Hull Trains have got better, although not perfect, reliability from the 180s
That would be why their service melted down earlier in the summer and the md got the bullet, would it? And why they have five 180s to cover a service that needs three sets in traffic plus one maintenance spare?
Thus far, none of the firms now using 180s has got to grips with the things that used to go wrong while
FGW▸ were operating them. They just stuck them straight into service.
While Grand Central has one in a nice new livery, it hasn't had any reliability modifications yet. They are only going to start this work with the next set that they put into service. And Northern won't be doing anything, since they only have their borrowed trio for another year.
I said better reliability than FGW not an excellent level of reliability. They had 7 222s replaced by 5 180s. 180113 has been refurbished and Hull Trains claim they are looking at increasing the frequency of their service once all units have been refurbished.
But it wasn't better - it was just as bad, or worse. I don't call days when you basically fail to operate much of your service - which was what happened a great deal of the time in early July - better than FGW, which always had a tatty turbo up its sleeve in such cases. Remember,
HT▸ borrowed an FGW
HST▸ at weekends, so bad was 180 availability at this time.
Just like the first Grand Central set out there, HT's 180113 had a basic internal refurbishment and coat of paint, it did not get the rewiring, engine and transmission overhaul, improved buffet, first class moved to one of the driving cars or any of the other things they have planned longer term.
And HT had only four 222/1s, hence the problems they had after one of the four fell off jacks in the depot and took an eternity to rebuild - it never ran for them again and went straight to
EMT» from Crewe.
Click on the map to explore geographics
