Great Western Coffee Shop

BRITAIN^S biggest rail union today welcomed a dramatic U-turn by First Great Western on plans to scrap buffet cars on high-speed trains, as 700 catering staff, train managers and senior conductors voted for strike action.

Link Below:

http://www.rmt.org.uk/Templates/Internal.asp?NodeID=108697&int1stParentNodeID=89732 (http://www.rmt.org.uk/Templates/Internal.asp?NodeID=108697&int1stParentNodeID=89732)

As much  as i welcome it - I dont like the slant that it is over safe working conditions

how about what passengers want

Whilst I accept that on SOME overcrowded peak trains it ma y be - for the vast majority I doub it

Slight distorsion of facts I understand. 47% of those ballotted actually voted.

Agree wholeheartedly. There was a similar issue when the RMT were threatening to strike over the use of managers as guards. In reality they were concerned about their members' jobs (which is a perfectly legitimate thing for a union to be concerned about) dressed up as a safety concern.

But let's be pleased that on another issue FGW have seen sense. So if EMT and FGW have seen the light on buffet cars, how about it XC?

Yes excellent news which again shows FGW are listening to it's passengers and it's staff.

Regards XC removing buffets from Voyagers, I still think that will go ahead because they need every available space to add extra seats that are desperately needed on XC services.

Have to agree here. Excellent news about FGW buffets, but more seats/luggage space is more of a priority on XC voyagers/turbostars (although the HSTs should have buffets).

What FGW failed to realise is that if a service is busy, a trolley won't be able to fit through the train.

Not really a u-turn though as Andrew Haines stopped the wholesale removal of the buffet cars days after taking the helm. If it wasn't for him there would be 20+ sets running around as I type this. All that said though the RMT may have had an influence over the decision to keep these vehicles. As I gather the un refurbished buffet will be refreshed to contain a smaller buffet unit and will have extra standard class seats.



Now then lets get something straight here.
It takes 6 weeks to train a guard to be able to carry his/her daily duties. Training includes Personal Track Safety, The in's and out of the rule book, Fire, Evacuation to name just a few of the operational parts of their jobs. After passing out they need to learn the railway that they will be travelling over on a daily basis which include getting to know Stations, Gradients, Crossings, Tunnels, Curverture of the lines and a whole host of other things. All this training helps you lot to go where you go to on daily basis safely. So when an office girl has two days to take in what a Train Manager/ Conductor has 10 or more weeks to learn it beggars belief that you can say that the RMT threat to strike over something that is dressed up as a safety concern




At least the RMT listens to the 47% of their members unlike the Association you are connected with! ;D ;D ;D ;D ;D

I think you'll find there will be no extra seats as the whole coach will be removed on XC services. Or should I say has been removed.

Not on Voyagers!

I think that on XC HSTs, they should reinstate the buffet coach - with extra second class seats.

Morning

Agreed to all.

My ideal solution for every single HST set would be,
power car + 1 first + Buffet + 7 second + power car.
The reason for taking out a first coach is especially
on XC, most people are on a buget holiday and most
will travel second.  So more of these to eliminate or
limit overcrowding.  There is a limited amount of
first at one end of the buffet coach anyway, so
really its one and quarter first!

To be honest I don't know how espcially XC are getting
away with not running a buffet coach.  You can't drink
the tap water and water is a basic human reqruirement
and you can't just rush off to a cafe at a station stop
without risking missing your train.  Ok you can buy it
before you board, granted, but on a 8+ hour journey
you would run out even with a bag of goodies, so a
buffet is needed!  Same with food.

Regards

Karl. 

Have FGW got enough buffet cars though?  I thought one of the issues was that they hadnt got enough buffer cars to put into every HST, hence why some have been running around with no buffer service at all?

WIll they be able to covert some of the MK3 buffet stock which sits round doing nothing?

 Also, are there any buffet cars which Xc could actually use?? 

There's always the trolley service, which will be replenished enroute. (Not that I'm advocating the change, far from it, but I don't think your argument for retention holds water.)

Afternoon

John R, I don't quite understand your statement at
the end, sorry its not making a lot of sense to me?

But if its regarding water, then yes it is a basic
human requirement,  no TOC can expect people to go
without at least water for 5+ hours.  Would you pay
the fare at todays prices where you have nothing?

If its to do with the trolley service, I'm not
against them on shorter services, i.e Penzance to
Exeter, but on longer services then no, again as per
my last sentence in the above paragraph.  On long
hauls they will just get in the way more than anything
else.  This brings me onto another point of once when
I cought a train to Newton Abbot and we had a trolley
service on a c158, the bloke pushing it would not
come down the train at all until we were coming into a
station stops (people trying to get off and trying to
get bags e.t.c.), which was really agrovating and I
can't see that working on a HST!

Also some things that nark me off is at least three
trains that I have been on in a month have not had
a buffet attendent at all, so no buffet from Penzance
to Plymouth (sometimes longer), they only seem to have
half the stock that they advertise fom Penzance until
restock at Plymouth so haven't got half the stuff you
ask for or not at all, plus incredibly long times the
buffet is closed (more than once), for a crew change
e.t.c.

But all in all I would understand and agree with the
proposed strike and would understand it if people
boycotted the trains for not having a suitable buffet
coach, if one was to happen that is!

Regards

Karl.

What I meant was I don't think the railways are under any obligation to provide any sort of refreshments however long the journey. And in any case, since XC will still be providing a trolley service, there will be the facility to purchase food and water, even without a buffet car. Therefore, even if there was such a stipulation, the facilities provided by XC will meet them.

Don't forget a lot of other services run for hours with only a trolley (Liverpool - Norwich - 5 1/2 hours, and only with a trolley for half of that), and many run for hours with nothing (Shrewsbury - Swansea).

But I agree that it's highly regrettable that they are abolishing them.

Going back to the FGW Buffet farce over the last year or so, what a good idea that is now being mooted. Refurb (sorry 'Refresh') the unrefurbished buffet vehicles and provide a smaller buffet (perhaps the same size as the 180's Refresca Cafe Bar or slightly bigger) and then have around 30-40 extra standard class seats. I assume the vehicle will be turned round in formation so that the new, smaller buffet still sits between Standard and First Class accommodation.

End result: More standard class seats at the loss of a few first class seats (two carriages worth is more than enough of the majority of affected trains). You retain catering facilities which remain important on Bristol's, Cheltenham's and Cotswold Line services.

The only loss is that the 5 minute performance gain (which wouldn't have been reflected in the timetable anyway) on a typical Paddington-Bristol service you have by removing the heaviest carriage in the formation is lost. However, we all know that claim was bobbins anyway as the overall train weight is only reduced by around 39 tonnes (or is that tons, i've always been confused by that!) as the buffet car, despite being the heaviest vehicle is only 5 tonnes heavier than the others and only accounts for 14% of the total trains weight (excluding the power cars). The actual time saving would be nearer 1 or 2 minutes I would guess?

What were Ms. Forster's regime taking?

Afternoon

Well as you have mentioned the weight devasite,
could I ask a QS, something which I have been
pondering over is whether there is any play in
sightly uprating the MTU engine?  This beween the
two power cars would surely be enough to overcome
any weight issues.

Regards

Karl.

Would require a total re-wire of the powercars and associated electical systems.

They said that time gains would be minimal.

GNER, when they refurbed their HSTs, swapped the buffets around and put in second class seats.


I have also been confused why the HSTs travel at 125 mph, over the X miles and Y chains of track, but each carriage is 23 metres long!

Why mix measuring systems? Why not 25 yards long?

Because manufacturing industry switched to metric measurements aeons ago, to match what pretty much the whole world - apart from the US - does. I have seen suggestions that Boeing's new 787 airliner is late partly because overseas sub-contractors have to convert all the design documents from Boeing into metric so they can produce the parts.

But our railways were built in miles and chains, so there are still lots of old distance markers out there. We could change it if there was the will - for example, the Irish have recently completed conversion of all their road signs to metric.

The original BR designation of the Class 91 and Mk4 coaches was InterCity 225 - for 225kmh, or 140mph.

No point in switching. Waste of money/time when you look at the problems that need cash and willpower in the UK...

Off topic, is it a Mark 3 Buffet which sits as a cafe on the West Somerset Railway?  I noticed it the other day!

DO FGW have sufficient buffet cars now for every train set to have one?  Or will theyhave to source more?

The HST electrical system is about at it's limit with the engine set to 2250bhp @ 1500 rpm. On certain power cars the rectifier is the limiting factor. It was this component which failed (and caught fire) during the trails with the Mirrlees MB190 which initially was set to 2400bhp @ 1500 rpm.

The MTU engine is set to deliver the maximum output it can deliver at 1500rpm in any case. It is not possible to increase the engine RPM due to the properties of the alternator and the effects of raising the frequency of the 415 volt three phase supply to the auxilaries on the power cars and trailers.

There are 7 off lease buffet cars at Long Marston which are capable of being used. 3 of them have been off lease for less than a year.

The one at the WSR is ex Loco Hauled not HST

Afternoon

Some of the very early railways (I think "The Bodmin
and Wadebrige Railway" was one of them), used furlongs
instead of chains!

Regards

Karl.

Who did those 3 buffets belong to then before going off lease?  Are they LH MK3 or HST buffets?

How many more do FGW require to enable every train set to have one?

3 bufffets required from what was told

Are the buffets available HST though or MK3 LH?  WOuld there be a huge cost to convert the remaining MK3 buffets to HST ?

Pretty sure they are all former CrossCountry HST buffet seconds. I dread to think what rewiring a loco-hauled MK3 buffet to HST spec would cost.

I was going to say, there should surely be a HSt buffet carriage available for each pair of HST power cars, as weren't they all built with them as standard? 

I sitll think cross country should jump on them and snap them up before they are all gone.  A perfect chance to add even more standard class seating into their formations?  Though can platforms on the relevant journeys take a 9 car train?  Eve if the buffet counter isnt used, its still a lot of extra seating.

Now, please don't flame me, but Ollie is quite right: for whatever reason, there is a 'shortage' of three HST buffet cars.  Andrew Griffiths confirmed that to us, at the recent FOSBR meeting in Bristol.  ::)

So there are no HST buffet cars they can acquire then to make up for the short fall?  Is it the plan for this issue to be resolved somehow?

Can't work this out. Every set was built with a buffet car, and as XC won't have them in their 5 sets, that must leave some spare. Unless some were written off in the 3 crashes and not replaced (could buy that theory with the 2004 crash as stock was lying idle by then, but probably not the earlier two).

I know of at least one FGW buffet involved in a crash that is still running today (actually this buffet was in two crashes and is still running, along with a rear power car that was repaired and sent back out into service!  :o )

I'm sorry to raise it, but I think one was destroyed at Ufton Nervet: see http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/england/berkshire/7072672.stm

"One carriage rolled over, the buffet car was bent double and the family coach in which most of the victims were sitting slid along on its side."

C.  :( :( :(

Er, did anyone read my post yesterday or Sprintermeister's from Sunday?

Here is a picture from the Long Marston open day last month showing... two EMT-liveried HST buffets, presumably from sets that went to XC.

http://www.jamespower.fotopic.net/p51051219.html (http://www.jamespower.fotopic.net/p51051219.html)

And it was never as easy as one buffet per two power cars, there were always spare power cars in the fleet. At the moment FGW has something like 118 Class 43s to 53 or 54 sets of HST trailers.

Were some buffets converted a few years ago to form extra First Class coaches for project Rio??

I feel that oneday, XC will regret not buying the 5 buffet cars, to add to thier services at a later date.

Im guessing the reason there are more power cars then coach sets is the reason why so much loco hauled mk3 stock is being converted to HST use. 

Good job for FGW that they didn't, or there wouldn't be any available to plug the gaps in the fleet.

If XC think they know better than everyone else about buffets in HSTs - and Voyagers - that's their business, but it surely can't be coincidence that both FGW and EMT have pulled back from the brink on this question.

Actually they are in Midland Mailine livery!


And XC lease these trailers don't they?

Buffets were discussed at the Central customer panel in July.

NHE is Nick Hebborn, Head of On-board Service. KF is Katharine Fee, the panel chairman. JB is James Burt, Director of Customer (Service? - the minutes do just say customer).

Not sure I'm much clearer about their intentions, despite reading this.

"KF asked about the 2+7 decision and the removal of the buffets?
NHE advised that the DfT and FGW have decided not to remove the HST buffets. 14 will have the smaller or mini buffet, others will have the current buffet car refreshed. All will have adequate equipment. We will not have a ^trolley only^ service for the HSTs but will develop a trolley service as support, not a replacement, for the buffet.
JB added that FGW would have to lease a floating vehicle whilst refurbishment of large and mini buffets is being undertaken.
KF asked if there would be more seats?
NHE explained that there would be no more seats but FGW have to decide whether they will be First Class or Standard
A member asked if all trains would therefore be 8 carriages?
JB stated that some will still be 7 with a trolley service
KF asked where will these run?
NHE replied that it would primarily be Oxford
JB explained that this allows the potential in the future for 8 carriages with extra seats put in. Recommendation is for 14 x 2+7 seats, with all others to be 8 carriages. 2+7 trains will have a mini buffet
KF asked will these mainly be on Bristol trains?
NHE confirmed that this would not necessarily be the case
JB added the plan is to put these less seated trains in places where the seat reduction will not be noticed. Regrettably it has taken six months to get to this decision; original plan would not work, as it did not put customers first. Recommendation is to spend ^1/2 million on each buffet."

Very confusing. At one point they say that all HSTs will have buffets. Then they say that some Oxford HSTs will be trolley!

And why are they going to run 2+7 HSTs (including buffet so really 2+6) when overcrowding is getting worse?

They aren't doing anything like that.

Believe a mini-buffet counter will be inserted in some coach Es

All this goes to show what a mess the DfT have made of rolling stock procurement and allocation.

As other threads on this board have highlighted everyone considers the HST to be an excellent long distance train (high desity excepted), especialy when there were more tables and fewer airline seats. Long distance trains need buffets/resturant cars.

Turning them into commuter trains is not what they built for. The fact they can actually perform reasonably well on such services is tribute the brilliance of their original design.

Tickering with the buffets is a bit like rearranging the deck chairs on the Titantic. A fairly pointless exercise. This is mainly because there is no way of guarenteeing that a set with full buffet will always be available for the Swanseas and West Country services where it is required as this would require extra sets of each type to ensure the right type could always be rostered for a particular type of service.

What is required is new intemediate distance commuter unit preferably electric to work the Oxfords etc. In the meantime, before we get electrification to at least Oxford, wasn't there something called an Adelante?

Then the HSTs can go back to running Intercity. Provided loops are put in to allow fasts to over take stoppers.

This "mini cafe" idea in coach E is a mad idea.

Even less seats for commuters! >:(

And as eightXXXX said, what happens when the 1505 is given a cafe in E on a summer Saturday?

Use the normal ones. If there are none left, convert a spare coach or build a new one!

1) Seats or food - your choice.
2) Not the busiest service on a Summer sat
3)That costs money and money FGW don't have considering the silly sum of cash they owe to some accountant in London
4)None left of HST variety
5) Ridiculous idea

1. No, with a buffet car you get seats and food (and a trolley area). With a mini cafe you get less seats and (I would expect) less food plus no trolley area.
2. Fine -sub in said busy service! Ditto applies. What happens if.....
3. I thought FGW had lots of mon^y.
4. What about a mark 2 coach?
5. Fair enough :P but why not? perhaps?

1) You either get seats or food - everyone seems to moan both ways so FGW can't win!!!
2) The 3 sets with no buffets cope fine at the mo
3) The more money they spend, the more the fares go up!
4) 100mph coach without HST coupling in a 125mph train........
5) Mk3s won't meet modern crash worthyness nor is the production line going to open for 10 mk3 coaches :S

1) How about this radical idea of a trolley... then you get both.
2) Mainly because they're diagrammed on extremely fast services or short services
3) Only because TOCs are money grabbing.
4) Is perfectly possible with various body mods but unlikely
5) You could get a very similar design with modern standards. The production line is going to open for HST2 soon anyway.

1) Trolleys are bad as they can't get through and end up being a mini buffet.
2) Those sets need buffet cars.
3) Agree! The profits they make....
4) I thought mark 2s ran on the WCML so how can they be restricted to 100 mph? I thought mark 1s went on the WCML!!!
5) Agree - why not make extra buffets part of the HST2 plan?

1) And? Do you want seats or a buffet or both? If you want both - trolley. End of story.
2) No, no train necessarily requires a buffet. You obviously haven't been on some 3 hour slogs on some services I know of.
3) Skip.
4) The WCML pre-modernisation was mainly 100-110mph throughout. The LHCS in use currently is a Mk3.
5) Trains would be too long.

Not this again! Adelantes are too small for the peak services between Oxford-Reading-London, with effectively the same number of seats as a three-car Turbo. The SRA recognised this wasn't adequate years ago, hence it dreamed up the high-density HST concept, though only in a small dedicated fleet for this specific route.

As noted earlier in this thread, there are spare HST buffets from Midland Mainline sets stored at Long Marston.

I remain dubious about this mix of 2+7 and 2+8 sets, with varying facilities, which could cause all kinds of fun if a set fails and control has to try to find one urgently that it can step up but which also has the right catering set-up needed for, say, a Pullman restaurant duty to Plymouth.

1) Buffet cars provides both also.
2) I would disagree - especially at peak times.
4) Understand, but it can't be too difficult to get 125 mph?
5) How is 8 coaches too long? And with SDO, surely train length is less of a restriction/?


I agree, but the 180 was good length for off peak Cotswold.

1) This links into train length, the longer the train the slower the train accelerates.
2) No train *requires* a buffet - end of story. Settle and Carlisle services regularly don't have buffets except where provided by the partnership. Likewise, frequently SWT long distance (Wey - Wat) have no trolley or buffet throughout. I can think of several instances of no buffet on WoE services too. The answer is to just buy stuff in advance from the station.
4) 125mph speeds are related to crumple zones. Mk2 crumple zones are tbh, crap...
5) Platform lengths. SDO on HST2 may not be the same concept as on the original HST. Note, "SDO" on SWT units is unit only so it's really SUO. HST2 AFAIK will be similar to E* in the sense that it is formed of 2 half sets.

As the number of retail outlets at stations increase, the argument for having a buffet service decreases, but I think it's one of those situations where the perception of having a buffet car on board increases the prestige of a service - even if a passenger isn't going to use it, then it is a positive facility that gives the train in question a certain 'Inter-City' feel.

If FGW could guarantee to a reasonable extent that the availablility of having in essence three 'types' of HST operating would mean that the right type would be allocated to the right train then I personally would think the best compromise would be:

Plymouth/Penzance/Swansea and that area services:
2+8 sets - with refreshed 1st class seating in the buffet vehicle as now.

Cardiff/Bristol/Exeter area services
2+8 sets - with the remaining un-refreshed buffet vehicles converted to standard class seating (approx 40 seats) with a smaller buffet area covering around the width of three windows (about 66% of the present size).

Oxford/Cotswold Line/Cheltenham area services
2+7 sets - with no buffet vehicle, but a trolley service.

That would mean:

a) A full buffet service on the vast majority of trains, backed up by a trolley service on the shorter services which could make use of the slight extra acceleration with more station stops.
b) Extra standard class seating on Cardiff/Bristol/Exeter services at a slight loss of 1st class seating.

Most of the Penzance/Newquay services this year have been stupidly busy, even more so than previous years, so why not convert the first class seating in coach F to standard seats? I know this was mentioned here before but there just isn't enough capacity on the HST's into and out of Cornwall for the summer months!

Or you could 'swap' the two 2+8 configurations around (as detailed in my previous post) so that on weekend services the maximum standard class seats are on the Cornwall routes?

But could you "guarantee" the right type? As I said last night, what happens when you hit trouble and need a set swap? And what actually is the 'right' train for particular sets of services?

For example, on the Cotswold/Oxford route, the two up morning peak services from Abergavenny/Hereford do need some sort of kitchen service, as there is a demand for hot breakfast food, and the seating capacity offered by a 2+8 set.

Likewise, the 15.51 and 17.21 from London need every seat they can get - and could really do with being 2+9s most Fridays. So you would need to work these factors - and 2+8s - in among your 2+7s, plus, if you are going for sub-fleets, then Oxford services really only need a single FO in the formation, which was what the SRA suggested when it floated high-capacity sets in its GW Main Line RUS.

And I've never really bought the performance argument. Even allowing for extra stops these days, the timings are pretty generous, compared with some in the past for 2+8 sets doing the same journeys.

I have been on late-running 2+8 HSTs that have run start-to-stop Moreton-Oxford in 25 and 27 minutes, inclusive of Kingham and Charlbury stops, compared with a booked time of 32 minutes. I'm sure the fuel consumption was a bit on the heavy side, but these efforts got both trains back near right time by Oxford, despite lugging a buffet car around.

The 05.35 from Hereford (now with a Hanborough stop added) is shamefully allowed 44 minutes for this section of its journey in the current timetable, that's a whole minute less than the halts train making seven stops! I appreciate some of the time is a pathing allowance to try to avoid conflict and knock-on delays but even so, it's over the top.

That would be the biggest issue of course, and there would need to be certain services that would go against the basic suggestions I mentioned - the Cotwold Line services you mention being one of them. We are still in a position where more Standard Class seats are required on certain trains though. 2+9 formations are a possibility on more routes thanks to SDO, but the buffet car size reduction and conversion to Standard Class would be a more cost-effective way of achieving extra seating.

I agree with you on the the performance issue to a large extent, Will. The difference is quite often negligible - there is about a 10% reduction in overall train weight with a buffet car removed. Though that doesn't mean a 10% saving in journey times as the previous management of FGW would have had you believe. For starters when the train is full many extra tonnes of weight are added to the train by the passengers reducing this weight saving, and when the train has accelerated to the linespeed then of course there is no further saving to be had. There are also no savings in terms of braking. I would hazard a guess that between 1-2 minutes would be saved on a 'typical stops' service from Hereford to Oxford with a 2+7 formation.

25 minutes from Moreton-Oxford really is going some though. That's well over a 60mph average speed inclusive of the two station stops. I timed 28 minutes for the same journey in an Adelante a couple of years ago which had an additional stop at Hanborough, but it really was being driven hard - and of course Adelante's have better accelerations and brakes (when they are working properly!).

Certainly was driven hard. You don't often get a whiff of brakepads on HSTs these days - anyone remember the stench the a/c used to suck in from the original type BR used in the late 1970s? - but we did on this occasion approaching both stations and again at Wolvercot, as the driver was using the 100mph limit to the full after Charlbury.

I remember it well. As you say, you only smell the brake pads nowadays if the driver has had to break hard.

I actually quite like the smell - perhaps I'm a bit odd? I believe when the driver selects their 'initial' brake notch, inlets to the air-con are closed. It's when the driver immediately selects one of the higher brake steps available without briefly putting it into the initial setting that brake dust can get into the air-con to give that trademark smell.

It's not just you, I quite like it, but I suppose I can be pretty odd. :D

Mk2s/150s are worse!!

I think you're both a bit odd - it's a horrible smell!   ::)

It's certainly not a "nice" smell, but to me at least it is both a familiar smell and a comforting smell; a smell which reminds one of both journeys and of homecomings.

...and better than the burning smell which you often used to get on Adelantes.  ;D

...better than the smell of the Hydraulics on the Voyagers....  ;)

Better than any of the smells on a Voyager!   ;) :D ;D

You couldn't be more right there Chris. Give me the smell of HST brakes over the less than welcoming smell you get every time you board a Voyager anyday.

Any of the smells? Amusingly, the smells you can smell on a Vomit are smells of the human body. Pleasant ;)

Well there is always one lying around at Minehead station!

(NB rather large in-line image replaced by a link to the image by moderator )

http://img398.imageshack.us/img398/8191/mk3buffetwsrdn2.jpg (http://img398.imageshack.us/img398/8191/mk3buffetwsrdn2.jpg)

Quote from the latest staff news/propaganga letter, which backs up recent posts on here...

...the results of the catering feasability study have come in, recommending that all HST's have buffet cars.

Around 70% of services will retain the current buffet, and FGW will develop a smaller buffet for the remainder, making space for additional seating over the next couple of years.

Make of that what you will...  ;)

Well, that's excellent news - I recommended right from the outset that buffet cars should be retained!  ;D

But what happens if a "small" buffet is put on a Pullman service?

No, they should all have the normal buffet, with second class table seats put in if necessary.

Or you could have the disabled area in the buffet coach, and put more seating in the coach which normally has disabled space.

It should be standard across the whole fleet.

....but a small buffet IS better than a trolley / trolley in A.

So will they be handing back any buffet cars to the leasing company?  Just it talks about 70% of services having buffets, and Im sure that over 70% of services already have buffets, so is this a loss?

Also how will they create more seats as a result of creating mini buffets? 

The Smell of Brakes on HST's in the early days, was (mainly) Resloved by putting a small Mod in the Air Con system, that when Brakes were applied the Air Con External Air inlet was closed whilst Brakes were appiled, however it only closed for a short time, and reopened after a short time delay.
So for prolonged brake applications or very heavy use of the brakes the smell of burning brakes still effect passenger saloons.

What is the latest with the buffet situation?

has anyone else seen a couple of old school buffet cars flying around the southwest?

They've always been flying about!

So how few services have no buffet each week?

Will the additonal hst set being gained from the end of the year havea  buffet car?

Are they not refurbishing the buffets in the ubrefirbished sets as well, as I thought they committed to refurbishing all rolling stock?  I find it odd when I see sets go past with an ld buffet, with old style first class seats.  Doesnt create a good impression in my eyes.

It does, the old buffet cars are much more plush (and comfortable) than their modern counterparts!

I'm sure we'd all much rather have unrefurbished buffets than the original plan of no buffets. And I agree with D-M. When travelling down to Cornwall recently I was delighted to find one of the unrefurbed buffets with the brown seats. Long distance travel how it used to be before First ruined the experience.

SO there are no plans to refurb those buffets?

I was under the impression that now FGW had decided to keep the buffets that the remaining coaches would be refurbed, although I am not that important to be told such things  ;D

It would seem stupid not to, given the cost savings for spare parts etc oif all of the carraiges had the same style interiors etc. 

I think there are 2 possibly 3 sets running as 2/7 without a buffet, 70% of services will retain a buffet and the other sets will get a mini buffet built somewhere in the train, apparently catering staff have be involved having viewed the prototype unit at some factory up North, and they came away very very impressed with it indeed, its much bigger and much better equipped than they had imagined.

Yes, but it is no good having a "mini buffet" on a Pullman train.

And having an extra coach means more seats.

Still not convinced.

How many 'Pullman' services actually operate at any one time though?

Some people never satisfied. Incase you have forgotten, the original plan was for NO BUFFET!

Yes, this is better than no buffets.

But why not have buffets.

Keep things simple, more reliable, plus more seats and facilities.

Perhaps because they are expensive to run/lease/refurbish

So the buffets are going still?  And losing the entire carraige?  And then even more seats in another carraige to enable a mini buffet to be fitted>

That's one of the reasons to keep them!

And D/M, FGW can't play the "cost" card when they make so much profit and get a subsidy.

So the premium payments are being dropped are they?

Digressing slighty, it's interesting isn't it. FGW (ie US) pay a whopping premium to DFT, and yet the subsidised franchises in the South East are the ones currently getting brand new rolling stock (LM, FCC, SC). (LM stock will be used on Euston services before anyone suggests they are not SE.)

Maybe that's why they need subsidies and FGW pays a premium. Because they've got the shiny new expensive to lease stock. Whilst we have to beg, borrow and steal.... and then give back (Class 142, ATW Class 150s).