Great Western Coffee Shop

In my experience, Modern Railways articles seem to be fairly accurate when it comes to rolling stock allocations, so I thought the latest article might be of interest.

What the November issue is suggesting is that FGW are going to get 30 class 150 vehicles (ie 15 2 car units) from LM and LO, once 172 deliveries commence. Seems a useful number,  :)  but then comes the flip side... FGW to lose 4 x 150 back to ATW, 7 x 142s back to NT, the single 158 back to SWT, and 4 coaches of LHCS.

Net improvement therefore only 2 carriages, so FGW are [again] lobbying to keep the 142s...    :'(

Paul

Surely that works out to be a nil carriage gain if the proposed second set of LHCS also finishes next December?

As no 'West' drivers are going to be trained (or retrained) on locomotives, the LHCS is presumably seen as a short term fix to DMMU shortages and has no long term place at FGW.

Also from December SWT stop operating services west of Exeter, so FGW will need to cover these services.

Mark

First Great Western are hiring in a extra loco hauled set to cover for this as well as extending the 09:00 Cardiff - Taunton service to Plymouth.

I know that First Great Western  should be receiving at least 30 class 150 dmu's from London midland by the end of 2010 and should recieve 5 class 150 dmu's from London overground next may, although First Great Western will be sending the 5 class 150 dmus they have hired back to Arriva Trains Wales which should help now that Arriva are very short of trains, especially on the  Cardiff valley lines.  Finally  all of the clas 142 pacers will be heading back to Northern at the end of 2010 to boost capcity on services around Manchester

That's covered with the currently available stock augmented by a second  set of LHCS. So as it stands those services should still be covered, as MR are only suggesting return of the existing LHCS stock?

http://www.firstgreatwestern.info/coffeeshop/index.php?topic=5476.0 (http://www.firstgreatwestern.info/coffeeshop/index.php?topic=5476.0)

Paul

I'd exercise caution there. I don't think it's '30 DMUs' it's far more likely that's the number of DMU vehicles... Also MR suggest 30 vehicles from 'LM and LO' combined, not 30 from LM and another 5 from LO - unless you know different of course.  So call it 15 DMUs?

Paul

Mixture of two and three car sets totalling 30 vehicles. Some of the LM 150s run as three car trains formed with a 150/1 unit with a car from a 150/2 in the middle. They will be reformed into 15 two car trains which should release 7 x 142, 4 x ATW 150/2, 1 x SWT 158 and 2 x sets of LHCS. If the LHCS was seen as a long term fix, the unions would almost certainly demand the West drivers be trained (or retrained) to operate it.

If this is true, then they'll need to spend some time refurbing the centre driving cabs! Yes, they are locked out of use, but they are in a bad state, and many speedos show the wrong speed.

FGW would be better keeping them as 3 car units, and eliminating overcrowding on busy services.

Hmm.  If they are 'locked out of use', and running 'idle' in the middle of the unit, would they even be able to show the correct speed?

Some do. Others are wrong. I doubt ANY are reliable.

There's usually a sensor on the non driven bogie of the carriage, this may have been disconnected or removed. Either way it would be pretty simple and cheap to fix.

Axle 2 is the one that feeds the speedometer on a 150. I doubt the sensor has been disconnected as that would disable the wheelslip protection on the car and put the engine into permanent idle setting. Putting speedometer heads and any other controls / gubbins that may have been removed back in isn't exactly a major job.

Two of the LM sets are formed with loose DMS coaches from 150/2's which have had the DMSL cars written off in accidents so it would not be possible to reform these as a 150/2 two car set. Doesnt actually mean these cars are actually headed FGW's way. Neither of the original 150/0 sets are heading this way either.

Theres been some wibble about the sets being refreshed after they transfer but possibly retaining the 3+2 seating. 150121 / 127 presumably then get refreshed as part of this process.

The speedos are simply out of calibration, which just requires simple physical & electrical adjustments to correct.

From what i understand, the 'centre' cabs of the LM Hybrid 150/1-2 formations were in a bad state, but this has slowly been rectified over time and msot of the cabs are now pretty much in a servieable state. Regradless of if they are boxed in, the cabs of these vehciles will still be covered under the vehicle/units exam scheduale (as we still do on the FGW Hybrid 158/9s) and so should be kept in a 'hot' (ish) conditon, ready for use. [Often as a quick fix, components from the middle cab may be swapped out or robbed to keep the unit running, but every effot is made to restore/replace these components ASAP]. This is also a requirement under the vehicles lease contract that it is handed back in a fully serviceable conditon to its owners before being re-leased to FGW. If this is not carried out/possible, then the ROSCO will usualy take steps to recover the costs from the offending TOC, although prior agreements/exemptions could be in place.

I have also heard that there are plans to split the 3-car units down into their respective 2-car formations again. If this happens i think this will effectivley be a two steps forward, one step back situation for the West, as 3-cars would be a nice capcity boost to current peak services, and amongst many other things would potentially be a technical nightmare in terms of reliabilty of the 'boxed' cabs. I recall when the orginal Central Trains hybrid 158/9s were split up. Absolute nightmare.

Wessex Trains 158/9's surely? The drivers were expected to check over the cabs in the middle of the sets during prep and test the equipment in it in the same way as they did with the cabs at the ends of the sets. In practice the Wessex 158/9's never ran as three car sets for more than a few days as the extra coach was usually massively out of step in its maintainance programme compared with the other two. The inner cabs therefore never got a prolonged period of disuse.

Nah, in about 2004 or so, Central Trains made up some 3-car Hybrid 158s, i think they were classified 1589xxs but i could be mistaken. They had huge relaibilty problems with the units when they were split up again, as the 'boxed' cab equipment & systems had not been used or maintained for such a long period.

Just to clarify, i am not going insane LOL:

Heres a picture of CT 158953 back in 2004:

http://daves-trains.fotopic.net/p47773854.html

and 158956:

http://daves-trains.fotopic.net/p3533651.html

London Midland have 12 2 car 150s and 14 3 car 150s and London Overground have 5? 2 car 150s, so I don't think there are 30 150s unless the 3 car ones are spilt up.

Are FGW still going to get new DMUs as wasn't the decision of who gets the LM 150s partly dependant on who gets brand new DMUs?  But then the electrification stratergy has come in since and postponed any new DMU order.

TransPennine Express used 158s in that way when they got some 158s sub-leased from Central Trains to strengthen services.  (Not using a mixture of CT and TPE livered units though!) I think the Central Trains 158s that TPE had went to Northern via First Great Western and the TPE 158s were returned to their original formation before mainly go to South West Trains (and also East Midlands Trains and one or two to Northern.)

it is 30 vehicles FGW are getting not 30 units,i would stick money on FGW splitting them back to 2 cars you will probably find as part of lease LM will have to reform them bac to 2 cars anyway that way middle cabs will need putting back to spec

I'm sure I've seen one of the 3-car 150s with a cab-less centre vehicle. Don't see it often, I think its a one-off. I guess that one would have to stay as a 3-car.

Quite possible. The two prototypes, 150001 and 150002 were built as 3 car units, and they are still to be found trundling around on the London Midland network.

You have pretty much answered your own question there. Sadly no new trains for Cardiff-Portsmouth because of electrification but that is still quite sometime away so we could see overcrowding occuring more frequently on this route than is already seen despite strengthening trains to three vehicles.

easy to tell by a couple of differences apart from no cab,the front end looks like a 150/1 but the crew doors are same as 150/2

more commonly known as scud 1 and 2 because in the early days they would get where they needed but not back again

I always though that the moniker 'scud' referred to 158s.

For those that are interested (?!!) there's a nice list here (http://www.rodge.force9.co.uk/faq/nicknames.html) of the various nicknames applied to UK locos and multiple units.

Too much time spent at the end of platforms with me egg sandwiches and hooded kagool.....

They seem to have missed out one popular local nickname for class 153. Not sure its entirely suitable for this forum though.....
 ::)

Well...I think I know to whit you refer (although for the unitiated, maybe a heavily censored version?) but in the meantime lets stick with 'Super Bubble'

Hang on...

As far as 153s are concerned they're missing "skateboard" (obvious) and "coffin nail" (because, supposedly, when they turn up on your branch line you know it will get closed down soon...). Or indeed, with a nod to one of our members, "dogbox".

scud was originally coined for the 150/0's
prior to the refurb job they had scud1 and scud2 wrote in cab for years,done in marker pen by persons unknown,it may well have reappeared again

also missing the FGW staff name for 142's "Chuckle bus".

Wasn't another 3 car one formed after an accident?

I mean the number of 150s both FGW and Northern were due to get was dependant on how many 172s were built and where they went, not just the fact that FGW were getting some would mean no new 172 for them.  But then the electrification plan and future 319s to both FGW and Northern seems to mean less, if any, 172s will be built.

they did have some more 150's that were 3 cars and numbered as 003,006 etc,these were formed as 2 x 150/1 and 1x 150/2 same as the rest but were just assigned 150/0 numbers

Yep - not long after they were delivered, both 150209 and 150212 both had their DMSL vehicles written off.  So, in the current London Midland fleet, there are two vehicles without matching pairs should the decision be made to return all units to two-car sets - 57209 (currently formed in 150017) and 57212 (currently in 150016).

The latter's cab is operational as it was recently used as a driving vehicle when the set was reduced to two carriages for a short period.

Not sure if they can be paired together (technically) but if they can be, they'd need to be restricted to short journey diagrams as neither vehicle has a toilet.

All 150s... ho hum. I'd like to see a bit more variety.  Back in September I visited Kidderminster, I was hoping for a 158 up to Worcester, and maybe a 170 on the Midland portion.  Nope, it was 150s all the way there and all the way back.

158s and 170s haven't been used on the Snow Hill lines since the 150s were banned from the Lickely Incline. When this happened, all 158s and 170s were transferred to Lickely services, with the remaining 150s coming to the Snow Hill lines. Many Central Trains 158s were then swapped for Anglia 150s (which make up most of the 2 car LM 150s).

Umm....Lickey Incline (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Lickey_Incline)

We do not want 142s in North yorkshire...a complete insult to the carriage building community. I suppose they'll dump on the Harrogate line again, just to encourage them to vote for a tram line...though where that will land in York is anyone's guess...bah >:(

I'm sure you'd find plenty of people in FGW land who would be more than happy to keep them, especially after the sterling job Exeter depot has done fixing them up.

Is that a unanimous view from up there? As Inspector_blakey has pointed out, the Exeter folks are doing an excellent job of looking after the units, and if you don't want one of them, we'll keep it down here to run as follows:

Exeter - Yeovil Junction - Yeovil Pen Mill  - Westbury - Swindon (to arrive at 08:53)
Swindon (09:02) - Salisbury (10:17)
Salisbury (10:31) - Swindon (11:50)
Swindon (12:02) - Salisbury (13:17)
Salisbury (13:31) - Swindon (14:50)
Swidnon (15:02) - Salisbury (16:16)
Salisbury (16:24) - Swindon (17:36)
Swindon (17:55) - Westbury - Yeovil Pen Mill - Yeovil Junction - Exeter

Please let the folks of North Yorkshire know what a pleasure it will be for us to take a 142 off their hands, as it will provide a service for which there's a real need, irrespective of the model of train used.  ;D

Purely my view, based some hairy journeys between Hull and Selby...70mph: the link plate between the carriages waving up and down like a flag!
However I will canvass opinion from a couple of "Northern" friends. ::) 

Sorry but you won't find many amonst the staff. We were talking about putting up a countdown calendar (XX days to go) in the mess room at Exeter.

Personally I am just hoping that my spine does not turn to dust before the (now allegedly delayed) day of reckoning.

q

I am still stunned over how the LM 150s will be sent elsewhere when the 172s arrive. The 150s are clapped out and really should be replaced by a rolling DMU production line (basically, 172s) which would gradually eradicate all pre 158 sprinters and pacers, AND THEN CONTINUE to provide MORE carriages to allow for overcrowding relief and growth.

Sprinters can be more than useful and should be used in addition to new DMUs. Cascaded Sprinters can be used to increase capcity and frequency that are lower down the pecking order when it comes to investment. Good examples are rural lines in Wales that do not have a service or an inedaquate service or the obvious Transwilts line where these units could be vital for providing a service. You also have the potential benefit of Sprinters which can be used on the mainline being used by heritage lines to provide services to areas such as Minehead.

Simply saying sprinters should be scrapped ASAP in my mind is somewhat stupid as with a little thought there are many better uses for them than scrapping when they could be far from life expired. Please remember Btline that not every line has the luxury of a rail service and such units make it more viable for lines to have new services or a reintroduced services. After all running trains is not that expensive, it's the infrastucture and the purchaing of rolling stock that is expensive. If you have access to redundant rolling stock then there is a stronger financial case for improving services in what are areas usually overlooked when it comes otimproving the railways in their area.

An excellent very rational plan in theory. However, the DfT is scared stiff that if electrification ever takes off they will have a fleet of relatively new non life expired DMUs on their hands because they are no longer required on the electrified lines. Forgetting that if they are well enough built amd maintained they could be sold for export.

Of course in a recesion it would be a good idea to keep Bombardier fully employed. it's a pity all the other train makers in the UK were asset stripped on privatisation.


 I'll take 1000 days if you are having a sweep just to be optomistic.

Ok, the 150s have some time left in them. But not long. I have been on one that could only reach 50 mph. Remember that they have been banned from the Lickey ( ;D ) incline. With a stop at Old Hill (on the Snow Hill line into B'ham) they can only just make it up the gradient outside the station. I have been on one 150 where several attempts were made before our net movement was forward! Others have gear problems, others have fumes coming into the passenger saloons, etc

So I am not trying to deprive others of potentially useful vehicles, but just being realistic about their use. They've clearly had next to no maintenance for some years, and have only started being cleaned regularly since LM took over!

So yes, they should be used on, say, the Transwilts next year. But in the long run they need to be replaced.

As for 153s, they can't keep to 150 timetables (LM have been there and tried that.... they lost the t-shirt), so there would be a problem of stock subs.

They are fine if maintained correctly, can't say the fgw fleet is falling apart.

150's are about the best units for hill climbing, so in your above scenario a 153 wouldn't even get halfway, the bank between Exeter St Davids and Central is just as bad, probably worse, and everything manages fine!
The 150's have still got about 10 years before they are life expired, so long as they give them a decent refurb they'll be fine!

Hmm, obviously ex Central 150s are not like ex Wessex ones!

Current and previous maintenance regiemes can make a world of difference. Remember the life expired pacers that ended up in Exeter? Not the best units in the world but justlike anything, with some good old elbow grease and TLC they are not that bad anymore. Not ideal by any standard but when the alternative is less or even no services then a pacer or sprinter will win hands down. Just look at the post by Graham in another topic showing how just one unit could provide a service and would be welcome compared to another poster who wold be glad not to have the pacer anywhere near their part of the network.

As I pointed out about a month ago elsewhere, the fundamental problem with the state of the West Midlands 150 fleet is that from the day LM ordered the 172s, they have done the minimum of maintenance on the 150s, just about enough to get them out of Tyseley depot each morning, hence the terrible state they are in - and with the delays to the 172s, the state of decline of these 150s only gets worse.

Other operators, FGW included, who know they are going to need at least another decade of service out of their 150s, look after them.

FGW's problem is that they are probably going to have to put some, if not most, of the LM sets they get straight into traffic to replace those DMUs going back to other operators, without the full mechanical and internal overhaul they so desperately need.

Central's maintenance was no better! There were more breakdowns, etc before 2007!

I was told by a pretty high-up FGW manager type today that FGW want rid of the 142s asap, so any delay will be as minimal as possible.

So...can we not have the damn things in Yorkshire please? >:(

Read that FGW has reached an agreement to recieve 30 class 150 vehicles from London Midland and London Overground in June 2010 which will all go through a refurbishment programme as part of the transfer process which will be a mixture of class 150/1 sets without end gangway doors and class 150/2 units with the doors.Some of the units are currently part of hybrid 3 car class 150/1 and 150/2 LM combinations.Simultanenously FGW will stop leasing 4x2 car class 150/2s from Arriva,7x2 car class 142s from Northern Rail and 1x2 car 158 from SWT as well as ceasing to use a 4 coach loco hauled set,so a net gain of just 2 vehicles.

Thanks for that, Woody.

Are you able to quote / refer to a source for those details? (I'm not doubting you for a moment, but it would be useful to know) :-[

Looks very much like what was said in the current issue of Modern Railways, referred to right at the start of the thread.

And I doubt they will get them in June 2010 - that was when all LM's sets were due to be delivered but with delays to Electrostar orders at Derby, after some of Bombardier's suppliers went out of business, work on the 172s is likely to be running late too.

Touche, willc - my apologies.

At least FGW are almost bound to get their 150s before Northern though. There is always the 'southern conspiracy' aspect of DfT's plans to consider... ;D

Paul

  Thats the source usually quite reliable.

Northern get 7 x 142 back in a far better condition than they were when they were fetched off their seagull poo infested sidings and sent West as of December 2007. What more do they want?
 ;D ;D

Should send them to Canton first, I'm sure Arriva must need to stock up on spare 142 parts ;)

My high-up management type person in FGW also confirmed this was the plan as things stand.

Hmm. I'd suggest it's well worth keeping in contact with that phufmtp, Donkey Guard! ;)

One for the Acronyms and Abbreviations (http://www.firstgreatwestern.info/acronyms.html) page? ;D

No, it's just another 'mouse hover' situation.  ;D

 ;D..... it was fate that our paths crossed and one of things we were talking about were DMU cascade, unfortunately not likely to cross again in the forseeable future.

I shall miss 142001. It's become quite a friend over the last couple of years. It's been raided for parts and christened 'scrapheap challenge' by the fitters yet still it bounces along, lurching from side to side and up and down as it trundles along the barny line. I think we should keep it and mount it on a plinth at the entrance to Exeter St Davids, rather like they put spitfires at the entrance to RAF bases. If the spitfire saved Britain then the 142 saved FGW,sort of, maybe...

Sounds like a great idea to me!  ;D  It is the pioneer of the fleet after all!

Or maybe it could retire to here (http://drupal.thedonkeysanctuary.org.uk/), just up the road in Sidmouth.

just at the top of trow hill so everyone sees it

Bangs and rattles even more at one end since the Winsford Mods have been done to it....

Perhaps we should give them to Stagecoach? Would supplement their clapped out bus fleet nicely.

I would buy them if I had the line inplace to sidmouth! I would even lease a couple to the melksham project :-) ok now I just need about 100 mil for my 8 mile branch line and stations

 Also known as Sh1tbox number 1

Mil? That's far too cheap. I would say at least 100 bil - this is a small scale project!

i didnt cost in the rolling stock... how much would a bus with no steering wheel set me back?

Northern didn't touch the 142s that went to FGW as it was their plan at the time to get 142s replaced with larger units ASAP.  They now realise ASAP may not be for another few years and with ever increasing passenger numbers in the North they need to hang on to the trains they currently have even if they get cascaded trains from elsewhere.  Hence, the the ex-First North Western 142s with Northern have mostly been repainted and had replacement seat covers, meaning the ones at FGW are more likely to be in worse conditions as it's likely FGW will spend as little possible on repairs and maintainence over the next year.

you've obviously not been on an FGW one then, now have been internally repainted, new seat covers, de-fleaed, mushrooms removed and they actually go more than 7 feet without failing now! no doubt when Northern get them back they will soon be bodged back to how they were like the rest of the Northern fleet!

No disrespect to Northern... But whenever I travelled on one of their 142's... The toilets were never in a usable condition >:( having said that... the rest of their fleet doesn't fair much better either... certainly a case of wait till the connecting LM Desiro :D

No i've not been on a FGW one but was aware of the interior refurbishment.  I didn't say FGW had done nothing on the 142s I said it's unlikely they'll spend a lot on 142s if they're set to lose them next year.  I was meaning if something goes wrong and a repair will last for 6 months but a replacement part would last for years I doubt FGW will get the replacement part.

As far as I'm aware the FGW refurb is to the same sort of standard as Northern have refurbished their 142s to- the difference being the blue North Western Trains seat covers on the Northern 142s have been replaced by purple seat covers, rather than seat covers in a First Group dynamic lines style and FGW haven't used the nasty dusky pink colour paint that Northern used.

They will go back in a far better condition than when "donated" by Northern

Sorry to divert the subject, but it is back to original topic:

Just to clarify, i was informed several weeks back that we are only getting 2-car 150/1s from LORL/LM, no 3-car hybrid 150/1/2s are planned to come to FGW land and they will presumbly be sent elsewhere or split up somehow.

Been told that for a fleet that most people expected to have been run into the ground, the LM 150 fleet are actually in quite a good state overall.

Interesting times ahead, we always like a new Challenge at the wests premier Bus depot!  ;D ;)

Hadn't realised you had transferred to 83C.......
 ;D :D

Sprog - I've been away, so sorry if this info has already been posted, but can you tell me how many 2-car 150/1s you are expecting?

You've been told wrong.

No offence but it is highly likely that Sprog has access to more reliable information so is more likely to know the condition of the units so the maintenance team know what to expect

As FGW are already running ex Silverlink Metro 150s, presumably that gives them a fair idea of the state of the other (now LO) units anyway?

Paul

Maybe so, but from a passenger's point of view....

??????

To say they are in a good condition, from a passenger's point of view, is just wrong!

A unit could be a right bag of spanners mechanically but nicely maintained in the passenger saloon. Alternatively, it could be an absolute dump "upstairs" but mechanically completely sound...

Well folks, shock horror, btline and I are in agreement on this one. The LM 150s are some of the sorriest DMUs out there at the moment. FGW's Turbos may be tired internally, but they don't try to shake themselves to bits accelerating away from a stop, which the LM sets I seem to encounter whenever I travel between Stratford and Birmingham do.

And most of the 150s coming FGW's way will still be coming from LM - there are only six sets left in London since FGW acquired two of the eight Silverlink used to operate. The LO sets are a small fleet looked after by the same people on the same depot every night - rather like Exeter's efforts with 142s and 143s. The LM sets don't get the same degree of tlc, just enough work to keep them running until the 172s turn up - and it shows.

Have been told 30 vehicles, equating to 15 units.


They will receve an internal re-fresh when or shortly after they transfer to FGW.


Indeed. Nail + Head.


The LM DMUs, whilst looking shabby & dated internally, are in pretty good conditon in terms of overall mechanical conditon (including reliabilty Modifications/Upgrades they have recieved), remaining Component life (eg.Bogies/Wheelsets, Engines, Transmissions etc.) and the standard of maintenance the vehicles have recieved over time. Unless im being strung a pack of lies of course!!

The LOROL sets are also tired interanlly, but less advanced in terms of Mods etc., but as pointed out by Will, they have had the advantage of being part of a small fleet that is maintained by a sole depot, formerly Bletchley & now Willesden.

But as I've been said before, they struggle to get up gradients. They are already banned from the Licky (whatever the spelling) Incline.

Some can go no faster than 50 mph. The driver said, "she'll only go as fast as she'll go"!

If that equates to "good mechanical condition", what is bad condition?

Thanks for that info, Sprog  :)

 :D The 150s are hardly the most powerful units.

Seriously though, the Lickey is a very notorious & challanging incline even for most of the rolling stock that uses it. Voyagers arnt officially allowed to attempt it if they have more than 1 engine out and they are kicking out 750HP per car.

I'm not going to be drawn into an argument with you about the maintenance standards of units!

There are always going to be good'uns and bad'uns in any fleet and it is on a very individual basis. You appear to be looking at things on a very 2D basis.

In the bigger picture, the vehicles major components like Engines, Transmissions, Bogies, Wheelsets etc. the LM 150s are well maintained with good remaining component lifes on alot of the fleet. This is the sort of thing that is looked at when assessing a fleet of trains, not if the seat covers are stained/lighting is dingy etc. The fleet has also recieved numerous reliabilty Mods to systems and components that ensure the fleet is up to current standards with DfT/group standards etc.

If you want an example of Bad condition, take a look at some of Northern's DMU fleet or think back a few years to when FGW (and SPM!) first took on the ex-Wessex DMUs from the clutches of Arriva Cardiff Canton. :o

My last post on the subject ;)

I believe all the LM units are maintained at the same depot aren't they? Tyseley? Lets not forget the thrashing that the LM 150's have been subjected to over the years, ALL 150's are banned from Lickey, not just LM ones!

And without recourse to the UN. I'm impressed ;D

It might not have gone to the UN but I'm guessing there was some midnight oil burnt at ACAS  ;)

I point blank refuse to use them.

To get to Brum i have the option of a 30 minute drive and then 40-50 minutes on one of those things

Or a five minute drive and then 30 minutes to shrewsbury following by 40 minutes to brum.

Arriva get my business hands down.

London Midland units must be awful then  :o

The 150s are!

When I was going via Newport I dreaded when an arriva 150 showed up ludlow to newport.......was actually a whole heck of a lot better than the LM ones

Very true, as when Anglia 150s were brought to CT (swapped for CT 158s), they weren't allowed on the Licky incline either. The ban was around 2003/4. So it just goes to show that they as a class are clapped out. Combine that with the woeful maintenance from both CT and LM, then I can't see them lasting, unless they are given some serious TLC.

Although I am no fan of them, I don't avoid them like FA - I consider that too far. The only time they are unbearable, is when it is hot, and they are packed. That's why I feel sorry for commuters to B'ham in the summer. The line from Kidderminster is Birmingham's MOST OVERCROWDED commuter line, and yet it has not been electrified, and the 172s will reduce seats by 10 in each coach (with 1 fewer vehicles as well). Not fair! Although they are well overdue, and they'll be more comfortable.*

*EDIT: Looking at the stats, LM 172s will have, on average, fewer seats per coach than CH 168s! So FA, you'll have plenty of tables!

i will have my 2 pennies worth now!

agreed the lm 150's are tired inside but why would a toc do anything to upgrade them when a new fleet is on its way?
the maintenance they get from tyseley is to a better standard than spm or any other dmu depot for that matter and despite the fact they have a new fleet on the way the existing stuff still needs maintaining to the same group standards.

sprog
i agree the ex wessex 150 fleet was tired internally when they arrived from canton but reliability wise they were better then as exeter did all the exam work.now they are fine inside but reliability has suffered since maintenance was transferred to spm.
maybe you could shed some light on to why this is the case,time constraints when doing exams over night for example?

as for the lm fleet only doing 50mph that is a load of rubbish,maybe it could happen on the odd occasion but the set would soon be pulled from service and repaired as the fines for delays would cripple them.
i would hazard a guess and say if you looked at the 150 fleet performance across all tocs then lm's fleet would fair quite well as they have had a lot of reliability/improvement mods over the years

Firstly - you live in Kiddie so for you to drive to ludlow to avoid them would be insanity - I'm closer to ludlow than you

You\re only viable option to avoid them is to drive to WOS and use the WOS-Bromsgrove-university route - which would probably take longer!

By the time I drive from clee hill to kiddie, park, wait for the clapped out 150, sit on a seat with no padding etc etc - its only about an extra 20 minutes door to door to go ludlow to brum via shrewsbury

To be fare - when I work IN london as opposed to Thamed valley - its only the LM 150 issue that keeps me loyal to FGW.

First, I didn't say ALL the fleet did. But I have been in the cab of one that did. The driver was not surprised and indicated that it was not rare.

But I have been on plenty (almost all) where 75 was reached.


I most certainly do not, at least 2 miles away! (although I take your points)

But will you switch to VT and LM to go to London post 172s?

You may not be aware that while Arriva Trains Wales and First Great Western have 150s with 2+2 seating and some tables, London Midland and Northern Rail have units with 3+2 seating and no tables.

it was moreof a dig at Arriva  :D

One month on from my post that started this thread, the latest Modern Railways (Dec edition) now suggests that FGW will not get any of LO's 150s, these 6 will now go to EMT.

Often these switch rounds are all about sorting out the stock into similarly lifed batches, or making sure a particular TOC has economies of scale in dealing with only one ROSCo, so it isn't that significant I guess.

Paul

Seems an odd move, bearing in mind FGW already have 2 x ex Silverlink / LOROL 150/1 on the books. Perhaps the balance of 150 vehicles to make up the 15 x 2 car sets will come from London Midland instead. Certainly 15 x 2 car is the minimum required to replace the current selection of subleased unit / locohauled tat currently in use.

Latest news according to the Bristol evening post is that the London overground class 150's are going to East Midlands Trains.

So is that instead of the 6 156s EMT were supposed to be getting from Northern or could it be the 6 150s go to Northern and the 6 156s still go to EMT.

I think if EMT are going to get anything from Northern they should get back the 158 centre cars not 2 car 156s, which go around overcrowded in the North West.  The middle 158s were supposed to be for York-Blackpool but Northern just use them on any service serving Leeds.  It would certainly be diastrous for Northern to downgarde the North West 156 diagrams to 150, they already did that with the 158 diagrams from the First North Western area when they sent all the 158s to Leeds Neville Hill depot.

I think the Modern Railways story suggests that more 2 car units is the preference so that some of the 158s currently in use on diagrams 'other than Liverpool - Norwich' can be transferred onto that route, but they'll then operate with joining and splitting at Nottingham.  This is probably more beneficial than having 3 car trains that are pretty empty as they head through East Anglia.

Paul

As I posted here last week, based on Modern Railways' article.  Note how the paper gets it completely wrong by suggesting that all 15 units (30 vehicles) were coming from LO, who only have 6 in use...

Paul

Here is a link to the Bristol Evening Post article that anthony215 is referring to:
http://www.thisisbristol.co.uk/news/Great-Western-loses-train-carriages/article-1567430-detail/article.html

This is th 116thpost on thread.

Have any DMU cascades taken place yet?

The DafT seem to be trying to make too few DMUs run too many servcies. Hence the chopping and changing of who gets what.

Lets go back to the original plan and build lots 172s and if there is no work for them after the electrification of certain lines  they can be used to replace the Pacers which can be scrapped.

With the best will in the world it will be a very long time before every strectch of line in England Scotland and Wales is wired up. There should be at least 30 work for any new DMUS unless we don't have any branch lines in 30 years.

The cascade we are discussing will be triggered by the new build of 172s for LM, LO and Chiltern. Although this was first proposed nearly 2 years ago, it was not planned to occur until 2010. That is the main reason why it hasn't happened yet, surely?

Paul

172 production is about 5 months behind schedule and counting. And this is before LM / LOROL get one out on test, find the ZF lorry transmission is an abject disaster and order some sort of Voith T211r (preferably T311r) to be retrofitted. Shouldn't hold your breath waiting for DMU's to start moving round the country just yet..........
 ;)

The message in that article seems very mixed up.  PTEs only involve themselves with local journeys not regional or express services and EMT's Liverpool-Manchester-Sheffield-Norwich service does not come under PTE categories. 

In the case of Merseyside the PTE, Merseytravel, are involved with Merseyrail and Northern Rail. London Midland who run Liverpool-Birmingham, TransPennine Express who run Liverpool-Scarborough and East Midlands Trains who run Liverpool to Norwich are not involved with Merseytravel.

I don't know where the idea that PTE's can get what they want comes from.  West Yorkshire Metro have been successful in doing that to get 158s and 333s, but Merseyside is stuck with a load of 1970s 507/508s and mid 1980s 142s and 150s.

So basically what everyone is saying is that until the first 172s start revenue earning and prove reliable there will be no cascade. 

So where the displaced units might go is is still speculation.

Speculation? - only in so much as it is based on the original rolling stock plan, which read 'First Great Western would introduce additional class 150 DMU vehicles for regional services around Bristol cascaded from London Midland'. 

Nobody has ever seriously suggested that isn't happening, it's the bit that refers to new units for LTV services that is looking like it's been completely cancelled.

Paul

so when are we loosing the old buses (142) then

Was it really two years ago...

No, it was two years and twenty days  ;)

Oh it must be the 143 then I see around the place, But I am sure I travelled on one last month

Lease currently runs until June 2010 I believe... (although that is not technically answering your question  ;))