166 A/C

[whole diary]

[devon_metro]

Still amazes me that no West depot is capable of heavy maintenance!

[willc]

FGW^▸ (First Great Western) Turbos and Chiltern's 165s and 168s will all happily couple to each other - if Chiltern have to run through to and from Paddington via Oxford, when their route is shut, then their sets are coupled to FGW workings to/from London to avoid taking up extra paths on the GW^▸ (Great Western) main line. But you can't couple a 168 to other Turbostars of the 17X varieties.

The 165/166 sets are cleared for the Thames Valley routes and out to Hereford, but are also approved to work up to Birmingham Snow Hill via Kidderminster and Stourbridge Junction (originally broad gauge Oxford Worcester and Wolverhampton Railway).

When Turbos were launched, BR^▸ (British Rail(ways)) did run an experimental service - one train out in the morning and back in the evening Birmingham-London, I think, via the Cotswold Line - I suppose a kind of precursor of Chiltern's Kidderminster services today. I did once do Stourbridge Jct-London and back on this service but it wasn't exactly busy to/from Worcester, so not surprising it got dropped.

[smithy]

FGW^▸ (First Great Western) Turbos and Chiltern's 165s and 168s will all happily couple to each other - if Chiltern have to run through to and from Paddington via Oxford, when their route is shut, then their sets are coupled to FGW workings to/from London to avoid taking up extra paths on the GW^▸ (Great Western) main line. But you can't couple a 168 to other Turbostars of the 17X varieties.

The 165/166 sets are cleared for the Thames Valley routes and out to Hereford, but are also approved to work up to Birmingham Snow Hill via Kidderminster and Stourbridge Junction (originally broad gauge Oxford Worcester and Wolverhampton Railway).

When Turbos were launched, BR^▸ (British Rail(ways)) did run an experimental service - one train out in the morning and back in the evening Birmingham-London, I think, via the Cotswold Line - I suppose a kind of precursor of Chiltern's Kidderminster services today. I did once do Stourbridge Jct-London and back on this service but it wasn't exactly busy to/from Worcester, so not surprising it got dropped.

they all have BSI^▸ (British Standards Institute) couplers so i cannot see any reason why a 168 cannot couple to a 170?

[swlines]

Software issues

[Btline]

168s are a combination of Turbos and Turbostars - different version have cabs off different ones.

So, I would think they can couple to 170s - they pretty much are 170s (more Turbostar than Turbo)!

[devon_metro]

As swlines states, the (needless!) computer doesn't agree with each other.

[swlines]

168s are a combination of Turbos and Turbostars - different version have cabs off different ones.

So, I would think they can couple to 170s - they pretty much are 170s (more Turbostar than Turbo)!

They can couple mechanically but cannot couple and provide through working/wiring due to incompatibilities between units.

[Btline]

As swlines states, the (needless!) computer doesn't agree with each other.

168s are a combination of Turbos and Turbostars - different version have cabs off different ones.

So, I would think they can couple to 170s - they pretty much are 170s (more Turbostar than Turbo)!

They can couple mechanically but cannot couple and provide through working/wiring due to incompatibilities between units.

[swlines]

By that I mean, they can couple perfectly fine, but trying to get them to move off at full speed won't happen - think max speed is 15mph for mechanical coupling on the 170s

[BBM]

The 165/166 sets are cleared for the Thames Valley routes and out to Hereford, but are also approved to work up to Birmingham Snow Hill via Kidderminster and Stourbridge Junction (originally broad gauge Oxford Worcester and Wolverhampton Railway).

When Turbos were launched, BR^▸ (British Rail(ways)) did run an experimental service - one train out in the morning and back in the evening Birmingham-London, I think, via the Cotswold Line - I suppose a kind of precursor of Chiltern's Kidderminster services today. I did once do Stourbridge Jct-London and back on this service but it wasn't exactly busy to/from Worcester, so not surprising it got dropped.

I recall that too - if my memory serves me right it only ran on Saturdays but I think it ran London to Birmingham and back, and during the day the unit (which was booked to be a 166) was used on Snow Hill to Stratford-on-Avon services alongside the more usual 150s. However I'm happy to be corrected - maybe a second unit was used for this in addition to the Birmingham-London return journey?

[willc]

Definitely ran weekdays too, as I was working permanent Saturdays at the time, so couldn't have used it if it was an Sat only working.

[willc]

Just came across the following exchange about 165/166 facelift in the minutes of the FGW^▸ (First Great Western) east area customer panel meeting last month, which I thought might be of interest to all you Turbo fans out there...

Peter Caplehorn, member for Gatwick Airport to Shalford (PC) requested more detail on the specific work within the LTV^▸ (London [and] Thames Valley) stock refresh, stressing that temperature fluctuations are common and must be looked at.
Tom Stables, FGW Commercial Director (TS) explained that FGW is reviewing all aspects of the 16X fleet, for example
^   Seating capacity
^   First Class? For example, 166 needs it but does the 165?
^   Information provision on board
^   Air conditioning and cooling ^ 166 has air conditioning but does not work so being addressed.
^   Additional disabled seating
PC asked for the seating to be replaced and assess how more luggage space can be put on the Gatwick services.

[Mookiemoo]

I did once do Stourbridge Jct-London and back on this service but it wasn't exactly busy to/from Worcester, so not surprising it got dropped.

Theres a good reason for that.

Up to Birmingham it is a fast intercity service

Fro Birmingham to Worcester it stopped almost as often as the central stopper train!

Of the total journey time, a good portion was spent just getting as far as Birmingham

There was no incentive to use the Chiltern service beyond Birmingham

[willc]

I wasn't referring to the current Chiltern trains past Snow Hill - which were never going to be quick with all the Centro services using the route too - just the BR^▸ (British Rail(ways)) Turbo service back in the early 1990s, which started at Snow Hill, then I think called Cradley Heath, Stourbridge Jct, Kidderminster and Droitwich only to Worcester en route to Oxford and Paddington and the same on the evening return journey.

[eightf48544]

As swlines states, the (needless!) computer doesn't agree with each other.

168s are a combination of Turbos and Turbostars - different version have cabs off different ones.

So, I would think they can couple to 170s - they pretty much are 170s (more Turbostar than Turbo)!

They can couple mechanically but cannot couple and provide through working/wiring due to incompatibilities between units.

I seem to rember that when the 165/166s came out it was remarked they couldn't couple with 158s due to I belive number of control wires linked through coupler. I believe Turbos are 9 wire whilst most other units are 8. So although as has been said they can couple mechaniclly but not electrically.

It was suggested that depending on which unit was in front you either had a brake or didn't, which would be scary.

This is another gripe of mine why is it the private railways of the USA have had a standard coupler since the early 1900s, BR^▸ (British Rail(ways)) still hasn't got a standard coupler. In fact the situation is worse now than when I left the Southern in 1967. On the Central we were down to three, screw link and Westinghouse brakes on the 4 subs,  the buckeye and EP brakes on the rest of the units, 33s 73s TCs^‡(resolve) and screw and plain links on loco hauled stock and freight wagons with vacuum brakes. Although most hauled passenger stock had buckeyes to couple with 33s and 73s. The South Eastern was down to 2 as they had no 4 Subs by 67.