Short formations/failed trains

[whole diary]

[IndustryInsider]

Yep, hence both being in the process of being replaced.

[ChrisB]

Strictly, no....exams are due on set mileage, don't have to be knackered. And being fitted with accessible toilets ditto

[TaplowGreen]

Yep, hence both being in the process of being replaced.

   
    31/08/2014 09:17
Route affected

    All routes through Reading
     


    Over-running engineering work at Reading is causing delays of up to 45 minutes to trains running through the station.

    This is mainly affecting services towards Basingstoke, Newbury and Didcot Parkway.

    South West Trains are not currently affected by this disruption.

    There is no firm estimate yet of how long the disruption is likely to continue, however delays are expected until at least 10:30

   

     
      ...............sorry, I forgot about the engineering work! 

[TaplowGreen]

Looking at current train running there are already 14 short formations listed between now and midnight on the Thames Valley lines...........all down to "train faults" - judging by the comments of those in the know this is as much down to planned servicing/refits so why not say so?

.....or are we really looking at this situation for the foreseeable future as the remaining units are being flogged to death and are reaching the end of their useful/reliable life, with nothing in reserve?

[Timmer]

.....or are we really looking at this situation for the foreseeable future as the remaining units are being flogged to death and are reaching the end of their useful/reliable life, with nothing in reserve?

Concerning for those of us further West that these are the units coming to replace the current stock of 150s/158s. And to think we were so close to getting a brand new fleet of four car DMUs^▸ (Diesel Multiple Unit) on the Cardiff-Portsmouth line a few years back until Dft changed its mind.

[ChrisB]

Nothing in reserve as these are away having accessible toilet etc fitted.

If they had no faulty units, I suspect a full service would run - it's the lack of standbys that cause the shorts. So they are correct in stating faulty trains.

Fatalities will also cause the loss of a unit until it's fixed & cleaned....no fault of the operator.

[grahame]

A quick look at the current shortages:

A 15:27 London Paddington to Oxford due 17:17
C 15:40 Bedwyn to London Paddington due 16:57
B 16:37 Oxford to London Paddington due 18:31
A 17:37 Oxford to London Paddington due 19:31
C 17:44 London Paddington to Reading due 18:44
B 18:42 London Paddington to Bourne End due 19:29
C 18:48 Reading to London Paddington due 19:46
B 19:34 Bourne End to Maidenhead due 19:45
B 19:49 Maidenhead to Bourne End due 20:00
C 19:50 London Paddington to Banbury due 21:23
A 19:57 London Paddington to Oxford due 21:44
B 20:05 Bourne End to Maidenhead due 20:16
C 21:38 Banbury to London Paddington due 23:24
C 23:49 London Paddington to Reading due 00:56

Services "A", "B" and "C" could run into each other (I may not be 100% there with my guesses) and that looks like a total of perhaps 4 or 5 carriages less operating that is required from a fleet of 152.   Yes, that's 3.3% of the fleet out when it should be in, and I suspect uncomfortable on the 17:44 and more so on the 18:42 out of Paddington  (5 rather than 6, and 4 rather than 2 carriages).  I count 51 departures in the 2 hours from 17:00 to 18:59, none cancelled and 2 short formed.   So about 2% capacity down.  2% more than it should be (and all in one train group) - but worth quoting what is running at full strength as wells what isn't to see it in perspective.

Looking at current train running there are already 14 short formations listed between now and midnight on the Thames Valley lines...........all down to "train faults" - judging by the comments of those in the know this is as much down to planned servicing/refits so why not say so?

.....or are we really looking at this situation for the foreseeable future as the remaining units are being flogged to death and are reaching the end of their useful/reliable life, with nothing in reserve?

Gawd I hope not is we're to get those as hand-me-downs in the Bristol area!

[Super Guard]

Looking at current train running there are already 14 short formations listed between now and midnight on the Thames Valley lines...........all down to "train faults" - judging by the comments of those in the know this is as much down to planned servicing/refits so why not say so?

Probably due to the agreed "reasons" with ATOC^» (Association of Train Operating Companies See - here), such as those for delays.

"Short formed due to Brussels interference, it's not broke but we have to fix it" is probably not one of them 

[Electric train]

.....or are we really looking at this situation for the foreseeable future as the remaining units are being flogged to death and are reaching the end of their useful/reliable life, with nothing in reserve?

Concerning for those of us further West that these are the units coming to replace the current stock of 150s/158s. And to think we were so close to getting a brand new fleet of four car DMUs^▸ (Diesel Multiple Unit) on the Cardiff-Portsmouth line a few years back until Dft changed its mind.

Gawd I hope not is we're to get those as hand-me-downs in the Bristol area!

Ah but the Thames Valley outers are getting stuff even older and possible more decrypted the 319's.

To be fair the FGW^▸ (First Great Western) 165/6 fleet are possible the hardest working DMU's in the UK^▸ (United Kingdom) certainly with one of the most intensive diagrams and are by and large very reliable.
Some of the failures could be down to the number of maintenance fitters being on leave, could be a shortage of en-parts that are refurbished off site, could be a coincidental mix of both these, genuine failures and units out for person hit

[TaplowGreen]

A quick look at the current shortages:

  So about 2% capacity down.  2% more than it should be (and all in one train group) - but worth quoting what is running at full strength as wells what isn't to see it in perspective.

Fair point and certainly puts it into perspective but that 2% needs to be looked at in the context of a service already bursting at the seams with overcrowding so actually means a great deal more than if there was slack to be taken up?