Great Western Coffee Shop

After the 172s they are the newest build of commuter diesel trains. 

Although there has been an increase in 155s, 156s and 158s used on more local services due to 175s indirectly replacing the First North Western 101s in 2000 and more recently the TP Express 158s being cascaded.

And they're life-expired at the end of the FGW franchise in 2016....they won't meet DDA requirements by then.

Even more worrying....

I somehow doubt that we will see all Pacers scrapped by 2016 and all other non-DDA complaint units either scrapped or made accessible.

It's only a matter of fitting disabled toilets though isn't it? pretty easy on a 16x unit bear in mind they are structurally very similar to 168/170 units which have disabled toilets.

With most units I'm guessing they could do like First North Western did with the 150s, add an accessible toilet, put a wheelchair space near the toilet and make sure it's 2+2 seating between one of the exterior doors and the accessible toilet to allow wheelchair access through part of the train, even if it's 3+2 seating elsewhere.

With Pacers I think they'll fail as the extended ramps can't be used at some stations and it'll be difficult to create an accessible toilet in the space available and with the doors in different positions on either side.

Edited to fix quote. bignosemac

Will this effect even older stock used on tours And spot hires... Mk'1s ?

Truly frightening. The 170s and 171s must be a figment of my imagination then. Not to mention Chiltern's 168 fleet.

How do you work that out? Typical working life of British rolling stock is about 30 years. If it was 23 or 24 years, then the 150s FGW is getting from London should actually be on their way to the scrapyard, along with the HST fleet. One of the final few Class 101s withdrawn in 2003 was well into its forties

Turbos date from 1990-3, which would make them a bit young for the cutter's torch and I don't imagine it would be too hard to make them DDA-compliant as northwesterntrains suggest. Just a bit pointless for FGW or the leasing firm to spend money on it at present when no-one knows where they will be working and on what type of services come 2016.

The width of the doors & vestibules I weas told....

Oh there was me thinking that 168s and 170s were designed as Regional trains not local commuter trains, to be in the same catergory as 156s and 158s and not belonging in the same catergory as the likes of 165s and Pacers.

Depends on what you define as 'regional' and 'commuter' I suppose?  I would say that Chiltern's 168's are a regional train, but that certainly doesn't stop them from doing a lot of work ferrying commuters between Marylebone and Banbury all day.  The same could be said of the 166's - designed for the longer distance services like the Cotswold Line and the North Downs line, but again can be seen helping out with the masses leaving Paddington every evening.

I suppose the simplest way of defining them is by the seating layout - 2+2 equals 'regional' and 2+3 equals 'commuter'.  That's far from perfect though as it would mean the Class 166's are 6/7ths 'commuter' train and 1/7th 'regional'.  ;)

Or another way of looking at it is what routes the trains are intended for on build.

Some of the routes 170s were built for:
Hull to London
Sheffield to London
Liverpool to Norwich
Liverpool to Stansted Airport

Not very local journeys and if anything the debate would be more regional vs intercity than local vs regional.

With 168s being built for London-Birmingham, again not very local even if they are more local than the 170 routes listed.

In the same way Pacers aren't regional trains as they were built for local routes, even though they've finished up on some local routes.

If Turbo doors aren't wide enough then pretty much the entire British rolling stock fleet would fail - and what on earth are they expecting to fit through them? Three wheelchairs abreast?

Interesting that everyone in this thread is focusing on a single disability issue, wheel chair access some one with a limb missing or someone who is blind, impaired sighting or learning difficulties have different requirements so adapting trains and stations for just wheel chairs does not answer all the DDA requirements.  The DDA does make exemptions for existing infrastructure and vehicles where it is impractical to modify them.

Indeed - but we are discussing the features that only fail the turbos....which are those already mentioned. Please stay with the topic....

The topic being what exactly? It start with a worrying 'fact' which was wrong.....

The FNW refurbed 150s that I mentioned are not fully DDA complaint they just demonstrate how an accessible toilet and wheelchair space can be added in.  Apparently to be fully DDA complaint you need braille buttons for opening and closing doors, warnings of doors closing, announcements before every station and PIS for deaf passengers.  Although, with the latter I'm not sure if that means all stations also need announcements and display screens.

Well I fail to see how it is wrong.

All Pacers and Sprinters are older than the Turbos.  The 139 runs on battery and only uses diesel in the event of a flat battery.  This leaves 168, 170, 172, 175, 180 and 185s as the diesel units newer than the 166s and as I mentioned 172s were a newer unit we discount them.

I've already mentioned how many of the routes 170s were originally intended for were long distance.  This has changed due to 222s coming in to operation and some being cascaded to ScotRail, as well as the Central reorganisation which has put them on shorter routes than originally e.g. Birmingham to Stansted Airport instead of Liverpool to Stansted Airport.  One of the most significant factors of the use of the former CT 170s now is that EMT run Liverpool-Norwich but all the CT 170s went to either LM or XC, meaning LM have too many to put them all on longer distance services.  170s have a 100mph top speed and slower acceleration than the Sprinters, which doesn't exactly make them a good choice for stopping services.

168s are used on Birmingham-London, which does probably make the 168s one of the less debatable options but then the 168s are the oldest after the 166s.

175s were built for the FNW Regional Express services such as Llandudno-Manchester, Manchester Airport to Windermere and Birmingham to Holyhead.  185s were built for routes like Manchester Airport to Newcastle/Middlesbrough/Cleethorphes and Liverpool to Scarbrough and since finished up being used to replace Voyagers on Manchester Airport to Glasgow/Edinburgh.

180s I think we can call intercity.  It was rumoured that the original 180 design was drawn up for FNW's open access Blackpool-London service but after Virgin got competition protection FNW's parent company FGW were still interested in using 180s.

ScotRail's turbos were all built for them* with some being built for regional services, with first class compartments and some being built for local services, being all standard.

* with the exception of the four that were inherited from Hull Trains

You said:

(referring to 166s) "After ther 172s they are the newest build of commuter diesel trains."

As you've now pointed out, between those two builds we've had the 168s the 170s. You've missed out the 171s as well.

So, I stand by my point that the OPs 'worrying fact' was wrong. It can be argued that all of the DMUs currently in service have been used/are used as commuter trains. It's a subjective term after all. Indeed, many folk commute on 'Inter-City' stock. HST to Oxford, anyone?


And incidentally, the 139 does not 'run on battery and only use diesel in the event of a flat battery'. It utilises a flywheel and a small LPG fuelled engine.

The terms commuter train is usually used as an alternative to local or stopping service.  While people do commute on longer distance services: Milton Keynes to London on Pendolinos would be another instance, but if a Pendolino was used to replace 319 or 323 diagrams it would be seen as a misfit.

171s were built as 170s (they weren't built as a seperate class) and had there not already been so many classes of 170 it would be likely that they would have been classed as 170/x. 

Maybe in Scotland and the South 170s are seen as more local but in the North they've been used on Liverpool to Norwich, Liverpool to Stansted Airport, Sheffield to London, Hull to London, Hull to Manchester/Liverpool and Manchester Airport to Cleethorphes.  None of those routes would look out-of-place in a XC franchise and 170s have also been known to fill in for Voyager shortages on the Manchester-Bournemouth route.

AIUI 171s were renumbered as a safety measure to prevent them being accidentally diagrammed in multiple with 170s, because they have incompatible couplings that match 377s for rescue purposes. The individual vehicle number series are common with the 170s.

Paul