Dont forget now The DFT want to do a large combined order fornGWR also though including replacement for Chilterns class 165s and SWRs class 158/159 fleets

 

Part of the MR article is on the existing DMUs and says

DIESELS SOLDIERING ON

It’s an exciting plan that meshes with net zero aspirations and we wait to see if the Department for Transport signs up to the vision – the positive point is that government recognises the need for replacement trains.

In the meantime, GWR is soldiering on with its ageing DMU fleet – with a C6 overhaul programme underway on the Class 150 fleet to keep them going for another few years that is costing north of half a million pounds per vehicle. “I am pleased that it’s being done properly: the corrosion is being dealt with, and we’re making a better environment for passengers” comments the MD. “But at the end of the day we have to remember that this fleet dates from 1985.”

The Turbo and Class 158 fleets are younger than the Class 150s, but won’t necessarily be the last to go. These trains were the first generation with an aluminium bodyshell, and nobody knows how long they will last – Mr Hopwood hazards a 2032 end date.

“The steel-bodied Class 150s are getting a lot of new steel in the C6 anti-corrosion work – but you can’t do that with a one-piece aluminium bodyshell” points out Mark Hopwood. “So the Turbos’ lifespan is an unknown.”

 
Fair comment, ChrisB: I have therefore moved and merged three existing topics - here - in the interests of continuity and clarity, for future reference.

 
This refers to the Churchward project we already know about I think

 

Most of that behind a paywall.  In the teaser, I note ...


"We're talking about it", alas, fails to commit anyone to actually doing anything about it as far as I can see.  It's rathe like talking about service reliability - sounds good, but if the train doesn't turn up, you can't travel on the fact that you've talked about why not ... for years ...

 
Modern Railways has also published an article on GWR rolling stock plans and aspirations

https://www.modernrailways.com/article/gwr-focuses-regional-fleet

 
When the Government finally gets around to publishing the Rail Bill, and then making time for it to go though Parliament & become law. And a few weeks after it receives Royal Assent.

 

Given that it was launched with much fanfare over a year ago, and has burned through upwards of £50 million already, it would be handy to know when it's going to step out of the shadows and start making a difference?

 

GBR is a "shadow" body at the moment as it has no legal standing, but that is not to say the rail industry is not working in the background of future rolling stock.

There is limited expansion of 25kV electrification on the Western Route, the only likely areas are Didcot - Oxford, Bristol Temple Meads - Bristol Parkway; there are still a number of issues to resolve for the Temple Meads route via Bath.  Therefore the option of replacing the 387's with a dual mode (contact system - battery) would make for a much more flexible fleet. 

The industry is looking a "short gap electrification" this where electrification is installed for a number of miles to charge the on board batteries also the GWR type scheme trial on the Greenford branch.

 
Well..if we are soon to be under one national operator (GBR), it's difficult to understand why there's not one project to replace all the remaining "second generation" diesel units across the country. Wouldn't it be nice and sensible if this was a phased 5 to 10 year program to work through the current diesel stock, starting with the oldest, and replace them with a new, inter-operable family of designs capable of working anywhere in the UK?

It's also a little concerning that current EMUs (presumably the Electrostar 387s) are possibly included as well among the stock to be replaced. That seems a strong signal that there's no prospect of further electrification on any of the current GWR & Chiltern networks, nor the West of England main line.

Another 30-40 years of sub-optimal rail transport ahead?

 
Just spotted that DfT has updated its procurement spreadsheet.

The GWR line now includes
"Potential for this procurement to include units for other non-GWR routes." which suggests there could be add on of more units for other Operators

The full text is "Procurement of rolling stock for Thames Valley / North Downs and West (including options)   
Replacement of all existing DMUs (and possibly EMUs), excluding the IET fleet, with Battery Electric Multiple Units (BEMUs) and/or diesel multi-mode units. Potential for this procurement to include units for other non-GWR routes."

I don't know if all existing DMUs includes the 175s (were 175s part of GWR fleet on update date 11th September)

https://www.gov.uk/csv-preview/6835872dd6d2692c9bdb02dd/dft-future-commercial-contracts-dft-partners.csv

 
This article had been doing the rounds and been posted now by rail magazine:

https://www.railmagazine.com/news/dft-talking-with-three-operators-about-combined-order-to-replace-dmus

Looks like the dft want to do a large combined order covering GWR/Chiltern and SWR. Battery emus look to be the plan and given Siemens proposals for discontinues electrification and new fast charging system been shown on the Greenford branch this could  actually happen.

Let's face it the GWR dmu fleet except 175s are in need or urgently being replaced same with the 159s etc

 
EWR aren't ordering stock - they are simply building the rails for the DfT.

Chiltern have just been confirmed as the operator & have 6 Cl 196s for phase 1 of EWR services. They are going to need extras for phase 3, not sure about phase 2 (Bedford)

 
I thought GWR were trying to do a joint order with Chiltern and East West rail unless the dft have decided they can get GWR some new rolling stock before then by tagging some onto Northerns.

 

The ETRMS fitment was not originally part of the trains, it was a later add-on, so in theory can be unbolted and taken off again.  Yes it would be more work (and more cost) to make them GWR spec, but it is not impossible.


On another note, the latest version of the DfT procurement pipeline spreadsheet, has the GWR project Churchward DMU replacement with slightly earlier date than those for Northern.  Confusing me because Northern have issued a tender, but to best of my knowledge GWR haven't.

https://www.gov.uk/government/publications/future-commercial-contracts-for-dft-and-partners

The estimated contract start dates are now 9th Jan 2026 for GWR, 2nd March 2026 for Northern DMUs and 27th May 2026 for Northern EMUs, battery EMUs and multi mode MUs

Can anyone enlighten me what is going on.

 

It struck me that the Cambrian Coast 158s have a lot of £££ signalling stuff on them which wouldn't be much use elsewhere, but they can run elsewhere, surely - they do at the moment.   And if some new trains are ETRMS fitted, what else will be done with them?

 
Correct, 15x and 175s cannot couple up. It used to cause chaos on the Marches if an 15x needed help and the only unit within 50 miles was an 175.

And regarding the TfW 15x going to GWR. 158s can't due to the ETRMS fitment and wouldn't be ironic if the ex Wessex 150/2s returned to Exeter.

Unfortunately they are due C6 exams and Portercrook won't pay for those.

 

I was thinking more along the lines of a couple of 10 year old single decker buses from Wales. Like the ones we now have in Worcestershire. Coupled together back to back and fitted with rail wheels like Stephens did with his Ford model T railbuses.

 

Shush Grahame - someone might remember there are quite a few Pacers still knocking around, particularly on heritage lines. 

 

Shame the last labour government cancelled that order for 4 carriage class 172s for the Cardiff to Portsmouth Harbour service.

Hopefully we see movement on new rolling stock orders especially ro replace the BR Dmus.

I wonder if battery fitted Class 350/2's could be useful to GWR possibly with further electrification

 
Trying to do an FAQ about trains mentioned - classes we may have or be about to have:
Class 255   Origin year 1976
Class 150   Origin year 1984
Class 158   Origin year 1989
Class 165   Origin year 1990
Class 166   Origin year 1992
Class 175   Origin year 1992
Class 230   Origin year 2015 (on 1976 base)

And classes that may have been mentioned and could be useful in our regional fleet
Class 172   Origin year 2010
Class 756   Origin year 2018
Class 197   Origin year 2022
Class 231   Origin year 2023
Class 398   Origin year 2023

Class 153, 155 and 156 units may also be in store / available for lease, but long in the tooth?

 
I can't help wondering if Project Churchward is being morphed - at least at this interim stage - to Project Holman Fred Stephens.

The Cardiff - Portsmouth route currently in the hands of turbos which are fine for local journeys but not for journeys in excess of an hour. To be replaced by other vintage units - though in my view having additional stock AND stuff designed for regional services is an improvement.  Col Stephens was famous for stretching out the life of locomotives he bought almost-life-expired, and I can't help looking at current reliability issues in the area - "cancelled because of a fault on this train" stuff, and wonder how that will change with more 158s around.

 

We still don't know when the date of award was or will be:

 

Lease of Class 175s to GWR dated 29 August 2024


https://www.find-tender.service.gov.uk/Notice/027591-2024
This is a new web service in beta at present.

 
Build some proper intercity trains for the longer distance routes, and cascade the IETs to regional or secondary routes.

 
I would sum them up as:

Reliability:  Better than the 180s, yes, but still not great - and they take a lot of looking after to get decent reliability.

Internal layout:  Excellent.  One of the best.

Capacity:  Poor.  A by-product of the great internal layout.

Suitability for GWR:  Not too bad as a stop-gap.  As long as they are mostly kept as 5-car formations and definitely not 2-car ones!  Cardiff<>Portsmouth and Penzance routes would seem to be the best fit.

 

I believe there's a significant difference between 175s and 180s. The engine raft design on both is said to be problematic and prone to overheating, but the smaller engine in the 175s means everything is less tightly packed together and ventilation is better.

Certainly ATW seemed to operate 175s without much issue for many years, until TfW transferred the maintenance contract from Alstom at Chester to CAF who had less familiarity with the units... at which point the fires started. (Shades of the 180s which were pretty good under Old Oak Common maintenance and less so when transferred elsewhere.)

But this is definitely not my specialist subject and others will know more.

 
I wonder if they'll keep the names. Seeing "Valhalla - Blackpool Pleasure Beach" or "Eisteddfod Genedlaethol Cymru" rumbling through Crediton would be a novelty, although I'm not sure the names survived the last repainting.

 
It's been posted on other railway forums and I've asked one member of gwr staff I know  that I know and they've also said its happening but there's been a memo from aslef to their members at GWR that all 27 class 175s will be heading west soon.

Hopefully if the plan remains as I wad told the units would be based mainly at laira  but will also be put on Exeter to Barnstaple and Okehampton services to free up class 150/158's

 
Very quick work by the new government! 

 

With a plan for more to follow?

 
Looks like next few weeks should see a 175 making its way to laira  depot

 

Beggars can’t be choosers.

 
That was one of my reasons against!

GWR will have sod all say in the matter though sadly.

 
Class 175s.

Did GWR learn nothing from their terrible experience with the Class 180s from the same Alstom Coradia family? They should steer well clear.

 
If Class 175s arrive then it will be a reasonably short-term thing of 5 or so years, until this new generation of stock is built and enters service.

The stock would be most useful in that respect, even if not the perfect fit for a few reasons.

 

Class 175 were introduced in 1997; coupling system: Scharfenberg Type 330. So yet another set of older trains that can't couple to others cascaded after they're superceded by something new on the "important" lines they were built for.

Having said that, yes please ... 20 "new" units would be great, provided that they add substantially to the reliable available carriage count on GWR.

 
If Filton Bank is wired perhaps see if batteries could be fitted to class 350/2's to use on the Cardiff to Portsmouth Harbour services.

Meanwhile looks like GWR will be having 20 kass 175 units

 
I've found what was behind the article: Siemens put out a kind of flyer about their battery trains today. Presumably The Times got that in advance.

They have been promoting the Verve as a 200 km/h Desiro for nearly ten years, and don't appear to have sold any. They offer all cars motored except those with pantograph and battery (or hydrogen fuel cell). The article cited them (with batteries) as just gone into service in Germany, but those are branded Mireo B plus and are for 160 km/h. All a bit puzzling, especially for the GWR and other DMU replacements where 200 km/h is not needed.

I'm still none the wiser about what they mean by "domestic grid". It sounds like they are saying you can avoid the delay and expense of getting a "traditional" national grid supply for OLE, but then they aren't the only ones who could do that for a small section. Here's another quote on this:

I'm guessing it's a small SFC fed at 11 or 33 kV. I have seen nothing to suggest they offer buffer battery storage at trackside.

 

I believe the "fast charging" system at West Ealing is basically "pump storage" an 11kV / 400V substation charges a set of line side batteries which provide the high current to charge to train; the line side batteries being charged at a slower rate between train charging.

There was (may still even be) a proposal to use battery trains on the Marsh Link (Ashford - Hastings) the train batteries being charged when the contact the 750V third rail at each end.  Sounds like a good idea however the fast charging current would mean a new 3 1/2 MW substation to be built at each end.

Battery trains are expensive in terms of line side infrastructure to fast charge them   

 
I am a bit doubtful about claims made for ultra-fast charging from a standard 400 volt, 3 phase supply.
The greatest load that can be connected to an existing substation is often about 315 amps or 400 amps, presuming that the substation has enough spare capacity. If insufficient capacity is available then a new substation will be required.

More than 315 or 400 amps will require a new substation, that could if desired be at the higher voltage of 690 volts (three phase, 4 wire systems at 400 volts phase to neutral and 690 volts between phases are catching on in industry, so the transformer will be readily available.)

400 amps at three phase 400 volts is about 276 kilowatts, perhaps a bit more in practice as the actual voltage supplied tends to be at least 415 volts.
276 kw will take at least a few hours to charge a reasonable size battery train. In the case of a 2,000kwh battery then 276 kw input will take about 9 hours, fine for overnight charging but limited for charging in service.

Use of multiple batteries each intended for an electric car may have the merits of competitive price due to the mass production of these batteries.

 
Much as I'd rather see proper OLE, based on a few things I've read recently, it actually seems quite reasonable.

Can't see the full article but suggests things have gone well with the Greenford trial, which was designed to prove that everything could be reliable and the fast charging systems work well - see https://railway-news.com/uk-gwr-commences-fast-charging-battery-powered-train-trial/.

IIRC, the fast chargers use a standard 3-phase mains supply (400V AC) which is relatively quick and easy to install, with far fewer H&S headaches than OLE. The time to recharge was advertised as 3 1/2 minutes, which if reliable, should mean that the technology is certainly suitable for most of the GWR branches from Windsor to St Ives.

As for the longer distance services, there's an interesting trial between Hitachi and Transpennine at the moment, replacing a single diesel power pack in an 802 with a similar weight battery power pack (Nissan Leaf batteries in case you were interested) which is recharged from the overheads and braking. They reckon the distance off the wires is 80 to 100km, which isn't enough for Exeter to Penzance, but would enable fiddly stretches like Dawlish to be left unwired, and with more efficient batteries and replacing fuel tanks, perhaps the 120ish km between Bristol and Weymouth could be reasonable. More at https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=pg8J0ONy3Go in case anyone is interested.

 
According to today's Sunday Times, "GWR, the West Country operator, this weekend announced its plan for 100 battery trains to serve Bristol, Devon, and Cornwall, as well as routes including Cardiff to Portsmouth and Exeter to Penzance." (I can't see anything public from GWR, but then putting that out over a weekend would be odd anyway.)

The article as a whole is a rehash of previous arguments about avoiding OLE and the need to decarbonise within the lifetime of any new stock, but that bit does claim to be factual. It quotes the engineering director (Simon Green) as saying he expects they will agree with the DfT to issue a tender by the end of the year.

There is also a bit about Siemens being a "battery train supplier", based on the entry into service of their Desiro Verve. They seem confident the product is now going to get a lot of interest from all the TOCS, which is fair enough. However, you might wonder whether "it can recharge from the domestic grid rather than relying on high-voltage lines, and be fully charged in 20 minutes" means anything.

 
Am I correct in thinking that class 175s cannot work in multiple with class 150/158s? If so, this is a problem, and I would agree with Richard B that class 158s would be preferable.

I also wonder (idle speculation from a layman) whether one of the problems with stock availability is that 165/166s cannot work with 150/158s so swapping out failed units is often not possible.

 

Of course, we'll see in time.   If the 175s come to Exeter, as well as route clearance, all the crews will need to be trained on them and Exeter Depot staff will need to be trained on how to maintain them, as well as have a stock of spares on hand.   None of it is impossible but it would be a big investment (in time and money) that could be avoided if some of the Welsh 158s and 150s come our way instead.

 

I think the idea is to replace the 158s at Exeter so they would still only maintain 2 fleets with 165/166s stabling at Exeter as they do now but maintained at Bristol.

 
Interesting to see the talk about the 175s.  Surely it's more 158s and 150s from Wales that we need?  The 175s would need to be route cleared and then there are the additional complications of managing another quite small fleet of trains.  I'd be surprised to see this happen.

 

I've been told this by a few people who are usually pretty spot on.

No doubt dft have realised they can get a good deal abd can reduce costs by replacing castle hsts and dont need to refurbish the 175s as tfw already did it. It also frees up class 150/158/165's to  boost capacity on other routes such as Cardiff to Portsmouth hbr  and metro West services around Bristol. 150/2's can be boost capacity in Cornwall etc.

There was talk of seated Barnstaple services possibly worked by a pair of 2 carriage class 175s


Edit to clarify quoting - grahame

 
Bet they'll look lovely in green though :-)

 
175s going to Exeter in place of 158s is doing the rounds on websites.  Problem with them they will not increase capacity at Barnstaple (if a 3 car 175) or Okehampton (if a 2 car 175).  Inevitably some will end up  Paignton-Exmouth as do the 158s. Also they would have to be cleared to Axminster especially if the service is increased.

If a five car (2+3)  is used at Barnstaple to increase capacity, could it still reverse at Exmouth siding.

Two 150 units would be released from Okehampton, but they will probably be needed in Cornwall so Paignton-Exmouth will still need turbos.

 
Latest suggestions is that GWR are to take on the class 175s to allow the final class 255s hsts to be withdrawn as well as to allow and internal cascade of stock such as  the 150s for the Devon and Cornwall metro services, 165s for metrowest around Bristol and 158s to increase capacity on Cardiff to Portsmouth hbr services

 
The next major National timetable change is 2029 to 2031, the railways next 5 year Control Period CP8 (CP7 is 2024-2029).  The DfT via the TOCs, the TOCs have been in discussion with Network Rail.  The TOCs have had to produce a report to the DfT what is required rolling stock renewals, example are the Networkers (465/6 165/6 etc)

Change of rolling stock leads to a change in infrastructure -
Train care facilities,
Stations
Traction power (substations, Grid supplies OLE / third rail), 
Signalling (roll out of ETCS ie in cab signalling) 
Track layouts

Some of this will rollover into CP9

 

....and to Oxford (better still Banbury as well so that all Thames Valley main line and "Oxford Canal Line" services can be run by those Electrostars that always seem to be hanging around the Reading Depot).

 

How's about this for a completely bonkers idea? Electrification of the (entirely self-contained) Devon Metro route between Exmouth & Paignton on which the principal 150/2 rolling stock is approaching it's fortieth birthday.

 

I support electrification, but remain of the view that all new electric trains should have a battery or a diesel engine to run basic on board services or proceed at much reduced performance when the wires come down.
Having incurred the cost and weight penalty, then this battery or engine could be used to a very limited extent in passenger service.
Electrification should be cheaper and simpler with the odd short gap in problematic locations such as inadequate clearances under bridges.
In most cases trains could coast through such gaps, but a secondary power source seems prudent. Also valuable for diversions, to Waterloo for example, or excursions to heritage railways.

 
"Project Chuchward" has been vaguely around for a while; good to see some flesh being put on the bones.  I seem to recall plans being to order a new fleet of 17x units  ( a dozen at 4 cars each) to run Portsmouth / Cardiff, but then that got canned with GWR electrification costing rather a lot and releasing the turbos.

I have seen some very sensible Network Rail long term aspirations for further electrification and use of battery / alternative fuels on remaining lines to the exclusion of diesel traction in due course.   What is lacking in my mind is the work being done on the ground to have this actually happen - perhaps pump priming is going on behind the scenes or unnoticed, but I'm darned if I have seen it!

It would make sense for the "next stage" to complete electrification from Chippenham via Bristol Temple Meads to Bristol Parkway and Patchway (overhead) , and from Basingstoke, Southampton and Eastleigh to Salisbury (perhaps 3rd rail) to allow Cardiff / Portsmouth service to make use of batteries from Bathampton to Salisbury (or Wilton?).  Heavy freight would/will provide an impetus to have electrification into the Westbury area too ...

 
I've heard talk of wires to Bristol TM via both Filton and Bath along with wires to Swansea.
A tri-mode 5 carriage unit be ideal for Cardiff to Portsmouth hbr and even Cardiff to penzance.  Heard other electric islands were being looked at

I heard they were trying to get wires from Swindon to Severn tunnel junction and Westerleigh jct too.

 
Some big decisions needed on electrification here. Surely, we can't have yet another stop-gap fleet of anything still needing diesel?

 

News to me, thanks for the tip.

Yes, the unrefurbished Turbos are looking very tired these days and the Welsh FLIRTS look very nice.

Any idea on whether that might include closing St Philip's Marsh and building a new depot somewhere else? Seems very quiet these days.

My presumption was/is that an unvoiced objective of the Temple Meads roof project is to have a solid structure to which electrification hardware can be fixed and that once they were reasonably far along, they'd pass the 3D models to electrification designers and propose wiring to Parkway as 'the thin end of the wedge'.

 

 
Class 75x/23x FLIRTs, Now!

Although why specify 24m per carriage? Surely the main focuses should be the traction package and seating capacity. Stadler FLIRTs of varying lengths and traction types would be, in my opinion, the perfect fleet to order. FLIRTs are already a very flexible, modular design. A 'next gen' update following on from the sucessful Greater Anglia and Transport for Wales fleets would be perfect for the diverse needs of the greater western network. As much commonality as possible would be best for future proofing should there be expansion of electrification. Losing diesel 'power packs' is much better than having to order another new fleet down the *ahem* line.




Edit note: Thread title updated to 'Project Churchward - Future regional fleet for the west' to better describe the topic.

 
Finally some detailed proposals, even if over 5 years away.  Here’s hoping for some or all to be provided by Stadler, and for cascades from other operators to help out in the meantime.


It’s a lot better than it was ten years ago when there was just Derby.

 
Presumably "Churchward" after the noted Great Western CME of the opening years of the last century?

He, as one of the great innovative railway engineers would be turning in his grave at the current state of the railway vehicle construction industry in the UK.

 
A few of you may know GWR been looking for ways to replace the entire dmu fleet as well.as possibly emus in the Thames valley.


GWRS MD has been quite vocal about particularly about getting Bristol TM wired to GWR could use a emu fitted with batteries on the Cardiff to Portsmouth hbr service.

Other UK TOCs especially northern and chiltern are struggling to get replacement parts for the BR dmus.

The DFT have now put a tenders out for replacement units including for GWR.

Looks like they are looking at units with 24m carriages  for  GWR hopefully 5 carriage units for the Portsmouth hbr service.

I doubt very much it would be Hitachi that would get the contract. My money is probably on Alstom or STadler

 

Isn’t the point of an investment that you get more money back than you put in? So the question should, perhaps, be - “ooooooooooooooooos gonna pocket the profit”

 
Quoting a member - "oooooooooooooooos gonna pay for it"

 
Cascade the IETs to regional services, scrapping them is far too expensive.
Build proper inter city trains for the routes presently suffering IETs.

 

Indeed.  Preferably the tri-mode version.

 

Single manufacturer with a 30 years maintain and support contract is the approach DfT have been taking

 
Stadler FLIRTs please.

 

There's a very brief reference to it on page 15 of the GWR Stakeholder briefing of last November on the TWSW web site:
http://travelwatchsouthwest.org/wp-content/uploads/2022/11/TWSW-Oct22.pptx

 
Within the UK Rail Forums website I have seen mentions of a 'Project (or Operation) Churchward' - which apparently concerns the wholesale replacement of existing GWR regional rolling stock with a single 'one design fits all' train - but interweb searches produce no other references.