Transport for Wales Class 231 / 756 FLIRTs

[Peter Sarf]

I'm sure Stadler would have come up with one if that were to be the deciding factor - but given it would be a first for them it would almost certainly have delayed development and delivery by a considerable amount of time while they designed an entirely new cab to accommodate it.

That is my feeling. And I think Stadler are busy enough as it is.

 

[oglord]

My guess is that Cheltenham is too far off the juice for a tri-mode's battery.

They have a diesel GU as well...

 

[Pete_uk]

Funny how the Maesteg to Cheltenham 'stoppers' will have the kind of train the XC Cardiff to Nottingham should have.

 

[Rhydgaled]

Funny how the Maesteg to Cheltenham 'stoppers' will have the kind of train the XC Cardiff to Nottingham should have.

I think TfW 170s already have more toilets and possibly more legroom than the XC ones, though the ideal train for the Nottinghams in my view would be something like a 175 (but with more carriages) rather than a FLIRT.

 

[AlexNL]

One of the things I remember reading about the FLIRTs on Greater Anglia is that their fuel tanks aren't that big, and that they need to be topped up during the day. Is it the same on the TfW FLIRTs or have the tanks on these been enlarged?

 

[TheEdge]

Thanks, very much a case of spending on the nicer stuff for the Metro and having no budget left for the rest of the network so going for Cheap As F... class 197s for everywhere else then.

The Anglia ones have the same seats and everyone was making the same comments and they've actually been well received and there are very few complaints about the comfort of the seats.

 

[anthony263]

One of the things I remember reading about the FLIRTs on Greater Anglia is that their fuel tanks aren't that big, and that they need to be topped up during the day. Is it the same on the TfW FLIRTs or have the tanks on these been enlarged?

I think tfw specified an additional fuel tank

 

[JonBridg]

But why straight diesel ?. Perhaps the PROPORTION of the Cheltenham route that is electrified is the factor - too little ?. Maybe the routes the 756s are meant for are more likely to get electrified. So instead of wondering why the 231s are straight diesel the optimist in me prefers to wonder why the 756s can use electrification.

That's highly likely why the decision was made. Cheltenham to Maesteg is about 90 miles but only about 20-25 miles are actually electrified, so it'd spend less than a third of the journey on the juice. Unfortunately it doesn’t look as if Cardiff-Bridgend-Maesteg and Severn Tunnel Jct-Cheltenham will be electrified any time soon, and there are no other OHLE routes in Wales as yet to take advantage of.

How about performance? From Stadler’s data sheet, the 231s look very much like 755s but without the several tonnes of transformers and overhead line equipment, and probably with lower motor gearing too (top speed is 90mph to the 755’s 100mph). So it should have superior performance to a 755 on diesel which was already faster off the line than most 2nd-gen EMUs! So 231s should have no trouble keeping up with the heavy 800/802s on the 90mph electrified section.

The Stadler FLIRT is a modular design so converting the units to bi-mode when the need arises shouldn’t be an issue. Maybe they are cheap out, but if they're a bit faster and cheaper to run and maintain that's a plus

Thanks for the vids and pics everyone, excited to see these finally in Wales!

 

[Bletchleyite]

The Anglia ones have the same seats and everyone was making the same comments and they've actually been well received and there are very few complaints about the comfort of the seats.

I think he was saying - and he is right - that it is bizarre that a premium seat designed for long distance use (FISA LEAN) has been chosen for the regional DMUs and a cheap and nasty one designed for regional and local use (Fainsa Sophia) for the long distance 197s.

 

[TT-ONR-NRN]

I think he was saying - and he is right - that it is bizarre that a premium seat designed for long distance use (FISA LEAN) has been chosen for the regional DMUs and a cheap and nasty one designed for regional and local use (Fainsa Sophia) for the long distance 197s.

“Premium” is certainly pushing it.

 

[AlexNL]

I think he was saying - and he is right - that it is bizarre that a premium seat designed for long distance use (FISA LEAN) has been chosen for the regional DMUs and a cheap and nasty one designed for regional and local use (Fainsa Sophia) for the long distance 197s.

And then to think KeolisAmey originally went for the same seats as found in the 700s.

TfW had to fork out some cash to get them to put in a different type of seats. It wasn't possible to get a completely different kind of seat so that makes me think CAF/KA had already signed a deal with Fainsa for the delivery of seats, as WMT did manage to procure the FISA seats for their Class 196 trains.

 

[43096]

“Premium” is certainly pushing it.

They are way better than any other seat that has been used in new stock here for many, many years, so in that sense they are "premium".

 

[TT-ONR-NRN]

They are way better than any other seat that has been used in new stock here for many, many years, so in that sense they are "premium".

I find it to be subjective. I find a LNER Azuma more comfortable that a GA Flirt, even if I do seem to be advocating the 755s in my avatar, though I appreciate I'm in the minority.

What is interesting, is that the FLIRTS are the only new stock that will have the FISAs, according to the mock up and artist impressions which show the 398 Tram Trains with Fainsa Sophias also.

 

[tomuk]

And then to think KeolisAmey originally went for the same seats as found in the 700s.

TfW had to fork out some cash to get them to put in a different type of seats. It wasn't possible to get a completely different kind of seat so that makes me think CAF/KA had already signed a deal with Fainsa for the delivery of seats, as WMT did manage to procure the FISA seats for their Class 196 trains.

Just confirms the WG/TfW obsession with the Core Valley Lines. Anything outside of them has less priority. Diesel 231 > Class 197s > Cascaded 170s >Class 230s. They would of rubber stamped the original seats in the 197s.

 

[TT-ONR-NRN]

Just confirms the WG/TfW obsession with the Core Valley Lines. Anything outside of them has less priority. Diesel 231 > Class 197s > Cascaded 170s >Class 230s. They would of rubber stamped the original seats in the 197s.

There's certainly not a priority on the Valleys. It's impossible to get into town because everything is always cancelled!

 

[tomuk]

There's certainly not a priority on the Valleys. It's impossible to get into town because everything is always cancelled!

Well up here in the North the service is a mess too. 150s and 153s subbing for 175s and 158s on most routes.

 

[TT-ONR-NRN]

Well up here in the North the service is a mess too. 150s and 153s subbing for 175s and 158s on most routes.

At least they run at all, bar the sparsely used Conwy Valley.
Having heard that these 231s and 756s will be rushed into service in order to shake off the 769s, I wouldn't hold my breath. They don't have enough drivers, sorry - "resources" to run even three quarters of the service down here, let alone to release some for driver training.

 

[Anonymous10]

Well up here in the North the service is a mess too. 150s and 153s subbing for 175s and 158s on most routes.

and in the west routes formerly run by 150s and 153s are now almost always 158s add to the mix random cancellations its sooo annoying

 

[AlexNL]

Regardless of that, it's nice to see that there's now a second operator of FLIRT trains in the UK. May there be more to follow. The level boarding will be a game changer.

 

[tomuk]

Regardless of that, it's nice to see that there's now a second operator of FLIRT trains in the UK. May there be more to follow. The level boarding will be a game changer.

Is it? They are apparently expensive and the level boarding only works if you modify all the stations too.

 

[43096]

Is it? They are apparently expensive and the level boarding only works if you modify all the stations too.

But the level boarding is at the standard UK platform height, so over time more and more stations will be compatible. They are without doubt a huge improvement on what has gone before for passengers.

 

[AlexNL]

Is it? They are apparently expensive and the level boarding only works if you modify all the stations too.

Level boarding is a game-changer when it comes to accessibility (wheelchairs, prams, and so on), they help to keep dwell times low as people can just walk in and out of the train rather than having to take a step up or down, and they also improve platform-train interface safety: there's less chance of someone misstepping and falling down the gap.

The FLIRTs are built to the standard UK platform height (91 cm above top of rail) and many stations will comply with that or be quite close to it already. A few years ago, the Permanent Rail Engineering consultancy made a visualisation of the spread of GB rail platforms along 10m intervals, compared to where the platforms should be according to the Railway Group Standards:



Source:

https://www.twitter.com/PermanentRail/status/1113131333721747456/

If you take a line-by-line approach, bringing platforms in accordance with the standards is doable. You won't have to touch each platform either: small height differences are still navigable by people, and platforms which are a little bit too far back from the track aren't much of a problem either as the extending step will cover the distance.

 

[Rhydgaled]

They are without doubt a huge improvement on what has gone before for passengers.

In accessibility terms yes, and compared to what they will mostly be replacing in Wales I expect they will be an improvement pretty much across the board. Things are less clear cut with the Anglia ones (particularly the EMU version) given the stock they were replacing was in many cases vastly superior to what Arriva were running on what will be the S.E.Wales Metro, and there's other stock out there which is superior to the FLIRTs in some respects.

 

[tomuk]

They are without doubt a huge improvement on what has gone before for passengers.

Pretty much anything is better than a BR era 150-156 or the Pacers. Would East Anglia have been better off with CAF Civitys? Not sure but I believe the marginal difference is small.

 

[Techniquest]

Regardless of that, it's nice to see that there's now a second operator of FLIRT trains in the UK. May there be more to follow. The level boarding will be a game changer.

Agreed, I loved the level boarding feature of the 745s and 755s when I was over that way in the autumn. It made things so much easier putting my bike on board after a long day of cycling and exploring!

Here's hoping more of these trains will soon enough arrive around the rest of the country!

 

[TT-ONR-NRN]

Pretty much anything is better than a BR era 150-156 or the Pacers. Would East Anglia have been better off with CAF Civitys? Not sure but I believe the marginal difference is small.

Indeed, I think that the FLIRTS are truthfully only loved so much because they’re fitted with something other than Fainsa seats for once

 

[Bletchleyite]

Indeed, I think that the FLIRTS are truthfully only loved so much because they’re fitted with something other than Fainsa seats for once

Level boarding.

Other than that it is a tube with (decent) seats in it, but level boarding is, as you would say in IT, a "killer app", good for most people and not negative to those who don't need it.

 

[Rhydgaled]

Indeed, I think that the FLIRTS are truthfully only loved so much because they’re fitted with something other than Fainsa seats for once

Level boarding.

Other than that it is a tube with (decent) seats in it, but level boarding is, as you would say in IT, a "killer app", good for most people and not negative to those who don't need it.

Level boarding has benefits most passengers yes, but that low-floor design of the FLIRTs (in GB at least) is not entirely without negative impacts. In some cases it may be advantagous to have the exterior doors above the bogies, and the design of the UK FLIRTs suggests that isn't possible with a low-floor design. Thus, to get level boarding on stock with doors above the bogies would appear to require raising platform heights (which may have gauging implications) rather than lowering the floor of the trains.

 

[Bletchleyite]

Level boarding has benefits most passengers yes, but that low-floor design of the FLIRTs (in GB at least) is not entirely without negative impacts. In some cases it may be advantagous to have the exterior doors above the bogies, and the design of the UK FLIRTs suggests that isn't possible with a low-floor design. Thus, to get level boarding on stock with doors above the bogies would appear to require raising platform heights (which may have gauging implications) rather than lowering the floor of the trains.

There is no specific need to have doors above the bogies. It's just a convention. You can have them elsewhere. It isn't a problem.

These rather nice bits of kit (which are high floor in Polish terms but probably low floor in UK terms) have doors in rather random positions but have the feel of end-doored units because there are relatively few doors and they have vestibule doors either side of them to prevent draughts.

PKP FLIRT showing door positions, from mediarail.be

 

[Techniquest]

Wow those PKP Flirts look good Certainly makes me want to go to Poland again even more!