Class 180s return to the Cotswolds

[whole diary]

[bathgreenpark9f]

Whats the situation with bikes on the train now 180s have (almost!) taken over the evening halts service?. Used to regularly catch the turbo back to Malvern from stations west of Ascott but perceived possible difficulty with bikes has made us stop doing it, eg at Honeybourne, Ascott and Shipton for example only one of two van areas is platformed so if its full...!
But can understand fully the need to have the 180, have often passed the halts service waiting for the single line at Wolvercote as a passenger on the 15.13 from Hereford, always looked very cosy in a turbo!!

[IndustryInsider]

Whats the situation with bikes on the train now 180s have (almost!) taken over the evening halts service?.

Well, it remains a bit of a risk.  A lot depends on the weather and the time of year.  A wet, windy, January day like today and you'd have no problem.  Fast forward to a lovely sunny June day and (unsurprisingly) the bikes start to come out of the woodwork.  If you're joining at stations further down the line, then you'd be OK 99% of the time as most bikes usually come off at station between Hanborough and Charlbury.  But if you were joining at Oxford wanting to go to Hanborough, or joining at Hanborough wanting to go to Moreton then it's much more of a lottery.

[Richard Fairhurst]

Agreed. As a regular bike traveller I avoid the up halts train - between Oxford and Charlbury it's quite likely to be full.

[Worcester_Passenger]

I've just waved someone off on the 12:08 from Shrub Hill to Paddington. Once again, a 3-car Turbo instead of a 180.

And this morning I noticed on 'JourneyCheck' that the 08:26 arrival into Foregate St had been started from Oxford as a result of a train fault - so that was probably a Turbo as well.

Are any of the 180s working today?

And why doesn't replacing a 5-car train with a 3-car train get to be displayed on JourneyCheck's 'Train Formation Updates' section?

[IndustryInsider]

Are any of the 180s working today?

2 out of 4 diagrams covered today.  180102 hit a tree earlier in the week and has been out of action since, so presumably stopped for damage repair.  Not sure about 103/4.

[Worcester_Passenger]

Thanks for that. Perhaps they just don't like me.

[Southern Stag]

And why doesn't replacing a 5-car train with a 3-car train get to be displayed on JourneyCheck's 'Train Formation Updates' section?

FGW^▸ (First Great Western) used to put all formation changes on but the policy changed a while back as part of a national initiative to improve information provision. Now only peak time short formations are shown, and possibly if it's a severe reduction in capacity as well I believe. Presumably the idea is to reduce the number of messages given out so people don't have to filter through so many which are irrelevant to them.

[IndustryInsider]

FGW^▸ (First Great Western) used to put all formation changes on but the policy changed a while back as part of a national initiative to improve information provision. Now only peak time short formations are shown, and possibly if it's a severe reduction in capacity as well I believe.

Probably a fair enough decision to make, though I would argue that Turbos replacing 180s should still be shown on the basis that it's a severe reduction in quality.  If I was intending to buy a 1st Class ticket I certainly wouldn't if I knew a Class 165 was about to come round the corner.  And whatever ticket you have, it would be nice to know in advance that your reserved seat counts for nothing.

[Southern Stag]

Yeh, it would be good if they were shown. The large number of west short formations that used be shown was quite overwhelming, but it was also useful.

[CLPGMS]

And whatever ticket you have, it would be nice to know in advance that your reserved seat counts for nothing.

I really cannot understand why FGW^▸ (First Great Western) is creating this situation by reserving seats on services which are diagrammed for Class 180 stock.  In pocket timetable 19, the only services which have the "Seat reservations available" symbol are HSTs^▸ (High Speed Train).

[Worcester_Passenger]

I really shouldn't have raised the question of this week's performance - today, the 05:48 Paddington - Foregate St gave up at Slough "due to a train fault". But hasn't been replaced with a Turbo, just cancelled for the rest of its journey.

[IndustryInsider]

I really shouldn't have raised the question of this week's performance - today, the 05:48 Paddington - Foregate St gave up at Slough "due to a train fault". But hasn't been replaced with a Turbo, just cancelled for the rest of its journey.

An ATP^▸ (Automatic Train Protection) fault was the reason it only got as far as Slough.  An empty Turbo went forward from Oxford to Worcester to form the return working.  Not sure why it ran empty - perhaps a Train Manager issue?  Another unit failed on the depot first thing, but has been patched up to cover OC502 from 12:21, so that's four 180s allocated at the start of service, resulting in only 2.75 diagrams actually getting covered.   

[Southern Stag]

And some great news for those lucky passengers on the 11:20 London-Great Malvern and the 14:26 return. No toilet facilities are available. Presumably a Turbo, as all the toilets being out of use on a 180 seems a little unlikely.

[IndustryInsider]

No toilets for a round trip of 250 miles?  I'm surprised the TM^‡(resolve) would take it unless the problem only developed after Oxford?!   

[CLPGMS]

Presumably a Turbo, as all the toilets being out of use on a 180 seems a little unlikely.

It was a rather grimy 165111.  Toilet stops were made at Moreton-in-Marsh and Evesham stations, both of which were staffed this afternoon.