Welcome to the forum Poggs 

The train is fairly lightly used south of Westbury for the reasons you mention.

In the past the train was ran with a Fratton crew from Westbury to Southampton on the way down and a Westbury crew on the way back. Today however, the train has a Westbury crew in both directions.

I suppose as the train originates from Cheltenham, it provides a handy through service.

Did this train ever stop at Dean or Dunbridge in the Wessex Trains days? If it did, that may well explain how it came in to being.

It's worth noting that Swansea will be served by an additional service to Cardiff and Newport post electrification, with the current Cardiff to Taunton service becoming a Swansea to Bristol EMU^▸ (Electric Multiple Unit) service.

Whilst not additional seats to Paddington, there will be a good number of seats remaining for local journeys.

It's the Clapham depot way of saying the train has been prepped.

Curiously the Conservatives managed 36% of the vote at the 2010 election, which taking in to account the 65% turnout means only 23.4% of the electorate actually voted for them.

What's good for the goose...

Can't point out a public announcement, but I can confirm staff have been told of the September rebrand. There are currently depot roadshows this week and next about the plans.

The only FGW^▸ (First Great Western) DMUs^▸ (Diesel Multiple Unit) with SDO^▸ (Selective Door Opening) are the class 180s.

For the rest of the FGW DMU fleet the only form of SDO is to physically lock shut the rear carriage(s) or for the guard to just open the local door (I.E. the one they are stood at).

Bobm, there is still a position light on the signal. It is now integrated into the main signal head, that's all.

The location of the telephone is a moot point as the majority of calls will be made using the GSM-R^▸ (Global System for Mobile communications - Railway.) radio, and of course trains should be stopped short of the signal anyway, so if anything the walk for the driver is a shorter one 

That's funny. Last time I flew by plane there was a pilot, co-pilot and six cabin crew. I make that 8 people resonsible for mine and a much smaller number of passenger's safety.

If you read my posts carefully,  you'll note I said drivers operating train doors isn't safer.

Comparing train door operation with bus door operation is laughable.

A bus usually has one door (perhaps sometimes two or even three at most). The door is right next to the driver on a bus. The rear door(s) are very close to a bus driver. On modern buses the rear door has a camera showing ONE image on one screen. The consequences of tripping on entering or exiting a bus door are less severe than on a train door. The bus driver can see inside their bus to know if there is anyone taking a longer time to get off. The bus driver has a wider field of vision outside the bus to see who is approaching. The bus might have 90 passengers at a push, the train could have ten times this number.

No, I don't think it is a fair comparison really.

If only this were true.

Has any DOO project ever resulted in any of the above? I wish I could think of a scheme where it has. But it hasn't.

I really do dispare to read of comments from people who seem to be perfectly comfortable with the thought of travelling at 125mph with hundreds of others with just ONE safety critical person responsible for their safety. And further more, this safety crtical person has to sit in the most venerable position in the train. Bravo.

There's no reason why there can't be. I'm sure in the fullness of time there will be across the network.

It just requires the additional hardware and expense to do so.

The SDO^▸ (Selective Door Opening) system employed on Electrostars doesn't prevent doors being opened out of course.

I know SWT^▸ (South West Trains) have installed balaises on the track for their Desiro fleet which are supposed to prevent any unplatformed doors from opening but trials have not gone well and the system is not used yet.

At least you had an opportunity to shout a warning. You wouldn't have had the same luck if a driver was in their cab with the window shut, would you?

Yes and no. FGW^▸ (First Great Western)'s policy for announcements made by the driver is summarised

No if:
* You are braking for a station stop
* You are running on cautionary signals
* You are between Kensal Green and Paddington

Yes if:
* None of the above apply and you feel it is safe to do so

Sometimes there might be an enthusiastic driver or a guard travelling in the back cab who might make an announcement(s) on behalf of the driver.

You can't use the cab to cab or make/answer a call to the signaller (unless an emergency) if you are running on cautionary signals or stopping for a station either.

These rules, whilst protecting drivers from distractions, make it difficult for drivers to pass on service disruption information to passengers.

As a driver (and in my career I've worked both DOO^▸ (Driver-Only Operation (that is, trains which operate without carrying a guard)) and non DOO services), I'm afraid it is a total myth that drivers controlling door operation is in any way quicker than a guard. It certainly isn't any safer.

Look at London Overground. They recently went from conventionally crewed trains to DOO.

Did it improve PPM^‡(resolve)? No.
Has time been saved from the timetable?  No.

So why doesn't driver control of doors save any time?

Say you are controlling the doors on a train by CCTV^▸ (Closed Circuit Tele Vision). You need the camereas to have good lighting, be clean and no sun glares (also the monitor). You have to check 5, 9 or 10 small squares of image at once, not as easy as just looking along a platform.

What about platform mirrors? No room for error when stopping. They are exposed to the elements. They get vandalised. They're not even safe from Network Rail putting fences in the way (as happened at two stations). They offer a poor view the further away from the cab.

What about platform CCTV? The worst of both of the above plus add monitors that are hard to read from an angle.

As a driver with the above challenges,  you can't rush the doors.

In fact, you can't rush releasing the doors because you need to make sure the train is fully platformed and the doors on the correct side are to be released. No time saved there by the driver doing the doors.

So I strongly disagree with anyone that argues drivers controlling door operation will some how speed it up.

On DOO routes you then have "irregular door releases" where due to the repetitive nature of driving you get a train stop and the driver releases the doors even though the train isn't at a station. Sure these events are rare, but it is a risk that doesn't exist when the guard does the doors.

There's also the customer service side of things. As a driver doing the doors, you're doing so from the driving cab. You have a narrow field of vision. You might not be able to see who might need help on the platform. Any time you have to leave the cab you are supposed to tell the signaller first, which slows things down. People get left behind or over carried.

So please excuse me if I am less than thrilled at the thought of guards losing control of train door operation.

To some of us this news about WCRC is not surprising at all.

I'll be careful about saying much more until the RAIB^▸ (Rail Accident Investigation Branch) have done their work.