Great Western Coffee Shop

Could Cardiff to Taunton, 165/166's ever be extended to Exeter or even Paignton? I know there are gauging issues, but most of the line to Penzance was built during broad gauge anyway.

There was a gauging run to Exeter St Davids yesterday and which checked platforms round the station, but don't think there are any plans to run beyond.   There wouldn't be enough of them to be able to run everywhere.

I understood that the XC trains and the London, Taunton, Plymouth/Penzance services were considered to provide sufficient capacity from Taunton into Devon and therefore there would be fewer Bristol/Cardiff, Exeter services in future.

That's a helluva journey on a train designed for shorter commuter runs..........really I don't think you'd be very comfortable!

Unfortunately it is proposed to use them on the Cardiff Portsmouth service which is also a long journey with a significant proportion of long distance passengers, often with a lot of luggage.

I wish they weren’t as I believe this route deserves better rolling stock but the Turbos are going to provide a much needed increase in capacity; something this route has needed for a very long time.

The 158’s have been the best rolling stock used on this route, except for the class 33s and coaches of course  ;)

I'm sure GWR would argue that Cardiff to Portsmouth, or Cardiff to Devon/Cornwall isn't really that different, journey time wise, to Paddington to Great Malvern/Hereford. A journey that Class 165/166s have done regularly for 20+ years.

It is however still intended to gauge clear Turbos to Plymouth & Penzance, and the Gunnislake and St Ives branches, at least according to the March 2018 enhancement plans update.  I make no comment on actual services.

Paul

Last I heard all gauging work for Turbos west of Newton Abbot had been cancelled.

Didn't think 165/166's where allowed over the Royal Albert Bridge because of gauging? But I suppose they allow GWR King's and the IET's over so..

Nowadays gauge clearance checks would only ever commence when they are first seen to be a requirement.  So “not cleared” in a sectional appendix doesn’t necessarily mean a particular stock cannot ever be cleared, it’s equally likely that it isn’t cleared because it just hasn’t been attempted yet.

Paul

I thought that Kings were never allowed over the Royal Albert Bridge in old GWR days.

And similar stock does similar type of journeys all over the country, including Birmingham to Liverpool which often produces Class 350/2 units.

Maybe I'm just happy with whatever as long as I get a seat. Having grown up using the old 1970s Tube stock, pretty much everything on National Rail is almost luxury in comparison :-X .

As did I.

I thought that Kings were never allowed over the Royal Albert Bridge in old GWR days.
[/quote]

That was the rumour. I saw a King quietly steaming away in the remnants of Truro shed in the final year of steam, rather dirty and looking rather lost on a Sunday evening.  Took me by surprise as I also believed they were not permitted down West.
Was on my way back to College many years ago.

From the 1949 WR Service Timetable:


If Kings ever were allowed over the bridge then it must have only been in the latter years.

6024 King Edward I has been across the Royal Albert Bridge a few times in recent years.

I guess that strengthening work since the days of steam has meant the restriction is no longer needed.

I think the strengthening work was done in 1960 so still well in steam days.

King Edward 1 has been a regular to Cornwall since the 90s, dismissing any bridge issues since at least mid 90s.

 http://www.cornwallrailwaysociety.org.uk/post-1985-steam-railtours-in-cornwall--devon.html

I am aware that the bridge was strengthened in the 1960's and again in 2011 so Kings working there now do not reflect previous policies.  However my recollection and Wikipedia both put this as 1968/9 which was post steam era. 

I seem to remember when the 2011 work was done with modern computer analysis they found the 1960's strengthening was counter productive. 

You may well be aware, but others in the post clearly weren’t from previous posts here. The post was not aimed at you!!!!!