|
Title: Well would you believe it?? Post by: vacman on February 07, 2008, 20:01:44 Well, from May FGW are keeping three 180's, gaining 5 150's from ATW (told you so shazz!) and some 158's are to be made up into 3 car sets! only taken two years but it seems as though Mr Haines is the best thing since sliced bread for FGW! The three 180's are for two Cotswold diagrams, whether they are going into store until May I don't know, obviously the (much needed) 3 car 158's will go onto Cardiff Pompey services and the 5 150's will replace some 2 car 158 diagrams probably on Cardiff-Taunton and Weymouth services.
Came from a good source of info, a reliable one. Title: Re: Well would you believe it?? Post by: Conner on February 07, 2008, 20:32:32 Well, from May FGW are keeping three 180's, gaining 5 150's from ATW (told you so shazz!) and some 158's are to be made up into 3 car sets! only taken two years but it seems as though Mr Haines is the best thing since sliced bread for FGW! The three 180's are for two Cotswold diagrams, whether they are going into store until May I don't know, obviously the (much needed) 3 car 158's will go onto Cardiff Pompey services and the 5 150's will replace some 2 car 158 diagrams probably on Cardiff-Taunton and Weymouth services. ITS A MIRACLE. ALL BOW DOWN TO SIR ANDREW HAINES!Came from a good source of info, a reliable one. Do you know how many 158's? And are they going to be hybrids like Wessex or purpose built 3-car? Or are they going to be split from some of are other 158's? Title: Re: Well would you believe it?? Post by: vacman on February 07, 2008, 20:38:25 Well, from May FGW are keeping three 180's, gaining 5 150's from ATW (told you so shazz!) and some 158's are to be made up into 3 car sets! only taken two years but it seems as though Mr Haines is the best thing since sliced bread for FGW! The three 180's are for two Cotswold diagrams, whether they are going into store until May I don't know, obviously the (much needed) 3 car 158's will go onto Cardiff Pompey services and the 5 150's will replace some 2 car 158 diagrams probably on Cardiff-Taunton and Weymouth services. ITS A MIRACLE. ALL BOW DOWN TO SIR ANDREW HAINES!Came from a good source of info, a reliable one. Do you know how many 158's? And are they going to be hybrids like Wessex or purpose built 3-car? Or are they going to be split from some of are other 158's? Title: Re: Well would you believe it?? Post by: Conner on February 07, 2008, 20:45:02 Well, from May FGW are keeping three 180's, gaining 5 150's from ATW (told you so shazz!) and some 158's are to be made up into 3 car sets! only taken two years but it seems as though Mr Haines is the best thing since sliced bread for FGW! The three 180's are for two Cotswold diagrams, whether they are going into store until May I don't know, obviously the (much needed) 3 car 158's will go onto Cardiff Pompey services and the 5 150's will replace some 2 car 158 diagrams probably on Cardiff-Taunton and Weymouth services. ITS A MIRACLE. ALL BOW DOWN TO SIR ANDREW HAINES!Came from a good source of info, a reliable one. Do you know how many 158's? And are they going to be hybrids like Wessex or purpose built 3-car? Or are they going to be split from some of are other 158's? Definatly Pompey-Cardiff needs extra capacity, I wouldn't mind a different 150 anyway. Are they likely to be the Ex-Central units? Title: Re: Well would you believe it?? Post by: vacman on February 07, 2008, 20:47:11 Well, from May FGW are keeping three 180's, gaining 5 150's from ATW (told you so shazz!) and some 158's are to be made up into 3 car sets! only taken two years but it seems as though Mr Haines is the best thing since sliced bread for FGW! The three 180's are for two Cotswold diagrams, whether they are going into store until May I don't know, obviously the (much needed) 3 car 158's will go onto Cardiff Pompey services and the 5 150's will replace some 2 car 158 diagrams probably on Cardiff-Taunton and Weymouth services. ITS A MIRACLE. ALL BOW DOWN TO SIR ANDREW HAINES!Came from a good source of info, a reliable one. Do you know how many 158's? And are they going to be hybrids like Wessex or purpose built 3-car? Or are they going to be split from some of are other 158's? Title: Re: Well would you believe it?? Post by: Conner on February 07, 2008, 20:52:04 Well, from May FGW are keeping three 180's, gaining 5 150's from ATW (told you so shazz!) and some 158's are to be made up into 3 car sets! only taken two years but it seems as though Mr Haines is the best thing since sliced bread for FGW! The three 180's are for two Cotswold diagrams, whether they are going into store until May I don't know, obviously the (much needed) 3 car 158's will go onto Cardiff Pompey services and the 5 150's will replace some 2 car 158 diagrams probably on Cardiff-Taunton and Weymouth services. ITS A MIRACLE. ALL BOW DOWN TO SIR ANDREW HAINES!Came from a good source of info, a reliable one. Do you know how many 158's? And are they going to be hybrids like Wessex or purpose built 3-car? Or are they going to be split from some of are other 158's? Title: Re: Well would you believe it?? Post by: Shazz on February 07, 2008, 20:55:18 Well, from May FGW are keeping three 180's, gaining 5 150's from ATW (told you so shazz!) and some 158's are to be made up into 3 car sets! only taken two years but it seems as though Mr Haines is the best thing since sliced bread for FGW! The three 180's are for two Cotswold diagrams, whether they are going into store until May I don't know, obviously the (much needed) 3 car 158's will go onto Cardiff Pompey services and the 5 150's will replace some 2 car 158 diagrams probably on Cardiff-Taunton and Weymouth services. Came from a good source of info, a reliable one. When i hear it from someone else/ a press release i'll believe you. it still doesnt make any business sence to take on 10 150's and get rid of 5 when you need 8 to cover the extra services ;) Title: Re: Well would you believe it?? Post by: vacman on February 07, 2008, 20:57:17 Well, from May FGW are keeping three 180's, gaining 5 150's from ATW (told you so shazz!) and some 158's are to be made up into 3 car sets! only taken two years but it seems as though Mr Haines is the best thing since sliced bread for FGW! The three 180's are for two Cotswold diagrams, whether they are going into store until May I don't know, obviously the (much needed) 3 car 158's will go onto Cardiff Pompey services and the 5 150's will replace some 2 car 158 diagrams probably on Cardiff-Taunton and Weymouth services. Came from a good source of info, a reliable one. When i hear it from someone else/ a press release i'll believe you. it still doesnt make any business sence to take on 10 150's and get rid of 5 when you need 8 to cover the extra services ;) Title: Re: Well would you believe it?? Post by: Timmer on February 07, 2008, 21:25:00 Well Vacman, I'll give two and a half cheers as I don't believe that you would post this without being pretty sure of the news you have received. I base this on your previous posts to this forum which are pretty good. I'll give you the final half cheer when I see the return of three car 158s on the Cardiff-Pompey route go past my office window in May undoing the vandalism done by FGW and DFT to this line back in December 06 for which Beeching would have been proud.
Remember what AG said the other week fellow coffee shop posters...It will be better by the Spring! Perhaps this time he could be right. :) Oh and before anyone sends the 142s back up north, remember that one unit would be more than welcome on the Transwilts line! Title: Re: Well would you believe it?? Post by: Jim on February 07, 2008, 21:27:28 Well Vacman, I'll give two and a half cheers as I don't believe that you would post this without being pretty sure of the news you have received. I base this on your previous posts to this forum which are pretty good. I'll give you the final half cheer when I see the return of three car 158s on the Cardiff-Pompey route go past my office window in May undoing the vandalism done by FGW and DFT to this line back in December 06 for which Beeching would have been proud. Remember what AG said the other week fellow coffee shop posters...It will be better by the Spring! Perhaps this time he could be right. :) I might have to change the quote in my sig soon! Title: Re: Well would you believe it?? Post by: BandHcommuter on February 07, 2008, 23:10:23 Well, from May FGW are keeping three 180's, gaining 5 150's from ATW (told you so shazz!) and some 158's are to be made up into 3 car sets! only taken two years but it seems as though Mr Haines is the best thing since sliced bread for FGW! The three 180's are for two Cotswold diagrams, whether they are going into store until May I don't know, obviously the (much needed) 3 car 158's will go onto Cardiff Pompey services and the 5 150's will replace some 2 car 158 diagrams probably on Cardiff-Taunton and Weymouth services. Came from a good source of info, a reliable one. When i hear it from someone else/ a press release i'll believe you. I have also heard this recently (the bit about 3 car 158s and subleased 150s) from someone who would know. ;) Title: Re: Well would you believe it?? Post by: mada on February 07, 2008, 23:21:25 Well, from May FGW are keeping three 180's, gaining 5 150's from ATW (told you so shazz!) and some 158's are to be made up into 3 car sets! only taken two years but it seems as though Mr Haines is the best thing since sliced bread for FGW! The three 180's are for two Cotswold diagrams, whether they are going into store until May I don't know, obviously the (much needed) 3 car 158's will go onto Cardiff Pompey services and the 5 150's will replace some 2 car 158 diagrams probably on Cardiff-Taunton and Weymouth services. Came from a good source of info, a reliable one. When i hear it from someone else/ a press release i'll believe you. I have also heard this recently (the bit about 3 car 158s and subleased 150s) from someone who would know. ;) Where do TOC's find the 158 centre carriages without cabs anyway? Title: Re: Well would you believe it?? Post by: Jim on February 08, 2008, 07:37:42 One point worth thinking about though, is the 16.30 CDF-PMH, 16.22 PMH-CDF and 06.00 PMH-CDF, which are ALL booked 4 car - what will happen to them??
Title: Re: Well would you believe it?? Post by: mada on February 08, 2008, 07:54:03 One point worth thinking about though, is the 16.30 CDF-PMH, 16.22 PMH-CDF and 06.00 PMH-CDF, which are ALL booked 4 car - what will happen to them?? 3 Car 158 vice 153 or 5 car 158? Title: Re: Well would you believe it?? Post by: tramway on February 08, 2008, 08:16:13 [quote Where do TOC's find the 158 centre carriages without cabs anyway? [/quote] You don't need to if they do what Wessex did. Split a 2 car and just attach them to other units. The additional cab end becomes redundant in the middle of the unit. As said earlier it will reduce the overall number of 158 untis which presumably the 150's will cover for. Title: Re: Well would you believe it?? Post by: Shazz on February 08, 2008, 11:44:31 The only way i could see this possible is if ATW are acrually taking the extra 180's and freeing up lots of 158's /175's to replace there 150's on longer distance routes
Title: Re: Well would you believe it?? Post by: vacman on February 08, 2008, 14:07:57 One point worth thinking about though, is the 16.30 CDF-PMH, 16.22 PMH-CDF and 06.00 PMH-CDF, which are ALL booked 4 car - what will happen to them?? One would think that they would probably just be a 3 car, but don't know? Title: Re: Well would you believe it?? Post by: tramway on February 08, 2008, 15:27:10 IIRC not all Wessex 158's were converted, but they seem to have diagrammed things so there were still 4 cars on peak services.
That was what was so annoying about the Dec 06 timetable, just blew all the hard work to get a reslient service out of the water. It's taken 2 years to return to Wessex service levels which everyone was content could be built on. Other members probably have more ready access to passenger figures for the past 5 years to compare pre and post franchise change, and to see what effect it has had financially. As Graham has pointed out at length, there were substantial groth figures in the region pre 12/06, and given possible projection figures and subsequent real passenger numbers I wonder what the impact has really been. Title: Re: Well would you believe it?? Post by: devon_metro on February 08, 2008, 16:29:31 One point worth thinking about though, is the 16.30 CDF-PMH, 16.22 PMH-CDF and 06.00 PMH-CDF, which are ALL booked 4 car - what will happen to them?? Stay 4 car I imagine with other services becoming 3 car, or maybe 5 car if they feel generous. Title: Re: Well would you believe it?? Post by: vacman on February 08, 2008, 16:36:53 One point worth thinking about though, is the 16.30 CDF-PMH, 16.22 PMH-CDF and 06.00 PMH-CDF, which are ALL booked 4 car - what will happen to them?? Stay 4 car I imagine with other services becoming 3 car, or maybe 5 car if they feel generous. Title: Re: Well would you believe it?? Post by: devon_metro on February 08, 2008, 16:54:17 Or simply strenghthen them between Cardiff and Salisbury/Southampton with a 150 and then send the 150 as a Soton - Swindon (via Melksham ;)) stopper!
Title: Re: Well would you believe it?? Post by: Btline on February 08, 2008, 23:49:17 Excellent, with 180s back on the Cotswold line, FGW can get rid of a lot of their "short platforms" on the list (eg Forgate Street)!
People will have tables and legroom again! Then again, seeing is believing! Title: Re: Well would you believe it?? Post by: vacman on February 09, 2008, 09:49:15 Excellent, with 180s back on the Cotswold line, FGW can get rid of a lot of their "short platforms" on the list (eg Forgate Street)! Very true! One thing Btline, your picture of a class 172 isn't too accurate as the 172's are being built with gangway ends. ;)People will have tables and legroom again! Then again, seeing is believing! Title: Re: Well would you believe it?? Post by: dog box on February 09, 2008, 17:40:37 Wonder what Mr Ambrose and his mates think about this then.........looks as if they might have to rename themselves just LESS STRAIN,
Title: Re: Well would you believe it?? Post by: Timmer on February 09, 2008, 19:31:36 Wonder what Mr Ambrose and his mates think about this then.........looks as if they might have to rename themselves just LESS STRAIN, If what Vacman has told us happens then MTLS would be finished. Once again they've gone very quiet again and the daily life of a FGW commuter continues as normal.Title: Re: Well would you believe it?? Post by: devon_metro on February 09, 2008, 19:33:29 I propose a renaming:
MTLTA "More Trains, Less Tony Ambrose" Title: Re: Well would you believe it?? Post by: Btline on February 09, 2008, 19:54:49 Excellent, with 180s back on the Cotswold line, FGW can get rid of a lot of their "short platforms" on the list (eg Forgate Street)! Very true! One thing Btline, your picture of a class 172 isn't too accurate as the 172's are being built with gangway ends. ;)People will have tables and legroom again! Then again, seeing is believing! Sort of! The picture is of the Class 172/0 which will be for Chiltern Railways and London Overground. These will have a top speed of 75 mi/h and will not have end gangways. The Snow Hill Lines will be getting 172/2 and 172/3 which will have end gangways and a higher speed of 100 mi/h. Look at Wikipedia for more details. The most important thing is, whatever they look like, it may spell the end of overcrowding in Bristol (assuming the new stock this year does not have the full effect)! Title: Re: Well would you believe it?? Post by: swlines on February 09, 2008, 20:57:49 If what Vacman has told us happens then MTLS would be finished. Once again they've gone very quiet again and the daily life of a FGW commuter continues as normal. To be fair, more than 3 coaches would probably be wise for some services .. Title: Re: Well would you believe it?? Post by: Timmer on February 09, 2008, 21:13:06 To be fair, more than 3 coaches would probably be wise for some services .. Couldn't agree more, 3 coaches for most trains on the Cardiff-Pompey line is the minimum and that was over a year ago. Since then passenger numbers have continued to increase though I suspect many have been put of from using this line ever again when they have been left behind on the platform because the two car 158 that turned up was already rammed full.Title: Re: Well would you believe it?? Post by: Jim on February 10, 2008, 00:23:23 IIRC not all Wessex 158's were converted, but they seem to have diagrammed things so there were still 4 cars on peak services. I belive so yes. Title: Re: Well would you believe it?? Post by: IanL on February 11, 2008, 10:32:51 Regarding the 3 180s for the Cotswold line, are these for a scheduled services or as a backup for broken or just in the wrong place HSTs, if so does anyone know which diagram?
I ask because the 0837 Worcester FS to Paddington is still an Adelante when we were promised all HSTs, this train is nearly always chronically overcrowded (standing only before Oxford) and it is the first train where CDR tickets are valid. Any confirmed news on the 180s? Title: Re: Well would you believe it?? Post by: Jim on February 11, 2008, 15:36:34 Regarding the 3 180s for the Cotswold line, are these for a scheduled services or as a backup for broken or just in the wrong place HSTs, if so does anyone know which diagram? I ask because the 0837 Worcester FS to Paddington is still an Adelante when we were promised all HSTs, this train is nearly always chronically overcrowded (standing only before Oxford) and it is the first train where CDR tickets are valid. Any confirmed news on the 180s? I belive that diagram is booked to last until Friday, so make the most of it! Title: Re: Well would you believe it?? Post by: devon_metro on February 11, 2008, 17:00:20 Make the most of a full and standing train?? ???
I don't think the 180s are special enough to warrant full and standing 'bashes' ;) Title: Re: Well would you believe it?? Post by: Jim on February 11, 2008, 18:52:21 Make the most of a full and standing train?? ??? I don't think the 180s are special enough to warrant full and standing 'bashes' ;) Not all the services it does a day are! Title: Re: Well would you believe it?? Post by: John R on February 11, 2008, 18:52:38 A couple of weeks ago the 0744 Chippenham was rumoured to become an HST but I still see an Adelante at TM each morning waiting to form the 0900, so it doesn't seem to have happened yet?
Title: Re: Well would you believe it?? Post by: willc on February 11, 2008, 22:55:37 Today's overcrowding on the 08.37 from Worcester was because it is half-term for schools in Worcestershire. And a friend who normally rides in the front coach eventually turned up in the quiet coach at the back as we were heading towards Kingham and said coach E was occupied by a massed group of Cub Scouts, which probably made matters even worse than a usual half-term morning.
We'll have to see if an HST turns up next week, but it would certainly be welcome with Gloucestershire and Oxfordshire schools both being off. But could someone please tell Old Oak to have an Adelante warmed up first thing in the morning, just in case the 125 won't work. This isn't the train to provide a Turbo on. The diagram starting with the 05.50 from Moreton-in-Marsh was an HST today for the first time, though if the Adelante comeback is true, then I expect this working will revert sharpish, as an HST is probably overkill capacity-wise at this time of day, even from Oxford. On the assumption that Friday is the last day of 180s (for the time being?), then the 17.51 London to Worcester and the 20.58 return (PAD 23.22) looks like it may be the last booked duty to run, as that Bristol diagram ends with the 19.53 from Exeter, due Paddington 22.30. Title: Re: Well would you believe it?? Post by: Jim on February 12, 2008, 07:29:13 Today's overcrowding on the 08.37 from Worcester was because it is half-term for schools in Worcestershire. And a friend who normally rides in the front coach eventually turned up in the quiet coach at the back as we were heading towards Kingham and said coach E was occupied by a massed group of Cub Scouts, which probably made matters even worse than a usual half-term morning. We'll have to see if an HST turns up next week, but it would certainly be welcome with Gloucestershire and Oxfordshire schools both being off. But could someone please tell Old Oak to have an Adelante warmed up first thing in the morning, just in case the 125 won't work. This isn't the train to provide a Turbo on. The diagram starting with the 05.50 from Moreton-in-Marsh was an HST today for the first time, though if the Adelante comeback is true, then I expect this working will revert sharpish, as an HST is probably overkill capacity-wise at this time of day, even from Oxford. On the assumption that Friday is the last day of 180s (for the time being?), then the 17.51 London to Worcester and the 20.58 return (PAD 23.22) looks like it may be the last booked duty to run, as that Bristol diagram ends with the 19.53 from Exeter, due Paddington 22.30. Don';t count on it happening though! Title: Re: Well would you believe it?? Post by: 12hoursunday on February 12, 2008, 13:12:11 I propose a renaming: MTLTA "More Trains, Less Tony Ambrose" ;D ;D ;D Prehaps a resurrection of the campaign to stop the low flying aircraft now that the holiday season is upon us again approaching Bristol International Airport will feel the time. I've heard the 180 story also so there must be some substance behind it, they will be used to cover Cotswold line work while HST's are withdrawn from service to have GSM radio equipment fitted which by all accounts is a fairly big job! I was made to modify this post because some people regarded it as a personal attack on a certain person. Funny that attacks on First Great Western are allowed though! Double Standards spring to mind! Title: Re: Well would you believe it?? Post by: Btline on February 12, 2008, 13:39:13 I propose a renaming: MTLTA "More Trains, Less Tony Ambrose" ;D ;D ;D Prehaps a resurrection of his campaign to stop the low flying aircraft now that the holiday season is upon us again approaching Bristol whilst he attends to his allotment ;D ;D ;D I've heard the 180 story also so there must be some substance behind it, they will be used to cover Cotswold line work while HST's are withdrawn from service to have GSM radio equipment fitted which by all accounts is a fairly big job! So they won't be permanent? Hmmmmm- come on FGW make up your mind. Title: Re: Well would you believe it?? Post by: Btline on February 12, 2008, 19:25:34 What's Andrew Haines' email address? Someone should email him (and others) DEMANDING a conformation for all these rumours.
If they are true, tn FGW may survive. If they are false, they might be another nail in FGW's coffin! I hope it is true, and salute A Haines if they are! PS- how do we know that he is not a member of this forum.......? Title: Re: Well would you believe it?? Post by: devon_metro on February 12, 2008, 19:28:15 Was the email I just posted too public then :-\
Title: Re: Well would you believe it?? Post by: Lee on February 12, 2008, 19:47:05 I think that you have made your point now, Btline.....
Andrew Haines e-mail address (for anyone who missed it) is : andrew.haines[at]firstgroup.com ;D And if you are reading this, Andrew, then you are of course more than welcome to join up.... Title: Re: Well would you believe it?? Post by: Btline on February 12, 2008, 20:03:56 I think that you have made your point now, Btline..... ??? What point? Quote Andrew Haines e-mail address (for anyone who missed it) is : andrew.haines[at]firstgroup.com ;D Thanks! Quote And if you are reading this, Andrew, then you are of course more than welcome to join up.... !!! Have removed duplicate post on other thread! Title: Re: Well would you believe it?? Post by: Btline on February 12, 2008, 20:20:38 Email sent.
Will notify you about reply when/if it comes! Title: Re: Well would you believe it?? Post by: Lee on February 12, 2008, 20:54:35 I think that you have made your point now, Btline..... ??? What point? Have removed duplicate post on other thread! I was gently referring to the duplicate post, and thanks for sorting that out. Title: Re: Well would you believe it?? Post by: Btline on February 13, 2008, 18:16:56 Email sent. Will notify you about reply when/if it comes! I got a reply!! Quote from: Andrew Haines Thank you for your email. We are working hard at present on a number of rolling stock options but I'm afraid I'm not in a position to make a public statement at the moment. A fair response- and rapid as well! What do people think? More stock? Yes or No? Title: Re: Well would you believe it?? Post by: Lee on February 13, 2008, 18:39:03 Email sent. Will notify you about reply when/if it comes! I got a reply!! Quote from: Andrew Haines Thank you for your email. We are working hard at present on a number of rolling stock options but I'm afraid I'm not in a position to make a public statement at the moment. A fair response- and rapid as well! What do people think? More stock? Yes or No? Standard "holding" reply, so difficult to tell either way. Title: Re: Well would you believe it?? Post by: vacman on February 13, 2008, 18:40:04 Time will tell!
Title: Re: Well would you believe it?? Post by: devon_metro on February 13, 2008, 18:43:34 Latest rumour going round is we are to get 150001 (Prototype 3 car) and 150002 (prototype 3 car) both from LM.
Title: Re: Well would you believe it?? Post by: Btline on February 13, 2008, 19:28:46 Latest rumour going round is we are to get 150001 (Prototype 3 car) and 150002 (prototype 3 car) both from LM. I've been on one of them. That'll be good for FGW- they are both pretty good as far as 150s go (if I remember correct!). Which picture are you going to have DM? Title: Re: Well would you believe it?? Post by: devon_metro on February 13, 2008, 19:35:23 Personally I don't posses a picture of them, but I will leave you with this: http://philtpics.fotopic.net/p39814318.html
;D Title: Re: Well would you believe it?? Post by: Btline on February 13, 2008, 20:29:57 Latest rumour going round is we are to get 150001 (Prototype 3 car) and 150002 (prototype 3 car) both from LM. good old scud 1 and 2. they are not the best and have a smaller fuel tank than the rest of 150 fleet,hence the nickname scud they always get where they are going but dont get back I thought I found them having better acceleration than the rest of the fleet. What are LM going to do with 2 fewer 150 units? They better not deprive the Snow Hill Lines of them- apparently, overcrowding is becoming quite bad in B'ham. Title: Re: Well would you believe it?? Post by: Btline on February 13, 2008, 22:31:54 Or they are axing the branch lines! >:(
If there is an excess, it might explain why LM's Class 172 order has 1 less vehicle in it than their 150s. Oh, well. Where will these units be going? Bristol commuter? Severn Beach? Oh- on the subject of Severn Beach, why do most trains terminate at Avonmouth to be "bustituted" to Severn Beach at off peak times? What's wrong with the railway? Title: Re: Well would you believe it?? Post by: mada on February 13, 2008, 22:43:14 Or they are axing the branch lines! >:( If there is an excess, it might explain why LM's Class 172 order has 1 less vehicle in it than their 150s. Oh, well. Where will these units be going? Bristol commuter? Severn Beach? Oh- on the subject of Severn Beach, why do most trains terminate at Avonmouth to be "bustituted" to Severn Beach at off peak times? What's wrong with the railway? I imagine Taunton - Cardiff / Weston - Parkway releasing 143's for the Severn Beach line. Or alternatively wherever 158's are allowing First to form more 3 car sets. Title: Re: Well would you believe it?? Post by: John R on February 13, 2008, 23:40:50 Or they are axing the branch lines! >:( If there is an excess, it might explain why LM's Class 172 order has 1 less vehicle in it than their 150s. Oh, well. Where will these units be going? Bristol commuter? Severn Beach? Oh- on the subject of Severn Beach, why do most trains terminate at Avonmouth to be "bustituted" to Severn Beach at off peak times? What's wrong with the railway? It enables one less set (and crew) to run the line for the sake of a journey to... well nowhere really. WOuld be much better if they carried on, turned east and headed for Filton or Parkway. Title: Re: Well would you believe it?? Post by: Lee on February 13, 2008, 23:55:11 Or they are axing the branch lines! >:( If there is an excess, it might explain why LM's Class 172 order has 1 less vehicle in it than their 150s. Oh, well. Where will these units be going? Bristol commuter? Severn Beach? Oh- on the subject of Severn Beach, why do most trains terminate at Avonmouth to be "bustituted" to Severn Beach at off peak times? What's wrong with the railway? It enables one less set (and crew) to run the line for the sake of a journey to... well nowhere really. WOuld be much better if they carried on, turned east and headed for Filton or Parkway. I know that London Midland will be deploying 2 Parry People Movers on the Stourbridge branch line, which should release a Class 153 unit for deployment elsewhere on their network. Although John R is technically correct about Severn Beach, his description is (in my personal view) a little harsh, given that there is a surprising amount of support for the restoration of daytime rail services to Severn Beach, along with, of course, support for new passenger services via the (currently) freight/diversionary-only Henbury line. For those who dont know, the services to Filton/Bristol Parkway that John hints at would run via the Henbury line. I am in favour of that, but want to see services to Severn Beach retained and improved as well. By the way, the draft May 2008 timetable contains an option for a 2-hourly daytime service to Severn Beach. There has also been a fair amount of recent housing development at Severn Beach, with more proposed. A final operational point - because of the way the lines around Avonmouth are signalled, freight trains cant run out of the docks while passenger trains are running to/from Severn Beach. This would be best resolved as part of any works to upgrade the Henbury line to regular passenger traffic status, given that up to 20 extra freight trains per day are likely to operate out of Avonmouth Docks (and run via the Henbury line) in the relatively near future. Title: Re: Well would you believe it?? Post by: Btline on February 14, 2008, 12:08:32 Or they are axing the branch lines! >:( If there is an excess, it might explain why LM's Class 172 order has 1 less vehicle in it than their 150s. Oh, well. Where will these units be going? Bristol commuter? Severn Beach? Oh- on the subject of Severn Beach, why do most trains terminate at Avonmouth to be "bustituted" to Severn Beach at off peak times? What's wrong with the railway? It enables one less set (and crew) to run the line for the sake of a journey to... well nowhere really. WOuld be much better if they carried on, turned east and headed for Filton or Parkway. I know that London Midland will be deploying 2 Parry People Movers on the Stourbridge branch line, which should release a Class 153 unit for deployment elsewhere on their network. Although John R is technically correct about Severn Beach, his description is (in my personal view) a little harsh, given that there is a surprising amount of support for the restoration of daytime rail services to Severn Beach, along with, of course, support for new passenger services via the (currently) freight/diversionary-only Henbury line. For those who dont know, the services to Filton/Bristol Parkway that John hints at would run via the Henbury line. I am in favour of that, but want to see services to Severn Beach retained and improved as well. By the way, the draft May 2008 timetable contains an option for a 2-hourly daytime service to Severn Beach. There has also been a fair amount of recent housing development at Severn Beach, with more proposed. A final operational point - because of the way the lines around Avonmouth are signalled, freight trains cant run out of the docks while passenger trains are running to/from Severn Beach. This would be best resolved as part of any works to upgrade the Henbury line to regular passenger traffic status, given that up to 20 extra freight trains per day are likely to operate out of Avonmouth Docks (and run via the Henbury line) in the relatively near future. Yes- that would be great. A hourly service from Temple Meads to parkway calling everywhere via Severn Beach. Yes- LM are releasing a 153 by slapping a bus on rails on the branch line (they might as well tarmac over the line the way they are going, and cut out the middle man, and just have a bus!). But how can that replace 2, 3-car 150s? And believe me, I been on a Central service where a 3-car 150 was subbed for a 153. It was not good (it was rush hour)! Think HST subbed by a Thames Turbo! Title: Re: Well would you believe it?? Post by: Lee on February 14, 2008, 12:23:41 Or they are axing the branch lines! >:( If there is an excess, it might explain why LM's Class 172 order has 1 less vehicle in it than their 150s. Oh, well. Where will these units be going? Bristol commuter? Severn Beach? Oh- on the subject of Severn Beach, why do most trains terminate at Avonmouth to be "bustituted" to Severn Beach at off peak times? What's wrong with the railway? It enables one less set (and crew) to run the line for the sake of a journey to... well nowhere really. WOuld be much better if they carried on, turned east and headed for Filton or Parkway. I know that London Midland will be deploying 2 Parry People Movers on the Stourbridge branch line, which should release a Class 153 unit for deployment elsewhere on their network. Although John R is technically correct about Severn Beach, his description is (in my personal view) a little harsh, given that there is a surprising amount of support for the restoration of daytime rail services to Severn Beach, along with, of course, support for new passenger services via the (currently) freight/diversionary-only Henbury line. For those who dont know, the services to Filton/Bristol Parkway that John hints at would run via the Henbury line. I am in favour of that, but want to see services to Severn Beach retained and improved as well. By the way, the draft May 2008 timetable contains an option for a 2-hourly daytime service to Severn Beach. There has also been a fair amount of recent housing development at Severn Beach, with more proposed. A final operational point - because of the way the lines around Avonmouth are signalled, freight trains cant run out of the docks while passenger trains are running to/from Severn Beach. This would be best resolved as part of any works to upgrade the Henbury line to regular passenger traffic status, given that up to 20 extra freight trains per day are likely to operate out of Avonmouth Docks (and run via the Henbury line) in the relatively near future. Yes- that would be great. A hourly service from Temple Meads to parkway calling everywhere via Severn Beach. Yes- LM are releasing a 153 by slapping a bus on rails on the branch line (they might as well tarmac over the line the way they are going, and cut out the middle man, and just have a bus!). But how can that replace 2, 3-car 150s? And believe me, I been on a Central service where a 3-car 150 was subbed for a 153. It was not good (it was rush hour)! Think HST subbed by a Thames Turbo! Long-term, I would prefer either of the following options - hourly to Severn Beach/hourly to Parkway or half hourly to Parkway/PPM Avonmouth-Severn Beach, if the dock area signalling issues can be sorted (yes, I know your views on PPM's ;D), but I know that Graz (for example) is a fan of your idea. I wasnt suggesting that the Class 153 unit could replace 2 three-car 150's, merely that it was part of the stock rotation process. Title: Re: Well would you believe it?? Post by: grahame on February 14, 2008, 15:47:54 I was made to modify this post because some people regarded it as a personal attack on a certain person. Funny that attacks on First Great Western are allowed though! Double Standards spring to mind! You were invited to change the post, and thank you for doing so. Please let me know of any personal attacks on FGW employees or others that you feel I have NOT stamped on - I have certainly had at least some such deleted in the past, and need to know of any more that our users feel need to be acted on. Clarification - personal attacks on ANYONE are outside our acceptable user policy. Title: Re: Well would you believe it?? Post by: devon_metro on February 14, 2008, 16:45:58 Or they are axing the branch lines! >:( If there is an excess, it might explain why LM's Class 172 order has 1 less vehicle in it than their 150s. Oh, well. Where will these units be going? Bristol commuter? Severn Beach? Oh- on the subject of Severn Beach, why do most trains terminate at Avonmouth to be "bustituted" to Severn Beach at off peak times? What's wrong with the railway? To sustain a 1 hourly timetable through the day. If they went to Severn Beach two units would be needed to run anything like an hourly service. The hop from Avonmouth - Severn Beach doesn't go any faster that 25mph I believe, so could be greatly improved! Title: Re: Well would you believe it?? Post by: Btline on February 14, 2008, 18:01:23 Or they are axing the branch lines! >:( If there is an excess, it might explain why LM's Class 172 order has 1 less vehicle in it than their 150s. Oh, well. Where will these units be going? Bristol commuter? Severn Beach? Oh- on the subject of Severn Beach, why do most trains terminate at Avonmouth to be "bustituted" to Severn Beach at off peak times? What's wrong with the railway? To sustain a 1 hourly timetable through the day. If they went to Severn Beach two units would be needed to run anything like an hourly service. The hop from Avonmouth - Severn Beach doesn't go any faster that 25mph I believe, so could be greatly improved! yes, but they manage during the peaks, when arguably, there is more of a demand for units. Still does not make sense! Surely there is another Pacer/153 available during off peak times? Title: Re: Well would you believe it?? Post by: Lee on February 14, 2008, 18:57:36 Or they are axing the branch lines! >:( If there is an excess, it might explain why LM's Class 172 order has 1 less vehicle in it than their 150s. Oh, well. Where will these units be going? Bristol commuter? Severn Beach? Oh- on the subject of Severn Beach, why do most trains terminate at Avonmouth to be "bustituted" to Severn Beach at off peak times? What's wrong with the railway? To sustain a 1 hourly timetable through the day. If they went to Severn Beach two units would be needed to run anything like an hourly service. The hop from Avonmouth - Severn Beach doesn't go any faster that 25mph I believe, so could be greatly improved! yes, but they manage during the peaks, when arguably, there is more of a demand for units. Still does not make sense! Surely there is another Pacer/153 available during off peak times? To put it another way, FGW are not obligated in the specification to provide a train service to Severn Beach during the daytime, and are allowed to instead operate the Avonmouth-Severn Beach section by bus. This they do, because it works out cheaper for them. This could change in May 2008, as Bristol City Council are meant to be funding an extra unit for the Severn Beach line, and, as mentioned in one of my earlier posts in this topic, one of the May 2008 service options includes a train every 2 hours for Severn Beach. Title: Re: Well would you believe it?? Post by: devon_metro on February 14, 2008, 19:19:46 Anyone have any passenger figures for Severn Beach and St Andrews Rd.?
Title: Re: Well would you believe it?? Post by: swlines on February 14, 2008, 19:23:18 http://www.rail-reg.gov.uk/server/show/nav.1529 is the latest publicly available...
Title: Re: Well would you believe it?? Post by: Lee on February 14, 2008, 19:42:22 From a list of questions that I asked Andrew Griffiths regarding the Severn Beach Line Development Plan :
I posed a further question regarding this : I would like to refer you to sections 2.6.7 - 2.6.9 of the LDP (link below.) http://www.firstgreatwestern.co.uk/Documents/Custom/Severn%20Beach%20Line%20Development%20Plan.pdf Your footfall data for 2005 - 2006 is as follows : Lawrence Hill - 46551 Stapleton Road - 74257 Montpelier - 65347 Redland - 50258 Clifton Down - 142329 Sea Mills - 34129 Shirehampton - 29651 Avonmouth - 28717 St Andrews Road - 4996 Severn Beach - 26690 However , the ORR station usage data for 2005 - 2006 is as follows (link below.) : http://www.rail-reg.gov.uk/server/show/nav.1529 Lawrence Hill - 55865 Stapleton Road - 86997 Montpelier - 73573 Redland - 55529 Clifton Down - 153027 Sea Mills - 36411 Shirehampton - 31539 Avonmouth - 43365 St Andrews Road - 8008 Severn Beach - 37008 With big rises in passenger numbers registered at Avonmouth & Severn Beach , and a smaller , but still significant rise registered at Shirehampton , please could I request that the following section of the LDP be altered to reflect this? : "2.6.9 Over time usage patterns are surprisingly erratic, and there must be a slight question mark about the data as the overall totals do not appear to be consistent. With this caveat, no station has grown every year, although St Andrews Road and Redland have become substantially more busy, and Shirehampton, Avonmouth and Severn Beach substantially less busy (but the latest - November 2006 - local authority count shows an increase in usage at Shirehampton)" AG - Report data is in fact RSP 2005 year and so should have been listed as 2004-05, not 05-06. Our data and ORR data is the same - comes from ticket sales. The 06-07 data should now be available, I will chase this up. Title: Re: Well would you believe it?? Post by: Btline on February 14, 2008, 22:30:36 Or they are axing the branch lines! >:( If there is an excess, it might explain why LM's Class 172 order has 1 less vehicle in it than their 150s. Oh, well. Where will these units be going? Bristol commuter? Severn Beach? Oh- on the subject of Severn Beach, why do most trains terminate at Avonmouth to be "bustituted" to Severn Beach at off peak times? What's wrong with the railway? To sustain a 1 hourly timetable through the day. If they went to Severn Beach two units would be needed to run anything like an hourly service. The hop from Avonmouth - Severn Beach doesn't go any faster that 25mph I believe, so could be greatly improved! yes, but they manage during the peaks, when arguably, there is more of a demand for units. Still does not make sense! Surely there is another Pacer/153 available during off peak times? To put it another way, FGW are not obligated in the specification to provide a train service to Severn Beach during the daytime, and are allowed to instead operate the Avonmouth-Severn Beach section by bus. This they do, because it works out cheaper for them. This could change in May 2008, as Bristol City Council are meant to be funding an extra unit for the Severn Beach line, and, as mentioned in one of my earlier posts in this topic, one of the May 2008 service options includes a train every 2 hours for Severn Beach. Then the spec. must be cr*p! What sort of spec says that a TOC can stop 2 stops short of the end of a branch line? Absolute madness! PS- sorry for swearing! Oh well, fingers crossed for May! Title: Re: Well would you believe it?? Post by: Lee on February 14, 2008, 22:54:18 What sort of spec says that a TOC can stop 2 stops short of the end of a branch line? This one : Quote Services between 0800 and 1700 on Mondays to Fridays may be provided by means of a Connection at Avonmouth and during these hours the service between Avonmouth and Severn Beach may be provided by road transport. Title: Re: Well would you believe it?? Post by: Btline on February 14, 2008, 23:26:51 What sort of spec says that a TOC can stop 2 stops short of the end of a branch line? This one : Quote Services between 0800 and 1700 on Mondays to Fridays may be provided by means of a Connection at Avonmouth and during these hours the service between Avonmouth and Severn Beach may be provided by road transport. >:( Title: Re: Well would you believe it?? Post by: Lee on February 15, 2008, 13:23:19 Avonmouth-Severn Beach, step-by-step :
(http://raildocuments.org.uk/feb08photos/010208avonmouth1.jpg) (http://raildocuments.org.uk/feb08photos/010208avonmouth4.jpg) (http://raildocuments.org.uk/feb08photos/010208avonmouth5.jpg) (http://raildocuments.org.uk/feb08photos/010208sbeach9.jpg) (http://raildocuments.org.uk/feb08photos/010208sbeach10.jpg) Title: Re: Well would you believe it?? Post by: Graz on February 15, 2008, 13:49:32 Thanks for that Lee :)
Just out of interest, how many people used the rail replacement bus? Title: Re: Well would you believe it?? Post by: Lee on February 15, 2008, 14:28:13 Thanks for that Lee :) Just out of interest, how many people used the rail replacement bus? If I remember rightly, there were about 5 on it both ways. One passenger got off at St Andrews Road on the return journey to Avonmouth. I travelled on it around lunchtime though, which is always a quiet time. As you move closer to the peak, the buses generally get busier. I gave a talk in Avonmouth towards the end of last year, and I asked the locals (around 12 people, so dont take this as being sceintific) what they would most like to see improved about their train service. I expected them to say "better reliability" or "higher frequency" but the majority said "more trains to Severn Beach, because the bus puts people off." I have to say that choice surprised me, and I am sure that it will surprise you as well. Title: Re: Well would you believe it?? Post by: vacman on February 15, 2008, 14:33:16 Then the spec. must be cr*p! What sort of spec says that a TOC can stop 2 stops short of the end of a branch line? Absolute madness! PS- sorry for swearing! Oh well, fingers crossed for May! Title: Re: Well would you believe it?? Post by: grahame on February 15, 2008, 14:36:18 If I remember rightly, there were about 5 on it both ways. ... I gave a talk in Avonmouth towards the end of last year, and I asked the locals (around 12 people, so dont take this as being sceintific) what they would most like to see improved about their train service. I expected them to say "better reliability" or "higher frequency" but the majority said "more trains to Severn Beach, because the bus puts people off." I have to say that choice surprised me, and I am sure that it will surprise you as well. Lee, I'm not surprised in the slightest ;) Local experience in Wiltshire has shown that is a train is replaced by a bus (one of Melksham's "bustititution"s), the number of passengers on the bus is somewhere between a sixth and a quarter of the passengers that use the service on the days that it's a train. So your "there were 5 on the bus" would have read "there were 25 on the train" if a train had been running, based on our experience. Title: Re: Well would you believe it?? Post by: Lee on February 15, 2008, 14:38:39 Then the spec. must be cr*p! What sort of spec says that a TOC can stop 2 stops short of the end of a branch line? Absolute madness! PS- sorry for swearing! Oh well, fingers crossed for May! Certainly since the late 90's, I think. It was all train in the 1991 timetable, for example. If I remember rightly, there were about 5 on it both ways. ... I gave a talk in Avonmouth towards the end of last year, and I asked the locals (around 12 people, so dont take this as being sceintific) what they would most like to see improved about their train service. I expected them to say "better reliability" or "higher frequency" but the majority said "more trains to Severn Beach, because the bus puts people off." I have to say that choice surprised me, and I am sure that it will surprise you as well. Lee, I'm not surprised in the slightest ;) Local experience in Wiltshire has shown that is a train is replaced by a bus (one of Melksham's "bustititution"s), the number of passengers on the bus is somewhere between a sixth and a quarter of the passengers that use the service on the days that it's a train. So your "there were 5 on the bus" would have read "there were 25 on the train" if a train had been running, based on our experience. Oh dont get me wrong, I'm pleased that was the majority view ;) I just didnt expect it to come in front of the other issues I mentioned. Title: Re: Well would you believe it?? Post by: Lee on February 15, 2008, 15:15:53 Then the spec. must be cr*p! What sort of spec says that a TOC can stop 2 stops short of the end of a branch line? Absolute madness! PS- sorry for swearing! Oh well, fingers crossed for May! Certainly since the late 90's, I think. It was all train in the 1991 timetable, for example. Knew I had something on this. From a note by the Severnside Community Rail Partnership written in April 2006 : Quote In the early 1990s, the Severn Beach timetable generally consisted of 15 trains a day, all operating through to Severn Beach. This service required 2 separate train units, which crossed at Clifton Down. In the run up to privatisation, BR sought to reduce the service, both to save costs and to release a train unit, because this was seen as the only way of providing a more frequent service at the new Filton Abbey Wood station, which Avon wished to promote. Around 1995 an agreement was reached between Avon and BR, under which Avon paid for the trains over and above those which BR was prepared to continue funding, to enable an hourly service, with buses providing some journeys between Avonmouth and Severn Beach. Additional services were introduced to serve the new Filton Abbey Wood station. This agreement was intended to last for at least 10 years, and so was taken on board by subsequent rail operators following privatisation. When privatisation was being considered, the government specified the minimum level of service for each line. This was called the passenger service requirement (PSR). Train operators were able to provide services additional to the PSR, provided they carried the cost (or obtained supplementary funding) but were contractually forbidden to go below this level. The PSR for the Severn Beach recognised that 12 services a day were funded by the train operator, and so the PSR was set at this level, with a requirement for only 5 of the 12 to be extended to Severn Beach. Following local government re-organisation in 1996, Bristol City Council assumed the responsibility for funding the additional 3 train journeys above the PSR, while South Gloucestershire Council funded the bus link. This agreement was re-negotiated, between Wessex Trains and the local authorities in 2004. The service was similar, but a performance element was introduced. Until 31 March 2006 the arrangement was therefore:- 15 services a day to Avonmouth, with 7 of the 15 running through to Severn Beach, including an hourly day-time off-peak service as far as Avonmouth after 10.30am; 12 of the 15 services were financed by the train operator; Bristol City Council paid the rail operator (about ^136,000 pa, but subject to reductions for poor performance) to cover the costs of 3 return services a day; South Gloucestershire Council paid for the full costs of a bus link between Avonmouth and Severn Beach, at times when the trains were not operating to Severn Beach. Initially the bus was equipped with a railway ticket machine, which was returned each day to Temple Meads, and the Council received a proportion of the ticket revenue. This arrangement was changed under the 2004 agreement, since when the train operator has not been involved in the ticketing of this bus service. Recently, tickets bought on the bus have only been issued to local Severn Beach line stations, not to other points on the national rail network. The total revenue support for rail services from South Gloucestershire Council (including assistance towards supplementary services serving Filton Abbey Wood) has been around ^65,000pa. This service of 15 return journeys to Avonmouth, with 7 being extended to Severn Beach, could be operated by one train, although in the very early morning a second train is currently in use, enabling the first two commuter journeys to Bristol to both start from Severn Beach - rather than one just starting from Avonmouth. The hourly service does not start until after 10.30am, which also permits a through train service from Severn Beach at 9.50am. The additional early morning train unit is used on the 06.16am service from Severn Beach, but once it reaches Temple Meads this train unit is then used on other routes in the Greater Bristol area. It should be stressed that there has never been any agreement with any of the local authorities for the local leasing of trains for the Severn Beach service. The responsibility for funding (as part of the franchise specification - Lee) the full current level of service (15 trains a day to Avonmouth, 7 of which continue to Severn Beach) was transferred to First Great Western on 1 April 2006. Bristol City Council was therefore no longer required to provide funding towards the current level of service. FGW also took over from South Gloucestershire Council the full responsibility for providing and funding the bus link to Severn Beach, which connects with trains terminating at Avonmouth. Title: Re: Well would you believe it?? Post by: Timmer on February 20, 2008, 18:21:46 Well, from May FGW are keeping three 180's, gaining 5 150's from ATW (told you so shazz!) and some 158's are to be made up into 3 car sets! only taken two years but it seems as though Mr Haines is the best thing since sliced bread for FGW! The three 180's are for two Cotswold diagrams, whether they are going into store until May I don't know, obviously the (much needed) 3 car 158's will go onto Cardiff Pompey services and the 5 150's will replace some 2 car 158 diagrams probably on Cardiff-Taunton and Weymouth services. Yes I am very much beginning to believe it Vacman!Came from a good source of info, a reliable one. Surprised no one else who received their copy of March's Modern Railways today hasn't posted about the report on page 72 that confirms what Vacman reported to us a couple of weeks back. FGW will get five of the nine 150/2s that are with ATW that came from Central. Industry sources suggest that this is possible because ATW didn't secure funding for all nine sets. This will allow some of the current 2-car 158 fleet to be disbanded to create five 3-car 158s as they go through Wabtec for refurbishing. :) This is such great news for the Cardiff-Portsmouth line and good to see that FGW are putting their money where their mouth is as this will cost them money. It also reports that the 142s on the Devon metro are doing better than first thought, better even than the 143s! putting this down to them running as permanent 4 car sets. I have a feeling that some of the fleet of 142s could be hanging around for quite sometime to come. If they are doing that well then FGW should keep some and do a proper refurb job. Before I get any strong response from our Devon coffee shop members, I'm not suggesting they stay on permanantly on the Devon metro though. Title: Re: Well would you believe it?? Post by: devon_metro on February 20, 2008, 18:27:28 Reliability has been second to none considering most of them came out of storage! All praise goes to the staff at Exeter TMD!
A refurb would be nice although a number of them might be going back which would remove the ability to have so many 4 cat sets - i'd be interested in seeing this modern railways article! Title: Re: Well would you believe it?? Post by: Conner on February 20, 2008, 18:45:30 Have a missed something or is it not possible to create 5 3-car units without leaving an extra half a unit unused.
I thought they would disband 5 158's to create 10 3-car 158's. Title: Re: Well would you believe it?? Post by: r james on February 20, 2008, 18:55:51 I am really surprised that it has been confirmed about the 150s to FGW. How on earth did ATW end up with them in the first place,if they haven't got the money to secure them??
Maybe the Welsh assembly will 'find' the money to keep them??? Or is this now a signed deal for FGW? What will ATW do now for the 6 car trainsets as promised for valley services in the peak??? Title: Re: Well would you believe it?? Post by: Btline on February 20, 2008, 20:05:52 What about the 180s?
Title: Re: Well would you believe it?? Post by: Timmer on February 20, 2008, 20:51:12 Have a missed something or is it not possible to create 5 3-car units without leaving an extra half a unit unused. You haven't missed something the article does indeed say to create 5 3-car units which would leave half a unit unused. Surely they must mean 6 3-car units? Along with the proper three car unit that they currently have would make 7 units which I believe is enough to cover the diagrams on the Cardiff-Pompey line apart from the additional units added to the peak time services. Lee will correct me if im wrong on this.I thought they would disband 5 158's to create 10 3-car 158's. Title: Re: Well would you believe it?? Post by: DanielP on February 20, 2008, 20:52:17 There are restrictions on the Valley Lines that prevents longer coaches from being used which is why we need 150s.
I'm in two minds about this: from a Welsh travel point of view, the reallocation of the 150s is a disaster and a farce. Where else could a project enable platform extensions to 6 coaches, yet manage to loose the stock to run it!!!!! Having said that, the Cardiff- Portsmouth route should be a major cross country route, with appropriate stock (like the Salisbury-Exeter line): three coach trains are barely adequate and two coach trains are a farce. ATW have also benefitted from 150s transferred from FGW which should never have left in the first place. To be honest, I feel like banging my head against a brick wall. It is just embarassing that TOCs are fighting over 30yr old units when new trains should be ordered. Meanwhile, the DaFT comes out with all sorts of old cobblers that ends up being changed around at the last min anyway!!! ::) ::) Daniel Title: Re: Well would you believe it?? Post by: Conner on February 20, 2008, 21:14:48 Have a missed something or is it not possible to create 5 3-car units without leaving an extra half a unit unused. You haven't missed something the article does indeed say to create 5 3-car units which would leave half a unit unused. Surely they must mean 6 3-car units? Along with the proper three car unit that they currently have would make 7 units which I believe is enough to cover the diagrams on the Cardiff-Pompey line apart from the additional units added to the peak time services. Lee will correct me if im wrong on this.I thought they would disband 5 158's to create 10 3-car 158's. Title: Re: Well would you believe it?? Post by: Timmer on February 20, 2008, 21:47:39 That means we will gain 2 units('lose' 3 158's gain 5 150's). So there will be more stock for cross bristol commuter routes. Looks that way. FGW look good and it really will be better by the spring. All we need now is for FGW to announce that they will be operating a loco and coaches service to Weymouth during the summer and it will be just like the good old days again and everyone will love FGW ;)Title: Re: Well would you believe it?? Post by: Lee on February 20, 2008, 21:54:26 That means we will gain 2 units('lose' 3 158's gain 5 150's). So there will be more stock for cross bristol commuter routes. Looks that way. FGW look good and it really will be better by the spring. All we need now is for FGW to announce that they will be operating a loco and coaches service to Weymouth during the summer and it will be just like the good old days again and everyone will love FGW ;)Not quite everyone, I suspect. Take a certain town in West Wiltshire, for example.... Title: Re: Well would you believe it?? Post by: grahame on February 20, 2008, 22:24:14 That means we will gain 2 units('lose' 3 158's gain 5 150's). So there will be more stock for cross bristol commuter routes. Looks that way. FGW look good and it really will be better by the spring. All we need now is for FGW to announce that they will be operating a loco and coaches service to Weymouth during the summer and it will be just like the good old days again and everyone will love FGW ;)Not quite everyone, I suspect. Take a certain town in West Wiltshire, for example.... There's also the question of Frome and Trowbridge to Swindon, but I think that can be answered with the same solution that solves that West Wiltshire town's issues. But I would actually be more suprised to see a loco-hauled Weymouth service this summer than I would be so see the TransWilts issue solved at long last! Title: Re: Well would you believe it?? Post by: Lee on February 20, 2008, 22:43:01 On the other hand, if all the various proposals are put in place, then FGW could put themselves in a position to claim acheivement of the following :
- More 3-coach Portsmouth-Cardiff services. - An appropriate (or close to appropriate) service for Melksham/TransWilts. - Extra services for Frome. - Extra Severn Beach Line services. - Extra capacity for Devon Metro services. - Extra capacity elsewhere through revised HST diagrams/services. - Retention of some Adelantes. - Widespread fleet refresh. Sounds like a "good news" story to me. So, how about an official announcement confirming all of the above, FGW? Title: Re: Well would you believe it?? Post by: r james on February 20, 2008, 22:48:30 I would say that if FGW are to take some of the 150s away, then it is only fair that ATW receive some of the London Midland and London Overground 150s when the time comes in 2009, and FGW receive a smaller number to previously planned??.
The 3 car sprinters with London Midland would be ideal for ATW. Title: Re: Well would you believe it?? Post by: vacman on February 20, 2008, 23:26:17 I would say that if FGW are to take some of the 150s away, then it is only fair that ATW receive some of the London Midland and London Overground 150s when the time comes in 2009, and FGW receive a smaller number to previously planned??. Well, I'll say "I told you so" when it's all confirmed, it seems as though Andrew Haines is taking his job seriously, I'm sure we will still get the complement of 150/1's from LO and LM, as for the 142's, I think many people who dissed them (the 142's that is)(me included in that one!!) should eat their words really, Devon services are more reliable than previous, more capacity and maybe now FGW should consider a refurb for them! I know the guys at Exeter depot always do the best they can with the limited resources they have at Exeter depot and this has paid dividends really. The 3 car sprinters with London Midland would be ideal for ATW. Title: Re: Well would you believe it?? Post by: Lee on February 20, 2008, 23:34:36 I would say that if FGW are to take some of the 150s away, then it is only fair that ATW receive some of the London Midland and London Overground 150s when the time comes in 2009, and FGW receive a smaller number to previously planned??. Well, I'll say "I told you so" when it's all confirmed, it seems as though Andrew Haines is taking his job seriously, I'm sure we will still get the complement of 150/1's from LO and LM, as for the 142's, I think many people who dissed them (me included in that one!!) should eat their words really, Devon services are more reliable than previous, more capacity and maybe now FGW should consider a refurb for them! I know the guys at Exeter depot always do the best they can with the limited resources they have at Exeter depot and this has paid dividends really. The 3 car sprinters with London Midland would be ideal for ATW. I'm not denying that this will be very good news if true, but it must form part of a wider package if FGW's problems are to be truly resolved. Only then can their critics made to "eat their words." Title: Re: Well would you believe it?? Post by: vacman on February 20, 2008, 23:36:39 I would say that if FGW are to take some of the 150s away, then it is only fair that ATW receive some of the London Midland and London Overground 150s when the time comes in 2009, and FGW receive a smaller number to previously planned??. Well, I'll say "I told you so" when it's all confirmed, it seems as though Andrew Haines is taking his job seriously, I'm sure we will still get the complement of 150/1's from LO and LM, as for the 142's, I think many people who dissed them (the 142's)(me included in that one!!) should eat their words really, Devon services are more reliable than previous, more capacity and maybe now FGW should consider a refurb for them! I know the guys at Exeter depot always do the best they can with the limited resources they have at Exeter depot and this has paid dividends really. The 3 car sprinters with London Midland would be ideal for ATW. I'm not denying that this will be very good news if true, but it must form part of a wider package if FGW's problems are to be truly resolved. Only then can their critics made to "eat their words." Title: Re: Well would you believe it?? Post by: Lee on February 21, 2008, 00:15:02 I was only referring to the 142 issue with eating words, have edited post accordingly. ;) I was expressing a personal opinion, not making a moderation decision ;D Due credit for your prediction appearing in Modern Railways, by the way. Title: Re: Well would you believe it?? Post by: dog box on February 21, 2008, 07:53:56 I would say that if FGW are to take some of the 150s away, then it is only fair that ATW receive some of the London Midland and London Overground 150s when the time comes in 2009, and FGW receive a smaller number to previously planned??. The 3 car sprinters with London Midland would be ideal for ATW. I Can see what you are saying ...but NO fgw need the extra units they have been dumped on now twice with loss of 150s to ATW and 158s to Northern. its time for some other area to suffer. Its tough in the dog eat dog world of stock allocation and whose to blame for that? Local rail users should be pleased with this decision, just like those in the Northern rail area were only a month or two ago. FGW were berated for the loss of the 158s and should be congratulated for getting hold of some suitable replacements ,i .....cant recall the passengers of Northern Land saying oh what are those poor folk going to do down south now. Prehaps they can have a few of the 142s FGW Might want to take off lease, you might not like reading this but thats life untill the daft get a grip and actually get on with building NEW Stock Title: Re: Well would you believe it?? Post by: Lee on February 21, 2008, 08:04:16 Local rail users should be pleased with this decision, just like those in the Northern rail area were only a month or two ago. FGW were berated for the loss of the 158s and should be congratulated for getting hold of some suitable replacements I have asked FGW for absolute clarification on this, and if I get it, then I will congratulate them. My point was, while this will be very welcome, it will still leave some significant issues unresolved. As I stated earlier in the topic, FGW now have an opportunity, based on proposals that are "here and now", to deal with an awful lot of these issues. Lets have an official announcement from them that does that. Title: Re: Well would you believe it?? Post by: devon_metro on February 21, 2008, 08:46:15 I agree with DanielP, why are we argueing over old knackered stock when the DafT should be ordering new stock!
I mean Cardiff is the capital of Wales for cry sake!! Oh don't worry i'm sure they will find some cash on the north/midlands/scotland ::) :-\ Title: Re: Well would you believe it?? Post by: Shazz on February 21, 2008, 08:50:46 I would say that if FGW are to take some of the 150s away, then it is only fair that ATW receive some of the London Midland and London Overground 150s when the time comes in 2009, and FGW receive a smaller number to previously planned??. The 3 car sprinters with London Midland would be ideal for ATW. I Can see what you are saying ...but NO fgw need the extra units they have been dumped on now twice with loss of 150s to ATW and 158s to Northern. its time for some other area to suffer. And you think we're not suffering over here already? Have you ever tryed getting on a peak hour valley lines service? Obviously not, as its a damn slight more overcrowded than most of the fgw ones. i'm still highly doubtful that ATW will be that stupid not to renew leases on valley line units, when they have there own capacity problems. Title: Re: Well would you believe it?? Post by: mada on February 21, 2008, 09:18:48 Aren't ATW still having the Adelantes then?
Title: Re: Well would you believe it?? Post by: DanielP on February 21, 2008, 09:48:53 I am desperately hoping that the reason why ATW is releasing the Central 150s is that they have a deal on 180s and that the cascaded stock will make up the shortfall.
I spoke to one of the ATW franchise managers last night, but he didn't want to chat about it!!!! Lee Fletcher.....I look forward to hearing any clarification that you can get. I will try ATW. Daniel Title: Re: Well would you believe it?? Post by: Jim on February 21, 2008, 10:10:17 I would say that if FGW are to take some of the 150s away, then it is only fair that ATW receive some of the London Midland and London Overground 150s when the time comes in 2009, and FGW receive a smaller number to previously planned??. The 3 car sprinters with London Midland would be ideal for ATW. I Can see what you are saying ...but NO fgw need the extra units they have been dumped on now twice with loss of 150s to ATW and 158s to Northern. its time for some other area to suffer. And you think we're not suffering over here already? Have you ever tryed getting on a peak hour valley lines service? Obviously not, as its a damn slight more overcrowded than most of the fgw ones. i'm still highly doubtful that ATW will be that stupid not to renew leases on valley line units, when they have there own capacity problems. I might have to argue, as on the Valleys you don't get turned away from daytime services do you? Title: Re: Well would you believe it?? Post by: DanielP on February 21, 2008, 10:36:31 Well, there is plenty of evidence that neither FGW nor ATW have enough trains at various times in the day- remember we have the Maesteg 17:21 special with 75% overcrowding garaunteed! That is due to what was previously a Pad-Swan service turning into a Pad-Car service!! Even though my parents live in Southampton, I have declined to use the Car-Sou service because of the stock crisis (I need to travel with a kiddie and my wife is pregnant), so if I loose trains one way, I gain them another way!
I have dropped ATW an e-mail now requesting specific infromation or a general idea on what's going on. Don't know if they will reply or not. Daniel Title: Re: Well would you believe it?? Post by: Lee on February 21, 2008, 10:38:13 Lee Fletcher.....I look forward to hearing any clarification that you can get. I will try ATW. Daniel Thanks Daniel. We can but try. Title: Re: Well would you believe it?? Post by: Jim on February 21, 2008, 10:39:12 Well, there is plenty of evidence that neither FGW nor ATW have enough trains at various times in the day- remember we have the Maesteg 17:21 special with 75% overcrowding garaunteed! That is due to what was previously a Pad-Swan service turning into a Pad-Car service!! Even though my parents live in Southampton, I have declined to use the Car-Sou service because of the stock crisis (I need to travel with a kiddie and my wife is pregnant), so if I loose trains one way, I gain them another way! I have dropped ATW an e-mail now requesting specific infromation or a general idea on what's going on. Don't know if they will reply or not. Daniel Yes, but remember we have a 09.22 Portsmouth-Cardiff which on SATURDAYS turned away 6consecutive times at Trowbridge! Title: Re: Well would you believe it?? Post by: DanielP on February 21, 2008, 11:03:30 Ha ha! We can have a "my service is more sh%t than yours" competition.
It would be long and probably quite tedious. Maybe they could televise it instead of late night roulette?? Daniel PS- I remember when they thought it was appropriate to use a Hampshire Unit to on the Sou to Cardiff- imagine that! I think the service was at its most comfortable when it was a Class 33 + four or five mk1s. Title: Re: Well would you believe it?? Post by: vacman on February 21, 2008, 11:11:10 Ha ha! We can have a "my service is more sh%t than yours" competition. Na, it was better about three years ago when the FO 12xx Bristol-Brighton was top and tailed propper loco's (31's!!!)It would be long and probably quite tedious. Maybe they could televise it instead of late night roulette?? Daniel PS- I remember when they thought it was appropriate to use a Hampshire Unit to on the Sou to Cardiff- imagine that! I think the service was at its most comfortable when it was a Class 33 + four or five mk1s. Title: Re: Well would you believe it?? Post by: Lee on February 21, 2008, 12:34:52 Lee Fletcher.....I look forward to hearing any clarification that you can get. I will try ATW. Daniel Thanks Daniel. We can but try. FGW source : Quote All I can say is that DfT have not signed off any rolling stock reallocation in our favour. Title: Re: Well would you believe it?? Post by: DanielP on February 21, 2008, 12:39:57 Interesting.
Nothing from ATW yet. There appears to be a "tug of love" over these units. The WAG seem to be quite a powerful force in rolling stock procurement, so we will see. I can also see why folks are being so quiet about the negotiations. This is such a waste of time, though. If the ATW and FGW fleets were part of the same thing (let's call it "Regional Railways" for sake of argument), all of the fleet requirements could probably be serviced via a common pool of units at Canton. Ho hum....welcome to progress. Daniel PS vacman- never went for a ride on the top 'n tailed rake. Pity, wish I had now. Title: Re: Well would you believe it?? Post by: Shazz on February 21, 2008, 14:10:05 Aren't ATW still having the Adelantes then? Theres been no confirmation they're taking them, just "rumours" Interesting. Nothing from ATW yet. There appears to be a "tug of love" over these units. The WAG seem to be quite a powerful force in rolling stock procurement, so we will see. I can also see why folks are being so quiet about the negotiations. Do correct me if i'm wrong, but as far as i'm aware the WAG now control who gets the franchise for wales, as well as stock allocations as they subsidise a large amount of the cost of leasing units now. I might have to argue, as on the Valleys you don't get turned away from daytime services do you? I have been a number of times. Title: Re: Well would you believe it?? Post by: DanielP on February 21, 2008, 14:27:36 Yup WAG do have direct control over the trains in Wales, which is why we have hoovered up a reasonable amount of units recently. However, this has been at the expense of the EMT and FGW (ex-Wessex). I bet we are seeing a WAG versus DaFT altercation regarding stock allocation.
Daniel Title: Re: Well would you believe it?? Post by: Shazz on February 21, 2008, 14:44:03 Yup WAG do have direct control over the trains in Wales, which is why we have hoovered up a reasonable amount of units recently. However, this has been at the expense of the EMT and FGW (ex-Wessex). I bet we are seeing a WAG versus DaFT altercation regarding stock allocation. Daniel ...and the DFT failing miserably. The WAG arn't going to release any units to anyone, even if it's costing them money to have them in storage before platform alteratiuons finish to the valleys. As they know damn well how important the railways are for wales. Title: Re: Well would you believe it?? Post by: DanielP on February 21, 2008, 14:53:20 I thought that the fact that these units weren't used straight away would cause problems!!!
Yes, you are right- I believe Rhodri Morgan likes his trains for a start. Also, instead of having a transport dept, the WAG dept covering transport is Economy and Transport. They actually make it clear that the two are connected and that good transport links improve the economy!! Pity that there is nothing like that in the South West, because Devon and Cornwall could do with it! Daniel Title: Re: Well would you believe it?? Post by: smithy on February 21, 2008, 19:17:41 Yup WAG do have direct control over the trains in Wales, which is why we have hoovered up a reasonable amount of units recently. However, this has been at the expense of the EMT and FGW (ex-Wessex). I bet we are seeing a WAG versus DaFT altercation regarding stock allocation. Daniel ...and the DFT failing miserably. The WAG arn't going to release any units to anyone, even if it's costing them money to have them in storage before platform alteratiuons finish to the valleys. As they know damn well how important the railways are for wales. well shazz come april/may time you are going to be very surprised then because fgw ARE taking 5 150 2's off atw as they cannot afford to keep em on and that is from a VERY GOOD source who happens to know the comings and goings. but if you still do not believe it just wait a few months and you will see those crappy green/cream units with fgw splattered down the side of them. Title: Re: Well would you believe it?? Post by: welshman on February 21, 2008, 19:29:57 Yes - WAG are not perfect but they are trying hard. There's nothing yet on the WAG website about train thefts by FGW.
The main fix needed urgently in Wales is the improvement of the bottleneck from Cogan to Cardiff Queen Street to birng a third platform in at Queen Street and organise two way working. But that means the railway bridge over Newport Road has to be widened and that's a job for Network Rail in 2011/12. So until then... WAG also responded to complaints from the Mid Wales users seeking the re-opening of Carno station between Shrewsbury and Aberystwyth. They actually showed interest and held a committee session in Carno to hear evidence. Sadly the answer is "No" because there's a short platform issue. So we have the silly position that there is a passing loop just to the West of Carno and at the top of the Talerddig Bank where 158s stand silently in the (lovely) countryside waiting for the "opposing" service to pass. The suggestions was to double track a section at Carno and rebuild the station so trains could pass at a station rather than in the middle of nowhere. Bore yourself rigid about it here (http://carnostation.org.uk/node/23) or Google "Talerddig passing loop" for more. Title: Re: Well would you believe it?? Post by: Shazz on February 21, 2008, 19:43:27 Yup WAG do have direct control over the trains in Wales, which is why we have hoovered up a reasonable amount of units recently. However, this has been at the expense of the EMT and FGW (ex-Wessex). I bet we are seeing a WAG versus DaFT altercation regarding stock allocation. Daniel ...and the DFT failing miserably. The WAG arn't going to release any units to anyone, even if it's costing them money to have them in storage before platform alteratiuons finish to the valleys. As they know damn well how important the railways are for wales. well shazz come april/may time you are going to be very surprised then because fgw ARE taking 5 150 2's off atw as they cannot afford to keep em on and that is from a VERY GOOD source who happens to know the comings and goings. but if you still do not believe it just wait a few months and you will see those crappy green/cream units with fgw splattered down the side of them. You seem to be missing the point, the WAG subsidise the lease cost on quite a majority of units, specifically the 10 new 150's we got a few months back. SO it's costing the WAG a small nominal fee to keep these units, even if they're not in traffic, they have allocations for the very near future across the AW area. I'm 99% certain the WAG won't be letting any units go. Title: Re: Well would you believe it?? Post by: Btline on February 21, 2008, 19:45:59 Ok- I'm confused!
Has Andrew got back to anyone? Are the rumours true? Title: Re: Well would you believe it?? Post by: Timmer on February 21, 2008, 20:19:28 For what its worth Modern Railways is a pretty well respected rail journal and wouldn't report on this if they didn't have a good source from which this story came.
To quote the first sentence of the story: Quote FGW is to receive five of the Class 150/2 DMUs which were transferred to ATW at the end of the Central Trains franchise on 9 December 2007. There is no 'maybe' or 'possibly' receive, 'is to' receive is what it says which goes along with what Vacman told us a couple of weeks back including the number of units. Of course FGW won't confirm or deny anything until the ink is dry on the contract and its all official. Besides they will probably want to make a right song and dance about this with Andrew Haines making the announcement. My theory is that these 150s will be leased until FGW receive their fleet 150/1s from London Midland as a stop gap measure. Either that or ATW will receive some of the London Midland sets that were due to FGW which if they are three car 150/1s will be a benefit to ATW of having some three car 150s instead of two car 150s in the long term. Title: Re: Well would you believe it?? Post by: gaf71 on February 21, 2008, 23:07:28 Ok- I'm confused! It's the rumour in FGW messrooms, and they are normally correct.Has Andrew got back to anyone? Are the rumours true? Title: Re: Well would you believe it?? Post by: Jim on February 21, 2008, 23:09:32 Ha ha! We can have a "my service is more sh%t than yours" competition. Na, it was better about three years ago when the FO 12xx Bristol-Brighton was top and tailed propper loco's (31's!!!)It would be long and probably quite tedious. Maybe they could televise it instead of late night roulette?? Daniel PS- I remember when they thought it was appropriate to use a Hampshire Unit to on the Sou to Cardiff- imagine that! I think the service was at its most comfortable when it was a Class 33 + four or five mk1s. 12.532 ;) Title: Re: Well would you believe it?? Post by: vacman on February 22, 2008, 00:06:37 Yup WAG do have direct control over the trains in Wales, which is why we have hoovered up a reasonable amount of units recently. However, this has been at the expense of the EMT and FGW (ex-Wessex). I bet we are seeing a WAG versus DaFT altercation regarding stock allocation. Daniel ...and the DFT failing miserably. The WAG arn't going to release any units to anyone, even if it's costing them money to have them in storage before platform alteratiuons finish to the valleys. As they know damn well how important the railways are for wales. well shazz come april/may time you are going to be very surprised then because fgw ARE taking 5 150 2's off atw as they cannot afford to keep em on and that is from a VERY GOOD source who happens to know the comings and goings. but if you still do not believe it just wait a few months and you will see those crappy green/cream units with fgw splattered down the side of them. You seem to be missing the point, the WAG subsidise the lease cost on quite a majority of units, specifically the 10 new 150's we got a few months back. SO it's costing the WAG a small nominal fee to keep these units, even if they're not in traffic, they have allocations for the very near future across the AW area. I'm 99% certain the WAG won't be letting any units go. Title: Re: Well would you believe it?? Post by: vacman on February 22, 2008, 00:09:27 For what its worth Modern Railways is a pretty well respected rail journal and wouldn't report on this if they didn't have a good source from which this story came. I've heard from a good source, the same source that all of this has come from, that these are EXTRA units to allow the strengthening of the 158 fleet, and the DaFT have got something to do with it, the 150/1's will still be coming to replace the 142's, maybe Arriva are getting more 142's?To quote the first sentence of the story: Quote FGW is to receive five of the Class 150/2 DMUs which were transferred to ATW at the end of the Central Trains franchise on 9 December 2007. There is no 'maybe' or 'possibly' receive, 'is to' receive is what it says which goes along with what Vacman told us a couple of weeks back including the number of units. Of course FGW won't confirm or deny anything until the ink is dry on the contract and its all official. Besides they will probably want to make a right song and dance about this with Andrew Haines making the announcement. My theory is that these 150s will be leased until FGW receive their fleet 150/1s from London Midland as a stop gap measure. Either that or ATW will receive some of the London Midland sets that were due to FGW which if they are three car 150/1s will be a benefit to ATW of having some three car 150s instead of two car 150s in the long term. Title: Re: Well would you believe it?? Post by: r james on February 22, 2008, 00:23:29 I suspect ATW wont be happy with more 142s, as they are a nightmare for revenue protection, as has previously been stated, when it comes to running them in multiple formations.
What's wrong with FGW getting some of the 142s which are in store if they are short of stock?? As has already been said, the pacers have apparently been received well in their new location, so FGW should keep them. Lets be honest, what has been confirmed for the LM 150s could all well change by the time they are actually freed up. Its not as if anything different has happened with the 150s this time is it? As has already been suggested by myself, even if ATW receive some extra 150s from the future cascade, as FGW will not require all of the LM units. I still look forward to seeing the FGW pacer refurbishment! It may turn them into reasonable units internally? Title: Re: Well would you believe it?? Post by: Shazz on February 22, 2008, 00:35:52 Yup WAG do have direct control over the trains in Wales, which is why we have hoovered up a reasonable amount of units recently. However, this has been at the expense of the EMT and FGW (ex-Wessex). I bet we are seeing a WAG versus DaFT altercation regarding stock allocation. Daniel ...and the DFT failing miserably. The WAG arn't going to release any units to anyone, even if it's costing them money to have them in storage before platform alteratiuons finish to the valleys. As they know damn well how important the railways are for wales. well shazz come april/may time you are going to be very surprised then because fgw ARE taking 5 150 2's off atw as they cannot afford to keep em on and that is from a VERY GOOD source who happens to know the comings and goings. but if you still do not believe it just wait a few months and you will see those crappy green/cream units with fgw splattered down the side of them. You seem to be missing the point, the WAG subsidise the lease cost on quite a majority of units, specifically the 10 new 150's we got a few months back. SO it's costing the WAG a small nominal fee to keep these units, even if they're not in traffic, they have allocations for the very near future across the AW area. I'm 99% certain the WAG won't be letting any units go. I know, but given the choice of loosing the units, or keeping them at cost, i'm 99% certain the WAG would offset the cost. As i believe they have done in the past. Title: Re: Well would you believe it?? Post by: Lee on February 22, 2008, 00:47:14 What's wrong with FGW getting some of the 142s which are in store if they are short of stock?? Unless you count the unit being used for spares recovery, there are no Class 142 units currently in storage. Title: Re: Well would you believe it?? Post by: r james on February 22, 2008, 08:07:27 I thought Northern has put some Pacers into store?
Title: Re: Well would you believe it?? Post by: Conner on February 22, 2008, 08:09:29 I thought Northern has put some Pacers into store? They did.We took some and the rest had to go back as they had less 158's coming than they originally thought. Title: Re: Well would you believe it?? Post by: r james on February 22, 2008, 08:11:31 Quote I know, but given the choice of loosing the units, or keeping them at cost, i'm 99% certain the WAG would offset the cost. As i believe they have done in the past. Exactly, this is why I am surprised that this hasn't happened! Maybe it still will if nothing is signed?!?! Ok, we can but dream on! Title: Re: Well would you believe it?? Post by: DanielP on February 22, 2008, 09:19:32 No reply from Arriva yet! I guess they are just a "passenger" in all this!
Daniel Title: Re: Well would you believe it?? Post by: devon_metro on February 22, 2008, 09:53:29 I suspect ATW wont be happy with more 142s, as they are a nightmare for revenue protection, as has previously been stated, when it comes to running them in multiple formations. Most of the valleys fleet is pacer operation, FGW was previously not so you already have the problem wheras we are getting a new one!! Quote What's wrong with FGW getting some of the 142s which are in store if they are short of stock?? Or perhaps they would be better suited to the short distance valley lines journeys unless of course you travel Aberdare - Barry Island every day... Quote As has already been said, the pacers have apparently been received well in their new location, so FGW should keep them. They have far from been received well, journey times are soon to get longer, the ride is awful, they are uncomfortable, slow and driver hate them, not forgetting multiple running has no corridors. They have not been well received, simply turned out slightly better than originally thought. Quote As has already been suggested by myself, even if ATW receive some extra 150s from the future cascade, as FGW will not require all of the LM units. We can never not need units as whatever spare we have can be used to strengthen services that are very overcowded. Quote I still look forward to seeing the FGW pacer refurbishment! It may turn them into reasonable units internally? Not in the case of the 142s. (http://img407.imageshack.us/img407/1621/seatsgl6.jpg) Thats the extent of the refresh As for the 143s: new seat covers, livery, Driver Viglance installed, new marker lights, old HST seats being fitted to cabs. Title: Re: Well would you believe it?? Post by: vacman on February 22, 2008, 12:37:44 It's all very well having this debate, but there is nothing anyone on this forum can say or do that will change anything, at the end of the day 142's are better suited to the valleys than the Devon branches, 142's have been better recieved than everyone thought, but are still far from suitable really, especially on journeys of up to 90 mins (Exmouth to Barny), especially when these services were previously run with 150's and 158's! As for the LM and LO units, there are plenty to go around, FGW only need 12 of these units (the case has been put to the DFT already, it's up to them now), and bear in mind most of the 3 car hybrid sets will probably be split back down to 2 cars thus creating more units.
Title: Re: Well would you believe it?? Post by: DanielP on February 22, 2008, 13:11:44 Actually, folks are mistaken that the Valley lines services are "short haul". Don't get the impression that this is a sleepy little backwaters either- the Valley Lines are more like an interurban metro commuter network and are run as such . Although many people do short "hops", the trains actually run from one end of each line and then on through Cardiff to another. So, all Rhymney Valley trains run to Penarth via Cardiff and Merthyr trains run through to Barry. Abedare services run through to Bridgend and Barry and the Chelt / Glouc services run all the way to Maesteg.
So, actually, the trains are doing serious high utlisation mileage and are rarely stationary. At the moment, I would say that the pacers aren't really fit for purpose, but at least they are there- 150s are completely ideal, except for lack of DDA compliance in the area of toilets etc. As an example: Rhymney to Penarth is 1hr 30. Treherbert to Cardiff is 1hr 5. Abedare to Bridgend via Barry is 2hrs. Ebbw Vale to Cardiff is 1hr. Stop frequency is high like a metro (stressing components)- the franchise manager I spoke to recently pointed out that Valley lines train frequencies through Queen St and Cardiff Central (a two track bottleneck which most services filter through) is actually higher than most London Underground services in the rush hour. Next time you are in Cardiff, step over to platform 6 and 7 and watch the show. The only shorter routes are Coryton to Radyr (Cityline) and the short hop from Queen St to Cardiff bay. However, even here units are diagrammed so there are minimal stop times at each end. Compare this with the Looe branch, where the 153 spends quite alot of its day sitting at Liskegard. What we really need on the VLs are a new build of Turbostars (20m body- C3 stock can't go past Taffs Wells), low gearing for 75mph and end connections. They would be pretty much specific to the VL network. I would say electrify, but I'm sure the residents of the upper valleys would be unable to resist nicking important components!! That's not me being nasty, it is a sad fact! If this occured, the West could have as many 150/2s and discarded pacers as it could manage!! Daniel Alth Title: Re: Well would you believe it?? Post by: devon_metro on February 22, 2008, 18:23:50 But then I will come along and say we get a new order of stock for the Portsmouth - Cardiff route rated at 100mph (3 car), along with a 75mph version with corridor connections (2 car), and the Valleys can have all of the 150s and 153s it likes ;D
The Valleys has had a large pacer fleet for a while, whereas FGW network has not so stick with what they have got is what I say. Its also silly that we arent getting any Wessex 150s back, instead Central ones which don't have door controls at each door! Title: Re: Well would you believe it?? Post by: r james on February 22, 2008, 20:22:09 Are there any more pictures of the FGW refurbished pacers around??? Would be interested to know if all the nasty green panelling at the carriage ends by the drivers cab has been changed to purple. Also, have they improved the lighting in these units, to make them less dark??
Title: Re: Well would you believe it?? Post by: tramway on February 22, 2008, 20:28:21 Also, have they improved the lighting in these units, to make them less dark?? Just keep your fingers crossed that they haven't saved the light fittings from the 150 refurb. ;D Title: Re: Well would you believe it?? Post by: devon_metro on February 22, 2008, 20:32:17 Are there any more pictures of the FGW refurbished pacers around??? Would be interested to know if all the nasty green panelling at the carriage ends by the drivers cab has been changed to purple. Also, have they improved the lighting in these units, to make them less dark?? No class 143s have been refurbished and won't start till the 150s are done. Title: Re: Well would you believe it?? Post by: r james on February 22, 2008, 20:38:34 What about pics of the 142 refurb though?
Title: Re: Well would you believe it?? Post by: smithy on February 22, 2008, 20:40:24 What about pics of the 142 refurb though? it is not a refurb on 142's just fgw stickers on outside,a heavy clean and new seat covering Title: Re: Well would you believe it?? Post by: devon_metro on February 22, 2008, 20:43:51 As previously postd
(http://img407.imageshack.us/img407/1621/seatsgl6.jpg) Title: Re: Well would you believe it?? Post by: r james on February 22, 2008, 20:59:14 Yeah, I saw that pic, but wondered if you had any views of other parts of the train, like the end panelling etc? And info on if the Lighting has been improved?
Title: Re: Well would you believe it?? Post by: devon_metro on February 22, 2008, 21:04:38 Lighting hasn't been touched.
The 142s never actually had a green panel at the cab, either orange or purple/blue when refurbished by FNW. Title: Re: Well would you believe it?? Post by: r james on February 22, 2008, 21:39:59 I wish ATW would do something about the nasty dark green panelling on their paces, as it simply makes the units seem so so dark!!
Were those purple wall panels under the windows, as shown on the above pic part of the FGW refurb, or where those already in place? IM surprised that they haven't resprayed the window frames in purple too, as on other refurbed units! Title: Re: Well would you believe it?? Post by: DanielP on February 22, 2008, 21:40:18 ;D Devon metro- it does work both ways except for one thing- Valley lines can ONLY have C1 restriction stock, not C3- that is why there are greater limitations on the stock that can be cascaded. So 153s are no good, especially considering our metro style dwell / turnaround times.
Obviously, FGW need more 158 (or equivalents) with 150 (or equivalent) on the branches and the 142s turned into garden sheds (I'd have one)! Daniel Title: Re: Well would you believe it?? Post by: devon_metro on February 22, 2008, 21:43:30 I wish ATW would do something about the nasty dark green panelling on their paces, as it simply makes the units seem so so dark!! Were those purple wall panels under the windows, as shown on the above pic part of the FGW refurb, or where those already in place? IM surprised that they haven't resprayed the window frames in purple too, as on other refurbed units! The blue panelling has been replaced. It used to be red :o Title: Re: Well would you believe it?? Post by: r james on February 22, 2008, 21:53:19 http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=r0G2BK04vsw&feature=related
The internal pics shown on this video clip look quote nice, if thats the full FGW refurb on the 142s?? If only ATW could come up with something similar, they would at least feel a bit better. I have to say, The bus seats on those pacers don't look so bad. The tall seats on the ATW pacers make them feel all claustrophobic . Ok that Refurb doesn't make them into new style trains, but does at least make them look more acceptable to me. Whats others think? Title: Re: Well would you believe it?? Post by: devon_metro on February 22, 2008, 22:01:24 I prefer the unrefurbs - back seat moulds around your back, refurbs have more padding. Main thing I miss from 150/153/158s is ARMRESTS!
Title: Re: Well would you believe it?? Post by: r james on February 22, 2008, 22:14:04 How come these weren't fitted?
Title: Re: Well would you believe it?? Post by: Conner on February 22, 2008, 22:14:56 How come these weren't fitted? They are the same seats. Armrests would only be available with totally new seats.Title: Re: Well would you believe it?? Post by: vacman on February 22, 2008, 23:19:10 One interesting fact, refurbed 14x units were not fitted with drop down tables because if someone puts a hot drink on one then the risk of it being shook onto their laps is too high! likewise if a trolley is ever on a 14x unit they are not allowed to sell you a hot drink!
Title: Re: Well would you believe it?? Post by: r james on February 22, 2008, 23:25:11 A trolley on a 142!!! Has this ever been seen?!?!
On the subject, why were so many pacers made, if they had such problems?!?! Title: Re: Well would you believe it?? Post by: vacman on February 22, 2008, 23:30:33 A trolley on a 142!!! Has this ever been seen?!?! I've seen them on 143's before, everyone says what a disaster 14x units were, but they can hardly be called unsuccessful, over 20 years in service so far, thats a lot longer than many classes of 1st gen DMU's and early diesel loco's!On the subject, why were so many pacers made, if they had such problems?!?! Title: Re: Well would you believe it?? Post by: r james on February 22, 2008, 23:36:37 Blimey, what TOC provided a trolley service on a 143?!?!
This is true about them being unsucessful, but i think the trouble is, they just seem to go on and on and on, without giving up!! Title: Re: Well would you believe it?? Post by: vacman on February 23, 2008, 00:26:32 Blimey, what TOC provided a trolley service on a 143?!?! in Wessex days when a 143 was covering a 150 or something.This is true about them being unsucessful, but i think the trouble is, they just seem to go on and on and on, without giving up!! Title: Re: Well would you believe it?? Post by: Lee on February 23, 2008, 06:32:57 I thought Northern has put some Pacers into store? They did.We took some and the rest had to go back as they had less 158's coming than they originally thought. All the Class 142's currently with Northern are under contract with Angel Trains, and are officially part of the Northern fleet. Title: Re: Well would you believe it?? Post by: Conner on February 23, 2008, 08:21:20 Blimey, what TOC provided a trolley service on a 143?!?! in Wessex days when a 143 was covering a 150 or something.This is true about them being unsucessful, but i think the trouble is, they just seem to go on and on and on, without giving up!! Title: Re: Well would you believe it?? Post by: John R on February 23, 2008, 09:15:23 A trolley on a 142!!! Has this ever been seen?!?! I've seen them on 143's before, everyone says what a disaster 14x units were, but they can hardly be called unsuccessful, over 20 years in service so far, thats a lot longer than many classes of 1st gen DMU's and early diesel loco's!On the subject, why were so many pacers made, if they had such problems?!?! Pacers have consistently had the worst mpc though by a country mile, so not that successful. Title: Re: Well would you believe it?? Post by: smokey on February 24, 2008, 12:46:38 Blimey, what TOC provided a trolley service on a 143?!?! This is true about them being unsucessful, but i think the trouble is, they just seem to go on and on and on, without giving up!! In W&W (might have been early Wessex days) days I've seen a Trolley on the St Ives Branch. A trolley on a 142!!! Has this ever been seen?!?! I've seen them on 143's before, everyone says what a disaster 14x units were, but they can hardly be called unsuccessful, over 20 years in service so far, thats a lot longer than many classes of 1st gen DMU's and early diesel loco's!On the subject, why were so many pacers made, if they had such problems?!?! Pacers have consistently had the worst mpc though by a country mile, so not that successful. Seems only the Railbuses have lost there engines whilst in service, I mean literally, not an easy thing to more from the four foot...One Bus Engine. Title: Re: Well would you believe it?? Post by: r james on February 24, 2008, 12:52:29 It simply defies belief that so many units were manufactured if it had already been identified that they would simply bounce too much on the branch lines which they were intended for!
Title: Re: Well would you believe it?? Post by: smokey on February 24, 2008, 13:05:01 It simply defies belief that so many units were manufactured if it had already been identified that they would simply bounce too much on the branch lines which they were intended for! IIRC British Leyland PAID for LEV-1 to be built (the prototype railbus). It was SHORTER than production units, BR being Cash Strapped found use in some area for Railbuses, but they are by nature of twin axles bouncey and unsuitable for sharpish curves. As I've posted before the Rail Bus twin cars should have had a common centre bogie (like trams have). Title: Re: Well would you believe it?? Post by: mada on February 24, 2008, 17:34:48 So have the two 150's turned up?
Title: Re: Well would you believe it?? Post by: Shazz on February 24, 2008, 17:39:33 nothings left he (from the obvious stockpile of new 150's that would go)
from what i can see from my window Title: Re: Well would you believe it?? Post by: r james on February 24, 2008, 17:44:35 Hopefully things will stay this way!! Surely in a worst case scenario, ATW could spare say 2 of the 150 units?
But will be really disappointing to see more than that go. Get ride of some 143s or 142s ATW! Im sure FGW would be grateful of even those?! Title: Re: Well would you believe it?? Post by: devon_metro on February 24, 2008, 18:11:16 Didn't we already establish that the Valleys has always been a pacer friendly area whilst journeys are longer on FGW??
Title: Re: Well would you believe it?? Post by: r james on February 24, 2008, 18:24:05 I would disagree when doing Bridgend to Aberdare which gets a pacer.
How is it friendly to pacers? Title: Re: Well would you believe it?? Post by: Shazz on February 24, 2008, 18:25:52 Didn't we already establish that the Valleys has always been a pacer friendly area whilst journeys are longer on FGW?? You thought they were. The people who use them do not. Thats were we go to. And for the record, the majority of journeys the pacers do here, are longer than the ones the fgw ones do. Title: Re: Well would you believe it?? Post by: devon_metro on February 24, 2008, 18:35:15 I would disagree when doing Bridgend to Aberdare which gets a pacer. How is it friendly to pacers? In fact I did Queens Street - Aberdare - Barry Island on a 142. Not nice but still it wouldn't be great on a 150 either. Title: Re: Well would you believe it?? Post by: Shazz on February 24, 2008, 18:45:46 I would disagree when doing Bridgend to Aberdare which gets a pacer. How is it friendly to pacers? In fact I did Queens Street - Aberdare - Barry Island on a 142. Not nice but still it wouldn't be great on a 150 either. oh it is, you cant feel a thing on a 150. Title: Re: Well would you believe it?? Post by: mada on February 24, 2008, 21:20:48 Hopefully things will stay this way!! Surely in a worst case scenario, ATW could spare say 2 of the 150 units? I don't imagine your view is particularly popular on here seeing as this is a forum for Title: Re: Well would you believe it?? Post by: vacman on February 24, 2008, 21:22:55 My hearts bleeding too. ;)
Title: Re: Well would you believe it?? Post by: r james on February 24, 2008, 21:27:32 Hehe! To be fair, I do know what its like. On a trip to Bognor Regis, I had to put p with a 2 car 158 to Southampton, and it was really really crowded! Not fun!!
Title: Re: Well would you believe it?? Post by: DanielP on February 24, 2008, 23:42:54 I have been a victim of FGW many times. ;D ;D
The problem is that where "privatisation" (har har har) has fragmented the system, we have lots of seperate arguments for additional stock + route developments from various different areas. What we need is one concerted and holistic argument from all areas, not lots of factions. We are falling into the trap of believing DaFT that Northern, EMT, FGW, Arriva and Co should be squabbling over insufficent units. Each gain for one is at the expense of another. What we need is a campaign for a mass order of Turbostars (or something) to be placed soon so that many of the current capacity issues can be zapped in one go AS WELL AS individual local campaigns. I would heartily support an urban metro in Bristol and cannot believe that there is no station at Portishead yet. However, when a proper Bristol metro is up and running, the level of wear and tear on units will not be as high as the VL. See post #130 for the amount of nodding the Welsh pacers do- Arriva squeeze major untilisation out of them on heavily loaded, steeply graded lines- they definately need something better before the poor nodders fall apart! Daniel Title: Re: Well would you believe it?? Post by: smithy on February 26, 2008, 16:22:48 officially announced today about the 5 class 150's coming to fgw to allow 158 3 cars to be made again.
hate to say it but told you so shazz as did vacman Title: Re: Well would you believe it?? Post by: Lee on February 26, 2008, 16:23:55 officially announced today about the 5 class 150's coming to fgw to allow 158 3 cars to be made again. hate to say it but told you so shazz as did vacman See also link below. http://www.firstgreatwestern.info/coffeeshop/index.php?topic=1862.msg13465#msg13465 This page is printed from the "Coffee Shop" forum at http://gwr.passenger.chat which is provided by a customer of Great Western Railway. Views expressed are those of the individual posters concerned. Visit www.gwr.com for the official Great Western Railway website. Please contact the administrators of this site if you feel that content provided contravenes our posting rules ( see http://railcustomer.info/1761 ). The forum is hosted by Well House Consultants - http://www.wellho.net |