Great Western Coffee Shop

All across the Great Western territory => Across the West => Topic started by: LawrenceHillbilly on September 29, 2017, 09:50:18 pm



Title: IETs into passenger service from 16 Oct 2017 and subsequent performance issues
Post by: LawrenceHillbilly on September 29, 2017, 09:50:18 pm
My huge apology, LawrenceHillBilly - in adding your post to the diary, I deleted your original text ... and it had only been posted for such a short time that it hadn't made the hourly backups  ;)   - Grahame


Title: Re: IETs into passenger service from 16 Oct 2017 and subsequent performance issues
Post by: bignosemac on September 29, 2017, 10:03:25 pm
This has already been discussed in the existing IEP thread.

http://www.firstgreatwestern.info/coffeeshop/index.php?topic=10150.msg220164#msg220164 et seq

The passenger service mentioned will be the first operated by an IET, Intercity Express Train, which is the name chosen for these trains by the current operator of the Greater Western franchise.

IEP, Intercity Express Programme, is the name given to the procurement, design, build and testing of these trains.

Mods, perhaps this thread (IEP in title changed to IET) can be the start of discussion into the passenger service operation of these trains. The existing thread is on the 'Looking Forward' board. The future is almost here...


Title: Re: IETs into passenger service from 16 Oct 2017 and subsequent performance issues
Post by: grahame on September 29, 2017, 10:23:23 pm
Mods, perhaps this thread (IEP in title changed to IET) can be the start of discussion into the passenger service operation of these trains. The existing thread is on the 'Looking Forward' board. The future is almost here...

I have indeed added to the calendar ... and as you'll note, I made an error in my editing (thinking I was quoting not editing) and deleted the original post

First services is the 06:00 Bristol to Paddington on 16th October 2017


Title: Re: IETs into passenger service from 16 Oct 2017 and subsequent performance issues
Post by: bignosemac on October 12, 2017, 05:25:16 pm
My plans for a trip on (and review of) the GWR Intercity Express Train (IET) are now fixed for Monday. With thanks to another forum member for helping out with tickets.

All being well I plan to be on the 0930 from Bristol Temple Meads, which is the back working of the 0700 off Paddington. If there's any other forum members planning to take this service then do come and say hello. I'll be very easy to spot. Usual grey flat cap, and additionally my dog, Finn.

I'll try and get plenty of pictures of the interior, hopefully including 1st Class before departure.



Mods, thread title still needs IEP changed to IET on a couple of posts.


Title: Re: IETs into passenger service from 16 Oct 2017 and subsequent performance issues
Post by: Timmer on October 12, 2017, 05:31:10 pm
My plans for a trip on (and review of) the GWR Intercity Express Train (IET) are now fixed for Monday. With thanks to another forum member for helping out with tickets.

All being well I plan to be on the 0930 from Bristol Temple Meads, which is the back working of the 0700 off Paddington. If there's any other forum members planning to take this service then do come and say hello. I'll be very easy to spot. Usual grey flat cap, and additionally my dog, Finn.

I'll try and get plenty of pictures of the interior, hopefully including 1st Class before departure.



Mods, thread title still needs IEP changed to IET on a couple of posts.
Done.

Look forward to your report and pics of this important milestone for our region. My gosh we've waited long enough.


Title: Re: IETs into passenger service from 16 Oct 2017 and subsequent performance issues
Post by: bignosemac on October 12, 2017, 08:23:43 pm
Attached is a picture doing the rounds on social media and rail enthusiast forums. The planned passenger diagrams for GWR's IET introduction.


Title: Re: IETs into passenger service from 16 Oct 2017 and subsequent performance issues
Post by: NickB on October 12, 2017, 10:17:32 pm
I took a peak at the new year timetable for Maidenhead to Paddington. National rail have details up to 3rd Jan today.  I'm really pleased with what I can see so far, with double the number of fast direct services in the 7am-7.30am peak.
I have my fingers and toes crossed for a deployment that mirrors the timetable.

Edit: I've just checked the evening return leg and that is quite depressing. There is no increase in the current poor provision of fast services. It's 2tph at xx.18 and xx.48 or thereabouts.  I had hoped that a better evening provision was on the cards as that's what I was promised by FGW and GWR at their meet the manager events for years.


Title: Re: IETs into passenger service from 16 Oct 2017 and subsequent performance issues
Post by: bignosemac on October 12, 2017, 10:30:50 pm
One major requirement for the IETs to enter front line service was completed yesterday.

Ian Prosser, Chief Inspector of Railways at the Office of Rail & Road, signed off the Class 800s to enter revenue earning passenger service.


Title: Re: IETs into passenger service from 16 Oct 2017 and subsequent performance issues
Post by: IndustryInsider on October 12, 2017, 11:37:17 pm
I took a peak at the new year timetable for Maidenhead to Paddington. National rail have details up to 3rd Jan today.  I'm really pleased with what I can see so far, with double the number of fast direct services in the 7am-7.30am peak.
I have my fingers and toes crossed for a deployment that mirrors the timetable.

Edit: I've just checked the evening return leg and that is quite depressing. There is no increase in the current poor provision of fast services. It's 2tph at xx.18 and xx.48 or thereabouts.  I had hoped that a better evening provision was on the cards as that's what I was promised by FGW and GWR at their meet the manager events for years.

There will be significant changes every December and May until the end of 2019 when Crossrail starts, so hopefully the evening peak should improve too.  What happens after Crossrail for Twyford, Maidenhead and Slough will be interesting.


Title: Re: IETs into passenger service from 16 Oct 2017 and subsequent performance issues
Post by: Adelante_CCT on October 13, 2017, 08:18:30 am
Quote
I had hoped that a better evening provision was on the cards

As well as the 18 / 48 pasts, Maidenhead also gets some not quite as fast services with the 17:26 (33mins), the 17:57 (29mins) and the 18:56 (34mins).

As II says the timetable will keep changing over the next two years with the start and then full implementation of crossrail, the full implementation of the IETs and the working of the class 387s operating at 110mph all to come.

With 6 crossrail trains per hour, it will be expected that Maidenhead passengers to use these, slower yes, but also more frequent. I agree that Maidenhead is a large commuting hub, though we've had this discussion in the past whereby everyone wants a fast direct service into London which is not possible. For every stop that is made on the main line, you lose a path for fast services heading further west. Having say 4 trains per hour call at Maidenhead gives you potentially 4 less trains per hour heading to further away destinations*, start throwing in calls at Slough and Twyford as well and an even greater headache is caused for the timetable planners.

* I can think of numerous forum members who would complain if a reduction of services to places such as Taunton, the Cotswold branch or Swindon (For Melksham) were to occur to facilitate additional stops in the Thames Valley.

* Yes, one way round this would be to have all long distance trains stopping at one TV location to minimise the loss of paths, but other problems would occur such as long distance passengers complaining of standing due to short distance commuters etc.


Title: Re: IETs into passenger service from 16 Oct 2017 and subsequent performance issues
Post by: ChrisB on October 13, 2017, 08:32:21 am
For that final point, more so on the evening trip, I feel.


Title: Re: IETs into passenger service from 16 Oct 2017 and subsequent performance issues
Post by: grahame on October 13, 2017, 08:45:16 am
* I can think of numerous forum members who would complain if a reduction of services to places such as Taunton, the Cotswold branch or Swindon (For Melksham) were to occur to facilitate additional stops in the Thames Valley.

Hmmm ... when the new timetable to take advantage of the IET's improved electric performance envelope and reduced station dwell time is introduced Swindon switches from being "all trains call at Swindon" into a service that selected services miss out, like Didcot is at present.

Provided that there are gaps of no longer than 20 minutes in fast services to London (let's define that as "no more than 2 intermediate stops on a train running at well over 100 m.p.h), with the ability for everyone to get their luggage on and have a seat, that's OK by me personally.    I would also like to see a gaps of no longer than 30 minutes in trains that call at Didcot (for Oxford) after Swindon ... unless some kind soul would like to provide a direct Swindon to Oxford service which they're starting tomorrow ... then withdrawing again at the end of Sunday  :-\ .



One of the draft timetables / ideas (not sure if it's the current flavour) has 4 trains an hour Bristol Temple Meads to Paddington - two with the current stopping pattern, one calling at Bristol Parkway then fast to Reading, and one calling at Bath Spa and Chippenham and fast to Reading.

From a TransWilts viewpoint, this is going to complicate the advise we give to Trowbridge and Melksham to Reading and London passengers, which is currently "always change at Swindon on the way up". That advise is based on the knowledge that if the main line services aren't running to schedule, getting to Swindon and changing onto first available train makes sense.

And I do hope that the new schedule takes great care of Chippenham to Bath and Bristol traffic - with 3 trains an hour rather that 2, indications are positive on that front;  worthwhile to log a reminder that more passenger journeys from Chippenham start out heading west than heading east, even though more revenue is generated by passengers heading east rather than west.


Title: Re: IETs into passenger service from 16 Oct 2017 and subsequent performance issues
Post by: ChrisB on October 13, 2017, 09:22:55 am
Provided that there are gaps of no longer than 20 minutes in fast services to London (let's define that as "no more than 2 intermediate stops on a train running at well over 100 m.p.h), with the ability for everyone to get their luggage on and have a seat, that's OK by me personally.

Hmmm - I see no/little difference between Swindon & Oxford, who only get 2tph 'fast'. Frankly, a 2tph service (on the same route - so 2tph BRI via BPW, and 2tph via CPH is good) west of RDG, is the minimum.

If SWI demands 3tph, and I'm not sure it does frankly, the OXF ought to get the same (but won't)


Title: Re: IETs into passenger service from 16 Oct 2017 and subsequent performance issues
Post by: PhilWakely on October 13, 2017, 09:45:46 am
One major requirement for the IETs to enter front line service was completed yesterday.

Ian Prosser, Chief Inspector of Railways at the Office of Rail & Road, signed off the Class 800s to enter revenue earning passenger service.

All that could possibly stand in the way of a Monday launch is the dreaded 'Engineering Works Overrun'.


Title: Re: IETs into passenger service from 16 Oct 2017 and subsequent performance issues
Post by: ray951 on October 13, 2017, 09:49:39 am
I picked this up this morning:


Title: Re: IETs into passenger service from 16 Oct 2017 and subsequent performance issues
Post by: grahame on October 13, 2017, 10:07:33 am
Provided that there are gaps of no longer than 20 minutes in fast services to London (let's define that as "no more than 2 intermediate stops on a train running at well over 100 m.p.h), with the ability for everyone to get their luggage on and have a seat, that's OK by me personally.

Hmmm - I see no/little difference between Swindon & Oxford, who only get 2tph 'fast'. Frankly, a 2tph service (on the same route - so 2tph BRI via BPW, and 2tph via CPH is good) west of RDG, is the minimum.

If SWI demands 3tph, and I'm not sure it does frankly, the OXF ought to get the same (but won't)

Swindon currently has 4 or 5 fast trains per hour to London, and no slower trains. A lot of that is indeed a factor of how they splay out as they get further west.  Ongoing from Oxford to major destinations is really the single route that ends up at Hereford, rather than 3 routes from Swindon to such little hamlets as Bristol and Cardiff!

New service will probably see 7 trains - but some passing through none-stop - into London (4 from Bristol via Chippenham - CPM [[not CPH, please - Caerphilly is not a big flow from Swindon]] and via Parkway), 2 from South Wales and one from Cheltenham Spa.   My suggestion wasn't 3 an hour calling at Swindon - it was a request for a maximum headway of 20 minutes.  At a level of 3 an hour, you would be halving express service from Chippenham to Swindon, and from Bristol Parkway to Swindon ... and I suspect that would cause some significant grumbles!


Title: Re: IETs into passenger service from 16 Oct 2017 and subsequent performance issues
Post by: ChrisB on October 13, 2017, 10:26:49 am
But drowned out by the cheers of faster services to Reading & London from those at the same stations! :-)

I take your point for down services - that 1tph to CPM and CDF for example isn't sufficient, but 2tph into SWI is sufficient for everyone. So with the splits in route x3 at SWI, I guess they all ought to stop. But 5tph from SWI to the east is rather overkill.


Title: Re: IETs into passenger service from 16 Oct 2017 and subsequent performance issues
Post by: Timmer on October 13, 2017, 11:12:40 am
But drowned out by the cheers of faster services to Reading & London from those at the same stations! :-)
Yep!  :)


Title: Re: IETs into passenger service from 16 Oct 2017 and subsequent performance issues
Post by: Adelante_CCT on October 15, 2017, 09:21:26 pm
I'm guessing that numerous 'enthusiasts' will be on the 06:00 from Bristol tomorrow, thus making the train busier than usual...... Have GWR responded by running the following service to take up some of the 'normal commuters', which would appear to be a class 180?

http://www.realtimetrains.co.uk/train/V08478/2017/10/16/advanced


Title: Re: IETs into passenger service from 16 Oct 2017 and subsequent performance issues
Post by: Richard Fairhurst on October 16, 2017, 05:48:13 am
0600 HSTituted apparently.


Title: Re: IETs into passenger service from 16 Oct 2017 and subsequent performance issues
Post by: chuffed on October 16, 2017, 05:51:50 am
And the 0630 cancelled to rub salt into the wound. Due to a broken down train......


Title: Re: IETs into passenger service from 16 Oct 2017 and subsequent performance issues
Post by: grahame on October 16, 2017, 05:58:48 am
Journey check tells me

Quote
06:00 Bristol Temple Meads to London Paddington due 07:46
Facilities on the 06:00 Bristol Temple Meads to London Paddington due 07:46.
Will be formed of 10 coaches.
This is due to a broken down train.


Title: Re: IETs into passenger service from 16 Oct 2017 and subsequent performance issues
Post by: bobm on October 16, 2017, 06:03:40 am
06:33 now reinstated at the expense of the 06:20 from Weston super Mare which now starts from Temple Meads at 07:00.


Title: Re: IETs into passenger service from 16 Oct 2017 and subsequent performance issues
Post by: bobm on October 16, 2017, 06:12:36 am
CIS at Bath reports

Quote
Code   From   To   Plat      Scheduled Arrival   Expected Arrival   Scheduled Departure   Expected Departure
1A03   BRSTLTM   PADTON   2      06:11   06:31   06:13   06:31
Last report: At Bristol Temple Meads (05:30)
10 coach Intercity Express Train. 1st Class in coaches D, E, K & L.


Title: Re: IETs into passenger service from 16 Oct 2017 and subsequent performance issues
Post by: Adelante_CCT on October 16, 2017, 06:18:36 am
Appears to have left depot an hour late but will be class 800.

Reports suggest a spare HST has been at Bristol (P7) just in case


Title: Re: IETs into passenger service from 16 Oct 2017 and subsequent performance issues
Post by: Richard Fairhurst on October 16, 2017, 06:23:32 am
Being live tweeted by https://twitter.com/clinnick1


Title: Re: IETs into passenger service from 16 Oct 2017 and subsequent performance issues
Post by: Adelante_CCT on October 16, 2017, 07:05:46 am
I'm guessing that numerous 'enthusiasts' will be on the 06:00 from Bristol tomorrow, thus making the train busier than usual...... Have GWR responded by running the following service to take up some of the 'normal commuters', which would appear to be a class 180?

http://www.realtimetrains.co.uk/train/V08478/2017/10/16/advanced

Just saw this go past, I would say a grand total of near to zero on board from what I could tell, guess it'll pick up more from Reading


Title: Re: IETs into passenger service from 16 Oct 2017 and subsequent performance issues
Post by: chuffed on October 16, 2017, 07:08:37 am
Richard Clinnick's facebook page shows Messrs Grayling and Hopwood in first class coach K. I wonder how much they paid for their tickets.....


Title: Re: IETs into passenger service from 16 Oct 2017 and subsequent performance issues
Post by: Adelante_CCT on October 16, 2017, 07:17:33 am
Reports suggest electric is being used out of Paddington, as if proof was needed, 07:00 off Paddington, 3 mins early by Acton, 4 mins early at Slough


Title: Re: IETs into passenger service from 16 Oct 2017 and subsequent performance issues
Post by: John R on October 16, 2017, 07:18:59 am
Richard Clinnick's facebook page shows Messrs Grayling and Hopwood in first class coach K. I wonder how much they paid for their tickets.....
NOthing I would imagine, and why would they pay?


Title: Re: IETs into passenger service from 16 Oct 2017 and subsequent performance issues
Post by: bobm on October 16, 2017, 07:36:37 am
On board the 07:00 out of Paddington.

With Hitachi’s involvement perhaps not surprising there seemed to be more Japanese TV crews on the platform that anyone else.

(http://www.mbob.co.uk/rforum/iet5.jpg)

Selection of other photos

(http://www.mbob.co.uk/rforum/iet1.jpg)

(http://www.mbob.co.uk/rforum/iet2.jpg)

(http://www.mbob.co.uk/rforum/iet3.jpg)

(http://www.mbob.co.uk/rforum/iet4.jpg)


Title: Re: IETs into passenger service from 16 Oct 2017 and subsequent performance issues
Post by: TaplowGreen on October 16, 2017, 07:51:13 am
Richard Clinnick's facebook page shows Messrs Grayling and Hopwood in first class coach K. I wonder how much they paid for their tickets.....
NOthing I would imagine, and why would they pay?

.......to save the taxpayer the expense?


Title: Re: IETs into passenger service from 16 Oct 2017 and subsequent performance issues
Post by: John R on October 16, 2017, 07:57:41 am
Because Hopwood is the MD of the railway and travelling on company business, and Grayling is his invited guest for the launch event. 

More importantly, ITV is reporting that they had problems coupling the two units together at the depot, hence the reason why it set off 25 minutes late from Bristol. Really?  You couldn't make it up could you? Hitachi should have had the units ready hours before for such an important launch event.  At least they didn't run the service short formed though...


Title: Re: IETs into passenger service from 16 Oct 2017 and subsequent performance issues
Post by: Birdie100 on October 16, 2017, 08:03:54 am
Rumour has it the PAD arrival has had technical difficulties and won't arrive! RTT showing it hasn't cleared Slough yet but not sure if this an error.

Finally arrived nearly 40min late...


Title: Re: IETs into passenger service from 16 Oct 2017 and subsequent performance issues
Post by: BerkshireBugsy on October 16, 2017, 08:07:26 am
Geeetings from a HST based service which I boarded at Reading for Paddington . Sadly it don't know the origin of the service I was too busy trying to board and get a seat

We have been switched onto the "slow" up line - does anyone know if this is connected with the introduction of the IETs today ?

Update: we were routed back on to the Up Main (?) line just west on Slough station





Title: Re: IETs into passenger service from 16 Oct 2017 and subsequent performance issues
Post by: Timmer on October 16, 2017, 08:12:49 am
Eeeeekkk! BBC Points West Tweeted this:
https://twitter.com/bbcpointswest/status/919822837136936961


Title: Re: IETs into passenger service from 16 Oct 2017 and subsequent performance issues
Post by: DidcotPunter on October 16, 2017, 08:42:30 am
Eeeeekkk! BBC Points West Tweeted this:
https://twitter.com/bbcpointswest/status/919822837136936961

Excellent! Ideal for dealing with smelly trainspotters  ;D


Title: Re: IETs into passenger service from 16 Oct 2017 and subsequent performance issues
Post by: DidcotPunter on October 16, 2017, 08:47:51 am
Up working 1C03 seems to have had a rather disastrous debut. Arrived at Padd 41 mins late. Failed to switch over from diesel to AC at Maidenhead, so diesel all the way to Padd. Return working 1B12 8:15 to Cardiff has been cancelled.

Down working 1A03 seems to be doing a bit better, 7 mins late at Bath.

No doubt they'll sort it all out eventually but fabled 'Japanese reliability' has taken a bit of a knock!


Title: Re: IETs into passenger service from 16 Oct 2017 and subsequent performance issues
Post by: chuffed on October 16, 2017, 08:50:59 am
Eeeeekkk! BBC Points West Tweeted this:
https://twitter.com/bbcpointswest/status/919822837136936961

Was this the moment when things started going swimmingly for the debutante ?


Title: Re: IETs into passenger service from 16 Oct 2017 and subsequent performance issues
Post by: bignosemac on October 16, 2017, 08:51:33 am
Is this the first dog to travel on a Class 800?

(https://drive.google.com/uc?id=0B8VBuNEcQ7EgV083a0YxZmQ4S3M)


Title: Re: IETs into passenger service from 16 Oct 2017 and subsequent performance issues
Post by: chuffed on October 16, 2017, 08:58:05 am
He very probably is. And so very very adorably photogenic. He could almost be looking into a gramophone horn just waiting for HMV !


Title: Re: IETs into passenger service from 16 Oct 2017 and subsequent performance issues
Post by: Adelante_CCT on October 16, 2017, 08:58:29 am
1A03 was the up working, 1C03 the down,


Title: Re: IETs into passenger service from 16 Oct 2017 and subsequent performance issues
Post by: DidcotPunter on October 16, 2017, 08:59:42 am
1A03 was the up working, 1C03 the down,

Ooops sorry, wrong way round.  :-[


Title: Re: IETs into passenger service from 16 Oct 2017 and subsequent performance issues
Post by: Richard Fairhurst on October 16, 2017, 09:01:39 am
(http://www.mbob.co.uk/rforum/iet2.jpg)

Wonder how long it's been since the word "Intercity" has appeared on screens (or Solari boards!) at Paddington?


Title: Re: IETs into passenger service from 16 Oct 2017 and subsequent performance issues
Post by: Timmer on October 16, 2017, 09:16:53 am
Up working 1C03 seems to have had a rather disastrous debut. Arrived at Padd 41 mins late. Failed to switch over from diesel to AC at Maidenhead, so diesel all the way to Padd. Return working 1B12 8:15 to Cardiff has been cancelled.
Hope there wasn't a welcoming committee planned for the first scheduled IET into Wales.


Title: Re: IETs into passenger service from 16 Oct 2017 and subsequent performance issues
Post by: Adelante_CCT on October 16, 2017, 09:30:44 am
From the ground...
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ICvraOwbg7M


And from the air....
https://mobile.twitter.com/GWRHelp/status/919820542542217216/video/1

I did wonder about the helicopter I could hear


Title: Re: IETs into passenger service from 16 Oct 2017 and subsequent performance issues
Post by: TaplowGreen on October 16, 2017, 09:41:31 am
Up working 1C03 seems to have had a rather disastrous debut. Arrived at Padd 41 mins late. Failed to switch over from diesel to AC at Maidenhead, so diesel all the way to Padd. Return working 1B12 8:15 to Cardiff has been cancelled.
Hope there wasn't a welcoming committee planned for the first scheduled IET into Wales.

It's somehow quite fitting & a suitable metaphor for GWR.......wonder how the Famous 5 are coping?  ::)


Title: Re: IETs into passenger service from 16 Oct 2017 and subsequent performance issues
Post by: bignosemac on October 16, 2017, 09:43:10 am
800009 leading 1A11 0930 Bristol TM - London Paddington. 800008 at the rear. I'm on board with Finn, bobm and PhilWakely.

(https://drive.google.com/uc?id=0B8VBuNEcQ7EgbUJVdW5vUGRycHc)


Title: Re: IETs into passenger service from 16 Oct 2017 and subsequent performance issues
Post by: Timmer on October 16, 2017, 09:44:50 am
wonder how the Famous 5 are coping?  ::)
Who? Mark Carne, Mark Hopwood, Tim O'Toole and Chris Grayling? I don't think BNM would let them borrow his little dog Finn.


Title: Re: IETs into passenger service from 16 Oct 2017 and subsequent performance issues
Post by: BerkshireBugsy on October 16, 2017, 09:54:18 am
The scene when I arrived at Paddington about 830 this morning



Title: Re: IETs into passenger service from 16 Oct 2017 and subsequent performance issues
Post by: Louis94 on October 16, 2017, 10:07:19 am
Geeetings from a HST based service which I boarded at Reading for Paddington . Sadly it don't know the origin of the service I was too busy trying to board and get a seat

We have been switched onto the "slow" up line - does anyone know if this is connected with the introduction of the IETs today ?

Update: we were routed back on to the Up Main (?) line just west on Slough station


1A03 stopped with a fault at the changeover point from Diesel to Electric, trains behind were diverted onto the Up Relief line Twyford to Slough. I presume the IET had carried on its journey (on diesel) by the time you got to where it had stopped (around Taplow).


Title: Re: IETs into passenger service from 16 Oct 2017 and subsequent performance issues
Post by: broadgage on October 16, 2017, 10:36:23 am
He very probably is. And so very very adorably photogenic. He could almost be looking into a gramophone horn just waiting for HMV !

Almost certainly the first pet dog to travel with a fare paying passenger.
Earlier non public testing might have included blind people and their guide dogs ?


Title: Re: IETs into passenger service from 16 Oct 2017 and subsequent performance issues
Post by: Adelante_CCT on October 16, 2017, 11:01:25 am
800009 leading 1A11 0930 Bristol TM - London Paddington. 800008 at the rear. I'm on board with Finn, bobm and PhilWakely.

(https://drive.google.com/uc?id=0B8VBuNEcQ7EgbUJVdW5vUGRycHc)

Me too!  ;D

First impressions, very nice, good smooth acceleration, lets hope they get the pan up this time!
If not Richard Branson might be getting his balloon out again, replacing BA with GWR!
(https://i.guim.co.uk/img/media/e9bb8c4716c7f0a68805ce48498503e1209637ea/706_223_1679_1007/1679.jpg?w=1200&h=630&q=55&auto=format&usm=12&fit=crop&crop=faces%2Centropy&bm=normal&ba=bottom%2Cleft&blend64=aHR0cHM6Ly91cGxvYWRzLmd1aW0uY28udWsvMjAxNi8wNS8yNS9vdmVybGF5LWxvZ28tMTIwMC05MF9vcHQucG5n&s=3517d947960376efd61992253c847a34)


Title: Re: IETs into passenger service from 16 Oct 2017 and subsequent performance issues
Post by: 1st fan on October 16, 2017, 11:03:48 am
Being live tweeted by https://twitter.com/clinnick1
He says the seats are firm  :(

but interiors are to be changed  :)


Title: Re: IETs into passenger service from 16 Oct 2017 and subsequent performance issues
Post by: bignosemac on October 16, 2017, 11:15:13 am
After Maidenhead, passing Slough. We're on the leccy.

(https://drive.google.com/uc?id=0B8VBuNEcQ7EgbXFRTHRfazNkcGs)

Noticeably different underfloor sound when accelerating on leccy. A typically electric motor "whine".


Title: Re: IETs into passenger service from 16 Oct 2017 and subsequent performance issues
Post by: bobm on October 16, 2017, 11:42:33 am
I travelled from London down to Bristol and then back to Chippenham.  (See some earlier photos up the thread)  Obviously, judging by reports, I chose the better of the two trains to be on.

Certainly on board they make for a comfortable journey.  The seats are firm, which some might find uncomfortable, but they were ok for me.

Each pair of seats has two power points under the arm-rests which is better than between the seats in front of you as on an HST.  Not only easier to reach but won't be used as a footrest and thus broken.

Most seats have a proper window view.  There are a few at the end of a carriage which have no view at all and some others with only a partial one.  The only thing I don't really like are the window shades.  They are similar to the ones on the Voyagers where they cover more than one set of seats, so you'll have to bargain with the person sitting behind you if you want the blind down or up.

I didn't count the number of tables in a standard class coach but it is certainly more than an HST.

First class has bigger tables and more room

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

I did see several people knock their heads on the overhead rack when getting up from their seats.  Also at the end of each train the gangway to the front and rear carriage has a lower headroom.  The floor does slope slightly to compensate - but it is another thing to look out for.

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

Some work is needed on the external signage

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

The photo actually highlights the text above each element of the display - but on the platform you can hardly see it and 09:30 Bath Spa isn't very intuitive when you are at Bristol Temple Meads wanting the 09:30 to Paddington.  Hopefully they can make the Time and Next Stop text stand out a bit more.

There is also no exterior signage showing where cyclists should board with their non folding bicycles.  There was one report of a person trying to join the driver in the cab with one!

Also the first door after the driver's door is for the kitchen and so not for passenger use - but it isn't marked as such.

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

On both trips we did lose time at stations while people got used to the doors (and which ones they could use).

Heading down to Bristol we had an extra delay at Chippenham when it was realised the rear three coaches wouldn't be platformed at Bath and a couple of bicycles had to be moved down the platform ready to alight at the next stop.  Once at Bath there was another delay while those in the rear three (the majority of standard class in the rear five car train) had to walk through to get off.  As people become more familiar with the trains hopefully they won't sit at the back of the train if they want Bath.

In standard class the trolley duly came through and people made use of it

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

Seems the trolleys belong to Hitachi rather than GWR too

(http://www.mbob.co.uk/rforum/iettrol2.jpg)

The ride was smooth.  I didn't detect when we switched from the overhead to diesel at Maidenhead and we arrived early into Reading on the down trip.

Needless to say a lot of Hitachi and GWR managers on board the train.

Also one local BBC Radio reporter doing vox pops of passengers.   Her first question to the person sitting opposite me - "Is this the first time you have travelled on one of these trains?"   ???


Title: Re: IETs into passenger service from 16 Oct 2017 and subsequent performance issues
Post by: didcotdean on October 16, 2017, 11:47:27 am
On board the 07:00 out of Paddington.

With Hitachi’s involvement perhaps not surprising there seemed to be more Japanese TV crews on the platform that anyone else.

NHK report: http://www3.nhk.or.jp/news/html/20171016/k10011179471000.html?utm_int=news_contents_news-main_005

Automated translation of the report from Japanese:

On 16 October in the UK, the high-speed rail vehicle manufactured by Hitachi, a major electronics manufacturer utilizing the Shinkansen technology, began operating operations, and the track record in the birthplace of the railway would lead to the expansion of orders for Japan manufacturers.

In the United Kingdom, a project of 800 billion yen is underway to update a vehicle that is decrepit by a railway connecting major cities, and Hitachi has ordered the production of 866 vehicles.

On the 16th, three hundred kilometers between the capital London and Wales, the operation started with this vehicle, and a brand new green train left the London station with many guests.

The maximum speed is 200 kmh, and the technology of the Shinkansen has been introduced to the device which suppresses the noise, and the passenger said, "It is very quiet and easy to ride" or "The inside of the car is clean and comfortable".

This vehicle is manufactured in Yamaguchi Prefecture and finished in the UK, and the majority of trains delivered in the future will be produced locally.

The product that the Kobe steel plant was tampering with the data in the body is used, but the managing director of Hitachi's Masai Kentaro is "properly verified and has no problem with safety." I'm afraid the problem is that it's a manufacturer's responsibility to deliver safe products. "

The birthplace of the railway, in the UK, the largest rail project in Europe, which connects the major cities in London and central Japan by 360 kilometers per hour, is planned, but the competition of manufacturers is increasing in intensity, and the results of this time will be focused on the expansion of orders made by Japan manufacturers.

The world rail market is expected to scale to 20 trillion yen, and the competition for the order acquisition has increased as the demand to update the vehicle which is decrepit in the advanced country as well as the development plan of the high-speed railway is increased.


Title: Re: IETs into passenger service from 16 Oct 2017 and subsequent performance issues
Post by: 1st fan on October 16, 2017, 12:14:15 pm
I travelled from London down to Bristol and then back to Chippenham.  (See some earlier photos up the thread)  Obviously, judging by reports, I chose the better of the two trains to be on.

Certainly on board they make for a comfortable journey.  The seats are firm, which some might find uncomfortable, but they were ok for me.

Ah well hopefully after a few thousand people have sat on them they'll soften.

Also the first door after the driver's door is for the kitchen and so not for passenger use - but it isn't marked as such.

(http://www.mbob.co.uk/rforum/ietkitch.jpg)
I believe that the crew door was covered in the same colour as the rest of the train to dissuade passengers from trying to use it. They were supposed to just use the grey ones instead but interesting to hear that's not always worked.

In standard class the trolley duly came through and people made use of it

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

Seems the trolleys belong to Hitachi rather than GWR too

(http://www.mbob.co.uk/rforum/iettrol2.jpg)

That's a shame about the trolley as it appears to be a Sovereign S-Lite In-Cup Trolley http://www.sovonline.co.uk/rail-catering-trolleys. That means no coffee machine and that's a seriously retrograde step for the coffee drinkers.  Ben Rule posted on this site saying:

What we are certainly not talking about is a trolley service like the one we have today. But more on that in a bit.

Well that trolley doesn't seem to be much different from the existing trolleys in use already today. They could have gone for something like a modified version of this https://www.ceka.ch/files/medien/bilder/Branchen/ceka-minibar-03.jpg and kept the coffee from fresh beans and not instant. I guess my expectations were raised too high.

Also one local BBC Radio reporter doing vox pops of passengers.   Her first question to the person sitting opposite me - "Is this the first time you have travelled on one of these trains?"   ???

  ::)  ::) ::)


Title: Re: IETs into passenger service from 16 Oct 2017 and subsequent performance issues
Post by: t0m on October 16, 2017, 12:18:05 pm
Oops

http://www.independent.co.uk/travel/news-and-advice/intercity-express-train-break-down-first-service-bristol-london-paddington-transport-secretary-rush-a8002471.html

My train into Paddington was over 30 mins late after being moved to the relief line to make way for VIPs......


Title: Re: IETs into passenger service from 16 Oct 2017 and subsequent performance issues
Post by: BerkshireBugsy on October 16, 2017, 12:26:58 pm
Oops

http://www.independent.co.uk/travel/news-and-advice/intercity-express-train-break-down-first-service-bristol-london-paddington-transport-secretary-rush-a8002471.html

My train into Paddington was over 30 mins late after being moved to the relief line to make way for VIPs......

As I mentioned earlier I was on an HST  service that was switched to relief line after leaving Reading and then switched back prior to Slough. I was surprised how fast we were travelling on the relief line. I know it's slightly off topic but what is the maximum speed allowed on that section of relief track?


Title: Re: IETs into passenger service from 16 Oct 2017 and subsequent performance issues
Post by: 1st fan on October 16, 2017, 12:46:54 pm
Oops

http://www.independent.co.uk/travel/news-and-advice/intercity-express-train-break-down-first-service-bristol-london-paddington-transport-secretary-rush-a8002471.html

My train into Paddington was over 30 mins late after being moved to the relief line to make way for VIPs......

As I mentioned earlier I was on an HST  service that was switched to relief line after leaving Reading and then switched back prior to Slough. I was surprised how fast we were travelling on the relief line. I know it's slightly off topic but what is the maximum speed allowed on that section of relief track?
From memory it's 90mph for the relief lines but don't quote me on that as I may well be wrong.


Title: Re: IETs into passenger service from 16 Oct 2017 and subsequent performance issues
Post by: chrisr_75 on October 16, 2017, 12:53:58 pm
A somewhat less positive view from the BBC:

http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-england-bristol-41633356 (http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-england-bristol-41633356)

I won't quote in full as there's a lot of Twitter screenshots and the like

Quote
Broken air conditioning and a 41-minute delay have overshadowed the launch of the UK's new fleet of high-speed trains.
The Hitachi 800 engine will be faster and carry more passengers and will run on GWR for the next 27 years.
But passengers on the first Bristol to London service arrived late and some had to dodge drips as water leaked from an air conditioning unit.
Hitachi said the delay was due to a "minor technical issue".
The fleet of intercity trains was designed to be electric, but due to delays in electrification of the line, engines will also be fitted with diesel power.


Title: Re: IETs into passenger service from 16 Oct 2017 and subsequent performance issues
Post by: bobm on October 16, 2017, 12:59:16 pm
Oops

http://www.independent.co.uk/travel/news-and-advice/intercity-express-train-break-down-first-service-bristol-london-paddington-transport-secretary-rush-a8002471.html

My train into Paddington was over 30 mins late after being moved to the relief line to make way for VIPs......

As I mentioned earlier I was on an HST  service that was switched to relief line after leaving Reading and then switched back prior to Slough. I was surprised how fast we were travelling on the relief line. I know it's slightly off topic but what is the maximum speed allowed on that section of relief track?
From memory it's 90mph for the relief lines but don't quote me on that as I may well be wrong.

If I am reading the sectional appendix correctly it *is* 90mph on the Up Relief from Reading to Southall except though Maidenhead and Slough stations where it is 75mph.


Title: Re: IETs into passenger service from 16 Oct 2017 and subsequent performance issues
Post by: 1st fan on October 16, 2017, 01:02:33 pm
Oops

http://www.independent.co.uk/travel/news-and-advice/intercity-express-train-break-down-first-service-bristol-london-paddington-transport-secretary-rush-a8002471.html

My train into Paddington was over 30 mins late after being moved to the relief line to make way for VIPs......

As I mentioned earlier I was on an HST  service that was switched to relief line after leaving Reading and then switched back prior to Slough. I was surprised how fast we were travelling on the relief line. I know it's slightly off topic but what is the maximum speed allowed on that section of relief track?
From memory it's 90mph for the relief lines but don't quote me on that as I may well be wrong.

If I am reading the sectional appendix correctly it *is* 90mph on the Up Relief from Reading to Southall except though Maidenhead and Slough stations where it is 75mph.
Thanks my memory clearly not as bad as I feared.


Title: Re: IETs into passenger service from 16 Oct 2017 and subsequent performance issues
Post by: 1st fan on October 16, 2017, 01:03:54 pm
Eeeeekkk! BBC Points West Tweeted this:
https://twitter.com/bbcpointswest/status/919822837136936961

Excellent! Ideal for dealing with smelly trainspotters  ;D

Do you have to pay extra to use the onboard showers?  ;D


Title: Re: IETs into passenger service from 16 Oct 2017 and subsequent performance issues
Post by: Timmer on October 16, 2017, 02:45:24 pm
Do you have to pay extra to use the onboard showers?  ;D
More than just a few drips wasn't it. I know it's very warm and muggy with air being drawn up from the South, but that is one very enthusiastic air con unit.


Title: Re: IETs into passenger service from 16 Oct 2017 and subsequent performance issues
Post by: 1st fan on October 16, 2017, 03:13:05 pm
Do you have to pay extra to use the onboard showers?  ;D
More than just a few drips wasn't it. I know it's very warm and muggy with air being drawn up from the South, but that is one very enthusiastic air con unit.
I suspect it was left on overnight and the condensation wasn't being cleared. Then when the train was moved the condensation did too. According to someone on twitter a fair few people and one laptop were hit. The press and media are unsurprisingly having a field day over this. There are numerous requests on twitter from various media outlets to use the pictures posted on twitter of people standing/water dripping.


Title: Re: IETs into passenger service from 16 Oct 2017 and subsequent performance issues
Post by: bobm on October 16, 2017, 03:16:13 pm
BBC Points West showed the laptop on its side being dried out.

Looks like the BBC crew got out at Reading as they had no footage regarding the reported problems switching from diesel to electric in the Maidenhead area.


Title: Re: IETs into passenger service from 16 Oct 2017 and subsequent performance issues
Post by: didcotdean on October 16, 2017, 03:34:40 pm
The classic reason is a blockage in the condensation line but there can be other causes.

Happened to me in a plane years ago on descent. Fortunately it wasn't quite as bad and could be mopped up by a pile of blankets.


Title: Re: IETs into passenger service from 16 Oct 2017 and subsequent performance issues
Post by: BBM on October 16, 2017, 03:38:51 pm
Photo I took at PAD around 1130 this morning (with Geoff Marshall of 'All The Stations' fame in the shot on the left!)


Title: Re: IETs into passenger service from 16 Oct 2017 and subsequent performance issues
Post by: Jason on October 16, 2017, 04:27:31 pm
As I mentioned earlier I was on an HST  service that was switched to relief line after leaving Reading and then switched back prior to Slough.

I was directly behind it on an already badly delayed HST, too close to be switched over. It came in an hour late in the end. Not impressed.


Title: Re: IETs into passenger service from 16 Oct 2017 and subsequent performance issues
Post by: 1st fan on October 16, 2017, 04:46:10 pm
The classic reason is a blockage in the condensation line but there can be other causes.

Happened to me in a plane years ago on descent. Fortunately it wasn't quite as bad and could be mopped up by a pile of blankets.
Happened to me where I used to work and water would pour out of the air-con unit if not emptied regularly. Could get easily 2.5 - 3 litres in 8hrs.


Title: Re: IETs into passenger service from 16 Oct 2017 and subsequent performance issues
Post by: stuving on October 16, 2017, 04:53:25 pm
The classic reason is a blockage in the condensation line but there can be other causes.

Happened to me in a plane years ago on descent. Fortunately it wasn't quite as bad and could be mopped up by a pile of blankets.
Happened to me where I used to work and water would pour out of the air-con unit if not emptied regularly. Could get easily 2.5 - 3 litres in 8hrs.

It's obviously pretty common - my desk at work was twice doused by a chiller in the roof, though not while I was there. Wrote off two monitors; the old CRT ones were so not showerproof.


Title: Re: IETs into passenger service from 16 Oct 2017 and subsequent performance issues
Post by: didcotdean on October 16, 2017, 05:08:39 pm
MD of Hitachi Rail Karen Boswell has issued an apology for the issues of the first train this morning

https://twitter.com/HitachiRailEU/status/919930521345544197

Now where is the one from Mark Hopwood ...


Title: Re: IETs into passenger service from 16 Oct 2017 and subsequent performance issues
Post by: Timmer on October 16, 2017, 05:14:34 pm
MD of Hitachi Rail Karen Boswell has issued an apology for the issues of the first train this morning

https://twitter.com/HitachiRailEU/status/919930521345544197

Now where is the one from Mark Hopwood ...
Saw it on GWR's Twitter feed just now. Good of Hitachi to fess up but that would be the Japenese way. They would have been most embarrassed by what had happened this morning.

Was just about to ask, was Mr Hopwood around for the launch? Have yet to see any pics of him?


Title: Re: IETs into passenger service from 16 Oct 2017 and subsequent performance issues
Post by: chuffed on October 16, 2017, 05:22:44 pm
MD of Hitachi Rail Karen Boswell has issued an apology for the issues of the first train this morning

https://twitter.com/HitachiRailEU/status/919930521345544197

Now where is the one from Mark Hopwood ...
Saw it on GWR's Twitter feed just now. Good of Hitachi to fess up but that would be the Japenese way. They would have been most embarrassed by what had happened this morning.

Was just about to ask, was Mr Hopwood around for the launch? Have yet to see any pics of him?

He was the funny little guy in the hat, dancing with the Duchess of Cambridge at Paddington around lunchtime. Hope he washed the marmalade off his sticky fingers first !


Title: Re: IETs into passenger service from 16 Oct 2017 and subsequent performance issues
Post by: Timmer on October 16, 2017, 05:44:38 pm
He was the funny little guy in the hat, dancing with the Duchess of Cambridge at Paddington around lunchtime. Hope he washed the marmalade off his sticky fingers first !
:D :D :D Brilliant! We do have some good humour on this forum  ;D


Title: Re: IETs into passenger service from 16 Oct 2017 and subsequent performance issues
Post by: John R on October 16, 2017, 06:04:39 pm
I suspect Ms Boswell will be getting some very frank feedback from her bosses. This was Hitachi's most important day in terms of media profile and they have right royally screwed it up. And in doing so made their customers (DfT and GWR) appear a laughing stock.

I don't think it's on Twitter she needs to be making her apologies.


Title: Re: IETs into passenger service from 16 Oct 2017 and subsequent performance issues
Post by: TaplowGreen on October 16, 2017, 06:12:53 pm
.....from the Telegraph.....

https://trib.al/Oa4NnMi


Title: Re: IETs into passenger service from 16 Oct 2017 and subsequent performance issues
Post by: ChrisB on October 16, 2017, 06:43:31 pm
Re Mark Hopwood at this morning's launch - Yes, saw him in the background of a shot of all the press surrounding the Hitachi bigwig....


Title: Re: IETs into passenger service from 16 Oct 2017 and subsequent performance issues
Post by: broadgage on October 16, 2017, 06:43:50 pm
Leakage of condensate from air conditioning units is indeed a relatively common fault, but simply should not happen on a new and very expensive train.

If the condensate line was blocked, not connected, or otherwise defective from new then that suggests poor quality control.
If a fault had developed during test running, then that is a bit worrying on a still new train.

The weather this morning was warmer and more humid than normal for the time of year, but was cooler and less humid than many summer days. The train did not appear heavily loaded, I wonder what will happen on a hot humid day with a crowded train.


Title: Re: IETs into passenger service from 16 Oct 2017 and subsequent performance issues
Post by: Rhydgaled on October 16, 2017, 08:08:32 pm
The weather this morning was warmer and more humid than normal for the time of year, but was cooler and less humid than many summer days. The train did not appear heavily loaded, I wonder what will happen on a hot humid day with a crowded train.
I can only recall one train ride where it was 'raining' inside due (I supposed) to the air conditioning system. The unit was a class 175 and I think it was a cold evening outside but possibly even colder inside (the 175's aircon was seemingly in 'Arctic Mode'), so perhaps showers is more of a cold-weather fault?

Regarding the delay this morning, was the train late off the depot? If so, does Hitachi get a penalty for that under the no-train, no-pay IEP contract or is it only a total failure to provide a set that incurs such a penalty?


Title: Re: IETs into passenger service from 16 Oct 2017 and subsequent performance issues
Post by: John R on October 16, 2017, 08:20:22 pm
Regarding the delay this morning, was the train late off the depot? If so, does Hitachi get a penalty for that under the no-train, no-pay IEP contract or is it only a total failure to provide a set that incurs such a penalty?
Yes, it was over an hour late leaving. I'm sure there will be a penalty for not presenting a train for service at the right time, else what's the point of having a contract where Hitachi are on the hook to provide a set for each journey which doesn't catch such a failure. 


Title: Re: IETs into passenger service from 16 Oct 2017 and subsequent performance issues
Post by: bignosemac on October 16, 2017, 08:36:24 pm
I suspect Ms Boswell will be getting some very frank feedback from her bosses. This was Hitachi's most important day in terms of media profile and they have right royally screwed it up. And in doing so made their customers (DfT and GWR) appear a laughing stock.

I don't think it's on Twitter she needs to be making her apologies.

The apology was posted on Twitter because it's from there it can be shared far and wide.

I think it's very good she has appeared on camera in the immediate aftermath and apologised unreservedly. That is no doubt because she is working for a Japanese company. That's the way they do things in the land if the rising sun.

I can think of at least one other MD from the same industry who would do well to ape Karen Boswell. Publicly apologising for the atrocious service his company has provided to its customers in recent months.

Now, the new trains. My impressions. Teething problems aside I think the Class 80x will be a worthy successor to the HST. The passenger environment is very good. There's attention to detail throughout the train. One design feature I particularly liked was the slot in the middle of the airline seat drop down tables. Allows you to rest a tablet (or a phone in portrait aspect) at a decent viewing angle.

Far more tables than the HSTs and much greater legroom. My only concern on the tables and legroom front are that these can be changed at a later date to accommodate even more seated passengers.

A comfortable smooth ride. With no complaints from me about the seats. The correct upright design to promote good posture. It's a myth that a soft enveloping seat is more comfortable. I remember well the back ache I had on my last trip to Norwich sat in an IC70.

The coffee from the trolley was acceptable. Better than the dishwater you get from a CrossCountry trolley.

I'm looking forward to trying the 1st Class experience. That'll probably wait until there's a confirmed Pullman service on a Class 80x. Breakfast from, or Brunch to, Swansea will most likely be the first Class 800 Pullman.

I can't comment on the toilets. Didn't need!

And there's no complaints from Finn. The underfloor engines were quiet enough for him to curl up on the floor and sleep.


Title: Re: IETs into passenger service from 16 Oct 2017 and subsequent performance issues
Post by: laird on October 16, 2017, 09:29:18 pm
Introducing a service on Monday morning on a generally busy service was certainly not the best choice; one of the two sets was unfit for service due to the waterfall in Carriage D (or as GWR would like to pretend Carriage K sadly they forgot to move the reservations so the true letter was known). As you can imagine that meant no First Class Service for passengers in Carriages D or E.
Add to that the debacle of the Diesel to AC transfer and you get an impression of my normal commute.
When I looked in the morning the backup plan of a HST was in progress with a set waiting to operate 1A03 sat in Platform 7 at Bristol Temple Meads, OK it was in reverse formation but no problem as that’s fairly typical for a post engineering works Monday.

It appears that having decided the train was to run at all costs a decision to re-form the train was taken thus the train was re-formed and departed 1 hour late (now with a working VIP section but no remaining first class), now with no hope of recovering the lost time.

By Didcot the train was reported as full and standing, at Reading this was announced along with a suggestion to board 1K71 which was being held to allow the late running 1A03 to depart ahead of it. However since 1K71 was already full and standing that wasn't of any use to anyone awaiting the service (1K71 was running late due to missing train crew at Bristol Temple Meads).
I should note that at Reading there were very few people specifically waiting for the new train.
For the record 1P13 and 1L08 the preceding 2 services both departed full and standing in both classes.


It appears that having realised one set had no viable First Class; Mark Hopwood's team decided it was better to run the service late and seat invited guests rather than the long suffering paying customers.

To make matters worse the Customer Information System on the platforms fails to display the carriage order merely reminding potential passengers of the carriage letters which constitute first class.
That wouldn't have been so bad but in deciding to re-order the carriages someone had managed to exchange the carriage letters but not move the reservations. Consequently the train was announced as not having seat reservations.

Above carriage D something was in the airflow, perhaps this is connected to the air conditioning waterfall which means its nosier than expected, although it doesn't suffer like the earlier Hitachi products like the Javelin which sounded like they were about to rattle every internal panel loose.

So far not great but then came the Diesel to AC change over, Maidenhead was passed and then the brakes came on and the train halted in Taplow station trapping the two following HSTs behind, behind those HSTs were put onto the Relief Line (oddly the video of that one passing wasn't on the twitter feed). Consequential further delays to 1K71.
The driver takes to the PA with an alarm in the background as technicians are summoned to the leading cab, fine in theory but the technicians are trapped in the rear set as the doors haven't been released. Eventually common sense prevails and a return to Diesel power is successful.

Whilst the build quality (technical fault with the equipment in Carriage D) can be fixed for me it revealed:
a. Whilst a small increase in seat numbers is offered by a 2x5 car set or 1x9 car set its already too little to meet the existing peak demand
b. When things go wrong GWR are not quick to react or react in favour of narrow self interest
c. Station customer information displays have not been updated to reflect the new stock


Title: Re: IETs into passenger service from 16 Oct 2017 and subsequent performance issues
Post by: Timmer on October 16, 2017, 09:37:00 pm
Re Mark Hopwood at this morning's launch - Yes, saw him in the background of a shot of all the press surrounding the Hitachi bigwig....
After what happened to the service from Bristol I'm not surprised he stayed in the background. "These aren't my trains guv, they belong to Hitachi and Dft are making me lease them for loads of money."


Title: Re: IETs into passenger service from 16 Oct 2017 and subsequent performance issues
Post by: PhilWakely on October 16, 2017, 09:41:20 pm
Aside from the problems suffered on 1A03 and the cancellation of 1B12, the other workings appear to have run with only minor problems.

I notice that a couple of potential challenges for the immediate future have not been mentioned. The 10-car trains do not fit into the platforms at Bath Spa, Chippenham or Didcot Parkway and it took some time for pax to get off/get on, leading to potential delays. There was also a problem unloading cycles from 1C03 at Chippenham.   


Title: Re: IETs into passenger service from 16 Oct 2017 and subsequent performance issues
Post by: bobm on October 16, 2017, 09:46:09 pm
Supposition on my part but I understand that it was *a* train late from the depot.  In other words the planned sets failed and another pair were pressed into service at short notice.  Obviously safety critical items would have been checked on the replacement but I suspect aircon isn't one of them.  Agreed that is little comfort for those who had an impromptu shower.  Similarly it is possible the change over in traction mode failed due to driver error.  These are obviously things that will be being looked at this very moment because no one will want a repeat tomorrow.

There was a problem with the reservation system on the 07:00 from Paddington.  The set at the London end appeared not to have the electronic system working from the start.  However the country end was working until about 06:50 when, just as I was about to take a photo of them, they all disappeared and the old style tickets were placed on the headrests.

I suspect it may be a training issue.  I noticed on the return journey we had automated announcements about calling patterns, the next station, the fact it was a busy service and do not put bags on seats and the usual security announcement.  The only one I didn't hear was about the quiet coach - of which there are two on a ten car.  


Title: Re: IETs into passenger service from 16 Oct 2017 and subsequent performance issues
Post by: bobm on October 16, 2017, 09:50:25 pm
There was also a problem unloading cycles from 1C03 at Chippenham.   

I was on 1C03 at Chippenham.  As I mentioned up thread the problem was, thankfully, someone realised the bike store on the rear set wouldn't be platformed at Bath so took the opportunity of the Chippenham stop to get them unloaded and wheeled down the platform to an area that would be ok for Bath.  I think the train, certainly on the down, was fully platformed at both Chippenham and Didcot Parkway.


Title: Re: IETs into passenger service from 16 Oct 2017 and subsequent performance issues
Post by: laird on October 16, 2017, 10:00:41 pm
It will certainly be interesting to see how performance improves (or not) on 1A03 up to Christmas, at least now I know where my seat is within the carriage (since the reserved seat turns out to be the same number now all the way through until then).

Although I'm not looking forward to the prospect of trying to guess which of the 4 possible carriage positions it will arrive in at Reading each day!

The slow boarding problem isn't likely to be solved soon as the train isn't designed with suburban commuting in mind, today if you happened to be slightly slow at getting to the door to leave you would have been met with a large flow and through the narrow vestibule passengers weren't making good progress as they met boarding passengers. Dwell time is likely therefore to be an issue if the train encounters a passenger needing assistance, used on routes where large luggage is common or the cyclists arrive and are not ready to sprint.

A sensible choice was made on the Old Oak set this morning to place the two first class sections in the centre of the train, fingers crossed in time that becomes the working practice as that would have a positive effect on dwell time.


Title: Re: IETs into passenger service from 16 Oct 2017 and subsequent performance issues
Post by: bobm on October 16, 2017, 10:04:12 pm
A sensible choice was made on the Old Oak set this morning to place the two first class sections in the centre of the train, fingers crossed in time that becomes the working practice as that would have a positive effect on dwell time.

Agreed - although they will have to reprint the glossy leaflet that has been produced....


Title: Re: IETs into passenger service from 16 Oct 2017 and subsequent performance issues
Post by: bignosemac on October 16, 2017, 10:20:38 pm
 
There was also a problem unloading cycles from 1C03 at Chippenham.   

I was on 1C03 at Chippenham.  As I mentioned up thread the problem was, thankfully, someone realised the bike store on the rear set wouldn't be platformed at Bath so took the opportunity of the Chippenham stop to get them unloaded and wheeled down the platform to an area that would be ok for Bath.  I think the train, certainly on the down, was fully platformed at both Chippenham and Didcot Parkway.

That does raise an issue though. Cycles are only meant to be carried with a reservation. Shouldn't the reservation system 'know' not to put a bike in a place where it can't be boarded or alighted at origin and/or destination? 

Same goes for seat reservations. The system needs to know not to put people in a carriage they can't directly board/alight at origin and/or destination. Any time advantage you gain from automatic doors is lost if you have dozens of passengers having to move through a train to get to a platformed door, or trying to find their carriage from the platform.

Teething problems that can be ironed out (excuse the mixed metaphors). The sort of things that crop up only when you start allowing the hoi polloi near your new train set.


Title: Re: IETs into passenger service from 16 Oct 2017 and subsequent performance issues
Post by: 1st fan on October 16, 2017, 10:22:51 pm
There was also a problem unloading cycles from 1C03 at Chippenham.   

I was on 1C03 at Chippenham.  As I mentioned up thread the problem was, thankfully, someone realised the bike store on the rear set wouldn't be platformed at Bath so took the opportunity of the Chippenham stop to get them unloaded and wheeled down the platform to an area that would be ok for Bath.  I think the train, certainly on the down, was fully platformed at both Chippenham and Didcot Parkway.

That does raise an issue though. Cycles are only meant to be carried with a reservation. Shouldn't the reservation system 'know' not to put a bike in a place where it can't be boarded or alighted at origin and/or destination? 

Same goes for seat reservations. The system needs to know not to put people in a carriage they can't directly board/alight at origin and/or destination. Any time advantage you gain from automatic doors is lost if you have dozens of passengers having to move through a train to get to a platformed door, or trying to find their carriage from the platform.

Teething problems that can be ironed out (excuse the mixed metaphors). The sort of things that crop up only when you start allowing the hoi polloi near your new train set.
I thought about this larger length of the new trains and Moreton in Marsh. There are several stations on the Cotswold line that have short platforms for the existing HST. Assuming they're going to run a 5+5 set up there, will they have to announce which section of the train passengers need to be in as well as reservations? From my calculations only one 5 car set will fit on the platforms at Moreton. So if you're in the wrong set after Kingham you're stuffed.


Title: Re: IETs into passenger service from 16 Oct 2017 and subsequent performance issues
Post by: laird on October 16, 2017, 10:28:03 pm
Are there sufficient passenger flows to justify running as 2x5 beyond Oxford/Swindon in the Worcester direction, I seem to recall when the Adelante sets operated in 2x5 car one of the two sets was simply out of service until Oxford/Swindon which in turn meant the commuters could be expected to board those in preference to the presumably well laden 5 car set?


Title: Re: IETs into passenger service from 16 Oct 2017 and subsequent performance issues
Post by: 1st fan on October 16, 2017, 10:40:16 pm
Are there sufficient passenger flows to justify running as 2x5 beyond Oxford/Swindon in the Worcester direction, I seem to recall when the Adelante sets operated in 2x5 car one of the two sets was simply out of service until Oxford/Swindon which in turn meant the commuters could be expected to board those in preference to the presumably well laden 5 car set?
Normally on the 19:22 there's often standing room only on the train until at least Oxford. I know by the time the train reaches Moreton there are fewer people but I wouldn't like to say whether it would fill more than a 5 car. If they want to make the front set for people going beyond Oxford only then that suits me. Won't matter until December though when the trains get up there.


Title: Re: IETs into passenger service from 16 Oct 2017 and subsequent performance issues
Post by: bignosemac on October 16, 2017, 11:06:00 pm
I suspect the longer term plan, when timetables are recast for exclusive IET service, the intention is to run 2x 5car to Oxford with one unit going forward to Worcester/Malvern /Hereford. In the other direction, a single unit inbound, joining another at Oxford.

Load factors may mean the peak services being 1x9 or 2x5 throughout. A uniform fleet (and no more Turbos on the Cotswolds Line - remember that!) with SDO and the option to split and join will be a huge benefit.


Title: Re: IETs into passenger service from 16 Oct 2017 and subsequent performance issues
Post by: 1st fan on October 17, 2017, 12:04:42 am
I suspect the longer term plan, when timetables are recast for exclusive IET service, the intention is to run 2x 5car to Oxford with one unit going forward to Worcester/Malvern /Hereford. In the other direction, a single unit inbound, joining another at Oxford.

Load factors may mean the peak services being 1x9 or 2x5 throughout. A uniform fleet (and no more Turbos on the Cotswolds Line - remember that!) with SDO and the option to split and join will be a huge benefit.
Killing off those Turbos cannot happen soon enough.


Title: Re: IETs into passenger service from 16 Oct 2017 and subsequent performance issues
Post by: Richard Fairhurst on October 17, 2017, 12:55:11 am
I believe that platform extensions are planned for the Cotswold Line and that 2x5 won't run until then. But what the state of that project is, who knows. References (both from 2016): http://orr.gov.uk/__data/assets/pdf_file/0008/24011/enhancements-delivery-plan-change-control-october-december-2016.pdf, https://www.nao.org.uk/wp-content/uploads/2016/11/Modernising-the-Great-Western-railway.pdf

Until then, there's the 1x5 and 1x9 units.


Title: Re: IETs into passenger service from 16 Oct 2017 and subsequent performance issues
Post by: grahame on October 17, 2017, 01:23:24 am
It will certainly be interesting to see how performance improves (or not) on 1A03 up to Christmas, at least now I know where my seat is within the carriage (since the reserved seat turns out to be the same number now all the way through until then).

Although I'm not looking forward to the prospect of trying to guess which of the 4 possible carriage positions it will arrive in at Reading each day!

The slow boarding problem isn't likely to be solved soon as the train isn't designed with suburban commuting in mind, today if you happened to be slightly slow at getting to the door to leave you would have been met with a large flow and through the narrow vestibule passengers weren't making good progress as they met boarding passengers. Dwell time is likely therefore to be an issue if the train encounters a passenger needing assistance, used on routes where large luggage is common or the cyclists arrive and are not ready to sprint.

A sensible choice was made on the Old Oak set this morning to place the two first class sections in the centre of the train, fingers crossed in time that becomes the working practice as that would have a positive effect on dwell time.

From yesterday morning / Real Time Trains - Station dwell times of first servives of the IET.  In all cases except Reading outbound, train did not leave on time so the duration is a measure of how long station duties took.

2.75 Bath Spa
2.0 Chippenham
3.0 Swindon
2.0 Didcot
2.5 Reading

5.0 Reading (awaiting time)
5.25 Didcot
3.0 Swindon
5.0 Chippenham
4.75 Bath Spa

I would expect these dwells to drop as people get used to the trains, and expect them to drop further as the fleet becomes uniform IET so that passengers don't have to go to different platform places for an IET and an HST, and know what's arriving.   Helpful HST "Coach C is here" indicators at stations haven't (yet?) been enhanced with "IET coach C is here", and I don't the old orange and purple zone for which some signage persists has been re-enlivened.


Title: Re: IETs into passenger service from 16 Oct 2017 and subsequent performance issues
Post by: IndustryInsider on October 17, 2017, 06:05:17 am
I believe that platform extensions are planned for the Cotswold Line and that 2x5 won't run until then. But what the state of that project is, who knows. References (both from 2016): http://orr.gov.uk/__data/assets/pdf_file/0008/24011/enhancements-delivery-plan-change-control-october-december-2016.pdf, https://www.nao.org.uk/wp-content/uploads/2016/11/Modernising-the-Great-Western-railway.pdf

Until then, there's the 1x5 and 1x9 units.

Works to be undertaken late next year I think.  Until then IET’s will mostly replace the existing Class 180 and Turbo diagrams AIUI and run as 5-car trains, with the longer distance services still in the hands of HSTs. 

No physical works have started yet, though a signal has been moved at Shrub Hill to facilitate the lengthening of one of the platforms there, and the works to introduce a turnback siding at Henwick are now nearing completion.


Title: Re: IETs into passenger service from 16 Oct 2017 and subsequent performance issues
Post by: bobm on October 17, 2017, 06:13:15 am
This morning’s 06:00 ex Bristol diverted via Hullavington due to a points problem just east of Bristol Temple Meads thus missing the calls at Bath and Chippenham.


Title: Re: IETs into passenger service from 16 Oct 2017 and subsequent performance issues
Post by: grahame on October 17, 2017, 06:18:39 am
This morning’s 06:00 ex Bristol diverted via Hullavington due to a points problem just east of Bristol Temple Meads thus missing the calls at Bath and Chippenham.

Previous train skipped Bath and Chippenham too ... and terminated at Swindon

Quote
05:29 Bristol Temple Meads to London Paddington due 07:17
05:29 Bristol Temple Meads to London Paddington due 07:17 will be diverted between Bristol Temple Meads and Swindon and terminated at Swindon.
It will no longer call at Bath Spa, Chippenham, Didcot Parkway, Reading, Slough and London Paddington.
This is due to a fault on this train.

and (curiously)

Quote
05:18 Bristol Temple Meads to London Paddington due 07:48
05:18 Bristol Temple Meads to London Paddington due 07:48 will no longer call at Westbury.
This is due to a fault with the signalling system.


Title: Re: IETs into passenger service from 16 Oct 2017 and subsequent performance issues
Post by: NickB on October 17, 2017, 08:41:01 am
A telling comment from GWR about their 'ownership' of this problem (and every other one on their franchise)...

From The Times this morning:

"A spokesman for Great Western Railway said: 'Hitachi will be investigating this matter thoroughly.'"


Title: Re: IETs into passenger service from 16 Oct 2017 and subsequent performance issues
Post by: ChrisB on October 17, 2017, 08:56:58 am
Well.....it's true on the IETs. What else would you expect? GWR aren't being allowerd anywhere near the ops side of the trains.


Title: Re: IETs into passenger service from 16 Oct 2017 and subsequent performance issues
Post by: ray951 on October 17, 2017, 09:38:09 am
For those who want a ride on the new trains today (17/10).
The diagram that failed yesterday (0815 Pad -  Cardiff) was being worked by 800008 and 800009 today and was on time at Didcot.
Where these the sets that failed yesterday or where they on the other diagram?


Title: Re: IETs into passenger service from 16 Oct 2017 and subsequent performance issues
Post by: ChrisB on October 17, 2017, 09:40:59 am
They were the replacement setr that formed the 0600 BRI-PAD, yes - so presumably they fixed the set(s) overnight


Title: Re: IETs into passenger service from 16 Oct 2017 and subsequent performance issues
Post by: SandTEngineer on October 17, 2017, 09:50:22 am
It will certainly be interesting to see how performance improves (or not) on 1A03 up to Christmas, at least now I know where my seat is within the carriage (since the reserved seat turns out to be the same number now all the way through until then).

Although I'm not looking forward to the prospect of trying to guess which of the 4 possible carriage positions it will arrive in at Reading each day!

The slow boarding problem isn't likely to be solved soon as the train isn't designed with suburban commuting in mind, today if you happened to be slightly slow at getting to the door to leave you would have been met with a large flow and through the narrow vestibule passengers weren't making good progress as they met boarding passengers. Dwell time is likely therefore to be an issue if the train encounters a passenger needing assistance, used on routes where large luggage is common or the cyclists arrive and are not ready to sprint.

A sensible choice was made on the Old Oak set this morning to place the two first class sections in the centre of the train, fingers crossed in time that becomes the working practice as that would have a positive effect on dwell time.

From yesterday morning / Real Time Trains - Station dwell times of first servives of the IET.  In all cases except Reading outbound, train did not leave on time so the duration is a measure of how long station duties took.

2.75 Bath Spa
2.0 Chippenham
3.0 Swindon
2.0 Didcot
2.5 Reading

5.0 Reading (awaiting time)
5.25 Didcot
3.0 Swindon
5.0 Chippenham
4.75 Bath Spa

I would expect these dwells to drop as people get used to the trains, and expect them to drop further as the fleet becomes uniform IET so that passengers don't have to go to different platform places for an IET and an HST, and know what's arriving.   Helpful HST "Coach C is here" indicators at stations haven't (yet?) been enhanced with "IET coach C is here", and I don't the old orange and purple zone for which some signage persists has been re-enlivened.

Grahame, I would be a bit careful about the dwell times given by RTT.  To the best of my knowledge they are measured by the signalling system recording occupation and clearance of the platform train detection system section and don't truly reflect the actual stop time.  So the arrival time is when the first wheel occupies the platform section and the departure time is when either the platform section clears or the next section ahead is occupied.  Some train detection sections are longer than the platform itself and some of the ahead ones are some distance from the platform end.


Title: Re: IETs into passenger service from 16 Oct 2017 and subsequent performance issues
Post by: chrisr_75 on October 17, 2017, 09:51:19 am
A telling comment from GWR about their 'ownership' of this problem (and every other one on their franchise)...

From The Times this morning:

"A spokesman for Great Western Railway said: 'Hitachi will be investigating this matter thoroughly.'"

'A spokesman'  ::)

What is wrong with Hopwood? Surely he must realise it would be a sensible thing for him (or to direct one of his fellow senior managers) to speak to the press and his customers finally after all of the recent problems.

I personally think it was downright foolish to make such a fanfare about the new trains, they should've just quietly introduced them into service with no fuss on quieter off peak services. Enthusiasts would still have got their fix, probably no-one else would notice. Press get to play on a one off press special. Chucking one on a busy peak service was doomed from the start really, wasn't it?!


Title: Re: IETs into passenger service from 16 Oct 2017 and subsequent performance issues
Post by: grahame on October 17, 2017, 09:56:34 am
Grahame, I would be a bit careful about the dwell times given by RTT.  To the best of my knowledge they are measured by the signalling system recording occupation and clearance of the platform train detection system section and don't truly reflect the actual stop time.  So the arrival time is when the first wheel occupies the platform and the departure time is when either the platform section clears or the next section ahead is occupied.  Some train detection sections are longer than the platform itself and some of the ahead ones are some distance from the platform end.

Caution (I think) understood, and good to be stated here.  I tend to use the time differences between arrival as comparisons rather than absolute figures, so I really should have quoted times for an HST at each location too, and one that's running slightly late so that I would be looking at true operational need.

Of course, all you need is one passenger who needs longer to get on or get off with assistance and the operational times of stops get blown anyway!


Title: Re: IETs into passenger service from 16 Oct 2017 and subsequent performance issues
Post by: Timmer on October 17, 2017, 10:11:00 am
'A spokesman'  ::)

What is wrong with Hopwood? Surely he must realise it would be a sensible thing for him (or to direct one of his fellow senior managers) to speak to the press and his customers finally after all of the recent problems.
Dan Panes appeared on both BBC Points West and BBC South Today last night with regards to the problems experienced on the launch service. Regards last weekend's blockade at Reading he also appeared on BBC South Today on Friday evening.


Title: Re: IETs into passenger service from 16 Oct 2017 and subsequent performance issues
Post by: BerkshireBugsy on October 17, 2017, 10:41:16 am
I travelled in from Reading to Paddington on one of the IETs this morning.

Very impressed with the smoothness of the ride. As did other posters I did notice some passengers hitting their heads on the luggage racks when they stood to get off.

I also notice that despite the coaches having seat reservation displays they were still using the old "card in top of seat" system. Is that because GWR haven't got the processes in place to deal with this alternative method?

Like a lot of services this morning it was delayed and there were quite a few passengers standing in my coach. I'm guessing travellers haven't yet adjusted their optimal platform position to match the IETs formation



Title: Re: IETs into passenger service from 16 Oct 2017 and subsequent performance issues
Post by: ChrisB on October 17, 2017, 10:58:46 am
I also notice that despite the coaches having seat reservation displays they were still using the old "card in top of seat" system. Is that because GWR haven't got the processes in place to deal with this alternative method?

My thoughts are that they're waiting for these trains to bed in before launching the online reservation system. Ben Rich also mentioned that they have the Voyager ability for on the day reservations and that they may go for reservations up to the point of departure from its originating station and that they would never go as far as XC and launch the 10-minute reservations that they offer, which will I'm sure be a relief to everyone.


Title: Re: IETs into passenger service from 16 Oct 2017 and subsequent performance issues
Post by: chrisr_75 on October 17, 2017, 11:00:20 am
'A spokesman'  ::)

What is wrong with Hopwood? Surely he must realise it would be a sensible thing for him (or to direct one of his fellow senior managers) to speak to the press and his customers finally after all of the recent problems.
Dan Panes appeared on both BBC Points West and BBC South Today last night with regards to the problems experienced on the launch service. Regards last weekend's blockade at Reading he also appeared on BBC South Today on Friday evening.

Presumably he is the aforementioned spokesman, being head of communications, but really someone from the board ought to be piping up - the responsibility of running the company ultimately lies with the board of directors. It just seems a bit pathetic that Hitachi can wheel out their MD with an apology, but GWR cannot, however he is happy to accept all sorts of corporate back slapping at industry award ceremonies and to meet the royals and Paddington bear...  ::)


Title: Re: IETs into passenger service from 16 Oct 2017 and subsequent performance issues
Post by: BerkshireBugsy on October 17, 2017, 11:13:09 am
Thanks to Chris for his earlier reply to my question about seat reservations.

Another question about the IETs is - apart from the bloke up front - how many crew are needed to run the services ?There seemed to be quite a few disembarking at Paddington this morning. Is this complicated by the fact that, for example, each individual diagram (correct term?) of 5 coaches has it's own first class and buffet facilities so this means a double up?



Title: Re: IETs into passenger service from 16 Oct 2017 and subsequent performance issues
Post by: 1st fan on October 17, 2017, 11:18:24 am
Thanks to Chris for his earlier reply to my question about seat reservations.

Another question about the IETs is - apart from the bloke up front - how many crew are needed to run the services ?There seemed to be quite a few disembarking at Paddington this morning. Is this complicated by the fact that, for example, each individual diagram (correct term?) of 5 coaches has it's own first class and buffet facilities so this means a double up?


Just to be pedantic, you either mean Trolley service, Kitchen or both because there sure as hell ain't no buffet.  ;)


Title: Re: IETs into passenger service from 16 Oct 2017 and subsequent performance issues
Post by: ChrisB on October 17, 2017, 11:20:20 am
Another question about the IETs is - apart from the bloke up front - how many crew are needed to run the services? There seemed to be quite a few disembarking at Paddington this morning. Is this complicated by the fact that, for example, each individual diagram (correct term?) of 5 coaches has it's own first class and buffet facilities so this means a double up?

It will do, yes.

I'm unsure of the usual number needed to run a 5car set - estimate being a driver, Train Manager, 1st class host & STD class trolley person - so 4. That'd then be 8 on a 10car.

Then you need to add the Pullman crew if it's one of those.

I think Ben mentioned that there would be 2 STD trolleys on a 9car, but we'll hjave to await their start in service to find out (January?)


Title: Re: IETs into passenger service from 16 Oct 2017 and subsequent performance issues
Post by: 1st fan on October 17, 2017, 11:20:59 am
I believe that platform extensions are planned for the Cotswold Line and that 2x5 won't run until then. But what the state of that project is, who knows. References (both from 2016): http://orr.gov.uk/__data/assets/pdf_file/0008/24011/enhancements-delivery-plan-change-control-october-december-2016.pdf, https://www.nao.org.uk/wp-content/uploads/2016/11/Modernising-the-Great-Western-railway.pdf

Until then, there's the 1x5 and 1x9 units.
The last time I was at Moreton there was nothing happening but that was late/end of summer and things might have changed. However I would expect to see press releases galore when the work does start given the publicity these trains are getting.


Title: Re: IETs into passenger service from 16 Oct 2017 and subsequent performance issues
Post by: ChrisB on October 17, 2017, 11:24:56 am
The CLPG understands that the work is scheduled for the second half of 2019 & that only 5car IETs will run along there until then. Once work is complete, they still won't be more than 6car in length & the idea will be to stop 2 x 3cars of each set alongside & use SDO as currently for 9car & 10car sets.

The current intention is to run 5car sets joining to another 5car set at Oxford but in the high peak (maybe 2 trains) a full 10car train will run as I describe above.


Title: Re: IETs into passenger service from 16 Oct 2017 and subsequent performance issues
Post by: broadgage on October 17, 2017, 11:39:13 am
Thanks to Chris for his earlier reply to my question about seat reservations.

Another question about the IETs is - apart from the bloke up front - how many crew are needed to run the services ?There seemed to be quite a few disembarking at Paddington this morning. Is this complicated by the fact that, for example, each individual diagram (correct term?) of 5 coaches has it's own first class and buffet facilities so this means a double up?



What buffet facilities ?


Title: Re: IETs into passenger service from 16 Oct 2017 and subsequent performance issues
Post by: NickB on October 17, 2017, 11:42:44 am
Well.....it's true on the IETs. What else would you expect? GWR aren't being allowerd anywhere near the ops side of the trains.

My point is that GWR singularly pointed the finger at Hitachi, with no attempt to take ownership or apologise themselves.  I would imagine that GWR managed the press attention for this event, got DfT to attend, and would have been first off the train at Paddington proclaiming how wonderful 'their' new trains were (afterall, GWR are Building a Greater West singlehandedly aren't they!?!)  IF they had run to plan.
 
Will GWR be claiming in the future that the trains are nothing to do with them, and the track is nothing to do with them?
Will I only be able to contact GWR about their catering in the future?  Or is that Nescafe/Tetley's fault, and nothing to do with them?
 
To me it just begs the question of what ARE GWR responsible for, aside from posters and adverts?


Title: Re: IETs into passenger service from 16 Oct 2017 and subsequent performance issues
Post by: BerkshireBugsy on October 17, 2017, 11:47:40 am
Thanks to Chris for his earlier reply to my question about seat reservations.

Another question about the IETs is - apart from the bloke up front - how many crew are needed to run the services ?There seemed to be quite a few disembarking at Paddington this morning. Is this complicated by the fact that, for example, each individual diagram (correct term?) of 5 coaches has it's own first class and buffet facilities so this means a double up?


Just to be pedantic, you either mean Trolley service, Kitchen or both because there sure as hell ain't no buffet.  ;)

To be fair due to the loading on the service I didn't get to explore much but I was going on the basis of the "painted out windows" which on the HST stock normally implied the buffet car.

I stand corrected.


Title: Re: IETs into passenger service from 16 Oct 2017 and subsequent performance issues
Post by: 1st fan on October 17, 2017, 11:50:25 am
The CLPG understands that the work is scheduled for the second half of 2019 & that only 5car IETs will run along there until then. Once work is complete, they still won't be more than 6car in length & the idea will be to stop 2 x 3cars of each set alongside & use SDO as currently for 9car & 10car sets.

The current intention is to run 5car sets joining to another 5car set at Oxford but in the high peak (maybe 2 trains) a full 10car train will run as I describe above.
Interesting thanks for the info, I assume that this will still mean that you have to go from 1st through standard to leave the train. It's not normally a problem for me except on the odd occasion that I sleep through Kingham. I then have a bit of rush to pack up and get to an opening door at a platform before the whistle. Fortunately the Train Manager had remembered where I was getting off, had woken me up and was waiting for me to get off.  


Title: Re: IETs into passenger service from 16 Oct 2017 and subsequent performance issues
Post by: 1st fan on October 17, 2017, 11:53:41 am
Thanks to Chris for his earlier reply to my question about seat reservations.

Another question about the IETs is - apart from the bloke up front - how many crew are needed to run the services ?There seemed to be quite a few disembarking at Paddington this morning. Is this complicated by the fact that, for example, each individual diagram (correct term?) of 5 coaches has it's own first class and buffet facilities so this means a double up?


Just to be pedantic, you either mean Trolley service, Kitchen or both because there sure as hell ain't no buffet.  ;)

To be fair due to the loading on the service I didn't get to explore much but I was going on the basis of the "painted out windows" which on the HST stock normally implied the buffet car.

I stand corrected.
That's alright it's just that there was a bit of angst from the unions and some passengers that there wouldn't be a buffet. What you saw (the "painted out windows") was the 1st kitchen which serves 1st, and will serve the Pullman dining experience and allegedly hot food in standard*. *I'll believe it when I see it


Title: Re: IETs into passenger service from 16 Oct 2017 and subsequent performance issues
Post by: ChrisB on October 17, 2017, 11:56:01 am
Staffing, timetabling & operating the trains in service.


Title: Re: IETs into passenger service from 16 Oct 2017 and subsequent performance issues
Post by: bignosemac on October 17, 2017, 02:02:54 pm

I'm unsure of the usual number needed to run a 5car set - estimate being a driver, Train Manager, 1st class host & STD class trolley person - so 4. That'd then be 8 on a 10car.

7. The second unit doesn't require a driver!


Title: Re: IETs into passenger service from 16 Oct 2017 and subsequent performance issues
Post by: ChrisB on October 17, 2017, 02:09:33 pm
good point! :-)


Title: Re: IETs into passenger service from 16 Oct 2017 and subsequent performance issues
Post by: Louis94 on October 17, 2017, 02:20:00 pm
Grahame, I would be a bit careful about the dwell times given by RTT.  To the best of my knowledge they are measured by the signalling system recording occupation and clearance of the platform train detection system section and don't truly reflect the actual stop time.  So the arrival time is when the first wheel occupies the platform section and the departure time is when either the platform section clears or the next section ahead is occupied.  Some train detection sections are longer than the platform itself and some of the ahead ones are some distance from the platform end.

RTT applies 'offsets' to the times provided by the train describer movement data. For arrivals these offsets are based on the time taken for a train to trigger the describer movement and come to a stand, and for departures the time taken for a train to trigger the describer movement after wheels start turning. Obviously there can be variation between different stock types, but unfortunately this is one of the limitations on reporting arrival/departure times in this way. Generally however RTT won't be hugely different to the actual time assuming the train gets a clear run into and out of the platform and isn't subject to any other issues such as wheel slip, etc, etc.

RTT has offset data for most of the country where train describer movement data is available, except in locations recently re-signalled where new data has to be collected. This is something that is on-going and hopefully will be available in the future.


Title: Re: IETs into passenger service from 16 Oct 2017 and subsequent performance issues
Post by: Louis94 on October 17, 2017, 02:21:50 pm

I'm unsure of the usual number needed to run a 5car set - estimate being a driver, Train Manager, 1st class host & STD class trolley person - so 4. That'd then be 8 on a 10car.

7. The second unit doesn't require a driver!

Nor a Train Manager from what I have seen allocated, so 6.


Title: Re: IETs into passenger service from 16 Oct 2017 and subsequent performance issues
Post by: ChrisB on October 17, 2017, 02:24:22 pm
Assuming the host/trolley person are safety trained, which I think they will be. So yes, 6.

Be interesting to see which unit the TM travels in, in a 10car. Anyone yet noticed?


Title: Re: IETs into passenger service from 16 Oct 2017 and subsequent performance issues
Post by: 1st fan on October 17, 2017, 02:50:59 pm
I've just met someone who did a journey heading in from the West yesterday and ended up on one of these services [though not the Monsoon Train]. I had a picture of the new train that I was sending to someone on my phone. He said he went on one of those yesterday. When asked about the experience he said (in a broad Yorkshire accent) "Well they're not Voyagers". After a bit of questioning this is apparently a good thing although.......the seats are "Rock 'ard" and no good for someone like him with a bony backside. He'd also sat in 1st before realising that it wasn't standard* and subsequently moved carriages. He was not a fan of the coffee from the trolley "Bloody instant stuff" and declined it when he saw what was offered. It was too bright in standard and the tray table was pathetically small. Other than that it hadn't been bad at all and he'd use it again.

* This might have been down to the new position of 1st rather than the minor differences between the two classes now. 


Title: Re: IETs into passenger service from 16 Oct 2017 and subsequent performance issues
Post by: plymothian on October 17, 2017, 03:38:10 pm
Assuming the host/trolley person are safety trained, which I think they will be. So yes, 6.

Be interesting to see which unit the TM travels in, in a 10car. Anyone yet noticed?

No they are not.

There is 1 driver, 1 TM, 2 hosts on a 5 car.
1 driver, 1 TM, 4 hosts on a 10 car - and supposedly 1 ticket examiner in "the other set" as a trial.

Only the driver and TM are safety trained.
The ticket examiner is supposed to be ramp trained.

This is part of the disputed working raised by the RMT.


Title: Re: IETs into passenger service from 16 Oct 2017 and subsequent performance issues
Post by: bignosemac on October 17, 2017, 03:54:38 pm
The hosts would have to know how to use the ramps too. To enable them to get the trolleys on and off. I bet the union won't let them near a wheelchair user though.


Title: Re: IETs into passenger service from 16 Oct 2017 and subsequent performance issues
Post by: ChrisB on October 17, 2017, 04:07:41 pm
And when did you see a trolley person get their own ramp & then get their trolley off on their own? Always a station staff member with the ramp  I've seen

I might support the Ticket examiner being safety trained too.


Title: Re: IETs into passenger service from 16 Oct 2017 and subsequent performance issues
Post by: BerkshireBugsy on October 17, 2017, 04:12:34 pm
Ironically enough - in this week of new IETs being launched - the only high speed service to be found when I went through Paddington (to get  through to Reading) this afternoon featured a power car sporting what I think was the original HST livery

It looks like signalling problems between Hayes and Harlington are to blame. Not the first time of the last time I suspect.

I find it sad that in launch week there have been a significant number of delays to my journey both inbound and outbound.



Title: Re: IETs into passenger service from 16 Oct 2017 and subsequent performance issues
Post by: laird on October 17, 2017, 06:24:42 pm
Day 2 of the morning commute Reding to Paddington, thanks to the earlier disruption the 0703 left full and standing (some rather desperate commuters prefering to stand rather than risk the impending 0716).
As other correspondents have reported the station dwell times (GWR responsibility) the train isn't achieving the booked timings, oddly the effect of that was minimised today as the train had not called as booked in Bath and Chippenham. The train was also consequentially slightly quieter.
Seat reservations seemed to be working on this set.
Sadly nobody could find out which coach was which without entering the train, I even tried asking the first class customer host which carriage she had just exitted, of course having not been briefed to expect the question she didn't know the answer.

At speed in a quiet carriage you become noticeably aware of the wind noise, its not clear if is poor air flow design in the air conditioning or poor aerodynamics of roof mounted components. It appears to be present in both carriages D and E even with air conditioning cut out so time will tell on that one.

Customer Information System on the platforms is still not identifying the carriage order.

Further delays and crew call bells suggest all is still not quite as smooth as it should be.

In good news the seat is more comfortable and less slippery than the old first class seating.
First Class catering turned out and was better than the previous breakfast selection.


Title: Re: IETs into passenger service from 16 Oct 2017 and subsequent performance issues
Post by: Adelante_CCT on October 17, 2017, 07:34:09 pm
I have had 3 journeys, all in coach A (under the pantograph), and the wind noise is very noticeable when the pan is up


Title: Re: IETs into passenger service from 16 Oct 2017 and subsequent performance issues
Post by: SandTEngineer on October 17, 2017, 07:34:51 pm
Received an email from GWR earlier this evening.  It had selected my nearest station (obviously based upon GPS).  On clicking the link to confirm this was my NEAREST station (which it is in a straight line), I got this:

Quote
Thank you for confirming that Bere Ferrers (BFE) is the station that you regularly travel from. We will keep you updated on future developments, in particular when the Intercity Express Trains will be arriving near you. In the meantime, if you would like more detailed information, please click here.

I look forward to travelling on a 9 coach IET on the Gunnislake branch........

 ::) :P :o


Title: Re: IETs into passenger service from 16 Oct 2017 and subsequent performance issues
Post by: grahame on October 17, 2017, 08:06:10 pm
I look forward to travelling on a 9 coach IET on the Gunnislake branch........

I'm sure we'll see them as far as Bere Alston from time to time once they can continue to Tavistock, Okehampton and Exeter.


Title: Re: IETs into passenger service from 16 Oct 2017 and subsequent performance issues
Post by: plymothian on October 17, 2017, 08:39:34 pm
All the Stations on board the IET feature

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Ovs-I6VnTPg


Title: Re: IETs into passenger service from 16 Oct 2017 and subsequent performance issues
Post by: PhilWakely on October 17, 2017, 10:27:08 pm
Received an email from GWR earlier this evening.  It had selected my nearest station (obviously based upon GPS).  On clicking the link to confirm this was my NEAREST station (which it is in a straight line), I got this:

Quote
Thank you for confirming that Bere Ferrers (BFE) is the station that you regularly travel from. We will keep you updated on future developments, in particular when the Intercity Express Trains will be arriving near you. In the meantime, if you would like more detailed information, please click here.

I look forward to travelling on a 9 coach IET on the Gunnislake branch........

 ::) :P :o

Mine said 'Polsloe Bridge'! Well, at least a HST has traversed the Exmouth branch in the past, so maybe, just maybe  :) ;D


Title: Re: IETs into passenger service from 16 Oct 2017 and subsequent performance issues
Post by: ChrisB on October 18, 2017, 09:12:58 am
Hey, I got Greenford.....when I clicked to say it wasn't, I couldn't correct it either.


Title: Re: IETs into passenger service from 16 Oct 2017 and subsequent performance issues
Post by: Bmblbzzz on October 18, 2017, 10:43:32 am
Yet to travel on one of these trains and only realized recently that the longer version (are they 9 or 10 cars? Both figures are given... ) is actually two put together. That is a little odd and seems awkward.


Title: Re: IETs into passenger service from 16 Oct 2017 and subsequent performance issues
Post by: ChrisB on October 18, 2017, 10:46:27 am
The 10car is 2 5cars together - there are no 10cars being constructed.

However, the 9car units were originally ordered as the electric version, subsequently converted to bi-mode construction by the DfT.


Title: Re: IETs into passenger service from 16 Oct 2017 and subsequent performance issues
Post by: Rhydgaled on October 18, 2017, 12:50:25 pm
no complaints from me about the seats. The correct upright design to promote good posture. It's a myth that a soft enveloping seat is more comfortable. I remember well the back ache I had on my last trip to Norwich sat in an IC70.
I can't remember what the IC70s in Anglia's mark 3s are like, but I seem to recall that my first impression of IC70 seats (which was on a Chiltern silver set before they had the power doors) was that they were NOT all that soft. Much more recently, I noted that the seat back on the IC70s in an East Midlands Trains IC125 was quite hard. The softest seat I've had recently was Northern's 158794 on a trip from Sheffield to Nottingham in August.

ronically enough - in this week of new IETs being launched - the only high speed service to be found when I went through Paddington (to get  through to Reading) this afternoon featured a power car sporting what I think was the original HST livery.
43002 currently carries a BR blue & grey colour scheme which is close to the original Intercity 125 livery (I think the shade of blue used on 43002 looked a little too green when I saw it for myself and I've read somewhere that the first two power cars had black fill on the lettering for a while so not quite the original livery but very nearly).

Yet to travel on one of these trains and only realized recently that the longer version (are they 9 or 10 cars? Both figures are given... ) is actually two put together. That is a little odd and seems awkward.
There will be some 9-car IEP trains in the GWR fleet in future (one train, not two together) but they aren't ready for service yet. The new trains currently entering service with GWR are the short version (5-car) which are currently being used in pairs, so you are right about two being put together to make a 10 carriage train. I agree with you that this is awkward for passengers as they will not be able to walk between carraiges 5 and 6. Also, there will be two seperate first class areas with kitchens in a 10 carriage train, which means the total number of seats is only about 3 more than the whole 9 carriage trains will have when they arrive.

At speed in a quiet carriage you become noticeably aware of the wind noise, its not clear if is poor air flow design in the air conditioning or poor aerodynamics of roof mounted components.
I've not been on a class 800 yet (do the current diagrams apply at weekends too?) so not sure what you mean, but the suggestion by Adelante_CCT that the pantograph could create wind noise when it is up makes sense. The new units do also have poor aerodynamics around the doors (due to Hitachi not using European plug door technology on this fleet), could the wind noise be due to that?


Title: Re: IETs into passenger service from 16 Oct 2017 and subsequent performance issues
Post by: ChrisB on October 18, 2017, 01:04:52 pm
The diagrams (7 days) for current 800s in service were in a post on the IET thread - I've printed off my copy.


Title: Re: IETs into passenger service from 16 Oct 2017 and subsequent performance issues
Post by: bignosemac on October 18, 2017, 02:18:17 pm
I'll start an IET diagrams thread when I get home. I've got the timings for the dates when up to six 10 car formations (2 currently, 4 from 13th November, 6 from 11th December) will be running. That's takes us through to January.

January  should see the first IETs running to Oxford, Newbury and Worcester/Great Malvern. No confirmed timings yet.



Title: Re: IETs into passenger service from 16 Oct 2017 and subsequent performance issues
Post by: 1st fan on October 18, 2017, 03:45:29 pm
I'll start an IET diagrams thread when I get home. I've got the timings for the dates when up to six 10 car formations (2 currently, 4 from 13th November, 6 from 11th December) will be running. That's takes us through to January.

January  should see the first IETs running to Oxford, Newbury and Worcester/Great Malvern. No confirmed timings yet.


I was given these dates which seem to tie in with yours for the rest of 2017:

13th November Weston-Super-Mare and Taunton see the IET.
11th December Camarthen will see the IET.
27th December Oxford, Worcester, Hereford and Great Malvern see the IET.

That's what I was told at Paddington and it will be interesting to see if they can stick to those dates.



Title: Re: IETs into passenger service from 16 Oct 2017 and subsequent performance issues
Post by: ChrisB on October 18, 2017, 03:52:35 pm
Ben Rule thought it would be Jan 2 before IETs were seen on the Cotswold Line....


Title: Re: IETs into passenger service from 16 Oct 2017 and subsequent performance issues
Post by: bignosemac on October 18, 2017, 04:29:51 pm
Ben Rule thought it would be Jan 2 before IETs were seen on the Cotswold Line....

That's the information I have too. These things can and do change though. Although the number of sets put into service is down to agreement between Hitachi and GWR.


Title: Re: IETs into passenger service from 16 Oct 2017 and subsequent performance issues
Post by: bignosemac on October 18, 2017, 09:04:59 pm
Ben Rule

Ben Rule? The guy that's been at CrossCountry for over a year?


Title: Re: IETs into passenger service from 16 Oct 2017 and subsequent performance issues
Post by: ray951 on October 19, 2017, 09:41:17 am
There don't appear to be any IET's running today (19th Oct), maybe Hitachi/GWR don't want them getting wet:-)


Title: Re: IETs into passenger service from 16 Oct 2017 and subsequent performance issues
Post by: lordgoata on October 19, 2017, 09:43:40 am
There don't appear to be any IET's running today (19th Oct), maybe Hitachi/GWR don't want them getting wet:-)

Probably wrong type of fog - maybe it was too thick  :D


Title: Re: IETs into passenger service from 16 Oct 2017 and subsequent performance issues
Post by: BerkshireBugsy on October 19, 2017, 10:04:36 am
There don't appear to be any IET's running today (19th Oct), maybe Hitachi/GWR don't want them getting wet:-)

I'm sure it is purely coincidence but on the first day the new IETs aren't running all other services out of Reading seemed to be running to schedule.

If there are general issues with the 80x services I guess it's best they sort them out now.


Title: Re: IETs into passenger service from 16 Oct 2017 and subsequent performance issues
Post by: bignosemac on October 19, 2017, 10:12:56 am
There are SDO issues apparently. That's all I've been able to find out.


Title: Re: IETs into passenger service from 16 Oct 2017 and subsequent performance issues
Post by: BerkshireBugsy on October 19, 2017, 10:14:28 am
There are SDO issues apparently. That's all I've been able to find out.

I would say that is probably a good reason to take them out of service.


Title: Re: IETs into passenger service from 16 Oct 2017 and subsequent performance issues
Post by: stuving on October 19, 2017, 10:18:07 am
The Guardian had an update to their report of Monday's "events" on Tuesday (https://www.theguardian.com/uk-news/2017/oct/17/more-teething-problems-on-gwrs-brand-new-intercity-express-train):

Quote
More details of what caused the “teething problems” on Monday have emerged. Hitachi said the maiden journey of the Class 800 left the depot 25 minutes late because of an “IT router issue”.

I guess that could disrupt the whole train-wide communications system (and I bet it's got lots and lots of that stuff). I don't see how that could affect coupling two units, but it might explain the problems with the per-seat reservation displays and even SDO.


Title: Re: IETs into passenger service from 16 Oct 2017 and subsequent performance issues
Post by: Tim on October 19, 2017, 11:38:13 am
The Guardian had an update to their report of Monday's "events" on Tuesday (https://www.theguardian.com/uk-news/2017/oct/17/more-teething-problems-on-gwrs-brand-new-intercity-express-train):

Quote
More details of what caused the “teething problems” on Monday have emerged. Hitachi said the maiden journey of the Class 800 left the depot 25 minutes late because of an “IT router issue”.

I guess that could disrupt the whole train-wide communications system (and I bet it's got lots and lots of that stuff). I don't see how that could affect coupling two units, but it might explain the problems with the per-seat reservation displays and even SDO.

I assume that the coupling procedure is only regarded as complete once the computer in one unit has correctly recognised the presence of the other unit (and is therefore able to communicate with and control it). Even if the physical attachment is successful, an IT communications issue could be regarded as a coupling failure. 


Title: Re: IETs into passenger service from 16 Oct 2017 and subsequent performance issues
Post by: bradshaw on October 19, 2017, 11:52:03 am
According to Richard Clinnick (@Clinnick1) on twitter

Quote
To carry out software mods, no IEPs are running today I'm told. @HitachiRailEU has found a solution, which is being tested says @GWRHelp


Title: Re: IETs into passenger service from 16 Oct 2017 and subsequent performance issues
Post by: 1st fan on October 19, 2017, 11:55:42 am
The Guardian had an update to their report of Monday's "events" on Tuesday (https://www.theguardian.com/uk-news/2017/oct/17/more-teething-problems-on-gwrs-brand-new-intercity-express-train):

Quote
More details of what caused the “teething problems” on Monday have emerged. Hitachi said the maiden journey of the Class 800 left the depot 25 minutes late because of an “IT router issue”.

I guess that could disrupt the whole train-wide communications system (and I bet it's got lots and lots of that stuff). I don't see how that could affect coupling two units, but it might explain the problems with the per-seat reservation displays and even SDO.

I assume that the coupling procedure is only regarded as complete once the computer in one unit has correctly recognised the presence of the other unit (and is therefore able to communicate with and control it). Even if the physical attachment is successful, an IT communications issue could be regarded as a coupling failure. 
I was thinking the same thing.


Title: Re: IETs into passenger service from 16 Oct 2017 and subsequent performance issues
Post by: ChrisB on October 19, 2017, 02:06:45 pm
.


Title: Re: IETs into passenger service from 16 Oct 2017 and subsequent performance issues
Post by: chuffed on October 19, 2017, 02:35:08 pm
.

!


Title: Re: IETs into passenger service from 16 Oct 2017 and subsequent performance issues
Post by: ellendune on October 19, 2017, 02:42:33 pm
Further update from The Guardian (https://www.theguardian.com/uk-news/2017/oct/19/gwr-takes-intercity-express-trains-out-of-service-after-pr-fiasco)

Excerpts below

Quote
GWR takes intercity express trains out of service after PR fiasco

Technical issues plagued new trains in £5.7bn fleet envisaged as replacements after electrification projects are scrapped....


....A spokesman for GWR added: “It’s not a single technical issue, but in order to fix some of the initial issues we saw on Monday, the computer system software on the trains has been updated at the depot. We want to make sure those changes are effective, and the trains are running on the network today to test they’ve worked. We hope to put them back into passenger services ASAP.”

The spokesman said there were also some technical issues on Tuesday and Wednesday but nothing that stopped them carrying passengers. He added: “This week, they’ve successfully covered around 4,000 miles in normal traffic.”

A Hitachi spokesperson said: “The trains are expected to be running again as soon as possible, after we’ve fully tested some improvements made overnight to the passenger experience.”

....


Title: Re: IETs into passenger service from 16 Oct 2017 and subsequent performance issues
Post by: TaplowGreen on October 19, 2017, 03:04:08 pm
Further update from The Guardian (https://www.theguardian.com/uk-news/2017/oct/19/gwr-takes-intercity-express-trains-out-of-service-after-pr-fiasco)

Excerpts below

Quote
GWR takes intercity express trains out of service after PR fiasco

Technical issues plagued new trains in £5.7bn fleet envisaged as replacements after electrification projects are scrapped....


....A spokesman for GWR added: “It’s not a single technical issue, but in order to fix some of the initial issues we saw on Monday, the computer system software on the trains has been updated at the depot. We want to make sure those changes are effective, and the trains are running on the network today to test they’ve worked. We hope to put them back into passenger services ASAP.”

The spokesman said there were also some technical issues on Tuesday and Wednesday but nothing that stopped them carrying passengers. He added: “This week, they’ve successfully covered around 4,000 miles in normal traffic.”

A Hitachi spokesperson said: “The trains are expected to be running again as soon as possible, after we’ve fully tested some improvements made overnight to the passenger experience.”

....


What an utter farce already.....they've only had.....oh....several years & loads of testing to get it right?

Fits in quite well with the rest of the GWR offering though.......although when I saw all the short forms this morning due to "more trains than usual needing repairs" I didn't realise it included those that have only been in service for a few days......😩


Title: Re: IETs into passenger service from 16 Oct 2017 and subsequent performance issues
Post by: plymothian on October 19, 2017, 03:20:42 pm
There are SDO issues apparently. That's all I've been able to find out.

Doors were opened that shouldn't have been according to the inputted SDO settings.


Title: Re: IETs into passenger service from 16 Oct 2017 and subsequent performance issues
Post by: bignosemac on October 19, 2017, 03:43:12 pm
What an utter farce already.....they've only had.....oh....several years & loads of testing to get it right?

I'm not old enough to remember the introduction of the HST in 1976 but have read about it extensively. Their introduction came 4 years after the first prototype ran. Despite that 4 years of testing they were plagued with teething troubles. Soon sorted.

The issues with the Class 800s will be fixed in short order.

It's also worth remembering the APT. Another train that had some issues on introduction to passenger service. Issues that would have been fixed were it not for an anti-rail Tory government who swallowed the press hyperbole hook, line and sinker. Thank God this time the government can't pull the plug.

3 days of passenger operation is far to short a time to describe minor faults as 'an utter farce'.


Title: Re: IETs into passenger service from 16 Oct 2017 and subsequent performance issues
Post by: Tim on October 19, 2017, 04:12:57 pm

3 days of passenger operation is far to short a time to describe minor faults as 'an utter farce'.

absolutely agree.  But hardly the "Japanese way" either. 


Title: Re: IETs into passenger service from 16 Oct 2017 and subsequent performance issues
Post by: johnneyw on October 19, 2017, 04:15:02 pm
What an utter farce already.....they've only had.....oh....several years & loads of testing to get it right?

I'm not old enough to remember the introduction of the HST in 1976 but have read about it extensively. Their introduction came 4 years after the first prototype ran. Despite that 4 years of testing they were plagued with teething troubles. Soon sorted.

The issues with the Class 800s will be fixed in short order.

It's also worth remembering the APT. Another train that had some issues on introduction to passenger service. Issues that would have been fixed were it not for an anti-rail Tory government who swallowed the press hyperbole hook, line and sinker. Thank God this time the government can't pull the plug.

3 days of passenger operation is far to short a time to describe minor faults as 'an utter farce'.

True but I did sort of enjoy seeing highly/over paid government, TOC & supplier top brass rocking up for a bit of public self congratulation but ending up in a bit of a cringe fest. Just me?


Title: Re: IETs into passenger service from 16 Oct 2017 and subsequent performance issues
Post by: chrisr_75 on October 19, 2017, 04:37:31 pm
3 days of passenger operation is far to short a time to describe minor faults as 'an utter farce'.

I think what is concerning is that the fact they have had the best part of a year to test these trains and basic stuff like coupling/uncoupling, door operation and so on really ought to have been ironed out by now. The whole idea of test running and mileage building is to sort these things out. Most of the components will almost certainly have been used in other trains, so I'm afraid the excuse of 'we weren't expecting that' doesn't really wash.

Most out of character of a Japanese company! But maybe that's the FGW* effect...!

As I mentioned previously, I think FGW*/Hitachi dropped a ball by introducing these trains into passenger service at peak time and with such an attempt at fanfare - an unannounced introduction on quieter diagrams would probably have worked better with the provision of a fanfare invite only service to launch it properly for the politicians and media types, if they really must have that.

* deliberate use of FGW, GWR isn't really a fitting name - Brunel is probably giggling in his grave at the on-going ineptitude!


Title: Re: IETs into passenger service from 16 Oct 2017 and subsequent performance issues
Post by: DidcotPunter on October 19, 2017, 04:44:13 pm


I'm not old enough to remember the introduction of the HST in 1976 but have read about it extensively. Their introduction came 4 years after the first prototype ran. Despite that 4 years of testing they were plagued with teething troubles. Soon sorted.

The issues with the Class 800s will be fixed in short order.

It's also worth remembering the APT. Another train that had some issues on introduction to passenger service. Issues that would have been fixed were it not for an anti-rail Tory government who swallowed the press hyperbole hook, line and sinker. Thank God this time the government can't pull the plug.

3 days of passenger operation is far to short a time to describe minor faults as 'an utter farce'.

I am and remember the introduction of the HST well. Recall waiting at Bristol Parkway one hot day for a delayed HST which rolled in with water pouring out from the louvres of the front power car with the engine shut down. Subsequent run on one engine only got us to Padd but with even more delay. Then there was the fault some time later with the power cars fitted with GEC (I think?) traction motors which caused some of the fleet to be withdrawn. What is now a reliable workhorse did indeed have a chequered start.

So I'm not surprised that there were teething problems with the 800s. Agree that with the Japanese reputation on the line these will soon be sorted out.

I took my first two rides on the 800 on Tuesday from Didcot to Padd and back later to Reading. First impressions were that it was an excellent train and a worthy successor to the HST. Looking forward to more being rolled out.


Title: Re: IETs into passenger service from 16 Oct 2017 and subsequent performance issues
Post by: TaplowGreen on October 19, 2017, 05:50:30 pm
3 days of passenger operation is far to short a time to describe minor faults as 'an utter farce'.

I think what is concerning is that the fact they have had the best part of a year to test these trains and basic stuff like coupling/uncoupling, door operation and so on really ought to have been ironed out by now. The whole idea of test running and mileage building is to sort these things out. Most of the components will almost certainly have been used in other trains, so I'm afraid the excuse of 'we weren't expecting that' doesn't really wash.


Exactly - these are basic, easily tested functions............as are aircon systems which in most environments are tested thoroughly enough to prevent those seated underneath them receiving impromptu showers.........other examples of railway failures 40+ years ago aren't really relevant and don't serve to mitigate these at all, other than to illustrate the way in which in public or private ownership the railways always seem to manage to make a spectacular mess of these things, in the full incandescent glow of publicity.


Title: Re: IETs into passenger service from 16 Oct 2017 and subsequent performance issues
Post by: IndustryInsider on October 19, 2017, 05:59:02 pm
I'm not old enough to remember the introduction of the HST in 1976 but have read about it extensively. Their introduction came 4 years after the first prototype ran. Despite that 4 years of testing they were plagued with teething troubles. Soon sorted.

The issues with the Class 800s will be fixed in short order.

It's also worth remembering the APT. Another train that had some issues on introduction to passenger service. Issues that would have been fixed were it not for an anti-rail Tory government who swallowed the press hyperbole hook, line and sinker. Thank God this time the government can't pull the plug.

3 days of passenger operation is far to short a time to describe minor faults as 'an utter farce'.

Well said BNM.  We should also remember that the first press run from Reading to Paddington and the naming run by the Queen from Slough to Paddington, went without a hitch.  Had the aircon leak not occurred there would have been no cause to describe it as a farce and a PR fiasco, but it did occur so I'm not surprised some have taken that easy route.  However, had the Queen had an impromptu shower then that really would have been a disaster worth the press going crazy over!

I too remember issues with introducing new trains in our area far more recently than 40+ years - Turbo doors were a nightmare to start with, and the less said about the 180s the better!  The 387s have settled in quickly, but that's no surprise given they are simply a version of an existing train type and we shouldn't forget how complex these new IETs are with bi-mode operation at high speed.

What I find far more interesting than a leaky roof is the fact that after some quite hefty dwell times at the start of the week the IET does indeed seem able to cope with the existing HST schedules.  That is the important thing in the long run.  One look at the 15:29 SWA-PAD yesterday, sees arrival times at Neath and Port Talbot of half a minute early, and Bridgend and Cardiff one and a half minutes early, and despite leaving Swindon a minute late it arrived at Reading half a minute early.  Given the operation of the train is only going to improve when staff and passengers become more familiar with them (and it isn't leaf fall season), I am pleased to see those timings being recorded so soon.


Title: Re: IETs into passenger service from 16 Oct 2017 and subsequent performance issues
Post by: didcotdean on October 19, 2017, 06:12:08 pm
It would also these days be much harder if not impossible to hide an attempt at a low-key yet public operation of a new train as movement information etc is freely available.

Another example of what proved in the end to be a good train but suffered numerous early niggles is the 442. At least for its initial purpose.


Title: Re: IETs into passenger service from 16 Oct 2017 and subsequent performance issues
Post by: TaplowGreen on October 19, 2017, 06:16:43 pm
Some succeed, the rest make excuses ☺


Title: Re: IETs into passenger service from 16 Oct 2017 and subsequent performance issues
Post by: 1st fan on October 19, 2017, 06:19:53 pm
With anything there are normally teething troubles even if you've done extensive testing and trials. The companies obviously wanted to start the new era with a bang and a bit of pomp and circumstance. That with 20:20 hindsight was a mistake but you can't predict the future easily. A soft launch would have been better with a press, dignitaries etc. run later in the day.

Yes I'll admit to finding it funny that there were problems given the Japanese reputation for reliability and the GWR desire to show off. However I'm sure:
They'll bed in over time,
More electricity will be used as quickly as they can hang it/certify it,
The seats will get softer with use,
The complimentary offering in 1st is improved,
Etc.

So long as journey times stay the same with more seats available then you've filled the main government requirement for these trains.


Title: Re: IETs into passenger service from 16 Oct 2017 and subsequent performance issues
Post by: Sixty3Closure on October 19, 2017, 06:22:49 pm
I think i'd be more understanding if the rest of the service wasn't so poor.


Title: Re: IETs into passenger service from 16 Oct 2017 and subsequent performance issues
Post by: chrisr_75 on October 19, 2017, 06:45:52 pm
It would also these days be much harder if not impossible to hide an attempt at a low-key yet public operation of a new train as movement information etc is freely available.


Indeed, but had they not bothered with loading up with press and making a fanfare of it on what is probably one of the busier long distance services, it probably would've slipped completely under the radar. 22:45 PAD-SWA might've been a sensible candidate, or perhaps some of the daytime offpeak services. They really were asking for it to go wrong by launching in the manner that they chose.


Title: Re: IETs into passenger service from 16 Oct 2017 and subsequent performance issues
Post by: didcotdean on October 19, 2017, 07:18:43 pm
Not clear of course how much it was really GWRs decision to make. But the early morning start had strange whiffs of the APT launch.


Title: Re: IETs into passenger service from 16 Oct 2017 and subsequent performance issues
Post by: John R on October 19, 2017, 07:37:59 pm
Had the aircon leak not occurred there would have been no cause to describe it as a farce and a PR fiasco, but it did occur so I'm not surprised some have taken that easy route. 
I'm sure the press would still have made considerable comment as to the near half hour delay in departure at outset and the further delay around Maidenhead resulting in a 41 minute late arrival.  The in built shower facility was purely the icing on the cake in terms of a visual aspect to the problems, and one which therefore got all the publicity.

Remember that on its very first outing the first train arrived at Temple Meads nearly an hour late, and presumably left a lot of dignitaries and press cooling their heels on the platform at 5.30 in the morning instead of getting on board early and being schmoozed by GWR and Hitachi. Do you blame the press for focussing on the negatives?


Title: Re: IETs into passenger service from 16 Oct 2017 and subsequent performance issues
Post by: SandTEngineer on October 19, 2017, 07:47:42 pm
With anything there are normally teething troubles even if you've done extensive testing and trials. The companies obviously wanted to start the new era with a bang and a bit of pomp and circumstance. That with 20:20 hindsight was a mistake but you can't predict the future easily. A soft launch would have been better with a press, dignitaries etc. run later in the day.

Yes I'll admit to finding it funny that there were problems given the Japanese reputation for reliability and the GWR desire to show off. However I'm sure:
They'll bed in over time,
More electricity will be used as quickly as they can hang it/certify it,
The seats will get softer with use,
The complimentary offering in 1st is improved,
Etc.

So long as journey times stay the same with more seats available then you've filled the main government requirement for these trains.


Its called the 'Bathtub Effect'.  New things will fail frequently in the first few weeks/months, then go on for years with minor problems and then begin to fail again more frequently (but less frequently than when new) towards the end of useful life....

However, I am puzzled why no testing was done with full passenger loads before actual public service started.  I'm sure that would of sorted out the snagging issues out of the glare of full publicity.  I raised this issue on another forum frequented by some of the engineers closely involved in the fleet introduction process.  The response was that only an 'emergency evacuation test' had been carried out with a full train (in a depot) and nothing else  ::)


Title: Re: IETs into passenger service from 16 Oct 2017 and subsequent performance issues
Post by: grahame on October 19, 2017, 10:00:45 pm
Its called the 'Bathtub Effect'. 

I seem to recall illustrating that ... http://www.wellho.net/pix/bathtubeffect.jpg


Title: Re: IETs into passenger service from 16 Oct 2017 and subsequent performance issues
Post by: Trowres on October 19, 2017, 10:08:05 pm

So long as journey times stay the same with more seats available then you've filled the main government requirement for these trains.


Such high ambitions for forty years of technological progress.


Title: Re: IETs into passenger service from 16 Oct 2017 and subsequent performance issues
Post by: John R on October 19, 2017, 10:20:32 pm

So long as journey times stay the same with more seats available then you've filled the main government requirement for these trains.


Such high ambitions for forty years of technological progress.

If journey times were to stay the same then services would still be slower than 40 years ago. The improvement in journey times expected just about takes us back to the times of the late 1970s.  (e.g. 1 hr 5 mins to Bristol Parkway).


Title: Re: IETs into passenger service from 16 Oct 2017 and subsequent performance issues
Post by: bignosemac on October 19, 2017, 10:45:50 pm
Journey times of the 1970s were on a quieter railway with fewer passengers calls and fewer services.


Title: Re: IETs into passenger service from 16 Oct 2017 and subsequent performance issues
Post by: 1st fan on October 20, 2017, 01:03:20 am

So long as journey times stay the same with more seats available then you've filled the main government requirement for these trains.


Such high ambitions for forty years of technological progress.
Well for the Cotswold line there's no promise of decreased journey times after they're introduced apparently.


Title: Re: IETs into passenger service from 16 Oct 2017 and subsequent performance issues
Post by: bignosemac on October 20, 2017, 01:47:23 am
There were a couple of late evening IET runs out from Stoke Gifford depot to Swindon and back yesterday. Via Box and Hullavington. With (non-passrnger) station stops at Bath, Chippenham, Bristol Parkway and Bristol TM.

I think it'd be a safe bet to assume that the SDO was being tested.


Title: Re: IETs into passenger service from 16 Oct 2017 and subsequent performance issues
Post by: bignosemac on October 20, 2017, 03:00:09 am
A consequence of the lack of Class 800 diagrams yesterday was that GWR had to press into service a 2+6 HST set as (indirect) cover, and had to cancel the 0529 Bristol TM - Paddington beyond Swindon to keep this short set away from heavily loaded services as far as practicable. It ran to Cheltenham then formed the 0831 to Paddington, the 1122 to Great Malvern, the 1425 back to Paddington, the 1722 to Hereford then 2151 back to Paddington. 

Another two Class 43 power cars and a handful of Mk3s are scheduled to go off to Scotland today. GWR are probably hoping Hitachi can supply the 800s they are contracted to.


Title: Re: IETs into passenger service from 16 Oct 2017 and subsequent performance issues
Post by: bobm on October 20, 2017, 06:52:42 am
Judging by the empty stock moves from Stoke Gifford and North Pole shown on RTT it seems the IETs are back in passenger service this morning.


Title: Re: IETs into passenger service from 16 Oct 2017 and subsequent performance issues
Post by: DidcotPunter on October 20, 2017, 07:49:51 am
Judging by the empty stock moves from Stoke Gifford and North Pole shown on RTT it seems the IETs are back in passenger service this morning.

Yes it is, mate is on 1A03 which is a 10 car 800. Currently running 14 mins late at Southall but that's not due to the train, there's a couple of late-running turbos in front of it. Was pretty much right time until after Reading.


Title: Re: IETs into passenger service from 16 Oct 2017 and subsequent performance issues
Post by: Richard Fairhurst on October 20, 2017, 09:05:34 am
Well for the Cotswold line there's no promise of decreased journey times after they're introduced apparently.
The GWR launch prospectus doing the rounds a while back did suggest improved journey times on the Cotswold Line. I suspect most of this will be a small acceleration between London and Oxford, and then the savings from powered doors at station calls between Oxford and Worcester/Hereford, rather than the performance of the trains themselves on the Cotswold Line.


Title: Re: IETs into passenger service from 16 Oct 2017 and subsequent performance issues
Post by: IndustryInsider on October 20, 2017, 09:17:45 am
Journey times of the 1970s were on a quieter railway with fewer passengers calls and fewer services.

Indeed.  I don’t have a late 70s timetable, but my 83/84 edition has one down train per day doing PAD-BPW in 1h08m, and one in 1h09m and everything else typically taking 1h 12m.  The up direction was curiously slower though with 1h 20m being the quickest.  Long gaps, too.  If you missed the 10:58 the next one wasn’t until 12:30.


Title: Re: IETs into passenger service from 16 Oct 2017 and subsequent performance issues
Post by: John R on October 20, 2017, 10:05:07 am
Journey times of the 1970s were on a quieter railway with fewer passengers calls and fewer services.

Indeed, but the other main lines (ECML, GWML, MML) have seen the maintenance or introduction of a sensible distribution of fast and semi-fast services, that have enabled point to point journey time improvements over those periods in the longer distance flows.

And yes, there were fewer services but the early HST timetables saw 3 trains every two hours to Cardiff, whereas the service for the last 20 years has only increased to 4, (and still only 1 per hour to Swansea). Hardly a step change, particularly in the context of longer journey times.

And point to point journey times have risen too.  eg. The typical departure off Reading was 22 mins after leaving Paddington.

Yes I know there are good reasons why, many of which haven't been listed (e.g. original sets were 2+7, impact of HEx, slower line speeds out of Paddington post Ladbroke Grove to name but three) but it is hardly progress.


Title: Re: IETs into passenger service from 16 Oct 2017 and subsequent performance issues
Post by: SandTEngineer on October 20, 2017, 10:13:50 am
Its called the 'Bathtub Effect'. 

I seem to recall illustrating that ... http://www.wellho.net/pix/bathtubeffect.jpg
Grahame, its actually along the length of the bath (steeper at one end than the other) ;)


Title: Re: IETs into passenger service from 16 Oct 2017 and subsequent performance issues
Post by: Bmblbzzz on October 20, 2017, 10:28:05 am
More frequent services mean journey times are shorter even if trains are no quicker. Though lesser ticket interavailability spoils the effect.


Title: Re: IETs into passenger service from 16 Oct 2017 and subsequent performance issues
Post by: Four Track, Now! on October 22, 2017, 10:54:14 pm
What an utter farce already.....they've only had.....oh....several years & loads of testing to get it right?

I'm not old enough to remember the introduction of the HST in 1976 but have read about it extensively. Their introduction came 4 years after the first prototype ran. Despite that 4 years of testing they were plagued with teething troubles. Soon sorted.

I am, and you are about right with your analysis. Not every HST suffered problems, by any means, but good news stories seldom sell papers.

Quote
The issues with the Class 800s will be fixed in short order.

Agreed! It sounds like a combination of minor problems with software, snagging of the build, and experience with real passengers, not helped by running the new trains on an old network that isn't used to them.

Quote
It's also worth remembering the APT. Another train that had some issues on introduction to passenger service. Issues that would have been fixed were it not for an anti-rail Tory government who swallowed the press hyperbole hook, line and sinker. Thank God this time the government can't pull the plug.

I passed the APT at Crewe twice on each visit to Mum, who departed this earth last Sunday, so I don't know when I will see it again. I'm not as sure that the problems could have been dealt with so easily given the state of the art at the time. The Pendelinos have the advantage of much better control of the tilt than could ever have been dreamed of in APT days, and the rebuild of the WCML. So far as electrification goes, I believe it is GWR cancelled by Labour once, by Conservatives twice (once partly), and although the wiring into Bristol has been put on hold (I don't believe that either), I don't think the current administration can be described as anti-rail, not with Crossrail and HS2. That may be driven by care for the environment, a desire to make money from share issues in TOCs and more profitably leasing companies, a wish to get people around London as quickly as possible, a desire to inflate house prices in Reading, or panic at the thought of how many Chinese tourists will be heading for a post-Brexit Britain and the realisation that National Express or Megabus may prove more useful as Air B'n'B options than as effective transport solutions.

Quote
3 days of passenger operation is far to short a time to describe minor faults as 'an utter farce'.

Agreed. I have just returned from a cruise in the sunshine, during which I was offered the chance of a cruise from Southampton to New York on the 2019 maiden voyage of the company's as yet unbuilt super cruise liner. As they don't currently operate that route, I smelled a rat (as may the passengers on that voyage). How many maiden voyages of luxury liners, including the Queen Mary and the QE2, were reported with glee by the red-tops as having carpenters, plumbers, carpet fitters etc still beavering away, sewage backing up the "heads" or pouring out of the showers and into the poolside hot-tubs because of hastily installed pipework, while guests paying six-figure sums queued for space at ship's rails to discharge their badly cooked dinner while cruisers from other countries formed pyramids, frightened the children, put towels on all the sunbeds, drank all the gin...

I might still go, since the actual problems won't be so bad unless it sinks, and I will probably get my money back and a free cruise on the mended ship.

Give it a month, and the IETs will be working fine.

And BNM, your coverage of Finn's maiden IET ride (and your experience as his guest) has been commendably positive. Positions were entrenched long ago, but it has been good to read your praise of certain aspects, even if the first week has proved something of a curate's egg.

MD of Hitachi Rail Karen Boswell has issued an apology for the issues of the first train this morning

https://twitter.com/HitachiRailEU/status/919930521345544197

Now where is the one from Mark Hopwood ...
Saw it on GWR's Twitter feed just now. Good of Hitachi to fess up but that would be the Japenese way. They would have been most embarrassed by what had happened this morning.

Hardly hara-kiri, is it?


Title: Re: IETs into passenger service from 16 Oct 2017 and subsequent performance issues
Post by: IndustryInsider on November 01, 2017, 06:36:05 pm
Seems to have gone a little quiet on this thread.  A sure sign that the new trains are settling in quite nicely.

I managed to have my first trip yesterday - I took 1B40, the 13:45 PAD-SWA as far as Cardiff Central, and returned on the other sets working 1L76, 15:29 SWA-PAD which I stayed on until Reading.  Here are my thoughts:

Performance and timekeeping
Both trips were largely punctual, except for a 10 minute delay after leaving Bristol Parkway on the down service.  We were held waiting a late running Pompey to Cardiff service to go ahead.  We left Paddington on electric power just under two minutes late and with my trusty GPS app I was able to note that we reached 100mph just before Acton so had to be held back as the 125mph limit starts just after there.  No diesel train would ever reach 100mph before the 125mph board.  After that we accelerated to 125mph by just past Hanwell - at which point you'd expect to be doing around 115mph in a 180 or 110mph in a HST.  We then effortlessly rolled along at around 125mph until the changeover point at Maidenhead.  As others have reported, you can hardly tell you've switched power source.  We dropped about 5mph immediately and that steadily reduced from then onwards to around 105mph when we started braking for Reading.  Arrival at Reading was on time in a shade over 23 minutes.

With next stop Swindon I was eager to see what speed we'd reach on diesel power.  Initially the acceleration was quite quick, but I was slightly disappointed with the rate of acceleration from 60mph onwards.  We had an unchecked run into Swindon, enroute the speedo briefly touched 108mph but the average over many minutes of recordings was a steady 104mph.  Nevertheless we arrived Swindon over a minute early.  A similar run from Swindon to Bristol Parkway saw an on time arrival and the same 104mph average.  After that we got delayed and followed another service so performance wasn't really worth monitoring.

Coming back the other way saw us leave Cardiff a minute late and we had made that up by Bristol Parkway and ran early into Swindon, before arriving Reading 2.5 minutes early - despite a check for another train at Didcot which slowed us to around 50mph for a brief period.  Performance on the return was much better.  We averaged over 120mph in diesel mode for several minutes on the gently falling gradients between Chipping Sodbury and Wootton Bassett and also until we were checked at Didcot Parkway.  On two occasions the reading was 125mph, but whether we actually reached that or not is open to debate given the possibility of an inaccurate reading from the GPS.  I'm very confident that we were doing those 120+mph averages though as it was recorded over several minutes.

Why the difference in maximum speeds on each trip?  Well, there could be a combination of four reasons at play.  1) The engines on the down service were running in 'muzzled' configuration, 2) Engine output wasn't optimal for some reason (one isolated maybe?), 3) Generally the gradients favour the up direction, or 4) Given we were running to time, the driver was driving to the timetable rather than maximum speed on the down service.

Dwell times were pretty much bang on two minutes at all stations, except Swindon on the way back where we were waiting time.  Certainly it appears there are no problems keeping to HST schedules as long as the signals stay green!



The travelling 'experience'
Unsurprisingly given the time of day I had no problems getting a seat in either direction.  Here are my opinions of the interiors, with a four grade marking system from ;D 'Great', to :) 'Good' to :-\ 'Undecided' to >:( 'Poor'.

 :)  Seats were surprisingly comfortable, given comments on their hardness by others.
 ;D  Leg room was ample.  I sat in both priority seats and normal seats and can report back that the rumours and worries of poor legroom simply aren't true with much more space than on the existing GWR HST interiors.
 ;D  A couple of nice little touches include the inner arm-rest by the windows being able to be moved into the upright position so you can lean against the window without it digging into your ribs.  Also there's a nice window ledge which is wide enough to rest your elbow and arm on.  Indeed it was wide enough that my phone could rest on it.
 :)  A nice ambience inside, a little bland maybe, but not the claustrophobic feel you get in a Pendolino or Voyager, and lower seat backs than on the HST's help.  Lighting less harsh, but still nice and bright.  Large windows, the majority of which have seats aligned well with them.
 :)  Ride quality was good, considering the state the track is in at the moment!
 :-\  Luggage space looks a little limited to me.  Perhaps the trains for Cornwall will have a little more, but I worry about there being enough room for large cases.  The overhead racks are excellent however, nice and deep and very tall so anything but the largest soft bag will fit in them.  Additional space between the seat backs is available as well of course.
 ;D  The three state reservation system was working on the way there, but not on the way back, but the green, yellow and red lights are easy to see throughout the length of the carriage, and the text display above each seat is clear and bright.  End of carriage displays are also clear and large.  Staff mentioned they will be sticking to paper labels as a back up until the new year.
 >:(  Too many automatic announcements as usual.  About five listing all the stations before we left Paddington, more at every station call and the TM was also making occasional manual announcements as well.  When is the message going to get through that people don't want to be bombarded with announcements the whole time!  It wasn't so bad given the number of station calls we made, but anything more intensive, such as the Cotswold Line, will have people reaching for cotton wool.  Hopefully it will be reconfigured.  On the plus side the automated system worked perfectly in both directions.
 :-\  Internal doors are floor pressure pad operated which surprised me a little.  They are quick to open (you hardly have to break your stride) and very, very quiet.  On the outward trip I was sat in the composite carriage and I literally could not hear them opening right behind me.  Having a pressure pad still means that they will be opening and closing constantly when a vestibule wanderer is on their phone, though the levels of noise in the vestibule means they won't be shouting so loudly and the doors themselves being quiet is a great improvement on the HST internal doors.  There was an annoying rattle on the composite compartment door when travelling at speed though.
 :-\  A trolley was provided both ways, though didn't come through until we were approaching Bristol Parkway on the way to Cardiff which is too long.  Seemed well stocked for a trolley and a total of five runs past me took place over both trips.
 >:(  Door release sounds are far too loud and prolonged.  A distinct noise when closing is a necessary evil, but every generation of train seems to make the door release noise more unnecessarily annoying.
 :)  Temperature seemed consistent and 'about right' throughout the train, except for one end of one carriage which was quite cool.
 ;D  Engine noise is very well dampened.  There's only three engines per five car train (and will be five per nine car train) anyway, but the location of the engines is towards one end of the carriage rather than in the centre.  On the outward trip I sat about two thirds of the way towards the other end of the carriage to where the engine is and you can barely hear it.  I purposely sat right above an engine on the way home and whilst you can hear it, it's far from obtrusive and very minimal vibrations can be felt.  I must admit I don't mind the low drone of an engine as it drowns out the annoying drone of other passengers, but for those that like a quiet ride you will more than likely not even know there's an engine in your carriage.
 :-\  One problem with two 5-car units attached is that if the first class portions are both positioned together at the coupled ends, that means there is a gap of three carriages (nearly 70 metres) between standard class accommodation right in the middle of the platform where most people are likely to be waiting.  That is where your potential dwell delays at stations might occur, especially as the two crew doors for the kitchen are not as obviously 'not for public use' as they might be.  Although operationally convenient in some regards (first class all in the middle), I feel that it will be best to try to marshall them so first class is at each end of the train.
 :-\  Didn't have chance to check out the cycle facilities and toilets.

Overall, I was pleasantly surprised.  I am looking forward to hearing the views of others, but for me a potentially worthy HST replacement.

For those stat fans amongst us, I've attached a chart with the data I recorded.  First chart has the running times and station dwell times.  The second chart has the average speeds recorded over 2 minute intervals for the 'down' journey, and the third chart has the same average speeds for the 'up' journey but broken down into one minute intervals.


Title: Re: IETs into passenger service from 16 Oct 2017 and subsequent performance issues
Post by: didcotdean on November 01, 2017, 07:13:54 pm
I had my first journey on one today ... although DID-RDG is hardly much of an experience really. I wasn't the only one I could see that chose not to get on a late HST in order to travel on it a few minutes later.

I was a bit underwhelmed if I'm honest, although I would echo the initial acceleration and the relative quietness of the diesel. It had left Swindon 4 minutes late as a result of the aforementioned HST but was only 1 down leaving Didcot.

I am usually a fan of hard-ish seats but found this one a bit extreme and inferior in comfort to the GWR HST but the leg room was fine. I question the use of light grey fabric; the seat cushion next to me was already noticeably stained, hopefully only by a spilled drink and not some other fluid. The seat table in front of me had grubby finger-marks all over it. All this unfortunately distracted from the 'new' feel somewhat.

No sign of any trolley over this short journey. The reservation system appeared to be switched off, but I couldn't see any paper labels in the carriage either.

To be more positive, this does seems a better package all round than others introduced over the last 10-15 years and has learnt from them. Certainly a great contrast to the return, done on a 2 carriage 165 - on a service that 12 months ago warranted a 180.



Title: Re: IETs into passenger service from 16 Oct 2017 and subsequent performance issues
Post by: bignosemac on November 01, 2017, 07:33:48 pm
With next stop Swindon I was eager to see what speed we'd reach on diesel power.  Initially the acceleration was quite quick, but I was slightly disappointed with the rate of acceleration from 60mph onwards.  We had an unchecked run into Swindon, enroute the speedo briefly touched 108mph but the average over many minutes of recordings was a steady 104mph.  Nevertheless we arrived Swindon over a minute early.  A similar run from Swindon to Bristol Parkway saw an on time arrival and the same 104mph average.  After that we got delayed and followed another service so performance wasn't really worth monitoring.

Through reading various sources I'm led to believe that the Class 800 engines are always unmuzzled (or unfettered  :P) in passenger service. What hasn't changed from the original DfT mandated spec is the acceleration curve. This is limited by engine management software to 0.7m/s2. Increasing this is possible, but then the component maintenance cycles would need changing. This would be another contract variation to be hammered out between the DfT and Hitachi. They've done one with the engine uprating and have seemingly determined that's all that's needed until the leccyfication catches up. Of course, overall, the traction components (excepting the diesel engines) are designed to run at up to 140mph.

That acceleration was based on not needing to get beyond 110mph on diesel, as all areas of up to 125mph operation were supposed to be electrified prior to introduction.

Distributed traction, a generally lighter consist, and the engine uprating mean the acceleration on diesel is initially better from a stand than the HST, but, after hitting the 0.7m/s2 limit, the HST edges ahead again on acceleration.

Of course once the wires reach Chippenham/Bristol/Cardiff the Class 800s will leave the HSTs trailing in their wake. That's when we should see the timetable recast and the promised modest journey time improvements.

It'll also be interesting to see whether the Class 802s have the same acceleration curve. As these have been ordered in the traditional way -  by an operator and funded by a RoSCo -  they could potentially be even more 'unmuzzled' by not having a DfT mandated acceleration limit.

Finally, it's worth remembering that 'speed' was not a primary reason for ordering these trains. An ageing fleet had to be replaced, and an increase in capacity was needed.


Title: Re: IETs into passenger service from 16 Oct 2017 and subsequent performance issues
Post by: stuving on November 02, 2017, 12:20:59 am
Through reading various sources I'm led to believe that the Class 800 engines are always unmuzzled (or unfettered  :P) in passenger service. What hasn't changed from the original DfT mandated spec is the acceleration curve. This is limited by engine management software to 0.7m/s2. Increasing this is possible, but then the component maintenance cycles would need changing. This would be another contract variation to be hammered out between the DfT and Hitachi. They've done one with the engine uprating and have seemingly determined that's all that's needed until the leccyfication catches up. Of course, overall, the traction components (excepting the diesel engines) are designed to run at up to 140mph.

That acceleration was based on not needing to get beyond 110mph on diesel, as all areas of up to 125mph operation were supposed to be electrified prior to introduction.

Distributed traction, a generally lighter consist, and the engine uprating mean the acceleration on diesel is initially better from a stand than the HST, but, after hitting the 0.7m/s2 limit, the HST edges ahead again on acceleration.

Of course once the wires reach Chippenham/Bristol/Cardiff the Class 800s will leave the HSTs trailing in their wake. That's when we should see the timetable recast and the promised modest journey time improvements.

It'll also be interesting to see whether the Class 802s have the same acceleration curve. As these have been ordered in the traditional way -  by an operator and funded by a RoSCo -  they could potentially be even more 'unmuzzled' by not having a DfT mandated acceleration limit.

Finally, it's worth remembering that 'speed' was not a primary reason for ordering these trains. An ageing fleet had to be replaced, and an increase in capacity was needed.

That doesn't sound right to me.

The acceleration limit in the IEP final spec. isn't just a fixed limit (of 0.75 m/s2), but above 45 km/hr it's a power limit. So if the limit implemented is 0.7 m/s2 (to be below the required maximum) that applies from starting up to the threshold (or "knee") velocity, then does not above.

Lifting that fixed limit would mean a threshold at a lower velocity, so it would only have a limited effect. It would also call for greater adhesion; 0.7 m/s2 already implies about 12%.

That high-speed curve on the graph is above the line for a muzzled diesel, or even one on full power, but just below that for the full motor rated power. It's probably about right or electric mode once you allow for mechanical losses. And this limit does apply in all modes.

The words above that curve talk about "compatible with the infrastructure", and come under section 3.23 Signalling Compatibility. Now, what's that about? A clever signalling system night measure the train's speed and need to assume it won't change too quickly. However, as far as I know we don't have one that clever.  But I can't believe signalling imposes any limit versus speed with quite that shape.

If it is a signalling constraint, it looks unlikely it will be any different for other variants, or indeed  for other trains. While that acceleration limit isn't mentioned in connection with track wear, I can imagine it might affect that. If so raising it should, by rights, lead to an increase in track access charges (but probably only a small one).

Higher traction or torque might have wear implications for the train too, mostly in electric mode. You'd need to be a designer to know, but I can imagine that the motors, gears, and wheelsets would all take more of a hammering. To some extent that depends how the train applies WSP - that's not mentioned in the spec. nor in Hitachi's suppliers list; presumably it's "only software" (plus a wheel-speed sensor).


Title: Re: IETs into passenger service from 16 Oct 2017 and subsequent performance issues
Post by: Tim on November 02, 2017, 11:36:04 am
Thanks for the review Industry Insider.  Very thorough and my experience of the ride quality in interior (on a short BTH-BRI hope) agrees with what you found. 

I thought that the internal ambiance was good.  Engine sound hardly noticeable and compared to something like the dreadful Voyagers, the train is streets ahead.  Many of the "issues" of other new trains have been addressed with these trains, so leg room is pretty good, table provision pretty good, electronic reservations have been done better, overhead luggage racks are good (glass bottom allows you to see if they are empty and capacity is decent), and window/seat alignment is not bad at all.   My only quibble  would be that I dislike window blinds especially those which cover more than one seat because others may put them down and block your view.  Train didn't blow my socks off but it did give me a very good overall first impression. 

Only one improvement I would suggest when more are running and when we have a mixture of 9 cars and 5 and 5+5 cars is that GWR upgrade the platform indicators and/or station announcements so that people know which part of the platform their coach will arrive at. 


Title: Re: IETs into passenger service from 16 Oct 2017 and subsequent performance issues
Post by: patch38 on November 02, 2017, 11:42:02 am
I have already experienced the window blind stand-off. Difficult to see how it could be done any other way though.

Perhaps they could invest some of the revenue from my exorbitant ticket price and install electronic-dimming windows like those on the 787 Dreamliner  ;)


Title: Re: IETs into passenger service from 16 Oct 2017 and subsequent performance issues
Post by: didcotdean on November 02, 2017, 11:52:43 am
I have already experienced the window blind stand-off. Difficult to see how it could be done any other way though.
Maybe there could be a notice to the effect that if there is any disagreement it stays up :)

One thing I missed out in my mini-review above was that whilst I was waiting for the door release getting on, I saw a couple walking briskly up the platform looking puzzled, with one of them saying 'these can't be the standard class'. I guess this means they were impressed.


Title: Re: IETs into passenger service from 16 Oct 2017 and subsequent performance issues
Post by: stuving on November 02, 2017, 11:57:31 am
While I've had no call to go on one yet, I did go and watch a couple come through Reading on Monday. Both (to and from SWA) were late, and dwelled too long. The first was replatformed from 9 to 12 just at its due time, with the preceding train in P9, which you wouldn't have thought was worth the trouble. I can only assume there was a known issue with that previous train that could have taken longer to sort. As it was the IET still went out second, but not by a lot, so maybe saved a minute or two. It took three goes to dispatch it because each time staff came running up to say there were still passengers coming across by lift.

The second had its external displays blank, so no-one knew which carriage was which, so that took extra time. There were no announcements for that, either, so it was down to the train and platform staff to direct people.

Both times there was a Voyager sitting at a nearby platform, and its idle noise was way louder than IET on idle, even right up close. On power, the IET engines were louder though, but still a lot less harsh.

From the end of the platform, it is very noticeable how much quicker this was than an HST by the time its back end left. Indeed,  The driver had power off by then, presumably having reached the maximum speed (30 mph, I think). The driver's view out does look very limited, despite that big front window. The side windows are more like quarter-lights, and the driving desk is very high, above half-way up that front window. Have they been complaining?


Title: Re: IETs into passenger service from 16 Oct 2017 and subsequent performance issues
Post by: Tim on November 02, 2017, 01:46:43 pm
I have already experienced the window blind stand-off. Difficult to see how it could be done any other way though.


I'd prefer no blinds at all.  The HST doesn't have them. 


Title: Re: IETs into passenger service from 16 Oct 2017 and subsequent performance issues
Post by: Tim on November 02, 2017, 01:49:13 pm
lights, and the driving desk is very high, above half-way up that front window. have they been complaining?

I suspect this has to do with providing crash protection lower down for the driver.


Title: Re: IETs into passenger service from 16 Oct 2017 and subsequent performance issues
Post by: IndustryInsider on November 02, 2017, 02:25:58 pm
lights, and the driving desk is very high, above half-way up that front window. have they been complaining?

I suspect this has to do with providing crash protection lower down for the driver.

Most of the comments have been very favourable regarding the cab layout.  Thorough ergonomic tests were carried out with union feedback using two of GWR’s shortest and tallest drivers (over 2 feet difference in height!) to ensure everyone was catered for.


Title: Re: IETs into passenger service from 16 Oct 2017 and subsequent performance issues
Post by: stuving on November 02, 2017, 02:28:56 pm
lights, and the driving desk is very high, above half-way up that front window. have they been complaining?

I suspect this has to do with providing crash protection lower down for the driver.

Most of the comments have been very favourable regarding the cab layout.  Thorough ergonomic tests were carried out with union feedback using two of GWR’s shortest and tallest drivers (over 2 feet difference in height!) to ensure everyone was catered for.

I was really talking about visibility. While seeing the track ahead only needs a small window, there must be times you want a broader view.


Title: Re: IETs into passenger service from 16 Oct 2017 and subsequent performance issues
Post by: 1st fan on November 02, 2017, 03:01:32 pm
I have already experienced the window blind stand-off. Difficult to see how it could be done any other way though.

Perhaps they could invest some of the revenue from my exorbitant ticket price and install electronic-dimming windows like those on the 787 Dreamliner  ;)
They should have really done curtains for 1st blind for standard but I guess curtains wouldn't fit with the clean lines of these new trains. The last time I travelled on a Voyager (which was some years ago now) the blind for my table of four was bust. It was all the way up and not wanting to budge which was annoying. Not quite as annoying as the little old lady sitting across the table from me who accused me of sabotaging it. This despite my repeated attempts to get it 'deployed' because I wanted it down. She moved seats the first time she had the chance.


Title: Re: IETs into passenger service from 16 Oct 2017 and subsequent performance issues
Post by: 1st fan on November 02, 2017, 03:07:22 pm
lights, and the driving desk is very high, above half-way up that front window. have they been complaining?

I suspect this has to do with providing crash protection lower down for the driver.

Most of the comments have been very favourable regarding the cab layout.  Thorough ergonomic tests were carried out with union feedback using two of GWR’s shortest and tallest drivers (over 2 feet difference in height!) to ensure everyone was catered for.

I was really talking about visibility. While seeing the track ahead only needs a small window, there must be times you want a broader view.
I remember being told that the Eurostar cab only had a very limited view for good reason. Otherwise when going through the tunnel at high speed the drivers could become hypnotised or an reach equivalent state. Not sure the same applies here though, but I'd want a broader view if it was me driving.


Title: Re: IETs into passenger service from 16 Oct 2017 and subsequent performance issues
Post by: stuving on November 02, 2017, 03:11:29 pm
I remember being told that the Eurostar cab only had a very limited view for good reason. Otherwise when going through the tunnel at high speed the drivers could become hypnotised or an reach equivalent state. Not sure the same applies here though, but I'd want a broader view if it was me driving.

The same point has been made about all these new OLE uprights - indeed there's a thread about that. But you can always use a moveable screen if that's a problem, while you can't unscreen a non-existent window.


Title: Re: IETs into passenger service from 16 Oct 2017 and subsequent performance issues
Post by: Bmblbzzz on November 02, 2017, 03:48:07 pm
I've never felt the need for a blind on a train window. It's an extra item to cause niggling faults and disagreements between passengers. Dare say it'll come in useful at some times though.


Title: Re: IETs into passenger service from 16 Oct 2017 and subsequent performance issues
Post by: stuving on November 02, 2017, 04:11:12 pm
I've never felt the need for a blind on a train window. It's an extra item to cause niggling faults and disagreements between passengers. Dare say it'll come in useful at some times though.

They have got a lot more important recently, due to the overwhelming importance to most people of being able to read the little screen they are peering intently at ... much more important that seeing out of the window.


Title: Re: IETs into passenger service from 16 Oct 2017 and subsequent performance issues
Post by: stuving on November 02, 2017, 04:46:56 pm
Re: this issue of low-speed acceleration:

The acceleration limit in the IEP final spec. isn't just a fixed limit (of 0.75 m/s2), but above 45 km/hr it's a power limit. So if the limit implemented is 0.7 m/s2 (to be below the required maximum) that applies from starting up to the threshold (or "knee") velocity, then does not above.

Lifting that fixed limit would mean a threshold at a lower velocity, so it would only have a limited effect. It would also call for greater adhesion; 0.7 m/s2 already implies about 12%.

To show the effect of raising the acceleration at low speeds, where it is not set by the overall power, I've got out an old model train* to play with. I looked at both diesel and electric power, and with an acceleration limit of 0.7 m/s2 or 1.0 m/s2 (which is not obtainable), and let the train run from a stand and accelerate continuously on the level. The speed reached and time taken are noted at two distances: 250 m (about the length of a 5-car IET) and 8 km (5 miles). The change in these, with very high vs standard acceleration, is also shown.

electric        time s     change   speed km/hr  change
at 250 m26.9  -3.5  65.1  +3.2  
as 8 km213   -4.7   198   +0.2
diesel
at 250 m27.9  -2.5  57.5  +0.9
as 8 km249   -2.9   166   +0.06


A number of points can be noted:
  • The absolute numbers can't be trusted; they are based on a number of guessed parameters. But the differences won't be far out.
  • By 250 m, the speed is already high enough for the power-limited acceleration to be below the fixed limit.
  • The change in time to 250 m is small.
  • The change in time from 250m m to 8 km is even smaller.
  • The change in speed at 250 m is also small.
  • the change in speed at 8 km is much less, almost negligible.
  • The difference in performance with full electric power is quite noticeable even by 250 m, but far more so at 8 km.


* No, not the kind the guys on RMweb make. On second thoughts, I bet someone on there has got a much better dynamic model than mine!


Title: Re: IETs into passenger service from 16 Oct 2017 and subsequent performance issues
Post by: bobm on November 02, 2017, 06:58:24 pm
I've never felt the need for a blind on a train window. It's an extra item to cause niggling faults and disagreements between passengers. Dare say it'll come in useful at some times though.

When I travelled last week on an IET almost all the blinds on the downside in my coach were lowered half way... so I sat on the upside.   ;D


Title: Re: IETs into passenger service from 16 Oct 2017 and subsequent performance issues
Post by: Bmblbzzz on November 02, 2017, 07:41:27 pm
I've never felt the need for a blind on a train window. It's an extra item to cause niggling faults and disagreements between passengers. Dare say it'll come in useful at some times though.

They have got a lot more important recently, due to the overwhelming importance to most people of being able to read the little screen they are peering intently at ... much more important that seeing out of the window.
Of course, silly me!

I've never felt the need for a blind on a train window. It's an extra item to cause niggling faults and disagreements between passengers. Dare say it'll come in useful at some times though.

When I travelled last week on an IET almost all the blinds on the downside in my coach were lowered half way... so I sat on the upside.   ;D

Downside, upside... Is this a new TV drama about life on an Edwardian country railway?  :D


Title: Re: IETs into passenger service from 16 Oct 2017 and subsequent performance issues
Post by: Thatcham Crossing on November 03, 2017, 06:40:49 pm
Watched an IET pulling into PAD at about 1300 today, pantographs definitely down on both 5 car sets.


Title: Re: IETs into passenger service from 16 Oct 2017 and subsequent performance issues
Post by: 4064ReadingAbbey on November 03, 2017, 08:18:54 pm
Watched an IET pulling into PAD at about 1300 today, pantographs definitely down on both 5 car sets.

Which platforms? AIUI platforms 1 and 2 will be energised during the Christmas blockade.


Title: Re: IETs into passenger service from 16 Oct 2017 and subsequent performance issues
Post by: Adelante_CCT on November 03, 2017, 09:01:42 pm
I'm guessing 1L51, which appears to have used Platform 10


Title: Re: IETs into passenger service from 16 Oct 2017 and subsequent performance issues
Post by: Thatcham Crossing on November 03, 2017, 10:46:45 pm
Quote
I'm guessing 1L51, which appears to have used Platform 10

Yep, that was it.


Title: Re: IETs into passenger service from 16 Oct 2017 and subsequent performance issues
Post by: Surrey 455 on November 03, 2017, 11:16:27 pm
Watched an IET pulling into PAD at about 1300 today, pantographs definitely down on both 5 car sets.

Which platforms? AIUI platforms 1 and 2 will be energised during the Christmas blockade.

Eh? I thought all platforms at Paddington were electrified when Heathrow Express started many years ago.


Title: Re: IETs into passenger service from 16 Oct 2017 and subsequent performance issues
Post by: Adelante_CCT on November 04, 2017, 05:51:50 am
Quote
Which platforms? AIUI platforms 1 and 2 will be energised during the Christmas blockade.

Quote
Eh? I thought all platforms at Paddington were electrified when Heathrow Express started many years ago.

I'm sure someone more knowledgeable can explain further, however I'm sure I have read elsewhere a class 387 has used P1 / P2 in the past


Title: Re: IETs into passenger service from 16 Oct 2017 and subsequent performance issues
Post by: IndustryInsider on November 04, 2017, 07:59:48 am
Quote
Which platforms? AIUI platforms 1 and 2 will be energised during the Christmas blockade.

Quote
Eh? I thought all platforms at Paddington were electrified when Heathrow Express started many years ago.

I'm sure someone more knowledgeable can explain further, however I'm sure I have read elsewhere a class 387 has used P1 / P2 in the past

1, 2, (11?), 12, 13 and 14 were not electrified as part of the original HEx scheme.  12 was done a few years ago, 13 now doesn’t exist and 14 was energised early this year.  1/2 are scheduled for Christmas - 1 has wired installed, but 2 has still got wires to be added.  The footbridge above 1/2 had to be altered so it was a bigger job than you might imagine.


Title: Re: IETs into passenger service from 16 Oct 2017 and subsequent performance issues
Post by: bignosemac on November 06, 2017, 12:12:26 pm
From The Daily Swansea (https://thedailyswansea.co.uk/2017/10/27/swansea-great-western-railway-to-ban-the-welsh-from-nice-new-trains/):

Quote
Great Western Railway to ban the Welsh from nice new trains

Great Western Railway have decided to go one step further from having no bilingualism on their services and will just ban all Welsh people from getting on their shiny new trains.

The company operate a number of services, including the Swansea to London Paddington route.

GWR spokesperson Pete Bowen said: “We opted against including Welsh language on our service because we used up our Government subsidy on a lavish launch party for Westminster ministers.

“After that we got to thinking, I mean, would you leave someone from Neath rummage around your wife’s new jewellery box? Or have someone from Penlan walk around your new cream carpet with their muddy, horse s**t drenched Nike Airs?

“There’s been some concerns around a drop in revenue, but we wouldn’t have been in business this long without succession planning. The long and short of it is that we’ll recoup the shortfall from the taxpayer.”

continues with fruitier language...

 ;D


Title: Re: IETs into passenger service from 16 Oct 2017 and subsequent performance issues
Post by: Rob on the hill on November 07, 2017, 02:25:30 pm
1L51 10.55 Cardiff - Paddington reported on Facebook as being a 5 coach train (instead of 10).

http://www.realtimetrains.co.uk/train/C29277/2017/11/07/advanced

Also cancelled between Cardiff and Newport:
Quote
This service was cancelled between Cardiff Central and Newport (South Wales) due to a problem with the doors (M7).


Title: Re: IETs into passenger service from 16 Oct 2017 and subsequent performance issues
Post by: stuving on November 07, 2017, 03:03:23 pm
And the same for the 13:45 PAD-SWA, and also the 17:29 back - Journeycheck says:
Quote
Facilities on the 13:45 London Paddington to Swansea due 16:43.
This is due to more trains than usual needing repairs at the same time.
Will be formed of 5 coaches instead of 10.



Title: Re: IETs into passenger service from 16 Oct 2017 and subsequent performance issues
Post by: grahame on November 07, 2017, 05:30:07 pm
And the same for the 13:45 PAD-SWA, and also the 17:29 back - Journeycheck says:
Quote
Facilities on the 13:45 London Paddington to Swansea due 16:43.
This is due to more trains than usual needing repairs at the same time.
Will be formed of 5 coaches instead of 10.

At least it wasn't an HST that needed repair - that would have resulted in 0 carriages

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

Arrived late into Swansea (17:07) ... Fishguard Harbour train held to make the connection. Return at 17:29 "delayed" ... I happen to be travelling home from Swansea, hope the connection at Swindon onto the last TransWilts doesn't fail.



Title: Re: IETs into passenger service from 16 Oct 2017 and subsequent performance issues
Post by: IndustryInsider on November 07, 2017, 07:48:14 pm
Good luck Graham - looking good connection wise.  I’ll be interested to hear your views on the new trains.


Title: Re: IETs into passenger service from 16 Oct 2017 and subsequent performance issues
Post by: grahame on November 07, 2017, 08:17:20 pm
Good luck Graham - looking good connection wise.  I’ll be interested to hear your views on the new trains.

Connection nicely made ... which is more than can be said for the 19:00 Paddington which is supposed to connect into the train I'm now on - 20:06 from Swindon.   The London train's a few minutes behind us, and I expect station staff at Chippenham will have to provide taxis.

New train - bit of a review last week;  they're much better than voyagers and the look more modern that HSTs.   Nice to see the deeper luggage racks.   Lady opposite went off to find the buffet ... came back grumbling that she had to wait for the trolley to come round.   Liked the hard seats ... but then was finding them too hard by the time we got to England.

Noting some of the light grey seats are already showing marks, and remark made by a fellow passenger about how they're going to keep the glass in the luggage racks clean.

I suspect we had all the in-train staff for a 10 car ... plus two Hitachi engineers ... never seen so many GWR staff on a regular service.

Was I on the first 5 car IET public service from Wales to England?   Think all prior ones have been 10?

Writing this from a 153 ... feels so much like home, sinking into the soft seats ...


Title: Re: IETs into passenger service from 16 Oct 2017 and subsequent performance issues
Post by: IndustryInsider on November 07, 2017, 08:37:38 pm
I won’t be surprised if those seat covers get changed sooner rather than later for something a little darker.  Thought lessons would have been learnt from the Turbo and HST set that were fitted with light grey!


Title: Re: IETs into passenger service from 16 Oct 2017 and subsequent performance issues
Post by: Chris from Nailsea on November 08, 2017, 12:32:13 am
I suspect we had all the in-train staff for a 10 car ... plus two Hitachi engineers ... never seen so many GWR staff on a regular service.

Any sign of Mark Hopwood among them?  :P



Sorry - did I really say that out loud??  :o ::)



Title: Re: IETs into passenger service from 16 Oct 2017 and subsequent performance issues
Post by: TaplowGreen on November 08, 2017, 06:04:17 am
And the same for the 13:45 PAD-SWA, and also the 17:29 back - Journeycheck says:
Quote
Facilities on the 13:45 London Paddington to Swansea due 16:43.
This is due to more trains than usual needing repairs at the same time.
Will be formed of 5 coaches instead of 10.



.....................already needing repairs???????  ::)


Title: Re: IETs into passenger service from 16 Oct 2017 and subsequent performance issues
Post by: Rob on the hill on November 08, 2017, 10:15:00 am
And the same for the 13:45 PAD-SWA, and also the 17:29 back - Journeycheck says:
Quote
Facilities on the 13:45 London Paddington to Swansea due 16:43.
This is due to more trains than usual needing repairs at the same time.
Will be formed of 5 coaches instead of 10.



.....................already needing repairs???????  ::)

If a HST power car fails the whole set of 8 coaches can often continue in service with the one power car working. The power car can then be repaired or replaced later at the depot. But if a 5 car IET set fails I wonder if it can continue in service? If not then we get yesterday's scenario with 5 coaches instead of 10. Can a 5 car IET on a 2 x 5 set be easily swapped in the same way as a HST power car?


Title: Re: IETs into passenger service from 16 Oct 2017 and subsequent performance issues
Post by: stuving on November 08, 2017, 10:30:40 am
If a HST power car fails the whole set of 8 coaches can often continue in service with the one power car working. The power car can then be repaired or replaced later at the depot. But if a 5 car IET set fails I wonder if it can continue in service? If not then we get yesterday's scenario with 5 coaches instead of 10. Can a 5 car IET on a 2 x 5 set be easily swapped in the same way as a HST power car?

Much easier - as long as you have a new one handy, of course. There's lots of complicated requirements, but the key one is:
Quote
TS1696 IEP Units must be able to automatically couple or uncouple with each other in no more than 2 minutes.

The coupling or uncoupling time shall be taken from the point at which the original IEP Train (or separate IEP Units, in the case of a coupling operation) cease to be available to operate until the time that the now separated IEP Units (or the coupled IEP Train, in the case of a coupling operation) are available to operate. This shall exclude any traincrew walking time between cabs and the BR-ATP start up time (provided this does not exceed 4 minutes), but shall include all train borne system reconfiguration activities, for example, ETCS, GSMR, TMS and brake proving.

So it's a push-button operation in the cab, but that's already true of most D/EMUs. What the requirement didn't mention is how many people have to stand on the platform and watch  - it always seems to need at least one.


Title: Re: IETs into passenger service from 16 Oct 2017 and subsequent performance issues
Post by: bobm on November 08, 2017, 10:34:32 am
The other snag is if it is a terminal platform, ie Swansea or London Paddington and the "good" IET is blocked in at the buffer stop end by the faulty one.


Title: Re: IETs into passenger service from 16 Oct 2017 and subsequent performance issues
Post by: 1st fan on November 08, 2017, 11:07:36 am
And the same for the 13:45 PAD-SWA, and also the 17:29 back - Journeycheck says:
Quote
Facilities on the 13:45 London Paddington to Swansea due 16:43.
This is due to more trains than usual needing repairs at the same time.
Will be formed of 5 coaches instead of 10.



.....................already needing repairs???????  ::)
Yeah whats going on with our brand new trains going wrong?


Title: Re: IETs into passenger service from 16 Oct 2017 and subsequent performance issues
Post by: Chris from Nailsea on November 08, 2017, 11:22:43 am
They started 'going wrong' on 16 October ...  ::)



Title: Re: IETs into passenger service from 16 Oct 2017 and subsequent performance issues
Post by: devonexpress on November 10, 2017, 11:33:49 pm
I just wondered since the dreadful first day in service, how have the new IET's performed in regular service?


Title: Re: IETs into passenger service from 16 Oct 2017 and subsequent performance issues
Post by: NickB on November 10, 2017, 11:45:50 pm
And further to that question how likely is it that the full (now published) timetable will be able to be introduced from 2nd January?

I ask because my annual season ticket expires on 31st December and I’m considering dropping my First Eastbound Only privileges on the promise of all this magical new seating and a doubling of morning services from Maidenhead. That requires the new trains to be operational...


Title: Re: IETs into passenger service from 16 Oct 2017 and subsequent performance issues
Post by: Chris from Nailsea on November 11, 2017, 12:01:44 am
Hmm.  ::)

You're probably both not going to like this, but things apparently have not improved.  :o

We have another ongoing discussion on the Coffee Shop forum, culminating presently with my own slightly caustic comment at http://www.firstgreatwestern.info/coffeeshop/index.php?topic=18792.msg224891#msg224891

I'll now look at how best to expand that other topic from a specific calendar diary entry and place it out on the wider forum.



Title: Re: IETs into passenger service from 16 Oct 2017 and subsequent performance issues
Post by: Chris from Nailsea on November 11, 2017, 01:27:59 am
I have now disconnected this topic's link to a specific date in the Coffee Shop forum diary (as that was purely historic) and moved / merged the ongoing discussion here.

Hope this helps!  ;)

CfN.  :)



Title: Re: IETs into passenger service from 16 Oct 2017 and subsequent performance issues
Post by: IndustryInsider on November 11, 2017, 12:52:57 pm
I just wondered since the dreadful first day in service, how have the new IET's performed in regular service?

The train's themselves seem to be doing pretty well.  One diagram was a 5-car one day, but otherwise all have been 10 to the best of my knowledge.  Timings have been kept reasonably well when you consider it's leaf fall season and staff and passengers are getting used to them.  A promising start in my opinion.

And further to that question how likely is it that the full (now published) timetable will be able to be introduced from 2nd January?

I ask because my annual season ticket expires on 31st December and I’m considering dropping my First Eastbound Only privileges on the promise of all this magical new seating and a doubling of morning services from Maidenhead. That requires the new trains to be operational...

There's three reasons why it won't happen.  Lack of trains, lack of trained drivers, or infrastructure not ready.

There's no shortage of 387s (they're parked up everywhere), the number of drivers trained is currently level with where GWR wanted to be at this time with courses ongoing - hopefully what they think they need will actually be enough in practice.  Infrastructure I'm not so sure about but with all the additional possessions it will be frustrating if not.  So, overall, looking promising I'd say.


Title: Re: IETs into passenger service from 16 Oct 2017 and subsequent performance issues
Post by: ChrisB on November 11, 2017, 03:24:19 pm
There are posters at Welsh stations showing a standard format of 2x5car IETs.

1st class is at the London end of each set, so very end of Eastern end and in the middle.

So no 2.5 coach areas with no STD seating exists


Title: Re: IETs into passenger service from 16 Oct 2017 and subsequent performance issues
Post by: grahame on November 11, 2017, 04:03:44 pm
1st class is at the London end of each set, so very end of Eastern end and in the middle.

So no 2.5 coach areas with no STD seating exists

Is that guaranteed, or just "in the normal run of events".   Very much aware that first class is at the London ends of HSTs ... except when it isn't.


Title: Re: IETs into passenger service from 16 Oct 2017 and subsequent performance issues
Post by: ChrisB on November 11, 2017, 04:28:27 pm
One assumes that this formation is what's in the contract with Hitachi? So would need GWRs agreement to turn them out otherwise


Title: Re: IETs into passenger service from 16 Oct 2017 and subsequent performance issues
Post by: stuving on November 11, 2017, 04:36:31 pm
One assumes that this formation is what's in the contract with Hitachi? So would need GWRs agreement to turn them out otherwise

You think so? Do they have some machinery we've not heard about in their depots for turning units round if they come in the wrong way round?


Title: Re: IETs into passenger service from 16 Oct 2017 and subsequent performance issues
Post by: grahame on November 11, 2017, 05:03:34 pm
Do they have some machinery we've not heard about in their depots for turning units round if they come in the wrong way round"

Probably have a bigger version of this

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


Title: Re: IETs into passenger service from 16 Oct 2017 and subsequent performance issues
Post by: IndustryInsider on November 11, 2017, 05:20:19 pm
One assumes that this formation is what's in the contract with Hitachi? So would need GWRs agreement to turn them out otherwise

I’ve definitely seen one with a 1st both in the middle configuration in passenger service.  As long as that is only going to happen on very rare occasions then that’s ok.


Title: Re: IETs into passenger service from 16 Oct 2017 and subsequent performance issues
Post by: ChrisB on November 11, 2017, 05:24:16 pm
If it were oikely to be a regular occurance, would they bother putting out posters saying the opposite?


Title: Re: IETs into passenger service from 16 Oct 2017 and subsequent performance issues
Post by: stuving on November 11, 2017, 05:34:27 pm
If it were oikely to be a regular occurance, would they bother putting out posters saying the opposite?

You're assuming all he relevant people and parts of GWR understand the importance of unit orientation in a 5+5 train, and that they understand the same as each other. I suspect a lot of that has been worked out after they started running, and they still have a way to go.


Title: Re: IETs into passenger service from 16 Oct 2017 and subsequent performance issues
Post by: broadgage on November 11, 2017, 06:09:04 pm
Putting both bits of first in the middle would have the merit that any unplanned or unexpected reversals would still leave first class at the middle.
If first class was at the London end of each unit, then any diversion that required reversing would result in it being at the country end.

The same argument would of course apply to putting first class at the outer ends, either policy would in my view be acceptable provided that it was applied consistently.


Title: Re: IETs into passenger service from 16 Oct 2017 and subsequent performance issues
Post by: grahame on November 11, 2017, 06:36:39 pm
Putting both bits of first in the middle would have the merit that any unplanned or unexpected reversals would still leave first class at the middle.
If first class was at the London end of each unit, then any diversion that required reversing would result in it being at the country end.

Where is First Class going to be in the 9 car units and will people know at intermediate stations whether a 9 or a 5+5 is expected; one expects the 9s on workings that don't divide, and 5+5s on ones that have onward portions to Pembroke, Newquay or Weymouth (will classes 800 and 802 come in long and short swing link flavours?)


Title: Re: IETs into passenger service from 16 Oct 2017 and subsequent performance issues
Post by: Timmer on November 11, 2017, 08:24:24 pm
Weymouth Graham? Do you know something we don’t?


Title: Re: IETs into passenger service from 16 Oct 2017 and subsequent performance issues
Post by: grahame on November 11, 2017, 08:34:15 pm
Weymouth Graham? Do you know something we don’t?

No, just being slightly naughty in my ask - HSTs have ended up at some pretty unexpected places (Exmouth and Falmouth come to mind) and perhaps 80x could at some time. 


Title: Re: IETs into passenger service from 16 Oct 2017 and subsequent performance issues
Post by: Timmer on November 11, 2017, 08:47:16 pm
Never say never as they say. As long as they get clearance no reason why an IET couldn’t make it down to Weymouth in the future.


Title: Re: IETs into passenger service from 16 Oct 2017 and subsequent performance issues
Post by: IndustryInsider on November 11, 2017, 08:52:59 pm
Seats look a different colour on the later units being currently delivered.


Title: Re: IETs into passenger service from 16 Oct 2017 and subsequent performance issues
Post by: 1st fan on November 11, 2017, 11:12:58 pm
Weymouth Graham? Do you know something we don’t?

No, just being slightly naughty in my ask - HSTs have ended up at some pretty unexpected places (Exmouth and Falmouth come to mind) and perhaps 80x could at some time. 
One made it almost to Minehead when they wanted to do an evacuation test many years ago.


Title: Re: IETs into passenger service from 16 Oct 2017 and subsequent performance issues
Post by: 1st fan on November 11, 2017, 11:19:31 pm
Putting both bits of first in the middle would have the merit that any unplanned or unexpected reversals would still leave first class at the middle.
If first class was at the London end of each unit, then any diversion that required reversing would result in it being at the country end.

The same argument would of course apply to putting first class at the outer ends, either policy would in my view be acceptable provided that it was applied consistently.
Would also have the advantage that the 1st carriages would be more likely to be on the platform when stopping at short platformed stations.


Title: Re: IETs into passenger service from 16 Oct 2017 and subsequent performance issues
Post by: broadgage on November 12, 2017, 01:02:33 am
Weymouth Graham? Do you know something we don’t?

No, just being slightly naughty in my ask - HSTs have ended up at some pretty unexpected places (Exmouth and Falmouth come to mind) and perhaps 80x could at some time. 
One made it almost to Minehead when they wanted to do an evacuation test many years ago.

An HST has made it all the way to Minehead, some years ago an HST was used in passenger service on the WSR, during the diesel gala. I was on it !
AFAIK HSTs are now out of gauge on the WSR but this was not the case a few years ago.
I rather doubt that we will see a 80x at Minehead in the foreseeable future since I suspect that they are badly out of gauge and that a great deal of work would be needed.


Title: Re: IETs into passenger service from 16 Oct 2017 and subsequent performance issues
Post by: Rob on the hill on November 12, 2017, 12:09:17 pm
The last HST to Minehead was on 23rd Sept 2017 - the Cotswold Line Promotion Group's Cotswold Quantock Explorer.

Edit: I should just add that the special train was operated by GWR who had kindly replaced a standard class coach with an additional 1st class coach at CLPG's request.
Previous gauging issues on the WSR preventing a HST reaching Minehead in May had been resolved to enable the visit of Flying Scotsman in the summer.
Will we see another in-service HST at Minehead?


Title: Re: IETs into passenger service from 16 Oct 2017 and subsequent performance issues
Post by: old original on November 12, 2017, 07:50:34 pm
One assumes that this formation is what's in the contract with Hitachi? So would need GWRs agreement to turn them out otherwise

I’ve definitely seen one with a 1st both in the middle configuration in passenger service.  As long as that is only going to happen on very rare occasions then that’s ok.

ATP style.... if I remember...


Title: Re: IETs into passenger service from 16 Oct 2017 and subsequent performance issues
Post by: bignosemac on November 12, 2017, 10:10:10 pm
One assumes that this formation is what's in the contract with Hitachi? So would need GWRs agreement to turn them out otherwise

I’ve definitely seen one with a 1st both in the middle configuration in passenger service.  As long as that is only going to happen on very rare occasions then that’s ok.

ATP style.... if I remember...

Did you mean APT - Advanced Passenger Train?


Title: Re: IETs into passenger service from 16 Oct 2017 and subsequent performance issues
Post by: IndustryInsider on November 13, 2017, 04:20:43 pm
Units 800010, 11, 12 and 13 have seen some passenger carrying action on the two additional diagrams that operate from today.

800005 appears to be running on its own as a 5-car though as 800006 has no allocations, the 19:00 to Bristol will be cosy if that's the case.  I saw 800008 and 800009 marshalled in a formation where 1st Class was at the very front and very rear.  That would be the best option in my opinion, although I can see why they've gone for the planned formation they have - getting two units the opposite way round regularly would be a recipe for disaster.  Let's hope they can manage to form them correctly at least 95% of the time otherwise producing posters will be a waste of time and punters won't know where they stand (literally!).  I would expect things to settle down when more units are in operation.


Title: Re: IETs into passenger service from 16 Oct 2017 and subsequent performance issues
Post by: Four Track, Now! on November 13, 2017, 05:05:32 pm
Did you mean APT - Advanced Passenger Train?

No, ATP - Anus Transit Pectusculum (Latin: roughly translates to arse over tit).


Title: Re: IETs into passenger service from 16 Oct 2017 and subsequent performance issues
Post by: laird on November 13, 2017, 06:27:43 pm
In good news the Customer Information System seems to have had an update such that it reports the position of First Class in both 5 car sets (Front and Middle or Front and Rear were in use today). The posters could therefore be retired although more specific details about position where Front, Middle and Rear on platforms along the route might still be beneficial.
Also is something not working with the cariage side displays, I've noticed a few which appear blank in service ... perhaps they only activate at low or zero speed?


Title: Re: IETs into passenger service from 16 Oct 2017 and subsequent performance issues
Post by: IndustryInsider on November 13, 2017, 07:25:39 pm
800005 appears to be running on its own as a 5-car though as 800006 has no allocations, the 19:00 to Bristol will be cosy if that's the case.

006 was sent from the depot to attach to 005 for the 19:00 to Bristol, so a 10-car as booked.  Left 6 minutes late though.


Title: Re: IETs into passenger service from 16 Oct 2017 and subsequent performance issues
Post by: PhilWakely on November 14, 2017, 09:54:56 pm
I take it that Grahame was out last evening (and maybe also this) to witness the first IET in passenger service to grace the line through Melksham as the 1A37 (2127 Taunton to London Paddington) (http://www.realtimetrains.co.uk/train/C29080/2017/11/14/advanced) is currently reversing at Chippenham and then heading down to the Berks and Hants for its onwards journey to Paddington.



Title: Re: IETs into passenger service from 16 Oct 2017 and subsequent performance issues
Post by: grahame on November 14, 2017, 09:59:05 pm
I take it that Grahame was out last evening (and maybe also this) to witness the first IET in passenger service to grace the line through Melksham as the 1A37 (2127 Taunton to London Paddington) (http://www.realtimetrains.co.uk/train/C29080/2017/11/14/advanced) is currently reversing at Chippenham and then heading down to the Berks and Hants for its onwards journey to Paddington.

Nope, he wasn't / isn't but thanks for the note. Catching the 06:38 again in the morning so need my beauty sleep; rail meeting season is in full swing.


Title: Re: IETs into passenger service from 16 Oct 2017 and subsequent performance issues
Post by: grahame on November 14, 2017, 11:57:46 pm
I take it that Grahame was out last evening (and maybe also this) to witness the first IET in passenger service to grace the line through Melksham as the 1A37 (2127 Taunton to London Paddington) (http://www.realtimetrains.co.uk/train/C29080/2017/11/14/advanced) is currently reversing at Chippenham and then heading down to the Berks and Hants for its onwards journey to Paddington.


Quote
21:27 Taunton to London Paddington due 01:12 has been delayed at Chippenham and is now 17 minutes late.
This is due to a problem currently under investigation.

Oops


Title: Re: IETs into passenger service from 16 Oct 2017 and subsequent performance issues
Post by: SandTEngineer on November 16, 2017, 12:26:57 pm
I was out train spotting earlier today........ ::) :P

(http://cbrailways.co.uk/PhotoAlbumsPro/1379866239/802XXX%20at%20Saltash%2016_11_2017_1.jpg?cache=0.5897023466514313)
Image (c)2017 SandTEngineer


Title: Re: IETs into passenger service from 16 Oct 2017 and subsequent performance issues
Post by: grahame on November 16, 2017, 01:18:45 pm
I was out train spotting earlier today........ ::) :P

802101?

From Devon Live (http://www.devonlive.com/news/devon-news/brand-new-great-western-railway-779303)

Pictured on the sea wall at Dawlish ...

Quote
Railway expert Thomas Mills captured it as it travelled along the Dawlish seawall approaching Kennaway Tunnel.

He said that Wednesday is the first time that the IEP class engine has visited Cornwall.

The class 802s are electric and diesel-electric hybrids which run on electric power between London and Bristol and then switches to diesel power when moving into Devon and Cornwall.

I'm not sure that (m)any will be routed via Bristol?



Title: Re: IETs into passenger service from 16 Oct 2017 and subsequent performance issues
Post by: Adelante_CCT on November 16, 2017, 03:13:10 pm
Errrrr, isn't 802101 a 9 car? The one that has been outside North Pole recently


Title: Re: IETs into passenger service from 16 Oct 2017 and subsequent performance issues
Post by: grahame on November 16, 2017, 03:49:10 pm
Errrrr, isn't 802101 a 9 car? The one that has been outside North Pole recently

Yes - shouldn't believe everything anything I read on Devon Live


Title: Re: IETs into passenger service from 16 Oct 2017 and subsequent performance issues
Post by: bignosemac on November 16, 2017, 05:15:37 pm
This is 802002, taking test runs between Stoke Gifford and Penzance this week.


Title: Re: IETs into passenger service from 16 Oct 2017 and subsequent performance issues
Post by: SandTEngineer on November 16, 2017, 08:21:30 pm
The carriage end overhang is quite impressive and the number of inter-carriage connecting cables is considerable.  Unfortunately I was on the wrong platform to judge the stepping distance from the door to curved platform (Saltash Down Platform).  The doors do look very narrow.

As BNM has stated above this was five-car set No.802002.

(http://cbrailways.co.uk/PhotoAlbumsPro/1379866239/IET%20Saltash%2016_11_2017_1.jpg?cache=0.18802215883068873)
Image (c)2017 SandTEngineer


Title: Re: IETs into passenger service from 16 Oct 2017 and subsequent performance issues
Post by: Tim on November 17, 2017, 09:16:15 am
The carriage end overhang is quite impressive and the number of inter-carriage connecting cables is considerable.  Unfortunately I was on the wrong platform to judge the stepping distance from the door to curved platform (Saltash Down Platform).  The doors do look very narrow.

As BNM has stated above this was five-car set No.802002.

(http://cbrailways.co.uk/PhotoAlbumsPro/1379866239/IET%20Saltash%2016_11_2017_1.jpg?cache=0.18802215883068873)
Image (c)2017 SandTEngineer

My impression was that the doors were of comparable width to an HST door. 


Title: Re: IETs into passenger service from 16 Oct 2017 and subsequent performance issues
Post by: TaplowGreen on November 29, 2017, 08:20:12 am
Water pouring in again and an evacuation of one of the new trains due to "fumes" this morning apparently.


Title: Re: IETs into passenger service from 16 Oct 2017 and subsequent performance issues
Post by: ray951 on November 29, 2017, 09:18:24 am
Water pouring in again and an evacuation of one of the new trains due to "fumes" this morning apparently.

Was this on the 0700 Paddington - BTM? It left Paddington 27 late and has just left Chippenham 54 late.
The automatic announcements at Didcot said it was because it had arrived late from the depot (which appears to be true according to RTT).


Title: Re: IETs into passenger service from 16 Oct 2017 and subsequent performance issues
Post by: TaplowGreen on November 29, 2017, 09:38:57 am
Water pouring in again and an evacuation of one of the new trains due to "fumes" this morning apparently.

Was this on the 0700 Paddington - BTM? It left Paddington 27 late and has just left Chippenham 54 late.
The automatic announcements at Didcot said it was because it had arrived late from the depot (which appears to be true according to RTT).


If that is the same train then the passengers are telling a somewhat different story.....quite possible/likely that more than one have fallen over though.... it is a tad chilly after all.


Title: Re: IETs into passenger service from 16 Oct 2017 and subsequent performance issues
Post by: stuving on November 29, 2017, 10:05:27 am
Last Friday evening was bad too. One IET got in the papers after it was cancelled RDG-BRI (1C27, problem with the train (M8)).

However, this was an evening with loads of other absentees:
All day (and all HSTs, I think) a string of: "problem at the depot (MU)"
An HST over RDG-PAD: "1L76, problems with the doors (M7)"
And even this oddity for RDG-PAD: "1J99 incident at a level crossing (XD)"

It's at times like this you look to your shiny new trains to be the reliable ones, isn't it?


Title: Re: IETs into passenger service from 16 Oct 2017 and subsequent performance issues
Post by: IndustryInsider on November 29, 2017, 10:27:59 am
Water pouring in again and an evacuation of one of the new trains due to "fumes" this morning apparently.

Was this on the 0700 Paddington - BTM? It left Paddington 27 late and has just left Chippenham 54 late.
The automatic announcements at Didcot said it was because it had arrived late from the depot (which appears to be true according to RTT).


If that is the same train then the passengers are telling a somewhat different story.....quite possible/likely that more than one have fallen over though.... it is a tad chilly after all.

Different train.  The smell of fumes was on 06:33 BRI-PAD which was delayed by 9 minutes at Swindon as a result, though then lost its path (5 extra mins) and had a door issue at Reading (3 extra mins) and arrived Paddington 18 minutes late, so not a serious delay.

You are of course going to get the odd problem with brand new trains and crews that are getting used to them.


Title: Re: IETs into passenger service from 16 Oct 2017 and subsequent performance issues
Post by: martyjon on November 29, 2017, 10:58:01 am
Quote
" smell of fumes "

Didn't we have a similar problem when the HST's first entered service. The smell was attributed to the brakes and it was suggested that drivers power down earlier and  'coast ' for a distance before applying the brakes and wasn't the composition of the brake pads altered which to a large extent eliminated the  " fumes ".


Title: Re: IETs into passenger service from 16 Oct 2017 and subsequent performance issues
Post by: Gordon the Blue Engine on November 29, 2017, 11:04:26 am
I agree with II.  The IET’s seem to be settling in reasonably well, considering how different they are from HST's.  One of the main potential issues was poor timekeeping because of lack of power on diesel, but this has been largely overcome by running the engines at their full power rating (though no-one has said anything about the financial settlement with Hitachi to allow this).

Presumably the S&T interference problem on electric between Reading and Didcot has been fixed, again no information about this.  Maybe the “leakers” on the inside have been told to keep quiet.


Title: Re: IETs into passenger service from 16 Oct 2017 and subsequent performance issues
Post by: Tim on November 29, 2017, 11:13:57 am
Quote
" smell of fumes "

Didn't we have a similar problem when the HST's first entered service. The smell was attributed to the brakes and it was suggested that drivers power down earlier and  'coast ' for a distance before applying the brakes and wasn't the composition of the brake pads altered which to a large extent eliminated the  " fumes ".

IIRC, the problem of brake smells on the HST was mitigated by fitting a flap to the brake mechanism which closed an aircon intake when brakes were applied. 


Title: Re: IETs into passenger service from 16 Oct 2017 and subsequent performance issues
Post by: Thatcham Crossing on November 29, 2017, 12:42:59 pm
Quote
brake smells on the HST

The "hot brakes" smells still occur (or maybe I have a sensitive nose!) on HST's, especially when braking to a stop (or near stop) from 125. Quite noticeable sometimes.


Title: Re: IETs into passenger service from 16 Oct 2017 and subsequent performance issues
Post by: Adelante_CCT on November 29, 2017, 12:54:00 pm
Glad I'm not the only one TC!


Title: Re: IETs into passenger service from 16 Oct 2017 and subsequent performance issues
Post by: IndustryInsider on November 29, 2017, 02:02:07 pm
All depends on how quickly the brake is applied and whether the ‘flap’ has time to close or not.  Moving the brake controller straight to emergency or full service will give you the smell, going through the braking steps steadily by selecting initial, then step two, three etc. will mean little or no smell.  The driver sometimes doesn’t have a choice of course.


Title: Re: IETs into passenger service from 16 Oct 2017 and subsequent performance issues
Post by: Western Pathfinder on November 29, 2017, 05:14:57 pm
Back in the day when we were still fitting brake pads that had asbestos in the friction material there was no problem with the smell it was just the dust that could kill you !!...


Title: Re: IETs into passenger service from 16 Oct 2017 and subsequent performance issues
Post by: tom m on November 29, 2017, 07:13:27 pm
I hope the much lorded contact for the IEP diagrams with the penalties for not meeting the required diagrams is being enforced with these issues.


Title: Re: IETs into passenger service from 16 Oct 2017 and subsequent performance issues
Post by: IndustryInsider on December 20, 2017, 05:52:13 pm
Seats look a different colour on the later units being currently delivered.

I think I should retract that statement, as the different seat colours I saw were just protective coverings on seats of new sets delivered to North Pole.


Title: Re: IETs into passenger service from 16 Oct 2017 and subsequent performance issues
Post by: mjones on January 10, 2018, 07:24:55 am
Are there problems with IEPs switching to electric power? I'm on the 0659 from Didcot, still on diesel leaving Reading.

Edit: diesel all the way to Paddington.


Title: Re: IETs into passenger service from 16 Oct 2017 and subsequent performance issues
Post by: stuving on January 10, 2018, 08:35:09 am
Are there problems with IEPs switching to electric power? I'm on the 0659 from Didcot, still on diesel leaving Reading.

Edit: diesel all the way to Paddington.

Yesterday I did see two IETs pass through Reading, on proper hectomains electricity in and out. So it is possible. But I could invent a possible explanation for it not happening every time - say if depends on a small modification to the trains that not all have received. 


Title: Re: IETs into passenger service from 16 Oct 2017 and subsequent performance issues
Post by: paul7755 on January 10, 2018, 08:54:08 am
Are there problems with IEPs switching to electric power? I'm on the 0659 from Didcot, still on diesel leaving Reading.

Edit: diesel all the way to Paddington.
It was suggested somewhere a few months ago that some early drivers would not initially be trained on OHLE operation.  No idea if that was true, either then or now...

Paul


Title: Re: IETs into passenger service from 16 Oct 2017 and subsequent performance issues
Post by: IndustryInsider on January 10, 2018, 09:17:43 am
It was true, not sure if anybody has yet to be passed on electric operation now though.


Title: Re: IETs into passenger service from 16 Oct 2017 and subsequent performance issues
Post by: Louis94 on January 10, 2018, 01:53:59 pm
Are there problems with IEPs switching to electric power? I'm on the 0659 from Didcot, still on diesel leaving Reading.

Edit: diesel all the way to Paddington.

Yesterday there was a report of a missing sign on the Up Main for the changeover to Electric. Drivers were being advised at the Didcot station call or at a signal if not stopping not to raise the pantograph. This went on until this afternoon when normal working resumed. Not sure if this would be the reason though.


Title: Re: IETs into passenger service from 16 Oct 2017 and subsequent performance issues
Post by: stuving on January 10, 2018, 02:15:16 pm
Are there problems with IEPs switching to electric power? I'm on the 0659 from Didcot, still on diesel leaving Reading.

Edit: diesel all the way to Paddington.

Yesterday there was a report of a missing sign on the Up Main for the changeover to Electric. Drivers were being advised at the Didcot station call or at a signal if not stopping not to raise the pantograph. This went on until this afternoon when normal working resumed. Not sure if this would be the reason though.

Both the trains I saw yesterday with pans up were down services, so that would at least fit. There should have been an up train too, but it was an HST.


Title: Re: IETs into passenger service from 16 Oct 2017 and subsequent performance issues
Post by: Western Pathfinder on January 10, 2018, 02:45:06 pm
The Names Bond Michael Bond !
As of lunchtime today class 800 ,800010 is carrying the name of the author on one end and his character Paddington Bear on the other.
The names were unveiled today at Paddington by none other than our very own Mark Hopwood and the late authors daughter,on platform one at about 1pm.


Title: Re: IETs into passenger service from 16 Oct 2017 and subsequent performance issues
Post by: ChrisB on January 10, 2018, 02:45:17 pm
IET named 'Michael Bond' this lunchtime - video on twitter. I think the number was 800 010


Title: Re: IETs into passenger service from 16 Oct 2017 and subsequent performance issues
Post by: bignosemac on January 10, 2018, 02:56:02 pm
There are also vinyls of Paddington Bear on the doors of 800010.

Some from the modern movies and some illustrations from the original books.


Title: Re: IETs into passenger service from 16 Oct 2017 and subsequent performance issues
Post by: TaplowGreen on January 10, 2018, 04:52:12 pm

The names were unveiled today at Paddington by none other than our very own Mark Hopwood and the late authors daughter,on platform one at about 1pm.

What a missed opportunity for a long overdue "Meet the Manager" session at Paddington!

I'm sure Hopwood would have welcomed the chance to meet some of his customers face to face to discuss/get feedback on the current standard of service and all the promised improvements which they're noticing?

He could even have dressed up as Paddington Bear to cheer everyone up!


Title: Re: IETs into passenger service from 16 Oct 2017 and subsequent performance issues
Post by: johnneyw on January 10, 2018, 06:32:50 pm
The Names Bond Michael Bond !
As of lunchtime today class 800 ,800010 is carrying the name of the author on one end and his character Paddington Bear on the other.
The names were unveiled today at Paddington by none other than our very own Mark Hopwood and the late authors daughter,on platform one at about 1pm.

So, a confirmed sighting of a Mark Hopwood, one for the I Spy book!


Title: Re: IETs into passenger service from 16 Oct 2017 and subsequent performance issues
Post by: Timmer on January 10, 2018, 07:22:29 pm
So, a confirmed sighting of a Mark Hopwood, one for the I Spy book!
Second one in a week.


Title: Re: IETs into passenger service from 16 Oct 2017 and subsequent performance issues
Post by: Timmer on January 10, 2018, 07:24:25 pm
What a missed opportunity for a long overdue "Meet the Manager" session at Paddington!

I'm sure Hopwood would have welcomed the chance to meet some of his customers face to face to discuss/get feedback on the current standard of service and all the promised improvements which they're noticing?

He could even have dressed up as Paddington Bear to cheer everyone up!
I think you’ve got more chance of meeting Paddington Bear.


Title: Re: IETs into passenger service from 16 Oct 2017 and subsequent performance issues
Post by: TaplowGreen on January 10, 2018, 07:38:09 pm
So, a confirmed sighting of a Mark Hopwood, one for the I Spy book!
Second one in a week.

Mating season?


Title: Re: IETs into passenger service from 16 Oct 2017 and subsequent performance issues
Post by: stuving on January 10, 2018, 07:46:22 pm
So, a confirmed sighting of a Mark Hopwood, one for the I Spy book!
Second one in a week.

Mating season?

Do you mean as in " 'ere mate, I want a word with you... "


Title: Re: IETs into passenger service from 16 Oct 2017 and subsequent performance issues
Post by: johnneyw on January 10, 2018, 08:20:24 pm
It would take all the filming ingenuity of the Springwatch team and then some to produce Hopwoodwatch.


Title: Re: IETs into passenger service from 16 Oct 2017 and subsequent performance issues
Post by: TaplowGreen on January 10, 2018, 11:09:20 pm
It would take all the filming ingenuity of the Springwatch team and then some to produce Hopwoodwatch.

Endangered species are notoriously shy & hard to find, they tend to hide away......in this particular case the creature in question will occasionally emerge if there are cameras present, and if he's guaranteed back slapping & being tickled behind the ear he may well be visible for a few hours before disappearing again for many more months......


Title: Re: IETs into passenger service from 16 Oct 2017 and subsequent performance issues
Post by: Western Pathfinder on January 10, 2018, 11:17:12 pm
I just read that out loud in my best David Attenborough impersonation !..
Very funny well done TG.


Title: Re: IETs into passenger service from 16 Oct 2017 and subsequent performance issues
Post by: broadgage on January 11, 2018, 01:12:45 am
Perhaps the springwatch team could set a camera trap in the buffet car of an IET in order to photograph the elusive creature.


Title: Re: IETs into passenger service from 16 Oct 2017 and subsequent performance issues
Post by: a-driver on January 11, 2018, 07:34:34 am
Perhaps the springwatch team could set a camera trap in the buffet car of an IET in order to photograph the elusive creature.

A buffet car??  Aren’t they already extinct on an IET?


Title: Re: IETs into passenger service from 16 Oct 2017 and subsequent performance issues
Post by: Timmer on January 11, 2018, 07:45:43 am
A buffet car??  Aren’t they already extinct on an IET?
I think that was the punchline because they don't exist  :)


Title: Re: IETs into passenger service from 16 Oct 2017 and subsequent performance issues
Post by: martyjon on January 11, 2018, 08:12:23 am
From Journeycheck this am (11/01.2018)

07:12 Taunton to London Paddington due 10:14


Facilities on the 07:12 Taunton to London Paddington due 10:14.

This is due to a fault occurring when attaching a part of this train.

Will be formed of 5 coaches instead of 10.


Could be a cosy journey for some today particularly those with reservations in the half of the service that ain't there.


Title: Re: IETs into passenger service from 16 Oct 2017 and subsequent performance issues
Post by: Thatcham Crossing on January 12, 2018, 11:03:28 am
Just passed Doncaster on a (25 min delayed!) Virgin Eastcoaster to Leeds, and think I saw a 9-coach IET (green, but without GWR branding) parked-up which I think was 800303 (we were going quite quick past it!) - would that be right?


Title: Re: IETs into passenger service from 16 Oct 2017 and subsequent performance issues
Post by: stuving on January 12, 2018, 11:15:42 am
Just passed Doncaster on a (25 min delayed!) Virgin Eastcoaster to Leeds, and think I saw a 9-coach IET (green, but without GWR branding) parked-up which I think was 800303 (we were going quite quick past it!) - would that be right?

Yes, according to reports in Rail it's ready and waiting for its turn - after all the 36 800/0s are delivered. 800302 has been out and testing on the GWR, and 800304 is a-building at Newton Aycliffe.


Title: Re: IETs into passenger service from 16 Oct 2017 and subsequent performance issues
Post by: Thatcham Crossing on January 12, 2018, 10:15:44 pm
After that earlier observation, I also managed my first IET ride, on the 1730 out of PAD this evening.

Very noticeable how the 5 coaches nearest the buffers were very full as I boarded, and the front 5 were half empty, so that's where I went for my short ride to RDG.

Feels bright and spacious. Seats do feel hard on first contact, but after a few mins got used to it, and the seat shape seems to encourage good posture. Whether I'd be so happy after a long journey I'm not so sure until I try it, but the Virgin East Cost 225 and HST I spent 4.5 hrs on altogether today did feel more comfortable, but less spacious.

Acceleration felt impressive as we were passing OOC and we reached RDG in 24 mins. Overall quite impressed.


Title: Re: IETs into passenger service from 16 Oct 2017 and subsequent performance issues
Post by: Richard Fairhurst on January 12, 2018, 10:38:59 pm
After a couple of journeys I'm not too fussed about the seats - they are firm, yes, but not really any more than the seat I spend most of my day typing away in.

What concerns me more is the luggage space: it feels like the lessons of the Voyagers have not been learned. Coach-end racks are smaller than HSTs or Eurostars. The "bike and bulk" rooms are small and ill-conceived. There is no equivalent of the carriage C space on an HST, which was informally the space where pushchairs would go if no wheelchairs required it. Even the gangways seem narrower than an HST, and I've very often seen suitcases or similar stashed in HST gangways.


Title: Re: IETs into passenger service from 16 Oct 2017 and subsequent performance issues
Post by: IndustryInsider on January 13, 2018, 11:19:54 am
I have concerns over luggage space too.  Hopefully the 802s will have more, reflecting their usage on the Cornish routes.


Title: Re: IETs into passenger service from 16 Oct 2017 and subsequent performance issues
Post by: stuving on January 13, 2018, 11:26:47 am
I have concerns over luggage space too.  Hopefully the 802s will have more, reflecting their usage on the Cornish routes.

Is there any reason, or rumour, for thinking they will?

If so, the most obvious way to do it would be to replace (some of) those windowless seats across the aisle from a luggage rack by more racks - though they'd probably be the same design.


Title: Re: IETs into passenger service from 16 Oct 2017 and subsequent performance issues
Post by: IndustryInsider on January 13, 2018, 11:36:03 am
There’s something in the back of my mind about more luggage space, but that might be tied up with the buffet that was being considered before being dropped.


Title: Re: IETs into passenger service from 16 Oct 2017 and subsequent performance issues
Post by: martyjon on January 15, 2018, 07:31:30 am
IET's splitting at Reading now ;-


13:00 London Paddington to Bristol Temple Meads due 14:43

Facilities on the 13:00 London Paddington to Bristol Temple Meads due 14:43.

Will be formed of 5 coaches instead of 10 between Reading and Bristol Temple Meads. Will divide at Reading, front 5 coaches only for Bristol Temple Meads via Swindon.

Additional Facilities Information

This train will divide at Reading today, the front 5 coaches only continue to Bristol Temple Meads.


Title: Re: IETs into passenger service from 16 Oct 2017 and subsequent performance issues
Post by: grahame on January 15, 2018, 08:23:51 am
13:00 London Paddington to Bristol Temple Meads due 14:43

Will be formed of 5 coaches instead of 10 between Reading and Bristol Temple Meads. Will divide at Reading, front 5 coaches only for Bristol Temple Meads via Swindon.

Many times something that's intended as a one-off illustrates what could be done on a regular basis. Certain evening peak services from London are rammed to Reading then quieter beyond.

Why not take train like the 17:06 and 18:06 and drop 5 at Reading, coming back on an "opposite" service and then providing a further extra 5 cars out of Paddington some 90 minutes later?

Or how would the Cheltenham Spa and Bedwyn (or Westbury or regional train via Taunton) combine to use only one London - Reading slot during the day, with portion working beyond?


Title: Re: IETs into passenger service from 16 Oct 2017 and subsequent performance issues
Post by: charles_uk on January 17, 2018, 07:13:47 pm
I've now lost my IET virginity. As I only travel a single stop along the Cotswold Line - and as I sit most of the day at work - I choose to stand. The vestibule areas seem much smaller than on HSTs and 180s; it felt especially cramped with just six or seven standing today. The problem is increased since passengers for stations with short platforms are concentrated in just a couple of coaches. Early days, I know, but there is a sense of disappointment.



Title: Re: IETs into passenger service from 16 Oct 2017 and subsequent performance issues
Post by: welshman on January 18, 2018, 11:06:18 pm
MY first IET today.  CDF to PAD by HST and the reverse by IET so a chance to compare. 

Going (07:59) was mostly empty even though we added the cancelled 08:00 Paignton passengers.

Returning (15:45) was full so had to stand (with two others in the (small) vestibule until Reading.  The slightest movement triggered the automatic doors so I had to keep really still.  Got a seat then.  As is said, thin and hard but not uncomfortable although I felt a bit close to the bloke sitting next to me.  Better legroom than the Mk 3 airline seating.

Ride comfort seemed fairly comparable but perhaps not quite as good as a Mk 3.  The switch from volts to diesel caused a slight thump but apart from that was seamless.  The only obvious difference was some increase in vibration felt through the floor.  From outside, the IET sounds like a Voyager taking off but inside are a lot quieter.

The train manager's announcements were mostly inaudible, which was a nuisance as we were affected by a defect in the Down Main at Didcot but no-one could hear what was being said about it.  I had to rely on Journey Check.  I mentioned it politely to the TM when he checked the tickets but he didn't improve.

As we slowed down for Cardiff, he made the first audible announcement, which was a new one on me:

Quote
Some of the toilets are out of toilet paper.  Please check before you use the toilet.  We will replenish the supply when we get to Swansea.

No, don't.   


Title: Re: IETs into passenger service from 16 Oct 2017 and subsequent performance issues
Post by: IndustryInsider on January 19, 2018, 04:54:36 am
Returning (15:45) was full so had to stand (with two others in the (small) vestibule until Reading.  The slightest movement triggered the automatic doors so I had to keep really still.  Got a seat then.

I think I said in my review a couple of months ago that I was surprised floor sensors had been fitted for that very reason.  One of the big faults with the HST Mk III’s is when somebody is constantly activating the doors when stood in the vestibule, especially (as is often the case) if they are taking a mobile phone call, or chatting to a friend at what they think is an appropriate level due to the noise in the vestibule, but of course it’s not for anyone sat in the saloon area!

It’s a much less intrusive problem on IET’s though as the vestibule area is almost as quiet as the saloon area and the doors open almost silently compared with a huge ‘whoosh’ on many of the Mk III doors.


Title: Re: IETs into passenger service from 16 Oct 2017 and subsequent performance issues
Post by: welshman on January 19, 2018, 07:36:13 am
I'm not sure that there are floor sensors.  Isn't there an overhead sensor just above the door?   I tested and it seemed to me that arm-waving had the effect of opening the door.


Title: Re: IETs into passenger service from 16 Oct 2017 and subsequent performance issues
Post by: Thatcham Crossing on January 19, 2018, 08:37:41 am
Other fora suggesting there is going to be some sort of IET journey time record attempt between PAD and RDG this morning, the 1045 to Swansea being the train in question. Apparently 20 mins is the target and the sets involved are 800013 and 800021.

Only what I have read elsewhere so don't shoot the messenger etc.....worth watching on RTT etc though to see what actually happens.


Title: Re: IETs into passenger service from 16 Oct 2017 and subsequent performance issues
Post by: a-driver on January 19, 2018, 09:05:22 am
Be interesting to see if they hold it back a minute to ensure the HEx has time to clear airport junction then it’s a 10 minute gap. The train in front being the 1035 to Paignton


Title: Re: IETs into passenger service from 16 Oct 2017 and subsequent performance issues
Post by: bobm on January 19, 2018, 09:33:22 am
the 1045 to Swansea being the train in question.

That should shake the orange juice up in the Pullman then....  ;D


Title: Re: IETs into passenger service from 16 Oct 2017 and subsequent performance issues
Post by: GBM on January 19, 2018, 09:37:34 am
Other fora suggesting there is going to be some sort of IET journey time record attempt between PAD and RDG this morning,
Does this mean it/they would be drawing more power from the wires for that burst of energy?  Or am I just being too simplistic.  Only a limited amount of juice to be shared around surely.  Don't want to turn my PC and monitor off fearing a power surge!  :D :D


Title: Re: IETs into passenger service from 16 Oct 2017 and subsequent performance issues
Post by: IndustryInsider on January 19, 2018, 10:19:03 am
I'm not sure that there are floor sensors.  Isn't there an overhead sensor just above the door?   I tested and it seemed to me that arm-waving had the effect of opening the door.

Could be - not button operated though which has been the norm for new fleets recently.


Title: Re: IETs into passenger service from 16 Oct 2017 and subsequent performance issues
Post by: patch38 on January 19, 2018, 10:48:52 am
Be interesting to see if they hold it back a minute to ensure the HEx has time to clear airport junction then it’s a 10 minute gap. The train in front being the 1035 to Paignton

Actually left 1/2 minute early if RTT is to be believed


Title: Re: IETs into passenger service from 16 Oct 2017 and subsequent performance issues
Post by: Thatcham Crossing on January 19, 2018, 11:39:38 am
Quote
Other fora suggesting there is going to be some sort of IET journey time record attempt between PAD and RDG this morning

Unconfirmed at 21 mins. Seems this was to show what can be achieved within permitted line speeds.

It's going to feature in the next series of the Paddington "fly-on-the-wall" documentary, apparently.


Title: Re: IETs into passenger service from 16 Oct 2017 and subsequent performance issues
Post by: ray951 on January 19, 2018, 11:42:10 am
It's going to feature in the next series of the Paddington "fly-on-the-wall" documentary, apparently.
When I was at Reading a couple of weeks ago they were recording a Reading 'fly on the wall' documentary for Channel 5, so it could be used for that.


Title: Re: IETs into passenger service from 16 Oct 2017 and subsequent performance issues
Post by: Rob on the hill on January 19, 2018, 12:06:06 pm
From RTT, unfortunately it was 12 late by Swindon!
http://www.realtimetrains.co.uk/train/C55335/2018/01/19/advanced


Title: Re: IETs into passenger service from 16 Oct 2017 and subsequent performance issues
Post by: eightf48544 on January 19, 2018, 12:19:29 pm
Heard a rumour from fairly reliable source that one of the problems with the 5 car units is coupling two sets together.

Due to the streamlined nose the driver loses sight of the coupler on the set he's approaching so has to guided with hand signals.

The problem with auto couplers is they have to be given a fairly hard bang to couple but hard enough  to cause damage  or too soft not to couple properly.

Maybe they should fit a camara in the nose like a reversing camera on  cars with lines showing distance from the other unit.

Apparently that's why the 387s have the a white light on the right front level with the coupler to assist coupling.


Title: Re: IETs into passenger service from 16 Oct 2017 and subsequent performance issues
Post by: Rob on the hill on January 19, 2018, 02:51:10 pm
Heard a rumour from fairly reliable source that one of the problems with the 5 car units is coupling two sets together.

If that is correct then there would seem to be problems with both coupling and uncoupling, issues which Hitachi will surely need to resolve asap.


Title: Re: IETs into passenger service from 16 Oct 2017 and subsequent performance issues
Post by: Tim on January 19, 2018, 04:44:25 pm

The problem with auto couplers is they have to be given a fairly hard bang to couple but hard enough  to cause damage  or too soft not to couple properly.


I assume that the speed of these trains is electronically controlled.  If the drivers can't judge that reliably, then can't there be a setting on the console that gets it right every time?   


Title: Re: IETs into passenger service from 16 Oct 2017 and subsequent performance issues
Post by: TaplowGreen on January 19, 2018, 04:54:16 pm
Heard a rumour from fairly reliable source that one of the problems with the 5 car units is coupling two sets together.

If that is correct then there would seem to be problems with both coupling and uncoupling, issues which Hitachi will surely need to resolve asap.

"Can the units couple together" Seems a pretty basic detail for GWR to have ascertained during/after testing and before signoff acceptance into service?




Title: Re: IETs into passenger service from 16 Oct 2017 and subsequent performance issues
Post by: paul7755 on January 20, 2018, 02:45:35 pm
Heard a rumour from fairly reliable source that one of the problems with the 5 car units is coupling two sets together.

Due to the streamlined nose the driver loses sight of the coupler on the set he's approaching so has to guided with hand signals.

The problem with auto couplers is they have to be given a fairly hard bang to couple but hard enough  to cause damage  or too soft not to couple properly.

Maybe they should fit a camara in the nose like a reversing camera on  cars with lines showing distance from the other unit.

Apparently that's why the 387s have the a white light on the right front level with the coupler to assist coupling.
The Dellner/Scharfenberg pattern coupler widely used in the older Electrostar and Desiro fleets (and on 387s and 800s) doesn’t normally require a ‘fairly hard bang’ to make it work.  The coupling action is hardly noticeable in the stationary portion.

I think the forward facing white light on more recent electrostar variants was reported to be for track illumination for the forward facing CCTV.


Title: Re: IETs into passenger service from 16 Oct 2017 and subsequent performance issues
Post by: eightf48544 on January 21, 2018, 11:06:21 am
Basing my experience on the Chiltern Simulator coupling a 168! 


Title: Re: IETs into passenger service from 16 Oct 2017 and subsequent performance issues
Post by: Rob on the hill on January 21, 2018, 11:25:59 am
Heard a rumour from fairly reliable source that one of the problems with the 5 car units is coupling two sets together.

Due to the streamlined nose the driver loses sight of the coupler on the set he's approaching so has to guided with hand signals.

The problem with auto couplers is they have to be given a fairly hard bang to couple but hard enough  to cause damage  or too soft not to couple properly.

Video of IETs coupling at Swansea:
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=fiitEoXTrbE&feature=youtu.be


Title: Re: IETs into passenger service from 16 Oct 2017 and subsequent performance issues
Post by: 4064ReadingAbbey on January 21, 2018, 11:39:19 am
Basing my experience on the Chiltern Simulator coupling a 168! 
Pedant mode ON
These units use the BSI coupler, not the Dellner/Scharfenberg design.
Pedant mode OFF


Title: Re: IETs into passenger service from 16 Oct 2017 and subsequent performance issues
Post by: eightf48544 on January 21, 2018, 03:21:34 pm

Video of IETs coupling at Swansea:
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=fiitEoXTrbE&feature=youtu.be

Interesting guy signalling driver wasn't wearing Hi-Vis.


Title: Re: IETs into passenger service from 16 Oct 2017 and subsequent performance issues
Post by: IndustryInsider on January 21, 2018, 05:14:33 pm
Looks like it was a fellow driver on the platform.  No need for hi-viz.


Title: Re: IETs into passenger service from 16 Oct 2017 and subsequent performance issues
Post by: mjones on January 23, 2018, 07:11:25 am
0659 from Didcot this morning, definitely still on diesel approaching Reading... Starting to feel like there are some persistent problems switching over.


Title: Re: IETs into passenger service from 16 Oct 2017 and subsequent performance issues
Post by: ellendune on January 29, 2018, 05:29:33 pm
Does anyone know whether the different Class 800 variants are considered to require separate traction knowledge?  I am thinking in particular of the version for the Plymouth and Penzance trains.


Title: Re: IETs into passenger service from 16 Oct 2017 and subsequent performance issues
Post by: IndustryInsider on January 29, 2018, 06:32:57 pm
I don’t know for sure, but I would doubt it.  Unless the location of equipment and controls are radically different.  Small differences are to be expected but, like the 165/166 fleet, I don’t think there will be enough for them to be considered different.


Title: Re: IETs into passenger service from 16 Oct 2017 and subsequent performance issues
Post by: eightf48544 on January 30, 2018, 03:52:36 pm
Might be different rules for running on full diesel power between 800s and 802s


Title: Re: IETs into passenger service from 16 Oct 2017 and subsequent performance issues
Post by: mjones on January 30, 2018, 05:48:11 pm
Just watched a London bound IEP leave Reading with pantographs up but a distinct diesel engine sound from the end nearest me. Is there any explanation for that other than ongoing problems with switch over?




Title: Re: IETs into passenger service from 16 Oct 2017 and subsequent performance issues
Post by: stuving on January 30, 2018, 05:53:26 pm
Just watched a London bound IEP leave Reading with pantographs up but a distinct diesel engine sound from the end nearest me. Is there any explanation for that other than ongoing problems with switch over?

The fans cooling the input transformer do make quite a racket, though it's not exactly diesel-like. The transformer in one end carriage, while the diesels, of course, are only in the middle three.

I watched one going through Reading yesterday - definitely  electric in and out.


Title: Re: IETs into passenger service from 16 Oct 2017 and subsequent performance issues
Post by: mjones on January 30, 2018, 06:24:47 pm
No, this was definitely engine noise from the diesel coach next to the transformer coach, ie the second along from the end. I think other ones were running as well, but couldn't be sure. I had walked to the end to see if the pan was up because  I was  curious about the noise.


Title: Re: IETs into passenger service from 16 Oct 2017 and subsequent performance issues
Post by: drenahmeti22 on January 30, 2018, 08:45:49 pm
I saw 800204 go past me on Platform 6 today with its pan up and on electric.


Title: Re: IETs into passenger service from 16 Oct 2017 and subsequent performance issues
Post by: Adelante_CCT on January 30, 2018, 09:13:31 pm
I sure hope it was not using Platform 6 at Reading with its pan up  ;)


Title: Re: IETs into passenger service from 16 Oct 2017 and subsequent performance issues
Post by: devonexpress on February 06, 2018, 08:20:41 pm
Does anyone know whether the different Class 800 variants are considered to require separate traction knowledge?  I am thinking in particular of the version for the Plymouth and Penzance trains.

From the RMT letter that was posted elsewhere on the forum, I believe all IEP's have to be operationally the same. Of course if there are differences, GWR will provide training courses to drivers as and when needed.


Title: Re: IETs into passenger service from 16 Oct 2017 and subsequent performance issues
Post by: mjones on February 09, 2018, 05:27:58 pm
Does anyone know how IEP introduction is going compared with what was planned? My impression from the last couple of weeks is more consistent with HST introduction and IEP withdrawal!

Edit- just seen one at Reading,.London bound running on diesel...


Title: Re: IETs into passenger service from 16 Oct 2017 and subsequent performance issues
Post by: WelshBluebird on February 21, 2018, 04:14:37 pm
Quote
Other fora suggesting there is going to be some sort of IET journey time record attempt between PAD and RDG this morning

Unconfirmed at 21 mins. Seems this was to show what can be achieved within permitted line speeds.

It's going to feature in the next series of the Paddington "fly-on-the-wall" documentary, apparently.

Seems like GWR are using this as part of their social media talk! (For anywho can't or doesn't want to go to the Facebook link, its a speeded up cab view of the run).

https://www.facebook.com/gwruk/videos/10155136262406806/ (https://www.facebook.com/gwruk/videos/10155136262406806/)


Title: Re: IETs into passenger service from 16 Oct 2017 and subsequent performance issues
Post by: stuving on February 22, 2018, 05:37:58 pm
We had reports earlier of electric-mode IETs upsetting axle counters, and I rather dismissed this when it was raised on the grounds that these axle counters were designed to cope with electric traction and have met a lot of different varieties already. But I heard it last month being described as still happening, and now I see the same on RailUK forums today. So could it really be direct EM interference with the sensors, rather than comms cables (which was also reported before as affecting the axle counters)?

I already knew that the Thales Zp30 sensors work at around 30 kHz, which seems safely above any mains harmonics that should escape filtering. But, of course, the trains have other power frequencies, to drive the motors and within the inverters. AIUI the motor drive (DC to three phase, and the reverse) and the input rectifier/converter (which works in reverse as a DC to single phase inverter for regeneration) will be PWM IGBT inverters. Exactly what that means doesn't matter here, except that the IGBT switches are turned off and on many times per cycle of the power frequency, and that switching frequency is a potential source of interference well above 100 Hz.

You can hear this frequency: most modern trains sing (even diesels, though you can't hear it). Some sing with a wide vibrato, 800s without - I went to audition one last week in Reading. I've never been any good at "name that tone", so my judgement of the frequency as about 1 kHz may be wildly out. I didn't think to record it, and I don't seem to have anything (audio or mainly video) that would cope with this rather quiet sound. If anyone happens to have a recording of one, maybe it could be looked at.

If there is interference from a harmonic of the inverter frequency, who's responsible for stopping it? I reckon the train is. That frequency has no reason to be outside the black box with "inverter" written on it; it only has any function inside it. It should be filtered out - after all, one reason for putting it much higher than the power frequency is to make such filtering easier. So I can see two fixes for this: add some more/modify the filtering, or shift the switching frequency a little to move all the harmonics to new safe positions.

The rules about this are in a technical standard (EN 50121), Railway Group Standards GE/RT8015 and GE/RT8270 about who does what, changes, and resolving conflicts. The infrastructure controller (NR) draws up lists of the emissions levels the various bits of his lineside equipment can tolerate versus frequency. Similar lists are needed for trains' susceptibility to infrastructure (and each other!), which can be route-specific. These lists are then an implied part of any rolling stock or infrastructure equipment procurement.

In this case the trains are new, and so is the widespread use of the axle counters. Which was known about first and could be listed as pre-existing it's hard to say, and I can't see anything on those RGSs about setting aside a band for future use and protecting it from EMI. So it probably comes down to the same kind of pragmatic engineering that EMI always has - you all just have to ignore the lawyers, dive into the can together, and wrestle those worms.


Title: Re: IETs into passenger service from 16 Oct 2017 and subsequent performance issues
Post by: Surrey 455 on February 22, 2018, 09:19:46 pm
In this case the trains are new, and so is the widespread use of the axle counters. Which was known about first and could be listed as pre-existing it's hard to say, and I can't see anything on those RGSs about setting aside a band for future use and protecting it from EMI. So it probably comes down to the same kind of pragmatic engineering that EMI always has - you all just have to ignore the lawyers, dive into the can together, and wrestle those worms.

EMI means something very different in Hayes. They had a large employment base by the railway line manufacturing vinyl records, medical instruments and possibly other stuff.


Title: Re: IETs into passenger service from 16 Oct 2017 and subsequent performance issues
Post by: stuving on February 22, 2018, 11:46:17 pm
In this case the trains are new, and so is the widespread use of the axle counters. Which was known about first and could be listed as pre-existing it's hard to say, and I can't see anything on those RGSs about setting aside a band for future use and protecting it from EMI. So it probably comes down to the same kind of pragmatic engineering that EMI always has - you all just have to ignore the lawyers, dive into the can together, and wrestle those worms.

EMI means something very different in Hayes. They had a large employment base by the railway line manufacturing vinyl records, medical instruments and possibly other stuff.

Most things do mean something else if you want them to (and if you don't). And EMI did far more than that - TV (Schoenberg's system, which really worked), radar, stereo records, etc, etc.

I did visit Blyth Road, Hayes, a couple of times. It would have been more but by the time EMI 'joined' us in Thales they were already planning to move to Crawley. There they met up with MEL again, having split a bit earlier, so that TPWS became one of their products again. That work was always done a Crawley (no, it's a lovely place, really).


Title: Re: IETs into passenger service from 16 Oct 2017 and subsequent performance issues
Post by: stuving on February 23, 2018, 12:36:41 am
Anyway, I was talking to one of my informants* tonight, and apparently the proposed cure for this IET vs axle counter issue is to replace one of the cables with a fibre-optic one. I don't know if that's been tried, and may be the replaced cable there was talk about earlier.

Of course you can't just replace a cable - it has to be a link, including the bit that goes inside the box at each end. And that's only going to work for digital links, so not the cable from the rail-mounted sensor to the electronics unit (yellow mushroom). From there to the ACE (grey box) is not a standard data link - it's actually ISDN, with power supplies too. But it can be replaced by another physical link, as can those from an ACE to the neighbouring ACEs or into the signalling system.

That would mean that the problem is not so much due to being an axle counter, but having to be close to the track and joined with long cables. That's true of other equipment, so why just a few of these AzLMs and one train type should be giving so much trouble remains unclear.

* I should make clear that I don't have any internal Thales information on this - I was  referring to alternative local sources of rumours.


Title: Re: IETs into passenger service from 16 Oct 2017 and subsequent performance issues
Post by: Four Track, Now! on February 23, 2018, 12:48:43 pm
That work was always done at Crawley (no, it's a lovely place, really).

Sounds creepy to me...


Title: Re: IETs into passenger service from 16 Oct 2017 and subsequent performance issues
Post by: 4064ReadingAbbey on February 26, 2018, 07:11:24 pm
In this case the trains are new, and so is the widespread use of the axle counters. Which was known about first and could be listed as pre-existing it's hard to say, and I can't see anything on those RGSs about setting aside a band for future use and protecting it from EMI. So it probably comes down to the same kind of pragmatic engineering that EMI always has - you all just have to ignore the lawyers, dive into the can together, and wrestle those worms.

EMI means something very different in Hayes. They had a large employment base by the railway line manufacturing vinyl records, medical instruments and possibly other stuff.

Most things do mean something else if you want them to (and if you don't). And EMI did far more than that - TV (Schoenberg's system, which really worked), radar, stereo records, etc, etc.
Alan Blumlein worked there, I believe. And somewhere I have seen a video of GWR freight train shot from an EMI window with the sound in stereo.

I did visit Blyth Road, Hayes, a couple of times. It would have been more but by the time EMI 'joined' us in Thales they were already planning to move to Crawley. There they met up with MEL again, having split a bit earlier, so that TPWS became one of their products again. That work was always done a Crawley (no, it's a lovely place, really).


Title: Re: IETs into passenger service from 16 Oct 2017 and subsequent performance issues
Post by: IndustryInsider on March 10, 2018, 11:41:55 am
Just watched the 07:59 from Swansea, a 10-car IET, arrive at Paddington with the rear 5 locked out of use.  The front half looked wedges to the rafters.  The locked out train was then unlocked at Paddington so all 10 were in service as it boarded for the 11:30 to Bristol.  After most passengers had settled those on the rear five were then turfed off minutes before departure as the back 5 were then hastily locked out of use.  Front five wedged again and a 10 minute late departure due to sorting the resulting mess out.

If this sort of nonsense isn’t sorted by the summer then I dread to think how we’ll cope.  Utterly pathetic!


Title: Re: IETs into passenger service from 16 Oct 2017 and subsequent performance issues
Post by: grahame on March 10, 2018, 11:55:57 am
Just watched the 07:59 from Swansea, a 10-car IET, arrive at Paddington with the rear 5 locked out of use.  The front half looked wedges to the rafters.  The locked out train was then unlocked at Paddington so all 10 were in service as it boarded for the 11:30 to Bristol.  After most passengers had settled those on the rear five were then turfed off minutes before departure as the back 5 were then hastily locked out of use.  Front five wedged again and a 10 minute late departure due to sorting the resulting mess out.

If this sort of nonsense isn’t sorted by the summer then I dread to think how we’ll cope.  Utterly pathetic!

And on the way back ... or is that a different train doing the same thing??

Quote
13:00 Bristol Temple Meads to London Paddington due 14:41
Facilities on the 13:00 Bristol Temple Meads to London Paddington due 14:41.
This is due to a shortage of on train staff.
Additional Facilities Information
Only the front 5 coaches will be in use on this service today.


Title: Re: IETs into passenger service from 16 Oct 2017 and subsequent performance issues
Post by: grahame on March 10, 2018, 11:57:00 am
I recall a promise that all of the busiest trains in and out of Paddington would be 9 or 10 carriages - none of them would be just 5.   Were we promised all 9 or 10 carriages in use?


Title: Re: IETs into passenger service from 16 Oct 2017 and subsequent performance issues
Post by: Timmer on March 10, 2018, 11:57:36 am
Just watched the 07:59 from Swansea, a 10-car IET, arrive at Paddington with the rear 5 locked out of use.  The front half looked wedges to the rafters.  The locked out train was then unlocked at Paddington so all 10 were in service as it boarded for the 11:30 to Bristol.  After most passengers had settled those on the rear five were then turfed off minutes before departure as the back 5 were then hastily locked out of use.  Front five wedged again and a 10 minute late departure due to sorting the resulting mess out.

If this sort of nonsense isn’t sorted by the summer then I dread to think how we’ll cope.  Utterly pathetic!
There’s quite a few 10 down to 5 IETs listed on JC today. The sooner the 9 car IETs arrive the better. GWR are struggling to provide crew for one train so it’s no surprise they can’t provide two sets of crew for these 2 x 5 trains. Why not have built the 9 car sets first?

All that’s happened is a new problem has been created of trains running with no passengers. Hardly the image protrayed on the famous 5 adverts is it?


Title: Re: IETs into passenger service from 16 Oct 2017 and subsequent performance issues
Post by: TaplowGreen on March 10, 2018, 12:00:46 pm
Just watched the 07:59 from Swansea, a 10-car IET, arrive at Paddington with the rear 5 locked out of use.  The front half looked wedges to the rafters.  The locked out train was then unlocked at Paddington so all 10 were in service as it boarded for the 11:30 to Bristol.  After most passengers had settled those on the rear five were then turfed off minutes before departure as the back 5 were then hastily locked out of use.  Front five wedged again and a 10 minute late departure due to sorting the resulting mess out.

If this sort of nonsense isn’t sorted by the summer then I dread to think how we’ll cope.  Utterly pathetic!
There’s quite a few 10 down to 5 IETs listed on JC today. The sooner the 9 car IETs arrive the better. GWR are struggling to provide crew for one train so it’s no surprise they can’t provide two sets of crew for these 2 x 5 trains. Why not have built the 9 car sets first?

International rugby at Cardiff tomorrow and this combined with the usual lack of staff on a Sunday could prove very embarrassing for GWR if they've got nothing arranged........accepting of course that they are immune to embarrassment.


Title: Re: IETs into passenger service from 16 Oct 2017 and subsequent performance issues
Post by: grahame on March 10, 2018, 12:35:10 pm
All that’s happened is a new problem has been created of trains running with no passengers. Hardly the image protrayed on the famous 5 adverts is it?

Perhaps an idea for 1st April
... 5 car train will be carriages A, D, G, J and T for Anne, Dick, George(ina), Julian and Timmy


Title: Re: IETs into passenger service from 16 Oct 2017 and subsequent performance issues
Post by: martyjon on March 10, 2018, 12:47:11 pm
International rugby at Cardiff tomorrow and this combined with the usual lack of staff on a Sunday could prove very embarrassing for GWR if they've got nothing arranged........accepting of course that they are immune to embarrassment.

But they have, if you believe notices. When at Bristol Parkway yesterday afternoon there was a prominent notice advising of two extra services to the Rugby International but, mind you, I didn;t read the notice just noticed it so it could be a motley collection of assorted sprinters cobbled together running from BTM and BPW only. Have to have a look at RTT later.


Title: Re: IETs into passenger service from 16 Oct 2017 and subsequent performance issues
Post by: IndustryInsider on March 10, 2018, 01:23:17 pm
International rugby at Cardiff tomorrow...

Are you sure this time?  :P


Title: Re: IETs into passenger service from 16 Oct 2017 and subsequent performance issues
Post by: Gordon the Blue Engine on March 10, 2018, 01:50:28 pm
It may seem obvious, but one of the key tasks for a TOC is to recruit, train and retain enough traincrew to run the service they plan to operate.  Clearly GWR are failing miserably on this. 

In my day (and I think this goes for a few of us who post here) cancelling trains because of a shortage of traincrew was almost unheard of, even through the periods of training for HSTs and Turbos for example.  Why does GWR find the management of traincrew so difficult? 


Title: Re: IETs into passenger service from 16 Oct 2017 and subsequent performance issues
Post by: ellendune on March 10, 2018, 07:50:00 pm
It may seem obvious, but one of the key tasks for a TOC is to recruit, train and retain enough traincrew to run the service they plan to operate.  Clearly GWR are failing miserably on this. 

In my day (and I think this goes for a few of us who post here) cancelling trains because of a shortage of traincrew was almost unheard of, even through the periods of training for HSTs and Turbos for example.  Why does GWR find the management of traincrew so difficult? 


Didn't someone say that the number of train crew was specified in the franchise?  If that is true then no one would plan on supplying more or they would not get the contract. There is also a limit to how many people can be trained to drive at once and rail companies are competing for a finite pool of drivers. Of course GWR could improve their chances by giving better terms and conditions, but many of this parish want to make them worse by making Sunday work mandatory so there and DfT want DOO more the norm so there is a bit of a conflict here. 

It has been explained a number of times how knock on effects of the delays to electrification has compressed the the training on new (or cascaded) stock so that the number of drivers hours being taken up with training is much higher than could be planned - albeit over a shorter period.  It has also been reported that in some or even many cases, drivers are available, but they are not qualified for the stock being used.   

The DfT like other government departments is clear that it wants its contractors to cut costs to the absolute minimum without realising the lack of resilience that provides when things don't go to plan - in this case electrification delays and the consequent delays in cascading stock. 

This all sounds to me like a problem of people who think they can have their cake and eat it. But then that is government policy.

So then there is the matter of why GWR don't come out explain it all. 

To answer this we should perhaps consider who GWR's customers are.  Yes of course it's all of us! But we are what economists call inelastic customers, we are relatively unlikely to go elsewhere, because we have no alternative.

However, if you look at it another way their main client and the one most likely to take their business elsewhere is DfT since they could not operate the line without the franchise.  So if coming clean means you have to say its all the fault of your biggest customer who could mark you down for the next contract what do you do?


Title: Re: IETs into passenger service from 16 Oct 2017 and subsequent performance issues
Post by: TaplowGreen on March 10, 2018, 08:23:55 pm
It may seem obvious, but one of the key tasks for a TOC is to recruit, train and retain enough traincrew to run the service they plan to operate.  Clearly GWR are failing miserably on this. 

In my day (and I think this goes for a few of us who post here) cancelling trains because of a shortage of traincrew was almost unheard of, even through the periods of training for HSTs and Turbos for example.  Why does GWR find the management of traincrew so difficult? 


Didn't someone say that the number of train crew was specified in the franchise?  If that is true then no one would plan on supplying more or they would not get the contract. There is also a limit to how many people can be trained to drive at once and rail companies are competing for a finite pool of drivers. Of course GWR could improve their chances by giving better terms and conditions, but many of this parish want to make them worse by making Sunday work mandatory so there and DfT want DOO more the norm so there is a bit of a conflict here. 

It has been explained a number of times how knock on effects of the delays to electrification has compressed the the training on new (or cascaded) stock so that the number of drivers hours being taken up with training is much higher than could be planned - albeit over a shorter period.  It has also been reported that in some or even many cases, drivers are available, but they are not qualified for the stock being used.   

The DfT like other government departments is clear that it wants its contractors to cut costs to the absolute minimum without realising the lack of resilience that provides when things don't go to plan - in this case electrification delays and the consequent delays in cascading stock. 

This all sounds to me like a problem of people who think they can have their cake and eat it. But then that is government policy.

So then there is the matter of why GWR don't come out explain it all. 

To answer this we should perhaps consider who GWR's customers are.  Yes of course it's all of us! But we are what economists call inelastic customers, we are relatively unlikely to go elsewhere, because we have no alternative.

However, if you look at it another way their main client and the one most likely to take their business elsewhere is DfT since they could not operate the line without the franchise.  So if coming clean means you have to say its all the fault of your biggest customer who could mark you down for the next contract what do you do?

.......and if you were in any doubt, you can now see that it really is possible to be that smug.


Title: Re: IETs into passenger service from 16 Oct 2017 and subsequent performance issues
Post by: ellendune on March 10, 2018, 09:01:31 pm
.......and if you were in any doubt, you can now see that it really is possible to be that smug.

I try and explain that the system stinks.  Are you suggest is that I am being smug?


Title: Re: IETs into passenger service from 16 Oct 2017 and subsequent performance issues
Post by: grahame on March 10, 2018, 09:38:13 pm
.......and if you were in any doubt, you can now see that it really is possible to be that smug.

I try and explain that the system stinks.  Are you suggest is that I am being smug?

Describing a system doesn't indicate support for it - but can so easily misread as being its advocate.   However, there's a hugely useful function in describing a system if you want to understand it and improve it.


Title: Re: IETs into passenger service from 16 Oct 2017 and subsequent performance issues
Post by: eXPassenger on March 10, 2018, 10:34:50 pm
I came down on the 17:00 (2 x 5) from Paddington to TM today.  My first journey on an IET and I thought it went well.  I was happy with the seats, negligible diesel engine noise and the lower seat backs make the carriage far more open.

The 'catering trolley' appeared after Reading with an apology.  There was 1 trolley that had done the other 5 carriages before Reading.

Interestingly the boards at Paddington, RTT and the train displays stated we would stop at Didcot.  The guard announced at Reading that we would not and then took pleasure in telling the passengers to ignore the display and announcements as we were proceeding through Didcot at full speed.


Title: Re: IETs into passenger service from 16 Oct 2017 and subsequent performance issues
Post by: mjones on March 14, 2018, 06:11:30 pm
Another post on my why aren't IEPs using electricity theme: I'm on the 1730 Pad to Taunton train today. Electric power to Reading, then they started the diesels. Why not switch at Didcot?


Title: Re: IETs into passenger service from 16 Oct 2017 and subsequent performance issues
Post by: martyjon on March 14, 2018, 06:20:34 pm
Another post on my why aren't IEPs using electricity theme: I'm on the 1730 Pad to Taunton train today. Electric power to Reading, then they started the diesels. Why not switch at Didcot?

Driver error perhaps ???


Title: Re: IETs into passenger service from 16 Oct 2017 and subsequent performance issues
Post by: Adelante_CCT on March 14, 2018, 06:26:24 pm
Aren't the axle counters tripping somewhere between Reading and Didcot, as what happened between Maidenhead and Reading a couple of months ago, this affects the IET on electric, class 387s are fine. Last time a length of cable needed replacing to solve the matter, I'm guessing they haven't got round to doing this section yet


Title: Re: IETs into passenger service from 16 Oct 2017 and subsequent performance issues
Post by: WelshBluebird on March 15, 2018, 11:19:06 am
Travelled to Reading from Bath on Tuesday and pretty sure they switched to Electric at Didcot.


Title: Re: IETs into passenger service from 16 Oct 2017 and subsequent performance issues
Post by: phile on March 15, 2018, 11:30:01 am
It's only in the Down direction that  there is a problem with the axle counters.


Title: Re: IETs into passenger service from 16 Oct 2017 and subsequent performance issues
Post by: Bmblbzzz on March 15, 2018, 12:08:41 pm
Staffing: I don't know what's specified in franchises or any other industry-specific or GWR-specific factors (though I do remember reading something in the last days of BR about an impending shortage of train drivers cos they were all nearing retirement age, and how they were recruiting in women's magazines cos they reckoned women made better drivers; and more relevantly right now, I know someone who's just left his job to start training as a train driver – he's in his 50s too, but male) but wider factors must affect TOCs like other businesses. People generally are more mobile in terms of employment and don't expect to remain in one job for more than a few years, which is bound to be a problem in jobs requiring long training.


Title: Re: IETs into passenger service from 16 Oct 2017 and subsequent performance issues
Post by: IndustryInsider on March 15, 2018, 12:17:43 pm
Faster turn over of staff, especially drivers, is certainly costing the industry a lot of money compared to the British Rail days when it was considered a 'job for life' when you got your key after serving an apprenticeship as a 'second man' and often stayed working at the same depot for thirty or forty years plus before retirement.  There's not many of those old hands left now - and the arrival of new traction such as the IETs has persuaded some in their early 60s that can afford to take early retirement to go early rather than learn something totally new for only a couple of years. 

By no means all new drivers leave to work for a different company after a couple of years, or stop driving entirely, but the percentage is far higher now that it has ever been.


Title: Re: IETs into passenger service from 16 Oct 2017 and subsequent performance issues
Post by: Chris from Nailsea on March 15, 2018, 11:16:23 pm
Thanks for that very insightful insight, IndustryInsider.  ;)

In my day job (not railway) too, many qualified and experienced drivers these days are happy to 'pick and choose' where they work, and for whom.


Title: Re: IETs into passenger service from 16 Oct 2017 and subsequent performance issues
Post by: ellendune on March 15, 2018, 11:27:23 pm
Faster turn over of staff, especially drivers, is certainly costing the industry a lot of money compared to the British Rail days when it was considered a 'job for life' when you got your key after serving an apprenticeship as a 'second man' and often stayed working at the same depot for thirty or forty years plus before retirement.  There's not many of those old hands left now - and the arrival of new traction such as the IETs has persuaded some in their early 60s that can afford to take early retirement to go early rather than learn something totally new for only a couple of years. 

By no means all new drivers leave to work for a different company after a couple of years, or stop driving entirely, but the percentage is far higher now that it has ever been.

Not a time for a company to push for unpopular changes in working conditions then, regardless of unions. 


Title: Re: IETs into passenger service from 16 Oct 2017 and subsequent performance issues
Post by: devonexpress on March 17, 2018, 01:01:20 am
Its the same with aviation though, mainly because crew,pilots and engineers get treated like a piece of dirt by management.


Title: Re: IETs into passenger service from 16 Oct 2017 and subsequent performance issues
Post by: GBM on March 18, 2018, 08:26:02 am
Its the same with aviation though, mainly because crew,pilots and engineers get treated like a piece of dirt by management.
And busses. Management treat anyone below with disdain.  Comments from 'those below' as to run on time and improve the service are always ignored; it's those below who take the fallout from the public.


Title: Re: IETs into passenger service from 16 Oct 2017 and subsequent performance issues
Post by: eightf48544 on March 18, 2018, 12:02:38 pm
From my limited experience (2 Visits) the US has by and large a Service economy whilst the UK still has a servile economy.

Corrected Service for device.


Title: Re: IETs into passenger service from 16 Oct 2017 and subsequent performance issues
Post by: Boppy on March 21, 2018, 10:44:42 am
Looks like a London bound IET had broken down this morning at Reading.

I was at the station at 10 and all the passengers were getting off the train and crossing the bridge to board London bound ones on platforms 10 & 11. It was still at there empty at 10.30.


Title: Re: IETs into passenger service from 16 Oct 2017 and subsequent performance issues
Post by: Jason on March 21, 2018, 01:03:04 pm
http://www.realtimetrains.co.uk/train/C55758/2018/03/21/advanced (http://www.realtimetrains.co.uk/train/C55758/2018/03/21/advanced)  perhaps ?


Title: Re: IETs into passenger service from 16 Oct 2017 and subsequent performance issues
Post by: Boppy on March 21, 2018, 01:15:20 pm
Ah yes.  Ready to go then!  :-)

Thanks!


Title: Re: IETs into passenger service from 16 Oct 2017 and subsequent performance issues
Post by: devonexpress on March 22, 2018, 07:01:34 pm
Looks like a London bound IET had broken down this morning at Reading.

I was at the station at 10 and all the passengers were getting off the train and crossing the bridge to board London bound ones on platforms 10 & 11. It was still at there empty at 10.30.

So was it actually a break down or did it get delayed?  As sometimes people seem to claim breakdowns to make the IET's sound worse than they are.


Title: Re: IETs into passenger service from 16 Oct 2017 and subsequent performance issues
Post by: broadgage on March 23, 2018, 01:27:16 pm
Todays list of short train formations train formation updates includes several 5 car instead of 10 car due to "more trains than usual needing repairs"
Presumably these are 5 car IETs instead of 5+5 car IETs. Are Hitachi paying penalties for this, or is there some wiggle room ?


Title: Re: IETs into passenger service from 16 Oct 2017 and subsequent performance issues
Post by: Jason on March 23, 2018, 04:35:01 pm
The 1730 out of Paddington last night ran as a 5 car. A fellow commuter was on a 5+5 some weeks ago with one half out of service. That was due to lack of trained crew though.


Title: Re: IETs into passenger service from 16 Oct 2017 and subsequent performance issues
Post by: stuving on March 23, 2018, 07:53:20 pm
Todays list of short train formations train formation updates includes several 5 car instead of 10 car due to "more trains than usual needing repairs"
Presumably these are 5 car IETs instead of 5+5 car IETs. Are Hitachi paying penalties for this, or is there some wiggle room ?

As I recall, the performance regime as written in the MARA & TARA only applies to the full fleet. However, there may be something that applies at this stage lurking among all those words.


Title: Re: IETs into passenger service from 16 Oct 2017 and subsequent performance issues
Post by: YouKnowNothing on March 29, 2018, 05:19:57 pm
I've been trying to find the TOC performance targets but I'm sure they are not published. I also remember seeing a report on a different TOC lambasting the DfT for changing the target. Does anyone have a link to these?


Title: Re: IETs into passenger service from 16 Oct 2017 and subsequent performance issues
Post by: stuving on March 29, 2018, 05:55:11 pm
I've been trying to find the TOC performance targets but I'm sure they are not published. I also remember seeing a report on a different TOC lambasting the DfT for changing the target. Does anyone have a link to these?

Do you mean the details of how performance affects franchise payments to/from DfT, as well as breach conditions? There is lots of that - more than it's easy to make sense of - in the franchise agreement (https://www.gov.uk/government/publications/first-great-western) itself, mainly in schedule 7 (from p 306).


Title: Re: IETs into passenger service from 16 Oct 2017 and subsequent performance issues
Post by: bobm on March 29, 2018, 06:11:04 pm
(http://www.mbob.co.uk/rforum/padtau.png)

I know what they mean, and I expect you do too - but would the average passenger?


Title: Re: IETs into passenger service from 16 Oct 2017 and subsequent performance issues
Post by: YouKnowNothing on March 29, 2018, 06:21:40 pm
The targets are agreed with ORR but I remember reading a report late at night about a TOC (think it was GTR Southern) and the DfT changing the targets without publication. The report was chasterising the parties. I have a funny feeling it was a NAO report. I want to do an FOI to see if GWR has had its target changed and the rations for the change. It will give some creed to a party accepting the liability for the recent driver debacle.


Title: Re: IETs into passenger service from 16 Oct 2017 and subsequent performance issues
Post by: stuving on March 29, 2018, 07:27:39 pm
The targets are agreed with ORR but I remember reading a report late at night about a TOC (think it was GTR Southern) and the DfT changing the targets without publication. The report was chasterising the parties. I have a funny feeling it was a NAO report. I want to do an FOI to see if GWR has had its target changed and the rations for the change. It will give some creed to a party accepting the liability for the recent driver debacle.

I don't think ORR have any role in franchising at all. DfT have what they call the Public register of rail passenger franchise agreements (https://www.gov.uk/government/collections/public-register-of-rail-passenger-franchise-agreements), which they describe thus:
Quote
Rail franchise agreements are legally binding contracts between the Secretary of State for Transport and franchisees.

These rail franchise agreements are published as required by the Freedom of Information Act 2000. The franchise agreements are redacted as determined by the Secretary of State under the exemptions permitted by the Freedom of Information Act 2000.

Franchise agreements published on GOV.UK may not be the most current documents held by the department.

So they are agreeing with you that negotiated changes to the agreements may not be public. However, since they acknowledge the public's right to see them, they should answer a direct question as to whether there is a newer version and why they have not posted. Well, logically they should, if that counts for anything.


Title: Re: IETs into passenger service from 16 Oct 2017 and subsequent performance issues
Post by: YouKnowNothing on March 30, 2018, 07:07:51 am
You're right. The targets are agreed with the DfT with the ORR holding Network Rail to account 

"A primary role for us is to enforce consumer law and compliance with the conditions contained in Network Rail’s and train operators’ licenses, to help ensure that all rail users get the service to which they are entitled"

I think I'm going to need to do so more digging. It has really annoyed me that there has been no public announcement about the problems. Have any other forum users had any correspondence from any of the parties involved? I noticed that they have not organised a meet the manager since the problems escalated in October 2017.


Title: Re: IETs into passenger service from 16 Oct 2017 and subsequent performance issues
Post by: phile on March 30, 2018, 11:13:52 am
You're right. The targets are agreed with the DfT with the ORR holding Network Rail to account 

"A primary role for us is to enforce consumer law and compliance with the conditions contained in Network Rail’s and train operators’ licenses, to help ensure that all rail users get the service to which they are entitled"

I think I'm going to need to do so more digging. It has really annoyed me that there has been no public announcement about the problems. Have any other forum users had any correspondence from any of the parties involved? I noticed that they have not organised a meet the manager since the problems escalated in October 2017.

As I think I have posted already, I E-Mailed Mark Hopwood direct requesting a Media statement but an acknowledgement  came back from Customer Services on his behalf with the cut and paste reply that they would reply in due course.  I gave up any escalating as I sensed I would get nowhere..


Title: Re: IETs into passenger service from 16 Oct 2017 and subsequent performance issues
Post by: YouKnowNothing on April 04, 2018, 10:10:29 pm
Over the past few days there seem to be less trains cancelled for driver shortages but a lot more trains short formed??? Especially the 10 carriage ones operating as 5 carriage trains.... Driver shortage over but now a shortage of crews??

There also seems to be more carriages out for maintenance at the moment or is this just a smokescreen for the other franchises have started to get the trains promised from the redistribution of the GWR fleet?


Title: Re: IETs into passenger service from 16 Oct 2017 and subsequent performance issues
Post by: TaplowGreen on April 04, 2018, 10:20:17 pm
Over the past few days there seem to be less trains cancelled for driver shortages but a lot more trains short formed??? Especially the 10 carriage ones operating as 5 carriage trains.... Driver shortage over but now a shortage of crews??

There also seems to be more carriages out for maintenance at the moment or is this just a smokescreen for the other franchises have started to get the trains promised from the redistribution of the GWR fleet?

I think there's been more trains "than usual" in for repair for at least 18 months now, so God knows what constitutes "usual" (again GWR always avoid that question) the baffling thing is that the trains are much newer now, so why do they constantly need repair?


Title: Re: IETs into passenger service from 16 Oct 2017 and subsequent performance issues
Post by: Richard Fairhurst on April 04, 2018, 10:25:39 pm
First time today that I've travelled on an IET with the reservation displays/lights in use.

Unfortunately they were showing reservations for a previous journey in the opposite direction (I was travelling Charlbury-Oxford, the reservations were for Paddington-Oxford and similar), but still, baby steps...


Title: Re: IETs into passenger service from 16 Oct 2017 and subsequent performance issues
Post by: YouKnowNothing on April 05, 2018, 05:59:50 am
How about.... we know there is a problem with the quiet carriage signs were working on a solution.... since October... here's a solution buy some vinyl off eBay with the word quiet carriage on it. It doesn't take 6 months


Title: Re: IETs into passenger service from 16 Oct 2017 and subsequent performance issues
Post by: broadgage on April 07, 2018, 10:03:42 am
Half length IEPs seem to be a regular event now, it is starting to look a bit like the voyager introduction.


Title: Re: IETs into passenger service from 16 Oct 2017 and subsequent performance issues
Post by: Timmer on April 07, 2018, 10:22:20 am
Half length IEPs seem to be a regular event now, it is starting to look a bit like the voyager introduction.
9 car IETs can’t come soon enough.


Title: Re: IETs into passenger service from 16 Oct 2017 and subsequent performance issues
Post by: IndustryInsider on April 07, 2018, 12:21:15 pm
Half length IEPs seem to be a regular event now, it is starting to look a bit like the voyager introduction.
9 car IETs can’t come soon enough.

Yes indeed. Broadgage’s pessimistic outlook might indeed come to pass but I think it’s too early to make any assumptions until the 9-car sets are in use and the new timetable introduced next January.


Title: Re: IETs into passenger service from 16 Oct 2017 and subsequent performance issues
Post by: paul7755 on April 07, 2018, 01:34:03 pm
Half length IEPs seem to be a regular event now, it is starting to look a bit like the voyager introduction.
What never seems to have been made clear is the crew requirements.  If there’s a requirement for a second guard, train manager whatever, are they preempting a set locked out of use because there’s no one to operate it?

Paul


Title: Re: IETs into passenger service from 16 Oct 2017 and subsequent performance issues
Post by: grahame on April 07, 2018, 01:42:20 pm
What never seems to have been made clear is the crew requirements.  If there’s a requirement for a second guard, train manager whatever, are they preempting a set locked out of use because there’s no one to operate it?

There is a requirement for a competent safety-trained person in each separate gangwayed area of the 800 class 10 car trains (though not to operate the second set, I don't think), but there is not such a requirement where two 143s or 16x units are coupled.  That does not necessarily mean two train managers - ticket checkers are also "competent people" ... and at present more of them are riding trains rather than being on datelines, I believe. So that could be why there is very limited use (so far) of that new gateline at Chippenham, for example. 


Title: Re: IETs into passenger service from 16 Oct 2017 and subsequent performance issues
Post by: broadgage on April 07, 2018, 03:02:36 pm
Was this requirement for double crewing of a 5+5 IET known when they were ordered ? Or is it a later requirement, presumably by the trade union.
A cynic like me might suspect that this double crewing requirement might be a good excuse to operate a single unit when two units might have been better.
"we would have liked to operate a double unit, and this is a future aspiration, but due to staffing and financial constraints, some services will be single units"


Title: Re: IETs into passenger service from 16 Oct 2017 and subsequent performance issues
Post by: IndustryInsider on April 07, 2018, 04:25:01 pm
Known when they were ordered I believe.  As Graham says, it just has to be somebody deemed ‘competent’, so Ticket Examiners are fine.


Title: Re: IETs into passenger service from 16 Oct 2017 and subsequent performance issues
Post by: SandTEngineer on April 08, 2018, 10:44:56 pm
This has cropped up elsewhere: https://www.rmt.org.uk/news/members-updates/intercity-express-programme-iep050118/

Quote
INTERCITY EXPRESS PROGRAMME (IEP)
Our Ref:  HC/14/2

5 January 2018

Dear colleague

INTERCITY EXPRESS PROGRAMME (IEP)

I write to provide an update on the most recent discussions which have taken place between your union and Great Western Railway with regard to the Intercity Express Programme.

The company tabled proposals at a meeting of the On-Trains Divisional Council last month in relation to an interim arrangement for “Front-Set Lead” working. This matter arises from previous discussions at OTDC level which were aimed to utilise Catering Grades staff as “Front-Set Lead” on IET 10-car trains in place of the Ticket Examiners currently in position. As part of the package, the company proposed the following:

• Training competence as agreed • A full day training – half day classroom and half day on board to be undertaken by competent OBS managers or peer trainers • The Hosts will receive a £20 (and not 15%) flat payment for any day on which they undertake this role

Prior to the proposals being considered by your National Executive Committee, the following resolution was submitted by our Paddington No1 Branch:

“That this RMT Paddington No.1 branch notes your Circular No: IR/549/17 ‘Intercity Express Programme (IEP)’ (1st December 2017, REF HC/14/2) regarding the “temporary agreement and operational method” for GWR Class 800 (IET) 10-car sets previously reported by this branch.

We note the RMT National Executive Committee decision (not numbered or dated) referred to in Circular No: IR/549/17 fails to respond to concerns of this branch. In particular, RMT Padding No.1 Branch called on the NEC to revoke the “temporary agreement and operational method” for class 800 trains, inform GWR no such agreement exists with this union, obtain a risk assessment for class 800 operation and provide immediate advice to RMT members (Train Managers, Ticket Examiners, Customer Service Hosts and Dispatch Staff) on what steps they should take to protect their safety in the event of being rostered to work Class 800 stock.

We further note that a further communication ‘working of 10 Car IET trains’ (unsigned and dated 29th November 2017) purportedly from RMT On-Trains Divisional  Council seeks to clarify the use of ‘IET Trained TE’ staff as competent persons to work Class 800 (IET) stock. The failure of the previous NEC decision on this matter to provide clear leadership to our members on the operation of Class 800 stock is facilitating GWR’s operation of non-gangway 10-car formation (2x5) Class 800 stock without a Guard in the front portion of the train. This is a breach of RMT’s policy.

This branch notes the meeting due to take place between our union and GWR at Director Level on Thursday 7th December 2017 on the introduction of IET trains. We call on the General Secretary and NEC to uphold this union’s policy that a Guard be rostered to work on each section of non-gangway Class 800 stock. In the event that GWR refuses to implement similar arrangements to those that have successfully operated with class 180 stock for many years, we call on the NEC to inform GWR that we are in dispute over the operation of class 800 stock and to ballot our affected members for industrial action.”

Your NEC has now considered the matter and noted both the situation which arose at the OTDC and the above resolution. Having consulted with the GWR members and their representatives, the NEC has instructed me to inform the company that the proposals are unacceptable.

Further, I have also been instructed to seek an urgent meeting with GWR to discuss our objections and to demand that the arrangements involving the 180 stock are applied to the operation of class 800 IET trains. Your Lead Officer is currently making the necessary arrangements to hold this meeting.

Additionally, the NEC has also instructed all branches with affected GWR members to arrange special meetings for our Guard, Catering and Ticket Examiner members to discuss this matter, so look out for details of such meetings from your branch.

I will of course write to you again with details of any further developments with regards to this situation, but I trust this keeps you advised of all recent matters for now.

Yours sincerely   Mick Cash General Secretary


Title: Re: IETs into passenger service from 16 Oct 2017 and subsequent performance issues
Post by: Timmer on April 09, 2018, 06:17:11 am
Is the reason why quite a number of IET scheduled services are running 5 rather than 10 with one set locked out of use?


Title: Re: IETs into passenger service from 16 Oct 2017 and subsequent performance issues
Post by: phile on April 09, 2018, 08:58:58 am
Is the reason why quite a number of IET scheduled services are running 5 rather than 10 with one set locked out of use?


Unable to crew the rear unit.


Title: Re: IETs into passenger service from 16 Oct 2017 and subsequent performance issues
Post by: TaplowGreen on April 09, 2018, 09:38:58 am
Is the reason why quite a number of IET scheduled services are running 5 rather than 10 with one set locked out of use?


Unable to crew the rear unit.

Is this due to crew shortages? If so, any idea why?

Surely GWR knew how many crew would be needed?


Title: Re: IETs into passenger service from 16 Oct 2017 and subsequent performance issues
Post by: phile on April 09, 2018, 09:42:10 am
Is the reason why quite a number of IET scheduled services are running 5 rather than 10 with one set locked out of use?


Unable to crew the rear unit.

Is this due to crew shortages? If so, any idea why?

Surely GWR knew how many crew would be needed?

GWR know crew are needed for all the cancelled trains that are listed in the traincrew shortage thread. Over to GWR :) :)


Title: Re: IETs into passenger service from 16 Oct 2017 and subsequent performance issues
Post by: mjones on April 09, 2018, 12:04:58 pm
And still lots of diesel running under the wires between London and Didcot. Saw another one pull out of PAD this morning with engines on, pantographs down. The suspicion grows that there are still technical problems with the IEP that aren't being admitted to.


Title: Re: IETs into passenger service from 16 Oct 2017 and subsequent performance issues
Post by: IndustryInsider on April 09, 2018, 01:07:59 pm
And still lots of diesel running under the wires between London and Didcot. Saw another one pull out of PAD this morning with engines on, pantographs down. The suspicion grows that there are still technical problems with the IEP that aren't being admitted to.

ECS moves out of Paddington use diesel rather than electric for the short hop to North Pole, also track circuit issues on the down line near Tilehurst mean it’s diesel from Reading on westbound trains for the time being, rather east of Didcot.  Up trains are unaffected.  I continue to be impressed how smooth the changeover is, both whilst moving and stationary, and how quiet the diesel engines are both internally and externally.

However, I’m sure there are many technical issues still being addressed (the reservation system for one), and learning curves being, well, curved!


Title: Re: IETs into passenger service from 16 Oct 2017 and subsequent performance issues
Post by: Adelante_CCT on April 09, 2018, 03:09:31 pm
The problem on the down main west of Reading must have been fixed around a week before Easter as I have noticed many heading over Cow Lane on electric since then


Title: Re: IETs into passenger service from 16 Oct 2017 and subsequent performance issues
Post by: mjones on April 09, 2018, 05:58:38 pm
Sitting at Pad on the 1800 to Bristol, diesel engine rumbling merrily away!


Title: Re: IETs into passenger service from 16 Oct 2017 and subsequent performance issues
Post by: IndustryInsider on April 09, 2018, 08:23:17 pm
Sitting at Pad on the 1800 to Bristol, diesel engine rumbling merrily away!

Yes, I noted that one was as well.  The other dozen or so (including one ECS move to North Pole) that I saw today were all running on OHLE as they arrived and departed from Paddington.


Title: Re: IETs into passenger service from 16 Oct 2017 and subsequent performance issues
Post by: Oxonhutch on April 10, 2018, 05:50:56 am
Everyone in the rear half of the 1645 Paddington-Swansea was moved forward yesterday when the 'Under Guard' (Ticket Manager?) failed to show. Departed 9 late and cosy.


Title: Re: IETs into passenger service from 16 Oct 2017 and subsequent performance issues
Post by: Timmer on April 10, 2018, 06:01:51 am
Such a waste carting around five empty carriages which is happening all too often.


Title: Re: IETs into passenger service from 16 Oct 2017 and subsequent performance issues
Post by: TaplowGreen on April 10, 2018, 06:35:15 am
Everyone in the rear half of the 1645 Paddington-Swansea was moved forward yesterday when the 'Under Guard' (Ticket Manager?) failed to show. Departed 9 late and cosy.

"Under Guard"........is that a euphemism for a jockstrap?


Title: Re: IETs into passenger service from 16 Oct 2017 and subsequent performance issues
Post by: Surrey 455 on April 10, 2018, 08:57:41 pm
Is the reason why quite a number of IET scheduled services are running 5 rather than 10 with one set locked out of use?


Unable to crew the rear unit.

Is this due to crew shortages? If so, any idea why?

Surely GWR knew how many crew would be needed?

GWR know crew are needed for all the cancelled trains that are listed in the traincrew shortage thread. Over to GWR :) :)

The turbos never needed a guard or other member of staff in the rear train when they were joined together. Why do the IET's need it?


Title: Re: IETs into passenger service from 16 Oct 2017 and subsequent performance issues
Post by: bignosemac on April 10, 2018, 10:52:52 pm
Because RMT.


Title: Re: IETs into passenger service from 16 Oct 2017 and subsequent performance issues
Post by: IndustryInsider on April 11, 2018, 01:46:01 am
Turbos mostly run under DOO conditions.  Turbos on non-DOO routes where some of the platforms are long enough, i.e. the Cotswold Line, cannot run in multiple with both sets unlocked.


Title: Re: IETs into passenger service from 16 Oct 2017 and subsequent performance issues
Post by: WelshBluebird on April 11, 2018, 01:56:14 pm
Turbos mostly run under DOO conditions.  Turbos on non-DOO routes where some of the platforms are long enough, i.e. the Cotswold Line, cannot run in multiple with both sets unlocked.

What about the non gangwayed 150's?


Title: Re: IETs into passenger service from 16 Oct 2017 and subsequent performance issues
Post by: IndustryInsider on April 11, 2018, 02:24:46 pm
Not so sure on the West fleet - perhaps someone can elaborate?

From my own personal standpoint I think every section of a non-gangway train should have a competent person on board each section to be able to help the driver and/or train manager if situations like Lewisham arise.  Be they a guard, a ticket examiner, or trolley staff as long as they have had basic emergency training.  That would include DOO trains.  I can't see it being enforced any time soon, Chiltern for example operate trains of up to four non-gangway sets both DOO and with a Guard.


Title: Re: IETs into passenger service from 16 Oct 2017 and subsequent performance issues
Post by: Four Track, Now! on April 11, 2018, 08:53:14 pm
Turbos mostly run under DOO conditions.  Turbos on non-DOO routes where some of the platforms are long enough, i.e. the Cotswold Line, cannot run in multiple with both sets unlocked.

What about the non gangwayed 150's?

I had the experience a couple of years back of being on a non-gangwayed 150 from Bristol to Bath. I was in the front carriage and wanted to buy a ticket, as I had started at Stapleton Road, had no chance on that train of buying a ticket, and wanted to get away from Bath Spa ASAP. Nobody available between the two locked doors. I waited until Keynsham - a lot of passengers got on, but still no crew, so at Oldfield Park, I hopped off and got into the next carriage. There were three staff there, all of whom started the old "I thought Jim was doing the front" - "No, I'm here, I thought Betty was up there" - "No, I'm here..."routine, finishing with a sotto voce "Oh sh*t!". I got my ticket, and also the impression that this should not have happened, and would have been viewed most seriously had anyone official seen it.

But nobody was harmed.


Title: Re: IETs into passenger service from 16 Oct 2017 and subsequent performance issues
Post by: bignosemac on April 11, 2018, 09:14:12 pm
The inaugural passenger service runs for the GWR Class 802/0 (five car sets) are scheduled to be on July 16th 2018. Diagrams as follows:

1A72 0553 Plymouth to London Paddington
1D20 0950 London Paddington to Oxford
1P26 1201 Oxford to London Paddington
1C89 1633 London Paddington to Exeter St Davids
1A98 1955 Exeter St Davids to London Paddington

1C04 0730 London Paddington to Penzance
1A93 1400 Penzance to London Paddington
1C96 2003 London Paddington to Plymouth

Each of those 2 diagrams will be worked as 2x five car sets.

Usual caveats for this information. Not yet confirmed by GWR.


Title: Re: IETs into passenger service from 16 Oct 2017 and subsequent performance issues
Post by: Four Track, Now! on April 11, 2018, 10:36:10 pm
The inaugural passenger service runs for the GWR Class 802/0 (five car sets) are scheduled to be on July 16th 2018. Diagrams as follows:

1A72 0553 Plymouth to London Paddington
1D20 0950 London Paddington to Oxford
1P26 1201 Oxford to London Paddington
1C89 1633 London Paddington to Exeter St Davids
1A98 1955 Exeter St Davids to London Paddington

1C04 0730 London Paddington to Penzance
1A93 1400 Penzance to London Paddington
1C96 2003 London Paddington to Plymouth

Each of those 2 diagrams will be worked as 2x five car sets.

Usual caveats for this information. Not yet confirmed by GWR.

Crikey! They're not easing them in slowly, are they!


Title: Re: IETs into passenger service from 16 Oct 2017 and subsequent performance issues
Post by: martyjon on April 13, 2018, 06:42:56 am
Played skittles Tuesday night and my pair for the night had requested to be first on as he was off to London after he'd played.

Whilst playing he told me of his wife's and his trip to London last weekend for a family event.

Arrived at Bristol Parkway for their booked train and found it was front 5 carriages only and of course their booked seats were in the rear 5 carriages so passengers surged along the platform as the train came in and it was a slow process alighting and boarding and he said to his wife, "in here", and they both got into first class as there was clearly few, if any, seats available in standard class. No ticket check to Swindon.

At Swindon an elderly couple of which the male was visually impaired got on with Customer Assistance and he clearly heard the assisting GWR staff member say to the elderly lady that if there was any problem to show their printed itinerary to the ticket inspector.

By Didcot still no ticket check and there about a dozen people came into the carriage and sat down and he said, "looked as if they were intent on an evening out in town", which turned out to be Reading which was again reached without a ticket check.

Leaving Reading he heard a voice, "All tickets please", so he got his wallet out, extracted the tickets and seat reservations from it and place them on the table. The ticket examiner picked up the tickets and remarked that they were standard class and this is first class. "Yes," he said, " and those reservations are for seats in a carriage back there", whilst he waved a hand above his head pointing to the rear of the train. "Oh, that doesn't give you the right to occupy first class seats in its place", said the ticket inspector. He said, "as the ticket inspector was saying this he opened his wallet, extracted a business card and handed it to the ticket inspector with the words well you get your supervisor to write to me at my business address to explain why not". The ticket inspector insisted that he would have to excess fare them but he could complain and if his complaint was valid the excess fare would be refunded. He said. "pointing to the business card in the ticket examiners hand I told him that he had my business card and for his superiors to write to me and include an invoice for the excess fare if they wish and concluded with the words matter adjourned". The ticket examiner carried on to the remaining passengers. As they were getting off the train at Paddington as his wife walked in front of him towing her Easyjet compliant cabin baggage case he noticed her case had run over a piece of card on the floor of the carriage and he stooped to pick it up and it was his business card. I laughed knowing that his business card reads, name and qualifications, Barrister, and the chambers address from which he conducts his professional services.

Their Sunday return was less eventful, their booked train was cancelled and they got on an earlier service on which they found two seats together.

He concluded that the weekends London visit was the third this year that he had made which would result in a full refund and he'd had a few more where one journey or other has been disrupted resulting in a complaint. 


Title: Re: IETs into passenger service from 16 Oct 2017 and subsequent performance issues
Post by: broadgage on April 13, 2018, 11:18:20 am
I am not convinced that the new trains being shorter* gives an automatic entitlement to use first class with a standard class ticket. Nor does the failure of GWR to honour reservations give such an entitlement, even for barristers.

The train manager might of course permit this at their discretion, but it is not an entitlement.

*I refer here to the length of train available for passenger use, the fact that another 5 vehicles are attached but not available for use is not relevant from the passengers point of view.



Title: Re: IETs into passenger service from 16 Oct 2017 and subsequent performance issues
Post by: Sixty3Closure on April 13, 2018, 11:58:40 am
It's a pity that the usual consumer protection doesn't apply to train tickets. I think I'd be quite frustrated if I've reserved a seat on a busy train for not only my reservation to have disappeared but the train to be half length. Probably wouldn't go sit in First Class though but then I'm still relatively fit and healthy.

It does tie in with the other post though about how some standard reservations were in first class carriages because of rolling stock changes but people were charged an upgrade. I think in that case I would have agreed with the Barrister.


Title: Re: IETs into passenger service from 16 Oct 2017 and subsequent performance issues
Post by: grahame on April 13, 2018, 12:23:34 pm
I am not convinced that the new trains being shorter* gives an automatic entitlement to use first class with a standard class ticket. Nor does the failure of GWR to honour reservations give such an entitlement

Current Conndtions of Travel:

Unless you have made a reservation please note that your Ticket does not automatically entitle you to a seat, and at busy times you may have to stand. You will not be entitled to any refund in these cases unless you hold a first class Ticket and no first class seats were available on a train service where the timetable indicated that first class seats would be provided. More information on the refund to which you are entitled in such circumstances can be found in section 31 of these Conditions.

and

Unless Train Company staff, or notices on the train give you specific permission, you cannot travel in first class accommodation (including standing in corridors or passageways) with a standard class Ticket. This applies even if there are no vacant seats in standard class.

Conditions of Carriage to 2016

Travelling in first class accommodation with a standard class ticket. If you have a standard class ticket (other than a Season Ticket), no standard class accommodation is available, and staff on that train give their permission, then you may travel in first class accommodation (or the equivalent) where this is available without extra charge.



Current conditions seem to make it very clear that you cannot travel in First class on a standard class ticket unless given permission by train company staff.   I might agree that's pretty harsh if you've reserved a seat, but the carriage it's in isn't available and there are no other standard class seats available on the train, but I think the correct action in such a case may be to either reclaim to ask a member of the TOC staff.

Part of me asks "why should a barrister be able to bluster his way through a circumstance that the rest of us would just give up on and pay up", but then the other part of me thinks "thank goodness someone stands up for his rights" (even though it sounds like he wan't in his rights!!).  

As described, the ticket examiner clearly made his pragmatic decision not to take the matter further at some point between moving on and the train arriving into London - he's perfectly entitled to do so.   His error was in dropping (in error, I would suspect) the barrister's business card.



Title: Re: IETs into passenger service from 16 Oct 2017 and subsequent performance issues
Post by: Four Track, Now! on April 13, 2018, 12:37:26 pm
I laughed knowing that his business card reads, name and qualifications, Barrister, and the chambers address from which he conducts his professional services.

I must get some of those cards printed. Is it two 's's in Barisster? Or I could try my spiel "Smell the coffee, my friend. I am a leading barista..."

I am not convinced that the new trains being shorter* gives an automatic entitlement to use first class with a standard class ticket. Nor does the failure of GWR to honour reservations give such an entitlement

As described, the ticket examiner clearly made his pragmatic decision not to take the matter further at some point between moving on and the train arriving into London - he's perfectly entitled to do so.   His error was in dropping (in error, I would suspect) the barrister's business card.

Agreed. No-one wants a rum pole up the bailey. Losing the card has the hallmarks of a diplomatic accident.


Title: Re: IETs into passenger service from 16 Oct 2017 and subsequent performance issues
Post by: bignosemac on April 13, 2018, 04:23:26 pm
It's a pity that the usual consumer protection doesn't apply to train tickets.

It does.

The Consumer Rights Act 2015 applies to rail travel. If the standard of service does not meet expectations customers can seek redress under the act. Its not just about compensation for delays.

If a train operator has failed to apply reasonable care and skill in providing a service then redress can be sought. First port of call is the operator. If you are not happy with their response then the next step is the (soon to go live) Rail Ombudsmen. Ultimately a passenger can seek redress through the courts.

And yes, a seat reservation not being honoured is an issue that could be covered by the Consumer Rights Act 2015.

We've already seen success in the courts for redress for delays that were outwith a train operators existing Delay Repay scheme. A passenger successfully sued for a string of delays less than 30 minutes each. The operator failed to defend the action and bailiffs were appointed to seize assets. Belatedly the operator paid the judgement.


Title: Re: IETs into passenger service from 16 Oct 2017 and subsequent performance issues
Post by: YouKnowNothing on April 13, 2018, 05:15:55 pm
https://www.parliament.uk/business/publications/written-questions-answers-statements/written-question/Lords/2018-03-27/HL6706/

Saw this and thought of you lot


Title: Re: IETs into passenger service from 16 Oct 2017 and subsequent performance issues
Post by: grahame on April 13, 2018, 06:41:33 pm
We've already seen success in the courts for redress for delays that were outwith a train operators existing Delay Repay scheme. A passenger successfully sued for a string of delays less than 30 minutes each. The operator failed to defend the action and bailiffs were appointed to seize assets. Belatedly the operator paid the judgement.

Made The BBC (http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-england-suffolk-43751468) today

Quote
A commuter who sued a train firm over delays has received compensation after a court threatened to send in bailiffs to seize its assets.

Seph Pochin, 43, of Halesworth, Suffolk, has received a cheque for £462 from Greater Anglia (GA) after suing them over "appalling" delays.

He said he wanted others to use the same consumer legislation to force train firms to run a better service.

GA said it was "sorry that Mr Pochin felt the need to take this action."


Title: Re: IETs into passenger service from 16 Oct 2017 and subsequent performance issues
Post by: TaplowGreen on April 13, 2018, 06:50:15 pm
We've already seen success in the courts for redress for delays that were outwith a train operators existing Delay Repay scheme. A passenger successfully sued for a string of delays less than 30 minutes each. The operator failed to defend the action and bailiffs were appointed to seize assets. Belatedly the operator paid the judgement.

Made The BBC (http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-england-suffolk-43751468) today

Quote
A commuter who sued a train firm over delays has received compensation after a court threatened to send in bailiffs to seize its assets.

Seph Pochin, 43, of Halesworth, Suffolk, has received a cheque for £462 from Greater Anglia (GA) after suing them over "appalling" delays.

He said he wanted others to use the same consumer legislation to force train firms to run a better service.

GA said it was "sorry that Mr Pochin felt the need to take this action."

"Sorry that Mr Pochin felt the need to take this action" - is it possible to be any more patronising?


Title: Re: IETs into passenger service from 16 Oct 2017 and subsequent performance issues
Post by: eXPassenger on April 13, 2018, 07:51:55 pm
If I was a consumer rights lawyer commuting on the Cotswold Line I think I would have plenty of business cards ready.


Title: Re: IETs into passenger service from 16 Oct 2017 and subsequent performance issues
Post by: Jason on April 19, 2018, 06:13:44 pm
1A23 has decided to park up on P8 at Reading


Title: Re: IETs into passenger service from 16 Oct 2017 and subsequent performance issues
Post by: IndustryInsider on April 19, 2018, 06:29:41 pm
1A23 has decided to park up on P8 at Reading

Due to dragging brakes.


Title: Re: IETs into passenger service from 16 Oct 2017 and subsequent performance issues
Post by: devonexpress on April 19, 2018, 11:51:31 pm
If the issue with supposedly 10 car sets running round as 5 car sets keeps continuing GWR are either going to have to renegotiate with the unions, or order extra carriages to make these sets 7 or 8 cars. Although this is a DFT balls up, it is completely unfair to paying passengers to go from standing up on a HST, to possibly not even getting on the train because its only 5 coaches.

Where are all these promised extra onboard staff that are meant to be coming? Maybe GWR's recruitment process is too fussy?


Title: Re: IETs into passenger service from 16 Oct 2017 and subsequent performance issues
Post by: Boppy on May 03, 2018, 09:01:28 am
Just saw 802001 pass through Reading non-stop at around 08:55.

Looks like most of the seats had their protective covers on still.

Is this one of the 802 units due to come into service shortly?


Title: Re: IETs into passenger service from 16 Oct 2017 and subsequent performance issues
Post by: phile on May 03, 2018, 09:44:48 am
GWR Journey Check has now come up with new explanation for 5 vice 10 HSTs:-

The train is running in short formation due to alterations yesterday, which prevented trains ending yesterday at the correct depot last night for today's service.


Title: Re: IETs into passenger service from 16 Oct 2017 and subsequent performance issues
Post by: broadgage on May 03, 2018, 09:57:31 am
If the issue with supposedly 10 car sets running round as 5 car sets keeps continuing GWR are either going to have to renegotiate with the unions, or order extra carriages to make these sets 7 or 8 cars. Although this is a DFT balls up, it is completely unfair to paying passengers to go from standing up on a HST, to possibly not even getting on the train because its only 5 coaches.

Where are all these promised extra onboard staff that are meant to be coming? Maybe GWR's recruitment process is too fussy?

And presumably no one could POSSIBLY have foreseen the need for these extra staff, and therefore started recruiting and training them in advance.
The late delivery of the new shorter trains should have given a bit of a margin for error and thereby increased the chances of being prepared.

I am a bit doubtful about extending the half length units to 7 or 8 car. Whilst 7/8 vehicles is a clear improvement on 5 vehicles, it is still a downgrade from the full length 5+5 or 9 car units. 7 or 8 car IEPs could not run in multiple on most routes due to platform length limits.
My previous experience of the wonders of "flexible train lengths" together with natural cynicism, leads me to suspect that if GWR DID have 7/8 car units, that these would be used instead of full length trains, rather than as an improvement over a half length train.

A better idea would be to lengthen some 5 car units to a full 9 car. That would still give a uniform fleet of only 2 train types, but would increase total capacity.


Title: Re: IETs into passenger service from 16 Oct 2017 and subsequent performance issues
Post by: Adelante_CCT on May 03, 2018, 10:10:32 am
Just saw 802001 pass through Reading non-stop at around 08:55.

Looks like most of the seats had their protective covers on still.

Is this one of the 802 units due to come into service shortly?

Due to be in service in July


Title: Re: IETs into passenger service from 16 Oct 2017 and subsequent performance issues
Post by: IndustryInsider on May 03, 2018, 10:12:05 am
The late delivery of the new shorter trains should have given a bit of a margin for error and thereby increased the chances of being prepared.

Indeed.  I’ve said before that I think we would have been hopelessly underprepared had 800s, 387s and 365s all arrived as originally planned.

Quote
A better idea would be to lengthen some 5 car units to a full 9 car. That would still give a uniform fleet of only 2 train types, but would increase total capacity.

That would be a possibility, or you could extend some of the 5-Cars to 8-Cars, and extend the 9-Cars to 10-Cars, so you’d have a flexible fleet of 5, 8 and 10 car trains very much like Virgin West Coast has.

Plenty of options if needed, though we don’t know whether there will be the need for anything to be done yet.  Especially if GWR continues to do its best to put people off travelling.


Title: Re: IETs into passenger service from 16 Oct 2017 and subsequent performance issues
Post by: Timmer on May 03, 2018, 10:22:28 am
That would be a possibility, or you could extend some of the 5-Cars to 8-Cars, and extend the 9-Cars to 10-Cars, so you’d have a flexible fleet of 5, 8 and 10 car trains very much like Virgin West Coast has.
Wouldn't be surprised to see something like that proposed either in the Direct Award or further down the line in the new franchise.


Title: Re: IETs into passenger service from 16 Oct 2017 and subsequent performance issues
Post by: TaplowGreen on May 16, 2018, 09:32:03 pm
Anyone know anything about this?

https://twitter.com/RailLeaks/status/996773135583252480?s=19


Title: Re: IETs into passenger service from 16 Oct 2017 and subsequent performance issues
Post by: SandTEngineer on May 16, 2018, 09:37:24 pm
Anyone know anything about this?

https://twitter.com/RailLeaks/status/996773135583252480?s=19

...which says (for those of us who don't do twitter)?.... ::)


Title: Re: IETs into passenger service from 16 Oct 2017 and subsequent performance issues
Post by: mjones on May 16, 2018, 09:44:58 pm
"We have received a tip off that there is a safety critical issue with [GWRs] IET fleet. Because of this GWR will be running their HSTs until early 2020"

Posted by "Rail Leaks  @RailLeaks  Releasing information about Uk Mainline and Heritage Railways."


Title: Re: IETs into passenger service from 16 Oct 2017 and subsequent performance issues
Post by: grahame on May 16, 2018, 10:17:17 pm
"We have received a tip off that there is a safety critical issue with [GWRs] IET fleet. Because of this GWR will be running their HSTs until early 2020"

Posted by "Rail Leaks  @RailLeaks  Releasing information about Uk Mainline and Heritage Railways."

See our thread on this in "The Rumour Mill" from 5 days ago - http://www.firstgreatwestern.info/coffeeshop/index.php?topic=19789.0

Cold water poured on in there, but on the other hand there is rarely smoke without some sort of fire.


Title: Re: IETs into passenger service from 16 Oct 2017 and subsequent performance issues
Post by: bignosemac on May 16, 2018, 10:36:26 pm
Safety critical but not such that they are being suspended from service.

Can't be that critical.


Title: Re: IETs into passenger service from 16 Oct 2017 and subsequent performance issues
Post by: broadgage on May 17, 2018, 05:20:28 am
Safety critical but not such that they are being suspended from service.

Can't be that critical.

Indeed, as is well known I do not think a lot of the new trains, and I suspect that reliability/availability may fall short of that expected. However a "safety critical flaw" seems a bit unlikely as they are still running in passenger service.
Of course "safety critical" might be only in the eyes of the RMT ! Most strikes or threats thereof are over "safety" though a big enough pay rise can make the problem go away.

Or of course there might be some design flaw that results in some technical non compliance with something that most of us would regard as trivial. Something like a grab rail in the disabled toilet being a few mm too high or too low for example. That would be "safety critical" according to some healthansafety experts, but of little real world importance.


Title: Re: IETs into passenger service from 16 Oct 2017 and subsequent performance issues
Post by: charles_uk on May 17, 2018, 12:38:01 pm
Anyone know anything about this?

https://twitter.com/RailLeaks/status/996773135583252480?s=19

That particular Twitter account has been pulled/deleted/removed since yesterday evening. It was a fairly dormant account with just a handful of tweets - the last before the one referred to above being in January.


Title: Re: IETs into passenger service from 16 Oct 2017 and subsequent performance issues
Post by: TaplowGreen on May 21, 2018, 09:32:39 am
Lots of these today...…………………..


09:30 London Paddington to Bristol Temple Meads due 11:09


Facilities on the 09:30 London Paddington to Bristol Temple Meads due 11:09.
This is due to more trains than usual needing repairs at the same time.
Will be formed of 5 coaches instead of 10.


Title: Re: IETs into passenger service from 16 Oct 2017 and subsequent performance issues
Post by: old original on May 21, 2018, 05:00:46 pm
Here's one I learnt today. Delay to the 10.00 Penzance to London due to the fact that an IET can't pass a HST at Redruth due to clearance issues!!


Title: Re: IETs into passenger service from 16 Oct 2017 and subsequent performance issues
Post by: broadgage on May 22, 2018, 08:16:34 am
Lots of these today...…………………..


09:30 London Paddington to Bristol Temple Meads due 11:09


Facilities on the 09:30 London Paddington to Bristol Temple Meads due 11:09.
This is due to more trains than usual needing repairs at the same time.
Will be formed of 5 coaches instead of 10.

And broadly similar today, with about 15 short formations consisting of a 5 car instead of 10 car.
Also several 8 car instead of 10 car, suggesting an HST instead of an IET.


Title: Re: IETs into passenger service from 16 Oct 2017 and subsequent performance issues
Post by: a-driver on May 22, 2018, 09:37:07 am
Lots of these today...…………………..


09:30 London Paddington to Bristol Temple Meads due 11:09


Facilities on the 09:30 London Paddington to Bristol Temple Meads due 11:09.
This is due to more trains than usual needing repairs at the same time.
Will be formed of 5 coaches instead of 10.

And broadly similar today, with about 15 short formations consisting of a 5 car instead of 10 car.
Also several 8 car instead of 10 car, suggesting an HST instead of an IET.

Some, if not all, are enforced by the DfT to release units for driver training. There’s over 40 drivers who have completed the theory but need practical handling but there’s no units available.


Title: Re: IETs into passenger service from 16 Oct 2017 and subsequent performance issues
Post by: WelshBluebird on May 22, 2018, 10:45:28 am
Lots of these today...…………………..


09:30 London Paddington to Bristol Temple Meads due 11:09


Facilities on the 09:30 London Paddington to Bristol Temple Meads due 11:09.
This is due to more trains than usual needing repairs at the same time.
Will be formed of 5 coaches instead of 10.

And broadly similar today, with about 15 short formations consisting of a 5 car instead of 10 car.
Also several 8 car instead of 10 car, suggesting an HST instead of an IET.

Some, if not all, are enforced by the DfT to release units for driver training. There’s over 40 drivers who have completed the theory but need practical handling but there’s no units available.

In which case why can GWR not just be honest? Because saying it is because of repairs or just "we don't know" (which is the answer I got over the weekend) when they know the actual reason just is not on.


Title: Re: IETs into passenger service from 16 Oct 2017 and subsequent performance issues
Post by: TaplowGreen on May 22, 2018, 10:48:51 am
Lots of these today...…………………..


09:30 London Paddington to Bristol Temple Meads due 11:09


Facilities on the 09:30 London Paddington to Bristol Temple Meads due 11:09.
This is due to more trains than usual needing repairs at the same time.
Will be formed of 5 coaches instead of 10.

And broadly similar today, with about 15 short formations consisting of a 5 car instead of 10 car.
Also several 8 car instead of 10 car, suggesting an HST instead of an IET.

Some, if not all, are enforced by the DfT to release units for driver training. There’s over 40 drivers who have completed the theory but need practical handling but there’s no units available.

In which case why can GWR not just be honest? Because saying it is because of repairs or just "we don't know" (which is the answer I got over the weekend) when they know the actual reason just is not on.

Because revealing the truth would further expose their ineptitude.


Title: Re: IETs into passenger service from 16 Oct 2017 and subsequent performance issues
Post by: broadgage on May 22, 2018, 11:13:04 am
When the adverts were telling us how wonderful the new trains would be, perhaps it might have been more honest to state the following.

"Whilst we aspire to run full length trains in the future, initially many services will be of only 5 cars. This is due to staff training, and due to the withdrawal of the old trains before enough new ones are available"

"In order to maximise the number of seats, the new trains have no buffet. Subject to availability of staff we hope to provide a trolley service in at least part of the train. Future aspirations include a wider range of goods from an improved design of trolley. We also hope in future to provide some form of hot snack service in standard class, though more work is required as to how best to achieve this"

And did my crystal ball not forecast regular short formations ? And did not a number of respected members rubbish such predictions as being unduly negative ?
It was widely suggested that I should "wait and see" before offering such criticism. Well I HAVE waited and have now observed routine short formations.

I do not recall speculating in any detail on the reason for short formations, staff shortage, lack of working trains, training or other reasons. I simply based my forecast on observations of other new trains, including class 159s, networkers, and voyagers.
"If short units are available, then they will end up being used on busy services"


Title: Re: IETs into passenger service from 16 Oct 2017 and subsequent performance issues
Post by: TaplowGreen on May 22, 2018, 11:18:30 am
When the adverts were telling us how wonderful the new trains would be, perhaps it might have been more honest to state the following.

"Whilst we aspire to run full length trains in the future, initially many services will be of only 5 cars. This is due to staff training, and due to the withdrawal of the old trains before enough new ones are available"

"In order to maximise the number of seats, the new trains have no buffet. Subject to availability of staff we hope to provide a trolley service in at least part of the train. Future aspirations include a wider range of goods from an improved design of trolley. We also hope in future to provide some form of hot snack service in standard class, though more work is required as to how best to achieve this"


Absolutely nails it.


Title: Re: IETs into passenger service from 16 Oct 2017 and subsequent performance issues
Post by: a-driver on May 22, 2018, 11:26:22 am
Lots of these today...…………………..


09:30 London Paddington to Bristol Temple Meads due 11:09


Facilities on the 09:30 London Paddington to Bristol Temple Meads due 11:09.
This is due to more trains than usual needing repairs at the same time.
Will be formed of 5 coaches instead of 10.

And broadly similar today, with about 15 short formations consisting of a 5 car instead of 10 car.
Also several 8 car instead of 10 car, suggesting an HST instead of an IET.

Some, if not all, are enforced by the DfT to release units for driver training. There’s over 40 drivers who have completed the theory but need practical handling but there’s no units available.

In which case why can GWR not just be honest? Because saying it is because of repairs or just "we don't know" (which is the answer I got over the weekend) when they know the actual reason just is not on.

Because revealing the truth would further expose their ineptitude.

This could be the instruction from the DfT or it’s just the way it’s coded for reporting and attribution purposes.


Title: Re: IETs into passenger service from 16 Oct 2017 and subsequent performance issues
Post by: Timmer on May 22, 2018, 11:47:47 am
Not going to happen but perhaps they need an 'under orders from Dft' code.


Title: Re: IETs into passenger service from 16 Oct 2017 and subsequent performance issues
Post by: a-driver on May 22, 2018, 11:51:59 am
Not going to happen but perhaps they need an 'under orders from Dft' code.


Except the DfT distances itself from operational decisions. Admitting a level of involvement opens them up to criticism. That’s what they pay private companies to do!!


Title: Re: IETs into passenger service from 16 Oct 2017 and subsequent performance issues
Post by: WelshBluebird on May 22, 2018, 01:35:32 pm
Even if they are under orders to not blame the DfT, surely there is a code for staff training, or the need for units elsewhere, that better covers this situation? No need to even mention the DfT?


Title: Re: IETs into passenger service from 16 Oct 2017 and subsequent performance issues
Post by: IndustryInsider on May 22, 2018, 01:59:53 pm
Broadgage is certainly correct in that the transitional phase has been particularly badly managed, regardless of who is to blame.


Title: Re: IETs into passenger service from 16 Oct 2017 and subsequent performance issues
Post by: froome on May 23, 2018, 08:06:07 am
I have now travelled on about 5 IET services, and apart from the short formations, the worst issue for me has been the wrong announcements that are made in the train and wrong information shown on the internal screens. All 5 journeys have had this problem. Some have come from what I assume is a preset computer system which hasn't been set to the actual journey, so that, for instance on my journey yesterday, the screens showed and the announcements made said that after Reading the next stop would be Swindon, when the train was actually due to stop at Didcot Parkway. The screens also stated that the train would terminate at Temple Meads, when it was actually terminating at Weston-super-Mare. On a previous journey on an IET I made just from Temple Meads to Bath Spa, the announcements started to announce our arrival at Bath Spa before we got to Keynsham, and then started announcing that the next stop would be Chippenham just after we had gone though Keynsham.

The problem with all of this, is that many travellers will be left thoroughly confused, and some may well get off at the wrong station. It's not as if we don't get any tourists on this line, and if I heard this sort of misinformation as a first time traveller, I might well make a bad mistake, and even if not, would be put off from using the service again.

What is going on with the communications system that has meant issues like these still seem to be happening all the time?


Title: Re: IETs into passenger service from 16 Oct 2017 and subsequent performance issues
Post by: a-driver on May 23, 2018, 08:39:15 am
I have now travelled on about 5 IET services, and apart from the short formations, the worst issue for me has been the wrong announcements that are made in the train and wrong information shown on the internal screens. All 5 journeys have had this problem. Some have come from what I assume is a preset computer system which hasn't been set to the actual journey, so that, for instance on my journey yesterday, the screens showed and the announcements made said that after Reading the next stop would be Swindon, when the train was actually due to stop at Didcot Parkway. The screens also stated that the train would terminate at Temple Meads, when it was actually terminating at Weston-super-Mare. On a previous journey on an IET I made just from Temple Meads to Bath Spa, the announcements started to announce our arrival at Bath Spa before we got to Keynsham, and then started announcing that the next stop would be Chippenham just after we had gone though Keynsham.

The problem with all of this, is that many travellers will be left thoroughly confused, and some may well get off at the wrong station. It's not as if we don't get any tourists on this line, and if I heard this sort of misinformation as a first time traveller, I might well make a bad mistake, and even if not, would be put off from using the service again.

What is going on with the communications system that has meant issues like these still seem to be happening all the time?

That issue has been reported by all staff and Hitachi are working on it. The onboard system doesn’t recognise all the headcodes so the system is setup using a generic route, none of the generic routes have Didcot as a calling point!


Title: Re: IETs into passenger service from 16 Oct 2017 and subsequent performance issues
Post by: froome on May 23, 2018, 10:43:46 pm
I have now travelled on about 5 IET services, and apart from the short formations, the worst issue for me has been the wrong announcements that are made in the train and wrong information shown on the internal screens. All 5 journeys have had this problem. Some have come from what I assume is a preset computer system which hasn't been set to the actual journey, so that, for instance on my journey yesterday, the screens showed and the announcements made said that after Reading the next stop would be Swindon, when the train was actually due to stop at Didcot Parkway. The screens also stated that the train would terminate at Temple Meads, when it was actually terminating at Weston-super-Mare. On a previous journey on an IET I made just from Temple Meads to Bath Spa, the announcements started to announce our arrival at Bath Spa before we got to Keynsham, and then started announcing that the next stop would be Chippenham just after we had gone though Keynsham.

The problem with all of this, is that many travellers will be left thoroughly confused, and some may well get off at the wrong station. It's not as if we don't get any tourists on this line, and if I heard this sort of misinformation as a first time traveller, I might well make a bad mistake, and even if not, would be put off from using the service again.

What is going on with the communications system that has meant issues like these still seem to be happening all the time?

That issue has been reported by all staff and Hitachi are working on it. The onboard system doesn’t recognise all the headcodes so the system is setup using a generic route, none of the generic routes have Didcot as a calling point!

How can they not have Didcot as a calling point?


Title: Re: IETs into passenger service from 16 Oct 2017 and subsequent performance issues
Post by: bobm on May 24, 2018, 07:36:18 am
Apparently another issue is the system gets confused when it loses its GPS “fix” while passing through tunnels.  Hence why after the tunnels at Twerton on an up service it gets out of sync with regard to the Bath Spa station stop.


Title: Re: IETs into passenger service from 16 Oct 2017 and subsequent performance issues
Post by: froome on May 24, 2018, 07:45:45 am
Apparently another issue is the system gets confused when it loses its GPS “fix” while passing through tunnels.  Hence why after the tunnels at Twerton on an up service it gets out of sync with regard to the Bath Spa station stop.

That would explain the confusion around Keynsham, as the train would have passed through the long tunnel at St Annes after leaving Bristol. But was this not an issue in HSTs? I don't remember it being one, and if not, how have we ended up with a worse system in these new trains?


Title: Re: IETs into passenger service from 16 Oct 2017 and subsequent performance issues
Post by: grahame on May 24, 2018, 08:02:01 am
Apparently another issue is the system gets confused when it loses its GPS “fix” while passing through tunnels.  Hence why after the tunnels at Twerton on an up service it gets out of sync with regard to the Bath Spa station stop.

That would explain the confusion around Keynsham, as the train would have passed through the long tunnel at St Annes after leaving Bristol. But was this not an issue in HSTs? I don't remember it being one, and if not, how have we ended up with a worse system in these new trains?

Sadly, a number of aspects of the information systems seem embryonic at present.  Missing data is wrong; wrong data is a nightmare, and whereas regular passengers can just laugh it off,  those occasional and new users who have been tempted to try the train can be seriously mislead to the extent of having their journey disrupted - but then someone may be asking "does it matter if we loose customers, as the 5 car trains can't cope anyway, let alone the capacity issues during engineering"

The positive news is that is the systems are indeed embryonic, they may well be born and grow up into a very nice child provided they have loving and thoughtful parent.


Title: Re: IETs into passenger service from 16 Oct 2017 and subsequent performance issues
Post by: bobm on May 24, 2018, 08:17:11 am
Apparently another issue is the system gets confused when it loses its GPS “fix” while passing through tunnels.  Hence why after the tunnels at Twerton on an up service it gets out of sync with regard to the Bath Spa station stop.

That would explain the confusion around Keynsham, as the train would have passed through the long tunnel at St Annes after leaving Bristol. But was this not an issue in HSTs? I don't remember it being one, and if not, how have we ended up with a worse system in these new trains?

HSTs don't have automatic announcements so the issue doesn't arise.


Title: Re: IETs into passenger service from 16 Oct 2017 and subsequent performance issues
Post by: Phantom on May 24, 2018, 09:32:10 am
Another classic, travelled on the 0648 from Weston to Paddington yesterday morning
Nice seat reservation in coach H, got to the train only to find there was no coach H !!

Turned out the train should have been a 10 car set, but was replaced with a 7 car HST

Which in turn meant there were no seat reservations anywhere on the train - starting the ensuing confusion at every stop up to Paddington


Title: Re: IETs into passenger service from 16 Oct 2017 and subsequent performance issues
Post by: Bmblbzzz on May 24, 2018, 10:41:44 am
I've just read that there's no little cycle logo to identify which door to put bikes in on the IETs, and that this is because Hitachi refused to allow it as part of the vinyl wrap. Can this really be true?
http://road.cc/content/news/242347-train-manufacturer-said-be-preventing-gwr-putting-cycle-logos-carriages-where
Quote
Now road.cc reader Oliver Strother has been in touch to flag up another problem with getting a bike onto a GWR service, one related to new rolling stock and the difficulty he encountered finding the part of the train where cycles are stored – and once he did, how poor the facility was.

One of the problems he had was that unlike on the previous trains that the new ones have replaced, there is no sticker with a picture of a bicycle on the side of the carriage where bikes can be placed – and he was later told that the reason was that the train manufacturer, Hitachi, won’t permit them.

That seems rather strange to us – given that the bike storage area isn’t going to move around the train, surely the bicycle logo could (and should) have been incorporated in the vinyl wrap of the GWR livery?

Quote
Head to platform, train arrives, as the train passes I look for cycle symbol but there isn't one. I head to the last section of the train, but no bike symbol anywhere. #wheredoigo? Train manager Simon pops out and says carriage 'A' or 'D' , at this point I'm stood outside 'L'. (later the I'm told the staff are not permitted by Hitachi to put a bicycle sticker on the outside of the train).


Title: Re: IETs into passenger service from 16 Oct 2017 and subsequent performance issues
Post by: broadgage on May 24, 2018, 10:50:30 am
Apparently another issue is the system gets confused when it loses its GPS “fix” while passing through tunnels.  Hence why after the tunnels at Twerton on an up service it gets out of sync with regard to the Bath Spa station stop.

That would explain the confusion around Keynsham, as the train would have passed through the long tunnel at St Annes after leaving Bristol. But was this not an issue in HSTs? I don't remember it being one, and if not, how have we ended up with a worse system in these new trains?

HSTs don't have automatic announcements so the issue doesn't arise.

Presumably no one could have foreseen the lack of a GPS signal in tunnels ?


Title: Re: IETs into passenger service from 16 Oct 2017 and subsequent performance issues
Post by: WelshBluebird on May 24, 2018, 10:57:46 am
I've just read that there's no little cycle logo to identify which door to put bikes in on the IETs, and that this is because Hitachi refused to allow it as part of the vinyl wrap. Can this really be true?
http://road.cc/content/news/242347-train-manufacturer-said-be-preventing-gwr-putting-cycle-logos-carriages-where
Quote
Now road.cc reader Oliver Strother has been in touch to flag up another problem with getting a bike onto a GWR service, one related to new rolling stock and the difficulty he encountered finding the part of the train where cycles are stored – and once he did, how poor the facility was.

One of the problems he had was that unlike on the previous trains that the new ones have replaced, there is no sticker with a picture of a bicycle on the side of the carriage where bikes can be placed – and he was later told that the reason was that the train manufacturer, Hitachi, won’t permit them.

That seems rather strange to us – given that the bike storage area isn’t going to move around the train, surely the bicycle logo could (and should) have been incorporated in the vinyl wrap of the GWR livery?

Quote
Head to platform, train arrives, as the train passes I look for cycle symbol but there isn't one. I head to the last section of the train, but no bike symbol anywhere. #wheredoigo? Train manager Simon pops out and says carriage 'A' or 'D' , at this point I'm stood outside 'L'. (later the I'm told the staff are not permitted by Hitachi to put a bicycle sticker on the outside of the train).

Don't you have to have a reservation to carry a bike on the new trains though? And wouldn't that reservation tell you which carriage to put the bike (and if it doesn't, it should!).


Title: Re: IETs into passenger service from 16 Oct 2017 and subsequent performance issues
Post by: stuving on May 24, 2018, 11:29:50 am
Apparently another issue is the system gets confused when it loses its GPS “fix” while passing through tunnels.  Hence why after the tunnels at Twerton on an up service it gets out of sync with regard to the Bath Spa station stop.

That would explain the confusion around Keynsham, as the train would have passed through the long tunnel at St Annes after leaving Bristol. But was this not an issue in HSTs? I don't remember it being one, and if not, how have we ended up with a worse system in these new trains?

HSTs don't have automatic announcements so the issue doesn't arise.

Presumably no one could have foreseen the lack of a GPS signal in tunnels ?

The train itself is pre-fitted with ETCS, so it must have odometers as well as balise communicators. GPS is pretty well universal, though not compulsory. So what is meant to happen before ETCS is for the odometers to be used between valid GPS fixes. However I don't imagine the ETCS funtion has even been tested, given the lack of balises to talk to, so I wonder how much else has been isolated by software sticky tape.

I presume the heavyweight software (traction and safety-critical stuff) was done mostly in advance, and probably in Japan, while the more superficial functions that have to interface with GWR's systems were done locally. Most of that can't be written until the shore systems are known, as it only does anything when they pass on the data.

With no actual information at all, I just know that the necessary specifications of the data and interfaces involved in PIS, reservations, etc. were handed over to Hitachi late, incomplete, inconsistent, partly wrong, and when they first tried their SW it didn't work and there wasn't time to sort it before first use in service.


Title: Re: IETs into passenger service from 16 Oct 2017 and subsequent performance issues
Post by: Bmblbzzz on May 24, 2018, 11:56:11 am
I've just read that there's no little cycle logo to identify which door to put bikes in on the IETs, and that this is because Hitachi refused to allow it as part of the vinyl wrap. Can this really be true?
http://road.cc/content/news/242347-train-manufacturer-said-be-preventing-gwr-putting-cycle-logos-carriages-where
Quote
Now road.cc reader Oliver Strother has been in touch to flag up another problem with getting a bike onto a GWR service, one related to new rolling stock and the difficulty he encountered finding the part of the train where cycles are stored – and once he did, how poor the facility was.

One of the problems he had was that unlike on the previous trains that the new ones have replaced, there is no sticker with a picture of a bicycle on the side of the carriage where bikes can be placed – and he was later told that the reason was that the train manufacturer, Hitachi, won’t permit them.

That seems rather strange to us – given that the bike storage area isn’t going to move around the train, surely the bicycle logo could (and should) have been incorporated in the vinyl wrap of the GWR livery?

Quote
Head to platform, train arrives, as the train passes I look for cycle symbol but there isn't one. I head to the last section of the train, but no bike symbol anywhere. #wheredoigo? Train manager Simon pops out and says carriage 'A' or 'D' , at this point I'm stood outside 'L'. (later the I'm told the staff are not permitted by Hitachi to put a bicycle sticker on the outside of the train).

Don't you have to have a reservation to carry a bike on the new trains though? And wouldn't that reservation tell you which carriage to put the bike (and if it doesn't, it should!).
Yes to the first part.
Quote
So I took a punt, and went down to the station ticket office who at 1715 said there was plenty bike spaces available, so I booked a ticket avec cycle reservation.
No to the second part. Presumably because it's just a space you've reserved, not a particular space, and unlike seats, where there are five or more carriages each with fifty or more seats, there are only a small number of cycle spaces all in one place. Or maybe in two places on the 5+5 IETs.


Title: Re: IETs into passenger service from 16 Oct 2017 and subsequent performance issues
Post by: Phantom on May 24, 2018, 12:01:07 pm
I've just read that there's no little cycle logo to identify which door to put bikes in on the IETs, and that this is because Hitachi refused to allow it as part of the vinyl wrap. Can this really be true?
http://road.cc/content/news/242347-train-manufacturer-said-be-preventing-gwr-putting-cycle-logos-carriages-where
Quote
Now road.cc reader Oliver Strother has been in touch to flag up another problem with getting a bike onto a GWR service, one related to new rolling stock and the difficulty he encountered finding the part of the train where cycles are stored – and once he did, how poor the facility was.

One of the problems he had was that unlike on the previous trains that the new ones have replaced, there is no sticker with a picture of a bicycle on the side of the carriage where bikes can be placed – and he was later told that the reason was that the train manufacturer, Hitachi, won’t permit them.

That seems rather strange to us – given that the bike storage area isn’t going to move around the train, surely the bicycle logo could (and should) have been incorporated in the vinyl wrap of the GWR livery?

Quote
Head to platform, train arrives, as the train passes I look for cycle symbol but there isn't one. I head to the last section of the train, but no bike symbol anywhere. #wheredoigo? Train manager Simon pops out and says carriage 'A' or 'D' , at this point I'm stood outside 'L'. (later the I'm told the staff are not permitted by Hitachi to put a bicycle sticker on the outside of the train).

Don't you have to have a reservation to carry a bike on the new trains though? And wouldn't that reservation tell you which carriage to put the bike (and if it doesn't, it should!).

This is an odd one at Temple Meads, as you come up the steps to Platforms 13/15 there is a sign telling people with bikes to wait by this sign and bikes will be carraiges H and J, but oddly those carraiges are never near this sign

Not seen anyone wait by this sign yet but assume some must otherwise it would have been removed by now?


Title: Re: IETs into passenger service from 16 Oct 2017 and subsequent performance issues
Post by: bradshaw on May 24, 2018, 12:39:57 pm
New edition of Modern Railways has the latest data on the Cl 800. Ending Period 13 2017/18, whenever that is.

Unit miles 313456 wit total of 17 units. 43 TIN, technical incidents. Current miles per TIN 7289.7 moving annual average for Mile per TIN 3892. So the mileage has nearly doubled over the last 4 periods, with TINs halved; so making progress.


Title: Re: IETs into passenger service from 16 Oct 2017 and subsequent performance issues
Post by: paul7755 on May 24, 2018, 12:44:07 pm
New edition of Modern Railways has the latest data on the Cl 800. Ending Period 13 2017/18, whenever that is.
Period 13 on the railway is the last of 13 x 4 week periods up to the end of the financial year.  So in this case effectively most of March 2018.

Paul


Title: Re: IETs into passenger service from 16 Oct 2017 and subsequent performance issues
Post by: CyclingSid on May 25, 2018, 10:11:40 am
Losing "sync" on announcements on trains or buses, is a pain, and potentially more so for the visually impaired.

Will the bike logo problem be solved when somebody vandalises the train and they have to re-finish the carriage.


Title: Re: IETs into passenger service from 16 Oct 2017 and subsequent performance issues
Post by: CyclingSid on May 27, 2018, 05:31:41 pm
GWR responds
http://road.cc/content/news/242347-train-manufacturer-said-be-preventing-gwr-putting-cycle-logos-carriages-where (http://road.cc/content/news/242347-train-manufacturer-said-be-preventing-gwr-putting-cycle-logos-carriages-where)
no timescale given


Title: Re: IETs into passenger service from 16 Oct 2017 and subsequent performance issues
Post by: Bmblbzzz on May 29, 2018, 04:45:05 pm
Doesn't directly answer the original point that Hitachi had for some reason refused to allow the cycle logos on the doors, but the fact that they're having it added does make it even more unlikely than it seemed originally. So why wasn't it there from the beginning? I know they did put some thought into the bike spaces (I know someone who was involved in the original consultation) but it seems they somehow overlooked the signage.


Title: Re: IETs into passenger service from 16 Oct 2017 and subsequent performance issues
Post by: WelshBluebird on May 29, 2018, 04:52:07 pm
I've just read that there's no little cycle logo to identify which door to put bikes in on the IETs, and that this is because Hitachi refused to allow it as part of the vinyl wrap. Can this really be true?
http://road.cc/content/news/242347-train-manufacturer-said-be-preventing-gwr-putting-cycle-logos-carriages-where
Quote
Now road.cc reader Oliver Strother has been in touch to flag up another problem with getting a bike onto a GWR service, one related to new rolling stock and the difficulty he encountered finding the part of the train where cycles are stored – and once he did, how poor the facility was.

One of the problems he had was that unlike on the previous trains that the new ones have replaced, there is no sticker with a picture of a bicycle on the side of the carriage where bikes can be placed – and he was later told that the reason was that the train manufacturer, Hitachi, won’t permit them.

That seems rather strange to us – given that the bike storage area isn’t going to move around the train, surely the bicycle logo could (and should) have been incorporated in the vinyl wrap of the GWR livery?

Quote
Head to platform, train arrives, as the train passes I look for cycle symbol but there isn't one. I head to the last section of the train, but no bike symbol anywhere. #wheredoigo? Train manager Simon pops out and says carriage 'A' or 'D' , at this point I'm stood outside 'L'. (later the I'm told the staff are not permitted by Hitachi to put a bicycle sticker on the outside of the train).

Don't you have to have a reservation to carry a bike on the new trains though? And wouldn't that reservation tell you which carriage to put the bike (and if it doesn't, it should!).
Yes to the first part.
Quote
So I took a punt, and went down to the station ticket office who at 1715 said there was plenty bike spaces available, so I booked a ticket avec cycle reservation.
No to the second part. Presumably because it's just a space you've reserved, not a particular space, and unlike seats, where there are five or more carriages each with fifty or more seats, there are only a small number of cycle spaces all in one place. Or maybe in two places on the 5+5 IETs.

Really? So the quote GWR have given - "the location of the bike reservation (ie where in the train you have been allocated a space), is clearly marked on that reservation" is a lie then?

Don't get me wrong, I think there should be some kind of indication on the outside of the train too. But if the reservation does say which carriage (which is what GWR are claiming, I can't verify as I have never had to get one) then its not THAT big of a deal.


Title: Re: IETs into passenger service from 16 Oct 2017 and subsequent performance issues
Post by: bobm on June 03, 2018, 07:44:10 am
Away from signs on the train to those on the platform.   If they bring in any more variants they'll need to put up a new pole at Teignmouth - this one is full!

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


Title: Re: IETs into passenger service from 16 Oct 2017 and subsequent performance issues
Post by: grahame on June 03, 2018, 08:23:07 am
Away from signs on the train to those on the platform.   If they bring in any more variants they'll need to put up a new pole at Teignmouth - this one is full!

Love it. Are you sure it's not the signs holding up the roof?

How about a single sign "4 cars or longer?   Stop here!"


Title: Re: IETs into passenger service from 16 Oct 2017 and subsequent performance issues
Post by: CyclingSid on June 03, 2018, 10:12:12 am
An example from 10:58 Reading to Weston yesterday. Train was busy, only a single 5-car set. Two cyclists with reservations find one of the two spaces is already taken. Reservation system appeared not to be working/indicating. Platform staff attitude appeared to be "just get on". So two full size bikes in the vestibule, both had straight handlebars, which have trouble fitting into the bike space at the best of times. Fortunately the train manager couldn't get down the train, as the computer compartment opposite the bike space was open, and just managed to take the Brompton.  From Didcot it was full and standing, Swindon and beyond they probably left another 5-car set's worth of passengers standing on each station. Train emptied at Bath!


Title: Re: IETs into passenger service from 16 Oct 2017 and subsequent performance issues
Post by: broadgage on June 06, 2018, 05:52:32 am
A dozen single 5 car units instead of 5+5 already announced for today.

Apologists for the new DMUs will no doubt explain that this is not the fault of the wonderful new trains, but is due to the unforeseen need to release some units for training, or some other reason.
They may well be correct, but as with other rolling stock replacements, the end result for the passenger is that new trains are shorter.


Title: Re: IETs into passenger service from 16 Oct 2017 and subsequent performance issues
Post by: TaplowGreen on June 06, 2018, 06:17:09 am
A dozen single 5 car units instead of 5+5 already announced for today.

Apologists for the new DMUs will no doubt explain that this is not the fault of the wonderful new trains, but is due to the unforeseen need to release some units for training, or some other reason.
They may well be correct, but as with other rolling stock replacements, the end result for the passenger is that new trains are shorter.


All of a sudden the reason for the "Famous Five " advertising campaign becomes clearer.


Title: Re: IETs into passenger service from 16 Oct 2017 and subsequent performance issues
Post by: Timmer on June 06, 2018, 06:53:23 am
All of a sudden the reason for the "Famous Five " advertising campaign becomes clearer.
Yes that awfully timed advertising campaign has reared its head again across social media. You’d think they’d just drop it until they can sort themselves out as it does is give frustrated passengers a chance to make comments about how bad the service is. Hardly effective way to promote yourself when end users tell potential users how poor the service is.


Title: Re: IETs into passenger service from 16 Oct 2017 and subsequent performance issues
Post by: Sixty3Closure on June 06, 2018, 09:11:22 am
The replies on Twitter gave a good indication of their customers thoughts. I have to agree though in that I wouldn't try any weekend leisure travel with GWR at the moment and they are just setting themselves up for criticism.


Title: Re: IETs into passenger service from 16 Oct 2017 and subsequent performance issues
Post by: stuving on June 06, 2018, 09:58:00 am
A dozen single 5 car units instead of 5+5 already announced for today.

Apologists for the new DMUs will no doubt explain that this is not the fault of the wonderful new trains, but is due to the unforeseen need to release some units for training, or some other reason.
They may well be correct, but as with other rolling stock replacements, the end result for the passenger is that new trains are shorter.
Well, that is still better than a single longer train that's not available for some reason. But for someone who's an irremediable glass-half-empty type, you see what you see.

When I was in Reading recently, an IET came through P9 on what was obviously a training run to Cheltenham, and that was 2x5 car units. Now, it might have been doing tests or training specifically of how to operate a train that long on that route. But ...


Title: Re: IETs into passenger service from 16 Oct 2017 and subsequent performance issues
Post by: TaplowGreen on June 06, 2018, 08:09:39 pm
A dozen single 5 car units instead of 5+5 already announced for today.

Apologists for the new DMUs will no doubt explain that this is not the fault of the wonderful new trains, but is due to the unforeseen need to release some units for training, or some other reason.
They may well be correct, but as with other rolling stock replacements, the end result for the passenger is that new trains are shorter.
Well, that is still better than a single longer train that's not available for some reason. But for someone who's an irremediable glass-half-empty type, you see what you see.


Nope, I think it is a fair comment which reflects the contrast between what was promised with much fanfare by GWR, and the reality of what is being delivered.


Title: Re: IETs into passenger service from 16 Oct 2017 and subsequent performance issues
Post by: grahame on June 07, 2018, 05:51:32 am
From Rail Magazine (https://www.railmagazine.com/news/network/great-western-railway-running-late-on-five-car-iet-acceptance)

Quote
The first nine-car ‘800/3’ has been accepted for traffic, with two more to follow.

At last  :D .  Will be good to start seeing trains you can walk through, "full length" trains that can all fit in at Bath Spa, and trains that don't need two train managers or equivalent.   But I do note this is two more "where to wait on the platform" possible combos, and whether the buffer trolley will be able to get all the way through enough times.


Title: Re: IETs into passenger service from 16 Oct 2017 and subsequent performance issues
Post by: broadgage on June 07, 2018, 09:21:28 am
It should be an improvement, but my natural cynicism leads to a suspicion that two new trains will result in the withdrawal of THREE old ones.
I cant see  the trolley making it through the whole train in a reasonable time. I think that the original plan was to provide two trolleys on full length trains, but I presume that this has now become a future aspiration rather than a promise.


Title: Re: IETs into passenger service from 16 Oct 2017 and subsequent performance issues
Post by: Lee on June 07, 2018, 09:33:27 am
From Rail Magazine (https://www.railmagazine.com/news/network/great-western-railway-running-late-on-five-car-iet-acceptance)

Quote
The first nine-car ‘800/3’ has been accepted for traffic, with two more to follow.

At last  :D .  Will be good to start seeing trains you can walk through, "full length" trains that can all fit in at Bath Spa, and trains that don't need two train managers or equivalent.   But I do note this is two more "where to wait on the platform" possible combos, and whether the buffer trolley will be able to get all the way through enough times.

Well, you certainly wont find me celebrating this latest milestone.

It's been over four decades since the HST's entered regular service, and many still sing their praises today. I suspect it wont take as long as that before their god-awful usurpers are seen for what they are - The most ill-conceived and biggest failure of a passenger rolling stock replacement programme in UK railway history.


Title: Re: IETs into passenger service from 16 Oct 2017 and subsequent performance issues
Post by: broadgage on June 07, 2018, 09:56:40 am

Well, you certainly wont find me celebrating this latest milestone.

It's been over four decades since the HST's entered regular service, and many still sing their praises today. I suspect it wont take as long as that before their god-awful usurpers are seen for what they are - The most ill-conceived and biggest failure of a passenger rolling stock replacement programme in UK railway history.

I agree.
Almost no one outside of these forums and the rail industry regards the new DMUs as an improvement over HSTs.
And a lot of customers don't realise that the down grade is PERMANENT  or at least for several decades.
I am aware of several people who have travelled on the downgraded units without realising that these are the future. A common view is that "a local train has been sent instead of a an intercity train"
The absence of reservations also gives the impression of a local train being used.
A lot of passengers are also expecting the buffet car to open once enough staff are available ! This being based on the GWR announcements "we regret that catering is not available. This is due to staff shortage" to the average customer, this implies that there IS a buffet but that staff shortage prevents it being used at present.
Voyager mark 2, but at least they don't smell as bad.


Title: Re: IETs into passenger service from 16 Oct 2017 and subsequent performance issues
Post by: IndustryInsider on June 07, 2018, 12:53:06 pm
In anticipation of the deal with drivers to operate some IET trains under DOO conditions going through early next month, training using 'shadow passenger trains' will begin next Monday running between Paddington and Didcot/Oxford and calling at Slough, Maidenhead, Twyford and Reading.  Not sure whether that will have a further impact on fleet availability?

The RMT is currently in dispute with GWR over the trains being allowed to run DOO, despite having known that was GWR's intention for an awful long time, and despite the original intention of GWR to operate the trains over all routes with the driver in control of the doors changing as a result of union pressure.  Trains will only run DOO on routes where DOO is currently authorised (so, for example Paddington to Oxford/Bedwyn services) and GWR maintain more Train Managers will be needed and not less.  The RMT fears that Train Managers will, over time, then not be required on ALL trains operating on DOO routes (so for example on a Paddington-Swansea train between Paddington and Didcot), and they also fear that, over time, DOO authorised routes will expand further so threatening their membership.  We'll see how this one shapes up in the end!


Title: Re: IETs into passenger service from 16 Oct 2017 and subsequent performance issues
Post by: TaplowGreen on June 13, 2018, 06:51:36 am
A lot more "Famous Five" (instead of 10) today...……………..

06:00 Bristol Temple Meads to London Paddington due 07:44
06:48 Weston-Super-Mare to London Paddington due 09:12
07:12 Taunton to London Paddington due 10:14
07:15 London Paddington to Cardiff Central due 09:20
08:15 London Paddington to Cardiff Central due 10:21
09:56 Cardiff Central to London Paddington due 12:00
10:00 London Paddington to Bristol Temple Meads due 11:43
10:45 London Paddington to Swansea due 13:43
10:56 Cardiff Central to London Paddington due 13:01
12:30 London Paddington to Bristol Temple Meads due 14:08
12:30 Bristol Temple Meads to London Paddington due 14:14
13:45 London Paddington to Swansea due 16:41
14:29 Swansea to London Paddington due 17:30
14:45 London Paddington to Swansea due 17:42
15:00 Bristol Temple Meads to London Paddington due 16:40
17:15 London Paddington to Carmarthen due 21:20
17:29 Swansea to London Paddington due 20:32
18:00 London Paddington to Bristol Temple Meads due 19:44
18:29 Swansea to London Paddington due 22:32


Title: Re: IETs into passenger service from 16 Oct 2017 and subsequent performance issues
Post by: broadgage on June 13, 2018, 07:30:11 am
So much for the various assurances that there would be plenty of stock, and that all rush hour services would be 5+5, or 9 car.


Title: Re: IETs into passenger service from 16 Oct 2017 and subsequent performance issues
Post by: TaplowGreen on June 13, 2018, 08:17:10 am
Attracting some media attention this morning......seems like a group of journalists got left behind on the platform when their short formed train rolled in packed to the gunwales & they were unable to board.


Title: Re: IETs into passenger service from 16 Oct 2017 and subsequent performance issues
Post by: SandTEngineer on June 13, 2018, 08:48:09 am
This was published on the WNXX Forum.  A snapshot of allocations today, 13 June 2018.

Quote
Snapshot of the 800 fleet today:

800001 - 800004 not in traffic, locations not given
800005 NP111
800006 NP108
800007 North Pole
800008 NP121
800009 NP122
800010 NP112
800011 North Pole
800012 NP125
800013 NP131
800014 NP105
800015 NP114
800016 NP124
800017 NP109
800018 NP117
800019 NP115
800020 NP132
800021 NP128
800022 Stoke Gifford
800023 Laira
800024 Stoke Gifford
800025 NP130
800026 NP119
800027 NP116
800028 NP199 (training run)
800029 NP126
800030 NP103
800031 NP118
800032 NP120
800033 NP104
800034 NP123
800035 NP106
800036 NP110

This suggests NP101/102/107/113/127 & 129 are all uncovered.

The NPxxx numbers are the allocated train diagrams for the day.  So, out of 36 available sets, only 26 are actually in service today.


Title: Re: IETs into passenger service from 16 Oct 2017 and subsequent performance issues
Post by: phile on June 13, 2018, 08:52:01 am
A lot more "Famous Five" (instead of 10) today...……………..

06:00 Bristol Temple Meads to London Paddington due 07:44
06:48 Weston-Super-Mare to London Paddington due 09:12
07:12 Taunton to London Paddington due 10:14
07:15 London Paddington to Cardiff Central due 09:20
08:15 London Paddington to Cardiff Central due 10:21
09:56 Cardiff Central to London Paddington due 12:00
10:00 London Paddington to Bristol Temple Meads due 11:43
10:45 London Paddington to Swansea due 13:43
10:56 Cardiff Central to London Paddington due 13:01
12:30 London Paddington to Bristol Temple Meads due 14:08
12:30 Bristol Temple Meads to London Paddington due 14:14
13:45 London Paddington to Swansea due 16:41
14:29 Swansea to London Paddington due 17:30
14:45 London Paddington to Swansea due 17:42
15:00 Bristol Temple Meads to London Paddington due 16:40
17:15 London Paddington to Carmarthen due 21:20
17:29 Swansea to London Paddington due 20:32
18:00 London Paddington to Bristol Temple Meads due 19:44
18:29 Swansea to London Paddington due 22:32

I make that 5 circuits running round short formed.


Title: Re: IETs into passenger service from 16 Oct 2017 and subsequent performance issues
Post by: Timmer on June 13, 2018, 08:54:14 am
Attracting some media attention this morning......seems like a group of journalists got left behind on the platform when their short formed train rolled in packed to the gunwales & they were unable to board.
Yeah you can see the headlines now 8 carriage trains replaced by 5 carriage trains.


Title: Re: IETs into passenger service from 16 Oct 2017 and subsequent performance issues
Post by: trainer on June 13, 2018, 09:09:53 am
This is very depressing from every angle. I noted some time ago that the commuters from Yatton would not be pleased that their 'increased capacity' would in fact turn out to be decreased.  Others on the forum thought it didn't matter as there wouldn't be that many people travelling between Weston and Bristol.  That's not been my experience.  Six months into the 'brave new world' of better trains and exhortations to be patient as things settle down is a long time for the daily commuter to be passive. 

I am anticipating using one of these services soon as the first train on my 'rover week' and wasn't sure if it would be an IET.  The knowledge that it might be a short formed IET does not bode well for a pleasant start.  I wonder if anyone here is monitoring the daily shortfall in supplying working IET units for the diagrams planned (and promised)?

My decision to spend most of the week in Scotland could be a good one although they have their own electric train shortage issues of a different nature up there.


Title: Re: IETs into passenger service from 16 Oct 2017 and subsequent performance issues
Post by: stuving on June 13, 2018, 09:31:44 am
The NPxxx numbers are the allocated train diagrams for the day.  So, out of 36 available sets, only 26 are actually in service today.

On a technicality: "available" has a specific meaning in the franchise agreement and the MARA, where 32 units are to be available to GWR. I presume (not having seen it written anywhere) that Hitachi could add extras to their fleet if reliability isn't good enough, so 36 is the minimum supplier's fleet size.

Since one unit is in GWR service though not carrying passengers, and five units are shown against a depot name,  I expect that means these are available to GWR (making the total of 32 as required) but have not been called up.


Title: Re: IETs into passenger service from 16 Oct 2017 and subsequent performance issues
Post by: SandTEngineer on June 13, 2018, 09:41:30 am
Thanks STUVING.  I have asked elsewhere if the IET Diagrams are published anywhere.  I have seen the Winter 2017-2018 ones.


Title: Re: IETs into passenger service from 16 Oct 2017 and subsequent performance issues
Post by: Jason on June 13, 2018, 04:04:31 pm
My evening SMS informs me that the 17:30 will be 5 not 10. One to avoid.


Title: Re: IETs into passenger service from 16 Oct 2017 and subsequent performance issues
Post by: broadgage on June 14, 2018, 06:13:49 am
Attracting some media attention this morning......seems like a group of journalists got left behind on the platform when their short formed train rolled in packed to the gunwales & they were unable to board.
Yeah you can see the headlines now 8 carriage trains replaced by 5 carriage trains.

As predicted by my crystal ball. I based this prediction not on any detailed study of fleet size or demand, but simply on previous introductions of new trains.

So what, in simple terms is behind the failure to run full length trains ?
Have Hitachi failed to provide what they promised ? In which case are they paying the price for this failure ? or is there some wiggle room ?

Or are GWR failing to utilise the trains fully and leaving them in the depots ? If so why ? It cant be lack of drivers because if a driver is available for a half length train, they presumably could drive a full length train.
It does not look like lack of duplicate train managers, since that has previously resulted in a full train but with half locked out of use.


Title: Re: IETs into passenger service from 16 Oct 2017 and subsequent performance issues
Post by: Thatcham Crossing on June 14, 2018, 09:09:21 am
On a more positive note, chat (stolen from) elsewhere suggests 9-car IET entered service in the Cotswolds yesterday.

(click on the below to make it more legible!)


Title: Re: IETs into passenger service from 16 Oct 2017 and subsequent performance issues
Post by: Jason on June 14, 2018, 09:26:17 am
Cool. 1W02 is my usual evening service, I look forward to seeing how a 9-car unit operates.


Title: Re: IETs into passenger service from 16 Oct 2017 and subsequent performance issues
Post by: ChrisB on June 14, 2018, 10:48:50 am
On a more positive note, chat (stolen from) elsewhere suggests 9-car IET entered service in the Cotswolds yesterday.

800304 formed the 1722 up the North Cotswolds yesterday as noted in the NC thread, yes.

There are many reasons in the supply contract with Hitachi why a set may get rejected by GWR, or Hitachi can fail to have enough sets ready. GWR get compensated for fewer sets than agreed being available/fully prepped.


Title: Re: IETs into passenger service from 16 Oct 2017 and subsequent performance issues
Post by: TaplowGreen on June 15, 2018, 06:33:27 am
A busy (and overcrowded!_Friday for "Famous Fives" everywhere...…………

04:33 Bristol Parkway to London Paddington due 06:26
06:00 Portsmouth Harbour to Cardiff Central due 09:42
06:48 Weston-Super-Mare to London Paddington due 09:12
07:15 London Paddington to Cardiff Central due 09:20
07:30 Carmarthen to London Paddington due 11:32
07:59 Swansea to London Paddington due 11:00
09:56 Cardiff Central to London Paddington due 12:00
10:00 London Paddington to Bristol Temple Meads due 11:43
10:30 Cardiff Central to Portsmouth Harbour due 13:52
12:00 London Paddington to Bristol Temple Meads due 13:44
12:15 London Paddington to Cardiff Central due 14:21
12:30 London Paddington to Bristol Temple Meads due 14:08
12:30 Bristol Temple Meads to London Paddington due 14:14
14:30 Bristol Temple Meads to London Paddington due 16:14
14:45 London Paddington to Swansea due 17:42
14:56 Cardiff Central to London Paddington due 17:02
15:00 Bristol Temple Meads to London Paddington due 16:40
16:45 London Paddington to Swansea due 19:46
17:15 London Paddington to Carmarthen due 21:20
17:30 London Paddington to Taunton due 20:31
18:29 Swansea to London Paddington due 21:31
20:29 Swansea to London Paddington due 23:37
21:28 Taunton to London Paddington due 00:31
22:15 London Paddington to Bristol Temple Meads due 00:03


Title: Re: IETs into passenger service from 16 Oct 2017 and subsequent performance issues
Post by: Timmer on June 15, 2018, 08:30:49 am
All I can say after looking at that list thank goodness no IETs are diagrammed on routes to the SW yet with the busy summer season now upon us. Hopefully they will start with 9 carriage IETs and not 5 carriage. Sadly I don't think that will be the case. Hope I'm wrong.


Title: Re: IETs into passenger service from 16 Oct 2017 and subsequent performance issues
Post by: trainer on June 15, 2018, 05:36:12 pm
Just a small point.  If the trains from Cardiff Central to Portsmouth Harbour listed above are composed of 5 coaches then this is actually an increase over the previous norm of 3. Further, if they are IETs, this would be an upgrade on the promised Turbos.

On the other hand if that's a list of cancellations, I would consider it a downgrade.


Title: Re: IETs into passenger service from 16 Oct 2017 and subsequent performance issues
Post by: Adelante_CCT on June 15, 2018, 06:00:07 pm
I believe its just simply a list of short forms in general, Taplow Green was purely highlighting the IET short forms from that list.


Title: Re: IETs into passenger service from 16 Oct 2017 and subsequent performance issues
Post by: FarWestJohn on June 15, 2018, 08:47:54 pm
With the experiences I have had with 800s I am dreading the 802s coming to the south west. I can see there being riots at Plymouth if a 5 car turns up from Penzance and there is no crew for the 5 car waiting at Plymouth and it has to go forward with 2 units and 5 cars empty. How easy and quick is it to couple and uncouple a pair of 802s as I have not seen any mention of this and how reliable is it? The coupling of two five car 444s at Bournemouth is very slick even with corridor connections somehow I don't expect GWR to equal this.


Title: Re: IETs into passenger service from 16 Oct 2017 and subsequent performance issues
Post by: ray951 on June 15, 2018, 09:12:14 pm
800305, looking very bright and shiny,  was working the 1421 Paddington to Worcester today.
It looked her long and took up the whole length of platform 4 at Oxford. Are they longer than an 8 coach HST?


Title: Re: IETs into passenger service from 16 Oct 2017 and subsequent performance issues
Post by: broadgage on June 15, 2018, 09:14:31 pm
I believe its just simply a list of short forms in general, Taplow Green was purely highlighting the IET short forms from that list.

I suspect that the list was MEANT to be a list of short formed IETS, and not a list of all short formed trains.
It would seem to contain at least two typos, trains that were probably short formed but NOT IETS.

IIRC, the short formations list earlier contained over 40 trains. Just over 20 IETs half length, and about the same number again of normal short formations mainly on the Cornish branch lines.

Good IET days seem to feature about a dozen short formations, and bad IET days about 20 half length units.


Title: Re: IETs into passenger service from 16 Oct 2017 and subsequent performance issues
Post by: broadgage on June 15, 2018, 09:27:05 pm
With the experiences I have had with 800s I am dreading the 802s coming to the south west. I can see there being riots at Plymouth if a 5 car turns up from Penzance and there is no crew for the 5 car waiting at Plymouth and it has to go forward with 2 units and 5 cars empty. How easy and quick is it to couple and uncouple a pair of 802s as I have not seen any mention of this and how reliable is it? The coupling of two five car 444s at Bournemouth is very slick even with corridor connections somehow I don't expect GWR to equal this.

I agree.
And not just at Plymouth, imagine the scenes at Paddington when a 5 car unit turns up for the 18-03 or the 19-03 to Penzance.
And to those who say that it wont happen, experience beats optimistic forecasts !

Voyagers, too short from day one, and still too short many years later.
159s Waterloo to Exeter, too short for at least five years, and some are still too short.
Networkers in South east London, too short from day one and still too short after twenty years of 6 car rush hour trains that were previously 8 car.
First batch of IETs on GWR. largely short formed from the beginning, though will hopefully improve a bit.

So why should the longer distance  IETs be any different ?


Title: Re: IETs into passenger service from 16 Oct 2017 and subsequent performance issues
Post by: IndustryInsider on June 16, 2018, 12:10:42 am
How easy and quick is it to couple and uncouple a pair of 802s as I have not seen any mention of this and how reliable is it? The coupling of two five car 444s at Bournemouth is very slick even with corridor connections somehow I don't expect GWR to equal this.

The coupling/uncoupling procedure is pretty quick and straightforward, and will get slicker once crews have gotten used to it.


Title: Re: IETs into passenger service from 16 Oct 2017 and subsequent performance issues
Post by: grahame on June 16, 2018, 02:11:45 am

And to those who say that it wont happen, experience beats optimistic forecasts !

Voyagers, too short from day one, and still too short many years later.
159s Waterloo to Exeter, too short for at least five years, and some are still too short.
Networkers in South east London, too short from day one and still too short after twenty years of 6 car rush hour trains that were previously 8 car.
First batch of IETs on GWR. largely short formed from the beginning, though will hopefully improve a bit.

So why should the longer distance  IETs be any different ?

You have a cynical bias at time, Broadgage ... but I have to say that I utterly agree with your questioning of IET train lengths.   This forum largely came about due to the dramatic reductions in services in December 2006, including the trimming back of the Cardiff to Portsmouth services from 3 to 2 carriages.


Title: Re: IETs into passenger service from 16 Oct 2017 and subsequent performance issues
Post by: devonexpress on June 16, 2018, 11:44:40 am
I've tried to stay positive throughout their introduction, but this is now becoming a shambles. What makes it worse is that the DFT have made all redundant HST's leave the franchise(apart from ones being made into 4 car Castles) so there is nothing to cover the service at all!   My personal belief is that all IET's at some point should be reformed into 8 or 9 cars (no doubling up).  And I'm starting to think a buffet should be reintroduced, I.e a proper buffet, no just a mini buffet, but moving the kitchen from First Class and making the area where it has vacated into bicycle storage.


Title: Re: IETs into passenger service from 16 Oct 2017 and subsequent performance issues
Post by: broadgage on June 16, 2018, 12:31:08 pm
I've tried to stay positive throughout their introduction, but this is now becoming a shambles. What makes it worse is that the DFT have made all redundant HST's leave the franchise(apart from ones being made into 4 car Castles) so there is nothing to cover the service at all!   My personal belief is that all IET's at some point should be reformed into 8 or 9 cars (no doubling up).  And I'm starting to think a buffet should be reintroduced, I.e a proper buffet, no just a mini buffet, but moving the kitchen from First Class and making the area where it has vacated into bicycle storage.

I very largely agree, but with the space taken up by a proper buffet, feel that 10 vehicles would be needed so as to provide this facility without reduction in seating.

Build extra vehicles, incorporating a full proper buffet. Put these in the middle of the standard class section of existing 9 car sets so that no standard class passenger has to walk too far.
A large buffet servery in the middle of the vehicle, equipped to serve hot and cold drinks and cooked to order hot snacks such as bacon rolls, fried eggs on toast and the like. Each end of the vehicle to have longitudinal seating with standing space equipped with grab rails and small tables.
Many longer distance commuters might actually PREFER to stand if in convivial company and enjoying freshly cooked bacon rolls and proper coffee in the morning , or a good choice of alcoholic drink in the evening.
Every passenger standing through choice is another seat free for those who want to sit down.

I would keep the present catering arrangements for first class, in order that the long walk from first to the buffet is of no consequence.
I would reduce the seating capacity in standard class by 4 seats per vehicle in order to provide more table seats.

I would lengthen all the 9 car sets to 10 car by the addition of the new "broadgage buffets"

I would modify about half of the 5 car sets into 10 car. 9 car made into 10 car, and 5 car made into 10 car should have identical or VERY similar interior fit out.

I would keep about half of the 5 car sets as existing, without buffet. I can see the merit of a limited number of lower specification and shorter trains for lightly used services.





Title: Re: IETs into passenger service from 16 Oct 2017 and subsequent performance issues
Post by: broadgage on June 16, 2018, 12:59:34 pm
Suggested stock list for broadgage buffet, showing the greatly improved choice and quality versus a trolley.

Cold sandwiches, choice of 6 including two luxury or premium choices and 4 budget options.
4 flavours of crisps, 2 sorts of peanuts.
3 choices of sweet biscuits, 3 choices of savoury biscuits, 3 types of cake portions.
pork pies, scotch eggs, hot pies, pasties.

Several choices of coffee, several types of tea, hot chocolate, instant soup.

Choice of cold drinks including 500ml bottles of water, cola and fruit juice.

A choice of about 6 cooked to order hot snacks such as bacon rolls, fried egg sandwiches, toasted ham and cheese sandwiches.

A good choice of spirits in miniature bottles, gin, vodka, several different whiskies, dark rum, white rum, brandy.
A reasonable choice of mixers including ginger ale, tonic, cola, soda water.
3 choices of lager, 3 choices of ale.
2 red wines in full bottles, 2 in half bottles, ditto for white
Champagne. Half bottles of port


Title: Re: IETs into passenger service from 16 Oct 2017 and subsequent performance issues
Post by: TaplowGreen on June 16, 2018, 02:37:11 pm
Agreed the IET situation is a shambles, but as far as the buffets go it's a very small sideshow with a very few advocates making a disproportionate amount of noise.

If there was enough demand to make on train catering profitable/worthwhile, GWR would be doing it. Simple as that. There are more, much better value options than the pretty mediocre and very expensive on train offering and people have voted with their feet.

A trolley is as much as it needs - devote all available space for seating, it's what the overwhelming demand is calling for, and for Christ's sake run trains of the appropriate size, reliably.

(No offence broadgage, I enjoy your musings, and you were and are absolutely spot on regarding the more important IET issues)  :)


Title: Re: IETs into passenger service from 16 Oct 2017 and subsequent performance issues
Post by: grahame on June 17, 2018, 05:26:05 am
Not so much down from 10 to 5 today - more like down from anything to zero

69 Train Cancellations
08:27 London Paddington to Cheltenham Spa due 10:43
08:30 London Paddington to Bristol Parkway due 10:10
09:00 London Paddington to Weston-Super-Mare due 11:18
10:30 London Paddington to Bristol Parkway due 12:10
10:34 Bristol Parkway to London Paddington due 12:20
10:34 London Paddington to Hereford due 14:07
11:18 Cheltenham Spa to London Paddington due 13:30
11:30 London Paddington to Bristol Parkway due 13:15
11:54 Weston-Super-Mare to London Paddington due 14:24
12:00 London Paddington to Weston-Super-Mare due 14:37
12:23 Bristol Temple Meads to Severn Beach due 12:58
12:27 London Paddington to Cheltenham Spa due 14:46
12:34 Bristol Parkway to London Paddington due 14:20
13:12 Severn Beach to Bristol Temple Meads due 13:54
13:20 Weston-Super-Mare to London Paddington due 15:54
13:30 London Paddington to Bristol Parkway due 15:15
13:34 Bristol Parkway to London Paddington due 15:15
14:22 London Paddington to Cheltenham Spa due 16:47
14:32 Hereford to London Paddington due 18:09
15:00 London Paddington to Taunton due 18:01
15:00 Bristol Temple Meads to London Paddington due 16:54
15:00 Penzance to London Paddington due 20:28
15:27 London Paddington to Bristol Temple Meads due 17:18
15:30 London Paddington to Bristol Parkway due 17:15
15:33 Cheltenham Spa to London Paddington due 17:45
15:34 Bristol Parkway to London Paddington due 17:20
15:47 Brighton to Bristol Temple Meads due 19:09
16:00 London Paddington to Bristol Temple Meads due 17:58
16:22 London Paddington to Cheltenham Spa due 18:45
16:27 London Paddington to Bristol Temple Meads due 18:18
16:28 Worcester Foregate Street to London Paddington due 19:07
16:30 London Paddington to Bristol Parkway due 18:15
16:34 Bristol Parkway to London Paddington due 18:20
17:23 Exmouth to Paignton due 18:49
17:27 London Paddington to Weston-Super-Mare due 19:57
17:30 London Paddington to Bristol Parkway due 19:15
17:33 Cheltenham Spa to London Paddington due 19:45
17:34 Bristol Parkway to London Paddington due 19:10
17:50 Paignton to Exmouth due 19:18
18:00 London Paddington to Bristol Temple Meads due 19:56
18:22 London Paddington to Cheltenham Spa due 20:45
18:30 London Paddington to Bristol Parkway due 20:15
18:34 Bristol Parkway to London Paddington due 20:10
18:38 Hereford to London Paddington due 22:07
18:54 Paignton to Exmouth due 20:24
18:56 Taunton to London Paddington due 21:53
19:00 Bristol Temple Meads to London Paddington due 20:51
19:30 Bristol Temple Meads to London Paddington due 21:25
19:32 Cheltenham Spa to London Paddington due 21:45
19:34 Bristol Parkway to London Paddington due 21:10
19:53 Paignton to Exmouth due 21:25
20:09 Weymouth to Bristol Temple Meads due 22:37
20:22 London Paddington to Cheltenham Spa due 22:35
20:26 Weston-Super-Mare to London Paddington due 23:03
20:28 Exmouth to Paignton due 21:49
20:30 London Paddington to Bristol Parkway due 22:10
20:34 Bristol Parkway to London Paddington due 22:13
20:53 Bristol Temple Meads to Clifton Down due 21:06
21:23 Clifton Down to Bristol Temple Meads due 21:38
21:30 London Paddington to Bristol Parkway due 23:10
21:30 Exmouth to Paignton due 22:56
21:53 Paignton to Exmouth due 23:20
22:00 London Paddington to Bristol Temple Meads due 23:57
22:05 Bristol Parkway to Bristol Temple Meads due 22:21
23:00 Paignton to Exeter St Davids due 23:52
23:03 London Paddington to Bristol Temple Meads due 01:06
23:10 Bristol Temple Meads to Weston-Super-Mare due 23:43
23:29 Exmouth to Exeter St Davids due 00:04
23:47 Weston-Super-Mare to Bristol Temple Meads due 00:20

Plus 8 short workings.   All (I think - I may not have clicker through a few) due to train crew shortage.   Still - if you're stranded at home you could enjoy

Sunday 17 June
17 Jun 2018 CRC Costa Rica 13:00 SRB Serbia
17 Jun 2018 GER Germany 16:00 MEX Mexico
17 Jun 2018 BRA Brazil 19:00 SUI Switzerland

I look at that list and I guestimate that they're 25 to 30 drivers down; should not come an an overnight shock. All very well talking about T minus 12 coming down to T minus 2 or 3 - but this is T zero stuff.     Time for an emergency Sunday timetable of an hourly service Paddington to Bristol Parkway via Bristol Temple Meads, and an hourly Paddington to Swansea via Gloucester during Severn Tunnel Sunday closures, rather than an over-optimistic initial plan followed by very patchy cancellations to make for an unforecast and erratic service on the day?


Title: Re: IETs into passenger service from 16 Oct 2017 and subsequent performance issues
Post by: Timmer on June 17, 2018, 07:32:06 am
Think it would be easier to list which IC services WERE running. 65 cancellations that’s poor and under normal circumstances and a clear breach of franchise, BUT these aren’t normal circumstances.

As well all know by what we’ve seen on the news and in the press, Dft Rail is bust and not fit for purpose so no point in expecting Grayling to do anything about the mess of a GW route his department have created over the years. Yes years, that’s how long it’s taken to get the rail network in the complete mess it’s in today.


Title: Re: IETs into passenger service from 16 Oct 2017 and subsequent performance issues
Post by: Adelante_CCT on June 17, 2018, 08:00:36 am
No doubt the official line from GWR would be:

"Due to the delay in electrification works and also the delay in acquiring new rolling stock, we have had to condense our driver training into a shorter timeframe so as to minimise disruption in the future. This requires our drivers to come in on allocated rest days to carry out training therefore they are unable to work weekends..... etc etc"


Instead of the far simpler explanation of:

"It's Fathers Day, and as a result many drivers have not turned up"


Title: Re: IETs into passenger service from 16 Oct 2017 and subsequent performance issues
Post by: Adelante_CCT on June 17, 2018, 08:03:34 am
For the record, the 11:30 and 15:00 from Paddington have been reinstated


Title: Re: IETs into passenger service from 16 Oct 2017 and subsequent performance issues
Post by: Timmer on June 17, 2018, 08:07:14 am
For the record, the 11:30 and 15:00 from Paddington have been reinstated
I hope when they can reinstate services they focus on the services to/from Bristol Parkway as there are no direct Pad-South Wales services today because the route through the Severn tunnel is closed with buses between Newport and Parkway.


Title: Re: IETs into passenger service from 16 Oct 2017 and subsequent performance issues
Post by: TaplowGreen on June 17, 2018, 08:08:57 am
For the record, the 11:30 and 15:00 from Paddington have been reinstated

Oh fantastic. 65 cancellations down to 63.


Title: Re: IETs into passenger service from 16 Oct 2017 and subsequent performance issues
Post by: TaplowGreen on June 17, 2018, 08:12:03 am
Not so much down from 10 to 5 today - more like down from anything to zero

69 Train Cancellations
08:27 London Paddington to Cheltenham Spa due 10:43
08:30 London Paddington to Bristol Parkway due 10:10
09:00 London Paddington to Weston-Super-Mare due 11:18
10:30 London Paddington to Bristol Parkway due 12:10
10:34 Bristol Parkway to London Paddington due 12:20
10:34 London Paddington to Hereford due 14:07
11:18 Cheltenham Spa to London Paddington due 13:30
11:30 London Paddington to Bristol Parkway due 13:15
11:54 Weston-Super-Mare to London Paddington due 14:24
12:00 London Paddington to Weston-Super-Mare due 14:37
12:23 Bristol Temple Meads to Severn Beach due 12:58
12:27 London Paddington to Cheltenham Spa due 14:46
12:34 Bristol Parkway to London Paddington due 14:20
13:12 Severn Beach to Bristol Temple Meads due 13:54
13:20 Weston-Super-Mare to London Paddington due 15:54
13:30 London Paddington to Bristol Parkway due 15:15
13:34 Bristol Parkway to London Paddington due 15:15
14:22 London Paddington to Cheltenham Spa due 16:47
14:32 Hereford to London Paddington due 18:09
15:00 London Paddington to Taunton due 18:01
15:00 Bristol Temple Meads to London Paddington due 16:54
15:00 Penzance to London Paddington due 20:28
15:27 London Paddington to Bristol Temple Meads due 17:18
15:30 London Paddington to Bristol Parkway due 17:15
15:33 Cheltenham Spa to London Paddington due 17:45
15:34 Bristol Parkway to London Paddington due 17:20
15:47 Brighton to Bristol Temple Meads due 19:09
16:00 London Paddington to Bristol Temple Meads due 17:58
16:22 London Paddington to Cheltenham Spa due 18:45
16:27 London Paddington to Bristol Temple Meads due 18:18
16:28 Worcester Foregate Street to London Paddington due 19:07
16:30 London Paddington to Bristol Parkway due 18:15
16:34 Bristol Parkway to London Paddington due 18:20
17:23 Exmouth to Paignton due 18:49
17:27 London Paddington to Weston-Super-Mare due 19:57
17:30 London Paddington to Bristol Parkway due 19:15
17:33 Cheltenham Spa to London Paddington due 19:45
17:34 Bristol Parkway to London Paddington due 19:10
17:50 Paignton to Exmouth due 19:18
18:00 London Paddington to Bristol Temple Meads due 19:56
18:22 London Paddington to Cheltenham Spa due 20:45
18:30 London Paddington to Bristol Parkway due 20:15
18:34 Bristol Parkway to London Paddington due 20:10
18:38 Hereford to London Paddington due 22:07
18:54 Paignton to Exmouth due 20:24
18:56 Taunton to London Paddington due 21:53
19:00 Bristol Temple Meads to London Paddington due 20:51
19:30 Bristol Temple Meads to London Paddington due 21:25
19:32 Cheltenham Spa to London Paddington due 21:45
19:34 Bristol Parkway to London Paddington due 21:10
19:53 Paignton to Exmouth due 21:25
20:09 Weymouth to Bristol Temple Meads due 22:37
20:22 London Paddington to Cheltenham Spa due 22:35
20:26 Weston-Super-Mare to London Paddington due 23:03
20:28 Exmouth to Paignton due 21:49
20:30 London Paddington to Bristol Parkway due 22:10
20:34 Bristol Parkway to London Paddington due 22:13
20:53 Bristol Temple Meads to Clifton Down due 21:06
21:23 Clifton Down to Bristol Temple Meads due 21:38
21:30 London Paddington to Bristol Parkway due 23:10
21:30 Exmouth to Paignton due 22:56
21:53 Paignton to Exmouth due 23:20
22:00 London Paddington to Bristol Temple Meads due 23:57
22:05 Bristol Parkway to Bristol Temple Meads due 22:21
23:00 Paignton to Exeter St Davids due 23:52
23:03 London Paddington to Bristol Temple Meads due 01:06
23:10 Bristol Temple Meads to Weston-Super-Mare due 23:43
23:29 Exmouth to Exeter St Davids due 00:04
23:47 Weston-Super-Mare to Bristol Temple Meads due 00:20

Plus 8 short workings.   All (I think - I may not have clicker through a few) due to train crew shortage.   Still - if you're stranded at home you could enjoy

Sunday 17 June
17 Jun 2018 CRC Costa Rica 13:00 SRB Serbia
17 Jun 2018 GER Germany 16:00 MEX Mexico
17 Jun 2018 BRA Brazil 19:00 SUI Switzerland

I look at that list and I guestimate that they're 25 to 30 drivers down; should not come an an overnight shock. All very well talking about T minus 12 coming down to T minus 2 or 3 - but this is T zero stuff.     Time for an emergency Sunday timetable of an hourly service Paddington to Bristol Parkway via Bristol Temple Meads, and an hourly Paddington to Swansea via Gloucester during Severn Tunnel Sunday closures, rather than an over-optimistic initial plan followed by very patchy cancellations to make for an unforecast and erratic service on the day?


Shouldn't this be in the "shortage of train crew " thread? By no means all of these services are IETs


Title: Re: IETs into passenger service from 16 Oct 2017 and subsequent performance issues
Post by: broadgage on June 17, 2018, 09:41:30 am
Indeed, half length new trains are primarily a weekday issue.(though the odd one appears at weekends)
No train at all due to lack of staff is primarily a weekend issue (though some weekday cancellations result from lack of staff)


Title: Re: IETs into passenger service from 16 Oct 2017 and subsequent performance issues
Post by: bobm on June 17, 2018, 12:02:32 pm
No doubt the official line from GWR would be:

"Due to the delay in electrification works and also the delay in acquiring new rolling stock, we have had to condense our driver training into a shorter timeframe so as to minimise disruption in the future. This requires our drivers to come in on allocated rest days to carry out training therefore they are unable to work weekends..... etc etc"


Instead of the far simpler explanation of:

"It's Fathers Day, and as a result many drivers have not turned up"


It is probably a combination of the two.  Drivers may have been away from home during the week attending classroom training sessions and don't feel inclined to be out of the house again today. 

As well as getting the training finished another big help to running Sunday services will be an agreement between GWR and ASLEF over making Sunday part of the working week rather than voluntary.  Talks are ongoing apparently.


Title: Re: IETs into passenger service from 16 Oct 2017 and subsequent performance issues
Post by: ellendune on June 17, 2018, 12:54:57 pm
It is probably a combination of the two.  Drivers may have been away from home during the week attending classroom training sessions and don't feel inclined to be out of the house again today. 

As well as getting the training finished another big help to running Sunday services will be an agreement between GWR and ASLEF over making Sunday part of the working week rather than voluntary.  Talks are ongoing apparently.

If drivers have attended training on a rest day during the week are they even permitted to work a Sunday? Surely drivers working 7 days a week is not a good idea on safety grounds. 


Title: Re: IETs into passenger service from 16 Oct 2017 and subsequent performance issues
Post by: IndustryInsider on June 17, 2018, 04:17:10 pm
As well as getting the training finished another big help to running Sunday services will be an agreement between GWR and ASLEF over making Sunday part of the working week rather than voluntary.  Talks are ongoing apparently.

They are indeed talking about it.  Though implementation date is not expected to be before January 2021 as it is recognised that a significant recruitment drive will be needed to bring it in and cover shifts for the rest of the week, and a trainee driver, once they have passed all the initial tests, take a year to become fully qualified.

However, if a 'harmonisation' deal which is currently being voted on passes (and it is likely to) any driver who is employed after that date will not have the option of throwing their Sunday away unless it is able to be covered by someone else, regardless of which sector they work for (some currently don't have that option anyway).  I believe this is what Broadgage suggested should happen.  Personally I think it will take several years to make much of a meaningful difference, and of course there's nothing stopping a driver from 'throwing a sickie' other than the fact that they would get no sick pay for it.

If drivers have attended training on a rest day during the week are they even permitted to work a Sunday? Surely drivers working 7 days a week is not a good idea on safety grounds. 

A minimum of one day off after thirteen consecutive days worked is the regulation which is nationwide following the Hidden Enquiry after the Clapham disaster.


Title: Re: IETs into passenger service from 16 Oct 2017 and subsequent performance issues
Post by: TaplowGreen on June 17, 2018, 04:29:36 pm
As well as getting the training finished another big help to running Sunday services will be an agreement between GWR and ASLEF over making Sunday part of the working week rather than voluntary.  Talks are ongoing apparently.

They are indeed talking about it.  Though implementation date is not expected to be before January 2021 as it is recognised that a significant recruitment drive will be needed to bring it in and cover shifts for the rest of the week, and a trainee driver, once they have passed all the initial tests, take a year to become fully qualified.



So three more years of this (to a greater or lesser degree) then?

GWR should have got this sorted out so that the latest tranche of recruits could not just opt out of Sunday working at will - they knew they were joining a 7 day a week operation, for God's sake it's not 1975 any more.

I know of no other service industry which feather beds its workers quite so much to the detriment of its performance and customers.


Title: Re: IETs into passenger service from 16 Oct 2017 and subsequent performance issues
Post by: IndustryInsider on June 17, 2018, 05:12:33 pm
So three more years of this (to a greater or lesser degree) then?

Yes.  Though perhaps better that than rush arrangements in and not have the cover and end up with even more cancellations over the rest of the week?  They should of course have attempted to get on top of it years ago.


Title: Re: IETs into passenger service from 16 Oct 2017 and subsequent performance issues
Post by: broadgage on June 19, 2018, 07:13:11 am
17 half length IETs today, so far. So much for the hope that the arrival of a couple of full length IETs might help.
Very poor show with the summer holiday season now underway.


Title: Re: IETs into passenger service from 16 Oct 2017 and subsequent performance issues
Post by: CharlieGCR on June 19, 2018, 07:46:04 am
Can’t wait for all the people going West on the 802s this August when they are cut in half!


Title: Re: IETs into passenger service from 16 Oct 2017 and subsequent performance issues
Post by: bobm on June 19, 2018, 07:55:22 am
17 half length IETs today, so far. So much for the hope that the arrival of a couple of full length IETs might help.
Very poor show with the summer holiday season now underway.

The two 9-cars won’t really change anything as they are on self-contained diagrams to new destinations. I suspect the contract specifies that in the same way as a failed HST cannot be replaced by an IET.


Title: Re: IETs into passenger service from 16 Oct 2017 and subsequent performance issues
Post by: Adelante_CCT on June 20, 2018, 10:20:27 am
Apparently no short forms planned at the moment, its strange not seeing loads of blue lines heading west from Paddington on the top left graphic.


Title: Re: IETs into passenger service from 16 Oct 2017 and subsequent performance issues
Post by: bobm on June 20, 2018, 10:22:45 am
Correct - GWR have confirmed they have had all the sets they need for traffic this morning.  Apparently for the first time in three months.


Title: Re: IETs into passenger service from 16 Oct 2017 and subsequent performance issues
Post by: IndustryInsider on June 20, 2018, 10:33:38 am
Does that mean the remaining units waiting acceptance have now joined the fleet?


Title: Re: IETs into passenger service from 16 Oct 2017 and subsequent performance issues
Post by: LiskeardRich on June 20, 2018, 11:31:32 am
As well as getting the training finished another big help to running Sunday services will be an agreement between GWR and ASLEF over making Sunday part of the working week rather than voluntary.  Talks are ongoing apparently.

They are indeed talking about it.  Though implementation date is not expected to be before January 2021 as it is recognised that a significant recruitment drive will be needed to bring it in and cover shifts for the rest of the week, and a trainee driver, once they have passed all the initial tests, take a year to become fully qualified.



So three more years of this (to a greater or lesser degree) then?

GWR should have got this sorted out so that the latest tranche of recruits could not just opt out of Sunday working at will - they knew they were joining a 7 day a week operation, for God's sake it's not 1975 any more.

I know of no other service industry which feather beds its workers quite so much to the detriment of its performance and customers.

Anyone in my work who started before 1994 can opt out of any Sunday. Those of us who started after have no choice, although a local unwritten agreement is in place on my department we can have either Saturday or Sunday off if wished. Nobody is contracted to work both weekend days unless voluntarily picked both for personal reasons of needing weekdays off.


Title: Re: IETs into passenger service from 16 Oct 2017 and subsequent performance issues
Post by: GBM on June 20, 2018, 01:31:40 pm
Quote
Anyone in my work who started before 1994 can opt out of any Sunday. Those of us who started after have no choice, although a local unwritten agreement is in place on my department we can have either Saturday or Sunday off if wished. Nobody is contracted to work both weekend days unless voluntarily picked both for personal reasons of needing weekdays off.

Admittedly not quite on topic, but; in First Kernow bus your contract states a 5 day out of 7 working days, which will include weekends and bank holidays. No choice but weekend and bank holiday working.




Edit note: Quote marks fixed, for clarity. CfN.


Title: Re: IETs into passenger service from 16 Oct 2017 and subsequent performance issues
Post by: Witham Bobby on June 20, 2018, 03:12:53 pm
Correct - GWR have confirmed they have had all the sets they need for traffic this morning.  Apparently for the first time in three months.

Seems to conflict with this, from Thatcham Crossing ...

Quote
I was arriving in PAD this morning and at around 1120 observed a 2-car 165 departing to Worcester Foregate Street, absolutely rammed to the gunnels.

As it left, the Chiltern (Parliamentary) 165 pulled in next door, and I think 1 person got off!




Title: Re: IETs into passenger service from 16 Oct 2017 and subsequent performance issues
Post by: SandTEngineer on June 20, 2018, 04:24:57 pm
Correct - GWR have confirmed they have had all the sets they need for traffic this morning.  Apparently for the first time in three months.

Seems to conflict with this, from Thatcham Crossing ...

Quote
I was arriving in PAD this morning and at around 1120 observed a 2-car 165 departing to Worcester Foregate Street, absolutely rammed to the gunnels.

As it left, the Chiltern (Parliamentary) 165 pulled in next door, and I think 1 person got off!

Its not planned for an IET but for a Class 165/166 Turbo (from RTT):

Quote
Schedule Information
WTT schedule UID C42010, identity 1W23
Runs SSuX between 21/05/2018 to 07/12/2018
Service code 25392003, headcode 7508
Express Passenger

Operational Information
Schedule from ITPS
Timed for 90mph max
Pathed as Class 165/1 or 166 (Turbo) DMU

Passenger Information
Retail Service ID GW7508
Seating: first & standard
Reservations available
Trolley service

Realtime Status
TRUST ID 731W23MI20
Running as 1W23
Activated 20/06/2018 10:20


Title: Re: IETs into passenger service from 16 Oct 2017 and subsequent performance issues
Post by: Worcester_Passenger on June 20, 2018, 04:38:18 pm
That may be what RTT shows, but it's not what is set out in timetable T6. Monday-to-Friday, the only Turbo workings are should be

    05:14 Oxford - Foregate St
    06:53 Foregate St - Didcot (the halts train)
    07:50 Paddington - Great Malvern
    09:50 Moreton-in-Marsh - Paddington
    10:59 Great Malvern - Paddington


Title: Re: IETs into passenger service from 16 Oct 2017 and subsequent performance issues
Post by: CharlieGCR on June 24, 2018, 10:45:13 am
Few short forms today including the Carmarthen service which calls at all stations to Gloucester additionally! Probably the worst service to short form today.


Title: Re: IETs into passenger service from 16 Oct 2017 and subsequent performance issues
Post by: a-driver on June 25, 2018, 10:34:57 pm
Several IET’s sets failed today with overheating issues causing engines to shut down. Will be interesting to see how this develops over the coming days.


Title: Re: IETs into passenger service from 16 Oct 2017 and subsequent performance issues
Post by: broadgage on June 26, 2018, 12:29:11 am
Will Hitachi be financially liable for the failures due to overheating ? Or is there some wiggle room ?


Title: Re: IETs into passenger service from 16 Oct 2017 and subsequent performance issues
Post by: Timmer on June 26, 2018, 06:31:52 am
Several IET’s sets failed today with overheating issues causing engines to shut down. Will be interesting to see how this develops over the coming days.

Oh pleaseeeeee no! This is a 21st century train that should be capeable of running in virtually any weather conditions. Thats poor.


Title: Re: IETs into passenger service from 16 Oct 2017 and subsequent performance issues
Post by: TaplowGreen on June 26, 2018, 07:17:29 am
Several IET’s sets failed today with overheating issues causing engines to shut down. Will be interesting to see how this develops over the coming days.

Oh pleaseeeeee no! This is a 21st century train that should be capeable of running in virtually any weather conditions. Thats poor.

Now that we have warm weather for a week or two the usual "poor track condition" chaos will no doubt kick in as well!


Title: Re: IETs into passenger service from 16 Oct 2017 and subsequent performance issues
Post by: charles_uk on June 26, 2018, 07:55:37 am
Several IET’s sets failed today with overheating issues causing engines to shut down. Will be interesting to see how this develops over the coming days.

Oh pleaseeeeee no! This is a 21st century train that should be capeable of running in virtually any weather conditions. Thats poor.

And lo...

Quote
Cancellations to services on all routes

Due to more trains than usual needing repairs at the same time fewer trains are able to run.

Train services running across the whole Great Western Railway network may be cancelled or revised. Disruption is expected until the end of the day.

Additional Information
Following a number of broken down trains yesterday evening; we are critically short of trains for todays' service - particularly on our London to Bristol / South Wales / Cheltenham / Worcester routes.

Engineering teams are working to repair as many trains as possible before this evenings' peak; but in the meantime services may be cancelled or formed of fewer coaches than normal.

Last Updated:26/06/2018 07:30


Title: Re: IETs into passenger service from 16 Oct 2017 and subsequent performance issues
Post by: broadgage on June 26, 2018, 08:03:34 am
Over a dozen half length IETs so far today.
Also several cancellations due to "more trains than usual needing repairs" I suspect that some of those are also IETs.

Edited, over 20 short formed IETs now.



Title: Re: IETs into passenger service from 16 Oct 2017 and subsequent performance issues
Post by: Birdie100 on June 26, 2018, 08:43:10 am
Does a short form service count towards the reliability metric for season ticket refunds? Presumably not, which would explain why it’s better for GWR to run more shortforms than half the ‘full service’ trains instead.


Title: Re: IETs into passenger service from 16 Oct 2017 and subsequent performance issues
Post by: didcotdean on June 26, 2018, 08:54:18 am
As GWR say:
Quote
Due to more trains than usual needing repairs at the same time fewer trains are able to run.
Impact:
Train services running across the whole Great Western Railway network may be cancelled or revised. Disruption is expected until the end of the day.
Additional Information:
Following a number of broken down trains yesterday evening; we are critically short of trains for todays' service - particularly on our London to Bristol / South Wales / Cheltenham / Worcester routes.
Engineering teams are working to repair as many trains as possible before this evenings' peak; but in the meantime services may be cancelled or formed of fewer coaches than normal.

Some HSTs having trouble as well and I can see some 387 running 4 vice 8.


Title: Re: IETs into passenger service from 16 Oct 2017 and subsequent performance issues
Post by: TaplowGreen on June 26, 2018, 09:08:41 am
Utterly hopeless- this is brand new kit for Christ's sake!.......and we haven't even started on cancellations due to "poor rail conditions" yet now that it's warm outside.


Title: Re: IETs into passenger service from 16 Oct 2017 and subsequent performance issues
Post by: SandTEngineer on June 26, 2018, 09:12:55 am
Just to be clear TG.  Its not poor rail conditions but generally caused by rails that haven't had time to be properly stressed due to recent relaying or renewal.  Last thing we need would be to have a buckled rail causing a high speed derailment.  Still a well known and managible situation though.  We used to hear less of it in those 'good old BR days!'.


Title: Re: IETs into passenger service from 16 Oct 2017 and subsequent performance issues
Post by: SandTEngineer on June 26, 2018, 09:18:42 am
According to 'insiders' on the WNXX Forum the engine overheating issue is being caused by blocked air filters under the body skirt.  What a brilliant place to put them......


Title: Re: IETs into passenger service from 16 Oct 2017 and subsequent performance issues
Post by: LiskeardRich on June 26, 2018, 09:28:17 am
  We used to hear less of it in those 'good old BR days!'.

Was that because we didn’t have social media, and such easy communications?



Title: Re: IETs into passenger service from 16 Oct 2017 and subsequent performance issues
Post by: SandTEngineer on June 26, 2018, 09:32:24 am
  We used to hear less of it in those 'good old BR days!'.

Was that because we didn’t have social media, and such easy communications?

Yes, that's what I was hinting at ;)


Title: Re: IETs into passenger service from 16 Oct 2017 and subsequent performance issues
Post by: stuving on June 26, 2018, 09:35:20 am
According to 'insiders' on the WNXX Forum the engine overheating issue is being caused by blocked air filters under the body skirt.  What a brilliant place to put them......

Given the motor/generator modules go under the floor, where else would the filters be? I was a bit surprised not to see the exhausts coming out of the roof (though they may do so, just being well hidden). But cooling air in and out has always been "down there", hasn't it?

But there are design issues to be got right or wrong, as always. Like how much filter capacity can be lost and still get full cooling, the inlet position and design (does it pick up litter as it goes along), how easy is it to check in servicing, and of course what the servicing schedule says. It may be just the last of those - i.e. "only software", but not in the computer sense (it's an item on a daily or weekly checklist).


Title: Re: IETs into passenger service from 16 Oct 2017 and subsequent performance issues
Post by: SandTEngineer on June 26, 2018, 09:38:34 am
According to 'insiders' on the WNXX Forum the engine overheating issue is being caused by blocked air filters under the body skirt.  What a brilliant place to put them......

Given the motor/generator modules go under the floor, where else would the filters be? I was a bit surprised not to see the exhausts coming out of the roof (though they may do so, just being well hidden). But cooling air in and out has always been "down there", hasn't it?

But there are design issues to be got right or wrong, as always. Like how much filter capacity can be lost and still get full cooling, the inlet position and design (does it pick up litter as it goes along), how easy is it to check in servicing, and of course what the servicing schedule says. It may be just the last of those - i.e. "only software", but not in the computer sense (it's an item on a daily or weekly checklist).

Yes, but toyally surrounded by a skirt which is stopping the free flow of air (apparently)....


Title: Re: IETs into passenger service from 16 Oct 2017 and subsequent performance issues
Post by: patch38 on June 26, 2018, 09:55:23 am
According to comments on another forum, one of the ten-car units that failed yesterday did so in Sapperton Tunnel. That must have caused chaos: the Golden Valley line is currently being used as the Severn Tunnel diversionary route and is way busier than usual with all the South Wales traffic.

One bonus - I bet it was lovely and cool in the tunnel itself... Shame the windows don't open!


Title: Re: IETs into passenger service from 16 Oct 2017 and subsequent performance issues
Post by: broadgage on June 26, 2018, 10:58:02 am
According to comments on another forum, one of the ten-car units that failed yesterday did so in Sapperton Tunnel. That must have caused chaos: the Golden Valley line is currently being used as the Severn Tunnel diversionary route and is way busier than usual with all the South Wales traffic.

One bonus - I bet it was lovely and cool in the tunnel itself... Shame the windows don't open!

Does anyone know what exactly caused this particular failure ?
It sounds to me as though ALL the engines must have failed. These units should be able to proceed at much reduced performance on just one engine, remembering that the nominally electric version only HAS a single engine, but can proceed at much reduced speed when the wires come down.

If all the engines did indeed fail, then that implies an absence of air conditioning and only minimal lighting.

Or was the failure not the engines, but something else?


Title: Re: IETs into passenger service from 16 Oct 2017 and subsequent performance issues
Post by: Worcester_Passenger on June 26, 2018, 12:53:05 pm
RTT has the 19:15 Paddington - Swansea as a possible - see http://www.realtimetrains.co.uk/train/C40095/2018/06/25/advanced (http://www.realtimetrains.co.uk/train/C40095/2018/06/25/advanced).


Title: Re: IETs into passenger service from 16 Oct 2017 and subsequent performance issues
Post by: BBM on June 26, 2018, 02:01:01 pm
The following has just appeared under 'Significant Disruption' in JourneyCheck and I think it surely must have appeared there by mistake?

Quote
Colleague Assault report - 1B22

Customer Host 1B22 10:15 London Paddington to Swansea advises of a colleague accident the occurred on board.
Customer was dispensing hot water from the standard class trolley in vehicle 812020 when the spout has moved of its own accord and spilt hot water all over the hand of the customer host.
Occurrence has been reported to Hitachi Maintenance.
Guards Comp Manager Swansea will meet customer host for welfare check and to complete accident paperwork.

Last Updated:26/06/2018 13:52


Title: Re: IETs into passenger service from 16 Oct 2017 and subsequent performance issues
Post by: broadgage on June 26, 2018, 02:09:41 pm
So was it an assault or an accident ?


Title: Re: IETs into passenger service from 16 Oct 2017 and subsequent performance issues
Post by: SandTEngineer on June 26, 2018, 02:26:52 pm
Well here is a report from another 'Industry Insider' (no not our one :) ) on the WNXX Forum:

Quote
The radiator vanes sit behind the intercooler vanes and there is a non accessible gap between the two. Hitachi have been keeping the intercooler vanes clean but they (wrongly) assumed that the radiator vanes were equally clean. They were in fact becoming clogged solid.

There is now some rapid cleaning going on to release sets back in traffic.

How this got past design review and test, I don't know. It is not as if the need to keep radiators clean on underfloor DMU's travelling at 100mph or more, especially in harvest, pollen or leaf fall seasons, is unknown in the UK.



Title: Re: IETs into passenger service from 16 Oct 2017 and subsequent performance issues
Post by: bignosemac on June 26, 2018, 02:55:33 pm
The following has just appeared under 'Significant Disruption' in JourneyCheck and I think it surely must have appeared there by mistake?

Quote
Colleague Assault report - 1B22

Customer Host 1B22 10:15 London Paddington to Swansea advises of a colleague accident the occurred on board.
Customer was dispensing hot water from the standard class trolley in vehicle 812020 when the spout has moved of its own accord and spilt hot water all over the hand of the customer host.
Occurrence has been reported to Hitachi Maintenance.
Guards Comp Manager Swansea will meet customer host for welfare check and to complete accident paperwork.

Last Updated:26/06/2018 13:52

I do hope BTP were called to arrest the catering trolley for this alleged assault on a member of staff just doing their job. It's hard enough having to deal with the great British public day in, day out, particularly when said public are so put upon by the woeful service provided by GWR, without the equipment getting uppity too.

That said, there are two sides to every story. So I'll wait to hear the catering trolley's version of events before pronouncing it a criminal.


Title: Re: IETs into passenger service from 16 Oct 2017 and subsequent performance issues
Post by: IndustryInsider on June 26, 2018, 03:11:39 pm
Well here is a report from another 'Industry Insider' (no not our one :) ) on the WNXX Forum:

Quote
The radiator vanes sit behind the intercooler vanes and there is a non accessible gap between the two. Hitachi have been keeping the intercooler vanes clean but they (wrongly) assumed that the radiator vanes were equally clean. They were in fact becoming clogged solid.

There is now some rapid cleaning going on to release sets back in traffic.

How this got past design review and test, I don't know. It is not as if the need to keep radiators clean on underfloor DMU's travelling at 100mph or more, especially in harvest, pollen or leaf fall seasons, is unknown in the UK.

Sounds like a less than ideal design, but with a manageable remedy in terms of just altering cleaning/maintenance procedures.


Title: Re: IETs into passenger service from 16 Oct 2017 and subsequent performance issues
Post by: Adelante_CCT on June 26, 2018, 03:20:11 pm
Perhaps the BTP should be called, it says the customer was dispensing the hot water, not the host!  :)


Title: Re: IETs into passenger service from 16 Oct 2017 and subsequent performance issues
Post by: stuving on June 26, 2018, 05:49:08 pm
Well here is a report from another 'Industry Insider' (no not our one :) ) on the WNXX Forum:

Quote
The radiator vanes sit behind the intercooler vanes and there is a non accessible gap between the two. Hitachi have been keeping the intercooler vanes clean but they (wrongly) assumed that the radiator vanes were equally clean. They were in fact becoming clogged solid.

There is now some rapid cleaning going on to release sets back in traffic.

How this got past design review and test, I don't know. It is not as if the need to keep radiators clean on underfloor DMU's travelling at 100mph or more, especially in harvest, pollen or leaf fall seasons, is unknown in the UK.

Sounds like a less than ideal design, but with a manageable remedy in terms of just altering cleaning/maintenance procedures.

I'd agree -  and that the designers didn't manage one of the objectives of engineering design: to spot in advance everything that could go wrong. Or it might be a bit more complicated - like originally there was to be a filter in front of the intercooler to prevent anything at all big getting in, but it was found to reduce the flow too much so was removed from the design at a later stage.


Title: Re: IETs into passenger service from 16 Oct 2017 and subsequent performance issues
Post by: a-driver on June 26, 2018, 07:20:07 pm
Will Hitachi be financially liable for the failures due to overheating ? Or is there some wiggle room ?

I suppose Hitachi could argue that they were designed to run under the wires for most of their journeys and not so extensively on diesel.


Title: Re: IETs into passenger service from 16 Oct 2017 and subsequent performance issues
Post by: SandTEngineer on June 26, 2018, 08:24:55 pm
Will Hitachi be financially liable for the failures due to overheating ? Or is there some wiggle room ?

I suppose Hitachi could argue that they were designed to run under the wires for most of their journeys and not so extensively on diesel.
Wasn't the Hitachi/DfT contract re-negotiated to cover all the extra diesel mileage/engines?  Wheres STUVING when you need him?.... :)


Title: Re: IETs into passenger service from 16 Oct 2017 and subsequent performance issues
Post by: stuving on June 26, 2018, 09:05:34 pm
Will Hitachi be financially liable for the failures due to overheating ? Or is there some wiggle room ?

I suppose Hitachi could argue that they were designed to run under the wires for most of their journeys and not so extensively on diesel.
Wasn't the Hitachi/DfT contract re-negotiated to cover all the extra diesel mileage/engines?  Wheres STUVING when you need him?.... :)

In this case I don't know, indeed I was going to ask about this very point only last week when IndustryInsider said this:
Quote
It would indeed be unusual to withdraw one from service because one of the engines was out.  I have seen several running in service with one engine out before, and as Broadgage says power output increases in the remaining engines.

That's not true unless the power is limited to below 700 kW. But I have seen very confident assertions, by reporters who look like they should be believed, that the original restriction had been lifted. So, does anyone know for certain sure?


Title: Re: IETs into passenger service from 16 Oct 2017 and subsequent performance issues
Post by: broadgage on June 27, 2018, 09:29:02 am
15 half length IETs today, so far.
This might suggest that something more than cleaning radiators is required since that should have been possible overnight.
It does sound like a poor design if the radiators cant be easily inspected and cleaned.

Very negative report yesterday evening on the TV news regarding the state of GWR services. Poor quality reporting that did not differentiate between new shorter trains, high track temperatures, and signal failures.


Title: Re: IETs into passenger service from 16 Oct 2017 and subsequent performance issues
Post by: TaplowGreen on June 27, 2018, 02:00:54 pm
https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/amp/uk-england-44629151?__twitter_impression=true

Rather embarrassing. I note the message on Journeycheck has been hastily amended with the word "critical" excised!


Title: Re: IETs into passenger service from 16 Oct 2017 and subsequent performance issues
Post by: a-driver on June 27, 2018, 03:31:55 pm
https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/amp/uk-england-44629151?__twitter_impression=true

Rather embarrassing. I note the message on Journeycheck has been hastily amended with the word "critical" excised!

All this points to is the DfT trying to run franchises with the bare minimum number of trains to cover a weekday timetable to suit the accountants. It hasn’t worked for the passenger in the past, it doesn’t work now and it won’t work in the future.


Title: Re: IETs into passenger service from 16 Oct 2017 and subsequent performance issues
Post by: IndustryInsider on June 27, 2018, 03:36:56 pm
I guess GWR would describe it internally as 'critical' whenever the booked number of diagrams can't be covered with stock available, so I could see why that wording would be used as the train plan can't be delivered fully.  To the casual observer the word critical might imply that there were hardly any trains available at all, so I can see why such wording has been jumped on by the press.

Of course the train plan hasn't been covered properly for on days recently, so the phrase critical loses its meaning somewhat anyway, but there should of course be enough trains to cover all the daily diagrams with allowances for routine maintenance and last minute failures.

Regarding IET shortages today, it looks like there are just three diagrams running around short which has been pretty common recently with the additional units out on training runs.  One of the diagrams is showing 5 cars instead of 8, so it looks like an IET is being used to cover a shortage of HST's, and that would leave another IET diagram short of course.  I would not think this is therefore down to any radiator cleaning problems particularly.


Title: Re: IETs into passenger service from 16 Oct 2017 and subsequent performance issues
Post by: broadgage on June 27, 2018, 03:48:39 pm
And whom predicted that "single 5 car operation will be a regular feature, as with Voyagers" Advocates of the new units pointed to various facts, figures, forecasts, and projections, to show that all busy services would be full length.

I simply looked at previous generations of new trains, and forecast that these would be similar. We have now had a few months of regular short formations.

Many reports/complaints also refer to the air conditioning not working properly, or at all. I also predicted that it would not cope with a crush loaded train and 40 degrees outside air. Advocates of the new fun sized trains suggested that coping with 40 degrees outside air was needless because it wont that hot.
40 degrees is indeed well in excess of that ever recorded by the Met office at an official met office weather station.
I suspect that 40 degrees IS BEING reached at engine height, in bright sun, and with another train adjacent.


Title: Re: IETs into passenger service from 16 Oct 2017 and subsequent performance issues
Post by: a-driver on June 27, 2018, 04:15:00 pm
And whom predicted that "single 5 car operation will be a regular feature, as with Voyagers" Advocates of the new units pointed to various facts, figures, forecasts, and projections, to show that all busy services would be full length.

I simply looked at previous generations of new trains, and forecast that these would be similar. We have now had a few months of regular short formations.

Many reports/complaints also refer to the air conditioning not working properly, or at all. I also predicted that it would not cope with a crush loaded train and 40 degrees outside air. Advocates of the new fun sized trains suggested that coping with 40 degrees outside air was needless because it wont that hot.
40 degrees is indeed well in excess of that ever recorded by the Met office at an official met office weather station.
I suspect that 40 degrees IS BEING reached at engine height, in bright sun, and with another train adjacent.

I’ve heard that the IET’s that failed due to overheating had engine temperatures running in excess of 110°c


Title: Re: IETs into passenger service from 16 Oct 2017 and subsequent performance issues
Post by: broadgage on June 27, 2018, 04:31:34 pm
Overbeating indeed :) since when did beating a DMU help ? It might urge a horse to greater efforts, but is cruel and should not be contemplated.

More seriously, 110 degrees sounds rather high, but I don't know what the normal operating temperature is, nor the limiting temperature if different.

Large MTU diesels with which I am familiar had a thermostatic cooling fan that was controlled to keep the engine coolant at about 85 degrees if possible. It could go higher in hot weather and at full load.
The temperature warning light came on at 95 degrees, and the engine tripped at 105 degrees.
This was for electric power generation, not traction.


Title: Re: IETs into passenger service from 16 Oct 2017 and subsequent performance issues
Post by: IndustryInsider on June 27, 2018, 05:10:59 pm
I could understand all these comments if IET's were failing all over the place, but they're not.  I can understand Broadgage clambering on-board any issues to try and prove his theories and agree with him that GWR have handled the introduction of the trains poorly, but given the amount of new technology in the trains themselves, I think they're doing pretty well.  Not perfect, as the overheating engine issue earlier in the week proved, but pretty well.  Even that issue seems to have been resolved with a pretty simple change to maintenance inspections.


Title: Re: IETs into passenger service from 16 Oct 2017 and subsequent performance issues
Post by: PhilWakely on June 27, 2018, 05:25:44 pm
I could understand all these comments if IET's were failing all over the place, but they're not.  I can understand Broadgage clambering on-board any issues to try and prove his theories and agree with him that GWR have handled the introduction of the trains poorly, but given the amount of new technology in the trains themselves, I think they're doing pretty well.  Not perfect, as the overheating engine issue earlier in the week proved, but pretty well.  Even that issue seems to have been resolved with a pretty simple change to maintenance inspections.

I remember 1976 and the introduction of the new InterCity 125 trains. They had their fair share of teething problems. The only differences between then and now were that the failures were easier to fix; more bods available to do the fixing; and plenty of spare loco-hauled rolling stock to cover for the failures.


Title: Re: IETs into passenger service from 16 Oct 2017 and subsequent performance issues
Post by: TaplowGreen on June 27, 2018, 06:44:44 pm
I could understand all these comments if IET's were failing all over the place, but they're not.  I can understand Broadgage clambering on-board any issues to try and prove his theories and agree with him that GWR have handled the introduction of the trains poorly, but given the amount of new technology in the trains themselves, I think they're doing pretty well.  Not perfect, as the overheating engine issue earlier in the week proved, but pretty well.  Even that issue seems to have been resolved with a pretty simple change to maintenance inspections.

GWR however have an unfortunate twin track - an MD who lacks the courage and integrity to stand up, admit his failures, apologise, given an honest account of the problems, articulate lessons learned and the road/timeline to recovery (even the despicable O'Leary of Ryanair held his hands up eventually),  combined with an infantile PR/Marketing department, apparently headed by Comical Ali, who promote twee rubbish like the Famous Five Campaign whilst all around is disintegrating.


Until the organisation has the culture and ability to communicate with its customers honestly and effectively, forget any improvement in public perception or image. The (well founded) cynicism will only get worse.


Title: Re: IETs into passenger service from 16 Oct 2017 and subsequent performance issues
Post by: a-driver on June 27, 2018, 06:49:35 pm
Overbeating indeed :) since when did beating a DMU help ? It might urge a horse to greater efforts, but is cruel and should not be contemplated.


Unfortunately the letter ‘h’ buckled in the severe heat and ended up as a ‘b’.  ;D

I don’t think the introduction has been handled badly by GWR, I just think you’re going to get more issues when you’re forced to rapidly introduce new trains as opposed to the planned phased introduction.


Title: Re: IETs into passenger service from 16 Oct 2017 and subsequent performance issues
Post by: IndustryInsider on June 27, 2018, 06:51:45 pm
I remember 1976 and the introduction of the new InterCity 125 trains. They had their fair share of teething problems. The only differences between then and now were that the failures were easier to fix; more bods available to do the fixing; and plenty of spare loco-hauled rolling stock to cover for the failures.

The other difference is that Internet forums weren’t quite so well established in 1976...


Title: Re: IETs into passenger service from 16 Oct 2017 and subsequent performance issues
Post by: grahame on June 27, 2018, 08:01:02 pm
I don’t think the introduction has been handled badly by GWR, I just think you’re going to get more issues when you’re forced to rapidly introduce new trains as opposed to the planned phased introduction.

First new train 16th October 2017 with a couple of diagrams, further diagrams every few weeks.  Firstly South Wales and Bristol turns, then some extensions to Taunton an Carmarthen.  Followed by north and south Cotswolds.   Hereford services to come, and next month there's a start made on the South West services.   Initially 5 car trains were introduced; now 9 car ones are coming on tap too.   Looks very much like a planned phased introduction to me!


Title: Re: IETs into passenger service from 16 Oct 2017 and subsequent performance issues
Post by: CharlieGCR on June 27, 2018, 09:52:49 pm
It annoys me when people moan about these trains. They were designed how they were ordered, yes the HST has reached 6mph more, as much as it’s lifechanging, we are not going to be seeing 150mph line speeds anytime soon. Are the HSTs practical for th next decade? I think not.

GWR could have used conmon sense for this but hopefully it will be sorted.


Title: Re: IETs into passenger service from 16 Oct 2017 and subsequent performance issues
Post by: a-driver on June 27, 2018, 11:24:05 pm
I don’t think the introduction has been handled badly by GWR, I just think you’re going to get more issues when you’re forced to rapidly introduce new trains as opposed to the planned phased introduction.

First new train 16th October 2017 with a couple of diagrams, further diagrams every few weeks.  Firstly South Wales and Bristol turns, then some extensions to Taunton an Carmarthen.  Followed by north and south Cotswolds.   Hereford services to come, and next month there's a start made on the South West services.   Initially 5 car trains were introduced; now 9 car ones are coming on tap too.   Looks very much like a planned phased introduction to me!

HST sets started going off lease in July/August 2017 having had their lease contracts extended for as long as possible.  The lease for the Porterbrook HST’s all expired in 09/17 with the remaining HSTs gone by 01/19
The original plan was for the first IET to be delivered by the end of 2014 with testing completed by March 2015.  The date of the first 5-car IET being accepted was scheduled for 25/05/17 with them all delivered by 08/02/18.
The acceptance of the 9-cars was scheduled to commence on the 15/02/18 with them all delivered by 06/07/18
This is what I mean by a forced introduction.  They are being forced into passenger traffic because there is no alternative, there is no HST back up. Putting them into passenger traffic then has a knock on effect when it comes to training as they don’t have any units available to train on.  This is why you’re now getting 5-car IET’s running in passenger train. 
Hitachi, at the time, didn’t their trains were ready to enter traffic.  They still wanted more time for testing.
Today, they had 29 IETs when they needed 32.  HST wise, they had 30 sets available when they needed 33.



Title: Re: IETs into passenger service from 16 Oct 2017 and subsequent performance issues
Post by: grahame on June 28, 2018, 06:00:16 am
I don’t think the introduction has been handled badly by GWR, I just think you’re going to get more issues when you’re forced to rapidly introduce new trains as opposed to the planned phased introduction.

First new train 16th October 2017 with a couple of diagrams, further diagrams every few weeks.  Firstly South Wales and Bristol turns, then some extensions to Taunton an Carmarthen.  Followed by north and south Cotswolds.   Hereford services to come, and next month there's a start made on the South West services.   Initially 5 car trains were introduced; now 9 car ones are coming on tap too.   Looks very much like a planned phased introduction to me!

HST sets started going off lease in July/August 2017 having had their lease contracts extended for as long as possible.  The lease for the Porterbrook HST’s all expired in 09/17 with the remaining HSTs gone by 01/19
The original plan was for the first IET to be delivered by the end of 2014 with testing completed by March 2015.  The date of the first 5-car IET being accepted was scheduled for 25/05/17 with them all delivered by 08/02/18.
The acceptance of the 9-cars was scheduled to commence on the 15/02/18 with them all delivered by 06/07/18
This is what I mean by a forced introduction.  They are being forced into passenger traffic because there is no alternative, there is no HST back up. Putting them into passenger traffic then has a knock on effect when it comes to training as they don’t have any units available to train on.  This is why you’re now getting 5-car IET’s running in passenger train. 
Hitachi, at the time, didn’t their trains were ready to enter traffic.  They still wanted more time for testing.
Today, they had 29 IETs when they needed 32.  HST wise, they had 30 sets available when they needed 33.



Indeed they would have liked longer and have had some very serious shortage, testing and training issues to contend with that have changed the original timescale.  But only in the rail industry would a process that takes over a year to change trains be describes as rapid, and a process in which we've been looking ahead to next January for the last 12 months fail to b described as planned.   And without all the trains changing at the same time, I don't see how the word phased cannot be applied.

There are examples of rapid in our rail industry.  How long did the new station at Workington North take to build and open?  And how long did it take to add the temporary car park at Tiverton Parkway during the Dawlish blockade - indeed look how quickly the whole works were done at Dawlish. 


Title: Re: IETs into passenger service from 16 Oct 2017 and subsequent performance issues
Post by: a-driver on June 28, 2018, 07:18:06 am
I don’t think the introduction has been handled badly by GWR, I just think you’re going to get more issues when you’re forced to rapidly introduce new trains as opposed to the planned phased introduction.

First new train 16th October 2017 with a couple of diagrams, further diagrams every few weeks.  Firstly South Wales and Bristol turns, then some extensions to Taunton an Carmarthen.  Followed by north and south Cotswolds.   Hereford services to come, and next month there's a start made on the South West services.   Initially 5 car trains were introduced; now 9 car ones are coming on tap too.   Looks very much like a planned phased introduction to me!

HST sets started going off lease in July/August 2017 having had their lease contracts extended for as long as possible.  The lease for the Porterbrook HST’s all expired in 09/17 with the remaining HSTs gone by 01/19
The original plan was for the first IET to be delivered by the end of 2014 with testing completed by March 2015.  The date of the first 5-car IET being accepted was scheduled for 25/05/17 with them all delivered by 08/02/18.
The acceptance of the 9-cars was scheduled to commence on the 15/02/18 with them all delivered by 06/07/18
This is what I mean by a forced introduction.  They are being forced into passenger traffic because there is no alternative, there is no HST back up. Putting them into passenger traffic then has a knock on effect when it comes to training as they don’t have any units available to train on.  This is why you’re now getting 5-car IET’s running in passenger train. 
Hitachi, at the time, didn’t their trains were ready to enter traffic.  They still wanted more time for testing.
Today, they had 29 IETs when they needed 32.  HST wise, they had 30 sets available when they needed 33.



Indeed they would have liked longer and have had some very serious shortage, testing and training issues to contend with that have changed the original timescale.  But only in the rail industry would a process that takes over a year to change trains be describes as rapid, and a process in which we've been looking ahead to next January for the last 12 months fail to b described as planned.   And without all the trains changing at the same time, I don't see how the word phased cannot be applied.

There are examples of rapid in our rail industry.  How long did the new station at Workington North take to build and open?  And how long did it take to add the temporary car park at Tiverton Parkway during the Dawlish blockade - indeed look how quickly the whole works were done at Dawlish. 

There’s a plan and to an extent it is a phased entry, but that phased entry is driven by a lack of other suitable rolling stock namely the HST.  Had every part of the project, electrification, train delivery and testing etc been on time, the phased introduction would have been based on available crew and you wouldn’t have had those situations where services were cancelled because there was a lack of a trained driver. 
The first run of a 9-car set wasn’t planned.  They were told it’s not available for use but a lack of other stock means it was forced into use.
The company is having to train, at a guess, 400-500 drivers maybe more, on the IET. It takes the best part of a month to train one driver.  That’s a huge undertaking and given the training stipulations made by Hitachi it’s been a job well done, it’s not been perfect though. 
The IET was due to enter traffic in the West Country next month, unlikely to happen as there’s still a host of operating restrictions on them which haven’t been cleared by NR which means it’s now looking like it’ll be August.  This will stretch the HSTs even further and also,  those West Country drivers already passed as competent may be required to go back to the classroom to refresh their IET knowledge.
Training a driver isn’t as simple as building a car park!


Title: Re: IETs into passenger service from 16 Oct 2017 and subsequent performance issues
Post by: TaplowGreen on June 28, 2018, 09:02:29 am
Two very good explanations from a-driver.

What a pity the GWR hierarchy haven't seen fit to be so frank & honest with their customers. Had they done so, they may not have found themselves & their organisation treated with so much ridicule & contempt.


Title: Re: IETs into passenger service from 16 Oct 2017 and subsequent performance issues
Post by: WelshBluebird on June 28, 2018, 09:55:14 am
People trying to shame GWR on twitter because their train says “delayed” and turns out to be one minute late.

At least speaking from my own experience, that is usually down to the live departure boards just saying "delayed" which means that the passenger may not know it will just be 1 minute late when they tweet.


Title: Re: IETs into passenger service from 16 Oct 2017 and subsequent performance issues
Post by: didcotdean on June 28, 2018, 09:59:14 am
The contrast is with TfL which is spending an age phasing in the Class 345, having the backstop of no real pressure regarding redeployment of the 315s that they are replacing out of Liverpool Street.


Title: Re: IETs into passenger service from 16 Oct 2017 and subsequent performance issues
Post by: Sixty3Closure on June 28, 2018, 01:46:58 pm
People trying to shame GWR on twitter because their train says “delayed” and turns out to be one minute late.

At least speaking from my own experience, that is usually down to the live departure boards just saying "delayed" which means that the passenger may not know it will just be 1 minute late when they tweet.

Bit like when it says 'on time' and is then cancelled. I think unfortunately GWR's track record (no pun intended) means people won't give them the benefit of the doubt any more. 


Title: Re: IETs into passenger service from 16 Oct 2017 and subsequent performance issues
Post by: YouKnowNothing on June 28, 2018, 09:20:28 pm

Is there a published programme for the stock introduction?

I don’t think the introduction has been handled badly by GWR, I just think you’re going to get more issues when you’re forced to rapidly introduce new trains as opposed to the planned phased introduction.

First new train 16th October 2017 with a couple of diagrams, further diagrams every few weeks.  Firstly South Wales and Bristol turns, then some extensions to Taunton an Carmarthen.  Followed by north and south Cotswolds.   Hereford services to come, and next month there's a start made on the South West services.   Initially 5 car trains were introduced; now 9 car ones are coming on tap too.   Looks very much like a planned phased introduction to me!

HST sets started going off lease in July/August 2017 having had their lease contracts extended for as long as possible.  The lease for the Porterbrook HST’s all expired in 09/17 with the remaining HSTs gone by 01/19
The original plan was for the first IET to be delivered by the end of 2014 with testing completed by March 2015.  The date of the first 5-car IET being accepted was scheduled for 25/05/17 with them all delivered by 08/02/18.
The acceptance of the 9-cars was scheduled to commence on the 15/02/18 with them all delivered by 06/07/18
This is what I mean by a forced introduction.  They are being forced into passenger traffic because there is no alternative, there is no HST back up. Putting them into passenger traffic then has a knock on effect when it comes to training as they don’t have any units available to train on.  This is why you’re now getting 5-car IET’s running in passenger train. 
Hitachi, at the time, didn’t their trains were ready to enter traffic.  They still wanted more time for testing.
Today, they had 29 IETs when they needed 32.  HST wise, they had 30 sets available when they needed 33.




Title: Re: IETs into passenger service from 16 Oct 2017 and subsequent performance issues
Post by: Sixty3Closure on July 02, 2018, 06:15:51 pm
Had my first journey in one and apparently it was the first run for the train itself so I'm guessing it was one of the 9 cars ones. 17.06 to Frome (or it might be Westbury seems to vary).

Sadly not a great experience as the train manager announced the doors wouldn't be opening in carriages A+B only for them not to open in C either. Mad rush to get off hindered by the refreshments trolley half way down coach C. The train crew didn't know why the doors hadn't opened and didn't seem able to over-ride it. A shame to start a maiden voyage late after the first stop.

Not quite as bad as the delay on the 12 car EMUs at Maidenhead though

Can't comment on the seats as didn't have one but i did find the vestible quite dark and cramped compared to the 125s and it was difficult to work out which coach I was in.


Title: Re: IETs into passenger service from 16 Oct 2017 and subsequent performance issues
Post by: TaplowGreen on July 02, 2018, 06:26:22 pm
Had my first journey in one and apparently it was the first run for the train itself so I'm guessing it was one of the 9 cars ones. 17.06 to Frome (or it might be Westbury seems to vary).

Sadly not a great experience as the train manager announced the doors wouldn't be opening in carriages A+B only for them not to open in C either. Mad rush to get off hindered by the refreshments trolley half way down coach C. The train crew didn't know why the doors hadn't opened and didn't seem able to over-ride it. A shame to start a maiden voyage late after the first stop.

Not quite as bad as the delay on the 12 car EMUs at Maidenhead though

Can't comment on the seats as didn't have one but i did find the vestible quite dark and cramped compared to the 125s and it was difficult to work out which coach I was in.

Sounds like a fantastic experience! 🙈


Title: Re: IETs into passenger service from 16 Oct 2017 and subsequent performance issues
Post by: FarWestJohn on July 02, 2018, 06:55:05 pm
Sounds like one of the better experiences of an IET.


Title: Re: IETs into passenger service from 16 Oct 2017 and subsequent performance issues
Post by: IndustryInsider on July 02, 2018, 08:21:30 pm
It barely lost any time enroute which was good to see.


Title: Re: IETs into passenger service from 16 Oct 2017 and subsequent performance issues
Post by: bobm on July 03, 2018, 05:17:03 am
According to Journeycheck the 17:07 to Frome is likely to be five coaches rather than nine tonight. 

Should solve the problem with short platforms at least.


Title: Re: IETs into passenger service from 16 Oct 2017 and subsequent performance issues
Post by: CharlieGCR on July 03, 2018, 06:54:03 am
First short form to Cheltenham last night, full and standing up to Gloucester in most coaches. 17:42 service.


Title: Re: IETs into passenger service from 16 Oct 2017 and subsequent performance issues
Post by: broadgage on July 03, 2018, 07:28:43 am
24 half length IETs today, mainly 5 car instead of 10 car, but some 5 car instead of 9 also.

Outside of these forums and the rail industry, hardly anyone believes that the new trains are an improvement.
Two neighbours have travelled on what I believe were IETs, both thought that a "local train" had been sent instead of an "intercity train" The reduced train length, the absence of a buffet, the hard seats, and no reservations, all suggested "local type of train"
One person even stated that "it will be OK when they get the new trains" and was shocked by my statement that these ARE the new trains.

There is considerable anger in the West country tourist industry that this downgrade is deterring visitors.


Title: Re: IETs into passenger service from 16 Oct 2017 and subsequent performance issues
Post by: Sixty3Closure on July 03, 2018, 08:20:19 am
According to Journeycheck the 17:07 to Frome is likely to be five coaches rather than nine tonight. 

Should solve the problem with short platforms at least.

Well that's going to be cosy especially if the 17.18 is 3 coaches again (which is the only reason I ended up on the delayed 17.07).



Title: Re: IETs into passenger service from 16 Oct 2017 and subsequent performance issues
Post by: ellendune on July 03, 2018, 06:10:27 pm
1A07 The 06:48 from Weston Super Mare to Paddington, the 08:12 from Swindon sat down at Didcot this morning with an electrical fault.  After a while we were advised to detrain as they would have to reset the train which would lock the doors for 5 minutes.  We were then advised to take the following train which came in on Platform 4.  This waited a while and was very crowded.  Then amazingly 1A07 went forward first and we waited longer before taking the relief line all the way to Reading, passing the nearly empty and once more stopped 1A07 at Moreton Cutting.

We arrived eventually at Reading on a train that was 25 late having just been overtaken again by 1A07 on the approach to Reading. 1A07 was 50 late at Reading and lost more time before reaching Paddington just after the later train 64 late.

Why could our train, which had most of 1A07's passengers and was ready to depart not allowed to leave Didcot only 10 late?  It could have then arrived at Reading not too late.  Instead a nearly empty train with a fault was given priority and proceeded to block the main line!


Title: Re: IETs into passenger service from 16 Oct 2017 and subsequent performance issues
Post by: TaplowGreen on July 03, 2018, 06:40:13 pm
1A07 The 06:48 from Weston Super Mare to Paddington, the 08:12 from Swindon sat down at Didcot this morning with an electrical fault.  After a while we were advised to detrain as they would have to reset the train which would lock the doors for 5 minutes.  We were then advised to take the following train which came in on Platform 4.  This waited a while and was very crowded.  Then amazingly 1A07 went forward first and we waited longer before taking the relief line all the way to Reading, passing the nearly empty and once more stopped 1A07 at Moreton Cutting.

We arrived eventually at Reading on a train that was 25 late having just been overtaken again by 1A07 on the approach to Reading. 1A07 was 50 late at Reading and lost more time before reaching Paddington just after the later train 64 late.

Why could our train, which had most of 1A07's passengers and was ready to depart not allowed to leave Didcot only 10 late?  It could have then arrived at Reading not too late.  Instead a nearly empty train with a fault was given priority and proceeded to block the main line!

Because GWR couldn't give a toss about their customers.


Title: Re: IETs into passenger service from 16 Oct 2017 and subsequent performance issues
Post by: broadgage on July 03, 2018, 06:50:52 pm
To be diplomatic, the decision may have been made by network rail who control the signals and other infrastructure, rather than by GWR.
Whoever made the decision though, it does seem very poor planning to give fast line priority to an empty train known to be sick whilst delaying  a fully loaded passenger train on the relief line.

So someone cares little for the passengers even if it might not have been GWR this time.


Title: Re: IETs into passenger service from 16 Oct 2017 and subsequent performance issues
Post by: broadgage on July 04, 2018, 12:03:24 pm
Similar today, about 27 half length trains.


Title: Re: IETs into passenger service from 16 Oct 2017 and subsequent performance issues
Post by: IndustryInsider on July 04, 2018, 12:15:26 pm
Yes, very very poor indeed.  The only improvement I've seen (and it is based only on visual observation) is the number of 10-car units running with half locked out of use, an even worse scenario, appears to have thankfully reduced quite substantially.


Title: Re: IETs into passenger service from 16 Oct 2017 and subsequent performance issues
Post by: broadgage on July 04, 2018, 01:11:34 pm
Yes, we seem to have progressed from "no staff for the other 5 car unit" to "5 car only"

What is the present excuse for routine short formations ? is it still the apparently unforeseeable need to train staff on the new stock.
Or simply a case of the new trains not working.

Advocates of the new shorter DMUs will no doubt state that in fact they are doing fine, and that the short formations are actually an advantage of the new shorter trains, on the grounds that half a train is better than no train.
Had we retained proper intercity trains, I doubt that we would have had cancellations on the scale of the present short formations.

Whilst full length trains no doubt remain a future aspiration, for the here and now the downgrade is worse than expected.

And even when we do achieve full length trains, these are still nasty outer suburban DMUs and not proper intercity trains.
This is not just my view, look at the reviews on trip advisor, trustpilot and similar websites.
My feelings about downgrading from a buffet to a trolley are well known, but a study of customer reviews suggests that many people expect a buffet on an intercity service, not just me.
The absence of reservations, hard and small seats, non functioning air conditioning, and limited luggage space are all frequent causes of complaint.


Title: Re: IETs into passenger service from 16 Oct 2017 and subsequent performance issues
Post by: Timmer on July 04, 2018, 02:20:28 pm
My feelings about downgrading from a buffet to a trolley are well known, but a study of customer reviews suggests that many people expect a buffet on an intercity service, not just me.
The absence of reservations, hard and small seats, non functioning air conditioning, and limited luggage space are all frequent causes of complaint.
You can thank Dft for all that you have listed to be wrong with the new trains on the GW network. Be interesting to see what the feedback is like once they start running on the East Coast mainline.


Title: Re: IETs into passenger service from 16 Oct 2017 and subsequent performance issues
Post by: broadgage on July 04, 2018, 02:29:01 pm
I suspect that the East Coast units wont be as bad as the GWR ones.
Firstly, I think that East coast passengers are still allowed a buffet, the "no buffet" downgrade was a GWR thing.
Secondly they might work better, lessons might have been learnt from the failed introduction on GWR.


Title: Re: IETs into passenger service from 16 Oct 2017 and subsequent performance issues
Post by: Four Track, Now! on July 04, 2018, 03:03:41 pm
Meanwhile, I had my first encounter with a full-sized IET today, at Tiverton Parkway:

(https://farm2.staticflickr.com/1762/42476287314_6efc482303_c.jpg)

(https://farm2.staticflickr.com/1782/41384137260_62fb8d4952_c.jpg)

(https://farm1.staticflickr.com/837/42476465654_2aaf3c2747_c.jpg)

It wasn't burdened with passengers obviously - 5Z05 was running to Paignton as a testing / training run.


Title: Re: IETs into passenger service from 16 Oct 2017 and subsequent performance issues
Post by: Richard Fairhurst on July 04, 2018, 03:44:24 pm
My feelings about downgrading from a buffet to a trolley are well known, but a study of customer reviews suggests that many people expect a buffet on an intercity service, not just me.

It's the worst of both worlds. The same trains are running on intercity services (like London-Penzance) without a full buffet, as well as on outer-commuter services (like London-Oxford) where they waste 20 seats worth of space on an unnecessary kitchen.


Title: Re: IETs into passenger service from 16 Oct 2017 and subsequent performance issues
Post by: bobm on July 04, 2018, 04:56:06 pm
I have now made 30 journeys on IETs and I have noticed in recent weeks the reservation system has been working more often than it hasn't - although yesterday it seemed to be case of "belt and braces" with both paper tickets and the electronic displays.  At least they agreed with each other!

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

One other thing I did notice yesterday however was a localised fault with the aircon.  An area of four rows of seats on one side of the train were all noticeably warmer than those around them.  On an HST it has always been a case of all or nothing.  Seems the systems on the IET might be more modular.


Title: Re: IETs into passenger service from 16 Oct 2017 and subsequent performance issues
Post by: FarWestJohn on July 04, 2018, 06:26:57 pm
After 40 years of amazing technical advances since the introduction of HSTs we finish up with a mediocre under floor electro-diesel train. Sadly we could not even design and build it in the UK. I find it amazing that there is no UK owned company that can build our trains.


Title: Re: IETs into passenger service from 16 Oct 2017 and subsequent performance issues
Post by: bobm on July 04, 2018, 06:30:16 pm
We gave football to the world and we can no longer win it....  oh hang on.  ;D


Title: Re: IETs into passenger service from 16 Oct 2017 and subsequent performance issues
Post by: SandTEngineer on July 04, 2018, 06:41:10 pm
After 40 years of amazing technical advances since the introduction of HSTs we finish up with a mediocre under floor electro-diesel train. Sadly we could not even design and build it in the UK. I find it amazing that there is no UK owned company that can build our trains.

Never mind, it will all change next March and all train manufacture will return to the UK...... ::)


Title: Re: IETs into passenger service from 16 Oct 2017 and subsequent performance issues
Post by: SandTEngineer on July 04, 2018, 06:53:10 pm
It would appear now (well, today at least) that service introduction to the far Southwest has been deferred from 16 July 2018 to 20 August 2018.


Title: Re: IETs into passenger service from 16 Oct 2017 and subsequent performance issues
Post by: TaplowGreen on July 04, 2018, 06:59:13 pm
It would appear now (well, today at least) that service introduction to the far Southwest has been deferred from 16 July 2018 to 20 August 2018.

…………...will there be enough HSTs left to maintain the service?


Title: Re: IETs into passenger service from 16 Oct 2017 and subsequent performance issues
Post by: SandTEngineer on July 04, 2018, 07:24:45 pm
It would appear now (well, today at least) that service introduction to the far Southwest has been deferred from 16 July 2018 to 20 August 2018.

…………...will there be enough HSTs left to maintain the service?

Probably not (cue lots of cancellations during the peak summer season).  Its apparently due to "more drivers than usual needing to be trained"..... :P ::)


Title: Re: IETs into passenger service from 16 Oct 2017 and subsequent performance issues
Post by: Four Track, Now! on July 04, 2018, 09:40:40 pm
Never mind, it will all change next March and all train manufacture will return to the UK...... ::)

Can we have a "Haha" button please?  ;D


Title: Re: IETs into passenger service from 16 Oct 2017 and subsequent performance issues
Post by: grahame on July 04, 2018, 11:00:01 pm
(http://www.wellho.net/pix/hahabutton.jpg)


Title: Re: IETs into passenger service from 16 Oct 2017 and subsequent performance issues
Post by: sikejsudjek3 on July 05, 2018, 04:43:09 pm
I think that the new stock they are being trained on is a ghost train to go with the invisible CEO....


Title: Re: IETs into passenger service from 16 Oct 2017 and subsequent performance issues
Post by: broadgage on July 05, 2018, 05:05:30 pm
I have had another very negative report from a relative about the new trains.

They booked a seat, but as is the norm with the new DMUs, bookings were not honoured.
The train was dangerously overcrowded with air conditioning not working.
They could not walk to the buffet, and seemed very surprised when I told them that the new trains don't have one.
No refreshment trolley was seen between London and Cardiff.

This was a return journey, no seats, refreshments, reservations or air conditioning in either direction.
With no prompting from me they remarked "I did not know that we where getting Virgin Voyagers"

Whilst the disappointment of one customer does not prove much, such experiences seem to be the norm.




Title: Re: IETs into passenger service from 16 Oct 2017 and subsequent performance issues
Post by: IndustryInsider on July 05, 2018, 05:36:02 pm
Have you made many journeys on them yourself yet, Broadgage?


Title: Re: IETs into passenger service from 16 Oct 2017 and subsequent performance issues
Post by: a-driver on July 05, 2018, 05:52:12 pm
Have you made many journeys on them yourself yet, Broadgage?

I’ve made a few journeys myself and they are in no way an improvement on an HST, in fact they’re a significant downgrade with, from what I hear, several technical difficulties most resulting from the change of specification.  Some are now restricted to running in diesel only mode.
As I understand it, there’s still grave concerns over their ability to cope with seawater at Dawlish. 


Title: Re: IETs into passenger service from 16 Oct 2017 and subsequent performance issues
Post by: bobm on July 05, 2018, 06:26:45 pm
Still undecided if the IETs are an improvement on the HSTs. Both have pros and cons. However I am certain they are better than the Voyagers - whether Virgin’s or Cross Country’s.


Title: Re: IETs into passenger service from 16 Oct 2017 and subsequent performance issues
Post by: broadgage on July 05, 2018, 06:58:06 pm
Have you made many journeys on them yourself yet, Broadgage?

Not many, I am glad to say. 3 journeys IIRC, all half length, standing only, so I cant comment on the seats.
Trolley not sighted on 2 trips. On the third journey I found the static trolley but it had run out of beer and most other drinks.
I was initially surprised by the near silent under floor engine, but then realised that it had failed.
I was told that "standing in first class is not allowed" even with a first class ticket. I have applied for a refund of the difference between first and steerage, might get it this year ?


Title: Re: IETs into passenger service from 16 Oct 2017 and subsequent performance issues
Post by: IndustryInsider on July 05, 2018, 07:14:03 pm
Yes it’s a shame the 5-car situation is ruining their introduction on so many trains - a definite result for your crystal ball there.  As a 10-car (or one of the new 9-car) formation I think they are better than Pendolino or Voyagers and remind me quite a lot of Mk IV’s.  The extra capacity over an 8-car HST really becomes apparent then. 

In my own trips, numbering a dozen or so, I’ve yet to have any issues with the air con, or non working engines (other than once in my first trip which didn’t make much difference performance wise as the other 5 were working), but the reservation system and automatic announcements/displays have been very problematic.


Title: Re: IETs into passenger service from 16 Oct 2017 and subsequent performance issues
Post by: trainer on July 05, 2018, 09:04:26 pm
I am part way through a 1st Class Rail Rover week and am reluctant to try to write on my phone, but I'll have a go.  The first train used was  on Monday from Yatton to Bristol on a 5 coach IET with folk standing in the 1st section of the composite because they physically couldn't get into standard. So much for improvement in capacity promised. There were no reservations. The unit was in reverse formation anyway so I would have been uncomfortable if they were.  However, for me  the 1st Class seat in the IET has been by far the worst I've experienced and that's including XC and Scottish Rail Standard class. I could not cope with that for long. Only my opinion of course, but I fear the days of treating myself to a 1st on GWR have passed. Ironing board? Luxury!


Title: Re: IETs into passenger service from 16 Oct 2017 and subsequent performance issues
Post by: IndustryInsider on July 05, 2018, 09:49:08 pm
Yes people have different options.  For me the first class seats are fine - not as luxurious looking as the lovely HST GWR seats which are fantastic but, I found neck support with the moveable head cushion a real bonus (my only problem with the HST seats) as was the ability to move the window armrest and rest my arm along the window ledge.

It doesn’t look the premium product it should be though and as such is one disappointing aspect of the new  trains.


Title: Re: IETs into passenger service from 16 Oct 2017 and subsequent performance issues
Post by: broadgage on July 06, 2018, 09:18:00 am
Only about a dozen half length IETs today, so far.
I do however note several advertised as being 9 car instead of 10 car. This is of very little DIRECT concern as the seating capacity is very similar. It does however suggest that availability of the 5 car units is less than expected.


Title: Re: IETs into passenger service from 16 Oct 2017 and subsequent performance issues
Post by: Richard Fairhurst on July 06, 2018, 11:17:31 am
Still undecided if the IETs are an improvement on the HSTs. Both have pros and cons. However I am certain they are better than the Voyagers - whether Virgin’s or Cross Country’s.
Absolutely. Though reliability aside, I'm not sure they're an improvement over the 180s. (Reliability remains to be seen...!)


Title: Re: IETs into passenger service from 16 Oct 2017 and subsequent performance issues
Post by: TaplowGreen on July 06, 2018, 01:26:52 pm
It would appear now (well, today at least) that service introduction to the far Southwest has been deferred from 16 July 2018 to 20 August 2018.

…………...will there be enough HSTs left to maintain the service?

Probably not (cue lots of cancellations during the peak summer season).  Its apparently due to "more drivers than usual needing to be trained"..... :P ::)

Latest from GWR.....can't give a specific date for first IET to Plymouth/Penzance other than "later in the summer" but "all timetabled services are expected to operate" in the meantime ...........we shall see!


Title: Re: IETs into passenger service from 16 Oct 2017 and subsequent performance issues
Post by: Worcester_Passenger on July 06, 2018, 02:36:35 pm
Which summer?


Title: Re: IETs into passenger service from 16 Oct 2017 and subsequent performance issues
Post by: bignosemac on July 06, 2018, 02:47:01 pm
I'm hearing, from a source I trust, that 9 car IETs will begin operating passenger services between Paddington and Paignton on Saturday 28th July. Three down at 0818, 1018, 1218 and their return workings at 1308, 1450 and 1700.

As this is during the Newbury blockade all will travel via Swindon and Westbury. Interestingly, on the down, all three call at Swindon, but of the return workings only the 1450 ex-Paignton has a Swindon call.


Title: Re: IETs into passenger service from 16 Oct 2017 and subsequent performance issues
Post by: grahame on July 09, 2018, 10:31:01 am
Relatively few short formations of IETs this morning ... I note a report of the following HST power cars being north of the border. 

Quote
Refurbished / repainted 43012/033/036, 43134/143/146/148/163/169/183
Not redone, but in Scotaland. 43021/132, 127/145, 135/179, 003/142

With just a handful of those not yet gone, we could have 10 cars down to 8 not to 5.  Mind you, for today the problem seems to be St Ives (2 car v 4) and Falmouth (a one car not 2 on alternate trains)


Title: Re: IETs into passenger service from 16 Oct 2017 and subsequent performance issues
Post by: phile on July 09, 2018, 01:01:43 pm
Relatively few short formations of IETs this morning ... I note a report of the following HST power cars being north of the border. 

Quote
Refurbished / repainted 43012/033/036, 43134/143/146/148/163/169/183
Not redone, but in Scotaland. 43021/132, 127/145, 135/179, 003/142

With just a handful of those not yet gone, we could have 10 cars down to 8 not to 5.  Mind you, for today the problem seems to be St Ives (2 car v 4) and Falmouth (a one car not 2 on alternate trains)

The short HST didn't run out of Penzance this morning due to train fault and is being replaced by a 150, although it ran down OK from Plymouth last night.   So, it would appear that this is where one of the St. Ives units has gone.


Title: Re: IETs into passenger service from 16 Oct 2017 and subsequent performance issues
Post by: 1st fan on July 10, 2018, 12:38:44 am
My coffee fiend friend has made her first trip on an IET and wasn't impressed. She decided not to travel in 1st after seeing there wasn't a massive difference between that and standard. So she sat in standard and didn't like the lighting "far too bright" nor the seats "far too hard" but worse was to come. Apparently when the trolley appeared she asked if she could get a cappuccino. The passenger host said yes but when she realised he was about to use instant in a cup said not to bother. As she thinks instant is an abomination that's like a red rag to a bull. She'd been unable to get anything before boarding as she'd arrived late to the station when her meeting overran. Also her tablet was misbehaving when connected to the onboard power socket. Typing or any screen press often wasn't where she pressed. It didn't happen when she took the cable out. I didn't have an explanation of what might be the cause of that. Given the tablet had 80% displayed she charged her power bank instead.


Title: Re: IETs into passenger service from 16 Oct 2017 and subsequent performance issues
Post by: Adelante_CCT on July 10, 2018, 06:17:23 am
Quote
Also her tablet was misbehaving when connected to the onboard power socket. Typing or any screen press often wasn't where she pressed. It didn't happen when she took the cable out. I didn't have an explanation of what might be the cause of that

I've heard stories of disruptive equipment as well. I think the logic is when an IET is travelling on AC power, it appears to interfere with some devices that are plugged in. I'm led to believe it doesn't happen when switched to diesel power and suggests it has something to do with an interfering frequency from being on the overhead wires that is being picked up by the charging cable.


Title: Re: IETs into passenger service from 16 Oct 2017 and subsequent performance issues
Post by: IndustryInsider on July 10, 2018, 09:12:23 pm
Two more trips as a passenger for me today. Didcot to Paddington and back.  Both 10 cars as booked, air-con working fine, seats plentiful, acceleration and general performance far superior to a HST, the sun blind most welcome on the return in the evening sunshine, and (most unexpected of all) a ticket check in both directions!  No trolley seen on either service though.

Though of course, I’m just an apologist for the new trains...  ;)


Title: Re: IETs into passenger service from 16 Oct 2017 and subsequent performance issues
Post by: broadgage on July 10, 2018, 10:47:02 pm
Yes, IMHO you are an apologist for the new trains, this is no more a personnel insult than I feel insulted if called a critic of the new trains. Both are factual observations.

Full length IETS are undoubtedly an improvement over half length ones, and the full length ones are an improvement in capacity if compared to an HST.
They still do not feel like proper intercity trains, and despite some favourable reports, are still generally considered to be a downgrade.


Title: Re: IETs into passenger service from 16 Oct 2017 and subsequent performance issues
Post by: IndustryInsider on July 10, 2018, 11:18:40 pm
I don’t mind being described as an apologist Broadgage, and certainly don’t take it as an insult.  I know in my own mind what I am, which is somebody who strives to be objective, balanced in opinion, open to change, and quite prepared to criticise whenever I feel it is justified as well as give praise.

Sadly, there’s certainly been more criticism from me than praise so far in 2018.


Title: Re: IETs into passenger service from 16 Oct 2017 and subsequent performance issues
Post by: SandTEngineer on July 12, 2018, 11:07:53 am
Cross posted from the May/December 2018 timetable thread as its relevant here as well...

There is no doubt this has bought Network Rail extra time to get the infrastructure works completed but no one will talk about how late they are running with these just that its better to delay the introduction of the new timetable.
Think this confirms my thoughts above:

Modern Railways Roger Ford on Twitter:

Electrification to Cardiff has been delayed to June/July 2019.

So don’t be surprised if the May 19 timetable change comes and goes with no major timetable change on the GW network.

A quote on the WNXX Forum yesterday (11/07/2018) from a GWR employee:
Quote
Mark Hopwood informed us this afternoon that electrification through to Cardiff has been put back, possibly to June/July 2019. The IET and 802 delivery plan will stay on schedule with considerably more diesel mileage than planned.

...so expect many announcements ".....train service has been cancelled due to shortage of fuel." :P


Title: Re: IETs into passenger service from 16 Oct 2017 and subsequent performance issues
Post by: NickB on July 12, 2018, 07:15:06 pm
I’m not convinced that the marriage of long trains with short platforms really works. I was on the 18.42 from Paddington which is 12 carriages. I was in coach 7 which is the last to platform at Slough (its first stop).
I counted 240 passengers emerging from coaches 8-12 once it was platformed. 240!!

It was platformed for nearly 5 minutes to do this. How does that fit into the timetable?

And then it shut its doors and proceeded, leaving 50+ still on the train who hadn’t made it through in time. They are not pleased.


Title: Re: IETs into passenger service from 16 Oct 2017 and subsequent performance issues
Post by: SandTEngineer on July 12, 2018, 07:49:31 pm
I didn't realise IET trains could be in 12 coach formations.  How does that work when the sets are 5 car or 9 car fixed set formations..... ::) :P


Title: Re: IETs into passenger service from 16 Oct 2017 and subsequent performance issues
Post by: rogerw on July 12, 2018, 07:54:41 pm
They can't be. 5, 9 or 10 only.  1842 booked for Cl 387 where passengers can walk through the train before Slough.  They will have to learn to listen to announcements.


Title: Re: IETs into passenger service from 16 Oct 2017 and subsequent performance issues
Post by: Adelante_CCT on July 12, 2018, 07:55:13 pm
Seems to have had an extended stop at Slough every day this week.

As I mentioned in the 387 thread a few weeks back, all it takes is for a few people to stop by the rear door of coach 8 (coach 7 for Slough) and that backs everyone else up who have no choice but to walk through once already platformed.


Title: Re: IETs into passenger service from 16 Oct 2017 and subsequent performance issues
Post by: SandTEngineer on July 12, 2018, 08:09:11 pm
They can't be. 5, 9 or 10 only.  1842 booked for Cl 387 where passengers can walk through the train before Slough.  They will have to learn to listen to announcements.
I did pose the question with 'tonuge in cheek'.....


Title: Re: IETs into passenger service from 16 Oct 2017 and subsequent performance issues
Post by: Sixty3Closure on July 12, 2018, 09:07:28 pm
They can't be. 5, 9 or 10 only.  1842 booked for Cl 387 where passengers can walk through the train before Slough.  They will have to learn to listen to announcements.

Or has been the case when I've been on these trains they're so crowded from cancellations and short formed stock elsewhere that you can't move forward. People are standing in all the coaches so you have no choice but to stand in one of the rear end coaches and hope you can get off in time.


Title: Re: IETs into passenger service from 16 Oct 2017 and subsequent performance issues
Post by: lordgoata on July 12, 2018, 11:02:50 pm
I’m not convinced that the marriage of long trains with short platforms really works. I was on the 18.42 from Paddington which is 12 carriages. I was in coach 7 which is the last to platform at Slough (its first stop).
I counted 240 passengers emerging from coaches 8-12 once it was platformed. 240!!

It was platformed for nearly 5 minutes to do this. How does that fit into the timetable?

Lucky you weren't on the 1751 (1D93), that stopped at Reading for its nightly lets waste 10 minutes trying to workout how to disconnect 4 carriages for absolutely no reason, only for us to be told that someone had pulled the emergency stop, and then finally 30 minutes after we had pulled in, that the train was going no where as it was all locked up and they had no clue what to do! The guy I spoke to had to manually open all the doors to get us all off and said he had never seen anything like it before!

Anyone know what the actual problem was?


Title: Re: IETs into passenger service from 16 Oct 2017 and subsequent performance issues
Post by: NickB on July 12, 2018, 11:23:06 pm
I didn't realise IET trains could be in 12 coach formations.  How does that work when the sets are 5 car or 9 car fixed set formations..... ::) :P

Apologies, I'm not great with train numbers and designations - I'd only just understood turbos vs HSTs.  If this is in the wrong thread then I am sorry.
It was a 12 car new shiny train, and my point was really about the long dwell times and that passengers got stuck on the train, facing at least a 30min return trip from the next station, once the driver lost patience with disembarking them, shut the doors and drove off.


Title: Re: IETs into passenger service from 16 Oct 2017 and subsequent performance issues
Post by: grahame on July 12, 2018, 11:33:35 pm
I didn't realise IET trains could be in 12 coach formations.  How does that work when the sets are 5 car or 9 car fixed set formations..... ::) :P

Apologies, I'm not great with train numbers and designations - I'd only just understood turbos vs HSTs.  If this is in the wrong thread then I am sorry.

It was a 12 car new shiny train, and my point was really about the long dwell times and that passengers got stuck on the train, facing at least a 30min return trip from the next station, once the driver lost patience with disembarking them, shut the doors and drove off.

I wouldn't worry about the stuff in little text.    There is a problem with stopping trains that are Y carriages long in stations which can only take a maximum of X carriages, where X<Y, unless Z (the number of passengers getting on and off) is a small number and W (the time taken between stations) is long enough for a train manage to walk through in "Collie mode" - i.e. gathering passengers wishing to leave the train ahead of himself.

Works well enough at Dilton Marsh and Avoncliff.   Was failing at Melksham because Z was an increasingly large number.


Title: Re: IETs into passenger service from 16 Oct 2017 and subsequent performance issues
Post by: stuving on July 13, 2018, 11:10:01 pm
What is going on with the platform extensions at Slough and elsewhere?

Network Rail's project W004 (Thames Valley Electric Multiple Unit Capability Works) includes stretching all four through platforms at Slough (and 9 others too) to 12-car length. It also covers any other NR work needed for 12-car trains to run and to call there. It was due to complete December 2017, and in March the milestone "EIS Infrastructure authorised (Paddington to Didcot) - Infrastructure authorised for passenger use" was listed as completed.

So have they actually done the work, or is that just not true? And if it is true, why don't the trains use that length? The only other step I can think of that's needed is to tell the trains to stop SDOing, and surely that doesn't take several months - even for GWR - does it? Note that work on SDO balises was excluded from W004, but for NR to not do what the trains need, or for NR and GWR do be still arguing about what that is, would be equally inexcusable.

PS: yes, this strand does belong on the thread about 387s, where earlier similar discussions took place.


Title: Re: IETs into passenger service from 16 Oct 2017 and subsequent performance issues
Post by: IndustryInsider on July 14, 2018, 07:55:09 am
The only station where extention works have been completed beyond Hayes is at Twyford.  Though the inability to extend the up relief platform means it is still SDO 7 until the software for recognising different platform lengths at a specific station is added.

Work started a year ago on Didcot, Cholsey, Goring and Pangbourne but has progressed at a pitiful pace - though Pangbourne now looks just about ready.  Works at Radley started last month.

Works at Slough and Maidenhead (and the rest) haven’t really started yet, and they are the two most important in terms of numbers of trains, and therefore passengers, being inconvenienced daily.


Title: Re: IETs into passenger service from 16 Oct 2017 and subsequent performance issues
Post by: broadgage on July 15, 2018, 10:55:48 am
After several days of full length IETs, I observe half a dozen half length services today, lack of staff rather than lack of trains this time.
Whilst the failure of GWR to engage enough staff is not the fault of the new trains, it does represent another drawback of downgrading an intercity service to short DMUs.

Had we retained HSTs, or if the HSTs had been replaced with new full length intercity trains, then this situation would not have occurred.

Whilst a few half length trains may seem of little consequence if compared to the DOZENS of cancellations, it is at times like this that full length trains are needed.


Title: Re: IETs into passenger service from 16 Oct 2017 and subsequent performance issues
Post by: Timmer on July 15, 2018, 10:59:35 am
After several days of full length IETs, I observe half a dozen half length services today, lack of staff rather than lack of trains this time.
Whilst the failure of GWR to engage enough staff is not the fault of the new trains, it does represent another drawback of downgrading an intercity service to short DMUs.

Had we retained HSTs, or if the HSTs had been replaced with new full length intercity trains, then this situation would not have occurred.

Whilst a few half length trains may seem of little consequence if compared to the DOZENS of cancellations, it is at times like this that full length trains are needed.
To add insult to injury the five carriages locked out of use will probably be joined to the five coaches being used which will be absolutely rammed.


Title: Re: IETs into passenger service from 16 Oct 2017 and subsequent performance issues
Post by: Adelante_CCT on July 18, 2018, 12:45:14 pm
Journeycheck looks very quiet as I type.........


Title: Re: IETs into passenger service from 16 Oct 2017 and subsequent performance issues
Post by: grahame on July 18, 2018, 01:56:33 pm
Journeycheck looks very quiet as I type.........

Sort of way it should look every day.


Title: Re: IETs into passenger service from 16 Oct 2017 and subsequent performance issues
Post by: bignosemac on July 18, 2018, 02:00:20 pm
Journeycheck looks very quiet as I type.........

Well, that's jinxed it. I fully expect a major issue in tonight's rush hour now.  :P


Title: Re: IETs into passenger service from 16 Oct 2017 and subsequent performance issues
Post by: Jason on July 18, 2018, 04:04:15 pm
Indeed  ;D


Title: Re: IETs into passenger service from 16 Oct 2017 and subsequent performance issues
Post by: bignosemac on July 18, 2018, 04:24:00 pm
Journeycheck looks very quiet as I type.........

Well, that's jinxed it. I fully expect a major issue in tonight's rush hour now.  :P

Oh dear. I hate to say I told you so, but:

Quote
Due to a points failure between Ealing Broadway and London Paddington some lines towards London Paddington are blocked. Disruption is expected until 19:30 18/07.
Impact:
Train services between Reading and London Paddington may be delayed by up to 15 minutes or diverted.
Customer Advice:
London-bound fast line is blocked between Ealing Broadway and London Paddington. Long Distance / High Speed services will be diverted via the Slow line between Ealing Broadway and London Paddington.



Title: Re: IETs into passenger service from 16 Oct 2017 and subsequent performance issues
Post by: didcotdean on July 19, 2018, 05:47:13 pm
Was somewhst amused by the announcement on a Bristol Temple Meads to Paddington train this morning, which was along the lines of "this is a 9 carriage train and for those unfamiliar with them, it has the feature that you can walk right along it, and all the first class is at the front'.

Later overheard a conversation he had with clearly a regular in that service that he was fed up of verbal abuse when it is 5 only.


Title: Re: IETs into passenger service from 16 Oct 2017 and subsequent performance issues
Post by: SandTEngineer on July 19, 2018, 07:29:11 pm
This was posted on the WNXX forum (19/07/2018) by a GWR 'Insider':
Quote
Text sent out by RMT ending the agreement whereby a customer host can be in one half of a ten car IET rake and a guard in the other. Allegedly this follows an on board incident, so the RMT insist on a guard in each unit from now on. What do they do on Voyagers was the question asked of me this afternoon. Answer is I don't know, but one thing is certain, GWR do not have enough guards, so expect a lot more 5 cars or tens with 5 locked out. Wonderful.


Title: Re: IETs into passenger service from 16 Oct 2017 and subsequent performance issues
Post by: CharlieGCR on July 19, 2018, 10:01:14 pm
Quote
GWR do not have enough guards, so expect a lot more 5 cars or tens with 5 locked out. Wonderful.


Ah, let’s just cancel the training because we do not trust that Customer Hosts can get the job done. Or, remove half the train and impress all the passengers. RMT make the best impression..


Title: Re: IETs into passenger service from 16 Oct 2017 and subsequent performance issues
Post by: broadgage on July 24, 2018, 01:11:43 pm
I see that half length IETs have returned today, about 6 I think.
Not as bad as some previous events but still far from impressive for new and very expensive units.

Stated as being due to breakdowns and not staff shortage.


Title: Re: IETs into passenger service from 16 Oct 2017 and subsequent performance issues
Post by: bobm on July 24, 2018, 01:13:16 pm
Suspect one 10 car formation may have been split to provide the five cars for the additional 12:33 Paddington to Bristol Temple Meads to take pressure off the 12:30 to Penzance via Bristol.


Title: Re: IETs into passenger service from 16 Oct 2017 and subsequent performance issues
Post by: ray951 on July 24, 2018, 01:27:23 pm
Are there more 9 car IET's running, as I have noticed a couple of services on the Cotswold Line that were previously HST's? The services were the
0710 Moreton-In-Marsh to Paddington and the 1522 Worcester Shrub Hill to Paddington.


Title: Re: IETs into passenger service from 16 Oct 2017 and subsequent performance issues
Post by: bobm on July 24, 2018, 01:32:00 pm
Not sure of total numbers but there are currently nine cars on both the 13:36 Paddington to Cheltenham Spa and the 14:15 to Cardiff Central.


Title: Re: IETs into passenger service from 16 Oct 2017 and subsequent performance issues
Post by: CharlieGCR on July 24, 2018, 02:33:24 pm
By 03/10, all services between London and Gloucester/Cheltenham will be IETs. 10 cars will be cleared for the line by the end of August just after Stonehouse is complete.


Title: Re: IETs into passenger service from 16 Oct 2017 and subsequent performance issues
Post by: CharlieGCR on July 26, 2018, 08:32:08 pm
Concerning at Kemble where the driver had overran the platform and ASDO (of course) opened the doors in coach A. Luckily, the passengers leaving checked before looking down however others would have been in a different situation.




Title: Re: IETs into passenger service from 16 Oct 2017 and subsequent performance issues
Post by: IndustryInsider on July 26, 2018, 09:02:02 pm
The driver still has to give door release after which ASDO takes over, so doors opening when not on platforms should not happen!


Title: Re: IETs into passenger service from 16 Oct 2017 and subsequent performance issues
Post by: paul7755 on July 26, 2018, 09:15:29 pm
The driver should realise he over-ran and not release, but I reckon it wouldn’t be automatically prevented.  My understanding of the fairly typical modern ASDO gear as used on SWR Desiros is that it doesn’t detect stop shorts or over-runs.  Still relies on the driver hitting the right stop marker.

The 458/5s on the Reading side have a less complex system where each carriage has a sensor that makes its own decision, and so guards against stopping short, but not an over-run.

Paul


Title: Re: IETs into passenger service from 16 Oct 2017 and subsequent performance issues
Post by: IndustryInsider on July 26, 2018, 10:51:50 pm
Yes, Paul - that was my point.  It should not happen as the driver should realise they have overrun.  If they have overrun (it's not difficult to work that out) then they should not operate the door release buttons.  If they do then ASDO will not indeed not come to their rescue.


Title: Re: IETs into passenger service from 16 Oct 2017 and subsequent performance issues
Post by: CharlieGCR on July 26, 2018, 11:36:42 pm
Say this was during staffing hours surely the driver would have taken the appropriate action? If I’m honest there were two train managers who showed no interest at all, and I’m sure a report would have had to of been filed if appropriate action was taken.

What is the procedure of over runs? I have watched a SWT overrun video and it explains about local door open yet the driver releases the door as usual. I should have taken a photo in the end but I didn’t want to delay the already delayed train.


Title: Re: IETs into passenger service from 16 Oct 2017 and subsequent performance issues
Post by: martyjon on July 27, 2018, 05:42:24 am
20 half length services today, yes a FRIDAY.


Title: Re: IETs into passenger service from 16 Oct 2017 and subsequent performance issues
Post by: grahame on July 27, 2018, 07:25:03 am
20 half length services today, yes a FRIDAY.

I may be talking slightly out of turn here ... but if 5 car IETs were to be used on the diagrams from which that Adelantes (class 180) were withdrawn a short while back, would there still be a problem?   Looking at where there are short formations, though, they do appear to be different diagrams to the old Adelante ones, with some seriously busy services involved.


Title: Re: IETs into passenger service from 16 Oct 2017 and subsequent performance issues
Post by: martyjon on July 27, 2018, 08:08:19 am
20 half length services today, yes a FRIDAY.

I may be talking slightly out of turn here ... but if 5 car IETs were to be used on the diagrams from which that Adelantes (class 180) were withdrawn a short while back, would there still be a problem?   Looking at where there are short formations, though, they do appear to be different diagrams to the old Adelante ones, with some seriously busy services involved.

Would be sensible but then ASLEF / NUR will probably not allow it as Worcester / Hereford drivers had received training on only 9 car IETs. and South Wales / Bristol drivers only received training on 5 / 2X5 car IETs.


Title: Re: IETs into passenger service from 16 Oct 2017 and subsequent performance issues
Post by: broadgage on July 27, 2018, 08:26:14 am
20 half length services today, yes a FRIDAY.

I may be talking slightly out of turn here ... but if 5 car IETs were to be used on the diagrams from which that Adelantes (class 180) were withdrawn a short while back, would there still be a problem?   Looking at where there are short formations, though, they do appear to be different diagrams to the old Adelante ones, with some seriously busy services involved.

When the Adelantes arrived, I recall FGW stating, suggesting, or implying, that pairs of 5 car units would be used instead of HSTs in order to provide extra capacity and reduce overcrowding.
In fact of course, single unit operation was the norm with reduced capacity.

One of my negative predictions about the new 5 car IEPs was that single 5 car units would be a regular feature, as with Adelantes, Voyagers and other new DMUs.


Title: Re: IETs into passenger service from 16 Oct 2017 and subsequent performance issues
Post by: Southernman on July 27, 2018, 09:01:07 am
I read that NUR had withdrawn the agreement that a Customer Host could be in one section and the Guard in the other 5 cars. Now insisting that there is a Guard in both. I wonder if that is an explanation for number of short formations.


Title: Re: IETs into passenger service from 16 Oct 2017 and subsequent performance issues
Post by: broadgage on July 27, 2018, 10:11:53 am
I read that NUR had withdrawn the agreement that a Customer Host could be in one section and the Guard in the other 5 cars. Now insisting that there is a Guard in both. I wonder if that is an explanation for number of short formations.

Quite probably, no reason is given for todays short formations.
The average customer however does not care about the cause of the problem.
They simply observe that overcrowding has got even worse, that reservations are not honoured, and that no or minimal catering is available, a static trolley if you are lucky.





Title: Re: IETs into passenger service from 16 Oct 2017 and subsequent performance issues
Post by: didcotdean on July 27, 2018, 04:53:38 pm
When the Adelantes arrived, I recall FGW stating, suggesting, or implying, that pairs of 5 car units would be used instead of HSTs in order to provide extra capacity and reduce overcrowding.
In fact of course, single unit operation was the norm with reduced capacity.
Having dug out the press release for the main deployment of Adelantes (Sept 2002) it mentions use of 10 cars only on the 15:10 Paddington-Bristol and return service @ 17:15, plus 20:30 Paddington to Weston super Mare on Fridays. This doubled-up train only had about 100 seats more than the HST layout of the time. The rest were in singles on various services, including as far as Swansea.


Title: Re: IETs into passenger service from 16 Oct 2017 and subsequent performance issues
Post by: SandTEngineer on July 27, 2018, 04:56:45 pm
Apologies.  I did post some info on the IET Far Southwest introduction elsewhere.
Maybe that was the wrong place for it?  Moderators, Help! http://www.firstgreatwestern.info/coffeeshop/index.php?topic=20133.msg242828#msg242828


Title: Re: IETs into passenger service from 16 Oct 2017 and subsequent performance issues
Post by: broadgage on July 27, 2018, 05:05:24 pm
When the Adelantes arrived, I recall FGW stating, suggesting, or implying, that pairs of 5 car units would be used instead of HSTs in order to provide extra capacity and reduce overcrowding.
In fact of course, single unit operation was the norm with reduced capacity.
Having dug out the press release for the main deployment of Adelantes (Sept 2002) it mentions use of 10 cars only on the 15:10 Paddington-Bristol and return service @ 17:15, plus 20:30 Paddington to Weston super Mare on Fridays. This doubled-up train only had about 100 seats more than the HST layout of the time. The rest were in singles on various services, including as far as Swansea.

But were those services regularly operated as 10 car ?
It was certainly implied that 10 car operation would be a regular feature, but that may have been an aspiration rather than a commitment.


Title: Re: IETs into passenger service from 16 Oct 2017 and subsequent performance issues
Post by: didcotdean on July 27, 2018, 06:46:10 pm
The key thing I take from this though that there was not enough units to double up even a single diagram, only a round trip service. Admittedly they wouldn't have all been delivered by then, but the Adelantes reliability, or lack of it in the early days wouldn't have helped either. They were mainly needed though as a consequence of the increased frequency out to Cardiff.


Title: Re: IETs into passenger service from 16 Oct 2017 and subsequent performance issues
Post by: IndustryInsider on July 27, 2018, 11:51:41 pm
It was certainly implied that 10 car operation would be a regular feature, but that may have been an aspiration rather than a commitment.

That's not how I remember it.  There was talk of the extra units supporting the HST fleet and allowing the 30-minute interval service from Cardiff to be introduced, along with very limited 10-car workings, certainly not what you would describe as regular. 

I believe the 17:15 to Bristol became a 10-car fairly soon afterwards (possibly at the expense of one of the others mentioned by didcotdean) and there was indeed mention at the time of the extra seats that would provide, but back in 2002 capacity wasn't anywhere near so much of an issue - hence the superb interior layout with loads of legroom being chosen over a more crammed in option.

When capacity did start to become an issue, and FGW took over the Thames Trains franchise, it was quickly decided that getting more HST sets and using the 180s on (mostly) the Cotswold Line was a better option all round.


Title: Re: IETs into passenger service from 16 Oct 2017 and subsequent performance issues
Post by: grahame on July 28, 2018, 03:29:52 am
It was certainly implied that 10 car operation would be a regular feature, but that may have been an aspiration rather than a commitment.

That's not how I remember it.  There was talk of the extra units supporting the HST fleet and allowing the 30-minute interval service from Cardiff to be introduced, along with very limited 10-car workings, certainly not what you would describe as regular. 

I don't remember too many (any) issue of 5 cars where 8 were needed but replaced. But then I was only a casual observer and occasional passenger in those days.  Indeed it was the Adelantes that were (successfully) 'sold' as the trains that would allow Cardiff to step up to half hourly.  And I do recall seeing double sets calling at Chippenham, with no recollection of issues such as staffing both sections, or catering both sections, shorter trains turning up or half being out of use.


Title: Re: IETs into passenger service from 16 Oct 2017 and subsequent performance issues
Post by: CharlieGCR on July 28, 2018, 09:26:35 am
At the moment staffing issues are rising and until May they will be short staffed. Apparently they are recruiting 100 drivers and 80 guards which would help services in the long run.


Title: Re: IETs into passenger service from 16 Oct 2017 and subsequent performance issues
Post by: Gordon the Blue Engine on July 28, 2018, 09:43:13 am
That sounds good, but how many drivers and guards will they losing due to retirement or resignation?


Title: Re: IETs into passenger service from 16 Oct 2017 and subsequent performance issues
Post by: chuffed on July 28, 2018, 10:32:05 am
Travelled on my first IET on Thursday 1212 from Reading to Temple Meads. Front 3 classes all said 1st class and standard coaches were J and K. Followed by 5 coaches locked out of use.  I had reserved seat A41. No sign of a train manager, ticket collector or trolley. Lightly loaded, but very hot. Only positives I could see were the sliding doors and more legroom. Many changes of speed possibly due to hot weather restrictions. And the interior ? Spartan, utility, with seats that certainly haven't developed any more give from the well named 'ironing board'. Is this what we have waited so long for ? What a disappointment!


Title: Re: IETs into passenger service from 16 Oct 2017 and subsequent performance issues
Post by: IndustryInsider on July 29, 2018, 11:45:07 am
Travelled on my first IET on Thursday 1212 from Reading to Temple Meads. Front 3 classes all said 1st class and standard coaches were J and K. Followed by 5 coaches locked out of use.  I had reserved seat A41. No sign of a train manager, ticket collector or trolley. Lightly loaded, but very hot. Only positives I could see were the sliding doors and more legroom. Many changes of speed possibly due to hot weather restrictions. And the interior ? Spartan, utility, with seats that certainly haven't developed any more give from the well named 'ironing board'. Is this what we have waited so long for ? What a disappointment!

There is no IET layout that has three first class coaches, so I'm a bit confused with that post, Chuffed?  5-car sets have 1.5 First Class, and 9-car sets have 2.  A 10-car set would have the equivalent of 3 first class carriages, but they would not all be at the front obviously.


Title: Re: IETs into passenger service from 16 Oct 2017 and subsequent performance issues
Post by: bobm on July 29, 2018, 11:50:40 am
I am also a little confused.  K is usually the composite coach with 58 standard class seats and 18 first class ones.


Title: Re: IETs into passenger service from 16 Oct 2017 and subsequent performance issues
Post by: broadgage on July 29, 2018, 12:00:00 pm
Agree, the end or driving vehicle is first class, but has very limited seating. The adjacent vehicle has some first class but mainly standard. Total first class seating is 36.

The seats are hard, and the interiors very basic, certainly don't feel like an intercity train. More like a regional DMU at best.


Title: Re: IETs into passenger service from 16 Oct 2017 and subsequent performance issues
Post by: CharlieGCR on July 31, 2018, 12:48:43 am
Apparently the timetable change means that the 802s can’t run until May!
So says another very reliable local news website.


Quote
Quote from Cornish Live

The new generation of Great Western Railway's intercity express trains will not run on the Paddington to Penzance line until May 2019.

The new trains were planned for early 2019 but Network Rail has now pushed back timetable changes.


The first Class 800 carrying passengers from London Paddington to Devon along the iconic Dawlish seawall line arrived in Paignton on Saturday.

But a newer Class 802 version is being specifically built in Italy to cope with the steep gradients at Totnes so that the trains can run all the way through to Cornwall.

GWR transformation director Richard Rowland said: “From later this summer, our customers in Devon and Cornwall will see more of these new trains when we introduce our Class 802 versions, which were specifically built to deal with the steep gradients en route to Penzance.”

This report makes no sence. They are saying at one point they are being modified (no, they are being designed to cope with) and the next minute it is because of the timetable.

Ah. The joy of the news.


Title: Re: IETs into passenger service from 16 Oct 2017 and subsequent performance issues
Post by: bignosemac on July 31, 2018, 01:06:00 am
That article, seen across Cornwall Live, Devon Live, Somerset Live is, not to put to fine a point on it, poppycock.

The 802s will be introduced incrementally up to the timetable change scheduled for May 2019. They are not being modified, they have been designed from day one to cope with the route from Paddington to Penzance via the Berks & Hants, with additional diesel engine power to cope with the hilly route between Newton Abbot & Plymouth. They have been testing on this route for several months now without major issue.


Title: Re: IETs into passenger service from 16 Oct 2017 and subsequent performance issues
Post by: PhilWakely on July 31, 2018, 06:00:30 am
That article, seen across Cornwall Live, Devon Live, Somerset Live is, not to put to fine a point on it, poppycock.

Agree entirely with BNM. Also, for those of you who did read the article(s), I guess you would have noticed that the forum's own bobm features with his pictures  :)


Title: Re: IETs into passenger service from 16 Oct 2017 and subsequent performance issues
Post by: bobm on July 31, 2018, 09:17:11 am
Thanks Phil - but the good news is readers here saw the photos first!


Title: Re: IETs into passenger service from 16 Oct 2017 and subsequent performance issues
Post by: Timmer on July 31, 2018, 09:28:27 am
That article, seen across Cornwall Live, Devon Live, Somerset Live is, not to put to fine a point on it, poppycock.
Like most of what appears on these xxxxxx Live websites/Facebook pages. It's not journalism just click bait.


Title: Re: IETs into passenger service from 16 Oct 2017 and subsequent performance issues
Post by: devonexpress on July 31, 2018, 11:47:05 am
Apparently the timetable change means that the 802s can’t run until May!
So says another very reliable local news website.


Quote
Quote from Cornish Live

The new generation of Great Western Railway's intercity express trains will not run on the Paddington to Penzance line until May 2019.

The new trains were planned for early 2019 but Network Rail has now pushed back timetable changes.


The first Class 800 carrying passengers from London Paddington to Devon along the iconic Dawlish seawall line arrived in Paignton on Saturday.

But a newer Class 802 version is being specifically built in Italy to cope with the steep gradients at Totnes so that the trains can run all the way through to Cornwall.

GWR transformation director Richard Rowland said: “From later this summer, our customers in Devon and Cornwall will see more of these new trains when we introduce our Class 802 versions, which were specifically built to deal with the steep gradients en route to Penzance.”

This report makes no sence. They are saying at one point they are being modified (no, they are being designed to cope with) and the next minute it is because of the timetable.

Ah. The joy of the news.

The joys of modern journalism, where some idiot who's left college gets to write about something they have no idea or interest in!  Someone should tell Cornish Live that story is fake news :P


Title: Re: IETs into passenger service from 16 Oct 2017 and subsequent performance issues
Post by: patch38 on July 31, 2018, 01:19:29 pm
Apologies if this has been asked/answered before but is it assumed that all IETs run on the wires from PAD to Didcot now? Reason for asking is that I was on the 1900 to Temple Meads yesterday (two 5-cars, both in service) and it definitely left both PAD and RDG under diesel power. I didn't notice if the pans were up or down when I boarded and couldn't be bothered to hop out at RDG to check. 


Title: Re: IETs into passenger service from 16 Oct 2017 and subsequent performance issues
Post by: bobm on July 31, 2018, 01:33:59 pm
A couple of 802s out on test today.

(http://www.mbob.co.uk/rforum/802test.jpg)

802 006 running from Stoke Gifford to Plymouth

(http://www.mbob.co.uk/rforum/802test3.jpg)

(http://www.mbob.co.uk/rforum/802test2.jpg)

802 101 running from Plymouth to Exeter St Davids



Title: Re: IETs into passenger service from 16 Oct 2017 and subsequent performance issues
Post by: bobm on July 31, 2018, 01:35:03 pm
Apologies if this has been asked/answered before but is it assumed that all IETs run on the wires from PAD to Didcot now? Reason for asking is that I was on the 1900 to Temple Meads yesterday (two 5-cars, both in service) and it definitely left both PAD and RDG under diesel power. I didn't notice if the pans were up or down when I boarded and couldn't be bothered to hop out at RDG to check. 

There are a few sets restricted to running on diesel only apparently.


Title: Re: IETs into passenger service from 16 Oct 2017 and subsequent performance issues
Post by: CharlieGCR on July 31, 2018, 03:04:59 pm
A couple of 802s out on test today.

(http://www.mbob.co.uk/rforum/802test.jpg)

802 006 running from Stoke Gifford to Plymouth

(http://www.mbob.co.uk/rforum/802test3.jpg)

(http://www.mbob.co.uk/rforum/802test2.jpg)

802 101 running from Plymouth to Exeter St Davids



Wonderful photos. Not long until the days of me waiting at Didcot and Swindon in the rain for a HST to turn up, beautiful trains. Will be missed.


Title: Re: IETs into passenger service from 16 Oct 2017 and subsequent performance issues
Post by: broadgage on July 31, 2018, 03:28:26 pm
Good pictures.
I rather like the external appearance of these units, and I consider that Bi-mode is better than all diesel.

My objections are to the interior layout and design.
Make them 10 car (keep a limited number of 5 car for portion working and lightly used services, but mostly 10 car)
Add a proper hot buffet.
4 fewer seats per vehicle to give more table seats (and thereby more luggage space between the seat backs).
Add padding to the seats.
Make the interior a bit more cheerful looking.

And I would consider them to be acceptable by modern standards


Title: Re: IETs into passenger service from 16 Oct 2017 and subsequent performance issues
Post by: chuffed on July 31, 2018, 03:32:53 pm
Hear, hear to all your comments broadgage....but knowing of your prediliction for fine dining, I would have thought a proper hot buffet would have been top of the list !


Title: Re: IETs into passenger service from 16 Oct 2017 and subsequent performance issues
Post by: grahame on July 31, 2018, 03:43:16 pm
Good pictures.
I rather like the external appearance of these units, and I consider that Bi-mode is better than all diesel.

My objections are to the interior layout and design.
Make them 10 car (keep a limited number of 5 car for portion working and lightly used services, but mostly 10 car)
Add a proper hot buffet.
4 fewer seats per vehicle to give more table seats (and thereby more luggage space between the seat backs).
Add padding to the seats.
Make the interior a bit more cheerful looking.

And I would consider them to be acceptable by modern standards

Now - perhaps that's an early major refit - or would you consider something more radical such as keeping the production line going with modified internals, and cascading the earlier trains onto the Cross Country routes, 5 cars replacing their current 4 car trains, and bimodes running electric from Bromsgrove to Birmingham / Manchesters, and from Yorkshire up to the Scottish Lowlands?


Title: Re: IETs into passenger service from 16 Oct 2017 and subsequent performance issues
Post by: broadgage on July 31, 2018, 04:04:45 pm
I put lengthening to 10 car first in my list, as that is the only way to provide a proper hot buffet without loss of seating.
Remove 4 seats from most vehicles to give more tables,that means a loss of about 24 seats.
Add a buffet  car with a decent size servery and there should be room for about 44 seats, so only a slight net gain, but still a gain, and a much more comfortable train as well.

Even on an intercity train, I would consider longitudinal seating to be acceptable but ONLY in the buffet car. With a central servery counter, and longitudinal seating at each end, there would be plenty of standing room.
I have long held the view that many people PREFER to stand if in convivial company and taking a drink, just as many people choose to stand in a public house, despite the availability of seats.
On a busy train, perhaps 40 customers standing THROUGH CHOICE in the buffet means 40 more seats available for other customers, a most useful gain in capacity.
Plenty of strong grab rails, and small tables would be a requirement.

I am no good at drawing on a PC, nor at posting images. Would some expert care to produce a drawing and post it,  showing their interpretation of my suggestion. I would reply.


Title: Re: IETs into passenger service from 16 Oct 2017 and subsequent performance issues
Post by: Thatcham Crossing on July 31, 2018, 04:56:00 pm
Quote
I have long held the view that many people PREFER to stand if in convivial company and taking a drink

The 2330 ex-PAD won't be quite the same without a bar to stand in!


Title: Re: IETs into passenger service from 16 Oct 2017 and subsequent performance issues
Post by: SandTEngineer on July 31, 2018, 09:30:31 pm
According to information from insiders on the WNXX Forum the first scheduled non-Paignton IET services to the Far Southwest effective 20 August 2018, are going to be (Note: Full train set diagrams quoted below):

Quote
1A72 05:53 Plymouth to Paddington
1D20 09:50 Paddington to Oxford
1P26 12:01 Oxford to Paddington
1C89 16:36 Paddington to Exeter
1A98 19:55 Exeter to Paddington

1C04 07:30 Paddington to Penzance
1A93 14:00 Penzance to Paddington
1C96 20:03 Paddington to Plymouth


Title: Re: IETs into passenger service from 16 Oct 2017 and subsequent performance issues
Post by: Southernman on July 31, 2018, 09:55:31 pm
Hopefully the IETS will be cleared from Yeovil to Exeter prior to the blockade 16/02/2019 to 08/03/2019 at Whiteball Tunnel?

Or are the passed already?


Title: Re: IETs into passenger service from 16 Oct 2017 and subsequent performance issues
Post by: IndustryInsider on August 01, 2018, 12:47:01 am
Apologies if this has been asked/answered before but is it assumed that all IETs run on the wires from PAD to Didcot now? Reason for asking is that I was on the 1900 to Temple Meads yesterday (two 5-cars, both in service) and it definitely left both PAD and RDG under diesel power. I didn't notice if the pans were up or down when I boarded and couldn't be bothered to hop out at RDG to check. 

There are a few sets restricted to running on diesel only apparently.

Two sets are currently restricted to diesel only I believe.  Also, if the train computer rejects the headcode for the train (quite common) then a generic code has to be entered and IIRC the instruction is then to swap to diesel at Reading rather than on the move near Didcot.  Software upgrades will no doubt sort that out soon, though there have been a disappointing number of such annoying software glitches that should really have been sorted out far quicker.


Title: Re: IETs into passenger service from 16 Oct 2017 and subsequent performance issues
Post by: TaplowGreen on August 01, 2018, 06:04:18 am
Lots of "Famous Five" short formations today already...…………

06:45 London Paddington to Swansea due 09:48
07:00 London Paddington to Bristol Temple Meads due 08:47
07:15 London Paddington to Cardiff Central due 09:20
09:30 Bristol Temple Meads to London Paddington due 11:12
09:56 Cardiff Central to London Paddington due 12:00
10:29 Swansea to London Paddington due 13:32
11:45 London Paddington to Swansea due 14:45
12:45 London Paddington to Swansea due 15:43
14:00 London Paddington to Bristol Temple Meads due 15:41
15:29 Swansea to London Paddington due 18:30
16:29 Swansea to London Paddington due 19:34
19:00 London Paddington to Bristol Temple Meads due 20:45
20:00 London Paddington to Bristol Temple Meads due 21:44


Title: Re: IETs into passenger service from 16 Oct 2017 and subsequent performance issues
Post by: IndustryInsider on August 01, 2018, 10:21:10 am
My objections are to the interior layout and design.

The colour shade used for the seats and carpets is a little too light and stains are starting to show on both.  I wouldn’t be surprised to see a seat refit with a more padded option within a year or two.  I’ve said before that I personally find the seats ok, but would appreciate slightly more padding as long as it doesn’t compromise the excellent legroom - aside from that gripe other issues passengers have generally seem minor.


Title: Re: IETs into passenger service from 16 Oct 2017 and subsequent performance issues
Post by: broadgage on August 01, 2018, 10:58:11 am
The absence of a buffet is a serious failing on so called inter city trains.
This is not just my view but is widely reported.
Hence my suggestion to lengthen all the 9 car units, and some of the 5 car ones to 10 car with the addition of a proper hot buffet.
Not a static trolley, or a microbuffet, but a proper inter city hot buffet that can serve real coffee, chilled beer, and cooked to order hot snacks like bacon rolls or eggs on toast.


Title: Re: IETs into passenger service from 16 Oct 2017 and subsequent performance issues
Post by: Rob on the hill on August 01, 2018, 11:24:13 am
My objections are to the interior layout and design.

The colour shade used for the seats and carpets is a little too light and stains are starting to show on both.  I wouldn’t be surprised to see a seat refit with a more padded option within a year or two.  I’ve said before that I personally find the seats ok, but would appreciate slightly more padding as long as it doesn’t compromise the excellent legroom - aside from that gripe other issues passengers have generally seem minor.

Some photos from IET Facebook group which apparently show new seat cushions, and comments to the effect that they are being retrofitted. They appear to be a darker shade as well.
https://www.facebook.com/groups/theiethstappreciationsociety/search/?query=seats


Title: Re: IETs into passenger service from 16 Oct 2017 and subsequent performance issues
Post by: broadgage on August 01, 2018, 12:06:32 pm
Does anyone know the reason for todays half length IETs ?
Trains broken
Staff shortage
Or in fact running as 5+5 but with half locked out of use, due to RMT.

Journey check no longer gives a reason.


Title: Re: IETs into passenger service from 16 Oct 2017 and subsequent performance issues
Post by: grahame on August 01, 2018, 01:14:00 pm
Does anyone know the reason for todays half length IETs ?
Trains broken
Staff shortage
Or in fact running as 5+5 but with half locked out of use, due to RMT.

Journey check no longer gives a reason.

There are reasons on some - here are a couple that relate to different diagrams

Quote
16:29 Swansea to London Paddington due 19:34
Facilities on the 16:29 Swansea to London Paddington due 19:34.
This is due to a fault on this train.
Will be formed of 5 coaches instead of 10.

Quote
14:00 London Paddington to Bristol Temple Meads due 15:41
Facilities on the 14:00 London Paddington to Bristol Temple Meads due 15:41.
This is due to a fault on this train.
Will be formed of 5 coaches instead of 10.


Title: Re: IETs into passenger service from 16 Oct 2017 and subsequent performance issues
Post by: onthecushions on August 01, 2018, 06:08:54 pm

Is there any reason why the 5 car sets can't have extra cars added while we are waiting for all the longer sets to be commissioned, even if that does prolong their introduction?

I understand that the units' s/w is set up to allow this.

OTC


Title: Re: IETs into passenger service from 16 Oct 2017 and subsequent performance issues
Post by: CharlieGCR on August 01, 2018, 07:13:36 pm

Is there any reason why the 5 car sets can't have extra cars added while we are waiting for all the longer sets to be commissioned, even if that does prolong their introduction?

I understand that the units' s/w is set up to allow this.

OTC

How would that work? The project is already well over budget and where woud they go after that time? They would only length them if it was permanent, and the five cars are going to run solo frequently in the new timetable. GWR (it comes as a surprise) do have a plan which they believe will work. We will have to just wait and see.


Title: Re: IETs into passenger service from 16 Oct 2017 and subsequent performance issues
Post by: stuving on August 01, 2018, 07:46:05 pm

Is there any reason why the 5 car sets can't have extra cars added while we are waiting for all the longer sets to be commissioned, even if that does prolong their introduction?

I understand that the units' s/w is set up to allow this.

OTC

How would that work? The project is already well over budget and where woud they go after that time? They would only length them if it was permanent, and the five cars are going to run solo frequently in the new timetable. GWR (it comes as a surprise) do have a plan which they believe will work. We will have to just wait and see.

This all depends - on the meaning of a bit of the requirement that has always puzzled me.
Quote
3.3 Unit Formation and Length

TS1829 IEP Units must be equipped with a Driving IEP Vehicle at each end and allow the IEP train be driven in either direction from each Driving IEP Vehicle.

TS223 IEP Units must be able to operate within the following length constraints:
• Maximum length – nominally 312m (this is the maximum design length of an IEP Unit); and
• Minimum length – nominally 130m, where two minimum length IEP Units coupled together form an IEP Train no longer than 260m.

TS1977 It must be possible to add Intermediate IEP Vehicles to an IEP Unit subject to the IEP Unit till being no greater than the maximum length identified in TS223.

TS1979 It must be possible to remove Intermediate IEP Vehicles from an IEP Unit from any intermediate position subject to the Intermediate IEP Vehicles being removed being of the correct Functional Vehicle Type and the IEP Unit remaining at least the minimum length.

TS1980 The design of the IEP Units must ensure the time to add or remove Intermediate IEP Vehicle is minimised and is in any event no greater than 8 hours.

TS1589 With regards to IEP Unit reconfiguration it must be possible to reconfigure software and control systems within 15 minutes when Intermediate IEP Vehicles have been added, removed or replaced.

There's also this bit:
Quote
3.1.3 Flexibility

TS1578 The design of the IEP Units must ensure that the IEP Units have the flexibility to allow for train formation changes, changes of power source, and redeployment throughout their life.
The design of the IEP Units must minimise the cost and timescales to effect these changes.

TS1965 It is an essential requirement that the number of different Functional Vehicle Types within the architecture of the various trains is minimised and there shall in any event be no more
D than 13 distinct Functional Vehicle Types.

Now, the published layouts (from ages ago - 2012) did list functional vehicle types, plus a longer type code that included the internal fittings too. Traditional BR vehicle labels are somewhere between those two. Those layouts are for 5, 8, and 9 car units, which are made up as:
5: DPT1 / M1e / M3-M3e / M1-M1e / DPT1
8: DPT1 / M1e / M2-M2e / T(p) / T1 / M3-M3e / M1-M1e / DPT1
9: DPT1 / M1e / M2-M2e / Tp / M2-M2e / T2 / M3-M3e / M1-M1e / DPT1

Now, I can work out that the M1/M2/M3 are electric motor cars and 'e' adds an engine, so they are listed as alternatives. And it does appear that a Tp and a T(p) are different, as presumably are T1 and T2. So it does not look as if you can make an 8-car out of one 5 plus the middles of another; it does say that anything added has to be of the right functional vehicle type (to add).



Title: Re: IETs into passenger service from 16 Oct 2017 and subsequent performance issues
Post by: paul7755 on August 01, 2018, 08:04:00 pm
Some photos from IET Facebook group which apparently show new seat cushions, and comments to the effect that they are being retrofitted. They appear to be a darker shade as well.
https://www.facebook.com/groups/theiethstappreciationsociety/search/?query=seats
The general understanding elsewhere seems to be that it’s a cover material change only, nothing to do with the cushions...

Paul


Title: Re: IETs into passenger service from 16 Oct 2017 and subsequent performance issues
Post by: onthecushions on August 01, 2018, 10:18:09 pm

Is there any reason why the 5 car sets can't have extra cars added while we are waiting for all the longer sets to be commissioned, even if that does prolong their introduction?

I understand that the units' s/w is set up to allow this.

OTC

How would that work? The project is already well over budget and where woud they go after that time? They would only length them if it was permanent, and the five cars are going to run solo frequently in the new timetable. GWR (it comes as a surprise) do have a plan which they believe will work. We will have to just wait and see.

As there seems to be a habit of towing 5-car units around locked OOU for lack of staff, it seems reasonable to add some of the unused trailers, unlocked, onto the leading unit.

It depends on the priority given to customer service....

OTC


Title: Re: IETs into passenger service from 16 Oct 2017 and subsequent performance issues
Post by: broadgage on August 01, 2018, 11:00:06 pm
Taking vehicles from locked out of use 5 car units and adding them to operational units, so as to make them longer than 5 car, sounds tempting but I suspect that it would be fraught with problems and hugely expensive.
These DMUs are fantastically complicated and I strongly suspect that vehicles removed from a certain 5 car set, can only be used as spares to replace failed vehicles in the same position in ANOTHER 5 car set,
I bet that some subtle difference prohibits them being used to lengthen a 5 car set to something longer.

It would probably be cheaper and quicker to either defeat the RMT, or to admit defeat and employ more union members.


Title: Re: IETs into passenger service from 16 Oct 2017 and subsequent performance issues
Post by: Thatcham Crossing on August 02, 2018, 08:35:46 am
Sad thing for me is that the travelling public will largely blame the new technology for these problems (50% of trains locked OOU etc) when it's all down to a good old-fashioned (and I mean old-fashioned) industrial dispute  >:(


Title: Re: IETs into passenger service from 16 Oct 2017 and subsequent performance issues
Post by: martyjon on August 02, 2018, 08:49:28 am
Sad thing for me is that the travelling public will largely blame the new technology for these problems (50% of trains locked OOU etc) when it's all down to a good old-fashioned (and I mean old-fashioned) industrial dispute  >:(

Really !

Isn't it also down to the fact that 5-car units were procured instead of 9-car units. In the event that an emergency alarm is activated by a passenger in the 5-car set NOT occupied by a competent member of staff, the sole competent member of staff other than the driver would have to detrain and walk to the other set and make an entrance there to investigate the emergency leaving the driver to do his duty to prep the train for moving on when it is safe/cleared to do so.


Title: Re: IETs into passenger service from 16 Oct 2017 and subsequent performance issues
Post by: grahame on August 02, 2018, 08:55:19 am
Isn't it also down to the fact that 5-car units were procured instead of 9-car units. ...

The overall fleet will be a mixture of 5 and 9 car units - designed as such so that a mixture can be used getting the right length trains on the right service.   However, just about all the 5 car 800s were delivered before any 9 cars arrived, resulting in 5+5 trains being run where 9 cars will become the norm, with the temporary extra crew issues.


Title: Re: IETs into passenger service from 16 Oct 2017 and subsequent performance issues
Post by: martyjon on August 02, 2018, 09:01:53 am
Isn't it also down to the fact that 5-car units were procured instead of 9-car units. ...

The overall fleet will be a mixture of 5 and 9 car units - designed as such so that a mixture can be used getting the right length trains on the right service.   However, just about all the 5 car 800s were delivered before any 9 cars arrived, resulting in 5+5 trains being run where 9 cars will become the norm, with the temporary extra crew issues.

And promises have been made in the past for the future and when the future came to pass where were those promises ?


Title: Re: IETs into passenger service from 16 Oct 2017 and subsequent performance issues
Post by: broadgage on August 02, 2018, 09:04:05 am
Sad thing for me is that the travelling public will largely blame the new technology for these problems (50% of trains locked OOU etc) when it's all down to a good old-fashioned (and I mean old-fashioned) industrial dispute  >:(

I blame the problems on the ordering of a fleet of mainly 5 car DMUs for so called inter city services.
The order should have been mainly 9 car with perhaps a limited number of short units for lightly used services.

Some naysayers like me predicted that short formations would be a regular event as has happened.
Whilst the obstructive attitude of the RMT has not helped (other multiple units run without a union member in each portion), a lot of the short formations yesterday and today, have been due to train faults and not RMT demands.


Title: Re: IETs into passenger service from 16 Oct 2017 and subsequent performance issues
Post by: grahame on August 02, 2018, 09:13:29 am
And promises have been made in the past for the future and when the future came to pass where were those promises ?

Can't deny that.  However, with 9 cars starting to arrive and being in the production pipeline, I think this is something that will is happening.  Later than intended, maybe ...


Title: Re: IETs into passenger service from 16 Oct 2017 and subsequent performance issues
Post by: didcotdean on August 02, 2018, 10:40:06 am
Isn't it also down to the fact that 5-car units were procured instead of 9-car units. ...

The overall fleet will be a mixture of 5 and 9 car units - designed as such so that a mixture can be used getting the right length trains on the right service.   However, just about all the 5 car 800s were delivered before any 9 cars arrived, resulting in 5+5 trains being run where 9 cars will become the norm, with the temporary extra crew issues.

Plus the other oddity that services where a single 5 car might be the long term intention currently have 9 cars. After being used to a settled pattern of deployment for some years we now have almost daily juggling round availbility of train sets and corresponding drivers and other staff.

Single 5 car units are also needed for the vanity non (or few) stop services that haven't started up yet :)


Title: Re: IETs into passenger service from 16 Oct 2017 and subsequent performance issues
Post by: Timmer on August 02, 2018, 11:33:24 am
Single 5 car units are also needed for the vanity non (or few) stop services that haven't started up yet :)
Glad its not just me who thinks that.


Title: Re: IETs into passenger service from 16 Oct 2017 and subsequent performance issues
Post by: Thatcham Crossing on August 02, 2018, 12:26:47 pm
Quote
Can't deny that.  However, with 9 cars starting to arrive and being in the production pipeline, I think this is something that will is happening.  Later than intended, maybe ...

Amen to that, I think (hope) we can all agree that a lot of these issues (be they due to technical, staff resourcing or industrial relations issues) could have been avoided if more 9-car units had been deployed earlier.

Once they are (on the routes where they are needed, and 5+5's have become the norm up to now), one hopes that the public perception will start to improve, where it needs to.



Title: Re: IETs into passenger service from 16 Oct 2017 and subsequent performance issues
Post by: eXPassenger on August 02, 2018, 03:46:58 pm
Quote
Can't deny that.  However, with 9 cars starting to arrive and being in the production pipeline, I think this is something that will is happening.  Later than intended, maybe ...

Amen to that, I think (hope) we can all agree that a lot of these issues (be they due to technical, staff resourcing or industrial relations issues) could have been avoided if more 9-car units had been deployed earlier.

Once they are (on the routes where they are needed, and 5+5's have become the norm up to now), one hopes that the public perception will start to improve, where it needs to.



The 9-car units were due for earlier delivery but they were all-electric 801s and only Cardiff will be fully electrified, so they had to be modified to 800s with diesel engines.  If only Network Rail had electrified the whole line to the original timetable.


Title: Re: IETs into passenger service from 16 Oct 2017 and subsequent performance issues
Post by: stuving on August 02, 2018, 05:00:37 pm
The 9-car units were due for earlier delivery but they were all-electric 801s and only Cardiff will be fully electrified, so they had to be modified to 800s with diesel engines.  If only Network Rail had electrified the whole line to the original timetable.

I have no idea where this bit of reverse engineered history came from, but it's not true. The order with all the 5-car trains (800s) first and then 9-car (originally electric 801) trains was in the original agreements with Hitachi/Agility and the GWR franchise. They are just all turning up about 3 months late, that's all.


Title: Re: IETs into passenger service from 16 Oct 2017 and subsequent performance issues
Post by: Bmblbzzz on August 02, 2018, 05:10:13 pm
So following the last few posts I'm unsure of this: When and if all the 9-cars have been delivered, are the 2x5s to continue running as 2x5 or are they to be split into two separate 5-car trains?


Title: Re: IETs into passenger service from 16 Oct 2017 and subsequent performance issues
Post by: broadgage on August 02, 2018, 05:29:44 pm
AFAIK, the intention is to run many services as 5+5 car from London to Plymouth* with a single 5 car unit going forward.
The intention is that all busy services will be full length, with relatively small numbers of lightly used services being 5 car throughout.

However my natural cynicism leads me to suspect that many services planned as 5+5 for the busy part of the route, will in fact be 5 car throughout.
I also suspect that some busy services that should be 9 car or 5+5 will end up being 5 car.

Many recent short formations have been due to train faults, and whilst the delivery of the 9 car sets will help some routes or services, if the 5 car units do not improve then the problem is only transferred to whatever route or service that the 5 car units are used on.

*Or a suitable point on another route.


Title: Re: IETs into passenger service from 16 Oct 2017 and subsequent performance issues
Post by: grahame on August 02, 2018, 05:36:52 pm
So following the last few posts I'm unsure of this: When and if all the 9-cars have been delivered, are the 2x5s to continue running as 2x5 or are they to be split into two separate 5-car trains?

You will see some 5+5 trains and some 9 trains.  Until recently, you only saw 5+5 and they were in use on some that will continue to be 5+5 and some that will become 9.   The 5+5 s will be able to split along the way, so you'll continue to see them on London to Carmarthen and London to Weston / Taunton, with 5 cars only west of Swansea / Bristol.

I'm trying to recall the exact text, but I think it was "no 5 car trains out of Paddington in the peak hour - they will all be 9 or 10". That may have been before Bedwyn was going IET ... or perhaps the plan is to split Cheltenham and Bedwyn sections at Reading?


Title: Re: IETs into passenger service from 16 Oct 2017 and subsequent performance issues
Post by: Oxonhutch on August 02, 2018, 09:05:22 pm
Introduced today is a crazy scheme to tell everyone how the train is assembled before it arrives in the station. Didcot 06:25 this [2-8-18] morning and the Platform 2 display announces 'First Class in Coaches D, E, K, and L'. Well like that is useful - those are the first class coaches on a 10 car set.

I enquire of platform staff. Their puzzlement matches mine.

Finally, over the tannoy, 'Sonya' (as opposed to her father) announces that First Class is in coaches 1,2, 6 and 7.  I get that (front and middle) - and agree with the platform staff that, at last, we have some tangible information.

Train [1A02] arrives in reverse formation!  Much running ensues...

Who thought of this latest wonderful idea?

GWR/Hitachi:- Please think again. Can I say that more slowly please:- 'P l e a s e   t h i n k   a g a i n'


Title: Re: IETs into passenger service from 16 Oct 2017 and subsequent performance issues
Post by: CharlieGCR on August 03, 2018, 12:05:05 am
I get your point well and truely, but for future reference the information board shows the atcuall formation. Platform staff don’t use it even though it is accurate, it showed a HST in reverse formation with: L K K F D C B A correctly shown. The man with the bike was annoyed at platform staff for not knowing.

But yes, bad idea by Hitachi however the information at Didcot is good, especially with the carriage numbers shown on the ground now.


Title: Re: IETs into passenger service from 16 Oct 2017 and subsequent performance issues
Post by: martyjon on August 03, 2018, 04:44:20 am
22 short 5 instead of 10 IEPs at 04:40 this am AND its Friday too, well at least there is no short formed Penzance / Plymouths - Paddington and vicky-versy 3 instead of 8 HSTs YET.


Title: Re: IETs into passenger service from 16 Oct 2017 and subsequent performance issues
Post by: grahame on August 03, 2018, 06:08:44 am
22 short 5 instead of 10 IEPs at 04:40 this am AND its Friday too, well at least there is no short formed Penzance / Plymouths - Paddington and vicky-versy 3 instead of 8 HSTs YET.

Less bad (at 05:18) - still 22 changed formations but some not so badly changed.   How many seats do you loose going down from a ten car to a nine, bearing in mind removal of the two driving ends in the middle?

Quote
07:45 London Paddington to Swansea due 10:45
Facilities on the 07:45 London Paddington to Swansea due 10:45.
This is due to a fault on this train.
Will be formed of 9 coaches instead of 10.

Quote
11:29 Swansea to London Paddington due 14:30
Facilities on the 11:29 Swansea to London Paddington due 14:30.
This is due to a fault on this train.
Will be formed of 9 coaches instead of 10.
Last Updated:03/08/2018 05:18

Quote
15:00 London Paddington to Bristol Temple Meads due 16:40
Facilities on the 15:00 London Paddington to Bristol Temple Meads due 16:40.
This is due to a fault on this train.
Will be formed of 9 coaches instead of 10.
Last Updated:03/08/2018 05:18

Quote
17:00 Bristol Temple Meads to London Paddington due 18:44
Facilities on the 17:00 Bristol Temple Meads to London Paddington due 18:44.
This is due to a fault on this train.
Will be formed of 9 coaches instead of 10.
Last Updated:03/08/2018 05:18

Quote
19:12 London Paddington to Bristol Temple Meads due 20:59
Facilities on the 19:12 London Paddington to Bristol Temple Meads due 20:59.
This is due to a fault on this train.
Will be formed of 9 coaches instead of 10.
Last Updated:03/08/2018 05:18


Title: Re: IETs into passenger service from 16 Oct 2017 and subsequent performance issues
Post by: broadgage on August 03, 2018, 06:32:54 am
The seating capacity of a 5+5 IET and a 9 car are virtually identical, so the substitution of a 9 car for a 5+5 is of almost no direct significance to the passenger.

It does however perhaps suggest a worrying level of non availability of 5 car units.
A pair of 5 car units are broken, so send a 9 car.
9 car unit therefore not available for planned working.
Send an HST instead of the 9 car.
All well and good whilst HSTs are still available, but when they are gone ?


Title: Re: IETs into passenger service from 16 Oct 2017 and subsequent performance issues
Post by: grahame on August 03, 2018, 06:54:39 am
It does however perhaps suggest a worrying level of non availability of 5 car units.

A number of the 5 car units have now been in service for 9 months ... and running prior to that for testing.  Routine maintenance programs were laid down with the introduction, with (this bit not exact) monthly, quarterly and annual elements.  It has turned out that one particular time-consuming task that was supposed to be annual is actually needed quarterly at present, and (?) pending potential engineering changes and additional availability of more trained maintenance staff, Hitachi have a challenge.  Problem noted, reasons known, actions in place to fix the issue.


Title: Re: IETs into passenger service from 16 Oct 2017 and subsequent performance issues
Post by: TaplowGreen on August 03, 2018, 07:05:09 am
It does however perhaps suggest a worrying level of non availability of 5 car units.

A number of the 5 car units have now been in service for 9 months ... and running prior to that for testing.  Routine maintenance programs were laid down with the introduction, with (this bit not exact) monthly, quarterly and annual elements.  It has turned out that one particular time-consuming task that was supposed to be annual is actually needed quarterly at present, and (?) pending potential engineering changes and additional availability of more trained maintenance staff, Hitachi have a challenge.  Problem noted, reasons known, actions in place to fix the issue.

No, GWR have a challenge.

The title of this thread illustrates that these trains are now almost a year into service, and much of this is still basic snagging that should be been evident/resolved much earlier. Dozens of trains running at half their intended/promised length on a daily basis. It's just a further example of the Alice in Wonderland nature of our railways.






Title: Re: IETs into passenger service from 16 Oct 2017 and subsequent performance issues
Post by: broadgage on August 03, 2018, 07:23:47 am
A number of the 5 car units have now been in service for 9 months ... and running prior to that for testing.  Routine maintenance programs were laid down with the introduction, with (this bit not exact) monthly, quarterly and annual elements.  It has turned out that one particular time-consuming task that was supposed to be annual is actually needed quarterly at present, and (?) pending potential engineering changes and additional availability of more trained maintenance staff, Hitachi have a challenge.  Problem noted, reasons known, actions in place to fix the issue.

This gives rise to at least two questions.
Firstly, do we know what the problem is ? Is it the not very accessible radiator that becomes debris clogged and is a challenge to clean ? or something else.

Secondly, whatever the problem is, will it also affect the mechanically VERY similar 9 car units ?

Are Hitachi paying the price in money for all this non availability of the new trains, or is there some wiggle room whereby they can claim that it is a customer problem and not a supplier problem.


Title: Re: IETs into passenger service from 16 Oct 2017 and subsequent performance issues
Post by: bradshaw on August 03, 2018, 09:30:29 am
Roger Ford in the current Modern Railways looks at the new trains, including the Cl 800 (p36). The moving annual average MTIN (minutes per technical incident) is 4693, well below the Cl 700.& 707. Even Northern pacer fleet has a better figure (8933).

This low level is common for new fleets but they do not seem to be showing the so called ‘Bath tub’ profile where reliability suddenly takes off. This seems to apply to all the above fleets.

The following page looks at the effect of the summer’s heat on the Class 800. Apparently on one day half the diagrammed units were out of action due to overheating.

P71 onwards has a feature on GWR.


Title: Re: IETs into passenger service from 16 Oct 2017 and subsequent performance issues
Post by: eXPassenger on August 03, 2018, 10:14:59 am
The 9-car units were due for earlier delivery but they were all-electric 801s and only Cardiff will be fully electrified, so they had to be modified to 800s with diesel engines.  If only Network Rail had electrified the whole line to the original timetable.

I have no idea where this bit of reverse engineered history came from, but it's not true. The order with all the 5-car trains (800s) first and then 9-car (originally electric 801) trains was in the original agreements with Hitachi/Agility and the GWR franchise. They are just all turning up about 3 months late, that's all.
My understanding (and I am probably wrong) was that when the 801s were converted to 800s this caused the delivery schedule to slip for the 9-cars.


Title: Re: IETs into passenger service from 16 Oct 2017 and subsequent performance issues
Post by: broadgage on August 04, 2018, 11:20:36 am
The usual selection of half length IETs today.
Two things that I noticed, firstly at least two short formations are listed as being 5 car instead of 9 car. rather than the usual 5 car instead of 10 car. This suggests that the very recently introduced 9 car units are starting to fail.

Also as the IETS spread, more destinations are suffering downgrading to DMUs. Weston Super Mare and Hereford are now affected, which will no doubt upset the tourist authorities in those places.


Title: Re: IETs into passenger service from 16 Oct 2017 and subsequent performance issues
Post by: IndustryInsider on August 04, 2018, 11:46:30 am
One 9-car diagram currently being covered by a 5-car set today.  Currently at Hereford where as we've discussed 9-car operation is currently very problematic due to platform and signalling conflicts.

Four more journeys as a passenger for me on 800s this week.  Plenty of seating available, air-con working, on time.  Trolley seen on three out of the four (though two of my journeys were very short ones) - on one occasion it looked like a hot food order had been placed, prepared in the kitchen, and delivered to the passengers seat in standard class at 11pm.  Perhaps I was hallucinating though?


Title: Re: IETs into passenger service from 16 Oct 2017 and subsequent performance issues
Post by: broadgage on August 04, 2018, 12:01:53 pm
Presuming that you were NOT hallucinating, then I am impressed if the promised hot food service in standard class is actually appearing.
I remain un impressed by the lack of a buffet, the hard seats, the frequent short formations and the absence of a through gangway on allegedly intercity trains.


Title: Re: IETs into passenger service from 16 Oct 2017 and subsequent performance issues
Post by: 4064ReadingAbbey on August 04, 2018, 04:36:47 pm
Roger Ford in the current Modern Railways looks at the new trains, including the Cl 800 (p36). The moving annual average MTIN (minutes per technical incident) is 4693, well below the Cl 700.& 707. Even Northern pacer fleet has a better figure (8933).

This low level is common for new fleets but they do not seem to be showing the so called ‘Bath tub’ profile where reliability suddenly takes off. This seems to apply to all the above fleets.

The following page looks at the effect of the summer’s heat on the Class 800. Apparently on one day half the diagrammed units were out of action due to overheating.

P71 onwards has a feature on GWR.
A small point... the 'M' in MTIN is 'miles' not 'minutes'...

(I'll crawl back under my stone now  :) )


Title: Re: IETs into passenger service from 16 Oct 2017 and subsequent performance issues
Post by: bradshaw on August 04, 2018, 04:42:24 pm
Apologies, I should have checked first.


Title: Re: IETs into passenger service from 16 Oct 2017 and subsequent performance issues
Post by: TaplowGreen on August 04, 2018, 05:14:43 pm
I remain un impressed by the lack of a buffet

Really? I don't recall you ever mentioning it before?  ;)


Title: Re: IETs into passenger service from 16 Oct 2017 and subsequent performance issues
Post by: CyclingSid on August 04, 2018, 08:29:06 pm
Took an early 5-car from Reading to Oxford today. For trains that have been in service for a year or less I was surprised by the amount of staining on the seats. In the "old days" they used more patterned fabrics on seats, probably with good reason. Have the Japanese assumed everybody else is as clean and fastidious as they are?

On a slightly different tack I was reminded, again, how "anti-climatic" electric trains possibly just a change in frequency from the solid state drive (or chatter of contactors in the past). Coming back from Didcot on an HST, you are aware when it is working for its living.


Title: Re: IETs into passenger service from 16 Oct 2017 and subsequent performance issues
Post by: didcotdean on August 04, 2018, 09:32:42 pm
Took an early 5-car from Reading to Oxford today. For trains that have been in service for a year or less I was surprised by the amount of staining on the seats. In the "old days" they used more patterned fabrics on seats, probably with good reason. Have the Japanese assumed everybody else is as clean and fastidious as they are?
Somewhere way up in this thread (or maybe another IET one) will show my comment on stained seats only a week or two after the first one was introduced.

As to the reliability, they are working somewhat better than the Class 345s are at present.


Title: Re: IETs into passenger service from 16 Oct 2017 and subsequent performance issues
Post by: IndustryInsider on August 05, 2018, 12:49:50 am
For trains that have been in service for a year or less I was surprised by the amount of staining on the seats. In the "old days" they used more patterned fabrics on seats, probably with good reason. Have the Japanese assumed everybody else is as clean and fastidious as they are?

Here are the new seat covers being fitted which should be much more stain resistant.  No change regarding levels of padding (or to the stained carpets), but the pattern does liven up the interior a bit.

 


Title: Re: IETs into passenger service from 16 Oct 2017 and subsequent performance issues
Post by: Surrey 455 on August 05, 2018, 10:36:41 am
For trains that have been in service for a year or less I was surprised by the amount of staining on the seats. In the "old days" they used more patterned fabrics on seats, probably with good reason. Have the Japanese assumed everybody else is as clean and fastidious as they are?

Here are the new seat covers being fitted which should be much more stain resistant.  No change regarding levels of padding (or to the stained carpets), but the pattern does liven up the interior a bit.

 

Looks like they've picked up a few stains already  ;D


Title: Re: IETs into passenger service from 16 Oct 2017 and subsequent performance issues
Post by: IndustryInsider on August 05, 2018, 10:50:58 am
There had obviously been some kind of party on that particular table of four during the journey as there was popcorn everywhere!


Title: Re: IETs into passenger service from 16 Oct 2017 and subsequent performance issues
Post by: Clan Line on August 05, 2018, 10:55:25 am

Looks like they've picked up a few stains already  ;D


Crumbs.................! ;D


Title: Re: IETs into passenger service from 16 Oct 2017 and subsequent performance issues
Post by: Rob on the hill on August 05, 2018, 12:06:03 pm

Looks like they've picked up a few stains already  ;D


Crumbs.................! ;D

I hope the cleaners can get those red circle stains out!  ;D


Title: Re: IETs into passenger service from 16 Oct 2017 and subsequent performance issues
Post by: broadgage on August 05, 2018, 12:55:33 pm
People who draw red circles on train seats should be prosecuted :)


Title: Re: IETs into passenger service from 16 Oct 2017 and subsequent performance issues
Post by: broadgage on August 07, 2018, 06:48:48 am
IET failures look worse than usual today with about 20 short formations, mainly 5 car instead of 10 car, but also several 5 car instead of 9 car.
A couple of 8 car versus 10 car, which I presume is an HST instead of an IET.

They did a little better yesterday with only about a dozen short formations.

Does anyone know if Hitachi are paying for this ? Or is there some wiggle room whereby it can be ruled to be a "customer problem" and not the suppliers fault.


Title: Re: IETs into passenger service from 16 Oct 2017 and subsequent performance issues
Post by: IndustryInsider on August 07, 2018, 08:35:42 am
I’m not sure how it works until the point at which full fleet acceptance and training has been completed.  I suspect there would be a little wriggle room until that point, but there should be a least some sort of penalty for the current poor availability.

I remain confident that a potentially reliable train is lurking underneath the poor availability of recent days but it’s disappointing (and unexpected by myself) that they are still not be on top of basic things like the reservation system yet.

With problems on the Scottish EMUs they built, Hitachi’s good reputation is under threat unless they get on top of the outstanding issues soon.


Title: Re: IETs into passenger service from 16 Oct 2017 and subsequent performance issues
Post by: Timmer on August 07, 2018, 10:23:07 am
With problems on the Scottish EMUs they built, Hitachi’s good reputation is under threat unless they get on top of the outstanding issues soon.
And being a Japanese company they will take that very seriously.


Title: Re: IETs into passenger service from 16 Oct 2017 and subsequent performance issues
Post by: Timmer on August 07, 2018, 10:26:29 am
A couple of 8 car versus 10 car, which I presume is an HST instead of an IET.
Good that GWR appear to have a spare HST or two to substitute a non available IET.


Title: Re: IETs into passenger service from 16 Oct 2017 and subsequent performance issues
Post by: CharlieGCR on August 07, 2018, 11:02:17 am
I don’t understand why they run an off peak Cheltenham service with a 9 car and operate a 5 car on services between Swansea and London that will run into peak? I was on the 17:42 out of Paddington to Cheltenham and this time of year the 5 coaches was enough.


Title: Re: IETs into passenger service from 16 Oct 2017 and subsequent performance issues
Post by: Timmer on August 07, 2018, 11:10:12 am
I don’t understand why they run an off peak Cheltenham service with a 9 car and operate a 5 car on services between Swansea and London that will run into peak? I was on the 17:42 out of Paddington to Cheltenham and this time of year the 5 coaches was enough.
All about diagrams and depots.


Title: Re: IETs into passenger service from 16 Oct 2017 and subsequent performance issues
Post by: IndustryInsider on August 07, 2018, 12:27:41 pm
Yes, while the 9-Cars remain thin on the ground they have to be on diagrams that end up in the right place at the end of the day.  As more and more are delivered and accepted that flexibility will increase.


Title: Re: IETs into passenger service from 16 Oct 2017 and subsequent performance issues
Post by: broadgage on August 08, 2018, 11:04:53 am
Broadly similar today, about 20 short formations.
The usual mix of 5 car instead of 10, 5 car instead of 9, and HST instead of 10 car.

From the passengers point of view, an HST instead of an IET is not bad since it is what was expected until recently  and is a proper train.

Reports suggest that reservations wont be honoured on any of the short trains, and the trolley, if provided at all will be hiding in first class.


Title: Re: IETs into passenger service from 16 Oct 2017 and subsequent performance issues
Post by: a-driver on August 08, 2018, 11:08:24 am
Broadly similar today, about 20 short formations.
The usual mix of 5 car instead of 10, 5 car instead of 9, and HST instead of 10 car.

From the passengers point of view, an HST instead of an IET is not bad since it is what was expected until recently  and is a proper train.

Reports suggest that reservations wont be honoured on any of the short trains, and the trolley, if provided at all will be hiding in first class.

I wonder if they’ve shortened some 10-cars in order to release an HST for the additional Newquay workings.


Title: Re: IETs into passenger service from 16 Oct 2017 and subsequent performance issues
Post by: old original on August 08, 2018, 02:30:39 pm
Looking ahead, there's going to be a few short forms instead of hst's especially on Monday as there are seven hst's  running from Newquay to London after boardmasters.  They'll have to come from somewhere!


Title: Re: IETs into passenger service from 16 Oct 2017 and subsequent performance issues
Post by: bobm on August 08, 2018, 05:29:06 pm
At least one HST has been made available by replacing the usual 10:49 Penzance to London HST with a unit running only between Penzance and Plymouth.    Another of course is the usual summer Newquay service formed from the 09:03 from London.


Title: Re: IETs into passenger service from 16 Oct 2017 and subsequent performance issues
Post by: BBM on August 08, 2018, 06:56:56 pm
Looking at GWR's Twitter tonight there are several complaints about the 17.42 PAD-Cheltenham being cancelled, and the response from GWR is "this has temporarily (today and tomorrow) been removed from the timetable to support the extremely high demand on services in Cornwall for Boardmasters Festival". Needless to say, customers are not impressed!


Title: Re: IETs into passenger service from 16 Oct 2017 and subsequent performance issues
Post by: bobm on August 08, 2018, 06:58:42 pm
That 17:42 to Cheltenham is always popular not least because it *doesn't* call at Reading.


Title: Re: IETs into passenger service from 16 Oct 2017 and subsequent performance issues
Post by: Adelante_CCT on August 08, 2018, 07:38:40 pm
Looking ahead, there's going to be a few short forms instead of hst's especially on Monday as there are seven hst's  running from Newquay to London after boardmasters.  They'll have to come from somewhere!

The following services are 'cancelled' on Monday:

05:15 Bristol TM to Paddington (via Newbury)
07:59 Swansea to Paddington
10:49 Penzance to Paddington
12:00 Paddington to Bristol TM
13:36 Paddington to Cheltenham
14:30 Bristol TM to Paddington
16:20 Cheltenham to Paddington


Title: Re: IETs into passenger service from 16 Oct 2017 and subsequent performance issues
Post by: bobm on August 08, 2018, 07:52:48 pm
The loss of that 10:49 from Penzance will be felt as it’s a Monday. It is replaced by a train only as far as Plymouth but that doesn’t connect into anything.  You’d arrive in London earlier by waiting for the 12:04 from Penzance.


Title: Re: IETs into passenger service from 16 Oct 2017 and subsequent performance issues
Post by: TaplowGreen on August 08, 2018, 09:52:00 pm
The loss of that 10:49 from Penzance will be felt as it’s a Monday. It is replaced by a train only as far as Plymouth but that doesn’t connect into anything.  You’d arrive in London earlier by waiting for the 12:04 from Penzance.

Agree the loss of the 1049 stands out but none of the others should cause major issues. I think GWR called this one about right and I hope it signals an ongoing improvement in planning &
capacity provision for major events and notably busy days.


Title: Re: IETs into passenger service from 16 Oct 2017 and subsequent performance issues
Post by: bobm on August 12, 2018, 01:18:23 pm
Introduced today is a crazy scheme to tell everyone how the train is assembled before it arrives in the station. Didcot 06:25 this [2-8-18] morning and the Platform 2 display announces 'First Class in Coaches D, E, K, and L'. Well like that is useful - those are the first class coaches on a 10 car set.

I enquire of platform staff. Their puzzlement matches mine.

Finally, over the tannoy, 'Sonya' (as opposed to her father) announces that First Class is in coaches 1,2, 6 and 7.  I get that (front and middle) - and agree with the platform staff that, at last, we have some tangible information.

Also at Didcot they have painted the stopping places on Platform 1 (Down Main).

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

However someone needs to decide whether the carriages are identified by numbers or letters....


Title: Re: IETs into passenger service from 16 Oct 2017 and subsequent performance issues
Post by: martyjon on August 12, 2018, 01:36:38 pm
Introduced today is a crazy scheme to tell everyone how the train is assembled before it arrives in the station. Didcot 06:25 this [2-8-18] morning and the Platform 2 display announces 'First Class in Coaches D, E, K, and L'. Well like that is useful - those are the first class coaches on a 10 car set.

I enquire of platform staff. Their puzzlement matches mine.

Finally, over the tannoy, 'Sonya' (as opposed to her father) announces that First Class is in coaches 1,2, 6 and 7.  I get that (front and middle) - and agree with the platform staff that, at last, we have some tangible information.

Also at Didcot they have painted the stopping places on Platform 1 (Down Main).

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

However someone needs to decide whether the carriages are identified by numbers or letters....


haven't they put the 10 on the platform the wrong way round, when the driver looks out of his side window the 10 will appear to him upside down ! Here we go again.


Title: Re: IETs into passenger service from 16 Oct 2017 and subsequent performance issues
Post by: bobm on August 12, 2018, 01:44:37 pm
Drivers have their own stop markers

(http://www.mbob.co.uk/rforum/didiet2.jpg)


Title: Re: IETs into passenger service from 16 Oct 2017 and subsequent performance issues
Post by: grahame on August 12, 2018, 02:16:18 pm
However someone needs to decide whether the carriages are identified by numbers or letters....
haven't they put the 10 on the platform the wrong way round, when the driver looks out of his side window the 10 will appear to him upside down ! Here we go again.

Ah yes - what is "??" in 16 06 68 88 ?? 98 sequence!

"10" as in ten car, 9, 5 for driver's train stops are logical, whether letters, digits or signs of the zodiac are used for passengers!


Title: Re: IETs into passenger service from 16 Oct 2017 and subsequent performance issues
Post by: CharlieGCR on August 12, 2018, 02:38:37 pm
Drivers have their own stop markers

(http://www.mbob.co.uk/rforum/didiet2.jpg)

Didcot and Bath do not have on train announcements for short platforms as they are going to be extended, so manual SDO is used instead by the driver.


Title: Re: IETs into passenger service from 16 Oct 2017 and subsequent performance issues
Post by: IndustryInsider on August 12, 2018, 03:14:50 pm
Didcot and Bath do not have on train announcements for short platforms as they are going to be extended, so manual SDO is used instead by the driver.

Yes, and quite a mash up for many months to come until all the extensions are complete - many haven't been started yet.  There has been at least one instance of the wrong half of the train opening due to an SDO error, so the quicker they are completed the better.


Title: Re: IETs into passenger service from 16 Oct 2017 and subsequent performance issues
Post by: martyjon on August 13, 2018, 08:38:02 am
Spot the unintentional mistake in the undermentioned item on JourneyCheck ;-

06:48 Weston-Super-Mare to London Paddington due 09:12

Facilities on the 06:48 Weston-super-Mare to London Paddington due 09:12.
This is due to a fault on this train.
Will be formed of 5 coaches instead of 10 to Weston-Super-Mare.

Does anyone proof read what is posted to JourneyCheck.


Title: Re: IETs into passenger service from 16 Oct 2017 and subsequent performance issues
Post by: grahame on August 13, 2018, 08:56:03 am
Spot the unintentional mistake in the undermentioned item on JourneyCheck ;-

...

Does anyone proof read what is posted to JourneyCheck.

Oh come on - I would much rather have information posted that contains the occasional blooper that makes us smile than have things proof read and checked to the extent that the information isn't made available at the earliest opportunity.

Lets' forgive the JourneyCheck team the occasional funny, thank them (if they read this) for their hard work, and encourage them to provide more and fuller information ... even if there's a glitch or two.


Title: Re: IETs into passenger service from 16 Oct 2017 and subsequent performance issues
Post by: Adelante_CCT on August 14, 2018, 10:18:57 am
How many IET services to Bristol/Swansea are actually diagrammed as 5 car?

Both the 10:01 & 10:12 services from Reading to Paddington are 5 cars and both completely rammed (I'm on the latter, leaving many behind at Reading), though neither are on journeycheck.


Title: Re: IETs into passenger service from 16 Oct 2017 and subsequent performance issues
Post by: Timmer on August 14, 2018, 12:25:54 pm
How many IET services to Bristol/Swansea are actually diagrammed as 5 car?
I wouldn't have thought ANY should be 5 car but there are many and they aren't always listed in Journeycheck either.


Title: Re: IETs into passenger service from 16 Oct 2017 and subsequent performance issues
Post by: grahame on August 14, 2018, 01:33:15 pm
How many IET services to Bristol/Swansea are actually diagrammed as 5 car?
I wouldn't have thought ANY should be 5 car but there are many and they aren't always listed in Journeycheck either.

I would have thought that there might be a few individual services on which a 5 car would suffice, but chances are that previous or following workings would be likely to be overcrowded if less than 9.  Should diagrams take an IET out from London 10 car in the evening peak, 5 carry on from Bristol to Weston and the other 5 return to Paddington, after which it goes on depot or to Bedwyn, that might be fine.

Can 2 x 5 car IETs split / join in the platforms at Paddington?


Title: Re: IETs into passenger service from 16 Oct 2017 and subsequent performance issues
Post by: broadgage on August 14, 2018, 01:51:29 pm
IIRC, being able to split and join at any station on the core IET routes was an "essential requirement" of the project.
There may be a reluctance to actually do this at Paddington in case something goes wrong.

Imagine the chaos at Paddington in the evening rush hour when an IET breaks in say platform 1 and the decision is then made to divide a 5+5 train on platform 4 to give two half units. During or immediately after the uncoupling "computer says no" Platforms 1 and 4 now blocked, and two train loads of very unhappy passengers.



Title: Re: IETs into passenger service from 16 Oct 2017 and subsequent performance issues
Post by: Timmer on August 14, 2018, 04:59:45 pm
I would have thought that there might be a few individual services on which a 5 car would suffice, but chances are that previous or following workings would be likely to be overcrowded if less than 9.  Should diagrams take an IET out from London 10 car in the evening peak, 5 carry on from Bristol to Weston and the other 5 return to Paddington, after which it goes on depot or to Bedwyn, that might be fine.
Yeah maybe first thing in the morning and last thing at night but as far as Bristol/Swansea services are concerned none should be 5 car but there are plenty running round at ALL times of the day at the moment that are as Broadgage rightly predicted would happen. And no this isn’t just early days running, this has been going on ever since the IETs were introduced. Maybe on some Cheltenham to London services 8 into 5 goes, elsewhere it certainly does not!


Title: Re: IETs into passenger service from 16 Oct 2017 and subsequent performance issues
Post by: broadgage on August 14, 2018, 05:19:38 pm
How many IET services to Bristol/Swansea are actually diagrammed as 5 car?
I wouldn't have thought ANY should be 5 car but there are many and they aren't always listed in Journeycheck either.

I smell a rat !
I suspect that they* are trying to "tiptoe away" from the original promise that rush hour services would all be 9 or 10 car. Don't advertise short formations as being short and after a while people will hopefully forget all about the promise.
Then when a full length train IS provided, this can be advertised as a "double length train, with hundreds of extra seats"
All very Voyager like.

BTW, one of the best criticisms that I have heard on board one of the new shorter trains was "when they said we were getting new trains, I did not realise that they would be Virgin Voyagers"

*"they" means Hitachi, or GWR, or the department for transport, take your pick.


Title: Re: IETs into passenger service from 16 Oct 2017 and subsequent performance issues
Post by: Timmer on August 14, 2018, 05:34:43 pm
*"they" means Hitachi, or GWR, or the department for transport, take your pick.
Try all three not forgetting Network Rail. Actually I don’t hold GWR as responsible as the others. Oh mustn’t forget a fifth...the unions.


Title: Re: IETs into passenger service from 16 Oct 2017 and subsequent performance issues
Post by: didcotdean on August 14, 2018, 07:05:12 pm
Single 5-car IETs were in the early indicative diagrams for procurement for some existing services, such as off-peak Cheltenhams, and Cotswolds. Also to be used on 'new' services, such as the no/limited stop Bristols/Swanseas, semi-fast Exeters etc. Back then of course the Oxfords would be all EMUs, the 9-cars not bimode and the HST replacement for the main WoE services was not finalised.

At an even earlier stage the DfT contemplated even wider portion working imagining 2*5 cars on every long distance service from Paddington, with splits occurring at Oxford and Swindon for onward destinations, maybe sometimes even at Didcot. (Can't remember where this was imagined to happen on the WoE.) This though didn't survive scrutiny of the actual passenger flows, fortunately.

Short-forming has been happening for years on GWR, but the main line services were not usually the ones to suffer first, as shortage of an HST or 2 usually fell onto Oxford/Cotswolds with a diagram becoming turbo vice HST (plus maybe some other turbo services becoming 2/3 car vice 5).


Title: Re: IETs into passenger service from 16 Oct 2017 and subsequent performance issues
Post by: CharlieGCR on August 14, 2018, 07:10:07 pm
Within two weeks of the 800s introduction the first 43s were off and you did not see any 5 vice 10 until the start of 2018 unless it was an issue with the staff of which five were locked out of use. I’d say between April and July were the most short forms, and I seem to feel that they have cut down slightly over the past month or so, but I can’t say it does not happen. The main issues related to short forms are currently that there are fewer HSTs than needed, there are units still being used for testing and the trains have teething problems.

I personally as a whole have no issue with the train itself, yes a buffet would be nice, yes it would be nice if they were not split in half but GWR always tell me once they are fully introduced the only time I will see a short form is because of a fault with a train, or maintenance work. I believe that there will certainly be many, many less though it will still happen, and to what extent no one can say.

I am from Gloucester, I am told next year when the service goes hourly that my trains will be 5 and 9 cars off peak and 9 and 10 peak. That’s enough for my line, and it also allows the 9 cars to operate most Bristol and Cheltenham trains. I wouldn’t be surprised if we see a 5 car 802 covering for a duty on my line because it is a fairly suitable train.

At the end of the day, both the Government, Hitatchi and GWR are to blame for the awful introduction of these ‘Super’ trains. I and many others see how they can provide better journey times and hopefully a better passenger experience, with 4tph Bristol and 3tph Wales (peak), also 1tph Cheltenham these trains will eventually (whenever that is) provide a better experience, hopefully  ;)

(didcotdean, I was typing whilst you posted yours, sorry if things are repeated  :D)


Title: Re: IETs into passenger service from 16 Oct 2017 and subsequent performance issues
Post by: didcotdean on August 14, 2018, 08:02:13 pm
(didcotdean, I was typing whilst you posted yours, sorry if things are repeated  :D)
No real overlap I think as mine was more historical background …

There is an interesting comparison between the introduction of the IET and the class 345. The latter has had a very slow introduction, plagued with various problems and has a poorer failure rate than the IET, but the Class 315s have been able to stick around as necessary on the eastern side.


Title: Re: IETs into passenger service from 16 Oct 2017 and subsequent performance issues
Post by: CharlieGCR on August 15, 2018, 01:07:26 pm
Found a photo on twitter of the new first class moquet https://twitter.com/cragoolia/status/1028167564730552320?s=21


Title: Re: IETs into passenger service from 16 Oct 2017 and subsequent performance issues
Post by: Timmer on August 15, 2018, 01:13:23 pm
Found a photo on twitter of the new first class moquet https://twitter.com/cragoolia/status/1028167564730552320?s=21
I look at that and it looks like a standard class set up rather than first class. GWR spoiled us with the last HST first class refurb. One of the best yet IMHO. Of course Dft is responsible for IET specs so can't blame GWR on this one.


Title: Re: IETs into passenger service from 16 Oct 2017 and subsequent performance issues
Post by: 1st fan on August 15, 2018, 02:00:55 pm
I was on a Ryanair flight at the weekend and found myself thinking how the seats were more comfortable than those on the IET even in 1st. I wasn't a fan of many features of the Ryanair experience but the seats surprised me.


Title: Re: IETs into passenger service from 16 Oct 2017 and subsequent performance issues
Post by: broadgage on August 15, 2018, 03:31:07 pm
If I owned a budget airline, I would offer a "budget comfort class" as an experiment.
More legroom and a wider seat , for say a 50% higher fare.
If a rather cramped seat can be offered for £50, I see no reason why more space cant be offered for say £75.

No frills or complications, just more space for more money.

I refer here not just to the seat itself, but to the space around it.


Title: Re: IETs into passenger service from 16 Oct 2017 and subsequent performance issues
Post by: TaplowGreen on August 15, 2018, 04:19:10 pm
If I owned a budget airline, I would offer a "budget comfort class" as an experiment.
More legroom and a wider seat , for say a 50% higher fare.
If a rather cramped seat can be offered for £50, I see no reason why more space cant be offered for say £75.

No frills or complications, just more space for more money.

I refer here not just to the seat itself, but to the space around it.

Would your airline have a buffet? 😉


Title: Re: IETs into passenger service from 16 Oct 2017 and subsequent performance issues
Post by: broadgage on August 15, 2018, 04:37:31 pm
No, for a budget airline it adds cost, weight and complexity.

For a train though, I feel that a buffet should be provided, thereby illustrating the inherent superior nature of train travel, which is also a lot more expensive than air travel.

The present day trend is to make trains as bad as budget airlines, but with much higher fares.

For a few pence a mile on budget airlines I don't expect a buffet.
For approaching £1 a mile on a train I do expect this.


Title: Re: IETs into passenger service from 16 Oct 2017 and subsequent performance issues
Post by: grahame on August 15, 2018, 04:39:29 pm
No, for a budget airline it adds cost, weight and complexity.

It does for a train too ...


Title: Re: IETs into passenger service from 16 Oct 2017 and subsequent performance issues
Post by: broadgage on August 15, 2018, 05:06:18 pm
No, for a budget airline it adds cost, weight and complexity.

It does for a train too ...

True, but considering the premium prices charged for rail travel, I think that the extra costs and weight are worth it.
Or perhaps in view of the money saved by not providing a buffet on the new DMUs, the fares should be reduced to reflect the downgraded facilities offered.

Trains in the 1970s had buffets, so with the country now more than twice as wealthy as it was then, why are buffets now an unaffordable luxury ?


Title: Re: IETs into passenger service from 16 Oct 2017 and subsequent performance issues
Post by: IndustryInsider on August 15, 2018, 05:14:24 pm
Trains in the 1970s had buffets, so with the country now more than twice as wealthy as it was then, why are buffets now an unaffordable luxury ?

As has been said before, it's largely due to the large number of retail outlets available at stations which are generally selling better quality produce at cheaper prices than can be offered on the train.

Back in the 70s you were lucky if you had a Travellers Fare and a John Menzies at your local large station.  Now they all have M&S Foodhall's, Upper Crusts etc. and several quality coffee outlets, and many of the smaller stations now have coffee stalls.  If you buy before you board you won't get let down when you are on the train and have no other option when they don't have what you want.

That being said, I remain disappointed that a buffet has not been chosen for the long distance route down to Penzance as I believe that should still have them.  Other routes?  Swansea perhaps, but otherwise I can see why the trolley has been chosen.


Title: Re: IETs into passenger service from 16 Oct 2017 and subsequent performance issues
Post by: mjones on August 15, 2018, 05:27:52 pm
5 cars for the 1700 to Bristol! Glad I'm only going Reading to Didcot.


Title: Re: IETs into passenger service from 16 Oct 2017 and subsequent performance issues
Post by: broadgage on August 15, 2018, 05:34:28 pm
5 cars for the 1700 to Bristol! Glad I'm only going Reading to Didcot.

Not on journey check. A cynic would suspect a plot.


Title: Re: IETs into passenger service from 16 Oct 2017 and subsequent performance issues
Post by: martyjon on August 15, 2018, 05:51:54 pm
5 cars for the 1700 to Bristol! Glad I'm only going Reading to Didcot.

Not on journey check. A cynic would suspect a plot.


5 cars in the 1715 to Carmarthen too, does this thicken the plot.


Title: Re: IETs into passenger service from 16 Oct 2017 and subsequent performance issues
Post by: IndustryInsider on August 15, 2018, 05:56:03 pm
Very poor again from GWR/Hitachi.  At least it's holiday time I suppose, so there will be fewer commuters.


Title: Re: IETs into passenger service from 16 Oct 2017 and subsequent performance issues
Post by: Adelante_CCT on August 15, 2018, 05:58:13 pm
At least the 17:15 is on journeycheck, but it does appear many more are not being recorded.


Title: Re: IETs into passenger service from 16 Oct 2017 and subsequent performance issues
Post by: mjones on August 15, 2018, 06:12:50 pm
Very poor again from GWR/Hitachi.  At least it's holiday time I suppose, so there will be fewer commuters.

It was still rammed. Luggage piled in the cycle racks, so cyclists standing in the vestibule with other passengers and their bags.


Title: Re: IETs into passenger service from 16 Oct 2017 and subsequent performance issues
Post by: Sixty3Closure on August 15, 2018, 09:30:06 pm
5 cars for the 1700 to Bristol! Glad I'm only going Reading to Didcot.

Not on journey check. A cynic would suspect a plot.


5 cars in the 1715 to Carmarthen too, does this thicken the plot.

The Carmarthen train has been 5 coaches fairly regularly since it moved to the IETs. As I've been planning on 'commuting' from West Wales I've been taking an interest while waiting for my often short formed Turbo train.


Title: Re: IETs into passenger service from 16 Oct 2017 and subsequent performance issues
Post by: 1st fan on August 15, 2018, 11:05:03 pm
Trains in the 1970s had buffets, so with the country now more than twice as wealthy as it was then, why are buffets now an unaffordable luxury ?

As has been said before, it's largely due to the large number of retail outlets available at stations which are generally selling better quality produce at cheaper prices than can be offered on the train.

Back in the 70s you were lucky if you had a Travellers Fare and a John Menzies at your local large station.  Now they all have M&S Foodhall's, Upper Crusts etc. and several quality coffee outlets, and many of the smaller stations now have coffee stalls.  If you buy before you board you won't get let down when you are on the train and have no other option when they don't have what you want.

That being said, I remain disappointed that a buffet has not been chosen for the long distance route down to Penzance as I believe that should still have them.  Other routes?  Swansea perhaps, but otherwise I can see why the trolley has been chosen.

Whilst I can see what you're saying it can still be bloody annoying. I had to run to catch a Cotswold line IET to Moreton in Marsh one night. Hadn't eaten a thing all day and had a burning desire to stuff my face. Got on and discovered there was no hot food available to purchase whatever class you were in. Had an hour and a half sitting in 1st having just a can of Coke and a packet of crisps as that's all they had. Very pleased I wasn't going to be on there for twice that going to Hereford.


Title: Re: IETs into passenger service from 16 Oct 2017 and subsequent performance issues
Post by: Phantom on August 16, 2018, 10:15:57 am
5 cars for the 1700 to Bristol! Glad I'm only going Reading to Didcot.

Glad I managed to get the 1630, nice 9 coach service.
But blimey those seats are uncomfortable by the time I got back to Weston


Title: Re: IETs into passenger service from 16 Oct 2017 and subsequent performance issues
Post by: broadgage on August 20, 2018, 08:52:28 am
Over a dozen short formed IETs again today.
This is the "new normal" and therefore not very newsworthy.
What is arguably of greater significance is that 4 services to or from Cardiff are cancelled due to no staff. Had these 4 services run, then presumably another 8 IETs would have been short formed taking the total to over 20.
20 short formations have occurred previously but would be worse than normal.


Title: Re: IETs into passenger service from 16 Oct 2017 and subsequent performance issues
Post by: broadgage on August 20, 2018, 08:56:25 am
I spoke too soon.
20 short formations now, so had the 4 cancelled services run it would presumably have been 28, which is worse than the new normal.


Title: Re: IETs into passenger service from 16 Oct 2017 and subsequent performance issues
Post by: phile on August 20, 2018, 09:41:00 am
3 consecutive Peak Time services from Swansea to Paddington reduced to 5 this morning


Title: Re: IETs into passenger service from 16 Oct 2017 and subsequent performance issues
Post by: Rob on the hill on August 20, 2018, 09:59:58 am
I notice that the majority of short-formed IETs today are due to train faults, as opposed to lack of GWR staff.


Title: Re: IETs into passenger service from 16 Oct 2017 and subsequent performance issues
Post by: IndustryInsider on August 20, 2018, 10:56:09 am
I notice that the majority of short-formed IETs today are due to train faults, as opposed to lack of GWR staff.

We're told that several units are undergoing modifications, including to the PIS/Reservation system, and are therefore the reason for the short forms which will be a temporary measure until all units are modified and accepted back into service.  For once I share Broadgage's scepticism about such claims!  ;)


Title: Re: IETs into passenger service from 16 Oct 2017 and subsequent performance issues
Post by: CharlieGCR on August 20, 2018, 02:06:39 pm
I am currently sat on a 9 car IET with no hot water, no reservations and the trolley is no where near me, even at Swindon!


Title: Re: IETs into passenger service from 16 Oct 2017 and subsequent performance issues
Post by: Timmer on August 20, 2018, 02:25:02 pm
I am currently sat on a 9 car IET with no hot water, no reservations and the trolley is no where near me, even at Swindon!
So all going well then.


Title: Re: IETs into passenger service from 16 Oct 2017 and subsequent performance issues
Post by: broadgage on August 20, 2018, 02:41:34 pm
I am currently sat on a 9 car IET with no hot water, no reservations and the trolley is no where near me, even at Swindon!
,
Not bad by IET standards. Reservations and hot water remain future aspirations. The trolley MIGHT appear, but don't count on it.  I think that two trolleys may be a future plan.


Title: Re: IETs into passenger service from 16 Oct 2017 and subsequent performance issues
Post by: a-driver on August 20, 2018, 05:08:06 pm
I notice that the majority of short-formed IETs today are due to train faults, as opposed to lack of GWR staff.

We're told that several units are undergoing modifications, including to the PIS/Reservation system, and are therefore the reason for the short forms which will be a temporary measure until all units are modified and accepted back into service.  For once I share Broadgage's scepticism about such claims!  ;)

More of a software update than physical modifications including an update to the SDO database.


Title: Re: IETs into passenger service from 16 Oct 2017 and subsequent performance issues
Post by: basset44 on August 20, 2018, 05:33:13 pm
Hi All,

On the 17.26 from Cardiff to London reservation for coach h, managed to bag a hard seat in A. It's short formed. Looking forward to seeing the trolley. ?

Bassett 


Title: Re: IETs into passenger service from 16 Oct 2017 and subsequent performance issues
Post by: broadgage on August 20, 2018, 06:21:34 pm
17-26 short formed ? I do not see it on journey check. I smell a rat.


Title: Re: IETs into passenger service from 16 Oct 2017 and subsequent performance issues
Post by: basset44 on August 20, 2018, 06:54:47 pm
Hi All.

Guard apologies said the it should have been a nine carriage set. No reservation showing still some seats left after Swindon.  Trolley been past 4 times it turned around 2. Noticing a nice little rattle from the one of the glass shelves when we go a little bit fast. I wonder how long before other's go this way. Oh and the air conditioning is working very well to the extent I am cold.  I  know I should move.

Bassett


Title: Re: IETs into passenger service from 16 Oct 2017 and subsequent performance issues
Post by: old original on August 20, 2018, 08:24:53 pm
2x5 on the first run into Cornwall today.


Title: Re: IETs into passenger service from 16 Oct 2017 and subsequent performance issues
Post by: PhilWakely on August 21, 2018, 06:04:08 am
Day two..........
Quote
05:53 Plymouth to London Paddington due 09:00
05:53 Plymouth to London Paddington due 09:00 will be starting late from Plymouth.
This is due to this train being late from the depot.


Title: Re: IETs into passenger service from 16 Oct 2017 and subsequent performance issues
Post by: TaplowGreen on August 21, 2018, 06:10:40 am
Day two..........
Quote
05:53 Plymouth to London Paddington due 09:00
05:53 Plymouth to London Paddington due 09:00 will be starting late from Plymouth.
This is due to this train being late from the depot.

Someone being careless with the new toys?

09:00 Penzance to London Paddington due 14:01
09:00 Penzance to London Paddington due 14:01 will be cancelled.
This is due to a derailment within the depot.


Title: Re: IETs into passenger service from 16 Oct 2017 and subsequent performance issues
Post by: bignosemac on August 21, 2018, 06:29:11 am
Someone being careless with the new toys?

09:00 Penzance to London Paddington due 14:01
09:00 Penzance to London Paddington due 14:01 will be cancelled.
This is due to a derailment within the depot.

That is not an IET service.


Title: Re: IETs into passenger service from 16 Oct 2017 and subsequent performance issues
Post by: bignosemac on August 21, 2018, 06:30:36 am
Day two..........
Quote
05:53 Plymouth to London Paddington due 09:00
05:53 Plymouth to London Paddington due 09:00 will be starting late from Plymouth.
This is due to this train being late from the depot.

Left Plymouth 35 minutes late. Following a CrossCountry service which it should pass at Totnes.

Inauspicious.


Title: Re: IETs into passenger service from 16 Oct 2017 and subsequent performance issues
Post by: PhilWakely on August 21, 2018, 06:54:22 am
And just the 5 cars. Going to be a bit cosy.


Title: Re: IETs into passenger service from 16 Oct 2017 and subsequent performance issues
Post by: PhilWakely on August 21, 2018, 07:09:40 am
And just the 5 cars. Going to be a bit cosy.
Apparently it is 10 coaches.


Title: Re: IETs into passenger service from 16 Oct 2017 and subsequent performance issues
Post by: woody on August 21, 2018, 12:30:48 pm
Alsob the 07.30 Paddington/Penzance which was an IET yesterday was a HST today.


Title: Re: IETs into passenger service from 16 Oct 2017 and subsequent performance issues
Post by: old original on August 21, 2018, 12:40:51 pm
Alsob the 07.30 Paddington/Penzance which was an IET yesterday was a HST today.

Apparently a 800 set was used as far a Bristol, then a hst to Penzance


Title: Re: IETs into passenger service from 16 Oct 2017 and subsequent performance issues
Post by: bobm on August 21, 2018, 12:41:53 pm
Alsob the 07.30 Paddington/Penzance which was an IET yesterday was a HST today.

Apparently a 800 set was used as far a Bristol, then a hst to Penzance

Indeed - see here - http://www.firstgreatwestern.info/coffeeshop/index.php?topic=19690.msg244563#msg244563 (http://www.firstgreatwestern.info/coffeeshop/index.php?topic=19690.msg244563#msg244563)


Title: Re: IETs into passenger service from 16 Oct 2017 and subsequent performance issues
Post by: CharlieGCR on August 21, 2018, 12:45:30 pm
I think I prefer the HST until these “improvements” come to these 40 years newer trains.


Title: Re: IETs into passenger service from 16 Oct 2017 and subsequent performance issues
Post by: Rob on the hill on August 22, 2018, 06:33:35 pm
I was due to get on a 2x5 IET the other day and before arrival it was announced that first class was in coaches 1,2, 6 & 7. The external coach displays were also showing numbers instead of letters. I wonder if this is a general change from letters to numbers for IET coaches. It could certainly be less confusing, with coach 1 always being at the front of the train.


Title: Re: IETs into passenger service from 16 Oct 2017 and subsequent performance issues
Post by: PhilWakely on August 22, 2018, 06:37:36 pm
I was due to get on a 2x5 IET the other day and before arrival it was announced that first class was in coaches 1,2, 6 & 7. The external coach displays were also showing numbers instead of letters. I wonder if this is a general change from letters to numbers for IET coaches. It could certainly be less confusing, with coach 1 always being at the front of the train.
Could be interesting for those with pre-booked seat reservations and the set(s) is/are reversed.


Title: Re: IETs into passenger service from 16 Oct 2017 and subsequent performance issues
Post by: stuving on August 22, 2018, 07:31:18 pm
I was due to get on a 2x5 IET the other day and before arrival it was announced that first class was in coaches 1,2, 6 & 7. The external coach displays were also showing numbers instead of letters. I wonder if this is a general change from letters to numbers for IET coaches. It could certainly be less confusing, with coach 1 always being at the front of the train.

Surely there will need to be both. The numbers are in a fixed order along the platform, and can be (and apparently are being) painted on it. When the train arrives, its carriages will be identified by letters as usual, according to what they are and to locate reservations. If you want to find a reservation, you need to know the mapping from letters to numbers for that service. For that, being told which four carriages (by number along the platform) hold first class is not enough - you need to locate one, and if that fails you certainly want the right unit.

Now, how you get told that remains to be seen. I seem to recall that for TGVs, at some bigger stations, there are screens showing you this so you know where to stand. GWR did a while ago have posters, but they are a bit less dynamic than they need to be.


Title: Re: IETs into passenger service from 16 Oct 2017 and subsequent performance issues
Post by: Rob on the hill on August 22, 2018, 08:08:49 pm
I was due to get on a 2x5 IET the other day and before arrival it was announced that first class was in coaches 1,2, 6 & 7. The external coach displays were also showing numbers instead of letters. I wonder if this is a general change from letters to numbers for IET coaches. It could certainly be less confusing, with coach 1 always being at the front of the train.

See also posts 783 & 784 on this thread, where numbers instead of letters were first mentioned.


Title: Re: IETs into passenger service from 16 Oct 2017 and subsequent performance issues
Post by: Lee on August 23, 2018, 12:28:58 am
Now, how you get told that remains to be seen. I seem to recall that for TGVs, at some bigger stations, there are screens showing you this so you know where to stand. GWR did a while ago have posters, but they are a bit less dynamic than they need to be.

We have them at Guingamp for the TGVs. There are two types - One is a big long black screen representation of where the coaches of the train will stop, with the platform divided into zones denoted by letter. Secondly, that same representation appears on the relevant Next Train passenger information screen.


Title: Re: IETs into passenger service from 16 Oct 2017 and subsequent performance issues
Post by: TaplowGreen on August 23, 2018, 07:21:54 am
IET?

05:53 Plymouth to London Paddington due 09:04
05:53 Plymouth to London Paddington due 09:04 has been cancelled.
This is due to a fault on this train.


Title: Re: IETs into passenger service from 16 Oct 2017 and subsequent performance issues
Post by: Sixty3Closure on August 23, 2018, 08:48:36 am
Somewhat belatedly I had my first journey on an IET where I got a seat.

Not quite what I was expecting for an 'inter-city' but I can understand why everyone else has mentioned the seats. On the plus they improved my posture and weren't too bad for the 20 min journey I made but I wouldn't want to go for a longer journey sat in one.

The decor also seemed to make everything very gloomy but that's more of a personal preference (or not).


Title: Re: IETs into passenger service from 16 Oct 2017 and subsequent performance issues
Post by: SandTEngineer on August 23, 2018, 08:52:13 am
IET?

05:53 Plymouth to London Paddington due 09:04
05:53 Plymouth to London Paddington due 09:04 has been cancelled.
This is due to a fault on this train.

Apparently, yes. And this was posted on the WNXX Forum earlier today (23/08/2018):

Quote
The 800 diagrams not faring well either, 6 whole diagrams of 5 vice 10 (34 trains), and one 5 vice 9 (3 trains so far), all listed as "fault on this train"

So much for Japanese technology, eh?


Title: Re: IETs into passenger service from 16 Oct 2017 and subsequent performance issues
Post by: Jason on August 23, 2018, 09:18:31 am
I was due to get on a 2x5 IET the other day and before arrival it was announced that first class was in coaches 1,2, 6 & 7

I've not seen that kind of announcement yet.
I have noticed that on HST and both 9 and 5 car IET first class is now advertised as being in the front/rear two coaches rather than before when it was simply at the front/rear.
This is technically correct but somewhat misleading as it's 1.5 coaches on a 9 car IET or HST and 2 * 0.5 coaches separated by a slalom corridor on 5 car sets. I've overhead mutterings about the 'amount' of first class based upon the signage.


Title: Re: IETs into passenger service from 16 Oct 2017 and subsequent performance issues
Post by: Timmer on August 23, 2018, 09:30:19 am
I've overhead mutterings about the 'amount' of first class based upon the signage.
What that there's too much or not enough First class?


Title: Re: IETs into passenger service from 16 Oct 2017 and subsequent performance issues
Post by: broadgage on August 23, 2018, 09:58:31 am
I've overhead mutterings about the 'amount' of first class based upon the signage.
What that there's too much or not enough First class?

I have heard many mutterings that there is too much first class, on a 5 car or on a 5+5. Such remarks are not IMHO based upon inspection of the actual number of seats, but are derived from listening to the announcements.
"First class is in coaches one, two, six, and seven" does imply to the average passenger that there are four coaches of first class on a 10 car train. That does sound excessive if compared to the reality of 36 seats per 5 car unit.

This is in contrast to the announcement for a 9 car train which would be "First class is in coaches one and two" that sounds a lot less to the average customer, despite the actual numbers of first class seats on a 9 car train being virtually the same as on a 5+5.

Indeed elsewhere on these forums there is a posting from a new member complaining about the "bizarre" situation of a short formed IET with "2 first class coaches" and suggesting that this might have been because "they ran out of standard class coaches"


Title: Re: IETs into passenger service from 16 Oct 2017 and subsequent performance issues
Post by: Timmer on August 23, 2018, 10:18:08 am
I have heard many mutterings that there is too much first class, on a 5 car or on a 5+5. Such remarks are not IMHO based upon inspection of the actual number of seats, but are derived from listening to the announcements.
"First class is in coaches one, two, six, and seven" does imply to the average passenger that there are four coaches of first class on a 10 car train. That does sound excessive if compared to the reality of 36 seats per 5 car unit.

This is in contrast to the announcement for a 9 car train which would be "First class is in coaches one and two" that sounds a lot less to the average customer, despite the actual numbers of first class seats on a 9 car train being virtually the same as on a 5+5.
Exactly, when on a five coach train these 'two coaches' of First class don't even make a full coach of First class. For a five coach train the kitchen area seems awfully long where more seats would be better, just my humble opinion.


Title: Re: IETs into passenger service from 16 Oct 2017 and subsequent performance issues
Post by: CharlieGCR on August 23, 2018, 11:13:47 am
Looking at JourneyCheck it looks like all of the 9 cars are not out today?


Title: Re: IETs into passenger service from 16 Oct 2017 and subsequent performance issues
Post by: Adelante_CCT on August 23, 2018, 12:49:07 pm
Quote
. For a five coach train the kitchen area seems awfully long where more seats would be better, just my humble opinion.

Are you really suggesting that GWR should reduce kitchen facilities further than they already have?? I can see broadgage having a heart attack on reading such a comment!


Title: Re: IETs into passenger service from 16 Oct 2017 and subsequent performance issues
Post by: IndustryInsider on August 23, 2018, 01:03:47 pm
Six 9-Cars have allocations today.


Title: Re: IETs into passenger service from 16 Oct 2017 and subsequent performance issues
Post by: CharlieGCR on August 23, 2018, 01:18:56 pm
Six 9-Cars have allocations today.

My mistake.


Title: Re: IETs into passenger service from 16 Oct 2017 and subsequent performance issues
Post by: SandTEngineer on August 23, 2018, 02:17:49 pm
An explanation by an insider on the WNXX Forum (23/08/2018):

Quote
With reference to the lack of units this week, Hitachi are doing software modifications to the fleet. Due to the way they are done they can't be done at the same time which means booking each unit in twice - one of the modifications can take up to an hour per vehicle, so getting them back in service for the following day has proven a challenge.

Hitachi have aim to have all units done by this Monday.

I assume by one hour per vehicle they literally mean per coach?


Title: Re: IETs into passenger service from 16 Oct 2017 and subsequent performance issues
Post by: broadgage on August 23, 2018, 02:30:59 pm
And is this "software modification" a one of event to correct some original deficiency in the software ?

Or are short formations to be a regular event due to software updates ?


Title: Re: IETs into passenger service from 16 Oct 2017 and subsequent performance issues
Post by: a-driver on August 23, 2018, 06:54:59 pm
And is this "software modification" a one of event to correct some original deficiency in the software ?

Or are short formations to be a regular event due to software updates ?

This is something like update number 60 since entering traffic!   More updates to come.


Title: Re: IETs into passenger service from 16 Oct 2017 and subsequent performance issues
Post by: Timmer on August 23, 2018, 09:01:26 pm
This is something like update number 60 since entering traffic!   More updates to come.
Gosh, worse than Microsoft!


Title: Re: IETs into passenger service from 16 Oct 2017 and subsequent performance issues
Post by: CharlieGCR on August 23, 2018, 09:18:19 pm
This is something like update number 60 since entering traffic!   More updates to come.
Gosh, worse than Microsoft!

Exactly like it.. it (Hitatchi) claims its 100% complete yet in reality it is not!


Title: Re: IETs into passenger service from 16 Oct 2017 and subsequent performance issues
Post by: TaplowGreen on August 23, 2018, 10:28:55 pm
This is something like update number 60 since entering traffic!   More updates to come.
Gosh, worse than Microsoft!

Exactly like it.. it (Hitatchi) claims its 100% complete yet in reality it is not!

Have they tried switching it off & switching it on again?


Title: Re: IETs into passenger service from 16 Oct 2017 and subsequent performance issues
Post by: Timmer on August 24, 2018, 06:24:06 am
Rail manufacturers really need to make more effort to stop making something built in the 1970s look so good.


Title: Re: IETs into passenger service from 16 Oct 2017 and subsequent performance issues
Post by: TaplowGreen on August 24, 2018, 07:19:40 am
Can't get this one to work can they? Cancelled yesterday and delayed on Wednesday.

05:53 Plymouth to London Paddington due 09:00
05:53 Plymouth to London Paddington due 09:00 has been delayed at Plymouth and is now 46 minutes late.
This is due to this train being late from the depot


Title: Re: IETs into passenger service from 16 Oct 2017 and subsequent performance issues
Post by: bobm on August 24, 2018, 08:38:07 am
It has struggled a bit this week.  There was a points problem near Laira Depot this morning, not sure if that was the issue.


Title: Re: IETs into passenger service from 16 Oct 2017 and subsequent performance issues
Post by: Thatcham Crossing on August 24, 2018, 09:29:32 am
Quote
05:53 Plymouth to London Paddington due 09:00 has been delayed at Plymouth and is now 46 minutes late

Seems to have lost more time en-route, just ran through Newbury 66 late! Every train coming up the B&H from the south-west this morning seems to be picking-up 10-15 minute delays in the Somerton to Castle Cary area (same with 1A75 which is an HST)?


Title: Re: IETs into passenger service from 16 Oct 2017 and subsequent performance issues
Post by: SandTEngineer on August 24, 2018, 09:37:56 am
Quote
05:53 Plymouth to London Paddington due 09:00 has been delayed at Plymouth and is now 46 minutes late

Seems to have lost more time en-route, just ran through Newbury 66 late! Every train coming up the B&H from the south-west this morning seems to be picking-up 10-15 minute delays in the Somerton to Castle Cary area (same with 1A75 which is an HST)?


That's due to speed restrictions due to the ongoing embankment stability issues.


Title: Re: IETs into passenger service from 16 Oct 2017 and subsequent performance issues
Post by: Phantom on August 24, 2018, 09:49:35 am
An explanation by an insider on the WNXX Forum (23/08/2018):

Quote
With reference to the lack of units this week, Hitachi are doing software modifications to the fleet. Due to the way they are done they can't be done at the same time which means booking each unit in twice - one of the modifications can take up to an hour per vehicle, so getting them back in service for the following day has proven a challenge.

Hitachi have aim to have all units done by this Monday.

I assume by one hour per vehicle they literally mean per coach?

Interestingly someone I know that works for Hitachi claims this to be BS, do you have the original URL please?
He is always VERY defensive on this issue


Title: Re: IETs into passenger service from 16 Oct 2017 and subsequent performance issues
Post by: broadgage on August 24, 2018, 12:40:35 pm
And did not my crystal ball SPECIFICALLY forecast software and computer issues ?

I cant find the post now, but I believe that I wrote something like

"Diesel engines and electric drives are mature technologies, and given competent design and manufacture should prove reasonably reliable. A reasonable level of redundancy should ensure that the train can still proceed in case of component failure. Software however is NEVER a mature technology, if it works it must be obsolete !
The new DMUs contain numerous computers all of which must work together, first time every time"

I fear that software issues may be ongoing. The software is no doubt complex and propriety with a significant risk that each fix introduces another flaw.

This is in contrast to say the clogged radiator issues in the recent warm weather. That sounds a very poor design but there are obvious engineering remedies to the problem.
1) re locate the radiator.
2) devise some special tool or machine to clean it
3) make the radiator bigger so that even when partly clogged it will still produce sufficient cooling.
And no doubt other alternatives.

Software that fails to function as intended does not normally have a comparably simple fix.


Title: Re: IETs into passenger service from 16 Oct 2017 and subsequent performance issues
Post by: SandTEngineer on August 24, 2018, 01:37:11 pm
An explanation by an insider on the WNXX Forum (23/08/2018):

Quote
With reference to the lack of units this week, Hitachi are doing software modifications to the fleet. Due to the way they are done they can't be done at the same time which means booking each unit in twice - one of the modifications can take up to an hour per vehicle, so getting them back in service for the following day has proven a challenge.

Hitachi have aim to have all units done by this Monday.

I assume by one hour per vehicle they literally mean per coach?

Interestingly someone I know that works for Hitachi claims this to be BS, do you have the original URL please?
He is always VERY defensive on this issue.

Response given by PM.


Title: Re: IETs into passenger service from 16 Oct 2017 and subsequent performance issues
Post by: IndustryInsider on August 24, 2018, 02:04:45 pm
And did not my crystal ball SPECIFICALLY forecast software and computer issues ?

Yes, you did write something like that and I don’t think anyone disagreed with you as it was a pretty safe bet that a new train with groundbreaking technology would have glitches.  It doesn’t help that the SDO system needs regular updates as the platform extensions slowly get completed when ideally they would all have been finished before the trains entered service.

Other glitches have taken much longer than they should have been to fix, surprising me in the process,  such as the reservation system.  Though I expect, like the 387s which now perform pretty well after a shorter bedding in period given their introduction on other TOC’s before, Hitachi will get on top of things before long.


Title: Re: IETs into passenger service from 16 Oct 2017 and subsequent performance issues
Post by: grahame on August 24, 2018, 02:12:14 pm
It doesn’t help that the SDO system needs regular updates as the platform extensions slowly get completed when ideally they would all have been finished before the trains entered service ...

It really should not be / have been beyond the wit of programmers to allow platform lengths to be variable and downloadable without the need for a software update, in much the way that passenger journey start and end points can be downloaded on a daily or even service by service basis.


Title: Re: IETs into passenger service from 16 Oct 2017 and subsequent performance issues
Post by: TaplowGreen on August 24, 2018, 04:59:52 pm
And did not my crystal ball SPECIFICALLY forecast software and computer issues ?

Yes, you did write something like that and I don’t think anyone disagreed with you as it was a pretty safe bet that a new train with groundbreaking technology would have glitches.  It doesn’t help that the SDO system needs regular updates as the platform extensions slowly get completed when ideally they would all have been finished before the trains entered service.

Other glitches have taken much longer than they should have been to fix, surprising me in the process,  such as the reservation system.  Though I expect, like the 387s which now perform pretty well after a shorter bedding in period given their introduction on other TOC’s before, Hitachi will get on top of things before long.

I accept glitches and snagging but this is very nearly a year in service now, with (it would seem) new issues popping up all the time - it's really not a very good story, and yet another example of GWR raising expectations that they ultimately don't get anywhere near meeting.


Title: Re: IETs into passenger service from 16 Oct 2017 and subsequent performance issues
Post by: a-driver on August 24, 2018, 05:11:35 pm
And did not my crystal ball SPECIFICALLY forecast software and computer issues ?

Yes, you did write something like that and I don’t think anyone disagreed with you as it was a pretty safe bet that a new train with groundbreaking technology would have glitches.  It doesn’t help that the SDO system needs regular updates as the platform extensions slowly get completed when ideally they would all have been finished before the trains entered service.

Other glitches have taken much longer than they should have been to fix, surprising me in the process,  such as the reservation system.  Though I expect, like the 387s which now perform pretty well after a shorter bedding in period given their introduction on other TOC’s before, Hitachi will get on top of things before long.

I accept glitches and snagging but this is very nearly a year in service now, with (it would seem) new issues popping up all the time - it's really not a very good story, and yet another example of GWR raising expectations that they ultimately don't get anywhere near meeting.

To be fair to GWR, there was no indication given that there was going to be issues. The testing of the units should have been undertaken by GWR. Instead the DfT awarded the contract to GBRf.  I’m guessing it was just driven up and down whereas GWR could have simulated service conditions ie coupling and uncoupling, ASDO, APCo etc.
Some of the issues can’t be rectified because they require infrastructure work or simply it’s a contract stipulation between Hitachi and the DfT.


Title: Re: IETs into passenger service from 16 Oct 2017 and subsequent performance issues
Post by: TaplowGreen on August 24, 2018, 05:24:42 pm
And did not my crystal ball SPECIFICALLY forecast software and computer issues ?

Yes, you did write something like that and I don’t think anyone disagreed with you as it was a pretty safe bet that a new train with groundbreaking technology would have glitches.  It doesn’t help that the SDO system needs regular updates as the platform extensions slowly get completed when ideally they would all have been finished before the trains entered service.

Other glitches have taken much longer than they should have been to fix, surprising me in the process,  such as the reservation system.  Though I expect, like the 387s which now perform pretty well after a shorter bedding in period given their introduction on other TOC’s before, Hitachi will get on top of things before long.

I accept glitches and snagging but this is very nearly a year in service now, with (it would seem) new issues popping up all the time - it's really not a very good story, and yet another example of GWR raising expectations that they ultimately don't get anywhere near meeting.

To be fair to GWR, there was no indication given that there was going to be issues. The testing of the units should have been undertaken by GWR. Instead the DfT awarded the contract to GBRf.  I’m guessing it was just driven up and down whereas GWR could have simulated service conditions ie coupling and uncoupling, ASDO, APCo etc.
Some of the issues can’t be rectified because they require infrastructure work or simply it’s a contract stipulation between Hitachi and the DfT.

I guess that by definition glitches don't come with advance indications or a big red light flashing on them, otherwise they could have been addressed in advance, but there's a saying that GWR should remember for future reference which may help prevent them being quite such a laughing stock - under promise, over deliver...

……….if you launch/jump on board one expensive advertising campaign after another, promising the world ("Building a Greater West", "Famous Five", more capacity and reliability than ever before etc), and the whole thing falls apart, people are much angrier because they've been led to expect a transformational experience.

Sometimes, a softer launch is better, whereby customers are pleasantly surprised by steady improvement on a smooth curve, and are more understanding of teething problems (especially if you have an MD who has the cojones and integrity to come out and admit when things have gone wrong with an action plan & timeline for putting them right, rather than hiding in the Boardroom)

Irrespective of pointing the finger of blame at other agencies, GWR are 100% responsible for the expectations they've raised, and failed to manage.


Title: Re: IETs into passenger service from 16 Oct 2017 and subsequent performance issues
Post by: devonexpress on August 24, 2018, 10:15:59 pm
And did not my crystal ball SPECIFICALLY forecast software and computer issues ?

Yes, you did write something like that and I don’t think anyone disagreed with you as it was a pretty safe bet that a new train with groundbreaking technology would have glitches.  It doesn’t help that the SDO system needs regular updates as the platform extensions slowly get completed when ideally they would all have been finished before the trains entered service.

Other glitches have taken much longer than they should have been to fix, surprising me in the process,  such as the reservation system.  Though I expect, like the 387s which now perform pretty well after a shorter bedding in period given their introduction on other TOC’s before, Hitachi will get on top of things before long.

I accept glitches and snagging but this is very nearly a year in service now, with (it would seem) new issues popping up all the time - it's really not a very good story, and yet another example of GWR raising expectations that they ultimately don't get anywhere near meeting.

To be fair to GWR, there was no indication given that there was going to be issues. The testing of the units should have been undertaken by GWR. Instead the DfT awarded the contract to GBRf.  I’m guessing it was just driven up and down whereas GWR could have simulated service conditions ie coupling and uncoupling, ASDO, APCo etc.
Some of the issues can’t be rectified because they require infrastructure work or simply it’s a contract stipulation between Hitachi and the DfT.

I guess that by definition glitches don't come with advance indications or a big red light flashing on them, otherwise they could have been addressed in advance, but there's a saying that GWR should remember for future reference which may help prevent them being quite such a laughing stock - under promise, over deliver...

……….if you launch/jump on board one expensive advertising campaign after another, promising the world ("Building a Greater West", "Famous Five", more capacity and reliability than ever before etc), and the whole thing falls apart, people are much angrier because they've been led to expect a transformational experience.

Sometimes, a softer launch is better, whereby customers are pleasantly surprised by steady improvement on a smooth curve, and are more understanding of teething problems (especially if you have an MD who has the cojones and integrity to come out and admit when things have gone wrong with an action plan & timeline for putting them right, rather than hiding in the Boardroom)

Irrespective of pointing the finger of blame at other agencies, GWR are 100% responsible for the expectations they've raised, and failed to manage.

Agreed GWR basically took a massive dump on themselves with the 4 years of building a greater west and the last year of the famous five.  I'm not surprised the IET's have issues, so doesn't everything new, multimillion pound aircraft, cars, buses, ships, computer etc etc. And I did say this a few weeks before the first IET service that you can expect this for at least the next 2 years (1 year down, 1 to go).   Possibly longer,  people wonder why older stuff is better, its simple because its been run in and most of the problems are known and rectified.

Edited to fix quotes - bobm


Title: Re: IETs into passenger service from 16 Oct 2017 and subsequent performance issues
Post by: grahame on August 25, 2018, 07:02:37 am
You have multiple factors at play in a business here, including the need for a business to maximise its short term income, and also maximise its medium to long term income through customer sentiment. They you need to consider the estimates your suppliers give you on delivery dates and teething curves, and how far off (and in which direction) they may turn out to be.  And you need to be aware that bad news makes the headlines and the gossip, where good news and good journeys rarely get viral exposure even if they account for 90% of your transactions.

Some curious factors come further in to the equation.  Long term business development through customer sentiment is not as valuable in our franchise or contract system as it would be in a "High Street Store" type environment (yes, I know they are in trouble), because every "n" years the franchise or contract is reset.  We have massive capital spend on the railways at present through RoSCOs and through Network Rail, but spend through TOCs for the future is somewhat more controlled.  It's still there - to meet franchise commitments, or where it can be sold / transferred on as part of an asset into the next franchise or management contract.   But there's a danger that a really good idea which has long term results will be held back into the next contract if that's due to start within a couple of years, because its setup cost cannot be clawed back in the remaining time, and its extra income may be lost beyond that point because it would increase the amount you had to bid for the continuing contract - such are the distortions of the current system of appointing train operators.  That's not me suggesting for a moment that "X" other system would be better - I have not seen any suggestion that's a "light bulb moment" on how you provide a public transport service and at the same time motivate operators and investment to do a superb job of providing it with passengers (and freight customers) first.


Title: Re: IETs into passenger service from 16 Oct 2017 and subsequent performance issues
Post by: SandTEngineer on August 25, 2018, 08:23:31 am
Some good points there, Grahame.

My solution to the problems.  Sell the whole lot off, lock stock and barrel. None of this silly fake franchising and national infrastructure provider stuff.

The Government might then have to renationalise the whole lot when it goes pear shaped and it all comes to a standstill afterwards...... ::)

Apologies, this has nothing to do with IETs. In a very cynical mood this morning. I'll get my hat and coat....


Title: Re: IETs into passenger service from 16 Oct 2017 and subsequent performance issues
Post by: TaplowGreen on August 25, 2018, 10:58:39 am
You have multiple factors at play in a business here, including the need for a business to maximise its short term income, and also maximise its medium to long term income through customer sentiment. They you need to consider the estimates your suppliers give you on delivery dates and teething curves, and how far off (and in which direction) they may turn out to be.  And you need to be aware that bad news makes the headlines and the gossip, where good news and good journeys rarely get viral exposure even if they account for 90% of your transactions.

Some curious factors come further in to the equation.  Long term business development through customer sentiment is not as valuable in our franchise or contract system as it would be in a "High Street Store" type environment (yes, I know they are in trouble), because every "n" years the franchise or contract is reset.  We have massive capital spend on the railways at present through RoSCOs and through Network Rail, but spend through TOCs for the future is somewhat more controlled.  It's still there - to meet franchise commitments, or where it can be sold / transferred on as part of an asset into the next franchise or management contract.   But there's a danger that a really good idea which has long term results will be held back into the next contract if that's due to start within a couple of years, because its setup cost cannot be clawed back in the remaining time, and its extra income may be lost beyond that point because it would increase the amount you had to bid for the continuing contract - such are the distortions of the current system of appointing train operators.  That's not me suggesting for a moment that "X" other system would be better - I have not seen any suggestion that's a "light bulb moment" on how you provide a public transport service and at the same time motivate operators and investment to do a superb job of providing it with passengers (and freight customers) first.

I hope there's not too many splinters on that fence Graham  ;)


Title: Re: IETs into passenger service from 16 Oct 2017 and subsequent performance issues
Post by: grahame on August 25, 2018, 11:03:54 am
I hope there's not too many splinters on that fence Graham  ;)

So do I.


Title: Re: IETs into passenger service from 16 Oct 2017 and subsequent performance issues
Post by: TaplowGreen on August 25, 2018, 11:35:21 am
I hope there's not too many splinters on that fence Graham  ;)

So do I.

😂👍


Title: Re: IETs into passenger service from 16 Oct 2017 and subsequent performance issues
Post by: broadgage on August 26, 2018, 11:52:39 am
Quite a few short formed IETs today, unusual for a Sunday.
Several of these are 9 car instead of 10 car, which does not matter much in itself as the capacity is almost the same.
It does however suggest a significant non availability of 5 car units.

I suspect the some rolling stock shortages are hidden by the normal Sunday staff shortages.


Title: Re: IETs into passenger service from 16 Oct 2017 and subsequent performance issues
Post by: CharlieGCR on August 26, 2018, 12:07:54 pm
Quite a few short formed IETs today, unusual for a Sunday.
Several of these are 9 car instead of 10 car, which does not matter much in itself as the capacity is almost the same.
It does however suggest a significant non availability of 5 car units.

I suspect the some rolling stock shortages are hidden by the normal Sunday staff shortages.

Still manage to cancel every Cheltenham HSS, you’d never have guessed.


Title: Re: IETs into passenger service from 16 Oct 2017 and subsequent performance issues
Post by: grahame on August 26, 2018, 12:21:22 pm
I suspect the some rolling stock shortages are hidden by the normal Sunday staff shortages.

With all the reasons and blame attribution that goes on ... I don't recall ever seeing a multiple reason:
"Shortage of drivers and in any case the train was broken"
"Tree blocking line - not really a problem as we didn't have a conductor"
Odd really, as you would expect there to be multiple problems some times, and indeed if a train was cancelled for one reason (it's run out of fuel) that would be a good reason to make that the train for which there was no driver, and for which there was no train manager!


Title: Re: IETs into passenger service from 16 Oct 2017 and subsequent performance issues
Post by: IndustryInsider on August 26, 2018, 01:02:44 pm
One improvement over the last couple of months is a reduction in the number of 10-Cars running with 5 locked out of use - I haven’t seen one in ages.  Some might suggest that’s because of the large number of 5-car short forms, but it is nonetheless an improvement.


Title: Re: IETs into passenger service from 16 Oct 2017 and subsequent performance issues
Post by: Timmer on August 26, 2018, 01:31:22 pm
One improvement over the last couple of months is a reduction in the number of 10-Cars running with 5 locked out of use - I haven’t seen one in ages.  Some might suggest that’s because of the large number of 5-car short forms, but it is nonetheless an improvement.
Indeed, it was a terrible advert highlighting the incompetency of the railways having everyone rammed into five carriages whilst the other five convey fresh air.


Title: Re: IETs into passenger service from 16 Oct 2017 and subsequent performance issues
Post by: stuving on August 26, 2018, 07:30:23 pm
I suspect the some rolling stock shortages are hidden by the normal Sunday staff shortages.

With all the reasons and blame attribution that goes on ... I don't recall ever seeing a multiple reason:
"Shortage of drivers and in any case the train was broken"
"Tree blocking line - not really a problem as we didn't have a conductor"
Odd really, as you would expect there to be multiple problems some times, and indeed if a train was cancelled for one reason (it's run out of fuel) that would be a good reason to make that the train for which there was no driver, and for which there was no train manager!

Of course the boring reason you don't see that is that mostly you see the official declared cause, and in some places its delay attribution code. The DAPR (remember that?) does cover "Joint Responsibility incidents", but the range of these is quite narrow. However, there is a bit under the slightly alarming heading of "Reactionary Principles" that says:
Quote
As mentioned in paragraph B7.5, the group of Y* Codes (Reactionary Delays) are used to describe the effect of late running due to an earlier occurrence on the same or other trains. Although the ‘Minutes Delay’ carries a separate TRUST Reactionary Delay Code they are still attributed to the principal Incident (i.e. the one that has the largest number of ‘Minutes Delay’ allocated to it that contributes to the lateness at that point). Where two or more Incidents have had the same affect then the Reactionary Delay must be split equally between them.

there is even a complicated example:
Quote
Suppose a Plymouth to York train is delayed as follows:-
At Plymouth:              10 minutes due to vehicle defect.   
Approaching Bristol:     3 minutes due to loss of path.   
Approaching Derby:      8 minutes due to signal failure.
Approaching Sheffield:  4 minutes due to waiting platform (due to its late running it has lost its platform ‘slot’).

The ‘Minutes Delay’ approaching Bristol would be attributed to the vehicle defect but using the Delay Code YC or YD to describe its loss of path. If no time were regained then the 4 ‘Minutes Delay’ approaching Sheffield would also be attributed to the vehicle defect using code YO since the 13 ‘Minutes Delay’ due to this exceeds the 8 ‘Minutes Delay’ due to the signal failure. However, if the train had regained all but 5 minutes by the time it left Birmingham, the delay outside Sheffield would be attributed to the signal failure since only 5 minutes of the lateness approaching Sheffield is due to the vehicle defect. It is important that the effects of subsequent incidents are properly taken into account when considering the attribution of reactionary delays, and determining where the earlier incident’s effects have ceased.

Apart from YL in respect of FOC delays (See N2(f)), the only other exception is where the main or only cause of delay is a P* coded incident in which case the code JB is to be used, reflecting that the location of the Recovery Time in the train schedule does not avoid conflicts with other trains after the TSR has been encountered. See Section O2.

Of course most of that should never get into the public explanations - but if it does, you'll know where it came from.


Title: Re: IETs into passenger service from 16 Oct 2017 and subsequent performance issues
Post by: broadgage on August 26, 2018, 07:51:08 pm
One improvement over the last couple of months is a reduction in the number of 10-Cars running with 5 locked out of use - I haven’t seen one in ages.  Some might suggest that’s because of the large number of 5-car short forms, but it is nonetheless an improvement.
Indeed, it was a terrible advert highlighting the incompetency of the railways having everyone rammed into five carriages whilst the other five convey fresh air.

Providing only 5 cars looks marginally better than providing 10 cars with 5 locked out of use, but the reduction in capacity is of course the same.
Looking at the number of 5 car instead of 9 or 5+5, on many recent days, would GWR have been able to staff both units ? had these been available.


Title: Re: IETs into passenger service from 16 Oct 2017 and subsequent performance issues
Post by: IndustryInsider on August 26, 2018, 11:16:21 pm
Quote
Suppose a Plymouth to York train is delayed as follows:-
At Plymouth:              10 minutes due to vehicle defect.   
Approaching Bristol:     3 minutes due to loss of path.   
Approaching Derby:      8 minutes due to signal failure.
Approaching Sheffield:  4 minutes due to waiting platform (due to its late running it has lost its platform ‘slot’).

The ‘Minutes Delay’ approaching Bristol would be attributed to the vehicle defect but using the Delay Code YC or YD to describe its loss of path. If no time were regained then the 4 ‘Minutes Delay’ approaching Sheffield would also be attributed to the vehicle defect using code YO since the 13 ‘Minutes Delay’ due to this exceeds the 8 ‘Minutes Delay’ due to the signal failure. However, if the train had regained all but 5 minutes by the time it left Birmingham, the delay outside Sheffield would be attributed to the signal failure since only 5 minutes of the lateness approaching Sheffield is due to the vehicle defect. It is important that the effects of subsequent incidents are properly taken into account when considering the attribution of reactionary delays, and determining where the earlier incident’s effects have ceased.

Apart from YL in respect of FOC delays (See N2(f)), the only other exception is where the main or only cause of delay is a P* coded incident in which case the code JB is to be used, reflecting that the location of the Recovery Time in the train schedule does not avoid conflicts with other trains after the TSR has been encountered. See Section O2.

And there in a nutshell is the ridiculous world of delay attribution, where TOC's, FOC's, and Network Rail have a good old squabble wasting large amounts of money, time and resources in the process, quite often coming to the wrong conclusions anyway.  There's a 139 page document that explains in more detail here:

http://www.delayattributionboard.co.uk/documents/dag_pdac/Current%20Delay%20Attribution%20Principles%20and%20Rules.pdf

Of course it would be nice if the industry was mature enough to not have to resort to such nonsense, especially given that even a major incident only sways the percentage of delay caused by one party to swing a couple of percentage points over a reporting period, and the overall average of roughly two thirds Network Rail and one third TOC's is pretty much a constant year on year.  The only argument for it is that I suppose it might encourage each organisation to minimise delays as much as they can - though we've seen precious little evidence of that recently.


Title: Re: IETs into passenger service from 16 Oct 2017 and subsequent performance issues
Post by: IndustryInsider on August 26, 2018, 11:24:29 pm
Trains in the 1970s had buffets, so with the country now more than twice as wealthy as it was then, why are buffets now an unaffordable luxury ?

As has been said before, it's largely due to the large number of retail outlets available at stations which are generally selling better quality produce at cheaper prices than can be offered on the train.

I was thinking about this when I took a wander round Oxford station today.  Up until AMT Coffee arrived in the mid-90s, all that was available serving food IIRC at Oxford station was Travellers Fare (two outlets) and a John Menzies. 

Fast forward to today and you have an Asian food outlet, the West Cornwall Pasty Company shop, a Delice De France, WHSmith, an M&S, a much larger AMT Coffee outlet, Upper Crust, Pumpkin, and the bloke (Bepe?) who serves burgers out the front.  There's even some vending machines on the platform if you're really desperate.  No wonder few people buy on board these days.


Title: Re: IETs into passenger service from 16 Oct 2017 and subsequent performance issues
Post by: Umberleigh on August 27, 2018, 12:52:54 pm
Back in 1999 four of us travelled from Totnes to Paddington day return. It was rare for us all to be together on a business trip and we had been looking forward to it. Indeed,  we even secured off-peak First Class tickets to make it an occasion.

Business done we caught our return service at 19.30, looking forward to a few G&Ts and snacks from the buffet, only discover that the buffet had not been restocked and was down to a handful of items. The crew blamed this on theft at the depot...!

Needless to say, we were disappointed and ever since then I have stocked up at Paddington’s Sainsbury and/or M&S prior to departure


Title: Re: IETs into passenger service from 16 Oct 2017 and subsequent performance issues
Post by: TaplowGreen on September 01, 2018, 08:57:36 am
Late, and no doubt very cosy...…

07:30 London Paddington to Penzance due 13:25 has been delayed at London Paddington and is now 12 minutes late.

This is due to a shortage of train crew.

Will be formed of 5 coaches instead of 10.


Title: Re: IETs into passenger service from 16 Oct 2017 and subsequent performance issues
Post by: a-driver on September 01, 2018, 09:48:37 am
Late, and no doubt very cosy...…

07:30 London Paddington to Penzance due 13:25 has been delayed at London Paddington and is now 12 minutes late.

This is due to a shortage of train crew.

Will be formed of 5 coaches instead of 10.


Rear 5 coaches locked out from Paddington but all 10 will be in use from Bristol


Title: Re: IETs into passenger service from 16 Oct 2017 and subsequent performance issues
Post by: Four Track, Now! on September 01, 2018, 06:20:46 pm

With all the reasons and blame attribution that goes on ... I don't recall ever seeing a multiple reason:
"Shortage of drivers and in any case the train was broken"
"Tree blocking line - not really a problem as we didn't have a conductor"
Odd really, as you would expect there to be multiple problems some times, and indeed if a train was cancelled for one reason (it's run out of fuel) that would be a good reason to make that the train for which there was no driver, and for which there was no train manager!

Sounds like old fashioned legal pleading, where all possible answers had to be submitted at once.
"In the first case, the window was not broken. In the second case, the window was broken, but my client did not break it. In the third case, my client did break the window, but it was an accident. In the fourth case, my client broke it deliberately, is very sorry, won't do it again, and will pay for the damage."


Title: Re: IETs into passenger service from 16 Oct 2017 and subsequent performance issues
Post by: devonexpress on September 02, 2018, 09:02:30 pm
In relation to the Class 800s would it not be easier to put First Class in the middle of 10 car units, as that way it could be guaranteed to be in the same position, rather than having it and the middle and rear, or front and rear etc.


Title: Re: IETs into passenger service from 16 Oct 2017 and subsequent performance issues
Post by: justdarkbeer on September 02, 2018, 09:14:59 pm
If first class was in the centre, there would be lots of 'second class' footfall passing through, looking for a seat, working toilet, buffet etc, on SWR  444s in my area, first is always at the london end of each 5 car set, less distance to walk at Waterloo, of course.


Title: Re: IETs into passenger service from 16 Oct 2017 and subsequent performance issues
Post by: grahame on September 02, 2018, 09:22:07 pm
In relation to the Class 800s would it not be easier to put First Class in the middle of 10 car units, as that way it could be guaranteed to be in the same position, rather than having it and the middle and rear, or front and rear etc.

With a 10 car ( 5 + 5 ) it often is in the middle but it rather depends on how trains are shunted and turned before they are joined up.   With the high level of cancellations, diversions and short runs at the moment, units tend to be front to back and back to front far too often and

Quote
16:30 Paddington to Bristol Temple Meads
16:30 Paddington to Bristol Temple Meads
This train is delayed and will be 45 minutes late from Paddington
This is due to the train having to be sent via Ealing and South Greenford to get first class as the right end

would probably not be popular


Title: Re: IETs into passenger service from 16 Oct 2017 and subsequent performance issues
Post by: devonexpress on September 03, 2018, 12:13:27 am
If first class was in the centre, there would be lots of 'second class' footfall passing through, looking for a seat, working toilet, buffet etc, on SWR  444s in my area, first is always at the london end of each 5 car set, less distance to walk at Waterloo, of course.

Not really possible as the end doors don't open anyway, so they could only get through on the second and third set of doors. To be honest id rather have first class in exactly the same place every time which having it in the middle might be an easier way to do so, than having one end at London and one end at the country.  The difference between SWR and GWR is of course Gloucester, by having the train being constantly turned around it screws up the first class end, by having it in the middle its problem solved.


Title: Re: IETs into passenger service from 16 Oct 2017 and subsequent performance issues
Post by: Adelante_CCT on September 03, 2018, 09:11:41 am
Cosy evening for many returning to work this week

Quote
17:15 London Paddington to Carmarthen due 21:20
17:30 London Paddington to Taunton due 20:31
17:42 London Paddington to Cheltenham Spa due 19:49
18:30 London Paddington to Weston-Super-Mare due 20:53

Will be formed of 5 coaches instead of 9/10.


Title: Re: IETs into passenger service from 16 Oct 2017 and subsequent performance issues
Post by: CharlieGCR on September 03, 2018, 09:24:24 am
Cosy evening for many returning to work this week

Quote
17:15 London Paddington to Carmarthen due 21:20
17:30 London Paddington to Taunton due 20:31
17:42 London Paddington to Cheltenham Spa due 19:49
18:30 London Paddington to Weston-Super-Mare due 20:53

Will be formed of 5 coaches instead of 9/10.

That’s painfull. All four of some of the busiest HSS services off the day.


Title: Re: IETs into passenger service from 16 Oct 2017 and subsequent performance issues
Post by: devonexpress on September 03, 2018, 01:29:46 pm
One improvement over the last couple of months is a reduction in the number of 10-Cars running with 5 locked out of use - I haven’t seen one in ages.  Some might suggest that’s because of the large number of 5-car short forms, but it is nonetheless an improvement.


Or maybe because they've had the chance to train up more staff onto the Class 800/802s? The problem was down to the Dft rushing the 800s into service and giving limited time for GWR to train all its staff. Whilst we now have all the 800 5 car units in service I believe they are still undergoing modification/update work, as I predicted would happen with them effectively being a brand new entire model.  We are still have a limited amount of 9 car 800s running, and only 4 (5 car) Class 802s in service which means juggling the fleet around like they did with the HST's is currently difficult. 

Also a quick question, as I presume its possible for the 800 and 802s to couple up, are they allowed to work a public service together, and since the 800s are banned for taking the public past Newton Abbot to Plymouth, if one was a 800s and the other was an 802s, would it still be banned?


Title: Re: IETs into passenger service from 16 Oct 2017 and subsequent performance issues
Post by: IndustryInsider on September 03, 2018, 02:26:46 pm
I don't think you'll see 800s coupled to 802s unless an emergency rescue is taking place.  Hitachi are very protective of 'their' 800 units (currently insisting they are not outstabled for example), whereas they don't have the same level of control over the 802 fleet.


Title: Re: IETs into passenger service from 16 Oct 2017 and subsequent performance issues
Post by: devonexpress on September 03, 2018, 04:09:17 pm
I don't think you'll see 800s coupled to 802s unless an emergency rescue is taking place.  Hitachi are very protective of 'their' 800 units (currently insisting they are not outstabled for example), whereas they don't have the same level of control over the 802 fleet.

Thanks for the information, I don't get why Hitachi are being so nit picky about the Class 800s, Do they own the leases for them or is it Eversholt Rail like the 802s? I read somewhere that they even stopped GWR putting bicycle signs on the vinyl livery, only for them to then deny this and say its down to GWR, but if it was down to GWR the entire train would be plastered in signs like the rest of its fleet.


Title: Re: IETs into passenger service from 16 Oct 2017 and subsequent performance issues
Post by: didcotdean on September 03, 2018, 07:42:29 pm
A recent GWR tweet claimed they will soon be beefing up the notices relating to quiet carriages so maybe some kind of agreement might be reached.


Title: Re: IETs into passenger service from 16 Oct 2017 and subsequent performance issues
Post by: stuving on September 03, 2018, 08:05:30 pm
... Thanks for the information, I don't get why Hitachi are being so nit picky about the Class 800s, Do they own the leases for them or is it Eversholt Rail like the 802s?

Agility Trains owns the two IEP/IET/Azuma fleets and is contracted to provide them to the TOCs. Its shareholders are:
Quote
  • The Agility Trains West shareholder group consists of Hitachi Rail Europe (70%), John Laing Infrastructure Fund (15%) and AXA Real Estate Investment Managers (15%)
  • The Agility Trains East shareholder group consists of Hitachi Rail Europe (70%) and John Laing Group (30%)

Presumably that corresponds to ownership of the trains, though there might be something more complicated to allow for Hitachi's contributions in kind.



Title: Re: IETs into passenger service from 16 Oct 2017 and subsequent performance issues
Post by: devonexpress on September 03, 2018, 08:19:10 pm
... Thanks for the information, I don't get why Hitachi are being so nit picky about the Class 800s, Do they own the leases for them or is it Eversholt Rail like the 802s?

Agility Trains owns the two IEP/IET/Azuma fleets and is contracted to provide them to the TOCs. Its shareholders are:
Quote
  • The Agility Trains West shareholder group consists of Hitachi Rail Europe (70%), John Laing Infrastructure Fund (15%) and AXA Real Estate Investment Managers (15%)
  • The Agility Trains East shareholder group consists of Hitachi Rail Europe (70%) and John Laing Group (30%)

Presumably that corresponds to ownership of the trains, though there might be something more complicated to allow for Hitachi's contributions in kind.



That would explain it then, I know Eversholt Rail owns the Class 802s, on a much cheaper lease too.  I would have found it funny if GWR decided to order loads of 802s and not use the 800s, but then again I doubt the Dft would have allowed that.


Title: Re: IETs into passenger service from 16 Oct 2017 and subsequent performance issues
Post by: broadgage on September 03, 2018, 08:25:08 pm
Regarding the RMT requirement for a train manager in each portion of a 5+5 IET, I am wondering if this might sway the  financial argument in favour of lengthening some 5 car units to 9 car.

On first sight, it would seem that a train managers salary is a lot less than the cost of leasing a longer train. But this does not tell the whole story.
The train managers annual working hours are a lot less than the hours for which the train works.
Presuming that a train manager has 5 weeks holiday a year, and 1 week sick leave, and an average of 1 weeks training, that leaves 45 weeks work. presuming an average 40 hour week, of which only 20 hours is productive, it would seem to me that the train manager would only achieve about 900 productive hours a year, 1,000 hours if being optimistic.

There are 8,760 hours in a year, and the intensively used trains might be in service for 5,000 hours a year. So lengthening a 5 car unit to 9 car, is potentially saving 5 or even 6 train managers salaries, and not a single salary as might be initially supposed.

Lengthening some 5 car units to 9 car would not of course double the leasing costs since the extra vehicles should be cheaper, and 4 extras are required, not 5.
Reliability should increase since coupling and uncoupling seems to cause some of the failures.


Title: Re: IETs into passenger service from 16 Oct 2017 and subsequent performance issues
Post by: devonexpress on September 03, 2018, 09:12:35 pm
Regarding the RMT requirement for a train manager in each portion of a 5+5 IET, I am wondering if this might sway the  financial argument in favour of lengthening some 5 car units to 9 car.

On first sight, it would seem that a train managers salary is a lot less than the cost of leasing a longer train. But this does not tell the whole story.
The train managers annual working hours are a lot less than the hours for which the train works.
Presuming that a train manager has 5 weeks holiday a year, and 1 week sick leave, and an average of 1 weeks training, that leaves 45 weeks work. presuming an average 40 hour week, of which only 20 hours is productive, it would seem to me that the train manager would only achieve about 900 productive hours a year, 1,000 hours if being optimistic.

There are 8,760 hours in a year, and the intensively used trains might be in service for 5,000 hours a year. So lengthening a 5 car unit to 9 car, is potentially saving 5 or even 6 train managers salaries, and not a single salary as might be initially supposed.

Lengthening some 5 car units to 9 car would not of course double the leasing costs since the extra vehicles should be cheaper, and 4 extras are required, not 5.
Reliability should increase since coupling and uncoupling seems to cause some of the failures.

You may be right Broadgauge, but knowing the railways, it will take them 10 years to work that out, by which time the design will be out of date and it would be too costly to manufacturer new coaching stock. However, there is also the question of if the remaining electrification ever gets done, what happens to the extra trains ordered due to the delay?


Title: Re: IETs into passenger service from 16 Oct 2017 and subsequent performance issues
Post by: broadgage on September 03, 2018, 10:48:18 pm
The extra trains would still be useful in the event of electrification, they could either be cascaded to areas not yet electrified, or simply have the engines removed use on the present routes.

That however still leaves the risk that by the time lengthening is authorised, that the design will be obsolete!
Remember the Pendolinos ? intended to be easily extended but this turned out to be hugely costly and complex when eventually done.


Title: Re: IETs into passenger service from 16 Oct 2017 and subsequent performance issues
Post by: broadgage on September 04, 2018, 10:55:51 am
IET availability looks worse than usual today.
Over 30 half length services, many in the rush hours.

As well as these 30+ half length IETs there are numerous other, less serious short formations suggesting availability is worse than the "new normal".

8 car instead of 9 or 10 car, not a great problem in itself as an HST is  what was expected until recently.
9 car instead of 10 car, virtually the same capacity, but does suggest lack of 5 car units.
5 car instead of 8 car.
7 car instead of 9 or 10 car.
These are less serious than the half capacity trains, but still a poor showing, and presumably mean no rservations, and probably no catering.


Title: Re: IETs into passenger service from 16 Oct 2017 and subsequent performance issues
Post by: Thatcham Crossing on September 04, 2018, 05:56:10 pm
I passed North Pole at around 1020 this morning inbound to PAD, and having only now read the above would say that there were at least 15 and possibly up to 20 IETs of various flavours parked at various places (inside and outside) around the depot at that time.

I'm not going to speculate (as that's all it would be) but the previous post suggests that at least some of those could have otherwise been in useful service?










Title: Re: IETs into passenger service from 16 Oct 2017 and subsequent performance issues
Post by: lbraine on September 04, 2018, 10:08:52 pm
So I pinged @gwrhelp the direct question asking why so many 10 car sets running with 5 cars out of use. The reply was ‘sets are running this way due to a fault on the second set’.

Sounds like the Class 800 don’t play nice together.


Title: Re: IETs into passenger service from 16 Oct 2017 and subsequent performance issues
Post by: IndustryInsider on September 04, 2018, 10:43:38 pm
I passed North Pole at around 1020 this morning inbound to PAD, and having only now read the above would say that there were at least 15 and possibly up to 20 IETs of various flavours parked at various places (inside and outside) around the depot at that time.

I'm not going to speculate (as that's all it would be) but the previous post suggests that at least some of those could have otherwise been in useful service?

Some of those will be 800 and 802 units yet to be accepted into traffic (especially the 9-car ones), some will have been in use earlier or later in the day, and (no doubt) a few would have been in service had there not been issues with them.  The exact split of those three different categories would be interesting to know.


Title: Re: IETs into passenger service from 16 Oct 2017 and subsequent performance issues
Post by: grahame on September 05, 2018, 08:56:53 am
I passed North Pole at around 1020 this morning inbound to PAD, and having only now read the above would say that there were at least 15 and possibly up to 20 IETs of various flavours parked at various places (inside and outside) around the depot at that time.

I'm not going to speculate (as that's all it would be) but the previous post suggests that at least some of those could have otherwise been in useful service?

Some of those will be 800 and 802 units yet to be accepted into traffic (especially the 9-car ones), some will have been in use earlier or later in the day, and (no doubt) a few would have been in service had there not been issues with them.  The exact split of those three different categories would be interesting to know.

Looking out on the other side of my train in the Old Oak area, there also seemed to be an awful lot of TfL trains parked up in the sidings. Not so much a shortage of trains, more a shortage of trains in use ... and I do understand that there are probably good reasons for lots of trains being OOU around OOC.

I wonder what the split across the UK is on ...

Carriages in daily use
Carriages parked up during the day but in nightly use
Carriages awaiting short term repair
Carriages undergoing short term repair
Carriages awaiting long term repair / conversion
Carriages undergoing long term repair / conversion
Carriages in use for testing
Carriages in use for crew training
Carriages held back to stand in for failures or unexpected loading
Carriages useable, off contract and awaiting new long term roles
Carriages off contract and awaiting new long term roles that would need work
Carriages available for spot hire
Carriages on the tracks in the UK but not yet accepted into service


Title: Re: IETs into passenger service from 16 Oct 2017 and subsequent performance issues
Post by: Timmer on September 05, 2018, 09:06:04 am
I just hope that if there a 9 car sets parked up waiting to accepted into traffic, that every effort is being made to get them in service ASAP. This daily long list of running of 5 vice 8/10 really is unacceptable.


Title: Re: IETs into passenger service from 16 Oct 2017 and subsequent performance issues
Post by: TaplowGreen on September 05, 2018, 09:27:35 am
I just hope that if there a 9 car sets parked up waiting to accepted into traffic, that every effort is being made to get them in service ASAP. This daily long list of running of 5 vice 8/10 really is unacceptable.


Indeed - a long list which seems to be sustained or get worse every day. A year after the IET came into service, we should be able to expect much better.


Title: Re: IETs into passenger service from 16 Oct 2017 and subsequent performance issues
Post by: Timmer on September 05, 2018, 09:42:26 am
Indeed - a long list which seems to be sustained or get worse every day. A year after the IET came into service, we should be able to expect much better.
The decision to manufacture the 5 car sets and not the 9 car sets first and being unable to reverse the decision was just plain wrong. Its once again the passengers who suffer the rail industrie's incompetence.


Title: Re: IETs into passenger service from 16 Oct 2017 and subsequent performance issues
Post by: Thatcham Crossing on September 05, 2018, 12:05:49 pm
Quote
Looking out on the other side of my train in the Old Oak area, there also seemed to be an awful lot of TfL trains parked up in the sidings

Yep, I noticed that yesterday also. A nice formation line-up of maybe a dozen 345's.


Title: Re: IETs into passenger service from 16 Oct 2017 and subsequent performance issues
Post by: old original on September 05, 2018, 05:13:30 pm
One improvement over the last couple of months is a reduction in the number of 10-Cars running with 5 locked out of use - I haven’t seen one in ages.  Some might suggest that’s because of the large number of 5-car short forms, but it is nonetheless an improvement.


Or maybe because they've had the chance to train up more staff onto the Class 800/802s? The problem was down to the Dft rushing the 800s into service and giving limited time for GWR to train all its staff. Whilst we now have all the 800 5 car units in service I believe they are still undergoing modification/update work, as I predicted would happen with them effectively being a brand new entire model.  We are still have a limited amount of 9 car 800s running, and only 4 (5 car) Class 802s in service which means juggling the fleet around like they did with the HST's is currently difficult. 

Also a quick question, as I presume its possible for the 800 and 802s to couple up, are they allowed to work a public service together, and since the 800s are banned for taking the public past Newton Abbot to Plymouth, if one was a 800s and the other was an 802s, would it still be banned?

A 5 car 800  (800 012) was out on it's own on the 0730 from Paddington to Penzance & back yesterday (Tuesday 4th)...


Title: Re: IETs into passenger service from 16 Oct 2017 and subsequent performance issues
Post by: devonexpress on September 05, 2018, 06:29:50 pm
One improvement over the last couple of months is a reduction in the number of 10-Cars running with 5 locked out of use - I haven’t seen one in ages.  Some might suggest that’s because of the large number of 5-car short forms, but it is nonetheless an improvement.


Or maybe because they've had the chance to train up more staff onto the Class 800/802s? The problem was down to the Dft rushing the 800s into service and giving limited time for GWR to train all its staff. Whilst we now have all the 800 5 car units in service I believe they are still undergoing modification/update work, as I predicted would happen with them effectively being a brand new entire model.  We are still have a limited amount of 9 car 800s running, and only 4 (5 car) Class 802s in service which means juggling the fleet around like they did with the HST's is currently difficult. 

Also a quick question, as I presume its possible for the 800 and 802s to couple up, are they allowed to work a public service together, and since the 800s are banned for taking the public past Newton Abbot to Plymouth, if one was a 800s and the other was an 802s, would it still be banned?

A 5 car 800  (800 012) was out on it's own on the 0730 from Paddington to Penzance & back yesterday (Tuesday 4th)...

Where was the 802s?   I know the 800s are having issues because Hitachi are more interested in having the train perfect than it actually running a service, the main problem with having the manufacturer as the leasing and maintenance company to the TOC.  Im surprised no HST was put on the service instead, unless we no longer have enough to cover for this kind of thing.


Title: Re: IETs into passenger service from 16 Oct 2017 and subsequent performance issues
Post by: old original on September 06, 2018, 04:48:10 pm
I also noticed the paint is already looking scrappy. Very dull and scratched and that's only after a few months


Title: Re: IETs into passenger service from 16 Oct 2017 and subsequent performance issues
Post by: CharlieGCR on September 06, 2018, 05:16:31 pm
I also noticed the paint is already looking scrappy. Very dull and scratched and that's only after a few months

Vinyl or Paint?


Title: Re: IETs into passenger service from 16 Oct 2017 and subsequent performance issues
Post by: The Tall Controller on September 06, 2018, 08:57:24 pm
800/0s are all vinyl. All other variations are paint.


Title: Re: IETs into passenger service from 16 Oct 2017 and subsequent performance issues
Post by: Umberleigh on September 06, 2018, 09:53:39 pm
So we’ve already had a 5 car Paddington - Penzance return service? I thought that was never going to happen...

Possibly also at 5 cars the shortest timetabled Paddington to Penzance service in living memory?


Title: Re: IETs into passenger service from 16 Oct 2017 and subsequent performance issues
Post by: Four Track, Now! on September 06, 2018, 10:18:46 pm
The decision to manufacture the 5 car sets and not the 9 car sets first and being unable to reverse the decision was just plain wrong. Its once again the passengers who suffer the rail industrie's incompetence.

I don't think it was the rail industry causing the problems alone. AIUI, the 9/10 car units were always going to be first in service, until the electrification went wrong. Then, the 5-car trains, which were always going to have diesels, were completed first, so that at least we would have something. Presumably, many additional engines had to be ordered to make the longer trains not just electric but bi-mode. It may have speeded things up a bit, but it took a political decision to pause the programme. DfT made strategic blunders which impacted on everything else. But the passengers did indeed suffer, whoever's fault it was.


Title: Re: IETs into passenger service from 16 Oct 2017 and subsequent performance issues
Post by: IndustryInsider on September 06, 2018, 10:34:59 pm
I don't think it was the rail industry causing the problems alone. AIUI, the 9/10 car units were always going to be first in service, until the electrification went wrong. Then, the 5-car trains, which were always going to have diesels, were completed first, so that at least we would have something. Presumably, many additional engines had to be ordered to make the longer trains not just electric but bi-mode. It may have speeded things up a bit, but it took a political decision to pause the programme. DfT made strategic blunders which impacted on everything else. But the passengers did indeed suffer, whoever's fault it was.

Over to you, Stuving?!   ;)


Title: Re: IETs into passenger service from 16 Oct 2017 and subsequent performance issues
Post by: stuving on September 06, 2018, 10:38:01 pm
I don't think it was the rail industry causing the problems alone. AIUI, the 9/10 car units were always going to be first in service, until the electrification went wrong. Then, the 5-car trains, which were always going to have diesels, were completed first, so that at least we would have something. Presumably, many additional engines had to be ordered to make the longer trains not just electric but bi-mode. It may have speeded things up a bit, but it took a political decision to pause the programme. DfT made strategic blunders which impacted on everything else. But the passengers did indeed suffer, whoever's fault it was.

Over to you, Stuving?!   ;)

Do you think he's doing it just to annoy me?


Title: Re: IETs into passenger service from 16 Oct 2017 and subsequent performance issues
Post by: Timmer on September 07, 2018, 06:45:29 am
I don't think it was the rail industry causing the problems alone. AIUI, the 9/10 car units were always going to be first in service, until the electrification went wrong. Then, the 5-car trains, which were always going to have diesels, were completed first, so that at least we would have something. Presumably, many additional engines had to be ordered to make the longer trains not just electric but bi-mode. It may have speeded things up a bit, but it took a political decision to pause the programme. DfT made strategic blunders which impacted on everything else. But the passengers did indeed suffer, whoever's fault it was.
Which wouldn’t have been a problem had GWR’s HST fleet been promised elsewhere. This constant ‘musical trains’ on such tight schedules that the Dft play moving stock from one TOC to another means once again it’s the passenger that suffers.

When I blame ‘the rail industry’ believe me my main aim is at Dft. Perhaps I should say rail industry/Dft in future.


Title: Re: IETs into passenger service from 16 Oct 2017 and subsequent performance issues
Post by: stuving on September 07, 2018, 08:51:07 am
I shall restrict myself to this summary of the IEP delivery dates from GWR's original (2015) franchise agreement (copied from the MARA):
5-car trains   25 May 2017 to 8 Feb 2018 (bi-mode at the time)
9-car trains   15 Feb 2018 to 6 Jul 2018   (electric at the time).

So all his stuff about the order having been changed is not exactly fake news, it just isn't true. As to why it keeps reappearing, quoted as if true and in no doubt, one of the reasons may also apply to fake news - it comforts preconceptions.


Title: Re: IETs into passenger service from 16 Oct 2017 and subsequent performance issues
Post by: Adelante_CCT on September 07, 2018, 01:06:45 pm
So we’ve already had a 5 car Paddington - Penzance return service? I thought that was never going to happen...

Possibly also at 5 cars the shortest timetabled Paddington to Penzance service in living memory?

In the 90s you had that 2/3 car class 15X that ran from Paddington, Reading or Waterloo via Reading (it seemed to vary in each timetable period) down to Penzance very early morning.


Title: Re: IETs into passenger service from 16 Oct 2017 and subsequent performance issues
Post by: The Tall Controller on September 07, 2018, 02:39:26 pm
So we’ve already had a 5 car Paddington - Penzance return service? I thought that was never going to happen...

Possibly also at 5 cars the shortest timetabled Paddington to Penzance service in living memory?

It's timetabled as a 10 car train.

Running it as a 5 car at late notice probably outweighed cancelling it throughout (as well as it's return journey).


Title: Re: IETs into passenger service from 16 Oct 2017 and subsequent performance issues
Post by: broadgage on September 08, 2018, 10:30:27 am
So we’ve already had a 5 car Paddington - Penzance return service? I thought that was never going to happen...

Possibly also at 5 cars the shortest timetabled Paddington to Penzance service in living memory?

It's timetabled as a 10 car train.

Running it as a 5 car at late notice probably outweighed cancelling it throughout (as well as it's return journey).

Most Bristol and Cardiff trains are also timetabled as 10 car, but 5 car is frequently provided and often without reservations.
As longer distance services are also downgraded to DMU operation it seems likely that 5 car operation will feature regularly, despite previous assurances to the contrary.
Advocates of the downgrade will of course point out that a 5 car unit is better than nothing.


Title: Re: IETs into passenger service from 16 Oct 2017 and subsequent performance issues
Post by: IndustryInsider on September 08, 2018, 10:33:23 pm
Most Bristol and Cardiff trains are also timetabled as 10 car, but 5 car is frequently provided and often without reservations.
As longer distance services are also downgraded to DMU operation it seems likely that 5 car operation will feature regularly, despite previous assurances to the contrary.
Advocates of the downgrade will of course point out that a 5 car unit is better than nothing.

5-car operation will indeed feature regularly, as that’s been the plan all along.


Title: Re: IETs into passenger service from 16 Oct 2017 and subsequent performance issues
Post by: broadgage on September 08, 2018, 10:51:39 pm
5 car west of Plymouth was indeed the plan for many trains, but I thought that the intention was that all busy services would be either 10 car to Plymouth, or 9 car throughout.
This service was 5 car throughout, in each direction.


Title: Re: IETs into passenger service from 16 Oct 2017 and subsequent performance issues
Post by: SandTEngineer on September 11, 2018, 05:24:37 pm
Facinating photograph published elsewhere of stored (redundant) HST sets at Ely: https://www.flickr.com/photos/robmcrorie/43879066534/in/photostream/


Title: Re: IETs into passenger service from 16 Oct 2017 and subsequent performance issues
Post by: Rob on the hill on September 11, 2018, 06:07:37 pm
Facinating photograph published elsewhere of stored (redundant) HST sets at Ely: https://www.flickr.com/photos/robmcrorie/43879066534/in/photostream/

Some of those sidings must be new, as they don't appear currently on Google maps:
https://www.google.co.uk/maps/place/Ely/@52.4097715,0.2907868,3606a,35y,60.7h/data=!3m1!1e3!4m5!3m4!1s0x47d80b13a8c66535:0xd5c9b00306add425!8m2!3d52.399539!4d0.262363


Title: Re: IETs into passenger service from 16 Oct 2017 and subsequent performance issues
Post by: paul7755 on September 11, 2018, 09:38:21 pm
Facinating photograph published elsewhere of stored (redundant) HST sets at Ely: https://www.flickr.com/photos/robmcrorie/43879066534/in/photostream/

Some of those sidings must be new, as they don't appear currently on Google maps...
I think they may have been put in only about two years ago in time to take the off lease 442s?

Paul


Title: Re: IETs into passenger service from 16 Oct 2017 and subsequent performance issues
Post by: stuving on September 11, 2018, 11:34:44 pm
Facinating photograph published elsewhere of stored (redundant) HST sets at Ely: https://www.flickr.com/photos/robmcrorie/43879066534/in/photostream/

Some of those sidings must be new, as they don't appear currently on Google maps:
https://www.google.co.uk/maps/place/Ely/@52.4097715,0.2907868,3606a,35y,60.7h/data=!3m1!1e3!4m5!3m4!1s0x47d80b13a8c66535:0xd5c9b00306add425!8m2!3d52.399539!4d0.262363

I don't follow - I can see the same six sidings, and even the same arrangmemnt of points lading to them!


Title: Re: IETs into passenger service from 16 Oct 2017 and subsequent performance issues
Post by: IndustryInsider on September 11, 2018, 11:46:28 pm
5 car west of Plymouth was indeed the plan for many trains, but I thought that the intention was that all busy services would be either 10 car to Plymouth, or 9 car throughout.
This service was 5 car throughout, in each direction.

All busy trains, hopefully, yes.  Though GWR have hardly inspired confidence in that regard since their introduction.  I thought you were referring to all long distance routes though, not just the west country, so apologies if that wasn't the case. 

For West Country trains, I can see some of the off-peak Paddington to Exeter semi-fasts (in whatever form they finally take) being 5-cars.  The first morning departure from, and last evening arrival at, Paddington to/from Penzance on weekdays could also be a 5-car at the Paddington end quite comfortably.

The rest should, and hopefully will, be 9 or 10-car.


Title: Re: IETs into passenger service from 16 Oct 2017 and subsequent performance issues
Post by: Rob on the hill on September 12, 2018, 09:29:09 am
Facinating photograph published elsewhere of stored (redundant) HST sets at Ely: https://www.flickr.com/photos/robmcrorie/43879066534/in/photostream/

Some of those sidings must be new, as they don't appear currently on Google maps:
https://www.google.co.uk/maps/place/Ely/@52.4097715,0.2907868,3606a,35y,60.7h/data=!3m1!1e3!4m5!3m4!1s0x47d80b13a8c66535:0xd5c9b00306add425!8m2!3d52.399539!4d0.262363

I don't follow - I can see the same six sidings, and even the same arrangmemnt of points lading to them!
The sidings on the far side of the photo (approx. 12 roads) are new.


Title: Re: IETs into passenger service from 16 Oct 2017 and subsequent performance issues
Post by: paul7755 on September 12, 2018, 12:37:36 pm
The sidings on the far side of the photo (approx. 12 roads) are new.
Found online coverage of them being opened.  A commercial venture by Potter Logistics, opened Oct 2016, e.g. here:
http://www.elyenterprisezone.co.uk/news/view,potter-logistics-ely-rail-freight-terminal-growth-on-track_58.htm

Paul


Title: Re: IETs into passenger service from 16 Oct 2017 and subsequent performance issues
Post by: bignosemac on September 14, 2018, 12:16:29 am
Discussion on the failure and subsequent protracted evacuation of an IET - 1A93 the 1400 Penzance to Paddington, 13th September 2018 - has been given its own dedicated topic on this board.

http://www.firstgreatwestern.info/coffeeshop/index.php?topic=20391.0

My thanks to forum Admin Chris from Nailsea for doing the splitting off of posts.  :)


Title: Re: IETs into passenger service from 16 Oct 2017 and subsequent performance issues
Post by: martyjon on September 15, 2018, 08:42:47 pm
I'm confused.

When the IEP's were introduced we were told that the HST's were going off lease because they had been promised to other TOC's, yes some have gone to another TOC and one (?) only converted and shortened and returned to GWR.

From the recent aerial view of sidings at Ely showing in what looked like FGW liveried HST mk3 carriages and power cars stored there. I cannot recall the presence in the vicinity of Ely any railway works capable of converting the mk 3 carriages to sliding door operation or overhaul of the power cars, I believe such works done already on ex GWR vehicles was done at Doncaster a mere 200 miles to the north of Ely.

Surely with this stock languishing in those sidings,some of it could have been retained by extending the leases and run in place of a 5 car IEP, or a 2x5 car IEP with 5 locked out of use or a cancelled train because of lack of trained staff to operate the new trains.

Passengers have had to suffer many months of travelling hell due to high-ups making stupid decisions for which the passengers has had to endure the consequences. Any new footage for a future episode of Paddington 24/7 should be shot of these trains laid up at Ely followed of footage of well overcrowded 5 car IEP's with the narrative for the shot film emphasizing that the 5 cars should be 9 or 10 carriages.

Overall to me it doesn't make sense.

See why I'm confused.


Title: Re: IETs into passenger service from 16 Oct 2017 and subsequent performance issues
Post by: bignosemac on September 15, 2018, 08:49:47 pm
Finances.

GWR can't continue leasing HSTs alongside IETs.

They won't take the financial hit, and the DfT won't bankroll it as they'd be admitting their IEP project is struggling.


Title: Re: IETs into passenger service from 16 Oct 2017 and subsequent performance issues
Post by: martyjon on September 15, 2018, 09:08:44 pm
Finances.

GWR can't continue leasing HSTs alongside IETs.

They won't take the financial hit, and the DfT won't bankroll it as they'd be admitting their IEP project is struggling.


An eye for an eye and a tooth for a tooth.

If an IEP is unavailable for service then a "lease credit" should be given for the unavailable IEP which should adequately cover the lease of a 40 year old, fully depreciated HST.

I think all readers of this forum are aware that the electrification of the GWML and the IEP project are both floundering deep in the brown stuff.


Title: Re: IETs into passenger service from 16 Oct 2017 and subsequent performance issues
Post by: ellendune on September 15, 2018, 09:20:53 pm
An eye for an eye and a tooth for a tooth.

If an IEP is unavailable for service then a "lease credit" should be given for the unavailable IEP which should adequately cover the lease of a 40 year old, fully depreciated HST.

I think all readers of this forum are aware that the electrification of the GWML and the IEP project are both floundering deep in the brown stuff.

That might work if they were available for spot hire, but they are not and GWR don't know when Hitachi might get the IET's working. GWR would have to hire them for some period without knowing when the IET's might be fixed.



Title: Re: IETs into passenger service from 16 Oct 2017 and subsequent performance issues
Post by: martyjon on September 15, 2018, 09:38:01 pm
An eye for an eye and a tooth for a tooth.

If an IEP is unavailable for service then a "lease credit" should be given for the unavailable IEP which should adequately cover the lease of a 40 year old, fully depreciated HST.

I think all readers of this forum are aware that the electrification of the GWML and the IEP project are both floundering deep in the brown stuff.

That might work if they were available for spot hire, but they are not and GWR don't know when Hitachi might get the IET's working. GWR would have to hire them for some period without knowing when the IET's might be fixed.



Then introduce a "spot hire" regime, simple.


Title: Re: IETs into passenger service from 16 Oct 2017 and subsequent performance issues
Post by: ellendune on September 15, 2018, 09:43:12 pm
Then introduce a "spot hire" regime, simple.
For that to happen the owner of the HST must make the offer and to do that they must find somewhere to stable them in the GWR area and keep them in a state that they can run at a moment's notice.  That will cost them money with no guarantee of income  - unless they believe Hitachi are going to be unable to solve the problems quickly.

In the mean time they are less able to look for a new long term use for the HSTs. 


Title: Re: IETs into passenger service from 16 Oct 2017 and subsequent performance issues
Post by: martyjon on September 15, 2018, 09:58:13 pm
Then introduce a "spot hire" regime, simple.
For that to happen the owner of the HST must make the offer and to do that they must find somewhere to stable them in the GWR area and keep them in a state that they can run at a moment's notice.  That will cost them money with no guarantee of income  - unless they believe Hitachi are going to be unable to solve the problems quickly.

In the mean time they are less able to look for a new long term use for the HSTs. 

Isn't anyone in GWR HQ got a tongue in their head who could ask the owner to discuss a spot hire arrangement, GWR has the ability to maintain HST's still and with the current performance of the IEP fleet a "spot hire" arrangement for a couple of HST's could well last for some time and could be negotiated at least say monthly, there are more than one way of skinning a cat you know.


Title: Re: IETs into passenger service from 16 Oct 2017 and subsequent performance issues
Post by: broadgage on September 15, 2018, 10:29:35 pm
So have we moved from

"HSTs have got to go, they are promised to other operators and some promises cant be broken"
To
"Well there might be some HSTs available, but the logistics of hiring them for an unknown period are just too much trouble"



Title: Re: IETs into passenger service from 16 Oct 2017 and subsequent performance issues
Post by: broadgage on September 15, 2018, 10:34:48 pm
Finances.

GWR can't continue leasing HSTs alongside IETs.

They won't take the financial hit, and the DfT won't bankroll it as they'd be admitting their IEP project is struggling.

But I thought that the IEPs only have to be paid for when they are available ? The recent levels of non availability should be SAVING GWR a lot of money, some of which they could spend on spot hire or monthly hire of a few HSTs.


Title: Re: IETs into passenger service from 16 Oct 2017 and subsequent performance issues
Post by: ellendune on September 15, 2018, 10:45:23 pm
But I thought that the IEPs only have to be paid for when they are available ? The recent levels of non availability should be SAVING GWR a lot of money, some of which they could spend on spot hire or monthly hire of a few HSTs.
Short term hire may be considerably more expensive that long term hire so it may not match. 


Title: Re: IETs into passenger service from 16 Oct 2017 and subsequent performance issues
Post by: sikejsudjek3 on September 16, 2018, 08:41:38 am
BR never had this problem......


Title: Re: IETs into passenger service from 16 Oct 2017 and subsequent performance issues
Post by: TaplowGreen on September 16, 2018, 09:52:10 am
BR never had this problem......

APT?


Title: Re: IETs into passenger service from 16 Oct 2017 and subsequent performance issues
Post by: Gordon the Blue Engine on September 16, 2018, 10:00:46 am
In our Sunday paper there is a GWR “Famous Five” advert claiming “More seats, more trains, more adventures”.

I wonder how this would stand up to a complaint to and a subsequent investigation by the Advertising Standards Authority.  The third claim is probably true, but the first two?


Title: Re: IETs into passenger service from 16 Oct 2017 and subsequent performance issues
Post by: Timmer on September 16, 2018, 10:02:46 am
In our Sunday paper there is a GWR “Famous Five” advert claiming “More seats, more trains, more adventures”.

I wonder how this would stand up to a complaint to and a subsequent investigation by the Advertising Standards Authority.  The third claim is probably true, but the first two?

If you call being stuck on one of their brand new trains that’s broken down for six hours an adventure then yes.


Title: Re: IETs into passenger service from 16 Oct 2017 and subsequent performance issues
Post by: TaplowGreen on September 16, 2018, 10:06:20 am
In our Sunday paper there is a GWR “Famous Five” advert claiming “More seats, more trains, more adventures”.

I wonder how this would stand up to a complaint to and a subsequent investigation by the Advertising Standards Authority.  The third claim is probably true, but the first two?

If you call being stuck on one of their brand new trains that’s broken down for six hours an adventure then yes.

Beat me to it!!!  ;D (I wonder how much these adverts cost by the way?)


Title: Re: IETs into passenger service from 16 Oct 2017 and subsequent performance issues
Post by: didcotdean on September 16, 2018, 10:39:07 am

And the HST to some extent. I can recall the announcement 'the next train will be instead formed of locomotive-hauled coaches' being all too frequent right through the early 1980s, heralding the arrival of some tatty old mixed rake. Or maybe I was just unlucky ...


Title: Re: IETs into passenger service from 16 Oct 2017 and subsequent performance issues
Post by: SandTEngineer on September 16, 2018, 01:23:31 pm

And the HST to some extent. I can recall the announcement 'the next train will be instead formed of locomotive-hauled coaches' being all too frequent right through the early 1980s, heralding the arrival of some tatty old mixed rake. Or maybe I was just unlucky ...

Yes, but at least some form of train turned up.....


Title: Re: IETs into passenger service from 16 Oct 2017 and subsequent performance issues
Post by: broadgage on September 16, 2018, 01:58:44 pm
HST failures did indeed occur regularly, but this was not comparable  to the present situation with IETs.
A failed HST usually resulted in a FULL LENGTH loco hauled train being substituted, with padded seats, reservations, and a buffet.

Today we get a half length DMU if lucky, or nothing if less lucky.

I, and I suspect many others, would have accepted the IETs if firstly they had been proper inter-city trains, full length, gangwayed throughout, with a buffet car, working reservations, padded seats, and so on, AND if the inevitable initial unreliability had been covered by retaining enough HSTs so as to minimise effects on passengers.



Title: Re: IETs into passenger service from 16 Oct 2017 and subsequent performance issues
Post by: didcotdean on September 16, 2018, 02:07:57 pm
HST failures did indeed occur regularly, but this was not comparable  to the present situation with IETs.
A failed HST usually resulted in a FULL LENGTH loco hauled train being substituted, with padded seats, reservations, and a buffet.
Or a complete cancellation. And some of the substitute Mark 1 carriages with the bouncy seat springs, fabric impregnated with years of smoke, drafty non completely closing windows or no noticeable heating weren't that pleasant either  ;D

Wasn't it BR Western Region that if it got hold of stock formally used elsewhere as 3 abreast with armrests used to try and stitch them back upright to seat 4?


Title: Re: IETs into passenger service from 16 Oct 2017 and subsequent performance issues
Post by: CharlieGCR on September 16, 2018, 02:24:01 pm
93% of the time a half formed Class 800 turns up due to a shortage of stock. Not because the seats were too hard for operation.

What do I expect as a semi-frequent commuter?
A seat, a catering offer and leg room. Also when I used to daily commute my block reservations.

What do I expect as a leisure commuter?
A seat/table, a decent catering offering, leg room and a nice view.

The catering offering on the 800 is the same as the HST at the moment, and the IET is capable of offering more food variety. I like the buffet but if I was traveling solo on a semi busy train I don’t want to lug everything through the train to get a cup of tea. If they had 2 on the 9 car that would be better, apparently they are looking into this.

What needs improving for me is the seat quality, food offering (including refrigeration) and 2 trolleys on the nine cars. All things that are possible on the new trains.

If a five coach mark 3 turned up do you expect people to say “at least it’s not a 800?” , no they want a seat.


Title: Re: IETs into passenger service from 16 Oct 2017 and subsequent performance issues
Post by: martyjon on September 16, 2018, 04:37:11 pm

Yep, but they didn't press on with production producing a lame duck (so far with the IEP's) offering.


Title: Re: IETs into passenger service from 16 Oct 2017 and subsequent performance issues
Post by: eightonedee on September 16, 2018, 06:41:45 pm
And we have to stir into this mess another depressing thought.

If the electrifcation had not been cut short by (let's blame the real culprit) HM Treasury, the potential of 110 mph Electrostars to step into the breach in emergencies could have been considered too


Title: Re: IETs into passenger service from 16 Oct 2017 and subsequent performance issues
Post by: TaplowGreen on September 16, 2018, 07:47:53 pm

Yep, but they didn't press on with production producing a lame duck (so far with the IEP's) offering.

They probably thought spending £50 million was enough.


Title: Re: IETs into passenger service from 16 Oct 2017 and subsequent performance issues
Post by: ChrisB on September 17, 2018, 10:08:36 am
Other TOCs have enquired about those Ely HSTs and been told that they're spoken for apparently. So I'm guessing they're not interested in spot-hire either.


Title: Re: IETs into passenger service from 16 Oct 2017 and subsequent performance issues
Post by: grahame on September 17, 2018, 11:20:19 am
Other TOCs have enquired about those Ely HSTs and been told that they're spoken for apparently. So I'm guessing they're not interested in spot-hire either.

My understanding was that they're in a queue for Wabtec in Doncaster for automatic door and retention loos.


Title: Re: IETs into passenger service from 16 Oct 2017 and subsequent performance issues
Post by: old original on September 17, 2018, 02:16:20 pm
HST on the 07.30 Paddington - Penzance & rtn today.


Title: Re: IETs into passenger service from 16 Oct 2017 and subsequent performance issues
Post by: bignosemac on September 17, 2018, 06:40:38 pm
HST on the 07.30 Paddington - Penzance & rtn today.

All services to and from the westcountry (beyond Exeter) that were IET last week are HST today. And possibly for the rest of the week too.

There's an issue with fuelling at Laira. Apparently the IETs don't like the taste of the liquid refreshment they're getting in Devon.

The computers are saying the fuel is contaminated.



Title: Re: IETs into passenger service from 16 Oct 2017 and subsequent performance issues
Post by: CharlieGCR on September 17, 2018, 07:42:33 pm
HST on the 07.30 Paddington - Penzance & rtn today.

All services to and from the westcountry (beyond Exeter) that were IET last week are HST today. And possibly for the rest of the week too.

There's an issue with fuelling at Laira. Apparently the IETs don't like the taste of the liquid refreshment they're getting in Devon.

The computers are saying the fuel is contaminated.




Hitatchi says the fuel pump has a sticker on it and they have been told to remove it  ;)


Title: Re: IETs into passenger service from 16 Oct 2017 and subsequent performance issues
Post by: Clan Line on September 17, 2018, 07:46:49 pm
Does anyone know of any seat plans for these wondrous transports of delight ? There's not much point in the GWR booking site asking you if you are happy with your reserved seats if you don't know where they are !


Title: Re: IETs into passenger service from 16 Oct 2017 and subsequent performance issues
Post by: didcotdean on September 17, 2018, 08:21:25 pm
Not sure of its original source (athough it appears to be in GWR fonts etc), but this is one  (https://i.gyazo.com/5f02e077545dbaeee11d71009aa5c0bf.jpg)I have found for a five car IET.


Title: Re: IETs into passenger service from 16 Oct 2017 and subsequent performance issues
Post by: grahame on September 17, 2018, 08:27:13 pm
Does anyone know of any seat plans for these wondrous transports of delight ? There's not much point in the GWR booking site asking you if you are happy with your reserved seats if you don't know where they are !

This sort of thing? In the GWR printed timetable  ;D

(http://www.wellho.net/pix/iet_5_pln.jpg)

9 car to follow


Title: Re: IETs into passenger service from 16 Oct 2017 and subsequent performance issues
Post by: martyjon on September 17, 2018, 08:29:17 pm
Not sure of its original source (athough it appears to be in GWR fonts etc), but this is one  (https://i.gyazo.com/5f02e077545dbaeee11d71009aa5c0bf.jpg)I have found for a five car IET.

Wot, no wheelchair space in standard class.


Title: Re: IETs into passenger service from 16 Oct 2017 and subsequent performance issues
Post by: grahame on September 17, 2018, 08:31:50 pm
9 car to follow

(http://www.wellho.net/pix/iet_9_pln.jpg)


Title: Re: IETs into passenger service from 16 Oct 2017 and subsequent performance issues
Post by: grahame on September 17, 2018, 08:33:50 pm
Not sure of its original source (athough it appears to be in GWR fonts etc), but this is one  (https://i.gyazo.com/5f02e077545dbaeee11d71009aa5c0bf.jpg)I have found for a five car IET.

Sorry to over post - think we were both posting at the same time there ...


Title: Re: IETs into passenger service from 16 Oct 2017 and subsequent performance issues
Post by: didcotdean on September 17, 2018, 08:37:37 pm
Not sure of its original source (athough it appears to be in GWR fonts etc), but this is one  (https://i.gyazo.com/5f02e077545dbaeee11d71009aa5c0bf.jpg)I have found for a five car IET.

Wot, no wheelchair space in standard class.
Yep, wheelchair users plus companion are upgraded to first class in the fives.


Title: Re: IETs into passenger service from 16 Oct 2017 and subsequent performance issues
Post by: bignosemac on September 17, 2018, 08:50:57 pm
Not sure of its original source (athough it appears to be in GWR fonts etc), but this is one  (https://i.gyazo.com/5f02e077545dbaeee11d71009aa5c0bf.jpg)I have found for a five car IET.

Wot, no wheelchair space in standard class.
Yep, wheelchair users plus companion are upgraded to first class in the fives.

Free of charge.


Title: Re: IETs into passenger service from 16 Oct 2017 and subsequent performance issues
Post by: eightonedee on September 17, 2018, 09:31:34 pm
Quote
Quote from: ChrisB on Today at 10:08:36 am
Other TOCs have enquired about those Ely HSTs and been told that they're spoken for apparently. So I'm guessing they're not interested in spot-hire either.

My understanding was that they're in a queue for Wabtec in Doncaster for automatic door and retention loos.

Really? Bearing in mind that these are 40 odd year-old stock, presumably with a surplus of coaches from shortening of units for re-use, and (from what I could see) many suffering from corrosion evident around window and door apertures, I would have thought that the breaker's yard was the likely destination.

Perhaps the seats could be recycled for upgrading a few Turbos for cross-country routes!


Title: Re: IETs into passenger service from 16 Oct 2017 and subsequent performance issues
Post by: Clan Line on September 17, 2018, 09:53:07 pm
Thanks, everyone, for the seat plans ...but.....

.............I can find seats 21 & 22 in both a 5 and a 9 car. I can find seat 30 (I think) in the 9 car - but it doesn't appear to be in coach D - and if I were a male chauvinist I might say "where is my wife going to sit" !! there doesn't appear to be a seat 29 on either version.

Am I missing the bleedin' obvious or just a seat ?

(http://i68.tinypic.com/14ctaux.jpg)


Title: Re: IETs into passenger service from 16 Oct 2017 and subsequent performance issues
Post by: Clan Line on September 17, 2018, 09:57:05 pm
I am missing the bleedin' obvious - we are going up Standard Class !


Title: Re: IETs into passenger service from 16 Oct 2017 and subsequent performance issues
Post by: TaplowGreen on September 18, 2018, 06:31:38 am
HST on the 07.30 Paddington - Penzance & rtn today.

All services to and from the westcountry (beyond Exeter) that were IET last week are HST today. And possibly for the rest of the week too.

There's an issue with fuelling at Laira. Apparently the IETs don't like the taste of the liquid refreshment they're getting in Devon.

The computers are saying the fuel is contaminated.



Beyond parody.

Still, we've had the wrong kind of snow, rain, leaves, sunshine etc, so why not the wrong kind of fuel too? 


Title: Re: IETs into passenger service from 16 Oct 2017 and subsequent performance issues
Post by: martyjon on September 18, 2018, 06:51:51 am
HST on the 07.30 Paddington - Penzance & rtn today.
All services to and from the westcountry (beyond Exeter) that were IET last week are HST today. And possibly for the rest of the week too.
There's an issue with fuelling at Laira. Apparently the IETs don't like the taste of the liquid refreshment they're getting in Devon.
The computers are saying the fuel is contaminated.
Beyond parody.
Still, we've had the wrong kind of snow, rain, leaves, sunshine etc, so why not the wrong kind of fuel too? 

Perhaps its pirated fuel illicitly imported from the land of the pixies.


Title: Re: IETs into passenger service from 16 Oct 2017 and subsequent performance issues
Post by: chuffed on September 18, 2018, 07:43:15 am
Oh Come on ! Perhaps it's time we cut them a bit of nutty slack ..... ???


Title: Re: IETs into passenger service from 16 Oct 2017 and subsequent performance issues
Post by: Timmer on September 18, 2018, 08:02:34 am
The old MTU engines inside the HSTs obviously aren't as fussy as to what they drink. Again, computer says NO!


Title: Re: IETs into passenger service from 16 Oct 2017 and subsequent performance issues
Post by: grahame on September 18, 2018, 08:13:23 am
I am missing the bleedin' obvious - we are going up Standard Class !

Are you sure you are going up IET?  Could those be HST seats?

(http://www.wellho.net/pix/hst_8_pln.jpg)


Title: Re: IETs into passenger service from 16 Oct 2017 and subsequent performance issues
Post by: Clan Line on September 18, 2018, 10:16:17 am
I am missing the bleedin' obvious - we are going up Standard Class !

Are you sure you are going up IET?  Could those be HST seats?


That is a possibility. The train in question is the 0805 (Su) from Cardiff.
We normally travel First (if reasonable Advance tickets are available) but decided to go up to London Standard on this occasion (via Melksham !). The two coaches (high speed services) on the reservations were both "D" - which led me off in the wrong direction, assuming both journeys were First !


Title: Re: IETs into passenger service from 16 Oct 2017 and subsequent performance issues
Post by: BBM on September 18, 2018, 11:52:19 am
Just to say that these seating plans are available to download as PDFs from the GWR website at these links below:

5-car IET (https://www.gwr.com/~/media/gwr/pdfs/seating-plans/intercity-express-train-5-carriage-seating-plan.pdf?la=en)

9-car IET (https://www.gwr.com/~/media/gwr/pdfs/seating-plans/intercity-express-train-9-carriage-seating-plan.pdf?la=en)

HST (https://www.gwr.com/~/media/gwr/pdfs/seating-plans/high-speed-train-seating-plan.pdf?la=en)


Title: Re: IETs into passenger service from 16 Oct 2017 and subsequent performance issues
Post by: old original on September 18, 2018, 12:42:49 pm
HST on the 07.30 Paddington - Penzance & rtn today.

All services to and from the westcountry (beyond Exeter) that were IET last week are HST today. And possibly for the rest of the week too.

There's an issue with fuelling at Laira. Apparently the IETs don't like the taste of the liquid refreshment they're getting in Devon.

The computers are saying the fuel is contaminated.


0730 Padd - Penzance back to 2x5 today,

All a bit random....




Title: Re: IETs into passenger service from 16 Oct 2017 and subsequent performance issues
Post by: a-driver on September 18, 2018, 02:22:11 pm
HST on the 07.30 Paddington - Penzance & rtn today.

All services to and from the westcountry (beyond Exeter) that were IET last week are HST today. And possibly for the rest of the week too.

There's an issue with fuelling at Laira. Apparently the IETs don't like the taste of the liquid refreshment they're getting in Devon.

The computers are saying the fuel is contaminated.


0730 Padd - Penzance back to 2x5 today,

All a bit random....



The 0730 downs forms the 1400 up from Penzance. It therefore doesn’t require a visit to Laira for fuel


Title: Re: IETs into passenger service from 16 Oct 2017 and subsequent performance issues
Post by: Clan Line on September 18, 2018, 06:19:24 pm
Just to say that these seating plans are available to download as PDFs from the GWR website at these links below:

5-car IET (https://www.gwr.com/~/media/gwr/pdfs/seating-plans/intercity-express-train-5-carriage-seating-plan.pdf?la=en)

9-car IET (https://www.gwr.com/~/media/gwr/pdfs/seating-plans/intercity-express-train-9-carriage-seating-plan.pdf?la=en)

HST (https://www.gwr.com/~/media/gwr/pdfs/seating-plans/high-speed-train-seating-plan.pdf?la=en)


Many thanks for those .


Title: Re: IETs into passenger service from 16 Oct 2017 and subsequent performance issues
Post by: Incider on September 18, 2018, 09:29:50 pm
HST on the 07.30 Paddington - Penzance & rtn today.

All services to and from the westcountry (beyond Exeter) that were IET last week are HST today. And possibly for the rest of the week too.

There's an issue with fuelling at Laira. Apparently the IETs don't like the taste of the liquid refreshment they're getting in Devon.

The computers are saying the fuel is contaminated.



Beyond parody.

Still, we've had the wrong kind of snow, rain, leaves, sunshine etc, so why not the wrong kind of fuel too? 

It’s a well known problem, GWR have had issues with it before, MTU have highlighted it on the powercars, but they have the advantage of have a very large coalescer in the engine room, absolutely no room to fit that on any unit with an underslung engine.  It has caused engine shutdowns on other fleets in GWR.

Why would you knowingly fuel a vehicle with contaminated fuel??

https://www.octane.uk.com/diesel-bugs-biofuel/


Title: Re: IETs into passenger service from 16 Oct 2017 and subsequent performance issues
Post by: grahame on September 18, 2018, 09:57:27 pm
It’s a well known problem, GWR have had issues with it before, MTU have highlighted it on the powercars, but they have the advantage of have a very large coalescer in the engine room, absolutely no room to fit that on any unit with an underslung engine.  It has caused engine shutdowns on other fleets in GWR.

Why would you knowingly fuel a vehicle with contaminated fuel??

https://www.octane.uk.com/diesel-bugs-biofuel/

Welcome to the forum, Incider ... I think you know a lot more about this than most of us.   

I do wonder "how contaminated is contaminated?".  With cheese, I will eat it even with mould and it will do me no harm. But with chicken, if it looks or smells even the slightest bit off, it's a "no".  As I'm reading you, diesel fuel is more like chicken than cheese??


Title: Re: IETs into passenger service from 16 Oct 2017 and subsequent performance issues
Post by: a-driver on September 18, 2018, 10:17:19 pm

Why would you knowingly fuel a vehicle with contaminated fuel??

https://www.octane.uk.com/diesel-bugs-biofuel/

I can only assume it would be because Laira don’t want the trains on depot, and I assume that based on the fact that the IETs off Laira never departed on time and the situation with the fuel is taking a considerably amount of time to resolve.


Title: Re: IETs into passenger service from 16 Oct 2017 and subsequent performance issues
Post by: Western Pathfinder on September 18, 2018, 11:17:51 pm
Diesel fuel or heavy oil can have any number of problems,mostly I see the Ingres of water to the fuel systems ,this is usually due to poor storage at filling stations,where the underground storage tanks become contaminated ,however in sustained periods of hot weather diesel can actually sweat causing condensation to occur in the tank,this then leads to fungus growing in the tank ,and to the filtration system becoming blocked.


Title: Re: IETs into passenger service from 16 Oct 2017 and subsequent performance issues
Post by: Incider on September 19, 2018, 05:41:34 am
It’s a well known problem, GWR have had issues with it before, MTU have highlighted it on the powercars, but they have the advantage of have a very large coalescer in the engine room, absolutely no room to fit that on any unit with an underslung engine.  It has caused engine shutdowns on other fleets in GWR.

Why would you knowingly fuel a vehicle with contaminated fuel??

https://www.octane.uk.com/diesel-bugs-biofuel/

Welcome to the forum, Incider ... I think you know a lot more about this than most of us.   

I do wonder "how contaminated is contaminated?".  With cheese, I will eat it even with mould and it will do me no harm. But with chicken, if it looks or smells even the slightest bit off, it's a "no".  As I'm reading you, diesel fuel is more like chicken than cheese??

Water mainly, but with an above acceptable level of the diesel bug in it.  Any modern common rail diesel system will have its high pressure pump knackered by too many contaminants, especially water, the tolerances are so tight and it needs the right quality diesel to lubricate the pump. 


Title: Re: IETs into passenger service from 16 Oct 2017 and subsequent performance issues
Post by: FremlinsMan on September 19, 2018, 10:40:06 am
There's a free talk in Oxford in November: 'INTRODUCING THE HITACHI CLASS 800 TRAINS INTO SERVICE ON GREAT WESTERN'
Details at https://communities.theiet.org/communities/events/item/259/77/21515 (https://communities.theiet.org/communities/events/item/259/77/21515)

Registration at http://nearyou.imeche.org/eventdetail?id=15641 (http://nearyou.imeche.org/eventdetail?id=15641)


Title: Re: IETs into passenger service from 16 Oct 2017 and subsequent performance issues
Post by: grahame on September 19, 2018, 11:00:57 am
There's a free talk in Oxford in November: 'INTRODUCING THE HITACHI CLASS 800 TRAINS INTO SERVICE ON GREAT WESTERN'

Many thanks.

6th November.   I've added a diary thread at http://www.firstgreatwestern.info/coffeeshop/index.php?topic=20409.0 so it will come up for people as they look at the forum calendar.


Title: Re: IETs into passenger service from 16 Oct 2017 and subsequent performance issues
Post by: Thatcham Crossing on September 19, 2018, 11:36:32 am
Counting IET's again today, on my way into PAD past North Pole at around 1015.

I counted 19 (there may have been a few more hidden away) at various points around the site.
That must be at least as many parked up (or being serviced) as are actually out working.


Title: Re: IETs into passenger service from 16 Oct 2017 and subsequent performance issues
Post by: IndustryInsider on September 19, 2018, 12:04:21 pm
Counting IET's again today, on my way into PAD past North Pole at around 1015.

I counted 19 (there may have been a few more hidden away) at various points around the site.
That must be at least as many parked up (or being serviced)