Great Western Coffee Shop

I'm scratching my head.  Why should a suicide cause the halts train to not stop at the halts?  When is the next train ?  ;)

Looks like a train was provided from Oxford, not Reading depot, due to the line closure after a death on the tracks overnight at Culham. Looks like the only Turbo available was a three-car, which is not allowed to stop at these four stations.

I don't work 165/6s, but in the west, when using say 3 or 4 car sets which are too long for a platform, we board pax via the front local door, leaving the remaining doors locked shut.  (This occurs at Melksham and Avoncliff as a matter of routine).  I am surprised that this facility is apparantely not available/used??? on the turbos.  Would this be due to local rules or just a design difference?

0852 from Worcester to Paddington also cancelled until Oxford where it started. Bus for me this morning.

Because the Turbos are designed for DOO they don't have "local" doors as such: there are no guard's panels in the passenger saloon at all. When they run with guards the doors are operated by the driver who is under instruction from the guard using buzzer codes (similar to the Adelantes, I guess).

The only way round this would be for the guard to allow pax to board/alight via the rear cab door, but I don't know if this gets platformed when a three-car unit appears vice two-car. Clearly boarding and alighting through the driver's cab would not be an option.

Rules are rules and the rule here is that three-car sets do no stop at the Cotswold Line halts - though it does sometimes seem to get bent for Ascott, where the platform is about two and two-thirds coaches long.

Melksham/Avoncliffe type operation is also allowed on the Birmingham-Stratford-upon-Avon line, at The Lakes, I think, where the driver will get out and open the front pair of doors from the platform using the butterfly switch on the 150s that work the line. I assume the 172s for LM will have SDO to overcome this problem.

It's a silly situation and one that there is NO NEED to have in place on non-DOO trains like the Cotswold Line services. The Guard could quite easily locally open a door using the external butterfly handle after exiting the train via the back cab door. All that would be needed is a 3-car stop board off of the platform edge so as the driver would know where exactly to stop so the rear vehicle is on the platform. Operating instructions prevent this from happening though.

It was discussed quite recently in the following thread: http://www.firstgreatwestern.info/coffeeshop/index.php?topic=4309.0 (http://www.firstgreatwestern.info/coffeeshop/index.php?topic=4309.0)

Thanks for that  :)

I must get down and have a close look next time I see a Turbo at WOS

Strong rumours BTW that the Malverns are to be dropped by FGW West services from the May timetable.

They're showing on the journey planner for late May at the moment

That wouldn't surprise me in the slightest if that was to happen G.Uard as I have often wondered why 'West' services go that far since the days when this started under Wessex Trains.

They go that far because otherwise the unit would sit around at Worcester.  There is no requirement in the franchise but the cost of doing so is only fuel and wear and tear on the units.  Staff are already there.

Just checked and the National Rail website shows they are still running in May so that rumour must be false.

Out of interest why don't they lock the end carriage off and keep it out of use then run as a 2 coach train?

Steady on guys, I did say the demise of the West 'Malvern Link' ;D  was a rumour :)

I know that it is showing on the JP at the moment and also that the 'extension' was thought preferable to sitting in the sidings.  This section of line is covered pretty comprehensively by LM though and if as rumoured, their WOS-GCR services are retimed from May, we may yet see a change. 

Back in the depth of winter, I did moot the possibility of an Unfounded Rumours and Gossip section, (rather than just a thread).  The idea was that stories such as these could be posted and discussed as possibilities, not hard facts or done deals.  Many 'depot' rumours come to nothing, but others hold a grain, (or more), of truth.

That was discussed in the following thread Andy (from the 4th post onwards)... http://www.firstgreatwestern.info/coffeeshop/index.php?topic=4309.0 (http://www.firstgreatwestern.info/coffeeshop/index.php?topic=4309.0)

I don't know how long it takes to do Worcester - Great Malvern, although it would no doubt probably mean an incoming service can form the previous service at Worecester? (thus leaving some units spare)

It's about 18-20 minutes - but then you have to add at least 15 minutes for a time consuming ECS shunt to Malvern Wells. All in all if you have an hourly service you would save one unit having it turn round at Shrub Hill.

Hi II, thanks for the reference. I understood from that thread that all 3 carriages were in use with the last having the doors locked but still having passengers in it. I was thinking of not having passengers in that carriage at all so the train would run with only two carriages in use. This should satisfy H&S as the doors in the carriages that were in use would be fully operational.

But people don't want the trains to terminate at Shrub Hill, they want to get off at Foregate Street.

However, Foregate Street is congested, so they can't have trains turning around and waiting for hours, so they run them up to Malvern instead.

Sometimes the service coming back from Malvern "terminates" at Worcester Shrub Hill, waits for 30 mins, then goes South! :D

Having a run to Malvern and back in the timetable presents an opportunity to make up lost time by stopping short at Worcester.  An option used fairly frequently in years gone by (less so these days for some reason).  I've never understood why this service operates such long distances stopping at almost all stations, it's bound to get delayed somewhere along the route.  I'm sure that it will ultimately be replaced by LM's Worcester / Gloucester shuttle as I'd imagine that service is much easier to keep on schedule.

I see what you mean, but if the rear carriage locked out of use was the one with the emergency equipment in it then passengers would not be able to access that equipment in an emergency. That is enough to prevent it on H&S grounds.

Also, on the Cotswold Line Turbo services, because the driver operates the doors each time after receiving permission from the Conductor, the Conductor has to be positioned in the rear cab of the train to give the buzzer codes, and so every time he/she needed to move into the occupied part of the train, the internal doors would have to be unlocked and then locked again to allow them access. Cumbersome to say the least.

I remain of the opinion that I stated at the beginning of this thread as the best compromise to the problem.

Hopefully any new rolling stock will be designed to be more flexible, with SDO, or a door de-select feature (as on Chiltern's Clubmans).

Hear, hear. At least BR's 'built to a budget' approach shouldn't apply this time. I assume the view when the Turbos were being ordered was that since there would be two-car sets in the fleet intended to cover the Thames Valley branches and the Cotswold halts train, there was no need to bother spending money on fancy door systems for the three-car sets.