham/ maesteg/ ebbw vale services?

Can't remember this has already been asked (and answered), but how quickly can staff who sign 231s be trainned on 756s (and vice-versa)? Or will all TfW staff that sign one type sign both? Unless traction knowledge is a non-issue in this suituation, then I would guess that complicates using the 756s outside the Core Valley Lines (plus Penarth, Barry Island and Barry-Bridgend).