HST Shortages - Cotswold Line suffers again

[whole diary]

[IndustryInsider]

Several Cotswold Line services saw Turbo's vice the booked HST^▸ (High Speed Train) this weekend.

Starting off with the 15:51 Paddington to Worcester and return on Friday (that must've been fun!), carrying on through Saturday when at least two diagrams were Turbos, and rounded off today with the 13:41 out of Paddington to Worcester and return at 16:27 from Worcester. Thankfully control managed to arrange an extra three coaches to be attached at Oxford on the return trip (rather hastily after pressure from the train's crew a colleague tells me!) - otherwise they'd no doubt have had to turn away some of the hoarding masses that would have been waiting at Oxford! The 6-car left Oxford with precious few seats available and those would no doubt have soon been gobbled up by those joining at Didcot, Reading and Slough!

Hopefully a temporary shortage, and not the weekend after weekend turbo substitutions that we were seeing last year.

[readytostart]

Hopefully nothing to do with the HSt set used for the sleeper on Friday night!

[Steve Bray]

Surely, control should have this flagged up anyway, to ensure that whenever a turbo substitutes for a HST^▸ (High Speed Train) on a Sunday afternoon service, that an extra unit be added at Oxford (there are plenty enough in the sidings). It shouldn't be for a train crew to request this. On recent occasions when I've travelled on the 1631 HST ex Hereford, this train (1840-ish ex Oxford), has departed Oxford full and standing. The preceeding Oxford/Paddington fasts are also very full on leaving Oxford. 

[IndustryInsider]

Surely, control should have this flagged up anyway, to ensure that whenever a turbo substitutes for a HST^▸ (High Speed Train) on a Sunday afternoon service, that an extra unit be added at Oxford (there are plenty enough in the sidings). It shouldn't be for a train crew to request this.

It shouldn't be, Steve, no. Sadly those in the ivory tower don't always realise what has to be done to avoid hell for the poor passengers. They do have a difficult job and it's difficult to know what trains always load heavily and those that aren't, but sadly it's often a case of 'bung a turbo on it and job done!' Now that might be adequate on a Saturday lunchtime, but as you say, on Sundays all the HST's leaving Oxford from 15:50 to 19:50 are all very full as they've come from the Cotswold Line and pick up a mountain of passengers at Oxford. Things quieten down slightly over winter, but still a 3-car simply can't cope with the numbers.

There was an occasion a couple of years ago when a 2-car 165 was put on a Hereford-Paddington Sunday evening working. That episode made the local press, and I'd hoped lessons might've got through to those in Control (I know one of them is an active poster on here, but I've forgotten his nickname, so perhaps this post will also prompt him to alert them to the problem?).

It is easier in terms of stock balancing and uses less drivers to just let a 3-car take the whole load, but on a Sunday afternoon that really isn't on I'm afraid.

[Nostalgic]

I've never understood why the powers that be consider that a Turbo is sufficient or satisfactory for the 18:30 Hereford departure to Paddington. An Adelante used to be allocated to this service and before that, an HST^▸ (High Speed Train), if my memory serves right. How FGW^▸ (First Great Western) could believe that a three-car suburban set could be appropriate for a 150 mile, three-and-a half journey is beyond me. I suppose that the answer is that they just don't care?  For my part, I am now compelled to use the 16:30, which is the last reasonably comfortable train up to London via Evesham on Sunday, so far as I'm aware. 

[IndustryInsider]

I've never understood why the powers that be consider that a Turbo is sufficient or satisfactory for the 18:30 Hereford departure to Paddington.

Another well loaded train which, I agree, really should be a HST^▸ (High Speed Train). Although loadings boarding at Oxford have tailed off slightly by 20:50, there's still people standing every week. Sunday evening continues to get busier and busier on virtually all routes - most of the early evening HST arrivals at Paddington are at least full to seating capacity.

[willc]

The Turbo on the 18.30 is a recent development and is another manifestation of over-the-top cost-cutting zeal, like putting a Turbo on the weekday 08.58 from Malvern. Just as in that case, I'm sure FGW^▸ (First Great Western) will insist there are average passenger counts proving that it's absolutely fine and the Turbo can cope with the 18.30's loading - never mind the passenger experience on a crowded and still unrefurbished Turbo.

While from December - despite FGW saying earlier in the year there there was no capacity problem - we're getting another Turbo on weekday mornings covering the main stations at the eastern end of the line, running 20 minutes in front of the service from Malvern, I'm afraid that looking at the train info on the LM^▸ (London Midland - recent franchise) site it appears that the 18.30 from Hereford on Sunday is going to be stuck with a Turbo, going by the trolley refreshments symbol.

As for control, yes it's a difficult job, but reaching for the nearest Turbo and sending it up the Cotswold Line whenever there's a problem with stock is a habit they just can't break - it's operationally very convenient, because the trains are cleared for the route (unlike, say, to Cheltenham) and the crews can operate either Turbos or HSTs^▸ (High Speed Train), but sending a Turbo out on the 15.51 should just not be allowed, never, ever, however difficult things are. Someone from Swindon really should come out to Oxford one afternoon and see the loading on this service for themselves.

And even on Saturday lunchtimes, Turbos aren't necessarily able to cope. I still remember a particularly nasty journey on a two-car 165 a couple of years ago, which arrived in and then left Oxford in late morning full and standing (not as grossly overcrowded as it can get on the 17.31 after a cancellation at Oxford of the 15.51, but not much better). Even a three-car would have been full in standard. The numbers on board had only really thinned out by Moreton-in-Marsh, where I mercifully took my leave.

What the Cotswold Line really needs outside the peaks and the busiest Saturday and Sunday services is something with about 280-300 seats, in 2+2 layout in standard class, able to mix it with HSTs on the fast lines east of Didcot. You could call it an Adelante...

[inspector_blakey]

Adelantes always seemed ideal for less-busy Cotswold services. How do numbers of seats compare to a 3-car Turbo? On the few occasions I used them (soon after they were introduced) it struck me that they were pretty full considering that only months before those services had been Turbos.

They seemed to get a rather bad press though from various commentators, notably Tony Berkeley writing in the Railway Magazine who lamented frequently and extensively about their use in the Cotswolds, despite their somewhat superior passenger comforts compared to what went before. I never did work that one out.

[IanL]

A three car turbo and Adelante actually have a very similar number of seats just in a little more comfort. Another reason I am glad they are gone (in addition to noisy, unreliable) as they didnt offer significant additional capacity.

[Nostalgic]

Adelantes may not have had many more seats than the Turbos do, but those that there were, were considerably more comfortable than the perches currently provided in Turbos - trains that seem to have been designed for midgets.

Despite their acknowledged faults, Adelantes were able to get away from stations very quickly, thanks to their rapid acceleration and to their automatic door closing system.  It often seems to take an eternity to get an HST^▸ (High Speed Train) away from a rural, unstaffed station, usually due to thoughtless passengers who seem to think that there will be a Porter on hand to shut the doors after them. 

[IndustryInsider]

Also, the number of seats quoted assumes that with the 2+3 seating all six seats together in a turbo are taken up. In reality it only takes two average sized males sat in the window and aisle seats to mean that fitting in a third person in the middle is very difficult. I've said before, if a turbo isn't too full it is still a perfectly pleasant train to travel in, even for longer journeys down the Cotswolds - not ideal, but acceptable. As soon as they get full though, they become horrible!

[willc]

Indeed - about the only ways you will ever fill every seat on a Turbo are: desperation on a grossly overcrowded service; loading the train entirely with small children; or breeding a new kind of human without any arms.

So how about being radical and ripping out all the seats when they are finally refreshed and putting in new 2+2 seats designed to accommodate something resembling an average-sized human adult, rather like the refreshed FGW^▸ (First Great Western) 150s - pic here http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/File:150233_C_Half_Internal.JPG

But I must confess I'm not au fait with what loads and actual use of the seats (ie do lots of people actually wedge themselves into the middle seat of the three) are like on the stoppers east of Reading in the peaks, so someone else may be better placed to comment on whether this would be a good idea.

Certainly it would make for a more comfortable train outside those times of the day and a wider aisle would surely help movement up and down a busy train. The existing aisle is so narrow between the 3+2s it's almost impossible to get down it without bumping into someone sitting on the aisle seats, whose arms inevitably stick out.

[johoare]

But I must confess I'm not au fait with what loads and actual use of the seats (ie do lots of people actually wedge themselves into the middle seat of the three) are like on the stoppers east of Reading in the peaks, so someone else may be better placed to comment on whether this would be a good idea.

Ok so it wasn't East of Reading.. But last Sunday I was on a turbo, sat next to the window (I do wonder why I did that now, but I did need somewhere to put my cup of tea and there was as tiny table there ..) Not only did just someone sit in the middle seat, but someone quite large sat in the middle seat, I was very squashed.. I think it made me remember why sitting in the aisle seat on turbos is slightly better (although as you also say, then you get bumped into as people walk down the train). Getting off at my stop was interesting too 

[inspector_blakey]

I'm not sure the 150s are hugely superior as regards seat width. I'm not exactly broad in the beam but my shoulders are too wide for the seats on 150s too. Bearing in mind that the 150 body is somewhat narrower than a Turbo and there's a much wider aisle in the 150 I don't know how much real difference in seat width there is; probably some, but maybe not a lot. We need two posters with tape measures, one in the Bristol area and one in the Thames Valley, methinks, who don't mind measuring seat widths and getting funny looks on their journey 

[willc]

It's not really about seat cushion width. I doubt there's anything in it in that respect and the Turbo seats are wide enough - it's just that there's nowhere for your arms to go - and that applies to the 2+2 Turbo seats as much as the 3+2s.

The obvious advantage that the 150 seats have is that there are armrests, including a central one, rather than the seat cushions being jammed in right next to each other, as they are in Turbos - and right next to the side of the coach in the case of the window seats, so you can't actually sit straight in them unless you are very small, because your arm gets in the way.