Train GraphicClick on the map to explore geographics
 
I need help
FAQ
Emergency
About .
No recent travel & transport from BBC stories as at 17:15 10 Jan 2025
Read about the forum [here].
Register [here] - it's free.
What do I gain from registering? [here]
 14/01/25 - Rail Sale starts
24/01/25 - Westbury Station reopens
24/01/25 - LTP4 Wilts / Consultation end
24/01/25 - Bristol Rail Campaign AGM 2025

On this day
10th Jan (2017)
Defibrillators discussion pack published by Network Rail (link)

Train RunningCancelled
13:48 London Paddington to Carmarthen
14:35 London Paddington to Paignton
15:16 London Paddington to Cardiff Central
15:30 London Paddington to Weston-Super-Mare
15:52 London Paddington to Great Malvern
15:54 Cardiff Central to London Paddington
16:23 London Paddington to Oxford
16:30 London Paddington to Taunton
16:32 Great Malvern to London Paddington
16:36 London Paddington to Plymouth
16:59 Cheltenham Spa to London Paddington
17:00 Oxford to London Paddington
17:18 London Paddington to Swansea
17:50 Cardiff Central to London Paddington
Additional 18:10 Bristol Temple Meads to Gloucester
19:04 Paignton to London Paddington
19:04 Great Malvern to London Paddington
19:35 Exeter St Davids to London Paddington
Short Run
14:03 London Paddington to Penzance
14:20 Carmarthen to London Paddington
14:48 London Paddington to Swansea
15:28 Weston-Super-Mare to London Paddington
16:07 London Paddington to Didcot Parkway
16:34 Newbury to London Paddington
16:50 London Paddington to Didcot Parkway
17:15 Exeter Central to Barnstaple
17:20 London Paddington to Didcot Parkway
17:28 Weston-Super-Mare to London Paddington
18:29 Gatwick Airport to Reading
18:38 Barnstaple to Exmouth
Delayed
13:55 Paignton to London Paddington
15:03 London Paddington to Penzance
15:30 Bristol Temple Meads to London Paddington
15:59 Cheltenham Spa to London Paddington
16:12 London Paddington to Bristol Parkway
16:13 Exeter Central to Barnstaple
16:31 Barnstaple to Exeter St Davids
17:10 Slough to Windsor & Eton Central
17:20 Windsor & Eton Central to Slough
17:33 Barnstaple to Exeter Central
PollsThere are no open or recent polls
Abbreviation pageAcronymns and abbreviations
Stn ComparatorStation Comparator
Rail newsNews Now - live rail news feed
Site Style 1 2 3 4
Next departures • Bristol Temple MeadsBath SpaChippenhamSwindonDidcot ParkwayReadingLondon PaddingtonMelksham
Exeter St DavidsTauntonWestburyTrowbridgeBristol ParkwayCardiff CentralOxfordCheltenham SpaBirmingham New Street
January 10, 2025, 17:18:37 *
Welcome, Guest. Please login or register.

Login with username, password and session length
Forgotten your username or password? - get a reminder
Most recently liked subjects
[103] Thames Valley infrastructure problems causing disruption elsew...
[98] Westminster Hall debate : Railway services to South West
[97] Ryanair sues 'unruly' passenger over flight diversion
[87] Mick Lynch announces retirement as head of RMT
[41] Birthday trip, Melksham to Penzance - 28th January 2025
[22] A Beginner's Guide to the Great Western "Coffee Shop" Passenge...
 
News: the Great Western Coffee Shop ... keeping you up to date with travel around the South West
 
   Home   Help Search Calendar Login Register  
Pages: [1] 2 3
  Print  
Author Topic: New Units revisited  (Read 16263 times)
paul7575
Transport Scholar
Hero Member
******
Posts: 5335


View Profile
« on: February 23, 2009, 13:43:13 »

Just received Roger Ford's e-preview of his 'Informed Sources' article for this Friday's Modern Railways, in which he confirms that the 202 new DMU (Diesel Multiple Unit) vehicles does include 11 x 4 car units for Portsmouth Cardiff services.

Available on his website here:

http://home.ezezine.com/759/759-2009.02.23.00.01.archive.html

Paul
Logged
Timmer
Global Moderator
Hero Member
*****
Posts: 6555


View Profile
« Reply #1 on: February 23, 2009, 18:20:13 »

Excellent! I look forward to reading it when arrives through the letterbox.
Logged
tramway
Hero Member
*****
Posts: 617



View Profile
« Reply #2 on: February 24, 2009, 10:06:07 »

As some posters may be aware there will be a substantial increase in the local population around Abbeywood in the next couple of years, and local management recently held a meeting with FGW (First Great Western) to raise awareness and concerns regarding public transport.

FGW stated their intention to push for the stock and indicated that they were hoping for a firm decision before the end of the year with stock arriving by 2012, releasing the 158's for cross Bristol services.



Logged
G.Uard
Hero Member
*****
Posts: 426


"Are we at Yate yet?"


View Profile
« Reply #3 on: February 24, 2009, 12:06:45 »

As some posters may be aware there will be a substantial increase in the local population around Abbeywood in the next couple of years, and local management recently held a meeting with FGW (First Great Western) to raise awareness and concerns regarding public transport.

FGW stated their intention to push for the stock and indicated that they were hoping for a firm decision before the end of the year with stock arriving by 2012, releasing the 158's for cross Bristol services.

Which will lead to very slack timetabling as these units are unsuited to high-density work.




Logged
bemmy
Sr. Member
****
Posts: 270



View Profile
« Reply #4 on: February 24, 2009, 13:54:20 »

As some posters may be aware there will be a substantial increase in the local population around Abbeywood in the next couple of years, and local management recently held a meeting with FGW (First Great Western) to raise awareness and concerns regarding public transport.

FGW stated their intention to push for the stock and indicated that they were hoping for a firm decision before the end of the year with stock arriving by 2012, releasing the 158's for cross Bristol services.

Which will lead to very slack timetabling as these units are unsuited to high-density work.
Which in turn will lead to more trains missing out stations such as Parson St and Lawrence Hill so they can squeeze into the congested timetable.
Logged
tramway
Hero Member
*****
Posts: 617



View Profile
« Reply #5 on: February 24, 2009, 14:49:50 »

As some posters may be aware there will be a substantial increase in the local population around Abbeywood in the next couple of years, and local management recently held a meeting with FGW (First Great Western) to raise awareness and concerns regarding public transport.

FGW stated their intention to push for the stock and indicated that they were hoping for a firm decision before the end of the year with stock arriving by 2012, releasing the 158's for cross Bristol services.

Which will lead to very slack timetabling as these units are unsuited to high-density work.
Which in turn will lead to more trains missing out stations such as Parson St and Lawrence Hill so they can squeeze into the congested timetable.

67's + Mk 2's don't seem to have many problems with timings, so I'm pretty sure a 3 car 158 would cope with that diagram.

There is also a prospect of extending to Yate not too far off and it would be nice to get rid of all the 150 Weymouth's which  would be heartily welcomed.
Logged
G.Uard
Hero Member
*****
Posts: 426


"Are we at Yate yet?"


View Profile
« Reply #6 on: February 24, 2009, 18:03:05 »

Good point ref the Mk 2s. 158s are however, around 8 feet longer I think, although that shouldn't make that much difference.  I will ask around and see what the EXE crews have to say.
Logged
devon_metro
Hero Member
*****
Posts: 5175



View Profile
« Reply #7 on: February 24, 2009, 18:12:35 »

The "skips" are only timed at around 37mph average between Taunton and Newport, so shouldn't have any problems with the schedules!
Logged
Chris from Nailsea
Administrator
Hero Member
*****
Posts: 19094


Justice for Cerys Piper and Theo Griffiths please!


View Profile Email
« Reply #8 on: February 24, 2009, 22:28:39 »

67's + Mk 2's don't seem to have many problems with timings   

Just as an aside, which I found amusing, anyway: the 67's and Mk2 (Mark 2 coach)'s on the 0828 from Nailsea this morning stopped at Bedminster ... then, in response to some whistling and gesturing from the guard, moved forward some 20 feet and stopped again, before the doors were released.

Well, as I said, I found it rather amusing ...  Roll Eyes
Logged

William Huskisson MP (Member of Parliament) was the first person to be killed by a train while crossing the tracks, in 1830.  Many more have died in the same way since then.  Don't take a chance: stop, look, listen.

"Level crossings are safe, unless they are used in an unsafe manner."  Discuss.
thetrout
Hero Member
*****
Posts: 2612



View Profile
« Reply #9 on: February 24, 2009, 22:34:18 »

67's + Mk 2's don't seem to have many problems with timings   

Just as an aside, which I found amusing, anyway: the 67's and Mk2 (Mark 2 coach)'s on the 0828 from Nailsea this morning stopped at Bedminster ... then, in response to some whistling and gesturing from the guard, moved forward some 20 feet and stopped again, before the doors were released.

Well, as I said, I found it rather amusing ...  Roll Eyes

We have a signal on the Up Main at Bridgwater Station. When A HST (High Speed Train) arrives it stops across the signal, which is normally showing a proceed aspect. Well... Once it showed a Danger aspect. Hence the train stopped with most  of the carriages (including the TGS) off the platform, we had to wait for the signal to change before we could move and doors be released Roll Eyes
Logged

Grin Grin Grin Grin
G.Uard
Hero Member
*****
Posts: 426


"Are we at Yate yet?"


View Profile
« Reply #10 on: February 25, 2009, 07:55:02 »

Of course it is the configuration of the 158s with the long body and end doors which contributes to a longer station dwell time.  I would imagine that similar problems exist with the later edition Mark 2s.  I guess the very generous timetabling, (referred to above), of the Skips +4 is designed to alleviate this problem.
Logged
tramway
Hero Member
*****
Posts: 617



View Profile
« Reply #11 on: February 25, 2009, 10:49:26 »

So what was running the diagram before the 67's. I'm assuming the timetable wasn't altered that much to accomodate them, therefore if it was regularly a 150 then the timings would be very similar.

IIRC (if I recall/remember/read correctly) the Wessex 31's were tested to ensure that they ran to Brighton in similar times to a 158 they replaced. But they only did that if they were fuelled for the trip of course.

Logged
willc
Hero Member
*****
Posts: 2330


View Profile
« Reply #12 on: February 25, 2009, 12:06:37 »

Just received Roger Ford's e-preview of his 'Informed Sources' article for this Friday's Modern Railways, in which he confirms that the 202 new DMU (Diesel Multiple Unit) vehicles does include 11 x 4 car units for Portsmouth Cardiff services.

Available on his website here:

http://home.ezezine.com/759/759-2009.02.23.00.01.archive.html

Paul

Which, if FGW (First Great Western) is to get the 52 vehicles indicated in DafT's rolling stock plan, would mean grand total of eight extra coaches for the Thames Valley - making no sense whatever operationally or maintenance-wise, especially if they were to be built by the Chinese or CAF - at least 172s are cousins of Turbos, so Reading depot would be able to handle them without too much trouble. But even so, what would be the point?

If this is the case - or has FGW just lost eight extra coaches? - surely it would make much more sense to keep all the new sets together and, failing any better ideas, send a small batch of three-car 158s over to Reading for the North Downs/Gatwick service? This route doesn't need pure commuter-style stock and this would allow its Turbos to go back into the main line fleet to help ease the strains there - and there would be enough of a different type of stock on the depot to make staff training worthwhile.


Logged
paul7575
Transport Scholar
Hero Member
******
Posts: 5335


View Profile
« Reply #13 on: February 25, 2009, 13:11:08 »


Which, if FGW (First Great Western) is to get the 52 vehicles indicated in DafT's rolling stock plan, would mean grand total of eight extra coaches for the Thames Valley - making no sense whatever operationally or maintenance-wise, especially if they were to be built by the Chinese or CAF - at least 172s are cousins of Turbos, so Reading depot would be able to handle them without too much trouble. But even so, what would be the point?

If this is the case - or has FGW just lost eight extra coaches? - surely it would make much more sense to keep all the new sets together and, failing any better ideas, send a small batch of three-car 158s over to Reading for the North Downs/Gatwick service? This route doesn't need pure commuter-style stock and this would allow its Turbos to go back into the main line fleet to help ease the strains there - and there would be enough of a different type of stock on the depot to make staff training worthwhile.


Hopefully Roger Ford has the answer to that when the mag comes out. The numbers and batches of units ordered, (discussed a few weeks ago) didn't match the rolling stock plan then, and apparently he now has the actual details, so FGW may get more or less than 52. But as you rightly say, all the stock displaced from Portsmouth - Cardiff shouldn't necessarily stay on Bristol locals...

Paul
Logged
tramway
Hero Member
*****
Posts: 617



View Profile
« Reply #14 on: February 25, 2009, 15:37:16 »

You then have to consider the 150's given back to ATW (Arriva Trains Wales (former TOC (Train Operating Company))).
The 142's which will probably go as well
the cascaded 150's from LM (London Midland - recent franchise)
and the retirement of 143's

anyone like to make a table up to show how that fits in with the 'plan'?
Logged
Do you have something you would like to add to this thread, or would you like to raise a new question at the Coffee Shop? Please [register] (it is free) if you have not done so before, or login (at the top of this page) if you already have an account - we would love to read what you have to say!

You can find out more about how this forum works [here] - that will link you to a copy of the forum agreement that you can read before you join, and tell you very much more about how we operate. We are an independent forum, provided and run by customers of Great Western Railway, for customers of Great Western Railway and we welcome railway professionals as members too, in either a personal or official capacity. Views expressed in posts are not necessarily the views of the operators of the forum.

As well as posting messages onto existing threads, and starting new subjects, members can communicate with each other through personal messages if they wish. And once members have made a certain number of posts, they will automatically be admitted to the "frequent posters club", where subjects not-for-public-domain are discussed; anything from the occasional rant to meetups we may be having ...

 
Pages: [1] 2 3
  Print  
 
Jump to:  

Powered by MySQL Powered by PHP Powered by SMF 1.1.2 | SMF © 2006-2007, Simple Machines LLC Valid XHTML 1.0! Valid CSS!
This forum is provided by customers of Great Western Railway (formerly First Great Western), and the views expressed are those of the individual posters concerned. Visit www.gwr.com for the official Great Western Railway website. Please contact the administrators of this site if you feel that the content provided by one of our posters contravenes our posting rules (email link to report). Forum hosted by Well House Consultants

Jump to top of pageJump to Forum Home Page