Another HST looks set to be 'Turbotised' from December

[whole diary]

[dog box]

ummhh....just to clarify a few points for some of the previous posters there are in fact DMU^▸ (Diesel Multiple Unit) trains that run each morning from Bristol to Penzance and these normally take the shape of a 2 car 150 or if its a bad day a single 153....sometimes refurbished sometimes not, very seldom are class 158 used.
this journey is close to Three hours and i expect if asked regular passengers would see the use of a Turbo on this route as a step up.
Also you would probably get the same answer from passengers bouncing up to Barnstaple on a 142 and from would be passengers at Melksham who would love any train at a reasonable time.
Turbos might  not be ideal for the cotswold line but they are better than what some passengers in other areas have to put up with.
And as for The 180s i understand the avaliabilty of spares for there units are now becoming a problem

[inspector_blakey]

I guess the rot started when some geographic illiterate decided that the Thames franchise extended to Worcester / Malvern

Short memory...? The rot set in when BR^▸ (British Rail(ways)) decided to operate the Cotswold line more or less entirely using the Thames Turbo fleet in the 1990s, nothing at all to do with FGW^▸ (First Great Western). I know others will bounce up and down complaining about FGW's promises in 2004, as happens every time i make this point, but in fact since FGW have been the sole operator on the Cotswold Line there are now significantly more "intercity"-quality services than pre-2004, when there were two return HSTs^▸ (High Speed Train) a day and that was your lot.

And dog box's point is a good one, there are many other examples all over the national network of DMUs^▸ (Diesel Multiple Unit) which are (debatably) inferior to Turbo stock operating services of a similar length. Because line speeds are relatively low and staff have the appropriate traction knowledge, the Cotswold line has a fair bit of operating flexibility - you can stick a Turbo on a service rather than cancelling it, for example. That's not (currently) the case with routes to Bristol/Swansea/west country etc, where staff aren't trained to operate Turbo equipment and one of them bumbling around at 90 mph in the middle of a 125 mph railway causes big capacity problems.

I know there's a tendency from some (but not all, of course) Cotswold line users to have a chip on their shoulder about how FGW seems to deliberately neglect them with a ridiculous subtext that it all seems to be done largely out of spite. However, the current situation has arisen because of a confluence of lots of different events that have happened at various stages in the line's history and would appear to this unbiased observer to be coincidence rather than some kind of conspiracy.

Edited to fix quote. bignosemac 

[Andy W]

"The rot set in when BR^▸ (British Rail(ways)) decided to operate the Cotswold line more or less entirely using the Thames Turbo fleet in the 1990s, nothing at all to do with FGW^▸ (First Great Western)"

And where exactly did I say that it had anything to do with FGW?

If you are suggesting the FGW are woefully inadequate in other parts of their franchise so be it. Hardly something to be proud of !!

[IndustryInsider]

The rot set in when BR^▸ (British Rail(ways)) decided to operate the Cotswold line more or less entirely using the Thames Turbo fleet in the 1990s, nothing at all to do with FGW^▸ (First Great Western).

I think the rot set in far before then - in fact the introduction of the Turbos was, at the time, gratefully received by most users of the line.

Remember what preceded them?  Those lovely Class 155's that ran as far as Oxford, with the odd, infrequent service in-between operated by loco hauled or HST^▸ (High Speed Train)'s!  I think the rot set in during the early 80's when the line was deemed unsuitable for anything loco-hauled due to the poor state of the track - fortunately the Cotswold Line Promotion Group, and others, stepped in to stop the decline into what may well have led to closure.

Has anyone, I'm thinking of Willc in particular, got a timetable for the early to mid-80's, so we can compare?

[willc]

this journey is close to Three hours

And exactly how many people do actually sit on a 150 for two or three hours all the way across Devon and Cornwall? Not many, I'll warrant. They are operating a local stopping service on a line shared with hourly XC^▸ (Cross Country Trains (franchise)) Voyagers/HSTs^▸ (High Speed Train) out to Plymouth, plus assorted FGW^▸ (First Great Western) HSTs. For large chunks of the day, for large chunks of the week on the Cotswold Line it's just Turbos.

dog box's point is a good one, there are many other examples all over the national network of DMUs^▸ (Diesel Multiple Unit) which are (debatably) inferior to Turbo stock operating services of a similar length.

None of which are operating nominally express services to and from London on routes which were promised - and let's just say it again, since it was a cornerstone of FGW's bid dislodging Thames Trains in 2004 - "InterCity quality and comfort throughout the day" as a step up from the previous service dominated by Turbos.

The rot set in when BR^▸ (British Rail(ways)) decided to operate the Cotswold line more or less entirely using the Thames Turbo fleet in the 1990s, nothing at all to do with FGW.

Maybe this is meant to be ironic, but I'm not really sure. What actually happened in 1993 was that BR scrapped the old timetable where everything except the two Hereford peak trains (plus the old off-peak Malvern and back HST which often gets overlooked, even though it was the first HST service on the route) stopped at Oxford by extending most services through to and from Paddington.

There wasn't the money at that stage to produce a more bespoke train than a 166 (a cut-price conversion of a basic suburban dmu design), nor to justify four cars, as the new timetable was bit of a shot in the dark, but based on some educated hunches by NSE^▸ (Network South East), which proved to be entirely correct, as traffic took off.

Long before the end of Thames, the inadequacy of the 166s on a number of services, due to ever growing passenger numbers, was plain to see but with a short franchise they had no incentive to do anything about it. Come 2004, FGW's ability to offer 180s, with the far better passenger environment they had, plus a handy few extra seats, which were normal human-sized, tipped the balance when set against two more years of the same from Thames.

every time i make this point

And every time you make it, there are fewer HSTs running on the route. Yes, there are more than at the start of 2004 but FGW moved over the next couple of years to a position where there were HSTs or 180s on pretty much everything that moved, bar the halts trains (and associated workings such as the last London-Worcester of the day) and a pair of out and back off-peak Turbo workings, one in the morning and one in the afternoon. The late-evening services out of London today are HSTs for stock positioning purposes and the first couple of trains towards London in the morning are HSTs because of the loadings from Oxford, not because there are huge numbers of insomniac commuters living in Worcestershire.

you can stick a Turbo on a service rather than cancelling it

But so many duties have gone back to Turbos now that it's just a Turbo, full stop. Substitutions are all but unknown because there's precious little left to substitute. You can't substitute the evening trains running west because you would have a riot on your hands if a Turbo rolled into Oxford of a morning.  

the current situation has arisen because of a confluence of lots of different events

What? FGW decided they didn't want to pay the running costs of 180s and told us they would get more HSTs instead, despite people telling them they were far too big for off-peak duties, even if FGW put some effort into marketing off-peak travel on the line, which it never has. Then they realised what they had been told was true and decided they didn't want to foot the running costs for the HSTs either. So what was left, oh yes, the Turbos, which FGW had branded inadequate for the route when bidding for the Thames Valley services in 2003-4.

Hardly a confluence of events. More a series of volte-faces by FGW's managers, leaving the quality of service most of the time off-peak and at weekends back where it was under Thames. And yet you still seem to suggest that we have nothing to complain about, despite all the things FGW said - openly and unprompted - in 2004 about the quality of service we could expect.

Some geographic illiterate decided that the Thames franchise extended to Worcester / Malvern

While I agree with much of what you say here Andy, what was wrong with taking a decision to align the management of the line with where the main passenger flows are headed? Ie to Oxford and London. Rather more logical than it being run from Birmingham, as it was before NSE took over.

Insider, I will delve into my CD^▸ (Capital Delivery) of back issues of Cotswold and Malvern Line News to see if I can find some timetable details from the 80s but it may have to wait a while as work will be pretty hectic in the run-up to Christmas. Certainly there were just eight trains each way in the 1978-9 service (Terry Worrall quoted in John Boynton's OWW^▸ (Oxford Worcester and Wolverhampton) book from 2003). I think off-peak then was a mix of dmus west of Oxford and a loco-hauled Paddington-Worcester or two.

[dog box]

Willc your prob right not many folk travel from BRI^» (Bristol Temple Meads - next trains) to PNZ on a unit..but there again i have not really ever seen severe over crowding form Hereford to Worcester. sure the turbos can load up from Evesham into Oxford.
The point i am making in passengers down in the West would Revel in the use of A Turbo vice 142,143, 150. 153 , the class 165/166 is a far better unit than this collection of BR^▸ (British Rail(ways)) Stock.
New units are needed, but thats another can of worms, and as for class 180 these things were poorly designed ,poorly built, expensive to run, expensive to maintain, prone to faults etc etc

[IndustryInsider]

Insider, I will delve into my CD^▸ (Capital Delivery) of back issues of Cotswold and Malvern Line News to see if I can find some timetable details from the 80s but it may have to wait a while as work will be pretty hectic in the run-up to Christmas. Certainly there were just eight trains each way in the 1978-9 service (Terry Worrall quoted in John Boynton's OWW^▸ (Oxford Worcester and Wolverhampton) book from 2003). I think off-peak then was a mix of dmus west of Oxford and a loco-hauled Paddington-Worcester or two.

Thanks, Will - I may be able to get hold of an old timetable from the 70's as well.  I'll see.

[Richard Fairhurst]

Brilliant posting, Will.

Remember what preceded them?  Those lovely Class 155's that ran as far as Oxford, with the odd, infrequent service in-between operated by loco hauled or HST^▸ (High Speed Train)'s!

155s are much more suitable for Hereford-Oxford than Turbos, though I'll grant you that the 75mph top speed makes them unsuitable for Oxford-Paddington (158s, on the other hand...). 2+2 seating and proper full-width tables - yes please.

[rogerw]

If I recall it correctly the original intention was for Worcester - Oxford to be worked by 158s.  Then NSE^▸ (Network South East) needed new stock for Waterloo - Exeter and the last of the 158 order was diverted and converted to the 159s with the agreement that 166s would cover the cotswold line.

[willc]

sure the turbos can load up from Evesham into Oxford.

Quite so, and that's where the capacity of the 180s was so helpful, as they have seats designed to fit a full person in them, and more of them, than a 166, not 2+3s that were designed for people with no arms doing short suburban journeys.

And really not sure I can agree that a refurbished 150 with 2+2 seats is that inferior to a 165, and definitely not to a tatty, unrefreshed 166 with broken air con.

As for 180s, HT^▸ (Hull Trains) and GC^» (Great Central Railway - link to heritage line) do now seem to have got the measure of the things (and where are HT's sets maintained, why, Old Oak Common), they were absolutely ideal for all but the busiest Cotswold Line services (indeed could almost have been purpose-built for the route) and as for bad design, in what way? The passenger environment is far superior to their contemporary the Voyager. Maybe you mean the silly positioning of bits of the engine cooling kit but that's not something that passengers on the Cotswold Line were worrying themselves about, they just knew they were a far superior train to travel in than a Turbo, refreshed or not. I, for one, would have them back like a shot if FGW^▸ (First Great Western) and DafT could agree a deal to bring the five EC sets back to these parts.

[Steve Bray]

I have 2 Pocket Timetables for the Cotswold Line - the Summer 1974 timetable and Summer 1984 timetable.

In Summer 1974, on weekdays, there were through services from Paddington to Worcester Shrub Hill departing at 1005, 1235, 1505, 1715, 1815 and 2125, as well as a 1925 that went via Swindon. The 1235, 1505 and 1715 went through to Hereford.

From Shrub Hill, there were direct trains at 0700, 0745, 0905, 1150, 1615 and 1855. An 0654 service went via Swindon.

By Summer 1984, through services from Paddington were reduced to only a 1025 (arriving Shrub Hill at 1222), 1705, 1807 and a Fridays Only 1903. From Shrub Hill, through trains departed at 0653, 0753 and 1400 (which took just 1 hr 54 minutes).

[IndustryInsider]

So, just three direct trains a day.  Back in the old days when things were much better!   

[Super Guard]

this journey is close to Three hours

And exactly how many people do actually sit on a 150 for two or three hours all the way across Devon and Cornwall? Not many, I'll warrant. They are operating a local stopping service on a line shared with hourly XC^▸ (Cross Country Trains (franchise)) Voyagers/HSTs^▸ (High Speed Train) out to Plymouth, plus assorted FGW^▸ (First Great Western) HSTs. For large chunks of the day, for large chunks of the week on the Cotswold Line it's just Turbos.

Clearly more than you are aware of.  Plenty of folk do the trip, hence the filthy looks we get when asked where the buffet car is.  Plenty of cheap advance tickets are taken up on these trains.

Units are full and standing a lot of time for peak connections from Penzance into Plymouth-Paddington services too.

Anyone arriving into Penzance before 1300 has no choice but a 150 or 153, as the first HST arrives ~1315.  After that, every other hour pretty much is a unit from Plymouth-Penzance.  (I can't comment on XC services, but precious few continue to Penzance.)

Plymouth to Penazance is a TWO HOUR journey, so yes, plenty of travellers have to travel on units that are substandard compared to a turbo for an unreasonable amount of time IMO^▸ (in my opinion), so there would be pretty much zero sympathy for you or any other Cotswold travellers.

I understand no-one is going to be happy with a downgrade of traction, but it occurs all over the South-West.  158s do not venture west of Taunton (unless they are on a PGN-CDF^» (Cardiff - next trains) once a day service.)  A downgrade from 158s to a 142 on Barnstaple, Exmouth or Paignton services is a joke at times and comparable to a HST/180 down to a Turbo, but we're stuck with them.

With respect, I would appreciate you not dismissing points when you clearly have limited knowledge on other areas of the network.  We are dismissed enough as it is by the DfT^» (Department for Transport - about) and Government as it is, without journalists assisting the bandwagon.

[willc]

a. I am writing here in a personal, not a professional capacity, so please don't bring my job into it, unless I have chosen to do so, which I have on occasion, usually when someone takes a cheap shot at journalists.

b.

Units are full and standing a lot of time for peak connections from Penzance into Plymouth-Paddington services too

Which units are these? The weekday timetable says there is one dmu among a string of HSTs^▸ (High Speed Train) and Voyagers from Penzance towards Plymouth from 5am until 08.45. In the afternoon, HSTs at 16.00 and 17.39 sandwich a dmu at 16.44. Maybe you mean the summer timetable, when it wouldn't exactly be surprising if West Country trains were busy? And on the Cotswold Line our issue is not peak capacity, though another southbound train wouldn't go amiss post-redoubling, it is post-peak capacity on weekdays, especially in the mornings towards Oxford and London, a number of Saturday services, and on Sunday, especially the 6.30pm from Hereford. A Turbo all the way.

c.

Anyone arriving into Penzance before 1300 has no choice but a 150 or 153, as the first HST arrives ~1315.

And were there lots of express sets in use previously? just as we were told by FGW^▸ (First Great Western) that putting Turbos back was the result of matching the capacity of trains in use with passenger numbers, I'm sure they would say exactly the same about morning demand from Plymouth towards Penzance.

d.

Clearly more than you are aware of.

But nothing like the numbers here, and not all year round, which is the case here, due to our proximity to London.

e.

units that are substandard compared to a turbo

Been on any unrefreshed 165s and 166s lately? And those 150s and 153s have 2+2 seats, rather more suitable for two-hour journeys. Turbos don't. They have inner-suburban 3+2. And kept in proper nick, your 150s and 153s are perfectly adequate for the length of most journeys people are doing on a regular basis. Unless every seat on your services is taken through from Plymouth to Penzance... up here 200-plus people doing 100 minutes between Moreton and London is not unusual, with plenty of that number doing the two hours plus to/from Evesham and Worcester

f.

I understand no-one is going to be happy with a downgrade of traction, but it occurs all over the South-West.  158s do not venture west of Taunton (unless they are on a PGN-CDF^» (Cardiff - next trains) once a day service.)  A downgrade from 158s to a 142 on Barnstaple, Exmouth or Paignton services is a joke at times and comparable to a HST/180 down to a Turbo, but we're stuck with them.

And very soon, you will be getting lots more 150s. Tired around the edges and needing a good makeover, but a sight better than a 142 under any circumstances. We are stuck with what we've got, for years, unless the 180s do make a surprise comeback.

And the local services in the West Country were never told they would be getting "InterCity quality and comfort throughout the day"

[Super Guard]

a. I am writing here in a personal, not a professional capacity, so please don't bring my job into it, unless I have chosen to do so, which I have on occasion, usually when someone takes a cheap shot at journalists.

Fair enough.

Which units are these? The weekday timetable says there is one dmu among a string of HSTs^▸ (High Speed Train) and Voyagers from Penzance towards Plymouth from 5am until 08.45. In the afternoon, HSTs at 16.00 and 17.39 sandwich a dmu at 16.44. Maybe you mean the summer timetable, when it wouldn't exactly be surprising if West Country trains were busy? And on the Cotswold Line our issue is not peak capacity, though another southbound train wouldn't go amiss post-redoubling, it is post-peak capacity on weekdays, especially in the mornings towards Oxford and London, a number of Saturday services, and on Sunday, especially the 6.30pm from Hereford. A Turbo all the way.

The original point made was BRI^» (Bristol Temple Meads - next trains)-PNZ unit, so I was talking about travelling West.  From EXD^» (Exeter St Davids - next trains) units to Penzance are as follows:  0655, 0813, 0936.  The first HST of the day leaves EXD at 1015 arriving 1317.

And were there lots of express sets in use previously? just as we were told by FGW^▸ (First Great Western) that putting Turbos back was the result of matching the capacity of trains in use with passenger numbers, I'm sure they would say exactly the same about morning demand from Plymouth towards Penzance.

I don't disagree at all with you, my point was not to dismiss another area of the FGW network that traction has gone backwards and that the line is well used.

And very soon, you will be getting lots more 150s. Tired around the edges and needing a good makeover, but a sight better than a 142 under any circumstances. We are stuck with what we've got, for years, unless the 180s do make a surprise comeback.

We've been told forever and a day that 142s are "going back up North soon" (end of next year now i've heard)... and 150s are on the way... It'll hopefully happen at some point, but it really feels like PR^▸ (Public Relations) spin at the moment