Great Western Coffee Shop

Anyone able to advise if this is still a 3 car Turbo instead of an HST on Fridays?

It seems, according to this thread http://www.firstgreatwestern.info/coffeeshop/index.php?topic=12851.msg138720#msg138720 (http://www.firstgreatwestern.info/coffeeshop/index.php?topic=12851.msg138720#msg138720), the service is likely to be operated as a 180 all things being equal.

Mod note: Have not merged topics as this provides a useful signpost to the other thread which also includes details of services for the lower Thames Valley.

Thanks for above, had not spotted this thread. Train shows tonight as non reservable which is unusual, maybe a turbo in prospect perhaps

Others may hopefully correct me - but has anyone seen seat reservations on the 180s recently? I've travelled on a few, and not seen any at all recently....

ON a 180 service  to PAD yesterday, lots of people with seat reservation tickets unable to use their seat as the seat reservation cards had not been placed out and the train was full and standing already by Charlbury.

That's a known problem if they're to be put out at WOS/WOF or GMV....

Todays service is currently showing as 180108, which has just gone back into OOC after it's morning trips and is due back into PAD at 15:23.

Yes, all depends on who the Train Manager is as to whether it gets done or not when the train gets turned round.

I am traveling home from Oxford on the 1551 ex Paddington or the 1732 Oxford stopping service most evenings and suffice it to say the 1649 Oxford train (now a 180 rather than the HST) is absolutely packed almost every evening, the stopping service is also picking up some of the overflow and is much busier than it used to be with lots of passengers standing from Oxford.

The (now) 15:52 hasn't been quite so squashed this week so far but was beyond funny last week.

I wrote to FGW about the downgrading of this service, and the reply arrived yesterday. There was the usual "apologise that... [the] service is always crowded... can imagine how uncomfortable these journeys have been" etc. Then the bit about national shortage of rolling stock followed by the revelation that my letter had not been read at all... "We were therefore delighted to bring in 48 extra carriages in 2012... providing a total of 4,500 additional Standard Class seats across our network at peak times." Leaving aside the fact this was exactly the same paragraph that appeared in FGW's reply to my letter complaining about the withdrawal of the HST on summer Fridays, I wasn't writing about the overcrowding (as the HST was usually very full) but the removal of three carriages and 150 Standard Class seats from this service. I doubt there was much point in replying but it has made me feel marginally better...

1W47 15:52 Ex Padd looked like a Sardine tin tonight on departure from Oxf but then it is Friday. Also being a superior 180 may have helped a little.

It does seem to be worse on Fridays. The HST which FGW felt we could manage without usually had a fair number of passengers standing so a 180 doesn't help at all. (For all their faults, Turbos do appear to have been designed to cope better with over-crowding).

It seems that if it is a Worcester service it is of no importance ! The city of Worcester does not count for much on the rail network just look at the state of the Stations and track layout.

I suspect that, in this instance, it is not a case of Worcester service being considered to be unimportant.  It is probably the easiest solution to having to take one HST at a time out of service for "refreshing".

Can anyone confirm that the HST stock which originally formed the 1551 to Worcester now forms the 1545 to Swansea?  If it does not, what does it now do?  It is understood that train crews on the Bristol, South Wales or South West routes have not been trained operate class 180s.

I wonder whether, if train crews have the relevant route and traction knowledge, the Class 180 could be used on the 1536 to Cheltenham Spa, releasing the HST from that to form the 1551 to Worcester. What are the loadings like on that train and its 1834 return from Cheltenham Spa?  Would misery merely be transferred to the South Cotswold Line passengers?

I'm not 100% sure how the workings work but replacing the HST set on the 1551 with a 180, as well as cancelling the 0640 Bristol-London reduces the number of sets diagrammed by one, therefore allowing a set of HST stock to go off for a mechanical overhaul.

Only Paddington and Oxford LTV drivers and guards (along with Reading guards) sign class 180s these days, so no chance of them operating on the routes your list any time soon, I'm afraid.

Charles comments that this train is worse on Fridays. This has been the case for many years now. The cause is believed to be the high number of wealthy city types that can afford a home in London to sleep in Monday to Thursday and then return to their hoiday home in the Cotswolds on Friday afternoon/evening. Traffic flows back to London from the Cotswold Line are higher on Sunday afternoons/evenings and again on Monday mornings as they go back for work in London.
A more recent factor increasing traffic flows has been the relocation of many city workers from homes in the home counties to less expensive homes in West Oxon. I know of one such person who lived in Wokingham and explained to me that as his family had grown and he needed a larger home, he found it economically viable to relocate from Wokingham to Witney with the bonus of living in a pleasant Cotswolds area. Property prices in Wokingham had been rising because people living in London were relocating outwards because of the increasing number of immigrants in London able to pay high rents because of high deensity living. He now has a season ticket from Hanborough to London and the commuting time of just over an hour to Paddington compares very well with the slow multi-station South West Trains journey from Wokingham to Waterloo and the savings on his mortgage more than offset his higher season ticket cost. He is just one of many that has resulted in an enormous growth in early morning commuting from Hanborough to London

Actually, there are no Train Managers (Guards) based at Oxford.  I believe that at least some of the Train Managers based at Worcester (who do sign Class 180s) now also work between Worcester and London via Stroud/Swindon.  I do not know what is the situation regarding drivers on that route, however.  No drivers are based in Worcester.

Times have moved on but when the 180s came to FGW the first time they saw a lot of work on the line from Swindon to Gloucester/Cheltenham.

And my first ever journey on a Class 180 was on an afternoon service from Taunton, to Paddington via Frome, in 2003.

Are the 180s cleared for South Cotswold use?

If so, I suspect it's driver knowledge....Cheltenham's will/could use Bristol drivers? Are they trained on 180s? I doubt it.

As I've already said, the only drivers that sign 180s are Paddington and Oxford LTV drivers.

Paddington LTV drivers sign Paddington to Oxford, Paddington to Bedwyn, the Greenford branch, and the Windsor branch. Senior LTV drivers also sign to Worcester Foregate Street.

Oxford LTV drivers sign Banbury to Paddington and the Greenford branch, a fair few sign as far as Great Malvern, and senior drivers also sign as far as Hereford.

Further more, even though only Oxford and Paddington LTV drivers sign 180s, there is a training backlog and some LTV drivers do not even sign them yet. With only four 180s diagrammed for service during the week, it is unlikely other depots or HSS drivers will learn them because there wouldn't be enough duties to enable the drivers that do sign them to retain their competency in them.

That's why it's unlikely you'll see them on Cheltenham services any time soon.

Network SouthEast's summary is correct, and to add that guard/TM/Conductor wise Paddington, Reading, and Worcester depots sign the 180s with most of the Worcester ones signing the route via Stroud, so it's the drivers that prohibit 180 working on that route.

The class 180 yesterday (Tuesday) on the 1551 ex Paddington was packed to the rafters as far as Oxford and had loads of seat reservations (to answer an earlier comment).

And from my experience, far more tend to get on at Oxford than get off - certainly coaches D & E.

Not on this occasion; it got a bit easier after Oxford. Still I have to use the same service next week, so we'll see what happens.

Friday's 1552 PAD:WOS service was appallingly over-crowded, to the extent that the automated announcement at Oxford suggested passengers wait for the following service.

What's frustrating is that whenever FGW is short of an HST, it always gets taken from this service. I understand that it is the least heavily used HST diagram and that the Cotswold Line is the only long-distance route that Turbos and 180s can operate on; I don't doubt it is the simplest solution in terms of stock utilisation but is it really the only option, especially if it's going to be a long-term issue? I find it hard to believe that FGW gives any serious consideration to passenger numbers when making such decisions.

[edited for a small grammatical correction]

I think that some may well have taken up this suggestion.  The number alighting from the 1552 PAD-WOS train at Charlbury was much lower than usual for a Friday.

Travelled from Paddington to Shrub Hill on this on Mon Nov 11.

I was in the middle coach. Full from Paddington to Oxford. Standing in the vestibules, luggage spaces and ends of aisle from Oxford to Charlbury. Merely full from there to Moreton. 60% load through to Worcester.

Worcester guard on Monday told a few of us that they've heard of plans to swap the HST on the 1750 with the Adelante on the 1551.....wait to see if this actually happens

That would be a bit like robbing Peter to pay Paul, though I suppose that train would only be absolute carnage as far as Maidenhead if they did that.  I'm sure Jo and the other Maidenhead commuters would have something to say about that...  :-\

Only as far as Maidenhead, rather than beyond Oxford.

If the proposed plans do happen, I'm sure the Maidenhead population will be 1st to complain !?

I believe that CLPG suggested to FGW a while ago, that with the projected improved reliability of the re-doubling of the Cotswold Line, then it should be possible to turnaround the Off-Peak Hereford services in half an hour and not the current 90 minutes or so.

So if the 1143 arrival at Hereford from Paddington then returned at 1214 or so (as it does on Saturdays), it would arrive Paddington at about 1530hrs and could then form the 1551. I haven't delved into what repercussions this would have to other services on the Cotswold Line or other knock-on effects.

One of the knock on effects would be that there would be one less HST arriving into Paddington at about 16:30, which might mean that there would be a few disappointed commuters if - say - the 17:00 to Bristol became a turbo ;-)

Aah but if they do that then we might get the 7.18 back as an Adelante?  ::) ::)  To be fair.. I've now changed my travelling pattern to go in really early (I won't say which train so they won't take it away) and to come home really late (ditto to my previous comment).. to avoid all the overcrowding.. :P

The gross overcrowding on this service seems to have got significantly worse this week. I understand why First Great Western has redeployed this HST, but surely for long-term maintenance projects like this there has to be a smarter way of managing its fleet?

Well the plan was that this overhaul would not have needed to take place, at least not for the majority of the fleet. But because of the continued delays in the replacements for the HSTs it's now necessary to carry out the overhaul to keep them going longer.

Just fell to flicking through the diagrams (HST (http://www.125group.org.uk/Diagrams%20FGW.pdf), 180 (http://pastebin.com/zvKKQZ13)) and one other possibility comes to mind.

Taking Steve Bray and the CLPG's point that HSTs could now be turned around faster at Hereford, if the 15.14 HFD-18.28 PAD were moved earlier (perhaps swapping with one of the 180s or Turbos plying the line in mid-afternoon), this could happen:

---

Current diagrams:

HST IW033 1L58 1220 CNM-PAD, 1D45 1522 PAD-OXF, 1P63 1701 OXF-PAD, 1W08 1822 PAD-HFD, 5W08 2142 HFD-PM.
HST IW036 1K71 0518 BRI-PAD, 1W02 1022 PAD-HFD, 1P65 1514 HFD-PAD, 1D67 1850 PAD-OXF, 1P81 2101 OXF-PAD.
180 OOC503 1P47 1206 WOF-PAD, 1W47 1552 PAD-WOS, 1P79 1849 WOF-PAD.

Change to:

HST IW033 1L58 1220 CNM-PAD, 1W47 1552 PAD-WOS, 1P79 1849 WOF-PAD.
HST IW036 1K71 0518 BRI-PAD, 1W02 1022 PAD-HFD, 1P65 (earlier) HFD-PAD, 1W08 1822 PAD-HFD, 5W08 2142 HFD-PM.
180 OOC503 1P47 1206 WOF-PAD, 1D45 1522 PAD-OXF, 1P63 1701 OXF-PAD, 1D67 1850 PAD-OXF, 1P81 2101 OXF-PAD.

---

It would require some adjustment to the Cotswold Line afternoon timetable, which I've not looked into. That probably needs to happen anyway given the odd spacing of up trains in the afternoon - currently a 2hr gap, then a half-hourly service for two hours, then a 1.5hr gap.

But overall it seems, to me, to be a better solution than the crush at present. (Please be gentle on me, I'm only a bumbling amateur in these things!)

There are adjustments coming to the May14 timetable, which the CLPG are pleased with. Not sure I can say more just yet.

An interesting proposal, though the 17:01 OXF-PAD gets mighty busy from Slough, so reducing that to an Adelante wouldn't go down very well, though it's for a much shorter stretch than the 15:51 PAD-WOS has to struggle through.

The 1701 OXF-PAD no longer calls at Slough. The 1523 TAU-PAD calls instead now. However the 1701 OXF-PAD calls at Maidenhead instead. When the 1523 TAU-PAD used to call at Maidenhead it got very busy there too, I don't think you'd get everyone on a 180.

Thanks for the correction.  I should've remembered given that I got it from Oxford to Maidenhead the other week!   ::)

...to the TT generally, not specifically to the 1551....yet

And today, the 180 was so full at Oxford that the train manager evicted all the Hanborough passengers and decided to run the train straight through to Charlbury. This did seem to take the staff at Oxford by surprise as well as causing considerable annoyance to the 50 or so who were travelling to Hanborough. Amongst those turfed off was a mother with her four month old child.

I can only assume the train manager in question doesn't normally handle this service as it was no more grossly over-crowded than usual for a Friday. My worry is that First Great Western will use this option to manage this regular over-crowding from time to time in the future rather than address the real cause of the problem.

Can Charles_uk tell us what happened to the Hanborough passengers?  Was road transport arranged or did they have to wait for the next train, 43 minutes later?

FGW's attitude on the platform was that as the delay was less than an hour they weren't obligated to do anything so we simply had to wait for the 1732 OXF:GMV.

Did it still stop at Hanborough (to pick up)?

Coz the Train Manager has NO authority to issue (non)stop orders, and knowing this, I'd have stayed on regardless, until at least a tannoy announcement made at Oxford saying it wasn't stopping...and if you did stay on knowing the train still had to stop, and you knew which carriages were on the platform (commuters would do), the TM wouldn't be any the wiser that you hadn't got off....

I've no idea whether it did stop to pick up as I was standing on the platform at Oxford! My partner did look at JourneyCheck (as I was late) which showed the HND stop as "cancelled".

My assumption was that it was the train manager who was responsible for the cancellation. That is what we were told at Oxford but it may have been that they got the appropriate permission before we were told to get off. However, staff at Oxford were certainly taken by surprise.

The fundamental problem though is that by taking 220 seats off what was already a very crowded service, FGW have caused this gross overcrowing problem and have to manage it more intelligently than simply kicking passengers off the train.

oh, agreed, and CLPG Have taken it up urgently with FGW.

If it were shown as Cancelled at HND, then someone must have iiaised with Control.

I had a trip down to Oxford yesterday 5th , a good run both ways and made good time , but still had to wait at Charlbury and Evesham for trains to come off the single track !! A class 180 on both runs no problems.

And today due to a fault with 180102 this morning at Didcot 166211 came to the rescue which was rather full all day and 180104 seems to have had problems when arriving at Paddington after working 1P57 from Great Malvern.

After months of pretty solid reliability there's been the odd hiccup over the last couple of weeks.  Hopefully it is just a hiccup!

Looks like another sensible change to the 180 diagrams from May. The 0517 Paddington-Oxford and 0721 Oxford-Paddington will no longer be a 180. Neither service was particularly suitable for a 180 as they were both stoppers. The 180 will instead work a new 0734 Didcot Parkway-Paddington, calling at Reading only. As a result the 0630 Bristol Temple Meads-Paddington will start at 0635 instead and cease to call at Didcot Parkway.

Putting it halfway between the current 06:30 and the old 06:40 which was withdrawn last year and never reappeared...

The 06:40 was a victim of the current overhaul programme for the MK3s, along with the subject of this thread, the 15:51 Paddington-Worcester SH. Whilst the 15:51 was replaced with a 180, the 06:40 was cut entirely. Maybe it will return once the overhaul programme is complete, but that will be some time yet I imagine.

15:51 Paddington to Worcester was a nightmare yesterday. A 3 car Turbo for what used to be a busy HST then more recently a choc-ful Adelante. Absolutely ridiculous. Between Reading and Hanborough it was, as they say, "rammed". Why can't FGW re-juggle the diagrams so as to switch an Adelante to this service - it's always very busy?

That is the current intention, it was the same diagrammed HST.

Coz it'd be an even busier HST right out of the evening peak. This was definitely the 'least-worst' solution.

Not sure wether this is going to be related in some way or another bit it looks like 180102 is having a jolly up North for the weekend with Hull Trains. Extra services due to the FA Cup Semi Finals At Wembley tomorrow.

Oh, b.....y football, please spare us from the curse of roundball.

An 3-car 165 Turbo actually has more standard class seats that a 5-car Adelante..... appreciate it doesn't make it acceptable but it's boils down to either a Turbo or a cancellation.

The Adelante failed on the inward working to Paddington thus meaning it wasn't possible to switch it with anything other than a Turbo.  I don't think there is ever an occasion during the day when two Adelantes are in the same location (I might be wrong) which again makes switching them over so one works the 1551 almost impossible.
The Adelantes leave the depot at around 0400 in the morning and return at about 2300.  They are in use pretty much all day long.  There isn't much scope, if any, for re-diagramming them without affecting night time refuelling and maintenance or ending up with them in Paddington for evening rush-hour services.

HSTs were given lifetime extension work to keep the running to around about this period.  The government had promised First that new trains and additional capacity would in place by now meaning HSTs would start to be withdrawn.  This obviously never materialised thanks to he governments continual dithering so now the company has had to take the HST out for more life extension work/overhaul to keep them running.
 

I agree a Turbo is better than nothing!! Just you wait till they have their C6 refurb in the near future. In times of disruption or failure things will need to be altered and with only 5 180s in the current fleet it's unlikely it will be replaced by another classmate. Maybe more 180s are needed from other TOCs or relief services out of Paddington towards Didcot and Oxford and yes I'm fully aware of the national rolling stock shortage but there are other Rail Operators that have rolling stock I'm sure would suit.

Yeah, and look at the furore created when Chiltern nabbed 6 units from Northern Rail!!

Psstt: 9 trains from Trans Pennine Express

And they aren't even transferring to Chiltern for a little white yet.

oops, thanks!

Honestly. There are no other operator who have spare stock available.  Even if they could, its a serious amount of training required for drivers and maintenance staff a like.  There's also no other stock that is compatible in terms of coupling with Turbos (as far as I know).  Any additional stock realistically could only be used on the Thames Valley branches
On the rare occasion stock does become free, you're looking at four or five different TOCs chasing them. 

172/0 and 172/1 Turbostars are both compatible with 165 and 166 Turbos. I don't think coupler compatibility even is much of a consideration otherwise we wouldn't have 150s or 180s operating amongst Turbos.

Inidently, there is still a training backlog for drivers on 150s and 180s, so it's probably a good idea to avoid introducing a third type of extra train before this is sorted out.

Still stands....
172/0 and 172/1 Turbostars are both compatible with 165 and 166 Turbos. I don't think coupler compatibility even is much of a consideration otherwise we wouldn't have 150s or 180s operating amongst Turbos.

Inidently, there is still a training backlog for drivers on 150s and 180s, so it's probably a good idea to avoid introducing a third type of extra train before this is sorted out.
[/quote]

A very uncomfortable journey on this train from Oxford to Worcester on Thursday July 3, on a very hot day.

Operated by a 180. Which arrived at Oxford some 20 minutes late due to a passenger having been taken ill at Reading. Left with the aisles full and standing - see picture.

And then we stop just north of Oxford, to allow an on-time HST to come off the single track section.

A very apologetic set of announcements from the Train Manager.

34 late at Charlbury and 28 late at Shrub Hill. Where, very sensibly, it ran forward to Foregate Street in service so as to be ready to go back to Paddington.

I was on this service as well, no effective aircon in the vestibule between coach A and B and the internal panels in the vestibule were too hot to touch comfortably. About 20 passengers in this space so ended up with coach A and B doors wedged open. Passengers standing in both coaches as well as the vestibules. Surprised there wasn't another ill passenger by Charlbury.

This service has been held just north of Oxford for the last three days - on Wednesday and Friday waiting for the GMV:DID service to clear the single track.

The lack of air-conditioning in the vestibules has been very noticeable over the past few weeks with temperatures pushing 30 degrees most days (I have a small thermometer attached to my back pack). First Great Western's line is that the vestibules were not intended to convey passengers - hence no air-con. That being the case, where did they think the displaced passengers were going to go when they removed 40% of the seats last autumn?

How crowded was it when it was an IC125? Would it have been ok if they reduced it by 173 seats instead of 220? If not, I'm afraid those unfortunate enough to be using that service (thankfully I'm not one of them) will have to get used to it. Or complain like hell to DfT, because a 315 seat 5-car unit is what they are likely to get in future. The DfT's daft modeled diagrams for IEP shows the following for Cotswolds services out of Paddington:

• 13:46 PAD - Hereford 5-car
• 14:46 PAD - Worcester 5-car
• 15:46 PAD - Hereford 5-car
• 16:46 PAD - Worcester 5-car
• 17:46 PAD - Hereford 10-car to Worcester 5-car Worcester to Hereford

So, not only will the 15:46 be 5-car, so will the Cotswolds services out of PAD before and after it. In fact, the every service from Paddington to Hereford/Worcester are shown as being 5-car throughout except the 17:46 shown above and the 18:46 which is shown as 10-car right through to Hereford. In the other direction it is a similar story, with two 10-car workings (05:12 Worcester-PAD and 05:26 Hereford-PAD) and everything else 5-car.

The caveats given in the draft diagrams document are as follows:
Franchise bidders can't conjure 9-car bi-modes out of thin air though, the order needs to be varied before too many driving vehicles get built.

None of us understand how the DfT can think that this is a workable solution, replacing an HST with a 5 car IEP just stinks of the DfT trying to do things on the cheap and leaving FGW to deal with the fall out.
They've clearly not learnt from their mistakes they made with XC

The HST used to be full and standing on a frequent basis particularly on friday afternoons. Some of this has moved to other trains^.I know people in Oxford who now have shifted work hours to finish earlier and catch the 1520, and I usually try and catch the stopper at 1732 rather than the 1649.

One issue is the gap in service between 1520 and 1649.

That gap will hopefully be filled when the service frequency is increased and that would take some of the pressure off of a departure from Paddington at around 4pm.  Perhaps a Turbo stopping service or two could be slotted in at peak times between Oxford and Charlbury/Moreton to help relieve the through services?

Regarding the diagrams, Rhydgaled is right to print the caveat in his post as that pretty much says that what is contained within it should not be taken seriously.  I think I pointed out before that the timings on the Cotswold Line won't even work in practice, let alone the diagram allocations.

According to a twitter comment, the 10:42 from Paddington to Hereford this morning was only a 4 carriage turbo rather than a HST. By Didcot it was so full that ~50 people were left on the platform.

There are a few problems with Turbos at the moment still 166221 at Wolverton Works since early March and sets going to Ilford for bogie replacement exams taking place on depot and faults and failures across the fleet. HSTs have been ok recently and 180s in the past week have performed well under the heat.

It was operated by a 3-car Turbo in the end.

There were problems between Swindon and Bristol Parkway this morning so I'd imagine there were some set swaps.  Unfortunately, with crew knowledge, services to  Worcester, Hereford and Malvern are the only services you can really swap from an HST to a Turbo

In circumstances like that, every effort should be made to strengthen it on its return working at Oxford as that will be one heaving 3-Car Turbo between there and Paddington.  It appears that every effort has not been made.  ::)

The set that worked the 1042 to Hereford would normally be the spare unit that sits in platform 13 at Paddington all day
To strengthen it on its return at Oxford would be pointless as it will only sit blocking the whole of platform 13 until 2315 tonight when it goes back to Reading.

It would not have been pointless as it would have provided passengers with a more comfortable journey.  Doesn't look as if anything much is booked to use Platform 13 in the meantime as most Turbo services are 5 or 6-Car on a Sunday so it doesn't matter what length of train is occupying it - so I don't buy that as an reason.  Sure, some set allocations might have had to change a little, but that happens all the time when there's disruption.

It does matter.  The 1830 from Hereford to Padd is a 3-car which attaches to the set stabled in platform 13 which makes the 2315 a 6-car.  Not only will you need a spare driver to mobilise the set at Oxford (and we were on a pub crawl yesterday!), you would also need another spare driver at Paddington to split the set and shunt it clear and possibly another driver to return the set to its correct location for Monday morning.   Again, this all depends on wether a set is available from Oxford.
You'd be better off advising passengers to travel on the XC service and then change at Reading

Ah, OK, understood about the coupling at PAD - I didn't realise that.  Still probably not an insurmountable challenge though.  I just hate to see passengers having an uncomfortable journey.  Perhaps it would be wise to have a 5/6-Car stabled at Paddington as a standby train on a Sunday, so that all you'd need would be a spare driver at Oxford to hook the set off on the way down and then back on when it comes the other way?  There's probably more Sundays than not when there are drivers available than not - even if there were a load of sick calls this morning if there was a depot pub crawl yesterday!

It was however, if I'm reading it correctly, what DfT used to decide how many diagrams of each type to procure.

In fact, the 3-coach Turbo was so full at Paddington that it left people behind. My other half was trying to get to Oxford, and decided that it was impossible to get on board this train.

Meanwhile, another substitution yesterday (Sunday Juy 6) meant that the 08:03 from Paddington to Great Malvern and the 11:15 return were operated by a 2-car Turbo.

Which was cosy by Moreton (first photo), standing after Kingham (second), worse still after Charlbury and difficult to photograph after Hanborough.
 

Not good enough, is it?  >:(

Luxury on Tuesday (8th June) - an Adelante that wasn't too crowded for once. Bliss, apart from the annoying underfloor buzz.

Frankly, I can't see the operator dropping to hourly in the peaks! They will retain the half-hourly services around 1722/1822, and that, together with the hourly services at the start of the peak, should alleviate the crowding on the 1551....

Yes, the peaks aren't really too much of a problem, it's the 'just before the peak' time from Oxford between 3-5pm, where there's only a 15:20, 16:49 and then 17:32.  If, for example, through trains from London to at least Worcester departed Oxford at 15:15, 16:15, 17:15, 18:15, 18:45, 19:15 and 20:15, then you could squeeze a shuttle service from Didcot/Oxford to Moreton in at 16:45 and 17:45 which could mop up all the passengers for the halts and remove the likes of Shipton from the fast trains helping to cut through journey times.  Capacity problem solved.

You won't need to - and it's unlikely there'd be a spare turbo in the peaks....

You've got....
^15:46 PAD - Hereford 5-car
^16:46 PAD - Worcester 5-car
^17:46 PAD - Hereford 10-car
and I suggest that the operator will insert (as now)
1622/1722 (ish)

and there will be a 1846 too

Isn't that pretty much what I've said?  And we haven't 'got' anything yet - except a demonstration timetable, which is exactly that.  If they come through from London then even better of course, but will there be spare IEPs in the peak?  I'd have thought 8 or 12-car EMUs to Oxford and a connecting train beyond would stand a better chance stock availability wise.

One issue is that the last non-peak train along the Cotswold line from Paddington (1551) is very much a peak time train from Oxford. So this train gets filled at Paddington by passengers avoiding peak times and added to by the peak at Oxford.

The reduction in capacity has already caused a spreading out of journeys, the 1520 ex OXF and the 1732 used to be quite quiet, but are now usually (and almost always on fridays) very cosy.

It only needs one cancellation and it all goes to pot like last wednesday (9th)  after the fatality near Ealing.

(Edited to correct day of week)

The 1732 halts train (if the booked Adelante) is never full off Oxford, anytime I've used it....assuming no delays. Any train during/immediately following a delay will be full, regardless

Agreed with the 17:32 usually having a little space on board, even on Fridays, assuming no other delays.

Regarding delays, that's where having a couple of shuttle services from Oxford may help on occasions as if there is a problem with the through trains off of London as they won't get caught up in it.  Take last Wednesday for example when, due to a fatality, the 14:21 ex-PAD was cancelled, and the 15:52 was about an hour late (and eventually turned into to the 'halts' train departing Oxford late at about 18:00).  A couple of shuttles and the passenger numbers that led to at least 30 taxis having to be used would have been largely solved.  The net result was no train from Oxford to Worcester for over five hours (and consequent cancellations back the other way).  In fact efforts were made to arrange a shuttle from Oxford to Moreton using a 180 that had arrived at 16:50 from Great Malvern, but despite crews and train in place (and plenty of passengers) control miles away in Swindon declined the request/plea from the Oxford staff - but that's another topic!  :-X

There are no extra paths in the peak along the Cotswold Line....

Correct.  Though the odd tweak to the timetable here and there, and a loop at Hanborough, would release paths.

Sometimes one feels like they're at school, with some acting as schoolmasters.

Agreeing sounds preferable to being told (I know I am....) that one is correct.

Apologies if you misunderstood the tone of my reply, but I did 'agree' with you in my previous reply.  Sometimes I find black and white swingeing statements difficult to reply to though (especially when the context isn't necessarily clear) as the actual truth is often somewhere in the middle, and I will question you on topics where I do know more than you, such as the pathing on the Cotswold Line - by the same principles I very rarely get involved with posts on subjects such as ticketing as it is an area I know comparatively little about.

Whilst there are currently no extra paths in the peak along the Cotswold Line (the 'correct' in my reply), there's currently a 25 minute period when there are no trains on the single line between Wolvercote and Charlbury between 17:55 and 18:20, so here's a way of plugging that gap and creating an extra path without any extra infrastructure and still allowing a little resilience in the timetable:

• Timetable as now until the departure of the 17:32 from Oxford to Great Malvern which you replace with a 17:32 faster service, calling at Hanborough and Charlbury.  That clears the single line at Charlbury at 17:48.
• You then run the halts train departing Oxford at 17:52 as far as Moreton-In-Marsh, which, calling at all stations clears the single line at 18:14 and reaches Moreton at 18:38ish.
• The 18:17 to Hereford then departs as now entering the single line at 18:20 and running as now.

So, there's your grey area - whilst it's correct to say that there's no extra paths in the peak based on the current timetable, it's perfectly possible to create one if you restructure the timetable - which is exactly what will be happening in a couple of years.  The final timetable might not look anything like the example above of course, but it demonstrates that there is still scope for improvement.

I have no problem whatsoever with being questioned, or even informed that I am wrong (with an explanation of course), but telling anyone they are 'correct' belittles them. Please try & use 'agree', 'indeed, ....', or some such like)

There is an Oxford arrival from the south at 1751, blocking the down platform for some minutes...also serving DID. Your suggestion won't work, and has been explored by the Cotswold Line P/Group (CLPG). We have a timetable expert, likely to better than even you, and I think I can safely say there are no useful things that can currently be done until the timetable is re-written for IEP.

Oh, and it's the 1715 from DID, not the 1732 from Oxford, don't forget.

Which one? There are two (and three in extremis).

I think you misunderstand.  My posts on this matter have been about what could be achieved post-IEP timetables.  There's no chance of any major alterations until then - I think the last paragraph of my previous post to this topic makes that perfectly clear.


I will try not to belittle you, Chris.  Tempting though it often is.

Might be a bit cosier today - it's on JourneyCheck as being 2 coaches instead of 5.

Having had a little think about the suggestion above, I'd probably make it a little more resilient by giving the 17:32 off of Oxford calls at Ascott and Shipton, and then a 17:52 could miss those out arriving Moreton around 18:34 - that would give it a little more of a buffer to reach Moreton well ahead of when the following 18:20ex Oxford reaches Ascott (at 18:39).

Oh, ok. Post-IERP, the Adelantes appear to disappear. Word has it that all services would be bi-mode, other than the very first towards Worcester & this halts train - which are likely to be a 2car 165. So with a half-hour bimode at that time of day, I suspect the 165 will only go as far as Moreton maximum.

Another Turbo replacing a HST diagram today, with the 05:20 PAD-GMV, 08:43 GMV-PAD, 11:50 PAD-OXF, 15:01 OXF-PAD, 16:21 PAD-HFD, and 20:20 HFD-PAD on diagram IW024 being replaced by a Turbo.  Not any old Turbo though as all the stops have not been pulled out and a whopping 2-Car train has been provided in the form of 165135.  I believe that is three out of the last four Saturdays when this diagram has been partly, or wholly, covered by a Turbo

The 08:43 GMV-PAD is usually full and standing when it arrives at Paddington when it's a HST, so it was of no surprise to find people having to stand from Moreton-In-Marsh onwards.  The situation would have been even worse had it not been for desperate pleas from the station staff at Oxford not to board it and wait for the 10:37 to Didcot for a connection to London.  That included a group of 100+ 'Education First' European students who swamp Oxford's trains every summer Saturday.  The Slough stop was also canned.

Whilst the other trains on this diagram might not be quite as busy, they will all have been cosy as a result, especially the 16:21 PAD-HFD.  Very, very disappointing FGW!

I was at a wedding in Malvern yesterday and at the meal I was sat next to the bride's uncle. He said he and his wife had come up from London to Great Malvern on Friday afternoon and the journey to Worcester was foul - coaches rammed, aircon not working (despite Friday's heat).

I asked what train he came on and he wasn't sure, so I asked if the service had 7, 5 or 3 coaches. 5 coaches he replied. Had he travelled at about 3.50 I asked. Yes, that was it he replied......................

Had a good look at this one today as it left London and it's no surprise a 3-Car Turbo would have been insufficient on the date in question.  A 2+7 HST (with six standard class carriages and one first class) was pretty packed in Standard Class and at a rough guess at least three dozen people were having to stand.  The First Class coach was about 75% full.  Summer tourists swell these trains with lots of people travelling to Slough (for Windsor) and Oxford in addition to the usual passengers which get close to filling it all over the year.

Makes my comments about making the summer standby set at Paddington a 5 or 6 car formation even more sensible in my mind in case of HST failures, and also makes comments about the additional standard class seats being provided at the expense of first class ones 'just so the Reading commuters can get a seat' as pretty ridiculous given similar loadings on other morning trains I witnessed today.

Excellent to see a full ticket check before Reading on this train today. Seems as though it may have been happening for a while as only one pax in my coach was excessed to Oxford, and I didn't see anyone else alight from around my coach doors.

It waa comfortably full on leaving Padd with a several now standing since leaving Reading

Reposted without comment from https://twitter.com/IsabelOakeshott ...

"Ok, so the no10 Tory team and a mob of Tory MPs has just descended on Charlbury. Apparently it's a Tory 'away day' this weekend..

"The PM's closest aides were on a hideously overcrowded and overheated @FGW 4.50pm* Padd-Worcs Shrub Hill. It was disgusting experience."

* subsequently corrected to 3.50pm

This train, and the 08:26 WOF-PAD (and associated workings), is a HST today, and presumably tomorrow.  Shame it's not a long term alteration!  :-\