Great Western Coffee Shop

Last night (13 Nov) on the 18.06 Pad to Frome train boarding was delayed at Paddington to allow for preparation of the train before any passengers got on.  The main platform gates to plt 10 were set to exit only and the top of the stairs at the Hammersmith & City end of the platform was manned and cordoned off to stop passengers getting on to the platform until it was announced as ready for boarding.  The staff member at the top of the stairs said this was because too many passengers were using phone apps to find out the platforms before they were announced and it was making it difficult for staff to clean the train and put reserved seating cards out.  He also said there are plans to remove platforms from phone apps to stop this problem.  I'm not sure this would help them as most regular passengers know which incoming train makes up the outgoing service.

The 18.06 service is probably the most busy of the HST commuter services out of Pad as it has the Twyford stop on it to coincide with the Henley service, I would estimate over half the passengers get off at Twyford.  Maybe FGW should just add more fast capacity on this route......

I'm not sure if the managed boarding was a one-off or if it will become regular and used on other busy peak services out of Paddington.  It did seem to move the problem from on the train to the bridge over the platform as there was a lot of puzzled and disgruntled passengers waiting and a bit of chaotic scrum once boarding was allowed.  It is also going to require more platform staff if it is made a regular feature.

I watch with interest.....

Phone apps can also inform passengers which platform their inbound service is coming into, which is information that less scrupulous passengers could take advantage of. Though given the operational issues in varying from day to day, I'm not sure what can be done about this.

There are often a significant number of potential restaurant customers queueing for the Pullman on the 18-03, long before the platform is anounced.
Other passengers who are not intending to dine, have learnt that if there is a queue outside the restaurant then that must be the 18-03.

There have been similar restrictions on some of the trains I usually get to Swindon, but only if the train is at platform 10.  I wonder if this is because the other platforms with barriers (2-5) share a set of barriers so it's not possible to restrict a single train?  Causes a mad scrum to get through the gates when the train is finally announced and there always seems to be someone with a bag which gets stuck in the gate or a ticket which doesn't work in front of me!

The same restrictions were in place again last night for the 18.06.  Many of the regular travellers, including me, got to the platform before the stairs were sealed-off so the train was almost as busy as usual pre-announcement.

I understand what FGW are trying to do but given the choice of getting early to the platform and guaranteeing a seat versus waiting at the top of the stairs with hundreds of others and then being in scrum to try and get a seat there is only one choice I will make.  Given the ^4K+ a year I give FGW for the privilege of travelling on this service I think a seat should be the least of my expectations, I already given up on assuming it will get to Twyford on time for the 18.31 Henley connection and see it as a bonus when it does.

If I'm honest I think this should have been done a while ago. It makes it equal to all potential passengers to get a good seat. Not everybody has a smart phone or the internet with them and staff need time to prepare the train and ensure its ready to depart. But then that's my opinion.

I disagree - you can't have a level playing field for everyone so you shouldn't penalise everyone and cause potential crush/rush hazard in the process. 
What about those who walk slower or with bags?  If you leave them only 2mins to get to a train then is that fair?

Just a thought - might it encourage those for Henley to use the through train which leaves shortly afterwards?  The handful of times I have caught that it appears to have a lot of capacity.

I admit it is slower but avoids a change and is less of a crush.

If people feel they are less likely to get a seat on the 18:06 might they not head for the other one where they can board without a scrum?

But that train takes 1hr 1min vs 37mins for the 18.06.  Thats 65% longer, or 81% longer if the passenger is actually around and ready to start their journey at 18.06.

I agree it is longer - but as mentioned higher up the thread the connection at Twyford for the branch is not that robust on the 18:06 so they may well end up on the through train at Twyford anyway.

Personally I think it is a crazy system that would encourage me to get a train that leaves 6 minutes later and arrives at the destination some 30 minutes after the earlier train.  Granted, like last night, I often end up on the 18.12 when it gets to Twyford at 18.58 due to the 18.06 being delayed and missing the 18.31 Henley connection at Twyford.  However, I would rather try and spend the 30 minutes at home than on a train - that's 2.5 hours a week or over 100 hours in a year... 

The 18.12 (and 17.12) are only run so that FGW can claim they run direct services to Henley.  No regular traveller would ever catch them when there is, on paper at least, a much faster alternative.

Does not look like there will be/have been many bonuses when you look at individual trains  :(
http://raildar.co.uk/timetable/train?trainid=P00247

The reliability of the connection at Twyford off the 18.06 (and 17.06) seems to have been affected for some weeks due to a speed restriction on the DM at Southall. I've been on leave for the past 2 weeks but I've just done a check of performance this week on RealTimeTrains and it would seem that trains are still losing a couple of minutes in the area. Is there any information on how long this speed restriction will continue?

It isn't helped by the fact that everyone has to funnel onto the stairs for the footbridge at Twyford.

It can sometimes be quicker to walk to the lift, call it and wait for it to take you up to the footbridge.

When these apps were first launched, PAD was one of the stations whose departing platforms were withheld - Euston still is tomy knowledge. So it would only be going back to the previous if they do.

One night the train pax want leaves from a different platform & pax will start waiting on the concourse again....

I was on the 1945 Paddington to Westbury last night, and before boarding there was a reasonable crowd forming by the Platform 10 gateline at about 1925 (before the platform had been announced), where the gates had been set to exit only. I guess that regular passengers get to know which platforms their trains are likely to depart from, and position themselves accordingly.

Regarding platform numbers on mobile apps, I had a look at the live departures on the National Rail app once I had boarded the train, and noticed that the platform had not yet shown up, so it may be that platform numbers are already being held back from these devices.

Regarding the 1806 departure, I often use this train, and find that unless I arrive before 1755 I have little chance of getting a seat, at least until the Twyford exodus. Since I am travelling west of Reading, my usual strategy is to jump on the 1803 Penzance train (which usually has plenty of spare seats) and transfer at Reading to the 1806. This doesn't work on Fridays (officially) when the 1803 does not carry Paddington to Reading passengers. I heard that another reason for the overcrowding on the 1806 is that it is one of the few evening peak trains on which off-peak tickets to Reading are valid, although I have not checked whether or not this is true.

correct

It is one of the few HST-worked services in the evening rush on which off-peak tickets are valid - however you can use them on the slower (and quite often equally well packed) Turbo worked trains.

Is it the only one that allows off-peak Reading between 4 and 7.15?

All the Oxfords/Herefords do too

Seems to be in place already for all HST services at least. Only two turbo local services plus Heathrow services on apps outside usual boarding times at 1600.

Btw- the 1615 to Swansea usually leaves from Pl 9....nice to get choice of all seats at 1555 :-)

Not all the Oxford/Hereford trains allow Off-Peak Reading-Paddington returns in the evening peak, in fact most don't. Between 1559 and 1916 the fast trains you can take are the 1618 Bedwyn, 1622 Hereford, 1706 Bristol Temple Meads, 1806 Frome and the Fridays only 1912 Oxford. There are also semi-fast train you can take: 1718 Oxford, 1735 Oxford and the 1818 Oxford.

Surely the 16:22 only goes to Oxford.
Anyway, I'd've thought that most Reading passengers at this time were using seasons - and presumably there's no restrictions on them.

Rumour has it that the 1622 will shortly be forming the extended-back 1715-ex Didcot Cotswold stopper. Again, we shall see, but you read it here first

That was originally speculated to be happening when the 180s were first reintroduced, indeed the FGW all network timetable even showed it as a future service, but obviously it never came to fruition, with the service instead being formed by the inbound Great Malvern-Didcot working. If the 1551 became an HST again it would be possible for the 180 to instead work a 1622 Paddington-Oxford-Cotswold. The 180 off the Great Malvern-Didcot could instead then work to Paddington and form the 1750.

Yup - if the conversation I had with that Worcester guard is just rumour - it does indeed all add up. Someone has worked really hard a constructing it - or it isn't a rumour. I starting to believe the latter.

From the original post:

The staff member at the top of the stairs said this was because too many passengers were using phone apps to find out the platforms before they were announced and it was making it difficult for staff to clean the train and put reserved seating cards out.  He also said there are plans to remove platforms from phone apps to stop this problem.

This kind of holder than thou (or Mother Knows best) diatribe really aggravates me. The arrogance from those 'in command/control' beggars believe.

Has any one at FGW or DfT thought 'why are these passengers resorting to such 'extraordinary' means to secure a seat/perch/place in these trains? Could it because that the capacity they are providing is so woefully inadequate for the demand ?

Whether people are using mobile apps, calculating biorhythms, gazing at the stars, or reading the entrails of some poor unfortunate beast who is now road/rail kill - don't slam the poor passenger for resorting to such 'unholy acts' in some desperate attempt to cling onto the last vestige of human dignity, while they attempt the basic act of moving from A to B on the abhorrence that is the service on the GW.

If you want to change the way people are a acting - you need to fully understand and accept what the root cause and motivation is that is causing the behaviour - and then fix the problem.

Oh, and removing 1 first class section per a Turbo and thus adding a miserly 16 seats per train is not accepting or understanding the root cause. And clearly is not fixing the problem.

So, survival of the fittest then ?

I find it interesting that the minimum connection time at Paddington is 15 minutes, and that's heavily advertised - and yet trains are not announced until just a few minutes before they leave.   One rule for the passenger, and another one for the train operator.  Perhaps platform numbers should be available at least the minimum connecting time at all stations, even if the train hasn't arrived, to allow people to make their connection in comfort?

I was standing, waiting for a Cheltenham Spa service, near platform 11.   It was announced, very late indeed, and even as I reached the first (First) carriages of the train whistles were blowing.  Survival of the fittest?  Yes.   Encouragement of me with a standard class ticket to get in and walk through First ...

I find it interesting that the minimum connection time at Paddington is 15 minutes, and that's heavily advertised - and yet trains are not announced until just a few minutes before they leave

While I am in cynical mode ....

Maybe this is the latest great idea by FGW to reduce overcrowding on their trains ?! Give passengers no more than a few minutes to board it before departure.

Survival of the fittest it is then - and the Gazelles win !

Late anouncing of the departure platform might well be a ruse to reduce overcrowding on certain services.

If the platform for say the overcrowded XX-15 is not anounced until the last minute, then it is probable that some customers might instead use the less crowded XX-09 if this be announced in plenty of time.

However the ingenoius methods that passengers have to use in order to get a seat, or even standing room, is indeed symptomatic of lack of capacity, and an apparent lack of urgency in addressing this.

As I have posted elswhere on these forums, I am not convinced that new shorter trains are going to help.
Experience of other TOCs and new rolling stock suggests that as soon as new stock is delivered, that the old will suddenly become "dangerous" or "non compliant" and be withdrawn, rather than useing to new stock to supplement the old and increase capacity.

There are no further paths in the peak. Adding coaches to lengthen trains isn't possible. Only doubling up turbos currently available, but there are no extras available.

So what could FGW currently do, folks?

One might hope that they would lease more rolling stock.
Although it is sometimes claimed that none is available, one does hear of stock being returned to the leasing company and stored, because no one wants it.

Or they could presumably lease loco hauled coaches ? Even a single suitably long set of coaches could help if used instead of a short and grossly overcrowded DMU. that would not only prevent overcrowding on the service run by the LHCS, but would free up a DMU or two to lengthen other services.


It is often claimed that this would be uneconomic, due to the leasing costs, and yet the new trains will presumably cost more when they arrive.

If FGW can not afford to lease old stock now, then how are they going to pay the presumably higher costs of the new trains ?

Trains have been extended from 2 + 7 up to 2 + 8, so FGW have indeed added stock, but consider too:

a) Each diagram probably has overcrowding for only 30 minutes in 24 hours on average

b) Adding an extra coach costs lots of ^ - will it generate that much more business, or simply let people spread out a bit during that 30 minutes? I note that money was paid to FGW to do the lengthening, which gives us a clue.

c) Adding a peak diagram with stock with a different top speed / acceleration profile (even if it's a longer train) will probably take up multiple paths.

The ultimate current logic is (in theory) to take all trains up to same-type or same-profile, maximum length services on the main and slow relief lines. That's going to be 2 + 8 HSTs and paired (10 car) Adelantes on the main, and 165 / 166 units on the relief. Outward of Airport Junction, the last train before each Heathrow service to make an extra stop   or two before it gets to Reading, thus providing the Slough / Maidenhead / Twyford expresses. Grand theory, and yet I expect pretty much the way it's being done save for train length.

So where could the extra carriages come from, IF it were economically or politically mandated?   Consider we're looking for a shortish term solution as electric trains will cause a rethink.   You could cascade - use LHCS on Cardiff - Taunton as has been done before, use the saved 15x units on branches such as Windsor, Marlow and Henley, and on Oxford - Banbury and Reading - Newbury stoppers, freeing up 16x units to lengthen shorten trains, and to fill the two diagrams vacated by joining up the Adelantes into pairs.

I'm being an amateur, armchair designer here and I can hear cries of "yes, but" going up, some of which may be show stoppers.  For example, a longer train takes longer to pass over speed restrictions so may be slower, and if we put 15x units on the branches, do we end up ending through trains?   Paddington to Marlow - would change at Maidenhead and change at Bourne End too be acceptable?  I have no answers, but perhaps I'm providing some clues as to the complexities that the experts face in what might at first look like a good solution.

I'd argue with that iro the HSS. Some services from Bristol to London are overcrowded much the way from Bristol TM to London with several different traffic flows. Therefore some diagrams could be overcrowded for as much as 3 hours in an 18 hour working day. However, on average across the HST fleet the proportion overcrowded during the day will be lower. So a solution that increases capacity on all HST sets is unlikely to be an optimal answer.

Those xtra coaches in the HST sets actually came frim a basterdised HST, so effectively cut the number if those....

Extra coaches would be nice, but someone has to pay - and as stated, they do in turn present operational problems.

How about this ?

For the 3 to 4 hours of the rush hour into London per day FGW runs itself to represent exactly what it is - a London metro commuter operator. It's 25 mins from Paddington to Reading on an HST. That's the same time (almost) for SWT doing a Waterloo to Wimbledon run.

What's the difference in the way this journey time is operated (apart from the stock used) ...... SWT have no First Class. The entire capacity is available for passengers - rather than the 2/3rds on a FGW HST.

Thus my proposal is : suspend First Class in all inbound London trains during the rush hour and like wise in the evening for outbound.

Imagine what having ALL the seats on a HST being available will do for the quality of the service we receive.

And for all those longer distance passengers who have paid for a 1st Class ticket to/from Paddington? Do they forthwith have to be sold a ticket only to/from Reading in future should they arrive/depart in the peaks? How do they access the 1st Class Lounge at Paddington if they only have 1st Class eligibility to/from Reading.

Massive revenue implications and operationally impossible I'd say. Lose that 1st Class revenue and it has to picked up by Standard Class passengers.
 
And people pay for a 1st Class fare for reasons. Extra space to work. The extra comfort and and a far greater chance of getting a seat.

Not to forget 1st Class fares effectively subsidise those in Standard Class.

SWT do have first class on all but their inner suburban stock, so I'm not sure why you say they don't. Even the SWT service to Reading has 1st.

Besides, unless you change the configuration of the stock, you don't actually have any additional seats, and in the rush hour first class is reasonably full. So the actual number of additional seats you would make available to passengers on the train would be very small, at the expense of seriously p**sing first class passengers off who could easily have paid between ^200 and ^300 for their return ticket (^307 from Bristol), and would find themselves unable to get a seat at Paddington.

Question - who is more deserving of a seat between Paddington and Reading? A commuter paying an average of ^17.86 per journey -   49.6p per mile (source - National Rail season ticket calculator, based on an annual return), or the ^309 fare which is around ^1.25 per mile.

I could ask the same question regarding season ticket holders from Swindon to Paddington ^17.73 per journey (23 p per mile) and Full standard class fare paying passengers at ^58.50 per journey (76 p per mile)

Everyone holding a walk-up or season ticket fare is equally entitled to any available seat, relevant to the class of travel on their ticket, regardless of the fare paid.

If you want to (almost) guarantee a seat on longer distance/bookable services you need to make a seat reservation.

What you say is absolutely correct. I do question why season tickets get such a discount when there is a shortage of seats.  This seems to be contrary to normal market pricing. After all I don'e expect any other form of discount ticket (saver or super saver as was) in the peak.

Yes, and anyway SWT DO have first class on longer distance services including those with a first stop near London.
What we need is longer trains, not tinkering.

We're going way off topic ... however ... one of the fascinating things is just how much season tickets cost in relation to standard tickets for a single day

Chippenham to London - 243 for a 7 day season, 152 for 1 day. So a season is just 1.6 times a daily peak fare.
Sevenoaks to London - 77.70 for a 7 day season, 20.70 for 1 say. So a season is 3.8 times a daily peak fare.

Just to take it even more OT -

Woking to Basingstoke - 79.10 for a 7 day season, 10.70 for 1 day. So a season is effectively 7.39 times a daily peak fare in that direction.

Obviously this is down to the fact the season is bi-directional and the daily fare is priced to encourage use of the capacity coming down from London in the morning and up in the evening (the daily fare the other way round is 21.10).

Wont do much to reduce queues at TVMs or ticket offices though.

There is, however, an argument to be made around complete removal of 1st class from turbo stock - and even more of a case from the 165xxx version.

Especially as FGW doesn't even recognise 1st on Turbo's as being a 1st Class service (no guarantee of a seat unlike HST, no paper, no coffee, no legroom)

I do not think that a seat is actually guaranteed on an HST with a first class ticket, though I grant that one virtually allways gets one.
I travell frequently in First on HSTs and only recall failing to get a seat just once.

I agree that so called first class on Turbos is inferior, and might not be worth providing ? how well used is it ?

If you were wondering how the fares "structure" here compares with other countries, there's a recent study done for ATOC and Passenger Focus on just that subject:
http://www.passengerfocus.org.uk/research/publications/comparison-of-international-rail-fares-and-ticketing-report-for-atoc-and-passenger-focus-february-2013 (http://www.passengerfocus.org.uk/research/publications/comparison-of-international-rail-fares-and-ticketing-report-for-atoc-and-passenger-focus-february-2013)

One point it shows is that the extra cost of 1st class is much higher here (26p/km average) than anywhere else - average standard class fares per km are high, and the ratio 1st:standard is one of the highest too.  I'm not 100% convinced about some aspects, in part because ours is not the only fares system that's far too complex to summarise simply. And their notion of a "regional journey" is odd: they picked Bourges (near the middle) to Vannes (top-left corner) as an example in France - I'd call that inter-regional. Maybe that's why they found the highest "regional" fare per km was in France.

But there's loads of other useful stuff in there too, which should help to answer questions such as "are these fares crazy, or are railways naturally like that?"

Of course you need to be aware of who did the study, just in case it affected their work. MVA are a transport consultancy involved (among other things) in HS2, and owned by Systra, hence by SNCF and RATP.

1st Class in Euroland is usually a fixed multiple of the Tourist or Standard fare in each country.

It *used* to be the same here, not many moons ago - certainly under BR.

I do not think that a seat is actually guaranteed on an HST with a first class ticket, though I grant that one virtually allways gets one.
I travell frequently in First on HSTs and only recall failing to get a seat just once.

I agree that so called first class on Turbos is inferior, and might not be worth providing ? how well used is it ?
[/quote]

If you travel on an HST with a First Class ticket, and fail to get a seat, you can get a refund from FGW for the difference between Standard and First.  FGW will not allow the same for Turbos.

Back 'in the day' a First Class ticket used to in general cost a simple 50% more. You didn't expect this fare to include papers, drinks, or any food let alone a three course meal, just a bit bigger and maybe more comfortable seat and space. Just what you get in the turbo 1st class area in fact.

Today for example an off-peak day return between Didcot and Reading is an additional 234% in first class compared with standard, for a 15-25 minute journey. Oddly the premium is slightly less in peak time, a mere 212%. On seasons it is actually not that far from the old days at 85% (why?). Put the off-peak return back to the old 50% (ie ^8.70 rather than ^19.40) and the first class seats on the turbo would in my opinion start to be utilised rather than being empty, with a greater fare revenue than declassification.

This enormous price gap didn't happen immediately with privatisation, but has accelerated in the last 10 years.

Of course the real problem with the turbos is that not nearly enough units were bought. ISTR that usage of the local services jumped by over 10% immediately they replaced the previous units, followed by the general rise in rail travel thereafter. Now everything is a management of insufficient capacity.

Such a lot to reply to !

SWT do have first class on all but their inner suburban stock, so I'm not sure why you say they don't. Even the SWT service to Reading has 1st.

My point was to Wimbledon - operated by inner suburban EMUs - that have no first class (and no toilet). Do not equate the 2 hour SWT rambling to Reading on Junipers with the 20 minute commute to Wimbledon.

Not to forget 1st Class fares effectively subsidise those in Standard Class.

Do not believe this myth ! Per passenger mile operated the 1st Class ticket is more valuable to the operator - but the bulk of the operational cost is well covered by a well loaded (65%+ plus) standard class train.


Don't get my wrong, as an occasional (3 to 4 times a year) use of First Class it is a great treat and actually 'makes the day' when I am able to take it. But I am also an adhoc user from the Thames Valley to London (1 or 2 times a week) and pay ^48 for the privilege of standing !

I appreciate, as I am sure most people on the forum do, the wonderful heritage of the Great Western Railway, an the idea of being the first UK operator not to operate a First Class service for part of the day is heresay - but as any smart businessman will tell you - when you have an asset the trick to making it work profitably is to maximise the utilisation. Be it a bus, a taxi, an airplane or ... a train. This cannot be said of FGW First Class for many many hours of the day.

The question is - are we operating a First Class service on the railways in the UK today as a luxury/prestige indulgence to historical pride , or instead, do we want our railways to provide a greater (more equitable) Standard Class service for the commuter.

Some, yes some, HSTs depart Paddington in the rush hour looking pretty well loaded. Most don't. Most leave with 1 or 2 seats occupied in a row of 6. And on the 180's the First Class coach is normally always mostly empty.

But are we to suffer the status quo (which wont be - the growth of the railway usage means increasingly overcrowded trains and the real liklihood of passengers left standing at stations due to services being 'Full and Standing') or do we look at all options (however unpalettable) to solve the capacity issues that are here today.

To not is just rank foolishness - and is putting pride before the fall !

IMHO.

You need to postpone this until the IEP stock comes in. NO way on earth you'll persuade anyone to make adjustments to the current stock above & beyond the changes already in progress - which in itself, makes your suggestions almost redundant in that the HSTs are moving to only having 2 coaches of 1st class with either a full coach or half-coach being converted.

Once this project is complete, then would be the time to monitor 1st Class. If there's still a full empty-equivalent coach of 1st class in the peak, your suggestion might stand up. But I suspect it won't - and yes, I do think there is still a market for 1st class, certainly in the peaks.

But with the advent of the IEPs and replacement of the turbos on lines into PAD, it's rather a redundant discussion, methinks.

I think I read somewhere (maybe on this forum) that FGW are planning to reduce the amount of first class provision on Intercity 125 trains, and increase standard. Although there are no doubt some trains where first class is very busy, my occasional experience of upgrading to first class on peak trains to/from Paddington is that there is a lot of spare capacity, which might be better deployed for standard ticket holders. As an example, a few weeks ago I travelled on the previously-mentioned 1806 from Paddington in first class. I would estimate that it was half-full leaving Paddington, and less than a quarter full leaving Reading. If one of the two first-class coaches were classified as standard, then there would be seating opportunities for the many people who have no choice but to stand in standard.

The problem for FGW is that they have to try and balance the needs of multiple markets within the constraints of fixed formation trains, and it must be really difficult to get the balance right such that capacity is used effectively and profitably.

As an aside, talking to a member of traincrew recently, I understand that first class ticket sales have suffered significantly from changes to travel policies in the public sector, where first-class travel by senior managers was once commonplace, and is now a rarity. I can see the rationale for reviewing how capacity is used on these trains.

Which I believe the DfT is doing - starting with FGW's reduction of 1st class ongoing in both HSTs & turbos.

As we've strayed into the 'removal of a first class carriage' debate I think it is worth contributing that not everyone in First Class does so just to get legroom and a paper.  I upgraded to First when I had a bad back and couldn't stand for the 20min journey from Maidenhead to Paddington - it was the only way to get a seat.

I know of several others who do exactly the same for the same reasons.

What I'm saying is that for some the extra cost of a First Class ticket is essential, rather than a luxury, and when FGW reduce provision it is likely that we will be standing every single day.

So you're comparing suburban services to Wimbledon (7 miles out of Waterloo) with high speed services to Reading (36 miles out of Paddington) carrying long distance passengers to Swansea, Bristol and Penzance. Hardly a like for like comparison. 

A better comparison would be SWT longer distance services to Bournemouth, Exeter and Portsmouth calling both at Woking (24 miles) and Basingstoke (47 miles, Bournemouth, Exeter lines only). Guess what? They both have very heavy commuter flows and all services have first class accommodation. So I don't think the SWT comparison helps your argument.

 

I think you'll find that the HST's first class accommodation has 3 across.

But at the same time less Standard Class passengers will be standing. If you replace a whole First Class carriage with a whole Standard Class carriage you go from 48 to up to 84 seats. First Class may be busy at first when the changes are made but I expect anybody who find they are standing in First Class everyday will quite quickly either take an alternative service or start travelling in Standard Class instead. It could well end up losing FGW revenue by reducing the First Class provision, but it seems that it is the DfT's idea.

That has been the result on Chiltern in that now everyone has an equal chance of being the standee. I too am someone who cannot physically stand stationary for more than a few minutes and also witnessed what happened to those unfortunate enough to be standing in the Ladbroke Grove crash. I therefore rarely risk travelling standard without a reserved seat these days, at whatever time. Movement maybe should be to allow seats to be bookable on all services!

It is a rock and a hard place situation. The HST replacement is now years later than needed, and although this delay has led to electrification, it has had an adverse affect on catering for the expansion in rail use. The high density HSTs I suspect were thought at their introduction to be enough but this is not been an adequate stopgap (and leave insufficient room for luggage). There turbos have been inadequate for years.

My weekly travel card  from Thatcham to London is ^121.50 as opposed to ^52 per day so it does take a lot to work out the savings

Ironically posting this from the 1806 Paddington to Frome services which tonight seems to be stuck at Reading for a long time

But lbraine wasn't suggesting replacing first seating with standard - simply allowing standard class pax to occupy those seats between Paddington and Reading. So no increase in actual seating capacity.

Let's look how this might work in practice coming out of Paddington. For simplicity I'll work with round numbers.  Say there are 100 first class seats, and 500 standard class seats, which is pretty close to the actual capacity of a 2+6 set.  Now suppose we have 75 first class passengers and 700 standard, so 90% standard, 10% first. (ie first is comfortable with 25 spare, standard is horribly overcrowded.)  Under the suggestion, 775 passengers turn up at random, so the first 100 take the 1st class seats. Of these, around 10 will have first class tickets and 90 standard.  There are now 500 seats left, which will be taken by around 50 first class pax and 450 standard. The stragglers will have to stand, being 15 first and 160 standard.

The result is that of the 75 first class pax, 10 get to sit in first, 50 sit in standard, and 15 stand, compared with 75 sitting in first.
For standard class pax, 90 get to sit in first, 450 sit in standard and 160 stand.

Under the current arrangement 75 first class pax sit in first (all), and 500 out of 700 standard class pax sit in standard, with the other 200 standing.

So for the benefit of seating an extra 25 people, 50 first class pax have had to sit in standard and a further 15 have had to stand. That doesn't sound like a proposition which would be appealing to those in FGW finance dept relying on the revenue obtained from 1st class pax.

We'll I wasn't being as bold as saying removing ALL first class - that's a whole new debate ;)

I admit my proposal may seem radical - but I honestly think we are getting close to that point. I commend FGW for introducing the extra HST coach to make it 2+8, but why not 2+9. Yes - impact on costs (isn't there always and someone always has to pay) and infrastructure cost (signalling and short platforms) but truly the increase of 1 coach has had little impact on the capacity and overcrowding. Not to mention a lack of MK 3 coaches it seems!

So - you have to change the use of the existing stock.

I too read the first class coaches were to be reduced in the HST - part of the recent FGW extension deal - but I see little movement. In comparison I saw my first Turbo with first class decals removed 2 days after the announcement.

Why is it taking so long ? Or has this gone by the wayside ? surely we are not waiting to change the seating ? Remove the decals and classification and get on with it.

If it is still going to happen I think it just strengthen my view that in the long term first class seating will slowly reduce (and, yes, even after the dreaded IEP stock is introduced).

As I understand it the option of 2+9 was considered several years ago, and was ruled out on the grounds of:-
i) the HST depots are only capable of taking 2+8, so it was a very substantial cost to increase to 2+9
ii) most of the day the extra coach would be carting around fresh air, so the business case couldn't be made to make such a substantial investment in the depots, let alone the ongoing leasing and operating costs (track access, fuel) of running an additional coach in each set all day long
iii) the performance of running 2+9 would be significant, particularly on the majority of services which have relatively short distances between stops, thus adding to journey times (unlike EC, where you typically have 30 mins+ between stops, so the impact of poorer acceleration is minimal). So you impair journey times all day to the West, South West and South Wales just to seat some more passengers between London and Reading in the peak.

Added to that, whilst there may have been some Mk3's available at the time the subject was considered, there aren't any more, (or certainly not 50+). Thus the DafT inspired stop gap of  reducing 1st until IEP comes along. But even DafT won't live up to their nickname to the extent that  they would suggest standard pax can sit in first from Paddington to Reading.

I'm not too sure I buy that 2+9 argument. Only on Saturday I witnessed the 17:40 Newton Abbot - London Paddington arrive with 9 Carriages. Admittedly It consisted of the following:

43 - TGS - TF - TFD - TFRB - TS - TS - TSD - TS - TS - TGS - 43

Obviously the TGS at the London End was locked out of use. I've seen this done many times when a carriage needs to be moved somewhere.

I've seen another set recently running around with 2x Coach C's in it; also 9 carrriages.

But also I have witnessed a set consisting of: 43 - TF - TFB - TS -TSD - TS - TGS - 43

First Class on that set got a little cosy :D

I don't see why FGW need to alter the First Class seating on the HST actually. I still think they need to either significantly reduce the First Class Fares during the validity times of SVR/SVS and SSR/SSS Tickets (Off-Peak and Super-Off-Peak Return and Singles retro-retrospectively).

If FGW allowed their Weekend First Promotion to be extended to the Off-Peak Trains in a weekday, perhaps with limited refreshments, I think alot of people would be very tempted to upgrade. GreaterAnglia do something similar for ^10.00 Return on Off Peak Trains which is a First Class Upgrade both ways.

---

Of course, If FGW decide to change the seating configuration, then would it not be beneficial to adopt the method of Virgin Trains and just have a carriage with 2+2 and only Tabled seating that can be alternated between First and Standard Class as per the capacity requirements?

I think that would be a great idea as the TM can make the decision in real time based on the loadings of their train.

I wouldn't be too worried about losing the 2+1 Seating. However the other perks that First Class can offer I perhaps would be.

If FGW also decide to remove the First Class Advance Fares or significantly reduce the availability of them, then sorry, but I'll be going South West Trains when I go to London. With First Advance fares as little as ^11.90 (with railcard) the decision when faced with say a ^50 First Advance is going to be obvious. I would however be willing to pay ^50.00 to go to London in First Class if it meant I could just turn up and travel on any Off Peak Service.

On the turbos, AFAIK no actual seating was changed, it was simply a case of removing the first class notices and thereby permitting standard class passengers to use seating previously only available to first class ticket holders. Simply removing notices is easily achieved overnight.

On the HSTs AFAIK it is proposed to remove first class seats and install instead standard class seats, this is a little more innvolved and cant be done overnight.

Broadgage you are right - on the first modified turbo I saw the sliding doors in to first class appeared to be permanently open, the headrest covers had been removed and the "gold" line had been covered with what appeared to be gaffa tape

All in all a cheap downgrade !

And as a result, standard class passengers are still standing outside, because the chairs don't look like the standard class ones; and some passengers (I assume to be first class) are trying to close the doors and wondering why they don't work anymore.

Judging by my trains in the morning, declassifying first on the turbos has done bugger all, due to none of the passengers actually being told about it!

I'm sure it will slowly dawn on people - in the meantime then make the most of it yourself by being one of the few that know.  It does make practically no difference though as the busiest trains in the morning saw widespread misuse of first class anyway (and still do in the remaining accommodation).  Some trains are so full the first class section is also packed solid with standing passengers.  8-Car EMU's are desperately needed post-electrification and 10-car ones post-Crossrail, but until then I can't see much happening apart from a bit of tinkering here and there with the current fleet

Regarding 2+9 HST's, perhaps the best chance of that will be post IEP introduction on the sets that remain as there will be plenty of spare carriages to add to them?  Though, I'm with ChrisB on this one - don't expect anything above and beyond the current part conversion of one carriage to happen before then, and there would be performance issues leading to slower journey times in Cornwall where the stops are frequent.

Suggestions of first class being used for standard class passengers at certain times of the day creates far more issues than it solves, though perhaps IEP's being built as standard class only makes more sense?  Can't see it ever happening though given the number of wealthy passengers who still use FGW at peak times, and the ability to offer cheaper advance first class fares at other times of the day.

Adding a 9th to HSTs would mean amending the selective door opening sequences too, so not an overnight job. They are replacing the 1st class seats with high-density Standard seats during their next exam....

The SDO works fine for 2+9 sets. You do get 2+9 sets every now and then, particularly the Summer Newquay trains used to be booked for 2+9 sets.

I recently travelled on a 2+9 set. We keep to time throughout the journey. I think the acceleration and Devon Banks issues are overstated. However, fuel consumption may be of concern to the operator. Also, running on one engine may be more problematical, but that can be equally true of 2+8 sets.

I think there was sufficient un-utilised Mk3 stock stored that could've been pressed into use if there was the will, and the DfT were willing to stump up most of the cost. The ropiness of that remaining stock would have determined how much needed to be spent. However, it would've been a big spend for a relatively short period of use. Instead though FGW and the DfT have gone for the cheaper option of converting some existing 1st Class accommodation to Standard.

There are five coaches  at Wabtec Kilmarnock now being converted to TS Spec. they are all ex buffet coaches three of these are ex Virgin vehicles which have been out of use for ten years