Cotswold Line journeys operated by Turbos - planned and HST substitutions

[whole diary]

[willc]

Repeated assertion - no, I used the word safety many posts in, and you then jumped all over it. I acknowledged the odds of anything happening were remote but a lot of it is about perception, as Bob Crowe knows, and this is a train covering 120 miles on a two-hour journey, not a London commuter train where people are travelling a matter of miles. If Mr O'Leary could do this on a plane, people probably wouldn't feel very safe there either.

Yes, the CLPG^» (Cotswold Line Promotion Group - about) has politely raised this specific issue with substitutions on the 15.51, and the trend back to Turbos, and been politely rebuffed.

You say the Cotswold Line simply suffers because they can just send a Turbo but among the medium/long-distance routes out of Paddington it is the only one where this option can be used, so yes, it does have a unique status in this respect, not least in the specific case of the 15.51 and the specific factors that influence the large number of people who use it and explain it being allocated an HST^▸ (High Speed Train) in the first place - factors which just go out of the window if it's the 15.48 v the 15.51 - in the "current situation" and on other occasions. I seem to recall the 15.48 was one of the last regular 180 workings west of Didcot, which may be a clue as to its typical load.

And you can bet your life that if they were able to and did send a Turbo to Swindon and Cheltenham, Bristol or Cardiff, someone would be complaining long and hard about it here, because they would find it just as unsatisfactory and uncomfortable on a busy long-distance service as those of us along the Cotswold Line do.

I want people to enjoy satisfactory, comfortable journeys on FGW^▸ (First Great Western) to this area and go away with good memories, not thinking 'that was horrible, I won't be getting the train again'. And on a route serving key tourist/day-trip/weekend-away territory, such as Oxford and the Cotswolds, that could do a lot more long-term harm to FGW's bottom line than a penalty payment, especially when another rail option between London and Oxford is on the horizon.

And one can only keep everything crossed that a Turbo does not appear on the 15.51 today or tomorrow, when lots of people will be trying to get to Great Malvern to catch the free shuttle buses to Eastnor Castle for the Big Chill. Has anyone warned the control room?

[IndustryInsider]

Has anyone warned the control room?

Warned?  I expect so.  Able or willing to do anything about it?  I doubt very much.  The 13:21 PAD^» (Paddington (London) - next trains)-GMV was reported full and standing and has steadily lost time en-route and has left Oxford 12 minutes late.  I dread to think what'll happen if a HST^▸ (High Speed Train) doesn't turn up on the 15:51 today!  That being said, it's the return journey which always causes the most trouble as the great unwashed tend to turn up en-mass!

[IndustryInsider]

Though if FGW^▸ (First Great Western)'s key problem is the rakes of Mk3 trailers with wheel flats from front to back and fried electrics, then surely all you need would be the XC^▸ (Cross Country Trains (franchise)) trailers between two FGW Class 43s, as was done with that MML^» (Midland Main Line. - about) set not long ago. One XC set is, I believe, spare Monday to Friday for the summer, with another spare Tuesday-Thursday and I see EMT^» (East Midlands Trains - about) has come up with an HST^▸ (High Speed Train) to loan to East Coast to cover for Mk4 overhauls.

Oh, sorry I thought that the shortage was with power cars at the moment (i.e. the 'tree incident' etc.)  Mind you, there still might be problems as the XC sets don't have Selective Door Operating as far as I know - not sure, but wouldn't be surprised if that now goes against FGW's safety case?

[willc]

I've never been able to form a clear picture from anything posted here or elsewhere as to what exactly it is that FGW^▸ (First Great Western) is short of, given that there are 118 Class 43s in the fleet, with only 53 sets of coaches and what someone said was a requirement for 50 sets in traffic. If they are struggling to turn out 50 sets each day, due to a lack of 43s, that would suggest nearly a sixth of the fleet has been unavailable for assorted reasons for the past couple of weeks, which seems hard to believe, even allowing for programmed overhauls, encounters with trees, or anything else. It doesn't exactly bode well for the notion that the HSTs^▸ (High Speed Train) will just keep going forever if electrification is delayed.

If you borrowed a set or trailers, would the ORR^» (Office of Rail and Road formerly Office of Rail Regulation - about) be so hard-hearted as to not allow it to shuttle up and down between London and Bristol or Cardiff, where SDO^▸ (Selective Door Opening) is neither here nor there?

Yes, the control room's hands are tied to a large degree but if the passengers on the 13.21 were as "disruptive" as those on the 11.22 appear to have been

14:34 Great Malvern to London Paddington due 17:27
This train has been delayed at Great Malvern and is now 25 minutes late from Great Malvern.This is due to disruptive passengers earlier.
Last Updated: 05/08/2010 15:11

I wouldn't like to think what they might be like if a 165 or 166 is turned out for the 15.51 today or tomorrow. Happily, with minutes to go, no sign of a notice about the 15.51 today.

[inspector_blakey]

Oh, sorry I thought that the shortage was with power cars at the moment (i.e. the 'tree incident' etc.)  Mind you, there still might be problems as the XC^▸ (Cross Country Trains (franchise)) sets don't have Selective Door Operating as far as I know - not sure, but wouldn't be surprised if that now goes against FGW^▸ (First Great Western)'s safety case?

Are there other peculiarities associated with the XC HST^▸ (High Speed Train) stock since it was converted from loco-hauled mark 3s, or was the conversion done to make them completely compatible with all HST trailers and powercars?

Think you're right about SDO^▸ (Selective Door Opening) - I'm assuming the EMT^» (East Midlands Trains - about) sets don't have it either. In all honesty I can't see FGW being too keen on having the odd rogue HST in the fleet, even as a temporary measure, that doesn't have SDO. Since the safety case will now take SDO into account, it would mean that no HST without the kit would be able to call at any short platform stations. Which would mean a lot of cancelled stops if such a train found its way onto a Penzance service, for example. In fact, are there any HST diagrams now that don't require SDO at some point during the day? Bristol, Swansea, Cardiff services are OK without it, but I think it's needed for calls at Slough, at least in the up direction, which probably rules out any Oxford services. Also required for Penzance and Carmarthen/Pembroke Dock services, plus W-s-M and anything taking the Great Way Round to Exeter or Plymouth. Is is also required for Exeter/Plymouth services using the B&H^▸ (Berks and Hants - railway line from Reading to Taunton via Westbury)?

And you can bet your life that if they were able to and did send a Turbo to Swindon and Cheltenham, Bristol or Cardiff, someone would be complaining long and hard about it here, because they would find it just as unsatisfactory and uncomfortable on a busy long-distance service as those of us along the Cotswold Line do.

True, but now you're shooting your own very sensible idea down and I don't really understand why. Yes there probably would be people who were unhappy. However, if there was the flexibility, both in terms of route availability and staff familiarity, to run the Turbo fleet across the region then Control would be in a position to make more "targeted" Turbo substitutions onto less busy services where they'll cause the least possible trouble, rather than it always having to be the Cotswold line that takes the hit since that's the only place they can currently be sent. The occasional Turbo substitution here and there spread around different routes and hopefully quieter trains would surely be preferable to repeated Turbo vice HST on busy Cotswold trains.

As a footnote, I'm not aware of there ever having been any particular rebellion when the Turbos were regularly used on Bristol-Oxford services back in the day, and that's when they were in a somewhat more rat-infested state than currently (windows held closed with sellotape, ripped and fraying seat covers, barely functioning toilets, etc etc). I've probably said here before, mea culpa, that I wasn't keen on them and would take an HST alternative if there was a sensible one available, but plenty of others seemed to be perfectly happy with them as every time I caught one it was well loaded. Whilst less comfortable than an HST more often than not the convenience outweighed the moderate discomfort which was hardly intolerable for that journey.

[willc]

14:34 Great Malvern to London Paddington due 17:27
This train has been delayed at Great Malvern and is now 25 minutes late from Great Malvern.This is due to disruptive passengers earlier.
Last Updated: 05/08/2010 15:11

And neatly illustrating the leisurely nature of the current timetable, but no doubt thanks to good driving, not sitting at Evesham for eight minutes and not actually needing 44 minutes to run between Moreton and Oxford, this train was just four minutes down by Reading, so should be in good time to form the 17.50. Strangely, the CLPG^» (Cotswold Line Promotion Group - about) says that in recent discussions of timetable drafts FGW^▸ (First Great Western) is curiously reluctant to attempt even modest speed-ups from next year.

[Steve Bray]

From what I've seen, from next May, the 1434 will spend a mere 21 minutes at Shrub Hill. It will still arrive Paddington at 1727.

[willc]

Was up the station end of Moreton-in-Marsh at about 5.30pm and bumped into a long-standing user of the 15.51 and its antecedents who has seen it all over the years and had just returned from Oxford. His summary (even with an HST^▸ (High Speed Train) today): "That wasn't pleasant. Absolutely packed."

[bigdaz]

Now, I don't know very much about the area or the general running of the railway, but would there be less overcrowding if...

1548 went London - Swindon - Cheltenham Spa - Worcester

1551 went London - Oxford - Worcester - Cheltenham Spa

This would give two trains and a different combination for people possibly?  What do you think?

[JayMac]

Unfortunately, bigdaz, you can't take services in isolation. Both the services you mention are just one journey of a particular train's daily diagram. Extending the services as you suggested has knock-on consequences.

The return workings have to be re-timetabled, paths have to be found, staff rosters have to be changed, route knowledge may have be learned, a business case has to be assessed...... Just some examples of the complexities that train planners face.

[Chris from Nailsea]

From FGW^▸ (First Great Western) live updates:

Service incidents

15:51 London Paddington to Worcester Shrub Hill due 18:07
This train will be formed of 3 coaches instead of 8.
Last Updated: 11/08/2010 14:08

18:49 Worcester Foregate Street to London Paddington due 21:29
This train will be formed of 3 coaches instead of 8.
Last Updated: 11/08/2010 14:08

[Btline]

A "Meet the Manager" session is due to take place on this train in March 2011. I wonder whether whether they'll Turbo it on that day?

[devon_metro]

1L62 had a little incident in Wales so Paddington was missing 1 HST^▸ (High Speed Train) set at 15:30, presumably something stepped up.

[Worcester_Passenger]

From live updates:

17:50 London Paddington to Worcester Shrub Hill due 20:23
    This train has been revised.This train will be formed of 3 coaches instead of 8.
    The following catering alteration will apply: No catering service available.
    Last Updated: 12/08/2010 18:33

18:30 London Paddington to Weston-Super-Mare due 20:53
    This train will be started from Bristol Temple Meads.It will no longer call at: London Paddington, Reading, Didcot Parkway, Swindon, Chippenham and Bath Spa.This train will be formed of 3 coaches instead of 8.This is due to an earlier train fault.
    Last Updated: 12/08/2010 16:52

18:51 London Paddington to Oxford due 19:50
    This train will be formed of 2 coaches instead of 8.
    Last Updated: 12/08/2010 18:22

21:00 Worcester Foregate Street to London Paddington due 23:37
    This train has been revised.This train will be formed of 3 coaches instead of 8.
    The following catering alteration will apply: No catering service available.
    Last Updated: 12/08/2010 18:33

Seem to have three HSTs^▸ (High Speed Train) missing this evening.

[IndustryInsider]

Seem to have three HSTs^▸ (High Speed Train) missing this evening.

I believe there was an issue regarding getting HST's off of Old Oak Common - due to 'staffing issues' I was told.  I bet the 18:50 Paddington to Oxford was fun as a 2-car Turbo and no doubt some of the inner-suburban services were short formed as Turbo's bailed out the longer distance services yet again - I know the 18:57 Paddington to Reading was a 3-car vice 5-car!