Class 387 coming to Thames Valley - ongoing discussion

[whole diary]

[a-driver]

I’m seeing a lot of cancellations and delays attributed to coupling/uncoupling issues
and DOO^▸ (Driver-Only Operation (that is, trains which operate without carrying a guard)) camera issues. The 1819 was cancelled because of a DOO camera fault.

[IndustryInsider]

I’m not sure what percentage of these are actual faults, and what part driver familiarisation plays in them.  I know many drivers either had never coupled/uncoupled a train in service having perhaps done it a couple of time’s many months before on the depot, so not surprising to me that there are issues.

Not in all cases on obviously, but the haphazard training programme is perhaps revealing itself now, more than the unreliablility of the 387s.  Identical new build trains seem to be performing fine on the Gatwick Express sector of Southern for example - their drivers would have been very used to driving similar types of train.

[lordgoata]

Why are they uncoupling them anyway? Surely it would be easier just to run them in longer formation with the back 4 locked out, than cancel or delay them? Or until the platforms are lengthened, keep them all 8 carriages? Or only run the 12 carriage ones on the Paddington <-> Maidenhead, and/or Paddington <-> Reading semi-fasts?

They are genuine questions by the way, having to couple/uncouple on a busy service like we have just seems to be asking for trouble to me!

[a-driver]

Why are they uncoupling them anyway? Surely it would be easier just to run them in longer formation with the back 4 locked out, than cancel or delay them? Or until the platforms are lengthened, keep them all 8 carriages? Or only run the 12 carriage ones on the Paddington <-> Maidenhead, and/or Paddington <-> Reading semi-fasts?

They are genuine questions by the way, having to couple/uncouple on a busy service like we have just seems to be asking for trouble to me!

Because there probably isn’t  enough units.
What probably happens is that a seevice leaves Paddington bound for Didcot as an 8-car. At Reading 4 will detach and form another service back to Paddington where on arrival it may couple to another set to make another 8-car.

I don’t think it is down to the 387 training. I think in general GWR^▸ (Great Western Railway) drivers and taught to be overly cautious in comparison to drivers with other TOC^▸ (Train Operating Company)’s. It really is no different to driving any other train in terms of powering and braking. The only real difference is fault finding and knowing your way around the unit and having said that, fault finding is gernally done by someone on the other end of a phone.

[lordgoata]

Because there probably isn’t  enough units.
What probably happens is that a seevice leaves Paddington bound for Didcot as an 8-car. At Reading 4 will detach and form another service back to Paddington where on arrival it may couple to another set to make another 8-car.

Ah, apologies, I thought all the new 387 were 8 carriages as standard, so it was the 12 unit ones being split to form an 8 and (assumed) sending the other 4 to the depot at Reading (I realise some have been out of action due to "repairs", but I've only been on them when its split at Reading as a 12).

[TaplowGreen]

Because there probably isn’t  enough units.
What probably happens is that a seevice leaves Paddington bound for Didcot as an 8-car. At Reading 4 will detach and form another service back to Paddington where on arrival it may couple to another set to make another 8-car.

Ah, apologies, I thought all the new 387 were 8 carriages as standard, so it was the 12 unit ones being split to form an 8 and (assumed) sending the other 4 to the depot at Reading (I realise some have been out of action due to "repairs", but I've only been on them when its split at Reading as a 12).

The 8 carriage configuration was sold to the public by GWR^▸ (Great Western Railway) as part of the Nirvana they would be delivering upon us all from 2nd January. Once again they have failed to deliver....it's not you who should be apologising lordgoata, it's GWR, but they've forgotten how to do that.

[a-driver]

Not really GWR^▸ (Great Western Railway)’s fault. This is what the DfT^» (Department for Transport - about) signed off for

Not all the units have been delivered and there is the possibility of more transferring from another operator. Again, this depends on the DfTs plans.

[ellendune]

If DfT^» (Department for Transport - about) are going to micromanage the railway they really need to come clean and say so.  Then we all know who to praise when the service is perfect.

[grahame]

The capacity discussions I've seen seem to measure for the most part in SOOPs (Seats Out Of Paddington) and indeed traffic on most trains out of Paddington if greater on departure than at any later point in the journey, so it does make some sense to drop carriages at some appropriate intermediate point and send them back in for another load.    Reading would seem a suitable point to drop 4 at the moment; at some future date, someone might sling up some cheap, light weight, low speed overheads on the Henley branch and you could drop 4 carriages at Twyford and provide a though service all day.

[TaplowGreen]

Not really GWR^▸ (Great Western Railway)’s fault. This is what the DfT^» (Department for Transport - about) signed off for

Not all the units have been delivered and there is the possibility of more transferring from another operator. Again, this depends on the DfTs plans.

It's GWR who have been trumpeting thousands of additional seats coinciding with the new timetable and referring to 8 carriage trains as the default formation with some trains having 12. If they weren't able to deliver it, then why (as so often) have they overpromised and under delivered?

Right now Maidenhead in the morning peak is a nightmare - far worse than it was before.

Anyhow, it's not the DfTs fault that they don't employ sufficient numbers of drivers or mechanics, that one sits squarely with GWR.

[a-driver]

Not really GWR^▸ (Great Western Railway)’s fault. This is what the DfT^» (Department for Transport - about) signed off for

Not all the units have been delivered and there is the possibility of more transferring from another operator. Again, this depends on the DfTs plans.

It's GWR who have been trumpeting thousands of additional seats coinciding with the new timetable and referring to 8 carriage trains as the default formation with some trains having 12. If they weren't able to deliver it, then why (as so often) have they overpromised and under delivered?

Right now Maidenhead in the morning peak is a nightmare - far worse than it was before.

Anyhow, it's not the DfTs fault that they don't employ sufficient numbers of drivers or mechanics, that one sits squarely with GWR.

Some locations are understaffed, some are massively overstaffed. Some locations aren’t fully trained on the new traction. I think a lot more left the LTV^▸ (London [and] Thames Valley) depots than they predicted, me included, and that was solely down to job security or lack of.

The whole service doesn’t revolve around Maidenhead, other locations may have benefited significantly but with such a large timetable change, there was always the risk of issues. Large scale changes could be made on the next timetable change. Small changes can be made quite easily and they been on the Henley branch.  Things need to be allowed to settle down. At the moment, all but one 387 is diagrammed to be used on a weekday.
What is the issue at Maidenhead. Lack of fast services or short forms?

[Electric train]

What is the issue at Maidenhead. Lack of fast services or short forms?

Yep ............... both

Also the timing of the Henley branch possibly means the trains a full before they reach Maidenhead.  An example is 06:32 fast from Maidenhead whilst not ram packed there is a shortage of seats

[IndustryInsider]

I’m sure something will happen last minute, and I know the 17:18 PAD^» (Paddington (London) - next trains)-OXF^» (Oxford - next trains) semi-fast Turbo was cancelled, but it looks like (for the first time?) both the 17:49 and 18:19 PAD-DID^» (Didcot Parkway - next trains) semi-fasts will actually be formed of the scheduled 12 carriages tonight.

[TaplowGreen]

I’m sure something will happen last minute, and I know the 17:18 PAD^» (Paddington (London) - next trains)-OXF^» (Oxford - next trains) semi-fast Turbo was cancelled, but it looks like (for the first time?) both the 17:49 and 18:19 PAD-DID^» (Didcot Parkway - next trains) semi-fasts will actually be formed of the scheduled 12 carriages tonight.

..............let's hope they can get through.............

Due to a track defect at Didcot Parkway some high speed services between London Paddington and Oxford have been altered. Customers travelling from London Paddington can travel to Reading to connect with a Cross Country service to Oxford. Customers from Oxford can travel via Cross Country services to Reading.
Congestion may occur in the Didcot Parkway area as only 4 out of the 5 platforms are available for use.

[IndustryInsider]

..............let's hope they can get through.............

They did, with a 7 and 12 minute delay respectively. Too early to be sure, and still not good enough, but availability does seem to be improving day on day.