Great Western Coffee Shop

For instance, the 11:32 from Paddington this morning.

https://www.realtimetrains.co.uk/service/gb-nr:V85805/2023-04-16/detailed#allox_id=0

Aside from the grim inevitability that as soon as they were introduced, 5 carriage trains would be run in place of 9 (often with the accompanying 'Oh, we'd far rather run something short formed than cancel the service completely') how does this happen so regularly? On a 5 carriage IEP, there's not many more seats than on, say, a three car 166. This practice makes for a really poor experience, rubs the passengers noses in the fact that we have a capacity-constrained railway, and discourages and excludes people who are unable to stand for long periods or people travelling with children.

Mark

Let them cancel it instead? Would that be better?

5 cars are fine for any service beyond Plymouth, and possibly beyond say, Newton Abbot….

Five cars may be better than nothing and while it may be fine for west of Plymouth (which is open to debate) you have to get Plymouth first.

The train quoted was full from London.

(http://www.mbob.co.uk/rforum/1132.jpg)

I don't know but this may be a hangover from yesterday when many early trains were delayed coming up because of problems at Hemerdon and sets may have ended up in the wrong place.

And at 14:00 GWR's online systems still up for selling a first class advance single from Exeter St Davids to Penzance with a seat reservation - which would be impressive save for the overcrowding on board and also for the (Twitter) account that a passenger bought a 1st class ticket for that train at Paddington and then found that the seat reservation was in the half of the service that was missing.

Mark

As forecast years ago by my famous crystal ball.
"Flexible train length" means shorter.
I pointed out the shorter trains that resulted from 3 other major renewals, IET supporters said this will be different.

Slam door DC EMUs replaced by networkers. 8 car old trains replaced by 6 car new trains, sometimes only 4 car.

4 car and 5 car voyagers replaced full length HSTs and loco hauled trains. Too short from day one and still too short after many years.

Waterloo/Exeter services, loco hauled trains replaced by 3 car DMUs. Old trains=seats, new trains=standing.

And now full length HSTSs replaced by five car DMUs. Only going to get worse as the short HSTs are withdrawn and replaced by 5 car IETs.

Ironically it’s going to be strengthened to 10-cars from Plymouth.

I would expect more and more services to now be formed of 5 cars given the rolling stock strategy from the DfT for GWR stretching the IET fleet, which is already stretched by the crack repair programme.

I had a theoretical First class seat on the 1230 from Reading on Saturday 15th April. It arrived as a 5 car unit with standing passengers and a platform load to collect.
I managed to find space to stand until Exeter where I got a seat. The air con was on the blink and the train was baking. We picked up a Hitachi fitter to sort it vaguely.

At Plymouth where the train emptied we joined with difficulty to another unit. That made the train 10 cars through Cornwall and 20 minute plus late.
This meant all the branch connections were missed and Newquay passengers were advised to get off at St. Austell and get a service bus.

By now most of the passengers where in the rear unit which meant they all had to move forward at the short platforms to alight making the train later and later.
At Truro there were two cars of passengers with luggage standing in the aisle to get off. I had to think what would happen in an emergency?

I know these units are appalling but worse when Hitachi cannot supply trains of the correct length to fulfil their contract where are GWR as the service provider?

Standing up for that distance makes you realise how rough riding they are and the whines and bangs from underneath provide a background din.

I felt very sorry for the staff who had to front for the company and no sign of any GWR management.

I don't think myself and many others will use the train to go to London again until Hitachi and GWR get their act together which is a shame as I have previously always enjoyed the trip dozens of times. Everything seems to have gone rapidly down hill since these rattletrap uncomfortable Hitachi units were introduced.

Just remember that the DfT don’t give a hoot about short trains. They are all for saving money

Rather like GWR.

Cancel the train and they have to pay delay repay to the affected customers, but run it at half length and they don't!

Pretty awful experience for those affected but hey, they're only customers after all.....ching ching!  :)

I know GWR has to report cancellations and short forms it causes as part of its National Rail Contract, but do GWR directly pay for delay repay claims for trains that are cancelled out of their own pockets?  Or do those payments get claimed back from the DfT as part of the NRC?

The preceding two trains before the 11.32 were both just five cars as well.

This happens often enough to believe it will never change unless more carriages are built and inserted. As I write this, a pink pig just flew past the window.

Comes out of farebox money that otherwise would get passed to the DfT.

Bear in mind that their contract with Hitachi will provide for fines where the correct fleet size isn’t produced. So maybe that payment is also included in farebox revenue

What should be done is to build a fleet of proper INTER CITY trains for long distance services.
Fixed formation 9 or 10 car, no flexible train length as that means shorter.
Bi mode operation.
Locomotive or power car at each end, no underfloor engines.
Padded seats.
Proper buffet car.
Space for surfboards and other bulky holiday luggage.
NOT LIKE AN IET ! and also not like a voyager !

The remaining IETs to be used on secondary or shorter routes.

Thanks.  So, as I thought, no real direct financial penalty for GWR then.

Perhaps that also explains the rumours that the DfT want to get rid of Delay Repay 15 then?

Why should GWr be penalised when a short-form is no fault of theirs?

Hitachi are contracted to put out trainsof the correct length & are penalised correctly if they fail to do so

GWR are the train operating company and should in my view be penalised for failing to deliver. Even if a supplier has failed in their duty to supply trains that work.

Are hitachi actually paying for their failure ? I have long suspected that they have found some "wiggle room" and are not paying up.

My understanding is that Hitachi have to pass credits against their lease fees each time they put out a short-form

How does that work if a major issue, outside of Hitachi’s control, prevents enough units from reaching a depot or stabling point in time to fully form services the next day?

Not forgetting of course the passengers on the short formed train being penalised with an uncomfortable journey. But of course they don't matter.

There are presumably allowances made where a unit is involved in a fatality, etc

I think it’s fair to say that the lines were already blurred, but with the era of NRC’s they are even more blurred.  What chance does the poor passenger have!

None. Zilch. Nada.

GWR hold a NRC requiring them to run specified services with rolling stock put out by Hitachi. If they are provided with x shortforms, then some services will be shortformed. That is the extent of the NRC.

The Government do not care about the passenger, just the cost to the taxpayer.

A great way to encourage people back onto the trains........

Yes, given all the current obstacles, it amazes me that the return to rail has been so strong!

Well, for that you have to consult the TARA - specifically, Part A of Schedule 6 where clause 2.10 defines Relieved Set. Subclause (b) says:

But there's a bit more to it than that, of course. It might be a Vindicated Set, an Excused Set, or something else. An Obstructed Set, for example, is not available for use where the operator is at fault.

The ideological basis for this kind of legalistic approach to the provision of (in his case) rolling stock is that if the provider knows they will suffer a big financial penalty for every deficiency they will make sure it does not happen. Of course there is a big "or else", often left unexpressed, there. And most of the decisions the operator makes are in advance (based on experience/predictions/wishful thinking/internal politics/etc.), so by the time things go wrong they have few options to reduce their losses.

All that's left for the customers (or some of them) is the reassurance of saying "at least it's not costing us money". For the politicians, that's useful; they don't like being accused of failing to make things work and losing money too. For the operator, it gives them a payment they can't use at the time to replace the missing stock. And in any case, under current arrangements, the Treasury snatch that away. And for the passengers ...

The last short formed train I was on was packed and the reservations as a result were kaput. Someone who did have a seat gave it up because a they were a bloke and being chivalrous handed theirs to a woman. They also said later on the phone to someone that they found the seat uncomfortable.

I used the Banbury to Marylebone service recently and the first to turn up was rammed because of the Oxford - Didcot closure.

Because of?  It hasn’t helped Chiltern of course, but their offering to the passengers has been pretty woeful in general since the pandemic IMHO.

Actually to be fair the train I had hoped to get was late arriving into Banbury, I don’t recall why that was - but it was late. The platform was full of Easter travellers and the tannoy announced that this next train was already very busy. They further announced that the service after that was scheduled to arrive on time shortly after this one and comparatively empty. Some passengers you might have thought would have then waited for the next train. Nope, they didn’t seem to care and pushed their way onto the train like it was the rush hour in London and this was the tube.

Virtually empty platform as the train left and people squashed up against the doors onboard. Next train turned up as promised after a short wait and it was much less busy. I got on and got a seat* quite happily.

*which didn’t require me to get my cushion out to be able sit comfortably on it.

Ah, if it was Easier then it was probably more due to the Euston closure for engineering work…and also the fact it was Easter and trains are much more likely to be busy.

It’s a well known fact that most passengers don’t trust or act upon good advice like that, though fair play to the team at Banbury for at least trying.

The bird in hand worth two in the bush. From some passengers' point of view, this train is here and will be going soon. The one behind could just break down, so I wouldn't get home. If this one breaks down, the one behind would be much use anyway, so I'll get on the rammed one and complain bitterly about overcrowding.

The 07.03 Paddington to Paignton was a 5 car 800011 today; usually 9 car.

I'm on the 1129 from Reading to Plymouth which is ironically 10 car rather than 9!

......as a result none of the reservations worked though......

Whilst that may be true for some, personally I would prefer to have a comfortable seat rather than stand for an hour or more.

Two 5 cars is ludicrous with 2 extra cabs and 2 sets of catering taking up vast amounts of unused space plus the extra crew and no connection between the sets.

If it's the same 10 carriage train all day joined up on the same service, then - yes - a 9 car set makes more sense.  But 2 x 5 off Paddington, divide at Westbury, rear all stations via Frome to Weymouth, front 5 Cary and Taunton, where it couples up to 5 cars from Birmingham and beyond and the new 2 x 5 carried on to Penzance - now that makes sense.

What have you been sniffing grahame?! :P

https://www.facebook.com/profile.php?id=100064077691565

Interesting one that.  I’m on a 10 vice 9 now and the reservations are working fine in the carriages where the seats are the same on both formations which is guess is about 80%.

I think that’s usually the case, but there do seem to be exceptions sometimes, such as your example.