TFW 197 units

[Ian Hargrave]

I had occasion last week to travel on one of these newly constructed units between Crewe and Chester…a fast non stop mainline service. They are smartly and thoughtfully designed with regard to passenger seating ( if a little too firm perhaps ) and space.. TFW proclaim they will be used on long distance services such as between Cardiff and Holyhead.Sadly the twenty 

minutes I rode in one would at this moment deter me from any such journey.I would liken the ride they give as that of a rapid

but firm propulsion over a cobbled road. Thinking that perhaps the permanent way between Crewe and Chester was maybe 

partially responsible,I awaited my return journey yesterday afternoon with curiosity. This was on a 2x Voyager 221 lash up on a service to Euston. This 20 + year old ensemble rode as a magic carpet over the same stretch of track in comparison.

 

Any observations on this from anyone ?

[The Stationmaster]

Lots of modern units seem to have the syndrome of hard seats and equally hard riding,  The Liz Line 345s are one example where their riding seems to have deteriorated as mileage has accumulated although their seats aren't in maximum hardness territory.  Something of a contrast with the basically similar age GWR 387s which boast hard seats but (to my satisfaction) a seat back angle which really suits me and excellent riding even at maximum speed of 110 mph.

 

Another modern example with lack of riding qualities are the IETs.  Seating isn't marvellous but tolerable from, say, Penzance to Reading -  but their riding, especially over pointwork is something akin to a box of ageing spanners with all sorts of crashings, rattling,  and bangs - nota patch on 387's riding.

 

A lot of it might be down to bogie design to suit British track. The 345s of course are basically UndergrounD trains (where their riding is, in my experience, excellent) while the IETs aren't a UK design and like, for example, past foreign designs such as the Blue Pullman and BR Mk4, bogies they don't seem to like British track.

 

The other worrying thing about 345 and IET bogies appears to be their ability to damage sub-formation in the Thames Valley to an extent which hasn't been seen since the original cwr installation times - pumping sleepers all over the place including some in recently laid pointwork.  Part of this may be down to NR maintenance and renewal standards and they certainly give every appearance of not understanding how to (or can't afford to) deal with the problem as all they seem to do is chuck in more top ballast.  However hard riding bogies clearly don't help matters one bit.

[Ian Hargrave]

5 minutes ago, The Stationmaster said:

Lots of modern units seem to have the syndrome of hard seats and equally hard riding,  The Liz Line 345s are one example where their riding seems to have deteriorated as mileage has accumulated although their seats aren't in maximum hardness territory.  Something of a contrast with the basically similar age GWR 387s which boast hard seats but (to my satisfaction) a seat back angle which really suits me and excellent riding even at maximum speed of 110 mph.

 

Another modern example with lack of riding qualities are the IETs.  Seating isn't marvellous but tolerable from, say, Penzance to Reading -  but their riding, especially over pointwork is something akin to a box of ageing spanners with all sorts of crashings, rattling,  and bangs - nota patch on 387's riding.

 

A lot of it might be down to bogie design to suit British track. The 345s of course are basically UndergrounD trains (where their riding is, in my experience, excellent) while the IETs aren't a UK design and like, for example, past foreign designs such as the Blue Pullman and BR Mk4, bogies they don't seem to like British track.

 

The other worrying thing about 345 and IET bogies appears to be their ability to damage sub-formation in the Thames Valley to an extent which hasn't been seen since the original cwr installation times - pumping sleepers all over the place including some in recently laid pointwork.  Part of this may be down to NR maintenance and renewal standards and they certainly give every appearance of not understanding how to (or can't afford to) deal with the problem as all they seem to do is chuck in more top ballast.  However hard riding bogies clearly don't help matters one bit.

Thanks for that Mike. I’m not one who normally notices or bothers but this was so evidently rough that tbh I’m more than surprised that to the best of my knowledge an issue over the ride on these units hasn’t been raised. The phrase  not fit for purpose springs to mind. On the other hand TFW are still using 150’s on Manchester -South Wales services and have several stored 3-car 175 units out of service on Chester station sidings so there does appear to be some sort of ongoing “logistical “ difficulty despite the investment in new stock. 

 

[ColinK]

All the new CAF units haveva hard ride, 195s, 331, 197 and the Mk5 coaches.

The Avanti 221 Voyagers you found comfortable are soon to be replaced with yet more IETs with their hard seats.

With strikes, lots of cancellations and uncomfortable seats, the railway really knows how to drive passengers away.

[Ian Hargrave]

18 minutes ago, ColinK said:

All the new CAF units haveva hard ride, 195s, 331, 197 and the Mk5 coaches.

The Avanti 221 Voyagers you found comfortable are soon to be replaced with yet more IETs with their hard seats.

With strikes, lots of cancellations and uncomfortable seats, the railway really knows how to drive passengers away.

And the Mk5 Sleeping Cars ?   

 

 

[ColinK]

Don’t know about the Mk5 sleepers, but I have been on the soon to be withdrawn TPE Mk5s and they were very poor, but the 68 pulling them sounded good.

[Wheatley]

195/331s and presumably 197s are better if you don't sit directly over the bogie. 

 

This 170 I'm sitting on right now is lovely :-)

[Ian Hargrave]

The 170 rides well and has relatively good seating.It’s in use on long distance services such as XC’s Nottingham- Cardiff,Scotrail Highland Main Line and EMR Newark-Crewe. CAF’s latest offerings don’t come close….and these units are over 20 years old. 

[Ian Hargrave]

3 hours ago, ColinK said:

All the new CAF units haveva hard ride, 195s, 331, 197 and the Mk5 coaches.

The Avanti 221 Voyagers you found comfortable are soon to be replaced with yet more IETs with their hard seats.

With strikes, lots of cancellations and uncomfortable seats, the railway really knows how to drive passengers away.

The 220/221/222 units with XC,Avanti WC&EMR I have used for the last 20 years.Much criticism….including mine…has been aired over them but it appears that their replacements will not be an improvement. Avanti & EMR units will soon be coming off lease.Indeed one of Avanti’s has already appeared as a replacement for a 180 on the ECML.

They aren’t perfect we know….but the ride they give is far superior to the new stock coming on stream from Hitachi and CAF .There must surely be a future for them with a TOC ,given that there is a need to still replace aged stock and a need to supply much needed extra capacity to reduce chronic overcrowding all over the system.

[Wickham Green too]

 

4 hours ago, ColinK said:

All the new CAF units haveva hard ride, 195s, 331, 197 and the Mk5 coaches. ...

Is it something to do with the fashion of squeezing the primary suspension in between the wheels ? ..... always looks like a kit that's been supplied without the necessary bogie frames !

[david.hill64]

12 hours ago, Wickham Green too said:

 

Is it something to do with the fashion of squeezing the primary suspension in between the wheels ? 

No. The main reason why outside bearings were standard was for hot box detection when this was a real issue. Moving the bearings inside results in a significant weight saving. Primary suspension design is mostly about wheel-rail interaction (steering). Softer secondary suspension will give a better ride at the expense of body movement which has to be restricted to comply with gauging requirements. I suspect that this is the reason why we notice poorer ride, though the dreadful tertiary suspension (seating) doesn't help.

 

 

[Hesperus]

On 18/10/2023 at 17:39, Ian Hargrave said:

The 220/221/222 units with XC,Avanti WC&EMR I have used for the last 20 years.Much criticism….including mine…has been aired over them but it appears that their replacements will not be an improvement. Avanti & EMR units will soon be coming off lease.Indeed one of Avanti’s has already appeared as a replacement for a 180 on the ECML.

They aren’t perfect we know….but the ride they give is far superior to the new stock coming on stream from Hitachi and CAF .There must surely be a future for them with a TOC ,given that there is a need to still replace aged stock and a need to supply much needed extra capacity to reduce chronic overcrowding all over the system.

 

I've just spent longer than I should admit to trying to work out who WC&EMR was.

 

I was somewhat surprised when all new units were announced for TfW.  An influx of 4 car Voyagers could have given a nice increase in capacity and allowed the older 150s and 153s to depart.

 

Perhaps the Voyager fleet will head north of the border, they seem keen to lose the Inte7city fleet now.

Edited October 20, 2023 by Hesperus

[Ian Hargrave]

47 minutes ago, Hesperus said:

 

I've just spent longer than I should admit to trying to work out who WC&EMR was.

 

I was somewhat surprised when all new units were announced for TfW.  An influx of 4 car Voyagers could have given a nice increase in capacity and allowed the older 150s and 153s to depart.

 

Perhaps the Voyager fleet will head north of the border, they seem keen to lose the Inte7city fleet now.

The Avanti Voyagers are 221 5car units and the EMR Meridian are 222 ,now also5 car and apparently differ from their Avanti cousins in some material respects .

[frobisher]

31 minutes ago, Ian Hargrave said:

The Avanti Voyagers are 221 5car units and the EMR Meridian are 222 ,now also5 car and apparently differ from their Avanti cousins in some material respects .

 

Their MU capabilities are incompatible (deliberately so).

[Hesperus]

Please say lessons have been learnt from that insanity and the 197s can multi with 196s?

[Ian Hargrave]

The Avanti and XC Voyagers are maintained at Twin Rivers,Barton under Needwood,next to the Derby-Birmingham main line.It was purpose built for the 220/221,all originally Virgin Trains. EMR depot is Derby. I would hope that the decision by Avanti to go the Hitachi way will not impact upon the work there.

[The Johnster]

I reckon standards of comfort for both long and short haul runs have been declining since the mk3s appeared in the 70s and the Sprinter family in the 90s.  I think a trick is being missed here; hard seats may be easier and more 'cost effective' to maintain, but comfort could and should be a major selling point for rail vis a vis competition with private car, bus/coach, and short-haul air.  I realise that the question is academic on too many overcrowded services where getting a seat at all is unlikely, but this is familiar territory and I can add nothing constructive to that debate. 

 

But good seats would, I am sure, repay their investment on such services as are not buried in standing punters.

[mikejames]

6 hours ago, frobisher said:

 

Their MU capabilities are incompatible (deliberately so).

why?

[frobisher]

45 minutes ago, mikejames said:

why?

 

So that they stayed with the commissioning franchises and couldn't be half inched by the XC franchise(s) as I understand it.

[St. Simon]

5 hours ago, mikejames said:

why?

 

4 hours ago, frobisher said:

 

So that they stayed with the commissioning franchises and couldn't be half inched by the XC franchise(s) as I understand it.

 

Hi,

 

Also, as the Voyager Design is owned by Virgin, it could be something with that side of the contract.

 

Simon

[New Haven Neil]

Hmm, it's all relative.  We rode on 197's this summer down to Llandudno from Llanrwst, and thought them pretty good.  Of course we're used to three foot gauge coaches and tramcars over a hundred years old.

[GMKAT7]

Good afternoon folks,

 

On Friday, during Storm Babet, my wife and I decided to travel to Norwich from Sheringham whilst on a week's holiday in Norfolk.

 

We travelled using a Stadler Flirt unit (there is no other choice on Anglia services). Although sat at a table/bay location above the bogie, at the articulation point, the ride was pretty good and the seat comfortable.

 

The only lively part of the journey was at Salhouse, where a couple of bumps were felt/heard. This I put down to track condition, given how wet the day was. Otherwise the high back seats were fine and comfortable for the hour journey.

 

So, somebody at Stadler seems to have got that bit right, unlike Hitachi and CAF.

 

Cheers, Nigel.

[Wickham Green too]

1 hour ago, GMKAT7 said:

... high back seats were fine ... So, somebody at Stadler seems to have got that bit right, ...

I very much doubt that Stadler made - let alone decided the specification for - the seats. ( Platform 5 is, unusually, silent on the matter - so I could be wrong.)

[GMKAT7]

Hello Wickham Green too,

 

Perhaps I should have clarified that I was referring to the ride rather than the seats specifically.

 

I agree that the seats may have been specified by the unit owner or Anglia. They look like a Grammer product to me but I may be wrong in that assumption.

 

Cheers, Nigel.