15.51 Paddington to Worcester Shrub Hill

[whole diary]

[stebbo]

Oh, b.....y football, please spare us from the curse of roundball.

[a-driver]

15:51 Paddington to Worcester was a nightmare yesterday. A 3 car Turbo for what used to be a busy HST^▸ (High Speed Train) then more recently a choc-ful Adelante. Absolutely ridiculous. Between Reading and Hanborough it was, as they say, "rammed". Why can't FGW^▸ (First Great Western) re-juggle the diagrams so as to switch an Adelante to this service - it's always very busy?

An 3-car 165 Turbo actually has more standard class seats that a 5-car Adelante..... appreciate it doesn't make it acceptable but it's boils down to either a Turbo or a cancellation.

The Adelante failed on the inward working to Paddington thus meaning it wasn't possible to switch it with anything other than a Turbo.  I don't think there is ever an occasion during the day when two Adelantes are in the same location (I might be wrong) which again makes switching them over so one works the 1551 almost impossible.
The Adelantes leave the depot at around 0400 in the morning and return at about 2300.  They are in use pretty much all day long.  There isn't much scope, if any, for re-diagramming them without affecting night time refuelling and maintenance or ending up with them in Paddington for evening rush-hour services.

HSTs were given lifetime extension work to keep the running to around about this period.  The government had promised First that new trains and additional capacity would in place by now meaning HSTs would start to be withdrawn.  This obviously never materialised thanks to he governments continual dithering so now the company has had to take the HST out for more life extension work/overhaul to keep them running.
 

[Busboy W1]

I agree a Turbo is better than nothing!! Just you wait till they have their C6 refurb in the near future. In times of disruption or failure things will need to be altered and with only 5 180s in the current fleet it's unlikely it will be replaced by another classmate. Maybe more 180s are needed from other TOCs^▸ (Train Operating Company) or relief services out of Paddington towards Didcot and Oxford and yes I'm fully aware of the national rolling stock shortage but there are other Rail Operators that have rolling stock I'm sure would suit.

[ChrisB]

Yeah, and look at the furore created when Chiltern nabbed 6 units from Northern Rail!!

[Network SouthEast]

Yeah, and look at the furore created when Chiltern nabbed 6 units from Northern Rail!!

Psstt: 9 trains from Trans Pennine Express

And they aren't even transferring to Chiltern for a little white yet.

[ChrisB]

oops, thanks!

[a-driver]

I agree a Turbo is better than nothing!! Just you wait till they have their C6 refurb in the near future. In times of disruption or failure things will need to be altered and with only 5 180s in the current fleet it's unlikely it will be replaced by another classmate. Maybe more 180s are needed from other TOCs^▸ (Train Operating Company) or relief services out of Paddington towards Didcot and Oxford and yes I'm fully aware of the national rolling stock shortage but there are other Rail Operators that have rolling stock I'm sure would suit.

Honestly. There are no other operator who have spare stock available.  Even if they could, its a serious amount of training required for drivers and maintenance staff a like.  There's also no other stock that is compatible in terms of coupling with Turbos (as far as I know).  Any additional stock realistically could only be used on the Thames Valley branches
On the rare occasion stock does become free, you're looking at four or five different TOCs chasing them. 

[Network SouthEast]

Honestly. There are no other operator who have spare stock available.  Even if they could, its a serious amount of training required for drivers and maintenance staff a like.  There's also no other stock that is compatible in terms of coupling with Turbos (as far as I know).  Any additional stock realistically could only be used on the Thames Valley branches

172/0 and 172/1 Turbostars are both compatible with 165 and 166 Turbos. I don't think coupler compatibility even is much of a consideration otherwise we wouldn't have 150s or 180s operating amongst Turbos.

Inidently, there is still a training backlog for drivers on 150s and 180s, so it's probably a good idea to avoid introducing a third type of extra train before this is sorted out.

[ChrisB]

Honestly. There are no other operator who have spare stock available.  Even if they could, its a serious amount of training required for drivers and maintenance staff a like. 

Still stands....
172/0 and 172/1 Turbostars are both compatible with 165 and 166 Turbos. I don't think coupler compatibility even is much of a consideration otherwise we wouldn't have 150s or 180s operating amongst Turbos.

Inidently, there is still a training backlog for drivers on 150s and 180s, so it's probably a good idea to avoid introducing a third type of extra train before this is sorted out.
[/quote]

[Worcester_Passenger]

A very uncomfortable journey on this train from Oxford to Worcester on Thursday July 3, on a very hot day.

Operated by a 180. Which arrived at Oxford some 20 minutes late due to a passenger having been taken ill at Reading. Left with the aisles full and standing - see picture.

And then we stop just north of Oxford, to allow an on-time HST^▸ (High Speed Train) to come off the single track section.

A very apologetic set of announcements from the Train Manager.

34 late at Charlbury and 28 late at Shrub Hill. Where, very sensibly, it ran forward to Foregate Street in service so as to be ready to go back to Paddington.

[IanL]

I was on this service as well, no effective aircon in the vestibule between coach A and B and the internal panels in the vestibule were too hot to touch comfortably. About 20 passengers in this space so ended up with coach A and B doors wedged open. Passengers standing in both coaches as well as the vestibules. Surprised there wasn't another ill passenger by Charlbury.

[charles_uk]

This service has been held just north of Oxford for the last three days - on Wednesday and Friday waiting for the GMV:DID^» (Didcot Parkway - next trains) service to clear the single track.

The lack of air-conditioning in the vestibules has been very noticeable over the past few weeks with temperatures pushing 30 degrees most days (I have a small thermometer attached to my back pack). First Great Western's line is that the vestibules were not intended to convey passengers - hence no air-con. That being the case, where did they think the displaced passengers were going to go when they removed 40% of the seats last autumn?

[Rhydgaled]

The fundamental problem though is that by taking 220 seats off what was already a very crowded service, FGW^▸ (First Great Western) have caused this gross overcrowing problem

How crowded was it when it was an IC125? Would it have been ok if they reduced it by 173 seats instead of 220? If not, I'm afraid those unfortunate enough to be using that service (thankfully I'm not one of them) will have to get used to it. Or complain like hell to DfT^» (Department for Transport - about), because a 315 seat 5-car unit is what they are likely to get in future. The DfT's daft modeled diagrams for IEP^▸ (Intercity Express Program / Project.) shows the following for Cotswolds services out of Paddington:

• 13:46 PAD^» (Paddington (London) - next trains) - Hereford 5-car
• 14:46 PAD - Worcester 5-car
• 15:46 PAD - Hereford 5-car
• 16:46 PAD - Worcester 5-car
• 17:46 PAD - Hereford 10-car to Worcester 5-car Worcester to Hereford

So, not only will the 15:46 be 5-car, so will the Cotswolds services out of PAD before and after it. In fact, the every service from Paddington to Hereford/Worcester are shown as being 5-car throughout except the 17:46 shown above and the 18:46 which is shown as 10-car right through to Hereford. In the other direction it is a similar story, with two 10-car workings (05:12 Worcester-PAD and 05:26 Hereford-PAD) and everything else 5-car.

The caveats given in the draft diagrams document are as follows:

The timetables in this file have been developed solely for the purposes of establishing diagrams and rolling stock requirements,
to enable the Train Service Provider to develop a stabling and maintenance strategy and to estimate Set Availability Payments.
They do not necessarily match the most recent timetables used in the IEP Business Case.
The train frequencies, journey times and calling patterns in this file should therefore not be regarded as a aspirations or proposals.

In addition, the fleet deployment shown in this file is only one option, and Franchise bidders will be free to propose alternatives.

Franchise bidders can't conjure 9-car bi-modes out of thin air though, the order needs to be varied before too many driving vehicles get built.

[a-driver]

None of us understand how the DfT^» (Department for Transport - about) can think that this is a workable solution, replacing an HST^▸ (High Speed Train) with a 5 car IEP^▸ (Intercity Express Program / Project.) just stinks of the DfT trying to do things on the cheap and leaving FGW^▸ (First Great Western) to deal with the fall out.
They've clearly not learnt from their mistakes they made with XC^▸ (Cross Country Trains (franchise))

The fundamental problem though is that by taking 220 seats off what was already a very crowded service, FGW have caused this gross overcrowing problem

How crowded was it when it was an IC125? Would it have been ok if they reduced it by 173 seats instead of 220? If not, I'm afraid those unfortunate enough to be using that service (thankfully I'm not one of them) will have to get used to it. Or complain like hell to DfT, because a 315 seat 5-car unit is what they are likely to get in future. The DfT's daft modeled diagrams for IEP shows the following for Cotswolds services out of Paddington:

• 13:46 PAD^» (Paddington (London) - next trains) - Hereford 5-car
• 14:46 PAD - Worcester 5-car
• 15:46 PAD - Hereford 5-car
• 16:46 PAD - Worcester 5-car
• 17:46 PAD - Hereford 10-car to Worcester 5-car Worcester to Hereford

So, not only will the 15:46 be 5-car, so will the Cotswolds services out of PAD before and after it. In fact, the every service from Paddington to Hereford/Worcester are shown as being 5-car throughout except the 17:46 shown above and the 18:46 which is shown as 10-car right through to Hereford. In the other direction it is a similar story, with two 10-car workings (05:12 Worcester-PAD and 05:26 Hereford-PAD) and everything else 5-car.

The caveats given in the draft diagrams document are as follows:

The timetables in this file have been developed solely for the purposes of establishing diagrams and rolling stock requirements,
to enable the Train Service Provider to develop a stabling and maintenance strategy and to estimate Set Availability Payments.
They do not necessarily match the most recent timetables used in the IEP Business Case.
The train frequencies, journey times and calling patterns in this file should therefore not be regarded as a aspirations or proposals.

In addition, the fleet deployment shown in this file is only one option, and Franchise bidders will be free to propose alternatives.

Franchise bidders can't conjure 9-car bi-modes out of thin air though, the order needs to be varied before too many driving vehicles get built.

[IanL]

The HST^▸ (High Speed Train) used to be full and standing on a frequent basis particularly on friday afternoons. Some of this has moved to other trains^.I know people in Oxford who now have shifted work hours to finish earlier and catch the 1520, and I usually try and catch the stopper at 1732 rather than the 1649.

One issue is the gap in service between 1520 and 1649.