Is there anyway to find out a couple of hours in advance what type of train....

[whole diary]

[Mookiemoo]

Is going to run.

Example scenario - I am doing weekend cover for 48 hours.  Tomorrow I am in the office and need to get home on either the 1652 or the 1822 (PAD^» (Paddington (London) - next trains) - Worcester).  Both are advertised as 180s - which is fine.

but, 50% of the time the advertised 180s get replaced by 165 crap heaps - which are no fun for 2.5 hours.

I want to get the 1652 but if it is a 165 I'd rather wait for the 1822 - no odds to me what time I get home as I'm working straight regardless.  how can I find out in enough time to make the decision.

[martyjon]

Try the link ;-

http://www.firstgreatwestern.co.uk/LiveUpdateList.aspx


If the 180 is replaced by a 165 the above page just might report the service as short formed with 2 (or 3) carriages.

Not guaranteeing it though.

[Conner]

I think it does depend on who is in control of the srevice incidents at any one time as to whats gets written but I have seen incidents saying:
"This train will run short formed with 2/3 carriages."
"This train will be formed of a 2/3 car turbo."
"This train is 5 vice 2/3 car."
Any of those mean its a 165/6 but not all are listed.

[Mookiemoo]

Try the link ;-

http://www.firstgreatwestern.co.uk/LiveUpdateList.aspx


If the 180 is replaced by a 165 the above page just might report the service as short formed with 2 (or 3) carriages.

Not guaranteeing it though.

This is what I feared  - Tuesday the 1922 was alledgedly ok - until I asked the man in the booth what the 1922 was going to be - and found it was a turbo

:-(

[Timmer]

I can understand you wanting to avoid travelling back to Worcester on a 165/166 as they are not suited to long distance travel and are no subsitute for an 'Intercity' service. Some would say they aren't much cop for short distance travel either.

[vacman]

They are crap! especially compared to 158's.

[Timmer]

They are crap! especially compared to 158's.

No comparisson. I'd even go as far as to say that 158s are better than 170/172s and dare I say Voyagers as well  Which would lead me to say why not build more 158s/159s instead of the tin cans that are built today?

Sorry Mookiemoo for going a bit off topic here 

[Conner]

166's are meant to be the equvilant of a 158. 158's are the best DMU^▸ (Diesel Multiple Unit) i have travelled on execpt 180.

[dog box]

qprrule..158 are far better than a 180.......Adelante....Spanish for pile of Shite

[Mookiemoo]

I can understand you wanting to avoid travelling back to Worcester on a 165/166 as they are not suited to long distance travel and are no subsitute for an 'Intercity' service. Some would say they aren't much cop for short distance travel either.

I can just about cope with a 166 - atleast I get a full size table to work on.

Its the 165's that I dont like - but in my experience, you only get a 166 when its scheduled to be a turbo - if it replaces a 180 it is invariably a 165

:-(

[Mookiemoo]

They are crap! especially compared to 158's.

No comparisson. I'd even go as far as to say that 158s are better than 170/172s and dare I say Voyagers as well  Which would lead me to say why not build more 158s/159s instead of the tin cans that are built today?

Sorry Mookiemoo for going a bit off topic here 

No worries....I'm not a worshipper of on topic/off topic - sometimes conversations just evolve

I dont know what a 158/170/172 is .......... I'm merely a passenger.

I know 165/166 because I look for the number as it tells me whether I can have a productive two hours or have sit back and think of england

I know a 180

I know a voyager, a pendaline, a HST^▸ (High Speed Train) - because these I use often.

The only other trains I use are arriva on the south wales - machester line (I pick it up at ludlow which is where I live) and occasionally central on worc - cheltenham or kiddie - brum or brum - liverpool.  I dont like central much.  I have once done chiltern kiddie to marylebone (never again).

If any of these are 158/172 etc etc I can comment - I just dont know them by number

[Timmer]

qprrule..158 are far better than a 180.......Adelante....Spanish for pile of Shite

As I didn't do spanish at school, I shall take your word for it 

[Conner]

qprrule..158 are far better than a 180.......Adelante....Spanish for pile of Shite

I've only ever travelled on a 180 once and it was much better than any 158. Buffet,more seats, faster. And the spanish for Adelante is speed and reliabilty. Reliabilty LOL^▸ (laughing out loud).

[Mookiemoo]

Well i've decided....

I'll go to pad and see whats running.  If its a 165 turbo, i'll get the next train to newport and then up to ludlow

Would rahter oay the 45+upgrade that sit for two hours+ (actually closer to 2.40 when you factor in the inevitable delays) in one of those cattle cars.

[Timmer]

Well i've decided....

I'll go to pad and see whats running.  If its a 165 turbo, i'll get the next train to newport and then up to ludlow

Would rahter oay the 45+upgrade that sit for two hours+ (actually closer to 2.40 when you factor in the inevitable delays) in one of those cattle cars.

Hope its an HST^▸ (High Speed Train) or 180 for you so you end the day travelling in style.