Class 180 Adelantes - discussions, including their return to FGW

[whole diary]

[ChrisB]

And the DfT^» (Department for Transport - about) will have to come up with the funding too.

There are all sorts of permutations. Rather than try & report these as fact, why not start a 'Latest Stock Movement Rumour' thread?

[inspector_blakey]

Directors can make mistakes.  Apparently a FGW^▸ (First Great Western) director once said Pacers can't cross third rail, despite them having done so at Hunts Cross (Merseyside) and Chester for many years.

What utter nonsense. So the fact that directors may not remember every single technical detail means that they won't have a clue what their company is planning strategically in terms of rolling stock procurement?

Are you seriously suggesting that the directors of FGW are less credible than the increasing quantities of unsubstantiated tosh posted above?

[northwesterntrains]

Directors can make mistakes.  Apparently a FGW^▸ (First Great Western) director once said Pacers can't cross third rail, despite them having done so at Hunts Cross (Merseyside) and Chester for many years.

What utter nonsense. So the fact that directors may not remember every single technical detail means that they won't have a clue what their company is planning strategically in terms of rolling stock procurement?

That isn't what I was suggesting.  I didn't think I needed to quote the whole post by IndustryInsider but he/she said they went to Bristol on a Turbo and the FGW Director said apparently they aren't permitted to do that, so I quoted an instance from when FGW first got the 142s to back up their point of Directors can make mistakes.

Regarding rolling stock procurement I think everyone reading this thread knows that FGW have not agreed to take on the 180s, otherwise there would be an official announcement.  However, if they are looking at them as a possible option, which has been suggested, then it means they will need to look at the option in detail before agreeing any deal, which is then a possible source of rumours as FGW staff may have heard something, but FGW are saying they haven't agreed to take them on.  One of the first posts on the internet on Northern getting the 180s was by a Manchester Victoria conductor but was laughed off by most people as Northern didn't have intercity routes, but it proved to be true.  Saying that it won't be the case that TPE^▸ (Trans Pennine Express) and FGW both get 180s so one will prove to be just speculation/rumours.

[ChrisB]

If the DfT^» (Department for Transport - about) don't play ball, they'll end up in storage....

[Electric train]

My guess it will be at least 7 years before there are any thoughts about moving the 165/6 from there current duties, that is once Crossrail time table starts in December 2017, by which time (2015) the GW^▸ (Great Western) franchise will have been reentered.  Currently the TV and North Downs services need more 165/6's not less

[ChrisB]

THe turbos will fail the DDA^» (Disability Discrimination Act - about) in 2013ish....

[paul7575]

So, there's zero substance in anyone saying that FGW^▸ (First Great Western) turbos are going west. Or that route clearance is the obstacle.  Total crap.

That's a little harsh I think Chris.

The use of 165/6s on Cardiff - Portsmouth services (part of the Bristol area in rail terms),  was mentioned in the 'NRDF candidate schemes' section of consecutive Wessex route plans from 2007 - 2009, wording in the tables being this:

2009-2014 - Various locations - Gauge clearance for Class 165/166 units - Would enable deployment of this rolling stock on Cardiff to
Portsmouth services

Also, within the Adonis announcement on electrification, you'll find this:

Existing modern diesel trains that operate the suburban services into
London Paddington can then be transferred to provide additional capacity
on services in the Bristol area and the South West

I'd agree it all seems to have been airbrushed from current policy, based on the 2010 route plans and the new RUS^▸ (Route Utilisation Strategy), but it clearly must have been under consideration before the rolling stock plans were eventually thrown into chaos...

Paul
 

[northwesterntrains]

THe turbos will fail the DDA^» (Disability Discrimination Act - about) in 2013ish....

They'll be given grandfather rights if they do fail DDA.  The 323s also have very similar interiors and access as the 165s.

Why do you suggest they'll fail?  If it's a lack of wheelchair space then that's easily fixed by removing a few seats near a door.  If it's an accessible toilet then what about units that don't have toilets in the first place?

[super tm]

THe turbos will fail the DDA^» (Disability Discrimination Act - about) in 2013ish....

They'll be given grandfather rights if they do fail DDA.  The 323s also have very similar interiors and access as the 165s.

Why do you suggest they'll fail?  If it's a lack of wheelchair space then that's easily fixed by removing a few seats near a door.  If it's an accessible toilet then what about units that don't have toilets in the first place?

If a train does not have any toilets then all people are being treated equally.  AIUI^▸ (as I understand it) That is why Southern on some of their new stock did not put any toiets in.  There is then no requirement to have a disabled toilet.

[ChrisB]

The turbos will fail the DDA^» (Disability Discrimination Act - about) in 2013ish....

They'll be given grandfather rights if they do fail DDA.  The 323s also have very similar interiors and access as the 165s.

Why do you suggest they'll fail? 

As I understand it, it's the width of the doors / walkways from vestibule to seating....

[IndustryInsider]

The forthcoming GSM-R^▸ (Global System for Mobile communications - Railway.) network that Chiltern are currently fitting to their turbos would sort that problem - but there's currently no plans to fit it to FGW^▸ (First Great Western) turbos.

To add to my post from yesterday, perhaps the FGW Director can explain why some of the FGW Turbo fleet has already been fitted with a circuit breaker in the cab (i.e. an isolation switch if it is faulty) specifically marked 'GSM-R'? in the last couple of months?  I don't see why you'd fit equipment to isolate something which there are currently no plans to fit?

[ChrisB]

Hmmm - I've asked the question....

[paul7575]

AIUI^▸ (as I understand it) That is why Southern on some of their new stock did not put any toiets in.  There is then no requirement to have a disabled toilet.

Have you possibly been taken in by recent headlines?

Southern have not had any 'new stock' that they 'did not put toilets in'.  The recent stories are about overhauled 313s (ex LO) that have never had toilets at all.

Paul

[IndustryInsider]

Correct me if I'm wrong, but the only recent build units for mail line railways not built without a toilet are the 172's for London Overground aren't they?

I'm hoping to take a trip around the Overground network next week to see the revolution that is taking place there - last time I was there it was rather dilapidated 313's and 150's in charge!

[ChrisB]

At least you stood a chance of getting a seat on those....