Great Western Coffee Shop

I understand from two reliable sources that the introduction of IET services to Bedwyn, planned for January, has been delayed.

Apparently there is an issue with the cameras required for Driver Only Operation.  Work is being carried out to rectify this and gain safety approval.   In the meantime the Turbos will continue on that route.

From elsewhere:

The quality of image can be very poor.  I’m not surprised this action has been taken, though hopefully it’ll be a fairly simple fix.

As quoted on the WNXX Forum:

It must be fate - Send them to Portsmouth-Cardiff instead! (http://www.firstgreatwestern.info/coffeeshop/index.php?topic=20156.msg245337#msg245337)  ;D

[ducks...]

Or introduce guards on the services?

(ducks further)

And if you do that extend them all to Westbury.  (ducks even further)

I do have a number of spare tin hats if anyone feels the need !.

Ah well, at least we will hopefully get some 387's (as far as Newbury) on the B&H in January  ::)

Never did understand why its IETs to Bedwyn.  Better to have a full 387 service Paddington/Reading - Newbury (with occaisional stops on West Country trains), with a 165/166 diesel shuttle from Newbury to Bedwyn (the latter being covered by one unit all day).

The Bedwyn brigade did not like that suggestion one bit!

SandTEngineer, I'd borrow one of Western Pathfinder's tin hats and pop to Bedwyn, Hungerford or Kintbury….  ;)

That was of course the intention stated in the 2015 stakeholder brief. 

I guess they must have forgotten to consult the right stakeholders, because it didn’t survive long at all...

Paul

I would be interested to know (if anybody does), what the actual rail usage each day is from Bedwyn/Hungerford/Kintbury that justifies an hourly 5 coach through service to Reading/London?  I accept that a through service may be justified in the peaks.

I don't need to wear a tin hat as I have a thick skin grown over many years of hard graft in the S&T trade..... :P ;D

Berks and Hants services are a very interesting study.

Today, there's a though train from London to Bedwyn every hour, a Reading to Newbury train every hour, and West of England expresses about every hour with some extras and some being not-quite-express. All have been diesel, though some of the West of England trains are starting to run under electric power from London to Reading.

Come the new year and planned timetable changes, there will be a though train from London to Bedwyn every hour, a Reading to Newbury train every hour, and West of England expresses about every hour with some extras and some being not-quite-expresses every two hours.   Note strike through and underline changes.

Agreed - not ideal.   But then many service from London load heavily from the termini and get thinner further out - I remember in my youth riding between Knockholt and Dunton Green on stoppers that weren't exactly crammed, even though the 10 car program had been put into place to add the two extra carriages on the line.   You see the same thing of buses that go out from town centres to boondocks - you can't remove the final bit from the run; not only do you get a lot of flack and really upset people's livelihoods, but you also slice off bits of the inner traffic too and render the next bit uneconomic too ... and so on until you have no bus left.

Idea.

At present, 5 trains every 2 hours head west from Newbury.   Reduce that to 4.  The two West of England Expresses remain - an hourly service for the businesses of Plymouth who, as we all know, would shrivel and die if the train takes a minute over 3 hours  ;) ... and the other two from London and Reading then Newbury, Hungerford, Kintbury, Bedwyn, Pewsey and Westbury, continuing on (hourly, I would hope!) to Castle Cary, Taunton and Exeter St. David's.

Hungerford and Bedwyn get a proper service west.  The quite trains you forecast west of Newbury to Bedwyn have other flows using them.  Pewsey - very much a growth station is up to hourly and there are decent connection from the Kennet Valley and Vale of Pewsey to Trowbridge, Bath and Bristol.  Traffic connecting westward at the Westbury hub has an hourly service in a high quality train (sorry Broadgage - no buffet, just a trolley) where at the moment there are four hour gaps.   Oh - and you release one slot every 2 hours between London and Reading.

The planned electric shuttle between Reading and Newbury, if I have my calculations right, will require 2 units; that would only go up to 3 for a half hourly service, making proper use of all that expensive electrification and allowing some work with intermediate stopping patterns.

Like I say - "idea".   I too have a tin hat - not sure whether or not I'll need it ...

Now thats better resource utilisation.  As a minimum extending the 5-car IETs to Westbury is the better idea.  Sure you could reasonably load them in the daytime.

They wouldn't be able to be operated DOO if they went to Westbury, so there would be additional staffing costs which might affect the viability of providing the service for the number of extra passengers Pewsey and Westbury would provide, welcome though it would be.  No doubt an IET service will draw more people to the service than on the Turbo operated service they currently get, but in all likelihood they will load quite lightly off-peak west of Newbury.

The infrastructure can't cope with one shuttle, there would need to be two plus somewhere to loop units. There is only so much looping at Newbury that can be done.

I have always presumed since the Flex order went in that we'll be seeing those on the Bedwyn line.

Don't understand that.  At Newbury trains would utilise Platform No.2 in both directions and turnaround in the East siding.  That way there would be a cross platform interchange with Newbury - Reading/Paddington electric services that would utilise Platform No.3.

But when they run a bit like this now (in the evening peak) it doesn't cope with the slightest late running in either direction, Newbury clogs up and the single unit is supplemented with extra trains anyway.

Agreed through to Westbury is better all round.

I'm not seeing the problem either ... though might well suggest turning the local train in the bay as I'm not sure there would be lots of people changing.     There is a major timetable change coming (at some point) at which point robusteness can be considered, and the changing away from slam-door HSTs at unstaffed 2 track stations in the peaks will really clear some cobwebs and paths!

I would agree the extra costs (not that DOO to Bedwyn is proving to be trouble free!) and also point out the saving elements in that you've got 4 trains not 5 in 2 hours headed west from / past Newbury; lots of elements to the sums.  I suspect the traffic might be rather more than you would think, especially considering the combination proposed with the semi-fast services all the way to Somerset and Devon.    The operation might turn out to be a rather nice balance - picking up and dropping off a series of flows along the way rather than a service on which 95% of the passengers join at one of the termini ...

Am I right in assuming,thats because there are no close door and right away buttons at Westbury, Or is Westbury on TVSC yet.

GWR's agreement with the unions only covers DOO as far as Bedwyn.  They have also given a commitment that there will be no extension of DOO past its current areas of use.

Does this mean that the fix has to be carried out to every IET, or just the 5-car 800's, or will a sub-fleet (that have been modified) be ringfenced for the Bedwyn's?

Anyone seeing any timescales for a resolution?

The fix will be for all units as they share the same design of CCTV.

It might range from 'simple' (better procedures for cleaning them on depot and a coating that is more moisture and dirt resistant), to 'medium' (modifying the design so that they have more protection like the ones on 387s have,) to 'hard' (re-fitting them all with a brand new design).  Timescales will vary wildly depending on which option is taken!

Thanks for being honest that a resolution is clearly in the early stages of development!

Had I had any input in the design I would have considered wiper blades.

That’s an interesting idea, and perhaps they did?  The mechanism would need to be very robust to work a small blade like that effectively at 125mph, unless they only activated whilst stationary.  Of course it might cause problems should a blade get stuck or become misaligned and obscure the camera.

Or a system similar to that used on in-car cameras in Formula 1 where a sheet of clear plastic scrolls in front of the lens on demand?

Yeah I thought of that as well but much later on the way into work. Great minds and all that  :)

I thought of the blade problem and would have made it spring loaded. So the resting place for the blade would be on one side and held there by a spring. When activated the blade arm is pushed across and the spring pulls it back. That should prevent the blade from being stuck across the lense. To prevent excessive wear on the blade and arm I'd make the resting place sheltered from the oncoming air/rain/snow etc.

The quality of picture you now get from those tiny cameras is remarkable, but being F1 it is no doubt not cheap! You would think it would be small enough to bolt to the side of a train though.

I'm sure they would be small enough; I'd imagine the challenge would be to service and maintain such a system. An F1 team has a lot of people to make two cars run for two hours once every few weeks. GWR have probably the same number of people to maintain a much bigger number of cameras operating almost 24/7.

An update (from RAIL Magazine): https://www.railmagazine.com/news/network/great-western-railway-delays-newbury-iet-introduction-for-cctv-modifications

I was told by a member of GWR staff today that we won't see IET's on the Bedwyn's now until May 2019.

No shock.  But so much for "we must get Newbury all converted by Christmas because otherwise the turbo cascade fails".  I wonder when we will have 5 cars on Portsmouth to Cardiff ...

Pathetic

I guess a couple of Turbo's will still be freed by the introduction of 387's on the Reading-Newbury Shuttle, which is still happening in January as far as I know.

The May date for IET's to Bedwyn may be worst case, as dialogue on another forum suggests the required (shrouding of door cameras) fix may be in place before that.

Mixed feelings. Want to see 5 car trains on the Cardiff-Portsmouths but don't want to see the newly refurbished 158s go to be replaced by Turbos.

Bedwyn is a village whose passenger numbers are (relatively) tiny, less than half those of Taplow  (small in itself) and actually declining looking at the numbers.....why would an Intercity express train (clue is in the name) stop there rather than local services?

(Sorry if I'm missing something?)

I guess for the same reasons expess trains stop at a whole host of other even smaller places on GWR routes and other TOC’s across the country?  Geography, demographics, history all play a part, as well as the flexibility of the IET trains making them more suitable than any of the alternatives, if maybe not a perfect fit.

Personally I’d like to see an hourly Paddington to Westbury semi-fast service (i.e. extending the Bedwyn service to Pewsey and Westbury), but again there are reasons why that is currently not on the agenda.

For Bedwyn-Paddington services it's because there's no other bi-mode stock available. I don't think there's been any consideration to look at 769s but there was a lot of pressure applied to keep through services from Bedwyn, Hungerford and Kintbury after electrification once the decision to terminate the wiring at Newbury was made.

Yes, indeed.  I should’ve added politics to my list on my previous post.  ;)

Firstly, I would "group" Hungerford, Kintbury and Bedwyn ... with 566k journeys per annum ... as a service group. It just happens that Bedwyn is the final station (116k of those passengers) and the place where it's convenient to turn trains. For comparison when this thread gets archived - Taplow in 281k.

Historically, those stations have not been routinely served by trains running further west.  The only trains headed beyond Bedwyn have been HSTs headed for the West Country, and extra stops at Newbury (to pick up local passengers for the other three), Hungerford, Kintbury and Bedwyn, would seriously extend journey times.  The HSTs have a relatively slow acceleration, and with shorter platforms at unstaffed stations and with slam door, journey times from Pewsey (next station out) range from 98 minutes into Paddington on the morning peak 'stopper' to just 65 minutes on the 10:19 which calls only at Reading.

Looking forward, like Industry Insider, I would suggest that the hourly Paddington to Bedwyn service be extended to Pewsey and Westbury.  With a Paddington - Reading - Newbury - Hungerford - Kintbury - Bedwyn calling pattern, a 5 car IET could reach Pewsey 20 minutes faster than that awful "long drag" HST and with Pewsey's and Westbury's service stepped up to hourly you have something that would be very much acceptable to the commuters from Westbury to Newbury (inclusive) to London.

So where does the extra IET needed to do this come from?  The planned 2-hourly semifast (the trains that serves Pewsey and stations west to and beyond Taunton) is replaced east of Westbury by the (now extended) Bedwyns. For sure, there's a slowing of journeys such as Reading to Taunton on these trains but how many people are actually going to be making that though journey once the Paddington to Plymouth expresses are running every hour, none-stop from Reading until Taunton. And indeed if all of the Bedwyns, extended to Westbury, can be extended further ... you are meeting other very clear requirements.

Extending the Bedwyns 'out west' would bring a question mark in about their calls at Theale and Thatcham ... and I wonder if the hourly electric train from Reading to Newbury could be stepped up to every half hour?  Looking at journey length, I suspect you'ld be looking at 3 electric trains rather than 2, as a 120 minute "cycle" got reduced to a 90 minute cycle.

Long answer there ... basic answer is "it's not JUST Bedwyn" ...

Also not yet mentioned is that Bedwyn serves Marlborough, probably the largest and most affluent town in the immediate area.

Bedwyn is slightly closer to Marlborough (and closer to London, and better served) than Pewsey is.

And much cheaper fares to London too. Example - anytime (period) return Pewsey to London - £116. Anytime (day) return, Bedwyn to London, £61.20 ... those are 2018 fares.  Slightly less marked difference on off peaks, but still a saving at Bedwyn.

Don't forget BEDWYN is the boundary for DOO Operation.  Extending beyond there adds costs.

Why?

Because it was the boundary for Network SouthEast services when that was set up and DOO services were established in the early 90s when the Turbos arrived.

There is an agreement not to extend the boundaries of DOO between the Unions and GWR, so whilst not impossible, it would involve a lot of politics.

aka a lot of noise about safety & a strike threat, which would magically disappear when additional pay is offered!  ;)

Possibly not given recent experience on Southern and South Western

Dunno about about added - it should have been the first item on the paper! But for politics, it would probably have been all electric decades ago, with a mixture of fast and stopping trains throughout.

Yes indeed.  GWR have been wise (and a little fortunate) in not getting bogged down in lengthy disputes with their new trains.  They'd be foolish to risk the relatively good relationship with the unions in that regard with trying for an extension to Westbury, which although desirable, is not of the up-most importance.

It is though sad that this lack of flexibility hinders extending a well-tried working practice a little further west to help make a better service down the Berks & Hants viable. 

Yes a wise and fortunate position to take.

However, sad because the problems with DOO seem to be more to do with the busy stations nearer to London. Stations such as Bedwyn and Pewsey seem to be more suited to DOO. 

I’m hearing through the railway grapevine that IETs will operate the Bedwyn’s from the May timetable.  If DOO monitors haven’t been cleared by then, they will be worked with Train Managers.

I may be letting the effects of the early 90's rose tinted specs get in the way here, but I seem to remember that in the network southeast days locomotive pulled trains from london down this line (semi-fast, Theale, Thatcham, etc.) continued to and finished at Westbury. Does this mean the Bedwyn termination began when the Turbos arrived? I recall signs at the top of the steps to the down platform at Theale suggesting trains for Newbury and Westbury long after the turbos had arrived.

Here's the timetable from 51 years ago.

(http://www.wellho.net/pix/51ago_18.jpg)

In those days, the only service from the west to call at Bedwyn was at 08:10 - all the rest started there. And the only westbound service to carry on beyond after calling was at 18:50.   The service has doubled since then, with services from the west calling at 06:28 and 06:44, and westbound services departing at 19:27 and 19:34.

I'll see if I can find anything for intermediate years.


If that happens, it will be very interesting to see what effect it has on revenue.

Summer 1989 has table 116 as "London and Reading -> Westbury and Birmingham" so would be a major scan to post it all here. Bedwyn served by a variety of terminating locals from Reading and from Newbury, with a single westward departure at 19:11. In the other direction, the only arrival from the west at 07:17.

Even harder to follow in 1998 as table 116 has become "London and Reading -> Bedwyn and Birmingham"

Interesting that all the intermediate stations are called halts except for Reading West. A service which terminates at a halt, that must be rare in railway operation, even if it was simply a railway term for a downgraded station rather than a designed halt.

Bedwyn turnback siding wasn't installed until resignalling in 1978.  Prior to that it had a single trailing crossover and Up Siding at the back of the Up Platform.  Terminating trains had to reverse through the crossover and shunt to the Up Siding and start from there, although strictly it wasn't a passenger line.........

I think there were a number in Wales - Coryton Halt (still open as a terminus), Moss Halt near Wrexham, ...

I just had a look at the layout on the old maps website, a complicated and time consuming move.  So this siding was used as the starting platform? So was it a halt with three platforms?

And even before 1931, when passenger services on the former Cardiff Railway were curtailed at Coryton Halt, the terminus of that line was still a halt, viz Rhydyfelin Halt Low Level.

Disappointingly, the weird little branch off the Vale of Neath in Aberdare used the style "crossing" rather than "halt"; otherwise the Black Lion Crossing to Cwmaman Crossing service would have been a service with both termini at halts.

Yes.  I've got a 1970 photograph somewhere.  I'll try and dig it out and post it up here.

Another trip to the garage then... ;D

Cheeky.  That's a cup of coffee you owe me next week.  They were actually in the spare bedroom..... ;D

(http://cbrailways.co.uk/PhotoAlbumsPro/1379866239/Bedwyn%20Station%201970%2003.jpg)
(http://cbrailways.co.uk/PhotoAlbumsPro/1379866239/Bedwyn%20Station%201970%2002.jpg)
(http://cbrailways.co.uk/PhotoAlbumsPro/1379866239/Bedwyn%20Station%201970%2001.jpg)

Going back to 1983, hardly yesterday, but still fairly recently, it wasn't much better than Graham's example from 51 years ago.  London commuters had a choice of an 06:40 changing at Newbury to arrive at 08:20 and a slow direct train at 07:15 arriving 08:45.  Coming home was slightly better with a direct train at 18:25 arriving at 19:45.  Unless you were returning on a Friday, however,  in which case it took 15 minutes longer!

Off peak travellers to London had no direct trains at all during the whole week, just a DMU service roughly every two hours all stations to Reading where they could change for a fast service, typically taking over 90 minutes.  There was one train serving Bedwyn on a Sunday, in the evening.  Now, compare that with December, with an IET direct every hour taking between 61 and 72 minutes. 

"It was much better under British Rail in the old days..."  ::)

I still don't understand why the peak IC services to the far Southwest have to make calls at the 'Halts'.  One now even stops at Hungerford, and thats following another barely 20 minutes before..... ::)

Because the franchise (see http://www.firstgreatwestern.info/coffeeshop/index.php?topic=21164) tells them too  ;D ;D

I was referring to the 0451 Plymouth to Paddington which isn't in the list.

OK, I must have read it differently thinking it was the 0529 Plymouth to Paddington that should call.  A bit complex those overlapping SLCs......

I still don't understand why such a small station should have such a service when there are pleanty of alternatives.

I think I'll stick to posting on S&T matters.  I'll go and have a lie-down now ;D

Sorry - my answer came across a bit too crisp.   I believe that the 05:29 is what is known as the "early service" - the start of trains running to a pattern - and the 04:51 is the extra train before the early service that's required to call at Hungerford.

But really my overall answer is poor - like telling the children "because I say so"; a cop-out.  In this case "because the DfT say so".

So why do the DfT say so?

The 'early service' has to arrive into Paddington by 09:15, so that's too late for 9 to 5 working people, hence putting a stop in it - the 05:29 - would not fulfil an express commute from Hungerford, which having a stop in the 04:51 - the train that runs before the early service will.

At that horrid early hour from Plymouth (04:51) I don't think the DfT expects huge crowds so the 04:51 is likely to have capacity.

Hungerford is give a nice, juicy express train to London for commuters, many of whom may be senior civil servants (surely not!), and others will be keen voters in what at one point in the not too distant past was a parliamentary seat that swapped from Conservative to Liberal and back again.

So ... popular thing to do, makes for good commute, on a train that otherwise might be a bit quiet.

As we are now in May (and that was the month that was suggested as the start date for IET's on the Bedwyn's) is there any update?

From Steve Smith and Bill Wells at the Bedwyn Trains passenger group (at the end of last week):

Thanks Graham, good news.

I should've checked the Bedwyn Groups web-page, but having now done so it doesn't look like it's been updated for some time in any case.

Final days of Turbos on the Bedwyns?

They seemed to be buzzing back and forth through Reading all day on Wednesday ... makes you realise just what a good / significant service that is with (?) three trains in the cycle,

(http://www.wellho.net/pix/final_bedwyn_16x.jpg)

There have been some short formation IETs this week ... is that catching up on / getting ahead on maintenance for next week, when three further IET diagrams are needed for the South West (replacing the final HSTs) and another three for the Bedwyns?   Or do we expect some short forms and / or some 16x trains still running on the Bedwyns?    Could there be the odd HST standing in for failed IETs prior to 1st June?

Over on the RailUK forums the word is that there will be no turbos at all from next week on any of the 1Kxx services.
It will all be 5-car 800's aside from:

1K04/1K11 PAD-NBY-PAD will be a 9-car 800 (currently a 4-car 387). This used to be a (very empty, mostly)
HST until the 387's started.
1K27 NBY-PAD which will remain as a 4-car 387 (it comes to NBY as a 2Kxx from RDG)

There will be a few Turbos I think still on RDG-NBY-BDW starting/terminating services (which are all 2Kxx)

Let's see what actually happens.

Sunday morning (new timetable day) and just watched 1K46 (down PAD-NBY) and 1K49 (up BDW-PAD) on the Newbury Railcam.

1K46 was a 3-car 16x and 1K49 a 5-car IET.

A report from Bedwyn Trains - on board the 10:54 first public IET working to Paddington - on time and no problems. Noting that tomorrow (today now) will be more of a test. Low key yesterday, but a local 'event' planned for later this week, so it should get some of the positive press exposure it deserves.

Summary of my observations from the Newbury Railcam of this morning's operations.....

2K27 0753 NBY-RDG was a 5-car IET! (suspect Midgham and Aldermaston didn't expect that)
1K02 0707 PAD-BDW was a 5-car IET (noted that it arrived 3E at RDG, as you would expect given 125 vs.90 timings)
2K29 0755 BDW-RDG was a 3-car 16x
2K34 0811 RDG-NBY was a 4-car 387
2K36 0834 RDG-BDW was a 5-car IET
1K09 0841 BDW-PAD was a 5-car IET
1K04 0806 PAD-NBY was a 9-car IET (becomes 1K11 NBY-PAD). Last week this was a 4-car 387.

So all the 1Kxx's that I saw above were IET's, and a few others besides (including a Newbury-Reading stopper!)

Sets 009, 032 and 034 are the three covering the daily diagrams today.

And interestingly (as far as I can see) no IET short forms reported. Good.

I watched a 5-car set run past the Newbury RAILCAM earlier today and it set me thinking.  Is that a good use of resources running to a place like Bedwyn.  I wonder how busy the services will actually be in the daytime?

You know my view on the subject - Time to get Western Pathfinder's tin hat out again!

There has been the odd 5-car vice 9/10 car, not listed on journeycheck, though nowhere near as many as a certain crystal ball was predicting and hoping for.  More of the Oxford<>Paddington services have gone over to IETs today as well, including the notorious 17:18 PAD-OXF which has been on many a list of overcrowded trains over the years.  It is a 9-car and if it runs with first class at the front it might cause a few dwell problems at Maidenhead until platforms are extended.  Obviously it will need a guard to stop at places like Goring and Cholsey as well.


Probably not that busy, but that's no different to many other daytime trains of course.  I am confident custom will build up from places like Hungerford and Thatcham as the IET offers a better product than the Turbo it is replacing.

I understand that the last Bedwyn service of the day was capped at Reading, with additional station calls added into the final Cardiff train from Paddington which was diverted via the Berks and Hants ... reports of what could be the first train direct from Kintbury to South Wales ... unless members know better!

I wonder what happened if you wanted to get to the intermediate stations to Newbury? - I suspect the answer was probably wait for the last Newbury stopper from Reading at 0020, which isn't ideal!

So are all the stoppers, out to Hungerford (and Bedwyn) in the new timetable IETs?

Which would explain why they are all marked as bicycles must be booked. This is a distinct pain if you are a leisure cyclist along the K&A Canal, I don't know about anybody else but I don't tend to ride to a timetable.

Neither do I. I try to go for cycle rides on routes that were stopper train only served (I.E not served by the HST's) simply because I could just turn back at any point I felt like.

Only about 10 mins after the Cardiff would be due to leave Reading though. Admittedly still bit of a longer delay, but on balance (taking into account delay would cause to the 2330 and for those going longer distance) it's probably the better decision.

Took my first ride on a BDW-PAD run yesterday, on the 1K15 joining at THA (the 1103 from there)

All going nicely (and quickly!) until we got to RDG and the doors couldn't be opened.

Sat for 15 mins while the TM made apologetic announcements about having to check circuit breakers up and down the train, and then managed to get one door open right at the rear for us to vacate.

Service was terminated and I joined another PAD-bound IET on the adjacent platform.

Unit in question was 800 009, so hardly one of the more-recently delivered ones.

Hope this doesn't happen late at night when they are running DOO!

What platform did you arrive at Reading into, Thatcham Crossing?

Think it was 11.

To explain that slightly odd question... 

If it was Platform 11 then that would have been the first time the doors had been opened on that side of the train train since its despatch from Bedwyn station into the reversing siding on its previous journey.  One of the most common door 'faults' that has caught most drivers out at least once is when 'door control' has been passed to the TM and they've forgotten to take it back themselves. 

On arrival at terminating stations like Bedwyn it is usual for the driver to open the doors, and the TM to wait until passengers have got off and close them again.  After which the TM then walks through the train to make absolutely sure everyone is off before reopening a local door to check all is clear before despatch to the sidings. 

In order for that local door to be opened the driver has to give 'door control' to the guard.  Basically by pressing a button in the cab.  After the guard has closed the door and keyed out, the driver than has to remember to take back door control (another press of a button) otherwise the next time an attempt to arm the doors on that side of the train is made they won't open - even if it is being driven from the other end of the train.  The 'door control' button is illuminated to advise the driver of this, but the illumination is very poor and virtually impossible to see in bright daylight conditions, so they might not realise that is the problem and assume it's more serious.

I might be wrong, but I would be a healthy amount that was the reason the doors wouldn't open! Especially given that the Reading drivers that are doing most of the Bedwyn trains have had little experience on them since training started due to the delay getting IETs onto the Bedwyn trains.

Thanks for the possible explanation. Yes it was the same side of the train that would have last been opened at Bedwyn at the end of the previous run.

It did seem to me that they were looking for a more complex problem than the need for the driver to press a button in the cab (hence comments around checking circuit-breakers etc).

Today GWR officially launched the Bedwyn IET service with a bit of help from the children of Great Bedwyn Primary School.

(http://www.mbob.co.uk/rforum/bedchild.jpg)

After welcoming the train in, the children - many of whom were making their first train journey - were treated to a trip to the turnback siding (along with a few interested adults).

(http://www.mbob.co.uk/rforum/bedshunt.jpg)

(http://www.mbob.co.uk/rforum/bedcross.jpg)

(http://www.mbob.co.uk/rforum/bedturn.jpg)

The cows - which were much in evidence when the extended turnback siding was opened last September  (http://www.firstgreatwestern.info/coffeeshop/index.php?topic=20288.msg246480#msg246480)- still pay more than a passing interest to trains as they wait to return to the station.  But we've seen them, so here is St Mary's Church instead!

(http://www.mbob.co.uk/rforum/bedchurch.jpg)

A very well behaved group of children who obviously enjoyed their morning out.   It seems, unwittingly, I helped them with their I-spy sheet.  They needed to spot "someone with a camera".

Must admit I enjoyed it too - and my shortest entry on my Railmiles log.  1Z15 - Bedwyn to Bedwyn - all of 44 chains!

That’s why I think it might have been the case, driver didn’t realise and then Hitachi assumed it was more serious and so driver sent on an ultimately futile hunt for a more serious fault. I’ve seen similar happen before...

Isn’t the shunt signal set up for the wrong direction or is that not an issue any more?

Which signal are you referring to jdr.wor?

Story also covered in the Reading Chronicle (https://www.readingchronicle.co.uk/news/17671350.new-intercity-express-trains-are-running-on-the-london-to-bedwyn-line/)


Credit also to the Bedwyn Trains (http://www.bedwyntrains.org.uk) group who have worked and continue to work so tirelessly for their station, passengers, and this service.

Sorry for the five day delay II. I was referring to the directional signal beneath the main signal. My memories are they were angled to indicate the direction the train was authorised for which is not the case here.

That was a very old 1950/1960s standard.  All signals are installed at 90° to the track they apply to unless a curve is involved, in which case they will be angled so that they are focussed approximately (but not always) to the signals AWS (Automatic Warning System) magnet which is generally positioned 183m on the approach to the signal.

I suspect jdw.wor was referring to another angle - whether the upper light is to the left or right of the lower. I think in the past the two lights of some of these mini-signals (associated, position-light, or whatever) were thought of as miniature route indicators. But that too went out long ago, and now the direction of any points is indicted by a tiny arrow or (as in this case) be a "theatre-type" indicator. In this case its "S" is presumably for siding - there's only one so there is no need to say which side.

It's all in the current version of the official signals picture-book: RSSB Handbook 521 "Signals, Handsignals, Indicators
and Signs" Issue 5 (https://www.google.com/url?sa=t&rct=j&q=&esrc=s&source=web&cd=1&ved=2ahUKEwijmYHWlcPiAhXqXhUIHcXtDakQFjAAegQIAhAC&url=https%3A%2F%2Fwww.rssb.co.uk%2Frgs%2Frulebooks%2FRS521%2520Iss%25205.pdf&usg=AOvVaw2nHod4W_GqA_BuGYUmE0md) (beware - several old issues are also Googlefindable).

Stuving, I think you need to try to explain that to me again as you have totally confused me...... ::)

The 09:07 Paddington to Bedwyn train is now going to call additionally at Slough for the remainder of the timetable.  Not to cater for any great demand for day trippers from Slough to Bedwyn, but to attempt to relieve the daily chronic overcrowding on the 09:21 Paddington to Worcester FS which is a very attractive train for both Windsor and Oxford day trippers from London.

Being an IET now, the stop can easily be absorbed in the current schedule which is still based on Turbo timings.

Another sign that a more genuine focus on the customer is returning to GWR.

Might not be new news but whilst travelling between Thatcham and Paddington last Friday afternoon (17/01) I was surprised to see a trolley service come through the train shortly after I got on.

The lady providing the service told me that this has been re-introduced on the "Bedwyns" since the December timetable change, and whilst only on a few services at the moment should increase as and when more staff are recruited/become available.

Good to see as this was tried and then withdrawn when Turbos were still running the services.

Can I get an update - re: a question that came up today (not been easily able to find the answer above).   I know there were initial issues running Driver Only with IETs to Bedwyn - is that still the case, or did the issues get fixed??

....possibly not as TM's still in evidence on the Bedwyn IET's in my fairly recent experience.

Still not fixed and no immediate sign of it being fixed.  All services to/from Bedwyn have a TM on board (west of Reading only possibly) and IETs can only work DOO at staffed stations within the DOO area that have a dispatcher.  In effect that means Paddington, Slough, Maidenhead, Reading, Didcot, Oxford and Banbury.  

In theory, Newbury could be added to that list but as the DOO area ends at Bedwyn, there are no IET operated services to which that would sensibly apply.

Thank you for that - would I be right in guessing this is linked to why GWR may have been short of train managers of late  :D