IETs into passenger service from 16 Oct 2017 and subsequent performance issues

[whole diary]

[grahame]

Correct me if I'm wrong but I believe the 0637 PAD^» (Paddington (London) - next trains)-PNZ is planned as a 5-car throughout. It certainly doesn't warrant any additional capacity from the times I've been on it.

Lets hope '9 to 5' is not the 'norm' on both the Western and London North Eastern in future.
https://twitter.com/1st_class_pie/status/1224674901031866368

Let's hope ... BUT the 06:37 from Paddington looks like it's booked as a five all the way to Penzance and back tp Plymouth where at about 14:10 it picks up another 5.  And for the race to Plymouth at the start of the day (at least) I can't image it needing more.    Mind you, stop it along the way to provide a peak train into Taunton and Exeter (i.e. couple of calls on the B&H^▸ (Berks and Hants - railway line from Reading to Taunton via Westbury) including Westbury) and you may have a story that changes.

[Gordon the Blue Engine]

Came across this poster from 1977.  Interesting to compare the fastest times from 43 years ago to to-day's...

[TaplowGreen]

Quite a few shortforms again today, but of all the services to choose, this one on a Friday has to be one of the most brainless;

19:04 London Paddington to Plymouth due 22:23


Facilities on the 19:04 London Paddington to Plymouth due 22:23.
Will be formed of 5 coaches instead of 9.

[Rob on the hill]

Quite a few shortforms again today, but of all the services to choose, this one on a Friday has to be one of the most brainless;

19:04 London Paddington to Plymouth due 22:23


Facilities on the 19:04 London Paddington to Plymouth due 22:23.
Will be formed of 5 coaches instead of 9.

RTT^» (Real Time Trains - website) shows that the 1904 set is currently working 1C78 1104 Pad - Ply. Tiger trains is showing this as having 9 coaches.

(Assuming the diagram remains as 1C78, 1A90, 1C94).

[IndustryInsider]

Quite a few shortforms again today, but of all the services to choose, this one on a Friday has to be one of the most brainless;

19:04 London Paddington to Plymouth due 22:23


Facilities on the 19:04 London Paddington to Plymouth due 22:23.
Will be formed of 5 coaches instead of 9.

Yes, indeed Rob on the hill, who'd have thought it?  JourneyCheck is wrong again! 

A 9-car (802104) is now allocated to that diagram, which also includes its previous two workings, 11:04 Paddington to Plymouth and 15:14 Plymouth to Paddington also listed on JourneyCheck wrongly.

Another diagram of working listed on JourneyCheck is also being covered by a 9-car (800305) instead of the 5-car listed, meaning the 11:20 Paddington to Oxford, 13:02 Oxford to Paddington, 17:34 Paddington to Hereford and 22:00 Hereford to Paddington are properly formed.

Only the five trips to and from Bristol listed on JourneyCheck are correct with 802016 covering that diagram at the moment.

[charles_uk]

JourneyCheck is wrong again! 

This morning, JourneyCheck was right, reporting the 06:43 Worcester Shrub Hill to Paddington service as a five car short-formation. Not so helpfully, the Customer Information Screens (CIS^▸ (Customer Information System)) said the first class would be at the back so passengers gravitated towards the front of the train. The train arrives with first class at the front so a bit of a rush as passengers swamp the first available standard class doors.

Yesterday, the CIS also reported this train with first class at the rear: it arrived with first class at the front. And for the last three four days, the CIS have reported the 15:20 Paddington to Worcester Foregate Street the wrong way round.

This is just my experience on a couple of regular services from and to the Cotswolds but it does seem this information has been far less reliable since the IETs^▸ (Intercity Express Train) were introduced: it can be a bit of a pain with a busy five car unit where there are just three and half standard class coaches and passengers have been directed to the first class end.

[bobm]

I had the same issue with CIS^▸ (Customer Information System) not matching the actual train on a service from Bedwyn.  Talked to the train manager about it and she showed me how they have the facility to "flip" the train on the Integrale app on their phone.  This should then get the CIS in step with the train.  However she says often when she has tried to do it the app has produced an error and a resolution is being worked on.

[rower40]

I had the same issue with CIS^▸ (Customer Information System) not matching the actual train on a service from Bedwyn.  Talked to the train manager about it and she showed me how they have the facility to "flip" the train on the Integrale app on their phone.  This should then get the CIS in step with the train.  However she says often when she has tried to do it the app has produced an error and a resolution is being worked on.

It's because the app can only be used at certain places:

• Didcot triangle
• Dr Days to North Somerset curve
• Hanwell to Drayton Green Jn to West Ealing

And it can cause aggro with the driver when he has to change ends.

_{This may contain elements of untruth.}

[Sixty3Closure]

I'm not sure its a bug but more a too literal interpretation.

The direct Carmarthen train from Paddington splits at Swansea. All the announcements from Paddington say to travel in the front of the train - first 5 coaches for Carmarthen. My reservation always puts me in the rear 5 coaches. The TM^‡(resolve) at some point makes an announcement to ignore this and that its the rear 5 coaches G to L (?) that travel onward. I've got use to it as a regular traveller on the route but it does make me a bit nervous in case something has changed.

I suspect its because the train reverses out at Swansea so this could technically be correct but its very confusing.

[Trowres]

The 17:30 Paddington to W-S-M tonight is shortformed 5 vs 10. It is being terminated at Bristol and has started 10 late from Paddington due to late arrival of crew.

The previous train to Bristol Temple Meads was cancelled due to crew issues.

  

[Umberleigh]

Came across this poster from 1977.  Interesting to compare the fastest times from 43 years ago to to-day's...

Suspect that is the work of my late father, Brian Haresnape FRSA. He was employed by the BR^▸ (British Rail(ways)) Design Panel to put on paper the BR blue liveries up to and including the BR Big Logo and APT^▸ (Advanced Passenger Train). No computers of course, everything done meticulously by hand from his studio in Dorking

[Celestial]

I recall the name well. A prolific author, photographer and contributor to the railway press if I remember correctly? I used to enjoy reading his articles.

[broadgage]

Over 40 short formed IETs^▸ (Intercity Express Train) today, significantly worse than the new normal of between 12 and 20.
Reported as being due to "more trans than normal needing repairs"

Are there any firm plans to run full length trains ? or is it just a case of get used to it and remember the mantra that half a train is better than no train.

We have been offered one excuse after another, the most recent being that the new timetable will improve matters.

Time in my view for Hitachi to lengthen some 5 car sets to 9 car at their own expense, as compensation for the trains not meeting the required standards of reliability/availability.

This fiasco is looking just like other new rolling stock on routes that I use.

3 car DMUs^▸ (Diesel Multiple Unit) replacing loco hauled trains on the Waterloo to Exeter route. The new units were too short, and routinely overcrowded. It took about 20 years before some services were as long as they all used to be.

A mixture of 4 car and 6 car networkers replacing slam door DC^▸ (Direct Current) EMUs^▸ (Electric Multiple Unit) in South East London. Too short from day one, 6 car units in the rush hour on routes previously served by 8 car trains. Short trains for 20+ years.

Voyagers replacing full length trains on cross country. Too short from day one, still too short decades later.

Year ago I suggested that the IETs would like other new trains, be routinely too short. IET supporters said that this time it would be different and that the IET fleet was ample for all trains that needed to be full length, to be full length.
Cynical experience trumps optimistic forecasts.

And even when full length, IETs still feel like a commuter train, hard seats, no buffet, unreliable toilets, unreliable reservations, and NO reservations on a short formed train.

I have avoided unduly frequent comment on this, but things are not improving. And it is not just me who considers a 5 car DMU to be a downgrade over the "proper trains" used previously.

[Timmer]

Over 40 short formed IETs^▸ (Intercity Express Train) today, significantly worse than the new normal of between 12 and 20.
Reported as being due to "more trans than normal needing repairs"

Are there any firm plans to run full length trains ? or is it just a case of get used to it and remember the mantra that half a train is better than no train.

We have been offered one excuse after another, the most recent being that the new timetable will improve matters.

Time in my view for Hitachi to lengthen some 5 car sets to 9 car at their own expense, as compensation for the trains not meeting the required standards of reliability/availability.

Not just GWR^▸ (Great Western Railway):

From MD LNER^» (London North Eastern Railway - about) David Horne:
https://twitter.com/DavidHorne/status/1231608956994359299

[broadgage]

Indeed, passengers of other TOCs^▸ (Train Operating Company) are now enjoying the flexible train length of IETs^▸ (Intercity Express Train). Though at least LNER^» (London North Eastern Railway - about) victims are allowed a buffet.

Whatever the theoretical advantages of IETs, a sensible approach by OTHER TOCs would have been to state to hitachi  "we wont order any of these until the GWR^▸ (Great Western Railway) ones are working properly, full length, day in and day out"

In fact, other TOCs rushed to order a clearly defective design that routinely fails to provide a full service of full length trains. Despite the odd soothing platitude from both GWR and LNER, train length seems a low priority. Short trains produce almost the same revenue but save on leasing costs, staff costs, and presumably also save track access charges.