Great Western Coffee Shop

In recent weeks (not just the snow affected week) I have noticed an increasing number of short-formed trains or revised services due to train failure (reason given on FGW website). I have seen the Adelantes back on the Cotswold line for the first time in ages after getting used to the HSTs which finally started being used on some services a year after they were originally scheduled.

This week though I have on two consecutive occasions on a usually very busy train had an 8-car HST replaced by a 3-car 165/166 Turbo.  Last night it was the 1551 from Paddington which was standing only into oxford and due to the large number of waiting passengers waiting to board it was standing only from oxford as well.

This morning due to a train failure a 3-car turbo was sent up the Cotswold line early to form the first offpeak train back to Paddington.

Are the HSTs showing problems or is it just that we are on the end of a long cascade of rolling stock when something breaks elsewhere?

THere is a booked adelante run across the Cotswolds.

Probably a lot to do now with the fact that staff west of didcot now no longer sign 180s....The HST fleet is pretty reliable given the fact most sets travel about 20000 miles a month

Not sure where you're getting that from, dog box - over 40 drivers at Oxford still sign 180's as do all the Worcester conductors and most of the Reading ones.

Anyway, back to IanL's points, yes - there does seem to be more turbos creeping in to the service. You can understand alterations due to bad weather, but having checked today it looks like the 13:21 Paddington-Gt. Malvern and return working at 17:00 Gt. Malvern-Paddington are now set to be 'turbo-tutioned' from now until the end of the timetable. Not so much of a problem with capacity on that one compared with the 15:51 ex Paddington and certain other services, but the standard of accommodation leaves a lot to be desired - especially the 1st Class.

At a rough headcount the following applies to down trains leaving Oxford on weekdays:

5 x Turbos
2 x Adelantes
9 x HST's

That's a significant shift away from HST's compared to a year ago. Is it down to lack of availability/reliability of the HST's or the operational flexibility offered by Adelantes/Turbos? I suspect both play a part, but it's mostly the latter.

Have to say I tend more to the broken HST theory. We simply weren't seeing Turbos on Cotswold Line trains, other than the booked duties until the past week or two - unless something had gone seriously wrong somewhere, or, like last September when HST availability dropped suddenly (was it about then that the wagon door side-swiped two sets?). Even when an HST failed to appear, it was usually replaced by a 180.

The 15.51 requires a full HST - even a 180 isn't adequate to meet demand - the problem is that since December and the pushing back of the former 8.37 from Worcester by 30 minutes to serve Malvern as well, the set that is on this diagram forms the 15.51, and if there is a problem with HSTs/180s at Old Oak in the morning, then the 5.42 to Malvern is, as ever, at the back of the queue for stock, which in recent days seems to mean it gets a 166.

Today and Monday, control had arranged for a 165 to be available at Oxford for the 166 to couple on to, so the 10.31 to London had sufficient capacity but no-one seems to have thought to take the same approach with the (far busier) 15.51.

This is the kind of stuff that gets FGW a bad name. And I've said it before and I'll say it again but what is going to happen when the 180s go? The remaining trio seem to be working pretty much flat out at the moment and one HST can't run on three diagrams.

And when is the Turbo refresh happening? The 166 today was grubby from floor to ceiling and cold due to a malfunctioning door closing system on the corridor connection which just kept trying to trigger the door, but only managed to shut it once in a blue moon. Most of the 165s I've been on recently seem to have at least one window per coach that simply will not stay shut, which is just lovely in the current weather conditions, etc, etc

Just to let you know that the 0542 to Great Malvern is now booked 166 until timtable change in May. After that  dont know.  Runs as a 3 car to Gt Mal and back to Oxford where another 3 cars are added for the rest of the way to London.

AIUI this is in readyness for the withdrawl of the 180 at the end of March and the fact that the extra HST is not ready. Apparantly they are definitely going.  Also there have been problems recently with getting drivers with the necessary traction knowledge as so few are now running on FGW.

While most of my experience is from the Cotswold line, looking at the FGW pages this morning it details 25 revisions (mostly shortforming) from across the region due to train failures. It has been like this for a few weeks now.

It^s also been an issue on Portsmouth/Cardiff for a while with quite frequent 150 ^ tution, with the 15.22 off Portsmouth yesterday being another example. Is there a continuing problem with the 158/9^s at the moment does anyone know.

And how^s about this one, a service last Friday afternoon from Cardiff, with both Severn bridges closed due to the ice, and a single car 153 is allocated, things are really getting bad if that^s all there is left.  :o :o

I was going to post a few days ago about this, so thanks IanL for prompting me.

So that's two trains each way now a turbo vice a HST then. For several months. Not very impressive at all I'm afraid. Not only that but these turbos being used must mean some LTV services are being shortened as a result as there is very little spare turbo capacity in the peak hours?

This morning the 07:03 fast and 07:08 slow Turbos from Twyford to Paddington didn't turn up. Not cancelled - that word wasn't used either on visual displays or by Digital Doris - the two trains just disappeared into thin air. But presumably they were cancelled, and presumably due to shortage of stock?

The 0703 ran 30 late throughout, due to a train fault.
The 0708 was fast between Reading and London Paddington, having left Reading 26 minutes late, due to a train fault.

Thanks for the info - I only wish that someone from FGW had the courtesy to tell us this morning!

I'll second all this.

I thought the Turbo refurb happened a few years ago with the dynamic lines.

industry insider.....No Bristol or Exeter Drivers/Guards now sign  180s, approx only 50% of PAD Staff sign the things. you are right in who do still retain the knowledge.. and the core routes of the depots you mention are Pad / Oxford and the cotswold line. so its no wonder this is where the 180s ply there trade

Fair enough. As the topic seemed to be concerning the Cotswold Line, I thought I'd clarify the situation as to the knowledge still being strong on that route, but as you say, on other routes it is fast disappearing.

Really not sure how we ever got on to who signs Adelantes or not. Crew in Devon don't work Oxford and Cotswold duties anyway, do they, and don't sign Turbos either, so what's that got to do with Ian's original point?

The 180s have been pretty much confined to Oxford and Cotswold Line work for months now, though the odd one has escaped to Bristol and Cheltenham in recent weeks, presumably crewed from London or Reading.

The point was about 180s and Turbos starting to creep back on Oxford and Cotswold workings - needless to say without FGW having the courtesy to tell anyone about these Turbo changes, which from what has been said here now seem to be set in stone for months to come and, given past form, I have little doubt they will become permanent.

It's pretty clear HST availability is not (and never has been?) at the level needed to cover all the services marked with that little 'H' in the timetables and one more set won't solve that problem - and out here, we know full well whose HST is the first to get swiped when things go wrong.

We seem to be heading back into the 'it's only the Cotswold Line' state of mind, which prevailed for so long under Thames, as well as FGW. If we are promised lots of HSTs, which we were from the December 2007 timetable, it's a bit much when they start to disappear again, especially to be replaced by the very Turbo trains that FGW told us weren't adequate for the route any more when they took it over in 2004 and the Adelante was hailed as the bright shining future - even if the ride was rubbish on the remaining bits of jointed rail.

The bright new dawn of December 2010 will look anything but if a third of the trains on the route are still being operated by tired, grubby versions of what was the bright new dawn back in 1993. We are now nearly three years into the franchise and there's still no sign of any contract for work on the Turbo fleet.

And a PS for anyone reading this at Reading depot or Old Oak Common. The same Turbo - 166216, I believe - was on the 05.42 etc diagram today, with the corridor connection door still malfunctioning and letting in a nice cold breeze at 90mph. It's on the driving car at the west end of the train. Please fix it.

The current state of Turbos is a disgrace with plastic wall panels looking ready to fall off and floor coverings being very worn and uneven. However all things considered I think FGW look after them much better than Thames Trains ever did. In TT days you often couldn't see out of the windows because of condensation inside the glazed unit and vandal scratchings on the outside, and the floors would be ankle-deep in litter even first thing in the morning.

Even so I can't understand why FGW is apparently currently doing nothing to improve the very tired interiors of what I suspect is now the worst outer-surburban stock on the London and SE rail network. Do any of our insiders have any news on any future progress?

The original point (illustrated by the Cotswold Line situation) was that lots of services are being short-formed across the FGW network, this morning of the 24 service alterations 20 were short-formed services due to a train failure (all info from FGW live updates).

But being more specific as WillC notes, the 1008 from Charlbury was this morning a turbo again instead of a HST, the timetable still shows it as an HST but there was no service revision in the live updates so perhaps this is an official service revision but it would be nice of FGW to confirm this to passengers. However this morning the service did not connect up with another 166/165 3 car unit at Oxford so it will have been very cramped from oxford onwards.

To WillC: I think we must travel in the same carriage sometimes as I also noted the door that tries to close 5-10 times before succeeding!

Although this thread seems to be concentrating the minds of those around the Dreaming Spires, we still have a lack of Wessex 158's which have caused a few problems in the past few weeks.

It has been suggested that the re-refurbish programme might be to blame, as usual the FGW web site is devoid of info and still refers to the original refresh, funnily enough without dates.

I have had a quick trawl in older posts to look for the one I remember which referred to the need to fit seats without fold down tables and that this was to be addressed in due course. It would be interesting to know if that and the fixing of the air-con and public info screens are also included if this is indeed the case.

 I bet regular users of the Barnstaple  Branch would perform cartwheels if a turbo showed up,.....bring on the 4 car 142 Oxford to Great Malvern semi fast nodding express. lol

Yes, but the Barnstaple line is a branch line. (although the 142s are woefully adequate for the 20th Century 21st Century)

The Cotswold line is a InterCity line. It therefore requires InterCity stock (HST, or at the very least a 180).

Thames Turbos are cramped even for similar outer commuter lines, if you look at Southeastern, Southern and SWT (although 3+2 is creeping in, I admit).

The Cotswolds Line is hardly intercity. Its painfully slow.

Not inter-city, no, but it's not suburban either and apart from the bits of 2+2 standard class seating with tables in the 166 trailer cars and a coupe bit next to the doors by first class in the 165 composite (were these sections originally meant to be first class?), the entire fleet is 3+2 seats, which is inner-suburban style.

A reworked 166, with new 2+2 seats throughout, vestibule doors to keep the cold out of the saloons in the winter and a thorough, top-to-bottom deep clean - and air conditioning which actually works and fully sealed windows - would be more acceptable, by slightly closing the yawning gap in quality of passenger environment with a 180 or Mk3, but I don't suppose it will happen, as every seat is needed for Thames Valley peak trains.

The problems further afield on the FGW network are no different really from what's happening on Oxford and Cotswolds services. The train fleet is stretched thin to start with and high levels of availabiity are required from trains that, apart from the 180s, were built a very long time ago.

At least someone seemed to have relented last night and sent an HST out on the 15.51, as one passed my train home as I was leaving Oxford on the 20.22, which I took to be the return working (leaves Oxford 20.31).

PS Ian: If only it had been 5-10 goes (that's a good set of Turbo doors these days) this one takes several minutes, usually closing just in time for the next station stop, when someone walks up the train, starting it off all over again...

Yes they were. In fact they actually were 1st Class seats for a couple of years after introduction. This gave 24 1st Class seats as opposed to 16 on a 165, but the decision was soon taken that standard class seats would be a better use of capacity. There used to be a manual opening glass partition door separating this additional 1st Class section with Standard Class - this was receiving a fair amount of vandalism so was sensibly removed.

As wiilc you are right the 8 seats in the bay in the middle next to the first class were originally first class but Thames? trains sensibly made it second class. Well it was hardly first class you had all the hoi poli coming through it to get to the doors plus they also stood  and sat in it so it was impossible to police on a crowded train. Regulars always make a beeline for those seats.

A four car 2*2 seat 166 (a slotted in 172 coach?) with SDO and working airconditioning would be a super train for the Cotswold line.  You could run in pairs in peak although getting the pasengers in the right set for the shorter platforms might be a problem.

I always wondered why they weren't fitted with gangways between sets considering the services they were designed for Bedwyn Oxford Banbury Cotswold.

I also thought that a 17x setup would be appropriate for the Cotswold Line.  The AXC sets on Nottingham-Cardiff are very comfortable and reasonably spacious.  Only problem is the limited top speed of 100mph, which would probably see them relegated to the slow line from at least Reading, en route to Pad. 

Probably because the trains are designed for DOO so noone cared about whether or not a conductor could walk though the train.

I think the 17x argument for the Cotswold line is a persuasive one. The Adelantes always seemed ideally suited to me, but HSTs are rather cumbersome: the huge numbers of short platforms and slam-doors must result in long dwell times and make the conductor's job a bit of a nightmare, and combined with relatively slow acceleration must be a real pain for timekeeping.

The line needs 125 mph stock for the London to Oxford stretch.

if you reduce this to 100 mph, there trains will go on the slow lines (until Crossrail starts) or will slow down HSTs on the fast lines. It would also reduce service recovery and extend journey times even more.

I think HSTs are fine for the job. Yes, the acceleration is poor, but some journeys are 3+ hrs.

Remember cotswolds line goes all the way to hereford - even on a refurbed 166 - unless its SIGNIFICANTLY better that the current - I would not want to be on it

Perhaps I should have clarified matters. I wasn't suggesting a wholesale return of Turbos or something similar. There was a good reason for displacing them, which was that, apart from the middle of the day, they could no longer cope with the traffic on offer, because it had grown so much over the 10 years they formed the core of the service.

Even a four-car set (for which SDO would be essential) would be inadequate for services at the shoulders of the peaks, like the 8.52 from Malvern and 15.51 from Paddington, as the Adelantes also are. A six-car Adelante would have been a better bet, but you still need an HST's seating capacity for the peak.

What I was suggesting was a way of improving the 166 passenger environment, so it isn't such a stark contrast between the two types of train if, as now seems likely, the Cotswold Line (and Oxford fasts) are going to get stuck with more Turbos off-peak, because the HST fleet apparently can't meet all the demands placed on it.

You can hear the mutterings of discontent when a Turbo comes into view approaching the stations here, because even infrequent travellers know the state they are in and because they have got used to inter-city type trains. That's because at every recent December timetable change FGW has promised ever more Adelantes, and then HSTs, on the line - but now starts taking them off without actually bothering to tell anyone - or do they have a magic wand to wave in May that will suddenly improve HST availability again?

It's fine and dandy providing an HST on the 21.48 from London to position a train at Worcester for the morning, but they are actually needed when there are lots of passengers out there and that's on the 05.42 diagram - that first journey out of London may be quiet but its two most important journeys the rest of the day are anything but.

On my journey on the North Downs line, I don't have a choice but to travel by Turbo and I reckon they are reasonably suited to this journey.  However, every 166 used to cover for an HST on the main line puts us at more risk of having 165s substitute.  The North Downs line is obsensibly booked for six 166s and one 2-coach 165.  Since the timetable changes in 2006, 2-coach 165s on the 166 diagrams have been few and far between, certainly less common that they might have been in the past.

In the past few weeks there have been more 165s and, even worse, 2 coach 165s on Gatwick services.  Travellers to the airport expect luggage racks and there is some confusion among occasional travellers when a 165 substitutes - luggage ends up on seats which isn't great.

On the matter of 16x refreshment, the difference between the middle section of coach 58117 [1] and the rest of the fleet is quite telling.  Does the recent CCTV fitment count as part money allocated for refreshment work?


Jonathan

[1] 58117 was, as I understand it, the carriage where someone set the interior alight at Reading station a few years ago and has considerably cleaner surfaces (and ceiling) than the rest of the fleet.

This morning (tuesday 17th Feb) 13 train revisions, 11 short-formed or cancelled due to train failures. None of these are Cotswold line, but a spread of Padd-BTM, Padd-Oxf, Padd-Bedwyn, Cardif-Portsmouth.

Also major disruption on CL ast night due to broken down train at Evesham, I wasnt on the trains yesterday but looks like lots of trains were stopped at Oxford/cancelled.

But the 08.52 from Malvern was full and standing arriving at Moreton and was cattle class from Charlbury onwards - and not even an announcement arriving at Oxford that more seats would be available after coupling to the other set.

Will,

Is this the HST that seems to have recently been permanently demoted to a 3-car turbo?, it wasn't on the revisions list so appears to confirm that this is now an official change despite FGW not announcing it. Last friday they didn't even have the extra set waiting at Oxford.

Ian L

This really is an FGW own goal of spectacular proportions. 1) Re-time your first off-peak long standing through London train 30 minutes later, and 2) knowing that it used to be a bit of a crush with an Adelante you then replace the booked HST with a turbo for several months without notice. Even with the extra carriages attached at Oxford this really is a way to get your regular customers riled.

Train failed between Moreton and Evesham on the single line during the evening peak.  No trains were canceled or re-routed. Although one - the stopper only made it as far as Moreton, and lots of people were delayed (especially at Moreton) until the failed train got going.

FGW did a great job in this case.

Yes. This working, 05.41 from London, 0852 back from Malvern and the 13.21/17.00 duty are definitely officially Turbos for the time being. The 15.51 is still meant to be an HST.

And today's experience will have done nothing to persuade all the families who were off on half-term trips to Oxford or London to take the train again - do FGW have someone in marketing with an ounce of common sense, who can bang heads together in the operating department when they come up with these strokes of genius?

Good point, willc!

Just as an aside, the 0859 Nailsea to BTM this morning was a 150, not the three-car 158 we were promised for this service in the new timetable.

Same comments apply - it was full of families, having to stand in the doorways, for possibly their first and last half term rail travel experience?   ::)

Don,

The 1722 from Paddington (1816 from Oxford) was truncated at Oxford (from a passenger who was on the train).

WillC, I was on the 1008 from Charlbury this morning, is was standing only when it arrived and was standing all through each of the three carriages on departure, worse at Hanborough, three further carriages were added at Oxford after a short delay but these carriages were already fairly full before any of the excess standing passengers could decant onto the front carriages.

I confirmed that the online and printed (poster and small booklet C) all show this still as a HST, verbally the staff at Charlbury confirmed this is now a fixture due to lack of available rolling stock.

Also, at 0830 this morning FGW had 14 train revisions across its region, 12 due to train failures 2 due to lack of available staff.

I've just noticed the following in the Live Updates on the FGW site:


They're not going to run a Turbo to Cheltenham are they???

And the 1650 from Reading to Shalford will be formed of 1 coach not 2. Surely not a 156 unit?

Well they ran a turbo to Swindon a few months ago when there was a shuttle service in operation. ie Bristol trains via Newbury and trains to Swindon terminting so it is possible.

More likely to be a typo though. possibly a 180 ?

About time the DfT stepped in and funded more loco hauled sets. A number are on the cards...

No, it ran as an HST. The set for the 15:51 was used on the 15:48

pretty hard job as FGW dont have any class 156 units

Glad to see the natural order of things upheld, with the Turbo going to the Cotswolds - I'm sure it was a fun-packed ride, especially for all the families with small children.

But wouldn't there be a logic in the circumstance of them being a "125" short to run the Turbo via Swindon to Cheltenham - anyone who feels overcrowded on the Paddington to Swindon leg of the journey has other trains (all 125s) every 15 minutes, and the section outward from Swindon is handled in ever other hour by a short "West Fleet" train anyway.   Or am I missing something?

I know that Cheltenham has to be a 125 on Gold Cup day!

On a technical point are Turbos passed for Swindon Cheltenham and are there any drivers who know both Turbos and the route?

probably not as clearances are tight in the stroud/stonehouse area, dont think any crews now sign both traction and route, although a handful of bristol guards did sign turbos when the oxford to bristol service used to operate

I will check my Sectional Appendix when i am next at work.

This morning at Paddington there was a dead HST in Platform 8 and opposite in 9 was a 5-car Turbo forming the 07:52 to Oxford vice HST.

Also the Gensheet Yahoo Group reported last night that 1A91 14:00 Penzance-Paddington failed at Newbury blocking the up platform and causing re-routings to other up trains.

To add to BBM's post, there sure were a heck of a lot of Turbos plying up and down the main lines today, so HST's really were in short supply. Another crocked set was being seen to by a fitter at the rear of Reading station.

That might be what I saw when I passed through about 13:00, it was just a powercar and Coach H

TF had a fault with the wheelset. The rest of the rake was taken to St Phillips Marsh.

Chaos this morning, broken down train near Ascott -u-Wychwood area (guard information). Trains running upto 45min late, information screens either off or showing incorrect information, missing out trains that have not yet arrived etc.

Edit: train ran out of fuel on single line according to a passenger announcement on an earlier train

Today,

24 February 2009
This train will be formed of 3 coaches instead of 6.This is due to an earlier train fault.

This is the 1008 from Charlbury, timetabled as an HST but quietly replaced by a 3 -car turbo to Oxford then coupled up at oxford to another turbo. Causes massive overcrowding as far as oxford, but looks like even the additional carriages not running today.

And an Adelante on the 11.22 to Malvern and 14.34 return.

What is going on with HST availabilty? Even when they have pulled two Cotswold train pairs, they still seem no better off.

Last time I checked, that is booked to be an Adelante. It then goes on to form the 17.51 to the Cotswolds.

So even the control room are confused as to what type of train is working which service. Who can blame them.

Given all FGW HSTs now have MTU engines are we now hitting one of those periods where a fault is beginning to show up as power cars exceed a certain mileage?

The problem with this type of fault is that you are so busy fixing units with the fault  you don't have time to correct the sets coming up to the trigger mileage before they too fail.

If it is the engines MTU must be in panic as their reputation for reliability could be at stake.

Lets hope the Turbos stand up to the extra work otherewise FGW is going to be in a mess.

eightf..what on earth are you going on about???........there is more to a class 43 power car than a mtu engine , as far as i am aware the mtu power plant is as reliable as ever,
there are a lot of things that can cause a train to be failed..,,no horn ,broken windscreen, cdl failure, hot box etc etc ,so dont naturally assume the power plant is always to blame

We now know the timetable for IEP roll out on the Western Region is summer 2016 so the HSTs have another 7 years service  :). They've done well up to now so lets hope it stays that way.

Good to hear it's not the MTU engine but there does seem to come a time with new or refurbished/re-engined  stock where faults start to creep in as mileage/time in service increases. I was speculating that the HSTs might be hitting that patch.

A classic case were the Hull Trains' Meridians, when they had 4 units for 3 diagrams they achieved one of the highest number of miles per 5 minute failure for DEMUs and DMUs. Once they were down to 3 units after someone carelessly dropped one on the floor without its bogies and wrote it off, the  milage per failure dropped dramatically, because they were doing more mileage/time in service per unit. 

This is what I don't understand. We still have MKI stock on the railway in the form of charters services and the Lymington - Brockenhurst EMU. These were made around the 1950's (do correct me if i'm wrong) and are nowhere near as safe as MKIII or even MKII. Soon they are going to be 60 ish years old, which I have to say is remarkable that they can still be used.

So why don't they reuse the HST's when the IEP comes into practice. Because if the IEP arrives in 2016 as Timmer suggests. HST's will only be 46 years old. Considering they are of a sturdy design, maybe again with new engines. we can get another decade of life out of them ;D

I read in another post somewhere that HST's can only work to 2019. Which if correct I think is wrong, simply because that would make the HST's 49 years old. Considering that as I've said above, MKI is still used on the railway at approximately 59 years old.

Not that I'm saying that is a bad thing at all. I just think that have MKI stock in use for a longer period of time (in total number of years on the railway) is an insult the superb design of the HST!

As a small idea mMaybe run a 6 Coach HST on the Portsmouth - Cardiff Line once we have the IEP, with the formation of:
43 - TGS - TS - TS - TS - TSC - TCD - 43
Which offers Disabled Access/Toilet, Catering and First Class. I personally think it would do rather well.

The date you were looking for is 2016 - which is when Alstom will stop supporting the HSTs' ATP system, so that would be the end for them on high-speed running without expensive new kit.

Nothing to say they couldn't go elsewhere but if, as posted in the Portsmouth-Cardiff area, most of the new batch of FGW DMUs are definitely going there, then that route's not going to be needing any.

The Mark 1 derived 4 CIG units were introduced in 2 phases, 1964 and 1970.  I'm not sure of the vintage of the 3 CIG Lymington vehicles, but they can't be more than 45 yrs old. 

...so actually given that the first production HST power car was delivered in late 1975 (that would be 43 002, still in use with FGW and one of the last power cars to be MTU-ified, fact hounds...) it's entirely possible that the CIG units in use on the Lymington branch are actually not much more than 5 years older than HST stock.

I'd never thought about it like that before.

I recall reading somewhere that the Lymington branch unit(s?) cannot carry passengers in service on a line where another service (more modern, heavier, stronger) stock is running, and have to run empty to / from depot.  Also the same thing is (I think) true of bubble car units, PPMs.   I think I can also remember seeing comments about final dates for use of certain stock types with an implication that those were final dates on lines shared with freight or newer stock and it may be perfectly acceptable for a 125 to be running from Bishop's Lydeard to Minehead in 2024 ... due to light railway orders, though, it might be called a "25" rather than a "125" by then  ;)

Nor do they have long left, take a trip down to Lymington whilst you can...

South West Trains axe is falling...

Graham is indeed correct, they may only carry passengers on the isolated Brockenhurst - Lymington branchline, this being due to them not having OTMR (On Train Monitoring Recorder), despite them having CDL fitted.

If I understood correctly. it's the crashworthiness of Mk 1 stock which precludes them running on the main line with pax. Similar situation with the Cardiff Bay Bubble and Aylesbury to Risborough unit.

As Mk 1s have separate underframes, I believe that there exists concern that body and frame could shear off, as at Clapham.  I am also pretty sure that the Mk 1s used by railtour companys have to have a non passenger carrying vehicle at either end of the train, preferably not another Mk1.  Lack of central door locking is also an issue.

What makes a Leyland National bolted to a freight hopper safe then  ;)

ATW have thought of that.  They only run Pacers on routes with other Pacers so they won't disintegrate even if they collide.  Leastways, that's my theory.   :)

What is the likelihood of this. >:(

I mean, it is 2 tph and connects with Wightlink. Surely useage can't be too low? ???

It's about time SWT handed the keys over.....

There was a pertinent question in the recent webchat, their answer suggested the units themselves might be retired prior to their next planned overhauls, but there is no suggestion that the branch service itself is under threat. IMX it is well used all day.

Paul

Quite high actually ;)

 :'(

Not to worry.

4CIG 1881 is being restored to full mainline working order not too far from Lymington ;)

You are 100% Spot On G.Uard ;D

With regards to the central door locking, either has to be fitted or an attendant at each vestibule with an exterior door.

Yesterday, Malvern to Paddington, Adelante forming the 1631 from Oxford was cancelled due to train failure. It was stationary at p1 Oxford with lots of announcements before crawling away into sidings.

Tonight at Paddington the departure of 17:15 to Swansea was announced as delayed due to mechanical problems. I see from Live Departure Boards that it eventually left at 17:44 and is now currently running 54 minutes late from Swindon. It looks like the 17:45 to Carmarthen has overtaken it!

I caught the 17:36 PAD-OXF Turbo (a 5-car 165 formation instead of a 6-car 166) in Platform 9 which was opposite the 17:30 to Taunton via Bristol TM in 8. The HST was still there with concerned looking FGW staff standing by it when we departed 2 minutes late at 17:38 but according to LDB it left shortly afterwards at 17:41.

According to FGW Live Updates the 18:00 to Bristol TM has been cancelled due to a train fault.

Not a good day again for FGW!

Was a bad day indeed.
It was the 17:48 Cheltenham that had the fault, and the set for the 18:00 was used on the 17:48 (which ended up leaving about 15 late) and the 18:00 as you say was cancelled.

I have a week's annual leave and look what happens. ::)

Oh heck, I have to go back tomorrow. :(

And the best-laid substitution plans continue to go awry. Today's 8.52 from Malvern to London was a three-car 165 - how long before it's a two-car? No sooner had the conductor announced there would be a slight delay opening the doors at Oxford due to coupling on to another set than he was back on announcing that there wasn't an extra set today. Glad I got off as there were lots of people waiting to board at Oxford. Still, it's not half-term any more, so who cares...

Following is a reply to an email I sent to FGW customer services about the extra Turbos:

"I can imagine your dismay at the change we have made to the type of train we provide to run our 09:50 service from Moreton-in-Marsh, especially the impact this had during half-term week. A considerable amount of research has been done to make sure that the capacity of a Turbo is able to cope with the average number of passengers who will use this service but of course we will of course continue to monitor this.

"I know you will remain disappointed but I hope you will come to understand our position".

No, I won't understand their position, especially when the loading in half-term and any other school holiday period is well above average, leading to the overcrowding and lousy travel experience for both regular passengers and the families on days out who FGW surely want to encourage to keep on using their trains in future. The bit of my email about this aspect of the situation was studiously ignored. They just don't seem to get it, do they?

Let's say that a fifty seater bus is provided from M to B and it loads with 40 people on Thursday and with 60 people on Friday.   "Considerable research" will tell you that it IS able to cope with the average number of people - 50.   But looking at the people travelling, you'll notice that 60% of them - well over a half - will have had a journey on a service that was unable to cope, and won't exactly be singing the praises of the bus operator!

Is this reply from Customer Services just flannel, or is it an honest admission that it's an accepted company policy to run trains that don't have the capacity to properly cope with the customers who wish to travel on up to half the days?

I have had similar replies from FGW customer services in response to a similar question. Lots of unhappy passengers from Charlbury/Hanborough especialy during half term week, but also yesterday (mid week during term time) when it was standing room only. Some of whom were paying for 1st class seats but told there were only 12 1st class seats so sorry, find yourself another one.

Why dont you ask them if they could make off-peak tickets valid on the previous train to ease the load on this one.  Part of the problem is that this is the first off peak train so will always be busy.  I like to see what their response would be !!!!

When I started on this route, off peak tickets were allowed on the 0842 to Paddington (now the 0835) but they were not allowed on the same train if you boarded at oxford. I think this was discontinued from approx 2004 when Thames were replaced by FGWLink.

The 0835 is already very overcrowded because they have delayed the first off peak train thereby moving customers from the offpeak to the peak! So no hope there I am sure.

Erm, is half term isolated to the Cotswolds line only?

As it so happened, the Cotswolds is the only line where turbos are able to be used. I travelled on a packed HST in Devon during half term, and if this was a turbo the overcrowding would have been astronomical. Clearly FGW is simply acting on what they can do. Which is not a lot!

The previous train is the Cathedrals Express, so is full and couldn't handle more passengers. As Ian says, we used to have a concession, but it went a long time ago. I think it was actually in the last year of Thames Trains, when they were the fare-setting operator for the route, even though the train involved was operated by FGW.

Of course half-term happens everywhere but until just days before, this train was an HST, and would have been able to offer a seat to everyone on board before Oxford and everyone beyond Oxford - instead of which it was an overloaded Turbo, which coupled to another full turbo at Oxford - and was, as I said previously, a lousy advert for train travel, even if it is operationally convenient for FGW, which I happen to believe is at the root of this change, not the passenger numbers.