WMR Class 196 Build and Implementation

[Mikey C]

I've not been paying much attention to this thread, but had my first rides on 196s today, and was disappointed by the legroom. Or rather by the seat mountings, as the legroom would be fine in the window airline seat, if it wasn't for the incredibly intrusive seat mounting which occupies the space where you'd expect your lower legs to go!

 

[TT-ONR-NRN]

I've not been paying much attention to this thread, but had my first rides on 196s today, and was disappointed by the legroom. Or rather by the seat mountings, as the legroom would be fine in the window airline seat, if it wasn't for the incredibly intrusive seat mounting which occupies the space where you'd expect your lower legs to go!

View attachment 175521

Yes, a trademark flaw of the FISA Lean seats, and making the window airline seats of 745s and 755s also horrible. I seriously, seriously hope it’s amended before they’re fitted to CrossCountry’s Voyagers.

 

[AJDesiro]

Yes, a trademark flaw of the FISA Lean seats, and making the window airline seats of 745s and 755s also horrible. I seriously, seriously hope it’s amended before they’re fitted to CrossCountry’s Voyagers.

It’s not the seat itself, it’s the mounting structure for that type of train. The LEANs on the 170s, 458s and 805/807 don’t have this issue.

 

[TT-ONR-NRN]

It’s not the seat itself, it’s the mounting structure for that type of train. The LEANs on the 170s, 458s and 805/807 don’t have this issue.

That’s good to know. It‘s very annoying on 745s.

 

[Mikey C]

It’s not the seat itself, it’s the mounting structure for that type of train. The LEANs on the 170s, 458s and 805/807 don’t have this issue.

Which does beg the question why on some trains they have just an awful design of seat mounting. Didn't anyone question it when the trains were being specced?

 

[AJDesiro]

Which does beg the question why on some trains they have just an awful design of seat mounting. Didn't anyone question it when the trains were being specced?

They would’ve been specified for cantilevered seating as it’s easier to clean the floor beneath those seats than a conventional mounting method.

 

[Peter Sarf]

Which does beg the question why on some trains they have just an awful design of seat mounting. Didn't anyone question it when the trains were being specced?

Its probably an ideal monting for face to face seating but not meant for airline seating !.

They would’ve been specified for cantilevered seating as it’s easier to clean the floor beneath those seats than a conventional mounting method.

Hmm, another example of operator convenience trumping customer convenience.

 

[Mikey C]

They would’ve been specified for cantilevered seating as it’s easier to clean the floor beneath those seats than a conventional mounting method.

The cantilevered arm doesn't have to be so far away from the seating though, right where the passengers behind would expect to out their legs. This is the Class 701 seating

One Arterio finally in service

Thursday 25th January 2024 I know I’m late to the “let’s finally welcome SWR’s new Arterio trains into service” party with lots of online coverage already available following SWR’s ‘sof…

busandtrainuser.com

 

[wls1]

Chiltern have published an article regarding East-West Rail and the use of 196s, stating that they will be branded in Chiltern colours

Chiltern Railways selected as operator for the first stage of East West Rail - Oxford to Milton Keynes | Chiltern Railways

Serving six stations, the new route will transform economic and social connections in the area by linking Oxford and Milton Keynes with reliable and efficient rail services for the first time in nearly 60 years.

www.chilternrailways.co.uk

Initial services will use Class 196 trains which will be branded in Chiltern colours.

 

[DavidGrain]

This question may have been answered before on this lengthy thread. If so my apologies. Was it always intended that 6 196/0s would be used on EWR (irrespective of who the operator would be) or have WMR lost 6 units that they were expecting for West Midlands use. I realise that the loss of the 230s on the LNR part of the franchise was unexpected otherwise the order could have been for an extra 3 units possibly of 3 car length.

 

[JonathanH]

Was it always intended that 6 196/0s would be used on EWR

EWR released an invitation to tender for provision of 12 to 14 units at one point, but ended up with the 6 2-car 196/0s.

https://www.railforums.co.uk/thread...k-procurement-updates-non-speculative.211423/

196s were ordered in 2018 https://www.railforums.co.uk/threads/wmt-class-196s-production-introduction-etc.165087

 

[Liam L]

This question may have been answered before on this lengthy thread. If so my apologies. Was it always intended that 6 196/0s would be used on EWR (irrespective of who the operator would be) or have WMR lost 6 units that they were expecting for West Midlands use. I realise that the loss of the 230s on the LNR part of the franchise was unexpected otherwise the order could have been for an extra 3 units possibly of 3 car length.

As far as I can remember, 6 units were always intended for EWR use. If we ignore the current rolling stock shortages on WMR services. Only 2 of 6 196/0s are required for service.

 

[JonathanH]

As far as I can remember, 6 units were always intended for EWR use. If we ignore the current rolling stock shortages on WMR services. Only 2 of 6 196/0s are required for service.

This post suggests that 2-car units would potentially allow 6-car formations on some peak services https://www.railforums.co.uk/thread...and-implementation.166065/page-5#post-4379264

 

[Wyrleybart]

This question may have been answered before on this lengthy thread. If so my apologies. Was it always intended that 6 196/0s would be used on EWR (irrespective of who the operator would be) or have WMR lost 6 units that they were expecting for West Midlands use. I realise that the loss of the 230s on the LNR part of the franchise was unexpected otherwise the order could have been for an extra 3 units possibly of 3 car length.

AIUI the WMR 196 fleet was ordered pre Covid and was all for the WMR / LNR service. Covid came along and wiped out much of the travelling farepayers. DfT and the TOCs thinned out the timetable and progressively introduced some culled services. Presumably DfT and WMR insist there is not the ridership to utilise the full class 196 fleet hence six 196/0s being conveniently hived off to EWR.

The questions would be
1) what were those six WMR class 196/0 diagrams that no longer need covering.

2) when EWR have their "permanent" fleet which will work east of Bletchley, will the 196/0s eventually return to WMR

 

[DavidGrain]

AIUI the WMR 196 fleet was ordered pre Covid and was all for the WMR / LNR service. Covid came along and wiped out much of the travelling farepayers. DfT and the TOCs thinned out the timetable and progressively introduced some culled services. Presumably DfT and WMR insist there is not the ridership to utilise the full class 196 fleet hence six 196/0s being conveniently hived off to EWR.

The questions would be
1) what were those six WMR class 196/0 diagrams that no longer need covering.

2) when EWR have their "permanent" fleet which will work east of Bletchley, will the 196/0s eventually return to WMR

Thanks for these comments. I have looked at Wikipedia which says that 26 units were ordered to replace 20 class 170s. So it looks as if 6 were always intended for EWR. Although it was only recently that it was announced that Chiltern would be operating Oxford to MKC, the fact is that this was stated in the last tender documents for the Chiltern franchise/contract. Back then there were comments on this forum that WMT would be operating the line possibly based on the fact that the trains would be housed at Bletchley which is an LNR depot.

Actually at the moment WMR could do with these 6 units as short formed and cancelled trains have been announced for the next month or so.

 

[Peter Sarf]

Thanks for these comments. I have looked at Wikipedia which says that 26 units were ordered to replace 20 class 170s. So it looks as if 6 were always intended for EWR. Although it was only recently that it was announced that Chiltern would be operating Oxford to MKC, the fact is that this was stated in the last tender documents for the Chiltern franchise/contract. Back then there were comments on this forum that WMT would be operating the line possibly based on the fact that the trains would be housed at Bletchley which is an LNR depot.

Actually at the moment WMR could do with these 6 units as short formed and cancelled trains have been announced for the next month or so.

What WMT need is for the 196s that were meant for them to be more reliable.
There are enough for the diagrams that I know of. Thats ten iirc 4car units needed out of fourteen, four 2car units needed out of six (then a further six for EWR). The Camp-Hill route will use another two 4car units when it is ready iirc, so two of each length spare.

Or is it mainly problems with the older 170s and 172s causing problems ?.

EDIT removed 170s, I forgot there are now no longer any with WMT/WMR

 

[Sprinter107]

What WMT need is for the 196s that were meant for them to be more reliable.
There are enough for the diagrams that I know of. Thats ten iirc 4car units needed out of fourteen, four 2car units needed out of six (then a further six for EWR). The Camp-Hill route will use another two 4car units when it is ready iirc, so two of each length spare.

Or is it mainly problems with the older 170s and 172s causing problems ?.

West Midlands no longer have any class 170s and haven't for a while. They now work for East Midlands.

 

[DavidGrain]

What WMT need is for the 196s that were meant for them to be more reliable.
There are enough for the diagrams that I know of. Thats ten iirc 4car units needed out of fourteen, four 2car units needed out of six (then a further six for EWR). The Camp-Hill route will use another two 4car units when it is ready iirc, so two of each length spare.

Or is it mainly problems with the older 170s and 172s causing problems ?.

WMT no longer have any 170s running in the West Midlands. I believe that they have some operating the Marston Vale Line from Bletchley to Bedford which they had to bring in when they could no longer use the 230s.

WMR have announced short formed trains and cancellations on the Snow Hill services because of maintenance problems. The 196s do not run on this route which is served by 172s. However it is possible that the problems could be with the 196s and some of the 172s are having to cover. I did see a 172 on the Hereford route a week ago when I was in Worcester. I didn't think much about it until typing this and realised it possibly should have been a 196.

 

[ls2270]

WMT no longer have any 170s running in the West Midlands. I believe that they have some operating the Marston Vale Line from Bletchley to Bedford which they had to bring in when they could no longer use the 230s.

WMR have announced short formed trains and cancellations on the Snow Hill services because of maintenance problems. The 196s do not run on this route which is served by 172s. However it is possible that the problems could be with the 196s and some of the 172s are having to cover. I did see a 172 on the Hereford route a week ago when I was in Worcester. I didn't think much about it until typing this and realised it possibly should have been a 196.

The Marston Vale Line is ex Northern Class 150s, not 170s.

 

[DavidGrain]

The Marston Vale Line is ex Northern Class 150s, not 170s.

Thanks for the correction.

 

[Jacob Porrett]

The Marston Vale Line is ex Northern Class 150s, not 170s.

3x 150s isn't it? Two daily in service and one spare?

 

[pokemonsuper9]

3x 150s isn't it? Two daily in service and one spare?

Yep, 150137, 150139 and 150141 (the only 150/1 I haven't ridden)

 

[DavidGrain]

Yep, 150137, 150139 and 150141 (the only 150/1 I haven't ridden)

Consecutive odd numbers, I remember noting that at the time.
Wait till the Oxford MKC is open to the public then a day trip to Bletchley is my plan to take in both parts of EWR.

 

[TT-ONR-NRN]

It’s a shame there’s no longer enough 196s to run a handful of Snow Hill lines services as originally planned (and indeed as a few 170s used to do prior to COVID). The 172s on that route are dire for any journey longer than half an hour. Travelling from Jewellery Quarter to Stratford on one was hell.

 

[nigelsporne]

There has just been a report on our local TV News that the WMR problems are with the 172s from Snow Hill and not the 196s. A new Timetable has been introduced. The problem appears to be the shortage of wheel sets. Further reductions in services were hinted at. Whether WMR use any spare 196s to help out remains to be seen.

 

[Class172]

There has just been a report on our local TV News that the WMR problems are with the 172s from Snow Hill and not the 196s. A new Timetable has been introduced. The problem appears to be the shortage of wheel sets. Further reductions in services were hinted at. Whether WMR use any spare 196s to help out remains to be seen.

Whilst there may be a problem with a shortage of wheelsets for the class 172s, that doesn't necessarily recuse the class 196s from being the source of the problem. If the unreliability of the class 196 fleet is forcing class 172s to accumulate extra unplanned mileage on Hereford services, then the shortage of parts could be seen as a symptom rather than a cause.

 

[newtownmgr]

Problems with both 172 & 196 units with no site in end.

The problem with using 196’s on Snow Hill line services are twofold. One not enough units and secondly only Worcester & Leamington sign them. 60% of services are worked by Snow Hill

 

[DavidGrain]

This is an extract from a Facebook post by Stourbridge Line User Group following a meeting with West Midlands Railways. The full report goes into both the 172s and the 196s but I have just extracted what I think is relevant on the thread.

Class 196. West Midlands had 12 2-car Class 196/0 and 14 4-car Class 196/1. Unfortunately, six of the Class 196/0 units have been requisitioned by the Department for Transport to operate the new Oxford to Milton Keynes (East-West Rail) service as the previous Government sanctioned the building of the line but not any new trains to operate it. This has coincided with engines on the Class 196s reaching the point where they need replacing, which is causing shortages of available units. West Midlands Railway is in contact with CAF re the supply of replacement engines.
It has meant that Class 172 units are sometimes being deployed on New Street to Hereford services, exacerbating the short-form problem on Snow Hill lines. In fact, I saw a 2-car Class 172/0 unit at New Street yesterday, replacing a 4-car Class 196 on the 1550 service to Hereford.

This gives the answer to a question I asked in a post above. DfT took the 6 Class 196s from the WMT order leaving WMT short of their planned stock.

 

[Peter Sarf]

This is an extract from a Facebook post by Stourbridge Line User Group following a meeting with West Midlands Railways. The full report goes into both the 172s and the 196s but I have just extracted what I think is relevant on the thread.

Class 196. West Midlands had 12 2-car Class 196/0 and 14 4-car Class 196/1. Unfortunately, six of the Class 196/0 units have been requisitioned by the Department for Transport to operate the new Oxford to Milton Keynes (East-West Rail) service as the previous Government sanctioned the building of the line but not any new trains to operate it. This has coincided with engines on the Class 196s reaching the point where they need replacing, which is causing shortages of available units. West Midlands Railway is in contact with CAF re the supply of replacement engines.
It has meant that Class 172 units are sometimes being deployed on New Street to Hereford services, exacerbating the short-form problem on Snow Hill lines. In fact, I saw a 2-car Class 172/0 unit at New Street yesterday, replacing a 4-car Class 196 on the 1550 service to Hereford.

This gives the answer to a question I asked in a post above. DfT took the 6 Class 196s from the WMT order leaving WMT short of their planned stock.

BUT what were WMT planning to use most of 12 x 2-car 196s for......

 

[Mikey C]

And why do the engines on the almost new 196s need changing? They're the same type as on the 195s