165/166s on this route

[whole diary]

[Clan Line]

Today I had the “pleasure” of undertaking my second journey on a 166 from Warminster to Salisbury.  I would have said “what a joke” – but a joke is funny, this was most certainly not !

The 1121 at Warminster, usually a pretty quiet service, was some 10 mins late due to the failure, at Westbury, of the Portsmouth Harbour train in front of it. The passengers off this train were transferred to my train – a perfectly sensible response, intended to get the passengers a bit further on their way towards Portsmouth.

However, this then showed up the gross unsuitability of the 165/166s on the Cardiff – Portsmouth route. The train was perhaps ¾ “full” in actual seat terms – but the 5 abreast seating in the 166 meant that many/most of the three abreast seats had only two people occupying them - the 3rd seat was totally unusable.  The two abreast seat that my wife and I occupied was cramped, width wise – every time that someone tried to walk down the aisle my wife had to lean towards me to let people pass. This was perhaps, just bearable, for the 20 min run to Salisbury – but for 2 or 3hr runs between Cardiff/Portsmouth/Great Malvern – hell on rails !! A 3 car 158 would probably have (just !) given everyone a seat - a reasonably comfortable seat .................and a trolley could have got through.

The return service from Salisbury (same rolling stock) was very lightly loaded – but by this time the AirCon had given up the ghost and free water was being handed out by the train crew.

Just who decided that these trains were suitable for this line ??  We are facing a repeat of the fiasco that occurred when FGW^▸ (First Great Western) originally took over the franchise – all the 3 car trains that Wessex had managed to gather, vanished - to be replaced by clapped out 2 (or even 1 car) trains.
I often take the train to Salisbury rather than drive – but if this is a taste of the future, the Fiesta is going to accumulate even more miles !!

Finally; while we were waiting at Warminster – passengers waiting for the 1100 service to Cardiff were told it had been cancelled. The reason given ?  “a train fault – which has now been fixed !!”. Just who put together such an idiotic announcement ?  If it had been fixed where was the train ?? 

[Timmer]

I don’t think you will find many passengers too pleased that the 165/166s are replacing the 158s on the Cardiff-Portsmouth line especially when the line came so close a few years back to getting brand new trains.

However, there is a big capacity problem on this line that a five carriage 165/166 combination is meant to solve but yes five across seating on a middle distance train is not ideal.

[FarWestJohn]

Similar to my awful Bank holiday experiences from Westbury to Weymouth standing on a scruffy knackered 166. Coming up from the west I have virtually given up GWR^▸ (Great Western Railway). I get a decent SWR^» (South Western Railway - about) 159 from Exeter to Axminster with a good seat and then the X53 bus to Weymouth. Might take longer but a much better trip and a very scenic bus ride through Lyme Regis, West Bay and Abbotsbury.

[Surrey 455]

However, there is a big capacity problem on this line that a five carriage 165/166 combination is meant to solve but yes five across seating on a middle distance train is not ideal.

It was never ideal on a Thames valley short trip. I still use those trains on the North Downs occasionally but I will normally aim for the double seats rather than the triples. Those double seats are cramped as well. Not sure whose bottom size and inside legs they measured when they put the seats in but I don't miss those trains.

[grahame]

The 165 and 166 units were designed in the late 1980s ... and people were smaller then.  Best link I can come up with is The Mirror looking back 40 years.

Back in 1967, when Flower Power was all the rage, the average British man was 5ft 7.5in tall, weighed 11st 8 lbs and had a chest of 38in and a waist of 34in. He wore size seven shoes, had a collar size of 14.5in and was expected to live just 68 years.

The 2017 version of Mr Average is 5ft 10in and weighs 13 stone 3 lbs, with a chest of 43 inches and a waist of 37 inches.  He wears size nine shoes and has a collar size of 16 - the more muscular neck a reflection of all those visits to the gym.  His life expectancy, meanwhile, has shot up by 13 years to 81 years.

Perhaps 2 + 3 was fine for people of the time of introduction?

Happy to have them on "TransWilts" through we could do with reliability please ... at least we can fit enough people on, which was getting impossible with a 153.

[didcotdean]

The standard seats on the 165/6 were designed for people without any arms. As someone who isn't tall at all, but is broad shouldered I have always found them very uncomfortable if someone is sitting next to me, especially if jammed up against the window.

[eightonedee]

A tip from a regular user- go for the down graded ex-first class at one end of a 166, or the first class end of a 165 on a service that is standard class only - these are the best seats in the house.

The Electrostars are so much better, even with the harder seats. I particularly like the way they seem to have configured the facing sets of four seats in a way that seems to make it difficult to allow the antisocial  to put their feet on the seat opposite.

Am I correct though in recalling that GWR^▸ (Great Western Railway) have claimed that the Turbos will be refitted in due course with four across seats?

[The Grecian]

The original plan as I understand it was to run Portsmouth-Cardiff trains as 5 car units - a 166/165 combo. The 166 would be refurbished to have 2+2 seating, with the 165 remaining 3+2. Seat reservations would be put in the 166, so generally longer-distance passengers (who are more likely to book ahead) would have more comfortable seating. That was the theory anyway.

Unfortunately it appears the DfT^» (Department for Transport - about) have told GWR^▸ (Great Western Railway) the 3+2 seating in the 166s stays to give more seating capacity. The fact that this is only ever a solution on paper seems to escape them. True there may be more seats with 3+2 seating but you can't sit comfortably in them. You also can't stand comfortably in the aisles. With 2+2 seating you can sit more comfortably and if standing is necessary, you have more room. It is very difficult for 3 average-sized men to sit in the row of 3 - and given this is probably to seat commuters for statistical purposes, it really isn't a solution in reality.

I believe if and when the GWR franchise is put up for tender that refurbishing the 166s to 2+2 seating may be on the agenda - no doubt presented as an 'improvement' to simply reinstate the long-established status quo.

Hopefully something might also be done about the air conditioning, which does seem to be utterly, utterly pathetic - it's been unsual to see one carriage on any 166 with the windows shut over the last few weeks. The 158 air conditioning has also long been notorious, but definitely seems to have improved - usually at least 1/2 carriages have had the windows closed indicating that it is actually working. Even when the windows on a 166 are open the internal carriage walls seem designed to stop any kind of external air flow - not a problem on a 158 at least. Added to the hot air being pumped into the carriage, I've felt extremely hot on them just travelling from Bristol Parkway to Temple Meads recently - I pity anyone doing a long journey on one in the heat.

If a 166/165 combo does turn up on a hot summer's day on this route, make a bee line for the 165 - at least there are more opening windows and the 'air-con' isn't pumping out hot air.

[CMRail]

The Bristol Area needs a new fleet of trains, suitable for slow services and fast(ish) e.g

Class *** for Portsmouth - Cardiff, Great Malvern-Bristol Temple Meads, and possible different routing in the next franchise

Class *** for Servern Beach, Parkway-Weston/Taunton and Westbury/Weymouth services (including TransWilts)

If not would there be any rolling stock on the agenda for the next 10 years? No “new trains” have been seen on the line(s) since privatisation. And GWR^▸ (Great Western Railway) think these trains are “better” but less comfortable and not practical for short stopping lines?

[martyjon]

Am I correct though in recalling that GWR^▸ (Great Western Railway) have claimed that the Turbos will be refitted in due course with four across seats?

Yea, I recall that too, it was supposed to happen when the transfer of the 165/166 that were coming west was complete and the units went for a major overhaul. With the financial state First Group seem to be in at the mo this may however have been put on the "back-burner".

[grahame]

Am I correct though in recalling that GWR^▸ (Great Western Railway) have claimed that the Turbos will be refitted in due course with four across seats?

Yea, I recall that too, it was supposed to happen when the transfer of the 165/166 that were coming west was complete and the units went for a major overhaul. With the financial state First Group seem to be in at the mo this may however have been put on the "back-burner".

In the short term, there was a need to get the 166s (or anything) into Bristol ... no time for anything more than pumping up the suspension.  Delayed electrification and some west fleet units going off lease and to be passed on to new operators who had contracts for them meant / means that anything available had to come into the area, even if a refurb first would have been nice.  Looking forward, though, I suspect that if the 166s as they are meet the franchise spec, they'll stay as they are; there is little appetite to reduce stock while a number are away for refit, little appetite to take on another project when so many are in trouble, and little appetite to spend money which would possibly not be balanced by an increase in income to pay.

[Clan Line]

A tip from a regular user- go for the down graded ex-first class at one end of a 166, or the first class end of a 165 on a service that is standard class only - these are the best seats in the house.

I think everyone has already latched on to that one - there were almost more in "First" than in the rest of the train on the return leg of my trip yesterday !

[Red Squirrel]

One modification that could be made to these units quite cheaply - GWR^▸ (Great Western Railway) may wish to take note - is to adapt the signs on the windows which instruct passengers what to do 'in the unlikely event' of an air conditioning failure. These signs could be updated to match the new operating conditions by simple covering the letters 'un'.

[didcotdean]

I have a vivid memory of travelling to Paddington in an ice-cold 166 in the hot summer of 1995. I guess it has stuck in the mind because I never had the experience again.

[Timmer]

I have a vivid memory of travelling to Paddington in an ice-cold 166 in the hot summer of 1995. I guess it has stuck in the mind because I never had the experience again.

When they first came out the air con actually worked. It didn’t last long.